Paul Joseph Watson
September 26, 2013
In another indication of how the TSA is expanding its turf way beyond airport security, the federal agency is about to roll out high-tech vehicles that will utilize secret technology to conduct “covert surveillance operations” in cities around the country.
According to a synopsis posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website (PDF), the TSA is set to purchase technology to retrofit three vans in Arlington, VA, Chicago, IL, and San Francisco, CA in order to convert them into surveillance vehicles that will “conduct covert surveillance operations in the course of investigations.”
Precisely where such covert surveillance will take place is not mentioned, although in 2010 it was revealed that US government agencies were already using roving street surveillance vans that deployed backscatter x-ray vision technology to inspect other vehicles.
In 2011, the Electronic Privacy Information Center also revealed plans for the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA to roll out mobile surveillance vans that had long-distance X-ray capability and eye movement tracking.
TSA Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR) teams are responsible for around 10,000 checkpoints every year in the US, and have expanded from airports to bus & train terminals and even highways despite the fact that there is “no proof that the roving viper teams have foiled any terrorist plots or thwarted any major threat to public safety,” according to the L.A. Times.
The total cost of outfitting just three vans with the covert surveillance technology will be a jaw-dropping $160,000 dollars.
Despite their tax dollars paying for such equipment, American citizens are not privy to any detailed information on what this surveillance system will actually entail.
The TSA vehicles will be fitted with Crime Point IP Network Surveillance technology. When attempting to access details of the technology via the Crime Point website, the user is met with the message, “Due to its sensitive nature, the product content on this website is restricted to law enforcement professionals and government agencies only,” and a password is required to go any further.
Although the general public is barred from scrutinizing specific details, the company says that it provides “covert outdoor video systems” that “incorporate the latest emerging technologies.”
Crime Point provides surveillance vans of its own but, like details of the surveillance systems, that information is also restricted.
The legality of the TSA conducting “covert surveillance” of Americans, whether it be at transport hubs or on highways, conflicts with the Fourth Amendment, which protects the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”
The Virginia Beach City Public School district is saying that the students aren’t actually being expelled; they’re being given “long-term suspensions.” Whatever the case, the students won’t be allowed back to school for the rest of this semester and even until June of next year. There will be some hearing in January to decide if these students deserve longer-term suspensions.
These “suspensions” were prompted by an incident a couple weeks ago when a few friends were playing with their airsoft plastic pellet guns in one of the boys’ front yards while they were waiting for the morning bus to come. A “concerned” neighbor called 911, even admitting to the operator that the guns were toys, but that they made her feel “uncomfortable.” Local news media reported that ironically, this concerned neighbor’s own son was among those kids playing in an airsoft gun war. That particular 911 call was made on September 9th.
A second 911 call was made three days later by another concerned neighbor. That time, police notified the kids’ school of their actions, and school officials investigated the incident and unanimously suspended the three boys involved who were playing with the toy guns: Khalid Caraballo, Aidan Clark and a third, unnamed friend. The other three kids involved who were not playing with guns were not suspended. Those suspended were charged with “possession, handling and use of a firearm.” On Tuesday, school officials changed the charge to “possession, handling and use of an airsoft gun.”
But by all accounts, the kids weren’t playing on school property. They weren’t playing with their guns on the school bus. They were in Caraballo’s front yard. So why did the police feel like they had to notify the school? And why did the school feel obligated to get involved with something that should have remained a private matter?
According to the chairman of the school board, the reason is that other students at the bus stop were put in danger of being hit by plastic pellets:
“[S]omehow student safety has taken a back seat in the intense media coverage of this case. This is not an example of a public educator overreaching. This was not zero tolerance at all. This was a measured response to a threat to student safety.”
The school must be so used to thinking they own the students that they butt in wherever they don’t belong. (Of course, they don’t really belong anywhere.) Khalid’s mom stated, “How dare he [Khalid] disobey me, but this is a home issue. It’s not a school issue, and it won’t happen again. He will never do this again.” And Aidan’s dad agreed: “I always thought this was a Dad deal, not a school deal. It was a parental issue, not a school issue.”
Thanks to the school’s actions, these kids will likely have “history of gun violence” branded on their school records.
The one good thing that’s come of this is that the parents are being forced to offer their kids an alternative to government schools:
Until the hearing in January, the boys will either attend Renaissance Academy or be homeschooled. Aidan’s father said his son will be homeschooled. Caraballo will attend an alternative school.
Like Will Smith’s son Jaden said, “If everybody in the world dropped out of school we would have a much more intelligent society… School is the tool to brainwash the youth.”
Networks don’t want to risk losing $2.4 billion in ad revenue from pharmaceutical giants
Paul Joseph Watson
September 18, 2013
Despite every indication that Navy Yard gunman Aaron Alexis was on SSRI drugs that have been linked to dozens of previous mass shootings, the mainstream media has once again avoided all discussion of the issue, preferring instead to blame the tragedy on a non-existent AR-15 that the gunman didn’t even use.
We now know that Alexis “had been treated since August by the Veterans Administration for his mental problems.”
As Mike Adams points out, “This is proof that Aaron Alexis was on psychiatric drugs, because that’s the only treatment currently being offered by the Veterans Administration for mental problems. Alexis’ family members also confirmed to the press that he was being “treated” for his mental health problems. Across the medical industry, “treatment” is the code word for psychiatric drugging.”
Alexis also suffered from PTSD, blackouts and anger issues – all of which are treated with SSRI drugs. The most common form of treatment for PTSD is Paroxetine, which is listed as the number 3 top violence-causing drug by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP).
The Navy Yard shooter was clearly on some form of psychiatric drug, but the media has shown no interest in discovering its identity.
Despite it being reported that prescription drugs were found in the apartment of ‘Batman’ shooter James Holmes days after the Aurora massacre, it took nine months to find out exactly what those drugs were. Like Columbine killer Eric Harris, Holmes had been taking Zoloft, another SSRI drug linked with violent outbursts.
The length of time it took to find out that Holmes was on Zoloft was partly because the media habitually shows zero interest in pursuing the link between anti-depressants and violence.
As the website SSRI Stories profusely documents, there are literally hundreds of examples of mass shootings, murders and other violent episodes that have been committed by individuals on psychiatric drugs over the past three decades. The number of cases is staggering.
Why is the corporate media so disinterested in pursuing this clear connection?
Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that the pharmaceutical giants who produce drugs like Zoloft, Prozac and Paxil spend around $2.4 billion dollars a year on direct-to-consumer television advertising every year. By running negative stories about prescription drugs, networks risk losing tens of millions of dollars in ad revenue.
While failing to ask questions about what SSRI drugs Aaron Alexis was taking prior to his rampage, the media instead blamed the shooting on assault rifles, even after it had been confirmed that no AR-15 was used by Alexis during the massacre.
FBI assistant director Victoria Parlave stated at a press conference on Tuesday that authorities, “do not have any information at this time that [Alexis] had an AR-15 in his possession.”
Despite there being no evidence that an AR-15 was used, the New York Daily News ran a front page headline yesterday morning entitled, “Same Gun Different Slay,” next to a picture of an assault rifle.
MIAMI (CBSMiami) – An Opa-Locka teenager is being held without bond after a court hearing and after Miami-Dade Police arrested him for shooting and killing a 71-year-old man.
As first reported first reported by the blog Random Pixels, Miami-Dade Police have identified the suspect who fatally shot Miguel Pilotos as 17-year-old Jamal Jackson.
The victim’s widow told D’Oench that she is distraught about the loss of her husband but she is grateful that Miami-Dade Police made an arrest.
“Now I feel free. I give a lot of thanks,” said Aleida Pilotos, who said she and her husband had been married for 25 years and had come to the U.S. from Cuba 19 years ago.
Atheist activists’ crusade to have the words “In God We Trust” removed from U.S. currency was dealt a major blow this week when a U.S. district court dismissed a lawsuit brought against the Treasury Department by the Freedom From Religion Foundation and Michael Newdow, a lawyer and emergency room doctor.
Judge Harold Baer, a federal district judge in the Southern District of New York, ruled that the argument that the national motto violates the establishment clause of the First Amendment is unfounded, CBN News reported.
The American Center for Law and Justice, a conservative legal organization, submitted a brief to the court defending the motto and calling it ingrained in American history. The organization also noted that the establishment clause isn’t intended to provide the public with a pledge that it will not be exposed to religion or religious symbols.
“The national motto simply echoes the principle found in the Declaration of Independence that our freedoms come from God and not the state,” the organization said.
While the ACLJ was pleased with the end result, Newdow and the Freedom From Religion Foundation most certainly won’t be.
In March, the atheist group announced it was joining 19 other plaintiffs in challenging “In God We Trust.” The challenge was filed on Feb. 1 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
“Our government is prohibited from endorsing one religion over another but also prohibited from endorsing religion over nonreligion,” Dan Barker with the Freedom From Religion Foundation said in a statement. “The placement of a monotheistic ideal on our nation’s currency violates this stricture and is therefore unconstitutional.”