Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Featured’

Feds go to bat for Muslim truckers fired for refusing to do their jobs


star transport

Last month, it was a Muslim flight attendant who sued her airline after it suspended her for refusing to serve booze. This month it’s two Muslim truck drivers, except in this case, handling booze — which is forbidden under Islamic law — was pretty much their entire job description.

The pair, Mahad Abass Mohamed and Abdkiarim Hassan Bulshale, had the backing of the federal government in their religious discrimination lawsuit against their former employer, who rightfully terminated them for refusing to make beer deliveries.Picture1

The Washington Examiner notes that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission won $240,000 in damages to the former drivers, both of Somali heritage, who were fired in 2009.

The EEOC said that Star Transport Inc., a trucking company based in Morton, Ill., violated their religious rights by refusing to accommodate their objections to delivering alcoholic beverages.

“EEOC is proud to support the rights of workers to equal treatment in the workplace without having to sacrifice their religious beliefs or practices,” EEOC General Counsel David Lopez announced Thursday. “This is fundamental to the American principles of religious freedom and tolerance.”

The EEOC argued that Star Transport could have easily reassigned the men to other jobs, but the reverse argument — that Mohamed and Bulshale could have just as easily sought employment in an area that doesn’t compromise their religious principles — is no less valid.

The jury awarded Mohamed and Bulshale $20,000 each in compensatory damages and $100,000 each in punitive damages. The judge awarded each about $1,500 in back pay.

Bulshale said following the judgment, “This case makes me proud to be American.” Really? What would he know about that?

More straight dope on Jade Helm 2015 and the ‘Human Domain’


Coolest dudes on the planet, no matter whose pond they're wading in. (Image: U.S. Navy SEALs)
Coolest dudes on the planet, no matter whose pond they’re wading in. (Image: U.S. Navy SEALs)

Back in March, I wrote that Texas wasn’t being invaded in exercise Jade Helm 2015.  The exercise isn’t about confiscating guns, and it won’t involve violations of Posse Comitatus.

I’ve updated information as it has come along on the exercise: when Texas Governor Greg Abbott decided to have the Guard monitor it (which I support), and when it became clear that the exercise is to be spread geographically further across Texas than originally briefed (which bears watching).

Now it’s time to take on a theme that has taken off over the last month.  The Jade Helm exercise motto is “Master the Human Domain,” which has been a head-scratcher for many.  The expression “human domain” comes from a Department of Defense effort, dating from the mid-2000s, to codify and plan for the environment of human activity in which the military has to operate during non-traditional missions.

  • There are three things to say up front.  One, it does matter that this was chosen as the motto of the exercise.  It’s not just a cute slogan; it means the exercise is focused on “mastering the human domain.”
  • Two, almost all of the speculation I’ve seen out there on what “mastering the human domain” is about appears to be profoundly mistaken.  It’s not about eugenics, for example.  Nor do attempts to break down the words “Jade” and “Helm” as acronyms lead to anything validly connected to the DOD human domain effort.*
  • Three, the human domain aspect does illuminate some things for us, and it does suggest a particular area of concern, especially for an exercise series that is supposed to be held among the communities of the American people.

(If you’re already convinced about the DOD programmatic origins of the human domain concept – a number of websites have provided discussions of it – and if you understand that it is very much about information technology and intelligence, you can skip to the segments on “application to Jade Helm,” below.)

Notional geography for Exercise Jade Helm 2015.  (Army Special Operations Command briefing)

The “human domain”

The need for a “human domain” effort became clear as the operations in Afghanistan and Iraq unfolded.  Counterinsurgency, with its aspects of embeddedness and pervasive contact across all segments of society, just isn’t the same thing as the more conventional model of rolling in hot, blasting military targets to bits, and forcing a political settlement on a recognized authority in a capital city somewhere.

But information connectedness is also a key to understanding the idea of the human domain.  Modern insurgents and other disruptive elements make tremendous use of information technology (IT) – and that in turn means that DOD wants to find ways to use it even smarter than the bad guys do.  Instead of detection and intelligence systems being stovepiped and specialized, a modern military needs to move and breathe in a pulsating environment of smart data on the human domain, if it’s to be the most agile, fastest-moving actor in the conflict problem.  The smart data can cover everything from local social customs and economic activities to alerts gleaned from social media and the “meta-patterns” of cell phone use.

For obvious reasons, special forces – the ones whose disciplines are being exercised in Jade Helm 15 – find the human domain to be an especially big deal.  Because of the tasks they are assigned, the human domain is particularly likely to be relevant to their operations.  And the link between the human domain push in DOD, and the human domain motto of Jade Helm 15, has left a traceable paper trail.

When DOD issued the first strategic guidance for the “human domain” of warfare in 2010, the military services hopped on board with their individual program lines to do R&D and develop doctrine in their respective warfighting spheres.  Figure 1, from an Air Force presentation on human domain factors modeling, shows a snapshot of the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps players from 2011.  The focus on irregular warfare is clear (although the effort still lacked programmatic specificity at that point.)

Figure 1.  Service programs to optimize operations in the human domain.  "HSCB" refers to Human Social, Cultural, Behavioral factors. (Graphic: Briefing by Dr. Mark T. Maybury, Chief Scientist, USAF. Link in text)

The broad extent of the human domain effort can be seen in figure 2, from the Defense Technical Information Center.  It depicts several years’ worth of related studies and projects contracted by DOD entities – both the DOD staff and the services – through a DOD program launched in 2008 called the Minerva Initiative.  The high-level interest in the human domain as a focus of warfighting was affirmed in a white paper from the Army, Marine Corps, and Special Operations Command in 2013.

Figure 2.  List of DOD Minerva initiative studies commissioned with universities, 2009-2016. Most related directly to human domain requirements. (Graphic: DTIC.  See link in text)

The thread we are most interested in is the one that runs through the Army, whose special forces command, USASOC (U.S. Army Special Operations Command), has been on point to the public for Jade Helm.  The Army was already on the trail of human domain warfighting at the time DOD adopted it as an official line of effort.  By 2007, the Army had cobbled together an Army Human Terrain System (official website here), which deployed Human Terrain Teams to try to operationalize insights from anthropology and related disciplines to improve operational methods and outcomes in Afghanistan.  The project has, admittedly, come in for intense criticism from multiple vectors (e.g., here, here, and here).

But Army doctrine authorities remain committed to human domain programming (i.e., training for it, developing systems for it, having doctrine for it).  And Army special operations forces are building their plan for the future force around it, as laid out in the ARSOF 2022 planning document.

In doing this, ARSOF planners draw their authority partly from the joint Special Operations Command (SOCOM), whose vision for a force in 2020 is cited on page 7 of the ARSOF 2022 document:

“SOCOM must not only continue to pursue terrorists wherever we may find them, we must rebalance the force and tenaciously embrace indirect operations in the Human Domain — the totality of the physical, cultural and social environments that influence human behavior in a population-centric conflict.” …

“While SOF is designed to contribute to or support efforts in every domain of warfare, the vast majority of SOF expertise lies in the Human Domain of competition, conflict and war. The Human Domain is about developing understanding of, and nurturing influence among critical populaces. Operating in the Human Domain is a core competency for SOF and we are uniquely suited for successful operations or campaigns to win population-centric conflicts.”

It would require too much space here to discuss all the elements taken into account in “population-centric conflicts.”  For further reading, I recommend a study updated for USASOC in 2013 called Human Factors Considerations of Undergrounds in Insurgencies.

The SOF emphasis on the human domain is significant because Jade Helm is a SOF exercise.  But it’s also significant because Jade Helm is designed to feature interoperation between special forces and conventional forces.  That point has been emphasized in the public briefs on the exercise, and Jade Helm makes so much of it because of a recent trend in thinking about such interoperability in the Department of Defense, both within the SOF community and at the higher levels of command that subsume all warfare communities.

See background links within the text of my March post on Jade Helm – but also see here: an Army War College paper from 2013 on “Interdependence between U.S. Army Special Operations Force and Conventional Forces.”  This paper has been broadly cited in community discussions of the needs and future of SOF, and it too places a significant emphasis on the human domain.

Unquestionably, the capstone SOF exercise of a generation – which is what Jade Helm 2015 is – will be about operating in the human domain.  The motto “Master the Human Domain” reflects that.

Application to Jade Helm: Cultural understanding

But what does that mean for the exercise this summer?  A lot of websites out there are trying to make this about population control of some kind (i.e., through deception, subversion, detention), up to and including a eugenics push.  (Just do a search on “Jade Helm” and “eugenics” and you’ll come right to the websites.) It is, however, nothing of the sort.

For one thing, nothing in the background material on the human domain effort can legitimately be read in that light.  The essential premise of the military’s human domain concept is quite clearly that populations and their cultures and routine activities take moral and political precedence over military tasks.  The military posture will be one of adapting – working within the constraints of local norms – and, if possible (as mission-appropriate), influencing and persuading.  Whether SOF or conventional forces, the U.S. military expects to operate frequently in an environment dictated by local human conditions – not to dictate those things to the local people.

The strategic utility of this mindset, and whether America ought to be sending forces out to operate in this way, are topics for another time.  (I don’t dispute that it’s legitimate to question using military force in this way.)  The point here is that mastering the human domain is predicated on it, and the exercise play in Jade Helm will be too.

This point underlies one of two key aspects of Jade Helm that we can extract from the emphasis on “mastering the human domain.”  I’ll address the second aspect in the segment below on “intelligence operations.”

Regarding the first aspect, which I refer to generally as “cultural understanding”: we know that Jade Helm is an unconventional warfare exercise, meaning that it’s about the irregular warfare discipline of supporting foreign insurgencies against hostile governments (again, see my March post).  There are two big clues as to what that means for the exercise.

One clue was embedded in the USASOC brief shopped around Texas in March and April.  Slide 7 of that brief explained why Texas was chosen for the live-play terrain:

The United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) has conducted numerous exercises in Texas because Texans are historically supportive of efforts to prepare our soldiers, airmen, marines and sailors to fight the enemies of the United States.

The second bullet on that slide provides a good compilation of operating requirements that are common to SOF and all human domain warfighting:

To hone advanced skills, the military and interagency require large areas of undeveloped land with low population densities with access to towns.  The proposed areas offer the conditions conducive to quality training because of real obstacles to challenge joint and IA personnel during planning and execution of their tasks.  These challenges include:

– Operating outside the normal support mechanisms

– Adapting to unfamiliar terrain, social and economic conditions

– Operating in and around communities where anything out the ordinary will be spotted and reported (locals are the first to notice something out of place)

The opportunity to work with civilians to gain their trust and understanding of the issues

In an interview with blogger Aaron Wilson, the Army spokesman for Jade Helm, LTC Mark Lastoria, added some depth to that earlier clue:

Q: [Wilson] What is this “blending in” that you talked about in Bastrop [TX]?

A: [Lastoria] We want to get the Midwest mindset going, it is an adaptive technique, a subtly [sic] we need to master, quite different than Atlantic Coast style.

What Lastoria is talking about is learning and adapting to cultural cues in the human domain.  He points out (elliptically, but you know this if you know where ARSOF regularly conduct exercises) that the cultural conditions in Texas will be somewhat different from those on the Atlantic Coast.  (Primarily North Carolina.)  That’s a desirable feature for a robust training evolution.

But put that together with the original point from the briefing: that Texas was chosen because of the traditional friendliness of the population.  That characteristic fits well with the population profile SOF would expect if it deployed abroad for unconventional warfare.  The U.S. would deploy SOF to link up with friendly elements of local populations for an unconventional warfare mission.

Putting it all together now: we might know going in that these foreign populations were friendly (like Texas) in the sense of sharing a political goal with us.  But SOF would still need to understand their local norms to operate among them successfully.  That, in sum, is the live-play proposition of Jade Helm.

The other big clue to this “cultural understanding” aspect of the human domain in Jade Helm is also from Lastoria’s interview with Aaron Wilson.  It’s this brief passage:

Q:  What does the wooden clog symbolize in your logo center between the crossed arrows and dagger?

A:  It relates to N. European resistance to tyranny going back some 70 years and a reuniting with a democratic form of governance.

Frankly, although I didn’t key on the clog, I immediately thought of the U.S. connection with European resistance movements when I first saw the original briefing back in March, and connected it with the meaning of “unconventional warfare.”  The main example that occurred to me was the French resistance in World War II.  The clog would symbolize equally the resistance movements in the Netherlands and Belgium.  (Although Lastoria refers to “northern Europe,” other examples from the same period would be the resistance movements in Greece and the Balkans.)

image: http://libertyunyield.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Jade-Helm-logo.jpg

Jade Helm logoJade Helm, in other words, really is about practicing the skills needed to embed with a resistance movement in a foreign population, where the government is hostile.  “Mastering the human domain” relates to the requirements and skills for that mission.

I don’t believe the exercise scenario designates the state government of Texas as a hostile entity.  There is no indication of that.  Given the fact that straightforward conclusions about Jade Helm make sense based on DOD policy, and on what has actually been said about the exercise, there appears to be no reason to speculate fancifully on this head.

“Hostile,” where it is played live in these exercises, is typically played by a separate force drawn from the designated agency or service participants, and organized to act independently.  In this case that would include DOD entities and players from other agencies, such as homeland security and the FBI.  (If you’d like a concurring opinion on that from another vet, I can recommend the very sensible post here.)

Application to Jade Helm: Intelligence operations

That said, the second key aspect of Jade Helm should be of concern to us.  And the validity of this concern is revealed most clearly by filtering the Jade Helm event through the prism of the “human domain.”

To put it briefly: from the perspective of American citizens, collecting and processing intelligence for human domain operations is likely to be intrusive and unacceptable in the IT realm.

Almost nothing has been said in public about the IT element in human domain operations, as it relates to Jade Helm.  But if you investigate human domain theory, IT figures hugely in it.  Much of operationalizing the human domain concept is about leveraging – wait for it – “Big Data”: that universe of data now floating around on people and events.

An example that would probably apply to an exercise like Jade Helm is monitoring the routine communications of the local population, whether by scooping in data from social media or by some means of watching patterns in communications metadata (e.g., big spikes in cell-phone calls just before major events, or just after something unique has been detected by the locals).  These are simplified examples, meant to suggest the categories of phenomena that human domain intelligence would be looking for.

Figure 3.  Schematic of old-style intelligence collection and analysis: stovepiped “INTs” tasked against specific targets, and compared and analyzed with a focus on those targets to produce an assessment.  Note the arrow at the top pushing outward from the grab-bag of INTs. (Graphic: Chandler P. Atwood, National Defense University. Link in text)

But the Big Data aspect of the approach is what’s most important.  (Hang in there with me; I promise you, this all matters.)  The concept of human domain intelligence explicitly says that the old-style collection of data – against designated targets, and once those targets are thought to be meaningful – is inadequate.  See figure 3 for a representation of this old-style mode of collection.

What human domain intelligence envisions is using the Big Data construct of persistent surveillance, meaning that the types of activity from which you can sometimes need to draw conclusions should be collected constantly and comprehensively, and then stored, and “pulled” from – data-mined – at the moment of need.  (See figures 4 and 5.)

Figure 4.  Schematic of “activity based intelligence” (ABI): persistent, all-INT collection from which network connections in the human domain can be developed, and which can be data-mined for specific current needs.  Note how the orange arrow is inverted, “reaching into” the Big Data database for what is needed for a particular problem.  (Graphic: Chandler P. Atwood, National Defense University. Link in text)

If this sounds like the description of NSA’s notorious database – the trillions and trillions of bits of unfiltered metadata being collected and stored on Americans’ IT activities over the past decade – that’s because it is.  The chirpy tone in which DOD briefers and contractors discuss the need for a persistent, Big Data approach indicates how routine and accepted the concept is today in government planning.

(For additional perspective, see the entire brief here from which figure 5 is an excerpt, and note the proposed application for emergency management and law enforcement use in slides 30-32.  The vision for using Big Data involves massive and persistent “mapping” of human activity.  In DOD’s human domain approach, Big Data is focused through the lens of an analytical rubric called Activity Based Intelligence, or ABI, which is discussed in the slide presentations linked above as well as here and here.)

Figure 5.  The emphasis on "persistent surveillance" as a core element of activity based intelligence. The idea is to record activities, or events, as they occur, store them in a massive database, and mine them later as necessary.  GEOINT refers to geospatial intelligence, which includes human activities referenced to terrain as well as natural physical features. (Graphic: Joseph D. Fargnoli, RITRE Corp. Link in text)

Now, constant collection is a very fine thing against foreign targets. If our special forces deploy into foreign territory to assist an insurgency we support against a hostile government, I hope the military is collecting the living snot out of the whole environment, IT included, as persistently and intrusively as we can manage.

But if an exercise is being held in the state of Texas – whose IT environment is being persistently collected against, to simulate the conditions special forces need for mastering the human domain?  What are they doing with the data?  What happens to the data afterward?  Is this something the citizens of Texas would approve?

Interestingly, in spite of the cloak of secrecy that always attends special operations, I’ve seen one reference to IT surveillance in reporting on Jade Helm, from this Gawker post by William M. Arkin in May:

Jade Helm is particularly focused on what’s called intelligence preparation of the battlespace (IPB), and the skills of surveillance and cellphone interception—targeting—that goes on in the Middle East and Africa.

Arkin doesn’t say what the source of this factual assertion is, but it does fit in with the common focal points of special operations and human domain operations.  And Arkin gets some other things right, like his allusion to “Phase Zero” as the earliest preparing-the-battlespace phase of a campaign’s life cycle.  We can assume with confidence that he’s correct here.

Concerns about Jade Helm 2015

That’s why I conclude this post with a reiteration of concern about Jade Helm.  The more we know, the better defined our concerns can be.  Initially, my main issue was that Americans should not simply accept being conditioned to having military exercises unfold in the midst of our communities.  We need not imagine that anyone has bad intentions, to recognize that that is still a bad idea.  It opens a door to misuse, down the road, of inherently dangerous activities we’ve become complacent about.

The other concern is what exactly will be going on with the IT-oriented, persistent-surveillance-plus-Big-Data aspect of Jade Helm and its human domain focus.  Someone in Texas – ideally, starting with the governor – should know what’s being done in that regard.

Big Data and the human domain: a simplified schematic of the mass of collectible "event" data available for characterizing the human domain in which a military force will operate.  It's one thing if this schematic is overlaid on Afghanistan.  It looks a little different if it's overlaid on Texas.  Whose data and "events" are being recorded, to map the human domain?

In fact, a condition of holding this kind of exercise in a state should be that the governor can select some people to be read into the requisite defense programs, and watch what’s being done in real time.

Senators and congressmen certainly have the right to inquire into this on behalf of their constituents.  There’s a valid need for operational secrecy, but if the American people are being collected on by any agency of the government, they have the right to critical, skeptical, even adversarial representation.  Ideally, more than one branch or level of government should be looking out for their interests.  One of the purposes of checks and balances is to ensure against just such a situation as unchecked presumptions being made in favor of the executive branch.

Government collecting Big Data on the American people, for general purposes, is a whole separate question, and I won’t get into it here.  But the necessity of doing it for a military exercise – assuming that is in fact what’s being planned – is a distinct question in and of itself.  The line protecting Americans’ rights becomes very shaky if military exercises start treating the citizens as if we are foreign collection targets, just because that can be done undetectably, without citizens being aware of it. 

* A number of websites are repeating a theme that “Jade” stands for Joint Assistant for Deployment and Execution, and that this planning software is connected somehow to the human domain aspect of the exercise.  This is incorrect (indeed, rather laughably so).

The Air Force commissioned a DARPA project in 1997 to produce a computerized tool that would help build a fearsome deployment-planning database known to harassed mid-grade officers as the TPFDD (“tip-fid,” or Time-Phased Force Deployment Data).  The project ran through 2001, and was reported out here.  It has nothing whatsoever to do with the human domain effort.

The word Helm, meanwhile, is not an acronym for “Homeland Eradication (or Elimination) of Local Militants.”

freedom combo 2

White House: Obama to restrict media’s reporting of anti-jihad articles


By Michael DorstewitzMichael Dorstewitz on January 14, 2015

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://libertyunyielding.com/2015/01/14/white-house-obama-restrict-medias-reporting-anti-jihad-articles/#1AwESo67hIi7ZlSj.99

Josh-Earnest-620x429

Source: Legal Insurrection

At Monday’s White House press briefing, chief spokesman Josh Earnest indicated that in light of the terrorist raid of Charlie Hebdo’s Paris offices by jihadists, President Barack Obama would be taking a serious swipe at the First Amendment freedom of the press as it pertains to future anti-Jihadist articles.

The Daily Caller reported:

President Barack Obama has a moral responsibility to push back on the nation’s journalism community when it is planning to publish anti-jihadi articles that might cause a jihadi attack against the nation’s defenses forces, the White House’s press secretary said Jan. 12.

“The president … will not now be shy about expressing a view or taking the steps that are necessary to try to advocate for the safety and security of our men and women in uniform” whenever journalists’ work may provoke jihadist attacks, spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters at the White House’s daily briefing.

The unprecedented reversal of Americans’ civil-military relations, and of the president’s duty to protect the First Amendment, was pushed by Earnest as he tried to excuse the administration’s opposition in 2012 to the publication of anti-jihadi cartoons by the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.Imperial President Obama kingobamafingerconstitution-300x204

Back in Sept. 2012, then-White House Press Secretary Jay Carney criticized Charlie Hebdo for its publication of cartoon images lampooning Mohammad. He said, according to White House Dossier:

Well, we are aware that a French magazine published cartoons featuring a figure resembling the Prophet Muhammad, and obviously, we have questions about the judgment of publishing something like this. We know that these images will be deeply offensive to many and have the potential to be inflammatory. But we’ve spoken repeatedly about the importance of upholding the freedom of expression that is enshrined in our Constitution.cropped-freedom-is-not-dictator-friendly.pngObama Muslim collection

It’s obvious that the White House, as of Monday, hasn’t backed off from this position.

The First Amendment, as it pertains to the press’ reporting and analyzing of events, provides, “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom … of the press….”

But over and above those rights that are guaranteed and protected under the Constitution, something else is at play here — something advanced by Ross Douthat in his Jan. 7 New York Times commentary:

“If a large enough group of someone is willing to kill you for saying something, then it’s something that almost certainly needs to be said, because otherwise the violent have veto power over liberal civilization, and when that scenario obtains it isn’t really a liberal civilization any more….”

Stated differently, when journalists back off of a story or sanitize its reporting and commentary of events out of fear of terrorist attacks, the terrorists have already won.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Michael DorstewitzMichael Dorstewitz is a recovering Michigan trial lawyer and former research vessel deck officer. He has written extensively for BizPac Review.

More by Michael Dorstewitz

 

 

 

Freedom with Prayer

Texas ranchers: Terrorists reportedly caught at border; feds clam up (Video)


Obamacare

Read more at http://libertyunyielding.com/2014/09/09/texas-ranchers-terrorists-reportedly-caught-border-feds-clam-video/#HdEtESlH5WAK5987.99

By J.E. Dyer on September 9, 2014 at 4:25 am

(Image via dailyslave.com)

(Image via dailyslave.com)

With 9/11 coming up and Fort Bliss, the Army post outside of El Paso, having implemented additional security measures following reports that ISIS is across the border in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, it is increasingly peculiar that federal agencies don’t want to talk about this.

It has been confirmed through the Texas Department of Public Safety that an alert was issued on the presence of ISIS over the border and the potential for an attack.

Texas sheriffs near the border are on alert as well, like Gary Painter in Midland County, which lies a little over 100 miles up country from the border but is easily accessible from it, across sparsely populated terrain, and is situated on the major thoroughfare of Interstate 20.  Painter spoke to the media on Saturday (all emphasis added):

The sheriff said he received an alert bulletin that ISIS — Islamic State of Iraq and Syria — may have formed a terrorist cell in or near Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, a Mexican border city across from El Paso. He said the alert warned law enforcement agencies to be on the lookout for such activity.

Imperial Islamic President ObamaThe Reporter-Telegram contacted the FBI for a statement on the reports, but the organization is currently not commenting on the subject.

This is a serious issue for Painter, the former president of the Sheriff’s Association of Texas. He said the situation is made worse by Texas’ open border.

Painter’s concern about the open border is being reinforced by more and more new-media reporting.  The Texas DPS and the sheriffs can’t be everywhere.  Neither can the Texas State Guard soldiers called up by Rick Perry.  A recent, very disturbing set of interviews with Texas ranchers, posted on 4 September by Oath Keepers (h/t: Truth Revolt), reveals just how big a threat that open border may be – and how the Border Patrol is reportedly being gagged and hamstrung in its effort to police it.  (The YouTube video with audio of the entire interview is embedded below.)

Rancher Cuban “Rusty” Monsees lives in Cameron County, at the east end of the Texas border on the Gulf coast.  (Cameron County is where Border Patrol agent Javier Vega, Jr. was killed by cartel-linked illegals on 3 August, while out fishing with his family).  According to Monsees, the Border Patrol has caught illegals infiltrating his area from several of the world’s major sources of terrorist operatives (all punctuation in original):

Rusty describes Border Patrol intercepting Muslim men from Somalia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and says “when they [Border Patrol] take them in, they’ll disappear – they’ll take them somewhere – and even the records will disappear. And I asked one of them ‘what’s the deal on the records’ and he said ‘that’s an order from way up the line, up in DC – they don’t want anybody to know how many are coming through’…they [the local Border Patrol agents] keep records but the records disappear, out of the mainframe – out of the computer – and the paper records too.”

A second man, Rob, an Oath Keeper who has been helping Rusty guard his ranch for the past month, added the following:

[They] had six middle eastern males on Rusty’s property [which Border Patrol was able to catch] … all I know is they were Muslim.   I wasn’t told a whole lot of information about it.   I do know they had told me they had caught eleven of the same group, the week prior to that, that had been on our United States terrorist wanted list [for acts against the United States] – not watch, but wanted list.  And this is the kind of stuff that they are not releasing to the public, they’re not allowed to release it.

Rob continued:

They were caught and they were turned over to Homeland Security, and everything pretty much disappeared like what Rusty was saying.  None of that is any public information or anything like that, so they don’t want it to be public.  [ the BP is not allowed to tell anyone that known terrorists are coming across the border].  They aren’t allowed to speak about it.  The only thing we [the American public] hear about is women and kids… and when they make huge drug busts, that’s what we hear about.  We don’t hear about the gang-bangers coming across, we don’t hear about the terrorists coming across.  We don’t hear about the violence going down on the border.  I had a rancher call me last week, and begging for help on 15,000 acres.  He had been moved off his ranch because he doesn’t feel safe with his family there.  He’s been shot at and threatened.  We don’t hear that [on the news].

We also don’t hear about this on the news:

In the interview, Rusty also describes attacks on lone Border Patrol agents, during day and at night, telling how one officer suffered a broken leg, broken arm, crushed sternum, and eight broken ribs, and how the illegals “stomped on him so bad they thought he was dead, and they stripped off his uniform, got his backup [handgun], his service automatic, went to the unit, they got the tac vest … they got the M-4, all the ammunition, and … all the comm[unications] equipment.” Rusty says this has happened “about six times.”Wake up America

The problem seems to be bigger than instituting adequate patrol measures, however (e.g., making sure Border Patrolmen are operating together Christian Persecutionand can outgun the illegals).  According to all the ranchers and security volunteers interviewed, including Rusty and Rob, the Border Patrol has been directed by higher authority not to engage armed illegals coming across the border.

They can’t make any contact with armed cartel, or any armed person for that matter, so if there’s an armed terrorist, armed cartel, uhm, armed MS-13, coming across that border, they’re not allowed to make contact with them. They have to let them walk and call DPS (Texas Department of Public Safety]. And they come out and they arrest them on criminal charges. [what’s their response time?] “Maybe two hours.” So, in other words, it doesn’t happen. “Yeh, it doesn’t happen. It’s complete bogus is what it is. …”

The deployment of the Texas Guard isn’t helping where Rusty is either.  The Guard’s equipment may not be the best, but the bigger problem for Cameron County is that the Guard is deployed somewhat further west along the border (see map).

The Texas State Guard are in the flimsy, cheap, probably Chinese made watch-towers.  They’re not bullet proof, they’ve got glass on four sides and they posted them from McCallen, which is the North end of the Valley, to Laredo, which is about 200 miles.  They’re not down here south.

The 1250 miles of the Texas border with Mexico. (Google map; author annotation)

The 1250 miles of the Texas border with Mexico. (Google map; author annotation)

Oath Keepers interviewed Monsees’ neighbor Fernando as well (video below).  Fernando says bluntly that Americans aren’t being told what’s going on:

border

When asked how many children has he seen coming across, he said “none.”   He has seen large groups of up to fifty people, and they have all been adults, and primarily men.

“Don’t believe everything you hear in the news.   There is something happening here, there is danger for the people that are living here right now, based on the way they’re handling the immigration problem.   They’re allowing these people to come through our neighborhoods and those of us that are actually living here are the ones that are seeing it on a daily basis.”

He confirms Rusty’s and Rob’s comments about restrictions on the Border Patrol:

They’re not even to draw their weapon on these people – if they can they are supposed to just continue on their way, move out and leave them alone.  And to me, that puts my family in danger because that [open] gate is right at the end of my street.

border 2

Read, as they say, the whole thing at Oath Keepers.  There’s a lot more.  Sean Hannity’s been to the border with Rick Perry.  It’s time for higher-profile media to get down there and talk to the ranchers.  Many of them have been on the same land for generations.  It’s because of national policy that they now find themselves on the front lines of what is effectively a growing war on Americans and our way of life.

Sheriff Gary Painter, back in Midland County, thinks we need to fight – and definitely fight ISIS:

Painter said that President Barack Obama and the federal government need to take quick and appropriate action to weaken ISIS leadership. For Painter, that means striking ISIS hard at the source: Iraq and Syria.

“What needs to happen is that there needs to be enough bombs dropped on (ISIS leaders), that every time they hear a jet propeller they urinate themselves down both legs.”

J.E. Dyer

J.E. Dyer is a retired Naval Intelligence officer who lives in Southern California, blogging as The Optimistic Conservative for domestic tranquility and world peace. Her articles have appeared at Hot Air, Commentary’s Contentions, Patheos, The Daily Caller, The Jewish Press, and The Weekly Standard.

More by

 

 

 

 

Bombshell: Has Michael Brown’s robbery accomplice recanted his story?


Complete Message

Read more at http://libertyunyielding.com/2014/08/20/bombshell-michael-browns-accomplice-recanted-story/#EKB3BykW20f4Zwhq.99

By Michael Dorstewitz on August 20, 2014 at 8:41 am

Special Note From

“This story has NOT been vetted. Please take what you are ready with the proverbial “grain-of-salt”.

 

 

 

 

 

Dorian Johnson
Dorian Johnson

Missouri rock-oriented radio station KFNS-FM, 100.7 “The Viper,” released a news item Tuesday evening that, if true, will destroy the case against Darren Wilson, the officer who shot and killed Brown.

Under the banner headline, “”JUSTIFIED!,” the station reported on its Facebook page:

***BREAKING NEWS***
Remember, you saw it and heard it here first. We have heard (from a VERY connected national media source) that Ferguson officer Darren Wilson will be cleared in the shooting of Michael Brown. The key: Dorian Johnson has now admitted that Michael Brown attacked Officer Wilson and attempted to take his gun. OFFICER WILSON WILL NOT BE CHARGED! This is scary. When this news is made official, we all have reason to be concerned about the reaction.

Johnson’s prior testimony that Wilson shot Brown in the back while running away from the officer was cast in doubt after autopsy reports indicated he was shot in the front.

Since the Ferguson, Mo., shooting, that area has become the scene of nightly looting, vandalism and racially-charged demonstrations. The vast majority of the demonstrators have called for the officer’s arrest.

In a video address released Tuesday, even Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon, a Democrat, has called for Wilson’s “vigorous prosecution.”

Readers should be cautioned that the radio station’s breaking news item has so far been uncorroborated.

Article collective closing

Tennessee Nullification of Obamacare & All Federal Gun Laws Legislation Introduced


After reading the following article, please pray with me that most of the other States will follow Tennessee’s Example. Obamacare will then die a natural death.

This is a great example of the States taking BACK the power our founders wanted the States to maintain. MrB

<><><><><><><><><><><><>

Posted By on Jan 16, 2014

http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/01/tennessee-nullification-obamacare-federal-gun-laws-legislation-introduced/#bGSrVmFKeZ4P212f.99

tennessee capital

First, SB1680 is being sponsored by Sen. Mae Beavers (R-Mt. Juliet), along with eight co-sponsors in the Tennessee senate and a companion bill in the House by Rep. Mark Pody (R-Lebanon).  The bills would prohibit the state, its officials and agencies from implementing or administering any part of the Affordable Care Act.

The bill reads in part:

“No powers, assets, employees, agents or contractors of the state, including any institution under control of the University of Tennessee or the Tennessee board of regents, or any political subdivision, municipality or other local government entity shall be used to assist in implementing the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, or any subsequent federal amendment to such act…”

Georgia has introduced similar legislation and this comes on the heels of South Carolina’s legislation to that is designed to gut the massive health care law.

According to the Tenth Amendment Center’s national communications director Mike Maharrey, the idea behind nullification by the states is to cause the federal system to collapse, in order to replace it with a decentralized system at the state level.

“We know the feds counted on the states to do the heavy lifting,” Maharrey continued.  “We know the number of states refusing to create exchanges created problems. If enough states simply say, ‘No,’ this monstrosity will collapse under its own weight.”

“This action, especially in conjunction with similar steps being taken in other states, has the effect of nullifying ObamaCare,” said Rep. Pody, echoing Maharrey’s comments.

“If the feds cannot even build an appropriate website or keep their promises to consumers, they will be extremely hard-pressed to implement the other provisions for this program within our boundaries,” Pody added.

Meanwhile, on Wednesday Senator Mae Beavers also introduced legislation to stop the usurpation of the federal government in the area of the Second Amendment.  SB1607, 2014 Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act, was introduced to cut the legs out from under any federal gun laws.

The legislation seeks to delete an entire section of the Tennessee code and replace it with the following:

(a) Any federal enactment or federal enforcement action relating to firearms, firearm accessories or ammunition, is void in this state.

(b) Any federal enactment or federal enforcement action impacting or infringing upon the rights of individuals or entities relative to firearms, firearm accessories or ammunition, is void in this state.

(c) No public official, employee, or agent of this state or any of its political subdivisions shall act, aid, or otherwise cooperate to impose, collect, enforce, or effectuate any fine, penalty, or other federal enactment or federal enforcement action in this state.

(d) Any enforcement of, or attempt to enforce, any federal enactment or federal enforcement action against any individual or entity in this state is an infringement of the civil rights of the individual so affected, and with respect to any such entity, such action is a violation of the rights of each individual having an ownership or membership interest in such entity.

Additionally, the bill would make it an “offense to knowingly enforce or attempt to enforce any federal enactment or to further assist any federal enforcement action.”

The person violating the legislation would be charged with a Class A misdemeanor on the first violation and a Class C felony on a second or subsequent violation.

A press release from the Tennessee Firearms Association reads:

The Firearms Freedom Act declares that the States speaking through the US Constitution expressly prohibited the federal government from having any regulatory authority over firearms inside the state of   Tennessee, and as such no federal firearms law in Tennessee is valid. These prohibitions are most prominent in the wording of 2nd and 10th Amendments. The new push will mandate criminal penalties for any federal or state official attempting to enforce unconstitutional federal firearms laws within the borders of Tennessee.  It is also expected to authorize citizens to pursue claims by expressly defining federal firearms laws as intentional civil rights violations.

Executive Director for the TFA John Harris said, “We are closely watching the legislature this year. Any elected official who votes against or works to obstruct the right to keep and bear arms will likely feel the pain from the voters in their district during their next election.” 

“Any elected official in Tennessee who works against this bill is frankly siding with President Obama on gun control,” Harris continued.  “If you don’t vote to protect your own citizens and state from Obama’s liberal gun-grabbing agenda, then you are effectively supporting his gun control scheme and the intentional destruction of the Bill of Rights.”

This would ultimately rule all federal firearm laws as null and void in Tennessee, something that should have been done when the first federal firearms laws were issued.  Well done Tennessee

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: