Man Charged With Terrorism For Criticizing School Security

A disabled grandfather from Centerville is behind bars facing terrorism charges.

In post-9/11 America, mere words can get you thrown in jail with a felony terrorism charge poised to ruin your life and confine you to a cage for years on end.
Sandy Hook has amplified the insanity.

Brian Davis, disabled man from Iowa, made the mistake of telling his physical therapist that he believes security at his grand daughter’s school is lacking. Now he is in the slammer charged with felony threat of terrorism.

According to the people who ratted out Davis to the cops, he threatened to storm the school and shoot people. “I never said that I would go in there and do something to those kids.” Davis told WHO TV 13 in Des Moines. “I said anybody, any one person could go in there. Anybody.”

The leviathan national security state and its engorged under belly of bureaucrats, judges, prosecutors and redundancy of increasingly sadistic cops needs victims like Mr. Davis to justify its existence.   source

WHOtv - Des Moines..." We talked with 52-year old Brian Davis from the Appanoose County Jail where he is charged with felony threat of terrorism. He says he was making small talk with his physical therapist, complaining about what he considers to be lax securty at his granddaughter’s school, when the therapist claimed Davis made a threatening comment about going into the school and opening fire."

“We got a call from the administrator of the hospital, expressed concern over what Mr. Davis had said to some employees.” says Centerville Police Sergeant Mike Moore, “It did become more of a personalized issue, where he said he was going to do this or he could do this.”

But Davis says he was making the point that anyone could get into the school, and never said anything about shooting students “I never said that I would go in there and do something to those kids.” Davis says, “I said anybody, any one person could go in there. Anybody.”

Davis, who has no criminal record and says he doesn’t even own a gun, says this is all a big misunderstanding. But police say they won’t take any chances when it comes to children’s safety. Davis is being held on $50,000 cash bond.

source

US Chemical Battalion in South Korea

The United States has deployed a battalion equipped to deal with nuclear, biological and chemical attacks in South Korea after North Korea threatened to attack the US with ‘nuclear weapons.’

Reports say about 250 soldiers from the US Army 23rd chemical battalion have returned to South Korea. The troops are stationed at Camp Stanley in Uijeongbu, north of Seoul.

Meanwhile, North Korea’s Committee for Peaceful Reunification of Korea (CPRK) has said that the deployment is a revelation of the criminal attempt of the United States to impose nuclear disasters on the Korean nation.

“During the Korean War, the US indiscriminately used germ and chemical weapons against the Korean people, stunning the world,” the CPRK stated on Wednesday. “The US now seeks to make such crimes against humanity repeat.”

War of words escalated between Washington and Pyongyang after the participation of nuclear-capable US B-52s and B-2 stealth bombers in the United States’ joint military drills with South Korea.

The North Korean Army said earlier on Thursday that it received final approval for a nuclear attack on the United States in response to Washington’s threats.

The General Staff of the Korean People’s Army (KPA) said in a statement that the threats by the US would be “smashed by… cutting-edge smaller, lighter and diversified nuclear strike means.”

The Pentagon said it would deploy an advanced anti-missile system to the Pacific island of Guam.

The deployment of the missile system is a “precautionary move to strengthen our regional defense posture against the North Korean regional ballistic missile threat,” the Pentagon stated.

The anti-missile system includes a truck-mounted launcher, a complement of interceptor missiles, an AN/TPY- 2 tracking radar and an integrated fire control system.


source

North Korea Moves Missile With 'Considerable Range' to Coast

North Korea has moved a missile with "considerable range" to its east coast, South Korea's defence minister said Thursday, but he added that there are no signs that Pyongyang is preparing for a full-scale conflict.

The report came hours after North Korea's military warned that it has been authorized to attack the U.S. using "smaller, lighter and diversified" nuclear weapons. It was the North's latest war cry against America in recent weeks. The reference to smaller weapons could be a claim that Pyongyang has improved its nuclear technology. Or a bluff.

South Korean Defence Minister Kim Kwan-jin said he did not know the reasons behind the North's missile movement, and that it "could be for testing or drills."

He dismissed reports in Japanese media that the missile could be a KN-08, which is believed to be a long-range missile that if operable could hit the United States.

Kim told lawmakers at a parliamentary committee meeting that the missile has "considerable range" but not enough to hit the U.S. mainland.

The range he described could refer to a mobile North Korean missile known as the Musudan, which has a range of 3,000 kilometres. 

That would make Japan and South Korea potential targets — along with U.S. bases in both countries — but there are doubts about the missile's accuracy.

source

CIA Has Unlimited Access to Your Bank Account!

Bank Account Info Belongs to the CIA

The Obama administration has proposed legislation that will give the CIA and NSA spy agencies access to your bank account and private finances.

Again, Washington is using the smoke screen of the war on terror as justification to remove more civil rights from the unsuspecting American public.

Currently, the FBI is the only agency that has access to these databases, but the plan will give the CIA and NSA the same access.

So does this proposition take the war on terror too far?

Are we seeing a further push towards the implementation of a police state in America?

Private investigator Kenneth Cummins explains the legality of the legislation.


source

ALERT: All Of The Money In Your Bank Account Could Disappear In A Single Moment

What would you do if you logged in to your bank account someday and it showed that you had a zero balance and your bank had no record that you ever had any money in your account?  What would you do if all of the money in your bank account suddenly disappeared in a single moment?  

If you had not kept any paper records, which most Americans do not, it would be exceedingly difficult to prove to the bank that you actually had any money in the bank.  If you don't think that something like this could ever happen in the United States, you might want to think again.  Cyber attacks against major banks in the United States are becoming more powerful and more sophisticated with each passing month.  In fact, major U.S. bank websites have been offline for a total of 249 hours over the past six weeks.  And just last month, thousands upon thousands of Chase customers logged into their bank accounts only to discover that their balances had all been reset to zero.  Anyone that would want to cause complete and total economic chaos in the United States could accomplish it very easily by wiping out all of our bank account records.  So please do not keep all of your money in a single bank, and from now on please keep a paper copy of all of your bank account statements.  At some point it is likely that one of these cyber attacks will cause permanent damage to our banking system, and you want to be protected.

The mainstream media has generally been very quiet about the massive cyber attacks against our major banks, but behind the scenes authorities are truly alarmed.  They don't know how to stop these attacks, and they just keep getting more intense and more sophisticated.

Could you imagine how you would feel if you logged in to your bank account and all of your money was gone?  That is exactly what happened to some Chase customers last month.  The following is from a recent CNET article...

JP Morgan Chase denied this evening that it had suffered a hack that many customers claimed had suddenly reduced their checking account balances to zero.

After discovering the apparently empty accounts via the Internet or mobile devices, many Chase banking customers turned to Twitter to express their frustration and show screen shots of zero balances. Other users were greeted with messages that their bank account balances were unavailable.

But this was most definitely not an isolated incident.  That same article noted that Chase and many of our other large banks have had their websites taken down for extended periods of time lately...

Customers' suspicions about a possible security breach are natural, with the zero balances appearing less than a week after a massive distributed-denial-of-service attack rendered Chase's Web sites useless for many hours. Customers trying to use the site's tools were instead greeted with a note that the site was "temporarily down."

Hackers have ratcheted up their assaults on financial institutions in recent months, using DDoS attacks to take down Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Chase, Citigroup, HSBC, and others.

In fact, as I mentioned above, major U.S. bank websites have been offline for an astounding 249 hours over the last six weeks alone.  The attacks just keep getting larger and bank officials are becoming very alarmed about the power of these cyber attacks.  The following is from an article that was posted on CNBC this week...

Major U.S. bank websites have been offline a total of 249 hours in the past six weeks, perhaps the clearest indication yet that American companies are prime targets in an unrelenting, global cyber conflict.

The heavier-than-usual outages are the result of a remarkable, sustained attack that began seven months ago and repeatedly knocks banks offline for hours at a time, frustrating consumers and bank security professionals alike.

"Literally, these banks are just in war rooms, sitting at controls trying to stop (the attacks)," said Avivah Litan, a bank security analyst with Gartner Group, a consulting firm. "The frightening thing is (the attackers) are not using as much resources as they have on call. The attacks could be bigger."

So who is behind these attacks?

Some are blaming Chinese hackers, others believe that Iran is behind the attacks, and yet others are convinced that it is the work of Islamic terrorists.

It is kind of frightening that they cannot positively identify who is behind these attacks.  Whoever it is, they sure do seem to have a tremendous amount of resources and they are very sophisticated.

And in the future, it may not be hackers on the other side of the globe that are attacking our banks.  In fact, if someone wanted to "recapitalize the banks", all they would have to do is wipe out all of our bank account records (including all backup records).  Suddenly trillions of dollars of "unsecured liabilities" (that is what our bank accounts are) would be wiped out and the banks would suddenly be solvent again.  Anyone that could not produce evidence that they actually had money in the banks would be in a lot of trouble.  It would be the largest single wealth transfer in the history of the world, and it would throw the U.S. economy into utter chaos.  This is a scenario that I am exploring in my new novel which will be coming out later this month.
In addition, there is the constant threat that a massive EMP burst could fry all of our electronics (including the banking records), but that is a topic that I have covered in a previous article.

And of course another way that your bank account could be wiped out in a single moment is if the government decides to "legally" steal it.  We just witnessed this happen in Cyprus.  In February, the Central Bank of Cyprus swore that such a thing could never possibly happen, but then one month later it did happen.  The politicians will lie to your face until the very day comes when they steal your money.

Sadly, a very similar thing could easily happen in the United States someday.  As I wrote about yesterday, the big banks are making incredibly reckless bets with our money.  When those bets go bad, our money could very well be used to cover those bets.

One way this could be accomplished is by using a practice known as "rehypothecation".  It sounds complicated, but it really isn't.  Basically, the banks use money that clients have entrusted to them to cover their own gambling debts.  This is how rehypothecaton is defined by Investopedia...

"The practice by banks and brokers of using, for their own purposes, assets that have been posted as collateral by their clients."

An excellent article by Jeff Nielson detailed how this could result in the big banks grabbing our money when their trillions of dollars of reckless bets go bad...

1) Our banking regulators knowingly allow financial institutions to engage in recklessly misleading (if not outright fraudulent) contracts with their clients, through the use of complex “small print” in their account contracts with clients.

2) The three largest U.S. “banks” by deposit (JP Morgan, Bank of America, Citigroup) have made bets in their own rigged casino, which total well in excess of $100 trillion, an amount which completely dwarfs their total, combined deposits (and assets).

3) A large portion of those bets occur in the $60+ trillion credit default swap market. Pay-outs in these markets can (and do) exceed 300 times the amount of the original bet. It is bets in this market which “blew up” AIG, requiring more than $150 billion in immediate government aid.

4) Following the Crash of ’08; these same banks mooched a package of hand-outs, tax-breaks and “guarantees” (i.e. future hand-outs) from the Bush regime in excess of $15 trillion, the last time their gambling debts went bad on them – and all of these banks have been allowed to dramatically increase the total amount of their gambling since then.

5) It would take only a minor change in the gambling contracts in which these bankers engage to allow their creditors to seize funds out of ordinary bank accounts.

6) The existing language for the bank accounts of these U.S. banks is possibly already so vague (and prejudicial to clients) that it would allow these banks to reinterpret the terms of these bank accounts – and allow rehypothecation to be used to rob the holders of ordinary bank accounts, people who themselves make no “bets” in markets whatsoever. Alternately, customers could be blitzed with an offer for “new and improved” bank accounts, where terms allowing rehypothecation are slipped into the contract, with the  banks knowing that the “regulators” will do nothing to warn account-holders of the gigantic risk they are taking.

But we are all covered by deposit insurance, right?

That is what the people of Cyprus thought too.

As we just saw in Cyprus, when there is a "banking crisis" sometimes government steps in and suddenly changes all of the rules overnight even though the vast majority of the population is against it.

Hopefully you can see that no bank account will ever truly be "safe" ever again.

Your money may be safe today, and your money may be there next week, but someday it could disappear in a single moment.

And the general public is definitely starting to lose faith in the banking system.  Google searches for the term "bank run" have been absolutely spiking recently.  Just check out this chart which shows that searches for "bank run" are now the highest that they have ever been.

So what should we all do to protect ourselves?

As I mentioned earlier, it is important to not have all of your money in one bank, and from now on you will want to permanently keep paper copies of all of your bank account statements.

Someday you may need those statements in order to prove that you actually had money in the bank. Our world is becoming increasingly unstable, and at some point financial disaster is going to strike.

By taking prudent precautions now, hopefully you will be able to minimize the damage to your family.

source

Veteran’s Guns Confiscated After Forced ‘Psychiatric Evaluation’

Paul Joseph Watson
Purge against armed ex-service-members accelerates.

A US Navy veteran had his guns confiscated by police following a forced “psychiatric evaluation” in another example of how the Veterans Administration is accelerating a purge of armed ex-service-members in accordance with a federal government demonization campaign that has labeled vets domestic terrorists.

50-year-old David A Schmecker is an honorably discharged disabled US Navy veteran from Connecticut with no criminal record and no psychiatric history.

On February 5, Schmecker’s hospital primary care doctor called and heard a message on Schmecker’s answer machine that “sounded peculiar,” prompting him to contact the local police and urge them to visit Schmecker to perform a “wellness check”.

“The police came to my home, and, without any justification whatsoever, hauled me away for a psychiatric evaluation at a local hospital. I submitted to their forceful insistence under duress and fear of arrest or worse. I wasn’t arrested, no crime was committed nor any threats were made to myself or others,” Schmecker told Survive and Thrive’s George Hemminger.

“They confiscated my guns and pistol permit. I was released two days later from the evaluation on my on recognizance. I have since attempted to use the courts and attorneys to fight the revocation of my pistol permit. Then on top of everything else, the bills from the short stay at the hospital and EMS bills that they billed me, along with what I had to pay the attorney adds up to a large amount of money,” he adds.

Schmecker warns that the harassment he suffered is part of “a campaign orchestrated to disarm law abiding citizens,” adding that he is “concerned about where this country is headed.”

As with all contemporary authoritarian governments, the psychiatric system is being used to circumvent courts and bypass normal legal due process.

In August 2012, we reported on how a veteran in Ohio had his guns taken because he was adjudged to be mentally incompetent, despite the fact that his previous VA psychiatric evaluations were all clear, he was not on medication, and he had no criminal record.

As we reported last year, David Sarti, one of the stars of National Geographic’s Doomsday Preppers show, visited his doctor complaining of chest pains, only to have the doctor later commit him to a psychiatric ward and alert authorities, before Sarti was declared “mentally defective” and put on an FBI list that strips him of his second amendment rights.

Veterans are increasingly being targeted by authorities as part of a broader move to demonize them as domestic extremists and even potential terrorists.

The FBI has repeatedly characterized returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan as a major domestic terrorist threat. In addition, Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano said she stood by an April 2009 DHS intelligence assessment that listed returning vets as likely domestic terrorists.

Just a month later, the New York Times reported on how Boy Scout Explorers were being trained by the DHS to kill “disgruntled Iraq war veterans” as part of anti-terror drills.

Back in February, constitutional attorney Michael Connelly warned that the government is now moving to strip veterans it determines to be mentally incompetent of their Second Amendment right to own a firearm. Connelly cites a letter “sent by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to hundreds, perhaps thousands, of America’s heroes.”

“A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition,” the VA letter states. “If you knowingly violate any of these prohibitions, you may be fined, imprisoned, or both pursuant to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, Pub.L.No. 103-159, as implemented at 18, United States Code 924(a)(2).”

“This must be Barack Obama’s way of thanking our veterans for serving,” writes the Gateway Pundit. “US veterans are receiving letters from the government informing them that they are disabled and not allowed to own, purchase or possess a firearm. If the veteran does decide to purchase a firearm he will by fined, imprisoned or both… This comes on page 2 of the VA letter.”

source