Monday, June 15, 2015



Bilderberg 2015 Best Footage of Hotel And Security

Infowars Reporters Thrown Out Of Bilderberg Hotel

Published on Jun 14, 2015
Despite there being no Bilderberg members remaining, the InterAlpen Hotel manager and police kicked out Infowars reporters Rob Dew, Paul Joseph Watson and Josh Owens, telling them they would have “problems” if they returned.












Citizen Jounalist Scares Elites

Bilderbergers Flee From Press At Innsbruck Airport

Bilderberg Media Mogul and Bankers
Confronted At Airport

Rothschild Head Confronted At Bilderberg
Published on Jun 14, 2015
Franco Bernabe Vice Chair of Rothschild Europe and Bilderberg Steering Committee member was confronted at a train station in Innsbruck, Austria as he was leaving the secretive Bilderberg 2015 confab . Reporter Tilman Knechtel from Germany upset that his defense minister is being tapped as the next chancellor gave Mr Bernabe several chances to identify himself. He also chastised the Bilderberg Steering Committee member for being part of a secret organization with tax payer funded security. The Rothschild Vice Chair that he was just attending a private meeting and everything was on the internet for all to see.

Subscribe to Tilman Knechtel’s Youtube Channel

Franco Bernabè (born 18 September 1948) is an Italian banker and manager, formerly the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Telecom Italia, appointed on 3 December 2007.
Bernabè was born at Vipiteno/Sterzing (Italy). He graduated in 1973 from the University of Turin and worked as a post-graduate fellow in economics at the Einaudi Foundation from 1973 to 1975. He is the author of several publications in economics, and has received an honorary Doctor’s degree in Environmental Sciences from the University of Parma.
He joined Eni in 1983 as an Assistant to the Chairman and became subsequently the Head of Corporate Planning, Financial Control and Corporate Development. Prior to his joining Eni, he worked in the planning department of Fiat as a Chief Economist. He started his career as a Senior Economist at the OECD Department of Economics and Statistics in Paris.
Bernabè has served pro bono on different public assignments: in 1999 he was appointed by the Italian Prime Minister as a special representative of the Italian government for the reconstruction of Kosovo; between 2001 and 2003 he was the Chairman of La Biennale di Venezia, and since 2004 he is the Chairman of Mart, the foremost Italian museum of modern art. He has served on the Advisory Board of the Council on Foreign Relations and currently serves on the Board of the Peres Center for Peace, on the Advisory Board of the Observatoire Méditerranéen de l'Énergie, and on the Board of Petrochina. In the past Mr. Bernabè has also served on the boards of several Italian and international listed companies.
Bernabè has also been Chairman and majority shareholder of FB Group, an investment company that he founded in 1999, which was active in the areas of ICT and renewable energy. He has been particularly active in the telecom sector - as a founder of Andala H3G, and as one of the controlling shareholders of Netscalibur and of Telit, contributing to the turnaround of the two companies – and in the software sector through the companies of the Kelyan Group, focusing on ICT solutions for the extended enterprise as well as on value-added services for the telecommunication industry. Besides, he is a Vice Chairman of Rothschild Europe. He is a member of the Steering Committee of the Bilderberg Group.

Bürgerberg: Bilderberg 2015 - Die Eindrücke von Donnerstag und Freitag

Bilderberg 2015: Mystery Surrounds Shadowy Globalist Summit

BY Alex Newman
SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

A shadowy collection of globalists embedded throughout centers of power worldwide — political, military, banking, media, intelligence, business, academia, and more — wrapped up their annual Bilderberg summit on June 14 in Telfs-Buchen, Austria. The secrecy-obsessed confab has been receiving increased attentionrelatively speaking, even from even the establishment press in recent years, following decades of complete silence. This year was no exception. But what humanity’s alleged public servants and self-appointed masters were discussing behind closed doors and armies of taxpayer-funded security officially remains a mystery — potentially in violation of numerous laws such as the U.S. Logan Act. Essentially, though, your future and the future of your nation were on the agenda.    
The “key topics” on the official agenda released to the public included a number of vague but alarming subjects to anyone concerned about the inordinate power wielded by Bilderberg attendees. Among the topics listed: “artificial intelligence,” cybersecurity, chemical weapons, “current economic issues,” European “strategy,” globalization, Greece, Iran, the Middle East, NATO, Russia, terrorism, the United Kingdom, the United States, and even “U.S. elections.” In its 2015 “press release,” following similar releases issued in recent years amid escalating public outrage over the paranoid secrecy surrounding the annual summits, the Bilderberg leadership noted that “around 140” participants from 22 countries were planning to attend.
However, despite pretenses of increased transparency, virtually nothing is known publicly about what “the money-changers and the self-appointed masters of the universe,” as the U.K. Guardian’s Kevin McKenna described them, were plotting at their mega-luxury hotel (shown). “Only bankers, the CEOs of multinationals and western political leaders who have been on their payroll for a minimum of 10 years get to attend,” McKenna wrote in a sarcastic and humorous piece. Of course, key establishment media operatives are also invited to attend, but only under conditions of strict secrecy. Along with the “journalists,” editors, propagandists, and media magnates were prime ministers, foreign ministers, defense ministers, top globalist bureaucrats, a president, CEOs, royalty, and even some convicted globalist criminals (anti-U.S. sovereignty fanatic Gen. David Petraeus) for good measure.    
At this year’s summit, a variety of media outlets sent reporters, including the U.K. Guardian, Infowars, American Free Press, some local outlets, and others. As has generally been the case, reporters and even locals were treated with disdain, hostility, and suspicion by the tax-funded security operatives guarding the globalists inside. More than 2,000 police, paid for with public funds, were reportedly on hand to guard the paranoid globalists against a handful of protesters, reporters, and local residents at the resort. The security was so on edge that a “COBRA” officer reportedly accidently fired an assault rifle at a police helicopter flying overhead.  
The Guardian’s Charlie Skelton, who has humorously covered multiple Bilderberg confabs over the years, was harassed by police — complete with an armored personnel carrier and military helicopters overhead — amid repeated searches of his hotel, vehicle, papers, and more. Infowars reporters Rob Dew and Josh Owens were also visited by police as Bilderberg organizers exhibit growing levels of paranoia about the public, in addition to being “constantly followed and harassed” throughout the three-day confab. Even an 11-year-old boy playing in the woods was reportedly terrorized by the paranoid security operatives.
According to news reports, Bilderberg security teams even erected a jamming system to block communications in the vicinity of the InterAlpen hotel where the summit took place, reportedly to further hamper media coverage. “Apparently, Bilderberg is so afraid of media coverage, that police checkpoints miles away from the hotel are not enough, now they have resorted to installing expensive devices which shut down communications, presumably at taxpayer expense,” reported Infowars editor Paul Joseph Watson. A communications expert source also told Infowars that the system can also be used to monitor communications, Watson added in an update.         
Despite numerous past statements by participants indicating that Bilderberg meetings and attendees help guide policy around the world, the official press release framed the gathering as a mere discussion forum. “Founded in 1954, the Bilderberg conference is an annual meeting designed to foster dialogue between Europe and North America,” it claimed. “The conference is a forum for informal discussions about major issues facing the world. The meetings are held under the Chatham House Rule, which states that participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s) nor of any other participant may be revealed.”
And indeed, the secrecy is tight, with journalists generally left to speculate about what their taxpayer-funded government officials are plotting behind closed doors with so-called “banksters,” media barons, Big Business crony capitalists, and other assorted globalists. Bilderberg’s press release, though, framed that all as a positive development, perfectly illustrating the chasm that exists between the thinking of summit attendees and the rest of humanity. “Thanks to the private nature of the conference, the participants are not bound by the conventions of their office or by pre-agreed positions,” the statement said. “As such, they can take time to listen, reflect and gather insights.”
In the official release, Bilderberg bigwigs also claimed, “There is no desired outcome, no minutes are taken and no report is written.” “Furthermore, no resolutions are proposed, no votes are taken, and no policy statements are issued,” it also said. However, those claims fly in the face of a wide array of public statements by numerous Bilderberg attendees. For example, in 2010, former NATO boss and two-time Bilderberg attendee Willy Claes said in a radio interview that reports of speeches given at the summit are, in fact, compiled. “The participants are then obviously considered to use this report in setting their policies in the environments in which they affect,” Claes added, which analysts said was essentially an admission that Bilderberg attendees are secretly plotting your future behind closed doors.
In other words, somebody is lying: Either the official Bilderberg press release, or the attendees. There are plenty of other statements that also contradict the official narrative. The year before Claes’ admission, then-Bilderberg chairman Etienne Davignon — a former European Union commissar and Belgian minister of state — told the online EUobserver that the summits “helped create” the controversial euro currency imposed on 17 formerly sovereign European nations. Much evidence also suggests that the summits played a major role in foisting the EU super-state on the peoples of Europe against their will — a process that continues despite the lack of public support.  
More recently, despite protestations to the contrary, a Bilderberg attendee and the leader of the Socialist International-aligned Dutch Labor Party admitted on camera at last year’s summit that he was there in his official capacity as parliamentary leader. Asked if he was there in an informal capacity, he responded: “Well, I’m formal, because being a politician, you’re 24/7, so there’s no way of exiting my role.” The Bilderberg website claimed, by contrast, “Participants take part in the conference as individuals in their own right.” But the comments by the Dutch lawmaker and “sustainability” zealot Diederik Samsom suggested otherwise.
More than 15 years ago, far-left Bilderberg attendee Will Hutton — a former British newspaper editor, pro-EU extremist, and vehement opponent of American conservatism — also hinted at the influence of the gathering. “[Bilderberg] is one of the key meetings of the year,” he wrote in 1998. “The consensus established is the backdrop against which policy is made worldwide.” The admission could not get much clearer than that — despite claims in the official release about the confab, summit attendees themselves have regularly boasted that Bilderberg does, in fact, plot policy behind the backs of the very same people who pay their salaries and are expected to submit to their extremist “policy.”  
Bilderberg also downplayed its extraordinary guest list. “Every year, between 120-150 political leaders and experts from industry, finance, academia and the media are invited to take part in the conference,” it said. “About two thirds of the participants come from Europe and the rest from North America; approximately one third from politics and government and the rest from other fields.” While largely “accurate,” at least technically speaking, the truth is that, combined, attendees represent many of the world’s top powerbrokers and wield vast power over humanity. Among others at this year’s summit were top technology giant executives, former EU Commission boss and ex-Maoist revolutionary leader José Manuel Barroso, representatives of Big Oil, Big Banking, Big Media, Big Government, and more. For the semi-complete official guest list, which often omits key participants, visit the official Bilderberg site.   
Of course, activists from across the political spectrum have long argued that Americans at the confab are feloniously violating the Logan Act. That federal law specifically bars any U.S. citizen without formal government permission from working with foreign officials on matters of policy. Passed under the John Adams administration in 1799, the Logan Act was amended as recently as the 1990s and, despite almost never being used, remains on the books today. And that, Bilderberg opponents say, means that Americans meeting with foreign officials at the secretive gathering should be investigated and eventually prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law if found to be in violation of it. As admitted by myriad attendees, practically the entire summit revolves around policy. Violators can be imprisoned for up to three years. Other nations also have laws about working on policy behind closed doors with special interests.  
What sort of policy do the Bilderberg globalists have in mind? Well, examining their actions outside the secret meetings certainly provides a good clue. But in 2001, former British Chancellor of the Exchequer and Bilderberg bigwig Denis Healey gave a relatively concrete answer. He told the U.K. Guardian that it was a little “exaggerated, but not wholly unfair” to say that the outfit’s overall goal was essentially to impose a global government on humanity. “Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn't go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless,” he claimed. “So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing.” By “community,” globalists really mean government — after all, the European Union was the European “Community” before the full-blown super-state was openly announced.
As governments around the world influenced by Bilderberg attendees continue to wage war on the privacy rights — and other liberties — of everyday citizens, perhaps the time has come for everyday citizens, acting through their governments, to strip the privacy rights of Bilderberg attendees and their summit. After all, if they having nothing to hide, they should have no problem with losing their privacy — at least that is what they and their minions constantly tell the rest of humanity to justify the increasinlgy lawless and Orwellian surveillance of the public. The globalists in attendance should practice what they preach. If they continue to refuse, Americans and Europeans should use their remaining freedoms to ensure that transparency and legitimate government prevail.
Related articles:


The 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads, “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

DJI - Introducing the Phantom 3 to Spy on You
ONLY $1259-1659


SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

A drone may be the next tool in the New Castle County Police Department equipment arsenal, joining new officer body cameras and other technology.
The County Council by the end of the month is expected to vote on spending $52,000 to buy an unmanned aerial vehicle, which will be able to beam police images of emergency situations or for use in surveillance.
The money will pay for staff to attend an unmanned aerial vehicle convention to find the right model, training for four employees, and the equipment and spare parts.
Police Capt. Pat Crowell said the drone will be versatile, with the potential to help in missing-persons searches, surveying public places in advance of large gatherings and investigations. The county is calling the initiative the "Cloud View Project."
"With something like an outdoor crime scene or a fatal car accident, getting an aerial view can be a critical piece to what happened," he said.
The agency currently calls in a State Police helicopter for aerial work, which can be expensive, officials said.
Crowell said the purchases are part of an effort by the department to explore how law enforcement can use camera technology. They tested Google Glass, a wearable device, within the past couple years, and the County Council earlier this month approved using part of a $64,000 state grant to get 25 body cameras and equipment to store the footage.
The devices are expected to be in place within three to six months. The county may buy more body cameras if funding allows, Crowell said.
"These are going to be some that are here to stay, but we have to learn what is entailed in that," he said.
Wilmington also is studying police body cameras. Mayor Dennis P. Williams last month said he wants officers using the devices by the end of the year. He announced the goal after the release of footage from a Dover police dashboard camera showing an officer kicking an unarmed suspect in the head.
Wilmington police have 13 body cameras purchased during a previous administration, but Williams said the particular model is not suited for the job.
The use of cameras by police has become a national issue in light of high-profile allegations of misconduct in Ferguson, Missouri; Baltimore; and North Charleston, South Carolina. President Barack Obama in December called on using federal funding to help equip police with body cameras.
There is disagreement in the law enforcement community about when the devices should be turned on, who should wear cameras and who should be able to see footage.
New Castle County has sent a draft of its camera policy to the Fraternal Order of Police. Police also are developing a policy for the drone use, outlining what rank of officer can deploy it and when, along with record-keeping rules on who flew, for how long and the purpose and outcome.
"It is exciting technology, but we have to proceed cautiously," Crowell said.
He said the county will treat the footage like any other evidence in terms of public availability and how long images are kept. Some evidence is stored for as little as 60 days, other evidence is kept indefinitely. They may use a county server or a third-party service to store the images.
"The cameras are relatively inexpensive," Crowell said. "Where they get you is back-office expenses with storage of the data."
The Consumer Electronics Association estimates about 425,000 unmanned aerial vehicle units will be sold this year, although regulations have not caught up with the popularity.
Unlicensed operators currently are limited to 55-pound or lighter drones and can only fly below 400 feet, within the line of sight of the operator and at least five miles away from an airport, among other restrictions.
The Federal Aviation Administration has permitted some government and academic organizations for broader applications. Crowell said the county will apply for a permit and in the meantime will comply with the consumer rules.
Wilmington police Sgt. Andrea Janvier said they've used a quad-copter drone purchased earlier this year to survey crime scenes and crowds.
Crowell said he hopes to have the New Castle County drone in service within six months.
The department in April also opened a "Fusion Center" in the Paul J. Sweeney Public Safety Building in Minquadale to pull in various public safety camera feeds and real-time data to help police. Monitors can show up to 16 sources of information.
"Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth."
"Delaware stakeholders, that have a right and need to know this information, for public safety." 
(quote from below)


"is an Intelligence Sharing Initiative owned and operated by the Federal, State and Local Public Safety Partners of the Region."
    "The Delaware Information and Analysis Center (DIAC) helps safeguard the community by serving as a dynamic security nexus.  To detect, prevent, investigate and respond to criminal and terrorist activity, we disseminate intelligence and facilitate communications between state, local, federal agencies and private sector partners, to help them take action on threats and public safety issues."
    "The Delaware Information and Analysis Center (DIAC) serves as Delaware's designated "fusion center."  The DIAC takes an "all crimes, all hazards" approach to public safety and includes other disciplines or stakeholders in the information sharing environment within Delaware.  The concept of a fusion center is the intake of information from multiple sources, determine their validity and relevancy, then analyze, collate, and organize this information into useful and many types of relevant analytical products for dissemination to Delaware stakeholders, that have a right and need to know this information, for public safety."
"Preparedness Links"

J. William Bell Fusion Center grand opening
Published on Apr 14, 2015
This video is about the J. William Bell Fusion Center opening, named in honor of New Castle Councilman Bill Bell. With County Executive Tom Gordon, CAO David Grimaldi, Director of Public Safety Joseph Bryant, Emergency Communications Chief Jeff Miller.

Jeff Miller
Jeff Miller
Jeffrey P. Miller, Chief of Communications for the New Castle County Emergency Communications Center
Targeted Analytical Policing System (TAPS)
"Christie is watching out for you. Your visual display system is critical to your success. You use it every day – sometimes around the clock. Your ability to deliver on your company’s promises is tied to your visual display system being up and running. It just has to work. Doesn’t it make sense to protect all that you have invested? The Christie® Network Operations Center (NOC) is a 24/7/365 facility where experienced Christie technicians monitor your visual displays throughout Canada and the United States. Through remote monitoring, Christie technicians make sure that tens of thousands of displays are running smoothly, getting timely maintenance and receiving software upgrades. Our technicians can spot potential trouble and relay the solution – anything from replacing a part to performing repairs remotely or onsite – often before there’s ever an observable problem with the display. Monitoring. Maintaining. Troubleshooting. Solving. Christie technicians are watching out for you." 

"Surveillance and security"

"Surveillance and security – whether that’s homeland security, airport security, computer security or retail loss prevention, all are important in our everyday lives. Video wall technology lets your operations center operators see the whole picture at a glance."
A monitor at the J. William Bell Fusion Center shows
EXCERPT: "A fusion center is an information sharing center, many of which were jointly created between 2003 and 2007 under the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Office of Justice Programs in the U.S. Department of JusticeThey are designed to promote information sharing at the federal level between agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. military, and state- and local-level government. As of July 2009, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security recognized at least 72 fusion centers. A two-year senate investigation found that "the fusion centers often produced irrelevant, useless or inappropriate intelligence reporting to DHS, and many produced no intelligence reporting whatsoever." The report also said that in some cases the fusion centers violated civil liberties or privacy."
SEE ALSO: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Last week, New Castle County Executive Thomas P. Gordon, in conjunction with the Director of Public Safety Joseph Bryant, Jr. unveiled the J. William Bell “Fusion Center.” The Fusion Center was dedicated to Councilman J. William “Bill” Bell for his lifelong commitment to the future and improvement of public safety.
The Fusion Center provides public safety with the ability to display and view real time pertinent information from different locations in the room simultaneously. The video wall consists of a 7’ x24’ display which weighs approximately 1800 pounds. The display consists of eighteen (18) 55 inch Christie Digital LED Displays, capable of displaying up to fifteen (15) video sources. The information can be displayed from different locations within the room and has the ability to record a training session in full HD.
The technology used in the Fusion Center was made possible by Integration Managed Services Staging (IMS) who was instrumental in assisting the Department of Public Safety with bringing an ideal into reality.
“This first of its kind video wall with the technology behind it allows us to seamlessly coordinate information from dozens of collection points including or latest New CAD system,” stated Chief Jeffrey Miller, Chief of New Castle County Emergency Communications. “All responders from seven (7) police agencies, 24 Fire and EMS agencies sharing information as it becomes available using in car laptops makes for a more informed first responder.”
Immediately after the dedication and grand opening, Colonel E. M. Setting, Chief of Police held the first Targeted Analytical Policing System (TAPS) meeting in the new “Fusion Center.”

 The Shame and Waste of Fusion Centers
SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger
The 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads, “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Seems pretty straight forward, doesn’t it?
It is well established that citizens enjoy a certain amount of privacy under the 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 5th Amendments.  The 9th Amendment’s statement that “[t]he enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people” certainly implies a general right of privacy. Although there is no specific protection of a general privacy right in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, case law has been consistent in providing a fairly broad right to privacy under the “liberty” guarantee of the 14th Amendment.
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin, Memoirs of the life and writings of Benjamin Franklin, (1818).
Seems like good advice, doesn’t it?
In America today, we as citizens have been usurped in our rights to privacy and to be free from unwarranted search and seizures.  One of the primary methods used to usurp your rights are called Fusion Centers.  They seem to have a rational purpose as they are designed to promote information sharing at the federal level between agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), U.S. Military, and state- and local-level government.  I don’t think that is prime facie a bad thing that the left hand of government knows what the right hand is knows or is doing and that all of law enforcement is essentially equally informed.  Uniform intelligence seems like a good idea, does it not?  After all, there are countless novels, films and television shows based on the thrilling and idiotic situations created by intra-departmental in-fighting because unequal playing fields and ego battles make for good drama and/or comedy by their nature.
But what if that information is bad or otherwise unusable? Where do they get their information? Why are the military involved in domestic operations? What is being done with the data vis a vis security, privacy and retention? Are your rights being violated by either the collection or collation of personal information? Is there adequate oversight and are there adequate safeguards for citizen’s privacy and right to be free from unwarranted searches? Is the support seeking uniform information providing useful information and working on a practical level?
Let us first consider what a Fusion Center is and is not, if they are effective at their stated purpose and how their proper and improper function impairs your rights.
The Fusion Centers are an overarching program and method of managing the flow of information and intelligence across levels and sectors of government to integrate information for analysis. They are not operational support on either a daily or an emergency basis although some of the 72 known Fusion Centers operate in conjunction with and share facilities with some operational centers. They are a support centers driven by analysis; information management and logistics. An apt analogy would be they are a large part of the brain behind the brawn, not wearing jackboots themselves but certainly responsible for informing their marching orders. No one from a Fusion Center is ever going to kick in your door.  That is what they are and are not. Again, their stated purpose is not necessarily a bad one: collating uniform information services for various law enforcement organizations and the military. But where are they getting their information from?  How are they using it? It it providing benefits for the costs?
The American Civil Liberties Union has identified five systemic problems with fusion centers.
  1. Ambiguous Lines of Authority. In a multi-jurisdictional environment it is unclear what rules apply, and which agency is ultimately responsible for the activities of the fusion center participants.
  2. Private Sector Participation. Some fusion centers incorporate private-sector corporations into the intelligence process, potentially undermining privacy laws designed to protect the privacy of innocent Americans, and increasing the risk of a data breach.
  3. Military Participation.Some fusion centers include military personnel in law enforcement activities in troubling ways.
  4. Data Mining. Federal fusion center guidelines encourage wholesale data collection and data manipulation processes that threaten privacy.
  5. Excessive Secrecy. Fusion centers are characterized by excessive secrecy, which limits public oversight, impairs their ability to acquire essential information and impedes their ability to fulfill their stated mission, bringing their ultimate value into doubt.
In a bipartisan report led by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) was released last week.  The conclusion of the Federal Support For And Involvement In State And Local Fusion Centers – Majority And Minority Staff Report – Permanent Subcommittee On Investigations – United States Senate (Fusion Center Report or FCR hereafter) was that “DHS-assigned detailees to the centers forwarded ‘intelligence’ of uneven quality -– oftentimes shoddy, rarely timely, sometimes endangering citizens’ civil liberties and Privacy Act protections, occasionally taken from already-published public sources, and more often than not unrelated to terrorism.” FCR, p. 27. Insult to injury, “DHS officials who filed useless, problematic or even potentially illegal reports generally faced no sanction for their actions, according to documents and interviews. Supervisors spoke with them about their errors, but those problems were not noted on the reporting officials’ annual performance reviews, and did not influence managers’ decisions about their salary raises, bonuses or career advancement, DHS officials told the Subcommittee. In fact, the Subcommittee investigation was able to identify only one case in which an official with a history of serious reporting issues faced any consequences for his mistakes – he was required to attend an extra week of reporting training. [paragraph] The Subcommittee investigation also learned that DHS did not adequately train personnel it sent out to perform the extremely sensitive task of reporting information about U.S. persons – a job fraught with the possibility of running afoul of Privacy Act protections of individuals’ rights to associate, worship, speak, and protest without being spied on by their own government.” FCR, p. 27-28.
Bad reporting from Fusion Centers has resulted in huge embarrassments such as the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment or TIDE, a database that allegedly contains “all information the U.S. government possesses related to the identities of individuals known or appropriately suspected to be or have been involved in activities constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism, with the exception of purely domestic terrorism information.”  These individuals are labelled as KST’s, Known or Suspected Terrorists. As such, TIDE is meant to be the backbone of the “No Fly” List and the State Department’s Visa Checking System.  Some of the terrorist suspects identified by the TIDE system?  A two year old and the Ford Motor Company.When asked how a toddler could end up as a KST, Ole Broughton, who ran intelligence oversight at Homeland Security’s Intelligence and Analysis division from 2007 until last January, said that “intelligence officials had routinely put information on ‘associates’ of known or suspected terrorists into TIDE, without determining that that person would qualify as a known or suspected terrorist.” “Not everything in TIDE is KST,”  Ken Hunt, a DHS privacy official, admitted to the Senate subcommittee.
This ineptitude is made even more troubling when you consider that public sources are not the only input for personal information regarding citizens. Much of the data is provided by the private sector which disturbingly doesn’t have the constraints on their actions to protect your privacy and rights that the government does. Compounding the problem is the issue of military involvement given that the 2012 Defense Authorization Act into law. Section 1031, clause “b”, article 2 defines a ‘covered person’ (someone possibly subject to martial law) as : “A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.” If the wrong person gets the wrong idea about based upon wrong information? You too could be spirited off to Gitmo. If you want to be truly appalled by the incompetence of the Fusion Centers, I urge you to read the report for yourself.
There is an old adage in computing and data processing: Garbage in, garbage out. How much is the incompetence driven violation of your rights costing us?  No one seems to be sure.  The estimates range from $289 million to $1.4 billion, but according to this report, the actual costs may be even higher. Perhaps the biggest insult is that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano repeatedly misled Congress about the effectiveness of the Fusion Centers. “The Subcommittee
examined four such cases in which DHS claimed fusion centers made important or ‘key’ contributions to investigations of significant terrorist plots on U.S. soil. The Subcommittee investigation found that the claims made by DHS did not always fit the facts, and in no case did a fusion center make a clear and unique intelligence contribution that helped apprehend a terrorist or disrupt a plot. Worse, three other incidents examined by the Subcommittee investigation raised significant concerns about the utility of the fusion centers, and raised the possibility that some centers have actually hindered or sidetracked federal counterterrorism efforts. [paragraph] Federal officials have been well aware of these episodes, and the underlying weaknesses in fusion centers’ capabilities that likely contributed to them. But they have chosen not to highlight the considerable shortcomings of fusion centers in public appearances or in briefings to Congress. Instead they have chosen to portray fusion centers as ‘linchpins’ of the federal government’s fight to prevent terrorism, making ‘vital’ contributions to the federal government’s efforts to keep the country safe from another terrorist attack. This portrayal is simply at odds with the actual counterterrorism records of the fusion centers.”  FCR, p. 84-85.
“Unfortunately, despite a significant investment of resources and time, fusion centers today appear to be largely ineffective participants in the federal counterterrorism mission. Much of the blame lies with DHS, which has failed to adequately implement a fusion center program that would produce the results it promised. But significant responsibility for these failures also lies with Congress, which has repeatedly chosen to support and praise fusion center efforts, without providing the oversight and direction necessary to make sure those efforts were cost effective and useful.” FCR, p. 105.
Spying on citizens for practicing behavior that is Constitutionally protected is allegedly illegal. Lying about people is allegedly a crime and a civil wrong given the particular circumstances.  Yet here we are (again, if  you consider COINTELPRO) in a situation where the government is trampling citizen’s rights for a little bit of security at exorbitant costs no one is really sure of and run by a people who seem to be content to lying to Congress and the public about what they do and how effective it is.  All in the name of fighting “terrorism”; something that is about as likely to kill you as your own furniture.
So we again come to the heart of Franklin’s statement.  “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” We as a nation have given up essential liberty in the name of an irrational fear and temporary safety. What is even sadder is that alleged security is not only a violation of your rights by governmental and private actors used purposefully to circumvent your rights in ways that stifle legal challenge, but that the security is in actuality an illusion of security that can harm the innocent through no fault of their own and leaves them with little or no recourse.  Is it any wonder the Electronic Privacy Information Center currently has filed suit against the DHS and other governmental bodies like the Virginia State Police over topics ranging from Fusion Center funding to compliance with the Federal Privacy Act by Fusion Centers to the deployment of airport scanning equipment which has been proven ineffective and possibly a health risk.
Should Fusion Centers be allowed to continue their failed mission?  Or should they be shuttered, the DHS dismantled and/or the Patriot Act repealed?  If were going to have an ineffective organization that hiders counterterrorism and interagency cooperation, why not just go back to the way things were before the Patriot Act? Should Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano be fired for her lies? Should she be fired for her incompetence? Clearly steps need to be taken to protect our civil rights and hold those in government responsible both for their protection and for wisely spending our tax dollars instead of perpetually pissing them away down an arguably unconstitutional hole.
What do you think?

What I Don't Like About Life in the American Police State

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

There's a lot to love about America and its people: their pioneering spirit, their entrepreneurship, their ability to think outside the box, their passion for the arts, etc. Increasingly, however, as time goes by, I find the things I don't like about living in a nation that has long since ceased to be a sanctuary for freedom are beginning to outnumber the things I love.
Here's what I don't like about living in the American police state: I don't like being treated as if my only value to the government is as a source of labor and funds. I don't like being viewed as a consumer and bits of data. I don't like being spied on and treated as if I have no right to privacy, especially in my own home.
I don't like government officials who lobby for my vote only to ignore me once elected. I don't like having representatives incapable of and unwilling to represent me. I don't like taxation without representation.
I don't like being subjected to scans, searches, pat downs and other indignities by the TSA. I don't like VIPR raids on so-called "soft" targets like shopping malls and bus depots by black-clad, Darth Vader look-alikes. I don't like fusion centers, which represent the combined surveillance efforts of federal, state and local law enforcement.
I don't like laws that criminalize Americans for otherwise lawful activities such as holding religious studies at homegrowing vegetables in their yard, and collecting rainwater. I don't like the NDAA, which allows the president and the military to arrest and detain American citizens indefinitely. I don't like the Patriot Act, which opened the door to all manner of government abuses and intrusions on our privacy.
I don't like the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which has become America's standing army in direct opposition to the dire warnings of those who founded our country. I don't like military weapons such as armored vehicles, sound cannons and the like being used against the American citizens. I don't like government agencies such as the DHS, Post Office, Social Security Administration and Wildlife stocking up on hollow-point bullets. And I definitely don't like the implications of detention centers being built that could house American citizens.
I don't like the fact that since President Obama took office, police departments across the country "have received tens of thousands of machine guns; nearly 200,000 ammunition magazines; thousands of pieces of camouflage and night-vision equipment; and hundreds of silencers, armored cars and aircraft."
I don't like America's infatuation with locking people up for life for non-violent crimes. There are over 3,000 people in America serving life sentences for non-violent crimes, including theft of a jacket, siphoning gasoline from a truck, stealing tools, and attempting to cash a stolen check. I don't like paying roughly $29,000 a year per inmate just to keep these nonviolent offenders in prison.
I don't like the fact that those within a 25-mile range of the border are getting a front row seat to the American police state, as Border Patrol agents are now allowed tosearch people's homes, intimately probe their bodies, and rifle through their belongings, all without a warrant.
I don't like public schools that treat students as if they were prison inmates. I don't like zero-tolerance laws that criminalize childish behavior. I don't like a public educational system that emphasizes rote memorization and test-taking over learning, synthesizing and critical thinking.
I don't like police precincts whose primary purpose -- whether through the use of asset forfeiture laws, speed traps, or red light cameras -- is making a profit at the expense of those they have sworn to protect. I don't like militarized police and their onerous SWAT team raids.
I don't like being treated as if I have no rights.
I don't like cash-strapped states cutting deals with private corporations to run the prisons in exchange for maintaining 90 percent occupancy rates for at least 20 years. I don't like the fact that American prisons have become the source of cheap labor for Corporate America.
I don't like feeling as if we've come full circle back to a pre-Revolutionary era.
I don't like technology being used as a double-edged sword against us. I don't like agencies like DARPA developing weapons for the battlefield that get used against Americans back at home. I don't like the fact that drones will be deployed domestically in 2015, yet the government has yet to establish any civil liberties protocols to prevent them from being used against the citizenry.
Most of all, I don't like feeling as if there's no hope for turning things around.
Now there are those who would suggest that if I don't like things about this country, I should leave and go elsewhere. And there are certainly those among my fellow citizens who are leaving for friendlier shores. However, I happen to come from a long line of people who believe in the virtue of hard work and perseverance and in the principle that nothing worthwhile comes without effort.
So I'm not giving up, at least not anytime soon. But I'm also not waiting around for the government to clean up its act. I'm not making any deals with politicians who care nothing about me and mine. To quote Number Six, the character in the British television series The Prisoner: "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered! My life is my own!"
I plan to keep fighting, writing, speaking up, speaking out, shouting if necessary, filing lawsuits, challenging the status quo, writing letters to the editor, holding my representatives accountable, thinking nationally but acting locally, and generally raising a ruckus anytime the government attempts to undermine the Constitution and ride roughshod over the rights of the citizenry.
As I make clear in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, we're at a crisis point in American history. If we don't get up off our duffs and get involved in the fight for freedom, then up ahead the graveyard beckons. As Martin Luther King Jr. warned, "The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in a period of moral crisis maintain their neutrality."

The Electronic Concentration Camp
Published on May 31, 2013
In conjunction with the upcoming release of his new book, A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, John W. Whitehead sits down to discuss several "pressure points" that are threatening the Bill of Rights and undermining our essential freedoms. In part four of this special series, Whitehead examines the collusion between corporations and government officials in erecting a system of mass surveillance aimed at all Americans.

Overcriminalization of America


Secret Spy Link between Fusion Centers and Private Sector Exposed
Published on Mar 7, 2014
Local law enforcement across the country are employing high-tech control grid surveillance technology to "stop crime". This doesn't make sense considering most US cities are enjoying a huge drop in violent crime. The truth is, police (and private sector businesses) are assisting in the implementation of a total surveillance panopticon meant to control the American public.

Judge Napolitano: Senate Report Finds DHS Fusion Centers Running Wild, Police State is Here!

Rand Paul "The problem is these fusion centers have targeted people based on political beliefs"

New York Fusion Center Declares Oath Keepers, Other Liberty Groups as Domestic 'Extremist Threats'
Published on Sep 29, 2014
The New York State Intelligence Center — a known Fusion Center with the stated purpose to, “collect, evaluate, analyze, and disseminate information and intelligence data regarding criminal and terrorist activity relevant to New York State” — issued a Counter Terrorism Bulletin last June identifying Oath Keepers in addition to other liberty related groups as “far-right extremist group and/or a threat to law enforcement.”