Secret FBI Program Now Jailing Activists for Speaking Out Against Police Brutality on Facebook

MAY 11, 2018

Dallas, TX – When militarized FBI agents clad in tactical gear raided the home of Rakem Balogun in December 2017—forcing him and his 15-year-old son outside in their underwear on the cold and windy night as agents ransacked his residence—he thought it had to be a mistake.

In an exclusive report by The Guardian, Balogun explains that he was stunned to later learn that he was under investigation for “domestic terrorism” and had been under law enforcement surveillance for years. Incredibly, Balogun’s arrest and the FBI raid on his home were partially due to a simple, and constitutionally protected, Facebook post that was critical of police.

“It’s tyranny at its finest,” Balogun, 34, told The Guardian. “I have not been doing anything illegal for them to have surveillance on me. I have not hurt anyone or threatened anyone.”

Balogun was imprisoned for five months and denied bail while US attorneys attempted to frivolously prosecute him on accusations of being an illegal gun owner and a threat to law enforcement—only later to be exonerated on both trumped up allegations.

Foreign Policy reported that the entire case has ominous implications and overtones of ’60s/’70s-style COINTELPRO, as Balogun is believed to be the first person prosecuted, and known to have been targeted, under a secretive US surveillance effort to identify and track suspected “black identity extremists”—a broad and nebulous term that civil rights advocates warn can be used to target and chill constitutionally protected political activism.

According to the exclusive report from The Guardian:

In a leaked August 2017 report from the FBI’s Domestic Terrorism Analysis Unit, officials claimed that there had been a “resurgence in ideologically motivated, violent criminal activity” stemming from African Americans’ “perceptions of police brutality”.
The counter-terrorism assessment provided minimal data or evidence of threats against police, but discussed a few isolated incidents, notably the case of Micah Johnson who killed five officers in Texas. The report sparked backlash from civil rights groups and some Democrats, who feared the government would use the broad designation to prosecute activists and groups like Black Lives Matter.

Not so coincidentally, Balogun is a long-time political activist as the co-founder of the Huey P. Newton Gun Club and Guerilla Mainframe; both groups advocate for the rights of black gun owners and fight against police brutality.

It was revealed when special agent Aaron Keighley testified in court that the FBI began surveillance of Balogun after he participated in a rally against police violence in Austin, Texas in March 2015. The FBI first became aware of the protest from a video posted by Infowars, Keighley said.

Balogun said he was stunned to learn that information from Infowars was used as the basis for their investigation:

They’re using a conspiracy theorist video as a reason to justify their tyranny? That is a big insult.

Ironically, no mention of any specific actions by Balogun was ever brought up by Keighley, who instead testified about protesters’ anti-police statements, such as “oink oink, bang bang” and “the only good pig is a pig that’s dead.”

The Guardian reports that despite making no mention of Balogun’s actions at the rally in court, Keighley did discuss Facebook posts by Balogun in which he called a suspect in the killing of a police officer a “hero” and expressed “solidarity” for the man accused of killing police when he wrote, “They deserve what they got.”

Keighley was later forced to admit that despite his fear-mongering about Balogun’s free expression of thought on social media, the FBI did not have evidence of any specific threats about harming police.

Balogun told The Guardian that at the time he made those Facebook posts he was “venting” about the anger he felt surrounding the numerous unjustified killings of unarmed black men and women. He said that out of being disgusted with media largely portraying these killings as justified, he wrote those posts to “mimic their reactions to our killings.”

In a jailhouse letter to The Guardian, Balogun wrote that he was a “prisoner of war on free speech and the right to bear arms” who had been “abducted” by the FBI. He noted that he was not targeted for being a violent threat, but for promoting black community groups and battling “government abuse,” adding, “Violence is the method of our oppressor, our method is hard work, love, and unity.”

While the prosecution’s case against Balogun completely unraveled, it is an ominous indicator of a renewed and brutal assault against political activism by government forces.

“They were really desperate,” Balogun said. When his home was raided, police confiscated his .38-caliber handgun, an unloaded AK-style assault rifle and his book Negroes with Guns by the civil rights leaderRobert F. Williams, according to The Guardian.

This is pretty much like Stalin 1950 – ‘You show me the man. I show you the crime.’

The entire idea of a “black identity extremism” (BIE) movement—a term coined by law enforcement—is unsupported by the government’s own data. But that has never stopped the government from persecuting political activists; especially ones espousing black empowerment ideology.

The failed prosecution and clear persecution of Balogun have drawn clear parallels to previous efforts by the U.S. government to discredit, disrupt and monitor political activists during the civil rights-era, particularly the FBI counterintelligence program called COINTELPRO, which targeted Martin Luther King Jr, Malcolm X, the NAACP and the Black Panther party.

Michael German, a fellow with the Brennan Center for Justice’s liberty and national security program and former FBI agent, said the BIE assessment was “extraordinarily overbroad,” but that the idea was being spread to state and local law enforcement agencies across the U.S.

The targeting of activists through police harassment and surveillance for espousing a disfavored ideological stance is immoral to the core and morbidly insidious. The Guardian reports that while authorities have not said publicly that Balogun has been labeled a BIE, “their language in court resembled the warnings in the FBI’s file.”

German revealed that the federal government utilized a “disruption strategy,” which is a tactic where the FBI attempts to target lower-level arrests and charges as a means of causing a disruption in their targets’ lives while the agency attempts to build a case.

“Sometimes when you couldn’t prove somebody was a terrorist, it’s because they weren’t a terrorist,” German said, adding that prosecutors’ claims that Balogun was too dangerous to be released on bail were “astonishing.”

“It seems this effort was designed to punish him for his political activity rather than actually solve any sort of security issue,” he said.

This is exactly what was done to Balogun as he has lost his vehicle, job, and home. His son was also forced to move and transfer schools and Balogun missed much of the first year of his newborn daughter’s life.

This man’s life is in shambles due to being targeted for his political activism. When the State persecutes you for attempting to empower others, you are dangerously close to tyranny.

(activistpost.com)

California judges, apparently ignorant of the meaning of the right to keep and bear arms, continuously have ruled against the Second Amendment. Now, it's on the verge of disappearing from California law.

California is easily the most anti-Second Amendment state in the nation, according to groups that push for gun control. The state is basically a testing ground for leftist policies on firearms.

Citizens living in California who thought they couldn’t see their rights restricted any further learned differently this week, due to the outcome of two cases against the state. California courts twisted the intent of the Second Amendment and Supreme Court rulings, silently restricting the right to self-defense. However, there was nearly zero coverage of it in the media. Almost like the media was hoping to hide the intent of ‘sensible’ gun control laws.

These cases, which concerned semi-automatic rifles and the right to carry pistols for self-defense showed just how far California will go to restrict firearm rights in the state.

On Monday, a federal judge in Los Angeles ruled on the case brought forward by California’s National Rifle Association affiliate, which hoped to preserve the right to carry firearms in the state. The case, Flanagan vs. Becerra, was heard by Judge John Kronstadt, an Obama appointee.

California is a ‘may issue’ state where concealed carry licenses are concerned. In most states, this means that someone seeking a permit to carry a concealed pistol has to apply for the permit, properly follow the guidelines, and then the sheriff has the last say, and can choose whether to issue the permit or not.

In the state of California, this essentially means that no one gets a concealed carry permit except the rich, the politically connected, and a handful of professionals (mostly bodyguards for the wealthy).

In metropolitan areas, average citizens almost never receive a permit, even if they have no criminal history.

Adding insult to injury, the state also banned open carry, meaning that millions of law-abiding citizens in the state cannot carry a firearm at all, even if they live in the most dangerous parts of the state.

The California Rifle and Pistol Association sued the state, claiming that California could not ban citizens from carrying firearms for self-defense entirely.

Kronstadt, in an absurd ruling, dismissed the CRPA’s case at the behest of the state and the Los Angeles County Sheriff. In doing so, he stated that the burden imposed by terrible state laws “if any” is not, in the view of the court, “severe.”

The Obama-appointed judge also said that California’s extremely restrictive laws don’t infringe upon what he viewed as the ‘core’ of the Second Amendment – the right of self-defense in the home. That statement shows both idiocy and ignorance.

It seems that Kronstadt is as useful a ‘constitutional’ lawyer as Obama was. If the largest cities in the state, and the most populous counties in the state, outright refuse to issue permits, they’ve placed a severe burden on the right to keep and BEAR arms. Arguing otherwise is simply ridiculous.

The other case, decided on Wednesday, May 9, challenged California’s 2016 Assault Weapons Control Act, a newer, stricter series of regulations on semi-automatic rifles in a state where restrictions already demand rifles are specifically built to be ‘CA compliant.’

The decision, handed down by Barack Obama-appointed Judge Josephine Staton, flew in the face of the famedD.C. vs. Heller decision, as well as common sense.

The case Rupp v. Becarra, brought again by the CRPA, attacked the law which outlawed the ‘bullet button,’ a poorly understood invention that brought semi-automatic rifles into compliance with California laws.

California law basically did not allow a semi-automatic rifle to have a detachable magazine. According to California law, the magazine was only defined as not being detachable if it requires a tool to remove.

Enter the bullet button, a brilliant invention that allowed for California compliant AR’s to have at least somewhat detachable magazines.

The bullet button is a recessed magazine release button, which could not possibly be activated by a finger. However, shooters could use the top of a bullet, inserted into the button, to activate the release, dropping the magazine and allow for insertion of a new mag. That justified the legal requirement of needing a ‘tool’ to remove.

California couldn’t have that, apparently.

Staton, in one of the most blatantly anti-Second Amendment rulings in history, twisted the Heller decision, and said that “even an outright BAN on certain types of semi-automatic rifles” was permissible. She also absurdly claimed that even if semi-automatic rifles were barred, citizens could defend themselves with handguns, which California also heavily restricts and does not let citizens carry outside the home.

The United States Supreme Court decision in Heller should have protected the right to keep and bear arms across the country. The decision stated clearly that the right to keep and bear arms was a core fundamental right, just like the right to free speech or practice of religion.

Leftist judges like Staton, looking to legislate from the bench, have abused the ruling to the point where it’s essentially worthless in California courts.

The CRPA has the option to appeal, of course, meaning that both cases would go to theNinth Circuit Court of Appeals. Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the rulings of that court understands that the outcome of such an appeal is predetermined.

The Ninth is a solidly anti-gun rights court, as well as being the most-reversed federal court in the nation. Of course, if the CRPA lost those appeals (or more honestly, when they lost those appeals), they could always appeal again, to the Supreme Court.

But the United States Supreme Court seems disinterested in hearing local Second Amendment cases. Their refusal to do so recently, in fact, is the reason that California and Illinois can do essentially whatever they want to restrict firearm rights.

By refusing to hear local cases, the Supreme Court allowed the decisions of lower courts to stand, abdicating their role as the arbiter of the law to leftists on the Ninth Circuit Court.

When the Supreme Court refused to hear the Silvester v. Harris case, another anti-gun California case, Clarence Thomas said that he suspected if the case involved any right other than the right to keep and bear arms, “I have little doubt that the court would intervene.”

However, according to Thomas, “the Second Amendment is a disfavored right in this Court,” and the “right to keep and bear arms is this Court’s constitutional orphan.”

Hopefully, the Supreme Court heeds the warnings from members like Gorsuch, and actually hears the appealed cases. But more likely than not, leftist judges in California will continue to do what they like and run roughshod over gun rights, while leftists on the Supreme Court refuse to hear cases.

(Conservative Daily Post)

By Janet Phelan

It only takes a slight adjustment to the lens through which we view the Middle East to see that the US’s policies in the region have put her purported ally, Israel, at increased risk. Rather than securing the tiny Jewish state, the policies of the US have turned the entire region into a cauldron of fire and have plummeted Israel into an increasingly fragile position. The rightful rage of those who have seen their countries invaded, their loved ones killed, has increasingly been directed towards Israel, although it was the US which made the decision to launch invasions and topple regimes.

The brutal reality is that the US is not Israel’s friend. The history of the US’s sabotage of Israel is part of the secret history of our world. The US’s refusal to lift Jewish immigration quotas during WWII, the withholding from the public the known atrocities taking place in the concentration camps and the decision NOT to bomb and therefore destroy the extermination centers only lays the groundwork for understanding the real regard the US government holds for the Jewish people.

The continuing nature of the sabotage was laid out clearly in John Loftus and Mark Aarons 1992 bestselling intelligence history,The Secret War Against the Jews. According to one review of the 672 page tome,

The authors demonstrate that numerous Western countries, especially the United States and Great Britain, have conducted repeated and willful spying missions on Palestine and later Israel over many decades. While on the surface these two countries and others profess to be ardent allies of Israel, they work, in fact, through their intelligence services to betray Israel’s secrets to the Arabs. Their motive: oil and multinational profits, which must be attained at any price through international covert policies.

The general response to these claims is to point to the three billion dollars that the US gives Israel in foreign aid each year. This foreign aid is earmarked for Israel to buy weapons from the US. At this point in time, when the tensions are ramping up between Israel and Iran, it might be useful to review the efficacy of these weapons. As it stands, the US may have foisted onto Israel a whole load of junk.

“It’s one of the greatest frauds in modern times,” declared MIT Professor Emeritus Ted Postol, speaking of the purported efficacy of missile defense systems. In an interview this past week, Postol stated to this reporter that what is protecting the Israelis is not the Iron Dome missile defense. It is the warning system, which not only involves sirens but also alarm messages sent through cell phones to those in the targeted area. “People are making money hand over fist through these defense systems,” stated Postol, “when what is protecting people is the shelters. The Iron Dome simply does not work.”

Postols’s investigation of the efficacy of the Iron Dome involved analysis of videos showing intercept — or the failure to intercept — incoming artillery missiles and has been published in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists. He estimates the actual successful interception by the Iron Dome to be around 5%.

The history of falsely lauded missile defense systems goes back at least to the Gulf War of 1991 and the deployment of the Patriot missiles against Scuds. Initially, the US claimed a 95% success rate in Patriot interception of Scuds. That appraisal was then downgraded to 79% in Saudi Arabia and 40% in Israel. In fact, the actual figure is now considered to be around 2-9% success rate.

Israel today maintains a multi-tiered missile defense system. The Iron Dome, which is deployed to intercept short range rockets and artillery shells, constitutes one tier. The Arrow system constitutes another.

The Arrow system was jointly developed by the US and Israel and has a range of around 150 miles. It is touted as “the first operational missile defense system specifically designed and built to intercept and destroy ballistic missiles.”

And according to Dr. Nathan Farber, former head scientist of the missile division at Israel Military Industries, the Arrow doesn’t work, either. In an article in Haaretz, Farber’s criticisms are enumerated. The article states

Farber’s analysis shows that the current policy based on defensive missiles (Arrow 2, Arrow 3, David’s Sling, Patriot and Iron Dome) is fundamentally flawed, likely to fail miserably when put to the test, carries an unreasonable price tag and instills the illusion that the Israeli home front is protected from missile attacks.
On the topic of ballistic missile interception, there is no significant data… They may have conducted some real interception trials for the Arrow-2, but half of them were failures. The faults were identified and corrected, but since more trials could not be conducted (due to financial considerations), it’s clear that a lot of malfunctions will be discovered only during a real war.

The third component of Israel’s missile defense system is David’s Sling, which was developed by Israel’s Rafael and the US company, Raytheon, to take out mid-range ballistic missiles. As reported in theJerusalem Post, “With all three systems up and running (David’s Sling is expected to be fully operational during the first quarter of 2016), Israelis will reap the psychological benefits of feeling protected by the best anti-missile systems available in the world.”

But are the Israelis being conned?

In a 2010 article in Haaretz, the late Dr. Reuven Pedatzur unequivocally stated that “Israel is investing billions of dollars in the development of defensive systems that will not be effective in a crisis and formulating an erroneous strategy for dealing with the ballistic missile/rocket threat.” In the article, Pedatzur crunches the numbers and concludes that any missile defense system as currently funded would only potentially deter the first two or three hundred incoming missiles.

Budgetary limitations will obviously prevent the procurement of tens of thousands of defensive missiles. In the best case, defense officials talk about hundreds of such missiles. Thus even if these systems prove effective (and there is no guarantee of that ), they can provide a defense against only a small portion of the rockets and missiles that would be fired at Israel during a war.

Dr. Pedatzur, a missile defense expert, discussed the history of missile defense and reviews its likelihood of succeeding in this video, as it relates to the Iranian nuclear threat.

Author and former DOJ prosecutor John Loftus also weighed in on the financial impact of the recent announcement by President Trump to exit the Iran nuclear deal, a decision which has increased nervousness in Israel and has apparently gravely disappointed the US’s allies in Europe. In an interview this week, Loftus stated that Trump’s decision will greatly aid the oil companies, whose revenues are predicted to shoot up with the return of sanctions on Iran. Loftus sees this as benefiting the Russian economy, as well. Alluding to an already existing oil pipeline between Russia and Iran, he stated that the sanctions may not hurt Iran as intended. A recent article in Haaretz quotes a former Israeli General who states that the US vacating the Iran Deal will only help Iran.

“An American announcement that it’s withdrawing from the agreement would let Iran drive a wedge between the world powers and gradually loosen international oversight over its nuclear program. If the Americans abandon the agreement, they have to prepare for alternatives, and I don’t see this being done,” stated the former research chief of Israeli military intelligence, Amos Gilad.

The missile threat is not the only thing that Israelis should be worried about. As exposed for the first time in my 2014 book, EXILE, the delivery system which resulted by the adding on of a second line to extant water systems, enabling water to serve as a conduit for a selective bio or chem attack, is in evidence in Israel (and appears to be also at play with most of the US’s western allies, as well as in the US itself). The existence of this in Israel has been backed up by WikiLeaks cables.

The fate of the Jewish people, the fate of any group of people residing within the borders of any country pledged to protect its citizens, should not be subject to the cold and calculated efforts of war profiteers and eugenicists. The fact that Israel, established after the horrors of the Holocaust, has fallen prey to the same interests and savage duplicity as it promised haven from should not go without note.

“Israel will cease to exist by 2020”– attributed to Henry Kissinger
“I stand for anti-bigotry, anti-Semitism, and anti-racism”– George H.W. Bush
“**** the Jews”– James Baker, former Secretary of State

Image credit

(activistpost)

The Trump administration is imposing crippling sanctions on Iran similar to the ones placed on North Korea.

by Martin Walsh

Trump levies major sanctions package against Iran.

Just days after pulling the United States out of the Iran deal, President Donald Trump‘s administration is preparing to cut the regime off from the global economy, Zero Hedgereported. The days of Obama rhetoric and impotence are over!

The U.S. Department of Treasury announced it will be levying a massive sanctions package against a financing network and central bank used to funnel U.S. money to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard (IRG), a blacklisted military outfit that works with terrorist groups in the region.

The sanctions package is similar to what the U.S. placed on North Korea last year, which stripped the communist regime of more than 80 percent of its annual income through trade. The package against Iran is only slightly different, but is expected to have the same effect on Iran as it did with North Korea — meaning they will be begging Trump to remove the sanctions.

The Treasury is working with the United Arab Emirates against six individuals and three companies who have been funneling millions of dollars to the IRG. The Treasury also accused Iran’s largest bank of aiding the group by setting up front companies in the UAE to secretly funnel the U.S. dollars to the IRG.

The funds are believed to have been used to fund the IRG, Iran’s military projects, and terrorist groups in the region. The exact amount is unclear, but it is reportedly over one million U.S. dollars.

When announcing on Tuesday that the U.S. would be leaving the “awful” nuclear deal with the “murderous regime,” Trump said Iran has been using U.S. dollars to fund terrorism.

While the liberal media scoffed at him and claimed he was leaving America at risk in abandoning the deal, this reaffirms that Iran never respected or honored the agreement in the first place.

Trump also warned that if Iran continues to advance its nuclear capabilities and programs, it will have “bigger problems than it has ever had before.”

Trump appears to be using the same tactics with Iran as he did with North Korea. By cutting Iran off from the global economy, the regime won’t have any source of income to fund terrorist groups. When the sanctions take effect soon, it will choke the regime into either supporting its people or continuing to fund terrorism.

If they chose to help their people, then maybe the U.S. will lift the sanctions down the road. If they starve their people and continue funding terrorism, then Trump and the world will have an obligation to step in and take action against the regime.

It only took one year for North Korea to crawl back begging Trump to make a deal and remove the sanctions he levied on them.

Let’s see how long Iran can afford to act tough.

(conservativedailypost.com)

Jerusalem Day: Israelis clash with Palestinians on Temple Mount ahead of charged week

Published time: 13 May, 2018 17:00Edited time: 13 May, 2018 17:37

Violence erupted between Israelis and Palestinians at the holy site of Temple Mount in East Jerusalem on Sunday, as hundreds of Jewish worshippers descended on the area for Jerusalem Day.

Footage posted by RT’s video agency Ruptly shows police breaking up a fight between a group of Arab and Jewish men. Clashes reportedly began after around 1,000 Israelis moved towards Temple Mount with Star of David flags, chanting Jewish songs.

READ MORE: 'Next time in Jerusalem': Israeli winner adds political jab to Eurovision Song Contest

Jewish visitors were removed from the site for praying and bowing in contravention of regulations that ban all non-Muslims from praying in the grounds of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. At least one person was arrested on suspicion of bowing, reported the Jerusalem Post.

Jerusalem Day is an Israeli national holiday marking the establishment of the Jewish state’s control over the Old City and East Jerusalem in 1967. Temple Mount is the holiest site in Judaism and the third-holiest site in Islam.

The clashes come ahead of what’s expected to be an explosive week for the region. On Monday, the US embassy will make the contentious move from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, while on Tuesday, Palestinians will observe Nakba Day – a commemoration of the forced displacement of some 700,000 Palestinians. Huge demonstrations are expected to take place on both days.

Dozens of Palestinians have been killed and hundreds more injured by Israeli Defence Forces over the past six weeks, as demonstrators gathered every Friday at the Gaza-Israel border for the ‘Great March of Return.’

(RT)

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 5/12/2018 5:32:06 PM
	Secret FBI Program Now Jailing Activists for Speaking Out Against Police Brutality on Facebook MAY 11, 2018 By Jay Syrmopoulos Dallas, TX – When militarized FBI agents clad in tactical gear raided the home of Rakem Balogun in December 2017—forcing him and his 15-year-old son outside in their underwear on the cold and windy night as agents ransacked his residence—he thought it had to be a mistake. In an exclusive report by The Guardian, Balogun explains that he was stunned to later learn that he was under investigation for “domestic terrorism” and had been under law enforcement surveillance for years. Incredibly, Balogun’s arrest and the FBI raid on his home were partially due to a simple, and constitutionally protected, Facebook post that was critical of police. “It’s tyranny at its finest,” Balogun, 34, told The Guardian. “I have not been doing anything illegal for them to have surveillance on me. I have not hurt anyone or threatened anyone.” Balogun was imprisoned for five months and denied bail while US attorneys attempted to frivolously prosecute him on accusations of being an illegal gun owner and a threat to law enforcement—only later to be exonerated on both trumped up allegations. Foreign Policy reported that the entire case has ominous implications and overtones of ’60s/’70s-style COINTELPRO, as Balogun is believed to be the first person prosecuted, and known to have been targeted, under a secretive US surveillance effort to identify and track suspected “black identity extremists”—a broad and nebulous term that civil rights advocates warn can be used to target and chill constitutionally protected political activism. According to the exclusive report from The Guardian: In a leaked August 2017 report from the FBI’s Domestic Terrorism Analysis Unit, officials claimed that there had been a “resurgence in ideologically motivated, violent criminal activity” stemming from African Americans’ “perceptions of police brutality”. The counter-terrorism assessment provided minimal data or evidence of threats against police, but discussed a few isolated incidents, notably the case of Micah Johnson who killed five officers in Texas. The report sparked backlash from civil rights groups and some Democrats, who feared the government would use the broad designation to prosecute activists and groups like Black Lives Matter. Not so coincidentally, Balogun is a long-time political activist as the co-founder of the Huey P. Newton Gun Club and Guerilla Mainframe; both groups advocate for the rights of black gun owners and fight against police brutality. It was revealed when special agent Aaron Keighley testified in court that the FBI began surveillance of Balogun after he participated in a rally against police violence in Austin, Texas in March 2015. The FBI first became aware of the protest from a video posted by Infowars, Keighley said. Balogun said he was stunned to learn that information from Infowars was used as the basis for their investigation: They’re using a conspiracy theorist video as a reason to justify their tyranny? That is a big insult. Ironically, no mention of any specific actions by Balogun was ever brought up by Keighley, who instead testified about protesters’ anti-police statements, such as “oink oink, bang bang” and “the only good pig is a pig that’s dead.” The Guardian reports that despite making no mention of Balogun’s actions at the rally in court, Keighley did discuss Facebook posts by Balogun in which he called a suspect in the killing of a police officer a “hero” and expressed “solidarity” for the man accused of killing police when he wrote, “They deserve what they got.” Keighley was later forced to admit that despite his fear-mongering about Balogun’s free expression of thought on social media, the FBI did not have evidence of any specific threats about harming police. Balogun told The Guardian that at the time he made those Facebook posts he was “venting” about the anger he felt surrounding the numerous unjustified killings of unarmed black men and women. He said that out of being disgusted with media largely portraying these killings as justified, he wrote those posts to “mimic their reactions to our killings.” In a jailhouse letter to The Guardian, Balogun wrote that he was a “prisoner of war on free speech and the right to bear arms” who had been “abducted” by the FBI. He noted that he was not targeted for being a violent threat, but for promoting black community groups and battling “government abuse,” adding, “Violence is the method of our oppressor, our method is hard work, love, and unity.” While the prosecution’s case against Balogun completely unraveled, it is an ominous indicator of a renewed and brutal assault against political activism by government forces. “They were really desperate,” Balogun said. When his home was raided, police confiscated his .38-caliber handgun, an unloaded AK-style assault rifle and his book Negroes with Guns by the civil rights leaderRobert F. Williams, according to The Guardian. This is pretty much like Stalin 1950 – ‘You show me the man. I show you the crime.’ The entire idea of a “black identity extremism” (BIE) movement—a term coined by law enforcement—is unsupported by the government’s own data. But that has never stopped the government from persecuting political activists; especially ones espousing black empowerment ideology. The failed prosecution and clear persecution of Balogun have drawn clear parallels to previous efforts by the U.S. government to discredit, disrupt and monitor political activists during the civil rights-era, particularly the FBI counterintelligence program called COINTELPRO, which targeted Martin Luther King Jr, Malcolm X, the NAACP and the Black Panther party. Michael German, a fellow with the Brennan Center for Justice’s liberty and national security program and former FBI agent, said the BIE assessment was “extraordinarily overbroad,” but that the idea was being spread to state and local law enforcement agencies across the U.S. The targeting of activists through police harassment and surveillance for espousing a disfavored ideological stance is immoral to the core and morbidly insidious. The Guardian reports that while authorities have not said publicly that Balogun has been labeled a BIE, “their language in court resembled the warnings in the FBI’s file.” German revealed that the federal government utilized a “disruption strategy,” which is a tactic where the FBI attempts to target lower-level arrests and charges as a means of causing a disruption in their targets’ lives while the agency attempts to build a case. “Sometimes when you couldn’t prove somebody was a terrorist, it’s because they weren’t a terrorist,” German said, adding that prosecutors’ claims that Balogun was too dangerous to be released on bail were “astonishing.” “It seems this effort was designed to punish him for his political activity rather than actually solve any sort of security issue,” he said. This is exactly what was done to Balogun as he has lost his vehicle, job, and home. His son was also forced to move and transfer schools and Balogun missed much of the first year of his newborn daughter’s life. This man’s life is in shambles due to being targeted for his political activism. When the State persecutes you for attempting to empower others, you are dangerously close to tyranny. (activistpost.com)
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 5/12/2018 11:10:44 PM
	PUBLISHED: 4:13 PM 11 MAY 2018 California Judges Quietly Remove All Second Amendment Rights This week, in two separate rulings, these judges have declared that the right to self-defense does not exist and is not what the Heller decision outlined. by Austin Lewis California judges, apparently ignorant of the meaning of the right to keep and bear arms, continuously have ruled against the Second Amendment. Now, it's on the verge of disappearing from California law. California is easily the most anti-Second Amendment state in the nation, according to groups that push for gun control. The state is basically a testing ground for leftist policies on firearms. Citizens living in California who thought they couldn’t see their rights restricted any further learned differently this week, due to the outcome of two cases against the state. California courts twisted the intent of the Second Amendment and Supreme Court rulings, silently restricting the right to self-defense. However, there was nearly zero coverage of it in the media. Almost like the media was hoping to hide the intent of ‘sensible’ gun control laws. These cases, which concerned semi-automatic rifles and the right to carry pistols for self-defense showed just how far California will go to restrict firearm rights in the state. On Monday, a federal judge in Los Angeles ruled on the case brought forward by California’s National Rifle Association affiliate, which hoped to preserve the right to carry firearms in the state. The case, Flanagan vs. Becerra, was heard by Judge John Kronstadt, an Obama appointee. California is a ‘may issue’ state where concealed carry licenses are concerned. In most states, this means that someone seeking a permit to carry a concealed pistol has to apply for the permit, properly follow the guidelines, and then the sheriff has the last say, and can choose whether to issue the permit or not. In the state of California, this essentially means that no one gets a concealed carry permit except the rich, the politically connected, and a handful of professionals (mostly bodyguards for the wealthy). In metropolitan areas, average citizens almost never receive a permit, even if they have no criminal history. Adding insult to injury, the state also banned open carry, meaning that millions of law-abiding citizens in the state cannot carry a firearm at all, even if they live in the most dangerous parts of the state. The California Rifle and Pistol Association sued the state, claiming that California could not ban citizens from carrying firearms for self-defense entirely. Kronstadt, in an absurd ruling, dismissed the CRPA’s case at the behest of the state and the Los Angeles County Sheriff. In doing so, he stated that the burden imposed by terrible state laws “if any” is not, in the view of the court, “severe.” The Obama-appointed judge also said that California’s extremely restrictive laws don’t infringe upon what he viewed as the ‘core’ of the Second Amendment – the right of self-defense in the home. That statement shows both idiocy and ignorance. It seems that Kronstadt is as useful a ‘constitutional’ lawyer as Obama was. If the largest cities in the state, and the most populous counties in the state, outright refuse to issue permits, they’ve placed a severe burden on the right to keep and BEAR arms. Arguing otherwise is simply ridiculous. The other case, decided on Wednesday, May 9, challenged California’s 2016 Assault Weapons Control Act, a newer, stricter series of regulations on semi-automatic rifles in a state where restrictions already demand rifles are specifically built to be ‘CA compliant.’ The decision, handed down by Barack Obama-appointed Judge Josephine Staton, flew in the face of the famedD.C. vs. Heller decision, as well as common sense. The case Rupp v. Becarra, brought again by the CRPA, attacked the law which outlawed the ‘bullet button,’ a poorly understood invention that brought semi-automatic rifles into compliance with California laws. California law basically did not allow a semi-automatic rifle to have a detachable magazine. According to California law, the magazine was only defined as not being detachable if it requires a tool to remove. Enter the bullet button, a brilliant invention that allowed for California compliant AR’s to have at least somewhat detachable magazines. The bullet button is a recessed magazine release button, which could not possibly be activated by a finger. However, shooters could use the top of a bullet, inserted into the button, to activate the release, dropping the magazine and allow for insertion of a new mag. That justified the legal requirement of needing a ‘tool’ to remove. California couldn’t have that, apparently. Staton, in one of the most blatantly anti-Second Amendment rulings in history, twisted the Heller decision, and said that “even an outright BAN on certain types of semi-automatic rifles” was permissible. She also absurdly claimed that even if semi-automatic rifles were barred, citizens could defend themselves with handguns, which California also heavily restricts and does not let citizens carry outside the home. The United States Supreme Court decision in Heller should have protected the right to keep and bear arms across the country. The decision stated clearly that the right to keep and bear arms was a core fundamental right, just like the right to free speech or practice of religion. Leftist judges like Staton, looking to legislate from the bench, have abused the ruling to the point where it’s essentially worthless in California courts. The CRPA has the option to appeal, of course, meaning that both cases would go to theNinth Circuit Court of Appeals. Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the rulings of that court understands that the outcome of such an appeal is predetermined. The Ninth is a solidly anti-gun rights court, as well as being the most-reversed federal court in the nation. Of course, if the CRPA lost those appeals (or more honestly, when they lost those appeals), they could always appeal again, to the Supreme Court. But the United States Supreme Court seems disinterested in hearing local Second Amendment cases. Their refusal to do so recently, in fact, is the reason that California and Illinois can do essentially whatever they want to restrict firearm rights. By refusing to hear local cases, the Supreme Court allowed the decisions of lower courts to stand, abdicating their role as the arbiter of the law to leftists on the Ninth Circuit Court. When the Supreme Court refused to hear the Silvester v. Harris case, another anti-gun California case, Clarence Thomas said that he suspected if the case involved any right other than the right to keep and bear arms, “I have little doubt that the court would intervene.” However, according to Thomas, “the Second Amendment is a disfavored right in this Court,” and the “right to keep and bear arms is this Court’s constitutional orphan.” Hopefully, the Supreme Court heeds the warnings from members like Gorsuch, and actually hears the appealed cases. But more likely than not, leftist judges in California will continue to do what they like and run roughshod over gun rights, while leftists on the Supreme Court refuse to hear cases. (Conservative Daily Post)
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 5/13/2018 11:03:16 AM
	PUBLISHED: 10:33 AM 12 MAY 2018 UPDATED: 6:30 PM 12 MAY 2018 US Moves To Cut Off Iran From Global Economy The Trump administration is imposing crippling sanctions on Iran similar to the ones placed on North Korea. by Martin Walsh Trump levies major sanctions package against Iran. Just days after pulling the United States out of the Iran deal, President Donald Trump‘s administration is preparing to cut the regime off from the global economy, Zero Hedgereported. The days of Obama rhetoric and impotence are over! The U.S. Department of Treasury announced it will be levying a massive sanctions package against a financing network and central bank used to funnel U.S. money to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard (IRG), a blacklisted military outfit that works with terrorist groups in the region. The sanctions package is similar to what the U.S. placed on North Korea last year, which stripped the communist regime of more than 80 percent of its annual income through trade. The package against Iran is only slightly different, but is expected to have the same effect on Iran as it did with North Korea — meaning they will be begging Trump to remove the sanctions. The Treasury is working with the United Arab Emirates against six individuals and three companies who have been funneling millions of dollars to the IRG. The Treasury also accused Iran’s largest bank of aiding the group by setting up front companies in the UAE to secretly funnel the U.S. dollars to the IRG. The funds are believed to have been used to fund the IRG, Iran’s military projects, and terrorist groups in the region. The exact amount is unclear, but it is reportedly over one million U.S. dollars. When announcing on Tuesday that the U.S. would be leaving the “awful” nuclear deal with the “murderous regime,” Trump said Iran has been using U.S. dollars to fund terrorism. While the liberal media scoffed at him and claimed he was leaving America at risk in abandoning the deal, this reaffirms that Iran never respected or honored the agreement in the first place. Trump also warned that if Iran continues to advance its nuclear capabilities and programs, it will have “bigger problems than it has ever had before.” Trump appears to be using the same tactics with Iran as he did with North Korea. By cutting Iran off from the global economy, the regime won’t have any source of income to fund terrorist groups. When the sanctions take effect soon, it will choke the regime into either supporting its people or continuing to fund terrorism. If they chose to help their people, then maybe the U.S. will lift the sanctions down the road. If they starve their people and continue funding terrorism, then Trump and the world will have an obligation to step in and take action against the regime. It only took one year for North Korea to crawl back begging Trump to make a deal and remove the sanctions he levied on them. Let’s see how long Iran can afford to act tough. (conservativedailypost.com)
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Menu

Forums

Secret FBI Program Now Jailing Activists for Speaking Out Against Police Brutality on Facebook

PUBLISHED: 4:13 PM 11 MAY 2018

California Judges Quietly Remove All Second Amendment Rights

This week, in two separate rulings, these judges have declared that the right to self-defense does not exist and is not what the Heller decision outlined.
by Austin Lewis

California judges, apparently ignorant of the meaning of the right to keep and bear arms, continuously have ruled against the Second Amendment. Now, it's on the verge of disappearing from California law.

Is Israel Burning?

PUBLISHED: 10:33 AM 12 MAY 2018

UPDATED: 6:30 PM 12 MAY 2018

US Moves To Cut Off Iran From Global Economy

The Trump administration is imposing crippling sanctions on Iran similar to the ones placed on North Korea.
by Martin Walsh

Jerusalem Day: Israelis clash with Palestinians on Temple Mount ahead of charged week

Published time: 13 May, 2018 17:00Edited time: 13 May, 2018 17:37

Like us on Facebook!

Menu

Forums

PUBLISHED: 4:13 PM 11 MAY 2018

California Judges Quietly Remove All Second Amendment Rights

This week, in two separate rulings, these judges have declared that the right to self-defense does not exist and is not what the Heller decision outlined. by Austin Lewis

California judges, apparently ignorant of the meaning of the right to keep and bear arms, continuously have ruled against the Second Amendment. Now, it's on the verge of disappearing from California law.

PUBLISHED: 10:33 AM 12 MAY 2018 UPDATED: 6:30 PM 12 MAY 2018

US Moves To Cut Off Iran From Global Economy

The Trump administration is imposing crippling sanctions on Iran similar to the ones placed on North Korea. by Martin Walsh

Jerusalem Day: Israelis clash with Palestinians on Temple Mount ahead of charged week

Published time: 13 May, 2018 17:00Edited time: 13 May, 2018 17:37

Like us on Facebook!

This week, in two separate rulings, these judges have declared that the right to self-defense does not exist and is not what the Heller decision outlined.
by Austin Lewis

PUBLISHED: 10:33 AM 12 MAY 2018

UPDATED: 6:30 PM 12 MAY 2018

The Trump administration is imposing crippling sanctions on Iran similar to the ones placed on North Korea.
by Martin Walsh