Archive for March, 2014

Director of “Noah” Movie Says It Is the Least Biblical Biblical Film Ever Made

March 31, 2014

Michael Snyder, The Truth Wins, March 31, 2014

In “Noah”, the fallen angels are “good guys” that were kicked out of heaven because of their compassion for humanity, they help Noah build the ark, and they ascend to heaven when they die helping defend the ark against a band of marauding evil humans.

Director Darren Aronofsky stated that he attempted to make “the least biblical biblical film ever made”, and he may have achieved that.  In “Noah”, almost everything is the opposite of what it should be.  Instead of villains, the fallen angels are heroes.  Instead of a preacher of righteousness, Noah is depicted as a psychopathic maniac that hates humanity and wants to kill his unborn grandchild if it is a girl.  The movie somehow finds a way to avoid using the word “God” the entire time, and during a scene where Noah explains to his family how the world was “created”, the film displays visuals depicting Darwinian evolution.  But all of the controversy surrounding the film only seems to have helped it at the box office.  In fact, it pulled in approximately 44 million dollars in North America alone over opening weekend.

When I first heard that a movie about Noah starring Russell Crowe was coming out, I was very excited.  I thought that it could spark discussion about one of the most important events in human history.

Unfortunately, the film twists and distorts the story of Noah so badly that it is virtually unrecognizable.  And Americans are so dumbed down these days that many of them will end up believing that Aronofsky’s version is what the Bible actually says.

So before we get into the specifics of what “Noah” says about the fallen angels, let us first take a look at what the Scriptures tell us.

In Genesis 6:1-4 we read the following…

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,

That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

Obviously the fact that fallen angels got together with human women and produced hybrid offspring displeased God greatly, and in the book of Jude we read that these fallen angels are kept in chains awaiting the day of judgment…

And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

The Book of Enoch, which is actually directly quoted in the book of Jude, refers to these fallen angels as “Watchers” and contains a lot more details about them.  The following is how Wikipedia summarizes what the Book of Enoch has to say…

In the Book of Enoch, the Watchers (Aramaic. עִירִין, iyrin), are angels dispatched to Earth to watch over the humans. They soon begin to lust for human women and, at the prodding of their leader Samyaza, defect en masse to illicitly instruct humanity and procreate among them. The offspring of these unions are the Nephilim, savage giants who pillage the earth and endanger humanity. Samyaza and his associates further taught their human charges arts and technologies such as weaponry, cosmetics, mirrors, sorcery, and other techniques that would otherwise be discovered gradually over time by humans, not foisted upon them all at once. Eventually God allows a Great Flood to rid the earth of the Nephilim, but first sends Uriel to warn Noah so as not to eradicate the human race. The Watchers are bound “in the valleys of the Earth” until Judgment Day. (Jude verse 6 says that these fallen angels are kept “in everlasting chains under darkness” until Judgement Day.)

So of course any movie about Noah would clearly depict the fallen angels as the bad guys.

Right?

Wrong.

In Aronofsky’s version, they are actually good guys that help Noah build the ark

This is the film that will introduce most of the country to the Watchers: fallen angels who, according to Aronofsky’s version, have been encrusted in stone and, with a little persuading, help Noah construct the ark (for giants with gobs of rock for hands, they are extraordinarily dexterous).

When I first heard this, I was absolutely dumbfounded.

And no, the Watchers were not giant rock monsters either.  I have no idea where Aronofsky got that.

In “Noah”, the fallen angels are actually portrayed as being more compassionate than the Creator, and when they are banished to Earth for showing too much compassion for humanity they are rescued by Methuselah and his flaming sword

It is recounted that the Watchers are friends with Methuselah because he saved them once. They came to earth to help the humans after the Creator had banished humans from Eden, but the Watchers too were punished for disobedience by the Creator, who bound them to the earth and forced them to take form as stone creatures. But after learning from them, the humans tried to enslave and kill them. They tried to run, and Methuselah helped their escape by fighting the waves of human soldiers with a burning sword.

Noah speaks with Methuselah and receives a seed passed down from the Garden of Eden. He plants the seed on a plain, and an entire forest grows upon it within seconds. This miracle convinces the Watchers that Noah is chosen by the Creator. Noah announces that all the wood will be used to build an ark, and they start to help with the construction work.

At the end of the movie, instead of receiving judgment, the fallen angels get to ascend to heaven as they die defending Noah’s ark from a violent horde of people trying to board it…

The fallen angels, led by Semjaza, defend Noah and the ark at the start of the flood from Tubal-Cain’s raging army that is fighting to board the ark. The Watchers begin to fall one by one under the army’s onslaught. As the first one dies, the Watcher cries out to the heavens for forgiveness, then his rock-like body transforms into light and shoots up into the sky. This “resurrection” prompts another rock giant to proclaim, “He returns to the Creator.”

I can just imagine how little kids that watch this film are going to feel.  They are going to want to be just like the heroic “rock giants” that helped Noah.  They are going to have absolutely no idea who “the Watchers” really are.

Normally I do not spend my time writing about Hollywood films.  But hundreds of millions of people around the globe could end up seeing this movie over the next several years, and instead of learning about one of the most important events in human history, they are going to get a version of the story that is almost totally opposite of what it should be.

The truth is that fallen angels are real, they really did mate with human women, and the Nephilim really did exist.

You can find some of my previous articles about the Nephilim hereherehere and here.

And Noah really did exist as well, and Jesus told us that we should learn from him, because the days when Jesus returns will be very much like the days of Noah.  In Matthew 24:37-39 it says the following…

But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,

And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

I really wish that Hollywood would have gotten this one right.

An accurate movie about Noah starring Russell Crowe would have been very cool.

Unfortunately, it didn’t turn out that way.

Hourslong Police Protest Turns to ‘Mayhem’ in Albuquerque, NM

March 31, 2014

Albuquerque’s mayor said that a more than 10-hour protest over recent police shootings turned from peaceful into “mayhem,” as officers in riot gear clashed with hundreds of protesters who blocked traffic, tried to get on freeways and shouted anti-police slogans.

By RUSSELL CONTRERAS of Associated Press, March 31, 2014

Richard Berry said Sunday that one officer was injured, rocks were thrown and at one point protesters trapped police in a vehicle and tried to break the windows, the Albuquerque Journal reported . An Associated Press reporter saw gas canisters being thrown outside police headquarters and Albuquerque Police and Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Deputies charging at the protesters late Sunday, which mostly dispersed the crowds.

Albuquerque protests: Hundreds take to the street: ​Protesters head out from Albuquerque Plaza to Central  as they protest against Albuquerque Police Department officers on Sunday, March 30, 2014.

The number of protesters dwindled to fewer than 100 before midnight, and three or four people were arrested, the newspaper said.

Multiple messages left for the Police Department weren’t immediately returned. Video by KRQE-TV showed people being led away in zip-tie restraints, but it’s unclear if those people were arrested or if any protesters were injured.

“We respected their rights to protest, obviously,” Berry said, “but what it appears we have at this time is individuals who weren’t connected necessarily with the original protest. They’ve taken it far beyond a normal protest.”

Protesters took to the streets in the early afternoon and stayed out late Sunday after authorities declared an unlawful assembly. People are angry over Albuquerque police’s involvement in 37 shootings, 23 of them fatal since 2010. Critics say that’s far too many for a department serving a city of about 555,000.

The protesters repeatedly marched the 2 miles from downtown Albuquerque to the University of New Mexico, holding signs protesting recent police shootings and often snarling traffic. Motorists honked, and supporters took photos with smartphones. Activists called on various city officials to resign, yelling late Sunday for the police chief to resign.

Justin Elder, 24, followed the protest as a passenger in a car and held a sign that read, “APD: Dressed To Kill.”

“That’s what this police force is about,” Elder said.

Albuquerque police in riot gear and New Mexico State Police followed the marchers, and protesters were seen shouting epithets at officers. At one point, a protester climbed a tall street sign on the city’s historic Route 66 and unsuccessfully attempted to bring it down.

A different protester, Alexander Siderits, 23, said he was participating because he was “fed up” with how police treat citizens. “It has reached a boiling point,” he said, “and people just can’t take it anymore.”

The U.S. Justice Department has been investigating the department for more than a year, looking into complaints of civil rights violations and allegations of excessive use of force.

The gathering came days after a YouTube video emerged threatening retaliation for a recent deadly police shooting.

The video, which bore the logo of the computer hacking collective Anonymous, warned of a cyberattack on city websites and called for the protest march. Albuquerque police said their site had been breached early Sunday afternoon, but it was back by evening after being offline for hours.

Earlier Sunday, police spokesman Simon Drobik confirmed the disruption was due to a cyberattack and said investigators had not uncovered the source of the hack.

In the shooting on March 16 that led to the YouTube posting Tuesday, a homeless man was killed in the foothills of the Sandia Mountains on the east side of Albuquerque. The shooting was captured on video and followed a long standoff. The FBI has opened an investigation into the shooting.

Last week, Albuquerque police fatally shot a man at a public housing complex. Authorities said he shot at officers before they returned fire.

Obama Providing Free High-tech U.S. Military Equipment to Russia

March 28, 2014

From The New American by Dave Bohon, March 27, 2014

The Obama administration is giving Russia military equipment used by the U.S. Marines and Army, according to U.S. Congressman Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.). This revelation comes on the heels of Obama’s announced sanctions against Russia over its annexing of Crimea, a part of Ukraine.

United States Providing Free High-tech Military Equipment to Russia

In a March 25 press release Bridenstine, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, reported that he and 15 other House members sent a scathing letter to Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz when they discovered that the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is providing the Russian Federation with high-tech hardware known as the Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System (MILES).

“Employed by the U.S. military for training purposes, MILES is a tactical force-on-force trainer, which uses a system of lasers and dummy ammunition to simulate ground combat for soldiers,” explained Bridenstine’s office in the media release. The release explained that the technology can be compared to a “laser tag” system available in commercial markets.

Bridenstine and Representative Mike Turner (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces, headed up the congressional delegation that penned the letter to Moniz, noting that “in the process of reviewing the Fiscal Year 2014 budget and the proposed Fiscal Year 2015 budget request, it has come to our attention that the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has been, and is planning to continue providing the Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System (MILES) to the Russian Federation free of charge.”

Bridenstine called it “ludicrous that U.S. taxpayers are paying to give Russia free military equipment after President Obama announced a suspension in military engagement with Moscow…. I expect Secretary of Energy Moniz to act quickly and stop irresponsible military equipment transfers.”

In his own statement, Rep. Turner said, “Putin has proven that he has a brazen disregard for the sovereignty and stability of Eastern Europe and that he will continue to manipulate and disregard international law.” He added that despite “overwhelming evidence that Putin is not our ally, it is astonishing that the Obama Administration would still provide superior, U.S. military technology to an aggressive and advancing Russia. The United States must seriously redirect its approach and immediately terminate all military aid to Russia.”

Anti-gun California State Senator Charged With Gun Trafficking

March 28, 2014

From The New American by Bob Adelmann, March 27, 2014

In a move that surprised nearly everyone who knows him, California State Senator Leland Yee was arrested by the FBI on March 26 on felony charges ranging from gun trafficking to soliciting illegal campaign contributions in exchange for political favors.

At about the time Yee was released on a $500,000 bond, California State Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg called for him to resign or else be suspended. Steinberg also removed Yee from all his committee positions.

A remarkably successful politician for years, Yee suffered only one loss — his unsuccessful bid for mayor of San Francisco in 2011, leaving him $70,000 in debt. When he decided to run for secretary of state in November, following the end of his term as state senator, Yee was under financial pressure.

Anti-gun California State Senator Charged With Gun Trafficking

Photo of Leland Yee: AP Images

The 137-page FBI affidavit against Yee spells out in excruciatingly painful detail how the FBI, in its years-long attempt to bring down gang kingpin Raymond “Shrimp Boy” Chow, had infiltrated Chow’s organization and discovered the link between Yee and his longtime friend and campaign finance manager Keith Jackson. Jackson and Yee served together on the San Francisco Board of Education together, and Jackson even served as school board president for a time. Jackson needed funds to support Yee’s campaign, and Chow’s organization looked to be the perfect place to obtain them.

So, in trying to bring down the big fish, the FBI got lucky and brought down an even bigger one.

Yee’s success as a politician was legendary. From 2006 to the present, he presented 181 bills and saw 138 of them signed into law. He served, up until March 26, on 10 different senate committees and chaired three others. He was opposed to violent video games such as Grand Theft Auto, holding that they were training grounds to inoculate youngsters against violence, and he was also notoriously anti-gun. At one point, while promoting the closing of a so-called loophole in California’s already onerous assault weapons ban, he said:

It is extremely important that individuals in the state of California do not own assault weapons. I mean, that is just so crystal clear, there is no debate, no discussion.

In 2006 Yee was named to the Gun Violence Prevention Honor Roll at the Brady Campaign for his efforts to promote micro-stamping on handguns and ammunition. And just last week Yee received an award from the Society for Professional Journalists for his work fostering government transparency.

Yee knew his way around guns, and he had connections to some Muslim groups that would be interested in importing fully-automatic M-16s into the United States. So when an individual associated with Chow offered to help him erase some of his campaign debt by making the introduction, Yee jumped at the chance, not knowing of course that he was in fact dealing with an FBI informant who had infiltrated Chow’s organization. Yee picked up $10,000 for the introduction.

That was only one of the seven felonies with which the FBI is charging Yee. The affidavit reads like something out of a John Grisham novel. Here’s just a small sample from pages 23 and 25:

During the time frame from at least May 2011 through the present, Keith Jackson has been involved in raising campaign funds for Senator Yee. This includes raising funds for Senator Yee’s campaign during Senator Yee’s run in the San Francisco mayoral election on November 8, 2011; to retire Senator Yee’s debt from [that] mayoral campaign; and for Senator Yee’s current campaign in the California Secretary of State election to be held in November 2014….

In connection with efforts to retire the mayoral campaign debt, Senator Yee and Keith Jackson agreed that Senator Yee would make a telephone call to a manager with the California Department of Public Health in support of a contract under consideration with [the FBI agent’s] purported client, and would provide an official letter in support of the client, in exchange for a $10,000 campaign donation. Senator Yee made the call on October 18, 2012, and provided the letter…. On November 19, 2012, Keith Jackson accepted the $10,000 cash donation from [the agent] who was paying Keith Jackson and Senator Yee the money on behalf of [another FBI agent].

In connection with the gun trafficking charge, the affidavit was equally clear about Yee’s role:

In a further attempt of Keith Jackson and Senator Yee to gain more money from [the FBI agent], Keith Jackson told [the agent] that Senator Yee had a contact who deals in arms trafficking. This purported arms dealer was later identified.

Jackson requested that [the FBI agent] provide a campaign donation on behalf of Senator Yee, for Senator Yee to facilitate meeting with the arms dealer with the intent of [the FBI agent] to purportedly purchase a large number of weapons to be imported through the Port of Newark, New Jersey.

During a meeting with [the agent], Senator Yee and Keith Jackson, Senator Yee discussed certain details of the specific types of weapons [the agent] was interested in buying and importing.

When asked about whether Yee would plead innocent, his lawyer, Paul DeMeester, said Yee would do so. But DeMeester also said he hadn’t had time to digest the details contained in the affidavit to know whether that decision was final.

Yee is the third California Democrat senator to find himself in serious trouble just since the first of the year. State Senator Roderick Wright was convicted in January of voter fraud and perjury, while State Senator Ron Calderone was forced to take a leave of absence following his indictment on charges of bribery and money laundering linked to a federal sting operation. Said Senate President Pro Tem Steinberg:

I am angry. I’m angry on behalf of the people and I’m angry on behalf of the 37 [remaining] members [of the senate] whose hard work every day on behalf of the people is being tarnished….

Then he spoke directly to Yee: “Leave! Don’t burden your colleagues and this great institution with your troubles. Leave!”

At this moment in time it’s fair to conclude that Yee’s career is over. Instead of taking over as California’s secretary of state in the fall, he’ll be contemplating his future from behind bars: Each felony comes with a 20-year jail sentence. For Jackson, the future is even bleaker: He’s been charged in the same affidavit for his involvement in a murder-for-hire scheme. As for Chow, the big fish the FBI was initially after, his long record of criminal activities will also likely give him plenty of jail time to contemplate his future.

For Derek Cressman, one of Yee’s opponents in the race for secretary of state, this is a gift from heaven: “We are clearly beyond the point of looking at [just] one bad apple and instead [we are] looking at a corrupt institution in the California senate,” he pointed out.

If Cressman is elected as the new secretary of state, it’ll be interesting to see if he can do anything about that.

Chester, SC City Council Member Charged for Threats Against Police Chief & Major

March 27, 2014

From http://www.wcnc.com, March 27, 2014

Police arrested a member of the Chester City Council because of statements made against authorities, according to the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division.

Odell Williams, 70, is charged with two counts of threatening the life of a public official.

Chester City Council member charged for threats

SLED says the incident happened on March 10 following a city council meeting.

Williams threatened Chester Police Chief Andre Williams and Major Gene Gilmore in the Chester City Hall bathroom, according to the police report.

Odell Williams allegedly used racial slurs and threatened to “take them out.” He also put his hand on his pocket implying he was carrying a weapon at the time, police say.

The charge carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a $5,000 fine.

Defending America’s Constitutional Founding, Idaho Governor Signs Federal Gun Grab Nullification Bill

March 26, 2014

From The New American by Joe Wolverton, II, J.D., March 25, 2014

On Wednesday, March 19, Idaho Governor Butch Otter signed a powerful protection against the federal gun grab into law in the Gem State.

The bill, SB 1332, came to Otter’s desk after being passed unanimously (with three abstentions) by the state House and Senate.

The published purpose of SB 1332, the Idaho Federal Firearm, Magazine and Register Ban Enforcement Act, makes clear the intent of state lawmakers:

This legislation is to protect Idaho law enforcement officers from being directed, through federal orders, laws, rules, or regulations enacted or promulgated on or after January 1, 2014, to violate their oath of office and Idaho citizens’ rights under the Idaho Constitution, Article 1, Section 11. This Constitutional provision disallows confiscation of firearms except those actually used in commission of a felony, and disallows other restrictions on a lawful citizen’s right to own firearms and ammunition.

The State Affairs Committee,the listed author of the bill, was right to point out the state’s right to refuse to execute unconstitutional demands of the federal government. The authors understood that states are constitutionally, legally, and historically on solid ground when they hold these usurpations as null, void, and of no legal effect. That state governments have the power to take this tack with regard to unconstitutional acts of the federal government, the Founders were universally agreed, as I have explained in earlier articles.

Nullification is a concept of constitutional law that recognizes the authority of each state to nullify, or invalidate, any federal measure that exceeds the few and defined powers allowed the federal government as enumerated in the Constitution.

Nullification is founded on the assertion that the sovereign states formed the union, and as creators of the compact, they hold ultimate authority as to the limits of the power of the federal government to enact laws that they expect the people to obey.

That is to say, the Constitution is an agency agreement between the states (the principals) and the federal government (the agent).

The law of agency applies when one party gives another party legal authority to act on the first party’s behalf. The first party is called the principal and the second party is called the agent. The principal may grant the agent as much or as little authority as suits his purpose. That is to say, by simply giving an agent certain powers, that agent is not authorized to act outside of that defined sphere of authority.

Upon its ratification, the states, as principals, gave limited power to the federal government to act as their agent in certain matters of common concern: defense, taxation, interstate commerce, etc.

The authority of the agent — in this case the federal government — is derived from the agreement that created the principal/agent relationship. Whether the agent is lawfully acting on behalf of the principal is a question of fact. The agent may legally bind the principal only insofar as its actions lie within the contractual boundaries of its power. 

Should the agent exceed the scope of its authority, not only is the principal not held accountable for those acts, but the breaching agent is legally liable to the principal (and any affected third parties who acted in reliance on the agent’s authority) for that breach.

Under the law of agency, finally, the principals (states) may revoke the agent’s (the federal government’s) authority at will. It would be unreasonable to force the principals to honor promises of an agent that has acted outside the limits of its authority as set out in the document that created the agency in the first place — the Constitution.

The Founders explained the philosophy behind the principle on several occasions:

In The Federalist, No. 33, Alexander Hamilton wrote:

But it will not follow from this doctrine that acts of the large society which are not pursuant to its constitutional powers, but which are invasions of the residuary authorities of the smaller societies, will become the supreme law of the land. These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such.

He restated that principle in a later letter, No. 78:

There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.

James Madison, also writing in The Federalist Papers, recommended that state legislators, in order to prevent federal abridgment of fundamental liberties, should refuse “to co-operate with the officers of the Union.”

This refusal to assist in the abridgment of fundamental liberties is also part of a principle of federalism known as anti-commandeering.

Put simply, anti-commandeering prohibits the federal government from forcing states to participate in any federal program that does not concern “international and interstate matters.”

While this expression of federalism (“dual sovereignty” as it was named by Justice Antonin Scalia) was first set forth in the case of New York v. United States (1992), most recently it was reaffirmed by the high court in the case of Mack and Printz v. United States (1997).

Sheriff Richard Mack was one of the named plaintiffs in the latter landmark case, and on the website of his organization the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, he recounts the basic facts of the case:

The Mack/Printz case was the case that set Sheriff Mack on a path of nationwide renown as he and Sheriff Printz sued the Clinton administration over unconstitutional gun control measures, were eventually joined by other sheriffs for a total of seven, went all the way to the supreme court and won.

There is much more “ammo” in this historic and liberty-saving Supreme Court ruling. We have been trying to get state and local officials from all over the country to read and study this most amazing ruling for almost two decades. Please get a copy of it today and pass it around to your legislators, county commissioners, city councils, state reps, even governors!

The Mack/Printz ruling makes it clear that the states do not have to accept orders from the feds!

Writing for the majority in the Mack/Printz case, Justice Antonin Scalia explained:

As Madison expressed it: “The local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.” The Federalist No. 39, at 245. [n.11]

This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty. “Just as the separation and independence of the coordinate branches of the Federal Government serve to prevent the accumulation of excessive power in any one branch, a healthy balance of power between the States and the Federal Government will reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front.”

When the federal government assumes powers not explicitly granted to it in the Constitution, it puts the states on the road toward obliteration and citizens on the road to enslavement.

One of the most important sections of the new Idaho law is the final one which declares that an “emergency is hereby declared to exist” and thus the law goes into immediate effect.

Recently, the legislatures of Missouri and Arizona have approved similar legislation, flying in the face of those who would deny the ability and will of states to nullify any and all federal acts that violate the limits placed on that power placed in the Constitution. By enforcing the boundaries states protect their citizens from federal tyranny and obviate the need for a dangerous constitutional convention to “fix” the Constitution.

 

 

 

CUPID Drone Has 80,000-Volt Taser Dart

March 26, 2014

From The New American by Warren Mass, March 25, 2014

A Texas firm recently unveiled its new CUPID drone equipped with a Taser capable of delivering an 80,000-volt shock.

Austin-based Chaotic Moon Studios demonstrated its CUPID at the SXSW (South by Southwest) trade show in Austin on March 10. Billed as a “stun copter,” CUPID (Chaotic Unmanned Personal Intercept Drone) mounts its Taser on a remote controlled Tarot Hexacopter. (According to a description on the website hexacopter.us: “A hexacopter is a radio controlled flying machine similar to a helicopter but the hexacopter has six rotors mounted in an array instead of one and unlike the helicopter, it does not have a rudder.”)

Hexacopters have until now been equipped mostly with cameras designed for aerial photography. Paparazzi have been known to use drones to photograph celebrities! But Chaotic Moon Studios put a Phazzer Dragon “conductive energy weapon” (a generic “Taser,” which is a brand name of TASER International) into the drone helicopter to shoot electrified darts into its targets.

Chaotic said that CUPID could be used by law-enforcement personnel to apprehend fleeing suspects. It requires two operators, one to fly the copter and a second to fire the dart.

“The drone can be deployed when an alarm is triggered. It can find a subject and send live video to the owner’s phone and ask if you want to authorize the subject or detain them. If you detain them, it drops into fully autonomous mode to detain them until police arrive. If need be stunning them with 80,000 volts of electricity to render them incapacitated,” said a statement from Chaotic.

Chaotic co-founder, William Hurley, was quoted by Fox News of Austin: “If you imagine a S.W.A.T. raid and people running, why send officers, with guns blazing, down an alley way where they can shoot and harm an innocent person or whatever, when you could just have the drone autonomously follow them.”

Hurley told Fox News that his firm has had lots of interest in CUPID from military and law-enforcement agencies.

“This is something that’s affordable for almost everybody and in the next two or three years the technology will probably cut in half, by price,” said Hurley. “Right now, the FAA just has some vague, basic rules around them.”

However, maintains Hurley, his firm’s demonstration of CUPID at SXSW was not intended to attract business because it has “no intention of commercializing it.”

When Fox News asked Hurley why his company built CUPID, if they have no intention of producing it commercially, he replied:  “I think that’s hopefully, a wake-up call. We, as a society, should all be involved in the conversation of technology governance, not just the legislators who often do a knee jerk reaction, or the inventors and entrepreneurs who often don’t think about some of the consequences of their technologies.”

If Hurley’s firm invented CUPID merely to demonstrate how it might be abused, and expect that its demonstration might lead to greater restrictions on drone use, that is an overly idealist expectation. Why does he think that the military and law-enforcement agencies have expressed interest in CUPID, if not to use it?

An article in Popular Mechanics noted that CUPID is made from many commonly available parts already used by hobbyists and that Hurley admitted that knowledgeable people could probably figure out how his team built the stun-gun-equipped copter. So although Chaotic Moon is not releasing the drone’s blueprint to the public, copycat versions could easily emerge.

Davey Alba, who wrote the Popular Mechanics report, appeared to be a little perplexed by Hurley’s inconsistent statements:

Hurley says he wants the project to raise awareness about what some hyped technologies — like drones — can actually accomplish in the real world, and to start realistic discussions about public response to technology and regulation. It certainly got people talking at SXSW, but the specifics of the discourse he wanted to spark seemed a little vague to me.

CUPID is a relatively simple device compared to some drones that our military already has produced. For example, in an article published by The New American last May, we learned that the Navy launched a prototype X-47B drone from the deck of the aircraft carrier U.S.S. George H.W. Bush. Two months later, the Navy reported that an X-47B had landed on the same ship on July 10, being “the first time a tailless, unmanned autonomous aircraft landed on a modern aircraft carrier.”

What also made the X-47B  unique is the fact that it is not only unmanned, but unpiloted — it uses a pre-programmed algorithm and GPS data.

“The Navy’s model is different from the Air Force’s,” said Rear Admiral Ted Branch, the commander of Naval Air Forces Atlantic. “We don’t have someone actively flying this machine with a stick and a throttle. We fly it with a mouse and a keyboard.”

Of course, technology can be used in ways that are beneficial or harmful, the distinction often being determined by whether the party using it has secured legitimate authority. This may be a congressional declaration of war, if its use is by the military. Or it may mean getting a search warrant, if it is used for surveillance of civilians.

The absence of such authority is always problematic. When our government uses drones to strike targets within sovereign nations with which we are not engaged in a declared war, resentment and blowback against us always ensues. This has been the case in Pakistan, where Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif shortly after his election last year charged that the United States was violating the sovereignty of Pakistan by ordering deadly drone missions without the approval of Islamabad. “Drones indeed are challenging our sovereignty,” said Sharif. “I think this is a very serious issue, and our concern must be understood properly.”

Drones can also be misused in actions against Americans. This usage represents such a grave threat to our citizens’ privacy, that the Utah Senate voted 23-0 on March 4 to approve a bill restricting law enforcement’s use of unmanned aerial systems. Among other restrictions, the bill requires law enforcement to obtain a warrant before using a drone.

While it is uncertain whether it was Chaotic Moon Studios’ intention to draw attention to potential misuse of drone technology by demonstrating its CUPID system, the publicity should serve to awaken Americans to exactly how invasive such technology can become.

In America, Has the Gestapo Replaced the Rule of Law?

March 26, 2014

Paul Craig Roberts, Infowars.com, February 14, 2014

RT is the best English language news source available to Americans. On January 29, RT published a photo of 5 presidential appointees lying through their teeth to Congress.

Image: Signing of U.S. Constitution (Wikimedia Commons).

All five of these Gestapo wannabes are in violation of their oath of office to protect the Constitution of the United States. They have relentlessly violated the Constitution, which makes these five, who are in charge of US intelligence and black operations, traitors to the United States. Yet, they have not been arrested and put on trial. Congress is content to sit there and listen to their ongoing lies time after time after time, despite the fact that these 5 have committed more and worse crimes against our country than the “terrorists” that serve as an excuse for the crimes committed by the intelligence agencies.

Remember, dear readers, it is a crime for you to lie to any federal agent even if you are not under oath or before Congress. How much more evidence do you need that you are not a citizen of the United States but a mere serf of the federal government? Will you ever wake up?

James Clapper, who has the grand title of Director Of National Intelligence, is an admitted liar to the US Congress but nevertheless remains in office. That Clapper is still in office is a good measure of the decline both in the integrity of the US government and in the integrity that Congress, media, and the public expect from the government. President Nixon was driven from office for a very small thing: Nixon lied about when he learned about a burglary with which he had nothing to do. Clapper brazenly lied to the US Congress, denying that he was spying on members of the US Congress.

Clapper is not only in violation of the Constitution, he has committed a felony, especially under the stretched interpretation of laws that is the norm for Department of Justice prosecutions. Huge numbers of Americans are in prison for offenses that are molehills compared to Clapper’s, or for that matter, any of the other five sitting there lying to Congress.

The Five Criminals told Congress that Edward Snowden, who is under the protection of the Russian government, must be made to give back the evidence of NSA spying on the entire world before some US troops or diplomats are killed by terrorists in some future war started by Washington, which routinely dismisses the victims of its war crimes as “collateral damage.”

None of the Five Criminals were able to specify how Congress could make the Russian government hand over Snowden. Rabid Republican warmongers have falsely and propagandistically accused Snowden of being “a Russian spy.” What utter dishonesty! The only reason Snowden is in Russia is that the US, in violation of international law, refuses to allow an airplane to fly from Russia with Snowden to any of the South American countries that have granted Snowden asylum. The fact that Snowden is in Russia is entirely the fault of Washington.

As I have written and said on many occasions, facts mean nothing to Washington, to the presstitute media, and to most of the American population, who prefer comforting lies to reality.

No one in the American media or most Internet sites will dare tell you that the reason the Five Criminals are again lying to Congress is to deflect Congress and an insouciant public and media from the fact that they have violated the law and their oath of office, and that the only purpose of invoking “national security” is to protect the criminal actions of the security agencies from being discovered. “National Security” is the blanket under which the crimes of government are hidden.

All that “national security” means is that “we are not going to let anyone find out that we are nothing but a gang of criminal thugs, and we are going to use the cover of national security to demonize Snowden who told on us.”

The so-called “security agencies” and their media whores have created a wartime atmosphere of fear as if the “world’s only superpower” was about to be destroyed by a handful of lightly armed fighters thousands of miles away who resist Washington’s invasions of their countries in corners of the earth that most Americans cannot find on a map. What kind of superpower is so terrified by peoples that the superpower chooses to invade and murder? If the wronged people are so threatening, the superpower should stay at home and leave them alone.

Listen to this bullshit from Clapper: As a consequence of Snowden, “the nation is less safe and its people less secure.” The truth is the opposite of what Clapper states. Snowden alerted us to the fact that Clapper was shredding the US Constitution that is our greatest protection. Clapper, who should be in the dock for treason, has stolen our rights and our shield against harm and abuse from arbitrary government power. Clapper is an enemy of every American.

Listen to this bullshit from Lt. Gen, Michael Flynn, director of the US Defense Intelligence Agency, who stupidly asserts that Snowden’s revelations of illegal mass spying on the US citizens and the world caused “grave damage” to “national security.”

What the general means is that it caused damage to his reputation and brought him some cause for anxiety by revealing that he was engaged in criminal activity. But the general knew how to invoke the sympathy and support of the right-wing superpatriots. He declared that the greatest cost of Snowden’s revelations is “the cost of human lives on tomorrow’s battlefield or in some place where we will put our military forces when we ask them to go into harm’s way.” He is, of course, talking about the next time that Washington criminally attacks another country in total violation of the Nuremberg standard.

Senator Barbara Mikulski listening to this bullshit said that what was needed was a Supreme Court ruling “to determine the constitutionality of these programs.” Was this sincere or a cop-out? Why is Mikulski passing the buck? Justice Antonin Scalia, truthfully said that concentration camps are a likely future reality for Americans and that the Supreme Court would not do anything about the tyranny should the executive branch think it necessary.

Senator Ron Wyden told the Five Criminals, “I don’t think this culture of misinformation [that the Five Criminals represent] is going to be easily fixed.”

Nothing will be fixed until the Five Criminals are arrested and put on trial for treason and until Congress defunds the illegal wars and states firmly, backed up with the threat of impeachment, that there is no such thing as “the unitary executive” who is above the Constitution, Congress, and the courts. Congress must put the executive branch on notice that it is not above the law and the Constitution.

Americans have lost the rule of law. Unless Congress quickly restores it, the country is lost.

Regional Police Force for Armstrong Co., PA Communities Gathers Steam

March 26, 2014

From The Tribune-Review by Brad Pederson, February 15, 2014

Several communities across Armstrong County, PA are following the lead of West Kittanning by looking at ways of cutting costs and improving services through regionalizing police departments.

Manor and North Buffalo officials are the latest to join the discussion about working with neighboring communities to bolster police protection for all.

“We’re looking at how to provide more service than we do now,” Manor Township Supervisor Patrick Fabian said. “Townships need to start brainstorming and set a date to get together and discuss our ideas.”

Among East Franklin, North Buffalo, West Kittanning and Manor Township, Fabian said he believes the part-time police forces have enough resources, such as cars, firearms and equipment, to establish a regional force.

Fabian said he plans to talk with officials from regionalized police forces and the State Department of Community and Economic Development to determine start-up costs associated with creating a regional force.

“One thing we want to do as supervisors is avoid raising taxes,” Fabian said. “If we can avoid raising taxes and keep our police force, great, but if we can keep our taxes level, while offering more police coverage by regionalizing, that’s even better. At the end of the day, we need to make sure we explore all of our options.”

West Kittanning officials are already on the way to investigating ways to improve police coverage. The borough last week appointed members to its police committee to study the issue. Council President Robert Venesky, Vice President Henry Mores and Councilman Ken Trudgen will serve on the committee.

The committee, along with Mayor James Sobiski, will consider options, such as contracting for services with a neighboring community or developing a regional police force.

Venesky and Mores have said they are interested in options to the borough’s two-man, part-time police department.

“We need 24-7 protection in West Kittanning, which we don’t have now,” Mores said. “West Kittanning and other municipalities are starting to discover part-time policemen were good in times gone by, but there are too many things going on in society now, so you can’t rely on just part-timers.”

In addition to the three councilmen, Venesky said council also plans to appoint two or three residents to the committee. He encourages any West Kittanning residents interested in serving on the committee to come to the March 4 council meeting.

Although Venesky said he is interested in signing on with Kittanning police, or even regionalizing, it all comes down to dollars. He said if the borough needs to pay more for regionalizing or contracting police services, officials may opt to stay with their current part-time police department.

The borough budgeted $76,306, or approximately 23 percent of its 2014 budget, to cover its police department.

“Crime is on the rise, especially with drugs, and the PA State Police can’t cover the entire county all of the time,” Venesky said. “I think people are finally ready to look at ways to get around-the-clock police protection.”

Paul Kirkwood, Chairman of the North Buffalo Twp. Board of Supervisors, said his board plans to establish a committee of residents to begin exploring a regionalized police force, instead of relying on three-man, part-time protection.

“At one point, we had one officer who worked 35 to 38 hours per week, and he did a real good job,” Kirkwood said. “But this set up with three part-timers doesn’t seem to work out too well.”

Kirkwood said he would like to see the surrounding communities, including West Franklin, East Franklin, West Kittanning and Manor, which all rely on part-time police, meet to discuss options for improving service.

“We’re all so close to each other,” Kirkwood said. “We could have a few officers patrol all of the communities around the clock, instead of dealing with just part-timers.”

Roethlisberger Foundation Gives Money for Nine Police Dog Programs

March 26, 2014

From The Tribune-Review by Rick Wills, February 13, 2014

New Sewickley, PA Police have never had a canine police officer but will by the end of the year.

“It will be a big help for our department,” Chief Ron Leindecker said.

The department is one of nine recipients of grants from the Ben Roethlisberger Foundation at The Giving Back Fund. The money will go to start K-9 units, maintain existing ones, purchase safety vests for the dogs, buy training equipment and food, and equip K-9 patrol vehicles.

The grants, totaling $77,000, are going to Forest Hills, Washington, Edinboro, North Fayette and Martins Ferry, Ohio, police; Eureka Fire Rescue EMS in Tarentum; the Jefferson County Drug Task Force; and UPMC Presbyterian in Oakland.

New Sewickley’s grant is for $10,000, which Leindecker said will cover about three quarters of the cost to buy a dog and train its handler.

“It’s not cheap to start a canine program,” he said.

The department has nine full-time and seven part-time officers who patrol a relatively rural township of 32 square miles, including wooded areas where suspects can flee on foot.

“Those are situations where canine officers would be really useful,” Leindecker said.

The Roethlisberger Foundation this week announced a grant to Pittsburgh police to help fill the void left when K-9 Officer Rocco was killed in the line of duty.

Pittsburgh Police provided this photo of K-9 officer Rocco. Police said a suspect stabbed Rocco in the back during an incident Tuesday, Jan. 28, 2014.

North Fayette Police Chief Mark O’Donnell expects his department’s canine program to grow as a result of its Roethlisberger grant.

“The foundation’s assistance will provide an integral role in the development of our newly started canine program,” O’Donnell said.

The grants constitute the seventh round that the foundation has awarded to benefit canine units. It was established when a police dog was shot and killed in the Steelers quarterback’s hometown of Findlay, Ohio.

“He’s always been a big fan of animals. He grew up with them. He sees canine officers while traveling in areas where there is security,” said Jessica Duffaut, relationship manager for The Giving Back Fund.