PDF version

 

January 2012

THE IMPENDING POLICE STATE

Dear Friend of Radio Liberty,

"[On] June 16, 1936, for the first time in German history, a unified police was established for the whole of the Reich -- previously the police had been organized separately by each of the states -- and Himmler was put in charge as Chief of the German Police. This was tantamount to putting the police in the hands of the S.S., which since its suppression of the Roehm 'revolt' in 1934 had been rapidly increasing its power.... The Third Reich, as is inevitable in the development of all totalitarian dictatorships, had become a police state."
William Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (1)

Los Angeles resident Shawn Nee, an amateur photographer, was taking photos of subway turnstiles on October 31, 2009, when he was accosted by Deputy Richard Gylfie of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office. Deputy Gylfie demanded to know what Nee was doing. Because Nee was doing nothing illegal, and the deputy had no business harassing him, the shutterbug quite properly told the officer to mind his own business.

This prompted what amounted to an extortion threat:

“You know, I’ll just submit your name to TLO [the Terrorism Liaison Officer program]. Every time your driver’s license gets scanned, every time you take a plane, any time you go on any type of public transit system where they look at your identification, you’re going to be stopped. You will be detained. You’ll be searched. You will be on the FBI’s hit list.”(2)

This is a perfect snapshot of “local” law enforcement at work in post-Constitutional America (perhaps “Amerika” would be a more appropriate spelling). What is particularly galling here is that the LEO (Law Enforcement Officer) responsible for this act of gratuitous bullying – and casual extortion – was a Deputy Sheriff.

In the American tradition, the Sheriff has a clear legal, moral, and constitutional duty to interpose on behalf of the rights of the citizens of his county against federal abuses – not to facilitate such abuses. This principle has been expressed – and acted on – by the heroic Richard Mack, former Sheriff of Arizona’s Graham County and founder of Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers of America (CSPOA). That organization is a desperate, last-ditch effort to rehabilitate the role of the peace officer – someone whose sole duty is to protect the life, liberty, and property of law-abiding citizens. God grant that this embattled band of principled men find success. Sure, they are few in number, but the same was true of the 300 men whom the Lord provided to Gideon. Sheriff Mack’s effort is worthy, and he is a proven man of sound principle. He and his associates, however, are very much the exception today. It’s true that men of character can be found in many police departments and sheriff’s offices. The problem is institutional: The system itself selects for people who are either depraved, compromised, or susceptible to compromise, while isolating and neutralizing men of character.

Every police state – from the ancient Spartan Krypteia to the Nazi Gestapo – was full of otherwise honorable men who facilitated tyranny and lawlessness through their willingness to enforce official edicts and their passive acceptance of criminal brutality. Blessed and privileged as America has been, we are not made of different stuff than people in other cultures – and the same is true of the kind of people found in law enforcement. What made America genuinely exceptional was our system of individual liberty protected by law – and that system is long dead, although hopefully not beyond the possibility of revival. As things stand right now, however, Americans now live inside a vertically integrated, Soviet-style surveillance state in which they confront the constant threat of government-licensed criminal violence.

By way of another example, consider what has happened in the city of East Orange, New Jersey, a city of roughly 65,000 people. Purportedly in response to gang violence (itself an outgrowth of the demented exercise called the “War on Drugs”), the municipal government has been inundated with federal Homeland Security subsidies that were used to install high-definition surveillance cameras throughout the city. Those cameras are constantly monitored, in real time, by police officers, who are able to isolate “suspicious” individuals and paint them with red light up to a distance of a city block. Those images are stored and fed through databases in search of warrants or “hits” on various watch lists. The information is then relayed to patrol officers, who can interrogate, detain, or arrest the subject – before an actual crime has been committed.

“The message to criminals is: The police are observing you, the police are recording you, and the police are responding,” states East Orange Police Chief William Robinson. Of course, police in East Orange — like their counterparts elsewhere — are most likely prepared to arrest any citizen who observes, records, and responds to criminal abuse by police officers. (3)

Meanwhile, the NYPD is working with the Pentagon to deploy a series of body scanners that can subject all pedestrians to virtual strip-searches. The NYPD has announced that it will deploy Terahertz Imaging Detection body scanners on the streets of the Big Apple.

Reports RT News:

“The head of the New York Police Department is working with the Pentagon to secure body scanners to be used throughout the Big Apple.

If Kelly gets his wish, the city will be receiving a whole slew of Terahertz Imaging Detection scanners, a high-tech radiation detector that measures the energy that is emitted from a persons’ body. As CBS News reports, “It measures the energy radiating from a body up to 16 feet away, and can detect anything blocking it, like a gun.”

What it can also do, however, is allow the NYPD to conduct illegal searches by means of scanning anyone walking the streets of New York. Any object on your person could be privy to the eyes of the detector, and any suspicious screens can prompt police officers to search someone on suspicion of having a gun, or anything else under their clothes.

According to Commissioner Kelly, the scanners would only be used in `reasonably suspicious circumstances,’ but what constitutes ‘suspicious’ in the eyes of the NYPD could greatly differ from what the 8 million residents of the five boroughs have in mind.”(4)

In practice, “suspicious” behavior for the NYPD consists of anything done by a young black or Hispanic male. In a New York Times op-ed, 23-year-old New York City resident Nicholas Peart describes being repeatedly detained, searched, and even thrown to the ground at gunpoint by police officers while carrying on such “suspicious” activities as attending a friend’s birthday party or going to the gym.

In 2010, Peart observes “the N.Y.P.D. recorded more than 600,000 stops; 84 percent of those stopped were blacks or Latinos. Police are far more likely to use force when stopping blacks or Latinos than whites. In half the stops police cite the vague `furtive movements’ as the reason for the stop. Maybe black and brown people just look more furtive, whatever that means.”(5)

One reason for the proliferation of stop-and-frisk detentions is a rigid but officially disavowed quota system. Two years ago, NYPD Officer Adil Polanco exposed that system in an interview with New York City’s ABC News affiliate. (6)

“Our primary job is not to help anybody, our primary job is not to assist anybody, our primary job is to get those numbers and come back with them,” Officer Polanco lamented. Each night he and other officers were expected to make at least one arrest and issue at least twenty summonses. To document that claim, Polanco provided an audio recording of a roll call briefing at the NYPD’s 41st precinct.

“If you think 1 and 20 is breaking your b*lls, guess what you’re going to be doing. You’re going to be doing a lot more, a lot more than what they’re saying,” declared the Patrol Supervisor. On another occasion, the supervisor escalated the pressure, unambiguously coupling quota-based performance expectations with job security: “Next week, 25 [summonses] and one [arrest], thirty-five and one and until you decide to quit this job to go to work at a Pizza Hut, this is what you’re going to be doing till then. Do you understand?”

As a result of these arrest and citation requirements, Polanco complained, “We are stopping kids walking upstairs to their house, stopping kids going to the store, young adults. In order to keep the quota.”

Regrettably, there is nothing new about police being assigned quotas (or “goals,” or “performance guidelines”) for arrests and citations. This kind of cynical behavior has long plagued even conscientious police departments, in large measure because they have always been used as profit centers by municipal police departments. There was a time when citizens could rein in abusive police because they were at least somewhat accountable to the local populace. Today, however, even those who are sufficiently organized to “fight City Hall” will often find that this avails them nothing, since the police are now funded by, and accountable to, the Leviathan State’s overlords in Washington – and protected by aggressive police unions with unfathomably deep pockets and uninhibited by decent shame.

If that description seems a little harsh, consider the example of Chris Mesley, president of the Albany, New York Police Officers’ Union. In that city, the median annual household income, as of 2010, was about $33,000. Mesley, who was hired as a patrol officer in 1992, received more than twice that amount ($70,000) in base salary, while pulling in another $30,000 per annum as union president.

At a time when people were losing their homes, turning down their thermostats, foregoing luxuries, and skimping on Christmas celebrations, Mesley was demanding a tax increase in order to get a raise for himself and his fellow police union members. His public comments made it pretty clear that he cared not one whit how this looked to the tax victims from whom that raise would be extorted

“If I’m the bad guy to the average citizen … and their taxes have to go up to cover my raise, I’m very sorry about that, but I have to look out for myself and my membership," grunted Mesley. "As the president of the ‘local,’ I will not accept ‘zeroes’ [no increase in salaries or benefits]. If that means ... ticking off some taxpayers, then so be it."

It would be difficult to find a more candid expression of the parasite class's predatory contempt for the productive than the words that departed Mesley's snout. The police union capo will occasionally remove that appendage from the public trough just long enough to spew demands for an ever-larger share of the wealth produced through the honest labor of others, or to justify some corrupt privilege he claims as a "cog in the mighty machine of state." In all of this he is entirely typical of the army of public employees pillaging what little remains of America's wealth. He is not there to “protect and serve”; he is there to regiment and plunder. And he is dreadfully typical of today’s unionized law enforcement.

Given the role of the police in the government’s extraction of wealth from a suffering population, it shouldn’t surprise us that police are increasingly taught to view the public as a pool of potential enemies to be over-awed and controlled, rather than citizens whom they are to serve. In fact, that indoctrination really took hold after the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing.

“I see the formation of a curious crusading mentality among certain law enforcement agencies to stamp out what they see as a threat to government generally,” complained law enforcement consultant Tony Cooper, who taught negotiation methods, in 1995. “It’s an exaggerated concern that they are facing a nationwide conspiracy and that somehow this will get out of control unless it is stamped out at a very early stage.”

After 9-11, these concerns were affixed to what we were told to perceive as an all-encompassing threat from radical Islam. However, toward the end of the second Bush administration, that focus shifted to the supposed threat of domestic “anti-government extremism” – and the Obama administration has enlarged that focus in dramatic and troubling ways.

On January 17, the White House convened a secretive meeting with scores of top-ranking state and local law enforcement officials to discuss the purported threat of “homegrown terrorism.” This category includes not only Islamic “radicalism” and “white supremacist beliefs,” but also what is described as “anti-government extremism” generally. The event, which was closed to the public, examined 62 case studies as part of a program devoted to “identifying and preventing violent extremism and homegrown terrorism.” Recounts the Washington Post:

“In the 62 cases reviewed, the subjects increasingly spoke out against the government, blamed the government for perceived problems and did so in a way that caught the attention of other people in their communities, according to the senior counter-terrorism official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the private White House event. Subjects became active on the Internet to espouse extremist views. And in some cases, the subjects purchased weapons, ammunition or explosive materials.”(8)
It’s important to point out that none of what is described above — condemning government policies (or even denying its legitimacy entirely, as the Declaration of Independence recognizes), expressing those views on the Internet, or buying weapons — is a crime. Federal and local law enforcement, however, have been indoctrinated since the Oklahoma City Bombing to think in terms of pre-emptive war against individuals and groups suspected of harboring anti-government sentiments.

Just a day after that meeting, the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force, in tandem with Seminole County Sheriff’s deputies, conducted a full-force raid on the Lake Mary, Florida residence of a family accused of association with the “Sovereign Citizens” tax-protest movement. (9)

Neighbor Evelyn Briggs told a local television reporter that the raiding party “even had robots out there, almost like a movie.” Evelyn’s husband, Robert, described the strike force that consisted of “about a dozen FBI agents and SWAT people.”

“It’s not something you see here in Lake Mary on an everyday basis,” agreed fellow neighbor Jim Famiglietti,” who appeared not to understand how the quiet and unremarkable couple could wind up being the target of such a draconian enforcement action. “It’s kind of shocking, actually. People make mistakes, but you just don’t know…. Maybe some tax protesting and that kind of thing. People protest all the time in this country, and it’s your right. I don’t think the FBI would come in with that kind of fire power,” said Famiglietti.”

The JTTF mounted a paramilitary raid despite the fact that the couple has yet to be charged with an offense of any kind, and the “evidence” removed from the home reportedly consisted entirely of computers and documents. The invaders also took the opportunity to go through the garage and the couple’s automobiles.

Terrifying as that operation may have been, it could have been worse: The FBI might have called in Predator drones to deal with that isolated and apparently harmless couple. That’s what happened in June 2011 in North Dakota, when a local farmer named Rodney Brossart got involved in a dispute with the local Sheriff over some stray cattle.

For several years, Brossart – whose family operates a farm near the tiny village of Lakota – has had problems with the local Sheriff. A team of deputies visited the farm in June to take possession of a half-dozen stray cows. Brossart reportedly believed that the cattle were unclaimed, and that he was entitled to retain possession until he was compensated for damage to his property – a position that may actually be sound under North Dakota range law. The deputies tasered the 55-year-old farmer and took him into custody. His daughter Abby, frantic for the safety of her father, tried to intervene; for "striking" the sanctified personage of a deputy, she was arrested and charged with assault. When Brossart's wife, Susan, refused to help the deputies locate what they described as "illegal" firearms, she too was arrested, and charged with lying to law enforcement officers.

When deputies returned the following day, they were reportedly confronted by Brossart's three sons – Jacob, Alex, and Thomas - who were allegedly carrying the rifles the police had tried to confiscate the previous day.

This led Sheriff Janke to escalate the confrontation to a full-spectrum military response – including, in the words of the Los Angeles Times, elements "from the state Highway Patrol, a regional SWAT team, a bomb squad, ambulances, and deputy sheriffs from three other counties. He also called in a Predator B drone." That unmanned aerial vehicle, identical to those used in CIA-directed missions in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and elsewhere, was supplied by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency(CBP), an affiliate of the Department of Homeland Security. (10)

"As the unmanned aircraft circled 2 miles overhead the next morning, sophisticated sensors under the nose helped pinpoint the three suspects and showed they were unarmed," continued the Times. "Police rushed in and made the first known arrests of U.S. citizens with help from a Predator, the spy drone that has helped revolutionize modern warfare.”

These extraordinary measures were supposedly justified because the Brossarts had been accused by the leftist Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) of consorting with members of the “Sovereign Citizen” movement – which has been designated a domestic terrorist group. In light of that depiction it’s worth noting that the same Predator drones used to overfly the Brossart property can be equipped with Hellfire missiles of the sort used to conduct assassination missions overseas – like the ones that resulted in the government-sanctioned murders of U.S. citizens Anwar al-Awlaki and his 16-year-old son Abdulrahman, neither of whom was formally accused of a crime, much less convicted of one. They were summarily executed because they had been designated “Enemies of the State” – just as the Brossart family had been.

The incident involving the Brossart family could be considered the first test run of the vertically integrated Homeland Security State, in which your friendly local sheriff or police chief, using hit lists compiled by the SPLC, can call in the drones to help round up anybody he considers to be potentially troublesome. The odds are very good that we’ll see more episodes of this kind – drone-enabled sieges, SWAT raids, and similarly draconian enforcement actions against dissenters and non-conformists – as the year unfolds. 2012 won’t bring the end of the world, but it promises to be a stimulating year in the worst sense of the expression.


REFERENCES

(1) William Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1974), pg. 274.
(2) “ACLU sues Sheriff's Department, alleges photographers were harassed,” Los Angeles Times, October 27, 2011; for a video record of this incident, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY2cCPW3htg
(3) “New Police Pre-Crime Technique: Light-Based Intervention System,” AP, January 23, 2012; see the video report at http://youtu.be/1punjkon-hU
(4) “NYPD and Pentagon to place mobile scanners on the streets on NYC,” RT News, January 18, 2012.
(5) Nicholas Peart, “Why Is the NYPD After Me?” New York Times, December 17, 2011.
(6) “NYPD Officer Claims Pressure to Make Arrests,” WABC News, March 3, 2010.
(7) “What Union Bosses Think,” New York Post, February 16, 2010.
(8)“Senior police officials meet at White House as part of effort to combat homegrown terrorism,” Washington Post, January 17, 2012.
(9)“FBI Terrorism Agents Raid Local Home: Neighbors Believe Couple In Home Involved In Sovereign Citizens Group,” WESH-TV, January 20, 2012.
(10) “Police employ Predator spy drones on home front,” Los Angeles Times, December 10, 2011.

Written by William Grigg


* * * * *

The Brotherhood of Darkness created the terrorist threat that is being used to justify the implementation of a “police state” in the United States. At the present time there are only 50 members of al Qaeda in Afghanistan, yet the U.S. is financing a force of over 500,000 men (and women) to counter them: 300,000 Afghan soldiers, 90,000 U.S. troops, 46,000 NATO troops, and 100,000 military contractors. How can you verify that fact? If you have a computer, search “Leon Panetta, 50 members al Qaeda, Afghanistan.”

Please ask everyone you meet why the U.S. is financing a force of over 500,000 men (and women) in Afghanistan to counter 50 members of al Qaeda.

What can you do? You can copy and distribute our newsletters to your friends and family. You can purchase and copy (for distribution only, we ask that you do not sell them) our: DVD “Planned Police State,” or any of our 4 audio CD sets “The Impending Police State,” “The Military Commissions Act,” and “Coming Dictatorship 2009 Update.” You can utilize the Script located on the Home Page of the Radio Liberty web site, and start telephoning people.

I believe most people realize something is seriously wrong, and are looking for answers. Our job is to provide the answers. Please continue to pray for God’s guidance, and for His direction.

Barbara and I appreciate your loyal support and your faithful prayers.

Yours in Christ,

Stanley Monteith


Please help Radio Liberty to expand our ministry to other outlets with your gift.

Monthly Donation
We have been asked by many of our listeners to be able to have an automatic monthly donation. you can do this now by clicking "Subscribe"
All of our donation plans will continue for 12 months and then be discontinued, and you are free to cancel at any time.

Please note if you pledge $20 a month or more, you have the option to be a member of the "Tape of the Month Club" and receive our picks of the 4 best shows of each month. Please make a note when signing up or email us to let us know if you would like to join and if you would like tapes or CDs.

Please note that donations to Radio Liberty are not tax deductible
 


Return to Radio Liberty home page