Yemen Streets Packed With Thousands of Houthis Rallying in Support of Iran

Hegseth Brings 'Arsenal of Freedom' Tour to Lockheed Martin’s Fort Worth F-35 Plant

Hegseth Brings 'Arsenal of Freedom' Tour to Lockheed Martin’s Fort Worth F-35 Plant


by Fort Worth Inc. Staff

Jan. 12, 2026

5:45 p.m.



Lockheed Martin


Speaking on the factory floor in front of a newly completed F-35, Hegseth thanked the more than 600 employees in attendance for their role in equipping the U.S. military.

Lockheed Martin on Monday welcomed U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth to its F-35 Lightning II production facility in Fort Worth as part of his nationwide Arsenal of Freedom Tour, a visit that highlighted the company’s central role in U.S. defense manufacturing and a record year for the world’s most advanced fighter aircraft.

Hegseth toured the F-35 final assembly line, met with Lockheed Martin executives, and addressed more than 600 employees inside the sprawling North Texas facility, which employs roughly 19,000 workers. The Fort Worth plant is the sole final assembly site for the F-35 and anchors a national supply chain of more than 1,900 suppliers, over half of them small businesses.

“I’m looking out into an incredible audience of Americans here who are committed to an incredible company that’s building incredible platforms,” Hegseth told employees. “Thank you for accepting and grasping the challenge of President Trump as well as our department. We are shoulder to shoulder with you because we can’t deter the next conflict without the skills and capabilities you have.”

How the U.S. Military Is Amassing Combat Power Near Venezuela | WSJ

What to know about counterprotests to Trump's June 14 parade

There are at least 1,500 events planned in 1,400 cities.

Data: No Kings; Map: Kavya Beheraj/Axios

Jun 7, 2025 
Politics & Policy

April Rubin

Protestors are taking to the streets and community hubs nationwide on June 14 in what organizers expect will be the largest single-day anti-President Trump rally since the start of the administration.

Why it matters: The widespread movement will run counter to Trump's multimillion dollar military parade in D.C.

"No Kings is a nationwide day of defiance," organizers wrote. "From city blocks to small towns, from courthouse steps to community parks, we're taking action to reject authoritarianism."
More than 100 pro-democracy advocacy groups are partnering to organize the No Kings events.

What they're saying: "Donald Trump wants tanks in the street and a made-for-TV display of dominance for his birthday," the No Kings website said."A spectacle meant to look like strength. But real power isn't staged in Washington. It rises up everywhere else."

By the numbers: Millions of people are estimated to protest in more than 1,500 cities across all 50 states and commonwealths, organizers said.

Washington D.C. on HIGH ALERT as 5,000 TROOPS DEPLOYED for 60th Presiden...

The Militarization of American Public Schools

De-Manufacturing Consent with Guillermo Jimenez- The Militarization of American Public Schools

GUILLERMO JIMENEZ | SEPTEMBER 24, 2015


Guillermo Jimenez Presents John W. Whitehead

On this edition of De-Manufacturing Consent Guillermo is joined by John Whitehead, a constitutional attorney and the founder and president of the Rutherford Institute.

We discuss the current state of American public schools and how zero-tolerance policies have criminalized an entire generation of young students. We touch on the case of Ahmed Mohamed, the 14-year-old Irving High School freshman who was arrested for bringing a homemade clock to school, and the way the story has been largely misrepresented in the mainstream media.

Whitehead shares various examples of students across the country who have been wrongfully arrested, and explains how these are anything but isolated incidents. He also describes the way rights to privacy and other protections are routinely violated in public schools, and the danger in having children trained to live in a police state.


Listen to the Preview Clip Here



Podcast (preview): Play in new window | Download
Listen to the full episode here (BFP Subscribers Only):


You can subscribe below to listen to this podcast, as well as all others on our site.

Source

,

NATO chief reacts to Russian surprise military exercises:

 

CBS27 May 2015 | 00:44 | FOCUS News Agency

Picture: AFPWashington. 

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg told CBS News he does not see any immediate threat against any of the 28 nations that make up the largest peacetime alliance in the world, despite Russian aggression in Eastern Ukraine and unannounced military exercises near member states' airspace.
"We urge Russia not to...do these kinds of snap exercises. Every nation has the right to exercise its forces, also Russia, but they should do it in a more transparent and predictable way to avoid any misunderstandings," Secretary-General Stoltenberg to CBS News Chief White House correspondent Major Garrett.

© 2015 All rights reserved. Citing Focus Information Agency is mandatory!

Source
.
.

The 'Big Event' in America: JADE HELM 15 (New World Order Plan For 2016)

Jason A

Published on Mar 29, 2015


Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/pages/End-Ti...
Martial Law training exercises across the country this past week as the REAl ID will become mandatory next year the big event prophecy has now begun
.
.

Kremlin pursues military modernization despite economic woes

By VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV32 minutes ago




MOSCOW (AP) — Hundreds of new Russian aircraft, tanks and missiles are rolling off assembly lines. Russian jets roar through European skies under NATO's wary eye. Tens of thousands of troops take part in war games showing off the military's readiness for all-out war.

Related Stories

Putin Spending Big On Military Modernization Despite Russia's Economic Woes Huffington Post

Russia says nuclear arms to keep military edge over NATO, United States Reuters

Russia could soon run multiple Ukraine-sized operations: U.S. general Reuters

Oligarchs out, 'siloviki' in? Why Russia's foreign policy is hardening. Christian Science Monitor

The Siege of Mariupol The Wall Street Journal

The muscle flexing suggests that Russia's economic woes so far are having no impact on the Kremlin's ambitious military modernization program.

Most Russian economic sectors face a 10 percent cut this year as Russia heads into recession. The military budget, meanwhile, rose by 33 percent to about 3.3 trillion rubles (some $50 billion). The buildup reflects President Vladimir Putin's apparent readiness to raise the ante in a showdown with the West over Ukraine — but it is unclear whether Russia can afford the modernization drive amid slumping oil prices and Western sanctions.

A new Russian military doctrine, endorsed by Putin in December, names NATO as a top threat to Russia and lays out a response to what the Kremlin sees as the alliance's expansion into Russia's sphere of interests. In the Ukraine crisis, Moscow for the first time demonstrated its new capacity for what experts call "hybrid" warfare, a combination of military force with a degree of deniability, sleek propaganda and political and economic pressure.

It is not only in Crimea — the strategic peninsula that Russia annexed from Ukraine — that the nation's 1 million-strong military is beefing up its presence. Russia is also reviving Soviet-era airfields and opening new military bases in the Arctic. Last fall the military rattled sabers by briefly deploying state-of-the art missiles to Russia's westernmost Baltic exclave — Kaliningrad — and it is planning to send strategic bombers on regular patrols as far as the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico.

NATO defense ministers, meeting Thursday in Brussels, are expected to approve further measures to enhance the alliance's ability to deter and, if necessary, respond to military threats from Moscow, officials said.

FILE - In this Monday, March 31, 2014 file photo Russian Black Sea fleet ships are anchored in one o …

As outlined by NATO officials, key decisions expected include upgrading the existing NATO Response Force, an official go-ahead for a proposal to establish six new command and control centers in Eastern Europe, and expansion of a multinational headquarters in Poland.

The West first got a sense of Russia's revived military might during last February's Crimea invasion. The U.S. and its NATO allies were caught off guard when waves of Russian heavy-lift military transport planes landed on the Black Sea peninsula days after the ouster of Ukraine's former Moscow-friendly president, unloading special forces which swiftly took over key facilities in the region and blocked Ukrainian troops at their bases. Dressed in unmarked uniforms and equipped with state-of-the-art weapons, the Russian troops were a far cry from the ragtag demoralized force the military was just a few years ago. The Kremlin first claimed they were local volunteers, but Putin recognized after the annexation that they were Russian soldiers.

Another surprise for the West came a few weeks later, when well-organized groups of gunmen took over local government offices and police stations in several cities across Ukraine's mostly Russian-speaking eastern industrial heartland, triggering a rebellion that evolved into a full-scale war that has killed more than 5,300 since April.

As fighting escalated in the east, the Russian military showed its agility by quickly deploying tens of thousands troops near the border with Ukraine. Ukraine and the West said that thousands of them crossed into Ukraine, helping turn the tide in the rebels' favor. The Kremlin denies that, although it has acknowledged that Russian volunteers have joined the insurgency.

Unlike the past, when the Russian military was filled through unpopular conscription, the force has grown more professional and motivated. Relatively high salaries have attracted increasingly more contract soldiers, whose numbers are set to exceed 350,000 this year from 295,000 in 2014. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said that by the end of this year all battalion tactical groups — the core units in the Army, the Airborne Forces and the Marines — will be manned entirely by professional soldiers.

FILE - In this Thursday, March 20, 2014 file photo, men in unmarked uniforms seized the Ukrainian co …

And in sharp contrast to the early post-Soviet years, when combat jets were grounded and navy vessels rusted dockside for lack of fuel, the military has dramatically increased both the scope and frequency of its drills. Ground forces conducted massive maneuvers near the Ukrainian border involving tens of thousands of troops, while navy ships sailed on regular missions and combat jets flew regular patrols near European borders to probe NATO's defenses. The alliance said it intercepted Russian aircraft more than 400 times last year and complained they posed a danger to civilian flights.

In Crimea, Russia had leased a major naval base even before the annexation. Now it has deployed dozens of combat jets, including nuclear-capable long-range bombers, along with air defense missiles, modern drones and other weapons. It is also preparing to dispatch more troops there.

Another key priority for the military is the Arctic, where global rivalry for major untapped oil and gas reserves is intensifying as polar ice melts. The military has restored long-abandoned Soviet-era airfields and other bases in the region after two decades of neglect. It formed a separate Arctic command to oversee its troops in the region.

Russia's weapons modernization plan envisages spending 20 trillion rubles on new weapons in 2011-2020. It produced some highly visible results last year, with the military receiving the highest numbers of new planes, missiles and armor since the 1991 Soviet collapse:

—Last year, the Russian armed forces obtained a record number of 38 nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles. This year they are to get another 50, allowing the military to fulfill its ambitious goal of replacing Soviet-built nuclear missiles, which are approaching the end of their lifespan. Officials say the new ICBMs have the capacity to penetrate any prospective missile defenses.

FILE - In this Saturday, March 1, 2014 file photo, troops in unmarked uniforms stand guard in Balakl …

—In a major breakthrough, the Russian navy finally conducted a series of successful test launches of the Bulava, a new submarine-based intercontinental ballistic missile, proving its reliability after a long and troublesome development. The navy already has two submarines equipped with the Bulava, and is to commission a third one next year. Five more are to follow.

—The ground forces are receiving large batches of Iskander missiles, which are capable of hitting enemy targets up to 500 kilometers (310 miles away) with high precision. Russian officials said the missiles, which can be equipped with a nuclear or conventional warhead, could be used to target NATO's U.S.-led missile defense sites. In a show of force, Iskanders were briefly deployed in December to the Kaliningrad exclave bordering NATO members Poland and Lithuania.

—The Russian air force received more than 250 new planes and helicopters last year and is set to receive more than 200 this year — numbers unseen since Soviet times. They include new models such as Su-34 bombers, Su-35 fighter jets and Mi-28 helicopter gunships equipped with sophisticated electronics and high-precision missiles.

—The Russian army this year is set to receive a new tank, which also will be used as the basis for a lineup of other armored vehicles. The model called Armata will be shown to the public during a Red Square parade in May. It surpasses all Western versions in having a remotely controlled cannon and a superior level of crew protection.

Its security enhanced by a new-look military, the Kremlin can be expected to pursue a defiant course in Ukraine and may raise the stakes further if the peace process fails.

FILE - In this Tuesday, July 16, 2013 file photo Russian Pacific Navy ships sail near the Sakhalin I …

The threat for Putin — who has insisted that Russia will not be drawn into a costly arms race with the West — is whether the massive military buildup will stretch the nation's economic potential beyond the limit.

Despite such challenges, the Kremlin made it clear that it will not cut corners on defense.

"The task set by the president not to allow anyone to get a military advantage over Russia will be fulfilled no matter what," Shoigu, the defense minister, said at a meeting with the top brass last week.

___

Associated Press writer John-Thor Dahlburg in Brussels contributed to this report.

Source

.

What China Is LearNing From the U.S. Military

Defense

They're realizing that disaster relief and humanitarian aid are among of the most effective tools in the national security toolbox.



(Elizabeth Dalziel - Pool/Getty Images)


By Stephanie Gaskell, Defense One
November 20, 2013


As Typhoon Haiyan slammed into the Philippines on Nov. 2, about 60 soldiers from the Chinese military were in Hawaii taking part in a joint military exercise with the United States and several other nations to better coordinate relief efforts in the event of a typhoon in the region.

The military exercise was timely, if not ironic, but it also underscores China's growing willingness to work with its neighbors, even if they're not allies.

After first offering just $100,000 in aid, China has now pledged $1.4 million after a recent editorial in China's Global Times criticized the government for not doing more for the Philippines, which lies right across the contested South China Sea. "China, as a responsible power, should participate in relief operations to assist a disaster-stricken neighboring country, no matter whether it's friendly or not. China's international image is of vital importance to its interests. If it snubs Manila this time, China will suffer great losses," the editorial said.

China is learning what U.S. military leaders have known for some time, which is that disaster relief and humanitarian aid are among of the most effective tools in the national security toolbox. It's also central to the Pentagon's post-war rebalance to the Asia-Pacific.

"The key pillars of our defense strategic guidance is to -- not just in the Asia Pacific region, but elsewhere -- build partner capacity. One of the linchpins of that guidance is to continue to invest in our allies and partnerships, particularly in the Asia Pacific region, where we have had bases open and closed over the years," said Pentagon Press Secretary George Little last week. "The goal is not to have new permanent bases for the U.S. military, but it's to enable rotational presences so that we can work together with allies and partners in the region to address problems like humanitarian assistance and disaster relief."

During a speech this weekend in California, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said disaster relief helps build these partnerships -- but it also provides priceless PR for the U.S. military. "When America responds to these kinds of human tragedies the way we are, the world sees the best of who we are," he said.

The joint exercise in Hawaii wasn't the first the Chinese participated in, but it was the first coordinated field exercise and is part of China's growing participation in maritime exercises in the region, including anti-piracy operations. It's exactly the kind of openness senior U.S. leaders have hoped for from the People's Liberation Army. As the U.S. looks for ways to connect with the PLA, some planners have suggested the Pentagon -- the Army in particular -- should do whatever it can to get China to participate in humanitarian exercises like disaster relief operations and civilian evacuations. The thinking goes that those types of operations are far more likely to occur in the years to come than any American land invasion of the Chinese mainland, and therefore that's what the U.S. Army should be training to do.

"What the American and Chinese militaries have tried to do, and we've been making more headway over this over the last year or two is to define domains in which both countries see an opportunity to cooperate without infringing on either country's perceptions of their sovereignty," said Jonathan Pollack, director of the John L. Thornton China Center at Brookings Institute.

The United States responded significantly after the 2004 tsunami, and even offered aid to Burma, which refused to let U.S. Navy ships dock there to deliver medicine and supplies. "We recognize obviously that it's a huge benefit [to] perceptions of the United States, so you could say we're doing well by doing good, in some sense," Pollack said.

As China steps up its aid to the Philippines, it seems its government is mindful of perceptions as well.


Source
.

Guillermo Jimenez on Constitution-Free Border Zones

15 Aug 2013

Interview 721 – Guillermo Jimenez on Constitution-Free Border Zones

Posted by Corbett
 

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

 

 

 

Today we’re joined by Guillermo Jimenez of TracesofReality.com to discuss the issue of the “constitution-free zones” that the ACLU have identified as existing anywhere within 100 air miles of any US border. We talk about Guillermo’s extensive coverage of this subject, including his recent article “Another Man Arrested at a Checkpoint for Doing Absolutely Nothing Illegal.” We also explore the background of the problem and what concerned US citizens can and should be doing to confront this growing tyranny.


Source
.

Rampant INjustice

Rampant Injustice

Published on Oct 31, 2012


For more information, go to: www.rampantinjustice.com

.

The Riddle, Wrapped In A Mystery, Inside An Enigma

Next Article → INFORMATION WARFARE: Discretion Is Now Required In China


March 25, 2013: Westerners are puzzled at the way Russian politicians are growing increasingly hostile to foreigners in general and the West in particular. Then there is the feud going on within the Defense Ministry over whether to import more Western weapons or rely instead on what Russian defense firms produce.

Scrounging up details from Russian media, discussions on the Internet, and statements by the many members of the Duma (parliament) with access to the inner circle reveals a rather bizarre (to Westerners and some Russians) state of affairs. Put simply, most of those currently running Russia really believe that the United States has formed an anti-Russian coalition that is surrounding Russia in preparation for an invasion. The motive behind this plot is the Western need for Russia’s many natural resources. The U.S. has been using pro-democracy and reform minded NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) within Russia to cause turmoil and weaken the government and military.

It’s true that the current Russian government, which is turning Russia back into a police state, has a lot to fear from Russians calling for reform and more democracy. The government is controlled by men who seized control of Soviet era industries in the 1990s, made them efficient and made themselves enormously wealthy. They were assisted by many former KGB men (especially current president Vladimir Putin) and the more able Soviet bureaucrats.

Along the way Russia became very corrupt and the rule of law was replaced by a system where those who could buy their way out of any trouble did so, and the majority had no access to justice or a clean and efficient government. Putin was smart enough to spread the oil money around and has kept most Russians satisfied (or at least not violently dissatisfied) at the way post-Soviet Russia turned out. Some believe that Putin invented the “Russia is about to be invaded” concept to gain more popular support and does not believe it himself. The KGB tended to recruit the smartest and most capable Russians, and that explains a lot of things about Russia today.

Creating the idea that Russia is surrounded by enemies, led by the old Cold War arch foe America, is something older Russians were exposed to most of their lives. It persuades Russians to keep electing Vladimir Putin and his cronies. But a growing number of Russians are noting that there’s no sign of this conspiracy in the West, only bewilderment over what the Russians are saying. Over time, the Putin paranoia program becomes less believable to more Russians. There is growing fear that, rather than face a majority of Russians who don’t believe in the conspiracy, the current rulers will try to turn Russia into a strict police state, without the trappings of Soviet–style communism or any other ism besides the greed of the small ruling class.

Meanwhile, many military leaders are having their own problems with the paranoia crowd. For over a decade military leaders have been complaining about the inability of Russian defense firms to produce effective and reliable weapons. It was hard to disagree with this, given the poor performance of new Russian weapons and the continued success of comparable Western systems. Russian military leaders also wanted to improve the quality of their troops, and this meant adopting Western practices, like the use of professional NCOs and an all-volunteer force. But many believers in “the Americans are about to invade” worldview also insisted that Russia could only defend itself with Russian designed and made weapons and military traditions. This resulted in growing resistance to the buying Western weapons or making the Russian military look and operates like a Western one. This policy is also meant to buy Western manufacturing technology as well and is, without coming right out and saying it, forcing Russian firms to reform and become more efficient and reliable.

Yet the way Russian leaders are dealing with the aftermath of the Soviet Union collapse makes no sense. That bewilderment is nothing new. Back in 1939 Winston Churchill described Russia as, “a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.” Despite all Russia has been through during the intervening 74 years, Churchill’s analysis still seems quite valid. In the meantime the Russians are clear minded on one point, their only effective defense against invasion remains their nuclear weapons and they had paid more attention to maintaining those weapons than any other.

Source

.

Attorney General Eric Holder: Drone strike on U.S. soil ‘hypothetically’ possible

By: Eric W. Dolan



The Obama Administration could use lethal force on Americans within the United States and without trial during “an extraordinary circumstance,” Attorney General Eric Holder said on Tuesday.

In a letter to Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), Holder said the Administration favored the use of law enforcement over the military when it came to fighting terrorist threats within the country. However, Holder refused to rule out the possibility that the President of the United States could use a drone strike on U.S. soil in an extreme situation.

“As members of this administration have previously indicated, the US government has not carried out drone strikes in the United States and has no intention of doing so,” he wrote. “As a policy matter moreover, we reject the use of military force where well-established law enforcement authorities in this country provide the best means for incapacitating a terrorist threat.”

“The question you have posed is therefore entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur, and one we hope no president will ever have to confront,” Holder added.

“It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States. For example, the president could conceivably have no choice but to authorize the military to use such force if necessary to protect the homeland in the circumstances like a catastrophic attack like the ones suffered on December 7, 1941, and September 11, 2001,” Holder continued, referring to the attacks on Pearl Harbor and the World Trade Center, respectively.

Paul had threatened to hold up the nomination of John Brennan as CIA director over questions about whether the Administration believed it could use drone strikes within the United States. In a separate letter, Brennan told Paul that the CIA had no authority to conduct lethal operations within the country.

“The U.S. Attorney General’s refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening – it is an affront the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans,” Paul said in a statement.

Source

.

Military Takeover of America, Part 1

Military Takeover of America, Part 1 - TV Berlin Video

John Osborne and Bob Trefz

Tags: john osborne bob trefz prophecy countdown wrm police state military buildup

Video von ftsnadmin

--------------------
The Military Takeover of America, Part 2
???

The Military Takeover of America, Part 3

http://www.tvbvideo.de/video/iLyROoafZYwL.html

The Military Takeover of America, Part 4

http://www.tvbvideo.de/video/iLyROoafZYwj.html

.

Invasion! DHS Source Tells Why Military Train in U.S. Cities

Written by: David Bard on February 6, 2013.
Last revised by: Michael Caldwell

A news article was sent to me earlier this week. It appeared in the Beaufort Gazette. The article stated that later this week about 150 Marines and Navy personnel will holdrealistic urban training in Jasper County, South Carolina.

This was one of many joint military-local law enforcement exercises that had come to my attention in less than one month. Held in cities across the U.S., they were becoming more common and more intense. But why? Why train in populated towns and cities where accidents could produce unnecessary casualties?

The Gazette further reported that the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit will train within Ridgeland town limits. The times and exact locations for the training are not being announced, according to 2nd Lt. Gerard R. Farao.

A little background on the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit (26th MEU). It is one of seven Marine Expeditionary Units. A MEU is a Marine Air-Ground Task Force with a strength of about 2,200 personnel. The MEU consists of four major parts: a command element, a ground combat element, an aviation combat element, and a logistics element. The 26th MEU was establishment in the early 1970s and has deployed extensively, and participated in numerous combat and contingency operations. The 26th MEU is based out of Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina.

I was once stationed at Camp Lejuene, NC. As a Navy Corpsman, I helped care for Marines. I tell you this because inevitably there will be those that assume I hold some anti-military motive. Quite the contrary. This writer is a Navy veteran, receiver of a Navy Commendation medal for lifesaving, Fleet Marine Force Expeditionary medal (2) and several letters of commendation – among other ribbons and medals. I also spent time at Camp Lejuene.

At no time during my time there were “realistic urban training” exercises conducted in towns and cities. This is a recent development.

According to 2nd Lt. Farao, and reported by the Gazette, residents will likely see and hear military vehicles and possibly see aircraft. Farao states the training is part of a certification for deployment to Mediterranean and African shores. Furthermore, he stated participants will be in uniform and carry weapons. Some exercises will take place at night and residents might hear “popping” sounds as Marines fire blanks.

The training has been coordinated with local, county and state agencies and officials, including the Ridgeland police and fire departments, according to a Marine Corps news release.

Although there is no danger, Farao said residents should stay away if they see training under way or uniformed personnel.

Realistic Urban Training is happening all over the U.S. In Miami, Florida on January 26, 2013, Army Backhawk helicopters swooped through the city at night, firing door-guns and chasing make-believe bad guys like something out of an action movie. The fired blanks echoed off of the buildings, scaring many residents into taking cover. The local news reported excitedly about the exercise, stating it was only a drill and for residents not to be concerned. However, there was no journalistic follow up asking hard questions. Such as, who authorized an exercise without informing the public? Why conduct this type of training in a populated U.S. city and put citizens at risk? Isn’t this a violation of Posse Comitatus? No hard follow up questions were asked, and to my knowledge, have not been since.

Not even when the same exercise occurred in Houston, Texas on January 29, 2013. The U.S. Army along with other agencies took over the Carnegie Vanguard High School in Houston on Monday. Alarmed residents called police and complained about gunshots and helicopters. No details were provided about the training. Watch the KTRK-TV Houston report and hear how alarmed residents responded after hearing gunshots and seeing military helicopters flying over their homes.


Wednesday, January 30, 2013. The same types of exercises were conducted in Galveston, Texas. The Houston Chronicle reported The training involved about 80 soldiers from the U.S. Army Special Operations Command in coordination with local law enforcement. According to Sgt. 1st Class Michael Noggle, an Army spokesman based at Fort Bragg, N.C., “We were invited by the city of Galveston to conduct joint training exercises to enhance the effectiveness of both services in order to better protect the residents of Galveston.”

He went on to say in an email that “The purpose of the realistic urban training is to give our Special Operators an opportunity to hone their skills in a controlled, but unfamiliar, realistic urban environment that cannot be replicated with the bare-boned facades found on military installation ranges.”

I’ve highlighted a few examples, but there are more. In a search I came upon these others. Los Angeles, CA, Plainville and Worchester, Massachusetts. As reported in the other stories, residents were unaware of the drills until helicopters swooped over their neighborhoods. And here’s more: Minneapolis, MN, and this in East Saint Louis, MO. There are many more, but these links provide a foundation for further research.

I spoke with a high-ranking, military source in DHS. Preferring to remain unnamed for obvious reasons, he told me, “DHS and DOD are conducting desensitizing exercises all across the U.S.,” he paused, then added, “we’re being prepared for mass civil unrest in major U.S. cities. DOD will be expected to help – when we’re requested.”

I asked if there was a timeline for expecting civil unrest in our cities and why should we expect it to begin with. I was told that there were many reasons, but that the continued devaluation of our currency, the predicted history-setting prices for gasoline this summer and the continued gun control debate are forming a perfect storm of civil discontent. When this storm hits, it will most assuredly produce mass casualties. When does DHS expect this to happen? This summer.

From a high-ranking source deep within DHS, who has strong DOD ties, we are being told that joint DOD-local law enforcement exercises are to desensitize us to military occupation. When asked if there was any concern about violating Posse Comitatus, he stated “no concern at all,” and added, “That’s been a non-issue for a long time.”

Reuters recently reported Jesse Jackson’s request for armed TSA in the streets of Chicago. Is it no longer a question of IF we see armed soldiers patrolling U.S. streets – but WHEN? And notice the way most mainstream media presents these training exercises. They are presented nearly like entertainment. The ones approaching public service announcements mostly center on what areas to avoid because of traffic closures.

No major concerns about military patrolling our streets are being spoken in national dialogue. Those that do are assigned fringe status. But in closing, I’d ask where do these training orders originate? Who is responsible for issuing the orders and at what level in DOD/DHS do they originate from? Since it crosses all military branches, we can assume it comes from the highest levels. Perhaps we should begin asking our elected officials to dig a little deeper into the subject. And if they will not, perhaps we – the People – should.

Source

.

Military black hawks fly over Miami Florida firing blanks

WeaponsCache


Published on Jan 29, 2013


Strange events over the skys of Miami as military black hawk helicopters fire blanks through the city. This is surprising to me because the police are involved yet no civilians were told about this. What about mass panic?!

What do you think this is all about?

.

Putin emphasizes military ties with Chinese VP

Posted on Wednesday, 06.06.12

Russia's President Vladimir Putin attends a bilateral meeting with China's Vice Premier Li Keqiang on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing Wednesday, June 6, 2012. Putin is emphasizing

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

BEIJING -- Russian President Vladimir Putin emphasized burgeoning military ties with China on Wednesday on the second day of a visit to his nation's eastern neighbor.

Putin told Vice President Xi Jinping that he and Chinese President Hu Jintao have vowed to expand military exchanges and he also recalled recent Russian-Chinese naval exercises in the Yellow Sea.

Military exchanges between Moscow and Beijing have accelerated under a regional security grouping that has hosted regular border protection and anti-terrorism drills.

China is a major customer for Russian fighters, submarines, missiles frigates, and other high-tech arms, but mistrust lingers from their Cold War rivalry. Ties have warmed steadily, however, over Putin's decade-long dominance of Russian political life.

Putin's visit is his first to China since returning to Russia's presidency last month and comes ahead of his first visit to the U.S. in a move seen as signaling an eastward pivot in Russian foreign policy.

In Beijing, Putin reaffirmed targets of raising bilateral trade to $100 billion by 2015 from $83.5 billion last year, and to $200 million by 2020.

Warming ties between China and Russia have counterbalanced U.S. influence and shielded Syria from international moves to halt its crackdown on a 15-month uprising.

Source: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/06/06/2835240/putin-emphasizes-military-ties.html#storylink=cpy

.

Why Do the Police Have Tanks?

AlterNet / By Rania Khalek

The Strange and Dangerous Militarization of the US Police Force

The federal government has supplied local police departments with military uniforms, weaponry, vehicles, and training.


July 5, 2011

Just after midnight on May 16, 2010, a SWAT team threw a flash-bang grenade through the window of a 25-year-old man while his 7-year-old daughter slept on the couch as her grandmother watched television. The grenade landed so close to the child that it burned her blanket. The SWAT team leader then burst into the house and fired a single shot which struck the child in the throat, killing her. The police were there to apprehend a man suspected of murdering a teenage boy days earlier. The man they were after lived in the unit above the girl's family.

The shooting death of Aiyana Mo'Nay Stanley-Jones sounds like it happened in a war zone. But the tragic SWAT team raid took place in Detroit.

Shockingly, paramilitary raids that mirror the tactics of US soldiers in combat are not uncommon in America. According to an investigation carried out by the Huffington Post's Radley Balko, America has seen a disturbing militarization of its civilian law enforcement over the last 30 years, along with a dramatic and unsettling rise in the use of paramilitary police units for routine police work. In fact, the most common use of SWAT teams today is to serve narcotics warrants, usually with forced, unannounced entry into the home.

Some 40,000 of these raids take place every year, and are needlessly subjecting nonviolent drug offenders, bystanders and wrongly targeted civilians to the terror of having their homes invaded while they’re sleeping, usually by teams of heavily armed paramilitary units dressed not as police officers but as soldiers. And as demonstrated by the case of Aiyana Mo'nay Stanley-Jones, these raids have resulted in dozens of needless deaths and injuries.

How did we allow our law enforcement apparatus to descend into militaristic chaos? Traditionally, the role of civilian police has been to maintain the peace and safety of the community while upholding the civil liberties of residents in their respective jurisdiction. In stark contrast, the military soldier is an agent of war, trained to kill the enemy.

Clearly, the mission of the police officer is incompatible with that of a soldier, so why is it that local police departments are looking more and more like paramilitary units in a combat zone? The line between military and civilian law enforcement has been drawn for good reason, but following the drug war and more recently, the war on terror, that line is inconspicuously eroding, a trend that appears to be worsening by the decade.

The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 is a civil war-era law that prohibits the use of the military for civilian policing. For a long time, Posse Comitatus was considered the law of the land, forcing militarization advocates to come up with creative ways to get around it. In addition to assigning various law enforcement duties to the military, such as immigration control, over the years Congress has instituted policies that encourage law enforcement to emulate combat soldiers. Hence, the establishment of the SWAT team in the 1960s.

Originally called the Special Weapons Attack Team, the Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) units were inspired by an incident in 1966, when an armed man climbed to the top of the 32-story clock tower at the University of Texas in Austin and fired randomly for 90 minutes, shooting 46 people and killing 15, until two police officers got to the top of the tower and killed him. This episode is said to have “shattered the last myth of safety Americans enjoyed [and] was the final impetus the chiefs of police needed” to form their own SWAT teams. Soon after, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) formed the country's first SWAT team, which acquired national prestige when used against the Black Panthers in 1969.

Use of these paramilitary units gradually increased throughout the 1970s, mostly in urban settings. The introduction of paramilitary units in America laid the foundation for the erosion of the barrier between police and military, a trend which accelerated in the 1980s under President Reagan, when the drug war was used as a pretext to make exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act.

In 1981, Congress passed the Military Cooperation with Law Enforcement Act, which amended Posse Comitatus by directing the military to give local, state and federal law enforcement access to military equipment, research and training for use in the drug war. Following the authorization of domestic police and military cooperation, the 1980s saw a series of additional congressional and presidential maneuvers that blurred the line between soldier and police officer, ultimately culminating in a memorandum of understanding in 1994 between the US Department of Justice and Department of Defense. The agreement authorized the transfer of federal military technology to local police forces, essentially flooding civilian law enforcement with surplus military gear previously reserved for use during wartime.

Between 1995 and 1997 the Department of Defense gave 1.2 million pieces of military hardware, including 3,800 M-16s, 2,185 M-14s, 73 grenade launchers and 112 armored personnel carriers to civilian police agencies across the country. But this was only the beginning.

In 1997, Congress, not yet satisfied with the flow of military hardware to local police, passed the National Defense Authorization Security Act which created the Law Enforcement Support Program, an agency tasked with accelerating the transfer of military equipment to civilian police departments. Between January 1997 and October 1999, the new agency facilitated the distribution of 3.4 million orders of Pentagon equipment to over 11,000 domestic police agencies in all 50 states.

By December 2005, that number increased to 17,000, with a purchase value of more than $727 million of equipment. Among the hand-me-downs were 253 aircraft (including six- and seven-passenger airplanes, and UH-60 Blackhawk and UH-1 Huey helicopters), 7,856 M-16 rifles, 181 grenade launchers, 8,131 bulletproof helmets, and 1,161 pairs of night-vision goggles.

The military surplus program and paramilitary units feed off one another in a cyclical loop that has caused an explosive growth in militarized crime control techniques. With all the new high-tech military toys the federal government has been funneling into local police departments, SWAT teams have inevitably multiplied and spread across American cities and towns in both volume and deployment frequency. Criminologist Peter Kraska found that the frequency of SWAT operations soared from just 3,000 annual deployments in the early 1980s to an astonishing 40,000 raids per year by 2001, 75-80 percent of which were used to deliver search warrants.

In 1997, Kraska observed that close to 90 percent of cities with populations exceeding 50,000 and at least 100 sworn officers had at least one paramilitary unit, twice as many as in the mid 1980s. Radley Basko correctly points out that the trends giving rise to SWAT proliferation in the 1990s have not disappeared, so it's safe to assume these numbers have continued to rise and are significantly higher today.

Then there are the effects of the war on terror, which sparked the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the introduction of DHS grants to local police departments. These grants are used to purchase policing equipment, although law enforcement is investing in more than just bullet-proof vests and walkie talkies. DHS grants have led to a booming law enforcement industry that specifically markets military-style weaponry to local police departments. If this sounds familiar, that's because it is law enforcement's version of the military-industrial-complex.

By instituting public policies that encouraged the collaboration of military and domestic policing, the US government handed a massive and highly profitable clientele to private suppliers of paramilitary gear. Following the breakdown of Posse Comitatus in the 1980s and '90s, Peter Cassidy writes in Covert Action Quarterly that "gun companies, perceiving a profitable trend, began aggressively marketing automatic weapons to local police departments, holding seminars, and sending out color brochures redolent with ninja-style imagery."

Private suppliers of military equipment advertise a glorified version of military-style policing attire to local police departments and SWAT teams. One such defense manufacturing company, Heckler and Koch, epitomized this aggressive marketing tactic with its slogan for the MP5 submachine gun, “From the Gulf War to the Drug War—Battle Proven.”

Today's latest in paramilitary fashion sweeping through local police departments is the armored tank, which is making appearances all over the country at an increasingly alarming rate. The police department in Roanoke, Virginia paid Armet Armored Vehicles, a private company that specializes in military vehicles, $218,000 to assemble a 20,000-pound bulletproof tank with a $245,000 federal grant.

Not to feel left out, the Special Emergency Response Team (SERT) in Lancaster, Penn., was recently seen sporting the Lenco BearCat, a camouflage colored Humvee-styled tank that can knock down a wall, pull down a fence, withstand small-arms fire and deliver a dozen heavily armed police officers to a tense emergency scene. The BearCat was purchased a year and a half ago with a $226,224 grant from DHS, yet it has spent nearly two years sitting in a garage at the county's Public Safety Training Center.

The most widely used justification for the purchase of heavily armored war machines is that violence against police officers has increased exponentially, necessitating the tank for protection of the men and women who serve our communities. But examination of the FBI's annual Uniform Crime Report, a database that tracks the number of law enforcement officers killed and assaulted each year, reveals that this is simply not true. According to the UCR, since 2000 an average yearly toll of about 50 police officers have been feloniously killed, the highest reaching 70 in 2001. So the notion that militarization is a necessary reaction to a growth in violence against police officers is absurd, considering that violent crime is trending downward.

Others argue these tanks are needed in case of a terrorist attack or a natural disaster. But on September 11, 2001, I do not recall the NYPD complaining that a lack of armored tanks was impeding its policing efforts. And during the catastrophic tornado that tore through Joplin, Missouri earlier this year, heavily armored vehicles weren't present nor were they needed to assist in the aftermath.

The majority of paramilitary drug raid proponents maintain that military-style law enforcement is required to reduce the risk of potential violence, injury and death to both police officers and innocents. The reality is that SWAT team raids actually escalate provocation, usually resulting in senseless violence in what would otherwise be a routine, nonviolent police procedure.

Just consider your reaction in the event of a SWAT team breaking down your door in the middle of night, possibly even blowing off the hinges with explosives, while you and your family are asleep. Imagine the terror of waking up to find complete strangers forcing their way into your home and detonating a flash-bang grenade, meant to disorient you. Assuming nobody is hurt, what thoughts might be raging in your mind while the police forcefully incapacitate you and your loved ones, most likely at gunpoint, while carrying out a search warrant of your home. Assuming you were able to contain the mix of fear and rage going through your body, consider how helpless you would feel to know that any perceived noncompliance would most certainly be met with lethal force.


Training and technology-sharing between the defense and civilian law enforcement seems responsible for the pervasive culture of militarism plaguing domestic law enforcement. In fact, an estimated 46 percent of paramilitary units were trained by "active-duty military experts in special operations." Lawrence Korb, a former official in the Reagan administration, famously said that soldiers are “trained to vaporize, not Mirandize." As police officers continue to emulate soldiers in their weaponry, language, tactics, uniform, and mindset, it won't be long before they vaporize instead of Mirandize as well.

We have created circumstances under which the American people are no longer individuals protected by the Bill of Rights, but rather "enemy combatants." The consequences of such a mindset have proven time and again to be lethal, as we now rely on military ideology and practice to respond to crime and justice. For some insight into the implications, one needn't look any further than minority communities, which have long been the victims of paramilitary forces posing as police officers. Black and Latino communities in the inner-cities of Washington DC, Detroit and Chicago have witnessed first-hand the deadly consequences of militarization on American soil. Military culture now permeates all aspects of our society. Does anyone really believe that heavily armed soldiers trained to kill are capable of maintaining an atmosphere of nonviolence?

It's important to remember that police officers are not responsible for instituting these policies. Over the last three decades local police departments supplied with military uniforms, weaponry, vehicles, and training, were told they were fighting a war on drugs, crime and terror. The politicians who instituted these policies are responsible for the militarization creeping into civilian law enforcement. What might the end result be if the distinction between police and military ceases to exist? The answer is a police state -- and certain segments of our society are already living in one.

Rania Khalek is a progressive activist. Check out her blog Missing Pieces or follow her on Twitter @Rania_ak. You can contact her at raniakhalek@gmail.com.

Source
.

North Korean Artillery Attack on a Southern Island

Red Alert: North Korean Artillery Attack on a Southern Island
November 23, 2010

North Korea and South Korea have reportedly traded artillery fire Nov. 23 across the disputed Northern Limit Line (NLL) in the Yellow Sea to the west of the peninsula. Though details are still sketchy and unconfirmed, South Korean news reports indicate that around 2:30 p.m. local time, North Korean artillery shells began landing in the waters around Yongpyeongdo, one of the South Korean-controlled islands just south of the NLL. North Korea has reportedly fired as many as 200 rounds, some of which struck the island, injuring at least 10 South Korean soldiers, damaging buildings, and setting fire to a mountainside. South Korea responded by firing some 80 shells of its own toward North Korea, dispatching F-16 fighter jets to the area, and raising the military alert to its highest level.

South Korean President Lee Myung Bak has convened an emergency cabinet meeting, and Seoul is determining whether to evacuate South Koreans working at inter-Korean facilities in North Korea. The barrage from North Korea was continuing at 4 p.m. Military activity appears to be ongoing at this point, and the South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff are meeting on the issue. No doubt North Korea’s leadership is also convening.

Read more »

.