State Dept Hid Identity of British Firm Providing ‘No Bulletes’ Security to Benghazi

September 21, 2012

State Dept Hid Identity of British Firm Providing ‘No Bulletes’ Security to Benghazi

Breitbart News has learned that the State Department hid the identity and nationality of Blue Mountain Group, the British firm it hired to provide “no bullets” security at Benghazi, in the federal contract it signed with that organization in February 2012. 

Breitbart News obtained a copy of the official summary of the contract by performing a search at the Federal Procurement Data System website, a link provided by Wired.com’s Danger Room.
Blue Mountain Group was not identified as the vendor in that summary of the contract. Instead, the vendor was listed under the vague term “Miscellaneous Foreign Awardee.”
Incredibly, the vendor contact address on the contract — 1275 First Street, NE, Washington, D.C. is not the office of Blue Mountain Group, but is instead the office of the Regulatory Secretariat Division of the General Services Administration of the federal government. The phone contact listed in the contract is of an office number for an employee of the GSA.
According to its website, the Regulatory Secretariat Division has the following responsibilities:

The Regulatory Secretariat Division staff prepares, compiles, and processes regulatory and general notices for publication in the Federal Register.  The Division works in conjunction with the efforts of the General Services Administration (GSA), Department of Defense (DOD), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to ensure publication of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). Additional publications are processed by working with various GSA offices to ensure the publications of the Federal Management Regulation (FMR), Federal Travel Regulation (FTR), General Services Acquisition Regulation/Manual (GSAR/GSAM), and other General Services Administration (GSA) regulations.

None of these activities seem consistent with functioning as the “front location” for an unidentified “Miscellaneous Foreign Awardee” responsible for providing security at the American mission in Benghazi.
On Tuesday, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland identified Blue Mountain Group as the “Miscellaneous Foreign Awardee” that had received the State Department contract to provide security Benghazi.
Read more on Breitbart

Tagged as: corruption, Criminal, Failure, Lack of Leadership, Left Wing Agenda, Lies, Obama, Scumbags, Terrorism

http://griffin.house.gov/sites/griffin.house.gov/files/email.pdf

UN Arms Trade Treaty Calls for Disarmament of Persons 55 and Older

4/01/13 | by S.H. Blannelberry  374 18.1K

Individuals 55 and older would lose their right to keep and bear arms under a provision that’s expected to be included as part of a comprehensive United Nations Global Arms Trade Treaty.
UN Secretary Gen. Ban Ki-moon spoke about the impetus behind the controversial measure at a press conference over the weekend in New York City, the site of the final negotiations between the 193 Member States.
“Regulating the international transfers of both weapons and ammunition is a key component of a robust arms trade treaty, as is limiting civilian access to small arms and munitions,” said Ban Ki-moon.

PFC Agnes Agnieszka, 23, mans a machine gun next to a truck.

“There’s an emerging consensus that certain groups should be restricted from possessing conventional arms, certainly those who fuel conflict, arm criminals or violations of international humanitarian or human rights law are at the top of the list,” Ban Ki-moon continued.
“But also, the international community believes segments of the population that present a danger to themselves and others, chiefly individuals deemed or adjudicated mentally defective and persons with attenuating cerebral faculties, should be added to that list.”
While Ban Ki-moon did not elaborate on what he meant by persons with “attenuating cerebral faculties,” a UN liaison with Amnesty International spelled it out in an interview with the Washington Post.
“Simply put, the UN believes guns don’t belong in the hands of the elderly,” said H. Michael Chase, an attorney for the human rights watchdog group.
“Pools of research show that a significant majority of gun-related suicides, accidental shootings, non-fatal negligent discharges are perpetrated by persons 55 and over,” Chase said.
“Along with the mentally ill, preventing those who are advancing in age from gaining easy access to firearms is a common sense way to save lives,” concluded Chase.
Dr. Michael Betti from the John Hopkins Center for Public Health Preparedness embraced the UN’s call to disarm senior citizens.
“Science tells us that we grow old,” said Dr. Betti, a neurologist who specializes in evaluating and treating patients with memory disorders. “And as we do, our reflexes diminish, our senses become impaired and our cognitive skills weaken … Therefore, as we enter our twilight years – clinically speaking, age 50 and above [Global life expectancy is only 67 years] – science tells us that we are in no shape to be handling or using a deadly weapon.”
In lieu of firearms, Dr. Betti suggests that seniors find other, non-violent and non-lethal options for self-defense.
“The optimal self-defense posture for seniors would include such items as a rape whistle or high-decibel air horn, quick-strike road flares, an electronic medical alert system, a cellular telephone with a large display, morphine injections, neon or glow-in-the-dark armbands, a mesh vest, a pith helmet with flashing headgear and a solar-powered radio,” said Dr. Betti.
Thus far, the White House has not offered a specific comment on the arms trade agreement or its call to disarm seniors, but to echo a recent statement issued by Secretary of State John Kerry, “The United States is steadfast in its commitment to achieve a strong and effective Arms Trade Treaty.”
As for the constitutionality of revoking an elderly person’s Second Amendment rights here in the U.S., at least one gun control advocate said, “That’s not a problem.”
“Look, Justice Scalia already ruled that the Second Amendment had ‘reasonable limitations,’” said William Kirchmeyer of the Coalition to Prevent Mass Shootings, in an interview with the Washington Post. “What can be more reasonable than taking guns away from people who are essentially ticking time bombs?”
What are your thoughts?  Should we hang em up after a certain age?

Categories: Gun Laws, International News, Politics & 2nd Amendment

Judge Napolitano on Leaked Emails on Sequestration: ‘This Conduct Is So Offensive, It’s Impeachable’

Twitter 1K

Share 16K

A leaked email is being highlighted by Republicans as apparent evidence that the Obama administration’s goal is to try to make the cuts look as painful as possible to the American people.
In the controversial email, circulated by two Republican House members, Charlie Brown, a USDA worker with the Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service (APHIS) in Raleigh, N.C., appears to be asking about how to implement budget cuts. USDA responded by writing, “however you manage that reduction, you need to make sure you are not contradicting what we said the impact would be.”
The USDA claims the email has been misinterpreted and taken out of context. Separately, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano recently announced that due to sequestration, thousands of illegal immigrants have to be released from immigration detention centers.

---

The Buzz on Fox News Channel:

• Michelle Malkin Takes on State Dept for Honoring Woman Who Praised 9/11
• WATCH: O’Reilly Asks Kirsten Powers to Name One Specific Obama Spending Cut
• SHOCKING: Lion Kills Volunteer Worker at Calif. Sanctuary

---

Steve Doocy discussed these issues with Judge Andrew Napolitano, who said if the president is intentionally trying to make the cuts as painful as possible in order to fit his political agenda, it’s an “impeachable” offense.
“It’s within his (constitutional) power to do it, but it’s so offensive it’s impeachable,” said Napolitano. Doocy pointed out that’s the second time in the last few weeks that the judge has mentioned impeachment.
“I hate to raise that word. The last time it happened (with Bill Clinton) it was a disaster for us. But this willful conduct is unacceptable,” Napolitano argued.
More Constitutional Questions with Judge Napolitano:

• Sen. Rand Paul ‘Leading the Charge’ Against Out-of-Control Gov’t
• Drone Spotted Over NYC Airport!?
• Colorado Wants to Hold Gun Makers Liable for Shootings

---

Follow Fox News Insider, the official blog of Fox News Channel on Twitter and Google+!

---

Posted in: Fox and Friends, Illegal Immigrants, Janet Napolitano, Judge Napolitano, Sequestration    

There is a complete Main-Stream-Media blackout on the current efforts to initiate impeachment proceedings. Whether the Chicago-Mob style Administration will use gang-land style tactics or a coup d'etat to kill the process remains to be seen. Obama has been Indicted by a Federal Court and a Resolution to begin impeachment proceedings is now before the HOUSE. This COULD be great news IF we do not go into cataclysmic-economic free-fall before it's completed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_CRG5DCk1w

PDF http://info.publicintelligence.net/US... The document (PDF), which is dated 2006 and was used for a self-learning course at the U.S. Army Military Police School at Fort McClellan, makes it clear that the operations described in the manual apply to both "CONUS and OCONUS," meaning inside the Continental United States and outside the Continental United States.

http://info.publicintelligence.net/USAMPS-CivilDisturbanceOps.pdf

Homeland Security Creates "Constitution-Free" Zones

Homeland Security Creates "Constitution-Free" Zones

By Seth Mason

The erosion of civil liberties in this country is scary, and it's a travesty that the MSM and even the conservative media (Rush, etc.) won't talk about it.

The latest development in 4th Amendment violations is the scariest I've heard yet. The Department of the Fatherland has approved a policy which states in no uncertain terms that electronic devices can be seized without a warrant within 100 miles of the border. The kicker? The "border", according to this policy, is any national barrier, political or physical. THIS INCLUDES BODIES OF WATER. So, that means that the United States has, in effect, "Constitution-free zones" stretching 100 miles inland from every coast and 100 miles from our northern and southern borders. Unbelievable! Wired has the story:

The Department of Homeland Security’s civil rights watchdog has concluded that travelers along the nation’s borders may have their electronics seized and the contents of those devices examined for any reason whatsoever — all in the name of national security.

The DHS, which secures the nation’s border, in 2009 announced that it would conduct a “Civil Liberties Impact Assessment” of its suspicionless search-and-seizure policy pertaining to electronic devices “within 120 days.” More than three years later, the DHS office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties published a two-page executive summary of its findings.

“We also conclude that imposing a requirement that officers have reasonable suspicion in order to conduct a border search of an electronic device would be operationally harmful without concomitant civil rights/civil liberties benefits,” the executive summary said.

The memo highlights the friction between today’s reality that electronic devices have become virtual extensions of ourselves housing everything from e-mail to instant-message chats to photos and our papers and effects — juxtaposed against the government’s stated quest for national security.

The President George W. Bush administration first announced the suspicionless, electronics search rules in 2008. The President Barack Obama administration followed up with virtually the same rules a year later. Between 2008 and 2010, 6,500 persons had their electronic devices searched along the U.S. border, according to DHS data.

According to legal precedent, the Fourth Amendment — the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures — does not apply along the border. By the way, the government contends the Fourth-Amendment-Free Zone stretches 100 miles inland from the nation’s actual border.

Civil rights groups like the American Civil Liberties Union suggest that “reasonable suspicion” should be the rule, at a minimum, despite that being a lower standard than required by the Fourth Amendment.

“There should be a reasonable, articulate reason why the search of our electronic devices could lead to evidence of a crime,” Catherine Crump, an ACLU staff attorney, said in a telephone interview. “That’s a low threshold.”

The DHS watchdog’s conclusion isn’t surprising, as the DHS is taking that position in litigation in which the ACLU is challenging the suspicionless, electronic-device searches and seizures along the nation’s borders. But that conclusion nevertheless is alarming considering it came from the DHS civil rights watchdog, which maintains its mission is “promoting respect for civil rights and civil liberties.”

“This is a civil liberties watchdog office. If it is doing its job property, it is supposed to objectively evaluate. It has the power to recommend safeguards to safeguard Americans’ rights,” Crump said. “The office has not done that and the public has the right to know why.”
Toward that goal, the ACLU on Friday filed a Freedom of Information Act request demanding to see the full report that the executive summary discusses.

Meantime, a lawsuit the ACLU brought on the issue concerns a New York man whose laptop was seized along the Canadian border in 2010 and returned 11 days later after his attorney complained.

At an Amtrak inspection point, Pascal Abidor showed his U.S. passport to a federal agent. He was ordered to move to the cafe car, where they removed his laptop from his luggage and “ordered Mr. Abidor to enter his password,” according to the lawsuit.

Agents asked him about pictures they found on his laptop, which included Hamas and Hezbollah rallies. He explained that he was earning a doctoral degree at a Canadian university on the topic of the modern history of Shiites in Lebanon.

He was handcuffed and then jailed for three hours while the authorities looked through his computer while numerous agents questioned him, according to the suit, which is pending in New York federal court.

Here's a map of the nation's "Constitution-free zones", according to the ACLU:

Where in the hell is the outrage in the media? Why the hell are nationally-syndicated talk radio hosts yapping about "Obamaphones" instead of this? Syndicate me! I actually talk about issues that matter!

The above originally appeared at Ecominoes and is reprinted here with permission.