Russian Military Will Provide Security At Mass Events In U.S.

As part of a deal signed last week in Washington DC between the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry and FEMA, Russian officials will provide “security at mass events” in the United States, a scenario that won’t sit well with Americans wary of foreign assets operating on US soil.

Russian troops. Image: Wikimedia Commons

According to a press release by the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Civil Defense and Emergencies, US and Russian officials met on June 25 at the 17th Joint U.S.-Russia Cooperation Committee on Emergency Situations.

In addition to agreeing with FEMA to “exchange experts during joint rescue operations in major disasters,” the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry will also be providing “security at mass events” in the United States.

This suggests that events designated as “National Special Security Events” by the Department of Homeland Security, which include the Super Bowl, international summits such as the G8 and presidential inaugurations, will now rely partly on Russian authorities to provide security.

The meeting last week also agreed on the conclusion that US and Russian emergency authorities will increase their co-operation, “in order to respond efficiently to all kinds of disasters.”

The use of foreign troops or other officials in a law enforcement capacity providing “security” inside the United States is illegal under Posse Comitatus. Capt. William Geddes of the U.S. Army Reserve acknowledged last year that it is against federal law to use US troops to conduct police patrols, despite the fact that such occurrences are becoming increasingly common. The use of foreign troops is an even more clear cut violation of Posse Comitatus.

Last year we reported on how Russian troops were invited to the US as part of a Fort Carson, Colorado drill focused around anti-terror training. Aside from learning how to target terrorists in America, the Russian soldiers were also out in the local community attending a baseball game in Colorado Springs.

As Mac Slavo writes, “Rumors have circulated for years about the possibility of foreign troops being deployed on U.S. soil in the event of a widespread declaration of a national emergency. For quite some time there have been anecdotal reports to support the claim that the U.N., Russia and other nations would be used in a policing capacity should some critical event befall our nation.”

“The fear should such a scenario take place has been that these soldiers would act under the banner of their own flags, ignoring the fundamental protections afforded to our citizens, leaving Americans under the jurisdiction of people who don’t speak our language or respect our fundamental rights to self defense, to be secure in our homes, and to be presumed innocent in the eyes of the law.”

Concerns about foreign troops being used on US soil have lingered ever since the release of State Department Publication 7277, which is a blueprint for the harmonization of US and Russian forces under a framework of United Nations-led global government.

Back in 2008 it was also reported that US and Canadian authorities had signed an agreement that would pave the way to using each other’s militaries on both sides of the border “during an emergency”.

Alex Jones has documented foreign troops being trained on U.S. soil to deal with “insurgents” since the late 1990′s as part of “urban warfare drills”.

Back in July 2010, our reporters covered the Operation Vigilant Guard exercises in Chicago which involved Polish troops training alongside U.S. National Guard troops in drills focused around raiding terrorists and drug dealers.

According to SFC Mark Ballard of the Illinois National Guard, the Polish forces were “integrating into some of the civil military units that are participating in this exercise” as part of Illinois’ partnership with the Republic of Poland, a relationship based around “integrative training” and blending military and civilian forces in the event of a national emergency, as well as making this process of integration with foreign troops more “visible”.

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

Zimmerman Aquittal Could Cause Mass Riots Across America

Paul Joesph Watson - Following a number of tweets making threats to kill white people if George Zimmerman is acquitted of murdering Trayvon Martin, a former Chicago police officer warns that the outcome of the case could spark race riots in cities across America.

George Zimmerman. Image: Wikimedia Commons

As Infowars reported yesterday, following the woeful performance of Rachel Jeantel, the state’s so-called “star witness,” a number of Twitter users took to the social network to express their intention to kill white people in retaliation for Zimmerman going free.

Tweets included remarks such as “If Zimmerman get off ima shoot the first #hispanic/white I see,” and “If they don’t kill Zimmerman Ima kill me a cracka.”

In an article entitled, America Will See Its Worst Race Riot Yet This Summer, Crime File News’ Paul Huebl remarks that the case against Zimmerman should never have been filed in the first place and that when the trial inevitably collapses with Zimmerman’s acquittal, “I fully expect organized race rioting to begin in every major city to dwarf the Rodney King and the Martin Luther King riots of past decades.”

Huebl is a licensed private detective and a former Chicago police officer.

“If you live in a large city be prepared to evacuate or put up a fight to win. You will need firearms, fire suppression equipment along with lots of food and water. Police resources will be slow and outgunned everywhere,” writes Huebl, adding, “America may see some combat related population control like we’ve not seen since the Civil War. Martial Law can’t be far behind complete with major efforts at gun grabbing.”

Huebl is not the only prominent voice to express fears that the outcome of the trial could lead to widespread social disorder.

Columnist and former senior presidential advisor Pat Buchanan warned last month that, “The public mind has been so poisoned that an acquittal of George Zimmerman could ignite a reaction similar to that, 20 years ago, when the Simi Valley jury acquitted the LAPD cops in the Rodney King beating case.”

Political Strategist Charles D. Ellison also warns that, “There is the risk of a flashpoint as intense as the aftermath of that fateful Los Angeles police brutality verdict in 1992,” if Zimmerman walks free.

“At that time, many underestimated the potential for social unrest. And a bit over 20 years to the date, many could be making the same miscalculation at this very moment. The ingredients are there in Sanford and they loom large nationally, from an economy barely managing its own recovery to an unemployment rate that’s much higher than it should be, particularly for African-Americans,” adds Ellison.

Some are even asking whether the law should be ignored and Zimmerman convicted simply to avoid race riots.

“Regardless of whether or not Zimmerman acted in self defense, a large segment of the population, particularly the black population, are demanding Zimmerman be punished. And if they don’t have their demands satisfied, it is possible they might riot,” writes a poster at the Aesops Retreat forum. “So would it be appropriate to consider potential riots when deciding on whether or not to prosecute Zimmerman? Or should justice be blind and follow the rule of law?”

Critics of the attempt to convict Zimmerman have cited numerous points of evidence which clearly suggest Zimmerman acted in self-defense and that the case against him was built largely on the back of contrived racial politics.

- Photos taken after the incident show Zimmerman with a bloody nose and lacerations to the head, suggesting he had been physically attacked by Martin;

- NBC News edited a 911 tape of Zimmerman’s call to the police to falsely depict him as a racist;

- Prominent black figures like Spike Lee and Jesse Jackson immediately portrayed the incident as an assault on the black community, stirring racial tension;

- President Barack Obama got involved in the case on the side of Trayvon Martin by stating, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”

- A police report suggested Zimmerman had been flat on his back during the altercation and an eyewitness said that Martin was sat on top of Zimmerman beating and pushing him down;

- A responder at the scene said Martin’s knuckles were bloodied, suggesting he had injured Zimmerman with a punch;

- The lead investigator on the scene, Officer Christopher Serino, wrote that Zimmerman could be heard “yelling for help as he was being battered by Trayvon Martin.”

If some form of social disorder, be it limited or widespread, does ensue should Zimmerman walk free, authorities will be well prepared. The Department of Homeland Security recently put out another order for hundreds of items of riot gear in order to prepare for “riot control situations.” The federal agency has also committed to buying around 2 billion rounds of ammunition over the course of the last year.

Conservative Supreme Court Will Support Gay Marriage

By MARK SHERMAN

(AP) Vin Testa of Washington waves a rainbow flag in support of gay rights outside the Supreme Court in... Full Image

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court is meeting to deliver opinions in two cases that could dramatically alter the rights of gay people across the United States.
The justices are expected to decide their first-ever cases about gay marriage Wednesday in their last session before the court's summer break.
The issues before the court are California's constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which denies legally married gay Americans a range of tax, health and pension benefits otherwise available to married couples.
The broadest possible ruling would give gay Americans the same constitutional right to marry as heterosexuals. But several narrower paths also are available, including technical legal outcomes in which the court could end up saying very little about same-sex marriage.

(AP) This Nov. 2, 2008 file photo shows supporters of Proposition 8, the state’s measure that... Full Image

If the court overturns California's Proposition 8 or allows lower court rulings that struck down the ban to stand, it will take about a month for same-sex weddings to resume for the first time since 2008, San Francisco officials have said. The high court rulings are arriving amid rapid change regarding gay marriage. The number of states permitting same-sex partners to wed has doubled from six to 12 in less than a year, with voter approval in three states in November, followed by legislative endorsement in three others in the spring.
At the same time, an effort to legalize gay marriage in Illinois stalled before the state's legislative session ended last month. And 30 states have same-sex marriage bans enshrined in their constitutions.
Massachusetts was the first state to allow same-sex couples to marry, in 2004. Same-sex marriage also is legal, or soon will be, in Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.
Roughly 18,000 same-sex couples got married in California in less than five months in 2008, after the California Supreme Court struck down a state code provision prohibiting gay unions.

(AP) In this Nov. 5, 2008 file photo, Joni Boettcher, left, kisses her roommate Tika Shenghur... Full Image

California voters approved Proposition 8 in November of that year, writing the ban into the state constitution. Two same-sex couples challenged the provision as unconstitutional and federal courts in California agreed.
The federal marriage law, known by its acronym DOMA, defines marriage as between a man and a woman for the purpose of deciding who can receive a range of federal benefits. Another provision not being challenged for the time being allows states to withhold recognition of same-sex marriages from other states.
DOMA easily passed Congress and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996, the year of his re-election.
Several federal district and appeals courts struck down the provision. In 2011, the Obama administration abandoned its defense of the law but continued to enforce it. House Republicans are now defending DOMA in the courts. President Barack Obama subsequently endorsed gay marriage in 2012.
The justices chose for their review the case of 83-year-old Edith Windsor of New York, who sued to challenge a $363,000 federal estate tax bill after her partner of 44 years died in 2009.
Windsor, who goes by Edie, married Thea Spyer in 2007 after doctors told them Spyer would not live much longer. She suffered from multiple sclerosis for many years. Spyer left everything she had to Windsor.
Windsor would have paid nothing in inheritance taxes if she had been married to a man.