Muslim Congressman Doesn’t Let Baltimore Crisis Go to Waste – Advances Marxist Agenda
May 2, 2015 by: Tim Brown
In what can only be seen as working towards a Communist-style revolution, Al Sharpton has affirmed his belief that Barack Obama should nationalize America’s police force. This is nothing more than an attempt to instigate and insurrection among freedom-loving Americans.
“We need the Justice Department to step in and takeover policing in this country,” Sharpton said. “In the Twentieth-Century, we had to fight states’ rights to get the right to vote. We gonna have to fight states’ rights in terms of closing down police cases.
“Police must be held accountable,” he said. “I don’t think all police is bad. I don’t even think most are bad, but most that are need to be held accountable.”
Well, yeah. Those police officers that commit crime and are caught in corruption do need to be held accountable. Who doesn’t agree with that? But the federal government stepping in and taking over the nation’s police force? Now that is only asking for the corruption to grow whether the cops are good or bad at the moment.
Then there was this little nugget from Joy Reid:
Sadly, that is a sore misrepresentation. We don’t have a national crisis. Apparently, we have a provocateur crisis, of which Mr. Sharpton is a part. The solution for that is not a national takeover of police, but an indictment, arrest, trial and sentencing of such provocateurs. And there is not doubt in my mind that the mastermind behind this provocation is one Barack Hussein Obama.
In March of this year, Barack Obama said, “We have a great opportunity … to really transform how we think about community law enforcement relations.”
“We need to seize that opportunity … this is something that I’m going to stay very focused on in the months to come,” he added.
He made these comments, as he touted a new interim report from his Task Force on 21st Century Policing.
Of course, Obama also made sure the useful idiots in the media were on board as well.
“I expect our friends in the media to really focus on what’s in this report and pay attention to it.”
Oh, they are paying attention alright.
Suzanne Hamner has broken down the report and writes, “Obama suggested ‘state and local policing may need to be subordinated to federal social policy.’ By changing ‘law enforcement’ to ‘policing,’ it suggests that only certain facets of police business will be addressed instead of the takeover of the state and local law enforcement agencies. Whenever Obama gets his finger in the pie, you can guarantee he’s going for the whole pie, not a sample.”
From Obama’s days back at Occidental College, Dr. John Drew told reporter Leon Puissegur that Obama was a member of the Democratic Sociality Alliance at Occidental, which was the Marxist student association on campus.
Drew, a Marxist at that time, then relayed that he and his girlfriend at the time used to spend time with Obama and his roommate Chandoo (whom many have alleged that he engaged in sodomy). “We hung out with Obama and Chandoo for that day and went out to lunch then we ended up arguing pretty late in the evening about Marxism and politics…. whether or not there would be a revolution, a Communist-style revolution in the United States. The key takeaway there is that I may have been one of the first people in the world to confront Barack Obama’s kind of silly belief, Marxist idea that there was going to be an inevitable Communist revolution coming to the United States. I feel in my heart that I had persuaded him that that wasn’t in the cards and it wasn’t going to happen and at the end of that time he believed me. I think a bunch of us, Marxist-Communist style people were turned off by a Communist-style revolution I think that Obama would have heard that from someone else eventually, but from his reaction, I think I was the first person that he could identify as an ally, and a friend and supporter who sincerely believes that there would never be a Communist-style revolution. That debate I think helped Obama intellectually, but it helped seal the end of my romantic relationship with Marxism.”
While Dr. Drew does claim a conversion to Christianity, he says that Barack doesn’t have a conversion story from Marxism. “There is a story about how he stopped being a Marxist. If anything his career, life shows an alarming consistency in his ideological extremism.”
In fact, Drew went on to affirm that he carries that ideology today. When asked if he still sees that in Obama, Drew said, “Yes, especially when he talks about the people holding on to their guns and religion because of economic stress. That is a Marxist idea. Everything he says about it being a good idea to spread the wealth around; that is Marxist/Socialist concepts. Some of the statements Obama makes about things inevitably get better, I think that is a Marxist ideological remnant.”
Of course, he does. He has an Attorney General that has not followed the Constitution and deprived people of property, even when they were not guilty. He has sought to take over the American health care system and the insurance companies of the nation. He has violated the Constitution in terrorist trades, as well as appointees. Now he is making good on pushing forward for a domestic police force that will be as strong as the national military.
Obama and company are simply using the media, provocateurs and others in key position to bring about a Communist-style revolution here in America.
The sad part in all of this is that Congress has shown an incredible amount of impotence in doing something about his numerous crimes and the crimes of his administration. Now, the media songbirds will begin debating nationalizing of the police force, so-called conservatives will join in the debate and we’ll probably hear just a handful of people with a national platform say, “It’s unconstitutional.”
http://sonsoflibertymedia.com/2015/05/al-sharpton-reaffirms-obamas-call-to-unconstitutionally-nationalize-police/
—
AL SHARPTON BALTIMORE IS THE MODEL, CALLS FOR ‘NATIONAL’ SOLUTION, A K A, OBAMA’S POLICE FORCE
—
Breaking News… Rev. Al The Rat Sharpton Calls For A Federal Takeover Of The Nations Police
—
Al Sharpton visited White House 82 times
—
Sharpton, Baltimore Mayor Speak on Gray Death
—
Baltimore Cops Face Justice
—
Interim Report – 21st Century Policing
http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/interim_tf_report.pdf
—
The Nazi Police State
The Nazi Police State was to ensure that everybody did as they were told – or paid the price. The Nazi Police were controlled by Heinrich Himmler and his feared secret police – the Gestapo – did as it pleased in Nazi Germany. Children’s loyalty could be developed with a policy of indoctrination via education and the Hitler Youth movement. Time and planning spent in these areas would bring a suitable reward for Hitler.
Adults were a different proposition. Some adults clearly supported Hitler – as the March 1933 election showed. But the same election clearly showed that a substantial number of Germans did not support Hitler and the Nazis. These people were likely to be a constant thorn for Hitler unless they were dealt with. For these people, the Nazis developed a policy of intimidation. Fear became a by-word for those who did not support Hitler. The wrong comment overheard by a Nazi official could have very serious consequences.
Hitler’s police state worked on the rule that if you said nothing, no harm, could come to you. If you had doubts about the way the country was going, you kept them to yourself – or paid the price. As nearly 17 million people had not voted for either the Nazis or the Nationalist in March 1933, a large and visible police force was required to keep this sizeable group under observation and control.
In Nazi Germany the police were allowed to arrest people on suspicion that they were about to do wrong. This gave the police huge powers. All local police units had to draw up a list of people in their locality who might be suspected of being “Enemies of the State”. This list was given to the Gestapo – the Secret Police. The Gestapo had the power to do as it liked. Its leader – Reinhard Heydrich – was one of the most feared man in Nazi Germany. His immediate chief was Heinrich Himmler. Both men ran their respective branches with ruthless efficiency.
Those arrested by either the police or the Gestapo had less than three minutes to pack clothing and say their goodbyes. Once arrested, they were sent to the nearest police cell. Those in custody were told to sign Form D-11; this was an “Order For Protective Custody”. By signing this, you agreed to go to prison. Those who did not sign it were beaten until they did or officers simply forged their signature. Once a D-11 was signed, you were sent to a concentration camp. How long you stayed here depended on the authorities. The usual rule of thumb was whether it was felt that you had learned your lesson (even if there had not been one to learn) and would behave in an acceptable manner once outside of prison.
The concentration camps were deliberately barbaric. Before 1939, deaths in them occurred but they were not common. The idea was that anybody who had been in one, once released, would ‘advertise’ the fact that they were not places where people wanted to go. This was another way of ensuring that people kept their ideas to themselves.
The concentration camps were run by men who could disguise their violent nature simply because they wore a uniform. The flogging of inmates was common -25 strokes was common practice – and the amenities were very basic and sparse. At Buchenwald, 480 men had one water tap between them which could only be used for 15 minutes on getting up. Any abuse of this rule would lead to 25 lashes. Any arrested Jew would get 60 lashes – a personal order from Hitler. Soap, toothpaste, toothbrushes etc were unheard of in camps such as Buchenwald (which held 8000 prisoners) and Dachau. Food and drink were minimal and the Jews had half the rations of other prisoners
Who would get arrested?
The list was intentionally expansive. Anybody considered to be a political threat was arrested;
those who made jokes about the Nazi Party were also arrested (jokes about Hitler were punished with death); the “work shy” were also arrested (this fitted in exactly with Hitler’s plan to reduce unemployment as an unemployed person would be offered work at a Labour Exchange and if they refused it as too menial for them, they would be arrested as work shy. As no-one in concentration camps counted as unemployed, the figures for unemployment had to come down; “Bibelforscher’s” were also arrested (these were people who would only seek guidance from the Bible and rejected all Nazi ideas and they also refused to do military service); homosexuals were also arrested and the SS used this as a common tactic to discredit someone. habitual criminals were also arrested.
In 1936, the Gestapo Law meant that the activities of the Gestapo were free from any review by courts of law. This law effectively meant that the Gestapo became a law unto themselves. This non-uniformed branch of the SS became justifiably feared just as the visible presence of the black uniformed SS men did. Himmler’s view on the SS was simple. In 1943 he said:
“We have always selected the highest and abandoned the lowest. As long as we maintain this principle, the Order (the SS) will remain healthy. After the war, we shall really build up our Order……it will provide Germany with an elite. This elite will provide leaders to industry, agriculture and politics and the activities of the mind.”
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/nazi_police_state.htm
—-
Muslim Congressman Doesn’t Let Baltimore Crisis Go to Waste – Advances Marxist Agenda
May 2, 2015 by: Suzanne Hamner
In the “after glow” of the riots in Baltimore, Minnesota Democrat and Muslim Rep. Keith Ellison seized on the anarchy to spew his Communist/Socialist rhetoric. Appearing on CNN Thursday, Ellison claimed that the poor are getting poorer because the rich are getting richer. It was the typical “never let a crisis go to waste” appearance.
Ellison issued this response to the CNN anchor’s question, “How do you explain what is going on in Baltimore this week?”
“Well, of course, excessive police officers and staggering unemployment go together, because what we’ve done in the United States, as we’ve said, that the affluent part of our society is going to demand more tax breaks, more wealth, more privilege, leaving less for the less fortunate, and the way we keep the less fortunate in control is through policing and prisons. That’s the unfortunate formula we constructed.”
Ellison needs to take a long hard look at Congress when making these statements. These “affluent” jackboots have been insider trading for years, increasing their own wealth while some have skirted paying “their fair share” of income tax. Congress has tremendous “privilege” that is not afforded the average citizen – impunity for wrong-doing – and has pushed for “zero tolerance” on so many issues that elementary school children are criminalized for eating pop-tarts into the shape of a handgun, leaving a classroom unexcused, and playing pranks on teachers.
Here’s another member of Congress who has no idea about the prison system; but, thinks that only the poor, less fortunate of society are housed behind a razor wire fence. There are plenty of inmates from middle-class backgrounds that have been incarcerated, along with some that have committed white collar crimes; but, Ellison’s comments are more code for “blacks” without saying it. Ellison ignores the militarization of law enforcement agencies across the country which results in all US citizens being treated in an aggressive manner by police, as it does not go along with the lie.
Ellison claimed that we, as Americans are “all connected.” In fact, Ellison commented that those who are making “good money” shouldn’t be making so much as that affects everyone else.
“We have got to say that, look, you can make good money, but do you have to make so much that the whole neighborhoods have nothing, and not even any hope? That’s the problem that we are facing right now.”
According to Ellison, people should not be allowed to earn money equivalent to the work they do or the education they obtain, or be paid in proportion to the fruits of their labors. He seems to think that one individual’s propensity for hard work diminishes someone else’s abilities. In essence, Ellison is saying that if one man works hard to earn good money that it takes away from another and an entire neighborhood.
It escapes Ellison that you get out of something what you put in it. There are individuals who are willing to take big risks for big returns; others are not. Each individual should be rewarded each according to their efforts. It is the “pursuit of happiness” pointed out so clearly in our Declaration of Independence. Again, this goes against the Communist diatribe Ellison is promoting.
The Muslim Democrat made sure to point out that Freddie Gray, along with Michael Brown, came from neighborhoods with high unemployment.
Ellison stated the answer to all of this was simple.
“You’ve got to make an investment, and our society has to decide, are we going to pay the police and prisons to keep the poor out of control, or we’re going to invest to include everybody in this economy?
…
“It starts with one, investing in the infrastructure. Investing in the educational opportunity there, raising minimum wage, making sure people can go to the doctor. I mean, we are – there is a big fight all across the country over minimum wage.”
When one hears the term “infrastructure,” most immediately think of roadways, bridges, dams, railroads, etc., which are in pretty poor shape in this nation. Investing in the infrastructure is a great idea as it is the means which provide Americans with goods. However, Ellison is not talking about the physical infrastructure, but the “social” infrastructure.
Ellison went on to talk about McDonald’s CEO making $9,000 an hour and not wanting to pay employees $15 an hour minimum wage. He identified paying only $7 or $8 an hour for working at a fast food restaurant while the CEO made $9,000 an hour as the heart of the problem. Of course, he had to point out the housing problem in the neighborhood where Freddie Gray lived. Ellison claimed Gray lived in a house with “excessive lead paint,” describing that as a hallmark of poverty. He stated that like thousands of kids in Baltimore and across the US, Gray had ingested it.
Ellison’s comments on “educational opportunity” almost makes one believe there are no government-run, free schools, aka indoctrination centers, nor is there a federal agency known as the Department of Education that has hijacked educational curriculum. Government schools are supported by taxpayer funds. Therefore, investment in lower education is already there. As far as any higher education is concerned, it is up to the individual to secure further education or training which means they would pay for that themselves – not be taxpayer funded. However, it would not be surprising if the government wanted to take control of “higher institutes of learning” just as they did the health care insurance agency.
Where is Ellison getting the information that people cannot go to the doctor? Are there places where certain people are being barred from going to see a physician? Everyone can go to a physician of their choosing at any time as long as they pay for the visit. Having access to a physician can be problematic in extremely rural areas. However, knowing the Communist mentality, this Muslim Democrat Communist is not referring to that situation. Ellison really means to say, “People are not getting free doctor visits.”
The fight over minimum wage and its effects – higher costs of items, layoffs, etc. – has been discussed over and over. Minimum wage jobs were never intended for individuals to use as permanent means of income. They were a stepping stone to other means of wage-earning or higher institutes of learning.
Naturally, Gray ingesting lead paint resulted in all of his problems. Can you even get lead paint? Wasn’t all lead paint to be removed in housing years ago? And why are parents letting their children lick and chew on the window sill? There are teething rings. If you can’t afford one, a cube of ice wrapped in a small washcloth works well.
Ellison claimed there were many in Gray’s neighborhood who “really want to work, who have talents, who want to make a life for themselves and their children.” Actually, that should be every citizen’s goal – work to make a life for the Lord, yourself and family. If these individuals had been working to make a life for the Lord, they would not have been on the streets committing crimes.
Rep. Ellison’s point was that no one has the “right” to make money in proportion to their efforts or as he put it, “Can we stop saying that I’ve got to make $9,000 an hour?” According to Ellison, individuals considered wealthy should not have tax cuts, get a break on estate taxes or have the money to re-invest into their own adventures. Instead, that money should be “shared” with others and the neighborhood. He claimed people in these neighborhoods were “dehumanized” by the media resulting in Americans’ “lack of compassion” for their plight. Ellison stated that we all “need to care about” those individuals in America’s cities who are struggling to “make a life for themselves.”
It’s the old “wealth is a zero-sum game” rhetoric. Funny, Ellison sure is enjoying the high life there in Congress. He, along with his cronies, should set the example and refuse part of their over $100,000 a year paycheck. Why should anyone in Congress receive that much pay for “serving” the public? According to them, it’s justified because they have tremendous responsibilities, yadda, yadda, yadda. The McDonald’s CEO, evidently, has little responsibilities, as well as others who have worked hard, taken tremendous risks and invested heavily in themselves to earn a good wage.
Only in corrupt government does someone else becoming wealthy make others poor. It’s called “crony capitalism” – the government destroys industries and transfers wealth to their friends, their friends’ corporations and themselves. Another way to look at it is “Communism at its best” or the normal day to day operation in the District of Corruption.
It’s difficult to have sympathy for those groups who riot, loot, pillage and vandalize businesses and property that isn’t theirs. They are committing crimes, which is not protected under the “freedom of assembly” clause in the First Amendment, in response to some perceived wrong or injustice. These individuals have a choice; they made the wrong one. Ellison doesn’t grasp the concept of “personal responsibility” at all.
As far as viewing these individuals in a more “human” light, it would be a lot easier if they weren’t running around the streets acting like animals. My grandmother used to say, “If you’re going to act like a heathen, you’ll be treated like a heathen. Have some self-respect.” Baltimore “smack down” mom appears to agree with that.
Ellison, the opportunist that he is, cares not one iota about anyone or anything except advancing the Communist/Muslim agenda. It’s evident in his words. The problem is the number of people who will buy into it and push it. Then, when they get it, they will not be happy and wonder what the heck happened. Unfortunately, it will be too late. They will be slaving away for near-starvation rations. One only has to look at the former Soviet Union or the current North Korea regime to see it.
http://sonsoflibertymedia.com/2015/05/muslim-congressman-doesnt-let-baltimore-crisis-go-to-waste-advances-marxist-agenda/
—-
Related
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/71623
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/71603
http://www.infowars.com/source-baltimore-police-officers-want-to-oust-the-mayor-video/
Tagged: abortion, al-Qaida, “Muslim Mafia, benghazi, Caliphate, Chemical Weapons, Christian, collapse of America, Constitution, dictator, Ebola, foreclosure, Hamas, immigration, IRS, Islam, Islamist, Israel, jihad, Muslim Brotherhood, Nazi, NSA, Obama, obamacare, radical Islam, rights, Second Amendment, Syria, Tea Party, Tyrannical Government, voter fraud, White House