April 23, 2026

Publisher Bill Collier

election-2014Editorial By Bill Collier-  GOP takeover of the US Senate could have interesting consequences, not so much in bills that will be passed as in the degree of pushback and resistance the President will receive regarding his massive use of executive actions, especially through the policies enacted by unelected regulators.

The EPA will certainly come under scrutiny as its regulatory regimen is seen as illegal on the part of many Republicans. One can expect joint House and Senate Hearings, and investigations, on this very subject. The EPA has been implementing, through the broadest possible interpretation of its regulatory powers (ceded to it by the Congress over the years), a cap and trade regimen aimed at dramatically reducing the coal industry and limited the use of fossil fuels, even at the cost of a loss of hundreds of thousands of good paying jobs and the precipitous increase in energy costs. This very agenda has been voted on in Congress and was rejected by lawmakers. It is also rejected by most voters.

But this is not the only area of concern. Lawmakers will have more clout to investigate Benghazi, the IRS, and the Justice Department’s actions regarding Fast and Furious and its attempts to silence the media by investigating and spying on reporters.

Beyond investigations and regulatory oversight, it will be impossible for the President to continue to determine spending largely without Congressional oversight through the use of “continuing resolutions” which have essentially skirted the Constitutional requirement for an actual BUDGET to be originated in the House and confirmed in the Senate. The President and the GOP will have to work out actual budgets as it is certain that the GOP will not tolerate one more year without an actual budget.

Many votes which were held off by Harry Reid, the now former Majority Leader, to shield Democrats from taking tough stands will be pushed with a vengeance.

What is more, it is possible the rule changes imposed by Reid, which effectively blocked man of the maneuvers formerly open to a minority, will remain unchanged, at least for now. If indeed the GOP leadership roll back those rules, to their own disadvantage, one can be sure their base will be angry. The media will give them no point for doing so, and their opponents will not hesitate to use the relaxed rules to gum up the works as much as possible.

In effect, then, those rule changes which many see as making the Senate far less collegial and deliberative than it used to be, could become permanent, leading to a further erosion of the public’s trust and confidence in their government.

This will be especially problematic for any Obama appointees, including whoever might replace Attorney General Eric Holder. With the current rule changes, Republicans will be able to quickly vote down nominees and avoid long, drawn our hearings and maneuvers by the other side to delay the vote while they and their media allies beat up on the GOP.

No doubt the establishment media, who are largely an adjunct of the Democratic Party machine in the eyes of most conservatives, will extol the virtue of the “rights of the minority party” and the need for “bipartisanship”, which, in practice, amounts to giving the Democrats everything they want while giving the GOP and its base nothing they want. Indeed, the media who place their own liberal bias first and foremost have aided in polarizing America because, like partisan Democrats, they present “fairness” as giving only one side a voice and giving only one side what it wants.

Of course, conservative media, especially blogs, radio talk shows, and Fox News, will be equally uncompromising and will call any compromise with Democrats a surrender. They will snipe at any GOP leader who considers immigration reform or modifying but not repealing the Affordable Healthcare Act, and they will in general add to the polarization. Most conservative media sources admit that they are conservative but do little to balance their coverage or go beyond watchdog news and opinion piece writing, and both their language and their coverage serve only conservative readers or viewers.

The difference is that many of these conservative outlets, including pundits on Fox News, disclose their own agenda while leftists in the media refuse to disclose their bias, or even admit to it. The practice of disclosing one’s ideological or party bias on the part of media is not accepted among most of the establishment media.

Between overtly biased partisan pundits and biased reporters who refuse to admit their bias, let alone disclose what it is, politicians face a media environment dominated on both sides by the ends of the political spectrum and will be clobbered unless they throw red meat at their base.

While the GOP are making many noises about cooperation and working with the President, voters in the middle are especially favorable toward this view, they must contend with the perception among many rank and file members that the Democrats (and their media allies) will demonize them unless they abjectly surrender and their own base (whom, feeling alienated, did not support their 2012 Presidential nominee) be further alienated if they perceive that the GOP is giving in too much. Likewise, however, the establishment media and the Democrat base are likely to pressure the President and his Party to “tow the line” and even to resort to more executive actions rather than giving in to the GOP.

In short, we will see real budget battles, more investigations and hearings, much more pushback on executive and regulatory actions not popular with the GOP, and probably more polarization fueled in part by partisan media on both sides which, far from being objective and counseling compromise, will attack anyone on “their side” who dares to go down that road.

October 22, 2014- OPINION AND ANALYSIS provided By William R Collier Jr- What began as reports of a gunman leaping from a car and shooting two guards at the Canadian War Memorial in Ottawa has become a story of multiple attackers disrupting life in the nation’s capital. But police revealed late that night that this was, “a lone wolf act of terror.”

Canada was under attack as police and paramilitary, along with armored vehicles, ranged the streets looking for “multiple shooters.” A shooter described as having long hair and carrying a long gun, exited a vehicle and “slowly but deliberately” approached a soldier at the War Memorial, a ceremonial guard, shooting him in the chest. The attacker then ran some 200 yards (past his car) to the “center block” of the Parliament building, which was filled because today is a caucus day. During caucus days, almost all Members of Parliament (MP’s) are present for caucus meetings of various sorts.

The shootings were first reported at 9:52 AM. The ceremonial guard was taken to the hospital where he would later succumb to his wounds, a terrible symbolic blow aimed at the heart of Canada’s storied martial past, and her honor, which the War Memorial represents. The guard who was killed was Cpl. Nathan Cirillo, reserve soldier from Hamilton, according to reports.

After shooting the soldier, the attacker is reported to have “raised his gun in triumph over his head.”

Craig Scott from Toronto, a Canadian MP, credited Kevin Vickers, Sergeant At Arms, with saving many lives by his quick action outside an MP Caucus Room where he killed the attacker- the attacker’s aim was to gain entrance into Caucus Room where the cabinet along with the Prime Minister Harper were meeting in caucus. With that in mind, the aim of the attack has clearly not been achieved, the goal would have been to kill the Prime Minister and as many cabinet members as possible. Vickers was a former member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

The quick action of a man on scene with a gun gives further credence to the notion that disarming large public spaces does not make them safer- if this had been a university no armed person would have barred access to that room.

The dead attacker’s name is Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, 32. He is believed to be Canadian born and was a recent convert to Islam. He had been banned from traveling abroad and it was believed he wished to join ISIS in Syria and Iraq. ISIS had been calling for lone wolf operations, which are impossible to detect because they involve no planning or communicating among multiple actors.

Right after the shooting, police were seen moving door to door along Spark street, an historic roadway that extends from Parliament Hill, looking for possible suspects. Residents were told to close and lock doors, barricade themselves, and cover windows and “do not open your door under any circumstances.” This was lifted at around 1:30 PM and people were released to go home in a deliberate process.

All the bridges across the Ottawa River which lead to the province of Quebec have been closed.

This comes just two days after a Muslim extremist ran over two Canadian soldiers in Quebec, killing one, which is one of the reasons fingers had already been pointed at Salafist radicals in Canada who hide among the peaceful, and unwitting, Muslim population. Concerns of an un-merited backlash against Muslims in general have also been raised.

As these accusations were lobbed and concerns raised, Police were urging Canadians in the capital not to post pictures of soldiers or police which might reveal locations and tactics. People are being told to “get off the streets into shelter.”

Coincident with the attacks is that on the same day Canada’s Parliament was expected to consider, and pass, tough new anti-terrorism measures.

Police had confirmed that there were multiple locations where shots were fired but late that same night they retracted the confirmation. There were reported shootings at the War Memorial, inside Parliament, at a local mall (Rideau Centre Mall), and at a hotel. The attacker was killed in the abrupt and short-duration fighting. It is now confirmed that this is related to Salafist Jihad.

The objective of terrorism is to achieve one of two aims: to cause the government to over-react and alien the target population which leads to new recruits for the terrorist group, or to show the ineptness of government which leads to public fears and giving in to terrorist demands. The ability of a government to target the enemy without clamping down harshly on a broader audience is seen as crucial in responding to such acts. Erring too much in either giving in to public outrage which is often directed at a broader audience or giving in to political correctness and appearing to be weak and indecisive are the two dangers which governments must avoid.

Only the day before, at a Canadian Senate hearing, officials warned that a “disrproportionate” number of “radicalized Islamists” have made there way too Canada and through Canada and that “resources to track and stop them” are stretched “too thin” and that Canadian agencies have been forced to make “hard decisions” about who to track. What was recommended was a “change in attitude” toward Canada’s immigration policy, particularly with regards to Muslims, and its policies towards its immigrant Muslim population.

During his speach, Prime Minister Stephen Harper declared this to be an act of terror and vowed that terrorists would have “no place to hide.” This is much different from how his American counterpart responded to the lone wolf operation of a Salafo-Jihadist in Fort Hood who killed a number of American service members. President Obama called that act “workplace violence”, but Harper called this act “a brutal and violent act of terror.”

The juxtaposition between the two men and their reactions was not lost on opposition groups in America who used it to paint their nation’s President as indecisive, weak, and bumbling. President Obama has yet to identify this as an act of terror, let alone Islamic terror. Fresh questions about the Administration’s categorization of the 2009 lone wolf act of terror in Fort Hood as “workplace violence” are inevitable.

Canada is now considering its response as the city of Toronto currently has a greater Muslim population than any city in North America. Some are calling for a broad-brush rethink of Canada’s relationship with Muslim immigrants and the Muslim community in general. Others argue that allowing this act of terror to cause such an “over-reaction” will lead to yet more radicalization. The Prime Minister is expected to steer a middle road between the two positions.

Elites scramble- in England the elite are scrambling. The “Better Together” campaign has enlisted the help of ex-PM Gordon Brown who rolled out a series of, well, desperate promises to give Scotland everything short of independence if they vote no on September 18th.

Here’s the problem- the offer only reminds the Scots of how for many decades all their appeals to Westminster to give Home Rule to Holyrood within the Union have been rebuffed. Indeed, all throughout the period when the Better Together campaign seemed to be on top in the polls, no such promises were forthcoming. Better Together’s appeal appears to be negative. It amounted to threats that the Scots would lose the Pound and a whole rash of bad consequences, some of which, like the Pound, would be punitive acts by an angry England. This was hardly the way to woo voters.

Throughout Scotland’s schools, being for Independence is “cool”, and nobody wants to be seen with a “NO” sticker or button. In a vote which, astonishingly, gives the vote to anyone 16 years and older, this is far more significant than pollsters and pundits might even now understand. In the streets, the YES crowd are fond of pelting eggs and hurling insults at the NO crowd, and nobody seems interested in stopping this. Indeed, it must be noted, the Scottish government is fully behind the YES vote and, surprisingly ignored by pollsters, these people have already won their party’s vote.

Now Westminster is all about “devolution”. This will not work. It is clumsy, cloying even, and only reminds the Scots that they can have all the home rule they want by voting YES rather than waiting for Gordon Brown to roll out a “plan for devolution” and Home Rule “by the end of November.” If this can happen so quickly, why wasn’t it proposed and promoted last year and why wasn’t it touted as a reason to stay in the Union?

Were I a Scot I’d vote for the Union, and I can think of many reasons why this is desirable. Scotland are a great people and a vital part of the UK. By going it alone they renounce that inheritance, which is the British identity, a British identity and way of life many Scots fought and died for. Consider World War Two, consider also the future. One does not have to give up being Scottish in order to be British, but one loses the British identity and heritage by a rash independence that will divide Great Britain and undermine the existence of Britain itself.

Scotland is better within the Union, it has earned a respectable inheritance within Britain, its sons and daughters have made that flag their own. The YES campaign are seeking to sunder a beneficial Union for transient political aims, they essentially want a free hand to move further down the road to socialism, they are putting their Party and their ideology, which tomorrow may be forgotten, ahead of a 300 plus year Union that has quite literally made their people wealthy and powerful.

But, having said all that, it’s far too late in the game for the Better Together crowd to come up with a positive message or to overcome the popularity of Independence. Who wants to say “no” to anyone these days? And therein is the problem. The Better Together crowd, so demonstrably “establishment”, occupied the “no” space, not the “yes” space. It should have been “choose Union of Independence” and the Union crowd should have defined “Independence” as “secession” for party political reasons.

The election results are too close to call. Conservatives, loyalists to England who live in Scotland, and the monied classes will all vote for the Union. The socialists, many of the young, and the working class will vote for independence. But the choice is not patriotic: the NO crowd are not feeling sentimental to Britain, they are feeling frightened about the prospect of living in a socialist state; the YES crowd are not re-enacting “Braveheart” at the ballot box with a deep love for Scotland, they’re saying yes to hand-outs and socialist utopianism.

Desperate? A private company, The Nicholas Group, has built and is donating this unlikely looking armored cars for paratroopers to use in "the ATO".
Desperate? A private company, The Nicholas Group, has built and is donating a fleet of these unlikely looking armored cars for paratroopers to use in “the ATO”. Photo- Ukrainian Min. Def.

While this new war is undeclared and while the invasion of the eastern Ukraine by 20,000 or so Russian troops has been tentative, this is in fact a war between Russia and the Ukraine. Much could be said about the history behind this conflict, how the Russian nation had its start in the Ukraine, how the Russians do not trust, or fear, the West, and how the Ukrainian nation identity has itself been rather weak in the past. Indeed, a valid question has been- “what is the cultural difference between the Ukraine and Russia?”

But national identity is an evolving thing and we are witnessing the emergence of a new and more vital Ukrainian national identity, spurred on by the current conflict. The mixing of the Russian ethnic population and the Ukrainian ethnic population means that the separation process could be ugly, pitting husbands and wives against each other.

Putting all that aside, the current war is real and it is threatening to escalate dramatically. Wars do not follow logic, they are not based on what we, sitting at home in our living rooms, might think is reasonable and logical. They often happen quite unintentionally, escalating each step of the way insensibly, as if the conflict itself has a mind of its own. Indeed, conditions on the ground in the eastern Ukraine are being set as much by unofficial pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian militias acting without regard for any strategic big picture or even for parochial interests as they are by the primary actors, Kiev and Moscow.

On the ground Russian forces are moving to occupy lands currently held by their proxy army, the pro-Russian militias, and the Ukrainian army is withdrawing from what it deemed an “anti-terror operation” zone into a more defensive and conventional military stance. One major critique has been that the Ukrainian government has failed to get heavy weapons, such as tanks and artillery, into the front lines, but this was owing to the nature of the operation- it was an operation aimed at “rebel” militias, not a conventional military foe. The real criticism would be that the Ukrainian high command failed early on to grasp the true nature of their enemy.

The Russians could send in over 100.000 well armed troops, that they are only sending in 20,000 so far indicates that Moscow has not yet mad a total commitment to total war, or it indicated their lack of regard for Ukrainian military resistance. An emerging problem for the Russians is that the family of those Russian soldiers sent into combat while their leaders deny that a military operation is underway are beginning to react negatively.

Currently, Ukrainian forces are preparing a conventional defense of Mariupol, a port that sits on the way between the Russian border on the south eastern Ukraine coast and the Crimea. Ukrainian forces are making a strategic withdrawal to more defensible lines and efforts appear to be underway to move armored brigades and divisions to the east but, evidently, not right up to the forward areas.

A recent photograph taken by Reuters News revealed Ukrainian troops training with what appear to be either Swedish or German man-portable anti-tank missiles which we believe have been supplied secretly by the Poles who have a much tougher stance on how to deal with Russia and who are calling for NATO to arm the Ukrainians. Currently, NATO and the US refuse to provide combat arms and are focusing only on “non-lethal aid” including rations and medical supplies. Such missiles and other crew served weapons, like mortars and automatic grenade launchers, can be combat equalizers and are relatively simple to learn to operate as compared to tanks or self-propelled artillery.

The “wild card” in this war will remain the degree to which the Ukrainians have maintained their stockpile of ex-Soviet weapons, including tanks and aircraft, which, while outmoded by Western standards, could stand up to modern Russian weapons on the battlefield. Additionally, it is unknown whether true changes in Ukrainian training, which had been poor, have been implemented. The Ukrainian Ministry of Defense has claimed that they have made substantial improvements to their training programs.

The next major battle which will set the tone for the next stage of this still undeclared war will be the battle  of Mariupol. If the Russians roll through and create a land-bridge to the Crimea, Putin may indeed attempt to roll into Kiev within two weeks as he threatened European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso recently. 

Commentary- William Collier – The debate on Scottish Independence (held on August 25, 2014) did not go well for the British faction. The argument against Independence stood, and perhaps fell, on a threat that an independent Scotland would lose the British Pound Sterling and would not be able to stand up an alternative.

Telling the Scotts “we don’t want independence or the British Exchequer will squeeze us” is not really a “rallying call.” The pro British side should have pushed the values of Scotland within the union in a positive way, not making threats of the UK punishing Scotland its centerpiece.

The Scotts could certainly make the UK suffer in return, consider the North Sea oil and the very important UK naval bases, including a specialized based for British nuclear subs, located in Scotland. Moreover, independent or not, Scotland remaining in a currency union would be better for both sides. Interestingly, while the pro Independence guy (Salmond) won the debate with the best zingers, he really failed to make these points. It may be, however, that he is thinking that if the vote goes his way it would be impolitic to make such brazen overt threats against the UK as a negotiating tactic.

Polls allege the pro Union side gets 51% of the vote while the pro Independence side gets 38%: but anyone over 16 can vote and turnout models have no clue which demographics will, well, turn out! In social media and, according to many reports I have read, the pro Independence narrative is the “cool” thing for young people. “Cool” is that undefinable factor that makes hash of the pollster’s best predictions.

I would predict…the unpredictable. This vote will be a surprise. But if the vote against independence is not a strong majority, 8% or more, the issue is not over, no matter what anyone else says. A close vote for independence will be followed with a rise in support, the “coolness” factor will take over. What would be troubling for all is a vote in which the margin is less than 2% and there is doubt about the veracity of the results.

The Independence crowd has won this debate, but will they win the vote?

Ukrainian and Russian Forces In Battle

russian bmp-1

WORLD NEWS- William Collier- In a major escalation of fighting, Ukrainian forces attacked a convoy of 12 armored Russian vehicles, among which were mostly Russian BMP Infantry Combat Vehicles with 100mm canons. The Ukrainian Ministry of Defense claims to have used artillery to “destroy a major part” of this armed convoy.

The Russians have been demanding the right to send in an aid convoy which many believe is actually filled with arms and munitions, not food, to help the Russian insurgents who have infiltrated into the Eastern Ukraine. The entire “uprising” against the Ukrainian government is peopled at the top by Russians, not Ukrainians, and many of the fighters are actually Russian military in disguise, according to many open press sources in the region.

The Ukrainian government has warned Russia that crossing the border would be seen as an act war. Now the European Union has weighed in, demanding that the Russians stop sending arms and remove all personnel from the Ukraine.

Britain’s Foreign Secretary, Phillip Hammond, scolded the Russian Ambassador to the UK. He said that unless the Russians immediately remove all personnel and vehicles from Ukraine “the consequences will be very serious.”

We had originally assessed that Ukraine could indeed stand up to the Russians in unexpected ways owing to the fervor of its citizens and owing to rapid efforts to upgrade and re-organize their forces. The Ukrainians have removed and repaired equipment held in mothball, they may have received stocks of arms and equipment from Polish inventories (this is not yet confirmed), and they have added new units.  These new troops have been in training for months and are now reaching deployment stages. A Russo-Ukraine war would not be a walk-over for Moscow, only Moscow does not seem to believe that.

This attack on a Russian military convoy inside Ukrainian territory proves that the Ukrainians are serious about fighting against Russia if it comes to that. Ukrainian officials also confirmed that Russian shelling of Ukrainian positions from inside Russia is “ongoing”, and a counter artillery response to neutralize those attacks, including the possibility of shelling the Russians who are inside Russia, is not off the table.

Presently Ukrainian forces have the upper hand and, despite the fact the Russian military personnel with Russian hardware have been fighting them, the Ukrainians are surrounding the Russian/separatist forces and defeating them steadily.

This battle may point to the lack of fighting ability and prowess of the Russians compared to their Ukrainian counterparts or it may indicate that Russia has not sent in their best forces yet.

Stay tuned here for updates.

The Polish push to military independence can be seen

through the accelerated missile shield program.

The Patriot Missile System- the current Polish Missile Shield Deplyoment
The Patriot Missile System- the initial Polish Missile Shield Deployment

WORLD NEWS- Analysis- William Collier- After the inauguration of President Obama, the US withdrew plans to deploy a missile shield for Europe.  This in agreement with Russia. But the Poles, who were supposed to host key elements of the system, have since then proceeded with their plans to deploy a new anti-air and missile shield of their own.

Owing to a robust and growing economy, spurred on by a pro growth economic policy, the Poles have been investing billions in upgrading their military capability. Deployments overseas in support of NATO operations have given their forces experience and have shown the areas of lack. Overall, it is believed the Poles are investing $5 billion in just the anti-missile element new system, within a total increased outlay of $40 billion for their planned rapid upgrading of their military.   Currently, the poles have a fixed budget of just under 2% of their gross domestic product for their military. This may be increased shortly as the Poles seem convinced that neither the US nor other NATO allies see the threat of Russian expansionism as clearly as they believe they do.

The final phases of their bidding process for providers of their components of a three-tiered anti-air and anti-missile system are being completed, but the process is now being sped up.  Funding is increasing beyond the $5 billion slated for this part of the system. The final two contenders for this project include a consortium of Thales Group, MBDA Missile Systems and the Raytheon Company (Raytheon makes the Patriot system). The total system, which includes missile defense (tier 3), national air defense (tier 2) and local air defense (tier 1) will cost around $13 billion. The Tier 2 system will be capable of shooting down aircraft and cruise missiles, a major new capability, operating 12 batteries. A top competitor is Raytheon’s NASAMS II, a missile system developed with Norway’s Kongsberg Defense. NASAMS stands for “Norwegian Advanced Surface to Air Missile System”. NASAMS I was first deployed in 1998, making this a proven system.

image

Back in March of 2014, Jacek Sonta, spokesman for the Polish Ministry of Defense, told Reuters, “The issues related with Poland’s air defense will be accelerated. Poland plans to choose the best offer for its missile defense in the next few weeks.” This was pushed despite pressure from Washington and Berlin to “not increase tensions”, which they believe Poland’s sped up process would do. The Poles rejected this out of hand citing their right to self-defense and have proceeded rapidly.

Action was spurred on as the Russians began what the Poles see as an expansionist policy, beginning with Russia’s war on Georgia and now with Russian war on the Ukraine. While the Poles are calling for more forward deployment of NATO forces in the former Warsaw Pact countries and the Baltic, Germany and France have resisted such proposals. And so the Poles have come to the conclusion that they must rapidly and dramatically invest in improving their own military.

This requires the almost wholesale replacement of Soviet era equipment and Russian technology in general.

Their missile shield will be as capable as what the Americans would have deployed in Poland, only it will be under total Polish control. Because NATO is not cooperating directly, the new system will also be out of NATO jurisdiction. It is possible that some NATO partners, especially Germany and Italy, will share resources for joint development as those two nations also seek their own missile defense shields.

The significance of all of this is that, if deployed, these systems would actually dramatically reduce the threat of a nuclear war and they would do so without the need for American protection. By withdrawing from missile defense in Europe, the US has ensured a decline in its own influence in Europe. As Poland and other NATO nations increase their defense budgets and capabilities, even while the US military is shrinking in size and investment, it is probable that within 10 to 20 years there will be no real need for American guarantees of security by European nations.

The Polish effort to deploy their own missile shield is serious, well-funded, multi-tiered, and robust. While initial deployment was slated for 2018, plans are under way to accelerate that “as quickly as possible.” The complete system was not slated to be finished until 2022, but this has also been accelerated dramatically.

This will likely mean the use of a modified Patriot system for their first stage of deployment. What is envisioned is a system with better radar and cheaper missiles (a French missile is envisioned). As both the core system and the new components are proven and available “off the shelf”, the Poles could deploy their first batteries for missile defense “within 18 months”, although some want to move even faster than that.

As one Polish officer noted, “every step the Russians take towards the Ukraine only pushes us to speed up the process of building up our forces.” This could become a serious national effort that would transform Poland into a major regional power virtually overnight.

The Ferguson Riots- An American Turning Point?

While politicians and activists from both sides of the political spectrum scramble to benefit from Ferguson, we wonder if Ferguson might be a turning point in American history, when people reject the limousine leadership of the left and the right and start leading themselves.

OPINION- William Collier- There is rioting, police brutality, and racial hate menacing the town of Ferguson, MO as a result of the fatal police shooting of 18 year old Michael Brown.

Michael Brown
Michael Brown (Social Media screen grab)

Events in Ferguson, Missouri, which is in St. Louis County, have taken a course which alarms many citizens across the political spectrum.

Meanwhile, leaders in Ferguson are calling for people like Al Sharpton to remove themselves from a local problem.  They accuse Al Sharpton of inciting a near-riot when he proclaimed that the incident in Ferguson involving a young black man being shot to death by police is ‘bearing witnesses for all of America’, specifically America’s race relations.

According to Sharpton, the Band-Aid has been ripped off, and all of America is seeing that racial hatred is alive and well. The accusations are seen as doing more harm than good, inciting militant activists to violent actions, such as can be seen in Ferguson right now.

image
PHOTO- Facebook MEME circulating allegedly shows another side of Michael Brown. We have not confirmed that this IS Michael Brown FACEBOOK SCREEN GRAB

Regardless of the act that led up to the unstable situation in Ferguson, the reaction by the local police has been dramatic and militaristic.  The police deployed were wearing military-style clothing.  They were armed with heavy weapons and drove armored vehicles.  They were not facing insurgents, but unarmed protesters.

This overt display of military power on American streets by a local police department has come under scrutiny not just from the protesters, but even from the members of the community who do not support the protesters.

image
An armored vehicle with a fully automatic weapon manned and ready…against unarmed protesters. PHOTO Provided by ANONYMOUS Twitter user

The incident that triggered the riots and unrest was the shooting of an 18 year old unarmed man, Michael Brown. Michael Brown had a long criminal background before the incident, so the police might well have been aware of who he was.  According to the police version of the incident, Brown was assaulting an officer.  There was a struggle for the officer’s gun which led to the 7 shots that killed Brown.

A friend of Brown, who is also accused of participating in the assault, claims Brown was attacked for no reason by the police.  The friend claims Brown was shot while trying to raise his hands and surrender.

Police supporters claim this is a cut and dry case.  They note that the officer was injured in the altercation and that both Brown and his friend have a criminal background (as I noted earlier), including assault (this has been confirmed in the case of Brown, but not in the case of his friend).

Michael Brown supporters say this is a case of police brutality and, now, as charged by Sharpton, racism. In fact, President Obama called Michael Brown’s family to offer condolences before any facts had emerged about the actual nature of the shooting.   Obama’s overture to the family is seen by the police supporters to reinforce the narrative that this is about racial hate, not an altercation that went wrong.

ferguson riots al sharpton
Scereen Grab- Fox News covered Al Sharpton’s inflammatory remarks which many local leaders wish he would not have uttered.

But both sides in that debate have problems to contend with.

For the police supporters, there are real and proven incidents of police brutality against members of the community of Ferguson during this unrest.  There have even been reporters that have been roughed up, arrested and let go without any paperwork filed, and a number of other documented ‘irregularities’ by this police department.  These incidents cannot be brushed aside, and they only serve to offer evidence of a police department gone rogue, one that could possibly have done what Brown’s friend alleges they have done.

Two reporters were arrested, one roughed up, at a local McDonald’s when they were clearly not breaking any laws and, though they were released, no paperwork was filed. Another reporter was shot point blank with a rubber bullet. Additionally, I myself watched a live feed as police, in military gear, with armored vehicles, pushed a crowd of protesters INTO an otherwise quiet and peaceful neighborhood.

The crowd being pressed by the police fled into the neighborhood, running between homes, often being chased by police, bringing chaos to a neighborhood that was not involved in the rioting. The police then proceeded to turn their tear gas and rubber bullets on the people in this neighborhood who had stepped outside to see what was causing all the disturbances on their front lawns and back yards.

The notion that this same police force, the local police force in Ferguson and the St Louis County Sheriff’s Department, never uses excessive force cannot be easily discounted after what has transpired.

For the supporters of Michael Brown, the problem is that the only witness to claim this was police brutality may himself have been involved in the alleged attack on the police officer and, if reports are true (which we have not confirmed), he is himself a criminal.

He certainly has the tattoos that are associated with gangs, say those who disbelieve his story, which we have not confirmed.  It had been alleged that the deceased man, 18 year old Michael Brown, had a criminal record already, including burglary and assault. Man posts with links to court records went viral. What is disconcerting about these allegation was that his juvenile record is closed and he is only 18- this means his list of crimes SINCE he turned 18 would be fairly lengthy. His rap sheet is cited as reason to believe the police officer’s version of the events.  We have learned that possibly 4 other witnesses have also come forward with similar stories. We have SINCE CONFIRMED- Michael Brown had NO CRIMINAL RECORD and no charges were pending against him.

The shooting took place on August 9, a Saturday, at around noon. After the shooting, efforts to organize protests and reprisals went viral on social media, and by Monday the riots had become severe, resulting in businesses being looted,  One local convenience store was not only looted, it was also burned down.

The rioters were further inflamed by the vitriolic and black supremacist rhetoric of the New Black Panther Party, as well as by Al Sharpton, both of whom flew in from out of state to ‘lead’ the protesters’.

The violence-inciting rhetoric was legitimized, police supporters argue, when US Attorney General Eric Holder promised to get involved, as well as by President Obama’s rush to call to offer condolences to Michael Brown’s family before getting the facts of what actually occurred.

But many local citizens and leaders, even those who believe this was police brutality, have accused the politicians and the national figures from outside of making things worse.

I saw one woman on live video, a black woman who had come out of her home. She was outraged at how the violence was encouraged by people from outside the community. She noted that while her taxes were up and schools were failing, these local politicians continue to ask for the “black vote” but do nothing for the black community.  The only time political leaders, local or national, show up in a black community is during times like this, in their helicopters and Lear jets, making matter worse for all concerned. She kept saying “they win, they win”.  When asked who “they” were, she replied, “them politicians!”

She did not appear to sympathize with police, who she saw come through her quiet neighborhood bullying anyone who was seen outside, even homeowners who were concerned about the ruckus.  But she did not endorse the rioting, which she blamed on “people from outside the community coming to stir things up and get their 15 minutes of fame!”

Whatever the truth is now may only matter in the legal sense of the word.  The question from the outside looking in is this, who benefits?

There seem to be two opposing views on this:

The first view is from the leadership on the right.  They believe that whether the killing was justified or not, leftist agitators saw an opportunity to reinforce the demonizing narrative of the white man attacking the black man.  It is the same tactic used by the mullahs of Iran who wish to deflect blame for their own failures away from themselves by attacking the great Satan, America.

In the case of the trusted leftist voting bloc of African Americans, the deflection is away from the failures of democratically controlled governments to deliver prosperity and security to the ghettos of America.  If the black community focuses on hating white people, they won’t pay attention to the failure of government, run by Democrats, to give them a good education, offer them a safe place to live and a path to prosperity.

The countervailing view from the leadership of the left is that the police are attempting to agitate the black community in order to create a similar bogeyman, for different voting bloc, this one for republicans, white America.  The narrative goes something like this; The black mob is being whipped up to a frenzy by republican-leaning agitators to reinforce the notion that white America should fear violent black America and come back to the republican party to check the growing power of the black-supported left.

As outlandish as these theories sound, they have more than a few adherents, and this is the cause of no small amount of division between Americans. But the police reaction may have a rather interesting effect not foreseen by anyone- people from the left and right, people who are of all races, and people who disagree about the original incident, all seem to agree that what the police in Ferguson are doing to protesters and what outside leaders are doing to stir the pot are equally awful and illegitimate in a free and democratic society of equals.

One sees leftwing and rightwing blogs, as well as social media commentary all saying the same thing- the spectacle of a military-styled police force is detestable on the streets of ANY American neighborhood.  It could be that if there are true agitators on the left and the right, neither side will get what they want, greater control over the voting power of a bloc of people.   It could be, at the end of the day, when the dust has settled on Ferguson, that the real winners might be the Americans, of all ethnicities and beliefs, who decide to no longer be led by the helicopter-swooping, Lear-jet parking leaders.  Rather, they will choose to lead themselves where they are, neighborhood by neighborhood, block by block, town by town, to build pathways to prosperity, security, and liberty.

In Ferguson, it appears, there are no heroes.  One can only hope that from such flames, a new resolve is forged in America, to build, where you are, with those who will build with you, what most of us really want, across all divides, the freedom to prosper and pass along to our children a better world than the one we were given.

Let us hope at the end of the day, be they Republicans or Democrats, that we do not say the only winners from Ferguson were ‘them politicians’’.

The Obama Bush- Perfect symbol of the reality today?
The Obama Bush- Perfect symbol of the reality today?

 

 

 

Robin Williams Dead- Possible Suicide

robin williams suicide

 

Mr. Bill Collier- Fans of comedian and actor Robin Williams were shocked to learn of the actor’s death of suspected suicide by asphyxia.

The actor has starred in countless movies but his big break came portraying that lovable alien “Mork” on the Mork and Mindy Show. Williams battled “severe depression of late” according to his wife and yet was often heard trying to encourage people to just be themselves and have a positive outlook. This role as the nation’s “encourager” was sealed during his appearance as “Patch Adams” in the movie of the same name.

In his latest project, “The Crazy Ones”, Williams played a man named Zach Cropper, a rather zany copywriter working for an ad agency which is run by Simon and his daughter, Sydney.

William’s passing was announced over major media who broke into normal programming to share the news.  The official press release follows:

August 11, 2014, at approximately 11:55 a.m, Marin County Communications received a 9-1-1 telephone call reporting a male adult had been located unconscious and not breathing inside his residence in unincorporated Tiburon, CA. The Sheriff’s Office, as well as the Tiburon Fire Department and Southern Marin Fire Protection District were dispatched to the incident with emergency personnel arriving on scene at12:00 pm. The male subject, pronounced deceased at 12:02 pm has been identified as Robin McLaurin Williams, a 63 year old resident of unincorporated Tiburon, CA.

An investigation into the cause, manner, and circumstances of the death is currently underway by the Investigations and Coroner Divisions of the Sheriff’s Office. Preliminary information developed during the investigation indicates Mr. Williams was last seen alive at his residence, where he resides with his wife, at approximately 10:00pm on August 10, 2014. Mr. Williams was located this morning shortly before the 9-1-1 call was placed to Marin County Communications. At this time, the Sheriff’s Office Coroner Division suspects the death to be a suicide due to asphyxia, but a comprehensive investigation must be completed before a final determination is made. A forensic examination is currently scheduled for August 12, 2014 with subsequent toxicology testing to be conducted.

We offer our condolences to and prayers for his family and friends as well as his fans.

Main

Back FREEDOM for only $4.95/month and help the Freedomist to fight the ongoing war on liberty and defeat the establishment's SHILL press!!

Are you enjoying our content? Help support our mission to reach every American with a message of freedom through virtue, liberty, and independence! Support our team of dedicated freedom builders for as little as $4.95/month! Back the Freedomist now! Click here