Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.

Fellowship of the Minds

by traildustfotm

April 30, 2015

Add the name, Peter Schweizer, to the death watch list

Andrew Breitbart, Joan Rivers, Loretta Fuddy, Michael Hastings, Ron Johnson, Vince Foster…

President Lucifer and the Clinton’s have some things in common. People who become inconvenient to them have a tendency to die.

---

The author of a book hammering Hillary Clinton says he now has full-time security

by COLIN CAMPBELL

The author of a controversial new book about Bill and Hillary Clinton said on Wednesday that he has arranged full-time security for himself.

Asked during a Bloomberg interview if he received any death threats over his controversial book, “Clinton Cash,” Peter Schweizer would only say he has “security.”

“I’ll just say we have security. And that security is not something that just came because we decided to have security. And we’ll just leave it at that,” he said.

Read more:

---

Clintons’ ‘Dead Pool‘

Click the link above to check out the incredibly long list of suspicious deaths connected to the Clinton’s. I’ve removed the list out of mercy to the readers, but if you have time to spare, this will shock you.

---

Obama’s ‘Dead Pool’

 

Click the link above to check out the incredibly long list of suspicious deaths connected to Obama. I’ve removed the list out of mercy to the readers, but if you have time to spare, this will shock you.

---

Conclusion: Peter Schweizer needs to pray Psalm 91 daily. 

After reading it, I’d suggest all day long.

THE END

######################

Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper, Patriot and Infidel.

They are no longer interested in killing, they have resulted is destroying oil refineries which one would think they would like to grab and hold thus adding to their oil stores that they can see to continue the funding of their operations.

The Islamic State with their money and oil holding have shown they can fight their enemies using drowns along with boots on the ground. 

For this we can say thank you once again to Obama for leaving the void with his preannounced departures of all U.S. Military forces from Iraq and Afghanistan, once again supporting his Muslim brothers.

The Threat Matrix

The Long War Journal

THE END

#########################

Conventional wisdom, meaning word of mouth and nothing more, Freddy Gray died at the hands of the Police.

According to the report by the medical examiner, Gray was standing up and fell against a bold on the van which would have severed his spine.

Of course this finding could be nullified potentially by the highest bidder. 

Thus the mayhem, looting and deaths allowed to go on by Baltimore’s Mayor, Stephanie Rawlings-Black could be just as culpable as the police if anyone is actually indicated  over this sad situation.

The wanton shootings and assassinations of the police can also be attributed to continual media distortions of riots in our inner cities.

Of course the democrats always have a solution, throw more of the taxpayers money at the situation, a concept that has never worked in the past.

THE END

Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.

Some time ago, an article was published predicting said outcome.

Very simply they are showing how to over take a country without firing a shot.

The Brits are such fools they are even wooing the Muslims for their vote.

Say goodbye to Freedom of Speech with other totalitarian ideas to follow.

On the other hand, if your wife is ugly you will be able to stuff her in a black trash bag.

We must demand U.S. Politicians never allow this to happen while emphasizing the need to rid the country of the like of Obama, his socialist, progressive, Marxist who would bring this about in the U.S. in a heart beat.

British Muslims — who voted overwhelmingly for Labour in the 2010 general election — could determine who will be the next prime minister.

The Clarion Project

By Soeren Kern

April 30, 2015

The leader of Britain’s Labour Party, Ed Miliband, has vowed, if he becomes the next prime minister in general elections on May 7, to outlaw “Islamophobia.”

The move — which one observer has called “utterly frightening” because of its implications for free speech in Britain — is part of an effort by Miliband to pander to Muslim voters in a race that he has described as “the tightest general election for a generation.”

With the ruling Conservatives and the opposition Labour running neck and neck in the polls just days before voters cast their ballots, British Muslims — who voted overwhelmingly for Labour in the 2010 general election — could indeed determine who will be the next prime minister.

In an interview with The Muslim News, Miliband said:

“We are going to make it [Islamophobia] an aggravated crime. We are going to make sure it is marked on people’s records with the police to make sure they root out Islamophobia as a hate crime.

“We are going to change the law on this so we make it absolutely clear of our abhorrence of hate crime and Islamophobia. It will be the first time that the police will record Islamophobic attacks right across the country.”

Miliband appears to be trying to reopen a long-running debate in Britain over so-called religious hatred. Between 2001 and 2005, the then-Labour government, led by Prime Minister Tony Blair, made two attempts (here and here) to amend Part 3 of the Public Order Act 1986, to extend existing provisions on incitement to racial hatred to cover incitement to religious hatred.

Those efforts ran into opposition from critics who said the measures were too far-reaching and threatened the freedom of speech. At the time, critics argued that the scope of the Labour government’s definition of “religious hatred” was so draconian that it would have made any criticism of Islam a crime.

Entire article below.

In January 2006, the House of Lords approved the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, after amending the text so that the law would be limited to banning only “threatening” words and not those that are merely abusive or insulting. Lawmakers also said that the offense would require the intention — not just the possibility — of stirring up religious hatred. They added that proselytizing, discussion, criticism, abuse and ridicule of religion, belief or religious practice would not be an offense.

Miliband’s renewed promise to make “Islamophobia” (a term he has not defined) an “aggravated crime” may signal an attempt to turn the 2006 Act — which already stipulates a maximum penalty of seven years in prison for stirring up religious hatred — into a full-blown Muslim blasphemy law.

According to British commentator Leo McKinstry, “Miliband’s proposal goes against the entire tradition of Western democracy, which holds that people should be punished only for their deeds, not their opinions.” In an opinion article, he added:

“In Miliband’s Britain, it will become impossible to criticise any aspect of Islamic culture, whether it be the spread of the burka or the establishment of Sharia courts or the construction of colossal new mosques. We already live in a society where Mohammed is now the most popular boy’s name and where a child born in Birmingham is more likely to be a Muslim than a Christian. If he wins, Miliband will ensure that the accelerating Islamification of our country will go unchallenged.”

McKinstry says Miliband is currying favor with Britain’s three million-strong Muslim community to “prop up Labour’s urban vote.”

Muslims are emerging as a key voting bloc in British politics and are already poised to determine the outcome of local elections in many parts of the country, according to a report by the Muslim Council of Britain, an umbrella group.

The report shows that Britain’s Muslim population is overwhelmingly young and will exert increasing political influence as time goes on. The median age of the Muslim population in Britain is 25 years, compared to the overall population’s median age of 40 years.

An extrapolation of the available data indicates that one million British Muslims aged 18 and above will be eligible to vote in this year’s election. According to one study, Muslims could determine the outcome of up to 25% of the 573 Parliamentary seats in England and Wales.

Others say that although Britain’s Muslim community is growing, it is also ethnically diverse and unlikely to vote as a single group. One analyst has argued that the potential for Muslim influence in this year’s election “will remain unrealized because the Muslim vote is not organized in any meaningful way on a national level.”

A study produced by Theos, a London-based religious think tank, found that although Muslims consistently vote Labour, they do so based on class and economic considerations, not out of religious motives.

Indeed, a poll conducted by the BBC on April 17 found that nearly one-quarter of “Asian” voters still do not know which party they will support at the general election. Some of those interviewed by the BBC said that economic issues would determine whom they vote for.

In any event, Muslim influence in the 2015 vote will be largely determined by Muslim voter turnout, which has been notoriously low in past elections: Only 47% of British Muslims were estimated to have voted in 2010.

Since then, several grassroots campaigns have been established to encourage British Muslims to go to the polls in 2015, including Get Out & Vote, Muslim Vote and Operation Black Vote. Another group, YouElect, states:

“A staggering 53% of British Muslims did not vote in the 2010 General Election, such a high figure of Muslim non-voters indicates that many Muslims feel ignored by politicians and disillusioned by the political process.

“With the rise of Islamophobic rhetoric in politics and an ever increasing amount of anti-terror legislation which specifically targets Muslims, it is now more important than ever that Muslims use the vote to send a message to politicians that their attitudes and policies must change.

“YouElect wants to get the message across that there is something you can do about the issues you care about. We have launched a new campaign using the hashtag #SortItOut, which calls on Muslims to use the political process to address the issues that concern them most.

“With 100,000 new young Muslims eligible to vote this year and 26 parliamentary constituencies with a Muslim population of over 20%, the Muslim community has a very real opportunity to make an impact on British politics.”

Not all Muslims agree. The British-born Islamist preacher Anjem Choudary is actively discouraging Muslims from voting. In a stream of Twitter messages using the#StayMuslimDontVote hashtag, Choudary has argued that voting is a “sin” against Islam because Allah is “the only legislator.” He has also said that Muslims who vote or run for public office are “apostates.”

Other British Islamists are following Choudary’s lead. Bright yellow posters claiming that democracy “violates the right of Allah” have been spotted in Cardiff, the capital of Wales, andLeicester, as part of a grassroots campaign called #DontVote4ManMadeLaw.

One such poster stated:

“Democracy is a system whereby man violates the right of Allah and decides what is permissible or impermissible for mankind, based solely on their whims and desires.

“Islam is the only real, working solution for the UK. It is a comprehensive system of governance where the laws of Allah are implemented and justice is observed.”

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook. Follow him on Twitter.

Comments by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.

This reporter has stated here repeatedly that the concerns about Jade Helm are over blow, showing each administration has conducted these exercises with U.S. troops on U.S. Soil.

Seriously doesn’t it make sense with the riots in blighted neighborhoods going up in flames around America that our National Guard train to be ready to handle the riots of the future. 

Much of this goes back to the Watts Riots in Los Angeles in 1965 when the Guard was unprepared.

 They did little more than put up road blocks with sandbags, and machine guns, diverting people from going into the areas rather than being a coordinate group that could have potentially quelled the situation.  (I know I was there, living about 20 blocks from the area)

The suspicions of the public are quite justified, it seems. The operational commanders for Jade Helm have compartmentalized the “exercise” to such an extent that no one, not the local and state law enforcement officers involved or the majority of military personnel, has any idea what is actually going on.

As noted in the letter, a realistic threat from our southern border certainly exists and as we’ve written previously, Border Patrol and Homeland Security have been capturing suspected terrorist operatives crossing into the United States for years.

All this being said, where’s the transparency Mr. Obama in what you promised to be the most transparent administration in U.S. History?

In depth refernce

But the Texas Ranger who penned the letter says this is not necessarily the full scope of the massive Summer exercise.

SHTFplan.com:

The reports about the coming Jade Helm 15 operation across the southwest continue to suggest that this is not merely a standard training exercise to prepare our military personnel for foreign engagements as has been suggested by officials.

A letter sent to Dave Hodges at The Common Sense Show by a concerned Texas Ranger indicates that the government is preparing for a scenario similar to what has been described in William Forstchen’s recent novella Day of Wrath in which ISIS terrorists cross the southern border of the United States and simultaneously attack soft targets across the nation.

But the letter doesn’t stop there. The Ranger, who has kept his identify private for obvious reasons and makes clear that the scope of Jade Helm is so secret that the intent is not completely clear, says that the JH15 mission objectives may go much farther than just preparing for terrorists. According to the law enforcement insider there are trains moving throughout Texas and some of them have been outfitted with shackles, presumably to “transport prisoners of some sort.” The claim adds further credence to a report about Jade Helm dissident roundups and arrests and widespread martial law declarations following an emergency.

His letter sheds some light on the Walmart store closings, suggesting at least one may be utilized in a national security capacity as a staging point for the Department of Homeland Security, an agency that is apparently not trusted by anyone within the Texas Rangers organization, according to the source.

The full letter follows:

Entire article and letter below.

Hello Mr. Hodges,

I have been a Texas Ranger for quite some time, and as such, I am privy to much of what is going on with regard to the Midland Walmart store closing, the presence of ISIS on Texas soil and our preparations to combat an insurgent threat.

I will not give you my rank or location because it would not be safe to do so. It is a waste of time to try and trace the IP#, etc., as I have taken steps to ensure that this note cannot be traced back to me.  I understand and  realize that you seem to have a growing issue with people who will not go on the record with their inside knowledge or first-hand observations, but you cannot understand the pressure and scrutiny that some of us are under. I am taking a big risk writing this email to you.

The main reason that I am writing to you is to encourage you to keep writing on the growing threat of infiltration in Texas and I suspect other states as well. The infiltration I am writing about is not just Special Forces that are going to conducting covert drills in our state. that is concerning and I agree with you this involves martial law.  For now I am talking about ISIS and the danger that they pose to all of us. Our intelligence indicates that they have enough manpower & firepower to subdue a small town.

The Midland Walmart takeover by DHS is a national security move in which we have been told falls under the Continuity of Government provisions. The Threat Fusion Centers are providing related information on what it is we are facing but the information sharing is only in one direction and that is very concerning.

We expecting an attack on more than one Texas city or town by ISIS and/or any of their partners. I believe the information to be accurate. However, this makes the covert operations of groups like the Navy Seals and others under JH15 highly suspicious.

We do not need the insertion of Special Ops into Texas towns and cities. I think that you are probably right about the intention of arresting political undesirables given what we know about JH15. I am of the opinion that whatever the mission objectives of JH15, they have nothing to do with the immediate threat. Therefore, I do not pretend to understand the full scope of JH 15 because there are unfolding operational details which are almost impossible to reconcile with what I already know to be fact based the evidence for what is going on.

Let me drop a bombshell that I have not seen you address. There are trains moving throughout Texas that have shackles inside some of the cars. I have not personally seen them, but I know personnel that have seen this. This indicates that these trains will be used to transport prisoners of some sort.

 I know from reading your articles that your default belief will be that these are for American political prisoners and will be transported to FEMA detention camps of some sort. We have been told by Homeland that these trains are slated for transporting captured terrorists, non-domestic. We are not sure we can trust this explanation because Homeland is keeping a lot from us and we are growing increasingly uncomfortable with their presence in Texas.

I wanted to tell also you that we believe that Pantex is a high value target for ISIS and much or our preparation is to thwart any action by terrorists against the facility.  I am wondering how in the hell you figured that out. Someone on the deep inside must be talking with you.

Keep writing Mr. Hodges, you and the underground media are making a difference. As I am sure you know, Colorado announced today that JH15 is suspended in that state. Unfortunately, we do not have that prerogative because we believe that we are under the threat of eminent attack here in Texas.

I do believe the ISIS threat is legitimate. But you are also correct to suspect the motives behind the JH15 drills. They are clouded in secrecy and we have been shut out regarding their operational intent. The people of Texas and all of the United States of America should be pushing back against JH15.

I will support the Feds in their preparation against ISIS. But the moment that this action turns against our locals is the moment I will perform my oath of office. I am not alone in this feeling. None of my brothers trust Homeland. We will have to see where this is going but I have a bad feeling.

You do your job and keep writing and I will do my job in upholding the Constitution

Thank You

Before we get into the article about U.S. and Chinese Satellite wars from sixty minutes, I must declare in fair disclosure in my dealings of how they make their programs.

CBS and Sixty Minutes has done it again, shades of exploding gas tanks on Night Line, with the false story by Dan “Blather,” President

George W. Bush’s flight time while in the Air National Guard in a lame attempt to influence his second election.

I’ve not been a fan of Sixty Minutes, since I saw the complete hatched job they did on a hypnotic, Halcion, made by the Upjohn Company.  They asked unfavorable investigators questions, would take a yes response and change it to no, thus creating their story which was just another lie.

(A three hour interview, with two hours of tape left on the cutting room floor.)

I watched this segment of 60 Minutes because a friend gave me a heads up on the article below.

In watching their propaganda on satellites, the interviewer asking the interviewees about the technology the US has as opposed to China’s.

Shame on them for putting those  interviewed in awkward positions with the questions asked of them.  The “Honchos,” at CBS clearly have no shame, evidenced by the editing of the tape to create the story that was broadcasted.

If anything, 60 minutes offers hope for Brian Williams the beleaguered faux news reporter who made things up as he reported his false stories.

The Battle Above

***U.S. and China are locked in a high stakes contest over satellites that are critical to national security and everyday life.***

2015 Apr 26
Correspondent David Martin
The following is a script from “The Battle Above” which aired on April 26, 2015. David Martin is the correspondent. Andy Court, producer.

Without most of us noticing, our everyday activities — everything from getting cash at an ATM to watching this program — depend on satellites in space. And for the U.S. military, it’s not just everyday activities.

The way it fights depends on space. Satellites are used to communicate with troops, gather intelligence, fly drones and target weapons. But top military and intelligence leaders are now worried those satellites are vulnerable to attack.

They say China, in particular, has been actively testing anti-satellite weapons that could, in effect, knock out America’s eyes and ears.
No one wants a war in space, but it’s the job of a branch of the Air Force called Space Command to prepare for one. If you’ve never heard of Space Command, it’s because most of what it does happens hundreds even thousands of miles above the Earth or deep inside highly secure command centers. You may be as surprised as we were to find out how the high-stakes game for control of space is played.

The research being done at the Starfire Optical Range in Albuquerque, New Mexico, was kept secret for many years and for a good reason which only becomes apparent at night.

First, the roof of one building is opened to the stars then the walls retract and an object straight out of Star Wars appears shooting a laser into the sky.

The laser’s beam helps a high-powered telescope focus in on objects in space, so the Air Force can get a better look at the satellites of potential adversaries like China whizzing by at 17,000 miles per hour. It’s part of a complex — and mostly secret — battle for what the military considers the ultimate high ground.

Entire article, below.

Gen. John Hyten: There is no such thing as a day without space.

That’s the mantra of General John Hyten, the head of Air Force Space Command.

Gen. John Hyten: Think of what life used to be like and all the things that we have today in warfare that wouldn’t exist without space. Remotely piloted aircraft, all-weather precision guided munitions didn’t exist before space. Now we can attack any target on the planet, anytime, anywhere, in any weather.

David Martin: What would the U.S. military do without space?

Gen. John Hyten: What happens is you go back to World War II. You go back to industrial age warfare.

David Martin: And your job is to make sure there is no day without space.

Gen. John Hyten: Absolutely.

[Gen. John Hyten addressing his troops: And you should be thinking right from the beginning that this is a contested environment and…]
“It’s a competition that I wish wasn’t occurring, but it is. And if we’re threatened in space, we have the right of self-defense, and we’ll make sure we can execute that right.”

Hyten drills into his troops that U.S. satellites are no longer safe from attack. Eleven countries, including Iran and North Korea, now have the ability to launch objects into orbit. And Russia and China have been testing new anti-satellite technologies.

Gen. John Hyten: It’s a competition that I wish wasn’t occurring, but it is. And if we’re threatened in space, we have the right of self-defense, and we’ll make sure we can execute that right.

David Martin: And use force if necessary.

Gen. John Hyten: That’s why we have a military. You know, I’m not NASA.

Space Command has 38,000 airmen at 134 locations around the world. One of their most visible missions is to make sure U.S. satellites can always get into space from launch pads like this one at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.

19-vandenberguse.jpg
Gen. John Hyten and David Martin. Vandenburg Air Force Base, Calif.
Air Force Photo by A1C Ian Dudley
Gen. John Hyten: This is where space begins. If you can’t get the satellite into space, it’s worthless. I’m a satellite guy. So I get very nervous around rockets. Because the most valuable thing on the rocket is the top — is the satellite. ‘Cause when you have 500,000 pounds of thrust, if anything goes wrong, it’s an explosion. It’s dangerous. And you lose the capabilities that’s on the top

The U.S. has more satellites in space than any other nation – over 500 and counting. More than 30 military and civilian launches will take place this year at Space Command bases in Florida and California.

The Pentagon told us it spends $10 billion a year on space. But we found a White House report that estimates the real cost is much higher — $25 billion dollars when you count spy satellites and other classified spending. That’s more than NASA or any other space agency in the world.

Some of those satellites provide the GPS signals that guide smart bombs now attacking ISIS targets in Iraq and Syria. But a lot of people don’t realize those same GPS satellites provide the signals your smartphone uses to navigate. It’s a service the Air Force provides free – not just here in the United States but to the entire world.

51-boeing-gpsuse.jpg
Col. Bill Cooley shows David Martin a GPS satellite at a Boeing plant in Los Angeles, Calif.
Air Force Photo by Maj Eric Simon
Col. Bill Cooley: This is a global utility. And there’s a lot of people depending on this. And we understand that.

At a Boeing plant in Los Angeles, Colonel Bill Cooley showed us a GPS satellite that was being tested in a special chamber to make sure it was ready for launch.

Col. Bill Cooley: When these things get on orbit there’s no depot. You can’t drive it back into the maintenance shop. It’s somewhat like trying to design an automobile that is going to run for, you know, 12 to 15 years and you can’t take it in the shop, you can’t take it in for refueling but, it’s gotta run 24/7.

60 Minutes: Segment Extras
Why not charge for GPS?
In orbit, the satellite will spread out its solar panels, point its odd-looking antennas towards the Earth, and broadcast its location along with a time signal accurate to nanoseconds. A GPS receiver needs signals from four of these satellites to figure out its location. Col. Cooley told us it costs a quarter of a billion dollars to design and build each one.

David Martin: And to put it into space, how much does it cost?

Col. Bill Cooley: That’s about the same.

David Martin: So you’re pushing half a billion dollars to get that–

Col. Bill Cooley: That’s right.

David Martin: –thing into space?

Col. Bill Cooley: That’s right.

The U.S. has 31 active GPS satellites in space right now, and a lot more than smart bombs and smartphones depend on them. Bank ATMs, cellphone towers, and power grids use their signals. Farmers use GPS to work their fields.

The GPS satellite system the whole world relies on is operated out of this room at Schriever Air Force Base in Colorado by Lt. Col. Todd Benson and his team. We were a little surprised by how many people it takes.

Lt. Col. Todd Benson: Eight personnel.

David Martin: Eight people?

Lt. Col. Todd Benson: Yes, sir.

David Martin: For the entire world?

Lt. Col. Todd Benson: Yes, sir.

David Martin: So are these technological experts?

Lt. Col. Todd Benson: Yes, sir. But they’re as young as 19 years old.

David Martin: Isn’t there a minimum age for driving satellites?

Lt. Col. Todd Benson: Not here.

Another thing that surprised us is that there’s no way to effectively armor an important satellite like this or to conceal its location from attack.

David Martin: So it can’t hide in space?

Col. Bill Cooley: That’s true. And we– in fact, it’s– it tells you where it is.

David Martin: This is a system the whole world depends on, costs a small fortune to put it up there, and it’s a sitting duck.

Col. Bill Cooley: Well this is one of the challenges that in Space Command, that we’re– we are very aware of.

David Martin: Today, can a U.S. military satellite maneuver itself outta the way of an upcoming anti-satellite weapon?

Gen. John Hyten: It depends on a huge number of variables.

David Martin: So the answer is maybe.

Gen. John Hyten: The answer is maybe.

David Martin: You’ve got these satellites worth hundreds of millions of dollars and they maybe could get out of harm’s way?

Gen. John Hyten: It depends on the satellite. It depends on the mission. It depends on when it was built, depends on how old it is. It depends on when we know the threat is coming.

Knowing a threat is coming is no small task when the territory you’re responsible for is 73 trillion cubic miles. Space Command maintains a global network of radars, telescopes, and satellite communications antennas like this one.

All the information feeds in to the Joint Space Operations Center, JSPOC for short, at Vandenberg Air Force Base.

David Martin: This is the command center for space?

Lt. Gen. Raymond: Yes sir. 24/7, 365 days a year maintaining…

If a U.S. satellite were attacked, Lt. Gen. “Jay” Raymond would use this phone to alert a chain of command leading to the White House.

David Martin: Is an attack on an American satellite an act of war?

Gen. John Hyten: That’s been a line of debate for as long as I’ve been in this business.

David Martin: If there is an attempt to attack or interfere with a U.S. satellite, who makes the decision about what we do about it?

Gen. John Hyten: That would be the president of the United States.

And it’s not just an anti-satellite weapon they’re worried about. There are other dangers too.

Lt. Gen. Raymond: Today, we track about 23,000 objects.

David Martin: How many of them are actually functioning satellites?

Lt. Gen. Raymond: Roughly 1,300 of those are active satellites. The rest are debris.

David Martin: Junk.

Lt. Gen. Raymond: Yes, sir. Junk.

[From the movie “Gravity”: Explorer, this is Kowalski reporting visual contact with debris. Debris is from a BSE sat….]

The movie “Gravity” dramatized the devastating effect manmade debris travelling at 17,000 mph could have on the international space station. The JSPOC tracks dead satellites, old rocket boosters, even stray space gloves, and alerts satellite operators and astronauts if a collision is likely.

Lt. Gen. Raymond: Last year, in 2014, the International Space Station was maneuvered three times to avoid colliding with a piece of debris.

A lot of the debris that’s threatening the space station was created in 2007 when the Chinese tested a ground-based anti-satellite weapon. It crashed into one of their old weather satellites 530 miles above the Earth, shattering it into pieces.

Lt. Gen. Raymond: This is the debris that resulted from the 2007 Chinese ASAT. So this is about 3,000 pieces of debris just from that one event.

David Martin: That came just from that one collision?

Lt. Gen. Raymond: Just from that one collision.

David Martin: Debris apart, how important was that test in terms of revealing Chinese space capabilities?

Gen. John Hyten: It was a significant wakeup call to our entire military until that singular event, I don’t think the broader military realized that that is something we’re gonna have to worry about.

David Martin: Have they conducted any similar tests since?

Gen. John Hyten: They continue to conduct tests. The testing they’re doing is to make sure that the – if they ever got into a conflict with us or any other spacefaring nation, they would have the ability to destroy satellites. And that is a bad thing for the United States, a bad thing for the planet.

A bad thing, no doubt, but is the U.S. doing it too? And did China recently raise the stakes — test-firing a weapon deeper into space than ever before, and threatening some of this country’s most valuable satellites? That part of our story, when we come back.
Part Two

Tonight, we’ve been giving you a rare look at how a branch of the U.S. Air Force called Space Command is preparing for a battle most of us have never thought about — one high above the Earth, defending the satellites upon which our daily life and national security have come to depend. Few of those satellites are more important to the U.S. military than the ones that provide early warning of a long-range nuclear missile attack.

600425battle2dot6.jpg
Even at the height of the Cold War those satellites — stationed deep in space, some 20,000 miles above the Earth — were considered safe from attack. But deep space is no longer the sanctuary it once was. A former Space Command officer told us that two years ago the Chinese tested an anti-satellite weapon that went higher than any previously reported and came too-close-for-comfort to the area where those missile warning satellites are located.

“I think what keeps a lot of American military planners up at night is if China has anti-satellite capabilities when do they use those in a conflict? Do they use them at the start to try and blind the U.S.?”

Brian Weeden: If those satellites are now at risk, that is something that, from the U.S. military’s point of view, is new. Because it’s always believed those satellites, there wasn’t really a significant threat to those capabilities.

Brian Weeden served as an officer in Air Force Space Command until 2007. He’s now technical adviser to the Secure World Foundation, which promotes the peaceful use of space.

Weeden says the Chinese have test-fired as many as six, ground-based, anti-satellite weapons. Only one, in 2007, actually hit a satellite and created debris. But one of the others soared to new heights.

Brian Weeden: There was one test in May of 2013 that may have gone as high as 30,000 kilometers. And that’s one that I think really is kind of causing quite a bit of concern on the U.S. side.

To understand just how far that is, the International Space Station orbits at about 200 miles above the Earth, and those GPS satellites we showed you orbit at 12,000 miles. The 2013 test-launch Weeden’s talking about is believed to have gone up to 18,600 miles, just shy of what’s known as geo-synchronous or geo-stationary orbit. And that’s where the U.S. military has stationed some of its most valuable missile warning sensors and top-secret communications devices that serve as its eyes and ears in time of war.

Brian Weeden: I think what keeps a lot of American military planners up at night is if China has anti-satellite capabilities when do they use those in a conflict? Do they use them at the start to try and blind the U.S.?

David Martin: Those sound like the crown jewels of American satellites up there in geo-synchronous orbit.

Brian Weeden: Absolutely. Those satellites were developed in an environment where the U.S. assumed there would not be reason to attack them. So you end up with a small number of very expensive satellites that have a lot of capability packed onto each one. And result is: juicy targets.

A spokesman for China’s foreign ministry admitted testing an anti-satellite weapon in 2007, but China has denied conducting subsequent tests, and told us it is committed to the peaceful use of outer space. It said the 2013 launch into deep space was simply a science experiment.

But using skills he honed as an officer in Space Command, Brian Weeden analyzed commercial satellite photos and other publicly available data about the launch. He concluded that science experiment was probably fired into space by a military missile launcher like this.

Gen. John Hyten: This building was built…

General John Hyten, the head of Air Force Space Command, has seen the classified intelligence about that launch.

David Martin: These follow on Chinese tests, how high up do they go?

Gen. John Hyten: Pretty high.

David Martin: Well, how high’s that?

Gen. John Hyten: I won’t characterize what the Chinese capabilities are. I just will tell you that we know what they are.

David Martin: Well, I’ve read reports by a congressional commission, which said that in the next five to 10 years, China likely will be able to hold at risk U.S. National Security satellites in every orbital regime.

David Martin: Do you agree with this statement by the commission?

Gen. John Hyten: I think they’ll be able to threaten every orbital regime that we operate in. Now we have to figure out how to defend those satellites, and we’re going to.Space Command is making its new satellites more maneuverable to evade attack, and also more resistant to jamming. It’s building a new radar system that will enable the space operations center to track objects in space as small as a softball. And it’s deployed two highly maneuverable surveillance satellites to keep watch on what other countries are doing high up in geo-stationary orbit.

David Martin: Satellites watching other satellites.

Gen. John Hyten: Satellites watching other satellites.

David Martin: And how do they improve your knowledge?

Gen. John Hyten: Because they’re up close.

Normally, the capabilities of spy satellites are kept top secret. But Space Command put out this fact sheet about its new assets in geo-synchronous orbit.

Gen. John Hyten: We want people to understand that we’re watching. There will be no surprises in geo. And we want everybody in the world to know that there will be no surprises in that orbit. It’s way too valuable for us to just be surprised.

David Martin: Deterrence in the nuclear world was built on weapons.

Gen. John Hyten: Right. And deterrence in the space world has got to be built on a little bit different construct. It’s the ability to convince an adversary that if they attack us, they will fail.

Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James told us the Pentagon plans to spend an extra $5 billion over the next five years to protect its satellites.

David Martin: What do you consider to be the greatest single threat to U.S. satellites?

Deborah Lee James: An anti-satellite weapon would certainly be a great threat. A laser would be a threat. Jamming capabilities are also a threat.

David Martin: Do China and Russia have lasers that could blind American satellites?

Deborah Lee James: They are testing and investing. And that is worrisome to the United States.

Testing and investing in sometimes mysterious ways.

Last year, airmen at the Joint Space Operations Center monitored the seemingly routine launch of three Russian communications satellites. Lt. Gen. “Jay” Raymond and his team spotted what they assumed was just an ordinary piece of debris from the launch.

Lt. Gen. Raymond: About a week later, a young Air Force captain detected that that debris started to move.

Move, as in maneuver, right up close to the body of the rocket that had launched it into space.

David Martin: So what is that object that keeps maneuvering in space?

Lt. Gen. Raymond: David, I’m not gonna speculate. But I can tell you what it isn’t. It’s not a piece of debris.

Brian Weeden: That type of maneuver is what’s called a Rendezvous and Proximity Operation. And it’s actually something that the U.S. had been working on for the last several years, if not longer.

Satellites that can “rendezvous” with other satellites may some day be used to refuel or make repairs. But they’re potential weapons as well.

David Martin: If you can get close enough to inspect or service another satellite, is that close enough to disable it?

Brian Weeden: Absolutely. And there’s a wide range of ways you can do that.

David Martin: Such as?

Brian Weeden: Breaking off a solar panel or even some have theorized, you know, spray-painting over optics so that the satellite can’t see anything.

So if you thought space was a peaceful haven, think again. This is a new kind of space race, a cosmic game of hide-and-seek. And the same technology that enables this telescope to see more clearly into space could potentially be used to help a laser weapon focus more powerfully on a target. The Bush administration wanted to develop such a weapon here in 2006, but ran into resistance from Congress.

David Martin: Is any work being done on lasers that could be used to blind satellites?

Deborah Lee James: There’s no such work at this time.

David Martin: Does the U.S. have any weapons in space?

Deborah Lee James: No, we do not.

David Martin: I’m thinking of satellites that maneuver next to another satellite and then take some action to disable it without blowing it up.

Deborah Lee James: We do have satellites that maneuver that look at things in space. But not what you just described.

David Martin: You think the Chinese believe that?

Deborah Lee James: I don’t know what they believe.

When the Chinese look at America’s space operations, they see a program that, by most estimates, spends 10 times more than they do and has tested anti-satellite weapons of its own. Space Command told us an American F-15 fired a missile into space five times in the 1980s, and one of those times destroyed a U.S. satellite, creating debris that remained in space for decades. One of the officers involved in that test was Gen. Hyten.

Gen. John Hyten: I think it was surprise to most people on that program, how much debris we created.

David Martin: So where do we get off lecturing the Chinese about testing anti-satellite weapons if we were the first and if we created debris?

Gen. John Hyten: Well, it– because we learned our lesson and told the world and the Congress said, “You will not test that weapon anymore.”

But when a U.S. intelligence satellite containing hazardous fuel malfunctioned in 2008 the Navy’s Aegis defense system — designed to knock out incoming missiles — was used to shoot it down.

David Martin: Chinese must think, “We’ve got an anti-satellite capability as well.”

Brian Weeden: I think they certainly have come to that conclusion. Or not– if the U.S. doesn’t have a capability, they certainly could field one very quickly.

David Martin: What you just described is– the formula for an arms race. They see a capability. We have that capability. They react to that capability. They react, we react, and there you go.

Brian Weeden: I think it certainly could turn out that way.

David Martin: One of the big dangers is that a problem in space could inflame a conflict here on Earth. For instance, if a nation suddenly its early-warning satellites in the middle of a crisis it might assume it was the beginning of an attack.

Brian Weeden: Now in reality, it might’ve been a simple manufacturing failure. It might’ve been a piece of space debris. But in the moment of crisis I think that’s the sort of situation that could escalate something that might otherwise have stayed partly contained.

Gen. Hyten told us Space Command is currently only developing weapons that do not create debris — like this mobile jammer which can be used to incapacitate satellites.

Gen. John Hyten: We have a capability called a counter communications system that is built to deny an adversary the use of space communications. All I can say is it’s a capability that exists on the ground and it does not create debris in any way.

David Martin: The only two things you told me about the U.S. ability to fight in space, are the ability to maneuver your satellites and to jam other satellites. Is that it?

Gen. John Hyten: –that’s not it, but that’s all I can tell you.

One secret project is hiding in plain sight. It’s the X-37B space plane, a small, remotely-piloted vehicle that can fly in space for 20 months at a time.

A model of it hangs in Hyten’s headquarters in Colorado.

David Martin: So here is your chance to end all the speculation about what the Space Plane is really for.

Gen. John Hyten: It’s really for cool things.

David Martin: For instance?

Gen. John Hyten: For instance, it goes up to space– but unlike other satellites, it actually comes back. Anything that we put in the payload bay that we take up to space we can now bring back. And we can learn from that.

David Martin: Can you tell me whether or not someday the Space Plane is gonna become a weapons system?

Gen. John Hyten: The intent is– I cannot answer that question.

David Martin: But if you’re determined not to create any more debris in space, why can’t you say that this might not become a weapon system?

Gen. John Hyten: I’m not gonna say what it’s gonna become– ’cause we’re experimenting.

Hyten told us there are bound to be conflicts in space. The important thing is to avoid a shooting war that could create so much debris it might become impossible to put satellites or astronauts into orbit.

David Martin: The Chinese of course look at everything you’re doing. And they–

Gen. John Hyten: I’m sure they’re lookin’ at this.

David Martin: –say– and they say you’re developing the capability to threaten them, and that all those satellites are a direct threat to their national security. So why wouldn’t they create a capability to take out those satellites?

Gen. John Hyten: You know, the Chinese are also building a very robust exploration program to go to the moon to explore the stars. They could destroy their entire program by going down the way they are.

David Martin: There’s not a shooting war going on out there. But it sure does seem like there is a very high-stakes contest going on in space.

Deborah Lee James: It is high stakes.

High stakes with very few rules. A 1967 U.N. treaty calls for the peaceful use of space. That sounds nice but leaves a lot of room for countries to do what they want.

David Martin: Right now, is there any code of conduct for space operations?

Deborah Lee James: There is not an agreed upon code of conduct.

David Martin: So it’s every country for himself?

Deborah Lee James: Pretty much.
© 2015 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

David Martin

David Martin is CBS News’ National Security Correspondent.

Recent Segments

The Battle Above
Death in the Mediterranean
A Crime Against Humanity
TED Talks
Hoop Dreams

60 Minutes App

New Look. New Season. The 60 Minutes app for iPad, iPhone and iPod Touch!
Download Now
More from 60 Minutes

Death in the Mediterranean

April 26, 2015

Desperation fuels the largest mass migration since WWII in which thousands have died trying to reach Europe by sea
The Battle Above

April 26, 2015

U.S. and China are locked in a high stakes contest over satellites that are critical to national security and everyday life
The Attack on Sony

April 12, 2015

North Korea’s cyberattack on Sony Pictures exposed a new reality: you don’t have to be a superpower to inflict damage on U.S. corporations
Kennedy name still resonates in Japan

April 12, 2015

After a year and half on the job, Amb. Caroline Kennedy has helped strengthen U.S.-Japan relations — an alliance her father was keen to build
Rush to Judgment

April 12, 2015

Former Duke lacrosse coach discusses his forced resignation during the 2006 Duke rape scandal and his hard road back to coaching
Homeland Security

April 5, 2015

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson talks about the evolving role of his department’s massive security efforts
The Good Friday Agreement

April 5, 2015

In a rare interview, Sinn Fein President Gerry Adams addresses allegations that he was complicit in the 1972 murder of Jean McConville
Wikimania

April 5, 2015

Meet the Wikipedians. Those “persnickety,” techy types who keep your favorite Internet information website brimming with data
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on 60 Minutes

March 29, 2015

Charlie Rose interviews the Syrian dictator as a four-year-old civil war drags on in which his regime has been accused of devastating attacks on civilians

Previous
Next
17
Comments
17 comments
Sign in
263 people listening

Commenting FAQs / Guidelines
Newest | Oldest | Top Comments
c-post April 26, 2015 8:8PM

According to Wikipedia and other sources, the US military budget now exceeds 800 billion dollars, and that doesn’t even include interest payment on its debt, which according to this chart i’m looking at is well over 300 billion dollars. This when we’re not at war with any serious adversaries. We’re spending more on our military than the next 10 countries combined. David Martin has failed to put his report in the proper context, or to ask any tough questions, focusing as usual on fancy graphics and beautifully photographed interviews with impressive spokesmen. It’s still a great mystery to me where that 800 billion is going, even as our veterans are here on the streets in America getting lousy medical care and asking for handouts.

“No matter who replaces the President, I have grave difficulty believing that they can bring under control the Pentagon, the secret intelligence agencies, the military-industrial complex. The Department of Defense is NOT today the Department of Defense. It’s an alternative seat of government on the south bank of the Potomac River.” ~ Chalmers Johnson, 2004
Share
LikeReply
c-post April 26, 2015 8:8PM

Meanwhile the officers of the military enjoy free state socialism, free housing, free medical care, free education for their kids, 234 golf courses at last count, 724 military bases around the world, and a fleet of 70 Lear jets to fly the generals around. I am of the opinion that our national security would be increased if the Pentagon budget was cut. Significantly. And look, if you just took 1/16th of ONE YEAR’S military budget, the Pentagon could buy up the entire amazon rainforest from timber companies and farmers, and insure oxygen to breathe for generations of soldiers to come.

Oh, and by the way 60 Minutes, your graphic showing the orbital heights of satellites is not to scale, not even close.
thanks
Share
LikeReply
1SWB April 27, 2015 7:7AM

@c-post “Oh the ignorant and uniformed”. Golf Courses are NAF, Non Appropriated Funds, (not paid for by taxpayers). It is pay as you go on a military base, be It golf, bowling or anything else. Quarters are a supplement to your pay, and unfortunately, munch of the junior force is food stamp eligible. I remember paying $200 for a clean up fee for my ten year old when we had a birthday party for her and a dozen friends…..we were not allowed to clean up the birthday cake crumbs ourselves. And those generals, and there are only a handful, for a million plus man and woman force, should “book American or United Next time there is a crisis, Avalanche , bombing or other event to get here to rescue you or your family…… Get your facts…..
Share
LikeReply
sgondo April 26, 2015 8:8PM

It was stated in the episode aired April 25th, 2015, that 4 GPS satellite are need to determine a position. Someone does not have a basic understanding of basic high school geometry; only 3 satellites are need. 4 satellites are needed if you want to provide redundancy should one malfunctions. Would be nice if this sort of inaccuracies by interviewees are corrected. It’s an example of the little and sometimes large errors that are allowed to be aired
Share
LikeReply
pt2015 April 27, 2015 6:6AM

@sgondo

You need three reference points to determine your location in two dimensions (i.e., on a table top map).You need four reference points to determine your location in three dimensions (i.e., latitude, longitude, and altitude).The reference in the story is correct.You may want to retake that geometry class.
Share
LikeReply
rzarc101 April 27, 2015 8:8AM

@pt2015

Only three GPS satellites are needed for a position calculation. The fourth dramatically improves precision by improving the time syc accuracy. think a few feet rather than many yards.
Share
LikeReply
pt2015 April 27, 2015 11:11PM

@rzarc101 @pt2015 No. Three satellites are needed to determine latitude and longitude. The fourth satellite is needed to determine altitude. i’ve been doing this for 23 years.
Share
LikeReply
miroad1 April 26, 2015 7:7PM

I believe 60 minutes screwed up in stating that ATMs use satellites. ATMs (Automated Teller Machines) don’t use satellites. Cellsites don’t either except for geolocation. The ATM that DOES is Air Traffic Management which I believe is the term 60 Minutes picked up on and thought it meant ATM machines. Kind of superficial research and reporting, huh?
Share
LikeReply
jtnels April 26, 2015 8:8PM

@miroad1 I believe the ATMs only need the TIMING signal from the GPS sats. Accuracy to the nanosecond can be necessary for some systems, not just ATMs…
Share
LikeReply
pt2015 April 27, 2015 6:6AM

@jtnels @miroad1 you are correct.
Share
LikeReply
stephens_je April 26, 2015 5:5PM
LikeReply
rzarc101 April 26, 2015 5:5PM

@stephens_je

The DOD would have not allowed the interview if they didn’t want any sort of info out. They need someway to educate the public. By the way everything said and far more not said is available on the net. If you’re technically and militarily savvy it’s not difficult to connect the dots.
Share
1LikeReply
C Montgomery Burns April 26, 2015 6:6PM

@stephens_je @STEPHENS_JE @STEPHENS_JE LOL, “I SELDOM WATCH TELEVISION.” DO YOU SELDOM VENTURE INTO THE REAL WORLD AS WELL? YOU SOUND LIKE ONE OF THOSE UNQUESTIONING KNUCKLEDRAGGERS WHO ARE CLUELESS TO HOW THE WORLD WORKS, BUT ONLY ARE CAPABLE OF FIRING ENOUGH SYNAPSES TO REFLEXIVELY CRY “I SUPPORT THE TROOPS.” DAVID MARTIN DID A GOOD JOB, AND HYTEN, COOLEY AND JAMES DIDN’T ANSWER QUESTIONS THEY DIDN’T WANT TO ANSWER, BUT WERE ACCOMMODATING AND DID A GOOD JOB EDUCATING THE PUBLIC OF THEIR MISSION AND WHAT THEY ARE WORKING TOWARD.
PLEASE, DO US ALL A FAVOR AND LEAVE THE PLAYGROUND TO THE ADULTS. STICK TO SUCKING YOUR THUMB AND WETTING YOUR PANTS.
Share
LikeReply
Jayjaybe April 26, 2015 7:7PM

@C Montgomery Burns @stephens_je

Childish response.
Share
LikeReply
Jayjaybe April 26, 2015 7:7PM

@stephens_je

This is an adult show. The interviews consist of adults who know the rules of engagement. CBS didn’t ask what was unexpected. A Congressional Oversight Committee would’ve been comparatively hostile–on the public record. No US military brass reaches much rank without the ability to field more agressive questions. Your naiveté isn’t a universal attribute.
Share
1LikeReply
jtnels April 26, 2015 8:8PM

@stephens_je I would expect a reporter worth his salt to ask some tough questions. Too many reporters today are not interested in the actual truth, just what will get them the most ‘likes’.
Share
LikeReply
Symera1 April 29, 2015 4:4AM

@stephens_je it’s likely that CBS had to submit the interview questions before anyone in the DoD would ever grant the interview.
Share
LikeReply
Most Discussed

168
A Crime Against Humanity
80
Killing Cancer
43
Death in the Mediterranean
43
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on 60 Minutes
24
Rush to Judgment

Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.

How difficult would it be to imagine that the recent riots in black neighborhoods are to prepare us for the coming national guard exercises and that they could ultimately be the prelude to Obama eventually calling for martial law as more of these  preorchestrated events take place.

Think about it, blacks and whites are not infrequently shot by the police, as we have seen some with cause, some without.

All it takes is compliant ignorant black mayors to go along, knowingly or unknowingly, and we have the tinder of racial fires that will burn out of control.

This of course would not be to Obama’s liking as “We the People,” the police and our military would not stand for a such a constitutional overreach, resulting in him leaving his occupation of the White House in a Coffin, which would go quickly to the Rotunda and be put on display as black in our nation come to Washington to riot and mourn their martyr.

Baltimore Leaders Try to Curb Expectations Over a Pending Police Report

BALTIMORE — An edgy peace held sway here as a huge crowd took to the streets before a curfew Wednesday night and the mayor and the police sought to tamp down expectations that residents would learn details on Friday about how a young black man died after being injured in police custody.

Fears ran high that the end of the week could return this city to the violence spurred by the still-unexplained death of the man, Freddie Gray, 25 — particularly if people think they will get answers but do not. Speculation about the possible release of some or all of the findings has fueled expectations that the public will learn much more about the case that day.

But the mayor, the police commissioner, a large group of prominent clergymen and a lawyer for Mr. Gray’s family emerged from a meeting Wednesday to give a united warning against expecting any revelations Friday, when the Police Department has said it will turn its findings over to the state’s attorney for Baltimore, Marilyn J. Mosby, who will decide whether to seek criminal charges. Six officers have been suspended in the episode.

Baltimore Mayor’s Response to Crisis

Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake has said she would like information to be released as soon as possible, but said Wednesday after talking with Mr. Gray’s relatives that justice mattered more than speed. “Whatever time the state’s attorney needs to make that determination, the family wants to get it right,” she said.

The Rev. Jamal Bryant, who delivered Mr. Gray’s eulogy on Monday, said he had spent the morning visiting high schools, trying to debunk “a rumor going through the high schools that somehow or other, there was a verdict coming on Friday.”

A lawyer for the Gray family, Hassan Murphy, said that the Grays did not want a repeat of the arson, rock-throwing and looting seen on Monday “They are terribly disappointed at what happened,” Mr. Murphy said.

Entire article below.

Photo

People venturing outside on Wednesday found a weary, wary city. Protesters milled in the middle of intersections devoid of traffic and chatted with police officers in riot gear; workers cleaned up debris left by the rioting; and televisions showed the Orioles playing baseball in an empty stadium, kept clear of fans for security reasons. Most surreal of all was the image of armed National Guard troops in camouflage-painted vehicles joining the police in patrolling the city.

“We’re not out of the woods yet,” Gov. Larry Hogan said, even as crowds gathered in the streets not only in Baltimore but also in other major cities, including Ferguson, Mo., Minneapolis, Washington and Boston. In New York, several hundred people gathered in Union Square Park, and at least 60 were arrested after they poured into nearby streets.

Just before the second night of Baltimore’s 10 p.m. curfew, a fistfight broke out at the west side intersection where much of the looting and violence occurred earlier this week. But the crowd dispersed quickly once the curfew was in effect. More than an hour into the curfew, the city appeared relatively quiet, and the police seemed to have a less forceful posture on the street.

Earlier Wednesday, the state’s attorney’s office, like the Baltimore civic leaders, also tried to lower expectations for Friday. Receiving the police report is just part of the investigation process by the state’s attorney, said Rochelle Ritchie, the communications director for Ms. Mosby. “When the state’s attorney comes out and gives something, it’s going to be something substantial,” Ms. Ritchie said. “You’re not going to see little bits and pieces here and there. When it is time to come forward, we will do that. I can’t say when it’s going to be.”

The state chief medical examiner’s office has also warned that preparing an autopsy report usually takes 60 to 90 days. Even after the investigations finish, the prosecutor’s office, if it decides to seek charges, must present the case to a grand jury and ask for an indictment. If there are to be criminal charges, they probably remain months away.

Officials said another potential flash point is a demonstration planned for Saturday, organized by Malik Z. Shabazz, an activist who has likened the police to an occupation force.

Play Video|3:09

Cleaning Up Baltimore

Mr. Shabazz said he planned to meet with city officials on Thursday “to make sure Saturday happens without incident.”

The governor summoned the National Guard on Monday, after peaceful demonstrations gave way to violence following Mr. Gray’s funeral. Mr. Hogan said about 2,000 troops had been deployed, along with more than 1,000 officers sent by police forces in Maryland, New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Joining the Baltimore Police Department’s 3,000 officers, they increased the uniformed security forces to roughly double their usual size.

“This combined force will not tolerate violence or looting,” Mr. Hogan said.

Continue reading the main story Slide Show

Slide Show|7 Photos

Protests in Baltimore

Neither the governor nor the mayor was willing to predict when the troops might be sent home. The mayor said the situation on the streets remained “very fluid,” and one of her aides predicted that the Guard would be in the city for at least a week.

The show of strength Tuesday night, coupled with a 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. curfew, helped restore some peace to areas where fires had raged and officers had been pelted with bottles and rocks the night before. Twenty officers were injured, and two of them remained hospitalized late Wednesday, officials said.

The Police Department said it had arrested 35 people from 10 p.m. Tuesday to late afternoon Wednesday, compared with 209 in the same period 24 hours earlier. At an evening news conference, the police commissioner, Anthony W. Batts, said there were 18 arrests Wednesday — 16 adults and two juveniles — and no injuries to city police officers.

Continue reading the main story

OPEN Photographs

Dozens of those arrested in the past week had been released without charges, but Mr. Batts said they could still be prosecuted. “I think the system right now is trying to catch up,” he said.

Maryland typically requires that charges be filed within 24 hours of an arrest without a warrant, but Mr. Hogan said the rule would be extended for the Baltimore courts.

Doug Mayer, a spokesman for Mr. Hogan, said that the decision was a “necessary measure due to the large number of arrests made over the last several days and the fact the courts were closed yesterday. It was also done to allow the city to properly prepare the correct and appropriate charging documents.”

Mr. Batts also sought to add his voice to the tamping down of expectations that information about the police investigation into Mr. Gray’s injuries and death would be immediately revealed once the department turns over its findings to Ms. Mosby on Friday.

“If you’re anticipating actions, the action will be turning the investigation over to the state’s attorney, and from there, they will take the ball,” Mr. Batts said.

The investigation into Mr. Gray’s death could prove to be a trial by fire for Ms. Mosby, who took office in January, days before turning 35, and promptly replaced much of the staff in the state’s attorney’s office. Making her first election run last year, Ms. Mosby — whose husband, Nick, is a city councilman — drew the support of much of the black establishment and defeated the incumbent, Gregg L. Bernstein, in the Democratic primary.

She ran primarily on a platform of being tougher on violent criminals, but she also promised to be harder than Mr. Bernstein had been on police abuses. “I’m going to apply justice fairly, even to those who wear a badge,” she said during the campaign.

After being closed for a day, city schools reopened on Wednesday. The afternoon release of thousands of students, which coincided with the start of the unrest Monday, went off without serious incident Wednesday.

Sabrina McKoy, 35, who lives in northwest Baltimore, said she was pleased that the violence had dissipated for now, but was skeptical of the city’s plans to keep the curfew in place.

“I understand why they did it, but I don’t think it’s necessary,” she said. “To me, people just acted out for a few hours.”

The city has a long record of allegations of police brutality, resulting in millions of dollars paid out in lawsuits. But the April 12 arrest of Mr. Gray, parts of which were caught on video, drew a more heated reaction than any previous case.

Officers reported that Mr. Gray had not been suspected of a crime, but that he had made contact with one of them and then ran, and they pursued and caught him. Officers accused him of possessing an illegal switchblade knife, handcuffed him and put him into a van for a ride to a police station.

At some point, Mr. Gray suffered a severe neck injury, but the video does not make it clear when, clouding the crucial question of who, if anyone, might have been responsible for it. At a minimum, the police have acknowledged, he should have received medical care sooner. Mr. Gray died on April 19.

Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.

The good news? None of the Obama’s budget proposals have ever come close to passing Congress, including when the Democrats held the House and Senate during Obama’s first two years.

So it’s incredibly improbable that this one will, either. But it does give insight into what he wants to happen. Thank God, the Constitution doesn’t allow presidents to use their pens to simply sign budgets into law.

IJReview

By Michael Hausam

Warning: This contains a bunch of mind-boggling gigantic numbers that we’ll try to make understandable!

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office just released its analysis of the budget proposal that President Obama presented last month. The result: it would yield the highest level of sustained taxation in the history of the country. Over the next 10 years, taxes would grow from 17.6% of gross domestic product to 18.7%. As current GDP is just under $17 trillion, that means annual taxes would be $3.1 trillion, or $9,804 for every American.

Here’s a graph showing taxes as a percentage of GDP since 1930:

In addition, the federal debt would increase by $7.2 trillion over that time. That’s like saying the debt will increase by $82.2 million per hour for 3,650 days or $22,831 per second, over the next 315 million seconds.

This graph shows what the debt increases would look like over the next ten years:

Some historical perspective:

• From 1930 to 1941 (preceding the attack on Pearl Harbor) taxes averaged 5.3% of GDP

• During World War 2 the average was 16.1%

• From 1946 through 2013 taxes averaged 17.1%

• From 1992 through 2013 taxes averaged 18.3% (note that the federal budget was balanced from 1998 – 2001)*This was the direct result of Hillary Clinton’s failed attempt to push forward her socialized medicine plan at the time dubbed, “Hillary Care.”

• As a result the Republicans took back the House of Representatives, the first time in over forty years, turning it over to Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the House. His contract with America forced Bill Clinton to move toward the center, taxes were cut and predictably economic growth followed.

• Revisionist historians  like Howard Zinn, would have you believe that the balanced budget was the result of William Jefferson’s policies when nothing could have been further from the truth.

There is a classic scene in Dinesh Souza’s movie “America.”  Tony Soprano’s son is reading out loud from the history book by Howard Zinn and Tony isn’t buying anything the son is telling him. 

The son said, “It’s true, it says so in my history book and my teacher is teaching us the same.

If you haven’t seen the Soprano’s it’s a serious comedy about the mob with Tony Soprano being the mob boss.

One get’s the distinct impression, the elder soprano is about to grab a baseball bat, go down to the school board in set the historical record as he knows it straight by crushing some skulls. 

***FBI Files revealed Howard Zinn to be a member of the communist party.***

Nothing much seems to have changed among the so-called academics in our universities.

THE END

######################