The most overlooked link in mass shootings

A lifelong friend of the man who killed 26 people and wounded 20 others at the First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs in Texas on Sunday says the killer was a lifetime taker of behavioral medications.
Ralph Martinez told The Daily Mail that he and the killer met at a skateboard park when they were youngsters and formed an immediate bond that lasted until the murderer was convicted of abusing his wife and son.
According The Daily Mail:

Martinez said he had a lot in common, both of them were super-hyper active.
Martinez says he took prescription medicine for his ADHD until he was 19 and Devin took prescription pills for the same thing for as long as he can remember.

And:

For Kelley’s 21st birthday Martinez flew out to New Mexico with his girlfriend, where they spent a long weekend with Devin and Tessa where they were living at the time.
‘While we were in New Mexico at one point my girlfriend saw some prescription pill bottles in their kitchen and asked Tessa what they were for,’ said Martinez.
‘Tessa said that they were Devin’s prescription pills that he needs to take them for his aggression. Tessa didn’t say anything more about it.

This is certainly no surprise to those of us who have spent years following these things. Psychotropic drugs is a common denominator in all mass shootings. Aurora movie theater shooter James Holmes, Columbine killer Eric Harris, Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza and almost every other mass murdering young killers — if not every one of them — were on some type of psychotropic drugs when they committed their crimes.
According to a study published in the journal PLoS One and based on the FDA’s Adverse Event Reporting System, the following mind-altering drugs are most frequently linked to violence:
10. Desvenlafaxine (Pristiq) is an antidepressant associated with 7.9 times more violence than many other drugs.
9. Venlafaxine (Effexor) is related to Pristiq and is an antidepressant also used in treating those with anxiety disorders. Effexor is 8.3 times more associated with violent behavior than other drugs.
8. Fluvoxamine (Luvox) is an antidepressant that affects serotonin (SSRI), and is 8.4 times more likely to be linked to violence than other medications.
7. Triazolam (Halcion) can be addictive and is a benzodiazepine that supposedly treats insomnia. It’s 8.7 times more likely to be associated with violence than other medications.
6. Atomoxetine (Strattera) is often prescribed to tread ADHD and is 9 times more likely to be associated with violence.
5. Mefoquine (Lariam) treats malaria and sometimes products bizarre behavior, and is 9.5 times more likely to be linked to violence.
4. Amphetamines come in many forms and are often used to treat ADHD (even to children not diagnosed with ADHD). They are 9.6 times more likely to be linked to violence.
3. Paroxetine (Paxil) is an SSRI (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor) antidepressant. Many users experience severe withdrawal symptoms and are more likely to produce children with birth defects as well as 10.3 times more likely to be linked to violence than other medications.
2. Fluoxetine (Prozac) is a household name for a powerful SSRI antidepressant linked with 10.9 times more violence than other drugs.
1. Varenicline (Chantix) is administered to smokers to supposedly help curb cigarette cravings, but it’s a whopping 18 times more likely to be linked to violent behavior than other drugs.
These drugs are prescribed to children diagnosed with depression, anxiety, anger issues, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD, attention deficit disorder (ADD), and autism spectrum disorders for educational and/or behavioral problems.
Today, more than 10 million American children are prescribed addictive stimulants, antidepressants and psychotropic drugs even though these drugs carry and FDA “black-box” warning that they can cause suicide in children and adolescents. The drugs are Schedule II drugs, meaning they are in the same class as morphine, opium and cocaine.
A recent U.S. report found that 10 percent of teens abuse Ritalin and another stimulant drug, Adderall. Eight out of 13 school shooters in the U.S. were taking antidepressants or stimulants at the time of the crime.
Of course, as is always the case with orthodox medicine, the “cure” is worse than the disease. It’s also just more symptomology – treating the symptoms rather than the cause.
Increased exposure to sugar and chemicals in our foods, clothing and environment is behind the growing number of cases of reduced attention span, delayed development and poor school performance in schoolchildren and the rise in cancers of all types. And all are added under government sanction if not government mandate.
Most foods and drinks marketed to kids are loaded with excess sugar. Researchers at Queensland University of Technology have found that long-term excess sugar consumption reduces dopamine levels and causes a reduction in the brain’s dopamine receptors. This study reinforces a study by a cardiovascular research scientist at St. Luke’s Mid-American Heart Institute in Kansas City, Missouri, that found that rats hooked on cocaine will choose sugar over cocaine once it’s introduced as an option.
Dopamine is the neurotransmitter that helps to control he brain’s reward and pleasure centers. It helps regulate movement and emotional responses, and it enables us to see rewards and move to attain them.
When dopamine levels drop as a result of long-term consumption of sugar, the brain requires ever-higher levels of sugar consumption to reach the same rewards levels and avoid mild states of depression. Drugs like cocaine, morphine and nicotine are addictive for the same reason – their effect on dopamine levels.
“You get this intense release of dopamine upon acute ingestion of sugar. After you chronically consume it, those dopamine receptors start becoming down-regulated — there’s less of them, and they’re less responsive,” said James DiNicolantonio, the researcher who conducted the study at St. Luke’s. “That can lead to ADHD-like symptoms … but it can also lead to a mild state of depression because we know that dopamine is that reward neurotransmitter.”
Sodium fluoride is added to most American drinking water. American dentists recommend using fluoride toothpaste. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention calls fluoride one of the “ten greatest public health achievements of the 20th Century.”
They don’t tell you it is a poisonous pesticide and industrial waste product. Just a half tube of the flavored toothpastes marketed to children contains enough fluoride to kill them.
A study by the Harvard School of Public Health and the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and published in The Lancet Neurology lists fluoride as one of six newly recognized “developmental neurotoxicants,” or chemicals that can cause brain deficits.
Fluoride and the other listed neurotoxicants are likely behind the increase in neurodevelopmental disabilities — including autism, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and dyslexia — seen in children.
Other chemicals on the new list include manganese, chlorpyrifos and DDT (pesticides), tetrachoroethylene (a solvent) and polybrominated diphenyl ethers (flame retardants). These join chemicals identified in 2006: lead, methylmercury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), arsenic and toluene.
Study authors “also forecast that many more chemicals than the known dozen or so identified as neurotoxicants contribute to a ‘silent pandemic’ of neurobehavioral deficits that is eroding intelligence, disrupting behaviors, and damaging societies.”
The study links manganese with diminished intellectual function and impaired motor skills, solvents to hyperactivity and aggressive behavior, and pesticides to cognitive delays. Many studies have linked fluoride to low IQ in children and adults.
So we expose our children to massive amounts of chemicals which create neurological problems. These neurological problems are treated with massive amounts of chemicals which cause aggressive behaviors, suicidal thoughts and depression. Big Pharma rakes in the dough and politicians have dead bodies over which to crow and use to divide the people who blame guns and clamor for more gun laws for “safety.”
Meanwhile, the source of the problem is not only ignored, it’s funded and sanctioned by government

The Democrats’ Inaccurate Talking Point

• By D'Angelo Gore
• Posted on November 17, 2017

Nonpartisan congressional analysts estimate that 13 million fewer Americans would have health insurance by 2025 if the health care law’s individual mandate is repealed. But that doesn’t mean that all 13 million would be kicked off their insurance plans, as some Democrats claim.
Many of them would voluntarily give up their health coverage. They would not have it taken away.
Senate Republicans amended their version of a bill overhauling the U.S. tax code to include a provision that eliminates the Affordable Care Act’s penalties for most individuals who do not purchase health insurance.
Democrats opposed to the plan are now distorting a report from the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation that says scrapping the mandate would reduce federal deficits by $338 billion over the next 10 years, but result in 4 million fewer people having insurance in 2019 and 13 million less having coverage from 2025 to 2027.
Because fewer people would have insurance, the CBO and JCT estimate that the government would spend less on those who receive subsidized coverage through Medicaid and the insurance marketplaces established by the Obama-era health care law.
In a Nov. 14 speech on the Senate floor, Democratic Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said, “President Trump’s absurd idea to repeal the individual mandate as a part of this bill would boot, according to CBO, 13 million people from the health insurance rolls and cause premiums to skyrocket.”
In a tweet the next day, Sen. Richard Durbin, the second-ranking Democrat, wrote that “Republicans now want to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy by taking health care away from 13 million Americans.”
Then, Sen. Elizabeth Warren piled on during a Nov. 16 interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” when she asked: “Who thinks you go forward on a health care plan that’s going to … knock 13 million people off health care?”
But, again, they wouldn’t all be booted or knocked off the insurance rolls.
In 2025, if the mandate was rescinded, an estimated 5 million fewer people would be enrolled in Medicaid; 5 million fewer people would get insurance through the nongroup or individual market; 3 million fewer people would get insurance through their employer; and as many as 500,000 fewer would no longer have some other form of health insurance.
CBO and JCT say “those effects would occur mainly because healthier people would be less likely to obtain insurance and because, especially in the nongroup market, the resulting increases in premiums would cause more people to not purchase insurance.”
The altered Senate bill would effectively nullify the individual mandate by removing the penalty payment. In their report, CBO and JCT say that would produce an outcome similar to an outright repeal of the insurance requirement.
“If the individual mandate penalty was eliminated but the mandate itself was not repealed, the results would be very similar to those presented in this report,” the analysts say. “In CBO and JCT’s estimation, with no penalty at all, only a small number of people who enroll in insurance because of the mandate under current law would continue to do so solely because of a willingness to comply with the law.”
Schumer’s office argued that the joint analysis actually supports the senator’s claim.
“If premiums become unaffordable to the point that people forgo health insurance, we think it’s more than fair to say this is the same as kicking people off health care,” his office wrote in an email to FactCheck.org.
Healthier people opting out would increase average premiums in the individual or nongroup market by 10 percent in most years, CBO and JCT say. That, in turn, would cause some others not to purchase coverage for financial reasons.
Still, expected premium hikes wouldn’t force all 13 million out of the insurance market. The report doesn’t say how many would willingly give up insurance and how many would be priced out of the market.
Rising premiums wouldn’t even necessarily account for all of the decline in the number of Americans who purchase their own insurance on the nongroup market. It also wouldn’t be a deciding factor for the estimated 5 million who would have otherwise enrolled in Medicaid.
In some cases, higher premiums would be offset by higher government subsidies in the form of premium tax credits for those eligible to receive them. As of March 2017, 84 percent of people purchasing health insurance through federal and state marketplaces received premium tax credits, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
The fact is, the CBO and JCT say that many of the 13 million, perhaps most of them, wouldn’t keep or obtain coverage because they wouldn’t be penalized for not doing so. That’s not the same as saying 13 million people will be kicked off their plans.

Abuses from the likes of Comey and Mueller are just the tip of the iceberg. We need to be reminded why the founders opposed having any sort of national police force.

Abuses from the likes of Comey and Mueller are just the tip of the iceberg. We need to be reminded why the founders opposed having any sort of national police force.

For the last few years, the media has been dominated by a number of sensational stories: that Trump colluded with Russia to influence the presidential election; that the Trump team was wiretapped by Obama intelligence officials; that Hillary used a private email server to transmit classified information; that Hillary and the DNC colluded with Russian sources to compile a dossier on Trump, and finally, that Russia acquired 20% of America’s uranium supply during the same time period $145 million miraculously appeared in the Clinton Foundation’s bank account. It all stinks to high heaven but it’s created a confusing array of facts that has bewildered most Americans. They all know something is seriously wrong with their country even if they can’t pinpoint exactly what the problem is.

But there is a common denominator in all these scandals or alleged scandals, and that would be the FBI and the actions they took or didn’t take. Indeed, it’s hard to not conclude that the agency’s actions in these events were improper if not illegal. If so, this validates the warnings by constitutionalists in the early 1900s that a federal police force would someday be used to prop up the ruling elites and attack those who dare challenge the establishment.
Under FBI Director James Comey, Hillary was allowed to escape prosecution, even though he presented compelling evidence that she committed numerous felonies by transmitting classified documents using her private email server. Comey also leaked classified information to a friend to be disseminated to the media, another felony, and his FBI was the recipient of a dossier full of sensational but false allegations traced to Putin-connected individuals. Instead of investigating the dossier’s sources, Comey used the phony intel as the basis for his allegation that the Russians intervened in our election, a charge later proven to be without factual basis. It also appears that Comey likely used the dossier’s claims to convince a FISA court to authorize a phone tap on various Trump aides and possibly even Trump himself.
Lastly, Comey refused to demand that the DNC hand over the computer servers they claimed were hacked by Russia, but nevertheless, he announced that the Russians had hacked into the DNC, thereby helping to create the phony Trump/Russia collusion narrative. But a group of cyber experts led by former high-ranking NSA cyber expert Bill Binney have concluded that the hack simply could not have occurred for technical reasons and that the leaked DNC emails had to come from an inside source. Regardless, for Comey to create a phony “Russia hacked the DNC” narrative without his agency ever analyzing the DNC server calls into question his honesty and his integrity.

On top of all that, former FBI director Robert Mueller — now Special Counsel — is investigating Trump for collusion with Russia when the evidence is now revealing that the only party that colluded with the Russians to influence the 2016 campaign was the Democratic Party. But Mueller doesn’t have the integrity to widen his investigation to cover the Clinton/GPS Fusion/Russian dossier scandal but instead is spending millions on investigating alleged crimes by former Trump campaign workers that occurred years ago and had nothing to do with Trump, Russian collusion, or the 2016 election.
Lastly, when Mueller was FBI Director, he served on the board of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), the agency that approved the sale of uranium to Russia by the Uranium One company only a short time after his own agency had arrested a Russian official attempting to bribe American uranium officials. But there is no record of Mueller warning his fellow CFIUS members about the illegal Russian efforts. It likewise begs logic to believe that Mueller knew nothing about the $145 million the Clinton Foundation received from Putin-connected sources shortly after the CFIUS vote. It is also inconceivable that Mueller, as FBI Director from 2001-2013, was not aware that the Clintons were using their foundation and Hillary’s Secretary of State position to operate a massive pay-to-play scam that went far beyond the Uranium One scandal.
It has become abundantly clear that Mueller is a partisan, as is Comey. Both of them have jeopardized national security in order to protect the Democratic Party. This is an unprecedented situation and both men should be investigated. Moreover, Mueller should be removed as the Special Counsel. The foxes are guarding the hen house.
Mueller and Comey have turned the FBI into a partisan force that ignores crimes by the left and fabricates crimes on the right such as the Trump/Russian collusion theory. Again, such corruption of the FBI was predicted by constitutionalists at the time the agency was formed. That time has arrived.

Within most conservative circles today it would be considered sacrilegious to argue in favor of abolishing the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Indeed, older Americans still think of the FBI as an agency full of incorruptible, efficient, clean cut guys in suits tracking down mobsters and exposing communist subversion. Younger Americans are influenced by popular shows such as television’s Criminal Minds, which, again, portray the G-Men as squeaky clean heroes.

However, it has become increasingly clear in recent years that this agency has become so politicized, so corrupt, and so large and bureaucratic that it may no longer be an effective agency. The time has come to discuss its abolition.
The FBI was started in 1935, although its predecessor — the Bureau of Investigation — was founded in 1908. In the early 1900s, crime was becoming more nationalized with multi-state mob crime families and the creation of large prostitution smuggling rings that crossed state lines. As a result, advocates of a federalized police force argued that a federal law enforcement agency was necessary in order to keep up with the criminals. The main argument was that the local police forces didn’t have the resources or the flexibility to investigate complex criminal cases or to chase mobsters from state to state.
But note that the FBI did not come into existence until 132 years after the country declared its independence. This was because the founders never envisioned a federal role for law enforcement. It is not one of the “enumerated” duties of the federal government listed in the constitution.
There were reasons for that. Our founders were skeptical of a large federal government and, indeed, not even the “federalist” faction argued for a federal law enforcement role. The Constitution’s authors all assumed that most of the country’s governing would be carried out by state and local governments; the Federal government was created simply to take care of things that states were not well suited to do, such as maintaining a military, minting currency, and negotiating trade treaties. Indeed, for most of America’s first century, the highest law enforcement officer was the county sheriff.
Except for treason, the idea of federal crimes was not even mentioned in the Constitution. Our founders had a healthy fear of America turning into a tyrannical government such as those which existed all over the world at the time. They wanted to maximize freedom; hence the Bill of Rights. They assumed the creation of a federalized police force would make it far easier for the federal government to abuse the rights of its citizens. This is why neither the Constitution, the ratification debates, nor the Federalist papers ever mention anything about a federal law enforcement role. Nada. Nothing. Indeed, in Federalist No. 45, James Madison specifically singles out “internal order” as an “unenumerated power” that must “remain in the state governments.”
In the last few decades, Congress has created over 3,000 federal crimes, thereby undermining the authority of local law enforcement and ultimately making the federal government more powerful and more prone to corruption and tyranny. As the late Washington Times columnist Sam Francis wrote, “Over the last 30 years or so, the creeping federal incursion into law enforcement has yielded some 140 agencies at the federal level that have such a role… but everyone knows the federal engulfment of law enforcement has failed miserably to control crime and make the country safe. That’s because, by its very nature, effective law enforcement is local.”
And there’s no doubt that national police forces in other countries have been used to transition a country to a dictatorship. Historian William L. Shirer wrote in his famous history of Nazi Germany, The Rise and Fall of the Third Rich, “On June 16, 1936, for the first time in German history, a unified police as established for the whole of the Reich — previously the police had been organized separately by each of the states …the Third Reich, as is inevitable in the development of all totalitarian dictatorships, had become a police state.”
But the FBI has never seemed concerned about its growing powers. Indeed, in the aftermath of WWII, the FBI was so impressed with Hitler’s police state, they secretly hired hundreds of Nazis as spies and informants. As Rutherford Institute president and conservative civil rights lawyer John Whitehead writes, the FBI “then carried out a massive cover-up campaign to ensure that their true identities and ties to Hitler’s holocaust machine would remain unknown. Moreover, anyone who dared to blow the whistle on the FBI’s illicit Nazi ties found himself spied upon, intimidated, harassed and labeled a threat to national security.”
But long before the rise of Hitler, America’s founders understood that the more locally controlled law enforcement is, the more accountable they are, whereas, a federal police force tends to be abused by a central government and is largely unaccountable to local and state governments. Indeed, it is unsettling to review the long list of incidents in which the FBI abused the rights of Americans and was clearly used by one political faction or another to carry out police state-like tactics. Let’s take a trip down memory lane:
Prosecuting Opponents of World War 1. President Woodrow Wilson used the FBI’s predecessor to illegally harass and prosecute thousands of peaceful opponents of World War 1, a war most conservatives would argue America had no business entering.
COINTELPRO. This was the FBI’s covert internal security program in the 1950s and ’60s, created to “disrupt, misdirect, discredit, and neutralize” groups and individuals the government deemed to be enemies. It was carried out under the direction of J. Edgar Hoover with the consent of Attorney General Robert Kennedy. Congressional hearings found that “Many of the techniques used would be intolerable in a democratic society even if all of the targets had been involved in violent activity, but COINTELPRO went far beyond that … the Bureau conducted a sophisticated vigilante operation aimed squarely at preventing the exercise of First Amendment rights of speech and association…” Many conservatives of the day cheered on COINTELPRO since it targeted Marxists and antiwar groups, but that cheering ended when the FBI set its sights on the right.
FBI Preparations for Martial Law. MuckRock, a group that exposes governmental corruption, obtained a 1956 FBI document via a FOIA request that described the FBI’s plans to implement martial law and round up dissidents in the event of nuclear war. The document, titled “Plan C,” states that ‘”as of April 17, 1956, 12,949 individuals were scheduled for apprehension in an emergency.” The FBI’s secretive list of “anti-government” citizens they felt needed to be rounded up has never been revealed but it’s clear the FBI was keeping files on anti-government individuals.
The Ruby Ridge Murders. In 1992, a BATF informant convinced former Green Beret Randy Weaver to sell him two shotguns which had barrels shortened illegally, thus creating the pretext for the FBI to launch a military-style assault on Weaver’s remote Idaho cabin, eventually killing his wife and fatally shooting his son in the back. The FBI agents violated numerous rules of engagement and an Idaho jury found Weaver innocent of almost all charges. According to author James Bovard, “Judge Lodge issued a lengthy list detailing the Justice Departments misconduct, fabrication of evidence and refusal to obey court orders.” No one was held accountable; indeed the agent in charge, Larry Potts, was promoted to FBI Deputy Director.
The Waco Massacre. In 1993, 76 citizens — including 26 children — were burned to death when the FBI laid siege to a Branch Davidian compound in Waco on the grounds they believed cult leader David Koresh possessed unauthorized weapons. However, there was no reason for the FBI to use police state tactics. Koresh visited town almost every week and could have easily been arrested during these excursions. Six years later the FBI admitted during the course of a civil lawsuit that the tear gas it fired into the compound was, in fact, pyrotechnic tear gas, which, probably caused the fire that killed most of the people. The shells were even stamped with a fire warning. Moreover, a law enforcement infrared video revealed muzzle flashes from the FBI’s positions, so contrary to the FBI’s testimony that they did not fire “a single shot,” it appears its snipers were shooting people as they tried to escape the compound. Indeed, a Policy Analysis report by the Heritage Foundation stated that “numerous crimes by government agents were never seriously investigated or prosecuted” and therefore, “the people serving in our federal police agencies may well come to the conclusion that it is permissible to recklessly endanger the lives of innocent people, lie to newspapers, obstruct congressional subpoenas, and give misleading testimony in our courtrooms.”
Helping Bill Clinton Collect Dirt on his Enemies. Often referred to as “Filegate,” in 1993-94, the FBI willingly turned over as many as 900 background check files on Republicans to the Clinton White House. Nothing came of the investigation into this as the Clintons claimed it was all a big mistake. Right.
Project Megiddo. This was another shady FBI project, launched in 1999, created for the purpose of monitoring groups on the right, such as constitutionalists, devout Christians, anti-tax activists, anti-UN and pro-gun groups and individuals, all considered by the FBI to be budding terrorists. Such descriptions cover just about everyone on the right. It is not known if Project Megiddo violated the rights of individuals as the FBI did with previous similar programs, such as COINTELPRO, but it’s likely. Not surprisingly, much of the info used by Project Megiddo was fed to them by hysterical leftist groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), as even the FBI has publicly acknowledged. Shameful.
Use of Criminals as Undercover Agents. Rutherford Institute President John Whitehead writes, “FBI agents are also among the nation’s most notorious lawbreakers. In fact, in addition to creating certain crimes in order to then ‘solve’ them, the FBI also gives certain informants permission to break the law… USA Today estimates that agents have authorized criminals to engage in as many as 15 crimes a day. Some of these informants are getting paid astronomical sums.”
Operation Vigilant Eagle. This FBI program initiated in 2009 targeted anti-government activists such as Tea Party activists and, alarmingly, veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars who are, as one FBI document states, “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering for the psychological effects of war.” The purpose of this program was allegedly to counter terrorism, but there’s not a shred of evidence veterans are more prone to terrorism than any other citizen. Nonetheless, the FBI actually claimed that veterans who challenge the government are suffering from “Oppositional Defiance Disorder (ODD).” One of the program’s first targets was 26-year-old decorated Marine veteran Brandon Raub. Due to posting anti-government statements on his Facebook page, the FBI arrested Raub with no warning, labeled him mentally ill and placed him in a psych ward against his will. Thankfully, Rutherford Institute attorney John Whitehead intervened and secured his release. Whitehead writes that he “may have helped prevent Raub from being successfully ‘disappeared’ by the government.” And this has happened to other veterans. If the FBI paid as much attention to jihadists as it does to military veterans, it would have stopped every domestic terror plot!
Targeting Pro-Lifers. In 2010, The FBI held a joint training session on terrorism with Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Federation. The main message of the seminar was that all pro-lifers are potential terrorists, an outrageous allegation. Indeed, material passed out by the pro-aborts at the seminar listed three pages of “anti-abortion web sites,” including those of National Right to Life, Concerned Women for America, the American Center for Law and Justice, and Human Life International. None of those groups advocate violence. This is another example of how the FBI allows itself to be used by the left to go after its enemies. Similarly, during Bill Clinton’s presidency, the FBI created a project called VAAPCON to create files on pro-life religious leaders such as Rev. Jerry Falwell. Indeed, Judicial Watch, representing Falwell, sued the Clinton White House, seeking info on the project, but all the files mysteriously disappeared, Clinton style.
The IRS Scandal. The government watchdog group, Judicial Watch, obtained documents revealing that the FBI was involved with the illegal IRS effort to investigate — and thus silence— around 500 conservative and Tea Party groups during Obama’s 2012 reelection. Perhaps the worst use of the IRS in American history, this was about manipulating the 2012 presidential election and the FBI was complicit in this abuse of governmental power. As JWs Tom Fitton writes, “Both the FBI and Justice Department collaborated with Lois Lerner and the IRS to try to persecute and jail Barack Obama’s political opponents.”
FBI Worked With the SPLC. For much of the Obama era, the FBI listed the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) on its website as part of its effort to combat “hate crimes.” However, many of the groups identified by the SPLC as “hate groups” are not. One example is the Family Research Council, a mainstream pro-family organization. As a result of the FBI’s promotion of SPLC’s phony hate group list, a shooter entered FRC’s headquarters in 2012, wounding the front desk security guard and attempted to slaughter all the FRC employees. He was subdued by the wounded guard. Indeed, the SPLC believes all Christian groups that oppose the gay agenda or abortion are “hate groups,” a bizarre notion that has never been condemned by the FBI even though it did, in 2014, quietly drop the SPLC from its website.
Data Mining Innocent Americans. In 2013, Bloomberg exposed the FBI’s data mining project carried out on hundreds of thousands of Americans, most of whom were not guilty of any crimes.
Raids on Homes of Anti-Government Activists. Repeatedly, the FBI has raided homes on the flimsiest of evidence. In 2014, it raided the home of prepper Martin Winters, claiming he was some kind of domestic terrorist. But nothing was found aside from food stocks and other survivalist gear. Then there’s Terry Porter, also a prepper, whose house the FBI raided in 2012 using twice as many agents as in the Branch Davidian raid. Again, nothing alarming found there. Since when did anti-government preppers become terrorists? The FBI raids group meetings as well, such as when it raided a Republic of Texas secessionist movement meeting in 2015. No one was arrested because no one did anything illegal. But once again, the FBI treated a handful of elderly men discussing constitutional issues as a terrorist plot.
Fraudulent Forensics. Special Agent and whistleblower Frederic Whitehurst revealed in 2015 that FBI crime lab technicians routinely testified falsely about crime lab samples throughout the 1980s and 1990s. As former Judge Andrew Napolitano writes, “its agents and lab technicians who examine hair samples testified falsely in 257 of 268 cases that resulted in convictions. Of the convictions, 18 persons were sentenced to death, and of those, 12 have been executed.” Yes, innocent people died, thanks to the FBI.
FBI High School Informer Network. In 2016, the FBI launched an effort to enlist the help of high school students to ostensibly identify terrorists, but the FBI documents in question reveal they were also urging students to report on anti-government groups such as libertarian and constitutional groups. This effort is shockingly similar to the informant networks set up by the KGB in the USSR and the Stasi in East Germany.
The FBI Record on Fighting Terrorism.
Many Americans assume, however, that at least in the area of Islamic terrorism, the FBI has kept Americans largely safe. Not so fast. The record doesn’t quite show that. In fact, the agency has blundered many terrorism investigations and thus jeopardized the security of Americans. Examples:

• In 2009, Islamist Nidal Hasan fatally shot 13 people at the Fort Hood Military Base, but his radical associations and open support for jihad were previously known by the FBI. It even had emails in which Hasan stated he wanted to kill his fellow soldiers. Indeed, records show that not only was there reluctance by officials to drum Hasan out of the military — for political reasons — but he was promoted at every opportunity.
• In 2013, local officials caught seven foreign Muslims trespassing after midnight onto Quabbin Reservoir, a critical Northwest drinking reservoir. The FBI took over the case but let the trespassers go because they believe them to be just “tourists.” Yes, just midnight tourists. Only a few months earlier, another terrorist had been arrested for planning to poison a different reservoir.
• In 2013, the Tsarnaev brothers bombed the Boston Marathon, killing three people and injuring hundreds more. Russian intelligence warned the FBI about Tamerlan Tsarnaev and the agency even interviewed him, but it appears the FBI determined that Russia’s intelligence was not accurate. Until the bombs went off.
• In 2015, when the government watchdog group Judicial Watch obtained documents confirming that ISIS terrorists were crossing the Mexican/Texas border, concerned FBI agents held meetings at the U.S. Consulate in Ciudad Juarez with Mexican officials. But not to figure out a plan to deal with such crossings, but rather to deny these allegations and to determine who leaked the info to JW. Forget the message and attack the messenger. What a great counter-terrorism strategy.
• In 2015, the FBI failed to prevent the San Bernardino terror attack by an Islamic couple from Pakistan connected to an Islamic terrorist group whose files were among those purged earlier by the FBI, thereby making it nearly impossible for the agency to detect this pair.
• In 2015, two Islamic terrorists attacked a Muhammad art expo in Garland, Texas, but the FBI actually had an informant at the scene with the terrorists, but it never bothered to warn the expo’s organizers of the impending attack. Apparently, the agency didn’t want to blow the informant’s cover! Fortunately, security guard Bruce Joiner shot and killed both shooters before they could get inside the exhibition hall. Joiner wonders why the FBI would allow this attack to transpire, stating “That’s not the kind of thing we do in the United States with our citizens.”
• In 2016, Islamist Omar Mateen slaughtered 49 people at an Orlando nightclub. While the FBI did investigate him for 10 months it closed his file because it believed he was “being marginalized because of his Muslim faith.” Seriously.
• The FBI has flat out denied that Las Vegas shooter Steven Paddock has any Islamic terror connections, but the reality is it really doesn’t know enough about him to make such a claim. Indeed, ISIS never takes credit for attacks that are not its own and on three occasions, it has announced Paddock was connected to ISIS. It even revealed Paddock’s Islamic name: Abu Abdul Barr al-Amriki. Also, Paddock made trips to the Middle East. Given the FBI’s record, ISIS’s statements may be more credible than the FBI’s denials.
• The latest terrorist incident in New York City was also bungled. Months before Sayfullo Saipov mowed down over 20 people, the FBI interviewed him because it knew he was connected to two men with terrorist connections. As such, his visa should have been revoked and he should have been deported, but the agency didn’t even open up a file on him.
• Finally, the 9/11 terrorist attack itself could have been prevented by the FBI. It had enough intel to connect the dots but didn’t. Many of its pre-9/11 reports on al Qaeda were lost or not shared with the proper people. One was a memo by Phoenix FBI Agent Ken Williams, describing suspected al Qaeda members training at U.S. flight schools. How could that not result in a full scale investigation? And Special Agent Mark Rossini sent a message to FBI headquarters warning that 9/11 hijacker Khalid al-Mihdhar had a multi-entry visa to enter the U.S. before 9/11. But that cable went “missing” when Congress held hearings on how our intelligence agencies manage to completely miss so many obvious clues.

And there are many other examples that can’t be cited here due to lack of space, but it’s difficult to find a domestic terrorist investigation that the FBI hasn’t screwed up. The above incidents alone cost the lives of almost 3,200 Americans. One would think that in the aftermath of 9/11, the FBI would make an effort to become more efficient when it comes to counter-terrorism, but with the 2008 election of Barack Obama, the FBI not only remained overly bureaucratic but became hyper politically correct.
Incredible as it may seem, in 2011, Obama’s FBI Director, Robert Mueller, met with a coalition of radical Islamic groups and agreed to purge thousands of files “offensive” to Muslims. Judicial Watch said the “purge is part of a broader Islamic ‘influence operation’ aimed at our government and constitution.”
In other words, the FBI caved in to groups that do not have our best interests at heart. Indeed, two of the groups Mueller met with, ISNA and CAIR, were unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Many terror experts believe this purge crippled the FBI’s abilities to detect some of the terror plots that occurred during the Obama years. Due to its desire not to offend Muslims, the FBI jeopardized the lives of many Americans.
Conservatives Should Quit Defending the FBI
The FBI has a long history of being used by various administrations to harass certain groups and individuals, or, conversely, to allow certain groups and individuals to commit crimes without fear of prosecution. The FBI is supposed to uphold the Constitution but instead has repeatedly violated the constitutional rights of Americans. This politicization has cost many Americans their lives and their freedoms. The abuse listed here is not comprehensive but it’s enough, one would think, to make conservatives think twice about defending this agency’s police state tactics.
Indeed, the Wall Street Journal has reported that “nearly one out of every three American adults are on file in the FBI’s master criminal database,” even though most of them have not been convicted of a crime. Does anyone really believe our founding fathers would be fine with such sweeping federal law enforcement powers?
The aforementioned conservative civil rights attorney, John Whitehead, summarizes today’s FBI: “In additions to procedural misconduct, trespassing, enabling criminal activity, and damaging private property, the FBI’s laundry list of crimes against the American people includes surveillance, disinformation, blackmail, entrapment, intimidation tactics, and harassment.” President Harry Truman once said, “We want no Gestapo or secret police. The FBI is trending in that direction.” And that was 72 years ago.
It’s Time to Turn Over FBI Investigations to the States
If the FBI was abolished and its workload turned over to the states, it would not be as difficult as some would portray it. Indeed, what most Americans don’t realize is that almost every state already has a state version of the FBI. New Mexico has the New Mexico State Police, the Golden State has the California Bureau of Investigation, Texas has both the Texas Rangers and the Texas Department of Public Safety, and Georgia has the Georgia Bureau of investigation. (One can view the list here.)
Moreover, all these agencies are equipped with crime labs and the latest forensic tools. At one time, such tools were prohibitively expensive for state police agencies to acquire, but technological advances have brought the cost of such equipment down, resulting in most states having the latest forensics equipment that at one time was monopolized by the FBI. For example, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation is famous for its forensic work: “The Division of Forensic Sciences envisions a future in which we continue to build and develop an internationally recognized forensic laboratory system that partners with governmental and private entities….”
Today, much of the FBI’s work entails the investigation of federal crimes committed within one state. There is no reason why the states can’t handle these investigations and if the case does happen to cross over into other states, then the states simply coordinate. Those days in which a criminal would escape the law by crossing a state line are long gone. Indeed, that practice was one of the reasons why the FBI was created, but with today’s advances in communication technology, that simply doesn’t happen anymore. All states today have the technology to easily track criminals as they cross state lines and it’s not difficult for two states or more to work together in the apprehension of a criminal. Already, states today cooperate on a wide array of governmental actions; there is no reason why they can’t coordinate on a police investigation or criminal apprehension.

Some of the FBI’s workload involves complex white collar cases such as tax evasion, money laundering, bank fraud, and commodities fraud, but if a state police agency feels it doesn’t have the expertise to investigate such crimes, it can enlist the assistance of existing agencies that already investigate such crimes. The IRS, Securities Exchange Commission, Treasury Department and the Secret Service all have investigative branches that handle different aspects of financial crimes.
Then, of course, there are the federal crime data bases largely maintained by the FBI, including the National Crime Information Center database, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, the Integrated Fingerprint Identification System, and the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS). These databases should be turned over to the Department of Justice, which, in part, already play a role in maintaining them. More importantly, the state police agencies will need to be given ready access to these databases if they are to take on cases formerly handled by the FBI.
State law enforcement agencies are not perfect but it is far more difficult for the federal government to politicize the actions of a state agency. Moreover, it is much easier to hold state agencies accountable for any abuses they commit, just by virtue of being closer to the people.
Indeed, with access to federal crime data bases, most state police agencies have the capability to handle cases the FBI now handles, including domestic terrorist investigations. It’s a good bet that, given the FBI’s record on terrorism, the states will do a better job at stopping and preventing terrorism.
America’s founders were wise men and they knew not to make law enforcement a federal responsibility. They foresaw how the federal government could use a national police agency to play favorites, wreck havoc on our democratic institutions, and ultimately move us closer to a police state. The only question that remains is whether any politician will have the guts to initiate discussion on abolishing the FBI.

Illegal Aliens Killed Border Agent by Crushing in His Skull with Rocks, Says NBPC

by Brandon Darby & Ildefonso Ortiz19 Nov 2017605

Exclusive details have emerged on the early morning attack against Border Patrol agents that left one agent dead and another hospitalized in serious condition on November, 19 2017. Breitbart Texas first broke the news of the death and injuries and now the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC) says that their agents on the ground have stated that the agents were tracking a group of illegal aliens who then beat the agents with rocks until one was killed and the other hospitalized.

Border Patrol Agent Brandon Judd, also president of the NBPC, stated, “What we know is that Border Patrol Agent Rogilio Martinez appears to have been ambushed by a group of illegal aliens whom he was tracking. Our agents’ reports from the ground say that he was struck in the head multiple times with a rock or rocks.”
Agent Judd continued, “The other agent arrived on scene a short time later and was also ambushed and struck in the head with what is believed to have been a rock or rocks. These disgusting acts and complete disregard for human life need to stop immediately. Family members of slain Agent Martinez will never get to see him come home again all because we have failed to secure our borders from such criminals.”
Shortly after Breitbart Texas broke the news of the incident, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) confirmed that one Border Patrol agent was dead and another hospitalized in serious condition; however, authorities would not provide more details. Breitbart Texas was unable to confirm the details with CBP and other federal agencies. The NBPC is the organization that represents approximately 16,000 of our nation’s Border Patrol agents.

advertisement

Our original report is included below.

One Border Patrol agent is dead and his partner left hospitalized in serious condition in the Big Bend Sector of Texas. The FBI is leading the investigation while Border Patrol Special Operations agents and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Air and Marine Operations aircrews are currently searching the area for possible attackers.

Breitbart Texas learned from a trusted CBP official that details on the matter are scarce.

We do know that two Border Patrol agents working as partners in the Van Horn Station area of responsibility of the Big Bend Sector responded to “activity.” Whether the activity was an activated sensor or something else is currently unknown. This occurred on the morning of Sunday, November 19, 2017.

One of the Border Patrol agents later radioed into the communication center saying that he needed assistance and that he was injured. Other Border Patrol agents responded and found one agent injured and unconscious with injuries to his head and body. That agent, Rogelio Martinez, was later pronounced dead. Breitbart has learned that the agent’s family has been notified.

The responding agents also found the partner who had radioed for help. The agents transported the injured agent to the hospital where he is in “serious condition,” according to the official.Border Patrol agents and Culberson County Sheriff’s Office deputies secured the area.

Border Patrol Agent and President of the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC) Brandon Judd spoke with Breitbart Texas and expressed the council’s deepest condolences to the family of Agent Martinez and to the family of the other agent who is not named at this time. Agent Judd said that this is another example of why the border must be secured. Judd stated, “When all facts come to light on this matter, I believe the public will be outraged as there are those who do not value life who come across our border. Our borders must be secured and criminals must be held accountable.”

On February 28, 1993, federal agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives attempted to raid a church in Waco, Texas over allegations of “weapons violations.”

Revising, modifying, segregating and unpranking the most ahistorical, contrived, racist and attention-seeking fakeries in the week’s fake news.
Not the deadliest, not by a long shot
In the wake of the massacre at the First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs, Texas, we were told that the shooting that claimed 26 lives and left 20 more wounded was the deadliest church shooting in modern U.S. history.
The truth is, this horrific event is not the deadliest church shooting in Texas history, so the media is, once again, peddling fake news.
On February 28, 1993, federal agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives attempted to raid a church in Waco, Texas over allegations of “weapons violations.”
A gun battle erupted in which four feds and six church members died. After a standoff that lasted 51 days, federal agents shot incendiary devices into the compound which set it ablaze, killing 76 people, including women and children. So whether you count 81 dead over the course of the entire event or just the 76 people killed at the end of the siege, this is clearly far and away a “deadlier” shooting than the one at Sutherland Springs.
Of course, the feds initiated the raid to “save the children,” which is the usual excuse for the specious nonsense that often leads to liberty-stealing government laws and sometimes government murder and mayhem. The church was the Branch Davidian sect led by David Koresh. And the charge that Davidians were abusing children turned out to be propaganda.
Somehow, when the government kills people it’s not called murder. So the careless, if not intentional, murder of 81 people in the church of their choice by the government does not count on official statistics. But those people are dead all the same.

A black student wrote those racist messages that shook the Air Force Academy, school says

Play Video 5:29

Air Force general to racists: ‘Get out’

Lt. Gen. Jay Silveria, superintendent of the U.S. Air Force Academy, spoke to cadets and cadet candidates on Sept. 28 after racial slurs were written on the dormitory message boards of five black cadets at the academy’s preparatory school. (USAFAOfficial/YouTube)

In late September, five black cadet candidates found racial slurs scrawled on message boards on their doors at the U.S. Air Force Academy Preparatory School. One candidate found the words “go home n‑‑‑‑‑‑” written outside his room, his mother posted on social media, according to the Air Force Times.
The racist messages roiled the academy in Colorado Springs and prompted the school to launch an investigation. They led its superintendent to deliver a stern speech that decried the “horrible language” and drew national attention for its eloquence.
Surrounded by 1,500 members of the school’s staff, Lt. Gen. Jay Silveria told cadets to take out their phones and videotape the speech, “so you can use it . . . so that we all have the moral courage together.”
“If you can’t treat someone with dignity and respect,” Silveria said, “then get out.”
The speech, which the academy posted on YouTube, went viral. It was watched nearly 1.2 million times, grabbed headlines nationwide, and was commended by former vice president Joe Biden and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).
But on Tuesday, the school made a jolting announcement. The person responsible for the racist messages, the academy said, was, in fact, one of the cadet candidates who reported being targeted by them.
“The individual admitted responsibility and this was validated by the investigation,” academy spokesman Lt. Col. Allen Herritage said in a statement to the Associated Press, adding: “Racism has no place at the academy, in any shape or form.”
The cadet candidate accused of crafting the messages was not identified, but the Colorado Springs Gazette reported that the individual is no longer enrolled at the school. Sources also told the Gazette the cadet candidate “committed the act in a bizarre bid to get out of trouble he faced at the school for other misconduct,” the newspaper reported.
The announcement thrust the Air Force Academy Preparatory School onto a growing list of recent “hate crime hoaxes” — instances in which acts of racism or anti-Semitism were later found to be committed by someone in the targeted minority group.
On Monday, police in Riley County, Kansas, revealed that a 21-year-old black man, Dauntarius Williams, admitted to defacing his car with racist graffiti as a “Halloween prank that got out of hand.” Scrawled in washable paint were racist messages telling blacks to “Go Home,” “Date your own kind,” and “Die.” The incident provoked controversy and concern at nearby Kansas State University, especially after Williams spoke with the Kansas City Star, claiming to be a black student who was leaving the school because of the incident. He was not, in fact, a student.
Officials decided not to file criminal charges against Williams for filing a false report, saying it “would not be in the best interests” of citizens of the Manhattan, Kan., community, police said in a news release. They said Williams was “genuinely remorseful” for his actions and published an apology on his behalf.
“The whole situation got out of hand when it shouldn’t have even started,” Williams said in the statement. “I wish I could go back to that night but I can’t. I just want to apologize from the bottom of my heart for the pain and news I have brought you all.”
When reports circulated last week about the racial slurs on the car, African American students at the nearby Kansas State University campus held a meeting to talk about the incident.
Andrew Hammond, a journalism student at Kansas State, told the Kansas City Star Monday he was “outraged and hurt” to learn the crime was fake.
“As a black student who has witnessed racist incidents first-hand around Manhattan this hurts the credibility of students who actually want to step out and say something about it,” Hammond said. “I’m not sure what type of human being does this kind of thing as a prank.”
About three weeks earlier, police announced that a 29-year-old black man, a former student named Eddie Curlin, had been charged in connection with three racist graffiti incidents at Eastern Michigan University: “KKK” sprayed on a dorm wall, messages ordering blacks to leave scrawled on a building, and a racist message left in a men’s restroom stall.
It’s unclear exactly what prompts people to commit these hoaxes, stunts and false reports. But such revelations have become a major concern for civil rights activists who document racist and anti-Semitic incidents, particularly amid a rise in reported hate crimes since the 2016 general election.
“There aren’t many people claiming fake hate crimes, but when they do, they make massive headlines,” Ryan Lenz, senior investigative writer for the Southern Poverty Law Center Intelligence Project, told ProPublica. All it takes is one false report, Lenz said, “to undermine the legitimacy of other hate crimes.”
These reports have also energized many right-wing commentators and President Trump supporters, who argue that reports about hate speech and racist graffiti are often fake accounts disseminated by liberal media.
“Anyone (including the lapdog media) who was surprised by this hate crime hoax hasn’t been paying attention,” Jeremy Carl, a research fellow at the right-leaning Hoover Institution at Stanford University, tweeted early Wednesday in response to the news about the Air Force Academy Preparatory School. “The stream of fake hate crimes became a flood after Trump’s election.”
“HATE HOAX: Air Force Academy Cadet Candidate Wrote Fake Racist Messages Himself,” read a headline in the conservative Daily Caller.
There is even a website — fakehatecrimes.org — committed to listing hate crime hoaxes.
In August, Sebastian Gorka, then-deputy assistant to Trump and his spokesman on national security matters, appeared on MSNBC to explain why the president hadn’t condemned the bombing of a mosque in Bloomington, Minn. He suggested it was because the attack may have been a “fake” hate crime.
“There’s a great rule: All initial reports are false,″ Gorka said. “We’ve had a series of crimes committed, alleged hate crimes, by right-wing individuals in the last six months, that turned out to actually have been propagated by the left.”
Despite the string of frauds, experts on hate crimes say that false accounts are still relatively rare.
Brian Levin, director for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University at San Bernardino, told Talking Points Memo that hoaxes do appear in hate crime reports, just as they do in reports of other criminal offenses. But these fakes are a “tiny fraction” of the hundreds of hate crimes reported to law enforcement every year.
“These hoaxes have become symbols for some who want to promote the idea that most hate crimes are hoaxes,” Levin said. “That’s important to rectify.”
And indeed, scores of these incidents are cropping up across the country, particularly on college campuses.
Using a ProPublica database, BuzzFeed News found 154 total incidents of hate speech at more than 120 college campuses nationwide. More than two-thirds promoted white supremacist groups or ideology, while more than a third cited Trump’s name or slogans, BuzzFeed News reported.
Yet authorities caught fewer than 5 percent of perpetrators in cases of vandalism or threats. In at least three instances, college officials determined the incident was a hoax, according to BuzzFeed News.
On Tuesday, Silveria, the Air Force general who gained national fame for his speech condemning the September incidents at the preparatory academy, stood by his original remarks.
“Regardless of the circumstances under which those words were written, they were written, and that deserved to be addressed,” Silveria told the Colorado Springs Gazette in a Tuesday email. “You can never over-emphasize the need for a culture of dignity and respect — and those who don’t understand those concepts, aren’t welcome here.”

Food and Drug Administration in 2004, is an injectable microchip that use radio frequency identification (RFID) technology.

Disaster preppers, survivalists, hunting enthusiasts and organic gardeners have been gathering annually in Kansas City, Missouri, for the past three years for the RK Prepper Kansas City Survival Expo & Gun Show.

It invites attendees to gain skills in emergency preparedness and offers a gun exhibition. The organizers said there were some 3,000 people and about 110 exhibitors at this year’s event, which was held in September.

The organizers told ABC News that recent news coverage of disasters, such as the hurricanes and wildfires that devastated parts of the country, seem to be encouraging more people to attend.

This year the organizers have held or have planned 17 shows across the country — an increase from five in 2015.

Below are what some attendees of the Kansas City show had to say.

Mark Kemp, Provo, Utah

Roger Kisby/Redux for ABC News

Mark Kemp holds a container of heirloom celery seeds at the Kansas City Survival Expo and Gun Show, Sept. 30, 2017, in Kansas City, Mo.

“

”

I teach classes to try and get everyone to realize that hard times are coming.

An economic collapse is coming.

This is the belief of Mark Kemp, a disaster prepper from Provo, Utah, who has spent 15 years building independent food resources.

He expresses concern about the possibility of losing food security in the future. “FEMA is going to come and take all our guns and food storage because that’s how they are going to get you take the RFID chip,” he says. “I’m not taking the chip.”

The VeriChip, approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2004, is an injectable microchip that use radio frequency identification (RFID) technology. It was originally intended to provide easy access to patients’ medical records and is now also used for access control and security. The chip is the size of a grain of rice and can be placed between a thumb and forefinger.

He refers to this identification chip of the future as the biblical “sign of the beast.”

Kemp is preparing to survive this future onslaught and is sharing his knowledge.

“I teach classes to try and get everyone to realize that hard times are coming. There are millions of people that we are going to need to feed in this country.”

Kemp tells ABC News that he has seed packs buried on his land, each with the potential to grow nearly 150,000 pounds of produce in 90 days.

He has plans to build several underground greenhouses.