Immediately after the space shuttle Columbia broke up upon re-entry ten years ago, I realized that it was very unlikely that NASA did not know that the spacecraft had been damaged. Further, I was certain that NASA had been aware the ship would probably be destroyed upon re-entry. My only question was whether the crew had been told or not. I was, after a few weeks, sure that they had not been told since there was no discussion of it by family members getting out to the press. And I was optimistic that, eventually, someone would talk and let us know the whole story.
Yes, I'll admit it: I was suspicious of a "conspiracy." My suspicions were in part confirmed by the information that came out immediately after the incident concerning the probable cause of the disaster. They had to have analyzed that footage immediately after take off as a routine matter, I was sure. The speed with which they came out with a lot of information was damning as well.
It was obvious to me that there was a cover-up of the facts to avoid an unprecedented public relations disaster that would have haunted NASA for years. Imagine, I stated to friends on and off the internet, what an utter failure NASA would have looked like as they had helplessly watched from below as the astronauts spent their last days alive in orbit, unable to return to earth, and slowly ran out of air. The space shuttle Columbia as an orbiting tomb was anathema to bureaucrats who make a very expensive affair out of launching rockets on old systems and so far are remaining an obstacle to man's full commercial exploitation of space. They were, and are, in the "catbird seat." They don't want to give up any of the taxpayer dollars flowing into their organization. To keep those dollars flowing, they have to engage heavily in politics. Politics is centered on perception and public reactions to what they accomplish--and especially on mistakes they make.
As bureaucracies tend to do, the decision to kill the astronauts upon reentry in an "accident" was made in order to protect the government agency and cover up their bureaucratic bumbling. While there was no way to "win" in the situation, the leaders quickly determined that the far better alternative was to have the accident be short and horrific with the resulting wave of public sympathy to ameliorate the negative outcome. On the other hand, a drawn out disaster lasting many days of instant news cycles with video footage of astronauts tearfully saying goodbye would have certainly led to the dismissal of the leadership and possibly a total reorganization of NASA. That the decision made was a result of cold, calculating minds that put the lives of the astronauts as the last priority has finally been revealed:
Well, uh, since I, like most people, actually have some empathy for the individuals that died aboard the space shuttle, I think if I had been in that situation that it would have been really grand in terms of the big picture of one's brief existence on (and above) earth to have had a chance to say goodbye to my friends and family before my body was destroyed in a fiery explosion miles above the earth.
Who the hell were they to determine what was best for the astronauts? What the bureaucracy did in taking away their last few days of existence is something akin to to murder. Flippantly assuming what the astronauts might have wanted or what was "best" for them is arrogant and evil, yet it is the essence of the all-powerful, big government mindset. Oh, how generous of them to send the shuttle crew to their deaths a few days earlier than they had to. They "saved them" from all that mental anguish? To hell with that! If it had been me, I'd have wanted every last second of life.
Yeah, it would have been miserable to go through that expectation of certain death, probably making the futile attempt to reenter just before the air ran out, but I'd rather have been treated with a little respect as a fellow human being and told of the bad news. Those last few days of existence would have been like gold to me and to my family however upsetting the circumstances. Such an ending, knowing that it is near, is a far better one than being conveniently dismissed as just another dog or chimpanzee experiment that just so happened to end in the death of the subjects.
Although another article from 2011 treated the discussion as if it were all a hypothetical question at the time and state that members of NASA leadership were certain that the heat shield would be fine, it is clear that the news of this discussion was held back on purpose in order to protect themselves and the agency as a whole. It is also apparent that the fact that the discussion occurred at all--even if under what they claim were "hypothetical" terms--indicates that there was, at the very least, a willing blindness to the potential of disaster. They purposefully did not do everything they could have to investigate fully the consequences after being made aware early on of the foam impact.
It is apparent to me that this was much more than a hypothetical discussion. It was, at the very least, a trial balloon that was quickly shot down by the powers that be. The question, if put in plain English, really was, "Since there was a heavy impact of a large piece of foam at high velocity on a critical section of the shuttle's heat shield, should we risk putting our agency under negative, worldwide scrutiny of the entire world in a drawn out, real-life disaster epic by actually finding out the facts of the situation?"
The answer was, "No. We let the astronauts die without warning for the good of the American space program and in order to protect our jobs. Look out for number one and CYA!"
Strangely enough, Hale admits there was a purposeful attempt to deceive the Columbia astronauts. NASA leadership admittedly had very big concerns but they downplayed everything to the crew:
Which was it then? A cultural norm of hopelessness and not wanting to know even when there are obviously bad signs of potential damage? Or was it purposeful deceit? Obviously it was both. They admit that they knew there was potentially bad damage but didn't want to face the consequences in a responsible manner and hide their heads in the sand.
What happened was obviously bureaucratic mind-gaming aimed at avoiding dealing with the problem in an open and honest matter. The leadership at NASA essentially admits that they did not want to know for absolute certain that there was a problem. That really means, for the bureaucratic mindset that they didn't want to be held culpable for having known ahead of time that the flight was doomed. If they had fully investigated, they couldn't have held out any hope and would have been forced to tell the crew the bad news. If, as they decided due to "fatalistic attitude about the heat shield system being unfixable" not to investigate, they felt themselves not responsible for what happened. "Oops! How did THAT happen?"
Then, of course, there was the expected drama of a full investigation, Challenger incident redux, and the systematic diffusion of real blame away from the leadership. Noble goals of not letting this ever happen again, developing a questionable repair kit, and claiming they were "never ever going to say that there is nothing we can do” are designed to distract but really only confirm that their failure to investigate was designed to protect themselves and their agency.
It is obvious that fear alone determined NASA administrators' course of action. They knew that the chunk of foam that hit was the biggest by far to ever hit a shuttle and they knew already of damage caused by smaller chunks and they knew the location of the hit was critical.
One of the most fundamental aspects of human dignity is that of choice. The leadership at NASA, in my opinion, acted in a depraved and cowardly manner. They took away the element of choice from the astronauts aboard Columbia. Withholding the knowledge they had from those fellow human beings most affected by it is criminal negligence in this writer's opinion. Treating humans as mere cogs in the NASA machine is the worst sin of all, morally. They took away their choice and their dignity by presuming to know what was best for them. NASA's treatment of the Columbia crew as not worthy of being consulted on their impending doom is a stain upon their reputation that can never be removed.
The treatment of the space shuttle Columbia crew by a self-absorbed government agency led by money-grubbing psychopaths looking out for the best interests of their future funding rather than treating their fellow man with respect is reprehensible. It should go down in history as yet another example of how big government treats individuals with disrespect. This treatment is part of the ongoing process of dehumanization of individuals and their attendant rights and liberties by creating in the public's minds the perception that individuals are the "little people" and that the grand goals and desires of large organizations and governments are the most important parts of the human experience. Indeed, space flight and the conquering of space are grand achievements that capture the imagination but even those goals and accomplishments so far are absolutely nothing compared to the miracle of life here on earth and the fact of our existence in the universe around us. Group achievements can never overshadow the wonder of the individual's relationship to God and nature.
In the past, such a big government attitude belittling or ignoring individual liberty was the definition of being a Whig. It was the Hamiltonian view that government existed in order to promote itself and to enrich favored individuals or groups in the ruling elite. In other words, such self-serving government was an extension of the monarchic system and its attendant aristocracy. Today, such a prevalent attitude is termed as being essential in order to promote grand public works projects in the name of the socialist state. Identical elitist attitudes, just different names for the same old tyranny.
Such organizations as NASA are very impersonal as a whole yet the experience that each of us has in our lives, due to the very nature of our existence, is VERY personal. This whole incident is yet another warning of how groups of people often act more as a brutal mob than as moral creatures grateful for their existence and respectful of their fellow human beings.
So, chalk one up to the "conspiracy nuts" this time around. Those of us who publicly or privately suspected the truth were right after all. A cynical view of big government is healthy for one's chances of survival. For those of us who want to be free and want succeeding generations to also be blessed with liberty, it is essential.
Nullification has historically been used since the very foundation of our country to protect the liberties of Americans and was a tactic advocated by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson even before the concept of judicial review was conceived in 1803. It recognizes that since the Constitution never states that the federal government has the exclusive power to declare a law unconstitutional, and that all powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states under the tenth amendment, that the states can declare an unconstitutional law null and void because an unconstitutional law isn’t a law at all.
Earl Capps, however, doesn’t like nullification. But instead of debating the merits of the issue, he is more interested in personally attacking those who do believe in using it to resist ObamaCare, gun control, or other unconstitutional federal actions.
Like the media reporters with an agenda who tried this past week to associate the nullification effort with secession by finding one or two people out of the 400 who rallied against ObamaCare in Columbia, Earl Capps attempted to tie the entire nullification effort to one person who suggested using violence to thwart implementation of ObamaCare. It’s called guilt by association or an “association fallacy” — and it’s B.S.
Those kind of association fallacy tactics are popular with the left who try to paint the tea party movement as racist, for example, but Earl Capps professes to be a conservative Republican. So why is he attacking his fellow conservative Republicans?
In fact, his “blogland” features anti-tea party rants on a regular basis. In the past, he supported Lindsey Graham’s doubts about the “sustainability” of the tea party because of its uncompromising conservative platform. He also attacked tea party backed candidates like Rex Rice, John Steinberger, and even Katrina Shealey. In his recent article, he claims the nullification effort by the “lunatic fringe” are “why people have soured on the Tea Party movement.”
Participant in the Charleston County Republican Party Facebook group wants to execute Ron Paul supporters.
Since he, like the left-liberals, believes so strongly in guilt by association, perhaps he will also criticize the Charleston County Republican Party Facebook group (which he participates in regularly) because someone there posted he wants Ron Paul supporters executed.
Click on the image to the right, and you will see someone who Earl Capps invites to his own home saying “Paulbots” (Ron Paul supporters) “should be hung, drawn, and quartered.”The Chairman of the Charleston County Republican Party group never interjects to say that is out of line (though she does say bylaws from our organization cannot be posted there) and she goes on to tell someone who believes the group has become too negative to leave the group.
Does that mean the Charleston County Republican Party supports Ron Paul supporters being hung, drawn, and quartered? Are they a violent bunch? We doubt that — Just as we doubt that most tea party activists wanting to nullify ObamaCare are how Mr. Capps portrays them. Each person is responsible for his own comments. We can’t judge the entire tea party nullify ObamaCare movement by the words of one person any more than we can judge the entire Charleston County GOP because of the words of one person.
Earl Capps Against Fixing Last Year’s Ballot Crisis.
But what more should we expect from Earl Capps? He is the same one who opposed fixing last year’s ballot crisis, where hundreds of candidates (most of them conservative Republicans) were thrown off the ballot, because it could be politically beneficial to Republicans in minority-majority districts.
In the image to the left, Earl Capps states that “the Clarendon GOP has a chance to win an unwinnable House seat by default with this issue… Are you asking the Clarendon GOP to give this once-in-a-lifetime shot away?” He goes on to explain that “House [district] 64 is a majority-black district with NO democratic candidates because of this situation. Open [candidate filing back] up and the three candidates who filed will be back on the ballot and you can kiss that seat goodbye.”
Earl Capps has attacked the RLC before for lamenting the fact that after 9/11 Americans have lost liberties with TSA body cavity searches and aerial drone surveillance over our back yards; however, we did not feel the necessity to dignify the rants of a minor-league blogger with a response at the time.
But it has come to our attention that Mr. Capps may seek the chairmanship of the Lancaster County Republican Party. Because of that, his outbursts against the tea party movement in general deserve the attention of Republican activists before the upcoming reorganization and county conventions that will decide who wins that seat.
If Barack Obama and his gaggle of gun grabbers have their way, the American citizenry will have all of their firearms taken away. If their current attempt to outlaw semi-automatic rifles is successful, does anyone think it will stop there? Don’t be naïve! The goal of people like Barack Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Charles Schumer, et al., has always been total gun confiscation. In fact, Senator Feinstein is actually on record as saying so.
According to Infowars.com, “Senator Dianne Feinstein’s ultimate plan has always been to have Mr. and Mrs. America turn in their guns to the government, period. Feinstein’s bill would criminalize millions of Americans and completely eviscerate second amendment rights.
“She tells us a gun ban is about saving the children and reducing crime, but her comments on 60 Minutes in 1995 reveal her true plan is to target law-abiding American gun owners.
“On Thursday, Feinstein will introduce her dream bill to disarm the American people. The legislation is open-ended and includes provisions to re-register firearms and submit the fingerprints of law-abiding Americans as if they’re sex offenders.
“Feinstein’s bill will also include a buy-back provision that will allow the government to confiscate all firearms. Both Feinstein and New York governor Andrew Cuomo have said that is their plan.
“It is a gun confiscation bill.
“The proposed bill is open declaration of war on the Second Amendment.
“It’s no coincidence that the communist Chinese, the biggest holders of U.S. debt, have demanded the American people be disarmed. History tells us that it is the instinct of all tyrants to disarm the slaves.”
The report plays a video in which Senator Feinstein said, “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States, for an outright ban, picking up [every gun]… Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in.”
Writing for the National Association for Gun Rights, Dudley Brown said, “After reading Senator Dianne Feinstein’s new so-called ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban, I can only describe it as the effective END of the Second Amendment in America.
“The definition of an ‘Assault Weapon’ in this bill is so broad you can drive a truck through it!
They’re targeting EVERYTHING--rifles, shotguns and even handguns.
“You see, the gun-grabbers are going for broke.
“Even owners of supposedly ‘grandfathered’ firearms will be treated like common criminals.
“If passed, Feinstein’s so-called ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban would:
“--Ban the sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing of 120 specifically named rifles, shotguns and handguns;
“--Ban the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of ALL firearms with a detachable magazine and at least one ‘military characteristic’--which could mean just about anything that makes a gun ‘look scary.’
“--Bans the sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing of magazines holding more than 10 rounds;
“--Force owners of ALL ‘grandfathered’ weapons to undergo an intrusive background check and unnecessary fingerprinting;
“--Force owners of ALL ‘grandfathered’ weapons to federally register their guns after obtaining permission slip from local law enforcement showing their guns are not in violation of state or local law. That’s right. If you own a $10 magazine that’s more than 10 rounds, you’ll have to register it with the BATFE in their National Firearms Registry.
“And you and I both know registration is only the first step toward outright confiscation. So don’t be fooled.”
As I stated in this column last week, “The semi-automatic rifle is the vanguard of our liberty; it is the surest and most trustworthy means of our self-defense; and it is the primary companion of any man who would both protect and feed his family.
“Make no mistake about it: to take away an American’s right to a semi-automatic rifle is to FULLY DISARM HIM. There is no Second Amendment; there is no right to keep and bear arms; there is no citizen militia; there is no liberty without the semi-automatic rifle!”
In that column I also quoted Thomas Jefferson who rightly observed, “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”
And it is Jefferson’s observation that the “strongest reason” that the American people must always retain the right to keep and bear arms is “to protect themselves against tyranny in government,” that is universally ignored in the modern gun-control debate.
Throughout the United States, there are tens of millions of fully-armed citizens who are more than capable of defending themselves and their communities against any enemy--whether that enemy is an internal or external one. In fact, many millions of these citizens have been trained in the US armed forces. Firearms--especially semi-automatic rifles--in the hands of millions of American citizens is truly the only thing that stands between freedom and tyranny for the people of the United States. That Barack Obama and Dianne Feinstein want to disarm the American people should be considered an act of war against our liberties! In other words, ladies and gentlemen, this is a line in the sand that none of us can afford to ignore.
Here’s how we must fight:
1. We must literally inundate our US representatives and senators with the most vociferous protest.
We must make sure that every representative and senator in America is told that under no uncertain terms their reelection will be determined by how they vote on this issue. Obviously, people such as Senators Feinstein and Schumer come from liberal, anti-gun states--which is why they feel safe in proposing these draconian gun-control measures. However, the vast majority of US House members represent average God-fearing Americans to whom the right to keep and bear arms is sacrosanct. And make no mistake about it: the legislative battle will be won or lost in the US House of Representatives.
Here in Montana, however, our two US senators (both Democrats) proudly profess to be pro-Second Amendment. Montanans should be sending a strong message to both of these senators to hold the line for our right to keep and bear arms--including semi-automatic rifles. I cannot imagine that any civil magistrate from either major political party could hope to be reelected in the State of Montana who would support Senator Feinstein’s gun-grab bill. And I would hope and pray that there would be dozens of other states in which the Second Amendment is equally honored.
Folks, CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATORS NOW! If we expect to retain any semblance of freedom for our posterity, we must pick up the phones and barrage our representatives and senators with opposition to this gun-control bill. And we must do it NOW! Furthermore, we must let our elected officials know that under no uncertain terms there can be NO COMPROMISE, that only outright opposition to any new gun-control measures will be deemed acceptable. There are already far too many gun-control laws in this country. We cannot accept any more abridgements and restrictions to our right to keep and bear arms. NO MORE!
2. We must demand of our State governors and legislators that they resist any attempts of the federal government to outlaw our firearms.
Should the Republican-led House of Representatives in Washington, D.C., cave-in to the Obama gun-grab like they did on Obama’s tax increases, it will be up to the states to say NO! If there is a single issue for which individual, sovereign states would be willing to defy the federal government and protect the rights and liberties of their citizens, it will be this issue. If the states, and liberty-minded people of the states, do not stand as one on this issue, there is no issue for which they would stand. We either draw the line on this issue or our liberties are gone forever!
This means State legislatures should pass laws defying the federal gun ban and protecting the right of citizens to keep and bear arms within their states. Governors should be willing to utilize State law enforcement agencies to protect their citizens’ right to keep (and not register) their guns, and county sheriffs should stiffen their backs and refuse to allow any federal police agency from enforcing the gun ban. After all, the county sheriff is the highest law enforcement authority in his or her county, trumping even federal law enforcement officers.
3. Individual citizens like you and I must be willing to draw our personal line in the sand on this issue and refuse to comply with any law requiring us to register or surrender our firearms--including our semi-automatic rifles.
Ladies and gentlemen, whatever the consequences might be, and whatever anyone else does or doesn’t do, I am prepared to become an outlaw over this issue! I don’t know how to say it any plainer: I will not register my firearms, and I will not surrender my firearms. Period. End of story. It’s not just a saying with me: when my guns are outlawed, I will be an outlaw!
It is time RIGHT NOW for every American citizen to make up his or her mind on this issue.
There are many laws, which I personally find repugnant and even unconstitutional, to which I grudgingly submit. For example, while I very much understand, and even philosophically agree with, those who refuse to pay income taxes, I pay income taxes. Even though I believe the income tax to be unconstitutional, onerous, and maybe even nefarious, I have not drawn my line in the sand on that issue. I haven’t drawn a line in the sand on the requirement for all sorts of government licenses, i.e., marriage licenses, driver’s licenses, CCW permits, Social Security cards, etc., even though I personally believe that many requirements for licensure stretch the boundaries of legitimate government. And, again, even though I understand those who refuse to take them, I have a marriage license, a driver’s license, a CCW permit, and a Social Security card. There are many issues over which I am willing to be annoyed, but for the sake of perceived Christian testimony and/or perceived good citizenship, I reluctantly and grudgingly comply. But on the issue of taking away my right to keep and bear arms--including a semi-automatic rifle--I absolutely refuse to comply!
My line in the sand is drawn here!
Make no mistake about it: it is not just semi-automatic rifles that these gun grabbers are after. Ultimately, they want to take all of our guns. We either stop them now or there will be no stopping them at all.
It is no hyperbole to say that this attempt by people such as Barack Obama and Dianne Feinstein to make outlaws out of law-abiding citizens for simply exercising our right to keep and bear arms is the most important political battle of our lifetimes! I am not exaggerating when I say that the future of freedom and liberty for our children and for our country--not to mention the future of our own personal lives and freedom--hang in the balance.
You see, Banning and many of his fellow big spending partners forget that it is your money they are promising.
It’s time to remind them!
They will promise the world to every community in the county to buy their support.
It must be stopped!
“We are going to have to prove that we are going to do something for them!” Banning told the 100 or so municipal and county representatives, chamber of commerce and non-profit leaders at the meeting where they were mapping out the strategy for getting more of your money.
Pelion Mayor Charles Haggard, 894-3535, said it’s a question of, “if they can come up with enough benefit for these [rural] areas.”
We MUST stop this NOW!
If it gets on the ballot I fear it will be too late.
NOW is the time to organize against this tax increase.
Our first step is to find as many people as possible who oppose this new tax.
The Lexington County Citizen’s Watch petition is the way to find people who are opposed to the tax. Then we’ll have a ready army to defeat this sales tax hike.
So, sign it, and share the link to the petition with everyone you know in Lexington County! It’s at www.LCCW.org.
Then call your mayor and your county councilman and let them know where you stand.
Kershaw County Sheriff and Federal agent Jim Matthews claims tactics save lives, continues to build police state
by Jeff Mattox
Kershaw County Sheriff Jim Matthews is claiming his tough tactics are the reason for a 70% drop in DUI related deaths in the rural South Carolina County. 70% decline sounds like a major victory for this former DEA agent and is being used by the sheriff and his media guru wife Heather Hoopes to tout what a great thing he has done for the county but things are not always as they seem. Last year there were 4 DUI related deaths in Kershaw County, out of 62,000 residents, and the sheriff claimed there was an epidemic of drunk drivers in Kershaw County even as the numbers clearly show that there is little problem relative to the total residents in the county.
This year there are a total of 4 DUI related deaths and yet the sheriff wants to ignore two of those and claim a great reduction. This is just a tactic used by law enforcement to justify their actions and their jobs. If we see a drop from 7 to 5 deaths the percentage drop is great even though relative to the total population it is insignificant. State wide there were 26,000 DUI arrests out of a total population of 3.2 million which is 0.008125% of the population hardly an epidemic but does make some great headlines for the government propaganda machine.
DUI deaths fluctuate with each passing year as does the total number of highway deaths and can be attributed to many factors including weather, what day a holiday falls on, or even how many squirrels are on the roads, but there is little to prove that anything the sheriff or SCHP does effects these numbers. For fun let’s take the 12 deaths in Kershaw County from last year and divide that by the number of residents within the county, 62,000. This easy math problem shows that the percentage of residents killed in accidents is 0.0001935% of the entire county population. The sheriff says there was an epidemic of drunk driving deaths but with a total of 4 alcohol related deaths the percentage of residents killed is small, around 0.0000645%.
Of course Matthews, along with almost every law enforcement officer, will never talk about these numbers because it makes their jobs seem insignificant and the cost benefit does not add up. That is why they use the total number of deaths, whether higher or lower, as the starting point because any change at all gives greater credence to either how good a job they are doing or why they need more money, cops, and heavy handed tactics to battle a boogeyman that really does not exist.
This is not to say I advocate driving while intoxicated it is merely to point out that law enforcement plays with the numbers in order to justify anything they do and secure more funding. The fact is drunk drivers are a very small percentage of the overall population and law enforcement along with all their proponents have created an illusion that there are drunks in almost every vehicle on the road.
Politicians, media, and law enforcement use statistics to baffle the public with bullshit.
It is important to recognize that whenever government itself enters into policy debate, it has the ability to drown out all other voices, and has done so in the law enforcement arena here.
As the NHTSA web site shows Law enforcement is well versed in these tactics. They use them to great effect when talking about drugs, DUI’s, Rapes, robberies and many other scenarios. The federal government is law enforcement’s best friend providing anything needed to sway public opinion, influence judges, and even prosecute cases.
Sheriff Matthews and his Media propaganda are touting his use of aggressive tactics as a reason for lower death rates and a great accomplishment even though they know it has nothing to do with law enforcement in general. Had the number gone up Matthews would be touting an epidemic and calling for more money and cops to defend against the tide of DUI’s. Every media outlet around Kershaw County promotes the law enforcement line while all voices in opposition are ignored or demonized as radicals or extremists.
Whenever you hear law enforcement use statistics grasp a large box of salt to take with what is being espoused because hidden behind these statistics is the underlying truth. They are playing with the truth to promote their own agenda. Remember it this is a game for money and power, it is that plain and simple.
“We’re out to change behavior”, Matthews said,” We’re not out to ruin someone’s day.”
The administrator of the KCSO Facebook page said this about checkpoints,” Kershaw County Sheriff’s Office @ Tim Taylor: I am not a fan of those checkpoints, but the courts have ruled them legal. Not the old drug checkpoints which are not, but the DUI checkpoints are. I don’t even like the term “checkpoints.” It has a sinister connotation. I would rather have officers out patrolling.”
Then in an article on the KCSO page SC trooper Kelly Hughes states, “We will have a lot of DUI checkpoints; we’ll have saturated areas where we see most DUI crashes occurring and we’ll have some nighttime safety belt enforcement.”
Matthews has never denied the use of checkpoints, just that he does not like them. His deputies regularly participate in partnership with the Highway Patrol in order to give him some sort of plausible deniability.
Fear is the tool of law enforcement and Matthews’ officers are under “orders” to make traffic stops for any infraction no matter how minor and to gain the driver’s permission to search the vehicle. This is done by intimidation and threat. Usually the officer will say something like, “do you mind if I look inside the vehicle?” If the driver questions the officer the response will be along the line of,” If you have nothing to hide why don’t you want me to look in the vehicle?” They may even say something like this,” It will be a lot easier on you if you cooperate.” They may even threaten the driver with a warrant but the whole stop was in fact made to garner a contact and make a search, what is known in the realms of the DEA as” fishing for gold”. The idea is twofold, first to make every person afraid of police and two, increase tickets and arrests to make it look like they are really making a difference and raise revenues. These tactics border lining on terrorizing the population and in particular the youth of the county should not be tolerated.
If we are going to tolerate these kinds of actions then why not have checkpoints at all intersections? Why not install breathalyzers in all vehicles? Remember, if it is fair to all and it is for the safety of all why should you mind if every time you get in your car you must blow into a tube before starting it? Now that is going too far you say? What’s the difference between checkpoints and in car sobriety checks other than the frequency of the check? And, would it make the roadways even safer? And, if you don’t drink and drive what do you have to hide? Is there something that you are not telling us? “I have been stopped many times” stated one 19 year old man,” They always want to search my car. I have gotten only one ticket and that was for a seat belt but it always comes down to the search.”
I refused to let them search my car and the guy started threatening me and yelling” said another young driver,” They target all us young people. All my friends hate them.”
One older man from Kershaw County stated, “Matthews and his goons have a rob and pillage policy.” They claim that all this ticketing saves lives but people still speed down the interstate and they keep writing tickets. I think it is about money and power and less about safety.”
“All he wants is his face on the TV” said another “He cannot prove that his gestapo tactics have changed anything except people don’t trust them anymore.” The 40 something, mother of three said.
“Matthews won’t even talk to someone who complains, he has some guy named Templar that runs interference for him.”
“His town hall meetings reminded me of something that the Nazis would have. You had to submit written questions and the sheriff went through them and only answered those he wanted to and ignored the others. He is a coward; I think he is a small man scared of his shadow.” stated yet another Kershaw County resident.
Force and intimidation are the tools of tyrants no matter if it is for good or evil.
To place a population under perpetual state of fear is the mark of a tyrant and to force those same people to pay for its application is despotism. With every passing year the American surveillance police state becomes increasingly powerful and over reaching. Each time the public allows these tyrants another encroachment on the rights of individuals the Constitution fades in its importance.
Each and every step of the way the excuse given is it is all for the safety and security of all and we, as individuals, must give up a little more of our rights in order to protect us all.
Where do we draw the line in the sand? When is enough, enough? The past one hundred years has seen the growth of a police force that looks and feels more like an occupying force rather than a sheriff elected to protect the rights of the individual from majority rule.
We have become a nation in living in fear, promoted and kept alive by those who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution and the rights contained within. Government and law enforcement have partnered together, each standing to gain power and control, at every infringement of individual rights, and grow their respective organizations.
DUI related deaths in Kershaw County are not down 70% yet the sheriff is painted as a hero, but the king has no clothes.
Their lie is they are providing security; the truth is they are taking away freedom.
Sheriff Matthews has been well trained in police state tactics, as his web site shows, including media propaganda and public information training (Edward Béarnaise would be proud) from the DEA as well as airport Interdiction at the NWO’s Denver Airport again under the DEA.
Matthews and his lovely wife, Miss Heather, are now seeking a major increase in funding as he continues to use the federal playbook to justify his vision of a world of safety by force.
In what can only be characterized as self- promoting conceit Matthews blames, county council, and the people themselves for not providing him with everything he wants for his police state.
“The powers that be and the public have allowed this problem to increase over time and now we are faced with an expensive fix.” Matthews wrote in an article in the Camden based Chronicle and Independent, a longtime supporter of Matthews. The “expensive fix” he is referring to is revealed as he compares his department with the adjacent county of Lancaster who has 12 deputies per shift while Kershaw County has either 6 or 4 depending on the time of day.
He writes that both departments responded to “approximately” 43,000 calls for service over the course of last year. “They (Lancaster County) have about 10,000 more residents. The difference is they handled this with 12 deputies per shift. As a result Lancaster’s response times are significantly shorter and ours remain unacceptably long. Lancaster can prevent crimes while we are relegated to simply responding to them after they occur.”
There are many things about this statement that are revealing and so I will take each in order.
First, Matthews plays on words when he writes 43,000 calls for “service”. As 911 calls come in the are routed to the proper service, law enforcement, EMS, or fire and one may respond while another may not, in fact most calls are for EMS services according to sources in the Kershaw County Emergency services department. So the truth is Matthews has exaggerated the case load of both departments to again push his agenda.
Second, Matthews claims the Lancaster is able to prevent crimes even though they respond to the same amount of “calls for service”. How does Lancaster prevent crime? Are the phone calls coming in coming from psychics or do they have some kind of pre-crime squad intervening? The fact is cops rarely, very rarely prevent anything. Response time is rarely critical as by the time a call comes in the crime has already been committed and the police are there to clean up and make a report.
Matthews wants a massive increase in funding estimated, if fully implemented, to be a $2.5 million increase in addition to the doubling of the KCSO budget since 2009 which was primarily funded through a solid disposal waste fee passed by Kershaw County Council in 2012 raising $1.5 million half of which went to the KCSO.
Sheriff Matthews may actually believe his rhetoric after all he has spent his entire adult life within the halls of the federal government’s law enforcement indoctrination centers and has been trained in the art of propaganda. Matthews is a government agent, one of the best, and he is doing his master's bidding.
Slowly one step at a time, hidden behind the cloak of safety and security, Matthews is building, with the help of his friends, the Fed and local politicians, a brutal, massive, expensive, police state.
Matthews is not alone. Across the nation police departments and sheriff offices are being infiltrated with federal agents like Matthews. They come in on white horses, armed with honors galore and once in office they start to build their little part of what will ultimately become a full-fledged totalitarian police state where citizens will be subject to stop at any time day or night.
They promise security but what you get is tyranny.
As the New Year begins Kershaw County citizens, as many across the nation, will be forced to pay for their own enslavement by those who claim the opposite. What is up is down. Lies have become truth and right has become wrong.
The people will be subjected to another massive propaganda assault by the government and promoted by media outlets across the land.
Will the people be fooled again? Of course and Kershaw County residents will move one step closer to 1984. The big question is, how much more will they take? The sad answer appears to be, whatever their masters dictate.
Feel free to make your own voice heard by contacting the Kershaw County Sheriff’s Department. Their contact information is listed below: