Quantcast

“Operation Independence”= Riot Gear and Random Searches on July 4th

operation independence

This Week’s Sign the Apocalypse is Upon Us

by Rebekah Maxwell

 

Fireworks? Too violent. Picnics? Passé. There’s a better way to celebrate the American people’s historic break from tyranny: have federal officers in riot gear patrol your every move.

Los Angeles residents were forced…er, obliged to trade liberty for security over the Independence Day holiday, when their local sheriff’s department teamed up with the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA for a 2-day “terrorism exercise,” which they dubbed Operation Independence.

At least the ‘powers that be’ have an ironic sense of humor.

 

According to CBS-LA, over 1,300 law enforcement officials patrolled Union Station and select other hubs, some in uniforms, some in full riot gear. Other agents were in plain-clothes, “working undercover, looking like any other passenger, they scour faces, briefcases and backpacks, looking for anything out of the ordinary.”

They told reporters that the exercise was planned in the wake of the Boston marathon bombing, but specified there was “no credible threat” the exercise was meant to defend against.

“No credible threat.” Well, that sounds like a good reason to turn your daily commute into 1984.   Plus, being randomly searched and questioned is fun for the whole family.

Officials in charge say they want increased visibility…they want “domestic terrorists” to be afraid.

Here’s FOX-LA’s take on the events:

The details of “Operation Independence” are top secret and that’s the way it should be. Only they need to know what the game plan is, like how many officers are here and how they’ll respond to a real threat.

The enemy knows too much already.

What we need to know, or rather be reminded of, is that the threats, homegrown and imported, are all too real. And in one way, we’re all undercover agents who need to be aware of our surroundings.

Right on! It’s every citizen’s responsibility to spy on their neighbors and friends. Just don’t have the means to defend yourself from those threats. Go tell the government. They’ll keep you safe.  That’s freedom.

Now, on this festive occasion, you might possibly be reminded of a vague and archaic notion that one’s own government could transgress its bounds. That a once-legal ruler or system could abuse their bestowed power to such an extent that it becomes illegal…tyranny, even. And, at that point, the people have the right to alter or abolish such a government and replace it with a more worthy one to better defend their God-given rights.

But that could surely never happen here in America!

Never could our government erect a multitude of New Offices, and send hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

Never would they keep among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

Never would they affect to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

Never would they excite domestic insurrections amongst us.

Never would they abdicate Government here, by declaring us out of their Protection and wage War against us.

Never would they constrain our fellow Citizens…to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

After all, they’re here to keep us safe. From ourselves, if necessary. Happy Independence Day.



  • ScottM

    Note if you will, Rebekah, that it is the “conservative” news outlet that is vigorously defending “Operation Independence.” The problem with conservatives is that in general, they are only wary of government power when they are not in power. They too often fully embrace government overreach when it is their government is in power.

    • deaceproducer

      Thanks, Scott. I thought it relevant enough to include in the article, yes. While the current government (federally and in LA county) can by no wise be considered “conservative,” any media outlet that defends such overt intrusion so credulously can only be criticized as naive (at best), negligent (at worst).