The Flint water treatment process in pictures

With the Flint water crisis making global news seemingly everyday, here is an inside look at at the Flint Water Treatment Plant. These are pictures from when Flint was utilizing the Flint River as its source from April 2014 through October 2015.

Android 078

This is where it all starts. The raw water intake at the Flint River.

Android 037

This building houses the pumps that draw water in from the river and then at the end of the process deliver it to the city.

Android 075

The raw, untreated water then travels to the ozone building where ozone generators disinfect the water by injecting ozone gas into the water to chemically remove contaminants.

Android 072

These are liquid oxygen and liquid nitrogen tanks used in the ozonation process. Note the ice on the condensers even in the summer.

Android 086

Now it’s off to the coagulation process and the start of Flint’s water woes. Ferric chloride is rapidly mixed in then travels to large settling basins where particles in the water accumulate together and slowly sink to the bottom where they are flushed to the sewer system. It is the ferric chloride that corrodes the pipes in the distribution system. It was causing rust to form on GM’s engine parts at its manufacturing plant that caused GM to drop Flint water and return to Detroit supplied water.

Android 160

These are the storage tanks used to hold the ferric chloride. Each tank holds 2,000 gallons.

Android 070

A water softening process is next as lime is added to the water via mixers called lime slakers which create a slurry. The slaker contains a shaker to remove grit.

Android 099

These are high maintenance machines requiring constant cleaning. The lime starts as a powder and is mixed with water which generates heat quickly. Any steam that isn’t removed will cause the lime to cake as seen here. Machine jams and pipe clogging are common.

Android 167

The lime slurry is pumped to a 120 ft. circular clarifier which mixes it in and another coagulation/flocculation process occurs to settle out contaminants. The mixing happens in the center, the water then flows outward and up through a blanket of sludge which traps the larger particles. the clarified water spills out over the top and it’s off to the filters.

Android 049

Android 112

There are a dozen filters that use a layer of anthracite coal on top of sand to trap particulates.

Android 119

These filters had to have their media replaced with granulated activated carbon (GAC) due to excessive TTHM problems Flint had in the summer of 2014. TTHM’s, or total trihalomethanes, are byproducts of chlorine reacting with naturally occurring organics in the water. Why didn’t Flint use the GAC from the start? Money, of course, as that’s been the root of all the Flint water problems. Flint finally had to cough up nearly 2 million dollars to replace the media after the news and public outcry even though the GAC won’t be necessary once the new Lake Huron water source comes online in the summer of 2016.

After the filters, the last step is to chlorinate the water. These are one ton cylinders.

Android 063

That’s it! It’s now off to the city and the aging distribution system where the lead and possibly the legionella bacteria problems began. Of course there is much more to the water treatment process than these few pictures showed. Here are some more miscellaneous examples.

The two million gallon water tank at the plant.

Android 045

The old water plant #1 now abandoned and condemned.

Android 052

Decaying Hamilton Dam located in downtown Flint.

Android 093

The sludge lagoon located on Bray Rd. where the grit from the lime slakers is pumped to dry. It can then be scraped up and disposed of. This fish didn’t fare so well.

Android 146

The new tie-in connection to the Karegnondi pipeline transporting Lake Huron water to the plant in late summer 2016.

Android 161

The fluoride pumps used to add fluoride to the water supply. Note the etched glass behind the pumps. What do you suppose that fluoride does to our bodies since the fumes alone can etch glass?

Android 384

The Flint Water Department. Maintaining quality water for its customers. No really. Says so right here.

Android 137




Possible link between Legionnaires’ and Flint water?

The news cycle has been highlighting the possibility that an outbreak of Legionnaires’ Disease that occurred in and around the Flint, Michigan area last year may be connected to the toxic water problem Flint has been experiencing. This is due to a report from the same professor that helped to expose the lead in the water issue.

Possible Links Between Flint River Water (Without Corrosion Control) and Higher Legionella Occurrence

The professor raises the possibility that a lack of a corrosion control program may have created conditions favorable to the growth and transmission of the Legionella bacteria. The Governors’ office has pointed out that no link exists to connect the two.

I have another possible rationale that you won’t hear anywhere else. Legionella bacteria are prevalent in fresh water sources. They grow well in cooling towers and hot water systems which is large building complexes tend to be where outbreaks occur. They can also grow in areas such as the biofilm that lines the inside of water transmission mains which is why the professor suggested the link. They also can grow in pipes with limescale buildup. Care to guess where that may exist? The Flint Water Treatment Plant (WTP), that’s where.

The Flint WTP utilized a softening process during the time they utilized the Flint River as a water source. Lime was the chemical used to soften the water. The lime began as a powder called quicklime. It is mixed with water in a machine called a lime slaker which produces a slurry that is piped into a clarifier where it was mixed with the city water supply.

Legionella wouldn’t grow in the lime slaker itself while in operation as the water is too hot, around 210 degrees. Anything over 131 degrees will kill the bacteria. However, when the machine is offline (Flint has 4 with 2 in use during normal operation), the lime quickly hardens into a scale. The same goes for the hoses used to transport the slurry. Just as the bacteria may grow in the biofilm of the distribution water mains, it may grow in the limescale of the water plant machines and hoses.

You can ready this study here to see that the biofilm can protect the bacteria from excessive heat and that dead ends are prime breeding ground. Dead ends are areas of the distribution system where water just sits and doesn’t ‘turn over’. The chlorine residual is low here making the problem worse. Flint has lots of them due to the ever shrinking population and abandoned houses.

It’s likely we’ll never know if this was the missing link. Flint isn’t using the machines now that they’ve switched back to Detroit water as a a source. They won’t be needed later this year either when Flint switches to its new source, the Karegnondi pipeline bringing water directly from Lake Huron. So those conditions won’t be replicated again and you can be sure no one from the Governors’ office will ever pursue it as they have no desire to have additional liability heaped upon them.

Editors note: this author has reached out to several different organizations from local reporters to activists such as Erin Brockovich to give them a chance to get the inside story from someone who has intimate knowledge of the Flint water treatment operation. To date, none have taken advantage. We’ll continue to shine the spotlight on the truth regardless.


Who SHOULD go to jail over the Flint water crisis

Spellchek participates in a variety of web based opinion formats. The Flint water crisis is a hot global topic. Exposing the truth is a concern to all and judging by the response we’ve had in other formats, more needs to be done concerning educating the public about lead in our drinking water. So we’ll continue to post on it here and elsewhere. Particularly on exposing the E.P.A. end. It’s bad enough that the residents of Flint were poisoned due to cost cutting, but the law said to protect the citizens may do the opposite.

Federal drinking water regulations contain a provision called the lead and copper (LCR) rule. Issued in 1991 and revised in 2007, it sets the standards public water supplies must follow to insure excessive levels of lead and copper are kept out of our drinking water. Or does it?

Physicians everywhere will tell you that no amount of lead is acceptable in humans. Particularly infants. Lead poisoning is irreversible. Yet the LCR sets an allowable limit of 15 parts per billion (PBB) in our water. Why? Shouldn’t it be zero? Regardless, the 15 PBB threshold wasn’t exceeded during the two six month monitoring periods conducted by the city of Flint after switching their source water. The first period was 6 PBB and the second was 11 PBB. Consequently, the city avoided a public notification and the required actions to correct it.

However, let’s say that the 15 PBB threshold was exceeded. The LCR requires a public water supply to supply treatment recommendations to the state within eighteen months of exceeding an allowable limit, in this case the 15 PBB for lead. States then have six months to respond to those recommendations. If required, public water supplies then have up to 24 months to install the treatment system.

Have you been keeping track? After a public water utility changes its water source it must conduct two six month monitoring periods, an eighteen month recommendation period, a six month state reply period, and a 24 month implementation period. That’s 5 years folks! Up to 5 years of putting excessive amounts of lead in to the drinking water. We are all sheep! We’re guinea pigs! The Feds have determined the best way to optimize corrosion control in a public water supply is to have real world data to work with. Your health is that data!

Where the DEQ screwed up concerning Flint was to misinterpret the rule concerning implementing optimized corrosion control. Cities with under 50,000 residents don’t require it during their two six month monitoring periods after a source water switch. Flint was improperly put in this category as they have over 50,000 residents and should have had corrosion control in place from day one.

Keep in mind that the rule doesn’t address the effectiveness of the corrosion control program. Only that it must be in place during the monitoring period. In water chemistry, there are a great many variables concerning treatment options. Changing any part of a treatment program may create unwanted or unforeseen changes elsewhere. Does it seem a bit strange that water treatment utilizes a key factor such as your health in optimizing change? Particularly when so much data and case studies are available to prevent such trial and error experimentation?

Would it not be better to require more extensive bench testing and jar testing beforehand (common water treatment testing practices)? Bench testing can simulate the same conditions found in the distribution system if properly set up. Would it not make more sense to force utilities to submit to an federal approval process that takes into account all existing data (the system now puts the impetus on the public water utility to submit the treatment proposal)? Spellchek usually never advocates any big government style program but the potential for disaster dictates that oversight by a broad based entity would help eliminate errors from utilities that may not have every resource available to them.

The process is certainly debatable, however the point is to take the human guinea pig out of the equation. The almighty buck factors mightily in the drinking water safety rulebook. Minimizing health risks can be an intensive and expensive process. Ask the poisoned kids in Flint if it’s worth it?

It is estimated that it will take $1.5 billion dollars to replace Flint’s water pipe infrastructure to eliminate the lead issue once and for all. Neither the city or county or state has that kind of money available. Only the federal government could. What about the pandoras box that bailing out Flint would open up? Every other community across the country with lead issues would also be in line for federal dollars.

The saddest part of all is that this disaster in Flint was entirely preventable and still could have delivered the cost savings the city sought. The chloride sulfate mass ratio (CSMR) was hard evidence that switching coagulants from alum to ferric chloride would result in aggressive, corrosive water. Flint had case studies available from other cities that had already implemented comparable changes with the same lead leaching results.

Switching to Flint River water wasn’t the issue that created the lead poisoning. The treatment process selected was. Those decision makers are the people that need to go to jail. People want heads to roll all the way up to the Governor himself. It’s easy to understand the outrage as so many innocent people have been harmed. Perhaps people need to look to our nations lawmakers as well when it comes to blame. Their Safe Drinking Water Act is a failure when it comes to protecting the public from lead. As I’ve laid out for you, you can see how a public utility can legally deliver a toxic lead soup to its customers. For up to 4 years in this scenario. That’s criminal is anyone’s book.



Arrest Gov. Snyder over Flint water?

Calls for Michigan Gov. Snyder’s Arrest as Flint Poisoning Scandal Implicates Top Staffers

Yeah, that will go far. Will he share a cell with Jerry Brown for the California methane leak poisoning? Rahm Emanual for the Chicago corruption? Hillary Clinton for Benghazi? Doubtful.

Calls for Michigan Governor Rick Snyder’s ouster—and arrest—are growing after internal emails showed that his high-level staffers were aware of lead poisoning in Flint’s public water supply six months before the administration declared a state of emergency.

Ouster maybe. Arrest no. Flint’s mayor during the debacle got canned. But now partisan politics take center stage.

Many hold Snyder directly culpable for the emergency itself, and note his role in the Detroit water crisis.

“The source of the Flint Water Crisis leads directly to Gov. Rick Snyder and the fiscal austerity policies that he and his Republican colleagues have been pushing for years on Michigan residents,” said Lonnie Scott, executive director of Progress Michigan,” in a statement released Thursday. “Families in Flint were forced to drink lead-tainted water while the administration scoffed at their concerns and cries for help. An entire generation of Michiganders now face an uncertain future because of Republican cuts to essential and life-giving services.”

Here’s a thought. If we’re trying to drill down to the source of the problem, we have to complete the sentence Lonnie. The reason Flint had 4 emergency managers and got caught in cost-cutting mode was the previous decades of democrat mismanagement. Bloated pensions. Getting caught putting all their eggs in the GM basket. As GM went, so did Flint. So much for diversifying to prevent that. Had the left not managed Flint into financial ruin, the state wouldn’t have been involved. It’s a fair assumption to say that Flint’s water woes would have never happened. In a story with plenty of blame to go around, if one wants to assess blame, why not go back to the root of the problem?

Why every American needs to be concerned about the Flint, MI water crisis

Flint, Michigan has felt the brunt of national embarrassment for years. High crime, high unemployment, poverty and stagnation. Now the city has one upped itself. Now it is the city that knowingly poisoned its own residents. Its 17 month experiment using Flint River water for its source has been a tragic failure.

First it was the high levels of TTHM or total trihalomethanes. These are byproducts of the disinfection process. In the case of Flint, it was chlorine reacting with organics in the water to create these new compounds which are thought to be cancer causing when subjected to high levels over a long period of time.

The city was forced to install an expensive filtration system in order to address the problem. They initially rejected the system as a cost saving move since the whole point of dropping city of Detroit water as its source was to save money. However, repeatedly failing DEQ standards led to a public relations nightmare and the city had to bite the bullet and replace the water treatment plant filter media even though they planned to switch to a cleaner source of supply water in another year.

But it didn’t stop there. Lead in the water turned the nightmare into a disaster. The river water was more corrosive than Detroit water and it caused the lead existing in Flint’s ancient infrastructure to leach out into resident’s drinking water. No amount of lead is safe in humans and infants are particularly susceptible to metal poisoning.

An array of cover-ups, botched interpretations of rules concerning sampling and reporting followed as the city, the DEQ and the Governor’s office attempted to deny reality and deal with the problem. It took a report from a college professor that made headlines to finally force the Governor to act and pony up the dollars required to get Flint back on Detroit water.

The media has yet to report on a key point. In the world of water chemistry, there exists a formula called the CSMR or chloride sulfate mass ratio. It essentially determines that an increase in chloride along with a decrease in sulfate results in more corrosive water. Sometimes dramatically more which can lead to the lead leaching problem witnessed. In fact, case studies exist from prior issues in other areas of the country which should have led  the powers that be in making decisions on Flint source water to change course. In other words, they had prior warning. They ignored it.

Coagulation is a water treatment process used to remove turbidity, and its potential to support disease, from water. Flint switched from a chemical called alum, which is sulfate based, to ferric chloride when the change from Detroit water to Flint River occurred.  Just as the CSMR formula predicted, the corrosivity of the water increased so much so that the lead issue blossomed. Some will blame the lead issue on the states failure to force Flint to treat its water with phosphates to create a seal inside the pipes which actually keeps the lead in place. Detroit water had this and is why Flint never had a lead issue previously. However, the more critical point is why the CSMR data was ignored before the switch was ever made.

Was this a failure of technical expertise? Not likely. The CSMR isn’t a trade secret. A deranged conspiracy to purposely poison the people of Flint? I don’t think many would actually believe that. A way to save money by taking shortcuts and hoping to get to the mid-summer 2016 projected switch to Lake Huron source water when these types of problems would simply go away? Now you’re talking. It’s always been about the almighty buck where Flint problems are concerned.

The corruption aside, there is another point that any person drinking water treated under the provisions of the United States Safe Drinking Water Act should be very concerned with. Part of the act lays out the rules concerning water utilities switching source waters. It says that after a switch, the provider must conduct a monitoring period to accumulate data from real world sampling tests. Flint was required to conduct two 6 month periods in succession which they did. This is where the DEQ dropped the ball. In utilities serving more than 50,000 people, an anti-corrosion program is supposed to be put in place from day one throughout the monitoring period. The DEQ interpreted the rule incorrectly and never forced Flint to do this.

Do you see the problem? Government rules require that citizens are guinea pigs for a year of testing to see if toxic poison levels may be too high. Why? They want to have real world data to measure the effectiveness of the anti-corrosion program. Make you feel good? Worse yet, if a utility finds those levels too high they than have another period of time to develop an anti-corrosion program and beyond that a period of time to install and initiate it. All totaled up a water utility may actually have years to remove toxins in your water. Legally. As laid out in the Safe Drinking Water Act.

In the case of Flint, all could have been avoided if they had simply utilized the lessons of past experiences. The CSMR was a red flag warning of what was to come. Now the afflicted will face an unknown future of health and cognitive problems due to lead poisoning. In America. The most advanced country the planet has ever seen. A historical tragedy that will always tarnish the city of Flint.

Texas gets behind the Article V movement

Bravo, Gov. Abbott! Texas is pushing to lead the way to get the Article V Convention of States into the national limelight.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott calls for Convention of States to take back states’ rights

If we are going to fight for, protect and hand on to the next generation, the freedom that [President] Reagan spoke of … then we have to take the lead to restore the rule of law in America

Along with the speech, Abbott released a nearly 70-page plan – part American civics lesson, part anti-Obama diatribe – detailing nine proposed constitutional amendments that he said would unravel the federal government’s decades-long power grab and restore authority over economic regulation and other matters to the states.

This is the same movement Mark Levin has been calling for.

By this point, you may be wondering just what a constitutional convention or Convention of the States is and why it would be a big deal. A convention is one of two ways that the U.S. Constitution can be amended, and it’s described in Article V. One way is that Congress can propose amendments approved by two-thirds of the members of both chambers. The other method allows two-thirds of the state legislatures to call for a convention to propose amendments. Republicans backing the idea are confident that because they control state government in a majority of states, their ideas would prevail.

In both cases, the amendments become effective only if ratified by three-fourths of the states.

Skeptics abound of course. It won’t work. It will be compromised. However, the biggest skeptics are those who fear it will work. The big government machine  They have the most to lose.

If you think the establishment is worried about a Donald Trump or Ted Cruz or Rand Paul as POTUS, they would be petrified to see the Article V movement take hold.

Let’s hope that Gov. Abbott tips the scales just a bit more to making Article V mainstream.

we the people must raise hell or die!

Terrible Tedly has once again put it all in perspective. Either raise hell and reverse course or watch America wither and die.

In 2016, we the people must raise hell or die!

Exclusive: Ted Nugent cites myriad activities that made up his ‘phenomenal 2015’

But with the sheer number of horrors too long to list, perpetrated by an out of control government in 2015 still stinging deeply, I pray daily to God Almighty that more and more Americans wake up to our we the people duties to raise hell and demand accountability from our elected employees.


Fear threat – Muslim or Christian?

Democrats think Christians bigger threat than Muslims

A new poll reveals that 45 percent of the Democrats who responded believe that Christians are a greater threat to America than Muslims.

No shock that 72 percent of atheists agree.

But the surprise is that 18 percent of those who consider themselves ” very conservative” agree.

As do 29 percent of Protestants.

And 23 percent of Catholics.

Interestingly, the sample of Muslims was very small, but 100 percent said it is Muslims who are the greater danger.

The results are from a new WND/Clout poll by Clout Research, a national opinion research firm in Columbus, Ohio. The telephone survey of registered voters was taken Dec. 18-27, except for the holiday, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.35 percentage points.

Trust the government? Maybe you shouldn’t. Read the details in “Lies the Government Told You,” by Judge Andrew Napolitano.

Poll chief Fritz Wenzel said, “A surprising finding in the survey shows that one in three respondents said they believe Christians pose a greater threat to America than do Muslims. Among Democrats, 45 percent said Christians are more dangerous than are Muslims, while 36 percent of political independents said the same. Among Republicans, 20 percent said Christians are the greater threat.”

The question asked?

“Which do you believe pose the greatest threat to America – Muslims or Christians?”

The questions I might have asked?

Which is a bigger threat to America – a Muslim in the White House or a Muslim posing as a Christian?

Which is a bigger threat to America – the threat of radicalization from a mosque or from a church?

Which is a bigger threat to America – lone wolf Americans who fear their government or sleeper cell Islamic terrorists who wish to attack high profile targets to inflict fear on average Americans?

Here’s a test for you. Take a stroll through Hamtramck or Dearborn, Michigan with an anti-Muslim shirt on as opposed to walking through an NRA convention wearing an ISIS shirt on. Let’s see who comes out unscathed. Or if you’re feeling particularly chippy, take a walk through the hood in Chicago with a KKK shirt on and see how things work out for you.

Fact is that receiving some scowls and unappreciative glares are far different than receiving a double tap.


Jesus – the domestic extremist?

In this holiday season, John Whitehead ponders what it would have been like if Jesus were born today. Jesus may have still died for our sins, but it wouldn’t have been on a cross. More likely would be a prison cell.

Via The Rutherford Institute

What If Jesus Had Been Born 2,000 Years Later in the American Police State?

By John W. Whitehead
December 21, 2015

“Two thousand years later … the memory of the revolutionary zealot who walked across Galilee gathering an army of disciples with the goal of establishing the Kingdom of God on earth, the magnetic preacher who defied the authority of the Temple priesthood in Jerusalem, the radical Jewish nationalist who challenged the Roman occupation and lost, has been almost completely lost to history.” ― Reza Aslan, religious scholar

The Christmas narrative of a baby born in a manger is a familiar one.

The Roman Empire, a police state in its own right, had ordered that a census be conducted. Joseph and his pregnant wife Mary traveled to the little town of Bethlehem so that they could be counted. There being no room for the couple at any of the inns, they stayed in a stable, where Mary gave birth to a baby boy. That boy, Jesus, would grow up to undermine the political and religious establishment of his day and was eventually crucified as a warning to others not to challenge the powers-that-be.

But what if Jesus, the revered preacher, teacher, radical and prophet, had been born 2,000 years later? How would Jesus’ life have been different had he be born and raised in the American police state?

Consider the following if you will.

Had Jesus been born in the year 2015…

Rather than traveling to Bethlehem for a census, Jesus’ parents would have been mailed a 28-page American Community Survey, a mandatory government questionnaire documenting their habits, household inhabitants, work schedule, and even how many toilets were in their home, etc. The penalty for not responding to this invasive survey would have resulted in a fine of $5,000.

Instead of being born in a manger, Jesus might have been born at home. Rather than wise men and shepherds bringing gifts, however, the baby’s parents might have been forced to ward off visits from state social workers intent on prosecuting them for the home birth. One couple in Washington had all three of their children removed after social services objected to the two youngest being birthed in an unassisted home delivery.

Had Jesus been born in a hospital, his blood and DNA would have been taken and entered into a government biobank without his parents’ knowledge or consent. While most states require newborn screening, a growing number are indefinitely holding onto that genetic material long-term for research, analysis and purposes yet to be disclosed.

Then again, had his parents been undocumented immigrants, they and the newborn baby might have been shuffled to a profit-driven, private detention center for illegals. There’s quite a lot of money to be made from imprisoning immigrants, especially when taxpayers are footing the bill.

Once in school, Jesus would have been drilled in lessons of compliance and obedience to government authorities, all the while learning little about his own rights. And if he dared to challenge school officials, he might have found himself suspended under a school zero tolerance policy that punishes minor infractions (such as doodling or talking in class) as harshly as more serious offenses (such as bringing a weapon to class).

According to scripture, Jesus, at the age of twelve, wandered the temple courts in Jerusalem alone and unsupervised. Today, had Jesus disappeared for a few hours let alone days, his parents would have been handcuffed, arrested and jailed for parental negligence. Parents across the country have been arrested for far less “offenses” such as allowing their children to walk to the park unaccompanied and play in their front yard alone.

Rather than disappearing from the history books from his early teenaged years to adulthood, Jesus’ movements and personal data—including his biometrics—would have been documented, tracked, monitored and filed by governmental agencies and corporations such as Google and Microsoft. Incredibly, 95 percent of school districts share their student records with outside companies contracted to manage the data.

If Jesus were to ever make contact with the likes of John the Baptist, he would have been flagged for surveillance because of his association with a prominent activist, peaceful or otherwise. Since 9/11, the FBI has actively carried out surveillance and intelligence-gathering operations on a broad range of activist groups, from animal rights groups to poverty relief and anti-war organizations.

Rather than being permitted to live as an itinerant preacher, Jesus might have found himself threatened with arrest for daring to live off the grid or sleeping outside. In fact, the number of cities that have resorted to criminalizing homelessness by enacting bans on camping, sleeping in vehicles, loitering and begging in public has doubled in recent years.

Had his travels taken him from community to community, Jesus might have been reported to government officials as “suspicious” under the Department of Homeland Security’s “See Something, Say Something” programs. Many states, including New York, are providing individuals with phone apps that allow them to take photos of suspicious activity and report them to their state Intelligence Center, where they are reviewed and forwarded to law-enforcement agencies.

Perceived as a dissident and a potential threat to the government’s power, Jesus might have had government spies planted among his followers in order to monitor his activities, report on his movements, and entrap him into breaking the law.

Jesus’ anti-government views would certainly have resulted in him being labeled a domestic extremist. Law enforcement agencies are being trained to recognize signs of anti-government extremism during interactions with potential extremists who share a “belief in the approaching collapse of government and the economy.”

Assuming Jesus used the internet to spread his radical message of peace and love, he might have found his blog posts infiltrated by government spies attempting to undermine his integrity, discredit him or plant incriminating information online about him. At the very least, he would have had his website hacked and his email monitored.

Had Jesus attempted to feed large crowds of people, he would have been threatened with arrest for violating various ordinances prohibiting the distribution of food without a permit. Florida officials arrested a 90-year-old man for feeding the homeless on a public beach.

Had Jesus spoken publicly about his 40 days in the desert and his conversations with the devil, he might have been labeled mentally ill and detained in a psych ward against his will for a mandatory involuntary psychiatric hold with no access to family or friends. One Virginia man was arrested, strip searched, handcuffed to a table, diagnosed as having “mental health issues,” and locked up for five days in a mental health facility against his will apparently because of his slurred speech and unsteady gait.

Without a doubt, had Jesus attempted to overturn tables in a Jewish temple and raged against the materialism of religious institutions, he would have been charged with a hate crime. Currently, 45 states and the federal government have hate crime laws on the books.

Rather than having armed guards capture Jesus in a public place, government officials would have ordered that a SWAT team carry out a raid on Jesus and his followers, complete with flash-bang grenades and military equipment. There are upwards of 80,000 such SWAT team raids carried out every year, many on unsuspecting Americans who have no defense against such government invaders, even when such raids are done in error.

Instead of being detained by Roman guards, Jesus might have been made to “disappear” into a secret government detention center where he would have been interrogated, tortured and subjected to all manner of abuses. Chicago police “disappeared” more than 7,000 people into a secret, off-the-books interrogation warehouse at Homan Square.

Charged with treason and labeled a domestic terrorist, Jesus might have been sentenced to a life-term in a private prison where he would have been forced to provide slave labor for corporations or put to death by way of the electric chair or a lethal mixture of drugs.

Either way, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, whether Jesus had been born in our modern age or his own, he still would have died at the hands of a police state.

Obama strategy to defeat the JV team revealed

Keep calm and carry on, folks: Obama insists ISIS can’t ‘destroy the United States’ and tells Americans to ‘keep things in perspective’

POTUS is a bit cranky. Apparently he doesn’t like any criticism of his ‘strategy’ to defeat ISIS, or ISIL as he calls them. His advice is to keep calm, business as usual. ISIS/ISIL is nothing more than an organization taking up space in the deserts of Syria and Iraq.

‘ISIS is a virulent, nasty organization that has gained a foothold in ungoverned spaces effectively in Syria and parts of western Iraq.’

Accordingly, we need to take on ISIS/ISIL with kid gloves so we don’t rile them up any more.

Obama also strongly defended his policy of engaging with the IS army ‘appropriately and in a way that is consistent with American values

The Obama strategy on ISIS/ISIL is quite simple.

  1.  Stop climate change. It is man-made global warming that has led to the economic conditions that force the impoverished to turn to ISIS/ISIL for a way out.
  2. Gun control. If we take away the weapons and ammo from private citizens than ISIS/ISIL will have no way to attain them.
  3. Close GITMO. The U.S. has been the evil enabler of ISIS/ISIL recruitment agencies due to our global conduct.

That’s it. Problem solved. Just keep on keeping on. And how convenient that the solution to defeating ISIS/ISIL just happens to be several core agenda items of the Obama Administration. Almost as if it were all by design.

Can it work? Of course not. Don’t be silly. But then, to be fair, these 3 items were never really intended to. They are merely for consumption by sheep and kool-aid drinkers.

Turns out that ISIS/ISIL is just another Obama agenda item. That being any Islam is good. Take the good with the bad. If it knocks America off its imperialist ‘exceptionalism’ perch, than it’s bloodshed well spent. At least in the eyes of Obama. If anyone thinks that this POTUS will take on muslims to get them to police their own, they’re in la-la land. And the ideologue marches on…