Police perform house-to-house raids in Watertown MA ripping innocent families from their homes

WATERTOWN, MA -- On Friday, April 19, 2013, during a manhunt for a bombing suspect, police and federal agents spent the day storming people's homes and performing illegal searches. While it was unclear initially if the home searches were voluntary, it is now crystal clear that they were absolutely NOT voluntary. Police were filmed ripping people from their homes at gunpoint, marching the residents out with their hands raised in submission, and then storming the homes to perform their illegal searches.

  • Currently 5/5 stars.

Views: 2178


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

Comment by Oleg Gielman on April 24, 2013 at 1:27pm

One more time Roberto –in the name of cohesion… by taking credit where credit isn’t due, it usually follows not taking credit where credit is due –like a mole ceo of a soon to be bankrupt company always intends his underlings take the fall… many practical conclusions can be derived through what's called deductive and inductive reasoning… I cannot prove stalin murdered tens of millions of people (many of whom were even willing to be his subjects) –but I know he did, it is in the “nature” of the beast –victory through lies, deception and blood… after becoming familiar with a beast’s ideology and/or behavior one doesn’t need a camera nor a witness to know where its crypto is.

Comment by ellis beam on April 24, 2013 at 5:19am

The irony of the fact that the part of the country where our nation started is now the hot spot of idiots who go along with the atrocities that started the Revolutionary War.

Comment by Roberto Benitez on April 24, 2013 at 12:00am

Oleg, I didn't ask you for proof of a false flag operation. I just asked if you believed that Obama did it as many claimed Bush was behind 911. Now I won't say it's impossible that Obama was involved. As a matter of fact, I don't trust that Fabian socialist Muslim operating by the Alinsky and Cloward-Piven plans one bit.

However, particularly with more information coming out I believe the Obama regime was intentionally "incompetent" due to ideological reasons, i.e., and unwillingness to admit the implication that Islam is our enemy. I believe there's a lot more than meets the eye about the Saudi national that Obama tried to whisk out of the country and also the matter of the warnings from Russia for example.

But I'll admit I see no purpose in stating or implying Mr. (intentional) Obama did it without proof. Of course I wouldn't expect anybody in this regime however to not practice taqiyya over this matter, Fast and Furious, or Benghazi. If you want to ask the question, could he have done it, that's quite fair. I believe both Fast and Furious and Benghazi amounted to treason.

As for taking out bin Laden, how does that connect to the Boston bombing? However, there're credible reports that both Clinton and Panetta kept Obama out of the loop until it was under way because Valerie Jarrett had talked Obama into canceling several times earlier opportunities to get bin Laden.

While I'm not afraid to ask questions, I don't engage in accepting speculation and conspiracies as fact without relevant facts. I also expect that people should answer questions forthrightly as best they can.

You see, I don't believe that we conservatives and libertarians can afford behaving like liberals, progressives, or socialists. We can't use their tactics of deceit, theft (elections), violence, and worse. We must conduct ourselves according to the principles we claim to believe in. For me that's the Constitution and the Bible.

There's a saying from people I know, "we don't lie, cheat, or steal nor permit those among us who do; and quibbling is lying." Does that help explain my position Oleg?

PS; I often agree with you, but on this matter it seems we've sadly gotten into a spat.

Comment by Donna Rammer, mod on April 23, 2013 at 11:20pm

yes, I too agree, they did not protest, they probably would have been shot. This was illegal. They stomped on the fourth Amendment... They were terrorized!

Comment by Debra A Shawver on April 23, 2013 at 11:16pm

I agree with Dan...it was a huge martial law test..and the people of Boston "performed" beyond king o's wildest dreams....

Comment by Oleg Gielman on April 23, 2013 at 3:07pm

Until what’s its name, also known by soldiers as boom boom says it did it or janet napolitano says he did it or somebody in authority with a tinkle down its his leg says boom boom did it …folks like Roberto will need proof, do we have any paparazzi willing to make a buck? …hey, like boom boom said, it took out bin laden all by its lonesome.

Comment by Donna Rammer, mod on April 22, 2013 at 9:43pm

I feel that the public in Boston should report to their congress and senate, how they were treated. Being treated like they were the terrorists. I AM appalled by their actions. These were not the police, they looked like special ops or something more sinister. They terrorized these Bostonians, and I felt so bad for them. This definately looked like a training day, to see what the american people would do and how they would re act. You know that Obama had to OK this. Dont forget we are under NDAA and whatever the other one is, NDRA....appalling to treat OUR citizens like this!

Comment by Roberto Benitez on April 22, 2013 at 9:13pm
Just as many on the left wanted the terrorists to be right-wingers and were willing to resort to preposterous canards, innuendoes, and prevarications to further a political agenda, it seems many on the supposed right like Dan Holsopple need to believe this was a false flag operation by the Obama regime. Professional conspiracy manufacturers are even claiming that the TX fertilizer plant was caused by a missile based on sounds that are clearly different.

Nevertheless, that doesn't justify the actions of the police to search homes in the manner they did without a governor formally declaring a state of emergency and martial law or Congress doing so. But then what's left of the Bill of Rights, perhaps only the Third Amendment?

However, as long as conspiracists make absurd claims against Fabian socialist Mr. (intentional) Obama we'll never get him removed from office for provable offenses like Libya, Fast and Furious, extortion, by passing Congress, refusing to enforce laws passed by Congress, appointing officials without Senate approval, and Benghazi, the latter which i believe amounted to treason.
Comment by Dan Holsopple on April 22, 2013 at 2:34pm

Martial Law is what the whole "drill" was about. Introducing Militarized Police and Martial Law to America. The bombing is a false flag attack. It was a "sting operation" taken to the next level. The difference being WE just got stung. (Did you notice the missile attack in West, Texas - go check it out. there were at least two video witness of the burning plant attacked by an incendiary missile) 
Wake up and smell the BS.

Comment by Donna Rammer, mod on April 22, 2013 at 2:39am

oh brother, what a bunch a a holes...i cannot believe we have come to this! Breaking into innocent peoples homes...this is bull stuff...



Romney Handed Shock
Defeat By Own State’s GOP

Mitt Romney is back in state politics, this time in Utah instead of Massachusetts. However, conservatives in The Beehive State aren’t exactly warming up to the 2012 Republican standard-bearer quite the way many people expected they would.

After finishing second in votes at the state GOP convention, Romney will now face a primary in his run for the Senate seat being vacated by Orrin Hatch, Fox News reported.

At the convention in West Valley City on Saturday, Romney polled just behind state lawmaker Mike Kennedy.

Kennedy captured 50.18 percent of the delegate vote compared to Romney’s 49.12 percent.

That means the two will face off in a primary on June 26 to determine who will represent the GOP this fall.

Romney, the first Mormon to head a major party ticket, is considered an extremely popular figure in Utah and was widely expected to have an easy path to the upper chamber.

In a hypothetical matchup with Democrat Jenny Wilson, at least one poll showed Romney up by 46 percent. That’s, uh, slightly more than the margin of error.

However, among party loyalists, Romney isn’t exactly viewed with unalloyed fondness.

The 2012 presidential nominee was always known for being decidedly moderate, particularly on issues of immigration and global trade. There was also the fact that he ran a campaign so bumbling that it almost made Michael Dukakis look good.

And then there was Romney’s war of words with Donald Trump during the 2016 campaign, which likely led many to perceive he secretly wished Hillary Clinton would take the Oval Office.

Trump would later consider Romney as a secretary of state pick, although how serious the president-elect was about appointing him is something we’ll likely never know.

While your average Utah Republican is unlikely to let these slights affect their vote, hardcore party activists probably don’t want another RINO who isn’t exactly known for his rapport with the president in the upper chamber of Congress, no matter how famous he may be.

For his part, Romney tried to put a good spin on the humiliation.

“I’m delighted with the outcome. Did very, very well,” he told KSTU. “On to a good, important primary ahead. This is terrific for the people of Utah.”

Dude, you just lost to a guy nobody has ever heard of. However, Kennedy was happy with the results, and unlike Romney, he had good reason to be.

“I’m a candidate with a compelling life story and a unique set of life circumstances I’d like to use to serve the people of Utah,” Kennedy said.

I have no idea what that story or those circumstances are, but I think the key point here is that he’s not Mitt Romney. If he wants to win, that’s pretty much what he should be focusing on. I can see the billboards now. “Mike Kennedy: Not Mitt Romney.” “Mike Kennedy: He didn’t borrow Ward Cleaver’s haircut.” “Mike Kennedy: Because Utah deserves a senator whose favorite food isn’t buttered noodles.”

Utah’s electorate tends to be less conservative than convention-goers, so it’s unlikely that Romney won’t be the GOP nominee for Senate. However, that’s not a 100 percent certainty — and it wouldn’t be the first time he’s lost to a Kennedy.

What do you think?


© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service