Log in



Categories » ‘POLICE BRUTALITY’

Owned by the State

May 21st, 2016 by

5-21-2016 7-36-01 AM

http://farmwars.info/?p=14926&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FarmWars+%28Farm+Wars%29

Barbara H. Peterson

Farm Wars

Can you feel it? Can you feel the chains encircling the world as you know it, causing it to shrink into a passing wisp of memory as we drift closer and closer each day into a homogeneous goo of anonymity in which nothing is wrong and nothing is right unless we are told it is by the state, and anything goes except for what is honest and true and valid?

We are instructed in the ways in which we must act, react and recover. State-approved responses in a state-generated manual. And we comply. We comply because that is what we have been taught all of our lives. We know no differently. The ones who remembered and shared their stories are long past gone, and we do not mourn their loss. We are the new generation of enlightened, politically correct citizens of corporate USA. Why? Because that is simply what it is.

We have a set of laws; an instruction manual. Statute and Code. We are expected to know them. ‘Ignorance of the law is no excuse.’ Yet, it is impossible to know each and every regulation within the law, and therefore, impossible to know if/when, at any given moment we are in violation. Especially when the rules change. Even the ones that you thought you knew yesterday are different today. So there you are. Wanting to be an obedient citizen, and because you do not know the unknowable, that does not relieve you of the responsibility to do so. That is your job. Your duty towards the corporate state.

And if you are in, you are in. No turning back. Once the gates close, you, my friend, are property of the state. Owned. Your life lies firmly in the hands of those put in place to ensure conformity to the rules. When the whistle blows, you hop to. When the sergeant barks a command, you run to obey. If you are called to place yourself in the line of fire, you do not hesitate.

And if something goes horribly wrong? It is your responsibility. Did you follow the rules? Every last one? Did they change while you were catching that round? Deep down, you know how this goes. You are on the bottom of the priority list. If someone is going to go down for any acts in violation of the rules it is going to be you. That’s a given. Unless you claw your way up the chain of command into a position of authority over another. Then guess who gets the short end of the stick? Pitted against each other like a cock fight. May the best man win. The culling of the herd.

You eat when told, bath when told, sleep when told, and give your life when told. Dissent is punishable by immediate banishment. Out in the cold you go, devoid of a base on which to stand. The ground ripped out from under you.

So you need a network of trust to keep from being chewed alive and spit out like last night’s chaw. And you march together to the beat of a silent, but deep bond of survival. Survival in a system that churns and burns toy soldiers all saluting in a row.

There is a thin line that keeps you balanced between what you’ve been told is real and what is real, commonly referred to as sanity. And you hold on for dear life because that is all you know how to do.

You survive while the world around you crashes into a state of chaos. You reach out desperately to grasp hold of anything that you can to stay afloat. And you find that the only thing remaining constant is truth.

When all is said and done; when all the control games have been played; when all those ‘in charge’ have been exposed for what they truly are and the only thing left is a wet spot where they once cowered in fear, what remains is the truth. The last man standing. Then another. And another. Until a bond is formed that cannot be broken. A bond that will dissolve the fetters of enslavement. A bond that will truly set us free is the only way out of the maze of confusion, doubt and tyranny of ignorance.

One word.

TRUTH.

©2016 Barbara H. Peterson

5-10-2016 8-55-33 AM

I. C. E. AGENT’S SUICIDE NOTE: GOVT. TO DISARM THE POPULATION, AND HEARD AMERICAN’S INTO CAMPS

May 19th, 2016 by

http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news512.htm

5-11-2016 9-31-05 AM

By NWV Senior Political News Writer, Jim Kouri
Posted 1:00 AM Eastern
May 19, 2016
© 2016 NewsWithViews.com

After writing a lengthy suicide note exposing terrifying plans the government has for American citizens, an agent with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) directorate walked onto a New York City pier on the Hudson River and used his service weapon to shoot himself in his head.

Several sources from the New York City Police Department reported to New York’s SuperStation95 FM, and to the Conservative Base that the contents of a lengthy and detailed suicide note found on the departed’s body described a frightening scenario of a federal government gone mad, according to Sgt. Neal McCaffrey.

“Apparently this was not an impromptu or impulsive act of suicide, but a plot that was hatched at least a week ago. The CBP agent, who was assigned to deportations of illegal aliens or legal aliens being kicked out of the U.S., was written in separate parts over at least seven days,” said McCaffrey who is assigned to city’s Human Services Police Division.

The note outlines why the officer chose to shoot himself: “The America I grew up in, and cherished, has been murdered by its own federal government. Our Constitution has become meaningless and our laws politicized so badly, they are no longer enforced except for political purposes” the note said. “Our elected officials are, to a person, utterly corrupt and completely devoid of any love or respect for the country which pays them. To them, everything is about getting and keeping power, and making illicit money from backroom deals.”

According to investigating homicide detectives, the 42-year-old U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement deportation officer — who hasn’t yet been identified — shot himself with his own .40 caliber semiautomatic service weapon while on Pier 40 in Hudson River Park at around 11 am (et) on Friday the 13th.

“There’s no indication that the May 13 date of the suicide had any significant meaning to the perpetrator/victim who worked at the Homeland Security Department’s offices in Manhattan,” said Police Officer Iris Aquino (NYPD-Ret.) who worked in Queens, New York.

The suicide victim was rushed to Manhattan’s Lenox Hill Hospital but doctors were never able to revive him. His superiors at ICE released an official statement Friday afternoon: “Tragically, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deportation officer from the New York field office suffered a self-inflicted gunshot wound and has passed away. The agency is not releasing further details pending notification of the officer’s next of kin.”

According to the suicide note, the officer said: “I was hired to enforce the law; to capture and deport people who come to this country against our laws. But now, if I dare to do that, I face being suspended or fired because our President refuses to faithfully execute the duties of his office. Instead, I come to work each day, and collect a paycheck twice a month, for intentionally doing little to nothing. I cannot and will not be a party to this fraud; to this usurpation of the law, or to the despicable politicians betraying our nation.”

ICE is conducting an internal investigation of the matter but the New York Police Department is in charge of the suicide shooting investigation.

Agent Mentions FEMA Camps for Americans

In the suicide note, the federal agent described horrifying plans the upper-echelon federal officials have been formulating:

“If the American people knew what this government is planning, they would rise-up and overthrow it. If I or anyone else in the federal government revealed what is coming, we would be killed anyway, so now I will reveal what I know.

“We in federal law enforcement have been drilling for several years to control riots and uprisings from a coming financial collapse and widespread bank failures. The drills involve life-sized images of American men, even women and children, whom we are told to shoot for “practice” and to “get used to it.”

“We have been told that the economy is terminally ill and will fail in 2016. We are also told the banks are all insolvent and the FDIC doesn’t have nearly enough funds to bail out depositors. We are told these events are unavoidable and it is imperative that the government survive when people rise-up over this.

“When the collapse takes place, detention camps created under the FEMA REX-84 program in the 1980’s to house illegal aliens whom we were going to deport, will instead be used to imprison American Citizens whom the government feels constitute a “threat.” American citizens will be rounded-up without warrants and imprisoned without trial for God knows how long.

“These camps have been equipped to carry out Hitler-scale killings! An actual “purge” of Americans citizens by the very government which they, themselves, created and pay for! I cannot be party to this.”

The bizarre suicide note also describes how the plan calls for state-level national guard soldiers to be disarmed by the feds and over 1-billion rounds of ammunition purchased by the feds, and the Military over-deployed and being shrunk:

“The government knows the military will rise-up to stop this, so our military is being deployed overseas, intentionally involved in foreign wars, and deliberately shrunk in size so they cannot be here or help Americans! This is why certain ammunition and weaponry has been removed from state-level National Guard Armories and over a Billion rounds of hollow point ammunition has been bought by the federal government. The states themselves have been disarmed of military-grade firepower so they cannot defend themselves from the federal activities. This is also why local police departments have been militarized and provided with armored vehicles and weapons of war.

“When the inevitable collapse begins to take place, electric power to the entire country will be shut off, as will all forms of communication. All banks will be immediately closed; no one will be able to get any money because all ATM’s will be offline. Credit, Debit and EBT cards will not function. Anyone without cash will have no way to get any. The Emergency Alert System will be used to takeover all broadcast stations and tell the public this is a result of a cyber attack.

“But while the American people patiently await things to get back to normal, the government will unleash round-ups of citizens they deem militants or dangerous. With all civilian communications out, and all TV and radio stations taken over by the Emergency Alert System, by the time word spreads of what is taking place, the government will already have the upper hand.”

Federal prisoners to be gassed

“Every federal prison has been outfitted with lethal gas systems. When things go bad, all prisoners in all prisons will be placed in their cells on lock-down. Prison staff will depart the facility, and a certain designated person will trigger a lethal gas system. All federal prisoners, regardless of their crime or their sentence, will be gassed to death in their cells. Once the gas clears, the dead will be removed and the prisons will then be used to house citizens who fight against the federal onslaught.”

Pastors recruited to calm the people to submit

“So intent is the government to succeed they have recruited priests, rabbis and clerics from various religions to quote Scripture about “obeying government.” They are being trained to tell people not to fight back and that their best hope is to pray.”

Appendix

The suicide note goes to great lengths about Executive Order #13603 signed by President Obama on March 16, 2012. That note details:

Executive order 13603 about “National Defense Resources Preparedness.”

This 10-page document is a blueprint for a federal takeover of the economy. Specifically, Obama’s plan involves seizing control of:

  • “All commodities and products that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals”
    “All forms of energy”
    “All forms of civil transportation”
    “All usable water from all sources”
    “Health resources – drugs, biological products, medical devices, materials, facilities, health supplies, services and equipment”
    “Forced labor ( or “induction” as the executive order delicately refers to military conscription)

Moreover, federal officials would “issue regulations to prioritize and allocate resources.”

SuperStation95 took a look at this Executive Order from the Government Printing Office (GPO) web site and, sure enough, everything contained in the Officer’s suicide note about this Executive Order is true. Executive order 13603 says with ominous ambiguity: during “the full spectrum of emergencies.”

“If the dead Officer’s claims about an unavoidable economic and banking collapse are true, would it then follow that the Executive Order put in place by Obama, might be activated? Would all of us find ourselves in forced labor, while the government takes OUR food and re-distributes it under the Executive Order’s paragraph about “allocating resources?” This is terrifying stuff!

“There is much more to the suicide note and SuperStation95 is considering how much more to publish. As such, this is a developing story and readers should check back for further updates,” according to the radio station’s newsroom.

© 2016 NWV – All Rights Reserved

  For radio interviews regarding this article:
COPmagazine@aol.com

OLDDOGS COMMENTS!

I was going to publish an apology for yesterdays rant, but now I will once again warn every reader that your false confidence in the government will get you murdered, one way or another the Banking Cartel that owns us is going to dismantle governments world wide and establish a world Authority that controls all Nations and it appears that America will be the first so as to destabilize the rest of humanity and their local governments. You can deny all this till hell freezes over but the evidence is explicit and available to all who will look and learn. We all have been beguiled from the get go and I know it is a miserable experience to love your country and kill innocent people for it only to discover we have been lied to from birth. These incredibly evil Bankers have been working non stop for this for over a hundred years and it is time for every American to wake up and get prepared. The police will show no mercy because they believe they will be protected as long as they are loyal & obedient. After all they have families and want them to survive. Most of you have no earthly idea how merciless warriors can be.

5-10-2016 8-55-33 AM

LEARN, BELIEVE, AND FIGHT BACK, OR SCREAM AND DIE!

May 18th, 2016 by

By OLDDOG

4-17-2016 4-30-16 PM

As things are right now in America, there is nothing dumber than a person who will absolutely refuse to read anything that will remotely upset them. They do not want to have their emotional opinion of America debased, or have a reason to stop worshiping their scumbag politicians. They are still in the second grade intellectually when it comes to loyalty to the flag, and the ILLEGAL GOVERNMENT. They still believe God will right all wrongs, and ignore what the Holy Scriptures say. Most Christians believe it is a lack of faith to protect their own family and self from the government. It is an insult to God!

Well let me tell you squirrel brain idiots something, you are going to revert to an animal when you and your children are starving and you have no weapons to protect your wife and children from being raped, sodomized, and tortured before your eyes. Everything you possessed is now gone and your biggest concern is your money went first; followed by no electricity, gasoline, heat and air conditioning, food, ammo, and guns, all gone in a matter of a few days.

People you formerly loved will beat you to death for a piece of bread. And you are too stupid to believe it’s possible, in spite of the provable history of nations, war, murders, and loss of property. You will crawl on your belly and beg for mercy when there is none. You will watch your family be roasted and eaten by the lowest animals on two legs, and they will be laughing at your cowardice.

1-6-2016 6-25-13 PM

WAKE THE FUCK UP ASSHOLES

Your dream world just puked on everything you worshipped, and now there is no choice but to fight back until your legs are cut off and your bowls are spraying you with putrid excrement.  Your last thought will probably be a vision of some young solider risking his life to drag your miserable ass to safety!  That’s how stupid it is to ignore what is and will be, just because you are too chickenshit to learn and prepare. You just can’t stand for the lie to be proven; your government was the pukes that installed the Banking Cartels plan for a world government under their control. And you are expendable. Don’t think they will be merciful and keep you around to wipe their royal asses. Learn or burn!

5-10-2016 8-55-33 AM

 

HOW AMERICA’S POLICE BECAME AN ARMY: THE 1033 PROGRAM

May 11th, 2016 by

5-11-2016 9-49-16 AM

By Jeffrey Phillips | May 9, 2016

REUTERS/MARIO ANZUONI

As many have noted, Ferguson, Missouri, currently looks like a war zone. And its police—kitted out with Marine-issue camouflage and military-grade body armor, toting short-barreled assault rifles, and rolling around in armored vehicles—are indistinguishable from soldiers.

America has been quietly arming its police for battle since the early 1990s.

Faced with a bloated military and what it perceived as a worsening drug crisis, the 101st Congress in 1990 enacted the National Defense Authorization Act. Section 1208 of the NDAA allowed the Secretary of Defense to “transfer to Federal and State agencies personal property of the Department of Defense, including small arms and ammunition, that the Secretary determines is— (A) suitable for use by such agencies in counter-drug activities; and (B) excess to the needs of the Department of Defense.” It was called the 1208 Program. In 1996, Congress replaced Section 1208 with Section 1033.

 

The idea was that if the U.S. wanted its police to act like drug warriors, it should equip them like warriors, which it has—to the tune of around $4.3 billion in equipment, according to a report by the American Civil Liberties Union. The St. Louis County Police Department’s annual budget is around $160 million. By providing law enforcement agencies with surplus military equipment free of charge, the NDAA encourages police to employ military weapons and military tactics.

1033 procurements are not matters of public record. And the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), which coordinates distribution of military surplus, refuses to reveal the names of agencies requesting “tactical” items, like assault rifles and MRAPs — for security reasons, a spokesperson for DLA told Newsweek via email. One can only trace “tactical” items as far the county of the requesting agency. In the case of Ferguson, that means St. Louis County.

St. Louis County law enforcement agencies have, through the 1033 Program, acquired the following “tactical” equipment, according to Mike O’Connell, Communications Director for the Missouri Department of Public Safety:

Despite the fact that police in Ferguson have been photographed with a matte black vehicle which appears to be a “Bearcat” MRAP, O’Connell told Newsweek that no St. Louis County law enforcement agencies have acquired any MRAPs through the 1033 program.

 

If the vehicle in the above Reuters photo is indeed an MRAP and not one of the nine “utility trucks” acquired by St. Louis County law enforcement, O’Connell said he does not know where it came from.

Police in Watertown, Connecticut, (population 22,514) recently acquired a mine-resistant, ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicle (sticker price: $733,000), designed to protect soldiers from roadside bombs, for $2,800. There has never been a landmine reported in Watertown, Connecticut.

Police in small towns in Michigan and Indiana have used the 1033 Program to acquire “MRAP armored troop carriers, night-vision rifle scopes, camouflage fatigues, Humvees and dozens of M16 automatic rifles,” the South Bend Tribune reported.

And police in Bloomington, Georgia, (population: 2,713) acquired four grenade launchers through the program, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported.

Given the proliferation of military weapons and military training among America’s police departments, the use of military force and military tactics is not surprising. When your only tool is a hammer, after all, every problem looks like a nail.

Update: Missouri DPS Communications Director O’Connell on Thursday morning sent the following e-mail confirming that St. Louis law enforcement agencies also received 12 5.56 millimeter rifles and six .45 caliber pistols as part of 1033 Program.

Our DoD program rep was curious why no weapons showed up in her search yesterday. She searched a different way this morning and it showed that twelve 5.56 millimeter rifles and six .45 caliber pistols went to St. Louis County law enforcement agencies between Aug. 2, 2010 and Feb. 13, 2013. This was erroneously omitted from the report I sent you last night. She’s double checked again this morning and is confident this was the only omission.

Sorry for the oversight.

Mike

5-10-2016 8-55-33 AM

World Leaders Are Cross Matching Troops to Seize Guns and Impose Martial Law

May 9th, 2016 by

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com

5-9-2016 11-19-10 AMOLDDOGS COMMENTS!

I will not accuse Dave of being a scare monger, but I have a hard time believing everything he publishes. However this time he has raised a problem I have not formerly applied much importance on, and that is the number of foreign troops he expects to show up. This could be a real problem in a Nation too self centered to have demanded a contingent of State Militias. As it stands now with our dumbed down population, and lack of secure communications, a counter offensive is sure suicide, and only a handful of us will stand up and fight back. Not all of us are willing to die on our knees. Good luck America, you had a good run!

By Dave Hodges

 This picture and depicts Russian soldiers at Ft. Carson. The Russians and other foreign troops (e.g. Germans, Canadians, Danes) are part of Jade Helm. They are here to carry out the mission should American troops stand down.

 All world leaders, who are proxies for the New World Order know that their own individual military forces will not murder their own people in large enough numbers to make a difference with regard to citizen resistance to a nation’s fall into absolute tyranny. 

The world is now witnessing the transfer of domestic military power to foreign entities and every citizen of every modern country in the world, should be extremely fearful. These foreign troops will have no compunction as to how many people that they will murder on the path to establishing a New World Order.  

There are clear signs that the globalists are making their move to subjugate the entire G-20, and they are making that move, NOW.

The Bloodbath Will Commence with the Fall of the American Economy

Australia In Danger!  

ABC News in Australia has announced that the Australian Government has just released a Multi- Billion Dollar Deal made with Singapore to House and Rotate 14,000 Singapore Soldiers. And of course, under the principle of incrementalism, it is only 14,000 troops today, but it could just as easily become 140,000 foreign troops tomorrow.

Under the agreement, that will bring combat troops from Singapore  to Australia, the Australian people would fund the cost of expanding the Shoal water Bay Training Area and the Townsville Field Training Area, both in the north of Queensland state.

This is a move predicated towards the implementation of martial law and this also provides the foreign interlopers a permanent base of operations.

Many Australians have not surrendered their guns because many of them anticipated what was coming, namely, total economic collapse courtesy of the derivatives, and absolute gun confiscation which will be enforced with extreme prejudice. The Australian courts will not be involved in the coming martial law and ensuing gun confiscation activities. Foreign officers, in their field command capacity will be given the Carte Blanche authority to enforce gun confiscation to the letter of the law.

 The Australian government has sold out their citizens and have set them up for foreign occupation the roll out a brutal martial law.

No Difference Between Australia and America

There is clear evidence that the foreign soldiers are going to be trained to take over the FEMA Camps and the question as to whether American forces would fire upon American citizens is a moot point.

Training Foreigners To Take Over the Camps

“This appendix addresses aspects of developing confinement officers in other countries. For the purposes of this appendix, the terms foreign and HN confinement officers are synonymous”.

Appendix N
Foreign Confinement Officer Training Program

Training U.S. Trainers

N-43. Soldiers and Marines who are assigned training missions receive a course of preparation to deal with the specific requirements of developing the target HN confinement officers (i.e. foreign detention officers). The course should emphasize the cultural background of the HN, introduce its language (to include specific confinement-related terms and phrases) and provide insights into cultural tips for developing a good rapport with HN personnel.

The beginning of this section attempts to create the illusion that foreign troops will be under the complete control of Army personnel. However, I believe it is likely that the mass exterminations of the detainees will take place when the American military is withdrawn from the facilities. If there was any doubt as to the fact that our soon-to-be jailers will be foreign and will have no hesitation to carry out mass genocide, the following regulation from the document should remove all doubt.

Training Methods
N-48. Training programs are designed to prepare HN personnel to eventually train themselves. Indigenous trainers are the best trainers and should be used to the maximum extent possible.

For nearly four years, I have interviewed numerous eyewitnesses on my talk show about the presence of foreign troops (mostly Russian) training on American soil. Sherrie Wilcox has presented videotape and still photo evidence. Others have provided their firsthand accounts of these events. I have detailed the existence of a FEMA bilateral agreement with the Russians to bring in 15,000 soldiers for “disaster training”.  And despite all the evidence, there are people who have roundly criticized The Common Sense Show for accurately claiming there are foreign troops on American soil. Those who have refused to look at the evidence owe my people an apology. Second, the “bury their head in the sand crowd” ,will never know what will hit them when all hell breaks loose.

New World Order Forces Preparing to Counter American Military Forces Fighting a Guerrilla War

5-9-2016 11-22-54 AMAustralia, Singapore, or America, There Is No Difference As to What Is Coming

In the first week of February, I published several documents pertaining to UWEX 16, including the following advertisement for “role players” in this “drill”. The drill involves the following:

5-9-2016 11-24-36 AM

Does anyone else find it interesting that your government is practicing to fight rogue elements of the of the US military who are engaged in a guerrilla war?

Pulling Out the Stops

5-9-2016 11-25-52 AMMark Zuckerberg censoring Donald Trump.

Can Donald Trump save America and the world from global depression and martial law? Alex Jones weighs in on this topic.

Facebook has revealed that they have the ability and permission to block Trump posts. That by itself, may not mean much except to reveal Facebook’s position in the NWO. However, this action may be designed to assist Hillary.

The Hillary Factor

5-9-2016 11-28-26 AMThe Hillary Factor

“I support Australia’s system of gun control”

One of Clinton’s main campaign positions is predicated on imitating the Australian gun control model.

5-9-2016 11-29-52 AM

The fallacy of Australian Gun Control

Isn’t it curious that Clinton would like to have the same impact on American individual security as will the Singapore military in Australia?

Conclusion

The game plan is apparent. World leaders will cross-match their troops in attempt to subjugate each other’s citizens who would dare to resist such things as gun confiscation efforts. In the past, Obama has made it clear he has access to Russians, Chinese and now even Cubans. Hillary Clinton has exposed her hand as she has announced she will implement gun confiscation, Australian style. Further, FEMA camps will ultimately be manned by foreign soldiers. By the way, Singapore’s pilots train at Luke Air Force Base (Glendale, AZ.) on American F-16’s. Isn’t that interesting?

I would say that Trump has his hands full.

10 13 11 flagbar

 

NEW WORLD ORDER COMBAT ARMS SURVEY

May 5th, 2016 by

http://www.knology.net/~bilrum/UN29palms.htm

5-5-2016 8-36-53 AM

Question # 46

“I Would Fire Upon U.S. Citizens…”

The RESISTER has confirmed that US Navy SEAL platoons, including SEAL Team Six, Marine combat veterans stationed at Twenty-Nine Palms, CA, and Marine basic trainees at Camp Pendelton, CA, have been administered a questionnaire asking, among other things, if they would “…fire upon US citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the US government.”

The questionnaire was first administered to operators by the commanders of SEAL Team Six on 15 September 1993, then subsequently to the remaining SEAL platoons throughout September and October. Rumors began circulating in November that US Army DELTA operators were given the same or similar questionnaire. The SF Underground had been aware of the questionnaire since late September but our observers had been unable to secure a copy or confirm other than its substance consisted of questions pertaining to the subordination of the US Military to the UN and confiscation of the firearms of US citizens. In early January, 1994, we obtained a copy of the questionnaire from one of our DOD sympathizers but lacking corroboration we ran the story in Vol.I, No.1 of The RESISTER as a rumor.

On January 22, 1994, one of our observers copied a chilling message off the Internet from Petty Officer 2nd Class W. Kelly, US Navy Special Warfare Team Six, to D. Hawkins, Re: Gun Confiscation. Kelly began by stating that the questionnaire was “…to find out if we would follow the orders of commanding officers without question.” (Kelly omitted the fact that the questionnaire assumes “commanding officers” gives equal authority to UN officers commanding US forces.) Kelly continued; “If you wish to find out how I answered I said yes I would fire and kill all persons attempting to resist…we aren’t around to be the good guys.” Remember, Kelly is referring to American civilians.

In February, 1994, MODERN GUN magazine ran a story on the elusive questionnaire which was subsequently circulated by various patriotic citizens groups. Then, on 10 May, 1994, the questionnaire was administered to Marine Desert Storm veterans at Twenty-Nine Palms, CA. A Marine smuggled a copy of the questionnaire out of the testing center and mailed it on 15 May, 1994, with a cover letter, to the editor of THE NEW AMERICAN, which ran the story in their July 11, 1994, issue. THE NEW AMERICAN quotes the Marine’s impression that the questionnaire “was just research for this (Navy) commander’s(sp) degree.” The RESISTER obtained a copy of the Marine’s letter, which actually states: “A Navy Commander came before us and said he was working on his masters degree and he was writing a paper about giving up our military’s soverenty(sp) to the United Nations Secretary General.”

The official DOD lie surrounding the questionnaire entitled “Combat Arms Survey,” supports that of the Navy Commander. Significantly, the Combat Arms Survey was first given at the time Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 25 was being prepared. The RESISTER’s correspondent in the Pentagon staff of the Joint Chiefs of Staff confirms that PDD 25 surrenders control of the U.S. military to the United Nations. (A cursory survey of articles written by MACOM commanders and staff members in official military journals for the past year reveals a universal acceptance of U.N. control of the American military.)

The RESISTER has been eliciting responses to the questionnaire for the past year. Frighteningly, among service members with less than 10 years of service, 63% agree or strongly agree with question # 46: “I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government.” Among new recruits almost 90% give the response: “If it’s the law and they order me to do it I guess it’s okay.” Our federally controlled public schools have done their job.

Of those with more than 15 years of service, 87% replied “disagree” or “strongly disagree.” Responses by members of the Special Forces Underground were unprintable; basically, there will not be many officers who give that order more than once.

The RESISTER has enclosed a copy of the Combat Arms Survey with this issue. As you read it pay particular attention to the qualifiers and their relation to recent articles in the official publications of the Department of Defense, the civilian media, and the policies of the federal government. * 

Editorial Note The enclosed Combat Arms Survey is a true and accurate reproduction of the contents of the questionnaire. We altered the format to accommodate the The RESISTER’s layout. THE EDITOR

COMBAT ARMS SURVEY

This questionnaire is to gather data concerning the attitudes of combat trained personnel with regards to nontraditional missions. All of your responses are confidential. Write your answers directly on the questionnaire form. In Part II, place an “X” in the space provided for your response.

Part I. Demographics

  1. What service are you in?
  2. What is your pay grade? (e.g. E-7, O-7)
  3. What is your MOS code and description?
  4. What is your highest level of education in years?
  5. How many months did you serve in Operation Desert Storm/Desert Shield?
  6. How many months did you serve in Somalia?
  7. What state or country did you primarily reside in during childhood?

Part II. Attitudes

Do you feel that U.S. Combat troops should be used within the United States for any of the following missions?

  1. Drug enforcement

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Disaster relief (e.g. hurricanes, floods, fires, earthquakes)

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Security at national events (e.g. Olympic Games, Super Bowl)

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Environmental disaster clean-up

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Substitute teachers in public schools

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Community assistance programs (e.g. landscaping, environmental clean-up,

road repair, animal control)

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Federal and state prison guards

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. National emergency police force

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Advisors to S.W.A.T. units, the FBI or the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and

Firearms (B.A.T.F.)

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Border patrol (e.g. prevention of illegal aliens into U.S. territory)

Do you feel that U.S. combat troops under U.S. command should be used in other countries for and of the following United Nations missions?

 

  1. Drug enforcement

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Disaster relief (e.g. hurricanes, floods, fires, earthquakes)

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Environmental disaster clean-up

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Peace keeping

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Nation building (Reconstruct civil government, develop public school

system, develop or improve public transportation system, etc.)

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Humanitarian relief (e.g. food and medical supplies, temporary housing,

and clothing)

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

Do you feel that U.S. combat troops should be used in other countries, under command of non-U.S. officers appointed by the United Nations for any of the following missions?

 

  1. Drug enforcement

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Disaster relief (e.g. hurricanes, floods, fires, earthquakes)

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Environmental disaster clean-up

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Peace keeping

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Nation building (Reconstruct civil government, develop public school

system, develop or improve public transportation system, etc.)

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Humanitarian relief (e.g. food and medical supplies, temporary housing,

and clothing)

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. Police action (e.g. Korea, Vietnam, but serving under non-U.S. officers)

 

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

Consider the following statements:

  1. The U.S. runs a field training exercise.  U.N. combat troops should be

allowed to serve in U.S. combat units during these exercises under U.S.

command and control.

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. The United Nations runs a field training exercise.  U.S. combat troops

under U.S. command and control should serve in U.N. combat units during these

exercises.

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. The United Nations runs a field training exercise.  U.S. combat troops

should serve under U.N. command and control in U.N. during these exercises.

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. U.S. combat troops should participate in U.N. missions as long as the U.S.

has full command and control.

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. U.S. combat troops should participate in U.N. missions under United

Nations command and control.

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. U.S. combat troops should be commanded by U.N. officers and non-

commissioned (NCOs) at battalion and company levels while performing U.N.

missions.

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. It would make no difference to me to have U.N. soldiers as members of my

team. (e.g. fire team, squad, platoon)

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. It would make no difference to me to take orders from a U.N. company

commander.

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. I feel the President of the United States has the authority to pass his

responsibilities as Commander-in-Chief to the U.N. Secretary General.

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. I feel there is no conflict between my oath of office and serving as a

U.N. soldier.

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. I feel my unit’s combat effectiveness would not be affected by performing

humanitarian missions for the United Nations.

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. I feel a designated unit of U.S. combat soldiers should be permanently

assigned to the command and control of the United Nations.

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. I would be willing to volunteer for assignment to a U.S. combat unit under

a U.N. commander.

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. I would like U.N. member countries, including the U.S., to the U.N. all

the soldiers necessary to maintain world peace. 

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. I would swear to the following code:

      “I am a United Nations fighting person.  I serve in the forces which

maintain world peace and every nation’s way of life.  I am prepared to give my

life in their defense.”

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

 

  1. The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale,

transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms.  A thirty (30) day

amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over the local

authorities.  At the end of this period, a number of citizen groups refuse to

turn over their firearms.  Consider the following statement:

 

      I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of

firearms banned by the U.S. government.

      (   )          (   )   (   )        (   )       (   ) 

Strongly disagree  Disagree  Agree  Strongly agree  No opinion

End Note

Our civilian readers maybe wondering why the Combat Arms Survey was circulated so heavily within the Department of the Navy. The reason is simple; the Navy is not subject to USC Title 10 Posse Comitatus prohibitions against using federal military forces for domestic law enforcement. This includes the US Marine Corps.

Just thought you would like to know.

THE STAFF[Resistor, Ed.] 

OLDDOGS COMMENTS!

Just more evidence of how effective government controlled education really is. As for me, I would shoot any commander that ordered me to kill Americans if they refused to surrender their lawfully owned weapons. THE UNITED COMMUNIST STATES OF AMERICA is not my country or government. The politicians who have merged America with the U.N. should be hung by the ankles and stoned until they die.

10 13 11 flagbar

Do You Own Yourself?

May 2nd, 2016 by

http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/ownyourself.shtml

http://www.lawfulpath.com/index.php?p=Reading-Room&i=0

By Butler Shaffer

One of my favorite quotations comes from Thomas Pynchon: “If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers.” Our world is in the mess it is in today because most of us have internalized the fine art of asking the wrong questions.

Contrary to the thinking that would have us believe that the conflict, violence, tyranny, and destructiveness that permeates modern society is the result of “bad” or “hateful” people, disparities in wealth, or lack of education, all of our social problems are the direct consequence of a general failure to respect the inviolability of one another’s property interests!

I begin my Property classes with the question: “do you own yourself?” Most of my students eagerly nod their heads in the affirmative, until I warn them that, by the time we finish examining this question at the end of the year, they will find their answer most troubling, whatever it may be today. “If you do own yourself, then why do you allow the state to control your life and other property interests? And if you answer that you do not own yourself, then what possible objection can you raise to anything that the state may do to you?” We then proceed to an examination of the case of Dred Scott v. Sandford.

The question of whether Dred Scott was a self-owning individual, or the property of another, is the same question at the core of the debate on abortion. Is the fetus a self-owning person, or an extension of the property boundaries of the mother? The same property analysis can be used to distinguish “victimizing” from “victimless” crimes: murder, rape, arson, burglary, battery, theft, and the like, are victimizing crimes because someone’s property boundaries were violated. In a victimless crime, by contrast, no trespass to a property interest occurs. If one pursues the substance of the “issues” that make up political and legal debates today, one always finds a property question at stake: is person “x” entitled to make decisions over what is his, or will the state restrain his decision-making in some way? Regulating what people can and cannot put into their bodies, or how they are to conduct their business or social activities, or how they are to educate their children, are all centered around property questions.

“Property” is not simply some social invention, like Emily Post’s guide to etiquette, but a way of describing conditions that are essential to all living things. Every living thing must occupy space and consume energy from outside itself if it is to survive, and it must do so to the exclusion of all other living things on the planet. I didn’t dream this up. My thinking was not consulted before the life system developed. The world was operating on the property principle when I arrived and, like the rest of us, I had to work out my answers to that most fundamental, pragmatic of all social questions: who gets to make decisions about what? The essence of “ownership” is to be found in control: who gets to be the ultimate decision maker about people and “things” in the world?

Observe the rest of nature: trees, birds, fish, plants, other mammals, bacteria, all stake out claims to space and sources of energy in the world, and will defend such claims against intruders, particularly members of their own species. This is not because they are mean-spirited or uncooperative: quite the contrary, many of us have discovered that cooperation is a great way of increasing the availability of the energy we need to live well. We have found out that, if we will respect the property claims of one another and work together, each of us can enjoy more property in our lives than if we try to function independently of one another. Such a discovery has permitted us to create economic systems.

There is no way that I could have produced, by myself, the computer upon which I am writing this article. Had I devoted my entire life to the undertaking, I would have been unable even to have conceived of its technology. Many other men and women, equally unable to have undertaken the task by themselves cooperated without even knowing one another in its creation. Lest you think that my writing would have to have been accomplished through the use of a pencil, think again: I would also have been unable to produce a pencil on my own, as Leonard Read once illustrated in a wonderful, brief essay.

Such cooperative undertakings have been possible because of a truth acknowledged by students of marketplace economic systems, particularly the Austrians about human nature: each of us acts only in anticipation of being better off afterwards as a result of our actions. Toward whatever ends we choose to act, and such ends are constantly rearranging their priorities within us, their satisfaction is always expressed in terms inextricably tied to decision making over something one owns (or seeks to own). Whether I wish to acquire some item of wealth, or to give it away; whether I choose to write some great novel or paint some wondrous work of art; or whether I just wish to lie around and look at flowers, each such act is premised on the fact that we cannot act in the world without doing so through property interests. It is in anticipation of being able to more fully express our sense of what is important to us, both materially and spiritually, that we cooperate with one another.

“Property” also provides a means for maximizing both individual liberty and peace in society. For once we identify who the owner of some item of property is, that person’s will is inviolate as to such property interest. He or she can do what they choose with respect to what is theirs. If I own a barn, I can set fire to it should I so choose? If I must first get another’s permission, such other person is the owner. Individual liberty means that my decision making is immune from the coercion of others, and coercion is always expressed in terms of property trespasses.

At the same time, the property principle limits the scope of my decision making by confining it to that which is mine to control. This is why problems such as industrial “pollution” are usually misconceived, reflecting the truth of Pynchon´s earlier quote. A factory owner who fails to confine the unwanted byproducts of his activities to his own land, is not behaving as a property owner, but as a trespasser. Economists have an apt phrase for this: socializing the costs. He is behaving like any other collectivist, choosing to extend his decision making over the property of others!

But not all of us choose to pursue our self-interests through cooperation with others. Cooperation can exist only when our relationships with others are on a voluntary basis which, in turn, requires a mutual respect for the inviolability of one another’s property boundaries. Those who seek to advance their interests in non-cooperative ways, create another system: politics. If you can manage to drag your mind away from the drivel placed there by your high school civics class teacher, and look at political systems in terms of what they in fact do, you will discover this: every such system is founded upon disrespect for privately owned property! All political systems are collectivist in nature, for each presumes a rightful authority to violate the will, including confiscation, of property owners. One can no more conceive of “politics” without “theft” than of “war” without “violence.”

Every political system is defined in terms of how property is to be controlled in a given society. In communist systems, the state confiscates all the means of production. In less-ambitious socialist systems, the state confiscates the more important means of production (e.g., railroads, communications, steel mills, etc.). Under fascism, “title” to property remains in private hands, but “control” over such property is exercised by the state. Thus, fascism has given us state regulatory systems, in which property owners, be they farmers, homeowners, or businesses, have the illusion of owning what they believe to be “theirs,” while the state increasingly exercises the real ownership authority (i.e., control). In welfare state systems, the state confiscates part of the income of individuals and redistributes it to others.

As stated earlier, property is an existential fact. Whatever the society in which we live, someone will make determinations as to who will live where, what resources can be consumed by whom (and when), and how such property will be controlled. Such decisions can either be made by individual property owners, over what is theirs to control, or by the state presuming the authority to control the lives of each of us. When such decisions are made by the state, it is claiming ownership over our lives.

It is at this point that I let the students in on the secret the political establishment would prefer not to have revealed: the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution did not end slavery, but only nationalized it! That most Americans acquiesce in such political arrangements, and take great offense should anyone dare to explain their implications, has led me to the conclusion that America may be the last of the collectivist societies to wither away. Most Americans, sad to say, seem unprepared to deny the state’s authority to direct their lives and property as political officials see fit. The reason for this, as my first-day question to students is designed to elicit, is that most of us refuse to insist upon self-ownership.

We may, of course, choose to accept our role as state-owned chattels, particularly if we are well-treated by our masters. We may be so conditioned in our obeisance that, like cattle entering the slaughterhouse, we may pause to lick the hand of the butcher out of gratitude for having been well cared for. On the other hand, we may decide to reclaim our self-ownership by taking back the control over our lives that we have long since abandoned.

Perhaps the insanity of our social destructiveness, including the Bush Administration’s deranged declaration of a permanent war against the rest of the world, will bring about an examination of alternative ways of living together in conditions of peace and liberty. Our political systems cannot bring about such harmonious and life-sustaining ways because they are premised on a rejection of the principle of self-ownership. In a society of self-owning individuals, there would be no place for politicians, bureaucrats, and other state functionaries. Like the rest of us, they would have to confine their lives to minding their own business, and deriving whatever benefit they could from persons who chose to cooperate with them.

There is one person who can restore you to a state of self-ownership, however, and that person is you. To do so, you need only assert your claim, not as some empty gesture, but in full understanding of the existential meaning of such a claim, including the willingness to take full control of and responsibility for your life. While your claim will likely evoke cries of contempt from many, you may also find yourself energized by a life force that permeates all of nature; an élan vital that reminds us that life manifests itself only through individuals, and not as collective monstrosities; that life belongs to the living, not to the state or any other abstraction.

February 25, 2002

Butler Shaffer [send him e-mail] teaches at the Southwestern University School of Law.

Copyright © 2002 LewRockwell.com, Reprinted by The Lawful Path http://lawfulpath.com under permission from the author.

 

OLDDOGS COMMENTS!

If you have read this far, by all means do not stop here! Before you do anything else go to amazon.com and buy this book.

You Know Something is Wrong When…..: An American Affidavit of Probable Cause (Paperback) by Judge Anna Maria Riezinger & James Clinton Belcher

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1491279184/ref=cm_cr_asin_lnk

Is this you!

Grateful Slave

by Paine’s Torch

Copyright 1993 ZENO Press, All Rights Reserved

I am a grateful slave.
My master is a good man.
He gives me food, shelter, work and other things.
All he requires in return is that I obey him.
I am told he has the power to control my life.
I look up to him, and wish that I were so powerful.

My master must understand the world better than I,
because he was chosen by many others for his respected position.
I sometimes complain, but fear I cannot live without his help.
He is a good man.

My master protects my money from theft, before and after he takes half of it.
Before taking his half, he says only he can protect my money.
After taking it, he says it is still mine.
When he spends my money, he says I own the things he has bought.
I don’t understand this, but I believe him.
He is a good man.

I need my master for protection, because others would hurt me.
Or, they would take my money and use it for themselves.
My master is better than them:
When my master takes my money, I still own it.
The things he buys are mine.
I cannot sell them, or decide how they are used, but they are mine.
My master tells me so, and I believe him.
He is a good man.

My master provides free education for my children.
He teaches them to respect and obey him and all future masters they will have.
He says they are being taught well; learning things they will need to know in the future.
I believe him.
He is a good man.

My master cares about other masters, who don’t have good slaves.
He makes me contribute to their support.
I don’t understand why slaves must work for more than one master, but my master says it is necessary.
I believe him.
He is a good man.

Other slaves ask my master for some of my money.
Since he is good to them as he is to me, he agrees.
This means he must take more of my money; but he says this is good for me.
I ask my master why it would not be better to let each of us keep our own money.
He says it is because he knows what is best for each of us.
We believe him.
He is a good man.

My master tells me:
Evil masters in other places are not as good as he; they threaten our comfortable lifestyle and peace.
So, he sends my children to fight the slaves of evil masters.
I mourn their deaths, but my master says it is necessary.
He gives me medals for their sacrifice, and I believe him.
He is a good man.

Good masters sometimes have to kill evil masters, and their slaves.
This is necessary to preserve our way of life; to show others that our version of slavery is the best.
I asked my master:
Why do evil masters’ slaves have to be killed, along with their evil master?
He said: “Because they carry out his evil deeds.”
“Besides, they could never learn our system; they have been indoctrinated to believe that only their master is good.”
My master knows what is best.
He protects me and my children.
He is a good man.

My master lets me vote for a new master, every few years.
I cannot vote to have no master, but he generously lets me choose between two candidates he has selected.
I eagerly wait until election day, since voting allows me to forget that I am a slave.
Until then, my current master tells me what to do.
I accept this.
It has always been so, and I would not change tradition.
My master is a good man.

At the last election, about half the slaves were allowed to vote.
The other half had broken rules set by the master, or were not thought by him to be fit.
Those who break the rules should know better than to disobey!
Those not considered fit should gratefully accept the master chosen for them by others.
It is right, because we have always done it this way.
My master is a good man.

There were two candidates.
One received a majority of the vote – about one-fourth of the slave population.
I asked why the new master can rule over all the slaves, if he only received votes from one-fourth of them?
My master said: “Because some wise masters long ago did it that way.”
“Besides, you are the slaves; and we are the master.”
I did not understand his answer, but I believed him.
My master knows what is best for me.
He is a good man.

Some slaves have evil masters.
They take more than half of their slaves’ money and are chosen by only one-tenth, rather than one-fourth, of their slaves.
My master says they are different from him.
I believe him.
He is a good man.

I asked if I could ever become a master, instead of a slave.
My master said, “Yes, anything is possible.”
“But first you must pledge allegiance to your present master, and promise not to abandon the system that made you a slave.”
I am encouraged by this possibility.
My master is a good man.

He tells me slaves are the real masters, because they can vote for their masters.
I do not understand this, but I believe him.
He is a good man; who lives for no other purpose than to make his slaves happy.

I asked if I could be neither a master nor a slave.
My master said, “No, you must be one or the other.”
“There are not other choices.”
I believe him.
He knows best.
He is a good man.

I asked my master how our system is different, from those evil masters.
He said: “In our system, masters work for the slaves.”
No longer confused, I am beginning to accept his logic.
Now I see it!
Slaves are in control of their masters, because they can choose new masters every few years.
When the masters appear to control the slaves in between elections, it is all a grand delusion!
In reality, they are carrying out the slaves’ desires.
For if this were not so, they would not have been chosen in the last election.
How clear it is to me now!
I shall never doubt the system again.
My master is a good man.

 10 13 11 flagbar

 

ANATOMY OF A MURDER

March 12th, 2016 by

Michael Gaddy is a political activist, writer and teacher who defends and teaches the Constitution as ratified (Originalist), our Bill of Rights and the tenets of our Declaration of Independence. He is constantly trying to understand why the great majority of people in this country are content being slaves to an unconstitutional, criminal government; a government that is systematically destroying the intent of the founders of this country and the culture that brought us Liberty and Individual Freedom. Dependent on readers in continuing this effort, please support his work by mail at: 404 West Main St. PMB 121, Cortez, CO 81321.


“It is forbidden to kill, therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets” ~Voltaire

12-21-2014 7-40-05 AM

On January 26, 2016, Robert LaVoy Finicum was murdered on a lonely stretch of highway in Oregon by as yet unnamed government employees. It was murder in the first degree for it meets all four of the legal tenets for such a crime.

Purposely. Lavoy Finicum, Ammon Bundy, Shawna Cox, Ryan Bundy, Victoria Sharp and others were purposely led into the aforementioned lonely stretch of highway in Oregon specifically to engage them in circumstances which favored the employees of the state while minimizing any form of defense or retaliation. There was obvious prior knowledge by employees of the state as to the direction and route the above parties would be traveling. (obvious plant inside) Thus, the stretch of highway that provided no cell phone service; the obviously pre-planned and set up roadblock; snipers deployed in the surrounding woods and the firing upon the vehicle(s) when no shots had been fired from those vehicles at the government employees. Going 70 mph on a public road to avoid being shot does not necessitate a death penalty. The employees of the state have no valid claims of self-defense.

Knowingly: This point is easily established by the previously mentioned facts in evidence. The employees of the government knowingly led the Bundys, Finicum and others into a pre-planned scenario complete with a roadblock which created the desired “kill zone.”
Recklessly: Government employees recklessly fired deadly weapons into the vehicle(s) containing people who at the time had no wants or warrants outstanding against them, nor were they fleeing the scene of a crime. Therefore, there existed no probable cause for the actions of members of law enforcement be they local, state or federal.

Negligently: there is a multitude of available evidence which indicates the entire operation conducted by law enforcement on that day was negligent in the extreme. Officers could have detained and questioned all involved—if that was their true intent—-which the planned roadblock and weapons fired into occupied vehicles proves otherwise. On numerous occasions, Bundy, Finicum and others were seen in and around town, even traveling to the airport where the FBI command post was located to engage the leadership there in conversation. Ammon even asked if any of the officers were LDS. (Mormons) A peaceful arrest could have occurred there or various other locations with little fanfare or shooting. But, acting out of pure negligence and malice aforethought, members of law enforcement opted instead for what became a deadly shootout with totally unnecessary loss of life and freedom. These acts on the part of these particular government employees were premeditated and designed to produce the desired outcome.

Legal charges which were made against Bundy and others retroactively did not constitute probable cause for the initiation of the stop or deadly force. Probable cause cannot be established ex post facto.
Every single bit of evidence provided by the so-called “authorities” in this crime further indicts their actions. The actions of the government employees are Prima facie evidence the desired end results were achieved as planned.

Someone was going to pay dearly for the egg on the face of the federal sheriffs that occurred in Bunkerville, Nevada in April of 2014. They reestablished their dominion and control over the masses by shooting LaVoy Finicum in the back at least twice, therefore taking his life. Shooting someone in the back is an act of total cowardice. The federal sheriffs have become characters not unlike Robert Ford of Jesse James fame. “It was a dirty little coward who shot Mr. Howard…” Once in America it was seen as dishonorable to shoot anyone in the back, even a wanted criminal.

It appears the state sheriffs in Oregon who shot Lavoy in the back are having problems with some members of the SS death squad of the federal sheriffs (FBI Hostage, Rescue Team HRT) for shooting and missing LaVoy Finicum and then lying about shooting at all. Of course we remember the HRT who were deployed at the Weaver home in 1993, where again, another victim of tyranny was shot in the back (preferred tactic of cowards) this time 14 year-old Samuel Weaver with his mother Vicki shot in the face while holding her infant daughter shortly thereafter. Of course the FBI HRT member, one Lon Horiuchi, who shot the unarmed and infant toting Mrs. Weaver, would later plead the 5th Amendment when questioned about his cowardly act before the US Senate. Ironic is it not these federal sheriff assassins demand their constitutional rights when confronted with denying the right to life, liberty and happiness to others?

At some point in time the federal macho men are going to claim they were acting in accordance with the request of the governor of Oregon. But, again, that damned constitution is going to get in their way—-not really. Was the legislature of the state of Oregon in session when the Oregon governor asked for federal intervention? If not, was it possible to call them into session? Governor Kate Brown said on January 2, 2016:
[Federal officials] “must move quickly to end the occupation and hold all of the wrongdoers accountable.”
“This spectacle of lawlessness must end, and until Harney County is free of it, I will not stop insisting that federal officials enforce the law.”

Liberty, Justice and the American people continue to pay a terrible price for electing people to high office who wouldn’t know the Constitution if they found it floating in their morning coffee. Article IV Section IV of said Constitution specifically states the legislature of a state, not the governor, is responsible for calling in the central government to deal with “domestic violence.” The governor cannot do so if the legislature is in session or can be called into session. Of course, with the collection of constitutionally ignorant air wasters currently serving in most state legislatures, the results probably would not have been much different.

The evidence the ambush of the Bundy/Finicum party was deliberately and precisely planned to end the way it did, with the exception the forces manning that ambush were resolved to take out as many people as they could, is irrefutable. This is corroborated by the number of shots fired at the vehicle after LaVoy Finicum had been shot in the back and lay dying, without help, in the snow.
The 18 year old lady who was in the vehicle at the time was released, without charges, even though her life was in constant jeopardy by government agents shooting indiscriminately into the vehicle where she was a passenger. She has a valid case of attempted murder against all the government agents present at that shooting. Don’t hold your breath.

There is the charge that LaVoy Finicum was reaching for a gun, and a gun conveniently appeared to support the government’s allegation. There is an issue here of course of whether he was reaching for that weapon or whether his was a reaction to having already been shot. A huge issue is that Finicum and the others in his vehicle had been fired on before he exited that vehicle. No one can deny for a moment that he exited his vehicle with his hands up.

LaVoy Finicum was shot in the back at least twice, according to the autopsy, a cowardly act by men in body armor, some cowering in fear behind cover. Economics Professor and columnist Walter E. Williams once asked and then answered his own question. The question was: How can you tell when your government is violating its authority? Professor William’s answer was most relevant to the subject of this Rant. It was: If the government is doing something, that if you did the same thing, you would go to jail, the government is acting outside its authority.

Apply this answer please to the ambush and death of LaVoy Finicum. Switch roles. If the government employees were to have been driving down the road and a group like the Bundys and others attempted to stop them, say for a citizen’s arrest, while standing armed on the side of the road and behind cover, and the government employees attempted to exit the obvious threat and failing to do so one of them exited his vehicle with his hands up and was promptly shot in the back and killed, would those who did so be charged with a crime?

If you believe, even for a nanosecond, that federal, state and local sheriffs have a right and subsequent immunity for doing what they did to LaVoy Finicum and the others sitting in prison, simply because they were acting under the color of authority, your proper place of residence should be in the old Soviet Union, Cambodia under Pol Pot or Nazi Germany. Any freedom and liberty that you experience is wasted on an undeserving dolt. Samuel Adams, a true and faithful Patriot to his death, had some words especially for you: “Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; may your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”

IN RIGHTFUL REBEL LIBERTY

Michael is a political activist, writer and teacher who defends and teaches the Constitution as ratified (Originalist), our Bill of Rights and the tenets of our Declaration of Independence. He is constantly trying to understand why the great majority of people in this country are content being slaves to an unconstitutional, criminal government; a government that is systematically destroying the intent of the founders of this country and the culture that brought us Liberty and Individual Freedom. Dependent on readers in continuing this effort, please support his work by mail at: 404 West Main St. PMB 121, Cortez, CO 81321.

10 13 11 flagbar

Obama Administration and U.N. Announce “Global Police Force” to Fight Extremism In U.S.

February 13th, 2016 by

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/10/02/obama-administration-and-un-announce-global-police-force-to-fight-extremism-in-u-s/

2-13-2016 2-44-57 PMAnthony Behar-Pool/Getty Images

By Pamela Geller

On Wednesday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced at the United Nations that her office would be working in several American cities to form what she called the Strong Cities Network (SCN), a law enforcement initiative that would encompass the globe.

This amounts to nothing less than the overriding of American laws, up to and including the United States Constitution, in favor of United Nations laws that would henceforth be implemented in the United States itself – without any consultation of Congress at all.

The United Nations is a sharia-compliant world body, and Obama, speaking there just days ago, insisted that “violent extremism” is not exclusive to Islam (which it is). Obama is redefining jihad terror to include everyone but the jihadists. So will the UN, driven largely by the sharia-enforcing Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the pro-Islamic post-American

President Obama, use a “global police force” to crush counter-jihad forces?
After all, with Obama knowingly aiding al-Qaeda forces in Syria, how likely is it that he will use his “global police force” against actual Islamic jihadists? I suspect that instead, this global police force will be used to impose the blasphemy laws under the sharia (Islamic law), and to silence all criticism of Islam for the President who proclaimed that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

What is a global police force doing in our cities? This is exactly the abdication of American sovereignty that I warned about in my book, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America. The Obama Department of Justice made it clear that it was exactly that when it distributed a press release last week announcing the “Launch of Strong Cities Network to Strengthen Community Resilience Against Violent Extremism.” In that press release, the DoJ complained that “while many cities and local authorities are developing innovative responses to address this challenge, no systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale.”

So if the local and municipal effort to counter the euphemistic and disingenuous “violent extremism” is inadequate and hasn’t developed “systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale,” the feds – and the UN – have to step in. Thus the groundwork is being laid for federal and international interference down to the local level. “The Strong Cities Network,” Lynch declared, “will serve as a vital tool to strengthen capacity-building and improve collaboration” – i.e., local dependence on federal and international authorities.

Lynch made the global (that is, United Nations) involvement clear when she added: “As we continue to counter a range of domestic and global terror threats, this innovative platform will enable cities to learn from one another, to develop best practices and to build social cohesion and community resilience here at home and around the world.”

This internationalist character was brought to the fore by the fact that the Strong Cities Network was launched on September 29 not at the White House or the Department of Homeland Security, or at the FBI headquarters or anywhere else that might be fitting for a national project, but at the United Nations.

Even more ominously, the DoJ press release says that the Strong Cities Network “will strengthen strategic planning and practices to address violent extremism in all its forms by fostering collaboration among cities, municipalities and other sub-national authorities.” Sub-national and international: the press release then quotes Governing Mayor Stian Berger Røsland of Oslo, Norway, a participant in the Strong Cities Network, saying: “To counter violent extremism we need determined action at all levels of governance. To succeed, we must coordinate our efforts and cooperate across borders. The Strong Cities Network will enable cities across the globe pool our resources, knowledge and best practices together and thus leave us standing stronger in the fight against one of the greatest threats to modern society.”

But what is that greatest threat, exactly? Remember, the DoJ presser says that the SCN will “address violent extremism in all its forms.” It also says that it will aid initiatives that are working toward “building social cohesion and resilience to violent extremism.” “Building social cohesion” is a euphemism for keeping peace between non-Muslim and Muslim communities – mostly by making sure that non-Muslims don’t complain too loudly about, much less work against, rapidly expanding Muslim populations and the Islamization of their communities.

The DoJ presser noted that at the launch of the Strong Cities Network, “welcoming remarks” would be offered by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein and Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York City. The involvement of New York City’s Marxist internationalist mayor is yet another warning sign.
Assert American sovereignty and individual rights. Contact your representatives now. Exhort them to oppose SCN now. Exhort them to keep America free – while it still is.

Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of PamelaGeller.com and author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance. Follow her on Twitter here. Like her on Facebook here.
Read More Stories About: Big Government, Jihad

OLDDOGS COMMENTS!

By now, all of my readers should know that OBUMA is a covert assassin who was put in office by the Banking Cartel, and his #1 objective is to devastate our country. By that I mean; use any and all methods to destroy everything we hold dear, and make American’s Banker Dependent street Beggars. He has performed like the organ grinder monkey he is from day one, and is sure to reap his rewards. When the blue hats come for you, put one between their eyes.

10 13 11 flagbar

Liberals Sneak Attack on The 2nd Amendment

January 21st, 2016 by

http://freedomoutpost.com/2012/02/liberals-sneak-attack-2nd-amendment/

By Tim Brown

It seems everywhere we look that the Second Amendment is under attack. Just last month the New Jersey Assembly Law & Public Safety Committee was considering legislation that would ban ammunition under the auspices of protecting police. Now it would appear from a brief reading of the proposal that the ammunition spoken of would be “armor piercing ammunition”, but the language also encompasses any ammo that is deemed to “pose a threat to the safety and well being of law enforcement.” Can anyone say “all” ammunition?

Let’s keep in mind that most law enforcement wear Level II-A protective vests that stop 9mm and .40 bullets. So that means that if strictly taken for armor piercing all other ammunition would be banned. This means you would be unable to get ammo for your AR-15, many hunting rifles and even some handguns, such as your trusty .45.

We are not even talking just common bullets. In addition, Ammoland.com states, “Common hunting, target, and self-defense ammunition would be subject to ban, along with BB’s, airgun pellets, and non-metallic ammunition like plastic airsoft pellets, if the Attorney General decides that they pose a threat to the safety and well being of law enforcement. “
The NRA also agrees with Ammoland’s assessment stating,

“Although the bill only mentions handgun ammunition, it is in fact not limited to handgun ammunition, and would apply to all rifle ammunition for which a handgun is ever made. As an increasing number of gun manufacturers make handgun models that shoot rifle caliber ammunition, the line between “handgun” vs. “rifle” ammunition has become blurred, and the New Jersey State Police have already begun treating rifle ammunition in this category as if it were handgun ammunition for regulatory purposes. As long as a handgun exists that shoots a particular caliber of rifle ammunition, New Jersey treats that ammunition as if it were handgun ammunition. “

The bills (Assembly Bill A588 & A1013) went even further and stated, “This bill makes using a defaced or stolen firearm in causing serious bodily injury or bodily injury to a law enforcement officer a crime.” So if you purchased a firearm from someone, paid a price and had a bill of sale (and the firearm was either stolen or had the serial number removed) and cops broke down your door and you defended yourself with the weapon and injured or killed the officer, you could be charged with a crime!
It is outrageous that these law makers do not respect their constituents enough to come head on after the guns people use. They have to manipulate and blow things out of proportion in order to get their agendas accomplished. However, in this instance they are doing a sneak attack and basically saying, “It’s OK for you to have weapons, you just can’t have ammunition.” I have to say this is a brilliant strategy but that is not to pat them on the back. I’m betting that most people see this and know they better obtain their ammo now, because once the ban is passed, it won’t be available in Jersey. In fact, if you are caught with it, it will probably be grounds for fines and jail time.

No doubt everyone has heard of the cries last year demanding federal legislation to ban high capacity ammunition clips after congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was shot.

Our own President is even undertaking efforts for more gun legislation, albeit “under the radar”, which many commentators connected to the Fast & Furious scandal. On top of that the New UN Small Arms Treaty is an international agreement which is seeking to disarm Americans. Some say it is an end around the 2nd Amendment. Others say no the Constitution would prevail over it. Let’s always keep at the forefront of our minds that the UN does not have our best interest at heart. Sadly, neither does the current occupant of the White House. This treaty would be up for ratification this year by the Senate.

10 13 11 flagbar

 

THE OBAMANIZATION OF AMERICA

January 20th, 2016 by

http://www.newswithviews.com/guest_opinion/guest248.htm

By Jon Hubbard
NewsWithViews.com

How is it possible that a nation founded upon Christian principles and values, one which had become the greatest and most successful experiment in government this world has ever known, could become such a willing participant in forsaking everything that made it great? What made it possible for that nation to deny, not only the American way of life, but to deny Christianity and Jesus Christ Himself? Although this did not happen overnight, there was only one way the forces of evil could have gained the foothold necessary to convert America into a Satanic State. As suggested in the book of The Revelation, there would have to be a catalyst in the form of some “authority figure” to bring all of the pieces together. That catalyst was found and put into place as a result of the election of 2008, in the person of Barack Hussein Obama.

Obama immediately went to work persuading his mesmerized flock of weak-minded individuals that there was more to life than what they had been taught. For those who loosely held onto the basic truth of Christianity, that one’s salvation and eternity in heaven could only be achieved by repenting of their sins and receiving Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, Obama quickly put them at ease by declaring that now there were several ways to make it into heaven, and these obedient and robotic minions were not about to question an official proclamation of their self-anointed “Messiah”!

Obama convinced them that there would be no need for them to die to make it into heaven, because he would create their heaven right here on Earth! If they didn’t want to work, all they had to do was sign up for perpetual unemployment benefits. And if that wasn’t enough, Obama would give them “free” health care, free cell phones, free education, free mortgages (which they couldn’t afford), food stamps, rent subsidies and even jobs for those who had not yet figured out that there was no longer any need to work for a living.

Wow, Utopia was here at last! Was Obama good, or what! He proclaimed that any government worth its salt would provide for a “cradle to the grave” existence for each and every one of the parasitical masses. Now it just couldn’t get any better than that! Obama knew that once this “free ride” mentality had been accepted, the rest would be easy. And for those who couldn’t be convinced through trickery and deceit, there was always the presumed guilt over slavery that would tie the hands and silence the voice of common sense and reason among those who had allowed this guilt to consume their every thought.

Under Obama, there would be no rules, except those, which he would create through his legislative procedure of choice, the Executive Order. He did make it very clear however, that in order for people to continue to enjoy this free and easy lifestyle, they must keep re-electing his disciples to office, those who would continue to provide this “free ride” existence. But then, who in their right mind would not vote for those people.

Responsibility and common sense were abandoned! Abortion would no longer be considered murder, but just another method of birth control. Same-sex marriage was no longer an immoral lifestyle and an abomination to God, but simply one’s right to co-habitat with whomever or whatever they choose.

Rules and responsibility were only for those who didn’t know how to enjoy the good life, and from now on, Christianity, the Constitution, ambition and all other obsolete principles and values relied upon to establish that old American nation would become but a distant reminder of an old-fashioned and square way of life.
Once Obama had rid the military leadership of those who might challenge his new world order form of government, and personal weapons had been removed from the hands of those who erroneously believed in a citizen’s right to keep and bear arms, the

“Obumanization” of America would then be complete.

From being the nation that the rest of this misguided and crazy world once depended upon to bring some sense of civility to life itself, we have become a disgrace to our ancestors and the laughing stock of a world gone totally mad. Congratulations Barack: Mission accomplished!

© 2014 Jon Hubbard – All Rights Reserved
Jon Hubbard, a former Arkansas State Representative, lives in Jonesboro.

E-Mail: hubbard_jon@yahoo.com

OLDDOGS COMMENTS!

In spite of his excellent blast of Obuma, Mr. Hubbard is still pouring out the same surreptitious garbage that makes uninformed people think that the election process really works. Heads up folks, the election process is the number one tool of the PTB to keep you ignorant of who runs the government. His denigration of the liberal parasites is a set up to get your sympathetic support. The entire Federal Government and all who work for it are either fools or covert back stabbers. Do not participate in the system that enslaves us. Demand the installment of Citizen Grand Juries and appoint Common Law Judges. We can rebuild America around the original Constitution with Common Law by the people and for the people. The existing political system is for Corporations.

Read this:

The Matrix and the US Constitution
http://anationbeguiled.wordpress.com/2014/05/10/what-is-our-government-really/

10 13 11 flagbar

BREAKING: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A GUN FREE ZONE

January 7th, 2016 by

http://www.thegovernmentrag.com/there-is-no-such-thing-as-a-gun-free-zone.html#.Vo6IhFJ77Te

1-7-2016 11-23-27 AM

By Jack Mullen |
Gun-free zones are a magnet for those who want to kill many people quickly. Even the most ardent gun control advocate would never put “Gun-Free Zone” signs on their home. Let’s stop finally putting them elsewhere. – John Lott Jr.

Theorem: There are NO GUN FREE ZONES

Gun Free Zones” are bounded regions where law abiding people are not allowed to be armed – formally being disarmed before entering. Gun Free Zones in Public Spaces (GFZPS) are a violation of the Constitution for the United States, violate many State Constitutions, and, more importantly, violate Natural Law.
The fundamental law is the foundation of our society. In the United States of America, it is the U.S. Constitution. Through this document, our fundamental rights are secured and protected against infringement by the federal government and by the State governments, because the States are also parties to this contract. – Paul Andrew Mitchell, “The Federal Zone”
No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it. [16 Am. Jur. 2d, Section 177; later 2d, Section 256]

The state of Nature has a law of Nature to govern it, which obliges every one, and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions. The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but to have only the law of Nature for his rule. John Locke
Gun Free Zones in Public Spaces are dangerous and, like cancer, can become a pathological process spreading ever widening areas, including cities, parks, government occupied buildings and properties. It can further metastasize over whole public regions including counties and States.

COMPETITION FOR PEACE AND SECURITY

Competition is a sin, therefore you must destroy it. John D. Rockefeller

The theory of natural monopoly is an economic fiction. No such thing as a ―natural monopoly has ever existed. The history of the so-called public utility concept is that the late 19th and early 20th-century ―utilities competed vigorously, and like all other industries, they did not like competition. They first secured government-sanctioned monopolies, and then, with the help of a few influential economists, they constructed an ex post facto rationalization for their monopoly power. . . . The theory of natural monopoly is a 19th-century economic fiction that defends 19th-century (or 18th-century, in the case of the U.S. Postal Service) monopolistic privileges and has no useful place in the 21st-century American economy. – June 14, 1995 at the CATO Institute conference examining the question Postal Service in the 21st Century: Time to Privatize? DiLorenzo, Thomas J.

It is an axiom: competition for solutions in the markets of human action produce outcomes maximizing the values which support mankind’s life and happiness.

Competitive forces maximize truth and transparency, while actively and invisibly minimizing deception, fraud and dissimulative activities which drain and dissipate the resources originally available for the problems.
Values necessary for human survival include Peace and Security, without out either, mankind cannot evolve as a community and in the long term he cannot exist.

Gun Free Zones reduce competition for peace and security. Proceeding with an analogy from economics, GFZPS have the same effect as cartel created monopolies, unnatural and forcibly defended barriers against competitors deliberately erected around lucrative high demand products such as medical drugs (legal) and recreational drugs (illegal), and services, such as the provision of security via police forces and law enforcement.

Unable to maintain their government-granted monopoly, the powerful railroad interests turned to government to do the regulating and price-fixing which they were unable to do themselves. In fact, the pressure that induced Congress to enact the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 did not come from reformers bemoaning abuses by the powerful railroad interests; it came from the railroad interests themselves, asking Congress to shield them against the harsh winds of competition. – THE BUSINESS END OF GOVERNMENT (1973). Dan Smoot

Forcibly defended monopolies mean the only people and groups allowed to provide and profit from the monopolized products, or services, are cartel members (corporate or criminal gangs) or Government created gangs (police forces.) In the case of gun free zones, the only people carrying weapons (illegally) are criminals. Criminals of course are not bound by the laws of a monopoly because all observance of law is a voluntary decision and criminals do not, by definition, voluntarily observe the law.

THE IDEA OF A GUN FREE ZONE IS MAGICAL THINKING: MANY PEOPLE ARE ARMED IN GUN FREE ZONES

In a monopoly controlled Gun Free Zone, there still exists a market for peace and security, but market forces are nullified creating a vacuum of competing solutions which would provide life maximizing results. In this situation, cartel members and criminals are given exclusive control of peace and security and yet neither group has any personal concern or investment for return in those values. Legally armed cartel members are concerned with law abiding people remaining disarmed and criminals are also concerned with law abiding people remaining disarmed, however for the different reason of increasing their chances of committing lowered risk further crime. This is common sense and is consistent with natural law.

Natural Law can be discovered and even understood and it can only be violated at some cost. In the case of an individual’s ability to maximize his peace and security, Natural Law is clear, the Individual must be fully self-responsible, ie., he or she must be a competing market provider of peace and security, primarily focusing on preserving protecting their own.
Competition, properly so-called, rests on the activity of separate, independent individuals owning and exchanging private property in the pursuit of their self-interest. It arises when two or more such individuals become rivals for the same trade. Ayn Rand

However as an individual provides for his own peace and security and brings his solution to the market, others will too, and must, bring their solutions thereby maximizing the number of competitive solutions providing peace and security. As the number of armed people increases, the incidence of violence and crime, inversely, is reduced. In an invisible way, crime and anti-life activity is minimized for all as the number of competing solutions for peace and security increase.

COMPETETIVE MARKET IN WEAPONS

In the case of weapons it’s also axiomatic that to support the Natural Law of competing solutions maximizing peace and security, there must be a competitive market of weapons available to competitors. It would be an unnatural (monopolized) market if only criminals and cartel members could be armed with the most powerful or technologically superior weapons. Again, criminals and unbalancing agents of the enforced monopoly would have a competitive edge in this market and peace and security would again be reduced if there were not competitive weapons available to everyone in the market.

Thus it is important to recognize: calls for reducing or eliminating your access to the best possible weapons technology of the day, are really a deceptive call to unbalance the market for peace and security and place you at a disadvantage in terms of maximizing your peace and security.

Gun Bans and Restrictions on Weapons Are Market Destabilizing
Cartels and monopolies of force are often created as a result of criminal elements having eliminated or usurped third party representatives formerly considered to be functioning to increase your peace and security.
The Constitution of the United States, acting as a clarifier and preserver of Natural Law, explicated the Natural Law of Self

Defense. The Constitution did not make the Law, but was created to provide a legal framework wherein the government established by the document would have enumerated restrictions on how the government could legally act.
It’s clear that for a period of some years, the Constitution was a sufficient reminder and the court systems a sufficient deterrent against acting outside or in a manner inconsistent with Natural Law and the Laws restricting government action as codified in the Constitution.

But consistent with our understanding of how deception, fraud and unbalancing of coercion free markets is necessary for criminals, and those seeking enrichment not via successful and productive efforts but rather by enslaving or stealing from others, we can directly correlate the creation of monopolies in all profitable markets required by man with a violation of Natural Law (with costs distributed to all not benefitting from the monopoly) and hence violations of the Constitution for the United States.

The Constitution has now become powerless and no longer limits government action, but has been interpreted to limit the action of market actors; the market being all areas where men and women could and should rightly participate in commerce without coercive limitations on action.
One such area is in the market for peace and security. Criminals, now actually parties with legal rights or cartel rights inside the created monopolies, are restricting free and open competition for maximizing the values of peace and security.
It’s totally clear and fully transparent, gun free zones, proliferating in ever widening circles of enforcement, are spaces being made safe and for criminal activity, keeping in mind, criminals do not voluntarily recognize the legal restrictions of gun free zones.

Arming the people has the effect of creating competition in economic markets – With more and more people armed the competition for peace provides MAXIMUM PEACE. And by way of economic principles, it is not the actual competition (outwardly carrying guns) that reduces violence, but rather it is the threat of competition (possible conceal weapons on everyone) — the threat of people everywhere competitively armed – that reduces the violence and cost.. It is common sense and natural law.
We are now witnessing the government acting in a manner that is consistent with favoring criminals, unbalancing the market and institutionalizing violence and predation.

STATE SPONSORED TERRORISM

History records time and time again, institutions organizing, at first in service or as representatives for individuals acting in a way supposedly beneficial to individuals. This usually starts out as a system of providing quasi-market solutions for problems individuals find troublesome or uncomfortable creating solutions.

However, over time, criminal elements, psychopaths and their sycophants will begin to infiltrate and then escalate the number of services provided. Slowly at first, market solutions for many common problems are eliminated as government offers solutions sold as better than competitive services can provide.
People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. – Adam Smith

This process easily continues as people, especially European people , (read about white Pathological Altruism), are very trusting and readily handover responsibilities and tasks they find troublesome, labor intensive, or otherwise not pleasurable.
Over time these governments, Monarchies, or any system of controlling people begin to use fear, intimidation and the invention of problems for which they can provide monopoly solutions. Costly solutions that ultimately reduce peace and security as their veiled goal is really predation on those unbalanced toward a weaker position in the market place of human action.

But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary. Adam Smith
State Sponsored Terrorism is a natural and typical act of a fully evolving criminal, mentally ill, control system which attempts to surround populations in monopolies of force, eventually creating total gun free zones inside their nations, while terrorizing the people into giving up their competitive positions and, as criminals, preying on the unprotected individuals across all perceived dimensions of wealth and value.

These governments and their masters know peace and security are increased by individual competitors, using the most competitive weapons technology available, freely offering (un-coerced) competitive solutions in the marketplace.

Therefore, the only logical conclusion to be drawn is, the Government intends to do violent crimes against the people and naturally must reduce the number of firearms in the hands of the people to accomplish this goal.
State Sponsored Terrorism is nothing more than marketing, albeit ruthless, often bloody, and always immoral, by a control system in support of a monopoly in the market of solutions and services offering peace and security

Governments, collectivized gangs and pockets of mentally ill crime syndicates must still compete in the social and economic market place of human action in order to gain market share and market control. This is a fact most don’t understand, much or all of the evil and injustice done by one group to another is done with permission, either overtly or covertly via tacit acceptance of the products, services and contracts of an illicit defacto control system.

It’s not until, an organization within a market obtains a corner on the market that they can evolved into a fully coercive tyranny, closing the doors to any competition and then gouging takes places in areas of important services. This explains why the Obama Regime must continuously create false flag shootings in order to gain American’s permission to begin the process of disarming. After a certain number of people provide support for the idea, the monopoly will have enough power to force its barriers around all peoples: Time is short.

Gun Free Zones are the safe spaces where State sponsored terrorism can exist mostly unimpeded.
Gun Free Zones are action zones, State actors and criminal actors artificially causing market unbalancing legal restrictions on people’s ability to protect themselves. In the end, as all people are disarmed, the worst personality traits begin to monopolize the positions of authority in the control system until, a mentally ill monopoly of force begins its most egregious acts of terrorism, theft, rape and mass murder. This has been explored as the concept of Pathocracy wherein, organizations begin to populate with similar minded, mentally ill or psychopathic personality traits.

Communism is such a political system and, over its nearly 200 years of implementation, every expression of this malignant political system has exhibited mentally ill and psychopathic behaviors leaving misery and wealth destruction as its legacy.
When a government or system of control begins to demand it provide solutions for peace and security, not voluntarily, and when concomitantly, peace and security are reduced with violent and escalating attacks on people and property (and always “advertised” via a public media circus) you must immediately recognize the danger; the control system is marketing a mentally ill system of control.

At this moment in time we have an emergency situation. The acts of Terrorism against the people, ie., Oklahoma City bombing, 9-11, mass shootings like the Batman Movie Theatre shootings, with James Holmes or the Safeway Shooting with Jared Loughner, or the TOTALLY FAKED attacks like the Sandy Hook School Shooting and likely the Boston Bombing, and attacks which may have been faked like those recently in Paris and San Bernardino, **are only the beginning**. Because when the people can no longer provide for their own defense, then anything and everything will be done to them — history has shown.

ARGUMENTS FOR IRRATIONAL ACTORS

Many argue mass shooters are mentally ill and emotionally charged. Claiming such states of mind preclude rational thinking regarding the location of mass shooting. The Batman Shooter, James Holmes for example never mentioned in his notes or other clues the theatre’s ‘Gun Free Zone” policy had anything to do with his choice of venue for his “mass shooting”.

However, if one actually believes the Holmes shooting was not either encouraged, provocateured, engineered or otherwise influenced by State actors working toward an agenda of total disarmament of the American people, one has to realize by unintentionally choosing a “Gun Free Zone” Holmes was elevating his chances of not being shot while committing his crime. Further the death toll was statistically likely to be higher as a result of the “Gun Free Zone” location.

It was also claimed in a 2002 study right to carry laws have no effect on the location of a mass shooting (This study does not include recent data, refuting this claim.) But again, it is not the location a “right to carry” law should affect, it’s the elimination of a threat or shooting in progress that a Natural Law right to defend your life most certainly will affect.

Most Americans cannot wrap their head around the fact that most of the recent escalation of mass shootings is in some way influenced by the control system which is attempting to disarm Americans.

NATURAL LAW SOLUTIONS FOR REDUCING GUN AND OTHER VIOLENT CRIME

If the government actually cared about insuring the least number of causalities were caused by mass a shooting situation (or other violent crime), then it would have no choice but to recommend the Swiss system of arming and training all people to defend themselves.

Gun and weapons training could again be part of the education system and begin early in a child’s life resulting in self-assured less fearful people aware of the fact that a virtual police officer was everywhere – all the time – in the form of citizens equally armed and trained to respond.
Training people at a young age to use, respect and understand the importance and position, in a self-dependent individual’s life tool complement, is the most responsible, rational and mature way to ensure self-defense is a basic component of healthy state of mind and part of creating, from birth, healthy and self-dependent personality traits.

This system naturally reduces violent crimes, rapes, robberies, while minimizing damage due to mentally ill shooters who are not motivated to save their own lives in first place.
Creating a state of dependency in which others are to stand up for your life and to be available in your instantaneous moment of need is childish thinking; the magical thinking of an undeveloped state of consciousness. This is a condition deliberated created by those planning to exploit this vulnerability; public education is culpable and complicit in the devolution of adult states of mind.

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin

Clearly Natural Law requires adult people take responsibility for their own lives, otherwise third parties, who are under no obligation to risk their lives for yours, will convince you to transfer your self-responsibility to them in exchange for protection. Transferring self-responsibility to another makes you a ward, a slave, beholden to another for your physical safety and, by induction, anything similar to safety, eventually transferring responsibility for whole classes of actions you are no longer rightfully allowed to take.

SILLY ARGUMENTS THAT GUNS IN HANDS OF THE PEOPLE DO NOT STOP TYRANNY

Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives. James Madison
There are many that argue (supporting their oppressors) guns in the hands of militias and the people could not have stopped the absolute torturous blood bath of the mentally ill Bolsheviks set loose on Russia by the European and American Jewry and other genocides prosecuted against defenseless peoples.

In the myopic article called Militia Myths the author makes the claim: A historical analysis reveals that Militias are typically the gateway to tyranny, not the safeguard against it. A heavily armed population has little to no bearing on preventing tyranny. and then gives examples of nations using a militia to throw off foreign aggressors only to create some new form of dictatorship afterwards. He cites examples of the liberating militias degenerating into tyrannies in countries like Vietnam, Afghanistan, Cuba, Somalia, Iraq, and southern Lebanon. The rest of the article makes similar claims about Bolshevik Russia and other nations where blood baths resulted when unarmed and untrained peoples fell victims to violent psychopaths.

The article referenced above is written by a person with absolutely no understanding, or apparent education regarding the psychologies and personality types of nations, races and cultures. Nations structured around forms of social heirarchy, having no long standing, historical and institutionalize protection of values, such as property rights, contract law, Individualism, Natural Law and other mainly Western values, as codified in common law principals, cannot be expected to create new governments or ruling bodies based on those values. Western culture (European white cultures) have for hundreds of years had an enlightened system of law and justice based on the Natural Law ideas of

1) Do all you have agreed to do – which is the basis of contract law;

2) Do not encroach on other persons and their property – which is the basis of criminal and tort law. Richard Maybury

Additionally, nations and their peoples with NO HISTORY of identifying and enshrining moral philosophical values preserving individual rights OR isolating governments from assimilating a religious dogma as part of its system of law, cannot expect some liberating internal militia to afterward “promote a Free State”. Again, this is childish or magical thinking, resulting in the formation of conclusions which are harmful to rational thought regarding maintaining peace and security and minimizing despotism, tyranny and mentally ill systems of control.

The cultures and governments of the East and, in fact, isolated and heavily influenced by Eastern immigrants, Czarist Russia, did not or do not possess a law based on Scientific Law, or Natural Law, but rather on Political law. As Richard Maybury aptly points out:

POLITICAL LAW IS BASED ON POLITICAL POWER.

It has no requirement for logic or morality. It changes whenever the political wind changes. Fickle and tangled, no one can completely understand it…. You do whatever the power-holders say, or else. Right or wrong.
This type of social structure will not allow or promote a system enabling individuals to grow and advance with an understanding of their right to self-defense and protection of their own property. To expect a “Free State” to just manifest after an untrained, either morally or philosophically, militia or organization of peoples with guns, throw off a given tyranny is just plain silly.

But in fact, Americans, mostly educated (as the educational system has been hobbled and purposely dumbed down) in a system of property rights, contract law, and the moral values of individualism, could easily and handily throw off tyrants and still retain the knowledge and understanding of how to reconstituted a system based on those principles of property rights, contract law and the common law (Natural Law) tenets of individual rights.

A skilled common law judge would try to make all his decisions logically consistent with the two fundamental laws. Common law was not only a private legal system, it was a scientific one. Abraham Lincoln considered `Euclid’s Geometry’ to be one of his most important law books; he studied it to be sure the logic of his cases was airtight.

One of the most important characteristics of common law was its certainty. It had evolved very carefully over many centuries, changing little from one decade to the next. The two fundamental laws remained always in place, a stabilizing force. The community could expect their legal environment to remain reasonably orderly. Richard Maybury]

It has been shown repeatedly armed citizens reduce causalities or prevent mass shootings.
The question for the American people, and not the usurped Federal or State Governments, is one of third party trust. Can

American’s expect their governments to protect them? Can American’s in light of all of human history, expect their governments to not become immoral, corrupt or tyrannical? Do Americans feel safe, even as their governments invite mostly fighting age males from Eastern nations having no moral or philosophical training or upbringing in the ways of a Limited Republic or a religiously unconcerned system of control based on common law, including property rights and individual rights? Do American’s feel safer disarmed as their own country is being overrun by criminals, former terrorists, rapists and people with other undesirable characteristics, a people that are not going to assimilate and become Western, but are rather going to struggle non-stop to make America more Eastern.

Will Americans feel safer disarmed as a financial collapse of proportions never experienced in America, deliberately caused by the financial looting of a criminal banking system and the vitiated corporate monopolies they licensed, creates armies of hungry, homeless and outraged people forced to take to the streets looking for answers and shelter from the banker’s caused financial nuclear winter?

The Government, their corporate masters and the criminal banking families behind them all are desperate to be sure Americans do not throw off their intended tyranny and restore a Natural Law system of government and reinvigorate the moral justice system that was once America and finally come after those who have attempted, with extreme hubris, to collapse civilization and rebirth it into a deformed, mentally ill, fledging New World Tyranny.

MY CONCLUSION: Hold On To Your Guns Like Your Life Depends On Them.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Please read more than once as Mr. Mullen’S make this situation clear as a bell. If you want something done your way, doing it yourself always works. Never trust a government, as history proves they always screw the people. Be ready and capable of defending your life no matter where you may be.

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

Deny the crooks jurisdiction over you, and destroy their power.

December 31st, 2015 by

http://www.paulstramer.net/2015/12/deny-crooks-jurisdiction-over-you-and.html?showComment=1451567012713#c6689684517931805263

12-21-2015 3-19-06 PM

By Anna Von Reitz

I get dozens and sometimes hundreds of letters, messages, emails, etc. from people wanting help with court problems– all in foreign courts that have no natural jurisdiction and no right to be here applying their “law” to our people. 

The Root Problem is that thanks to fraud and falsification of public records, our people have been registered as their people without anyone’s knowledge or consent. This self-interested fraud on the part of governmental services corporations needs to be recognized for what it is and forthrightly rebutted. 

Deny them jurisdiction over you and you deny them any ability to proceed — regardless of the issue be it foreclosure or child custody or driving without a license. 

You were born on the land of one of the American states.  You are by birthright “one of the free sovereign and independent people of the United States” and NOT an “inhabitant” — a British Crown Subject merely “residing” here.  Both these political statuses are clearly defined in The Definitive Treaty of Peace known as the Treaty of Paris 1783 ending the Revolutionary War, Article 3. 

But… Within hours of your birth you were defrauded of your birthright when your Mother was coerced into unknowingly registering your “birth” as a British Crown Subject instead of “one of the free sovereign and independent people of the United States”. 

This in turn creates the “presumption” that like all British Crown Subjects you are merely here to provide “essential governmental services” (Constitution of 1789, Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2) and are obligated to obey their corporate statutory “law”. 

And that is how and why they presume against you and tax you and carry out all their crimes against you. 

How do you rebut this? 

You identify yourself as the living man or woman appearing in the flesh, one of the free sovereign and independent people of the United States and not an inhabitant as defined by the Definitive Treaty of Peace 1783, one of those owed “essential governmental services” under Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the 1789 Constitution, guaranteed your right of expatriation by the Expatriation Act of 1868, the retention of your native political status by the Geneva Convention Protocols of 1949, Laws of War, Volume II, Article 3, and the right of Self-Declaration guaranteed by the United Nations Universal Right of Self-Declaration. 

Then further inform the court that the essential government services you are owed do not include defrauding you, miss-administering your estate, or mischaracterizing you as an inhabitant of the District of Columbia or any “federal Territory” whatsoever. 

Then clearly state that you are the only one having any first hand knowledge of your nature, intentions, motivations, will or any other matter of fact concerning you and that every word dropping from you lips is to be understood by the court as a Matter of Fact and all else that anyone may say is only immaterial hearsay and presumption. 

Then proceed to ream them brand new paper bung holes about whatever it is they are bothering you about–

Taxes? 

You are exempt and any vessels in commerce operated in your name are tax pre-paid.  You are a Priority Creditor of the court, the banks and the corporations they employ, having the absolute right to offset any thing you may owe them against all that they already owe you and properly demanding the benefit of your exemption. 

Child custody? 

Your biological children are your creation, accepted and supported by you, belonging only to you, and are not entrusted to anyone or any thing else by you; and that is a Matter of Fact not subject to any fictitious claim or interpretation by the court. 

Foreclosure? 

You received no “loan” and retain all security interest provided contingent on the receipt of a loan; you require the return of the Promissory Note and Incomplete Mortgage Agreement paperwork. If anyone asks, reply that the Promissory Note is more than nine months old, the transaction was never completed, no loan was received by you and the whole process is void for fraud, including any presumption of a valid security interest.  Any check received from the bank was merely a transfer of your own credit and the bank cannot show any other source of funds for the transaction. 

Driving without a license? 

You were traveling for private purposes and who can say otherwise? 

You are stating Matters of Fact known to you on a firsthand basis. All else is hearsay and presumption. 

And to all the above and more you may add that the court’s presumption of jurisdiction over you and your property are in violation of both the Public Law and The Constitution and will not be respected as anything but attempted personage and fraud against one of their Priority Creditors and Benefactors. 

Get your backs up. Tell it like it is. Let the facts be plainly stated. Remember who you are and tell the “court” off.  Be polite– but ice cold and determined. What they are doing is a rude and unconscionable affront to you and a false claim being made against you and your property? Be appropriately outraged and hold your head high. Peer down at your miscreant employee sitting on that bench and demand to know who he thinks he is and what he thinks he is doing? 

See this article and over 100 others on Anna’s website here:www.annavonreitz.com

 

OLDDOGS COMMENTS!

 

I assume that sooner or later I will have a confrontation with what is euphemistically called law enforcement, and will most likely be murdered for lack of memory recall, as I have no intention of letting them arrest me. Most all of the uniformed tyrants would much rather kill someone rather than be humiliated back at the station for letting someone convince them they have no jurisdiction over me. Such as this is the real state of the union. Even if I could recall the exact words to use in my defense, can you imagine the average cop being intelligent enough to understand and accept he has been miss-informed for his entire life or a bailiff who refuses to obey a judge? Stay armed and capable everywhere you go. If the worst they can do is murder me, I consider that a gift because living under their tyranny is hell on earth.

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

Until Obuma Gets the Guns, False Flag Attacks Are Now Part of American Daily Life

December 7th, 2015 by

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2015/12/05/until-obama-gets-the-guns-false-flag-attacks-are-now-part-of-american-daily-life/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=until-obama-gets-the-guns-false-flag-attacks-are-now-part-of-american-daily-life

12-7-2015 9-06-54 AMBy Dave Hodges

The numbers do not lie, false flag mass murder events are exponentially increasing under Obuma. First, it was a case of “give up your guns” and we will protect you from the mentally ill mass murderers. Now, the Obuma mantra consists of “giving up your guns” and we will protect you from ISIS (that we created).

Mass Shootings Under the Last Five Presidents

Mother Jones acquired data, immediately following the most recent mass murder event, and the numbers were related to the totality of mass murders for the last five Presidents. The numbers associated with mass murder and the Obuma Presidency are stunning. The numbers simple do not lie.

Ronald Reagan- 1981-1989  11 mass shootings

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 5

George H. W. Bush- 1989-1993  12 mass murders

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 3

Bill Clinton- 1993-2001  23 mass murders

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 4

George W. Bush- 2001-2009  20 mass murders

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 5

Obuma- 2009-2015 (< 7 years) 162 mass murders

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 18

Statistical Analysis

The numbers do not lie with regard to the number of mass murders that have taken place under Obuma vs. the four Presidents that have come before him.

President                        Average Number of Mass Murders Per Month

  1. Obuma                           23+  per year or almost 2 per month
  2. GHW Bush                   3.0  per year
  3. Clinton                           2.875 per year
  4. GW Bush                       2.5 per year
  5. Ronald Reagan           1.375 per year

An American citizen is nearly 8 (7.666) times more likely to be killed in a mass murder event under the current President than the previous four Presidents.

During the incomplete tenure of the Obuma administration, there have a total of 163 murders in less than 7 years. During the previous tenure of the last 4 Presidents, 66 total mass murder events. These 66 mass murders took place in 28 Presidential years. When one takes this perspective, an American is 10 times more likely to be killed in a mass murder event under Obuma than the four previous Presidents. 

If Obuma’s mass murder statistics were only limited to one year, we might safely conclude that we are merely witnessing a statistical anomaly. However, as Obuma approaches his 7th year in office and see such a dramatic uptick in mass murder events under his watch, we no longer have an anomaly; we have a clear and undeniable pattern. We desperately need to be asking why? 

It is an undeniable fact that every time there is an active shooter event, Obuma turns up the propaganda about how his is going to be forced to use executive action (Executive Order) in order to separate most Americans from their Second Amendment rights to own a firearm.

As we approach the inevitable, World War III, there is a desperate need to put America into a type of undeclared martial law in order to control the people before they become the cannon fodder for the very next banker war for profit.

In the Beginning

When mass murders increased under the Obama administration, the reason most cited was mental illness. The Virginia Tech event and the “alleged” Sandy Hook event are cases in point in which the alleged shooter was on psychotropic medication for mental illness. Very quickly, this administration quickly moved to take as many guns as they could from veterans citing reasons related to PTSD diagnoses. This move made a lot of sense when one realizes that veterans would form the backbone of any resistance movement against the coming martial law tyranny which will precede World War III.

The Obuma administration is now attempting to perpetrate a new fraud on the US. Instead of the mentally ill engaging in acts of mass murder, it is now ISIS that is threat. Why the shift? Because the emphasis of the Obuma administration has shifted from gun confiscation from the veterans, to including gun confiscation for the entire population. History speaks very clearly as to what lies next.

Conclusion

12-7-2015 9-08-38 AM12-7-2015 9-09-33 AM12-7-2015 9-10-18 AM12-7-2015 9-11-13 AM12-7-2015 9-12-04 AM12-7-2015 9-13-28 AM

OLDDOGS COMMENTS!

INDICTE HIM

TRY HIM

HANG HIM

FORGET HIM

EXCEPT FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO

PISS ON HIS GRAVE
2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

AMERICAN POLICE STATE

November 27th, 2015 by

Chicago Police Officer Charged with Murder in Shooting of Black Teenager as City Releases Video Footage

Man Beaten by SAPD Officers Paralyzed After Complications From Surgery

NYC Emergency Responders Go Through Active Shooter Drill

Federal Lawyers Fly to Minneapolis to Investigate Shooting

Release of Video of Police Shooting Will Cast Spotlight on Chicago

Complaints Against Boston Police Pile up Officers Face Multiple Grievances; Resolutions Lengthy

11-27-2015 11-07-24 AM

A Badge, a Gun and No Self-Control

By Matthew Spina / News Staff Reporter
A Louisiana police chief ushers a drunken woman to his office and forces her into sex.
A Utah officer takes advantage of a suicidal woman before escorting her into a hospital.
A Buffalo cop insists a vulnerable mother give in to him whenever he pounds on her door.
In the past decade, a law enforcement official was caught in a case of sexual abuse or misconduct at least every five days. Nearly all were men. Nearly all victims were women, and a surprising number were adolescents.

Details of more than 700 credible cases from the past 10 years are now available, county by county and state by state, from The Buffalo News.
No federal agency tracks job-related sexual misconduct by police officers. So The Buffalo News combed through news reports and court records to compile a database. More than 700 credible cases from the past 10 years are now detailed, county by county and state by state.

The violators pulled over drivers to fish for dates, had sex on duty with willing or reluctant partners, extorted favors by threatening arrest and committed rapes.

In more than 70 percent of the cases, officers wielded their authority over motorists, crime victims, informants, students and young people in job-shadowing programs. Then there were covert acts. One officer on patrol would hunt for WiFi signals and use them to collect child pornography. Another secretly photographed girls’ underwear.

The numbers are almost certainly higher. Sex offenses go widely unreported even when cops are not suspects. Victims may be even less likely to report offenses when they fear it will be their word versus an officer’s. Police often prey on accursers with weak credibility, such as prostitutes, addicts or parolees.

“This is just the tip of the iceberg,” said former police officer Timothy M. Maher, now a criminal justice professor in St. Louis, whose research shows that police sexual misconduct is under-reported. Maher says most officers do not commit felony sex crimes. But he believes many offenses never come to light or are swept under the rug.

Detailed in The News data are some 160 offenses against young people. An Alabama officer raped a 13-year-old girl attending the school where he served as a crossing guard. A cop in North Carolina told a 14-year-old crime victim that having sex with him would prove she was telling the truth.
A school resource officer in Arkansas climbed into a student’s bedroom window. He was 48. She was 16.
Sex-related misconduct generates more citizen complaints than any factor except excessive force, the Cato Institute, a libertarian think-tank tracking police wrongdoing, found in a 2010 study.

A Niagara Falls patrolman completed a pat-down then let his hands roam over a woman’s breasts, buttocks and between her legs. A California officer sent to quiet a loud party stripped down and splashed into a pool of women. A Texas officer told a motorist she could drive off without a ticket if she let him lick her feet or take her underwear.

Norm Stamper hit the streets as a San Diego patrolman in 1966 and ended his career 34 years later as police chief in Seattle. During those decades, Stamper said he saw racism, sexism and misogyny in the ranks. He saw cops come to believe that no one may defy them.
In 2005, he published a book that included a chapter called “sexual predators in uniform.”

“You won’t find a major law enforcement agency that has been around for more than five minutes that has not had a chapter in its history of sexual abuse by a police officer on duty,” Stamper said.
“We’ve got too many rapists in uniform.”

A picture emerges

The News data includes only cases in which an officer’s bad acts were linked to police work. That doesn’t mean all were on duty. Jeffrey Pelo, a sergeant in Bloomington, Ill., stalked and raped women in his private time but used police resources to find his victims, so the data includes his case. Minneapolis Officer Bradley Schnickel used no police resources as he sought adolescent girls for sex. The data omits his name, and the names of hundreds more officers convicted of serious sex crimes unconnected to their jobs.

All but five of the officers named in the data are men, though women make up 13 percent of sworn officers nationwide. Among the five women: A Texas probation officer struck up a sexual relationship with a 16-year-old boy she supervised, and went to prison; and a Georgia sheriff’s deputy who failed to provide backup to a colleague because she was off having sex. She resigned.

Most of the offenders had enough time on the job to learn to evade varying levels of supervision. The officers averaged 38 years of age, with nine years of service to their departments, when those factors could be determined.
Just 6 percent were department rookies who started to strike soon after hitting the streets. A 25-year-old in Charlotte-Mecklenburg, N.C., for example, pressured a half-dozen women for sex during traffic stops. He went to prison. So did a rookie in Houston, Texas, who took his victims to a remote area and forced them to strip.

Road cops are most likely to offend. About 72 percent were patrol deputies, troopers, officers, constables. Others were detectives, officers with rank, or federal agents, federal security workers, or parole or probation officers.
About 3 percent held high-level posts: chiefs, deputy chiefs and sheriffs, such as the sheriff in Custer County, Okla., who forced female drug defendants into sex with him in exchange for better treatment. Some 28 percent were suspected of engaging with more than one person.

Many of those named faced only departmental charges and were fired or resigned. Some have been indicted and their cases are still playing out. But most officers in the data, 63 percent, were convicted of a crime after being accused of various acts of abuse, assault or misconduct.
A case in Buffalo years ago looks typical.

A knock on the door

At around 9 on a November night in 2004, a single mother gassed up her Honda as she headed out to return a book to a fellow University at Buffalo student. Joyce Pecky was 42, a slender 5 feet, 5 inches tall, with reddish brown hair falling to her shoulders. She was determined to write a new chapter in her life, and it would go like this: Bid farewell to a drug habit, earn a master’s degree in nutrition and provide solid support to the 6-year-old daughter riding in the back seat.

11-27-2015 11-56-31 AMJoyce Pecky says she was preyed upon by former Buffalo Police Officer

Greg O’Shei, who was convicted in 2006 in connection with the demands he placed on Pecky for sexual favors. Photo by Robert Kirkham / Buffalo News

The Buffalo News does not identify the victims of sex-related crimes, but Pecky says the problem of police sexual misconduct has been in the shadows for too long. She wants to speak publicly about her ordeal. Her account:
Standing at the pump in jeans and a heavy sweatshirt, Pecky was unaware of a police car nearby. But soon after she returned the nozzle and angled toward Bailey Avenue, a squad car threw streaks of light across the road, and Pecky slowed to a stop on a dark East Side street.

Pecky handed over her license, and the officer left her for a few minutes. Then he reappeared with an odd request, she said. Would she walk with him to the rear of her car?

Once there, the cop moaned things in her ear, crude things, she said. He implied that she was out searching for drugs and questioned whether she was a good mother for having her little girl out so late, Pecky recalled.
Pecky said she was stunned — and bending backward over the trunk of her car to get some space.

Can I please leave? Pecky asked again and again, she said.
Finally, Officer Greg O’Shei told her she could drive home. He would not arrest her.

O’Shei, as he described himself for a deposition years later, was a large man, about 6 feet 3 and 215 pounds. When he stopped Pecky he was 41, with a family at home. He first donned a Buffalo police badge nine years before the traffic stop, but a brain injury suffered in an on-duty crash had idled him for years and played games with his memory and temperament. If he acted oddly at times, the Buffalo Police Department wasn’t one in which an officer questioned another about such things, he said.

O’Shei would also say he had seen Pecky in the past trying to score drugs and wanted to know who was selling them. She insists she had never seen him before. Regardless, Pecky realized the officer never called in her information from the traffic stop. If he had, he would have learned she was driving with a suspended license.

Pecky returned to her flat on Mineral Springs Road, put her daughter to bed, then went to bed herself.

At 2 a.m., someone pounded on the door.
“I just wanted to make sure you are OK,” O’Shei explained, according to Pecky.

O’Shei was still on duty but miles outside his Ferry-Fillmore district. Pecky cracked opened the door, and seconds later he was roaming the apartment. He complained it was messy, questioned her mothering skills and mentioned the child could be taken away with one arrest, Pecky said.

With the girl waking up, Pecky persuaded O’Shei to leave. But he came back the next day, when he was off duty and the girl was at school, and got the sexual favor he wanted from Joyce Pecky.

O’Shei came by again and again for months while on duty, Pecky said. Sometimes she and her daughter would hide, pretending no one was home as he banged on the door and the windows and shined his flashlight inside. But when they hid, she said, O’Shei returned the very next night.

Looking the other way

One author called sexual abuse by law enforcement authorities “the police violence we aren’t talking about.”
When people die at the hands of police, reports are filed and the public responds. Not so with sex acts.

Some researchers say the problem is more widespread than many administrators realize.

Just two years before Officer O’Shei first banged on Joyce Pecky’s door, Criminal Justice Professor Samuel Walker of the University of Nebraska at Omaha used the term “driving while female” after seeing that cases of police sexual abuse tend to begin with traffic stops. Among his examples: A Suffolk County officer on New Year’s Day 2001 forced a woman to strip and walk home wearing only her underpants. A California Highway Patrol trooper in 1986 strangled a 20-year-old college student, Cara Knott, and threw her body off a bridge.

Walker’s report, written with Dawn Irlbeck, said sex offenses can multiply when departments allow sexist cultures, tolerate wrongdoing, ignore citizen complaints and fail to supervise. They suggested departments collect data on the types of drivers their officers pull over — do they tend to be young women? — and hire more women because female officers generate few sexual misconduct complaints.

Timothy Maher began as a police officer in 1985.
“When I went through the academy 30 years ago, it was never brought up,” he said. “Yet working the road … I was seeing all kinds of at least minor stuff. But it was enough to get some guys fired if they had been caught.”
As a criminal justice professor at the University of Missouri at St. Louis, Maher presented male police chiefs in the St. Louis metropolitan area with a questionnaire asking about the prevalence of sexual misconduct. Maher compiled the answers and learned that the chiefs, on average, suspected nearly one in five officers were committing at least low-level acts that would nonetheless violate department rules, like pulling over women drivers to fish for dates.

Maher surveyed road cops in and around St. Louis. On average, they suspected it was about one in every three officers violating the rules. Then he surveyed just female officers around St. Louis. On average, they suspected that even more cops – better than two out of every five – were probably committing at least noncriminal offenses.
Maher says too many police officers fail to report bad conduct they know about.

“It’s that tolerance level,” he said. “Even when some of them hear about it or know about it, they tolerate it and don’t report on it.”

Young victims

A school resource officer in Atlanta molested a 12-year-old developmentally disabled girl as he drove her around town after school one day. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

A New Mexico officer who investigated cases of child abuse and sex crimes sexually assaulted a high school intern trying to learn about police work. He was sentenced to nine years in prison.

An officer in Cleveland, Ohio, videotaped himself having sex, in uniform, with a 15-year-old he met while working security at a recreation center. He was sentenced to nearly 20 years in prison.

More than 160 people — 23 percent of those in the data — are included because authorities alleged they trafficked in child pornography or engaged inappropriately with young people under the age of 18. They were students, young motorists, runaways, teen prostitutes.

About 5 percent of the offenders – 34 cops – had been assigned to work with young people, typically as school resource officers, DARE officers or leaders in their department’s Explorer programs, which acquaint young people with law enforcement careers.

Some were caught grooming young people for physical relationships that never began.
A Kentucky officer sent suggestive texts to a student and was fired. A school resource officer in North Carolina sent suggestive pictures and was stripped of his law-enforcement certification and placed on probation. A police chief, also in North Carolina, engaged in sexually graphic computer chats, sometimes from his office, with people he thought were underage females.

In reality, they were criminal investigators. He was sent to a federal prison for more than 12 years.

The power imbalance

In Buffalo, Joyce Pecky agonized about her situation with Officer O’Shei. He would park his patrol car outside her home and bang at her door with his expectations.
If she reported him, would the department take her seriously?
She had a record.
If O’Shei found out, would it only get worse for her?

A woman in Jacksonville, Texas, accused an officer of rape. When he later spotted her on the street, he wrapped a belt around her neck and dragged her toward his van. She escaped, and he was sentenced to 12 years in prison.
In many cases in The News’ database, officers preyed on women with weak credibility: prostitutes, ex-convicts, women named in arrest warrants, drug informants, drug abusers, women on probation or parole.

Who would believe their word over a police officer’s?
But to prove her claim, a parolee in Broward County, Fla., set up a hidden camera to record her parole officer forcing her into sex in her home under the threat of imprisonment. The parole officer was fired and now faces charges.

When confronting overwhelming evidence against them, accused officers often argue that the sex was consensual – forbidden by department rules, but not sexual assault and certainly not rape.
In his December 2010 deposition, Officer O’Shei said he believed the sex with Pecky and others was consensual.

O’Shei admitted he knocked on windows and peered into Pecky’s apartment with his flashlight. He agreed he said things that could be taken as threats. He admitted she told him she wasn’t interested.
Yes, he mentioned to her what could happen if a Child Protective Services worker ever showed up. Yes, his gun remained on him at all times. And yes, Pecky was vulnerable to his police powers.

But O’Shei did not think Pecky or any of the other women would report him – “because I didn’t feel we were involved in a situation where one felt compelled to do something,” he explained.
“As you look back now you realize otherwise?” a lawyer asked.
“Yes,” he said.

Day in court

The chances for criminal convictions and stiff sentences depend on the strength of the case, a victim’s willingness to testify, the skill of prosecutors, a jury’s attitudes toward police and the accuser.
An officer in Indianapolis threatened to arrest a 19-year-old woman on a warrant if she did not have sex with him. He was charged with seven felonies, including rape, but was allowed to plead guilty to sexual misconduct and official misconduct. Instead of jail time, he received two years of home confinement, a year of probation and an order to register as a sex offender while on probation.

A cop in Edgewater, Fla., had a woman perform a sex act on him or be arrested for marijuana possession. He was sentenced to a year of probation but had to surrender his certification as a law enforcement officer.
In Flagstaff, Ariz., a state officer out for a night of drinking and entertainment flashed his badge to get into a music venue for free and later threatened to have the bouncers who evicted him arrested. He had walked up to a friend of a friend and rubbed his hand up her skirt and across her genitals. Convicted of sexual abuse, the officer was placed on probation for two years and fired.

With a few fellow cops in court to support their colleague, the judge lectured the victim: “If you hadn’t been there that night, none of this would have happened to you,” Judge Jacqueline Hatch said, according to the Arizona Daily Sun. The judge later apologized.
Some officers go to prison for decades.

In New Orleans, an officer who took a woman in his custody to a warehouse and sexually assaulted her was given 45 years.
An officer in Anchorage, Alaska, received 87 years for sexually assaulting several women.

A deputy in Cobb County, Ga., grew angry at a waitress as he drank in a bar. He accused the woman, who spoke little English, of stealing his cell phone. He flashed his badge, took her to the apartment complex where they both lived and raped her and beat her at gunpoint. A judge sentenced him to 25 years to life.

Victims can sue police officers or other law enforcement officials accused of such wrongdoing. They can go after the officers themselves or their supervisors who fail to address known wrongdoing or are grossly negligent in their supervision.

To reach the deeper pockets of government, plaintiffs must link the municipality to the crime by some fact other than the officer’s mere employment. Was the misconduct part of a policy or pattern? Was it so consistent and widespread that officials should have known about it? Did a failure to monitor, supervise or train amount to deliberate indifference to the rights of victims? Was the supervisor grossly negligent?

Houston Officer Abraham Joseph used his patrol car to pull over female motorists and would rape them. But the victims lost their civil rights claims against the city after a judge ruled Houston’s practices for hiring, training and supervising officers were not so poor that they were unconstitutional.
Civil outcomes are all over the board. The City of San Diego paid $1.3 million to settle a lawsuit filed by two women who had been groped by a San Diego officer.
In their lawsuits against the City of Buffalo, Joyce Pecky and two other plaintiffs have so far collected nothing.

‘Grave abuse’

Early this year, dozens of organizations advocating for women of color told the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing that police sexual misconduct is “by no means an isolated phenomenon” and requires “a policy response by law enforcement agencies.”

The wheels for a policy response were already in motion. Four years earlier, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, in Alexandria, Va., created a “working group on sexual offenses by police officers.” Named to the group were professors Walker and Maher.
The international association, widely respected by police administrators, stated in 2011 that sexual misconduct by police represents a “grave abuse of authority” and warrants “the full attention of law-enforcement leadership.” The IACP presented a guide to help administrators recognize and deal with cases and prevent new episodes.

No one at the organization can say how many of the nation’s 18,000 police agencies follow the guidelines. But the volume of incidents coming to light has not abated. In 2014, newspapers and television stations around the country reported 105 new and credible cases of job-related sexual misconduct by police.

It was the highest annual total in the 10 years’ of data, and an average of two cases every week.

He is ‘the cops’

Joyce Pecky never called the police about Officer O’Shei. But Susan Phister did.

Like Pecky, Phister wanted to talk publicly about her experience. Ten years ago, Phister’s life was a dangerous mix of drug abuse and sex for money, she said, and O’Shei would show up expecting her to give in to avoid arrest.
Phister would agree with O’Shei when he says he never worried about being caught. She recalled looking out the window after one encounter. As O’Shei slept, his squad car remained as he left it — the emergency lights swirling, the driver’s door open and the dome light shining. “It was lit up like a firecracker,” Phister said in an interview.

O’Shei became enraged, she said, if she ever tried to say no or could not be found. She was afraid of him and went to the police department when she couldn’t take it anymore. Phister produced text messages from O’Shei to back up her story.

O’Shei in 2006 admitted using his police powers to coerce sexual favors. He pleaded guilty to two misdemeanors — linked to his conduct with Pecky and Phister. Neither was a sex charge. O’Shei was sentenced to probation, not jail. While he had already resigned, the conviction ensured he would not be a police officer in New York.

Pecky today spends hours with her battered laptop computer, searching for cases of police sexual misconduct from around the country. She studies policy statements and research on the problem of predators in uniform. She read the reports by Samuel Walker in Omaha and Timothy Maher in St. Louis and read former Seattle Chief Norm Stamper’s chapter on the subject.

She plans to write a book of her own.
She is angry. Why don’t police departments accept responsibility for their offenders when facing lawsuits? she wonders. Why does the FBI take on so few “color of law” violations involving sexual abuse? Federal authorities were active in less than 10 percent of the cases in The News’ data.
Pecky never got her master’s degree. During the months that O’Shei hounded her she started using drugs again.
No one took her daughter away.

Now 16, the girl is studious, pleasant and poised. She still remembers a night when she was about 7.
As the officer pounded on the door and peered inside, the girl and her mother crouched near the floor to hide.

“I remember telling my mother ‘I’m scared.’ ”
She said she suggested to her mother that they “call the cops” then immediately thought better of it.
He is “the cops,” she realized.
“It was actually terrifying,” she said.


Luis Edward Hermosillo
U.S. Border Patrol Agent Luis Hermosillo in June 2009 allowed a woman, with her two children in the car, to pass into the country through his checkpoint near Mecca, Calif. Then he hurried to his vehicle and pulled her over, on the pretext that he had forgotten to search her luggage.
Hermosillo ordered her out of her car and, in the course of a pat down, penetrated her with his fingers, according to her civil lawsuit. Then he pulled her into his car, started kissing her buttocks over her skirt and penetrated her again with his fingers, her court complaint said. In time, she was allowed to drive off,
It was easy for her to identify the agent who had assaulted her. Hermosillo had given her his phone number, in case she would like to go out on a date, according to a statement from the Office of Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security. Hermosillo in 2012 pleaded guilty to charges of sexual assault and kidnapping and was sentenced to eight years in a California prison.
— Matthew Spina


Hamilton Riley
State police in Arkansas were waiting for him.
They were told by the parents of a 16-year-old girl that something was wrong with the attention that Neil Hamilton Riley, a 48-year-old school resource officer, was lavishing on their daughter. So the state investigators had some advance notice and were in the family’s home when Riley clambered into the girl’s bedroom window around 1 on a February morning in 2010.
Later that day, Riley resigned from the police department in Searcy, Ark., which had employed him for almost eight years. He had met the girl through his work at Ahlf Junior High, a prosecutor on the case told the Associated Press.
Some parents and students interviewed by a local television station reacted with disgust at Riley’s conduct. One person told the station that Riley and his wife had split about five months earlier.
As incredible as the circumstances are, The News found that it was hardly a unique event. Over a 10-year span, more than 30 officers assigned to work with young people as school resource officers, DARE officers or as leaders of Explorer programs were accused of crossing the line.
Riley’s lawyer had sought probation for his client. But Riley said little as a judge in 2011 ordered him to spend 15 years in prison.
— Matthew Spina


Ryan G. Warme
This is the sexual misconduct that Ryan Warme admitted: In July 2007 he encountered a woman parked in a high-crime area of Niagara Falls. He ordered her out of the car for a pat down. “Instead of stopping once the ‘pat down’ was finished,” prosecutors wrote, Warme touched the woman’s “breasts, buttocks and genital area” without her consent. As a result, Warme deprived the woman of her civil rights.
A federal grand jury in 2008 had accused the officer of much more: rape and sodomy while on duty and receiving sexual favors from a prostitute while on duty. In one case, according to court records, Warme showed up unannounced at the apartment of a female acquaintance, stripped off his police gear and forced himself on her. When she protested he told her, “Shut up, you know you want this,” according to an FBI affidavit.
Meanwhile, Warme was suspected of selling and using cocaine, and prosecutors wanted a conviction on that conduct as well. As part of his plea agreement, Warme admitted to drug-related wrongdoing and a charge related to his possession of a firearm.
“I have shamed my family and humiliated myself,” Warme wrote in a letter to U.S. District Court Judge Richard J. Arcara before he was sentenced in 2010 to almost 14 years in prison. “There are no excuses.
I crossed the line and used drugs. I knew better.
When Warme stood before him in an orange jumpsuit, Arcara wondered what had gone wrong with him. He’d been a talented athlete from a solid family.
“It’s my fault,” Warme said, “and now I have to pay for it.”
— Matthew Spina


Earl Theriot
Earl Theriot was the police chief in Sorrento, La. – population 1,500 – when he received a call in November 2013 about an unresponsive woman in a gas station’s parking lot.
Theriot drove her back to his office and, taking advantage of her drunken state, had her perform sex acts. When FBI agents investigated her complaint weeks later, Theriot told them he only drove the woman straight home, he did not know she had been in his office, that he was never alone with her there, and they had no sexual contact.
Theriot admitted to the lies and the sexual misconduct in federal court. But he never went to jail. His age, 66, his health problems and his willingness to immediately resign worked in his favor when sentenced.
The judge gave him a lecture. “You believed yourself to be above the law,” he told Theriot, according to television station WAFB. But Theriot was sentenced to just two years’ probation and fined $2,500.
The News was unable to contact Theriot. But the former police chief told a local TV station that he had been sufficiently punished because the matter “cost me my law enforcement career and brought embarrassment to my family and the town of Sorrento.”
— Matthew Spina


Nelson Tuatagaloa
Nelson Tuatagaloa and another officer in West Jordan, Utah, responded in September 2008 to a call about a woman sitting in her car and contemplating suicide over family and personal problems. The woman had been drinking and had a gun, according to the Deseret News.
In time, Tuatagaloa offered to drive the woman to the Jordan Valley Hospital and placed her, handcuffed, in the front seat of his squad car. But he later removed the cuffs, drove her to a dark part of the hospital parking lot and engaged with her in sex acts without her consent.
Tuatagaloa later resigned from the department and, with his trial about to begin, pleaded guilty in February 2010 to two felony counts of custodial sexual relations.
He was sentenced to a year in jail and three years of probation, and his police officer certification was revoked.

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

In Mali and Rest of Africa the U S Military Fights a Hidden War

November 26th, 2015 by

https://theintercept.com/2015/11/20/in-mali-and-rest-of-africa-the-u-s-military-fights-a-hidden-war/

11-26-2015 10-48-26 AM

By Nick Turse

THE GENERAL LEADING the U.S. military’s hidden war in Africa says the continent is now home to nearly 50 terrorist organizations and “illicit groups” that threaten U.S. interests. And today, gunmen reportedly yelling “Allahu Akbar” stormed the Radisson Blu hotel in Mali’s capital and seized several dozen hostages. U.S. special operations forces are “currently assisting hostage recovery efforts,” a Pentagon spokesperson said, and U.S. personnel have “helped move civilians to secured locations, as Malian forces clear the hotel of hostile gunmen.”

In Mali, groups like Ansar Dine and the Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa have long posed a threat. Major terrorist groups in Africa include al Shabaab, Boko Haram and al Qaeda in the Islamic Magreb (AQIM). In the wake of the Paris attacks by ISIS, attention has been drawn to ISIS affiliates in Egypt and Libya, too. But what are the dozens of other groups in Africa that the Pentagon is fighting with more special operations forces, more outposts, and more missions than ever? For the most part, the Pentagon won’t say.

Brigadier General Donald Bolduc, chief of U.S. Special Operations Command Africa, made a little-noticed comment earlier this month about these terror groups. After describing ISIS as a transnational and transregional threat, he went on to tell the audience of the Defense One Summit, “Although ISIS is a concern, so is al Shabaab, so is the Lord’s Resistance Army in Central Africa and the 43 other illicit groups that operate in the area … Boko Haram, AQIM, and other small groups in that area.”

Bolduc mentioned only a handful of terror groups by name, so I asked for clarification from the Department of Defense, Africa Command (AFRICOM), and Special Operations Command Africa (SOCAFRICA). None offered any names, let alone a complete accounting. SOCAFRICA did not respond to multiple queries by The Intercept. AFRICOM spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Anthony Falvo would only state, “I have nothing further for you.”

While the State Department maintains a list of foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs), including 10 operating in Africa (ISIS, Boko Haram, Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis, al Shabaab, AQIM, Ansaru, Ansar al-Din, Ansar al-Shari’a in Tunisia, as well as Libya’s Ansar al-Shari’a in Benghazi and Ansar al-Shari’a in Darnah), it “does not provide the DoD any legal or policy approval,” according to Lt. Col. Michelle Baldanza, a Defense Department spokesperson.

“The DoD does not maintain a separate or similar list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations for the government,” she said in an email to The Intercept. “In general, not all groups of armed individuals on the African continent that potentially present a threat to U.S. interests would be subject to FTO. DoD works closely with the Intel Community, Inter-Agency, and the [National Security Council] to continuously monitor threats to U.S. interests; and when required, identifies, tracks, and presents options to mitigate threats to U.S. persons overseas.”

This isn’t the first time the Defense Department has been unable or unwilling to name the groups it’s fighting. In 2013, The Intercept’s Cora Currier, then writing for ProPublica, asked for a full list of America’s war-on-terror enemies and was told by a Pentagon spokesman that public disclosure of the names could increase the prestige and recruitment prowess of the groups and do “serious damage to national security.” Jack Goldsmith, a professor at Harvard Law School who served as a legal counsel during the George W. Bush administration, told Currier that the Pentagon’s rationale was weak and there was a “very important interest in the public knowing who the government is fighting against in its name.”

The secret of whom the U.S. military is fighting extends to Africa. Since 9/11, U.S. military efforts on the continent have grown in every conceivable way, from funding and manpower to missions and outposts, while at the same time the number of transnational terror groups has increased in linear fashion, according to the military. The reasons for this are murky. Is it a spillover from events in the Middle East and Central Asia? Are U.S. operations helping to spawn and spread terror groups? Is the Pentagon inflating the terror threat for its own gain? Is the rise of these terrorist organizations due to myriad local factors? Or more likely, is it a combination of these and other reasons? The task of answering these questions is made more difficult when no one in the military is willing to name more than a handful of the transnational terror groups that are classified as America’s enemies.

Before 9/11, Africa seemed to be free of transnational terror threats, according to the U.S. government.
In 2000, for example, a report prepared under the auspices of the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute examined the “African security environment.” While noting the existence of “internal separatist or rebel movements” in “weak states,” as well as militias and “warlord armies,” it made no mention of Islamic extremism or major transnational terror threats.

In early 2002, a senior Pentagon official speaking on background told reporters that the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan might drive “terrorists” out of that nation and into Africa. “Terrorists associated with al Qaeda and indigenous terrorist groups have been and continue to be present in this region,” he said. “These terrorists will, of course, threaten U.S. personnel and facilities.”

Pressed about genuine transnational threats, the official drew attention to Somali militants, specifically several hundred members of al Itihaad al Islamiya—a forerunner of al Shabaab — but admitted that even the most extreme members “really have not engaged in acts of terrorism outside Somalia.” Questioned about ties between Osama bin Laden’s core al Qaeda group and African militants, the official offered tenuous links, like bin Laden’s “salute” to Somali fighters who killed U.S. troops during the infamous 1993 Black Hawk Down incident.

The U.S. nonetheless deployed military personnel to Africa in 2002, while the State Department launched a big-budget counterterrorism program, known as the Pan Sahel Initiative, to enhance the capabilities of the militaries of Chad, Mali, Mauritania, and Niger. In 2005, that program expanded to include Algeria, Morocco, Nigeria, Senegal, and Tunisia and was renamed the Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism Partnership.

In the years that followed, the U.S. increased its efforts. In 2014, for example, the U.S. carried out 674 military missions across the continent — an average of nearly two per day and an increase of about 300 percent since U.S. Africa Command was launched in 2008. The U.S. also took part in a number of multinational military interventions, including a coalition war in Libya, assistance to French and African forces fighting militants in Central African Republic and Mali, and the training and funding of African proxies to do battle against extremist groups like al Shabaab and Boko Haram.

The U.S. has also carried out a shadow war of special ops raids, drone strikes and other attacks, as well as an expanding number of training missions by elite forces. U.S. special operations teams are now deployed to 23 African countries “seven days a week, 24/7,” according to Bolduc. “The most effective thing that we do is about 1,400 SOF operators and supporters integrated with our partner nation, integrated with our allies and other coalition partners in a way that allows us to take advantage of each other’s capabilities,” he said.

The U.S. military has also set up a network of bases — although it is loath to refer to them in such terms. A recent report by The Intercept, relying on classified documents leaked by a whistleblower, detailed an archipelago of outposts integral to a secret drone assassination program that was based at the premier U.S. facility on the African continent, Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti. That base alone has expanded since 2002 from 88 acres to nearly 600 acres, with more than $600 million allocated or awarded for projects and $1.2 billion in construction and improvements planned for the future.

A continent relatively free of transnational terror threats in 2001 is — after almost 14 years of U.S. military efforts — now rife with them, in the Pentagon’s view. Bolduc said the African continent is “as lethal and dangerous an environment as anywhere else in the world,” and specifically invoked ISIS, which he called “a transnational threat, a transregional threat, as are all threats that we deal with in Africa.” But the Pentagon would not specify whether the threat levels are stable, increasing, or decreasing. “I can’t get into any details regarding threats or future operations,” Lt. Col. Baldanza stated. “I can say that we will continue to work with our African partners to enable them in their counter-terrorism efforts as they further grow security and stability in the region.”

In the end, Bolduc tempered expectations that his troops might be able to transform the region in any significant way. “The military can only get you so far,” he told the Defense One Summit audience. “So if I’m asked to build a counter-violent extremist organization capability in a particular country, I can do that … but if there’s not … a valid institution to plug it into, then we are there for a long time.”

Top photo: Republic of Mali and United States Special Operations Forces troops stand in formation next to each other during the opening ceremony of the Flintlock 10 Exercise held May 3, 2010 in Bamako, Mali.

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

Is This More Proof Insiders Are Flying In Terrorists To Complete The Destruction Of America?

November 25th, 2015 by

http://allnewspipeline.com/The_Final_False_Flag_To_Martial_Law.php

Are We Now Witnessing The Buildup To The Final False Flag That Will Lead To Martial Law And The Globalists ‘Endgame’?

11-25-2015 10-48-26 AMBy Stefan Stanford – All News Pipeline – Live Free Or Die

An absolutely bizarre story from the NY Daily News tells us that just days after ISIS released a video threatening New York City with a terrorist attack, 150 people on a plane flight from Mexico to JFK airport were permitted to skip customs and leave JFK without having their passports or bags checked as also shared in the 3rd video below.

In just the latest event that makes us believe that certain members of the current administration want terrorists to be successful in America, we also look at this story from Intellihub where we’re given more proof that this administration is bringing refugees (and possible terrorists) into the country under the cover of darkness aboard commercial airline flights.

When we tie in this information with news from a former FBI official who recently went on Fox News to discuss Obama’s dangerous plan to import thousands of Syrian refugees, we see a highly ‘orchestrated event’ (in former FBI assistant director James Kallstrom’s own words!) unfolding that may soon lead to the total destruction of America and the implementation of martial law all across the country as shared in the 2nd video below.

11-25-2015 10-50-10 AMWith new claims coming out that the Pentagon actually doctors ISIS intelligence to fit the White House as shared in this Daily News story and news coming out that both the FBI and the DHS oppose the new refugee screening bill recently passed by the House of Representatives we have to ask if we’re now being set up for the slaughter with more than 1 out of every 4 Americans now believing that government IS the enemy of the American people?

More than 1 in 4 Americans believe that the government is the enemy, according to a new poll.
Pew Research Center found that 27 percent of registered voters say they think of government as an enemy, up 8 points since 1996. The latest poll looked at general public opinion regarding the federal government.
More than a third (35 percent) of Republicans believe the federal government is the enemy, while 34 percent of Independents believe the same. The poll found that half of all Democrats (50 percent) view the government as a friend and only 12 percent see it as the enemy.
Other findings include that few think the government is run for the benefit of all the people and that it is viewed as wasteful and inefficient. About 3 in 4 Americans say the federal government is “run by a few big interests” and 57 percent say the “government is almost always wasteful and inefficient.”
Why has former FBI assistant director Kallstrom put himself in danger by telling us that letting potential terrorists into countries is an ‘orchestrated event’? Does he know something that we don’t know? Telling us that we have NO IDEA who the people are that we are letting into the country we quickly see, the handwriting is on the wall as govt prepares to brutally attack their own people while blaming it on the terrorists it’s continually flying into the country.

Why would Barack Obama (or other ‘globalist’ members of this administration) WANT a successful terrorist attack upon America? All we need to do is remember what happened here after 9/11 or what is happening in Paris now…a total crackdown on civil liberties, another uptick of the ‘surveillance state’ and the ‘need’ for a totalitarian government to ‘fix’ what’s broken. Would totalitarian globalists intent upon implementing global government REALLY want another 9/11 in America? Of course they would! Much more below videos including X22Report in the 1st video telling us that the US government and Central banks are preparing for the final stages of collapse.

Is Barack Obama setting the stage for martial law in America by ushering terrorists in?

Why did customs let over 100 people just ‘leave’ upon arrival from Mexico when we KNOW that possible Syrian terrorists are trying to get into our country through our southern border? This incident reeks of being something other than we’re being told.

With news coming out of Russia that the US helped to created ISIS, will Americans finally get some truth about ISIS’ creation or will the globalists be successful at their next false flag in America, possibly a massive Paris-style massacre in several US locations or cities at the same time, forever silencing truth in this nation as martial law and total government censorship and complete dictatorship are brought in?

We know that there is a possibility, if slight, that the 2016 elections won’t be held in America, leaving Barack Obama a dictator and an America that will never learn truth from lies. Would a series of massive terrorist attacks upon America grant Mr. Obama his wish, endless terms in office, and an America that never finds out the truth? If massive attacks are launched upon Americans and in US cities, will those in Washington DC who are clearly aiding and abetting ISIS terrorists be held responsible for their actions?

We strongly believe that the next series of massive terrorist attacks upon America will lead to the globalists end game – a total crackdown on the few Rights that Americans still have remaining and the ‘new world order’ that the criminal elite globalists have been working towards for many years. We are running out of time America.

May God stand with the brave men and women across the nation in law enforcement and the US military who are diligently working to keep America safe – our thoughts and prayers for strength and protection are with you.

11-25-2015 10-52-29 AM11-25-2015 10-53-10 AM2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

Second Amendment For Europe? Plus Two Things Banned by Totalitarian Governments

November 20th, 2015 by

https://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Article/186851-2015-11-19-second-amendment-for-europe-by-alessandro-fusillo-rome.htm?From=News

11-20-2015 6-23-26 AMBy Alessandro Fusillo (Rome)

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

The terrible facts of Paris still linger in our minds and hearts. Dozens of innocent people murdered without any reason while they were in a restaurant enjoying a dinner with friends, attending a soccer match or a rock concert. It’s violence without sense. No one is secure any more. The terrorists can strike everywhere, anytime and, as the news keep repeating, it’s impossible for any police force to protect all citizens everywhere against such random violence. Newspapers and televisions keep repeating this depressing message. A feeling of impotence and fear is spreading in an atmosphere of gloom and despondency.

I recently visited Arizona and friends invited me to a very fine show in Phoenix. Visiting a theatre or a concert is a heartwarming experience. It’s free market at work. The actors and musicians sell their services and the spectators buy them. Each party gains. It’s a win-win game. Especially if like in the USA no public authority is involved and the show makes its revenue from the tickets and not from some kind of subvention.

The theatre in Phoenix was completely sold out and thousands of persons occupied every available seat. Would an attack like that in Paris have been possible or conceivable in Arizona? I don’t think so. Why? It’s simple, because the people in Arizona are basically armed to their teeth and are allowed to go around with their guns in open display. Imagine the three or four terrorists entering the theatre in Phoenix. For sure upon entering the theatre and opening fire they would have murdered many innocent spectators, but they would have faced an armed response by a huge number of persons. What would have happened? The terrorists would have been rightly and justly killed way before they could even think of wreaking such damage and suffering as they did in Paris. In Paris the “special forces” of the police intervened when the terrorists already had run out of ammunition, the only reason why they couldn’t continue to murder.

An attack in a restaurant or at a sports venue in Arizona would have had the same predictable outcome. The attacked innocent persons would have opposed an armed response.

By the way, my friend in Arizona, a true man of peace, owns several handguns and two assault rifles. Of course he means no harm, but he rightfully claims his right to defend himself from an attack.

In Europe an armed reaction would have been impossible – and indeed it was as Paris’ tragic facts witness – because we have strict laws prohibiting most of the people from owning and carrying around firearms. Hence, we are defenseless. We can’t meet violence and coercion with an equal amount of violence. Self-defense is forbidden by law. In fact in most countries a home-owner who shoots an armed trespasser faces big problems and possibly substantial jail time.

No one among the very intelligent mainstream commentators of the Paris terrorist attacks voiced this simple and evident truth: we have the right to defend ourselves; we should be allowed to carry our arms in order to meet violence with violence! As Roman military writer Vegetius famously said: si vis pacem para bellum; if you want peace, be prepared for war. Unfortunately even if what is going on is a war, as French President said, we can’t be prepared for it, but we have to put all our trust in a police force that turned out to be incapable of defending the citizens.

This is my proposal. Let’s work for a second amendment for Europe. The American Constitution may have a lot of defects and may have not prevented the American government from an abnormal growth that none of the founding fathers could even imagine, but it is nonetheless a beacon of liberty and justice, at least for Europe. Let’s adopt the good things from America, let’s introduce the Second Amendment in every European constitution. Cives arma ferant: let the citizens bear arms.

Instead, what many commentators said was that the correct reaction should be to suspend the civil liberties, to endow the States and the police forces with even more powers and to imitate the American example of the Patriot Act. “You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before”, like Rahm said. That’s the spirit. We don’t imitate the good things form America, but the worst.

On the contrary, we should think of ways to take our defense in our own hands. The right to carry arms and to be able to defend ourselves cannot be infringed. It’s a fundamental right as important as the right of free speech or the religious freedom. On a closer look it’s much more important than the latter fundamental rights because a dead person won’t be able to express any thoughts or to profess any religion.

This is especially true, because all police officers and governmental bureaucrats clearly said that they won’t be able to defend us in theatres and restaurants form random violence. If they aren’t then we should be able to try our own defense.

Moreover, did France’s strict firearms laws stop the terrorists from achieving their bloody and inhuman goals? Not at all. If I’m up to evil and wrongdoing I won’t be stopped by a law forbidding the use of firearms. Firearms laws simply enhance the black market and drive up the process of illegal arms. Thus, the laws regarding the prohibition of firearms reveal themselves in their utter stupidity and uselessness. Such laws don’t prevent criminals from killing and wreaking havoc, but they prevent normal citizens form defending themselves.

Sadly few in Europe will think, let alone voice publicly such a thought. We are so used to our armless condition that thinking out of the box will be very difficult or even impossible.

These considerations may be useful for a reflection about violence from a libertarian point of view. Libertarianism or anarcho-capitalism can be summed up in the non-aggression principle. Violence and coercion may not be initiated against other human beings. Thus, homicide, rape, theft and fraud are clearly prohibited by libertarian legal principles because all of these criminal acts entail the initiation of violence against other peaceful human beings.

Yet, libertarianism does not prohibit any kind of violence. Violence aimed at defense from aggressive and coercive acts is admissible. In fact it’s a stronghold of liberty against all persons who wish to encroach and limit our freedom. Hence, violence – defensive violence – is part and parcel of libertarian philosophy. A libertarian who is against the initiation of violence may and will resort to violence and force in order to repeal an attack.

Individual defense is much stronger and effective than the defense organized by the States. Governments really have a very weak interest in defending their citizens as individuals, i.e. to enhance and protect life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. A simple look at the way the police forces act is a sufficient proof. Whereas a President or chief of State has a big bodyguard at his disposal and can be reasonably sure that he won’t be victim of random violence, the common citizens enjoy almost no protection. Of course this happens because it isn’t true that we are equal before the law. Some, like presidents and chiefs of States, are much more equal than the commoners. The latter may be gunned down by terrorist fanatics. At the end of the day, no one really cares.

What the State will not allow is an attack to its officials and to face an armed citizenship that at some point may affirm that it is fed up by the violence and coercion coming from the State and may begin to resist. This is the biggest fear of any government, a much bigger fear than that of a bunch of terrorists. Bearing such truth in mind it’s easy to understand why the mainstream media almost unanimously didn’t even mention the obvious: if the victims had been armed, the effectiveness of the attack would have been much less and probably there wouldn’t have been any attack at all.

Give us our arms and leave us in peace!

 

OLDDOGS COMMENTS!

The people of Planet earth have clearly been subjected to a sustained sub-conscious perversion of reality for at least the last hundred years, and the effects have been stupendous. However, some people have been immune to this travesty, and I am one of them. It is impossible for me to accept total control over my mental process; it is impossible for me give up my natural right of self-defense, and that has always meant assuming the responsibility to become proficient with the means to do so. I call that – common sense! It is beyond my ability to understand how anyone would give up the right to defend their self; government diktats be damned! For those poor people who accept Government as their Lord and master, I have absolutely no respect for them, and have concluded long ago that their basic humanity has been altered to accept cowardice as a superior philosophy. If a man does not love his wife and children enough to be their protector, he has no business being a husband and father. I understand that some people have accepted passivism as correct human action, and taking a life cannot be justified under any circumstances, but I for one would kill anyone who tried to kill my family or myself without a second thought. I will not accept passivism in my family or make friends with anyone who would stand by and watch their family murdered. Those who would use any method to deny me this God Given Right are advised to bring their own body bag when making the attempt to disarm me. I don’t really know what you people are who support the confiscation of all weapons, but you sure as hell are not American’s!

STAND UP EUROPE, AND GROW A SET!

TELL YOUR GOVERNMENT TO GO PISS UP A ROPE!

Two Things Banned by Totalitarian

Governments

http://exposingmodernmugwumps.com/2015/11/18/two-things-banned-by-totalitarian-governments/

11-18-2015 11-19-51 AM

Second Amendment foes lying about

gun control

By Lee DeCovnick FOR AMERICANTHINKER.COM

The Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting.
The Second Amendment has nothing to do with personal self-defense.
Firearms are our constitutionally mandated safeguard against tyranny by a powerful federal government.
Only dictators, tyrants, despots, totalitarians, and those who want to control and ultimately to enslave you support gun control.

No matter what any president, senator, congressman, or hard-left mainstream media whores tell you concerning the statist utopian fantasy of safety and security through further gun control:
They are lying.

If their lips are moving, they are lying about gun control.
These despots truly hate America.

These tyrants hate freedom, liberty, personal responsibility, and private property.
These oligarchs fear that America will wake up one day from the MSM’s digital drug of social engineering aimed at an acceptance of the lie of a utopian fantasy of safety and security through gun registration and confiscation.
But the reality is that our citizens’ ownership of firearms serves as a concrete deterrent against despotism.
They are demanding to hold the absolute power of life and death over you and your family.
Ask the six million Jews, and the other five million murdered martyrs who perished in the Nazi death camps, how being disarmed by a powerful tyranny ended any chances of fighting back. Ask the murdered martyrs of the Warsaw Ghetto about gun control.

Their single agenda is to control you after you are disarmed. When the people who want to control you hold the absolute power of life and death over your family, you have been enslaved.
The hard-left Marxist and Islamists who infect our federal government plus the MSM media whores who protect them will gleefully lie, falsify, fabricate, slander, libel, deceive, delude, bribe, and treasonably betray the free citizens of the United States into becoming an unarmed population.
Unarmed populations have been treated as slaves and chattel since the dawn of history.
Will we stand our ground, maintaining our constitutionally guaranteed Second Amendment rights, fighting those who would enslave us?

Or do we let these and other rights slip away one by one until we are herded into the gas chambers by armed guards, waiting those last twenty seconds for metallic clicks of the Zyklon B canisters pressurizing the fake shower heads?

Totalitarian governments ban bibles and firearms

Donald Trump says tough gun control laws in Paris contributed to tragedy

This Is The Most Disturbing Muslim ‘Refugee’ Video You Will Ever See

More than half of U.S. state governors refuse Syrian refugees, who get staggeringly generous services from taxpayers

Trump calls Obama “insane” to flood U.S. with Syrian refugees


OLDDOG say’s that OBUMA is not insane, because that would make him non-responsible for his actions. That worthless piece of dogshit knows perfectly well what he is doing; OBEYING HIS BANKER MASTERS AT OUR EXPENSE, because he HATES AMERICA with all his mind.

 

 

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

You Know Something is Wrong When…..: An American Affidavit of Probable Cause

November 10th, 2015 by

THANK YOU FOR SUBSCRIBING

From Olddog at http://anationbeguiled.com And http://anationbeguiled.wordpress.com
Thank you for subscribing to my sites, and hopefully you will find information that will help you understand the real state of the Union. I am 75 years old and not a journalist by any means, and my involvement is for the purpose of showing the people just how close America is to total destruction and what they can do about it.

Each of us can at the very least, become astute and spread the info as far as each persons ability allows; otherwise we will be taken over by the powers that be and become just another fallen Nation.
If you never read anything else on my sites, please do read this one America’s Coming Crackup
If this article does not stir your heart and mind, and make you commit to learn and work for your future freedom, all I can say is you are truly brain dead already. Do you not know instinctively that freedom from tyrannical governance is one of the few things worth dying for?
Our lives have become so controlled that only a massive educated populace will have the standing to make demands for our return to a republic. In reality, if we do not produce a hundred million educated Americans who are willing to defy the powerful International Investment Banking Cartel, we will become a Nation of slaves.

My heart felt contention is, our human rights are from God Almighty which means they were not given to us by government and cannot be taken away by government. This is something worth dying for as no other method of living free from tyrannical governance has ever worked. In today’s America the Powers that be tell us our rights were given by them and are subject to their discretion, and there is no God. I say, A man is a fool who trusts his rights to a lawyer, his soul to a preacher, his health to a doctor, his wealth to a banker, and his happiness to a government.

The education and media industry have twisted our history until the majority will have to be totally re-educated on the principals of freedom before they are willing to stand up and be heard. I have spent thousands of hours searching for indisputable information sites. Hopefully you will learn from this web site all you need to know to help restore our republic.

New info!

Buy this book and you won’t have to read anyone’s site.
It is past time for the internet Patriots to wake up to the truth, learn it, and revise their commentary to fight it with all their might. This means educate the sheep non stop until they are as outraged as we all should be. We need to get this information out to a hundred million people ASAP. Why would an entire Nation accept a Corporation for a government? There is only one way for things to change for the better, and that is for a hundred million people to read this: You Know Something is Wrong When…..: An American Affidavit of Probable Cause (Paperback) by Anna Maria Riezinger & James Clinton Belcher

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1491279184/ref=cm_cr_asin_lnk

Anna and James should receive National support for this gift to America. Now there is no excuse to continue supporting the political system that enslaves us, and every reader should make it a personal obligation to promote this work. I envision a hundred million people reading this book over and over until they can recite verbatim the skullduggery used to rob, rape, and pillage millions of unsuspecting Americas; not to mention the trillions of dollars these Tyrant Bankers have made from our ignorance. This fiasco is akin to a Preacher in a mega Church raping the women thereof and getting away with it for years, because they had so much faith in him. I will demand every family member and friend read this magnificent piece of research. More praise and info on this book will continue to be available at http://scannedretina.com/ and http://anationbeguiled.com    ALSO http://anationbeguiled.wordpress.com

GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS FOLKS, THE BASTARDS LIED TO US!

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

The Four Reasons Why Russia Is Invading Syria

November 7th, 2015 by

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2015/11/06/the-four-reasons-why-russia-is-invading-syria/

11-7-2015 9-30-10 AMBy Dave Hodges

With all that has been written about the events inside of Syria and Iran, which have accompanied recent Russian aggression, I have read very little about the underlying motivations for what is occurring in this volatile part of the world. This article identifies the four major reasons which underlies the Russian military presence in Syria.

1. Russia is Protecting Its Only Middle East Allies
ISIS is a CIA creation. As former Army Special Operations Officer, Scott Bennett states, “ISIS was a CIA creation, supplied by illegally-left-behind military equipment in Iraq”. According to Bennett, ISIS is funded by CIA sponsored, covert Swiss bank accounts. ISIS’ purpose was to eventually bleed over into Syria, where they would help ferment the collapse of the Assad regime. Once Syria had been toppled, Iran would be invaded and the Federal Reserve’s Petrodollar would be saved. Conversely, Syria and Iran are Russia’s only path into the Middle East. Subsequently, Putin has very cleverly turned the tables on the CIA strategy to use ISIS to topple Syria and this has provided Russia with a pretext to have a military presence in the region.

2. Russia is Leading the Charge Away from the Petrodollar

11-7-2015 9-32-30 AMThe BRICS have attacked the sacred Federal Reserve by undermining the Petrodollar.
At the beginning of the of the Syria/Iran crisis, all of the world’s nations used the dollar as the world’s reserve currency except for IRAN and SYRIA. So long as the world used the dollar as a prerequisite to purchase oil, the nations of the world would always prove to be subservient to the United States and its “Petrodollar”. The Federal Reserve dollar has been the world’s reserve currency since 1944. It provides the only backing for the dollar. Without the dollar being on World Reserve currency status, the dollar would hyper-inflate and crash in a very short amount of time. The lives of average Americans would be over as they have known it.

There have been past attempts to abandon the practice of purchasing Iraqi oil without first going through the Federal Reserve to purchase the Petrodollar. In the early 1990’s, France and Germany attempted to use the Euro to “quietly purchase” oil from Iraq. Iraq was invaded by the United States. When history repeated itself, Iraq was invaded again, and Saddam Hussein was executed. When Libya did not play ball with the Central banks over much of the same issue, it was invaded and Gadhafi was executed. Going back in history, Abraham Lincoln was executed for similar reasons. When JFK printed silver certificates in an attempt to bypass the Federal Reserve, he was also executed. Putin is standing tall in opposition to this trend. At the end of the day, he too, will be executed or assassinated once he has fulfilled his purpose.

While growing weary of paying higher prices for oil in order to prop up the Petrodollar, Russia, under Putin, led a bold charge away from the world reserve status of the dollar. Iran and Syria began to sell its oil for gold. India, Brazil, South Africa and most of all, China joined the revolution against the dollar and the BRICS were formed. The US postured to invade Iran under the pretense that Iran was developing nuclear weapons. Russia and China both threatened to nuke the United States and Obama backed down. All of this adds up to the death of the dollar and ultimately, World War III.

These events have resulted in Putin taking away the moral high ground from the United States and have paralyzed US military policy in the Middle East. As a result, the dollar now has a date with destiny. Putin’s actions are leaving the Federal Reserve without backing for the dollar. With a $19 trillion dollar deficit, a $240 trillion dollar unfunded and mandated liabilities (e.g. Social Security, Medicare, etc.) and a whopping $1.5 quadrillion dollar credit swap derivatives debt, the dollar, after losing much of its former Petrodollar status, is the on the verge of collapse and it could happen any day.

3. Russia Is Preparing to Invade the Middle East

11-7-2015 9-33-38 AMRussia’s excuse to eradicate ISIS on the pretense of saving the Assad regime of Syria, has provided Russia with a means to build a military base of operations in Syria and serves to provide a path in which they can invade US-friendly Middle East partner oil-rich nations who are promoting the continuance of the Petrodollar. Quite frankly, I am surprised that the United States, under Federal Reserve Board leadership, has not already launched a nuclear first strike. I fear that day is coming. The Federal Reserve will not go down without a fight. The Russian counter strategy is to occupy as many parts of the world as possible, thus, making it impossible for the US to effectively counter the BRICS economic war upon the Petrodollar.

4. All the World Is a Stage and Putin is the Leading Man

11-7-2015 9-34-51 AM

No Fear.
Putin is ex-KGB. As a result, following the collapse of the former Soviet Union, the KGB morphed into the Russian mafia and ruthlessly controlled Russian politics, media and much of its foreign policy. The Russian mafia was a brutal entity. In short, Putin is a thug, a KGB Mafioso thug who has brutally murdered tens of thousands of his own people. The fools that engage in worshipping Putin are very misguided. The only reason that Putin enjoys rock star status among some misinformed Americans is because he publicly espouses the beliefs of Russian people, which also represents mainstream middle class American values. Putin is openly anti-gay, while the White House displays the colors of the rainbow after the Supreme Court’s ruling on gay marriage. Putin has banned GMO’s, while Congress blocks any legitimate control over Monsatan, and Putin has told the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) to go to hell, while Obama is their lap dog. Putin is actually arrogant enough and enough of a demagogue to believe that he can overcome the satanically inspired banking forces on the planet. Eventually, Putin will suffer the same fate as Saddam Hussein.
Conclusion
Short of divine intervention, World War III is a foregone conclusion. Each and any of these four reasons will culminate in the final date with destiny. In short, Putin is being used by BIS to move the planet toward World War III. The BIS wants World War III in order to promote order out of chaos. They want a war of political and economic unification. Putin is their unwitting accomplice to this end. At the end of the day, Putin, like Obama, will lead their respective nations to total annihilation and the final version of the New World Order will be upon us.

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM


SEO Powered By SEOPressor