News Items 2013
In a free society, government exists, at most, to protect people's rights, and should neither provide for people nor punish them for activities that interfere with no one else.
One of my favorite types of stories to report!
It looks like The Hack's ploy to punish evil rich air travelers has failed. But keep in mind that the real story is that the FAA's budget actually went up in the sequester and did not need to cut any controllers!
It was his momma's gun? Are you actually buying that? Will the mother now face charges now for altering the serial number?
Jiggs McDonald, NHL Hall of Fame broadcaster speaking in Orillia , Ontario , says:
"I am truly perplexed that so many of my friends are against another mosque being built in Toronto. I think it should be the goal of every Canadian to be tolerant regardless of their religious beliefs. Thus the mosque should be allowed, in an effort to promote tolerance.
That is why I also propose that two nightclubs be opened next door to the mosque, thereby promoting tolerance from within the mosque. We could call one of the clubs, which would be gay, "The Turban Cowboy ", and the other a topless bar called "You Mecca Me Hot." Next door should be a butcher shop that specializes in pork, and adjacent to that an open-pit barbecue pork restaurant, called " Iraq o' Ribs."
Across the street there could be a lingerie store called "Victoria Keeps Nothing Secret ", with sexy mannequins in the window modeling the goods. Next door to the lingerie shop there would be room for an adult sex toy shop, "Koranal Knowledge ", its name in flashing neon lights, and on the other side, a liquor store called "Morehammered."
All of this would encourage Muslims to demonstrate the tolerance they demand of us, so their mosque issue would not be a problem for others.
Yes we should promote tolerance.
Blame social media and narcissism. And the fact that they are coddled to the point of being wimps.
A second-grader has been suspended from school for throwing an imaginary grenade - by principal and teachers with imaginary brains! Zero tolerance equals zero thought!
More government school idiocy!
Stupid people are ruining America!
Pelosi Air is now grounded?
Another asinine story: A 5-year-old boy faces possible suspension - after building a gun out of Legos? You trust these mindless hypersensitive government idiots with your children? Government school idiocy!
Democrat Senator Mary Landrieu says our spending problems are fabrications of Fox News? Is she drinking Kool-Aid, or perhaps something more potent?
What does it matter to him? It's your money, not his.
What the heck, let's just raise taxes on the rich bastards again!
If The Hack had a son, at least there would be a man in the family.
"To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them..." - George Mason, Father of The Bill of Rights
Why has no one previously mentioned this?
DICK ACT of 1902 ... CAN'T BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN) - Protection against Tyrannical Government
CAN NOT BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN) The Trump Card Enacted by the Congress Further Asserting the Second Amendment as Untouchable. The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.
The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army. The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy. The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders. The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion). These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard. Attorney General Wickersham advised President Taft, the Organized Militia (the National Guard) cannot be employed for offensive warfare outside the limits of the United States.
The Honorable William Gordon, in a speech to the House on Thursday, October 4, 1917, proved that the action of President Wilson in that he felt Wilson ought to have been impeached. During the war with England an attempt was made by Congress to pass a bill authorizing the president to draft 100,000 men between the ages of 18 and 45 to invade enemy territory, Canada. The bill was defeated in the House by Daniel Webster on the precise point that Congress had no such power over the militia as to authorize it to empower the President to draft them into the regular army and send them out of the country.
The fact is that the President has no constitutional right, under any circumstances, to draft men from the militia to fight outside the borders of the USA, and not even beyond the borders of their respective states. Today, we have a constitutional LAW which still stands in waiting for the legislators to obey the Constitution which they swore an oath to uphold.Charles Hughes of the American Bar Association (ABA) made a speech which is contained in the Appendix to Congressional Record, House, September 10, 1917, pages 6836-6840 which states: The militia, within the meaning of these provisions of the Constitution is distinct from the Army of the United States.
In these pages we also find a statement made by Daniel Webster, that the great principle of the Constitution on that subject is that the militia is the militia of the States and of the General Government; and thus being the militia of the States, there is no part of the Constitution worded with greater care and with more scrupulous jealousy than that which grants and limits the power of Congress over it.
This limitation upon the power to raise and support armies clearly establishes the intent and purpose of the framers of the Constitution to limit the power to raise and maintain a standing army to voluntary enlistment, because if the unlimited power to draft and conscript was intended to be conferred, it would have been a useless and puerile thing to limit the use of money for that purpose. Conscripted armies can be paid, but they are not required to be, and if it had been intended to confer the extraordinary power to draft the bodies of citizens and send them out of the country in direct conflict with the limitation upon the use of the militia imposed by the same section and article, certainly some restriction or limitation would have been imposed to restrain the unlimited use of such power.
The Honorable William Gordon More Info With over 300 Million guns in the United States, the federal CORPORATE government (federal gov't defined as corporation under 28 U.S.C. Section 3002 (15) and the states are subdivisions of the corporation, 28 U.S.C. Section 3002 (10), cannot ban arms or stop people from defending themselves against a tyrannical government. I read somewhere that just the State of North Carolina can call up 20-30 divisions of unorganized militia (would be about 200,000-300,000 armed North Carolinians) on a moment's notice.
Imagine the State of Texas or Oklahoma if that's the case? Amazingly, even if the US tries to ban all arms through backdoor measures like domestic violence laws (Violence Against Women Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 922 (g)) or through an unconstitutional U.N. declaration adopted by our current Marxist unconstitutional Congress, no treaty can supersede the Constitution:"This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty." - Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17. This case involved the question: Does the NATO Status of Forces Agreement (treaty) supersede the U.S. Constitution?
Keep reading. The Reid Court (U.S. Supreme Court) held in their Opinion that, "... No agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or any other branch of government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution. Article VI, the Supremacy clause of the Constitution declares, "This Constitution and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all the Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land..."
There is nothing in this language which intimates that treaties and laws enacted pursuant to them do not have to comply with the provisions of the Constitution nor is there anything in the debates which accompanied the drafting and ratification which even suggest such a result..."It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power UNDER an international agreement, without observing constitutional prohibitions. (See: Elliots Debates 1836 ed. pgs 500-519)." In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that document in a manner not sanctioned by Article V.
The prohibitions of the Constitution were designed to apply to all branches of the National Government and they cannot be nullified by the Executive or by the Executive and Senate combined. Did you understand what the Supreme Court said here? No Executive Order, Presidential Directive, Executive Agreement, no NAFTA, GATT/WTO agreement/treaty, passed by ANYONE, can supersede the Constitution. FACT. No question!
At this point the Court paused to quote from another of their Opinions; 7Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 258 at pg. 267 where the Court held at that time that, "The treaty power as expressed in the Constitution, is in terms unlimited except by those restraints which are found in that instrument against the action of the government or of its departments and those arising from the nature of the government itself and of that of the States. It would not be contended that it extends so far as to authorize what the Constitution forbids, or a change in the character of the government, or a change in the character of the States, or a cession of any portion of the territory of the latter without its consent."
Assessing the GATT/WTO parasitic organism in light of this part of the Opinion, we see that it cannot attach itself to its host (our Republic or States) in the fashion the traitors in our government wish, without our acquiescing to it. The Reid Court continues with its Opinion:"This Court has also repeatedly taken the position that an Act of Congress, which MUST comply with the Constitution, is on full parity with a treaty, the statute to the extent of conflict, renders the treaty null. It would be completely anomalous to say that a treaty need not comply with the Constitution when such an agreement can be overridden by a statute that must conform to that instrument."
The U.S. Supreme court could not have made it any clearer: TREATIES DO NOT OVERRIDE THE CONSTITUTION, AND CANNOT, IN ANY FASHION, AMEND IT!!! CASE CLOSED.
Quiz - Who said it?
1) "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
A. Karl Marx
2) "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...... And to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."
3) "(We) .....can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."
A. Nikita Khrushev
4) "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own ... in order to create this common ground."
A. Mao Tse Dung
5) "I certainly think the free-market has failed."
A. Karl Marx
6) "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."
(1) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/29/2004
I have been overloaded with commentary on the latest shooting tragedies and reactions. I was waiting for some facts to congeal with respect to all of this before I commented to you with my concerns. I like others was sickened by the school shooting, all I could imagine was my granddaughter and if I were in those families shoes. I suspected the knee jerk reaction that would be coming and it has exceeded my expectations so far. The media in a frenzy to report on events can be documented to be one of the largest sources of misinformation and anti-gun bias out there. The latest retort to the established media I have read is that there was in fact no "assault rifle" used in the school for the shootings and that only handguns were used. Video is available of the "assault rifle" that was found in the trunk of the shooters car. Therefore any attempt to further regulate and restrict access to those weapons is purely political opportunism by those with an agenda. The media has become a propaganda tool and no longer does investigative journalism.
The Governors' latest proposals offend me. Massachusetts has some of the strictest laws in the country as does Connecticut. These laws do not stop criminals or those with evil intent. Our legal system is broken from my observations. My experiences in the past year related to the two burglaries I was a victim of have only caused me to lose confidence in the police, courts and our government. The public is burdened with all manner of regulation in an attempt to cure every social ill and yet there is no safety, only a reduction in freedom for those who attempt to live civilly. I am old enough now to have a broad life experience from which to compare conditions, they have only worsened, financially, socially and morally. I feel more like a prisoner these days hampered by an over reaching government with the hostile environment it has created for business and the restrictions it places on me that did not exist when I young.
My views are not exclusive. For instance when I joined our Sportsmen's Club many years ago we had 115 members, as of the last meeting we have 495 active memberships. That is MEMBERSHIPS not individuals. About half are Family memberships so multiply that total of active users of our facility. In the past two years we have added over 100 new members each year, some rejoin, some don't. In any case it has caused us to have an extensive list of contact info of like minded individuals that is multiples of the active membership. We are seeing a surge in citizens taking firearms safety courses to apply for concealed weapon permits. I am also witnessing a frenzy of gun buying the past few months by citizens who are new to the concept, persons who only had a passing interest who wish to "lock in" their ownership of a weapon before further restrictions are enacted or are living in fear of being a victim of criminals. What I do not hear is support for the governments latest agenda. That is in my circle of activity, from what I hear this is being repeated all across the country.
I am of Polish descent, I enjoy reading and learning from history. I am particularly sensitive to what I have learned of the history of the Polish people. They were a great nation that was destroyed by their neighbors. They suffered persecution and much of that history is not common knowledge, I continue to learn more about it. One thing that I learned details of only a few years ago was of the Katyn Forrest massacre. Over 28,000 Polish Officers, Officials and Intelligentsia were systematically murdered by the Russians and buried in mass graves during WWII by Stalin's orders. They blamed the Nazi's and it was not until the fall of the Soviet empire in 1995 that secret papers of the KGB were exposed documenting the facts that were for decades denied. Truman and Churchill suspected that Stalin had committed the atrocity but he was an ally and it was overlooked. Such was justice for the Poles and the promulgation of political propaganda. Throughout history there has been documentation of many other governments' similar attacks on citizens. It is never expected and often denied. Such is the fuel for proclamations such as our Second Amendment.
As I watch our country swirl around the toilet bowl I cannot help but wonder what horrors await us. I call on you to vigorously defend our Constitution and rights of citizens. We are not subjects of a Monarch and many of us recognize the slippery slope we are on. We are on a path far removed from the world I grew up in. Some of it is progress much of it is not and I would hope we could recapture some of the better parts of the past, most importantly more freedom.
We have a Despot using children as propaganda tools? This is nothing new.
Obama will use kids as a prop for his gun control message. This is despicable behavior, even for him. He's a political virus, and a deadly one at that. Note: Saddam Hussein did the same thing - used kids as props for his propaganda. Come to think of it, So did Hitler, Stalin and Mao.
Gun Control - Written by Jeff B. Geraci
Today we find ourselves as a nation of cowardly subjects living within the confines of fear, begging government for permission to exercise our natural rights, rights that the government has no authority to challenge or deny, but rights for which our government will imprison us for exercising. That's called tyranny- blatant tyranny which negates freedom. You yourself may not like guns, but you're walking a dangerous line by picking and choosing which constitutional rights you think are important and worth protecting, while forsaking the ones you deem unnecessary.
Why does a hunter need an assault rifle with a 10-round magazine just to shoot Bambi? Well, he doesn't, but then nowhere in our American Constitution does it even mention hunting or target practice, because that was not the intent of the 2nd amendment.
The purpose of the 2nd amendment was to provide the citizens with the means to defend themselves from tyrannical government, should that government over-step its boundary and infringe upon our inalienable rights. And that is precisely what our government is doing right now with gun control.
Not all government is corrupt, but there is a rapidly growing faction of admittedly socialist government in America, and the threat to liberty posed by such sects is why assault rifles are absolutely essential. The right to bear arms has already been infringed upon multiple times under the guise of "safety" by the likes of senators, governors and even the office of president, yet not a single official has been brought to justice or even arrested. An armed society is highly unpredictable, and that threatens a corrupt government, because such government relies on predictability for maintaining control. It much prefers that you protest weaponless in the streets where it can contain you with superior force, while all you can do is shout grievances.
Don't forget that our founding fathers had broken away from such oppression and corruption, vowing to ensure that it never happens again by securing inalienable rights in our constitution. Most Americans don't realize that they declared these rights as absolute and beyond contestation by government. Our founding fathers were viewed as criminals, and if caught by their existing government, would have been prosecuted as "traitors" and swiftly executed. These men were left with no other option than to disregard the law and commit illegal acts against their government in order to defeat tyranny- thankfully their religious convictions held what was "right" above that which was declared "illegal" by the written laws of men.
Timothy McVeigh killed 168 people and injured 800 more, yet he never fired a single shot. School massacres weren't more prevalent in the 70's and 80's, and yet assault rifles had no magazine capacity restrictions, no waiting periods, and anyone could order one through the mail without so much as an I.D. The aurora shooter, the Norway Island shooter, Columbine shooters, the Newtown shooter- these were all mentally disturbed people. But there isn't any money to be made from fixing our disastrous mental health system, nor would that help to advance the gun-control agenda. The anti-gun establishment is shamelessly exploiting the Newtown shooting, but at some point we have to acknowledge that societal degradation and mental illness, not guns, are ultimately responsible for these mass horrors.
Sixty years ago, the population majority consisted of two-parent households where the mother was home to raise and nurture her children, while some type of religious faith provided the foundation of morality and integrity. Things weren't perfect, but parents had the maturity and wisdom to be their child's "parent", rather than their "buddy" They taught their children by example, instilling decency, discipline, ethics and respect. The majority shared a common bond and a sense of unity, investing themselves in God and country, whereas today's segregated and divided society wishes only to thrust its distorted will upon everyone else, embracing a Godless ideology filled with instant gratification and self-entitlement.
Our inalienable rights are invaluable. They are above both government and politics. Our forefathers understood that a corrupted government cannot be negotiated with, nor can it be abolished through legal or political processes. They themselves took action and confronted tyranny head on, making reluctant tyrants surrender their power, albeit at a great cost. The evil that is at work today is no different. But that evil is prevailing now as it brazenly infringes upon the very rights that were created to protect us from its ambitions in the first place, and all because good people like you and I continue to wait around and do nothing.
The clerk should be given an award for defending himself and ridding the world of these two vermin.
Wounded Knee gun confiscation
A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY TO THINK ABOUT - December 29, 2012 marks the 122nd Anniversary of the murder of 297 Sioux Indians at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine ...Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota. These 297 people, in their winter camp, were murdered by federal agents and members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearms "for their own safety and protection". The slaughter began after the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms. The Calvary began shooting, and managed to wipe out the entire camp. 200 of the 297 victims were women and children. About 40 members of the 7th Cavalry were killed, but over half of them were victims of fratricide from the Hotchkiss guns of their overzealous comrades-in-arms. Twenty members of the 7th Cavalry's death squad, were deemed "National Heroes" and were awarded the Medal of Honor for their acts of [cowardice] heroism.
We hear very little of Wounded Knee today. It is usually not mentioned in our history classes or books. What little that does exist about Wounded Knee is normally a sanitized "Official Government Explanation". And there are several historically inaccurate depictions of the events leading up to the massacre, which appear in movie scripts and are not the least bit representative of the actual events that took place that day.
Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people.
Before you jump on the emotionally charged bandwagon for gun-control, take a moment to reflect on the real purpose of the Second Amendment, the right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government. The argument that the Second Amendment only applies to hunting and target shooting is asinine. When the United States Constitution was drafted, "hunting" was an everyday chore carried out by men and women to put meat on the table each night, and "target shooting" was an unheard of concept. Musket balls were a precious commodity and were certainly not wasted on "target shooting". The Second Amendment was written by people who fled oppressive and tyrannical regimes in Europe, and it refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defensive purposes, should such tyranny arise in the United States.
As time goes forward, the average citizen in the United States continually loses little chunks of personal freedom or "liberty". Far too many times, unjust gun control bills were passed and signed into law under the guise of "for your safety" or "for protection". The Patriot Act signed into law by G.W. Bush, was expanded and continues under Barack Obama. It is just one of many examples of American citizens being stripped of their rights and privacy for "safety". Now, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is on the table, and will, most likely be attacked to facilitate the path for the removal of our firearms, all in the name of "our safety".
Before any American citizen blindly accepts whatever new firearms legislation that is about to be doled out, they should stop and think about something for just one minute- Evil does exist in our world. It always has and always will. Throughout history evil people have committed evil acts. In the Bible one of the first stories is that of Cain killing Abel. We cannot legislate "evil" into extinction. Good people will abide by the law, and the criminal element will always find a way around it.
Evil exists all around us, but looking back at the historical record of the past 200 years, across the globe, where is "evil" and "malevolence" most often found? In the hands of those with the power, the governments. That greatest human tragedies on record and the largest loss of innocent human life can be attributed to governments. Who do the governments always target? "Scapegoats" and "enemies" within their own borders but only after they have been disarmed to the point where they are no longer a threat. Ask any Native American, and they will tell you it was inferior technology and lack of arms that contributed to their demise. Ask any Armenian why it was so easy for the Turks to exterminate millions of them, and they will answer "We were disarmed before it happened". Ask any Jew what Hitler's first step prior to the mass murders of the Holocaust was- confiscation of firearms from the people.
Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should vehemently resist any attempts to infringe on our Rights to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment we will be totally stripped of any ability to defend ourselves and our families.
TED NUGENT: Open letter to Joe Biden on guns
'Gun control' won't save lives
Congratulations on your appointment to lead a presidential commission to end gun-related violence.
As a National Rifle Association board member, husband, father, grandfather, law enforcement officer and genuinely concerned American, I too want nothing more than to see evil, senseless massacres stopped. I concur with the president and caring people everywhere: It's time to end these slaughters.
As you gather your team to study massacres and how to stop them, I offer to you my services and a lifetime of expertise on guns in all their implementations. While I strongly differ with President Obama on many issues, I agree with him that we must work with all we can possibly muster to end these tragedies.
As you begin to formulate your thoughts on how to proceed with your task, I hope your starting point is to provide the president with the facts regarding these slaughters and to offer him common-sense recommendations that are void of a political agenda and will actually make a meaningful difference. If the American people smell a political agenda here, that will only bog down our efforts.
In the spirit of goodwill and a deep desire to end gut-wrenching, incredibly sad and senseless rampages, I offer you the following recommendations:
I encourage you to persuade the president to lead this effort by providing a number of public service announcements. The announcements should include watching out for each other, encouraging parents to be more involved in their children's lives regarding entertainment choices, and knowing various indicators we should watch for in people who are unstable.
Clearly, the focus on solving these mass murders must be on the mentally ill. In almost every instance of mass killing, there were ample red flags and warning alarms that either were avoided or were not acted upon by mental health professionals, family members, friends and acquaintances. While I deeply respect an individual's privacy and civil liberties, the American people need basic awareness of what indicators to look for regarding potentially violent, psychotic people. Our collective safety begins with being collectively vigilant.
You will find in your assessment that all of the massacres have occurred in gun-free zones. What gun-free zones create is an environment where good people are unarmed and virtually defenseless against an unstable person intent on committing mass murder. Gun-free zones are modern killing fields. I implore you to recommend that Congress pass a law to ban gun-free zones immediately.
Just like your full-time, armed security detail, qualified citizens with authorized, legal concealed-carry permits should be able to carry weapons virtually everywhere to protect themselves, their loved ones and innocents.
I also implore you to strongly consider recommending that trained school officials have access to weapons to protect students. Just as airline pilots may have access to a weapon to prevent another Sept. 11 mass murder, school officials also should be trained to stop shooting sprees at our schools.
I don't encourage you to recommend a ban on any weapon, magazine capacity or type of ammunition. That won't accomplish anything other than prevent the 99.9 percent of responsible, law-abiding Americans from enjoying these modern weapons as we do now. We should never recommend or develop public policy that restricts the rights of the good guys based upon what evil people do or might do. If that were the case, alcohol still would be banned. As you may know, drunk drivers kill an estimated 12,000 Americans each year and hurt tens of thousands more.
I encourage you also to keep this misnamed "gun violence" in perspective. While all deaths are tragic, the vast majority of gun-related murders and violence are committed by gang members who do not use guns that look like - but do not perform like - military assault weapons. The majority of crimes that involve a firearm are committed with handguns. I concurred with you back in 2008 when you stated, "If [Mr. Obama] tries to fool with my Beretta, he's got a problem." I trust you still maintain those sentiments.
Again, I offer you my services and a lifetime of expertise. I look forward to hearing from you.
UNAUTHORIZED DUPLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, EXHIBITION OR USE MAY RESULT IN CIVIL LIABILITY AND/OR CRIMINAL PROSECUTION.