Tuesday, June 28, 2016

Spoken Like A True Communist!

Why do I think of the phrase, "None shall pass!"

Angela Merkel, the Evil Bitch of Europe, says,

We must act to prevent countries from fleeing EU.

Money Quote:

"And according to Merkel’s spokesman, Britain hasn’t really left until it invokes Article 50 of the EU treaty pertaining to members leaving before any informal talks on the conditions for its departure are had. According to the spokesman, “if the [UK] government needs a reasonable amount of time to do that, we respect that.
"One thing is clear: before Britain has sent this request there will be no informal preliminary talks about the modalities of leaving," spokesman Steffen Seibert told a news conference."

I have a question, you'll forgive me for being logical, will the EU use its new continental Army to force retention of States who wish to flee? Have we seen this before in recent history?

Nigel Farage Dresses Down the EU Parliament

Enjoy! I sure did.

At least one man in the UK still has his balls.

This Has Nothing To Do With Islam!

Links found on Drudgereport.com






Nope. Islam is a religion of peace. It isn't death cult or anything like that. It isn't an organized crime syndicate or anything like that. It isn't a political system mascaraing as a religion or anything like that.

So, all is well!

Oh! And, Don't buy a gun! It'll only add to the violence!

Friday, June 24, 2016

Why Is it Only The UK Daily Mail Has This?

image found on Google

Go here and read the full story. One policeman tells the truth. He was told to wait while Omar was supposedly gunning people down.

"A police officer who was one of the first to arrive at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando has claimed he was made to wait while Omar Mateen wandered around the club gunning people down."


Wednesday, June 22, 2016

Supreme court Says, The Cops Is Always right!

Or, "Prove to me you haven't committed a crime and MAYBE I'll leave you alone."

Go here and read the full story.

First, the Fourth Amendment reads in part,

The right of the people to be secure in their persons... against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated...

The amendment says that you have a right and that it shall not be violated. On its face, a random stop and search of your person without probable cause is a violation of your right to be secure. 

Now we have a US Supreme Court ruling called Utah v. Strieff.

So, the cops are watching a drug house. A fellow comes along and a cop stops and searches him without probable cause. The cop demands ID, finds out the man has a warrant, and finds drugs on him. Now, in the days before this Supreme Court session, everything discovered pursuant to an unlawful stop and search would be inadmissible due to the initial stop being without PC (this is generally the way it is supposed to work).

But, Justice Thomas says,

"...discovery of a valid, pre-existing, and untainted arrest warrant attenuated the connection between the unconstitutional investigatory stop and the evidence seized..."

Did you get that?

If the cop finds contraband during his unlawful stop and search it magically becomes not unlawful.

Unconstitutional investigatory stops are A-OK, so long as Officer Friendly finds something on you or you have an outstanding warrant. No probable cause. No fourth amendment required. So, if we have this strait, as you walk down the street, a cop can stop you, search you, demand that you ID yourself, and harass you because he wants to. He no longer needs probable cause at all. If he finds no contraband... well, you can bring suit.

Justice Bryer, Kennedy, Roberts and Alito all agree with Justice Thomas's statement:

"Strieff argues that, because of the prevalence of outstanding arrest warrants in many jurisdictions, police will engage in dragnet searches if the exclusionary rule is not applied. We think that this outcome is unlikely. Such wanton conduct would expose police to civil liability."

If Officer Friendly finds no contraband, you can bring suit. Get butt-hurt over the Officer violating your Fourth Amendment rights? Get over it! What Fourth Amendment? Ha!

I never thought I would agree with Justices Kagan, Sotomayor and Ruth Buzzy Ginsberg, but they said the following:

Sotomayor-"Do not be soothed by the opinion’s technical language: This case allows the police to stop you on the street, demand your identification, and check it for outstanding traffic warrants—even if you are doing nothing wrong."


"If the officer discovers a warrant for a fine you forgot to pay, courts will now excuse his illegal stop and will admit into evidence anything he happens to find by searching you after arresting you on the warrant."


"It says that your body is subject to invasion while courts excuse the violation of your rights. It implies that you are not a citizen... but the subject of a carceral state, just waiting to be cataloged,"

Kagan- "The officer’s incentive to violate the Constitution thus increases: From here on, he sees potential advantage in stopping individuals without reasonable suspicion—exactly the temptation the exclusionary rule is supposed to remove..."

Last question: What is the difference between a cop searching your person without probable cause and a cop searching your home without probable cause? Go ahead. Answer silently to yourself.

Now there is to be no such doctrine as "Fruit from the poisonous tree".

But not to worry, the VAST MAJORITY cops are such good guys that this new authority will never be abused... Oh, well, bad guys, sure. But good folks like you? What are you? Paranoid? Just exactly how much privacy do you think you need? You must be in favor of drug dealers and child molesters getting away with it.

Why don't you just keep your mouth shut, your head down and do as you're told, peasant! What do you think you are? A free man?

You know what? Who fuckin cares anymore? Why bother even making the point. We're so done.

Trump's Anti-Hillary Speech

It actually starts at 35 minutes into the video.

Tuesday, June 21, 2016

A Good Piece From Truth And Shadows

Go here to read the full piece.

Money quotes:

Why did there seem to be no ambulances at the scene or even arriving with injured people at the hospital (a nurse interviewed in one report said injured people were brought in private vehicles)? Why were injured club patrons being carried by other club-goers past cameras towards the club rather than away from it? And why did they set that person down and stop walking as soon as they appeared to be out of camera range?

So, let’s look at how the event itself played out, starting with how police could wait three hours to re-enter the club and take control of the situation after they had been engaged with the suspect in a shootout three hours earlier? According to a description of the events by USA Today, the shooter entered through a side door and then shot a doorman and numerous others before exiting from the main entrance on the other side of the building. He encountered an off-duty police officer in the parking lot who was working for the club, and they exchanged gunfire. In a disastrous turn of events, this exchange forced the shooter back inside the club. (I’m no armed-siege expert, but isn’t that the very thing you don’t want to happen?)


Some 100 officers from the Orange County Sheriff’s Office and the Orlando Police Department respond to the chaotic scene.”

It sounds from these reports that the rest of the 100 officers remained outside after Mateen entered the club. According to police, it wasn’t until 5 a.m. (the first shots were at 2:02 a.m.) when Mateen told them he had some kind of explosive device on him that they decided to breach the building by ramming it with an armored vehicle.


How could critically wounded people inside the club be left without help for that long, and how many died because of it? ...

Police explained that they could not move against the shooter more quickly because they had to “get armored vehicles on the scene and make sure they had enough personnel.”

The URL to the piece is, https://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2016/06/15/orlando-suspicions-multiple-shooters/

Saturday, June 18, 2016

Another False Flag Op? Pieces Of The Puzzle

Read here.

Then read here.

And here.

Step away from the mosaic and it becomes clear.

Videos to watch and consider. Watch them before they are taken down.

A complete lack of emotion in her description.

Thursday, June 16, 2016

This Is A Joke, Right?

Is nobody taking this seriously? Professional Only Ones allowed this to happen.

Headline from Theblaze.com,

Just One Day After Orlando Terror Attack, Reporters Enter Open Back Door and Explore Terrorist’s Residence

First San Bernadino and now Orlando. Same game, same rules, same "who gives a fuck?". But all the people who own guns and never hurt anyone, are baaaaaaaaaaaaad. Maybe Oathkeepers should mobilize each time one of these events happens. Stuart, are you listening?

Monday, June 13, 2016

What If You Shot A Cop's Dog?

This story comes to us courtesy of David Codrea. The original Story is at The Daily Steeple.

Cope go out on a domestic disturbance call. Cops go to wrong address. Cops shoot and kill beloved pet dog named Buddy. Cops then claim there was,


The question is, what would happen if you shot a policeman's dog at his home? What would the policeman do to you? Or a better question would be, what would the policeman get away with doing to you?

But, you say, the cops were on business! What if you were on your business? What if you were walking down the sidewalk in a local neighborhood and dogs approached you barking and snarling, but staying in their yard? Would YOU be "authorized" to shoot them? Could you claim "No other reasonable option?"

I can just hear the audio coming from the dash cam on this one,

"Keep your paws when I can see them! Stop resisting! Stop reaching for my gun!"

Sunday, June 12, 2016

The Robbie Parker Of The Orlando "Incident"

Can you spell fake? Watch the video before Youtube takes it down. I'm sure there will be others. The money shot comes at around 3:45.

Saturday, June 11, 2016

One Of The Big Lies: Driving Is A Privilege

found on google

Read the following:


Money Quote:

"The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness..."

General David Petraeus: Oathbreaker

image found on google
By the way, what are you saluting there, Dave?

This story comes from Breitbart.com.

It seems that the esteemed General is colluding with Mark Kelly (husband to Gabby Giffords) to form an advocacy group, with the intention of lobbying for universal background checks. That is, universal prior restraints.


Leftists never get enough of placing prior restraints on rights until they feel better. They never feel better. There are only more restraints on your rights.

How about your right to breathe? Should we put prior restraints on your right to breathe, until you are able to prove you "need to"?

On a related note, what famous General didn't want to be seen at Bilderberg? I'll give you a hint... where do you think he gets his marching orders?


Thursday, June 09, 2016

The Vince Foster Murder and Cover-Up

This is video worth your time. It is nearly twenty-nine minutes long. Grab a cup of coffee and watch. Seriously, take a few minutes and watch. I found a link at Rense.com, which led to fbicover-up.com.

Remember, the Vast Majority...

Kommifornia: Ninth Circus Strikes Again. No Concealed Carry. No Open Carry.

image found on google

This story comes from The Blaze.

It seems the Ninth Circuit court of appeals in Kommifornia has decided that,

"An 11-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said law enforcement officials can require applicants for a concealed weapons permit to show they are in immediate danger or have another good reason for a permit beyond self-defense."

Now, we can pretty much assume the Constitution is a dead letter. I suggest you read Ken Royce's Hologram of Liberty.

The Heller and McDonald decisions both require that all lower courts consider the right to Kepp (own and posses) and Bear (carry!) arms is an individual right and the 2nd Amendment protects it. That is the highest law in the land.

A couple of years ago, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals required the State of Illinois to come up with a Shall Issue permitting system to facilitate the concealed carry of firearms by law abiding citizens, or open carry would be the law within the State. Illinois has 120 days to comply. The State complied.

See here for more.

The Kommifornia legislature and the Ninth Circuit Court with both soon be slapped into compliance with the highest law in the land. Either Kommifornia will go open cary with no concealed carry or they will get creative with a new Shall Issue law. They will initially drag their feet as D.C. is doing, but eventually they will probably pattern it after Texas law as Illinois did.

Wednesday, June 01, 2016

Standard Procedure. Self Explanatory.

Watch the video FIRST.

Did you watch the whole thing?

Now, tell me again about the Vast Majority, how they are all super duper good guys, who believe in the Constitution and bill of rights, would never do such a thing.

Tell me again how its just a few bad apples who give the whole bunch a bad reputation. Tell me again how we shouldn't judge the whole group.

Hey, Officer Friendly, if you know tis is going on, if you witness this and you do not stop THEM from doing this, if you do not make a report, if you do not speak out and denounce this, if you turn a blind eye and allow it to continue, YOU ARE one of THEM.

Friday, May 27, 2016

Executed For Failure To Grovel

The end result was a man dead in a hotel hallway. The man was a threat to no one and had not committed a crime. He was shot dead when he did something other than abject submission. Remember, folks, the cops work under counter-terrorism rules. Any action other than abject submission is an act which, under these rules of engagement, is a hostile act. The appropriate reaction to such an act is "shoot 'em dead".

Daniel Shaver didn't know the rules. The cops know the rules. They won't tell you the rules. They demand you grovel before them. Any other action, gesture or intention, will get you shot. And, by the way, the cops WILL NOT render aid. They will cuff you and wait for you to bleed out. If that ambulance and para-medics arrive in time, well, thats ok I guess. Otherwise, sucks to be you.


“Young man, you are not to move,” Langley says to Shaver. “You are to put your eyes down and look down at the carpet. You are to keep your fingers interlaced behind your head. You are to keep your feet crossed. If you move, we’ re going to consider that a threat and we are going to deal with it and you may not survive it.

“Do you understand me?” Langley asks.

What Daniel Shaver did was reach down to keep his underwear from falling off. That action was not abject surrender, abject submission. It was failure to grovel. That got him shot. It doesn't matter that he wasn't actually reaching for a weapon. It doesn't matter that a reasonable man might see him only pulling up his underwear. What matters is that, the act of pulling up his underwear wan an act other than submission and that got him killed. The cop who shot him can make any justification he wants to. He can say something like, "Under the totality of the circumstances... furtive movement... reasonably believed... threat to my life and my fellow officers... had no choice... feel really bad about it, but..." etc.

It doesn't matter, Shaver failed to grovel.

Read more about this incident HERE.

A Simple Traffic Stop Turns Deadly

David Codrea gets the credit for this one.

Follow David's link and read the full story.

“At no point did I intend to hurt him. But I did.”

At no point did you intend to render aid. Unless you believe kicking him with the toe of your shoe and standing over him yelling are life saving steps. Let me guess at one thing also. All your buddies at the station slapped your back and said,

"Don't worry bud, you did the right thang. We got yer back."

Isn't that about right?

Ben Garrison Cartoon... Speaks For Itself


Sunday, May 22, 2016

An Ex-Cop Speaks Out And Gets Fired

Worth a couple of minutes. It speaks for itself.

Wednesday, May 18, 2016

Ladies and Gentlemen, The President of The United States!

This come courtesy of Atlantean Conspiracy.

Watch the video. Most especially, after the 18:00 mark.

Is there any wonder why Obama The Fraud is obsessed with filling our military with homosexuals?

Kyrie Eleison!

Wednesday, May 11, 2016

Natural Born Citizen? Who Cares Any More?

This piece from Divvy Kidd is posted at Newswithviews.com. As usual she knocks it out of the park.

Money Quote:

Jindal was born in June 1971. His mother became a U.S. citizen in 1976 and his father in 1986. Hardly 'natural BORN'. Rubio was born in 1971. His parents became U.S. citizens in 1975. Hardly natural BORN'.


Cruz was born in Canada in 1970. Most who have done zero research believe he held dual citizenship since his mother was born in the U.S. However, Canada did not recognize dual citizenship until 1977, so Cruz was a full blown Canadian citizen until he renounced in 2014 and became a citizen of no country.

I say no country because Cruz refuses to provide a court certified copy of a CRBA (Consulate Report of Birth Abroad) filed by his parents when he was born. He refuses to provide a copy of his passport or any other documentation proving US. citizenship. If a CRBA wasn't properly submitted when Cruz was born, then how does he even claim U.S. citizenship?


The Republican Party protected all three of them. They had to because if they didn't and the Pandora's box got blown open, the truth about Barry Soetoro/Obama usurping the office of president by fraud would then be out there for the whole world to see. An impostor acting as Commander-in-Chief signing one unconstitutional bill another another into 'law'. Oh, no. The GOP could not let that happen so they allowed Jindal, Rubio & Cruz to illegally appear on ballots in every state of the Union.

Final thought: Jeepers! Do you think they just didn't know? I said after Obama was elected, that from then one the Natural Born requirement would be ignored. This election cycle is proof.

Monday, May 09, 2016

New Hampshire Going Constitutional Carry...?

This story comes from Breitbart.com. It is good news for the people of New Hampshire. I hope the trend continues.

image found on Google

Stop begging permission!

Tuesday, May 03, 2016

What Happens To White People... Is Happening Now

I should entitle this piece, What White People Do To Themselves.

I came across, while web surfing, an article entitled What Race Were The Greeks And Romans? You should read the entire piece.

A Couple of money quotes:

"What became of the Nordic Greeks and Romans? Their numbers were reduced and thinned through war, imperialism, immigration, and slavery. Protracted internecine war was devastating. The Hellenes lost relatively few men in their two wars with the Persian Empire (490, 480-479 BC), but they were decimated by the ruinous series of inter-Hellenic wars that followed. The Peloponnesian War (431-404 BC) pitted Athens and her subject Ionian cities against the Spartan Dorian confederacy. That was followed by 35 years of intermittent warfare between Sparta and Thebes (396-362 BC), which pitted Nordics against Nordics. These wars so weakened the Greek republics that they fell under Macedonian rule about 20 years later (338 BC), bringing to an end the classical age of Greece."


"Immigration was the inevitable backwash of imperialism as slaves, adventurers, and traders swarmed into Rome. Over time, slaves were freed, foreigners gave birth to natives, non-Romans gained citizenship, and legal and social sanctions against intermarriage fell away. By the early empire, all that was left of the original Roman stock were a few patrician families."


"The last Roman writers therefore came to see their own people as both morally and physically degenerate. The subtext of Tacitus’ (56-117 AD) ethnological treatise Germania is a longing for the northern vigor and purity the Romans had lost. He saw the Gauls and Germans as superior to the Romans in morals and physique, and Roman women shared this admiration. Blond hair became the rage, and German and Gaulic slave women were shorn of their blond or reddish-brown hair to make wigs for wealthy women. By the time of Tertullian (160-225 AD), so many Roman women were dying their hair that he complained, “they are even ashamed of their country, sorry that they were not born in Germany or Gaul.”"

You should read the entire piece.


Sunday, May 01, 2016