Sandy Hook: The Real Investigation Begins

You should watch this video with Wolfgang Halbig. This man is asking the right questions. I found the link on Rense.com.

Then, take a quick look at this video. Take the information with a grain of salt, but continue looking into it. A search for the truth is doing justice.

Cops Recorded Abusing Man and... They Charged Him With Mutiple Felonies

If you don't read David Codrea's War On Guns blog daily, you should. This is where I found the link to the story.

It seems a man was stopped by the cops in New Jersey. After fully complying with the demands of the Thugs he was beaten and his property damaged. He was then arrested and charged with multiple felonies. All of which were false charges.

     

 Filing a false charge is itself a felony. For which cops are rarely held to account. Typically, when the prosecutor finds the charges are false, he quietly dismisses them with a chuckle and a comment of "Well, we couldn't make that one stick anyway..."

The man would have gone to prison on these false charges if the dash cam video hadn't finally surfaced. It was only diligent work on behalf of the attorney for the accused which brought it forward. And get this. The prosecutor says he had never seen the video of the event. Do you believe that? Was his willful ignorance or is he lying also? In this instance, the cops are being held accountable.

The cops were lying. All of them were lying. Those men of "sterling character" you are taught to "honor and respect" were lying and committing felonies which would have sent an innocent man to prison. Does that describe a good man? Does that describe a man whom one should honor and respect? How many of their peers knew about it? How many times did they get away with just this sort of thing? How many times have "internal investigations" cleared cops of criminal activity just like this?

Playing AC/DC's "Thunderstruck" on a Cello? You gotta watch this!

Enjoy!

I love the look on the faces of the Audience at the end.

By the way I saw this on The Blaze.

Austin Police Chief Would Have Been More Thuggish

I saw this piece from a link on David Codrea's War On Guns blog. I originally saw this Story on The Blaze yesterday. Honestly, commenting on Thugs acting thuggishly is getting boring. It is hard to be outraged anymore because the thuggery is getting so blatant and so common.

 

image from The Daily Texan

 So a young woman, 24-year-old Amanda Jo Stephen, decides to go out for a run in Austin. Austin is a beautiful city and a nice place to go for a run if you are so inclined. The weather is warm. The people are friendly. You might stop in route and get a snow cone or take a dip in Barton Springs while you're out. The police... well, they are getting a reputation and it ain't a good one. It looks like several officer happened to be writing jay-walking citations at 24th and San Antonio Streets (slow month guys?) when Amanda happened by. She apparently was wearing her headphones and listening to something motivational while running. The cops saw Amanda cross the street and said stop. Amanda, being in her "zone" naturally didn't hear them. The next thing she knows she is grabbed by the arm and has no idea why. The rest is predictable. She behaved like a woman outraged at being abused by a stranger in a State Employee's costume. She was arrested and charged with “failure to identify”, and “failure to obey a pedestrian control device”.

Think about the term "Pedestrian Control Device" and imagine what that could mean.


Now, though, it seems the chief of police in Austin where the original incident occurred says he would have been harder on the woman. Chief Acevedo is quoted in the Daily Texan as saying,

“I don’t buy that you can’t hear an officer yelling at you to stop,”...  “I’ll give the benefit of the doubt initially, but when the officer is right by you and can see the hat and he’s looking at your face, you should be able to know what’s going on.” (emphasis mine) You know, the officer's word is golden. His word is to be taken at face value because he wears a Super Hero Costume and bears the Magic Shield. He can't be wrong.

and,

“All that young lady had to do when she was asked for her information was to provide it by law, “...  “Instead of doing that, she decided to throw [herself] to the ground – officers didn’t sit her down – and she did the limp routine.”

First, no one is required by law to produce any form of State issued identification just because another person demands it. A person violates the law when he refuses to identify himself AFTER he has been formally placed under arrest. If a  cop says, "Why don't you show me some I.D., your response should be, "Am I under arrest?"

Second, the officer's word is golden. It is Gospel. Acevedo cannot fathom that there is another version of "the truth" because his officers all told thew same story. Imagine that!

and,

“Quite frankly, she wasn’t charged with resisting, and she was lucky I wasn’t the arresting officer because I wouldn’t have been quite as generous.”

Apparently, Acevedo would have taken the opportunity to stack on as many charges as he could think up. Amanda was "lucky" you see. She was lucky that she was snatched up by the police without warning. She was lucky that a stranger put his hands on her. She was lucky that her day was ruined and she will now have to go to court and justify her freedom to go out for a run. She was lucky that Austin Policemen are such super-duper good guys who would never do such a thing, because Chief Acevedo would.

Is Barry's Foreign Student I.D. for Real? Anyone Know?

This is new to me. Someone sent it to me in email. I do not do Facebook. I was wondering if anyone has confirmation of this?

Is there anyone from Columbia, or who knows someone at Columbia, who can confirm this?

More Sandy Hook Fraud Information.

Just listen to what this man says. Then ask yourself, is there more you need to know? It is valid information and valid questions. Many of us in the Liberty Sphere already know this stuff. There are many who do not. Share it widely.

There is a part three on Youtube.com if you haven't heard enough already.

Policemen in Electra, Texas Harass a citizen... Because They Can

And then knowingly file false charges. Filing a false charge is the same as perjury. Perjury is a felony. These policemen appear to commit felonies with impunity.


Listen carefully to all the audio. Especially listen to the prosecuting attorney and note his attitude. We have come to expect arrogance and hubris from policemen these days. The video indicates that the entire power structure in Electra, Texas is corrupt. They seem to care for nothing but their own power, and their ability to wield it over whom they choose.

And we are told these are the best in our society. The highest in moral character. The best sumbithces who ever shit between two boots.

Once Again We Look at a North Carolina Cop, Indicted Now, But He Had No Choice...

This comes from Blacklisted News by way of Battlefield USA and gives us an update.

I mentioned this a while back myself.

Now it seems a Grand Jury has Indicted Officer Byron Vassey, who had been on paid administrative leave, since murdering the young man. Did you get that? His department put him on leave, with pay, after he committed murder. He has been charged with Voluntary Manslaughter. A charge which could result in a prison sentence in North Carolina of up to twelve years.

Officer Byron Vassey was in the company of two other officers when he murdered Keith Vidal. Indeed he was the latecomer to the scene. He reportedly said, "We don't have time for this..." and drew his pistol and shot Vidal. Now Vassey is saying, through his attorney, he had no choice but to shoot Vidal because he left his Taser at home. Really, that is what he has said.

"Quote from the Blacklisted News piece, Vassey's lawyer James Payne has said the following, for the record,

“Detective Bryon Vassey exercised the only morally, legally justified duty of protecting the life of a fellow officer and that sadly (ended) the life of young Mr. Keith Vidal,”

Did you get that? Vassey had a moral duty to murder Vidal. He was justified by way of protecting the life of another Officer. As we know, Officer Safety is the Panacea which grants cover to any act of abuse committed by a State employee... or so the State employed Thugs believe. And the lives of State employed Thugs are far more valuable than the lives of mere mortal "civilians".

I ask the question again. I will keep asking until I get a truthful answer. Where were those Good Guy officers, who mean well and want only to do the right thing? What was the reaction of the two policemen who were holding Vidal down when Officer Vassey murdered him?

Did they say, "Whoa Byron, you just shot a kid for no good reason. Gimme yer weapon pal, you're gonna go sit in my cruiser and call your attorney."

Did those other two Super-duper good guys,  who mean well and just want to do the right thing,and are in the vast majority, make sure Officer Vassy was taken down to booking and see that charges were filed against him?

No, Vassey was put on paid administrative leave until a Grand Jury indicted him.

If you were called to assist your neighbor who had a schizophrenic son, and instead of helping, you said, "We don't have time for this..." and murdered him, what would happen to you?

Are policemen a class of super citizen who can't be bothered by the laws which apply to the rest of us?

You Mean Mercury Is Bad For You? Well, Shucks!

I have never believed that filling one's head with mercury is a good thing. Some dentists will replace all of your fillings with a synthetic enamel if you ask them. The hard part is finding a dentist who isn't bought into the lies he was told in medical school.

This comes from The Sleuth Journal. Ten reasons are listed as to why Mercury Amalgam fillings are bad for you, VERY bad for you. It shouldn't really be news to anyone. Maybe more people are waking up. Let us pray that is the case. Is it a conspiracy? No. It is malpractice due to willful ignorance.

Also see this list of facts about mercury.

Now, why would you allow a man to stuff your head full of Mercury? Because you believe he loves you?

See? I Told ya.

                      This is Rand Paul saying, "OK, you caught me. Whatcha gonna do about it?


This link comes from CNN. It is Rand Paul speaking privately to Mitch McConnell. In the video, you can hear Senator Rand Paul state his intention to screw the people who elected him. McConnell stands there nodding and grinning, pleased at his new accomplice.

He is saying, "I think if we keep saying we wanted to defund it...we'll win."

Meaning,  We will keep saying it even though we never intended to defund it in the first place. We can pose as "conservatives" while still selling out the rubes who elected us. We can keep playing this game indefinitely! We'll line our pockets at our constituents' expense and retire with a healthy sum. We must turn the reigns of corruption over to a new generation at some point, but lets enjoy this while we can."

Now, Smile for the Camera!

 Shhhh... don't say anything. Just smile and wave, let them believe what they want to... moronic Tea Party fools.

I Stand Corrected... Rand Paul Shows His True Colors

In my last post I said we needed more holders of public office like Rand Paul and Mike Lee. I Omitted Ted Cruz because I am already convinced he is an M1A1 slickster and a fraud.

I have been watching Rand Paul since his election and I have waited and hoped. I have seen thus far a "moderate conservative", while hoping to eventually see a principled constitutionalist.

Rand Paul is now showing his true colors. He is telling the Texas Republican Party, in order to win elections, they must be more like the other side. This information comes from The Blaze and should hit you like a fire alarm.

Quote from the piece on theblaze.com, "The senator, who has expressed similar sentiments before, said party leaders in the state need to learn to adapt with the times and to be the party of inclusion."

and,

 “That means we evolve. It doesn’t mean we give up on what we believe in, but it means we have to be a welcoming party,”

Translation: We don't have to give up what we believe, we just put it on the back burner and adopt the other side's principles. We can still cling to them, hopefully, in the backs of our minds, but we need to think and behave like the opposition and then we can win elections!

and,  “We have to welcome people of all races. We need to welcome people of all classes — business class, working class.”

Translation, You Republicans... Uhhh, I mean WE republicans have been exclusive of other races and classes. We need to acknowledge our guilt and acquiesce to the program. If we are nice enough and play the game, eventually we will be allowed to drive the bus for a while.

and,

“We need to have people with ties and without ties, with tattoos and without tattoos — with earrings, without earrings,” he said. “We need a more diverse party. We need a party that looks like America.”

Translation: You stuffed shirts need to loosen up. Get with the times! Don't be a Hay-ter!

Now I ask you, have you heard any Constitutionalist or Liberty minded person demand that everyone wear the same uniform? Think in lockstep? Expose and anathematize those who look "different"? Are of another "class"?

and,

 “Doesn’t mean I don’t believe in securing the border first, doesn’t mean I don’t believe it’s important we have a secure country,” Paul said. “But it does mean we have to have a different attitude.”

Translation: Securing the border first, i.e., ...and then grant amnesty to twenty million foreigners who have invaded our country and abused our generosity. Of course we secure the border first. How about we secure the border, period? There is an invasion of our country happening right before our eyes and those in Rand Paul's position don't want to halt it. They want to facilitate it! Amnesty means letteing someone get away with his acknowledged crime without punishment. If those twenty million people who have invaded our country are allowed to stay, whether they work toward citizenship or not, they are granted amnesty. Rand Paul sees nothing wrong with this.

Ok, so we say we want to "secure the border first...", does that mean completely stopping the invasion? Or is there some other nebulous, nonspecific definition of "secure the border first"?

How about a virtual fence?

How about the use of drones?

How about check points fifty to a hundred miles inside the United States to harass citizens and non citizens alike?

Oh yeah, we already have those things.

This whole speech is telling republicans, to be more like Socialists and they can win elections. No one asks the question, "To what end?"

I am now convinced Rand Paul is a walking, talking false flag operation. Welcome to The Party, Rand. You're in good company.

Vote Republican! They're not as bad as the Other Guys!

Vote for the Mensheviks! They aren't like those evil Bolsheviks!

Join the Fabians! They aren't revolutionaries like those Leninists!

May God save our progeny. In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Ghost. Amen.

Rush Limbaugh Keeps Asking Why

Rush keeps asking why the Republicans are so timid. Why won't they grow a pair and act like they have our best interest in mind? Why won't they act like they want to oppose the leftist agenda? Why won't they act like they want to prevent amnesty for illegal aliens? Why won't they act like the want to repeal ObamaCare? Why won't they act like they want to roll back government regulations and lower our taxes? Why won't they act like they are a genuine opposition party?

I will tell you why. They are the Opposition Party. They want to be the Opposition Party. They want to be the Loyal Opposition. They want to play the game of sycophantic facilitation. They want to assist the other side in advancing THE agenda.

They want to keep you fooled. They want you to believe they are the only alternative to the leftist Democrats. They want you to believe they are "Conservative". They want you to believe they are working to resist the other side. They are none of the above.

If they were truly in opposition they would embrace they ideas of Rand Paul and Mike Lee. If they truly stood for your values, they would embrace the Tea Party. They oppose it tooth and nail.

I ask you to remember the election of Ronald Reagan. The mainstream Republican Party hated Reagan. They hated the Reagan/Goldwater form of "conservatism". They hated the Constitutional limits on their power just as they hate such an idea now. After Reagan took office, he was promptly shot. The assassination attempt was unsuccessful. He served eight years and got much of his agenda passed into law. The mainstream of the Republican Party still worked with the leftist Democrats at every opportunity. But Reagan came into office with what might be called a Tea Party coalition today. When George H.W. Bush took office, what happened to the Reagan legacy? It was promptly retired. It was dismantled and forgotten. You might recall that Bush called Reagan's economic policies "Voodoo Economics". He acted on that presumption when he took office.

Now I ask you, if the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan had been successful, who would have been president? George H.W. Bush, that is who. What did bush do to the Reagan agenda? He dismissed it. What would have happened if Mr. Bush had taken office seven and one half years earlier? The Reagan Revolution would have been forgotten and might have been a minor foot note in history. THE program would have continued apace.

Reagan wasn't supposed to happen. Just as the Tea Party eruption over bail outs, attempted granting of amnesty, and a stimulus bill which became the new baseline for future budgets, was not supposed to happen. He was a speed bump on the road to Socialism, or if you will, "progress".

One might also remember George W. Bush's nomination of Harriet Meyers for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Ms. Meyers had no judicial experience. I say again, she had NONE. When the backlash grew from the right (which became the Tea Party) over her nomination and her utter lack of qualification for the office, Bush's half assed response was something along the lines of,

"Whaaaat? She's a nice person..." (insert Beavis and Butthead chuckle here).

They Republican Party is the Flip side of the same coin. They are not the opposition to the leftist Democrats, they are watching their backside. When the coin rolls, it rolls in one direction, to the left. Socialism. Government control. Central planning. Controlled distribution of goods and services. This is the future for these former United States of America. This will be the United Socialist State of North America by hook or by crook.

Why don't Republicans act like they want to win? Because they don't. If they did win the the kind of landslide a candidate like Reagan would cause today, they would be forced to act on the Tea Party's agenda. They would have to act like Constitutionalists, instead of the Socialists they truly are. They just don't want to do that...

Because they don't have a genuine disagreement with the other side. Onward to Sociali... uh, I mean Progress!

Armed Citizens in Alabama! Vigilantes! Oh My!

Mike, was that you and your crew? The Vigilantes I mean...

This interesting piece comes from The Blaze and illustrates the "...natural defense of a free State." In Pinson, Alabama to be exact.


It seems the neighbors, seeing one of the nearby houses being robbed, armed themselves (Oh my!) and went to do something about it. This is a good thing. In fact, this is the best of responses to an incident such as this. It is the Natural and Normal response.

From The Blaze, "

When residents of an Alabama town spotted three teens trying to break into a neighbors house in the middle of the day... They armed themselves and confronted them."  

I edited out the part where they "of course contacted the police." Do you see how naturally and logically it flows after I edited it? This is how it should be. The part about calling the police should have been an afterthought.

They did call the police first and for that reason it is a miracle they all survived the incident.

Criminals are known to shoot innocent citizens due to agitation and fear. Cops are known to shoot innocent citizens due to agitation and fear. Armed citizens are known to pose the biggest threat to criminals. Armed citizens are known to pose no threat to peace officers. Cops generally see armed criminals as a threat to their own safety. Cops generally see armed innocent citizens as a their own safety. Criminals see an armed innocent citizen and think, "Oh lohhdy, I mo git my ass shot!" Cops see an armed innocent citizen and think "Enemy! Threat! Dominate! Stomp! Kill!", of course being justified by the doctrine of "officer safety" and the mandate to go home at the end of their shift...regardless of the cost to those who pay their salary.

Which do you see as more likely to be a threat to your safety?

This?

Or this?

 (Images found on google)

 Score one for the Good Guys, the Good Neighbors and Free Citizens of Pinson, Alabama.