Via The Smallest Minority. Kleenex Warning.
Humanity is capable of great evil...but also great kindness.
Talk about hanging Gaza children out to dry…
27 minutes ago
There is no "other option"; stating that if you don't get the results you want you will ignore the justice system is open and notorious sedition.
1. incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government.
2. any action, especially in speech or writing, promoting such discontent or rebellion.
3. Archaic . rebellious disorder.
Refusal to abide the judicial system if it doesn't give you the results you want is the very definition of insurrection.
Well first this proves this video was not released by the police department. Nor was it leaked by the police department or it would have been footage from the actual digital recording. They would not release footage from recording a monitor showing the footage, they would just copy the recorded image on DVD and present.
This is stolen and intentionally leaked “unauthorized” video footage from someone recording it from a monitor inside the Police Department. Either by an employee of the police dept., or by a journalist who convinced an employee within the police dept to film it.
So why steal, sneak, and release the video? and why via ABC ? Who does this benefit? That’s the bigger type of question those of us who have been following the media manipulation want to know.
When the truth is being presented, one does not have to work so hard to control, portray obfuscate and spin. The media have been working very hard because the media has not been presenting ‘the truth’.
But now, against the shere weight of the truthtelling, research, and presentation of facts by the New Media, the Legacy media is beginning to backtrack. Their false construction is crumbling around them.
However, we are not going to let them just skulk back into the shadows. They, the media, created this mess - and make no mistake, this is a huge mistake – and now they are going to be forced to own it. All of it.
Jim could feel the blood draining from his face. His hands began to shake. This had to be wrong, this could not be possible. He raced for the phone, punched in his uncle's number, and demanded that the old man get there NOW. Jim paced the floor while he waited, unable to continue perusing the pages in the box. Not possible. Not possible.
Jim's uncle knocked on the door in short order. Jim nearly wrenched the door off its hinges, grabbed his uncle by the arm, dragged him to the box, and thrust the first paper into his face. "How?" bellowed Jim. "How is this possible?!"
Jim's uncle stepped back, stroked his white goatee thoughtfully, and calmly said, "Jim, I told you it was taken care of. You never asked how."
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.
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America...By the Constitution and the rule of law, Obummer is--at the very least--acting far outside his Constitutional authority. At the most, he's a usurper and not our legal President. But none of this has mattered so far to anyone in Washington, and I don't expect that to change now.
The Founders did not write it into The Constitution, nor did they codify it into law, but enough of Them wrote about it frequently and with powerful words. They wrote in some detail what was expected of the generations that follow when the government again becomes tyrannical. They understood human nature. They knew without a doubt that powerful men would again try to gain power over the Citizens of this country. They knew that men would again try to dismiss our God given rights and that those same men would try to rule over us. They expected future generations of Americans to do as they themselves did. They expected us to fight and die and to do whatever was necessary to preserve Liberty in America for all future generations.
We can never experience the full measure of the gifts that God gave us without the Liberty to lead our lives as we see fit. The gift of life. The gift of family. The gift of America. The gift of free will. Americans have been far too willing to give up Liberty for comfort. There is a price to be paid for that. A terrible price.
What are we willing to do to regain and retain that Liberty?
During the one-and-a-half-hour question-and-answer session, Solomont asked those in attendance simple rhetorical questions, including: “Did you know that the United States sends a lot of money to Pakistan?” and “Did you know that the decision to destroy Osama bin Laden’s house was made by the United States?”
After responding to queries about the “Talibanization of Pakistan due the war in Afghanistan” and the “demonization of Islam in the West,” Solomont said Obama wants to end the long-time American practice of establishing alliances with dictators in the Middle East, a strategy which he said has failed to prevent the rise of “the bearded ones” [radical Islamists], this according to the Barcelona-based newspaper La Vanguardia, which also interviewed Solomont on the sidelines of the event.
The Barcelona meeting, which was held in a Muslim ghetto called Raval (a.k.a. Ravalistan because Muslim immigrants now make up 45% of the barrio’s total population), is an example of the Obama administration’s so-called Muslim Outreach. The U.S. State Department — working through American embassies and consulates in Europe — has been stepping-up its efforts to establish direct contacts with largely unassimilated Muslim immigrant communities in towns and cities across Europe.
In the modern case of Operation Fast and Furious, hundreds of Mexicans were murdered as a necessary pre-condition for a desired political outcome, the undercutting of Second Amendment rights in America. From the outset, the administration's goal was to bury our Right to Keep and Bear Arms beneath a growing mountain of Mexican corpses. The innocent murdered Mexicans were not collateral damage of Operation Fast and Furious, they were the intended targets from the start.
Murdergate, plain and simple.
Dear readers, it does not get more evil than that.
Perhaps that is the most alarming portion of the entire statement. We are not a democratic republic, we are a Constitutional Republic. HUGE DIFFERENCE, as in totally opposite forms of governance.
If a government structure is “of the people, by the people, for the people” how and when does it become socialistic and flawed to address the needs of people?The line of quotation is from Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. The reference was a follow-on to the larger statement … “that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom”… the construct of the principle “freedom” was individual freedom and liberty. Your INDIVIDUAL freedom, everyone’s individual freedom, and the right of the individual to be considered equally. Freedom for blacks, freedom for whites, freedom for everyone; and most importantly freedom to strive forward, in a manner of their own choosing, toward their own needs and aspirations, with equality in opportunity to succeed. It is not the role of government to define individual needs, nor provide for them. It is the role of the individual to determine for themselves, as an outcome of their effort, what they desire and need. The individual must then be free to pursue, or strive, toward that end.
Stop and think about that for a minute. Barack Obama passed multiple SocSec numbers WHILE IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE. One of the reasons that we are totally and completely screwed is because the intel services, namely the FBI, CIA, NSA and Secret Service absolutely, positively know that Obama is using fake I.D. Either they are totally incompetent, or they are complicit. And they're not incompetent, so that leaves complicit.
This problem extends past rhetoric. His argument’s implication is that the poster and commenters are illegitimate because they have never experienced poverty. As if he has.
There is no poverty in the United States. Poverty is suffering without a safety net. Can’t put food on the table? Get food stamps. Can’t put a roof over your head? Get subsidized housing. Can’t find a job? Get unemployment benefits. Safety net, safety net, safety net. One would have to put in a serious amount of effort to avoid the government programs and actually live in poverty.
America never sees what poverty really looks like; we just pretend to know what it is. So I’ll show you.
Firstly, an amateur working as a clerk is just as able to present the truth as the most gifted professional. The truth is the truth no matter who presents it. The unwillingness of many main-stream “Climate Scientists” to engage with alternate viewpoints sets them apart from “Science”. To many the science is not settled, and needs a full open and honest public debate.
For the general public that does not have an objective scientific bend, how do you tell virtual reality from the real thing?
That’s a serious problem, actually. Hell, I have an objective scientific bend and I have plenty of trouble with it.
Ultimately, the stock answer is: We should believe the most what we can doubt the least, when we try to doubt very hard, using a mix of experience and consistent reason based on a network of experience-supported best (so far) beliefs.