September 15, 2019

Not Your Grandfather’s America…Or is it?

Facebook and Youtube are instruments of destruction put in place, created by, or at least allowed to operate by your U.S. Federal Government. Since their inceptions, we continuously experience both entities exercising censorship on any subject matter they deem “inappropriate.” The argument does exist as to whether these “companies” have a lawful right to become censors, limiting what some would describe as their freedom of speech, among some other “freedoms” that might require a bit of imagination.

It would be in the best interest of all if everyone just stopped enabling these fascists/totalitarians and abandoned the use of their censored media platforms that are slowly becoming a form of sterilized, well-controlled propaganda, complete with censorship based on their ideology.

In 1798, the U.S. Congress passed and was signed by President John Adams, the Alien and Sedition Acts. Consequently, because President Adam signed these bills, it ultimately deterred him from serving a second term. At least the people disliked and objected to such governmental censorship and control.

From Wiki it states the following: “The Alien and Sedition Acts were four bills passed by the Federalist-dominated 5th United States Congress and signed into law by President John Adams in 1798. They made it harder for an immigrant to become a citizen (Naturalization Act), allowed the president to imprison and deport non-citizens who were deemed dangerous (Alien Friends Act of 1798) or who were from a hostile nation (Alien Enemy Act of 1798), and criminalized making false statements that were critical of the federal government (Sedition Act of 1798).” (emboldening added)

Sedition is defined as: “conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch.”

This action has continued in one form or another since that time. The Sedition Act of 1918 was signed into law by then-President Woodrow Wilson (no surprise). This Act: “…extended the Espionage Act of 1917 to cover a broader range of offenses, notably speech and the expression of opinion that cast the government or the war effort in a negative light…” (emboldening added)

In modern times, often the destruction of our rights is accomplished through the passage of National Defense Authorization Acts in which power is granted to the president and/or Congress to do just about anything they want to do so long as it is determined to be in the best interest of National Security (wink-wink); Bill of Rights be damned!!

So is it wrong or illegal for Facebook and Youtube, as well as others, through their “terms of policy” (changed with every political ideology that crosses their path) censor your thought of right to “free speech?” Your guess is as good as mine.

Most people, at least that are affected by censorship, would say it is a violation of their rights. That’s mostly because they think they have them. Those promoting censorship and limiting rights do it to further their political and social ideology until their own actions come back to bite them on the ass.

We have no “rights” when it comes to anything listed within the Bill of Rights. That total listing is incorrectly labeled as a bill of rights. It has always been a bill of privileges meted out and taken back in the fashion that Government deems appropriate.

Anger is being expressed under the false pretenses that some believe they have a right to keep and bear arms, a right to free speech, a right to protest, a right to religious worship, etc. Perhaps years ago when my father and grandfather were alive, rights we more easily tolerated because people were taught to respect the wishes and chosen lifestyles of other people. That doesn’t exist in this angry society. Hate is everywhere. Fear controls everything. Insanity rules. Insane people in positions of authority are dictating their subjective terms of mental illness. All of this contributes to totalitarian operations like Facebook and Youtube and all other social media platforms to determine themselves to be lords of who can say what, when, where, and how. AND YOU LOVE IT! YOU’RE ADDICTED TO IT!

Whether you want to accept the fact that both Facebook and Youtube are government operations matters not to me. Because they are, they will continue to operate in the exact same fashion as your government. They will censor you and squash any seditious activity that makes them look bad or that might in any way threaten their power base. They have that power because they gave themselves that power. You had no say over any of it. Wake up!!

Bitch and complain all you want. I know I will. The staggering truth is you and I are basically helpless in fighting against the direction this country is headed. You may kid yourself but you cannot correct a rigged system by working within that rigged system thinking it will change anything.

Soon my words will be censored because I refuse to speak of the operations of the U. S. Government as anything but contrary to my best interests; that I can be a free person, that I can exercise my inalienable right to Life, Liberty, and Property. I’ll shut my mouth as soon as you leave me alone.

The road ahead looks very bumpy.

Share

I’m Not All In With This Man’s “Gun Culture”

I read this article this morning of a man describing his world of “gun culture.” I thought a lot of it was well presented, although I didn’t necessarily agree with all of it, including some of the “feelings” he gets from carrying a concealed weapon, etc.

What I disagreed with the most was what is on display in this country at present. Somehow the “gun culture” has taken the high road, while on the one hand promoting a person’s right to self-defense and to keep and bear arms, and on the other hand assuming the role of a good totalitarian in support of fascist government regulation and control over an inalienable right to keep and bear arms and a person’s choice as to how to do that.

The author writes: “Many gun-rights supporters were appalled to learn after the Sutherland Springs shooting that the military was systematically underreporting disqualifying convictions to the federal background check database. Under pressure, the military has added more than 4,000 new names in just three months. Similarly, law-enforcement failures or background-check failures that preceded, for example, the Virginia Tech, Charleston, Orlando, Sutherland Springs, and Parkland shootings are spurring serious new consideration of the gun violence restraining order, a move that would allow family members and others close to a potential shooter to get in front of a judge to request that the court direct law enforcement to temporarily seize a dangerous person’s weapons. It gives ordinary citizens a chance to “do something” after they “see something” and “say something.

The intent here is understandable. What is seriously flawed in the circular thinking process is the belief that some Second Amendment restrictions affect only the lawful citizen and others don’t. This action requires that the True Believer fully trusts his government to do the right thing and protect us. How has that worked in the past?

I can’t be a part of this “gun culture.” I don’t like government telling me how, when and with what, I can defend myself.

The author is proud that the military has turned in more names of those now prohibited from buying and owning a gun, with complete faith and trust that each and every one of them was justified…by whose standards I might ask. Seriously, is there any valid reason that we should believe and trust the government to do anything that is right?

The writer has complete faith in his government that a “temporary” taking of a person’s property, deeming them “dangerous” (by whose standards I ask again?) is a good thing. And, I’ll bet this same person is the first to wonder why his inalienable right to protection is being systematically taken away and by piecemeal being ceded over to the Government for administration.

By God don’t we ever learn anything?

Share

Attention Readers: Don’t Trust Google Search?

Or perhaps we should not trust ANY search engine.

I’ve written sparingly on this topic but perhaps it is time to expand on it just a bit. Please understand one thing. If you, the reader, are not willing to devote the time to “vet” any and all “news” stories, don’t waste any more of your time to read the rest of this post. If you are, pay attention.

Many years ago, the Powers and Principalities that rule this world, (let’s just call them PnPs) had to devise a way to discredit anyone who questioned or challenged their authority. And so was born the vicious and extremely effective vituperation; Conspiracy Theorist. It has worked marvelously for the PnPs for many years, but perhaps that obloquy has lost its punch. Overuse may have caused some sort of desensitization of the masses, rendering it ineffective so as to not have the same amount of control over what people see and hear. The PnPs cannot stand for such loss of power.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, we were all introduced to “Fake News,” the new castigation, stamped on anyone who dared offer truth or any contradiction to what we are deemed to see and hear by the PnPs Media.

Yesterday, in the Open Thread, I posted a photograph of Mika Brzezinski, daughter of the Monster of Evil, Zbigniew Brzezinski, one of the prolific members of the PnPs. Mika B was quoted as saying that it was Media’s job to control what we, the people, are supposed to see and hear. This was not a slip of the tongue but something that she, and others like her, have, for so long carried out, it is routine – routine enough that few pay attention anymore or care that she said it. That is the weather vane of success.

The first time I heard “Fake News” I knew we were in for a change. Mostly gone now are the days of conspiracy theorists, replaced with “Fake News.”

To label something or someone as “Fake News” is easy to do. Like conspiracy theorist, it’s the lazy man’s way of passing off something they have no interest in discussing or in discovering truth about. In short, what ever doesn’t fit the personal narratives, that is those mind manipulated ideas beat into the brain since birth, are cast aside – now labeled Fake News.

But there’s a lot more to this than simply placing a label. Fake News accusations became rampant, slapped onto any and all sources of information, both in the so-called Mainstream Media and Social Media. This was done when somebody with a voice didn’t like something somebody else wrote or said. Even the newly elected president, Donald Trump, called CNN “Fake News.” Unfortunately, Trump failed to remind everyone that ALL news sources are fake – fake to the extent that details of a news event always become a fake Left vs. Right issue, or is saturated with untruths, crafted by the PnPs in order to influence public opinion. The average reader is incapable of recognizing what parts of a “news” report is truth and what parts are fake. The PnPs depend on that ignorance and work diligently to make sure the masses remain that way.

The entire world has been given a free license to be judge and jury over what is and what isn’t “Fake News.” However, it doesn’t matter. News has always been fake. I’m just surprised it took the PnPs this long to bring out the “Fake News” war weapon. What does matter, or should, to all of us is what happens now?

Recall the Hegelian Dialectic in which the PnPs create a problem (always a fake problem). In this case the “problem” was, Fake News. Once the monster is created, it must be embellished and perpetuated. This always instills fear – the more the better. During this process, the lies and trickery are for the purpose of carrying out desired outcomes. And thus, the dialectic ends with the PnPs offering a solution.

It may have been a new speed record in accomplishing an embellishment of the fake, PnP-crafted “problem” of Fake News, as it tore through the American Society like a pack of ravenous wolves. Within days, solutions to the fake, Fake News began to surface.

A person has to be extremely stupid and/or willfully blind to not realize, by now, that things like Google, Facebook, Twitter, the Internet, cellphones, music, movies, etc. etc. etc. are the PnPs’; directly or indirectly owned and/or controlled by them. Understand that the PnPs must control all of this in order that they can effectively control the minds of every person on the planet.

One of the first “solutions” that I became aware of came from Facebook, where it was announced that Facebook was going to make some changes in order that users would be assured that no “Fake News” would be allowed on the social media giant’s website that would confuse and mislead the readers. What could possibly go wrong?

Most people can’t see any of this because they never saw and still haven’t seen, that after 9/11 the scared masses were willing to give up some, more and all of their rights, believing the government’s embellishment that we are were, and are, all going to die if we don’t give government power to spy on us and watch everything we do and say. The Patriot Act was government’s “solution” to the “problem” they created in the first place. If you are struggling with this, ask yourself if the Patriot Act has been repealed and why not.

Now, across Cyberspace, we are being bombarded with claims that search engines, such as Google give “Fake Search Results.” This is an embellishment looking for a solution. So do we trust that Google search results are honest. If you have in the past and still are, you are a fool.

Do you use Wikipedia? Do you believe everything you read there? If you do you’re a fool. Oh, but wait! There are sites like Snopes or Truth or Fiction that can tell us “the truth.” Then there’s Fact Checker and any other creation that tells you whether something is fact or not. Do you trust them? If you do you’re a fool. (Note: To be clear, I use Wikipedia, Snopes and others, as a starting point. Just as I read both “sides” of the fake news, Fake News sites.)

So what is going to change? We know that search engines like Google give us search results they think we are looking for. What? You haven’t noticed that before? Here’s a way to find out. Call a friend – Sorry, text or email. Have them type in the exact same search term as you and then compare results.

Google could not get away with informing the public that they censor and control the Internet and all of your search results. However, with enough people now scared about whether they are getting “Fake News” they will be anxiously willing to let Google decide what “news” you should get…And you WILL like it.

Truth is a very dangerous substance to the PnPs, who never operate in Truth and always operate in deception. They, the PnPs, must control any opposition to their propaganda and media (all media not just the news).

We live in a Post-Normal world now. For those not knowledgeable about post-normal, it simply means that what once was the truth is now a lie and what once was a lie is now the truth. If you are living the lie, you cannot see truth, and that is what makes the job of the PnPs easier with each passing day.

Share

The Fakers Who Fake Fake News (Propaganda) Trying to Fake Us All

*Editor’s Note* – Missing from this information is the fact that under the Obama Administration, when Congress, both republicans and democrats, passed the National Defense Authorization Act, they granted themselves permission to publish any and all propaganda without fear of any kind of punishment. It is only FAKE that the Senate, in the secrecy of the night, somehow is putting a stop to an act they are and have been doing for a very long time. I see all of this as simply a means to instill fear and further destroy our liberty of free speech. I have said for a very long time that as much of the perceived good we see in the Internet, there does exists those of us who will question and refute the official government narrative. This Government must find a way to stop that. This is one reason for the increase in propaganda about “Fake News.” Please open your eyes! Be aware of EVERYONE promoting and embellishing the “fear” of “Fake News.”

“The witch hunt for “fake news” and “Russian propaganda” has been kicked up a notch, after the House passed a bill quietly tucked inside the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, designed to crack down on free speech and independent media.”

“It is easy to see how this law, if passed by the Senate and signed by the president, could be used to target, threaten, or eliminate so-called ‘fake news’ websites, a list which has been used to arbitrarily define any website, or blog, that does not share the mainstream media’s proclivity to serve as the Public Relations arm of a given administration,” Global Research reported.”<<<Read More>>>(Note: please be forewarned that when I landed on the linked-to website, my computer was essentially hijacked due to excessive forced advertisement.)

 

Share

RMEF on Public Lands Transfer

*Editor’s Comment* – It is understandable the RMEF would be looking out for their concerns as a “special interest group” however, one has to wonder if this position is in the best interest of all. In this presser, RMEF explains some of the reasons why the Federal Government is incapable, whether by choice or ineptness, to take care of the lands they directly control and yet, continue to support the insanity of doing the same thing and hoping for a different outcome. It’s also puzzling that a special interest group is calling on the government to manage Federal Lands void of pressures from special interest groups.

The issue is far more complicated than whether the states or the Feds can better manage the lands, but many of those issues are never discussed. For all the things the RMEF claims about how the Federal Government does and does not manage its lands, there is no discussion about the validity of claims that the Federal Government has zero intentions to do anything different. History shows us their continue efforts to grab more and more lands and then shut out access and limit or prohibit public access. Isn’t it their goal to manage those forests by not managing them? To insure there is scarcity and to limit or completely prohibit public access and multiple use? And yet, we are supposed to believe (there is no thinking) that if we just work harder at convincing government to do a better job, it will be done?

True insanity!

There once was a time with most people believed smaller government with more and more local control, all the way down to the individual, was in the best interest of all.

Press Release from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:

MISSOULA, Mont.—In light of recent legislative efforts seeking the sale or transfer of federal lands to state ownership, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation strongly maintains its opposition to such proposals.

“Nearly one-third of our nation’s land is in public ownership and that includes the majority of key elk habitat,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. “Transferring or selling these lands to states will do nothing to solve federal land management issues. It may also close the door to public access for hunters, anglers, hikers and others. We all want better public lands but this concept is not the answer. We take this issue very serious.”

RMEF Land Transfer Official Position

The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation remains opposed to the wholesale disposal, sale or transfer of federal land holdings. Federal public lands comprise vital habitat for elk and other wildlife species. They are where we hunt, fish, camp, hike, ride and recreate. Transferring ownership of federal lands to states is not a solution to federal land management issues; it is a shell game to avoid the heavy lifting of establishing proactive land management policies in the United States.

What is the core issue motivating the transfer of these lands?
Lack of Active Management – People are frustrated with public land management for a variety of reasons, including: catastrophic wildfires, diminished access for recreation and sustainable resource development, incoherent game management policies that favor individual species over balanced wildlife conservation, endless litigation preventing active land management, executive orders creating national monuments and more.

What prevents active management of these lands?
Lawsuits – This is the era void of adult conversations taking place, avoiding any balanced remedies achieved. There are others who subscribe to “keep land management issues tied up in litigation” while the clock runs out; no matter what, do not negotiate, compromise or work together and nothing changes. Sadly, this is the era of political posturing using our natural resources as pawns; meanwhile the greater American outdoors is losing and so is the public. An overreaching use of environmental agendas exists to eliminate any consideration of multiple use in many public forests and the health of those national forests is suffering as a result.

Lack of Resolve – Some within public land management fundamentally oppose active management of forest and range resources in favor of “preserving landscapes.” RMEF believes certain landscapes must be conserved and managed to develop the types of diverse ecosystems elk and other wildlife need to thrive. Man inhabits the landscape thus we have an obligation to steward and manage our natural resources. Additionally, there is a diverse public who wish to recreate in the outdoors yet many are being restricted or limited today by special interests and agendas that strive to either substantially diminish use of our public lands or eliminate it all together.

Why can’t states manage these lands?
States cannot afford to manage federal lands on multiple levels. Land transfer proponents argue states can manage lands at less cost per acre than do their federal counterparts, while at the same time generating revenues for economic development and public schools through a “best use” determination.

Recent studies show states would need to increase timber harvests, mineral and other resource development well beyond sustainable levels to afford the management of these lands. And states would be forced to defend the same frivolous lawsuits the federal government currently faces, not to mention adherence to overreaching uses of the Endangered Species Act and other federal policies are not being discussed.

One question not being addressed at all is what will happen to hunting, fishing, camping, trapping, grazing and other current public land uses in some states should those states assume control over 100 percent of public lands within their borders? The simple answer is those activities will soon cease, causing a cascade of other complications and issues for wildlife and our public lands. The simple truth is groups like the Humane Society of United States (HSUS) and others would relish the idea of exerting political influence and litigation in various states to eliminate many uses of our public lands. This must never happen.

What are the solutions?
First, acknowledging the true problem is a must. We have critical land management issues that require solutions. Second, a commitment to truly resolve these issues must supersede special interests. RMEF believes the solutions lie in addressing obstacles to pro-active land management and providing federal land agencies the leadership, tools and direction to properly manage lands for a variety of environmental, recreational and economic interests.

A true dialogue and course of action to provide real forest management reform and multiple uses of public lands and forests is a must. The shell game of transferring or selling public lands is not a solution. These are public lands, owned by the public and it must remain that way.

Share

War on Food Freedom (and Free Speech!) by Nannystaters Continues

War on Food and Free Speech Continues: Nanny State Activists Got Whistleblower Journalist ‘Disinvited’ from Consumer Federation of America National Conference

Journalist Has Uncovered Shoddy Science in Government Nutrition Advice That Led Americans to Avoid Certain Fats in Favor of Carbohydrates

Bad Advice in Part Led to Expanded Obesity, Diabetes Rates

But Nanny State Activists Want Americans to Rely on Government for Food Advice

Whistleblower Reporting About Bad Science is Extremely Inconvenient to Left-Wing Agenda

Goal of Liberal Activists is to Advance Government Control Over What You Eat, in Part to Fight Global Warming, in Part to Control Americans’ Lives

 

Washington, D.C.  – In a timely article for National Review Online today, National Center for Public Policy Research Risk Analysis Director Jeff Stier and food writer Julie Kelly criticize the Consumer Federation of America (CFA) and nanny-state activists for silencing investigative journalist Nina Teicholz, a key critic of government-backed shoddy nutrition “science,” at this week’s CFA-sponsored National Food Policy Conference.

According to Stier, “We respectfully disagree with the left’s preference for using the levers of government to tell us how to eat. First it was just nutritional ‘advice’; then the advice started to influence everything from food stamps to how we feed the military. Now nannystaters want to put warning labels on salty foods, tax sodas, and ban ingredients.”

Adds Stier, “We do not respect the left’s latest tactic: silencing critics such as Nina Teicholz by forcing them off important public forums with McCarthyite tactics.”

In the National Review Online piece, Kelly and Stier write:

Those special interests are now scheming to not only discredit but also outright silence Teichholz. Now, after some participants objected to her presence, the National Food Policy Conference, held this week in Washington, D.C., has disinvited her. Teicholz was scheduled to sit on a panel with the USDA and Center for Science in the Public Interest to discuss how to turn nutrition science into policy.

The silence will be a detriment to public health policymaking, according to Kelly, because, “There is a very good chance that Americans have been receiving poor nutrition advice from the government, medical community and others for more than five decades.”

Referring to the Teicholz’s perspective, Kelly says, “It’s a discussion worth having and very unfortunate that those who profess to have Americans’ best interest at heart would prevent this debate from advancing.”

The authors argue that the left’s latest maneuver is outside the bounds of acceptable political tactics, even given today’s overheated rancor. They write,

Of course this has little to do with science and everything to do with ideological agendas. Never before has food policy been so politicized, whether it’s the Dietary Guidelines or the National School Lunch Program. For the most part, major decisions are being made by the same cabal of crusaders who refuse to countenance dissent or discussion even as the collective health of Americans continues to suffer.

Regardless of one’s take on nutritional issues, or even the proper role of government in determining how and what we eat, one should agree that the campaign to silence Teicholz is distasteful. The National Food Policy Conference is billed by its organizer, the Consumer Federation of America, as “a key national gathering for those interested in agriculture, food, and nutrition policy.” It could have been a much-needed forum for open discussion and debate among leading voices from different schools of thought. But now, because of the food fear-mongerers’ fear of debate, it will be just another high-profile missed opportunity to raise the level of discourse in Washington.

“Censorship is a red flag,” said Amy Ridenour, chairman of the National Center. “Someone finds the information this journalist uncovered to be a threat to their agenda — so much so, they moved secretly behind the scenes and got her disinvited from a speaking role. The Consumer Federation of America not only agreed to the censorship, but apparently has also kept secret who pressured it to do it. We disagree with both. Let the facts come out.”

Many major corporations and law firms are sponsoring this conference,” added Ridenour. “These include General Mills, Walmart, Campbell Soup, Hormel Foods, Mars Inc. and many other famous names. We call on these companies to withhold support for this conference and all future conferences that censor science and disinvite journalists who uncover information inconvenient to left-wing agendas. The public deserves to know which corporations are supporting the nanny state, anti-food freedom agenda, and we intend to make sure the public finds out.”

Nina Teicholz, the journalist who was disinvited from the conference, will be holding a press conference of her own at the National Press Club in Washington at 3 pm on Tuesday, April 5. The National Center is not participating in nor involved with that press conference.

The National Center for Public Policy Research is aggressively fighting the attacks of big-government activists on food freedom. Recently it has supported Congressional efforts to roll back Obamacare regulations that make it a felony for prepared food providers to make a mistake in calorie counts; questioned the usefulness of government-mandated salt warnings; noted the connection between anti-meat and anti-global warming activism; and questioned the science behind calls to remove processed meats from school cafeterias, among other initiatives. The National Center also sponsors the Free Enterprise Project, which blows the whistle when major corporations engage in left-wing activism or surrender to the political demands of left-wing activists.

The National Center for Public Policy Research, founded in 1982, is a non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think-tank. Ninety-four percent of its support comes from individuals, less than four percent from foundations, and less than two percent from corporations. It receives over 350,000 individual contributions a year from over 96,000 active recent contributors. Sign up for free issue alerts here or follow us on Twitter at @NationalCenter.

Share

Shifting Paradigm: Changing How Gun Control is Discussed

*Editor’s Note* – Recall the old saying that if you put lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig.

A link to this article was posted on the Face Book page of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine – and I’m not sure I understand why. I certainly hope it was not because they endorsed the content of the interview with a “shrink” professor at a university.

At points here and there in the interview, the good professor makes some points about how mental illness is not necessarily the factor behind the causes of mass killings by deranged people. However, the overall tone of the interview is advocating for more government control and more government god-playing in making determinations as to who can and cannot own a gun based upon some god-man sitting in judgement over others of which he or she should never be given authority to do.

To present an interview that readers are led to believe is to “dispel” the “myths” of mental disorders and mass killing, when it is only shifting the paradigm and changing the way we discuss gun control, should be recognized for what it is and nothing more.

While we should advocate for a healthy society, one that includes a serious reduction in the promotion of violence, i.e video games, movies, music, etc., we will never eliminate the occasional nut job who wants to kill for whatever the reasons. I understand that there is always a certain risk to life no matter what I do or where I go. However, it should be MY CHOICE to be able to be prepared to protect myself from those rare instances if I DECIDE that the risk is great enough.

For many years there has always been topics of discussion as to why Americans should have a right taken from them to self protection and to prohibit tyranny. Now that the paradigm is shifting, thanks to ignorant people like Donald Trump who now want to make gun rights about mental health, don’t be fooled into believing that the desire of the anti-gun crowd has actually changed. Imagine that the government determines your Second Amendment “right” by making a determination on your state of mental health. Remember both sides of the fake Left and Right believe those of opposite ideology are mentally ill.

Whatever it takes to remove the threat of tyranny, the ruling elite will accomplish no matter how many fake shootings and psyops they create. Propping them up only accelerates the end result.

To separate the facts from the media hype, we talked to Dr. Jeffrey Swanson, a professor in psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Duke University School of Medicine, and one of the leading researchers on mental health and violence. Swanson talked about the dangers of passing laws in the wake of tragedy ? and which new violence-prevention strategies might actually work.

Here is a condensed version of our conversation, edited for length and clarity.

Source: Myths about mental health and violence, and what makes mass shootings more likely | BDN Maine

Share

FASCISM RULES: Plow Field, Go To Jail? Feds Threaten John Duarte. He Slugs Back

For Duarte, the unthinkable began in early 2013 when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (CoE) presented him with a “Cease and Desist” Order (CDO) against him and and Duarte Nursery alleging that the act of plowing his field was an illegal “discharge of dredged or fill material.” (Premium Wine Executive News subscribers can obtain the full Cease and Desist Order letter at this link.)Further, the CoE order claimed that Duarte’s illegal discharge was under their jurisdiction because his wheat field was part of the “waters of the United States.”

Source: Plow Field, Go To Jail? Feds Threaten John Duarte. He Slugs Back | Wine Industry Insight

Share

Asteroid Watching

Which direction you go will depend on your party. The Democrats will argue for more carbon controls, more immigration, Single Payer, more deals with foreign dictators, etc. The Republicans will argue for more GOP Senators and Congressmen to be elected to Capitol Hill — after which they will vote for more carbon controls, more immigration, Single Payer, more deals with foreign dictators, etc.

Each side will assert that the problem is that we haven’t gone far enough; therefore the solution to all problems is to go a little further yet: one more donation, one more grant of power to bring final victory. Which of course won’t happen any more than the promotional mailers which proclaim you’ve been selected to enter a narrowing group of lottery candidates will pay off, if you just buy one more ticket, one more time.

Source: Asteroid Watching | Belmont Club

Share

Global Warming to Cause More, Severe Storms….But, Don’t Go Look

I have often repeated the story of my nephew, who at around age 3, told his father, “Dad, I’ve finished eating my lunch….but don’t go look.”

The nonsensical hysteria of end-of-earth blathering, because of global warming, caused by man and therefore man must pay, continues, despite facts. Government-controlled, useful idiots, are continuing to repeat Government’s lies that global warming is going to make us all dead due to more and bigger storms; one report even claiming that if we don’t do something about global warming, Bruce Springsteen might begin to actually carry a tune.

“A major “scientific” study issued in the summer of 2013 by a climate researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) warned of increased activity of killer hurricanes because of global warming/climate change.”<<<Read More>>>

We’re all going to die……or be subjected to more Bruce Springsteen music. BUT DON’T GO LOOK!

Share