BOBT12
Forum Replies Created
-
Bing wrote on Jun 30 2009, 02:07 PM:The “Green Stasi”, huh?I will show them. 😡
And speaking of poop, in a concerted effort to defeat the Green Stasi and, for lack of a better phrase, “smok'em out”, I am resolved to devote the entire month of July 2009, to self-producing as much methane as I possibly can…..starting right now….. pfft…..pfft…….and pfft! 😮
Bing
Okayyy, maybe we should call this a “Brown Alert”?
-
'franklin' wrote on 'Jun:Well now that RobinHood has been welcomed and initiated…back to Riverway and the militia,
Viera's article is excellent and helpful. He's right about patriots being armed mainly as individuals for personal self-defense, and not being organized to protect the freedom of the state (as in union state).
And he breaks the problem down into a manageable chunk of 100 men per county who are committed, trained, organized. It's one thing to describe a problem and another to give a clue as how to solve it. Viera makes a do-able suggestion.
One thing he suggests is linking up with others through NRA training programs. This would help in making contacts with those who may be of a like mind.
Viera has some pretty good ideas and research.
-
Thanks for that article. Yes we are witnesses to similar events today.
Quote:By Chuck BaldwinMay 12, 2009
NewsWithViews.com
First, it was a Missouri Analysis and Information Center (MIAC) report; then it was a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report; now it is a New York congressman's bill. Each of these items, taken on their own, is problematic enough; taken together they portend “a clear and present danger” to the liberties of the American people. It is getting very serious now.
As readers may recall, the MIAC report profiled certain people as being potential violence-prone “militia members”: including people who supported Presidential candidates Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and myself. In addition, anyone who opposed one or more of the following were also included in the list: the New World Order, the U.N., gun control, the violation of Posse Comitatus, the Federal Reserve, the Income Tax, the Ammunition Accountability Act, a possible Constitutional Convention, the North American Union, the Universal Service Program, Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), abortion on demand, or illegal immigration.
The MIAC report prompted a firestorm of protest, and was eventually rescinded, with the man responsible for its distribution being dismissed from his position. The DHS report profiled many of the same people included in the MIAC report, and added returning Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans as potentially dangerous “extremists.”
As I have said before, it is very likely that when all of the opinions and views of the above lists are counted, 75% or more of the American people would be included. Yet, these government reports would have law enforcement personnel to believe we are all dangerous extremists that need to be watched and guarded against. If this was not bad enough, a New York congressman has introduced a bill in the House of Representatives to deny Second Amendment rights to everyone listed above.
According to World Net Daily, May 9, 2009, “A new gun law being considered in Congress, if aligned with Department of Homeland Security memos labeling everyday Americans a potential 'threats,' could potentially deny firearms to pro-lifers, gun-rights advocates, tax protesters, animal rights activists, and a host of others–any already on the expansive DHS watch list for potential 'extremism.'
“Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., has sponsored H.R. 2159, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009, which permits the attorney general to deny transfer of a firearm to any 'known or suspected dangerous terrorist.' The bill requires only that the potential firearm transferee is 'appropriately suspected' of preparing for a terrorist act and that the attorney general 'has a reasonable belief' that the gun might be used in connection with terrorism.
“Gun rights advocates, however, object to the bill's language, arguing that it enables the federal government to suspend a person's Second Amendment rights without any trial or legal proof and only upon suspicion of being 'dangerous.'”
WND quotes Gun Owners of America Executive Director Larry Pratt as saying, “By [DHS] standards, I'm one of [DHS Secretary] Janet Napolitano's terrorists. This bill would enable the attorney general to put all of the people who voted against Obama on no-gun lists, because according to the DHS, they're all potential terrorists. Actually, we could rename this bill the Janet Napolitano Frenzied Fantasy Implementation Act of 2009.”
Pratt was also quoted as saying, “Unbeknownst to us, some bureaucrat in the bowels of democracy can put your name on a list, and your Second Amendment rights are toast.” He went on to say, “This such an anti-American bill, this is something King George III would have done.”
Now that DHS has established both a list and a lexicon for “extremists,” it looks to Congress to confer upon it police-state-style powers through which these individuals may be disarmed and eventually done away with. Rep. Peter King is accommodating this goal with H.R. 2159.
Let me ask a reasonable question: how long does anyone think it would be, after being profiled by DHS and denied the lawful purchase of firearms, that those same people would be subjected to gun confiscation? And how long do you think it would be before DHS began profiling more and more groups of people, thus subjecting them to gun confiscation?
This was exactly the strategy employed by Adolf Hitler. The Jews were the first people denied their civil rights–especially the right to own and possess firearms. Of course, after disarming Jews, the rest of the German citizenry was likewise disarmed. And we all know where that led.
I'm not sure how many of the American people realize that it was the attempted confiscation of the colonialists' cache of arms in Concord, Massachusetts, that started America's War for Independence. Yes, my friends, it was attempted gun confiscation that triggered (pun intended) the “shot heard 'round the world.” And now it would appear that, once again, a central government is on the verge of trying to deny the American people their right to keep and bear arms.
I am told that as of 2004, 50% of the adults in the United States own one or more firearms, totaling some 270 million privately owned firearms nationwide. I would venture to say that the vast majority of these gun owners would find themselves matching the DHS profile of a potential “extremist.” I wonder how many gun owners realize the way they are now being targeted by their government, and just how serious–and how close–the threat of gun confiscation has become?
If one doubts the intention of the elitists in government today to deny the American people their right to keep and bear arms, consider what former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger is purported to have said just a couple of weeks ago. Kissinger attended a high-level meeting with Russian President Medvedev that also included former Secretaries of State James Baker and George Shultz; former Secretary of Defense William Perry; and former Senator Sam Nunn. Included in the discussions was Kissinger's assertion that the American people were now ready to accept a “New Global Order.” He is also reported to have told Medvedev, “By September we'll have confiscated all privately owned guns so it really doesn't matter what we do, we'll still be in charge.” (Even though the national news media has not reported this statement, the Internet is abuzz with Kissinger having said it. Whether Kissinger actually made that statement or not, he, and rest of his ilk, have repeatedly called for a New World Order, in which there will be no constitutional protection for the right to keep and bear arms.)
This leads to a very serious question: how many of America's gun owners would allow their government to deny them gun ownership? Further, how many would passively sit back and allow their guns to be confiscated?
As humbly and meekly as I know how to say it: as for me and my house, gun confiscation is the one act of tyranny that crosses the line; debate, discourse, discussion, and peaceful dissent cease and desist at that point. I say again, it is getting very serious now.
*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link.
© 2009 Chuck Baldwin – All Rights Reserved
-
Admin wrote on Jun 22 2009, 02:23 PM:
Well now they want to triple the shots, thus, triple your fun. Look they are going for broke folks!
It started at Fort Dix, mmm?
Flu shots, more government lies? If people want their brains damaged, well….?
-
This article is spot on.
Of course, one can just imagine the havoc that the killer Boy Scouts and Obama brigades will unleash as we move forward.
-
Quote:The only remaining question is whether this will occur next decade, next year, next month, or next week. Got silver?”
Who can say when these things will come to pass, yet, I am leaning toward sooner rather than later.
We all need to get some physical silver and gold! How much do you need? I don't know. How much do you want? All you can get!
-
kd7one wrote on Jun 13 2009, 03:41 PM:A lot of government agencies rely on the internet as well. If Obama shut it down, he could be shooting himself in the foot.
As noted above, this is a risk that he and other PTB may be willing to take.
Quote:”Freedom of speech has always been encouraged or discouraged, according to the innocence or guilt of men in power.” -[L] Cato's Letters, #24, p. 178This goes to show the type of people in government office.
-
Quote:Shutting down the internet, if it ever came to that, is a clear sign that, well, it would not be good.
e-commerce is so huge right now, probably in the trillions of $$$$ in terms of GDP, that if “Obama the communist” did shut down the internet, it would destroy many businesses and many folks would lose their jobs.
Not to mention that it would throw a monkey wrench into distance learning programs, etc.
Bing
Well, dear Mr. Bing,
The PTB want to make money; yet, they do not want the people to be free. People all over the nation are starting to wake up, and they still have their guns!
What happens when they really go for broke? What happens when they go to disarm the people…well, it may not be pretty.
There is too much freedom on the web to let the ugly truth just work its way around the public. Hence, they may want to shut down all free commutations. They want the people to remain calm; this is why they have been putting fluoride in our water for years, why we need to take our Mercury vaccinations, etc. If the people really wake up to what is going on, they would throw the people at the top out of office and into jail, or worse. What would happen to Obama, Paulson, or Ben Bernanke, etc., they might not have a good day. Hence, they will instead close down free speech and lose a little money. Crap they have already stolen $14 Trillion Dollars from the American people, they will just have to live within their mean for a short time.
Quote:Those who begin by burning books, will end by burning men.After all the dissension they hope that the people will be ready for their Killer Chips.
-
franklin wrote on Jun 17 2009, 09:20 AM:kd wrote:Quote:get an amateur radio license
That's a government franchise isn't it? Did you have to give a SSN number to get licensed (i.e. if you are licensed)?
Franklin
The real question is what happens if the government stops issuing such Licenses?
-
kd7one wrote on Jun 13 2009, 09:27 AM:We can watch them just as much as they watch us. We can even use the internet to our advantage. If another manmade or natural emergency takes place where police are involved, all we have to do to find out the truth , is to do a Google search of……..Online police scanners for the area where the emergency is taking place. We don't need the media to tell us their version of what happenned.
Thanks for the information. However, I believe this is why the Obama administration wants the ability to shut the internet down at will (in the event of an emergency as determined by the president). This is also the the goal of internet 2.0, greater control and snooping by the government.
-
Well it looks like Ron Pauls bill will get to the floor.
Quote:You did it! Bill to audit the Fed to go to house floorDaily Paul
June 11, 2009
[…]
On record so far on THOMAS (Library of Congress).
Title: To amend title 31, United States Code, to reform the manner in which the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is audited by the Comptroller General of the United States and the manner in which such audits are reported, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Paul, Ron [TX-14] (introduced 2/26/2009) Cosponsors (208)
Latest Major Action: 2/26/2009 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
-
kd7one wrote on Jun 8 2009, 08:59 PM:Admin wrote on Jun 7 2009, 08:30 AM:Senior Architect Proves 911 is an Inside Job With Evidence
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM
The following link was also mentioned in the video:
The owner of the World Trade Center even admitted that Building # 7 was demolished on purpose: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2q2mD2HaKA…PL&index=36
It was clearly an inside job, we must wake up the people. This event was designed to provide cover in order that our chains could be forged, and we would put them on. Look how we have taken on the fascist model? Would we have done this without 9-11?
-
kd7one wrote on Jun 7 2009, 10:01 AM:Here is a video that describes the 10 steps that every dictatorship takes to destroy a country: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjALf12PAWc
It is already happening here in the USA
The full movie can be viewed at http://www.snagfilms.com/films/title/the_end_of_america/
It is 1 hour and 13 minutes long.
This is outstanding information, and timely, too.
-
I wish you could be on the jury! Clearly, the government is on a witchhunt. Further, this is an example of double jeopardy.
-
Admin wrote on Jun 2 2009, 11:23 PM:Are you ready for the spychip driver's license?
No, I am not ready for any of this Real ID nonsense.
Everyone should let Congress know that we don't like this crap!