The American Ruling Class

[rickoff]

Quotable quote of the day......

"The affirmative task we have now, is uhhh, is to actually, uhm, uh, to create, uhh, uhh, a New World Order." - Joe Biden, speaking at the Export Import Bank Conference in Washington DC on April 5, 2013

Speaking like a true zombie, and reading from a prepared speech, Joe Bite'em reveals the administration's primary goal.

[aljhoa]

"The affirmative task we have now, is uhhh, is to actually, uhm, uh, to create, uhh, uhh, a New World Order." - Joe Biden, speaking at the Exprt Import Bank Conference in Washington DC on April 5, 2013

Last week, the hacker organization “Anonymous,” symbolized by the famous “Guy Fawkes” mask, hacked Israel’s Mossad.
The hack, initially exposing a hidden network of 30,000 covert operatives, some openly labeled “hitman,” came only days after Israel admitted to their 2010 act of piracy and terrorism against the Freedom Flotilla.
Veterans Today

Al

[aljhoa]

Corps West Coast - Fukushima Fallout

Published on Apr 3, 2013
A VERY IMPORTANT Study: 28% Increase In Thyroid Problems In Babies Born After Fukushima in Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon and Washington

28% Rise In Thyroid Problems in Babies Born After Fukushima in US West Coast! update 4/3/13 - YouTube

Al

[rickoff]

Interesting survey results

PoliceOne.com, a web site exclusively for federal, state, and local law enforcement, took a member survey this March to gather responses to questions regarding several gun control topics. There were 15,000 respondents, and here are a few of the more interesting results:

• 86 percent feel the currently proposed legislation would have no effect or a negative effect on improving officer safety.
• Similarly, 92 percent feel that banning semi-automatic firearms, or “assault weapons,” would have no effect or a negative effect on reducing violent crime.
• 71 percent support law enforcement leaders who have publicly refused to enforce more restrictive gun laws within their jurisdictions.
• 91 percent support the concealed carry of firearms by civilians who have not been convicted of a felony and/or have not been deemed psychologically incapable.
• Likewise, 80 percent feel that legally-armed citizens would likely have reduced the number of casualties in recent mass shooting incidents.

The survey was promoted by PoliceOne.com exclusively to its 400,000 registered members, comprised of individually-verified law enforcement professionals. Only current, former or retired law enforcement personnel were eligible to participate in the survey. Of those who took the survey, 80 percent were current law enforcement officers and 20 percent were former/retired law enforcement.

With the US Senate aiming to force a vote on gun control legislation today, and only 14 Senators willing to stand with Rand Paul in a filibuster, it is likely that 'Dirty Harry' Reid will eventually succeed in passing at least some of the unconstitutional legislation that has been proposed, and thereby diminishing the Second Amendment rights of Americans while doing absolutely nothing to counter gun related violence. How ironic that law enforcement professionals, the very group that is called upon to respond and deal with shooting incidents, and enforce the laws, understands what gun control legislation will not accomplish, while those who make those laws seem to have no idea what they are actually doing - or do they?

[dutchdivco]

Rick

This survey supports what I was saying, in a post awhile back. While you can't make an ACCURATE 'blanket statement' about any large group of people, (Like; ALL police officers, or ALL repubs, etc.) it is a safe bet that many, probably even a majority of those who go into lwa enforcement come from a 'gun culture'; they own guns, their family memebers and friends own guns, etc.
And they see this recent effort fro what it is, politiaclly exploiting New Town, for POLITICAL ends.
And, I gotta say, as much as I get p*ssed off, at the 'sheeple', I THINK in this instance, while liberal commentators are bemoaning people not 'keeping up their enthusiasm' for G.C., the reality is that while people right after New Town MAY have been responding to poll ?'s emotionally, they've now given the subject more thought, and see through the lies being used to try to justify legislation, and recognise its NOT going to 'make anyone safer'.

They SEE Bite'em talking about how "ALL the Police chiefs he met with, are BEGGING for assault weapons ban, cause their officers are being 'out-gunned', and then recall the pics OF the New Town Police responce; a SMALL police force, in a small town in rural conneticut, and yet they sure didn't LOOK like they were in a position to be 'out-gunned'! And they see interviews of the police Chief of Chicago, saying he DID NOT ask O'bummer for such legislation, that he specifically said HE didn't want any 'new' legislation, only that the Feds enforce the laws already on the books, etc.

And you can't fool all the people, all the time. I could be wrong, of coarse, but I doubt they will be able to pass legislation that is very far reaching, or any major increase on impinging on the 2nd amendment.

By that I mean we already have a requirement for background checks; and if we start with that IS an 'infringement', expanding background checks is a slight expansion of that infringement, but its NOT a 'national registry', or door to door confiscation.

And yes, I KNOW your going to say rights get eroded a little at a time, etc.

Just saying, over all, I am not at all sure this is a 'win' for O'bummer and co.
They 'deserve a vote', and they'll get a vote. And then we'll see what happens in 2014! I THINK those who are prepared to vote a representative out, for voting 'for' G.C., may have much longer memories, and much greater tendency to be a one issue voter, than those who support G.C., right now.

So, this COULD be one issue that causes the Dems to lose the Senate majority in 2014! So, let 'em vote, and we'll see what happens! Jim

[Mad Scientist]

How ironic that law enforcement professionals, the very group that is called upon to respond and deal with shooting incidents, and enforce the laws, understands what gun control legislation will not accomplish, while those who make those laws seem to have no idea what they are actually doing - or do they?

I suspect they do or at least some of them. They want us to believe that guns are dangerous and that we cannot be trusted with them. Meanwhile DHS buys billions of rounds of ammunition, thousands of these "scary" assault rifles and special mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) armored personnel carriers. Just what do they plan to use all this stuff for.
If they want to ban guns I think the DHS would be a real good place to start.

[Mad Scientist]

Gerald Celente’s Trends In The News (4/8/13) 15min.

News and commentary. Now if the man would only tell how he really feels and believes.


Gerald Celente - Trends In The News - "Let's Rebuild America!" - (4/8/13) - YouTube!

[rickoff]

If they want to ban guns I think the DHS would be a real good place to start.

Amen to that!

[rickoff]

We've seen a lot of presidential eligibility cases come and go with none of the issues ever being settled, but there's a new case brewing in Alabama that could prove to be an exception. The 2012 Constitution Party presidential nominee, Virgil Goode, and Alabama Republican Party leader Hugh McInnish, are asking the Alabama Supreme Court to force Secretary of State Beth Chapman to verify that all candidates on the state's 2012 ballot were eligible to serve. Evidence had been presented to the Alabama Secretary of State's office before the 2012 election showing that Barry was not qualified to be on the ballot, but the Secretary of State refused to investigate the matter, or to require validation of eligibility from any candidates, and therefore violated both the Alabama and US constitutions.

A case was brought against the Secretary of State in the Montgomery Circuit Court, which dismissed the case, but an appeal of that decision was filed with the Alabama Supreme Court on April 9th by attorney Larry Klayman, founder of Judicial Watch, and currently head of Freedom Watch. Klayman believes that this case will succeed where others have failed, mainly because the case will be heard in a court where Judge Roy Moore presides as Chief Justice. Moore was elected chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court last November, a decade after he defied a federal order to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the state Supreme Court building, and Moore is already on the record as questioning Barry's eligibility. Moore said, in a World Net Daily interview, that he had seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a natural-born citizen and much evidence that suggests he is not. It would therefore seem probable that the case would be given a fair hearing if allowed to proceed.

Barry's lawyers are likely to claim that the case is moot for the reason that the election has already been held and decided, but Klayman correctly argues that factor has no bearing, saying, "It would be paradoxical beyond measure if the real and grave question of the legitimacy of the de facto President, a question which lies at the very heart of our American Constitutional Government, were left unresolved for want of the simplest of documents, a birth certificate." If the case proceeds, Barry's lawyers would likely be forced to finally either submit a bona fide certificate as evidence of eligibility, or admit that none exists. That presents a sticky situation for Barry, because of the fact that both the short form and long form certificates, which he alleged to be "real" and "true" copies of his birth records, have been proven to be forgeries. So if Barry can produce a seemingly "legitimate" certificate then it will not resemble either of the previous two certificates released to the public. That of course would raise some serious questions, such as why Barry released falsified certificates and lied to the public about them when he could have produced a factual birth record. Also, if a true record can be shown, what information would it actually show? Barry probably does have access to his true birth record, but obviously it would show information which he desperately wants hidden from public exposure. That information could possibly be a foreign birth, a father who was not Barack Obama Senior as claimed, an adoption by Indonesian citizen Lolo Soetoro, or could result in something even more damaging to Barry's claims.

Barry's lawyers will try every trick in the book to avoid having to reveal the truth, and so far that has worked in Barry's favor. But while other judges have been bought or intimidated, this probably won't work in Judge Moore's court. My guess is that the likely outcome could be a default judgement in favor of Klayman's case, for failure (refusal, actually) of Barry's lawyers to produce the requested eligibility documentation, followed by Barry's lawyers appealing to the SCOTUS in hopes of an overturn. Absent a decision to overturn, the Alabama Secretary of State would be forced to disqualify Barry from having received any votes. Of course Barry only received less than 40% of Alabama's popular vote anyways, which allowed Mitt to capture all of Alabama's 9 electoral college votes, so it would not sway the election to another candidate. But with Alabama paving the way and setting a precedent, other states could then fall in line and pull enough votes away from Barry to cancel his win. Whatever comes from all of this, it is definitely going to prove interesting.

[rickoff]

Here's the official list of turncoat Senate Republicans who sided with Progressive Socialist Democrats and voted against allowing the gun control filibuster to take place:

Alexander (TN), Ayotte (NH), Burr (NC), Chambliss (GA), Collins (ME), Corker (TN), Coburn (OK), Flake (AZ), Isakson (GA), McCain (AZ), Heller (NV), Hoeven (ND), Kirk (IL), Graham (SC), Toomey (PA) and Wicker (MS).

Only two Democrats voted against proceeding to debate on Harry Reid's gun control bill, S-649: Sen Begich (D-AK) and Sen. Pryor (D-AR).

Reid needed 60 votes to thwart the filibuster, and the 16 turncoat Republicans made that possible. The vote tally was 68 to 31.

Sad to say that both my Maine Senators voted to proceed on the gun control bill. But don't blame me, as I didn't vote for either of them. To see the complete list showing how all Senators voted, go here.

[Mad Scientist]

WE’RE DOOMED! Maybe the PTB are correct and the sheeple are too stupid, or have been dumbed down to a point, were they are totally incompetent of making rational decisions or even asking simple questions.
Here are some interesting “man-in-the street” interviews.


» Californians Sign Petition to Ban and Confiscate Firearms Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

[dutchdivco]

Rick and Mad Scientist

MS; have you seen the various 'man in the street' interviews, where they took the Bill of Rights, modernised the language (in order to 'diguise' the origin, and asked people if they were 'in favor'? something like 80% said "NO"!

The Sheeple AREdumb, no doubt! Most college graduates could NOT pass the 'citisenship test' every legal alien has to pass; example; "Name the 3 branches of Gov't, and what they are 'responsible' for. Real hard questions like that, most college grads can't answer!

Rick;
Maybe its the optimist in me coming out, but I'm thinking not filibustering this G.C legislation MIGHT be a good thing; in 3 weeks of 'debate', arguments 'pro-gun' MAY get w 'wider' hearing.

Such as that filling out the paperwork for a background check, in an attempt to purchase a firearm, and then being denied (because your a convicted felon) is, in and of itself a CRIME. And yet FEDERAL Gov't. doesn't prosecute these cases; they don't have the time or resources, they say.

So, lets see; You have clear evidence of someone who is not 'supposed' to have a firearm attempting to get one.You KNOW where he lives, and how to 'put your hands on him' . His/her signature, on the form, is all the evidence you need to send them back to jail. And its only reasonable to assume they are not going to stop in their attempt to obtain a weapon.But your 'too busy' to be bothered with arresting and prosecuting.

And yet you say you want to reduce gun violence, by INCREASING the 'background check' system???

Its POSSIBLE that giving these kind of issues a 'fuller' airing, will only make MORE clear, the hypocrisy of these 'pro G.C.' advocates. One can hope, and i KNOW such optimism is uncharacteristic of me; I MUST be 'coming down with something!"

Seriously, I see lots of P'ing and moaning, of people assuming the initial 'impetus' (according to polls) 'for' G.C. 'slipped', and making the assumption that people are not as 'fired up' as they were right after New Town' cause they are moving on to other things, or whatever.

But I THINK maybe its because the initial responce was an 'emotional' one, and given a little time, they talked it over with neighbors, friends and co-workers, and really THOUGHT about it, and SOME of the arguments that these proposals are going to do NOTHING to make anyone 'safer', sunk in.

This, of coarse, is something GC advocates are 'blind' to recognising, and so THEY are actually bemoaning the 'sheeple'; isn't THAT ironic!!

Anyway, I'm going to 'reserve' judgment, that this 'decision' to 'allow' debate is in any way a victory for the GC advocates. I think their Hubris and 'blindness' may just be as big a problem for them as it can sometimes be for Conservatives, on this issue, at least. In short, lets have a REAL debate; They, (G.C advocates) have been benefitting from 'sound biting' the policy questions, and by telling lots of lies. A REAL debate makes that much harder to get away with. And then (I STILL think) by all means, "They deserve a VOTE!"; actually, 2 votes; one on the legislation, and the second in 2014, when we may well see any Dem in a red state who votes FOR the GC legislation defeated!Jim

[rickoff]

WE’RE DOOMED! Maybe the PTB are correct and the sheeple are too stupid, or have been dumbed down to a point, were they are totally incompetent of making rational decisions or even asking simple questions.
Here are some interesting “man-in-the street” interviews.


» Californians Sign Petition to Ban and Confiscate Firearms Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

Just goes to show how easily people can be misled into believing that they are "doing the right thing," supporting "worthy causes," and voting for the candidates who will make life "better for them."

[aljhoa]

The Sheeple AREdumb, no doubt!

Aaron Harvey from Florida found a note scrawled in Crayon in his son’s back pack that read
“I am willing to give up some of my constitutional rights
in order to be safer or more secure.”
» Father Sickened By Anti-Constitutional Note From Son’s School Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

Al

[rickoff]

Quotable quotes of the day.....

“The longer you stay in school in America, the dumber you get.” - Bill Bennett, the secretary of education under Reagan

Isn't that the honest truth! More than 700,000 students who graduate high school each year cannot even read their own diplomas.

“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.”
– Harry Truman, in a speech opposing communism

I'd say that our "government" is already well along that path, wouldn't you?