Archive for June, 2016

This story is not getting much play. Thought it needed to be shared with those who want to pay attention:

Islamist extremists hide huge stockpile of weapons near German mosque

A HUGE stash of weapons reportedly belonging to Islamist extremists have been found hidden near a mosque in Germany.

PUBLISHED: 18:11, Wed, Jun 29, 2016 | UPDATED: 18:26, Wed, Jun 29, 2016

The stockpile of weapons was found near a mosquePH

The stockpile of weapons was found near a mosque

The weapons arsenal was discovered during a top secret raid by a SWAT team in Nordrhein-Westfalen.

Local politician Ismail Tipi revealed details of the raid and warned of “the danger of fundamentalists”.

The weapons were found in a cold room of a greengrocer near a mosque.

The state is the most populous state in Germany with nearly 18million people in the area, which includes Dusseldorf.

A weapons arsenal with war grade weapons was found in this search

Ismail Tipi

Mr Tipi, who is a member of the Hessian parliament, warned of the dangers of Salafi fundamentalists.

Germany has seen sharp increases in the number of ultra-conservative Islamists known as Salafists in recent years, with the total number of sympathisers now seen at 8,900, up from 7,000 at the end of 2014, German officials said.

He said: “According to my information, a weapons arsenal with war grade weapons was found in this search.

“The danger of fundamentalist Salafists who are ready to use violence arming themselves in Germany is very large. This secret raid finding this weapons cache makes this more than clear.”

Ismail Tipi raised concerns sleeper cells are gearing up for a terror attack on GermanyPH

Ismail Tipi raised concerns sleeper cells are gearing up for a terror attack on Germany

Three Syrian men were earlier this month suspected of planning large-scale attacks in DusseldorfGETTY

Three Syrian men were earlier this month suspected of planning large-scale attacks in Dusseldorf

Mr Tipi, who is said to have received death threats for his comments against jihadis, raised concerns sleeper cells are gearing up for a terror attack on Germany.

He said: “The information about this is increasing. The fear is large that Salafist sleeper cells, jihadis, and get support from foreign intelligence services that are not friendly to us.

“Through the weapons arsenal, the sleeper cells and militant jihadis can be armed with weapons and prepare for their likely attack. This is exactly what I have always feared.”

He added: “Politicians must speak clearly about this.

(read the rest here)

I don’t know what happened in Orlando, but a lot of things look very strange. Seems the only way to know the truth about a situation is if you were actually present. Here is an article that you may find interesting. Link is in the title below:

Judge: FBI Transcript Shows Nobody Died in Orlando Shooting Until SWAT Teams entered the Building

What should have been front page news everywhere, somehow got buried amid the official narrative we were given about the Orlando shooting. Judge Andrew Napolitano told FOX News that an FBI transcript indicated that no one died until 05:13am Sunday morning when the police SWAT teams entered the building.

“Here’s what is news in the summary – nobody died until 05:13 in the morning, when the SWAT team entered. Prior to that no one had been killed. The 53 that were injured, and the 49 that were murdered all met their fates at the time of, and during, the police entry into the building,” Judge Napolitano said.

Consider that the narrative we have been given was that Omar Mateen entered the club around 02:00am on Sunday morning to begin his killing spree, so why was no one actually killed until 05:13am, over three hours later?

Here’s the official transcript.



So, this makes one question why the 911 call transcripts are being redacted and why the people are not being told the truth across the media about what really took place.

We have been told that 5 to 6 police officers were already in the club for 15 to 20 minutes or more prior to the SWAT teams’ entering.

So, what is the truth here?  Some claim that 05:13am is the time of death, but how is that when that suspect was not even down until 05:15am?  Could it be that some of the people in the club were shot by the SWAT team or by Mateen?  With nearly50 people dead and more wounded, how was Mateen able to get off that many shots?  I’m really curious.

Take a listen to the entrance of the SWAT team into the club.

If that was not enough, police officers have even admitted that they may have killed some of the people. WFAA reports:

Monday, Orlando Police Chief John Mina and other law enforcement officers offered new details about the shooting, including the possibility that some victims may have been killed by officers trying to save them.

“I will say this, that’s all part of the investigation,” Mina said. “But I will say when our SWAT officers, about eight or nine officers, opened fire, the backdrop was a concrete wall, and they were being fired upon.”

A law enforcement source close to the investigation who asked not to be named said a crowd of up to 300 people and the complex layout of the dance club may have resulted in some patrons being struck by gunfire from officers.

Sheriff Mack Will Speak In  Thayer City Park June 25 1 pm
Sheriff Richard Mack will speak June 25 at 1 pm in Thayer City Park in the pavilion at the top of the hill near the swimming pool. Sheriff Mack is known nationally as America’s Sheriff and is the only sheriff to win in the Supreme Court challenging the Clinton Administration over ufunded enforcement of the Brady Bill. He is also the founder of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, a group that includes Minneapolis Sheriff David Clark, and Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona. Mack, Arpaio and Clark are all frequently on national news programs including the Today Show, Fox News Channel, CNN, Freedom Watch with Judge Andrew Napolitano and more than 500 radio talk shows.
Mack is a trainer in constitutional issues for law enforcement and author of several books. He is best known for challenging the Brady Bill, a gun control measure  requiring local law enforcement to perform background checks on prospective gun purchasers. He maintained that the Federal Government had no authority to command local officials, and became the first sheriff in American history to sue the Federal Government and win at the US Supreme Court. The case was based on the Tenth Amendment, states rights and local sovereignty.
Mack is the son of an FBI agent and began his own law enforcement career as a street cop in Provo, Utah. After graduating from BYU in 1978, Mack became an officer with Provo P. D. He was soon promoted to corporal, sergeant, and detective. He spent one year as an undercover narcotics agent. In 1988, Mack moved home to Arizona where he ran for sheriff. He was elected Graham County Sheriff and served as such for eight years. It was during this time – in 1994 – that federal agents informed all sheriffs that they would be required to work for the Federal Government under the mandate of the Brady Bill, and Mack’s court case began.
Since that landmark ruling Mack has written six books and appeared at over 120 Tea Party rallies nationwide. He has stood against the incursions of the Federal Government and has fought for civil rights from Hawaii to Bangor, Maine.
The public is invited and the event is free of charge. Sheriff Mack especially invites law enforcement officers and military veterans to attend. For more information call 417-264-2435.
The Ozarks Property Rights Coalition will meet Thursday June 23 at 7 pm at the El Rancho Restaurant in Cabool, Missouri according to co-chair Bob Parker.  Topics for the evening will be property rights issues in the state followed by the main speaker of the evening  Dave Lohr, an expert in survival and wilderness bushcraft, who will discuss surviving during emergencies with few resources. Lohr owns Kosh Trading Post in Koshkonong and is  a frequent speaker at Mountain Man and Native American events. Lohr will also instruct listeners in how to create dehydrated eggs, pemmican and parched corn, which he describes at the “original preparedness long term storage food.”    
 “This is a new meeting location for us” Parker said. “The El Rancho Restaurant is in the Sinclair truck stop building in Cabool on Highway 60 on the north side of the highway. They are generously allowing us to use their meeting room and we encourage everyone to come early and enjoy the buffet. Note that El Rancho is a bit east of the Hwy 63 exit in Cabool. ” For more information call 417-264-2435.

We’ll Keep Our Guns, Thanks

Posted: June 15, 2016 in Fire Arms

Good article below. Let us know if you agree or disagree.

We’ll Keep the 2nd Amendment and Our Guns

An article at CounterPunch titled “Eliminate the Second Amendment and Keep Your Guns” by Tom H. Hastings offers more of the same flawed gun-control arguments we’ve come to expect from the opposition. Here, we’ll refute them, point by point.

Hasting writes:

OK, I confess I fail to see the thrill or need associated with gun ownership and use…

If there were no police, you might have a change of heart.

but we live in a free country—sort of—and I get why those who hunt need long guns.

Except the Second Amendment wasn’t written for hunters. George Mason wasn’t worried about the feds taking away people’s right to a well-dressed deer.

But I teach, write, and live trying to practice nonviolence between and among humans at least.

I suppose that’s admirable. What happens when Person A practices nonviolence but Person B doesn’t and uses violence to violate Person A’s rights?

I’m sure there are people who prefer not to talk or write, but their personal preferences shouldn’t have any bearing on other people’s right to do either of those two.

I’ve had guns pulled on me and fired at me twice and have never ever wanted to shoot anyone. That direct violence is beyond my understanding so I fully acknowledge my bias against guns, especially handguns.

So you’ve met Person B, it seems. One can understand why you don’t want to shoot somebody, but that doesn’t change the fact that they’re trying to hurt you. Wouldn’t it have been nice to have had a gun to defend yourself? Why advocate disarming more people like yourself? And if you have no desire to fight back, that’s your decision. But what exactly authorizes you to make that decision for somebody else? Person C might like to have the option to defend herself against person B.

I believe in regulating those things that prove they harm others. No one should be free to harm others—that is not freedom, it is unwarranted arrogated license. The freedom of your hands stops where my nose begins, as they say.

The problem is criminals don’t care about regulations. On a side note, they also tend to prefer their victims are unarmed.

My real point on the Second Amendment is that it effectively blocks sane control of weaponry.

“Sane” control of weaponry always involves restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens (which is what Hastings is advocating). It never involves restrictions on government no matter how many innocent people it hurts. This is why we duly appreciate the efforts of Founding Fathers like George Mason to prevent “sane” controls from happening.

Repealing the Second Amendment would not affect anything that most gun owners feel is desirable.

Aside from indiscriminate weapons, any weapon the U.S. military has or will have I feel is desirable. I also feel most gun owners feel the same.

Glad we got that clarified.

But the Second Amendment as interpreted by the Supremes does make it possible for the gun industry, through its most powerful lobbyist–the NRA–to claim that laws restricting anything to do with guns are odious and part of an unconstitutional slippery slope.

It seems the Supreme Court is somewhat literate, because the amendment says the right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed.”

The track record is so clear. The Second Amendment protects the gun manufacturers and sellers at the expense of a lot of lives every year.

Tell that to the men and women who have been able to defend themselves and their loved ones because they were able to purchase weapons from gun sellers and made by gun manufacturers. I’m sure they will disagree.

Suicide is possible without guns, clearly. What if greatly limiting handguns, or using available technology so only the registered owner could fire it, could save just 1000 of the estimated 21,175 firearm suicides or just 100,000 of the estimated 836,000 ER visits from self-inflicted gun wounds in the most recent CDC data? Would rational Americans perhaps think about that and fix at least part of the gun problem?

As you’ve already noted, people don’t commit suicide because they got a gun. They commit suicide because they have major underlying issues that drive them to kill themselves. If they can’t get a gun they’ll use something else. There is a reason San Francisco is building a net to prevent suicidal people from jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge.

Instead of trying to take the means away from them perhaps we should be more interested in figuring out what drives people to kill themselves. Taking the bottle away from the alcoholic doesn’t cure them of the problems that make them want to drink in the first place.

By the way, Hastings is (perhaps unwittingly) arguing from a social utility perspective in which rights are contingent on their overall social benefit. Under this same logic I could argue that putting certain groups of people in jail without due process or trail would be acceptable if it resulted in a lower crime rate. Once you allow for social utility to determine rights anything is up for discussion.

Finally, some serious brave NRA members are challenging the wingnut level of gun lobbying by the NRA, including some who flat out quit the group publicly when NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre said the two terrorists who shot up San Bernadino, California, killing 14 and wounding 21, should not have been stopped from purchasing their assault rifles.

This is misconstruing the issue at hand. It’s not about whether those two specific individuals should have been prevented from obtaining guns. It’s about whether or not innocent people should have their rights taken away or restricted after the fact because other people broke the law. It’s about whether gun control laws would have prevented two criminals from obtaining firearms.

Clearly the two killers didn’t care about our laws against murder. Why would they let gun laws stop them?

Perhaps that’s why the California State Legislature just voted to exempt itself from the gun-control laws that apply to ordinary people in the state.

But the politicians who take on the NRA are open to serious retributive electoral pressure and the ones who toe the line for the NRA are richly rewarded by an annual NRA lobbying expenditure of at least $735,000, possibly as much as $3 million. That is a lot of junkets, TV ads, and fat honoraria.

But more Americans are rejecting the politicians who accept big NRA donations—their success rate is falling, and no wonder. Every new mass shooting brings out the most twisted defense of “gun rights” and the most warped disregard for the right to life imaginable by the NRA leadership.

Every new massing shooting demonstrates why it’s important for people to exercise their right to bear arms so they can shoot back. This tends to deter mass shooters and terrorists who want unarmed, defenseless prey.

How many shootings have taken place at gun shows compared to gun-free zones?

However we get there, we need to stop the massive flow of weaponry into our streets and we need to do it on a large scale.

My memory fails me but I think we tried that with alcohol and weed and it didn’t work out well.

Strict gun laws in one town are nice but when we have a 50-state open border country, guns flow into places like Chicago despite good local efforts to stop the murders and suicides.

If that’s the case, why is it that cities with strong gun control laws like Chicago have higher levels of gun violence than those with fewer gun control laws? Also, why is it that countries like Switzerland have a high gun ownership rate yet also a low crime rate?

There are almost 400 million guns out there so it will take a long time to bring down the numbers but we can do it if we get sane and serious about it.

So it’s not about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. It’s about reducing the numbers of privately-owned guns. Got it.

I know no gun opponent who favors disarming the rural hunter putting provender on his or her family table.

Can we drop the whole hunting issue already? It’s a distraction, nothing more. The Second Amendment says a “well-regulated militia” is the necessity of a “free state,” not a “well-armed hunter is the necessity of a well-fed state.”

The Founders wanted us to have guns so we could be sufficiently armed to overthrow a tyrannical government just as they had done. You don’t have to like that, but it is why they were so adamant about ensuring we could have guns.

I can hope that those, in fact, will be some of the voices calling for far greater sensible gun control so they can take a trip into a city and make it back alive—or so they can send their child to college in some town and not fear so much.

Hastings’ proposal to abolish the Second Amendment falls under the same misunderstanding as so many other gun control advocates. The amendment doesn’t give us our right to have guns. It merely acknowledges that right so government can’t later claim ignorance when it tries to restrict it.

Abolishing the Second Amendment removes that right just as much as eliminating the First Amendment denies me the right to free speech.

Even so, we should keep the Second Amendment as a reminder to the federal government we’re going to keep our guns with it or without it.

Howell County C4L Meeting

Posted: June 15, 2016 in Uncategorized
The Howell County Campaign for Liberty Group will meet Thursday
The Howell County Campaign for Liberty Group will meet Thursday, June 16. At 7:00pm with speakers  Billy Sexton (incumbent) and Burl Owenby, candidates for the office of Howell County Southern Commissioner. There will be time for questions and answers.  The group meets at  Chen’s Garden, 1705 Gibson, in West Plains according to chair Don Eagleman.
The meeting will also include an update on campaign events including the upcoming rally by Sheriff Richard Mack in Oregon County, and preparedness training upcoming in Cabool, and candidate debates in surrounding counties.
Speakers in future months will include other County Commission candidates and the two candidates competing for State Representative, incumbent Shawn Rhodes and challenger Terry Hampton. All are welcome and encouraged to arrive early for the buffet according to Eagleman.
Auditor Galloway identifies concerns with oversight procedures in audit of Oregon County
Recommendations also made to increase data security and citizen access to government information
JEFFERSON CITY, MO (June 9, 2016) Missouri State Auditor Nicole Galloway announced today that her office has released its audit of the government of Oregon County. The county, which is located on the Missouri-Arkansas border, received an overall performance rating of “good.”
Auditors raised a number of concerns about accounting procedures in the sheriff’s office, which have been raised in past audits. The sheriff relies on one employee, a bookkeeper, to perform nearly all accounting duties for the office, from receiving and depositing money to making payments and reconciling bank accounts. Without sufficient oversight of that employee’s work, the office faces an increased risk of loss or misuse of funds. Auditors recommended the office establish additional procedures to ensure money is appropriately received and recorded.
“In small offices where one or two employees have a great deal of responsibility, it’s critical that supervisors provide oversight and review,” Auditor Galloway said. “We want to create safeguards against loss or misuse of funds, and I’m encouraged Oregon County is taking our recommendations seriously and instituting new procedures to help protect public dollars.”
Auditors recommended changes to procedures in other county offices as well, including increased monitoring of the county’s fuel use and enhanced password protection measures to prevent unauthorized access to employees’ computers. Auditors also found the county commission violated the Sunshine Law in a number of areas, failing to post notification or agendas for meetings and failing to document reasons for holding a number of closed sessions.
The complete audit report can be found online here.