Until My Last Dying Gasp


President Trump has drawn back a bit on his support for the NRA in reaction to the recent Parkland Massacre in which 17 people (students & adults) were killed by an ex-student of the High School Nikolas Cruz. Second Amendment proponents view this as a betrayal. Justin Smith shares his feelings on the issue.

 

On a personal level I believe something must be done to protect soft targets (like schools, but there are many more soft targets) from terrorism and nut jobs. HOWEVER, gun confiscation or restriction is NOT the solution. I won’t delve into alternative solutions here, but I will state my largest concern about gun control that will affect in law abiding American.

 

Especially due to Obama weaponizing government agencies – including law enforcement and intel agencies – I have zero trust in government to not force some unwanted way of life down my throat. Gun control will lead to tyrannical totalitarianism. Justin Smith’s thoughts below should warn of future potential government tyranny that begins with gun control.

 

JRH 3/3/18

Please Support NCCR

****************

Until My Last Dying Gasp

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent March 2, 2018 7:18 PM

 

Let me be as clear as I can be. I don’t give a good damn how many Americans have died in recent shootings, when their lives are placed next to the liberty of millions of Americans, for generations to come. President Trump and Democrat and Republican senior senators, those who beamed at the prospect of exerting greater gun control during their February 28th meeting, seemed to forget that so many more lives have been saved by the right to self-defense, as they attacked the Second Amendment, due process under the law and individual liberty; and regardless of any new illegitimate and unconstitutional “law” they may implement, through coercion or “might makes right” action, they will still be wrong and spitting in the faces of the Founders and the American people.

 

Today’s criminals are nearly always armed with semi-automatic weapons, so police are not the only ones who need AR-15s. Criminals victimize the public, and if citizens are to stand a fighting chance against criminals, they too need effective weapons.

 

However, America now finds itself saddled with a Trump administration, which is not so different from a Clinton administration on the Second Amendment after all. Trump endorsed the “assault weapons” ban, background checks for private sales at gun shows and raising the age for purchasing firearms to twenty-one. He also contended Congress was “petrified of the NRA”, as he tore into fellow Republicans as tools of the NRA and handed Democrats a propaganda victory.

 

As Katie Pavlich, journalist and Fox News contributor, recently noted [Outnumbered Video], despite the AR-15s popularity, data from Homeland Security shows that handguns are the weapon of choice when it comes to mass shootings. She also stated: “And let’s not forget that during the church massacre in Texas … it was an NRA-certified instructor who used an AR-15 to stop the killing … “.

 

During the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court stated that the right to self-defense pre-existed government, which had already been confirmed by U.S. v. Cruikshank in 1875 and never overturned. The court went further in Heller, and it articulated the right of the individual to use firearms, that are at the same level of sophistication as firearms one’s potential adversary might have, whether that person is a criminal bad guy, psychopath or a soldier of a tyrannical government. And this must negate any attempt to ban semi-automatic rifles, even those deemed “assault weapons”.

 

The suggestion to raise the age limit is a non sequitur argument, and once again, a punishment of law abiding Americans. Age is not indicative of good sense or good moral character. Timothy McVeigh was in his late twenties when he bombed the Murrah Federal Building and the Las Vegas shooter was sixty-four. Aside from this, guns aren’t the problem any more than age can denote one’s mental stability, or lack thereof.

 

Forty-eight years ago at the age of thirteen, I would often walk through the main streets of Dixon, Missouri, with my twelve gauge shotgun slung across one arm and on my way to the fields and backwoods trails to shoot wild hogs, and I would happily wave at the police and sheriff’s deputies, as they drove by. No one thought this to be anything unusual.

 

Mental illness and its role in gun violence was also part of the discussion, and President Trump revealed his despotic side, when he explicitly denounced due process of the law, saying: “… take the firearms first, and then go to court … because a lot of times, by the time you go to court, it takes so long to go to court to get the due process procedures, I like taking the guns early … take the guns first, go through due process second.”

 

Who deems these people dangerous? the government? family? friends? It takes more than just one assertion, one allegation, and it must receive due process consideration, as guaranteed by the Constitution. Otherwise, the mere accusation of mental illness might become a subterfuge to disarm thousands of normal people, perhaps political opponents, by any future administration.

 

Trump’s far left suggestion to grab guns without legal cause was radical, idiotic, fascistic and unconstitutional. Such a comment from any Democrat president would have resulted in armed stand-offs with the police, calls for impeachment and a fury from the American people hotter than a thousand 100 megaton nukes exploding.

 

Senator Ben Sasse, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, was the only Republican to openly oppose President Trump, as he stated: “Strong leaders don’t automatically agree with the last thing that was said to them. We have a Second Amendment and due process of the law for a reason. We’re not ditching any Constitutional protections simply because the last person the President talked to today doesn’t like them.”

 

At what point are Trump’s supporters going to hold him accountable for his outlandish statements? At what point will they stop excusing him?

 

God forbid that America should ever descend into real tyranny, however, Trump’s remarks show precisely the reason America must not allow the Second Amendment to be eroded. Modern history is replete with examples of fascist and communist regimes that exterminated a combined total of 160 million of their own people, between 1940 and 1980 [Closest citation I could in cursory search], and, in light of our own early history under the British, it is ever more important for Americans to retain the right to possess modern semi-automatic weapons, to ensure that our government never feels it is more powerful than its citizens.

 

Foremost among our unalienable rights, the Framers of the Constitution recognized our right to life and to defend life — one’s self, one’s family and one’s property — by ratifying the Second Amendment. They wrote the amendment understanding that it did not grant this right and the right to self-defense was not dependent on that instrument for its existence. It was written to ensure that all future U.S. governments would respect the right to keep and bear arms, as a natural extension of the right to self-defense, in natural law and God’s law, standing alone and independent of the Constitution.

 

President Trump is a damned dangerous fool, and anyone who seeks to undermine our right to self-defense and to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes, through Trump’s proposals, isn’t a friend to the American people. Those who seek added “security”, in any manner other than targeting the criminals, who mock our existing gun laws, rape laws, robbery laws and homicide laws, only ensure security will not exist, our liberty will be eroded, and we will cease to be a free people. And for everyone who thinks Trump and his fellow despots are right, you can relinquish your rights like sheep, and I’ll keep and defend my God-given Rights Until MY LAST DYING GASP.

_____________________

John R. Houk, Editor

All source links or any text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

Tony Newbill Comment to “More on why we are where we are with Tyranny Today in America”


Jefferson on Tyranny & Liberty

This post is somewhat a Part II to Tony Newbill’s defense of Ranchers and Farmers as an explanation or reason that these land owners are upset with Government appropriation of land that has been in the traditional usage in the public domain or even stolen from private ownership.

 

JRH 3/23/16

Please Support NCCR

********************

Tony Newbill Comment to “More on why we are where we are with Tyranny Today in America

 

n3angus

March 18, 2016 at 12:16 PM

 

Understanding what we are up against by reading the First Link PLAYING OUTSIDE THE RULES. Read the back and forth debate between Walley and Suckling … When you get done reading this back and forth, I would say that the ego of environmentalism has become more important than the realities of what sustainability means and the courts need to be asked to consider this line of thought when they are deciding on the use of resources going forward here!!!!!!
Kieran Suckling got his name from an Irish saint. Now he thinks he is one:
http://www.rangemagazine.com/archives/stories/winter99/playing_outside_the_rules.htm

Hundreds, if not thousands, of public land ranchers, loggers and miners have had their livelihoods destroyed by the ultra-effective strategies of the Southwest Center for Biological Diversity (SWC). They move like a band of guerrilla insurgents in their battle for public lands. The old, dogmatic environmental groups like the Sierra Club and the Audubon Society have became so bureaucratic and public opinion driven, that they have become slow and cumbersome in their efforts. SWC moves rapidly because decision making is concentrated in the activists who founded the group, and they appear not to give a damn about public opinion or the lives of people affected.

 

 

Suckling describes his team as “incredibly driven and passionate about the work we do. We are creative and manic. We have not played by the general ‘rules’ of activism. Unpredictability, speed and creative action has made it very hard for extractive industries and the government to anticipate or respond to us. By keeping everyone, including ourselves, continually moving in new directions, we have been able to destabilize the status quo of subsidized logging, grazing, mining and urban sprawl…. Many groups are hampered by the fear of upsetting their congressional connections, their funders, the media, etc. While we feel the pull of such things, we daily remind ourselves that social change comes with social tension and that our job is to create that dynamic tension, regardless of the pressure of back-down or compromise.”
Their “manic” guerrilla tactics have been efficient, damn efficient. The group’s active litigation record-84 lawsuits in five years-on everything from waterways to woodlands to dams has attained national attention. The group says it has won 77 percent of final judgments. Suckling declares their success is built on what he describes as the two strongest forces of the environmental movement: science and law.
“The law says that the best possible science is to be used in managing our public lands,” he says, “so we conduct our own scientific research to show that’s not happening, then we litigate. It’s an incredible amount of work, but with an honest judge you can shut down a billion-dollar development in a heartbeat.”

 

 

Kieran’s using “The force of the courts,” has created untold suffering and distress for many westerners.
The effects of courtroom and backroom bargaining by the SWC deeply trouble   New Mexico rancher, Hugh McKinney. “What knocked me off my lease was a backroom agreement between the Forest Service and SWC [what some call The Tucson Back-Alley Agreement] that excluded ranchers. The judge did not approve it; he would not sign it. The agreement affects you to the point that’s all you talk about with friends and neighbors. It bothered me to the point that I have no spirit, no energy to plan for a future. They took my allotment with lies and I have no recourse to correct those lies. We were forced off our land, but the Forest Service called it volunteering to quit.”

 

 

I asked Kieran’s old professor, Pax, a hard question during the telephone interview. “What do you think of the pain, human suffering, the dismantling of rural communities created by Kieran’s actions?”
The professor’s indifferent answer was a revelation that brought Suckling’s environmental philosophy back to its seed. “He doesn’t see any other way to proceed in his work without disruption like that! He doesn’t do it for the sake of disruption, but he is not going to stop his work simply because people are uncomfortable with it!”
I had asked Kieran similar questions in our Tucson meeting.
Walley: “What about those people you are putting off the land and out of work? What is your ethic and social responsibility to those humans?”
Suckling answered slowly and cautiously, choosing each word with care and sidestepping the question: “Our government and its corporate sponsors have created a system of subsidies that has to be abolished. They turned the lands into a commodity. We have to get public land users off this welfare system. It is not a simple thing to break those chains.”
Walley: “But what about those people who are suffering during this change?”
Suckling: “As I say, it is not a simple thing. We have entire communities that have grown up in this system of land-based government subsides. To change that is not a painless thing.”
Walley: “You, are creating rural refugees!”
Kieran’s ego finally shows, his speech picks up speed and emphasis: “It’s more than rural. I’m dealing with the Grand Canyon, Hoover Dam and Los Angeles. Thirteen million people are used to getting their water this way, I say that’s great, but we are going to show them a different way to do it!”
Walley: “You are forcing change on society and you are aware of it?”
Suckling: “Yeah! Isn’t that what an activist is! What do you think an activist is? We change society!”
Walley: “Can’t you do this in a humane and gentle way?


Suckling: “It is sad, but I don’t hear you put that in a direct relationship to the effect on the land. I hear you talk about the pain of the people but I don’t see you match that up with the pain of the species.”
Walley (dumbfounded): “What?”
Suckling: “A loach minnow is more important, than say, Betty and Jim’s ranch-a thousand times more important. I’m not against ranching, it is a job. My concern is the impact on the land.”
Walley: “Ranchers across America and Australia are going to read this article Kieran. What would you say to them?”
Suckling: “The logging industry denied for years that logging damaged the land. Because they refused to acknowledge problems or change their operations, the   came under tremendous public pressure, which led to a massive collapse of the industry on public lands. Thus far, the ranching industry is heading down the same   path. Its obstacles will be far greater: many more species are threatened by grazing than by logging, the public is much more aware of environmental damage today than a decade ago, and activists are bringing skills and organizing abilities to the overgrazing issue which have been honed in the logging battles. Ranchers should take a long hard look at what happened with the logging industry. They should also take a long hard look at the reality of overgrazing on public lands. If the industry does not acknowledge and change, it won’t exist on public land two decades from now. Ultimately it will be ranchers, not environmentalists, who determine whether public lands grazing will continue.”
Walley: “Do you see a middle-ground with the ranching industry? Compromise? If so, what are the parameters you could work within?”
Suckling: “I sincerely believe that cattle ranching has done more damage to public lands in the Southwest than logging, mining, urban sprawl, or any other extractive use. While it is easy to see the scars of logging and sprawl, the denuding of groundcover, erosion of soils, and destruction of riparian vegetation is far more widespread. Numerous scientific studies confirm that species endangerment in the Southwest is more closely connected to grazing than any other single event. That said, I also have no personal dislike of cattle grazing. If cattle can be run on public lands and not destroy the environment, that’s fine with me, but it is up to the ranching industry to change its practices and demonstrate public lands can be economically grazed without damaging the land. That is the forum of compromise.  We have worked out a few projects with loggers because it has been demonstrated that small trees in thickets can be removed while benefiting the environment. The ranching industry needs to demonstrate the same. Happy talk about ‘sustainability’ is just talk. Extrapolations from private lands in different ecosystems to public lands are unconvincing. The parameters, then, have to take the form of demonstration.”

 

READ ENTIRETY (Kieran Suckling got his name from an Irish saint. Now he thinks he is one; By J. Zane Walley; Range Magazine; © 1998)

 

 

…… And to point out a conception of Animal Racism with the way these Environmentalists are using Government laws to “Select Certain Species for Salvation over Others” and compare that to the concept of Human extinction under what is becoming obvious as an effort to engineer a die-off of humanity by locking up all the resources that humanity survives on. When do we see these same Environmentalists begin to Select themselves as the Threatened Species that needs a Law to protect their Existence????

 

What stands out as a Possible solution to bring balance back to what these Radicals are doing to human existence? Use the same tactics of lawsuits to sustain resources for humans that they have used for the species they have used as tools to lock up the resources away from Human access for Life!!!!! The Courts have NEVER been put in a situation to Decide if Human Life is More important than Animal Species. If Courts rule this way as far as making resources the topic of how to preserve Renewable usage for Human Life so that Human Life can then be what sustains Animal Life…. And the path Environmentalism is on will leave NO ONE Human Left to take care of the habitat that takes care of the Animal species. The Courts need to rule on this aspect of this effect going forward, starting with the Irrigation Water Lawsuit here in Central Oregon!!!!!!!!
http://www.bendbulletin.com/localstate/environment/3987937-151/frog-lawsuit-could-change-deschutes-river-flows

 

Environmentalists and irrigators have differing opinions on how a court order being sought for changes in Deschutes River flows upstream of Bend would affect farms, ranches and other water users.

 

The Center for Biological Diversity and WaterWatch of Oregon filed for a preliminary injunction last week, requesting the Bureau of Reclamation and three irrigation districts in Central Oregon manage the river’s water differently. The irrigation districts named in the filing are the Central Oregon, North Unit and Tumalo.

 

The problem, says Noah Greenwald, endangered species director for the Center for Biological Diversity, is this leaves the Oregon spotted frog and other river animals with little water. He said the group, which is based in Arizona and has an office in Portland, wants to find a way for the amphibians and irrigators to coexist.

 

 

Currently the bureau keeps wintertime flows in the Deschutes River reduced in order to fill upstream reservoirs. Summertime flows are then higher to supply farmers, ranchers and other water users.

 

 

So if the court orders a change in how the Deschutes River is managed this spring, people who draw water from the district may face “abrupt and severe restrictions,” according to a news release last week from the Deschutes Basin Board of Control. The group represents eight irrigation districts.

 

READ ENTIRETY (Frog lawsuit could change Deschutes River flows: Environmental groups, irrigators have differing views on court case; By Dylan J. Darling; The Bulletin; 2/14/16 12:01AM – updated 2/16/16 11:27AM)

 

The Opening arguments on the 22nd regarding our [Tony Newbill is from Oregon] Irrigation water lawsuit with Suckling needs to hear this concept. We need to ask the courts to consider the sustainability of habitat for animal species if the trend of creating an environment that humans go extinct is not balanced out here before it’s too late. The crisis of human extinction is met with the Chaos of those events unfolding, because if we get to this kind of a stage in food production the chaos will override the efforts to keep habitat sustained!!!!

 

I would say that the ego of environmentalism has become more important than the realities of what sustainability means and the courts need to be asked to consider this line of thought when they are deciding on the use of resources going forward here!!!!!!

 

And here is more on how we can see the Egotism that’s gone array from the reality that the Courts should not be influenced with:

https://law.lclark.edu/live/profiles/3604-kieran-suckling 

 

[Blog Editor: The link above is a short backgrounder of Kieran Suckling. The last paragraph provides an interesting micro-profile of Suckling:]

 

The New Yorker has dubbed Suckling’s organization, the Center for Biological Diversity, “the most important radical environmental group in the country” and Suckling a “trickster, philosopher, publicity hound, master strategist, and unapologetic pain in the ass.” The LA Weekly calls the Center “pound for pound, dollar for dollar, the most effective conservation organization in the country,” and says of Suckling: “Rimbaud reinvented poetry. Kierán Suckling would do the same with environmentalism.” (Animal Law Conference: Kierán Suckling; Lewis and Clark Law School)

 

The New Yorker has dubbed Suckling’s organization, the Center for Biological Diversity, “the most important radical environmental group in the country” and Suckling a “trickster, philosopher, publicity hound, master strategist, and unapologetic pain in the ass.” The LA Weekly calls the Center “pound for pound, dollar for dollar, the most effective conservation organization in the country,” and says of Suckling: “Rimbaud reinvented poetry. Kierán Suckling would do the same with environmentalism.”

 

Mr. President: 5 Ways to Salvage Your Environmental Legacy (and Our Future)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kieran-suckling/obama-environmental-policy_b_2086050.html

 

 

The climate crisis is deepening, rare plants and animals are vanishing at an accelerating clip, and politicians — well supported by the polluter class — are freshly emboldened to chip away at laws that protect our water, air, environment and wildlife.

 

To be blunt, when it came to tackling the most important environmental issues of our age, President Obama’s first term was a disappointment. He has a chance to salvage his legacy (and ours) in his second term. Here are the five places to start:

 

  1. Address climate change and ocean acidification. …

 

 

  1. Stem the extinction crisis.

 

 

  1. Keep politics out of the Endangered Species Act and other vital environmental laws.

 

 

  1. Safeguard our public lands, wild places and the Arctic.

 

 

  1. Embrace a newer, cleaner energy. …

 

It’s time to reinvent our energy future by focusing on renewable sources of energy, including solar, geothermal and wind. Yes, these come with complications, and we’ve got to be smart about how we make the shift, but it can and must be done. There’s a smarter, saner way to move ahead, and that path is open to us. All we need now is the courage and political will to step onto it. (Mr. President: 5 Ways to Salvage Your Environmental Legacy (and Our Future)); By Kieran Suckling; HuffPost Green; 11/7/12 01:12 am ET – updated 1/6/13)

 

Suckling points out that he wants more of the Federal Lands Locked up and Obama has already locked up 265 million acres so the courts need to be asked HOW MUCH More before we cause a Major Disruption in Food Supplies Worldwide that causes People to become Chaotic and that Chaos interrupts the sustaining of Habitat????

 

Obama’s designations total 265 million acres, and he isn’t done yet:
https://landandlivestock.wordpress.com/2016/02/29/ranchers-losing-ground-in-government-land-grab/

 

As the presidential election heats up, ask yourself which candidate will repeal WOTUS, get control of the EPA and allow ranchers to get back to work without being held back by unfair regulations.

 

Don’t hold your breath for any of them to “repeal WOTUS” etc. There is not a dime’s worth of difference in any of them. They are all under the influence of radical environmentalism (because it is PC and being PC is necessary to get elected).

 

But, at least it is encouraging to see a main-stream rag like Beef Magazine is finally beginning to pay attention to what is going on in the (about to get really) Wild West. — jtl, 419

I don’t know about you, but in my opinion, the 2016 presidential election can’t come soon enough.

 

For the 22nd time during his nearly eight years in office, President Obama has taken advantage of the Antiquities Act of 1906, locking up millions of acres of land in the western states.

 

Obama’s designations total 265 million acres, and his most recent designation of the Sand to Snow National Monument, Mojave Trails National Monument and Castle Mountains National Monument totals 1.8 million acres.

 

With several months left in office, Obama is expected to designate another 10 million acres of land in Oregon, Arizona and Utah. What’s worse, Obama will more than likely continue to use his executive power when making these designations without … READ THE REST (Ranchers losing ground in government land grab; By Amanda Radke in BEEF Daily; Land & Livestock International, Inc.; 2/29/16)

 

And besides the use of Monumenting lands, the Sue and Settle tactic has been deemed Undemocratic:

 

http://www.gazettextra.com/article/20131219/ARTICLES/131219660/1034

 

[Blog Editor: Either go to the above link or read the same link summary in the post “More on why we are where we are with Tyranny Today in America”. The “Sue and Settle tactic” is the topic.]

 

And Suckling says he wants Radical transformation:

 

http://www.rangemagazine.com/archives/stories/winter99/playing_outside_the_rules.htm

 

[Blog Editor: The link summary is above in this post.]

 

So is he willing to cause people to become Chaotic????? Did his actions cause people like Hammonds, Bundys and Finicum to act out the ways in which they did or were made to be seen as such???????

 

4. [Blog Editor: This looks like a quote but I’m not sure where Newbill found it.] Safeguard our public lands, wild places and the Arctic. There are nearly 650 million acres of federal land in the United States.

 

But not all of those 650 acres of Federal Lands is Grazing production for food, as this link points out. So we need to start considering how much of an Impact has Environmentalist Land Grabs affected our sustainable food supplies, because we don’t know to what extent these same NGOs have affected other food producing areas around the world too????

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rangeland

 

Rangelands are grasslandsshrublandswoodlandswetlands, and deserts that are grazed by domestic livestock or wild animals. Types of rangelands include tallgrass and shortgrass prairies, desert grasslands and shrublands, woodlands, savannaschaparralssteppes, and tundras. Rangelands do not include forests lacking grazable understory vegetation, barren desert, farmland, or land covered by solid rock, concrete and/or glaciers.

 

Rangelands are distinguished from pasture lands because they grow primarily native vegetation, rather than plants established by humans. Rangelands are also managed principally with practices such as managed livestock grazing and prescribed fire rather than more intensive agricultural practices of seeding, irrigation, and the use of fertilizers.

 

 

Fire is also an important regulator of range vegetation, whether set by humans or resulting from lightning. Fires tend to reduce the abundance of woody plants and promote herbaceous plants including grasses, forbs, and grass-like plants. The suppression or reduction of periodic wildfires from desert shrublands, savannas, or woodlands frequently invites the dominance of trees and shrubs to the near exclusion of grasses and forbs.[1]

 

READ ENTIRETY (Rangeland; Wikipedia; page last modified 2/24/16 22:02)

 

And don’t forget the Dead Harvest Video, it’s a glowing example of yet more reasons to consider if we are reaching a food supply crisis:

 

https://vimeo.com/149917045

Dead Harvest

Posted by Gar Tootelian

Posted 12/2015

Dead Harvest from Gar Tootelian on Vimeo.

 

 

And this guy wants a Great Disruption, I wonder how many others in the Environmental community want this too???

 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/08/opinion/gilding-earth-limits/index.html

[Blog Editor: The above link begins with a Paul Gilding 2-minute CNN video I’m not embedding about Enviro-Marxist spiel in forcing people to take care of the environment for the good of planet, then comes the CNN article.]

 

For 50 years the environmental movement has unsuccessfully argued that we should save the planet for moral reasons, that there were more important things than money. Ironically, it now seems it will be money — through the economic impact of climate change and resource constraint — that will motivate the sweeping changes necessary to avert catastrophe.

 

 

The eminent scientists of the Global Footprint Network, for example, calculate that we need about 1.5 Earths to sustain this economy. In other words, to keep operating at our current level, we need 50% more Earth than we’ve got.

 

 

… Chinese Environment Minister Zhou Shengxian said last year, “The depletion, deterioration and exhaustion of resources and the worsening ecological environment have become bottlenecks and grave impediments to (our) economic and social development.” If I had said that in the ’90s, when I was the global head of Greenpeace, it would have been dismissed as doom-and-gloom extremism!

 

 

As a result, the crisis will be big, it will be soon, and it will be economic, not environmental. The fact is the planet will take further bludgeoning, further depleting its capital, but the economy cannot — so we’ll respond not because the environment is under great threat, but because the science and economics shows that something far more important to us is jeopardized — economic growth.

 

 

So when this crisis hits, will we respond or will we simply slide into collapse? Crisis elicits a powerful human response, whether it be personal health, natural disaster, corporate crisis or national threat. Previously immovable barriers to change quickly disappear.

 

In this case, the crisis will be global and will manifest as the end of economic growth, thereby striking at the very heart of our model of human progress. While that will make the task of ending denial harder, it also means what’s at risk is, quite simply, everything we hold to be important. The last time this happened was World War II, and our response to that is illustrative of both the denial and delay process and the likely form our response to this crisis will take.

 

 

Do you find this hard to imagine today? Then try to imagine the alternative — that in a collapsing global economy and society we will stand by and simply watch the slide. There is no precedent in modern history on which to base that conclusion and plenty of evidence for the alternative. Humanity may be slow, but we are not stupid. Get ready for the great disruption. … You can READ ENTIRETY, but trust me it’s propaganda to get the normal person living a life to accept harsh State control of government, production, population and our lives. (The Earth is full; By Paul Gilding; CNN; 4/8/12 Updated 9:39 AM ET)

 

I have more examples of these kinds of things, but hey do we know what we are really up against here????

_______________________

Edited by John R. Houk

All text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Tony Newbill

 

Newbill Shares on Finicum & Dearborn Cop’s Murdering Woman


John R. Houk, Editor

February 1, 2016

Tony Newbill has found two stories that are not really similar except perhaps in one thought; viz. the focus is in government overreach as in utilizing too much police authority as per the rights of American citizens.

The first examines that LaVoy Finicum’s murder was motivated more by government greed via the deception of ecological concern. Evidently the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) usurped public land in Oregon under the auspices of protecting a bird that MIGHT go on the endangered species, BUT when the bird did not make the list the BLM began collaborating with a mining company that wants to mine for uranium to turn it into yellow cake. The thing is the process of extracting the yellow cake is a probably environmental disaster toward ranchers and farmers in that Oregon area.

The second case involved the Dearborn Police chasing a woman that fled a mall in which she aimed her car at mall security. As the chase ensued the Dearborn Police managed to place the lady’s car into an enough of a standstill for massive bullet to be shot at the fleeing 31-year-old lady (Janet Wilson) who died from the bullets. Two things of note to me is that the Dearborn Police have a habit propping up the Dearborn Muslim majority’s acts of stifling the First Amendment rights of Christians AND the 31-year-old lady was an African-American. Sadly, within a 40-day period the 31-year-old Black lady was the second African-American that died (Kevin Matthews) at the hands of the Dearborn Police through the same use of unreasonable force.

JRH 2/1/16

Please Support NCCR

************************

The Hegelian Dialectic: Problem, Reaction, Solution

Oregon Standoff: Robert ‘LaVoy’ Finicum Dead, Bundys Arrested

Tony Newbill

Sent: 1/31/2016 11:03 AM

The police in cooperation with the FBI got their men about 20 miles north of Burns, Oregon on Tuesday, January 26, 2016. Mark that day in history, folks, as the day the old west was given a warning shot. A warning shot that said very loud and clear to the American public: Don’t mess with the government, don’t question authority, don’t stand up for the Constitution or your supposed “rights,” just submit or die.

©2016 Barbara H. Peterson

Consider this: http://farmwars.info/?p=14481

A Tale of Cattle, Sage Grouse, and Uranium in Oregon

By Barbara H. Peterson

January 28, 2016

Farm Wars

Once there was a cowboy who let his herd of cattle roam free on thousands of acres of wilderness. He knew that they would live in harmony with the other critters, and that the land would benefit. He made sure that there was plenty of water and plenty of room so that the land would flourish. You see, if given enough room, critters are good for the land. They eat the overgrown forage and leave behind fertilizer that helps new forage to grow, which nourishes every other critter. Each critter has enough room to get out of the other one’s way, and everyone is happy.

That is, until the government in its infinite “scientific” wisdom, decides that cattle are bad for the land.

But is that the real reason that cattle ranching, as it has been done for over a hundred years, is now scheduled to become obsolete? A thing of the past – something to be disdained and thrown to the curb?

Picture a pristine wilderness devoid of the ravages of civilization and industrial development. Birds flying overhead and deer roaming free. Paradise as far as the eye can see. And in the middle of this haven designated as “public lands” set apart to be protected by the benevolence of the Federal Government’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM), is an open pit uranium mine.

Say what??? You have got to be kidding me! Nope. This is what the BLM has on the back burner for the Malheur Wilderness area.

And the cowboys? Well, the last ones who attempted to get in the way of this takeover of land for the “public good” are now sentenced to 5 years in prison and branded as terrorists for protecting their land and cattle and forced to “grant the BLM first right of refusal if the Hammonds ever sold their ranch.”

The Dark Side of Environmental Conservation

Environmental conservation is a good thing. But is that what is really being done by the BLM when it takes over land? Maybe what the BLM is actually doing is grabbing land in the name of environmental conservation and placing it under the sole control of the government and out of the hands of we the people in order to do with it as the government pleases.

The lands that the government collects are called “public lands.” The BLM is charged with managing “public lands,” and routinely leases and sells mineral rights on the very same lands that it is supposed to manage and protect.

BLM’s Planning Manual 1601 explains the use of public lands:

Land use plans ensure that the public lands are managed in accordance with the intent of Congress as stated in FLPMA (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), i.e., under the principles of multiple use and sustained yield. As required by FLPMA, the public lands must be managed in a manner that protects the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water resource, and archaeological values; that, where appropriate, will preserve and protect certain public lands in their natural condition; that will provide food and habitat for fish and wildlife and domestic animals; and that will provide for outdoor recreation and human occupancy and use by encouraging collaboration and public participation throughout the planning process. In addition, the public lands must be managed in a manner that recognizes the Nation’s need for domestic sources of minerals, food, timber, and fiber from the public lands.

http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/ak/aktest/planning/planning_general.Par.65225.File.dat/blm_lup_handbook.pdf

According to the BLM Planning Manual, the agency is charged with maintaining the ecological environment of its public lands. That is, of course, unless it decides that mining for uranium supersedes any such directive.

Uranium on BLM-Administered Lands in OR/WA

In September 2011, a representative from Oregon Energy, L.L.C. (formally Uranium One), met with local citizens, and county and state officials, to discuss the possibility of opening a uranium oxide (“yellowcake”) mine in southern Malheur County in southeastern Oregon. Oregon Energy is interested in developing a 17-Claim parcel of land known as the Aurora Project through an open pit mining method. Besides the mine, there would be a mill for processing. The claim area occupies about 450 acres and is also referred to as the “New U” uranium claims.

http://www.blm.gov/or/energy/uranium.php

This is conservation? Here is the open pit uranium mining proposal:

Uranium mine plan

Oregon Energy’s proposal calls for extracting ore from a mile-long, 600-foot wide, 250-foot deep open pit 10 miles west of McDermitt and 3 miles north of the Oregon-Nevada border. The mine, adjoining the former Bretz Mercury Mine, a contaminated open-pit site from the 1960s, would cost $200 million to develop and uranium extraction could continue for up to 20 years, said Oregon Energy President Lachlan Reynolds.

Plans call for the ore to be crushed and mixed with an acid solution in enclosed vats to leach out the uranium, he said. The acid would bond with the uranium and when dry become a sand-like powder called uranium oxide concentrate, or yellowcake. Yellowcake would bring $52 per pound and could fuel nuclear reactors or be processed into weapons.

Tuttle, spokesman for the Portland-based Center for Environmental Equity, foresees environmental problems.

The likelihood of sulfuric acid being used in READ THE REST

Problem: The government wants the land.

Reaction: Demonize cattle ranchers and blame the cattle for a decline in the sage grouse in order to free the land for alternate government use by pitting environmentalists against cattle grazing and the ranchers to gain the required reaction of placing the land under further restrictions in order to be protected from environmental harm.

Solution: The government gets the land.

The government wants the land for “conservation” efforts. In order to achieve this, the ranchers with their cattle and any private property interests need to go so that there is no interference. This way the land can be “protected” by the BLM and used for any purpose that the government wants it for, including uranium development.

The question then becomes – who will get the land – the sage grouse or uranium miners. In either case, the ranchers are out and the cattle can be consigned to your friendly neighborhood CAFO (concentrated animal feeding operation).

The rancher takes the blame, and the government does as it pleases. If the grouse is listed as an endangered species, the land is taken for conservation. If it isn’t, the land is taken for corporate energy and uranium mining. A win/win for big government. It’s called hedging your bets. Either way, the little guy loses and the government wins, and the rancher is left holding the bag. He either gets booted out by the sage grouse, or booted out by uranium interests, and there goes another source of local food and independence, leaving us ever more dependent on the corporate food chain.

Since a decision was made to not list the sage grouse as an endangered species in 2015, guess which interests won? You’ve got it – mining. Now the only problem left is to work out how to make the energy industry operations appear “beneficial” to the environment so as not to concern the sage grouse supporters, and to declare more public land as “cattle free,” again, for the benefit of the environment. Not a problem that a good Public Relations campaign can’t handle. Cha-Ching!

+++

This is Interesting Stuff

Tony Newbill

Sent: 1/31/2016 12:39 PM

Enhanced Video: LaVoy points out his Assassins:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmeIZkqMLDg

VIDEO: Enhanced Video: LaVoy points out his Assassins

Posted by Lorri Anderson

Published on Jan 30, 2016

Thank you to Call of Duty Goddess: https://youtu.be/HRmbVDS4p4I

Definition of Assassin: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assassin

This footage must get everywhere. This also needs to be downloaded by anyone and everyone that has the ability. Please reshare, and save and help spread the truth of what happened.

To help support RTR Truth Media continue to report unedited truth please donate via PayPal to: tomlacovara@gmail.com

FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/TruthMovemen… [Blog Editor: Link incomplete]

TWITTER: https://twitter.com/LorriA1970

NEWS BLOGS:

http://freedomoutpost.com/author/lorrianderson

http://www.freedomlover70.blogspot.com/

http://www.resurrecttherepublic.com/ 

 

GOOGLE: https://plus.google.com/+LorriAnderson

https://plus.google.com/communities/1… [Blog Editor: Link incomplete]

Wayne County Medical Examiner rules death of woman shot by Dearborn police a homicide (UPDATED) Yesterday’s fatal shooting of a 31-year-old Detroit woman by Dearborn police has been ruled a homicide by the Wayne County Medical Examiner’s office.

Janet Wilson was shot Wednesday afternoon by a Dearborn officer after driving erratically and allegedly trying to run over an officer on Hubbard Drive near the Southfield Freeway. Witnesses had reported Wilson acting strangely at nearby Fairlane Town Center and mall security was notified.

http://www.pressandguide.com/articles/2016/01/31//news/doc56a94288a2c62871199629.txt

Wayne County Medical Examiner rules death of woman shot by Dearborn police a homicide (UPDATED)

By Andrea Blum

Published: Sunday, January 31, 2016

Press & Guide

Yesterday’s fatal shooting of a 31-year-old Detroit woman by Dearborn police has been ruled a homicide by the Wayne County Medical Examiner’s office.

Janet Wilson was shot Wednesday afternoon by a Dearborn officer after driving erratically and allegedly trying to run over an officer on Hubbard Drive near the Southfield Freeway. Witnesses had reported Wilson acting strangely at nearby Fairlane Town Center and mall security was notified.

Michigan State Police Lt. Mike Shaw said the 31-year-old woman’s vehicle got stuck in traffic as she left the mall, and she tried to flee as officers approached.

Shaw says a Dearborn officer fired when the woman almost ran over an officer. Wilson died of multiple gunshot wounds and the officer was treated for non-life threatening injuries.

Dearborn Police Chief Ronald Haddad said both of the officer-involved shooting incidents are being independently criminally investigated by outside agencies, and that the department is committed to transparency and disclosure by fully cooperating with the investigations.

“Upon conclusion of the criminal investigations we will be conducting internal reviews on both of these incidents,” Haddad said. “While we are very proud of our long history of Civil Rights advocacy as well as our history of appropriate use of force, we will closely examine all of our policies and procedures to ensure that we are employing the latest training and following national best practices in all of our responsibilities to the community.

Once we are allowed and it is appropriate to do so, we fully intend to make public disclosures regarding these incidents.”

_____________________

Edited by John R. Houk

© Tony Newbill

Liberty or Big Brother Order – YOU Choose


John R. Houk

© July 12, 2015

Somehow (probably of my own doing) I have found myself on the mailing list of the Campaign for Liberty. Undoubtedly since I reside in the great State of Oklahoma, the national organization has funneled my name to the local State chapter. The Campaign for Liberty is plugged into the Conservative-Libertarian views of former Representative Ron Paul. I confess I have an affinity for Ron Paul’s policy reforms on a national level; however his foreign policy ideals are something I am in great disagreement.

I’m not real big on Ron Paul isolationist policies to manage the national budget in a more efficient manner. It is my belief once America relinquishes the reach of its military prowess, ideologies (the variations of Marxist-Socialist transnationalism), religions of hate (viz. Islam and Islamic Supremacist ideologies) and various reawakenings of foreign American-hating nationalism (e.g. Russia and Iran); THEN America’s National Security will be vulnerable to outside intrusions into our way of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

The thing is though, if America continues on the Left Wing path that Obama’s transformation agenda has sent we Americans, great turmoil will occur in our nation once the rest of the Americans awaken to the loss of the American way of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Once that awakening occurs then those who still are drawn to the Founding Fathers’ revolutionary paradigm will recall the words framed by Thomas Jefferson and signed by the representatives from Thirteen British-American Colonies demanding the bonds of tyranny from an unjust government be ended – by arms if necessary.

In that spirit I share this email not only with my fellow Oklahomans but also with the citizens of all these United States to take a moment and contemplate the posterity of American freedoms especially under the light of the Christian principles and morality those former Englishmen and other Europeans brought to the then British American Colonies to worship as freely as an equal to the Church of England.

It is time for Americans to unite under the Freedom and Liberty issues that draw us together and not to hold the slimmer issues in which we might be in variance to separate us. For example, I am not an isolationists. BUT a time may arise in which isolationism vs. international military power is rendered irrelevant in the face of any tyranny that threatens our moral Freedom, moral Liberty and our moral Common Good.

JRH 7/12/15

Please Support NCCR

**********************

They Want You to Stop Paying Attention

By Kirk Shelley – Oklahoma State Coordinator

Sent from: Oklahoma Campaign for Liberty

Sent: 7/9/2015 3:04 PM

After election season, legislators count on you to stop paying attention, go back to your daily lives, and forget about politics until they need your vote again.

They want you to blindly believe their legislative votes will line up with their party platform and campaign rhetoric.

What happens if you believe them?

The state apparatus will continue to bury your liberties and squander your resources.

And you can most certainly count on the horse-trading and backroom deals to continue.

They’ll sell your rights to the highest bidder . . . if you let them.

If you’re willing to take the lead and help Campaign for Liberty throw a wrench in their plans, please click here to let us know.

Every year, thousands of bills are passed across the nation. The vast majority of them limit your liberty in some way.

In fact, there are currently so many laws on the books at the federal level alone, the Congressional Research Service has admitted they can’t even keep track of all of them!

It’s said the average American is guilty of breaking 3 federal laws every day and they don’t even know it.

Imagine how that translates when you add in state and local laws.

Many (if not most) bills are passed every year because some powerful, establishment insiders and their well-financed cronies hit the right pressure points and bought the right legislators to get the job done.

And the result is a windfall to those same politicians and their powerful allies, but they annihilate your liberties.

Said to be one of the greatest historians, Gaius Tacitus said, “The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government.”

How right he was.

Will you help Campaign for Liberty fight back?

If you’re willing to help by taking the lead in your area, please click here to let us know.

All across the country, Campaign for Liberty grassroots leaders are taking on the status quo at the local, state, and national levels.

These activists have taken the time to learn and implement C4L’s winning model and they are defeating statist schemes at every level of government.

Do you believe in individual liberty and constitutional government?

Are you tired of Big Government’s attacks on your rights?

Are you ready to do what it takes to neutralize the anti-liberty politicians in your Township, School Board, City Council, and State Legislature?

If you’re willing to learn and apply our proven model, you’ll be provided with extensive training options and materials, as well as support from our volunteer leadership network and State Operations staff.

Do you have the desire to lead but lack experience? Don’t let that stop you! Some of the most successful C4L coordinators in the country started out with little or no experience.

Our training materials will provide you with:

· Tips on how to start and grow your local group;

· A clear understanding on why the typical “Access-Based” lobbying method does not work;

· Proven techniques other successful C4L groups are implementing;

· Tips on how to employ these effective techniques to achieve meaningful victory;

· And much, much more.

You don’t need vast experience in the field to be selected as a new coordinator.

If you are serious about learning what it takes to win, are willing to apply the C4L model, and have a desire to lead others to victory, we have the tools to help you succeed.

If you’re ready to foil the establishment’s schemes against your liberty, click here to let us know.

In Liberty,

Kirk Shelley
Oklahoma State Coordinator
Campaign for Liberty

P.S. Every year, thousands of bills are passed across the nation. The vast majority of them limit your liberty in some way.

Gaius Tacitus was correct when he said, “The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government.”

If you’re tired of Big Government’s attacks on your liberties, believe in limited, constitutional government, and are ready to join the winning team advocating for freedom, I want to hear from you.

Click here to let us know you’re willing to take the lead and help Campaign for Liberty throw a wrench in the establishment’s plans.

_____________________

Liberty or Big Brother Order – YOU Choose

John R. Houk

© July 12, 2015

_____________________

They Want You to Stop Paying Attention

 

Campaign for Liberty Oklahoma State Page

 

Campaign for Liberty (National) About Page

 

Statement of Principles

 

Americans inherit from our ancestors a glorious tradition of freedom and resistance to oppression.  Our country has long been admired by the rest of the world for her great example of liberty and prosperity—a light shining in the darkness of tyranny.

 

But many Americans today are frustrated.  The political choices they are offered give them no real choice at all.  For all their talk of “change,” neither major political party as presently constituted challenges the status quo in any serious way.  Neither treats the Constitution with anything but contempt.  Neither offers any kind of change in monetary policy.  Neither wants to make the reductions in government that our crushing debt burden demands.  Neither talks about bringing American troops home not just from Iraq but from around the world.  Our country is going bankrupt, and none of these sensible proposals are even on the table.

 

This destructive bipartisan consensus has suffocated American political life for many years.  Anyone who tries to ask fundamental questions instead of cosmetic ones is ridiculed or ignored.

 

That is why the Campaign for Liberty was established: to highlight the neglected but common-sense principles we champion and reinsert them into the American political conversation.

 

The U.S. Constitution is at the heart of what the Campaign for Liberty stands for, since the very least we can demand of our government is fidelity to its own governing document.  Claims that our Constitution was meant to be a “living document” that judges may interpret as they please are fraudulent, incompatible with republican government, and without foundation in the constitutional text or the thinking of the Framers.  Thomas Jefferson spoke of binding our rulers down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution, and we are proud to follow in his distinguished lineage.

 

With our Founding Fathers, we also believe in a noninterventionist foreign policy.  Inspired by the old Robert Taft wing of the Republican Party, we are convinced that the American people cannot remain free and prosperous with 700 military bases around the world, troops in 130 countries, and a steady diet of war propaganda.  Our military overstretch is undermining our national defense and bankrupting our country.

 

We believe that the free market, reviled by people who do not understand it, is the most just and humane economic system and the greatest engine of prosperity the world has ever known.

We believe with Ludwig von Mises, Henry Hazlitt, and F.A. Hayek that central banking distorts economic decision making and misleads entrepreneurs into making unsound investments.  Hayek won the Nobel Prize for showing how central banks’ interference with interest rates sets the stage for economic downturns.  And the central bank’s ability to create money out of thin air transfers wealth from the most vulnerable to those with political pull, since it is the latter who receive the new money before the price increases it brings in its wake have yet occurred.  For economic and moral reasons, therefore, we join the great twentieth-century economists in opposing the Federal Reserve System, which has reduced the value of the dollar by 95 percent since it began in 1913.

 

We oppose the dehumanizing assumption that all issues that divide us must be settled at the federal level and forced on every American community, whether by activist judges, a power-hungry executive, or a meddling Congress.  We believe in the humane alternative of local self-government, as called for in our Constitution.

 

We oppose the transfer of American sovereignty to supranational organizations in which the American people possess no elected representatives.  Such compromises of our country’s independence run counter to the principles of the American Revolution, which was fought on behalf of self-government and local control.  Most of these organizations have a terrible track record even on their own terms: how much poverty have the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund actually alleviated, for example?  The peoples of the world can interact with each other just fine in the absence of bureaucratic intermediaries that undermine their sovereignty.

 

We believe that freedom is an indivisible whole, and that it includes not only economic liberty but civil liberties and privacy rights as well, all of which are historic rights that our civilization has cherished from time immemorial.

 

Our stances on other issues can be deduced from these general principles.

 

Our country is ailing.  That is the bad news.  The good news is that the remedy is so simple and attractive: a return to the principles our Founders taught us.  Respect for the Constitution, the rule of law, individual liberty, sound money, and a noninterventionist foreign policy constitute the foundation of the Campaign for Liberty.