A friend recently sent me a report below about the USAF Chief who says
if sequestration happens, ALL Combat Aircraft will be non combat capable
by July. This is NOT because of sequestration; this is because of lack
of preparation for "The Great Train Wreck," and Obama's $500 Billion in
defense cuts. "The Great Train Wreck" was predicted more than a decade
ago. It was named thus by a large group of defense analysts that said
America needed to consider, that its' current Air Force was almost
entirely built in the 1980's under Ronald Reagan.
More than a
decade ago, USAF leaders and defense analysts realized, as F-22 Raptor
production fell behind, and costs went up, we would face major problems.
The F-15 was produced to be America's premier air superiority fighter,
and it has done its' job, but pilot training and skill have also been a
large part of the success of the F-15 in combat. It is now older than a
lot of its' pilots. The USAF was asking for over 700 Raptors when it
was picked as the winner of the ATF (Advanced Tactical Fighter)
competition over the YF-23. 700 is a lot of aircraft, but more than
1000 F-15s have been produced and flown by the USAF, as well as its'
partner in air combat, the F-16 (3000+ produced). We had a huge,
capable, highly advanced mixed fighter force, that would guarantee air
superiority in a major war. We enjoyed this, with the best example
being the destruction of Iraq''s air forces during Desert Storm, when
Iraq invaded Kuwait. The USAF cleared the skies of enemy fighters, and
the troops and troop support helicopters, bombers, and CAS (close air
support) aircraft could operate with impunity.
Sadly, during
the Clinton administration, the neglect of military funding (as can be
shown by an expenditure of GDP percentage) began. F-22 Raptor
production became mired in Congressional dogma, and legislative battles.
The pilots of this aircraft believed in and knew the potential of this
aircraft to be the most dominant fighter plane ever built, period.
Washington said it was too expensive. Why is it, when it comes to the
military, cost is always the number one factor on Capital Hill, but they
can spend billions (and Obama trillions on his pet projects, parties,
golfing, and campaigning even after he won reelection)?
The
USAF compromised and said that the minimum number of Raptors needed to
win a near peer war (North Korea, Iran, etc, threats with robust air
defenses) not to mention China or Russia, was 381 Raptors. President
Bush, while dealing with 9/11, two wars, and the regular business of the
nation lost his fight to do more for the military in 2006 when the
Democrats took over both branches of Congress, effectively making him a
lame duck. After the F-35 by Lockheed Martin was selected as the
replacement for the F-16, legacy F-18, and Marine Corps Harrier fleet, Bush left further decisions to the next
administration.
Enter Obamanation and the end. F-22
production was killed at 187 aircraft, the F-35 has been besieged by
Congress, and is frankly, the only game in town now (meaning we have no
other option but to build it). Pilots love it, calling it a quantum
leap in fighter design and capability. Congress, especially the
democrats and John "I served and nobody else ever did" McCain hate it
because it is far more expensive now than it should be.
Simply
put, the way to make something affordable is to build them in large
numbers. As you do, the costs overall from beginning to end
decrease, but you don't get there until you have reached ahead into the
mass production. Congress failed here as well, by not allowing anyone
to buy Raptors or even the "dumbed down" versions. I would have
sold them to Israel, Japan, and our closest allies to balance power in
unstable regions, and counter emerging threats. This was exactly what
happened with the F-22. By the time Raptor production was killed,
average cost for the aircraft was down to around $120 million, the most
expensive fighter in the world, but not by much, and clearly the BEST
fighter in the world. Compare it to Boeing's project, the F-15 Silent
Eagle, which is nothing more than an upgraded F-15E, with new systems,
and some frontal only RCS (Radar Cross Section) reducing features, as
opposed to the Raptors 360 degree RCS (also called stealth, nearly
invisible to radar) and infrared signature decreasing features. The
Silent Eagle is projected to cost $100 million! It is still a 1970's
design upgrade, and not as capable as emerging threats. It doesn't even
have thrust vectoring ( developed in the 80's as a way of pointing a
jet engine's exhaust nozzles allowing tighter turns, and maneuvers that
make a plane an incredible dogfighter, the Russians, and Chinese are
incorporating it in their newest designs, and retrofitting older
ones)which of course the Raptor does. Beyond visual range, or in a
visual dogfight, the F-22 will easily destroy several F-15 Silent Eagles
on its' own. How much is our national defense and sovereignty worth.
Now F-35 production is behind, threatened with cancellation (numbers
reduction is a certainty, despite denials), and each aircraft, which
will never have the Raptor's air to air ability, is far more expensive.
We have many partner nations working on the F-35 project, including
Great Britain, Japan, and others, and the way to bring costs down is to
build them in great numbers for ourselves, and keep our ally's well
supplied to counter emerging Chinese and Islamic threats.
So
now you know what I have known for years, and why I was on here, and
everywhere else shouting to the rooftops, if Obama is reelected, it may
be the last ever free Presidential election in the US. I have been
telling people this was coming for so long, I almost feel insulted that
someone from the DoD can finally admit it publicly. Retired Generals
from the Air Force have been crowing about this for years, and this is
why several Air Force Chiefs pushed for more Raptors. They were
denounced, fired, and replaced with more Obama yes men (Good boy, here
is your bone). America is on the verge of a military, economic, and
social collapse. It may already be too late, and all Obama wants to do
is disarm us, cost hundreds of thousands of firearms industry jobs, and
let everybody live on welfare while our military disintegrates.
Americans, if you say "I support my troops" and you support the
democrats and Obama-- You are a liar or woefully uninformed.
In closing, I would like
to say that the F-22 can still be saved. Lockheed Martin has
mothballed the entire factory, including the tools and production
equipment to build it, in case it ever was needed. Well, it is needed.
The problem is, it would cost hundreds of millions to reopen the plant
and restart production. That is a tough pill to swallow right now, but
if Obama can spend $500 million on an electric car plant (Fisker) that
went overseas, and Solyndra can be justified, isn't our very national
security more important? If he took 3 or 4 fewer vacations a year he
could restart it.
The point is, Obama doesn't care about you, this
nation, or anyone other than himself. That is what a narcissist is and
does, and that is why he is still campaigning. He wants to be a
powerful popular celebrity, not a President leading a nation.
Are you
ready for change?
Then fight for your nation. Stand up for the men
like Rand Paul, Dr. Ben Carson, and others who speak the truth and stand
up to the radical left. Demand Obama's impeachment, demand that our
military not be cut, protest, write letters, do whatever it takes to be
heard. It is now or never people. Do or die, the nation is in danger
because it was put their by bad decisions, and the worst one was ours,
because Obama got reelected. This is the result. The consequences of
doing the wrong thing and trusting the worst President ever with a
second term.
~ Steve J., guest blogger
The Franklin Buzz: A blog about what defines America-- The inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We're not talking right or left... This is about common sense and American values. We are not the silent majority. We are America.
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Liberal fallacies: "If we can save one life..."
In 1999, Eric Holder gave a speech in which he said that we should shame gun owners and make the owning of guns no less "dirty" and "embarrassing" as smoking is, and that all we need to do is "brainwash" the youth to eliminate gun ownership in future generations.
Now, we have VP Joe "The Joker" Biden advancing Obama's argument that "If it only saves one life, it [gun control] is worth it."
For that to be a valid argument, it must be valid when applied more broadly. So let us consider what other legislative action would be warranted based on this fallacy:
- Ban abortions: Since the legalization of abortion in the US, approximately 50 million abortions have been performed.
- Ban unprotected sex, multiple partners, and injection needles: Worldwide, nearly 30 million people have died from AIDS-related causes.
- Ban tobacco: Approximately 443,000 Americans will die each year because of tobacco products.
- Ban exercise and sporting events: According to the CDC, approximately 400,000 Americans die each year during exercise, or a sporting event, or shortly thereafter. About 100,000 of these are under the age of 30.
- Raise the driving age: 5,000 teens ages 16 - 20 die each year due to fatal injuries caused by car accidents; about 400,000 of these young drivers will be seriously injured each year.
- Ban crossing the road: More than 4,000 pedestrians are killed each year.
- Ban alcohol: In 2010, 211 children were killed in drunk driving crashes. It is estimated that 300,000 incidents of drinking and driving occur each day and at least 27 people will die each and every day in America from drunk drivers.
- Ban unprotected sex: Nearly 4,000 women in America will die from cervical cancer, a cancer associated with HPV and contracted from unprotected sex.
- Ban doctors: Nearly 200,000 people will die each year due to medical errors in America.
- Ban knives: Nearly 2,000 people die each year in knife-related crimes.
- Ban being outside during stormy weather: Approximately 39 people die each year from being struck by lightning in America.
- Ban the use of ladders: Nearly 6,000 people die each year due to injuries sustained from tumbling off ladders.
- Ban the killer soda machine: About 2-3 people each year will die from being crushed by tilting a vending machine.
I'm sure we could add more to this list-- How many mothers die in childbirth? How many people die in police chases or shootings? How many die in the course of working on their car?-- but this is sufficient to demonstrate the inherent fallacy in the gun-grabbing left's argument that we should do whatever it takes to save just one life.
Now, we have VP Joe "The Joker" Biden advancing Obama's argument that "If it only saves one life, it [gun control] is worth it."
For that to be a valid argument, it must be valid when applied more broadly. So let us consider what other legislative action would be warranted based on this fallacy:
- Ban abortions: Since the legalization of abortion in the US, approximately 50 million abortions have been performed.
- Ban unprotected sex, multiple partners, and injection needles: Worldwide, nearly 30 million people have died from AIDS-related causes.
- Ban tobacco: Approximately 443,000 Americans will die each year because of tobacco products.
- Ban exercise and sporting events: According to the CDC, approximately 400,000 Americans die each year during exercise, or a sporting event, or shortly thereafter. About 100,000 of these are under the age of 30.
- Raise the driving age: 5,000 teens ages 16 - 20 die each year due to fatal injuries caused by car accidents; about 400,000 of these young drivers will be seriously injured each year.
- Ban crossing the road: More than 4,000 pedestrians are killed each year.
- Ban alcohol: In 2010, 211 children were killed in drunk driving crashes. It is estimated that 300,000 incidents of drinking and driving occur each day and at least 27 people will die each and every day in America from drunk drivers.
- Ban unprotected sex: Nearly 4,000 women in America will die from cervical cancer, a cancer associated with HPV and contracted from unprotected sex.
- Ban doctors: Nearly 200,000 people will die each year due to medical errors in America.
- Ban knives: Nearly 2,000 people die each year in knife-related crimes.
- Ban being outside during stormy weather: Approximately 39 people die each year from being struck by lightning in America.
- Ban the use of ladders: Nearly 6,000 people die each year due to injuries sustained from tumbling off ladders.
- Ban the killer soda machine: About 2-3 people each year will die from being crushed by tilting a vending machine.
I'm sure we could add more to this list-- How many mothers die in childbirth? How many people die in police chases or shootings? How many die in the course of working on their car?-- but this is sufficient to demonstrate the inherent fallacy in the gun-grabbing left's argument that we should do whatever it takes to save just one life.
Monday, February 25, 2013
A rebuttal to the illogic of Joe Biden
Joe Biden recently said in an interview that he told his wife, "If there ever is a problem, take your double
barrel shotgun out on the porch, and fire off 2 rounds, and trust me,
you won't have to worry about your safety."
Where do I start with the stupidity of this statement? I'll start here: Biden lives in the country, doing so in the city will get you immediately arrested. Honestly, since he lives in Delaware, if his wife took his advice she'd be charged with a felony (I guess he must not love her too much to want to see her in prison). Second, if there was someone approaching, saw that she had a double barrel, and she just emptied both barrels, they would know she was empty, and could attack as she either fumbled to reload, or simply the sad realization she is out of shells and is know holding a club.
He went on to say that an AR-15 is much more difficult to fire and operate, particularly for women. Moronic statement. Aside from the patronizing and insulting advice to "little women" whom he presumes to be incapable of handling an AR-15, the AR-15 has multiple advantages as a home defense weapon over a shotgun. I speak from experience: I have taught for years in personal and home defense, I am a retired tactical unit officer, and private owner of these weapons for twenty years.
Advantages to the AR-15 for home defense are many. One such reason is accuracy. A shotgun is nearly useless in a hostage situation, we would never perform an assault as a tactical unit with shotguns alone for this very reason, a shotgun has great firepower, but it all depends on the load of the shell, and even the rifled slug is not of acceptable accuracy when better alternatives are available. An AR-15, in many different calibers, is especially effective in a building such as a home for hostage situations. Have you ever shot a twelve gauge, loaded with 3 inch magnum buckshot, back to back with an AR-15? If you do, you will immediately notice the lack of recoil of the AR in comparison. It is not only far more accurate as a first shot hostage taker elimination round, but follow up shots are quick and easy, even on the move.
AR-15s are not difficult to operate (especially as this condescending sexist pig implied toward women, who not only serve in law enforcement, tactical units, and are int the military, such as my daughter, that they aren't capable of thinking of their own defense under pressure!), are lighter, have far less recoil (as I mentioned previously), are far more accurate, and are simple to work with. As with ALL firearms, it takes time and practice to be proficient.
An AR-15 is my primary home defense weapon. Why? For the reason listed above and more. Bad guys come in groups, well armed, and wear body armor at times. The AR-15 can defeat these. Why do we need high capacity magazines? We don't know what the bad guys will have, how many there will be, and I guarantee, that even I, and other highly trained weapons experts can miss in the real world with adrenaline flowing and shots being fired.
This article is not going to postulate on handguns, I will save that for another time, but I will say this: as a weapon, even as an officer on the street, when an armed confrontation is likely, it should always be the weapon of last resort. A shotgun is a wonderful weapon in very particular and limited applications. If you live alone, have no one but yourself to watch out for, and you can guarantee there is one intruder that you can identify and eliminate. The spread of buckshot means you won't miss your target inside a home, but if there are other people in the house, and they are your family, if they are in the vicinity, you CANNOT fire and be sure you won't hit the wrong person with one of those pieces of shot. The limited number of rounds always eliminates it as my first option in any situation anyway.
Lastly, the trump card of all of this is the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment was to quote Thomas Jefferson (and while I quote Thomas Jefferson, all of the Constitutional Framers echoed this statement), "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." He goes on to say, “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
Moreover, quoting Cesare Beccaria, "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they (the Government ) try to take it."
Trust me my friends, when they come, they don't want you to have assault weapons, because that is what they will be bringing, and the beauty of that, is the Founding Father's meant for us to able to meet the unlawful attack of our government on equal ground. They knew full well this day would likely come, and that is why I am against ALL of the proposed gun talks at all. The government, if it has no tyrannical desires, never needs to know what I have at home to protect my home, my family, and my life.
This government has tyrannical desires, but they cannot carry them out if they do not first disarm us. They realize that if we the people are willing to fight and die by the millions as free citizens rather than become subjects like the people under Adolph Hitler, they cannot win, for the whole nation will be destroyed. Ultimately, they must back down if they see our resolve, which is why I implore you to either speak out, or share this writing. They MUST know, because if they do, we can win without a shot ever being fired, and that should be the goal of every patriot.
~ Steve J., guest blogger
Where do I start with the stupidity of this statement? I'll start here: Biden lives in the country, doing so in the city will get you immediately arrested. Honestly, since he lives in Delaware, if his wife took his advice she'd be charged with a felony (I guess he must not love her too much to want to see her in prison). Second, if there was someone approaching, saw that she had a double barrel, and she just emptied both barrels, they would know she was empty, and could attack as she either fumbled to reload, or simply the sad realization she is out of shells and is know holding a club.
He went on to say that an AR-15 is much more difficult to fire and operate, particularly for women. Moronic statement. Aside from the patronizing and insulting advice to "little women" whom he presumes to be incapable of handling an AR-15, the AR-15 has multiple advantages as a home defense weapon over a shotgun. I speak from experience: I have taught for years in personal and home defense, I am a retired tactical unit officer, and private owner of these weapons for twenty years.
Advantages to the AR-15 for home defense are many. One such reason is accuracy. A shotgun is nearly useless in a hostage situation, we would never perform an assault as a tactical unit with shotguns alone for this very reason, a shotgun has great firepower, but it all depends on the load of the shell, and even the rifled slug is not of acceptable accuracy when better alternatives are available. An AR-15, in many different calibers, is especially effective in a building such as a home for hostage situations. Have you ever shot a twelve gauge, loaded with 3 inch magnum buckshot, back to back with an AR-15? If you do, you will immediately notice the lack of recoil of the AR in comparison. It is not only far more accurate as a first shot hostage taker elimination round, but follow up shots are quick and easy, even on the move.
AR-15s are not difficult to operate (especially as this condescending sexist pig implied toward women, who not only serve in law enforcement, tactical units, and are int the military, such as my daughter, that they aren't capable of thinking of their own defense under pressure!), are lighter, have far less recoil (as I mentioned previously), are far more accurate, and are simple to work with. As with ALL firearms, it takes time and practice to be proficient.
An AR-15 is my primary home defense weapon. Why? For the reason listed above and more. Bad guys come in groups, well armed, and wear body armor at times. The AR-15 can defeat these. Why do we need high capacity magazines? We don't know what the bad guys will have, how many there will be, and I guarantee, that even I, and other highly trained weapons experts can miss in the real world with adrenaline flowing and shots being fired.
This article is not going to postulate on handguns, I will save that for another time, but I will say this: as a weapon, even as an officer on the street, when an armed confrontation is likely, it should always be the weapon of last resort. A shotgun is a wonderful weapon in very particular and limited applications. If you live alone, have no one but yourself to watch out for, and you can guarantee there is one intruder that you can identify and eliminate. The spread of buckshot means you won't miss your target inside a home, but if there are other people in the house, and they are your family, if they are in the vicinity, you CANNOT fire and be sure you won't hit the wrong person with one of those pieces of shot. The limited number of rounds always eliminates it as my first option in any situation anyway.
Lastly, the trump card of all of this is the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment was to quote Thomas Jefferson (and while I quote Thomas Jefferson, all of the Constitutional Framers echoed this statement), "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." He goes on to say, “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
Moreover, quoting Cesare Beccaria, "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they (the Government ) try to take it."
Trust me my friends, when they come, they don't want you to have assault weapons, because that is what they will be bringing, and the beauty of that, is the Founding Father's meant for us to able to meet the unlawful attack of our government on equal ground. They knew full well this day would likely come, and that is why I am against ALL of the proposed gun talks at all. The government, if it has no tyrannical desires, never needs to know what I have at home to protect my home, my family, and my life.
This government has tyrannical desires, but they cannot carry them out if they do not first disarm us. They realize that if we the people are willing to fight and die by the millions as free citizens rather than become subjects like the people under Adolph Hitler, they cannot win, for the whole nation will be destroyed. Ultimately, they must back down if they see our resolve, which is why I implore you to either speak out, or share this writing. They MUST know, because if they do, we can win without a shot ever being fired, and that should be the goal of every patriot.
~ Steve J., guest blogger
Sunday, February 24, 2013
An Open Letter To All Members Of The Armed Forces And Law Enforcement
We are living in a very scary time right now. The vast majority of Americans truly appreciate how perilous the jobs of you men and women who serve in this capacity are, and the sacrifices you make on our behalf. You deserve much more credit and support than you get from the government. They are all too willing to use your services on behalf of our country and then turn a blind eye to problems physical or mental that may arise from your service on our behalf.
Our forefathers fought an oppressive government for the right to live as free men and built those rights into the Constitution and the bill of rights we have been governed by ever since. Throughout our history our leaders have mostly been honorable men who tried to govern with wisdom and compassion. However there have always been some in politics who have been self servant with only their best interests at heart and there will always be some of those people who believe they are above the law and everyone else because of the positions they have been elected to. No one is above the law, not even the President of the United States, whoever that might be at the time!
Recent events here in America, tragic and senseless as they are have been the latest catalyst for some of those people in high positions in the government to try and take away the rights guaranteed to us by the governing laws our forefathers established. Laws established to always allow us to live as a free people and make it impossible for a corrupted government or foreign power to ever take our rights away from us as long as we are able to stand up to their attempted abuses of power.
Currently it is the second amendment of the Constitution under attack. The right to keep and bear arms. This governing law is essential in allowing us to remain a free society and our forefathers had the wisdom and insight to include it in our main governing document because they foresaw the possibility of a corrupt government trying to oppress the American people somewhere in the future just as the King of England had done to them. If the government is allowed to take this right away from the American people, then they will have the power to abolish ALL of the rest of the rights guaranteed to us by our forefathers as a free people.
The reason I am writing this letter addressed to all of you who serve us in this capacity and protect us on a daily basis is that one of these days a corrupt politician or group of politicians may call upon you to take up arms against us the American public. When you joined the military service or law enforcement you swore an oath to uphold the constitution we are governed by. Anyone who might order you to take up arms against your fellow Americans would be ordering you to violate the oath you swore to because they would be asking you to do so so that they could abolish the laws we are currently governed by and establish an Autocratic government in it's place where the only rights Americans have is what they decide people can have (which may very likely be none at all). There are millions of law abiding patriotic people in this country who are willing to try and protect those rights at all costs, but for a corrupted government to try and implement such a plan would require them to order people in the standing military to carry out those orders. Orders which would quite possibly require the members of the military to kill thousands upon thousands (possibly millions) of men, women and children who are your fellow citizens and very possibly your fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters, husbands, wives and children. Those not killed in a conflict like this would surely be forced to live under an oppressive regime with no rights at all should the government prevail.
You are our first best defense against this ever happening. You are the ones who are in a position because of your status to keep something like this from ever happening.
We know that to disobey orders from your superiors could carry a heavy penalty but there is precedent for the argument of doing so. In the prosecution summary by the prosecutors in the court martial of Lt. William Calley for the massacre of villagers of My Lai in the Viet Nam conflict under orders from his superior, they said that a soldier has to use common sense and disregard unjust orders. They have a duty to NOT blindly follow orders they know to be wrong morally. Soldiers cannot be mindless robots following orders just because some misguided military commander or politician tells them to if they know them to be morally unjust.
If the situation I have described ever comes to pass then all of you will have to make a decision as to whether what you are being ordered to do is right or wrong. If you feel it is wrong then you have a duty to disregard those orders. We truly hope that this scenario never happens but if it should you will be the ones who have the most power to stop it from happening. As stated previously, there are millions of loyal Americans willing to stand up to preserve freedom in this country. We would much much rather stand beside you in a fight to preserve freedom in this country than against you. A lot of good people would die on both sides and America would become vulnerable to attack from outside forces.
America is not perfect but it is still the best form of government in the world and has stood tall for 250 years. We would like to see it continue for another 250 years.
May God bless and watch over all of you where ever you may be.
Signed,
The American People
Our forefathers fought an oppressive government for the right to live as free men and built those rights into the Constitution and the bill of rights we have been governed by ever since. Throughout our history our leaders have mostly been honorable men who tried to govern with wisdom and compassion. However there have always been some in politics who have been self servant with only their best interests at heart and there will always be some of those people who believe they are above the law and everyone else because of the positions they have been elected to. No one is above the law, not even the President of the United States, whoever that might be at the time!
Recent events here in America, tragic and senseless as they are have been the latest catalyst for some of those people in high positions in the government to try and take away the rights guaranteed to us by the governing laws our forefathers established. Laws established to always allow us to live as a free people and make it impossible for a corrupted government or foreign power to ever take our rights away from us as long as we are able to stand up to their attempted abuses of power.
Currently it is the second amendment of the Constitution under attack. The right to keep and bear arms. This governing law is essential in allowing us to remain a free society and our forefathers had the wisdom and insight to include it in our main governing document because they foresaw the possibility of a corrupt government trying to oppress the American people somewhere in the future just as the King of England had done to them. If the government is allowed to take this right away from the American people, then they will have the power to abolish ALL of the rest of the rights guaranteed to us by our forefathers as a free people.
The reason I am writing this letter addressed to all of you who serve us in this capacity and protect us on a daily basis is that one of these days a corrupt politician or group of politicians may call upon you to take up arms against us the American public. When you joined the military service or law enforcement you swore an oath to uphold the constitution we are governed by. Anyone who might order you to take up arms against your fellow Americans would be ordering you to violate the oath you swore to because they would be asking you to do so so that they could abolish the laws we are currently governed by and establish an Autocratic government in it's place where the only rights Americans have is what they decide people can have (which may very likely be none at all). There are millions of law abiding patriotic people in this country who are willing to try and protect those rights at all costs, but for a corrupted government to try and implement such a plan would require them to order people in the standing military to carry out those orders. Orders which would quite possibly require the members of the military to kill thousands upon thousands (possibly millions) of men, women and children who are your fellow citizens and very possibly your fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters, husbands, wives and children. Those not killed in a conflict like this would surely be forced to live under an oppressive regime with no rights at all should the government prevail.
You are our first best defense against this ever happening. You are the ones who are in a position because of your status to keep something like this from ever happening.
We know that to disobey orders from your superiors could carry a heavy penalty but there is precedent for the argument of doing so. In the prosecution summary by the prosecutors in the court martial of Lt. William Calley for the massacre of villagers of My Lai in the Viet Nam conflict under orders from his superior, they said that a soldier has to use common sense and disregard unjust orders. They have a duty to NOT blindly follow orders they know to be wrong morally. Soldiers cannot be mindless robots following orders just because some misguided military commander or politician tells them to if they know them to be morally unjust.
If the situation I have described ever comes to pass then all of you will have to make a decision as to whether what you are being ordered to do is right or wrong. If you feel it is wrong then you have a duty to disregard those orders. We truly hope that this scenario never happens but if it should you will be the ones who have the most power to stop it from happening. As stated previously, there are millions of loyal Americans willing to stand up to preserve freedom in this country. We would much much rather stand beside you in a fight to preserve freedom in this country than against you. A lot of good people would die on both sides and America would become vulnerable to attack from outside forces.
America is not perfect but it is still the best form of government in the world and has stood tall for 250 years. We would like to see it continue for another 250 years.
May God bless and watch over all of you where ever you may be.
Signed,
The American People
Friday, January 11, 2013
Patriots and the Government
Today, Geraldo Rivera debated the issue of gun control on Fox News. Most of what he said was factually inaccurate, based on a dislike of guns, and straight out of the liberal anti-gun playbook. He stooped to a whole new level of ignorant demagoguery when he opined, that 2nd Amendment patriots are so "deeply suspicious of their own government, that it is bitterly ironic that it is also the same people who claim a mantle of patriotism; how could you not trust your government? What's going to happen? Are black helicopters going to come and kick down your door?"
What's going to happen? Why might people be leery of their own government? A simple four-word answer: Because they know history. Let us consider:
- How popular was the American government among the American Indians as our country expanded West? Was there not this little thing called "The Trail of Tears"? What of the deliberate attempts to infect Native Americans with smallpox?
- In Buck vs Bell (1927) the US Supreme Court upheld a state statute allowing for compulsory sterilization of the unfit. In the American eugenics movement, which was the basis for the "Final Solution" employed by the Nazis, the unfit were the poor, mentally retarded, and those deemed of "immoral character." In the ruling, the Court advocated that a pure gene pool outweighed the interests of the individual. "It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes," wrote Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
- The German government in the 1930s labeled Jews, gays, gypsies, and others as non-desirables. This led the government to confiscate their property, lock these undesirables away in concentration camps, and eventually implement a Final Solution to the Jewish problem in 1942.
- The government conducted an experiment on blacks residing in Macon County, Alabama between 1932-1972 in which 600 men were recruited and informed they were being treated for "bad blood." The doctors withheld life saving medicine from these men, and they watched-- under the guise of science and the purview of the government public health service-- as these men and many of their wives and children died. This heinous behavior of the US government directly led to the 1979 Belmont Report to ensure such inhumane experiments could not occur again.
- On May 4, 1970, the Ohio National Guard executed unarmed college students at Kent State in an attempt to disperse a peaceful protest against American involvement in Cambodia and Vietnam. 13 men and women were either wounded or killed by their government.
- In 1985, the government responded to complaints by neighbors around 6221 Osage Ave., in the Cobbs Creek area of West Philadelphia that the occupants (an organization called MOVE) were being obnoxious, that they were creating health hazards, and were illegally possessing firearms (as well as other allegations). A police stand-off ensued. To protect the lives of the police involved, a police helicopter dropped a 4 lb BOMB on the house. The resulting explosion caused the house to catch on fire, igniting a massive blaze that destroyed nearly 70 nearby houses. Eleven people, including 5 children, died.
- In 1992, the government constructed events to enable a confrontation with Randy Weaver. By the FBI's own admission, the charge against Randy Weaver had no legal merit, and yet they conducted a siege of Weaver's property, altered the ROEs to allow for the execution of anyone on the Weaver property and which was later deemed to be unconstitutional, and ultimately murdered Randy Weaver's wife and son. One of the snipers, Lon Horiuchi, was indicted for manslaughter but managed to wiggle his way out of trial thanks to the government protecting him. The government also settled out of court with Randy Weaver and his surviving daughters in their unlawful death suit.
I could provide other examples, but I think it fair to end with this final thought. Throughout history, we have seen atrocious behavior towards the people from their government, the very institution established to protect the people. In addition to the examples above, consider the following genocidal attempts made by various governments against its citizens in: Haiti, Mexico, USA, Germany, Sudan, Rwanda, Cambodia, Turkey, Soviet Union, China, Iraq, Pakistan, Ethiopia, Brazil, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Somalia.
There is a very scary, valid reason Ronald Reagan once said, "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
Perhaps instead of trying to find Al Capone's vault, Geraldo should have read a history book or two?
What's going to happen? Why might people be leery of their own government? A simple four-word answer: Because they know history. Let us consider:
- How popular was the American government among the American Indians as our country expanded West? Was there not this little thing called "The Trail of Tears"? What of the deliberate attempts to infect Native Americans with smallpox?
- In Buck vs Bell (1927) the US Supreme Court upheld a state statute allowing for compulsory sterilization of the unfit. In the American eugenics movement, which was the basis for the "Final Solution" employed by the Nazis, the unfit were the poor, mentally retarded, and those deemed of "immoral character." In the ruling, the Court advocated that a pure gene pool outweighed the interests of the individual. "It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes," wrote Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
- The German government in the 1930s labeled Jews, gays, gypsies, and others as non-desirables. This led the government to confiscate their property, lock these undesirables away in concentration camps, and eventually implement a Final Solution to the Jewish problem in 1942.
- The government conducted an experiment on blacks residing in Macon County, Alabama between 1932-1972 in which 600 men were recruited and informed they were being treated for "bad blood." The doctors withheld life saving medicine from these men, and they watched-- under the guise of science and the purview of the government public health service-- as these men and many of their wives and children died. This heinous behavior of the US government directly led to the 1979 Belmont Report to ensure such inhumane experiments could not occur again.
- On May 4, 1970, the Ohio National Guard executed unarmed college students at Kent State in an attempt to disperse a peaceful protest against American involvement in Cambodia and Vietnam. 13 men and women were either wounded or killed by their government.
- In 1985, the government responded to complaints by neighbors around 6221 Osage Ave., in the Cobbs Creek area of West Philadelphia that the occupants (an organization called MOVE) were being obnoxious, that they were creating health hazards, and were illegally possessing firearms (as well as other allegations). A police stand-off ensued. To protect the lives of the police involved, a police helicopter dropped a 4 lb BOMB on the house. The resulting explosion caused the house to catch on fire, igniting a massive blaze that destroyed nearly 70 nearby houses. Eleven people, including 5 children, died.
- In 1992, the government constructed events to enable a confrontation with Randy Weaver. By the FBI's own admission, the charge against Randy Weaver had no legal merit, and yet they conducted a siege of Weaver's property, altered the ROEs to allow for the execution of anyone on the Weaver property and which was later deemed to be unconstitutional, and ultimately murdered Randy Weaver's wife and son. One of the snipers, Lon Horiuchi, was indicted for manslaughter but managed to wiggle his way out of trial thanks to the government protecting him. The government also settled out of court with Randy Weaver and his surviving daughters in their unlawful death suit.
I could provide other examples, but I think it fair to end with this final thought. Throughout history, we have seen atrocious behavior towards the people from their government, the very institution established to protect the people. In addition to the examples above, consider the following genocidal attempts made by various governments against its citizens in: Haiti, Mexico, USA, Germany, Sudan, Rwanda, Cambodia, Turkey, Soviet Union, China, Iraq, Pakistan, Ethiopia, Brazil, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Somalia.
There is a very scary, valid reason Ronald Reagan once said, "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
Perhaps instead of trying to find Al Capone's vault, Geraldo should have read a history book or two?
Monday, January 7, 2013
The demise of literature through the Common Core Curriculum
Teachers often find it challenging to get kids to read this: "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us..."
This truism is one of the reasons why some English classes allow for the reading of this instead: "When I wake up, the other side of the bed is cold. My fingers stretch out, seeking Prim’s warmth but finding only the rough canvas cover of the mattress. She must have had bad dreams and climbed in with our mother. Of course, she did. This is the day of the reaping."
I am not comparing the present popularity of Suzanne Collins to the enduring beauty of Charles Dickens. I am merely pointing out that there's a reason that adults and educators lauded JK Rowling for re-introducing a love of reading and literature through Harry Potter-- the power of The Boy Who Lived, his struggles against He Who Must Not Be Named, and the sheer power of a world in which every fan ardently hopes that their Hogwarts acceptance letter merely got delayed by a wayward owl.
There is an innate power and majesty to literature. Some lingers with us as moral lessons (A Christmas Carol), others with profound and enduring political (The History of the Peloponnesian War) or psychological (Hamlet) insights. Others remind us of times long past, teaching us about our history and the roots of our present triumphs or failures (To Kill a Mockingbird). Others tell us something about the human condition (Moby Dick and The Joy Luck Club). All good literature (and arguably bad ones too) can teach the reader the power of the written word-- how a well turned phrase lingers in the mind and heart of the reader, and how a poor choice in words can alienate or "turn off" the reader.
Knowing this, then, I wonder why President Obama believes that reading something like this-- "It is the policy of the United States that Federal agencies conduct their environmental, transportation, and energy-related activities under the law in support of their respective missions in an environmentally, economically and fiscally sound, integrated, continuously improving, efficient, and sustainable manner... In implementing the policy set forth in section 1 of this order, the head of each agency shall: (a) improve energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions of the agency, through reduction of energy intensity by (i) 3 percent annually through the end of fiscal year 2015, or (ii) 30 percent by the end of fiscal year 2015, relative to the baseline of the agency’s energy use in fiscal year 2003..." -- will will inspire a love of learning and reading, or how it will linger in the hearts and minds of children readers.
He and a select others (notably NOT those who teach English or Literature) are replacing literary classics with things like he Federal Reserve Bank’s “FedViews,” “The Evolution of the Grocery Bag,” “Health Care Costs in McAllen, Texas," and “Executive Order 13423: Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management". Ostensibly this is because kids today just aren't prepared to be successful in college or on the job. One could argue that a better approach to fixing this wrong would be to not pass those who don't measure up, to ensure quality teachers, reduce the might of teachers unions who promote the better welfare of their members while undermining the welfare of students, pay teachers a salary commiserate with their importance and quality of performance, to not give trophies to kids for showing up, and to not dumb down classes for those who either refuse to participate fully in their education or those who refuse to learn English.
I believe the Common Core Curriculum not only dumbs down our education (consider its restriction on accelerated learning in math), it also fails to promote learning, competency, or success while simultaneously accomplishing what only bonfires used to do in Nazi Germany.
"You're talking about brainwashing!" you might say, surprised.
Yes, I am. Because I've read great classics like Atlas Shrugged, 1984, A Brave New World, and Fahrenheit 451. I also know enough about Eric Holder's past comments advocating for no less... and Obama's influences, so literarily expressed in Dreams of My Father, to know that this administration would do anything to promote its socialist agenda. Obama himself quite eloquently discusses his radical, Marxist, anti-American, anti-colonial, and pro-Muslim upbringing and deliberately cultivated experiences in his autobiography and in his comments to Arab newspapers.
Given this, should we be surprised that he would rather we read about how the grocery bag came to exist rather than how to critically consider what we read, to discover a passion for knowledge through the written word, to become inspired by literature, or be moved with passion over Sydney Carton's eloquent expression of self-sacrifice?
Ultimately, there is a reason that Einstein himself declared, "If you want your children to be intelligent, read them fairy tales. If you want them to be more intelligent, read them more fairy tales." Were he alive today, I imagine he would now encourage us to share Hogwarts with our students rather than EPA regulations.
Read more about the Common Core at:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/12/27/why-all-cool-kids-are-reading-executive-order-13423/?intcmp=trending#ixzz2H6pHqELt
and
http://www.redstate.com/candicelanier/2012/12/17/government-information-documents-replace-traditional-curriculum-as-feds-seize-more-control-of-schools/
This truism is one of the reasons why some English classes allow for the reading of this instead: "When I wake up, the other side of the bed is cold. My fingers stretch out, seeking Prim’s warmth but finding only the rough canvas cover of the mattress. She must have had bad dreams and climbed in with our mother. Of course, she did. This is the day of the reaping."
I am not comparing the present popularity of Suzanne Collins to the enduring beauty of Charles Dickens. I am merely pointing out that there's a reason that adults and educators lauded JK Rowling for re-introducing a love of reading and literature through Harry Potter-- the power of The Boy Who Lived, his struggles against He Who Must Not Be Named, and the sheer power of a world in which every fan ardently hopes that their Hogwarts acceptance letter merely got delayed by a wayward owl.
There is an innate power and majesty to literature. Some lingers with us as moral lessons (A Christmas Carol), others with profound and enduring political (The History of the Peloponnesian War) or psychological (Hamlet) insights. Others remind us of times long past, teaching us about our history and the roots of our present triumphs or failures (To Kill a Mockingbird). Others tell us something about the human condition (Moby Dick and The Joy Luck Club). All good literature (and arguably bad ones too) can teach the reader the power of the written word-- how a well turned phrase lingers in the mind and heart of the reader, and how a poor choice in words can alienate or "turn off" the reader.
Knowing this, then, I wonder why President Obama believes that reading something like this-- "It is the policy of the United States that Federal agencies conduct their environmental, transportation, and energy-related activities under the law in support of their respective missions in an environmentally, economically and fiscally sound, integrated, continuously improving, efficient, and sustainable manner... In implementing the policy set forth in section 1 of this order, the head of each agency shall: (a) improve energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions of the agency, through reduction of energy intensity by (i) 3 percent annually through the end of fiscal year 2015, or (ii) 30 percent by the end of fiscal year 2015, relative to the baseline of the agency’s energy use in fiscal year 2003..." -- will will inspire a love of learning and reading, or how it will linger in the hearts and minds of children readers.
He and a select others (notably NOT those who teach English or Literature) are replacing literary classics with things like he Federal Reserve Bank’s “FedViews,” “The Evolution of the Grocery Bag,” “Health Care Costs in McAllen, Texas," and “Executive Order 13423: Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management". Ostensibly this is because kids today just aren't prepared to be successful in college or on the job. One could argue that a better approach to fixing this wrong would be to not pass those who don't measure up, to ensure quality teachers, reduce the might of teachers unions who promote the better welfare of their members while undermining the welfare of students, pay teachers a salary commiserate with their importance and quality of performance, to not give trophies to kids for showing up, and to not dumb down classes for those who either refuse to participate fully in their education or those who refuse to learn English.
I believe the Common Core Curriculum not only dumbs down our education (consider its restriction on accelerated learning in math), it also fails to promote learning, competency, or success while simultaneously accomplishing what only bonfires used to do in Nazi Germany.
"You're talking about brainwashing!" you might say, surprised.
Yes, I am. Because I've read great classics like Atlas Shrugged, 1984, A Brave New World, and Fahrenheit 451. I also know enough about Eric Holder's past comments advocating for no less... and Obama's influences, so literarily expressed in Dreams of My Father, to know that this administration would do anything to promote its socialist agenda. Obama himself quite eloquently discusses his radical, Marxist, anti-American, anti-colonial, and pro-Muslim upbringing and deliberately cultivated experiences in his autobiography and in his comments to Arab newspapers.
Given this, should we be surprised that he would rather we read about how the grocery bag came to exist rather than how to critically consider what we read, to discover a passion for knowledge through the written word, to become inspired by literature, or be moved with passion over Sydney Carton's eloquent expression of self-sacrifice?
Ultimately, there is a reason that Einstein himself declared, "If you want your children to be intelligent, read them fairy tales. If you want them to be more intelligent, read them more fairy tales." Were he alive today, I imagine he would now encourage us to share Hogwarts with our students rather than EPA regulations.
Read more about the Common Core at:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/12/27/why-all-cool-kids-are-reading-executive-order-13423/?intcmp=trending#ixzz2H6pHqELt
and
http://www.redstate.com/candicelanier/2012/12/17/government-information-documents-replace-traditional-curriculum-as-feds-seize-more-control-of-schools/
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Sandy Hook Part 2: Discrepancies
I'm a father. The morning of the Sandy Hook shooting, I watched my daughter perform at her Christmas concert. My daughter is 6 years old, the same age as many of the Sandy Hook victims. At the same time that my little girl was singing her praise at the birth of Jesus, a madman slaughtered innocent lives. When I learned of the event, I was devastated. My wife cried for days, too easily imagining what it would feel if it had been our little girl. We kept her home from school the next day, and we talked to her about how even a school can be visited by evil. We wanted her to know how to protect herself, what to do if she ever heard gunfire in the hallways of her school. It was devastating to have to peel yet another layer of childhood innocence away from our little girl.
Beyond the grief of what happened, we know now that some are reacting angrily and some have even suggested reacting violently to what happened (see our earlier blog about this very issue). We know now that Obama has declared banning assault weapons to be his #1 priority. We know that Senator Feinstein has a bill that could well ban all guns depending on how liberally one interpreted the language of the bill. We see the names of gun owners being published in a NY newspaper and we see many bills in many states now advocating for gun bans. Those who oppose the 2nd Amendment are capitalizing on the Sandy Hook massacre. Perhaps that is to be expected.
But as I keep my eyes and ears open to anything other than what is peddled by the MSM, I am becoming concerned about the rising crop of discrepancies suggesting a conspiracy at Sandy Hook. Before reading further, please understand that I am not saying a tragedy didn't happen nor am I saying that people weren't killed there. I am questioning, however, the official narrative especially given how the liberal left is fully exploiting this to achieve an agenda that no other crisis in recent history has enabled them to do.
Without putting these in any order, this is what I have found:
1) Watch this video clip. It looks like he is faking this. Smiling at the beginning, almost looked like he was laughing. Look at his eyes, nose, mouth, and face coloring. There is no real emotion here-- nothing that would suggest distress, grief, anger, sorrow, or any emotion you might expect a father to show.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYt4T201Lrw
2) Look at this video clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSvzwDsgrs8; at about 1:38. Now the CNN caption merely describes them as parents of "two children at Sandy Hook." It doesn't say they are parents of slain children. However, the implication is that they are. However, there are no victims of Sandy Hook who share the same last name, much less named Phelps. Morever, "Nick Phelps" appears to get choked up, his voice cracking; no tears on either his or his wife's faces. Curious? Yes. There is an allegation (without evidence to corroborate it) that these are "crisis actors" employed by the government to train crisis personnel how to respond to emergencies. Here is a video describing, in part, how Nick Phelps' wife bears an uncanny resemblence to "Jennifer Sexton" who is allegedly associated w/ the Cathy Giffords shooting; this person alleges that Christina Taylor Green bears an uncanny resemblence to the daughter of Jennifer Sexton: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfScPPysADQ. Here is another link discussing "Nick Phelps" and his wife: http://politicaltrance.wordpress.com/tag/nick-phelps/.
3) There is (on Fb) floating around an image of Obama comforting the sisters of one of the slain Sandy Hook victims (Emile Parker). Also publically available is a family portrait of the family prior to the tragedy. Emile is shown wearing a beautiful red and black party dress... the same one as her sister in the image of Obama. Odd? Yes.
4) More discrepancies are noted in this article: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/12/20/sandy-hook-massacre-official-story-spins-out-of-control/. If you go here, you'll find video footage of the second gunman... now stripped out of the official narrative. You'll have audio feed of on the scene cops reporting on their chase of 2 gunmen. You'll see the conflicting reports of the weapon used, including original reporting that the Bushmaster rifle was found in the trunk of the shooter's car... then later it suddenly became the primary weapon used.
5) You should also note in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4CT4boLPrU that the sheriff says there will be local, state, and federal prosecution if anyone questions the official narrative.
I have no conclusions on this. I have not made up my mind about what all these discrepancies mean. Perhaps nothing. But it has been said there is no such thing as coincidence... and there are a lot of coincidences popping up as it pertains to the official narrative about what happened at Sandy Hook.
Beyond the grief of what happened, we know now that some are reacting angrily and some have even suggested reacting violently to what happened (see our earlier blog about this very issue). We know now that Obama has declared banning assault weapons to be his #1 priority. We know that Senator Feinstein has a bill that could well ban all guns depending on how liberally one interpreted the language of the bill. We see the names of gun owners being published in a NY newspaper and we see many bills in many states now advocating for gun bans. Those who oppose the 2nd Amendment are capitalizing on the Sandy Hook massacre. Perhaps that is to be expected.
But as I keep my eyes and ears open to anything other than what is peddled by the MSM, I am becoming concerned about the rising crop of discrepancies suggesting a conspiracy at Sandy Hook. Before reading further, please understand that I am not saying a tragedy didn't happen nor am I saying that people weren't killed there. I am questioning, however, the official narrative especially given how the liberal left is fully exploiting this to achieve an agenda that no other crisis in recent history has enabled them to do.
Without putting these in any order, this is what I have found:
1) Watch this video clip. It looks like he is faking this. Smiling at the beginning, almost looked like he was laughing. Look at his eyes, nose, mouth, and face coloring. There is no real emotion here-- nothing that would suggest distress, grief, anger, sorrow, or any emotion you might expect a father to show.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYt4T201Lrw
2) Look at this video clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSvzwDsgrs8; at about 1:38. Now the CNN caption merely describes them as parents of "two children at Sandy Hook." It doesn't say they are parents of slain children. However, the implication is that they are. However, there are no victims of Sandy Hook who share the same last name, much less named Phelps. Morever, "Nick Phelps" appears to get choked up, his voice cracking; no tears on either his or his wife's faces. Curious? Yes. There is an allegation (without evidence to corroborate it) that these are "crisis actors" employed by the government to train crisis personnel how to respond to emergencies. Here is a video describing, in part, how Nick Phelps' wife bears an uncanny resemblence to "Jennifer Sexton" who is allegedly associated w/ the Cathy Giffords shooting; this person alleges that Christina Taylor Green bears an uncanny resemblence to the daughter of Jennifer Sexton: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfScPPysADQ. Here is another link discussing "Nick Phelps" and his wife: http://politicaltrance.wordpress.com/tag/nick-phelps/.
3) There is (on Fb) floating around an image of Obama comforting the sisters of one of the slain Sandy Hook victims (Emile Parker). Also publically available is a family portrait of the family prior to the tragedy. Emile is shown wearing a beautiful red and black party dress... the same one as her sister in the image of Obama. Odd? Yes.
4) More discrepancies are noted in this article: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/12/20/sandy-hook-massacre-official-story-spins-out-of-control/. If you go here, you'll find video footage of the second gunman... now stripped out of the official narrative. You'll have audio feed of on the scene cops reporting on their chase of 2 gunmen. You'll see the conflicting reports of the weapon used, including original reporting that the Bushmaster rifle was found in the trunk of the shooter's car... then later it suddenly became the primary weapon used.
5) You should also note in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4CT4boLPrU that the sheriff says there will be local, state, and federal prosecution if anyone questions the official narrative.
I have no conclusions on this. I have not made up my mind about what all these discrepancies mean. Perhaps nothing. But it has been said there is no such thing as coincidence... and there are a lot of coincidences popping up as it pertains to the official narrative about what happened at Sandy Hook.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)