The American Ruling Class

[Mad Scientist]

Reminds me of the dairy farmer who was accused of destroying a wetland on his farm by filling it in. The particular wetland in question was a piece of land between a fence gate that lead out to a pasture. It seems that as his cows walked in and out through this gate they created a slight depression which in turn collected rain water and thus became a mud hole. Of course to the mind of a brain dead bureaucrat this was obviously a wetland and needed to be protected.

[rickoff]

Reminds me of the dairy farmer who was accused of destroying a wetland on his farm by filling it in.

Yes, these happenings just prove that some government agencies serve no really useful purpose whatsoever, and are unnecessary impediments to efforts made by the public to improve their properties.

There's a flip side to the wetlands issue, too. A few years ago there was a Maine property owner who had obtained a permit to construct a pond on his property. He did a really nice job of it, and it not only provided water resources for his property, but also served as a wildlife habitat enhancement. After he had completed the project, which was featured in a magazine article, the Maine Land Use Regulatory Commission (LURC) told him he would have to fill in the pond and restore that portion of the property to its original condition. There's just no end to the bureaucratic insanity, is there. If we fill in something they designate as a "wetland" area then we have to remove the fill, and if we create a "wetland" area then we have to fill it in. Makes a lot of sense, huh?

[Mad Scientist]

And the bureaucrats continue to march on, oblivious to common sense.
I just read this article about a couple that is be prevented from cleaning the trash off of their desert property.

Feds to landowner: Don’t touch that trash

[Mad Scientist]

From a state with already tough anti-gun laws, comes another mass shooting. It’s getting to be almost like clock work, whenever we start hearing stories of large numbers of people buying guns or a major set back in anti-gun laws (as just happened here in Illinois) it seems magically some brain dead drugged zombie pops up and goes out on a shooting spree. Then of course all of the usual suspects crawl out from under their rocks and wail about the senseless loss of live saying this proves we need even stronger gun laws.

But why is it that in shootings like this the shooter is always described as being in a dazed condition? To me this just reeks of a blatant in-your-face false flag attack. Some unlucky person who is already depressed and unstable is picked up drugged out of his mind, brain washed, and given a gun pointed at a target and told to start shooting.

What better way for the powers-that-be to advance their anti-gun agenda? This is simply a problem, reaction, solution scenario. First you create a problem, and then to the reaction of that problem you offer the solution that you want to see, and if some people die in the process “so what”.

[rickoff]

And the bureaucrats continue to march on, oblivious to common sense.
I just read this article about a couple that is be prevented from cleaning the trash off of their desert property.

Feds to landowner: Don’t touch that trash

Yes, and that's the story I featured in post #3629.

[rickoff]

From a state with already tough anti-gun laws, comes another mass shooting. It’s getting to be almost like clock work, whenever we start hearing stories of large numbers of people buying guns or a major set back in anti-gun laws (as just happened here in Illinois) it seems magically some brain dead drugged zombie pops up and goes out on a shooting spree. Then of course all of the usual suspects crawl out from under their rocks and wail about the senseless loss of live saying this proves we need even stronger gun laws.

But why is it that in shootings like this the shooter is always described as being in a dazed condition? To me this just reeks of a blatant in-your-face false flag attack. Some unlucky person who is already depressed and unstable is picked up drugged out of his mind, brain washed, and given a gun pointed at a target and told to start shooting.

What better way for the powers-that-be to advance their anti-gun agenda? This is simply a problem, reaction, solution scenario. First you create a problem, and then to the reaction of that problem you offer the solution that you want to see, and if some people die in the process “so what”.

I too see this as a very likely set-up, where the "shooter" is set up to take the fall. There are two possible scenarios in which the powers that be (TPTB) could be involved:

1. In this first scenario, Adam Lanza, the 20 year old boy found dead in the school, and dressed in black military attire, actually was the shooter, but had no part in planning this attack and would not even remember carrying it out if he were still alive. The same was true of Sirhan Sirhan, John Hinckley, and Lee Harvey Oswald. None of them had any recollection whatsoever of having shot anyone. And it's not because they were too whacked out on drugs, or so mentally deficient that they simply had no reliable memory. Had any of these men been in such a state of mind, they could not have followed through on pre-planning and accomplishing the objectives. TPTB know that they will be far more assured of a successful mission, and get a much better kill rate, if the shooter is fully alert and mentally capable, but is under hypnosis. Those who don't quite understand what is possible under hypnosis can read my post #3141. One factor I may not have mentioned in that post, however, is that the best candidates for hypnosis are intelligent people who have a wide variety of life experiences they can relate to, and are able to concentrate on what the hypnotist is saying without their mind drifting about. A drugged up, or mentally unstable person, therefore, makes a very poor "manchurian candidate."

2. In the second scenario, as controlled by TPTB, the "shooter" was not actually the shooter at all. He is simply a patsy set up to take the blame, much as I believe Lee Harvey Oswald was, and claimed to be. In this case TPTB have done their homework carefully. They look for a young man who does have some history of either mental instability or being a loner who doesn't get along well with others. With such instability, they don't really need to show that he had a motive - and everyone will figure he simply killed because he was nuts and had gone way off the deep end. They do, however, need to provide evidence to show that he had access to firearms, and if your objective is to ban assault weapons and handguns then the subject must be shown to have had easy access to both. So TPTB create gun registrations in the name of the subject's mother (unless she is already known to be an ardent gun owner). Later they go to the house where the subject and his mother reside, and taking the firearms with them (if she had none, or didn't have all that was needed). The mother is executed with one of the firearms, and the son is forced to put on a bullet proof vest under the garments that he will be found in later at the school. One operative drives the boy to the school in the family's SUV, while another one or two operatives remain at the house just long enough to plant certain types of "evidence" (computer files, Facebook posts, ammo, violence videos and games, receipts for certain "related merchandise," a journal containing confused and sick thoughts, etc.) that will be of "significance" when found later. At the school, the son is told to walk in through the door just ahead of the operative, and is then shot in the head once inside. Anyone able to view the actual shooter, or who emerges into the hallway corridor to see what is going on, is methodically and quickly killed with precision. With all witnesses killed, the operative leaves and escapes on foot to meet with his buddies who are waiting nearby. Everyone else is hiding inside the school in locked closets or rooms, sees nothing, and doesn't dare to come out of hiding until the police arrive several minutes later and start pounding on doors and calling out to survivors. The police figure, of course, that the dead boy killed himself after killing the 20 children and 6 adults, else why would he be found dead an wearing the attire he was found in? The police said they never fired a shot upon arriving, so they obviously didn't kill the boy. They didn't have to, because he was already dead.

Don't subscribe to either of those scenarios? Then script another scenario which makes more sense to you. That's what TPTB do, of course, and often times weeks or months in advance.

Yes, MS, this really does look like a problem-reaction-solution ploy. The problem, of course, actually being how TPTB can either get the public to surrender their guns, or take them by force. The problem, when presented to the public, is depicted through the mainstream media as being one of ever increasing and ever deadlier gun violence. The public reaction is designed to be of absolute horror and outrage, and what better way to accomplish that than to ensure the killing of multiple young and innocent children, as well as the "heroic" adults who would be sacrificed. No matter what news show you listen to on the TV, they will go on and on at questioning why it was so easy for the "shooter" to get access to these guns, and wondering out loud why anyone would need such lethal weapons in the first place. Barry plays his part in all of this of course, be it the shedding of tears (who hasn't seen that by now?) or advocating that strict gun control is needed. Parents across the nation who are worried sick that this could happen at the school their children attend will be meeting with school boards, police, and local and state politicians to demand that "something must be done" to prevent this from ever happening again. When that demand becomes loud enough, or is reported on TV as being so, Congress will step in and say, "we hear you," and will offer the solution, which in reality is what they wanted to do all along but hadn't been able to accomplish without the needed widespread and intense public reaction and demand that this event has provided.Once again, guns and ammo will be portrayed as instruments of death and destruction which should not be in the hands of anyone other than the military or police. Of course the reality is that if someone wants to kill others then a gun is really not needed. Children could be mown down by a vehicle as they wait in line to board a school bus, or could be killed just as easily by homemade pipe or fire bombs than by guns. Outlawing guns and ammo only assures that the only people retaining them will be outlaws or the authorities, and sometimes the difference between those two is difficult to see.

[jdodson]

Children could be mown down by a vehicle as they wait in line to board a school bus, or could be killed just as easily by homemade pipe or fire bombs than by guns.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/wo...hina.html?_r=0

Exactly rickoff, Ban guns?....What next ban knives too?
A man who sacrifices his Libery for Security, gets neither!

Maybe if those adults were trained and had access to a firearm they could have killed the attacker before the attacker killed them.

I personally will never abide by any form of gun ban.
I am a law abiding citizen and it is my right to protect myself!

[Mad Scientist]

, and sometimes the difference between those two is difficult to see.

Not that difficult if ones eyes are open.

I believe the problem with these scenarios is that for many people they simply cannot possibly imagine an individual, much less a group, which possesses evil of this magnitude such that they do not have any qualms about killing a bunch of children if it advances their goals. These people really what to believe in a “lone gunman” even when there is no credible evidence to do so. To do otherwise would make their world way too scary.

[rickoff]

I believe the problem with these scenarios is that for many people they simply cannot possibly imagine an individual, much less a group, which possesses evil of this magnitude such that they do not have any qualms about killing a bunch of children if it advances their goals. These people really want to believe in a “lone gunman” even when there is no credible evidence to do so. To do otherwise would make their world way too scary.

Exactly, MS. Believing in the lone, crazed gunman theory is so much easier for most people to swallow. Anything closer to the probable truth would cause mass hysteria and paranoia.

I'd be willing to bet that the clip of Barry saying, "Our hearts are broken," and wiping a "tear' from his left eye has been shown at least a thousand times already. I cannot believe that his "grief" is sincere. If it were, then he would have simply spoken from the heart, rather than reading a prepared speech written by someone else. The speech was most likely prepared well in advance of it being used. Barry is scheduled to appear in Newtown, Connecticut today to offer a speech to the townspeople. I'm sure he will include a promise to all the American public that he will do everything in his power to ensure that "what happened here in Newtown will never happen again anywhere in the United States." And of course that statement will get applauded loudly, and will be featured in TV news airings for weeks on end. All the other high profile shooting sprees will also be rehashed over and over again to drive the point home that there is way too much of this sort of violence, and that "something must be done."

In regards to the weapons used in this incident, we were first told that the Bushmaster .223 was found in the shooter's car, but that doesn't make much sense. A report by the forensic medical examiner confirms that all those persons killed were shot using the Bushmaster .223 semi automatic "assault rifle." If the rifle was in fact found in the car, then why would Adam Lanza have gone outside, placed the rifle in the car, and returned inside the school just to shoot himself? This makes much more sense under my 2nd scenario where the actual shooter takes the Bushmaster rifle outside and leaves it in the automobile after determining there is no immediate threat to him, and then walks away slowly so as not to draw attention to himself. Why would Adam not use all the ammo available to him to kill more people using the two handguns, and save the last round for himself if he really was hell bent on killing as many people as possible and taking his own life as a last act? And exactly what gun was used to kill Adam? Were either of the semi-automatic handguns found beside Adam used at all? Another thing - we were told that all the firearms found at the scene had been purchased legally, but how could that be so? From my understanding, Connecticut is one state that bans assault weapons. The Bushmaster .223 is a military grade weapon that is used by military snipers because of its relatively light weight, rapid fire, and extreme accuracy.

You may remember that the "Beltway shooter" used a Bushmaster .223, pictured below, which in fact was made here in Maine, and used the rifle with an optional tripod mounted up front, which is not shown here.

The Bushmaster factory in Windham, Maine, closed last year, and one of the reasons for closing was no doubt the amount of negative publicity that arose from the Beltway shootings, but was also in part due to the expense of defending Bushmaster against copyright infringement claims by Colt firearms. Interestingly, though, about half of the 73 employees were rehired by a new weapons startup business, Windham Weaponry, which was founded by the former owner of the Maine Bushmaster factory, and is located in the same building. As you can see, this newly formed company makes no bones of the fact that they are producing weapons, rather than just" guns." Just imagine the negative publicity they are likely to face in the days and weeks ahead unless they change the name to something which sounds less offensive to gun control advocates.

[rickoff]

The main obstacle to auditing the Federal Reserve

From this 1995 video of a speech given by "Dirty Harry" Reid, the US Senate majority leader, you would think that he is all for a full audit of the Fed, and that he would consider it a priority to bring up S202 for a Senate vote as quickly as possible. But that's not the case. Even before the House of Representatives voted 327:98 to pass Ron Paul's Audit The Fed bill last July, Dirt Harry had already said that he would not allow a vote on Audit The Fed in the Senate without first consulting with Ben Bernanke to determine if that would be acceptable to him. Rand Paul submitted the Senate version of Audit The Fed in January of 2011, so there is absolutely no excuse for this heel dragging and shelving by Reed. Of course Reid would claim that he referred this to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and that the committee is to blame if anyone is. There are 12 Democrat and 10 Republican members on the Committee, so not much chance of getting the Act out of committee. So far there are 37 cosponsors in the Senate, which of course falls short of a majority needed to pass the Act. Check the official cosponsor list, and if you don't see both of your state's Senators listed there then please get busy and hound them to be a cosponsor. Send them e-mails, call their local office, and comment on their You Tube and Facebook sites demanding that they add their name as a cosponsor, and pressure Harry Reid for an immediate Senate vote, or explain why they won't. And keep up the pressure - these Senate politicians certainly won't vote to pass, or even vote on Audit The Fed at all, if left to their own desires. It's easy to see why Dirty Harry is stalling the vote. Just read the description of S202: "A bill to require a full audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks by the Comptroller General of the United States before the end of 2012 and for other purposes." If the vote is put off until after 2012 expires, then the audit that the bill calls for will be impossible to achieve, and auditing the Fed goes back to square one. That, of course, has been the plan of Dirty Harry, Barry, and the Ruling Class elites all along. We probably won't succeed in forcing a Senate vote, but what can we say about ourselves if we don't at least try? A roll call vote would put every Senator on record as to whether he or she stands with the American People or the Federal Reserve banksters.

[Mad Scientist]

Isn’t it interesting how the MSM has had virtually noting much to say about auditing the FED. But that may change!
Check out David Wilcock’s site. Top Russian TV Station Exposes Financial Tyranny [PICS, VIDEO!]
Apparently Russian TV is about to do a major review of the history of the FED and how it went about acquired the world’s gold “to keep it from being stolen”.

Regarding the shooting here is a unique coincidence. Remember the Colorado shooting and the “joker” and how his father was scheduled to testify before a government committee about high level banking scandal?
Well guess what; it now appears that our current shooter’s father was also scheduled to testify before a government committee about high level banking scandal. (libor)

My Oh My what a strange coincidence.

[FuzzyTomCat]

Howdy all,

For those that are unfamiliar with rifles or the ammo that they use please see the attached image for a comparison between them. The recent assaults that were made used a rifle with a .223 [#26] caliber or possibly a 5.56 [#29-30](NATO) round which are the same physical size one is a NATO round with a little hotter load.



As you can see by the above rifle ammo illustration of #1 through #81 there is quite a range of sizes, some are specific to a particular weapon. The .223 (5.56) size was a caliber that was made originally for the military to cause casualties not deaths, with the thinking that the enemy had to care for the wounded and slow the opposition down, a more humane way of doing battle. The problem with being humane is your enemy usually isn't and doesn't adopt the same battle methods or equipment used against you, or in this case NATO and it's allies or members. The weapon of choice of our advisory or enemy is the Kalashnikov AK-47 or a model made by numerous manufactures world wide all using a 7.62 [#44] projectile which has much more fire power than the .223 caliber. The most dangerous to law enforcement probably is the .17 Hornady magnum rimfire [#9] it can easily penetrate several models of vests.

Kalashnikov AK-47 (stock model)


"LOOKS" are deceiving .....


For those whom have shot various rifles already know the comparison of a .223 (5.56) to a 7.62 caliber bullet is like comparing a weed whacker to a lawn mower, thank god these nut cases haven't figured that out yet.

[mbrownn]

Good man rickoff, don't let 'em grab your guns, learn the lesson of Europe, they have no guns and it's like being neutered.

When they banned the guns in Britain I worked at one of the 6 companies destroying the ammo. I personally destroyed 300 tonnes of it and not one round from the government, the criminals or the IRA. They still have their guns and ammo and have bought much more. Ask why they need it if we don't have any?

[gene gene]

Looking at $100 bills

This is REAL SCARY!!!!
http://http://demonocracy.info/infog...2012-2013.html

Gene

the right link-Federal Reserve's Money Printing Failure - Quantitive Easing (QE)

[rickoff]

Here's a link to a short video made by Senator Rand Paul that is well worth watching. Rand tells it like it is, and I applaud him for it. In a Senate with 100 members, there are very few that will stand with Rand to fight against government power grabs and constitutional abuses.