III Percent Patriots: Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. ~ Thomas Jefferson

Click the Image

Mar 8, 2012

President Baby Killer

Who Said Socialist Shit Birds Don't Flock Together

Selco's Global State of Survival & Preparedness survey

Selco has a in depth report on his Global State of Survival & Preparedness survey from last month.

Read the break down here.

Support Indiana SB1

Help support Indiana SB1. 

It reinforces the Castle Doctrine against unlawful police entry that the Indiana Supreme Court said citizens could not resist.

via ProLiberate

The text of SB 1 states that its legislative purpose “is to protect citizens from unlawful entry into their homes by law enforcement officers or persons pretending to be law enforcement officers. Both citizens and law enforcement officers benefit from clear guidance about the parameters of lawful home entry, which will reduce the potential for violence and respect the privacy and property of citizens.” 
To that end, the bill recognizes that an individual “may use force … to prevent or terminate a law enforcement officer’s unlawful entry.”

And you thought I was paranoid

Rifle, Drones & Bombs Oh My!!!

via Wirecutter

FBI director: Have to check whether targeted killing rule is outside US only

Published March 07, 2012
| FoxNews.com

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder's "three criteria" for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.
Pressed by House lawmakers about a recent speech in which Holder described the legal justification for assassination, Mueller, who was attending a hearing on his agency's budget, did not say without qualification that the three criteria could not be applied inside the U.S.
"I have to go back. Uh, I'm not certain whether that was addressed or not," Mueller said when asked by Rep. Kevin Yoder, R-Kan., about a distinction between domestic and foreign targeting
Yoder followed up asking whether "from a historical perspective," the federal government has "the ability to kill a U.S. citizen on United States soil or just overseas."
"I'm going to defer that to others in the Department of Justice," Mueller replied.
Indeed, Holder's Monday speech at Northwestern University seemed to leave the door open. While Holder speaks of Americans who lead al Qaeda overseas, the implications of the speech seem broad.
"First, the U.S. government has determined, after a thorough and careful review, that the individual poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States; second, capture is not feasible; and third, the operation would be conducted in a manner consistent with applicable law of war principles," Holder said.
Holder said the feasibility of capturing a U.S. citizen terrorist is "fact-specific and potentially time-sensitive."
"Given the nature of how terrorists act and where they tend to hide, it may not always be feasible to capture a United States citizen terrorist who presents an imminent threat of violent attack. In that case, our government has the clear authority to defend the United States with lethal force," he said.
Three Americans were killed last year when lethal force was used against American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. Awlaki is credited with helping plot the foiled Christmas Day bombing of Northwest Flight 253 by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and inspiring the Fort Hood shooting. The two others killed -- his son and a cohort who published his online terror magazine "Inspire" -- were considered by the U.S. to be collateral damage.
Asked about Mueller's response, the Justice Department said the answer is "pretty straightforward."
"The legal framework (Holder) laid out applies to U.S. citizens outside of U.S.," said a spokeswoman pulling excerpts from the attorney general's speech.
Holder said the circumstance were legal when it is a case of "an operation using lethal force in a foreign country, targeted against a U.S. citizen who is a senior operational leader of al Qaeda or associated forces, and who is actively engaged in planning to kill Americans.
The circumstances "are sufficient under the Constitution for the United States to use lethal force against a U.S. citizen abroad," Holder added.
However, the attorney general, referencing legal authority in the War on Terror that dates back to the George W. Bush administration, said the Obama administration is not bound to a particular battlefield.
"Neither Congress nor our federal courts has limited the geographic scope of our ability to use force to the current conflict in Afghanistan," he said.
Holder argued in his remarks that it is "simply not accurate" that the president must get permission from a federal court before taking action against a United States citizen terrorist.
"Due process and judicial process are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process," he said.
But Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, wrote in Foreign Policy magazine on Wednesday that Holder's remarks not only would be seen by the framers of the Constitution as "the very definition of authoritarian power," but were met "not with outcry but muted applause."
"Holder's new definition of 'due process' was perfectly Orwellian," Turley wrote. "What Holder is describing is a model of an imperial presidency that would have made Richard Nixon blush. ...
"Where due process once resided, Holder offered only an assurance that the president would kill citizens with care. While that certainly relieved any concern that Obama would hunt citizens for sport, Holder offered no assurances on how this power would be used in the future beyond the now all-too-familiar 'trust us' approach to civil liberties of this administration," he wrote.

And thanks again to Swamp Rat for kicking this along to me.

Got Peeps?


Going Old School

The ancients had ways that were just as effective today as they were then.   Plus they were simple to make.

I saw this on History Channel's "Ancient Discoveries" yesterday.

Just look at what happens when you burn feathers with charcoal and a little sulfur.  Nasty shit for something you can whip up from the BBQ pit and a pillow.

The content of the smoke was high in ammonia, sulfur dioxide & nitrogen dioxide.  The guy that did the analysis said that the ammonia content was so high that it would kill you with in 10 seconds of breathing.

Not to mention that the amount of smoke produced was comparable to a mil smoke grenade.

All kinds of nice info in the below link.

Bio & Chem Warfare in Ancient Times

Smoke Them Romans Out (187 BC) - The inhabitants of the town of Ambracia in Epirus dealt a setback to Roman soldiers seeking to tunnel under their walls: "Filling a huge jar with feathers, they put fire in it and attached a bronze cover perforated with numerous holes. After carrying the jar into the mine and turning its mouth toward the enemy, they inserted a bellows in the bottom, and by pumping the bellows vigorously they caused a tremendous amount of disagreeable smoke, such as feathers would naturally create, to pour forth, so that none of the Romans could endure it. As a result the Romans, despairing of success, made a truce and raised the siege." (Cassius Dio, Roman History, Book XIX)
transcript of episode
00:55:52>> narrator: NOW THE READINGS Must be analyzed to discover whether polybius' original descriptions of lethal compounds are correct.
00:56:00>> The concentrations we measured with the gasmet today certainly surprised me.
00:56:05I would have expected co and co2 as being normal products of combustion, but the high ammonia concentration is something that I wasn't expecting.
00:56:14We're recording levels that would render somebody incapable of breathing within seconds.
00:56:19>> narrator: THE LETHAL AMMONIA Was created out of protein strands in the chicken feathers.
00:56:24High concentrations can lead to encephalopathy, disease of the brain, followed by death.
00:56:32Ambracia fell three months later.
00:56:35But so impressed were the romans with the greeks' inventions that everyone in the city was spared.

A Modern Day Houdini

The folks at Briebart.com are releasing some of the what Andrew was talking about before his "convenient" heart attack.

More than that, a close associate of the Obama campaign, Harvard Law School’s Professor Charles Ogletree, admitted on our exclusive tape, “We hid this throughout the 2008 campaign. I don’t care if they find it now.”

 If you factor in what Sheriff Joe released about the BC.   

“A six-month long investigation conducted by my cold case posse has lead me to believe there is probable cause to believe that President Barack Obama’s long-form birth certificate released by the White House on April 27, 2011, is a computer-generated forgery,” Arpaio said according to the Washington Times.

What others have found with the SSN & Selective Service registration 
This is one of the numerous SocSec numbers Barry has used over the years – which is very, very common amongst hard-core Communists. In fact, Barry passed TWO SocSec numbers IN WASHINGTON D.C. after being elected to the U.S. Senate. He passed the Connecticut SocSec number beginning with 042 when he rented an apartment on Massachusetts Ave. in 2005. In 2008, he used a SocSec number beginning with 282 when he moved closer to the Hart Senate Office Building.
Then you know what's up.

If some one like you or I were found to have used 2 different SSN's and to have used visibly forged Selective Service cardsdocuments then we would have had the FBI and State Troopers crawling up our ass to see what we ate 2 weeks ago.

Instead the "great" law enforcement & investigative agencies of this nation just sit on their thumbs spinning scared. 

If they went crawling up ass of our leader Barry Soetero, the only thing they would find is a load of semen from one of his gay lovers.  Because all the incriminating evidence had been disappeared.