Behind The Woodshed Blogcaster – September 4, 2016.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
4BTWRLM178

Behind The Woodshed 3rd year Anniversary at Real Liberty Media

At the Situationally Aware Action Oriented Intelligence Center
Of Evolutionary Engagement

Open you a can

The Victory Against You in the Silent War is Your Silence

The Ring And The Nose

Protect Your Granted Rights

From the Jefferson Mining District front page, Click on the petition link. Thank you very much for defending your property and that of future generations, no the real ones, and additionally, for helping Jefferson Mining District help you.

Take This Baton

  • Mandatory vaccination in CA: let’s school a Federal Judge

    Judge Sabraw: here’s something you didn’t know about the DPT shot…

    I’ll repeat myself a bit here, in case you missed my last article. Then I’ll get into something else, something dangerous that a Federal Judge knows nothing about…

    Federal Judge Dana Sabraw is overseeing a lawsuit against mandatory vaccination in California.

    So far, Sabraw has denied a petition to suspend mandatory vaccination for school children while the case moves forward.

    He believes tradition and history are on the side of forced vaccinations. That’s because he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Or he’s just making it up out of thin air.

    As the LA Times reports: “U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw in San Diego wrote that state Legislatures have ‘a long history of requiring children to be vaccinated as a condition to school enrollment, and for as many years, both state and federal courts have upheld those requirements against constitutional challenge’.”

    I don’t see how Judge Sabraw’s opinion could be more ridiculous.

    Why? Because ‘the long history’ he refers to is quite different.

    The states have always upheld exemptions from vaccination on several grounds: medical waiver, religious objection, philosophical objection. Hello? THAT’S the tradition.

    SB277, the new CA law, goes against the tradition, to say the very least. SB277 breaks new ground in allowing the state to operate as a medical fascist in the area of vaccinations.

    So…let’s look at one of the mandatory vaccines that’ll be injected into children in California, whether their parents agree or not. I’m talking about the DTP shot—diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough). Let’s give Judge Sabraw a history lesson. You know: actual history.

    Buckle up.

     

  • District Attorney Nico LaHood says vaccines cause Autism

    Bexar County District Attorney Nico LaHood is making a bold statement about vaccines.

    In a video posted on Facebook by the Autism Media Channel, LaHood says:

    “I’m Nico LaHood. I’m the criminal district attorney in San Antonio, Texas. I’m here to tell you that vaccines can and do cause autism,” says LaHood in a promotional video for the movie ‘VAXXED.’

    The 21 second clip, which includes a full screen that reads “THE PROSECUTOR: Nico’s story coming August 30, 2016,” has received hundreds of shares and nearly 30,000 views.

    LaHood and his wife are parents to one autistic child and the couple has participated in many Autism awareness-related events.

    The Centers for Disease Control states vaccines do not cause Autism Spectrum Disorder.

    If you’re interested in watching the movie, VAXXED is available online, in a limited number of theaters and soon on DVD.

    CLICK HERE to learn more…

CDC Plan To Indefinitely Detain HEALTHY People

  • CDC Claims It Can Indefinitely Detain Healthy People Without Appeal

    Description: Based on CDC’s 8/15/16 publication of ‘ Rules for the Control of Communicable Diseases’, the CDC is giving itself the power to forcibly apprehend healthy people en masse and detain them indefinitely with no process of appeal.

    Kindly enough the CDC is giving the public until 10/14/2016 to comment on its new found extra-Constitutional power,
    “and whether there are any public concerns with the absence of a specific maximum apprehension period in the regulation.”

    Of course and as would be expected from a totalitarian unconstitutional power grab,
    “When an apprehension occurs, the individual is not free to leave or discontinue his/her discussion with an HHS/CDC public health or quarantine officer.”

    Moreover, the CDC also would like the public’s input on the fact their power is not limited to just individual persons but rather they could apprehend entire cities in mass if they so desired:
    “HHS/CDC specifically requests public comment on this proposed provision to issue Federal orders to entire groups rather than individuals.”

    And as is to be expected since its impossible to give a medical examine to an entire city, the CDC would also like your comments on the fact
    “the proposed practice to issue Federal orders before a medical examination has taken place.”
    For those wishing to give the CDC their requested comments on their new found powers, the link to make such comments can be found under the SOURCE links at the end of this article. Anyone who is interested would do well to read the CDC’s entire publication in the Federal Register.

    The CDC’s claimed power follows these Stages:
    1 You (or your city) are declared “precommunicable”
    2 Apprehension and Detention [A&D] 3 Order of Isolation, Quarantine, or Conditional Release

    More details and Source links available at https://pissinontheroses.blogspot.com…

     

  • Control of Communicable Diseases A Proposed Rule by the Health and Human Services Department on 08/15/2016

    Here’s a perfect example of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and request for public comment as required under The Administrative Procedures Act. This one has a 2 month comment period. Beyond the fact that is a legal requirement for the agency to publish this solicitation for public comment, is it important to us?

    It’s hugely important! Firstly, it makes for a permanent public record of the submitted comments, which the agency is required to consider and address in its final rule, and secondly, the proper issuance of comment gives the commenter legal standing to challenge the final rule with an action for injunctive relief against its implementation. Without this comment, it is likely that any attempt at such action would be summarily dismissed for a lack of standing by the petitioner.
    As one can see, even submitting a proper comment is a significant investment of time, not to mention the necessary effort and insight to “decode” the actual meanings of the proposed rules, and this is one of the ways we as “The People” are simply overwhelmed by this occupying monster we call government.
    I’ve highlighted just some of the areas of interest and potential targets of comment. Some are more important than others, but they’re all important. I’m afraid you’ll have to search and read the complete areas highlighted for a complete understanding of the section in question. The entire posting is found at the hyperlink below. (‘Ctrl F’ is your friend) {Click for the rest . . .}

 

Certifiable Cancer Crime

  • Chemotherapy warning after deaths from cancer fighting drugs

    Patients should be warned about the dangers of chemotherapy after research showed that cancer drugs are killing up to 50 per cent of patients in some UK hospitals.
    For the first time researchers looked at the numbers of cancer patients who died within 30 days of starting chemotherapy, which indicates that the medication is the cause of death, rather than the cancer.
    The study by Public Health England and Cancer Research UK found that across England around 8.4 per cent of patients with lung cancer, and 2.4 per cent of breast cancer patients died within a month.
    But in some hospitals the figure was far higher. In Milton Keynes the death rate for lung cancer treatment was 50.9 per cent, although it was based on a very small number of patients.

     

Aren’t Cures Illegal?

  • Scientists might have accidentally found a cure for cancer

    Scientists might have accidentally made a huge step forward in the search for a cure for cancer — discovering unexpectedly that a malaria protein could be an effective weapon against the disease.
    Danish researchers were hunting for a way of protecting pregnant women from malaria, which can cause huge problems because it attacks the placenta. But they found at the same time that armed malaria proteins can attack cancer, too — an approach which could be a step towards curing the disease.
    Scientists have combined the bit of protein that the malaria vaccine uses to bury into cells it with a toxin — that can then bury into cancer cells and release the toxin itself, killing them off.
    The scientists have found that in both cases the malaria protein attaches itself to the same carbohydrate. It is the similarities between those two things that the cure could exploit.
    The carbohydrate ensures that the placenta grows quickly. But the team behind the new findings have detailed how it serves the same function in tumours — and the malaria parasite attaches itself to the cancerous cells in the same way, meaning that it can kill them off.
    Scientists said that they had been searching for a long time for a way to exploit the similarities between the placenta and the tumour.
    Cancer breakthrough revealed
    “For decades, scientists have been searching for similarities between the growth of a placenta and a tumor,” said Ali Salanti from University of Copenhagen. “The placenta is an organ, which within a few months grows from only few cells into an organ weighing approx. two pounds, and it provides the embryo with oxygen and nourishment in a relatively foreign environment. In a manner of speaking, tumors do much the same, they grow aggressively in a relatively foreign environment.”
    The process has already been tested in cells and on mice with cancer, with the findings described in a new article for the journal Cancer Cell. Scientists hope that they can begin testing the discovery on humans in the next four years.

Planting Evidence

  • The DEA Is Placing Kratom And Mitragynine On Schedule I

    The U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency has filed a notice of intent (PDF) to place the southeast Asian plant called kratom to the most restrictive classification of the Controlled Substances Act. The plant, Mitragyna speciosa, and its two primary constituents, mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine, will be temporarily placed onto Schedule I on September 30, according to a filing by the DEA at 8:45 am Eastern time today. The full announcement is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register tomorrow, August 31.

    Related – DEA Argues No Need For Public Comment Before Kratom Ban

    Various forms of kratom and teas made from the plant’s leaves are sold in cafes and on the internet. Their primary effect is to provide a short-lived peaceful and calm feeling that is described as pleasant. Consistent with this effect being opioid-like, anecdotal reports indicate that some users have used kratom to successfully recover from physical and psychological dependence on prescription opioids and heroin. Comments on my last report on kratom have also indicated the successful use of teas made from the plant in managing chronic pain without the side effects and addictive potential of prescription opioids like oxycodone, hydrocodone and morphine.

     

  • ACTION ALERT!!!: 8-31-16 – Help Stop The DEA’s Attack On Kratom

The 2nd & Medical Infringement

  • US Court Upholds Ban on Gun Sales to Marijuana Card Holders

    A federal ban on the sale of guns to medical marijuana card holders does not violate the Second Amendment, a federal appeals court said Wednesday.

    The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals applies to the nine Western states that fall under the court’s jurisdiction, including California, Washington and Oregon.

    It came in a lawsuit filed by S. Rowan Wilson, a Nevada woman who said she tried to buy a firearm for self-defense in 2011 after obtaining a medical marijuana card. The gun store refused, citing the federal rule banning the sale of firearms to illegal drug users.

    Marijuana remains illegal under federal law.

    Wilson said she was not a marijuana user, but obtained the card in part as an expression of support for marijuana legalization.

    She challenged guidance issued by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in 2011 that said gun sellers should assume people with medical marijuana cards use the drug and not sell them firearms.

    The 9th Circuit in its 3-0 decision said it was reasonable for federal regulators to assume a medical marijuana card holder was more likely to use the drug.

    The court also said Congress had reasonably concluded that marijuana and other drug use “raises the risk of irrational or unpredictable behavior with which gun use should not be associated.”

     

Free Speech or CENTSorship

  • YouTube Says No to Sexual Humor, Profanity, Partial Nudity, Political Conflict, and ‘Sensitive Subjects’ In Partner Content

    There goes YouTube? The online-video monarch just released new* publicized rules prohibiting everything from “sexual humor” to any depiction of drug use to “sensitive topics” such as politics and war on its “advertising-friendly” video content. If it’s not a Christian music video, a beauty vlog, or a hamster on a piano, it’s probably a no-no under YouTube’s newly-clarified terms of service for anyone hoping to monetize their channel.

    YouTube content publishers—both those who are exclusively YouTube phenomenons and the offline comics, artists, journalists, and activists who rely on the site to spread (and help fund) their work—have been aghast at the platform’s seemingly new policy, with #YouTubeIsOverParty now trending on Twitter. (See a sampling of those tweets below.)

Two Dare Witness Treason

  • Architect of the ‘New World Order’ is Giving up on America’s Empire

    Foreign policy lunatic, architect of the ‘New World Order,’ and personal mentor to Barack Obama, Zbigniew Brzezinski, appears to have abandoned his lifelong dream of a complete, unchallenged American empire. He is now yielding to what he refers to as a “global realignment,” instead.
    Some of Brzezinski’s most notable foreign policy achievements to date include brokering the Israel-Egypt peace treaty, actively supporting Poland’s opposition Solidarity movement, providing covert support for national independence movements in the former Soviet Union, and normalizing relations between the U.S. and China. Most notoriously, Brzezinski was instrumental in providing assistance to the Afghan mujahideen fighters who were battling the Soviet invasion (these fighters became the bulk of al-Qaeda and included Osama bin Laden). He was also a strong advocate of NATO expansion in the face of Vladimir Putin’s rise to power in Russia.
    However, Brzezinski appears to have abandoned his former fears of Russia and has shifted his attitude to adapt to five main developments, which he concedes are redistributing global political power. Namely, these five changes are that (1) following complex geopolitical shifts in regional balances, the U.S. is no longer the globally imperial power it once was; (2) Russia is experiencing the “latest convulsive phase of its imperial devolution,” as he describes it; (3) China is rising steadily and slowly enough so as not to pose an outright military challenge to the U.S. (for now); (4) Europe is no longer likely to become a global power; (5) the violent political awakening among post-colonial Muslims is a belated reaction to years of suppression by European states.
    However, Brzezinski still posits that the U.S. must take the lead in realigning this global power structure by “elaborating” on the five aforementioned developments. This suggests that Brzezinski still intends for the U.S. to have the upper hand in all of the world’s future developments. The essence of his argument is basically that even though the U.S. can no longer bully every country on earth, they should at least maintain as much influence in the world as possible.

     

  • US Government Says It’s No Longer Against al-Qaeda

    Central to America’s war against terrorism was al-Qaeda as being the specific target, but, on August 16th, a US Defense Department spokesperson said that al-Qaeda is no longer an enemy of the United States at all, and that only ISIS is America’s enemy in the war against terrorism. However, Congress never authorized anything but al-Qaeda to be the enemy in the war against terrorism. Consequently, President Obama is now violating the law by his no longer targeting al-Qaeda at all, and he is also ignoring the law by his targeting ISIS (as he has long been doing) without requesting a new authorization from Congress to do so – an authorization that both Democrats and Republicans in Congress would be virtually certain to grant immediately. This new war-authorization would need to rectify a key failing of the original war-authorization, by naming «jihadism» specifically as America’s enemy, so that regardless of what a particular jihadist group is, it can legally be a target to eliminate. Under the existing resolution, only al-Qaeda can be targeted, because that was the group which was ultimately determined to have caused 9/11, and because the existing war-authorization is restricted to only the organization that perpetrated that specific jihadist act. This new war-authorization would thus need to replace, instead of modify, the existing authorization, so that US military action can legally be taken against any jihadist group, and not only (as at present) against al-Qaeda.

Evidence Doesn’t Fit? Must Acquit?

  • FBI Evidence Proves Innocence of Accused Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

    I have been contacted by attorney John Remington Graham, a member in good standing of the bar of the Minnesota Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court. He informs me that acting in behalf of Maret Tsanaeva, the aunt of the accused Tsamaev brothers and a citizen of the Kyrgyz Republic where she is qualified to practice law, he has assisted her in filing with the US District Court in Boston a pro se motion, including an argument of amicus curiae, and an affidavit of Maret Tsarnaeva. The presiding judge has ordered that these documents be included in the formal record of the case so they will be publicly accessible. The documents are reproduced below.

    The documents argue that on the basis of the evidence provided by the FBI, there is no basis for the indictment of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. The FBI’s evidence clearly concludes that the bomb was in a black knapsack, but the photographs used to establish Dzhokhar’s presence at the marathon show him with a white knapsack. Moreover, the knapsack lacks the heavy bulging appearance that a knapsack containing a bomb would have.

    As readers know, I have been suspicious of the Boston Marathon Bombing from the beginning. It seems obvious that both Tsamaev brothers were intended to be killed in the alleged firefight with police, like the alleged perpetrators of the Charlie Hebdo affair in Paris. Convenient deaths in firefights are accepted as indications of guilt and solve the problem of trying innocent patsies.

    In Dzhokhar’s case, his guilt was established not by evidence but by accusations, by the betrayal of his government-appointed public defender Judy Clarke who declared Dzhokhar’s guilt in her opening statement of her “defense,” by an alleged confession, evidence of which was never provided, written by Dzhokhar on a boat under which the badly wounded youth lay dying until discovered by the boat owner and hospitalized in critical condition. Following his conviction by his defense attorney, Dzhokhar allegedly confessed again in jihadist terms. As legal scholars have known for centuries, confessions are worthless as indicators of guilt.

    Dzhokhar was not convicted on the basis of evidence.

    In my questioning of John Remington Graham, I concluded that despite 48 years of active experience with criminal justice, both as a prosecuting attorney and defense attorney, he was shocked to his core by the legal malfeasance of the Tsarnaev case. As Graham is nearing the end of his career, he is willing to speak out, but he could not find a single attorney in the state of Massachusetts who would sponsor his appearance before the Federal District Court in Boston.

    This tells me that fear of retribution has now extended its reach into the justice (sic) system and that the America that we knew where law was a shield of the people no longer exists.

    Here is the Affidavit of Maret Tsarnaeva:

    AFFIDAVIT OF MARET TSARNAEVA CONCERNING THE PROSECUTION OF DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV

    Mindful that this affidavit may be filed or displayed as an offer of proof with her authorization in public proceedings contemplated by the laws of the United States of America, and in reliance upon Title 28 of the United States Code, Section 1746, Maret Tsarnaeva deposes and says:

    I am the paternal aunt of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev who has been prosecuted before the United States District Court for Massachusetts upon indictment of a federal grand jury returned on June 27, 2013, for causing one of two explosions on Boylston Street in Boston on April 15, 2013. In the count for conspiracy, certain other overt acts of wrongdoing are mentioned. As I understand the indictment, if Dzhokhar did not carry and detonate an improvised explosive device or pressure-cooker bomb as alleged, all thirty counts fail, although perhaps some lingering questions, about which I offer no comment here, might remain for resolution, subject to guarantees of due process of law, within the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

    I am currently living in Grozny, the capital of Chechnya which is a republic within the Russian Federation. My academic training included full-time studies in a five-year program of the Law Faculty at the Kyrgyz State University, and I also hold the degree of master of laws (LL. M.), with focus on securities laws, granted by the University of Manitoba while I lived in Canada. I am qualified to practice law in Kyrgyzstan. I am fluent in Russian, Chechen, and English, and am familiar with other languages. I am prepared to testify under oath in public proceedings in the United States, if my expenses are paid, and if my personal safety and right of return to my home in Chechnya are adequately assured in advance.

    Aside from other anomalies and other aspects of the case on which I make no comment here, I am aware of several photo exhibits, upon which the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) relied, or of evidence which their crime laboratory has produced, and certain other reports or material. Together, these plainly show that Dzhokhar was not carrying a large, nylon, black backpack, including a white-rectangle marking at the top, and containing a heavy pressure- cooker bomb, shortly before explosions in Boston on April 15, 2013, as claimed by the FBI and as alleged in the indictment for both explosions. On the contrary, these photo exhibits show unmistakably that Dzhokhar was carrying over his right shoulder a primarily white backpack which was light in weight, and was not bulging or sagging as would have been evident if it contained a heavy pressure-cooker bomb. The only reasonable conclusion is that Dzhokhar was not responsible for either of the explosions in question.

    On or about June 20-21, 2013, during their first trip to Russia, which lasted about ten days more or less, Judy Clarke and William Fick, lawyers from the federal public defender’s office in Boston, visited my brother Anzor Tsarnaev, and his wife Zubeidat, respectively the father and mother of Dzhokhar. The meeting was at the home of Dzhokhar’s parents in Makhachka which is in the republic of Dagestan adjacent to the republic of Chechnya, and about three hours’ drive from Grozny. My mother, my sister Malkan, and I were present at this meeting. Zubeidat speaks acceptable English. Mr. Fick is fluent in Russian.

    Laying aside other details of the conversation on June 20-21, 2013, I wish to note the following:

    — The lawyers from Boston strongly advised that Anzor and Zubeidat refrain from saying in public that Dzhokhar and his brother Tamerlan were not guilty. They warned that, if their advice were not followed, Dzhokhar’s life in custody near Boston would be more difficult;

    — Mme Clarke and Mr. Fick also requested of Anzor and Zubeidat that they assist in influencing Dzhokhar to accept the legal representation of the federal public defender’s office in Boston. Mr. Fick revealed that Dzhokhar was refusing the services of the federal public defender’s office in Boston, and sending lawyers and staff away when they visited him in custody. In reaction to the suggestion of Mr. Fick, lively discussion followed;

    — As Dzhokhar’s family, we expressed our concern that the federal public defender’s office in Boston was untrustworthy, and might not defend Dzhokhar properly, since they were paid by the government of the United States which was prosecuting him, as many believe for political reasons. Dzhokhar’s parents expressed willingness to engage independent counsel, since Dzhokhar did not trust his government-appointed lawyers. Mr. Fick reacted by saying that the government agents and lawyers would obstruct independent counsel;

    — I proposed that Dzhokhar’s family hire independent counsel to work with the federal public defender’s office in order to assure proper and effective representation of Dzhokhar. Mr. Fick replied that, if independent counsel were hired by the family, the federal public defender’s office in Boston would withdraw;

    — Mr. Fick then assured Anzor and Zubeidat that the United States Department of Justice had allotted $5 million to Dzhokhar’s defense, and that the federal public defender’s office in Boston intended to defend Dzhokhar properly. Zubeidat then and there said little concerning assurances of Mr. Fick. But for my part, I never believed that the federal public defender’s office in Boston ever intended to defend Dzhokhar as promised. And my impressions from what happened during the trial lead me to believe that the federal public defender’s office in Boston did not defend Dzhokhar competently and ethically.

    In any event, I am aware that, following the meeting on June 20-21, 2013, Mme Clarke and Mr. Fick continued to spend time with Anzor and Zubeidat, and eventually persuaded Zubeidat to sign a typed letter in Russian to Dzhokhar, urging him to cooperate wholeheartedly with the federal public defender’s office in Boston. I am informed by my sister Malkan, that Zubeidat gave the letter to the public defenders, shortly before their departure from Russia on or about June 29, 2013, for delivery to Dzhokhar.

    During subsequent trips Mme Clarke and Mr. Fick to see Dzhokhar’s parents in Makhachkala, the strategy for defending Dzhokhar was explained, as I learned from my sister Malkan. The public defender’s office in Boston intended to contend at trial, as actually has happened since, that Tamerlan, now deceased, was the mastermind of the crime, and that Dzhokhar was merely following his big brother. I was firmly opposed to this strategy as morally and legally wrong, because Dzhokhar is not guilty, as FBI-generated evidence shows. Some ill- feeling has since developed between myself and Dzhokhar’s parents over their acquiescence.

    On or about June 19, 2014, during their visit to Grozny over nearly two weeks, three staff members from the public defender’s office in Boston visited my mother and sisters in Grozny. I am told that they also visited Dzhokhar’s parents in Makhachkala.

    The personnel visiting my mother and sisters in Grozny on or about June 19, 2014, included one Charlene, who introduced herself as an independent investigator, working in and with the federal public defender’s office in Boston; another by the name of Jane, a social worker who claimed to have spoken with Dzhokhar; and a third, by the name of Olga, who was a Russian- English interpreter from New Jersey. They did not leave business cards, but stayed at the main hotel in Grozny, hence I presume that their surnames can be ascertained.

    I was not present at the meeting in Grozny on or about June 19, 2014, but my sister Malkan, who was present, called me by telephone immediately after the meeting concluded. She revealed to me then the details of the conversation at the meeting. Malkan and I have since spoken about the visit on several occasions.

    Malkan speaks Russian and Chechen and is willing to testify under oath in public proceedings in the United States through an interpreter in Russian, if her expenses are paid, and if her personal safety and right of return to her home in Chechnya are adequately assured in advance. She relates, and has authorized me to state for her that, during the conversation on June 19, 2014, in Grozny, Charlene the independent investigator stated flatly that the federal public defender’s office in Boston knew that Dzhokhar was not guilty as charged, and that their office was under enormous pressure from law enforcement agencies and high levels of the government of the United States not to resist conviction. [Remember what happened to Lynne Stewart, the federally appointed public defender who actually served her client. She was sentenced to prison.]

    This affidavit is executed outside of the United States, but the foregoing account is true to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, and subject to the pains and penalties of perjury under the laws of the United States of America.

    Given on this 17th day of April 2015.

    /s/ Maret Tsarnaeva

     

Hot Diggity Doge

Doge Of War CoinThe Weekend War Report
 

Defending with
The DOGE OF WAR
D8rgRZjcBPLAhvmUazYXxCZasueoEmP7VG

Unleash the Power of the DOGE OF WAR
Please Donate to RLM

In This Doge Eat Doge World

Tox:
Secure Private Alternative To Skype

Client Side only as of 4/15/2016 Jitsi:
Dump Skype – Piss Off The NSA

RakEM!

Required Reading

Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars

  • The people know that they have created this farce and financed it with their own taxes (consent), but they would rather knuckle under than be the hypocrite. Factor VI – Cattle Those who will not use their brains are no better off than those who have no brains, and so this mindless school of jelly-fish, father, mother, son, and daughter, become useful beasts of burden or trainers of the same.
  • Mr. Rothschild’s Energy Discovery
    What Mr. Rothschild [2] had discovered was the basic principle of power, influence, and control over people as applied to economics. That principle is “when you assume the appearance of power, people soon give it to you.”

Can’t Be Fixed Unless
YOU bring “Them” BEHIND THE WOODSHED
Listen How
 

The Law of War

Where Not Throwing Oppression Off, You Live Either Under an Occupation or by Conquest.

The Choice and Responsibility are Yours. United We Strike

Behind The Woodshed for that practical education & hard but necessary dose of reality.

Spread The Word Behind The Woodshed.

(^_^)

4

Similar Posts:

Behind The Woodshed for that practical education & hard but necessary dose of reality. B.Y.O.B. : Bring Your Own Brain. Spread The Word. (^_^)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

What is 4 + 13 ?
Please leave these two fields as-is:
IMPORTANT! To be able to proceed, you need to solve the following simple math (so we know that you are a human) :-)