Archive for July 2013

Mercenaries — UN Troops – What’s the Difference?   Leave a comment

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

This refers to King George hiring foreign mercenary troops to fight against the colonists. Remember the Hessians?

Again, we’re not living the same experience as the colonists, but there are similarities. Consider that President Obama and his administration tend to think we ought to follow United Nations’ edicts. Consider that federal officials frequently override state laws that are appropriate within that state. Was anyone being hurt by Jim Wilde not having his boat registered on the Yukon River? State of Alaska Troopers and Fish & Game officers didn’t think it was important enough to bother him. The National Park Service, however, though it was worth boarding his boat and threatening his passengers with guns.

http://www.adn.com/2010/09/30/1480077/state-supports-man-arrested-on.html

Are we sure we want to get to a point where Obama or some future president authorizes the blue helmets into, say, Alaska to calm us all down and force us to be good little socialists?

Plundering & Ravishing   16 comments

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
King George had declared war on the Americans. British troops had burned several American towns, considering Americans to be in open rebellion against their lawful rulers. For the Americans, their “lawful rulers” were the very colonial legislatures and town meetings that were declared closed by British decrees and were under attack by British troops.

No, as far as I know, President Obama is not burning our towns. Do we want for it to get that far?

Just in the last year, there have been several instances of federal troops conducting “training exercises” in American towns and cities — Houston, Miami, Port Angeles WA, and others. The exercises included Apache helicopters flying low over houses with machine gunners clearly visible, storming an abandoned school, firing dummy ammunition which sounded like real gun fire. These seemed very real to the residents of these communities, who were given no warning that these exercises would occur. In some cases, their own city governments were unaware of the “planned” exercise.

How safe do you feel now?

Remember Boston after the Marathon bombing? People forced from their homes by gun-toting police, made to run down the street with their hands over their heads?

How safe do you feel now?
image

Except that it is clearly a clean American street in the photo to the right, doesn’t it look chillingly like Baghdad or Cairo?

How safe do you feel now?

WAKE THE HECK UP, AMERICA!  Teddy Roosevelt (we haven’t talked about him yet, but we need to) and Woodrow Wilson set modern American tyranny in motion and just about every president since then has contributed to the encroachment of the federal state on our liberties. George Bush certainly set the table for the loss of liberty we’re seeing now, but Barack Obama put troops on the streets. He’s not burning our towns … yet … but increasingly it looks like it’s only a matter of time.

How safe do you feel now?

Sit Down and Shut Up, Americans!   Leave a comment

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
Having concluded the list of complaints whereby Britain denied Americans their right of self-government, the Declaration turned to the assault of the British government on the Americans’ lives, liberties, or properties, contrary to the purpose of government, which is “to secure these rights.”

George III approved, on December 22, 1775 and again on February 27, 1776, an act of Parliament which declared the colonies out of the King’s protection. The British government issued this declaration because of what it viewed as the intolerable degree of unruliness of the colonists. Basically, the American colonists were outlaws, in the original sense of the word.

 

If you have a complaint about American government in the 21st century, you’d best be careful how you state that complaint or you risk coming up on a surveillance program and having your life totally turned upside down.

Our government hasn’t officially declared war on us, but they sure are treating us like the enemy. Someone pointed out to me last night that it seemed interesting to her that whenever a official disagrees with the Obama administration, their sex life suddenly becomes common knowledge. Maybe it’s because they are moral scoundrels, but she found it really interesting that the sex lives of those who support the Obama administration (Anthony Weiner aside) don’t appear to make the media. Maybe it isn’t that the media isn’t reporting it. Maybe, she suggested, it is the NSA now finds out about these affairs through email and phone call tracking and chooses which ones to make public.

As far as I’m concerned the Patriot Act has pretty much declared war on all American citizens who hold views different from the current administration. But recognize, that if we change parties in the White House, we’ll just switch the enmity to those who disagree with the White House, so if you disagree with surveillance programs on principle, you’re an enemy of the state no matter who is in the White House.

Swapping Jurisdictions   Leave a comment

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
British policy allowed Americans to be transported to England at the desire of either prosecutor or defendant in trials of persons charged with having committed murder in the course of suppressing a riot or enforcing revenue laws. Americans charged with crime subject to trial in the military courts could also be transported far from the scene of the actual crime to stand trial. And, Americans could also themselves be shipped to England to stand trial for certain crimes against the King’s property, for example His Majesty’s ships or other military equipment. This policy was so obnoxious to the Americans that the first Continental Congress on October 21, 1774, adopted a resolution declaring “That the seizing, or attempting to seize, any person in America, in order to transport such person beyond the sea, for trial of offenses, committed within the body of a county in America, being against law, will justify, and ought to meet with resistance and reprisal.”

That’s not happening today, is it?

Well, … yeah, actually it is. Locally, Shaefer Cox committed his so-called crimes in Fairbanks. He vented, he gave some speeches, he planned violent actions in response to a future collapse of society (all theoretical) and he owned a semi-auto rifle that had been non-functioning since he’d attempted to convert it to an automatic more than 10 years before. Scary dude, huh? He did all these things in Fairbanks. The federal government insisted upon trying him in Anchorage and when his attorney objected that Anchorage is 400 miles away from Fairbanks, the judge replied that they could just as well move the trial to New Jersey and still get a fair jury of Shaefer’s peers.

You decide? Do you see any similarities?

Where Is The Media Outrage!!??   2 comments

This case is fairly old, but it has come up again because the judge in the case was found to be addicted to prescription drugs, thereby requiring a review of all the cases. I’ve attached a link for a more current story and suggest you read the comments attached because they are illustrative of the community.

Fact is — Stand Your Ground is a GOOD law, a law that says regular people should not have to cower in fear of the bad guys or be raped, mutilated and murdered as these young people were. Yes, these folks were probably partying at the time and it is a rule of gun safety that you never carry when drunk or high, but the very fact that the bad guys don’t know if you’re carrying is a deterrent to attacking you.

http://www.wate.com/story/22900871/judge-denies-christian-newsom-request-for-access-to-baumgartner-files

Freedom Is Just Another Word...

**Wake Up White Boy**
The text description is very horrific !!!!
As horrific as this is, it needs to circulate!!!
The animals pictured below car-jacked then raped Christopher Newsom, cut off his penis, set him on fire and fatally shot him several times while they forced his girlfriend, Channon Christian, to watch. An even more cruel fate awaited her!
Channon Christian was beaten and gang-raped in many ways for four days by all of them, while they took turns urinating on her. They cut off her breasts and put chemicals in her mouth… and then murdered her.

No Outrage

Knoxville (WVLT) – The District Attorney General of Knox County announced the list of charges facing now five suspects in the double murderof Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom.

The District Attorney General Randy Nichols is not saying whether or not he will seek the death penalty, but he does say the State will…

View original post 255 more words

Posted July 27, 2013 by aurorawatcherak in Uncategorized

PLF defeats scheme to deny access to justice for coastal property owners   Leave a comment

Note, the administrative state started this one — AGAIN, but then the state court and the federal court worked to get the administrative state what it wanted. Good to see the higher courts are starting to rule with some sanity. Today, anyway.

Posted July 27, 2013 by aurorawatcherak in Uncategorized

Detroit: Why Pay for Nothing?   Leave a comment

My husband and I were scanning Netflix a couple of weeks ago and we ran across a documentary film from 2008 (I think). In it, a Detroit woman was documenting the deterioration of her city. At a townhall meeting, the mayor warned that the city would no longer keep pace with the cost of services and suggested that people who wanted to continue to receive services choose some built-up neighborhood in the core of the city and turn their abandoned homes into farmsteads. That was the only way he could see to save the city. I guess he came up with another one — stop providing services.

Detroit is what happens when government grows too big and too expensive, so that people can no longer afford to pay the taxes that support the government. In Detroit, people who could moved away. People who couldn’t or wouldn’t stopped paying. Now the city has applied for bankruptcy.

May I suggest this is a (potentially) good thing. Detroit’s city workers were unionized a long time ago, which means they receive high wages and lush benefits regardless of the city’s financial situation. Somewhat like Hostess and the car companies that built Detroit, the only choice to get out from under these legacy burdens is to file bankruptcy. Detroit could (potentially) be the city that reorganizes and returns as a healthy, vibrant urban center with an engaged tax-payer base.

Maybe. And, it won’t happen quickly. It’s going to take time for people to wake up and realize that THEY were the problem — that the services that they no longer receive and rarely pay for were the problem. In the absence of city trash pickup, what’s going to happen? Well, there’s going to be a mess … until someone (maybe an out-of-work former city garbage collector) says “Hey, I could do that.” He goes to the homeowners in his area and says “I’ll haul your garbage for this much.” They say “Well, we can afford this much.” He thinks about it a while, goes around the neighborhood finding out that he’s charging too much, and then he comes back with a reasonable offer and VIOLA, Detroit has private garbage service in one of its neighborhoods, which inspires others to do the same and ….

The market will find a way if the government gets out of the way. In Detroit, maybe the government needed to be TKO’d for that to happen. Maybe other towns will wake up and smell the burning coffee beans and start privating services before they fall victim to Detroit Syndrome.

Maybe.

Posted July 27, 2013 by aurorawatcherak in Uncategorized

Mock Trials   Leave a comment

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
The Sugar Act of April 5, 1764, entrusted military courts–the courts of admiralty and vice-admiralty–with enforcing all acts of the British Parliament pertaining to commerce and related revenues. In 1768, the British government, partly in an effort to suppress smuggling, increased the number of these courts. All trials by such courts were conducted without juries. Americans regarded trial by jury as a necessary protection to the rights of individuals against the abuse of power by government. It meant that before the coercive power of government could be brought to bear against a man, it had to be approved by a body of men, most likely his neighbors, who are not government employees.

Most of us were raised with the idea that in the United States of America, we are innocent until proven guilty and that we are owed a trial by a jury of our peers who approach the case fairly.

If you believe that, I have a pipeline in Alaska I’d like to sell to you … cheap.

Prosecutors enjoy a 98% “win” ratio. Most of their “wins” never actually go to court. People plea bargain before getting there. A number of cases have emerged from the Innocence Project showing that people sometimes plead guilty even though they didn’t commit the crime — DNA later proved someone else committed the crime. Why would you plead guilty to a crime you didn’t commit? Because your public defender, who works for the same state government the prosecutor works for, told you that it would be less time in jail if you didn’t fight the charge and convinced you that you would definitely be found guilty because you couldn’t prove that you didn’t do the crime.

If you do choose to go to trial, your public defender works for the same government as the prosecutor and so does the judge, so ….

Yeah … there’s no such thing as a fair trial if you can’t afford your own attorney.

George Zimmerman in courtAnd, even if you can — we all saw the Zimmerman case. In case you think you just imagined it — you didn’t. They prosecuted him on a charge that they couldn’t prove. That’s not unusual. A retired judge here in Alaska told me (several years ago now) that it is standard procedure for prosecutors to charge one step higher for any felony charge, so that when the defendant plea bargains (as 96% of them do) they will actually plead guilty  to what the prosecution believes they could prove in a court of law. Alaska has “also included charges”. So, if you’re charged with 1st degree murder, but actually guilty of manslaughter — two steps below Murder One — you have a compelling reason to accept the 2nd degree murder plea the prosecutor offers.  Since more than 50% of cases are represented by public defenders now, it’s a good strategy for incarcerating people for a very long time without any chance that they will appeal. You can’t appeal if you plea out and you’ll plea out if you’re scared enough — especially if you know you’re guilty of a lesser charge. Back when the judge was telling me this, most juries were biased in favor of the prosecution. I think that’s changing now, but many other examples where our American system of “justice” is anything but just and very much the opposite of a presumption of innocence.

That’s not King Obama’s fault, by the way, folks! When you’re pointing your fingers, please note the three pointing back at you. We’re all guilty of allowing this travesty to develop.

Posted July 27, 2013 by aurorawatcherak in History, Tyranny

Tagged with , ,

Intolerable Acts   Leave a comment

The Declaration of Independence happened because of a specific set of historical circumstances. We aren’t taught about those in our schools anymore, so one goal that I have in analyzing the Declaration is to provide that historical context.

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

When I was in honors history class in high school and later as a political science minor in college, instructors would throw out the term “The Intolerable Acts” without explaining that these were. The Intolerable Acts were passed by Parliament partly in response to the “Boston Tea Party” (December 16, 1773). In 1774, the British government decided that it was not possible to single out the participants in the Tea Party for punishment, so imposed a series of punitive actions against the town of Boston and the entire colony of Massachusetts Bay. There were five acts:

  1. The Boston Port Act closed the port of Boston beginning June 1, 1774, until the East India Company had been repaid for the losses it had suffered as a result of the Tea Party; this act in effect declared a military blockade of Boston. Thus, John Hancock and others became smugglers.
  2. The Administration of Justice Act empowered the Massachusetts governor (a political appointee sent from DC … I mean, London) to transfer either to Britain or to another colony for trial any official or soldier accused of a capital crime committed in the line of duty who could not expect a fair trial in Massachusetts.
  3. The Massachusetts Government Act nullified and altered the Massachusetts Charter in several ways, by stipulating, among other things, that the Council would thenceforth be appointed by the Crown rather than elected by the House of Representatives, and that town meetings could not be held without the prior written approval of the governor.
  4. The Quartering Act authorized every colonial governor under certain conditions to lodge troops in private establishments; this act showed that the British government intended to act firmly, very likely with force, to suppress American self-government.
  5. The Quebec Act reversed previous colonial policy by depriving inhabitants of Quebec of representation in government; this act also declared that the Roman Catholic religion was to be given the support of government in the exercise of its “accustomed dues and rights,” meaning that Catholics would be taxed to support the Catholic clergy. It also extended the territory of Quebec far southward, including a vast area we call Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. Many American colonists viewed this as a cynical British attempt to buy the loyalty of Catholic priests so that they would not protest its abolition of republican government in Canada and prevent the westward expansion of the colonies by peopling the western region with Catholics who would willingly submit to despotic government if their priests urged it.

So it’s 2013 and the Intolerable Acts are history, right?

Oh, really????

1) How many of us will need medical care that will become unavailable in the United States within a half-decade of the full runout of ObamaCare and have to travel to third-world countries just get get medical treatment? Many doctors — my own and a cousin who works at a major research center — say this will be the outcome of ObamaCare.

2) I’ve mentioned Shaeffer Cox here before. An Alaskan who was an effective voice for liberty who also shot his mouth off in private, planning what he and his small group would do if there was ever a governmental collapse and theoretical soldiers came to impose theoretical martial law. He was found guilty of crimes against the government, though there was never any actual action taken. How did a jury come to that conclusion? Well, it wouldn’t have in Fairbanks because here we know that venting keeps you from actually carrying out crimes of violence. The feds knew that we knew that, so they transferred the federal jurisdiction to Anchorage, which is a far less libertarian town. The demographic makeup of the jury was essentially no long-time Alaskans. The prosecutor wanted people who were afraid of guns, unfamiliar with rifles, and preferrably either military members or their spouses. They got that. Arguments by the defense that Anchorage, which is 400 miles away from Fairbanks, was not a venue of like-minded citizens fell on deaf ears. The prosecutor went so far as to say in the media that the trial could also be held in Washington DC because all of the United States is federal venue. Do you think that’s a fair trial? Cox also had to pay for every defense witness to travel and to stay in Anchorage, which limited the scope of his defense because when you’re locked up behind bars, you can’t make any money. Of course, he was found guilty.

3) Alaska’s constitution requires that our wildlife resources by managed for the benefit of all Alaskans. Federal law (not constitution, just a law) requires that wildlife be managed for with rural preference. Forget that rural residents also have easier access to the game (remembering that Alaska has few roads, so you have to fly in). During times of scarcity (definition of which changes with the federal wind from week-to-week sometimes), rural residents get first crack at the game and then urban residents get a chance. But, ironically, when it comes to fish, out-of-state commercial fishers get first shot off-shore, then the rural residents and finally, the urban residents. So, 25% of the population of the state gets more access to 100% of the game than 75% of the state does — in violation of our state constitution, because of a law that probably violates the United States constitution.

4) The Quartering Act — soldiers do not live in our homes. Discussion closed! WRONG! The NSA has the ability and the usurped authority to listen to our telephone conversations and read our emails and Word Press posts for the purposes of using that content against American citizens. Anyone with a GPS equipped car can be tracked easily with modern technology and there’s no reason to believe you’re not being We’re living the Quartering Act every day and most of us don’t even realize it.

5) If you live in a western state, you know that most of your state belongs to Washington DC. Good luck using it for ANYTHING. If you live near a wetland, have fun in court if you ever want to build anything. Think it would be a good idea to build a refinery so the gasoline would be cheaper in your area? Laughing hysterically at the suggestion. There hasn’t been one permitted in over 25 years. Are we being prevented from expanding? And, what about the buy-off? Well, faith-based organizations take federal dollars in exchange for … not discussing politics. Alaska almost seceded in the 1980s, so the federal government increased revenue-sharing — making us part of the interstate highway funding system, for example — in order to placate us and make us less surly. It worked — for a while.

The Intolerable Acts — alive and well in a town near you.

No Taxation without Representation   1 comment

Before my laptop had a disabling encounter with water, we were working out way through the Declaration of Independence, seeking to see where our current government is acting a lot like the British in 19976.

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

This is not a problem we have today. We have plenty of trade. We could have a discussion about our trade imbalance, how environmental regulations prevent us from having trade appropriate to our national needs. We could also have a discussion about how Alaska is prevented from selling our oil overseas. We’re required to sell our oil to domestic markets, which costs Alaska a fair amount of money on every barrel of oil. It’s not a wide spread problem, but tyranny exacted toward one state should be the concern of all states.

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: 

The Stamp Tax of the early 1760s was the first major cause of the quarrel between the Americans and the British. It occasioned the first strong articulation of the principles of the Declaration by James Otis in 1764, entitled “The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved.” The principle “no taxation without representation” was soon extended to the whole conduct of government. Not just taxes, but all acts of government must be by “the consent of the governed.”

Supposedly we have representation in Congress, but many of us experience regulatory “taxes” all the time. We don’t realize we pay these taxes, because they’re hidden in our phone and electric bills and the cost of items we buy. ObamaCare is requiring a lot of new “fees” on medical supplies. Ask your Congressman if there’s anyway to discontinue these fees. I know the answer. Even those who are sympathetic to our side of things will tell you that it’s not going to happen without a major reform of the administrative state.

Have you heard of the REINS Act? Have you written your Congressional delegation about it yet?

Who the Hell Knows?

The name says it all.

Rebellious Hazelnuts

Surreal Stories, Very Tall Tales

Adjusting My Sails

When the wind doesn't blow the way you want, adjust your sails

Stine Writing

Poetry, Positivity, and Connecting!

Writer vs the World

In search of beauty, inspired by literature.

Inside My Mind

Words from my brain

Happiness Between Tails by da-AL

Tales + Tales: Books + Compassion + Culture

Fairfax & Glew

Vigilante Justice

The Wolf's Den

Overthink Everything

SaltandNovels

Sprinkling wonder into writing

Remmington Reads

A book enthusiast bringing you all things bookish

MiddleMe

Becoming Unstuck

Magical BookLush

A New Dimension to Explore!! A reason to Love and A promise to fight the wrong is hidden in Books. Come, Let's Explore it!!!

Jacquie Biggar-USA Today Best-selling author

Read. Write. Love. 💕💕💕

Not Very Deep Thoughts

Short Fiction and Other Things

%d bloggers like this: