Wednesday, June 22, 2011

Castner's Cutthroats

Saga of the Alaska Scouts

by Jim Rearden

Innokenty McBratney, the half-Aleut son of a Scot trader from the Aleutian island of Attu; Talky Lloyd, a renegade Colorado cowboy turned Alaska guide/trapper; Johnny Blackwolf, an Athapaskan from the arctic Koyukuk valley; Shorty the Bear, a trapper from deep in the Wrangell Mountains; Silver Fox Will Rooney, a trapper and commercial fisherman from Bristol Bay. These are the heroes of this exciting tale of the Alaska Scouts who play a key role in the Aleutian Campaign for World War II.

6"x9", black and white photos and maps, 384 pages, paperback: $23.95. ISBN 978-1-57510-084-5


The Vest Guy

"A person can be a partisan or a survivalist, but not both. The survivalist defends himself, his people and his redoubt against all comers. It's not just his right, it's his duty. He may have standing patrols or mount a rescue operation, or do a preemptive strike against bad guys advancing on his community, or even take control of a strategic hilltop. He may make arrangements with other survivalists for mutual aid, much like volunteer fire departments do. All this is defensive. What he will not do is join with others in wholesale annihilation merely to expand turf. Legitimate defense does not involve gang war. The survivalist wins this game by not playing, which is to say he wins by staying away from crowds. Same as always."
-- Ol' Remus

Recommended by Survival

Solar-powered Samsung NC215S netbook to arrive in Russia and USA

Val Kilmer needs talking to........

PUNK with a capital P

Blue's Blog

The following is an excerpt from his Esquire Magazine interview in 2005

[Klosterman]: You mean you think you literally had the same experience as Doc Holliday?

Kilmer: Oh, sure. It's not like I believed that I shot somebody, but I absolutely know what it feels like to pull the trigger and take someone's life.

[Klosterman:] You understand how it feels to shoot someone as much as a person who has actually committed a murder?

[Kilmer] I understand it more. It's an actor's job. A guy who's lived through the horror of Vietnam has not spent his life preparing his mind for it. He's some punk. Most guys were borderline criminal or poor, and that's why they got sent to Vietnam. It was all the poor, wretched kids who got beat up by their dads, guys who didn't get on the football team, couldn't finagle a scholarship. They didn't have the emotional equipment to handle that experience. But this is what an actor trains to do. I can more effectively represent that kid in Vietnam than a guy who was there.

Mr. Kilmer, you make me want to vomit. You are totally out of touch with reality. You don't know shit from shinola.

Stay safe.
My comment:
I swear, it's hard to believe he said that, but if he did, he needs to get the shit kicked out of him.

An Empire Strikes Home, Part Two: Militarizing Law Enforcement / Domestic Military Deployment

Via California Tree of Liberty

Profiling The Policy

In Part One of “An Empire Strikes Home” we focused on a sad shooting death involving the Pima County, Arizona, Sheriff’s Department regional multi-jurisdictional S.W.A.T. team. We also spotlighted several Arizona news articles in which the Sheriff’s Department issued conflicting stories regarding the S.W.A.T. raid. The published statements began by claiming that the suspect initiated and conducted a “standoff” and started a “gun battle” with deputies who had come to his home to serve a warrant.

I think that everyone knows that for any government action involving shooting of a citizen those kind of reports is the proper (meaning, from LE’s perspective) way this sort of operation should be presented to the press and to the public – the cops are the good guys and the dopers are the bad guys.

When SWAT showed up to enforce the law one of the bad guys had the audacity to draw down on the good guys as they were busting in his front door. As the acceptable, just, and lawful scenario was presented to the press, the good guys prevailed and the bad guy failed.

Message done, cut and dried, clean and closed, nothing more to see here, now move along to the next five-second news sound bite and have a nice day.

The public will take that kind of story and say, “Oh well, that ‘bad guy’ should have thought twice before choosing a life of crime, and it’s no loss to society that he’s gone. Too bad about the widow and fatherless children she’ll raise alone now – she married the wrong dude. The man was associated with marijuana, so he must be a ‘bad guy’. Live by the gun, die by the gun.”

That is, generally speaking, how a significant part of the public would see this event by reading the first Sheriff’s Department accounting of the death of Jose Guerena. And that is the desired perception which the Sheriff’s Department and higher-ups wished to present for public consumption, for that is the perception which will spare the County the trouble of more extensive damage control. If it works.

Days later, however, the Pima County Arizona Sheriff’s Department confessed that Jose Guerena did not shoot at the officers. Tough luck for Sheriff Dupnik, drat.

In early June, 2011, the cheerleaders for militarized law enforcement are saying “But hey – wait a minute here! We’re telling you the facts as we get them. There are new discoveries coming out of the investigation and we now know that earlier reports were less than factual. It is true that we said Jose fired on the officers first, and that bullets were bouncing off the SWAT shield at the doorway, bullets fired by Guerena. Yeah we said that, but now we are saying that he did not fire his rifle at the SWAT team, and besides, we now believe that the man was associated with a grouping of family members who constituted a threat to society They are under suspicion of marijuana-related crimes. So he really was a bad guy and we really were justified in sending a SWAT urban-warfare combat team into his home and shooting him dead. After all, he did have a rifle in his hand.”

They’re saying stuff like that already, not quite a month into this. Jose was shot on Cinco de Mayo, May 05, 2011.

But shouldn’t we ask: Who gave that story to the Sheriff’s Department’s official spokespersons?

Who told the two spokespersons to tell the press and media that Jose fired first, and that his bullets were bouncing off the SWAT team’s shield as they came through the doorway?

It’s a good question, because just asking that question leads to something very sinister, a psychological anomaly which is subtle and very much out-of-sight, very much hidden from the public awareness. We must ask – Is there a purpose in the perception generated by the Sheriff’s Department?

Editorial: Was Fast And Furious A Gun-Control Plot?

Scandal: Rather than a botched attempt to catch criminals, was the ATF program actually an attempt to advance gun-control efforts by an administration that has blamed Mexican violence on easy access to U.S. weapons?

If "Operation Fast and Furious" was merely a botched attempt at law enforcement, why was a supervisor of the operation, David Voth, "jovial, if not, not giddy but just delighted about" marked guns showing up at crime scenes in Mexico, as career Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent John Dodson told Rep. Darrell Issa's House Oversight Committee?

Perhaps because all was going as planned until it was learned that two of the AK-47s recovered at the scene of the fatal shooting of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry in December were bought in ATF's Operation Fast and Furious. That wasn't supposed to happen.

"Allowing loads of weapons that we knew to be destined for criminals — this was the plan," Dodson testified to the panel. "It was so mandated."

ATF agent Olindo James Casa said that "on several occasions I personally requested to interdict or seize firearms, but I was always ordered to stand down and not to seize the firearms."

Yet, as we've noted, gun-tracking operations stopped at the border. That seems odd if the purpose was to catch gun traffickers and their drug-lord bosses. It makes sense, however, if the real purpose was to perpetuate, in the interests of pursuing the administration's gun-control agenda, what Bob Owens of Pajamas Media calls the "90% lie."

Unwilling to guarantee a secure southern border, and as part of a campaign to reinstate an expired assault weapons ban, the administration has charged that much of Mexico's gun violence is our fault. Both governments have pushed the myth that 90% of weapons confiscated by Mexican authorities originate in the U.S.

Fox News has reported that, according to ATF Special Agent William Newell, Mexico sent about 11,000 guns to the U.S. for tracing in 2007-08, out of about 35,000 confiscated. Of that 11,000, 6,000 were successfully traced. And of that number, 5,114, or 90%, were found to have originated in the U.S.

Weapons that originated in foreign countries are not sent to the U.S. for tracing. Neither are weapons of Mexican army deserters or those stolen from armories.

Bill McMahon, ATF deputy assistant director, testified that of 100,000 weapons recovered by Mexican authorities, only 18,000 were made, sold or imported from the U.S. And of those 18,000, just 7,900 came from sales by licensed gun dealers. That's 8%, not 90%.



The gang that couldn't sting straight



Jon Stewart Makes Fun Of Gun Walker, Darrell Issa Not Laughing

Governors: Don't Deal With the Regime That Gave Us the Tiananmen Massacre

Mark your calendar! There’s a new threat to our national independence and prosperity. It’s the U.S.-China Governors Forum scheduled for July 15-17 in Salt Lake City and held in connection with an annual conference of the National Governors Association (NGA).

This forum is the result of recent agreements made by President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton with the leaders of communist China. In her Press Statement, “Memorandum of Understanding concerning the establishment of the U.S.-China Governors Forum to Promote Sub-National Cooperation,” dated January 19, 2011, Clinton stated:

For two years, the Obama administration has made it a priority to strengthen the bonds between the United States and China. We have worked to extend mutual understanding and interests beyond national governments to individuals, businesses, and state and provincial governments….

That is why we support the National Governors Association and the Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries in creating the Governor’s Forum, which is designed to help states build their own successful partnerships....

Many of you have likely been unaware of just how close our nation and China have become. For example, you’re probably not aware that our State Department posted a Media Note, “U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue 2011 Outcomes of the Strategic Track,” on May 10, 2011, that stated:

At the Strategic Track under the framework of the Third Round of the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED) held on May 9-10, 2011, the two sides discussed major bilateral, regional and global issues. The two sides commented positively on the progress in U.S.-China relations since President Hu Jintao’s state visit to the United States in January 2011, reaffirmed their commitment to the January 19, 2011 U.S.-China Joint Statement, and in accordance with the Joint Statement, committed to nurture and deepen bilateral strategic trust and work together to build a cooperative partnership based on mutual respect and mutual benefit. The discussions produced 48 specific outcomes….

The 29th outcome welcomed the establishment of the U.S.-China Governors Forum that would be launched in July in Salt Lake City with a second meeting to take place in China in late 2011 or in 2012.

Overall the 48 outcomes agreed on by the U.S. and China are reminiscent of the laundry list of cooperative initiatives agreed on by the U.S., Canada, and Mexico at the Security and Prosperity Partnership summits held beginning in 2005.

To understand where all of the U.S.-China cooperation is heading, be sure to read William F. Jasper’s article, “China: The New Investment Savior?” (The New American magazine, May 23, 2011). In brief, state-run corporations from communist China are buying up natural resources and land with the U.S. dollars they’ve rapidly accumulated from selling us the products that we used to make for ourselves. For example, the China National Machinery Industry Corp., known as Sinomach, is negotiating to buy a massive 50 square miles of land near the Boise, Idaho airport as the site of a proposed manufacturing, trade, and technology zone.

What’s chilling about these bold moves to buy up America by the Chinese is the ecstatic reception they’re getting from the governors of many states.

Furthermore, according to Jasper:

The national security aspects of China’s global investment program are complicated even further by an investment-immigration program sponsored by the United States government known as the EB-5 visa, which has the potential to bring to the United States tens of thousands of millionaire “princelings” of China’s privileged Communist Party as “small investors” in American businesses.

So, these are just a few of the facts regarding the U.S.-China Governors’ Forum, but I think you’re getting the big picture that “The U.S.-China Governors’ Forum Leads to Disaster!”

Please contact your governor now and ask him or her to protect our national independence and prosperity by avoiding further entanglements with the state-run corporations of communist China and by not participating in the U.S.-China Governors’ Forum in Salt Lake City on July 15-17.


Your friends at The John Birch Society

Issa warns ATF not to retaliate against whistleblowers

Via Sipsey Street Irregulars

House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa is warning the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco and Explosives (ATF) not to retaliate against whistleblowers who contradicted initial blanket denials by the Justice Department over “Operation Fast and Furious” in testimony to Congress.

A June 21 letter from Issa to William Hoover, deputy director at ATF, lists a series of accounts from whistleblowers recounting fears they would face retaliation.

ATF agents testifying before the Oversight Committee at a June 15 said that retaliation was common at the agency for officials who did not toe the company line.

But a deputy for Attorney General Eric Holder said the Justice Department would never strike back at whistleblowers. “The Department of Justice will not, would never, retaliate against whistleblowers,” Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich said.

In his June 21 letter, Issa tells another story, recounting testimony from four agents saying ATF is “a very retaliatory agency,” in the words of an unnamed “Special Agent Number 3.”


Also: (Issa staffer: Gunrunner investigation points much higher than ATF director)

Racial Racketeering for Fun and Profit: The Southern Poverty Law Center Scam

Via Southern Nationalist Network

"I have great respect for the Southern Poverty Law Center."

~ Congressman Lacy Clay (D-Banksters)

"Instead of monitoring "hate" and "extremism," they [the SPLC] are concerned with tarring patriotic Americans who oppose their left-wing agenda as haters and extremists."

~ Former Congressman Tom Tancredo

"When you get right down to it, all the SPLC does is call people names. It’s specialized in a highly developed and ritualized form of defamation . . .

What they do is a kind of bullying and stalking . . . . Americans really need to ask themselves if they are willing to tolerate this kind of operation in a free society.

~ Laird Wilcox, author of The Watchdogs: A Close Look at Anti-Racist "Watchdog" Groups

When Rush Limbaugh attempted to buy into an NFL franchise, the political left spread spectacular lies about him, even falsely and absurdly claiming that he had defended slavery on his radio program. When the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., sponsored a public debate on immigration policy, the left-wing hate group known as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) smeared and denounced AEI by claiming that it was "mainstreaming hate" by sponsoring the debate. Of course, Americans have been debating immigration policy ever since the Louisiana Purchase. The SPLC is the leading leftist group that engages in this kind of totalitarian behavior.

When a group of military and police officers organized a group called "Oathkeepers" to simply affirm the oath they had all taken to respect and live by the U.S. Constitution, they were denounced by the SPLC as a "hate group," the exact same language the SPLC uses to describe the KKK. When in 2009 the Department of Homeland Security issued a statement that "Ron Paul for President" bumper stickers "could identify likely threats," their asinine statement came from information supplied to them by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

The League of the South recently published its "Declaration of Cultural Secession" advocating a society that advances what it calls the virtues of "Celtic culture," defined on its Web site as "the permanent things that order and sustain life: faith, family, tradition, community, and private property; loyalty, courage, and honour." The SPLC lied about and defamed the League of the South by spreading the falsehood on its own Web site that by "Celtic culture" the League of the South means, and I quote, "white people." Apparently the SPLC believes that only white people embrace family, tradition, community, private property, courage, etc.

Impuning the motives of one’s political opponents, rather than engaging in civilized debate, is an age-old strategy of socialists and other left-wing extremists. In his famous book, The Law, Frederic Bastiat wrote

Vehicle Fighting: The Draw Stroke

5 ready


The necessity to be able to fight in and around vehicles is a binding thread that’s shared by military, police and civilian operators alike. The automobile in America has become the very symbol of our freedom and the mobile nature of our society. We all either drive or are passengers in vehicles for hundreds if not thousands of hours every year, but rarely do we ever train to fight in and around the confines of what is such a peculiar environment.

Part of that environment that is so peculiar is the physical posture we find ourselves in that is so different from how we normally train. I’m referring to the seated position. How many times have you had the opportunity to drive your car to the firing line and practice shooting from the draw, while seated and buckled in? There are a few problems we need to work through to practice this smoothly, but there’s no problem that can’t be solved.

When you can…cheat. A .45acp weighs on average 230 grains or 0.032857lbs. The average car in America weighs 3,000-4,000lbs or 13999980.555 grains. So if you’re attacked while in a running vehicle, run the bad guy over with the car. Now let’s move on to when you can’t run over the bad guy.

I carry everywhere I go and almost always in an appendix holster, specifically an Archangel holster. Quite frankly the best holster to draw from while seated and buckled. Wearing the seatbelt does have a tendency to interfere with pistol carry; however, it does me no good to die in a car crash on my way to a gunfight, because I didn’t wear my seatbelt. Like I said, there’s no problem that can’t be fixed.

NLRB tried to save America from dumb, unskilled Southern workers

redneck security

Via What Bubba Knows

I had to check my paper copy of the Wall Street Journal today to make sure this wasn’t some elaborate prank. Then I double-checked what year it is, to make sure I hadn’t been slingshotted around the sun and found myself back in 1975.

That’s about when I remember it last being routine for Rust Belt lawyers to publicly disparage the skills and education of people from the South. The only thing missing from the op-ed by Chicago-based lawyer Thomas Geoghegan is the word “hick” or “hillbilly.” WSJ is to be applauded for its determination to feature different viewpoints, but Geoghegan’s piece certainly pushes the envelope.

The topic is the NLRB ruling against Boeing moving its assembly plant for the Dreamliner to South Carolina. And it really is as bad as my intro suggests. Go read it, if you think I may be cherry-picking or making a mountain out of a molehill. I’ll wait. OK, here’s that last paragraph again:

Most depressing of all, Boeing’s move would send a market signal to those considering a career in engineering or high-skilled manufacturing …: Don’t go to engineering school, don’t bother with fancy apprenticeships, don’t invest in skills.

In case you miss the point of the piece, here’s another go at it: “We should be aghast that Boeing is sending a big fat market signal that it wants a less-skilled, lower-quality work force.”

And this:

Pledging Allegiance to the Omnipotent Lincolnian State


Via GunRights4US

by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

The US Supreme Court's recent decision to review the constitutionality of the "under God" wording in the Pledge of Allegiance provides an occasion to educate Americans about the ideological purpose of the Pledge. A good place to start would be John Baer's book, The Pledge of Allegiance: A Centennial History, 1892-1992 (Free State Press, 1992). In it one would learn that the author of the Pledge was one Francis Bellamy, a defrocked Baptist minister from Boston who identified himself as a Christian Socialist and who preached in his pulpit that "Jesus was a socialist."

Bellamy was the cousin of Edward Bellamy, author of the extremely popular 1888 socialist fantasy, Looking Backward. In this novel the main character, Julian West, falls asleep in 1887 and awakens in the year 2000 when the socialist "utopia" has been achieved: All industry is state owned, Soviet style; everyone is an employee of the state who is conscripted at age 21 and retires at age 45; and all workers earn the same income.

Francis Bellamy said that one purpose of the Pledge of Allegiance was to help accomplish his lifelong goal of making his cousin's socialist fantasy a reality in America. He further stated that the "true reason for allegiance to the Flag" was to indoctrinate American school children in the false history of the American founding that was espoused first by Daniel Webster and, later, by Abraham Lincoln.

Lincoln falsely claimed that the states were never sovereign and that the union created the states, not the other way around. (But as Joe Sobran has remarked, the notion that the union is older than the states makes as much sense as the idea that a marriage can be older than either spouse. It is impossible for a union of two things to be older than either of the things it is a union of).

The truth is that in all of the American founding documents, including the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and the Constitution, the states refer to themselves as "free and independent." The Treaty of Paris that ended the Revolutionary War was a treaty with the individual, free and independent states, not "the whole people" of the United States.

The citizens of the states understood that they were sovereign over the federal government, not the other way around, as Lincoln absurdly claimed. The sovereign states delegated a few enumerated powers to the central government, as their agent, while maintaining sovereignty for themselves.

Despite Lincoln's effort to destroy the system of federalism and states' rights that was championed by Jefferson and other founders by waging total war on the South, many Americans still believed in the Jeffersonian states' rights ideal as of the 1880s. Despite all the death and destruction of the war, and several subsequent decades of Lincolnian propaganda about the alleged evils of states' rights, many Americans still viewed federalism and states' rights as a safeguard against federal tyranny — just as the American founding fathers, especially Jefferson, had done.

Francis Bellamy was alarmed by this, for he understood perfectly well that the first step along the way to his socialist utopia was a consolidated or unitary state, just like the one Bismarck had created in Germany through "blood and iron," and the one Abraham Lincoln championed in the U.S. Monopoly government, in other words, was a necessary first step on the road to socialism. All semblances of the Jeffersonian philosophy of federalism and states' rights must be destroyed. In Bellamy's own words:

The true reason for allegiance to the Flag is the "republic for which it stands." ... And what does that vast thing, the Republic mean? It is the concise political word for the Nation — the One Nation which the Civil War was fought to prove. To make that One Nation idea clear, we must specify that it is indivisible, as Webster and Lincoln used to repeat in their great speeches. (See John W. Baer, "The Pledge of Allegiance: A Short History)."

Bellamy considered the "liberty and justice for all" phrase in the Pledge to be an Americanized version of the slogan of the French Revolution: "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity." The French revolutionaries believed that mass killing by the state was always justified if it was done for the "grand purpose" of achieving "equality." In an 1876 commencement speech Francis Bellamy praised the French Revolution as "the poetry of human brotherhood." And "what we call the Civil War," Donald Livingston has remarked, "was in fact America's French Revolution, and Lincoln was the first Jacobin president" (Donald Livingston, "The Litmus Test for American Conservativism," Chronicles, Jan. 2001).

Bellamy intended the Pledge of Allegiance to be a vow of allegiance to the state, a quintessentially un-American idea. He stated that he got the idea from the "loyalty oaths" that were imposed on Southerners during Lincoln's invasion of the Southern states and afterward, during Reconstruction. During the war, adult male civilians in the South were compelled to take a loyalty oath to the federal government or be shot. During Reconstruction almost all Southern white adult males were disenfranchised by the requirement that in order to vote or hold political office, they must take the following oath: "I ______ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I have never voluntarily borne arms against the United States since I have been a citizen thereof; that I have voluntarily given no aid, countenance, counsel, or encouragement to persons engaged in armed hostility thereto . . ." (Baer, The Pledge of Allegiance, Chapter 4). Few if any Southern men would dare to take this public pledge in the post-war years.

Francis Bellamy first published the Pledge of Allegiance in the September 1892 issue of The Youth's Companion, which has been described as "the Reader's Digest of its day." By that time, Bellamy had been forced to leave his Boston pulpit because of his practice of preaching socialism rather than the Gospel.

In addition to his work at the magazine, Francis Bellamy was the vice president in charge of education for the "Society of Christian Socialists," a national organization that advocated income taxation, central banking, nationalized education, nationalization of industry, and other features of socialism. In his classic book, Socialism (p. 223), Ludwig von Mises characterized Christian socialism as "merely a variety of State Socialism." Its advocates, like the Bellamy cousins, held that

Agriculture and handicraft, with perhaps small shopkeeping, are the only admissible occupations. Trade and speculation are superfluous, injurious, and evil. Factories and large-scale industries are a wicked invention of the "Jewish spirit"; they produce only bad goods which are foisted on buyers by the large stores and by other monstrosities of modern trade to the detriment of purchasers.

The Bellamy cousins decided that American youth needed to be taught "loyalty to the state" because they realized that the individualism and the love of liberty of the American founding fathers would always stand in the way of achieving the socialist utopia that was described in Looking Backward. America supposedly suffered from too much liberty and not enough equality, said the author of the Pledge of Allegiance.

The "one nation, indivisible" wording was especially important to the Bellamy cousins, for if secession were legitimized, their pipe dream of socialism through a consolidated, monopoly government would be destroyed. This was the thinking of all the worst tyrants of the twentieth century, including Hitler and Stalin. (Hitler even quoted approvingly Lincoln's "union created the states" theory from his first inaugural address in Mein Kampf in order to make his own case for destroying federalism and states' rights in Germany.)

The public schools must be used to teach blind obedience to the state, the Bellamys reasoned, and the National Education Association was pleased to help them accomplish this goal. They planned a "National Public School Celebration" in 1892, which was the first national propaganda campaign on behalf of the Pledge of Allegiance. It was a massive campaign that involved government schools and politicians throughout the country. The government schools were promoted, along with the Pledge, while private schools, especially parochial ones, were criticized.

Students were taught to recite the Pledge with their arms outstretched, palms up, similar to how Roman citizens were required to hail Caesar, and not too different from the way in which Nazi soldiers saluted their Führer. This was the custom in American public schools from the turn of the twentieth century until around 1950, when it was apparently decided by public school officials that the Nazi-like salute was in bad taste. The Pledge of Allegiance is an oath of allegiance to the omnipotent, Lincolnian state. Its purpose was never to inculcate in children the ideals of the American founding fathers, but those of two eccentric nineteenth-century socialists. (Not surprisingly, among its staunchest contemporary defenders and promoters are the Straussian neocon Lincoln idolaters at the Claremont Institute.)If the Supreme Court decides that the "under God" wording in the Pledge is unconstitutional, it will be doing the right thing for the wrong reason (it does not "establish a religion"). The Pledge itself is an oath of allegiance to the central state, and the "under God" language only serves to deify the state. From the perspective of a Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, or James Madison, nothing could be more un-American. After all, they and their contemporaries had fought a long and bloody war of secession to sever their forced allegiance, complete with loyalty oaths, to another overbearing and tyrannical state, namely the British empire.

National Police Misconduct NewsFeed Daily Recap 06-21-11

Here are the 14 reports of police misconduct tracked in our National Police Misconduct News Feed for this Tuesday, June 21, 2011:

  • A Hampton VA police drug raid on a 69yr-old man’s home based on an alleged informant’s tip accusing him of selling prescription pain pills is being questioned by neighbors & witnesses who appear to suggest police broke down his door without warning after several home invasions in the area which may have prompted the man to shoot before he was shot to death. [3]
  • An Orange County VA drug task force deputy has been charged w/indecent liberties w/a child under 15 & giving false reports to cops [2]
  • Hickman Co TN deputy pleads guilty to civil rights charges for taking nude pics of DV victims by telling them he needed them for his investigation when they were for his own personal gratification instead. [0]
  • A Scottsbluff NE cop resigned before arrested on 10 possession of child porn charges after images were found on his computer by a relative who was fixing it. [0]
  • Rochester NY police are promising to review the arrest of a woman for videotaping police who were conducting a traffic stop in front of her home. [3]
  • New York NY police are being sued by 2 men alleging that stickers on cabs that grant police the right to stop cabbies to ask if they are being robbed do not justify police to conduct invasive searches that they were subjected to just for riding in those cabs. [3]
  • Madison Co KY deputy is being sued alleging he made up false charges against a man in order to illegally search his home. [3]
  • Myrtle Beach SC & Horry Co SC are being sued by a family claiming cops were negligent for arresting their teen son for crimes he didn’t commit based on descriptions he didn’t match. [3]
  • Caledonia WI cop resigned as part of a deal that dismissed charges against him for pointing a gun at a fellow officer while on duty [2]
  • St Charles Parish LA sheriff’s lieutenant & his wife pled guilty to filing $800k in false tax returns by using IDs he stole from inmates in the parish jail. [0]
  • The 2nd of 17 Baltimore MD police officers who are charged with extortion involving a tow truck kickback corruption scandal has pled guilty to those charges. [0]
  • The Columbus GA Metro Airport police chief was arrested after witnesses reported seeing him break into a car at a movie theater parking lot. [1]
  • 2 Easton NY cops were arrested on drunk & disorderly charges in an unspecified off duty incident at an out-of-town hotel [1]
  • And finally, the Dallas TX police department is investigating to determine if any of their officers, and how many, may have urinated in a fellow officers police car and on his uniform. [0]

That’s it for today, stay safe out there!

Residents riding with assault weapons (sic) will be arrested

AK30 VSSaiga12 Mags

This punk needs to get made straight.


Any residents of St. Helena Parish caught riding around the parish with assault weapons will be arrested, Sheriff Nat Williams warned Tuesday.

“As far as them riding around with an assault rifle, it will not be tolerated,” he said. “Somebody with an assault weapon is no different from a criminal and will be treated the same way.”

Via avordvet, L&P

Just 8% Approve of Job Congress Is Doing

Voter approval of Congress' job performance has now fallen to a near five-year low.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that only eight percent (8%) of Likely U.S. Voters think Congress is doing a good or excellent job. Fifty-two percent (52%) rate Congress' performance as poor. (To see survey question wording, click here.)