The Secret Sandy Hook Secrecy Bill.

If it walks like a duck. Nuff Said.

———————————-  ~ Steve ~ ———————————–

http://lastresistance.com    posted on May 24, 2013 byMark Horne

Been wondering what has happened with the Sandy Hook case? Want many of the weird questions settled? The legislature of Connecticut has been bypassing normal open procedures to craft a bill behind closed doors that would, if passed, keep basic evidence of the crime forever behind closed doors

From the Hartford Courant, “Bill Drafted In Secret Would Block Release Of Some Newtown Massacre Records”:

Adam Lanza

“The staffs of the state’s top prosecutor and the governor’s office have been working in secret with General Assembly leaders on legislation to withhold records related to the police investigation into the Dec. 14 Newtown elementary school massacre — including victims’ photos, tapes of 911 calls, and possibly more. The behind-the-scenes legislative effort came to light Tuesday when The Courant obtained a copy of an email by a top assistant to Chief State’s Attorney Kevin Kane, Timothy J. Sugrue. Sugrue, an assistant state’s attorney, discussed options considered so far, including blocking release of statements ‘made by a minor.’”

You have got to be kidding.

The bereaved Sandy Hook parents are going through hell, I’m sure, and will be doing so for years to come. But they are no more special than the bereaved parents of children who were murdered in Columbine High School. As I wrote back when Michael Moore said he wanted the pictures released,

“If you use Google image search for words like crime scene columbine or Cleboldand Harris, you will find some pretty gruesome pictures. Why is Sandy Hook being treated so differently?”

This entire investigation has been shrouded in secrecy, as evidenced by repeated protests by local editorials (here and here). All this secrecy has been kept simply by the raw will of the police and whoever is overseeing them. What will happen if this becomes enshrined in law? Will it only be the bodies that are kept from view, or will we never get to see any more pictures of the bullet-ridden cars in the parking lot? Or will we be forbidden from seeing photographs of Adam Lanza’s Honda Civic with all four doors open and black sweatshirts strewn on the pavement around it? What about spent shells and the bullet holes in the interior walls? The official story makes Adam Lanza a lone gunman who managed to shoot 155 bullets in under five minutes and hit multiple targets multiple times.

Other than some professional local Connecticut Journalists, the major media has investigated nothing at all related to Sandy Hook, but rather considered it an opportunity to play Oprah Winfrey and to lobby for gun control. Many (Most? All?) of the Sandy Hook parents whose delicate privacy the Connecticut legislators are so concerned about have been aggressively lobbying in the news and in legislatures using their pain as a license to attack the second amendment. Showing the damage would further their cause, just likeMichael Moore said.

I’ve never in my life heard of the side of law and order wanting to suppress evidence. It is always the defense who wants the pictures concealed because of the fear that the jury will become enflamed with a sense of justice against the perpetrator.

What the Connecticut legislature is trying to do just seems backwards. The fact that they have tried to hide what they are doing makes it seem even more sinister.

FOTM has many investigative pieces on this incident. For the links to those posts, please go to our “Sandy Hook Massacre” page. Click here!

Do You NetFlix? Do You Cheat? What’s That you Say? Watch.

~Steve~                      H/T  Miss Sage

Hollywood Mind Bleach Moment: “The Bourne Flamboyancy” or “Romancing the Bone”

And these guys think THEY are the enlightened ones!!! ~TD

Michael Douglas “Comfortable” Kissing Matt Damon;

Candelabra Costar Jets Out of Switzerland With George Clooney

by Peter Gicas

Here’s the link to this story: http://www.eonline.com/news/417914/michael-douglas-comfortable-kissing-matt-damon-candelabra-costar-jets-out-of-switzerland-with-george-clooney

For Michael Douglas, locking lips with Matt Damon was no big deal.

“Once you get that first kiss in, you are comfortable,” the 68 year-old actor tells New Yorkmagazine about shooting love scenes with his costar for the upcoming HBO biopic Behind the Candelabra. “Matt and I didn’t rehearse the love scenes. We said, ‘Well—we’ve read the script, haven’t we?’”

NEWS: Ben Affleck “jealous” of Matt Damon kissing Michael Douglas

But Douglas, who plays Liberace in the film, knows some viewers may be critical about the intimate moments between him and Damon, who portrays Liberace’s younger lover, Scott Thorson.

“The hardest thing…is that everybody is a judge,” Douglas says. “I don’t know the last time you murdered somebody or blew anyone’s brains out, but everyone has had sex and probably this morning, which means everyone has an opinion on how it should be done.”

Behind the Candelabra premieres May 26 on HBO.

NEWS: Michael Douglas and Matt Damon share a bath in new Behind the Candelabratrailer

Meanwhile, over the weekend, Damon was spotted with good friend George Clooney.

The two were seen boarding a private plane together at the airport in Lugano, Switzerland, on Sunday.

Just last week, Clooney celebrated his 52nd birthday with Damon on the Berlin set of their latest film, The Monuments Men.

Just The Facts Ma’am, Just The Facts.

Subject: Why Carry a Gun?

Why Carry a Gun? 

My old grandpa said to me ‘Son, there comes a time in every man’s life when he stops bustin’ knuckles and starts bustin’ caps, and
usually it’s when he becomes too old to take a whoopin.’

I don’t carry a gun to kill people.
I carry a gun to keep from being killed.

I don’t carry a gun to scare people.
I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m paranoid.
I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m evil.
I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the world.

I don’t carry a gun because I hate the government.
I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m angry.
I carry a gun so that I don’t have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.

I don’t carry a gun because I want to shoot someone.
I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.

I don’t carry a gun to make me feel like a man.
I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.

I don’t carry a gun because I feel inadequate.
I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.

I don’t carry a gun because I love it.
I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.

Police protection is an oxymoron.
Free citizens must protect themselves.
Police do not protect you from crime, they usually just investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.
Personally, I carry a gun because I’m too young to die and too old to take a whoopin’…..author unknown (but obviously brilliant)

See Update on Switzerland!!

**********************************************

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
—- ————- ————-

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
—————————–

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
——————————

You won’t see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans, before it’s too late!

The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.

With guns, we are ‘citizens’. Without them, we are ‘subjects’.

During WW II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

If you value your freedom, please spread this anti gun -control message to all of your friends. 

The purpose of fighting is to win. 
There is no possible victory in defense. 
The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either. 
The final weapon is the brain.
All else is supplemental. 

SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN! 
SWITZERLAND’S GOVERNMENT TRAINS EVERY ADULT TO WHOM THEY ISSUE A RIFLE. 

This was brought to my attention

One other point is particularly important here. The description of gun distribution in Switzerland omits important information.

The Swiss government doesn’t hand out a gun to every household. It requires nearly every able-bodied young male adult to serve in the citizen militia, where they are issued a military rifle. The guns are supposed to be for military use only, not for personal defense.

Those men are supposed to show up for 18 weeks of training, followed by seven re-training sessions (each lasting three weeks) over the next 10 years.

If you want to keep your weapon after your years of service, it is refitted to scale back its firepower and you need to provide a reason for keeping it.

IT’S A NO BRAINER! 
DON’T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET. 

I’m a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment! 
If you are too, please forward.
    

~ Steve ~                   H/T  FOTM’s OWN  Ken L.

Liberal Jon Stewart goes postal on Obama

I can’t do better than FOTM’s WildBillAlaska, who alerted us to this video:

When the sycophant late night comedians go this far, the steaming POS is in trouble. Oh Joy!!

H/t The Daily Sheeple

On a more serious note, see “Groups & individuals targeted by Obama’s IRS witchhunt.”

~Eowyn

Why are there no t-shirts of America’s Founding Fathers?

Chuck Woolery asks why American youth wear t-shirts with faces of dictators and murderers.

Why is it hip and cool to wear a t-shirt with the face of a killer, Che Guevara, on it?

I know. I know!

Because our young people are “useful idiots,” brainwashed by their Marxist teachers, professors, and Hollywood.

~Eowyn

55 Questions IRS Asked of Tea Party Groups. It’s A Doozie.

all I have to say is “duct Tape” Lots and lots of duct tape. You can borrow some of mine.     ~Steve~

3 layers should do it.

Oh, one more thing. i really love to watch skippy sweat.

From the http://www.dailymail.co.uk

By DAVID MARTOSKO IN WASHINGTON

PUBLISHED: 16:18 EST, 13 May 2013 | UPDATED: 16:20 EST, 13 May 2013

The Internal Revenue Service wrote to the Richmond Tea Party last year demanding to know the names of all its financial donors and volunteers, as part of a 55-question inquisition into its application for tax-exempt status, MailOnline has learned.

The agency wanted to know ‘the names of the donors, contributors, and grantors’ for every year ‘from inception to the present.’

It also demanded ‘the amounts of each of the donations, contributions, and grants and the dates you received them.’

‘How did you use these donations, contributions, and grants?’ the IRS asked. ‘Provide the details.’

And in addition to the names of board members, officers and employees, the nation’s taxing authorities insisted on knowing the names of everyone who helped the Richmond Tea Party without compensation.

‘Please identify your volunteers,’ the January 9, 2012 letter from the IRS read.

The agency also required the Virginia conservative group to provide copies of sections of its website that only its members can access.

The IRS came under fire on Friday when its Office of Inspector General released a draft of an investigative timeline showing that the agency had played political favorites with nonprofit groups seeking tax-exempt status.

In 2010, according to that investigation, the Cincinnati-based IRS office responsible for vetting tax-exempt applications began targeting groups with ‘Tea Party or similar’ words in their names – including words like ‘patriots’ and ’9/12′ – for tighter scrutiny.

The Richmond Tea Party received this demand along with dozens of others from the IRS, asking for a list of its donors and the amounts they had contributed. The group refused, citing their donors’ right to privacy

The IRS ultimately identified approximately 300 such organizations, many of which were independently organized in 2009 and 2010 under the larger ‘tea party’ banner. Those groups had a decisive impact in the 2010 midterm congressional elections, and became a thorn in the side of the Democratic party, costing it race after race, especially in the House of Representatives, which shifted to Republican control.

In the nearly three years since the IRS began looking more closely at conservative nonprofit groups than others, 125 of the 300 target organizations have been approved for tax-exempt status. Another 25 withdrew their applications. The remainder are still waiting.

The Office of Inspector General’s timeline shows that in Washington, senior officials with the IRS were made aware of the practice by at least August 4, 2011. On that date, the chief counsel of the IRS met with the agency’s Rulings and Agreements unit ‘so that everyone would have the latest information on the issue.’

But during a press gaggle about Air Force One on Monday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney insisted the White House was unaware of the investigation or its political implications until last month.

The Rest Of The Story Here..       

Below is Link to list  . Sorry as it gets all jumbled when I try and paste it in. Trust me it’s a good read, providing you have your head protection on.

Link To LIST!!

 

 

MSM Start To Turn On Benghazi . Could Get Interesting Real Quick.

This is encouraging. This will be the only way to take him down. Kinda wish the media would have done their jobs say…about 5 yrs ago.

~Steve~

——————————————————————————————

MAY 10, 2013  POSTED BY ALEX KOPPELMAN

http://www.newyorker.com

SPINNING BENGHAZI

——————————————————————————————

                          Poor wittle Jay Carney. Busted lying thru his teeth.    :D

                        I definitely have a case of Schadenfreude on this.  LOL

It’s a cliché, of course, but it really is true: in Washington, every scandal has a crime and a coverup. The ongoing debate about the attack on the United States facility in Benghazi where four Americans were killed, and the Obama Administration’s response to it, is no exception. For a long time, it seemed like the idea of a coverup was just a Republican obsession. But now there is something to it.

On Friday, ABC News’s Jonathan Karl revealed the details of the editing process for the C.I.A.’s talking points about the attack, including the edits themselves and some of the reasons a State Department spokeswoman gave for requesting those edits. It’s striking to see the twelve different iterations that the talking points went through before they were released to Congress and to United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, who used them in Sunday show appearances that became a central focus of Republicans’ criticism of the Administration’s public response to the attacks. Over the course of about twenty-four hours, the remarks evolved from something specific and fairly detailed into a bland, vague mush.

From the very beginning of the editing process, the talking points contained the erroneous assertion that the attack was “spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved.” That’s an important fact, because the right has always criticized the Administration based on the suggestion that the C.I.A. and the State Department, contrary to what they said, knew that the attack was not spontaneous and not an outgrowth of a demonstration. But everything else about the changes that were made is problematic. The initial draft revealed by Karl mentions “at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi” before the one in which four Americans were killed. That’s not in the final version. Nor is this: “[W]e do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa’ida participated in the attack.” That was replaced by the more tepid “There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.” (Even if we accept the argument that State wanted to be sure that extremists were involved, and that they could be linked to Al Qaeda, before saying so with any level of certainty—which is reasonable and supported by evidence from Karl’s reporting—that doesn’t fully explain these changes away.)

Democrats will argue that the editing process wasn’t motivated by a desire to protect Obama’s record on fighting Al Qaeda in the run-up to the 2012 election. They have a point; based on what we’ve seen from Karl’s report, the process that went into creating and then changing the talking points seems to have been driven in large measure by two parts of the government—C.I.A. and State—trying to make sure the blame for the attacks and the failure to protect American personnel in Benghazi fell on the other guy.

But the mere existence of the edits—whatever the motivation for them—seriously undermines the White House’s credibility on this issue. This past November (after Election Day), White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters that “The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility’ because ‘consulate’ was inaccurate.”

Remarkably, Carney is sticking with that line even now. In his regular press briefing on Friday afternoon (a briefing that was delayed several times, presumably in part so the White House could get its spin in order, but also so that it could hold a <href=”#.uy1gksebagw.twitter”>secretive pre-briefing briefing with select members of the White House press corps), he said:

The only edit made by the White House or the State Department to those talking points generated by the C.I.A. was a change from referring to the facility that was attacked in Benghazi from “consulate,” because it was not a consulate, to “diplomatic post”… it was a matter of non-substantive factual correction. But there was a process leading up to that that involved inputs from a lot of agencies, as is always the case in a situation like this and is always appropriate.

This is an incredible thing for Carney to be saying. He’s playing semantic games, telling a roomful of journalists that the definition of editing we’ve all been using is wrong, that the only thing that matters is who’s actually working the keyboard. It’s not quite re-defining the word “is,” or the phrase “sexual relations,” but it’s not all that far off, either.

 

Your Sunday Morning Funny Papers.

 

~Steve~                                H/T My Bud I-Man

Did you know You Could Be Jailed For Blasphemy? — in America

No? Then read on...

I present 2 stories. rather 2 crimes. in america when you are arrested you usually have the right to bail. now read CLOSELY and see if you can tell me what’s  wrong with these 2 stories.

First story. 

By RUSSELL GOLDMAN (@GoldmanRussell) , JOSH MARGOLIN (@JoshMargolin) and MATT JAFFE

May 9, 2013

Ariel Castro, Cleveland Kidnap Suspect.

An Ohio prosecutor said he may seek the death penalty against Ariel Castro, the Cleveland man charged today with the kidnap and rape of three women he allegedly brutalized for a decade while allegedly inducing abortions in at least one of the captives.

“Capital punishment must be reserved for those crimes that are truly the worst examples of human conduct,” Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Timothy McGinty said today, indicating that Castro will likely face additional charges of aggravated murder related to the pregnancies.

The death penalty is applicable under Ohio law for the “most depraved criminals who commit aggravated murder during the course of a kidnapping,” McGinty said.

Castro allegedly induced abortions in one of his victims, Michele Knight, 32, on at least five separate occasions by punching her in the stomach.

But another alleged captive, Amanda Berry, carried a child to term, delivering the now 6-year-old girl in a plastic kiddie pool, police said.

Castro today was charged with four charges of kidnap, one for each woman and the 6-year-old child whom Berry delivered while in captivity. He was charged with three counts of rape.

Bail was set at $2 million per case, for a total of $8 million.      Hmmmmmmm

Not happy about it , but I guess the dirtbag is entitled to bail. Right? 

Well maybe not.

Rest HERE!!!

OKIE DOKIE!!

Story Two

  Nakoula Basseley Nakoula  

 Jailed for blasphemy — in America

Did you know it’s now a crime to tell Mohammad he’s a dipwad? Me Neither

• By RICH LOWRY
• Last Updated: 11:36 PM, May 9, 2013
• Posted: 10:52 PM, May 9, 2013
• 

      Nakoula Basseley Nakoula

Nakoula Basseley Nakoula deserves a place in American history. He is the first person in this country jailed for violating Islamic anti-blasphemy laws.

You won’t find that anywhere in the charges against him, of course. As a practical matter, though, everyone knows that Nakoula wouldn’t be in jail if he hadn’t produced a video crudely lampooning the prophet Muhammad.

After the attack on US facilities in Benghazi that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others, the Obama administration claimed the terrorist assault had been the outgrowth of a demonstration against the video. In a speech at the United Nations, the president declared — no doubt with Nakoula in mind — “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

After Benghazi, the administration was evidently filled with a fierce resolve — to bring Nakoula to justice.

Charles Woods, the father of a Navy SEAL killed in Benghazi, said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told him when his son’s body returned to Andrews Air Force Base: “We will make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted.”

Lo and behold, Nakoula was brought in for questioning by five Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies at midnight,

eventually arrested and held without bond, and finally thrown into jail for a year.

Did I read That right? No Bail? But…But…But…

He sits in La Tuna Federal Correctional Institution in Texas, even as the deceptive spin that blamed his video for the Benghazi attack looks more egregious by the day.

Rest HERE

So Dear readers can you spot the difference between the mild mannered Mr . Castro who only Kidnapped, Raped, & Tortured 3 young woman for 10 years…oh and by the way did you know he’s a registered Democrat. http://clashdaily.com/2013/05/ariel-castro-cleveland-kidnapper-is-a-registered-democrat/

And the ever so violent Terrorist Nakoula Basseley Nakoula Who dared to make the crappiest vid of all time and the audacity to tell mohamad he was a dirt bag.

I will give you a hint. Look for the big Red Comments of mine to see if you can spot the difference. Oh and here you may need this.

~ Steve~