Benghazi Witness: Special Forces Told “You Can’t Go” To Benghazi

In my opinion this is the biggest cover up and out right lie and for some reason it was permitted to happen. Help was prevented from coming. Do you understand that? I would call it accessory to MURDER!.

Situation this big you can bet your sweet bippy Skippy and Madame shrillery knew about it 3 minutes after it happened. If they were not told people would be fired. This is not a minor matter that minions handle.

If this does not send people to jail, notice I did not say just impeachment, then I would say we are just peeing in the wind and fooling ourselves by saying it’s raining.

In closing might I just say….They need to fry all their sorry arses.

———————————— ~ Steve~  ———————————————

From  Freedom Outpost

May 7, 2013 by Tim Brown

More is coming to light surrounding one of the biggest scandals of the Obama administration as Benghazi whistleblowers prepare to testify before Congress this week. According to CBS News, Benghazi witness Greg Hicks informed congressional investigators that “a team of Special Forces prepared to fly from Tripoli to Benghazi during the Sept. 11, 2012 attacks was forbidden from doing so by U.S. Special Operations Command South Africa.”

“I believe if we had been able to scramble a fighter or aircraft or two over Benghazi as quickly as possible after the attack commenced, I believe there would not have been a mortar attack on the annex in the morning because I believe the Libyans would have split. They would have been scared to death that we would have gotten a laser on them and killed them,” Hicks testified.

Sharyl Atkisson reports,

The account from Gregory Hicks is in stark contrast to assertions from the Obama administration, which insisted that nobody was ever told to stand down and that all available resources were utilized. Hicks gave private testimony to congressional investigators last month in advance of his upcoming appearance at a congressional hearing Wednesday.

According to excerpts released Monday, Hicks told investigators that SOCAFRICA commander Lt. Col. Gibson and his team were on their way to board a C-130 from Tripoli for Benghazi prior to an attack on a second U.S. compound “when [Col. Gibson] got a phone call from SOCAFRICA which said, ‘you can’t go now, you don’t have the authority to go now.’ And so they missed the flight … They were told not to board the flight, so they missed it.”

Obama administration officials have insisted that no military resources could have made it in time. A White House official told CBS News that, at the start of the attack, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Martin Dempsey and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta “looked at available options, and the ones we exercised had our military forces arrive in less than 24 hours, well ahead of timelines laid out in established policies.”

The following is an excerpt from Hicks’ April congressional testimony which was released from the House Oversight Committee.

Q: But do you think, you know, if an F-15, if the military had allowed a jet to go fly over, that it might have prevented [the second attack]?

A: Yeah, and if we had gotten clearance from the Libyan military for an American plane to fly over Libyan airspace. The Libyans that I talked to and the Libyans and other Americans who were involved in the war have told me also that Libyan revolutionaries were very cognizant of the impact that American and NATO airpower had with respect to their victory. They are under no illusions that American and NATO airpower won that war for them. And so, in my personal opinion, a fast-mover flying over Benghazi at some point, you know, as soon as possible might very well have prevented some of the bad things that happened that night.

Q: The theory being, the folks on the ground that are doing these — committing these terrorist attacks look up, see a heavy duty airplane above, and decide to hightail it?

A: I believe that if — I believe if we had been able to scramble a fighter or aircraft or two over Benghazi as quickly as possible after the attack commenced, I believe there would not have been a mortar attack on the annex in the morning because I believe the Libyans would have split. They would have been scared to death that we would have gotten a laser on them and killed them.

******

Q: I just wanted to ask, you mentioned permission from the Libyans. Why is that important? What did you mean by that?

A: Well, it’s their country. And for an American military aircraft to fly over their country, we have to have permission from them to do so.

Q: So what would have been the risk of — do you think it would have been risky for us to send someone, do you think it would have been counterproductive for us to send a fighter pilot plane over Benghazi without that permission?

A: We would have certainly wanted to obtain that permission. I believe we would have gotten it if we had asked. I believe that the Libyans were hoping that we were going to come bail them out of this mess. And, you know, they were as surprised as we were that American — the military forces that did arrive only arrived on the evening of September 12. Yeah.

While this would not have saved Chris Stevens of Sean Smith, it would have probably saved the lives of Tyrone woods and Glen Doherty who were waiting on support that never arrived.

Q: Now, at this point, are you having communications with Washington?

A: I was in communications with Washington all night long. I was reporting all night long what was happening to Washington by telephone.

Q: When these Special Forces folks were told essentially to stand down, what was your next move? Did you have a recourse? Were you able to call Washington? Were you able to call anyone at this point to get that decision reversed?

A: No, because the flight was — the flight was leaving. And, you know, if they missed — you know, if the vehicles didn’t t leave when they leave, they would miss the flight time at the airport. And the airport — you know, we were going all the way to Mitiga. The C-130 is at Mitiga, which is all the way on the other side of Tripoli.

Q: What was the rationale that you were given that they couldn’t go, ultimately?

A: I guess they just didn’t have the right authority from the right.

Hicks indicates that there was not a denial from Libya to allow US armed aircraft, but rather that the Libyans would have been willing, but they were never asked. This is contradictory to the Obama administration’s claims.

                                                                  H/T  Freedom Out Post

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/05/benghazi-witness-special-forces-told-you-cant-go-to-benghazi/ 

Obama’s No Child…err..Gang Banger Left Behind

 

In a brilliant new study by the Dept Of Education

(which only cost You and I 85 bazillion dollars)

They have determined the reason most inner city youts

(Yep, I said youts) are failing math is because they can’t see it in a practical application.

So they have devised a new test and we here at FOTM have gotten a copy from one of our many clandestine operatives planted in various and sundry places.

Don’t ask, cause you don’t want to know.

Just another service brought to you by the

FOTM Team. 

Inner City Schools are finally starting to teach practical math that these kids can use in real-world situations! 

NAME____________________

GANG/CREW NAME______________

CRIB_________________

1. Little Psycho has an AK-47 with a 200-round clip. He usually misses 6 of every 10 shots and he uses 13 rounds per drive- by shootin. How many mofos can Little Psycho ice on a drive- by before he gotta reload?

2. Big Mutha has 2 ounces of cocaine. If he sells an 8 ball to Antonio for $320 and 2 grams to JimJam for $85 per gram, what be the street value of the rest of his shit?

3. Jay-Jay pimps 3 ho’s. If the price is $85 per trick, how many tricks per day must each ho turn to support Jay-Jays $800 per day Crack habit?

4. Raul wants to cut the pound of cocaine he bought for $40,000 to make 20% profit. How many ounce bags will he need to make to gets the 20% upside?

5. Ray-Ray gets $2000 for a stolen BMW, $1500 for stealing a Corvette, and $1000 for a 4 x 4. If he steals 1 BMW, 2 Corvettes and 3 4×4′s, how many more Corvettes must he steal to make the 10k for his brother’s bail?

6. Killa got 6 years for murder. He also got $10,000 for the hit. If his common-law wife spends $100 of his hit money per mo nth, how much money will be left when he gets out?

7. If an average can of spray paint covers 22 square feet and the average letter is 3 square feet, how many letters can be sprayed with three 8 oz. Cans of spray paint with 20% paint left over?

8. Pee-Wee knocked up 4 girls in the gang. There be 20 girls in his gang. What be the percentage of bitches Pee-Wee knocked up?

9. Little Big Boi is a lookout for the gang. Little Big Boi also has a Boa Constrictor that eats 5 rats per week and a cost of $5 per rat. If Little Big Boi makes $700 a week as a lookout, how many weeks can he feed his snake with one week’s income?

10. Marvin steals Juan’s skateboard. As Marvin skates away at 15mph, Juan loads his 357 Magnum piece. If it takes Juan 20 seconds to load his piece, how far away will Marvin be when he gets whacked?

 

~Steve                                  H/T  The I_Man 

 

 

Liberal Logic 101

 

~Steve~                                            H/T   I_Man

A Marine veteran’s stinging letter to Sen. Marco Rubio

Roy G. Callahan, USN, Ret.

1529 NW 143^rd Street
Gainesville, Florida 32606
Tel:  (352) 332-9144
Fax:  (352) 332-9144
Call6603@Bellsouth.net

Wednesday, May 01, 2013

Senator Marco Rubio
317 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Rubio:

I received your undated “Personal & Confidential – Urgent Reply Requested” telling me “the GOP faces a math problem of epic proportions that simply cannot be ignored.” Your letter goes on to tell me “We lost the African American vote 93%-7%, the Hispanic vote 71%-27% and the vote under 30 by 60%-40%.”

Your first mistake was thinking that I care about what happens to the GOP. There’s not a tinkers damn difference between Democrats and Republicans other than the pace that either will get the American people to the promised land of socialism. My generation sacrificed thousands of American lives in Korea and Vietnam fighting Marxism; now you want me to accept it, condone it and foster it here? No deal!

Your second mistake was playing the divide and conquer game. I did not see African Americans or Hispanic Americans on the battle fields of Vietnam; I don’t see African or Hispanic Americans here now. All I see in America is Americans. If you are not an American you do not belong here. This rhetoric tells me you are part of the problem, not the solution.

I find your comments about our “not needing to change our economic principles nor our values” interesting. If history is correct, we fought and beat Fascism during WWII. Somehow or another however, we practice Fascism here today. [1]  I don’t support that either.

With regard to our “values and conservative philosophy,” we differ. I’m a constitutional conservative; you are not. I support and defend the rule of law; you do not. Your willingness to “compromise” with the likes of Schumer, and McCain et al says a lot about who you are. They trash the Constitution and rule of law with every breath. Mit Gehangen, Mit Gefangen. [Note from Eowyn: "Mitgefangen, mitgehangen" is German for "Cling together, swing together" or "In for a penny, in for a pound".]

Similarly, I do not share the vision or the political construct you are pushing regarding Republicans reaching out to “new voters.” I do not share your ultimate vision of nations without borders.

What you propose is in the Humanist Manifesto of 1973 (Marxist) that deals with American sovereignty. It declares, “Americans must transcend the limits of national sovereignty and move toward the building of a world community. We look to a world order based on transnational federal government.”[7]

Charles Reich, in the “Greening of America,” the manifesto, said “The true revolution is occurring . . . At the present junction of history, commitment to all humankind is the highest commitment of which we are capable; it transcends the narrow allegiances to church, state, party, class or race in moving toward a wide vision. What more daring a goal for humankind than for each person to become, in ideal as well as practice, a citizen of the world community”.”[8]

The idea of the end of nations and the creation of a world government has been to dream of intellectuals since Kant. It is Christian Heresy. Trading the hereafter for the here-and now is the bargain. As Christianity dies in the West the foundation of the first floor of a world government is already in place. The Supreme Court ruling on religion was not an aberration or an accident. Neither is the current invasion of Illegal aliens.

The oft touted “Global Economy” is the precursor to global governance where the UN is the parliament, the Security Council is its upper chamber (abolishing the veto) the General Assembly is the lower house. The International Criminal Court, the World Court, and the World Trade Organization constitute its judicial branches; and the IMF is the Federal Reserve. The World Bank and its sister development banks are the foreign aid agencies. The UN Food and Agricultural Organization and the World Health Organization are an example of its welfare agencies. The Kyoto Protocol and global warming marks the creation of a global EPA. This represents the model and forerunner of the EU. [9] I do not support global governance; neither should you.

Like many other Americans I see my country transforming into something do not I recognize. I resent being a stranger in my own country.

I also reject and vehemently oppose

• Seeing old holidays disappear.
• Seeing old heroes degraded.
• Seeing the art and artifacts of a glorious past removed from their museums and replaced by authors and titles I have never heard of.
• Seeing the moral code I was raised with being overthrown by a popular culture that is saturated with raw sex that trumpets hedonistic values taught, encouraged, and condoned in public schools which is causing the culture I grew up to die inside the country I grew up in.
• God being dethroned, my heroes defiled, my culture polluted, my values assaulted and my country invaded.

In summary, I’d really be stupid if I supported your vision for this country with my time and money, don’t you think? When you tell your Republican backers and the rest of the world you are constitutionally ineligible to run for the presidency and you finally decide to do something about the sitting usurper, I will be happy to discuss my support for you. Until then, please take me off your list.

Yours in the Bill of Rights,

 

Roy G., Callahan

Copy to: Representative Yoho; Representative Keith Perry; State Senator Bradley, et al

[1] Government control of business.

[7] American Humanist Association, Humanist Manifesto II, 1973, http://humanist.net/documjents/manifesto2.html.

[8] American Humanist Association, Humanist Manifesto II, 1973.

[9] “All countries are basically social arrangement . . . No matter how permanent and even sacred they may seem at any one time, in fact they are all artificial and temporary. Within the next one hundred years nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, glob al authority. A phrase briefly fashionable in the mid-20^th century – Citizen of the world – will have assumed real meaning by the end of the 21^st.” – Strobe Talbott, “America Abroad, The Birth of a Global Nation,” Time, July 20 1992 – p. 70

***

H/t FOTM’s Tina!

~Eowyn

This Is Brilliant! North Korean Army Can Be Easily Defeated With A Giant Magnet!

ok – Here’s The idea.  We pick a day.  We pick a time.  We go out into  our yards and streets and we point giant magnets in N. Korea‘s direction.

When they fall from the sky, they’ll probably be already dead.  The west coast will probably get them first.  They could fall into the Pacific, hit the mountains, squash in the desert.  Worth a try.

You have a better idea?

At The very least they’d sink when hitting water.

~Steve~                                        H/T   Miss May

Wear A Shirt With A Gun Picture To School and Get Suspended And Go To Jail…Say What?

 

8TH GRADER ARRESTED, SUSPENDED FOR NRA ‘PROTECT YOUR RIGHT’ T-SHIRT WITH IMAGE OF GUN

Apr. 19, 2013 1:38pm Liz Klimas   From the Blaze.com

An eighth grade student from West Virginia has been arrested, suspended and faces charges for wearing an NRA T-shirt with the image of a firearm and the words “Protect Your Right” printed on it to school.

WOWK-TV reported Jared Marcum saying he never thought there would be a problem with his pro-Second Amendment apparel.

“I never thought it would go this far because honestly I don’t see a problem with this. There shouldn’t be a problem with this,” Marcum told WOWK-TV.

Police confirmed that Marcum had been arrested and faced charges of obstruction and disturbing the education process after getting into an argument over the shirt with a teacher at Logan Middle School, which is south of Charleston.

Logan Middle School’s policy regarding dress states:

A student will not dress or groom in a manner that disrupts the educational process or is detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of others. A student will not dress in a manner that is distractive or indecent, to the extent that it interferes with the teaching and learning process, including wearing any apparel that displays or promotes any drug-, alcohol- or tobacco-related product that is prohibited in school buildings, on school grounds, in school-leased or owned vehicles, and at all school-affiliated functions.

 (Nope, nothing about guns there)

The student’s father, Allen Lardieri, told WOWK that the shirt didn’t violate this policy, nor did his son become aggressive when confronted about it.

 

“I will go to the ends of the earth, I will call people, I will write letters, I will do everything in the legal realm to make sure this does not happen again,” Lardieri said.

~Steve~

A Form Of Gun Confiscation Has Reportedly Begun In New York State — Here’s The Justification Being Used.

This is a follow up to a post I did the other day about gun’s and permit’s being taken in N.Y. because of certain medications people have taken. While there may be a correlation between a few mass shooter’s ( Adam Lanza) and Med’s, I don’t think that justifies pulling someones permit or weapons without other factors.

http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2013/04/10/new-york-police-confiscating-firearms-from-people-taking-anti-anxiety-medication/

 I’ve found More details and a list of med’s. I would venture to say that at one time or another many , many people have taken one or more drugs on this list.

Ever have trouble sleeping say 3-4 yrs ago and had your Doc write you a Prescription for something to sleep? Say Ambien, Lunesta

————————————-   ~    Steve  ~   —————————————–

Apr. 9, 2013 6:30pm Mike Opelka

Despite promises from the president and a host of other politicians who are pushing for more gun control that nobody is coming for your guns, the confiscation of guns and gun permits has apparently started in some form in New York State. One attorney representing several people who have been forced to surrender their guns spoke with TheBlaze and alerted us to some disturbing facts:
Gun owners are losing their 2nd Amendment rights without due process.

HIPAA Laws are likely being compromised and the 4th and 5th Amendments are being violated in some of these cases
How did confiscation start happening so quickly? Apparently the gun grabbing was triggered by something inside the NY SAFE Act — New York’s new gun law — that has a provision apparently mandating confiscation of weapons and permits if someone has been prescribed
psychotropic drugs.

Chapter 55.01 Definitions.
(6s) “Psychotropic medication” means a prescription drug, as defined in s. 450.01 (20),
that is used to treat or manage a psychiatric symptom or challenging behavior.
Some psychotropic medications fall into specific medication classes like antipsychotics
or antidepressants. In other cases, the medications may be primarily used for other
diseases but have been found effective in controlling behaviors thus making that specific
use a psychotropic medication.
Below is a list of psychotropic medications or medications with psychotropic uses. This
list is not intended to be all-inclusive, however it can act as a resource to alert you to
psychotropic medications where regulations like psychotropic monitoring, informed
consent or guardianship may impact. If you have any questions about the medication, its
intended use or adverse effects please contact the prescribing physician, pharmacist or
nurse.
Brand Name Generic Name Class
Abilify Aripiprazole Antipsychotic
Ambien Zolpidem Sleep Medications
Amytal Amobarbital Sleep Medications
Anafranil Clomipramine Antidepressants
Aricept Donepezil Other
Asendin Amoxapine Antidepressants
Atarax Hydroxyzine Antianxiety Short Acting
Ativan Lorazepam Antianxiety Short Acting
Ativan Lorazepam Sleep Medications
Benadryl Diphenhydramine Antianxiety Short Acting
Benadryl Diphenhydramine Sleep Medications
Buspar Buspirone Antianxiety Short Acting
Butisol Butabarbital Sleep Medications
Celexa Citalopram Antidepressants
Chloral Hydrate Chloral Hydrate Sleep Medications
Clozaril Clozapine Antipsychotics
Cognex Tacrine Other
Cylert Pemoline Other
Cymbalta Duloxetine Antidepressants
Dalmane Flurazepam Antianxiety Long Acting
Depakote Valproic Acid Other
Desyrel Trazadone Antidepressants
Doral Quazepam Antianxiety Long Acting
Doriden Glutethimide Sleep Medications
Effexor Venlafaxine Antidepressants

Elavil Amitriptyline Antidepressants
Exelon Rivastigmine Other
Gabitril Tiagabine Other
Geodon Ziprasidone Antipsychotics
Halcion Triazolam Sleep Medications
Haldol Haloperidol Antipsychotics
Inderal Propranolol Other
Invega Paliperidone Antipsychotic
Klonopin Clonazepam Antianxiety Long Acting
Lamictal Lamotrigine Other
Librium Chlordiazepoxide Antianxiety Long Acting
Lithium Lithium Other
Loxitane Loxapine Antipsychotics
Ludiomil Maprotiline Antidepressants
Lunesta Eszopiclone Sleep Medications
Luvox Fluvoxamine Antidepressants
Marplan Isocarboxazid Antidepressants
Mellaril Thioridazine Antipsychotics
Miltown Meprobamate Sleep Medications
Moban Molindone Antipsychotics
Namenda Memantine Other
Nardil Phenelzine Antidepressants
Navane Thiothixene Antipsychotics
Nembutal Pentobarbital Sleep Medications
Neurontin Gabapentin Other
Noludar Methprylon Sleep Medications
Norpramine Desipramine Antidepressants
Pamelor Nortriptyline Antidepressants
Parnate Tranycypromine Antidepressants
Paxil Paroxetine Antidepressants
Paxipam Halazepam Antianxiety Long Acting
Phenobarbital Phenobarbital Sleep Medications
Placidyl Ethchlorvynol Sleep Medications
Pristiq Desvenlafaxine Antidepressant
Prolixin Fluphenazine Antipsychotics
Prosom Estazolam Antianxiety Short Acting
Prosom Estazolam Sleep Medications
Prozac Fluoxetine Antidepressants
Razadyne Galantamine Other
Remeron Mirtazepine Antidepressants
Restoril Temazepam Sleep Medications
Risperdal Risperidone Antipsychotics
Ritalin Methylphenidate Other
Rozerem Ramelteon Sleep Medications
Serax Oxazepam Antianxiety Short acting
Serax Oxazepam Sleep Medications
Serentil Mesoridazine Antipsychotics
Seroquel Quetiapine Antipsychotics
Serzone Nefazodone Antidepressants
Sinequan Doxepin Antidepressants
Sonata Zaleplon Sleep Medications
Sparine Promazine Antipsychotics
Stelazine Trifluoperazine Antipsychotics
Surmontil Trimipramine Antidepressants
Taractin Chlorprothixene Antipsychotics
Tegretol Carbamazepine Other
Thorazine Chlorpromazine Antipsychotics
Tindal Acetophenazine Antipsychotics
Tofranil Imipramine Antidepressants
Tranxene Clorazepate Antianxiety Long Acting
Trilafon Perphenazine Antipsychotics
Tuinal Secobarbital Sleep Medications
Valium Diazepam Antianxiety Long Acting
Vesprin Triflupromazine Antipsychotics
Vistaril Hydroxyzine Antianxiety Short Acting
Vivactil Protriptyline Antidepressants
Wellbutrin Bupropion Antidepressants
Xanax Alprazolam Antianxiety Short Acting
Xanax Alprazolam Sleep Medications
Zoloft Sertraline Antidepressants
Zyprexa Olanzapine Antipsychotics
Updated thru 1/09

http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/rl_dsl/MedManagement/psychMeds.pdf

This is curious because in his January 9th address, Cuomo specifically addressed the issue of confiscation:

The Case:
On April 1st, a legal gun owner in upstate New York reportedly received an official notice from the state ordering him to surrender any and all weapons to his local police department. The note said that the person’s permit to own a gun in New York was being suspended as well. The gun owner contacted attorney Jim Tresmond (a specialist in gun laws in New York) and the two visited the local police precinct.
Mr. Tresmond reportedly went into the precinct and informed the officers that his client, waiting in the parking lot, was coming in to voluntarily surrender his weapons as requested. The local police were aware of the letter because they had already been contacted by the State Police. Apparently, if people do not respond to the initial mailing, local law enforcement is authorized to visit the gun owner at their home and demand the surrender of the firearms. In this case, the gun owner followed the request as written. The guns and permits were handed over and a receipt given to the client.
After the guns were turned over, a request for a local hearing was filed and the gun owner is expecting to have his Second Amendment rights restored. But there is more to this story.
In our conversation with lawyer Jim Tresmond, we learned that this client, who has never had a problem with the law — no criminal record and or violent incidents on record — did have a temporary, short term health issue that required medication. But how were his client’s private medical information accessed by the government? This appears to be a violation of HIPAA and Health Information Privacy policies at HHS.gov. If it is declared a violation, this becomes a civil rights issue.
Some claim that a broad interpretation of this statement from HIPAA might allow the government to have instant access to the medical records and gun ownership records of anyone who is prescribed psychotropic drugs.
“A major goal of the Privacy Rule is to assure that individuals’ health information is properly protected while allowing the flow of health information needed to provide and promote high quality health care and to protect the public’s health and well being”.

That short phrase, “protect the public’s health and well being” is probably going to be cited as the reason governments can require notification of any gun owner who is prescribed a class of drugs used to treat Depression and Anxiety known as SSRI ( Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors).
The Mental Health Law provision of the SAFE Act claims
The NY SAFE Act is designed to remove firearms from those who seek to do harm to themselves or others. This means keeping the minority of individuals with serious mental illness who may be dangerous away from access to firearms. This law should not dissuade any individual from seeking mental health services they need.

The law is clear on what it expects:
MHL 9.46 requires mental health professionals to report to their local director of community services (“DCS”) or his/her designees when, in their reasonable professional judgment, one of their patients is “likely to engage in conduct that would result in serious harm to self or others.”
The man who was asked/directed to turn over his guns reportedly did not exhibit any signs of violent or dangerous behavior. According to his attorney, the man’s doctor did not report any danger to the authorities. So, who did report it?

Also known as MHL 9.46, the law talks about who is supposed to report on mental health risks and which patients qualify:
The reporting requirement extends to “mental health professionals,” defined in the law as four professions – physicians (including psychiatrists), psychologists, registered nurses, or licensed clinical social workers.
In addition to what Mr. Tresmond called “the laughable diminution of our rights,” the lawyer speculated about additional unintended consequences of releasing this confidential patient information to law enforcement.
What if an employer learns that a worker had their firearms confiscated? Could that person’s employment be put at risk?
What if your neighbors saw police come to your home and leave with your guns? Could that compromise your safety?
Could this kind of confiscation also make people think twice about getting treatment for a temporary mental illness?

In an effort to learn how many permits and guns have been rescinded due to this medical exception, TheBlaze has made several attempts to contact the Erie County office over pistol permits where this one incident originated. We have yet to be connected with a real person who can answer these questions.
We have also reached out to the Albany office of the New York State Police, but no official response has been received.
Mr. Tresmond has also agreed to keep us posted on his client’s efforts to have his Second Amendment rights restored and get back his guns.
TheBlaze will continue to monitor this story and we are also interested in hearing from other New Yorkers who may have experienced this type of confiscation. Please send all emails to mopelka@TheBlaze.com.

Interview with Jim Tresmond the Atty below.

Tuesday, Buffalo radio talk show host Tom Bauerle spoke with Jim Tresmond on WBEN radio.
http://audio.wben.com/a/73319182/bauerle-with-jim-tresmond.htm

—————————————————————————————————-

So let me ask you, if this is the road the Gov tries to go down, just how long before we have our first, second , third,…. Ruby Ridge’s?

This could go real bad real Fast.

New York Police Confiscating Firearms from People Taking Anti-anxiety Medication

Yep folks inch by inch they are coming. Is anyone else besides me tired of playing by the rules? You know we’re the good guys and we don’t cheat.

Frankly I am so sick and friggen tired of it. They just trample EVERYTHING that is decent and right that is in this world. They lie, cheat , beat , and yes even kill for their agenda. How bout we start drawing a line in the sand and say you better not cross this or I’m gonna bop you UPSIDE the head. I’m sorry but

the marquis de queensbury rules simply don’t apply anymore.

I forget who said it But it went something like this.

“All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing”  

This story grabs me by my gut and makes me want to hurl. HIPPA, Dr. Patient ——privacy, civil rights. Where is the outrage.?—————–

Government increases “onerous activity” to confiscate legal firearms.

Infowars.com
April 9, 2013

The New York State Police are suspending the handgun permits of people in the state who are prescribed anti-anxiety medication, according to Jim Tresmond of the Tresmond Law Firm in Hamburg, New York. Tresmond Law specializes in firearm litigation.

“We are representing a client right now who is impacted by this onerous activity of the government,” Tresmond told WBEN, a news talk radio station in Buffalo, New York.

“We were flummoxed by this whole matter,” the attorney said. “The HIPPA act is supposed to prevent this kind of thing from happening. It’s a gross invasion of our privacy rights.”

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Privacy Rule establishes national standards to protect individuals’ medical records and other personal health information, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

Tresmond said the New York State Police are responsible for taking action against legal firearms owners. “Based on information the county received from the New York State Police, they’ve suspended the permits. The State Police instigates the proceedings.”

Section 9.46 of the NY SAFE Act of 2013 authorizes therapists, doctors, nurses and social workers to report patients they determine may engage in conduct that may result in harm to self or others. If a determination is made that the person in question poses a threat, the provision permits the government to confiscate firearms. The provision is a direct violation of the Fourth Amendment and the legal standard of probable cause.

Experts said many mental health providers will likely ignore the provision.

NY SAFE was passed by the New York State Legislature on January 15, 2013, and was signed into law by Governor Andrew Cuomo the same day.

This article was posted: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 at 4:52 pm

~Steve~                   H/T  INFOWARS

 

In Florida, number of CCW permits up, violent crimes down

Somewhere some Lib’s head is about to explode with these facts

Just ran across this lovely article and thought I would share. Now if some nincompoop would like to debate the fact that having people armed to defend themselves makes for a safer society, well just jam some of these facts down  their throats.                      ~Steve~

———————————————————————————————–

Florida Update: Concealed Carry Permits Up, Violent Crime Down.

Written by  Bob Adelmann

The recent report from ABC News that in Florida, where there are more concealed weapons permits than anywhere else in the country, violent crime has dropped to the lowest point in history, delighted Sean Caranna, executive director of Florida Carry, Inc. “We’re happy to have facts and statistics put into these debates, because every time they do, we win,” he said.

Firearm-related violent crimes in Florida have dropped by one-third in just four years, 2007 to 2011, while concealed carry permits jumped by 90 percent in that period. Further, violent crime of any kind dropped almost as much, 26 percent.

There were naysayers, but their voices are becoming muted as more and more states have adopted “shall-issue” carry laws and have seen their own crime rates drop as well. One of the naysayers was Gary Kleck, a Florida State criminologist who calls himself “as liberal as they get.” He said the link between more permits and less crime might just be a coincidence. He said that nationally, crime has been falling steadily since 1991 and Florida’s numbers might just be part of that trend. He warned against drawing too hasty a conclusion that one statistic caused the other. “The real problem there in drawing conclusions is that you’re guessing why that decline or change in gun violence has occurred,” he stated.

In a backhanded support of Kleck’s warning, Arthur Hayhoe, the executive director of the Florida Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, said “It’s difficult to attach gun control to the reduction of crime, and vice versa. We don’t know what works. We can’t prove that gun control works because we don’t have gun control laws.”

( Excuse me while I move this rock…  OK ,Mr. Hayhoe, hey that sounds like..ah never mind. You say we can’t prove it because we don’t have gun control laws. Well since you’ve been under a rock, believe it or not they have laws in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles. Guess what? As far as helping your argument, they suck. Just so you know. Scurry back under that rock now.    ~Steve)

Kleck has authored numerous books and articles over the last 20 years, but none garnered as much national attention as his 1994 National Self-Defense Survey which, based on a survey of 5,000 households, concluded that there were far more incidents where gun owners defended themselves against potentially violent crime than there were actual crimes involving the use of guns. This outraged liberals who thought Kleck would find something that would support their typically anti-gun posture. One such was Marvin Wolfgang, another liberal Florida criminologist who described himself as being “as strong a gun-control advocate as can be found among all criminologists in this country.” He said,

I would eliminate all guns from the civilian population and maybe even from the police. I hate guns — ugly, nasty instruments designed to kill people…. What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck … The reason I am troubled is that [he has] provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator … I do not like [his] conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault [his] methodology….

Such a report from Florida must encourage Professor John Lott, who in 2000 authored the groundbreaking book More Guns, Less Crime. Lott never intended to become the lightning rod for the anti-gun forces. He began the study initially because he saw that much of what passed for valid statistical analysis in the field was poorly done, and he saw an opportunity to correct and update it. What it did was change his life, and not necessarily for the better. In his recent update to the book, Lott wrote,

Ten years have passed since the second edition of this book. During that time, both the argument and the data have been hotly debated. This debate has often been unpleasant, vociferous, and even disingenuous. To say that my career has suffered as a result is something of an understatement.… And yet … within the scholarly community [my] research has withstood criticism and remains sound. Further, the additional ten years of data provide continued strong support for [my] arguments.…

When Florida passed the first “shall-issue” law requiring authorities to issue concealed weapons permits to qualified citizens upon request in 1987, critics warned that the Sunshine State would soon become the “Gunshine” State, with predictions of differences being settled by gun fights in the streets, and crime soaring. The exact opposite happened. As Guncite.com noted, “homicide rates dropped faster than the national average [and] through 1997, only one permit holder out of over the 350,000 permits issued, was convicted of homicide.”

That was then. This is now. Lott provided an update on right-to-carry laws for the Maryland Law Review last October in which he noted that there are now more than 912,000 permit holders in Florida, many of whom have had their permits for years. Across the country, as some 40 other states have joined Florida in its decision to allow “shall-issue” permits to its citizens, the number of permit holders has reached nearly eight million, and is still climbing. And Lott is getting support for his once-controversial view by recent studies showing similar declines in violent crime. Wrote Lott:

There have been a total of 29 peer reviewed studies by economists and criminologists, 18 supporting the hypothesis that shall-issue laws reduce crime, 10 not finding any significant effect on crime … and [one] paper … finding that right-to-carry laws temporarily increase one type of violent crime: aggravated assault.

He noted that the predicted disasters following passage of such laws never happened. In fact, despite more and more states adopting them, not a single one of those laws has been repealed. As Lott noted,

One simple measure of how well these laws have worked is a political one: despite states adopting right-to-carry laws as long ago as the 1920s, there has never even been a legislative hearing held to rescind these laws.

In that paper, Lott took delight in debunking so-called studies by anti-gun groups that have distorted the data to prove a different, and less favorable, conclusion:

A June 2010 analysis of the gun control groups’ claims examined those groups’ claims for Florida: the Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center portray Florida as Ground Zero for problems with concealed handgun permit holders.

They boldly assert that seventeen Florida permit holders have “killed” people with their guns over the past three years [from May 2007 to May 2010] and that this one state by itself accounts for seventeen of the ninety-six “killer” permit holders nationwide.

( Liar Liar Big Fat Stupid Pants on Fire…. I’m such a child.  LOL)

Yet even though a newspaper reported on the shooting, seven cases were such clear-cut cases of self-defense that no one was even charged with a crime, three cases involved suicide, and two of the other cases, including one involving a police officer, actually didn’t involve permit holders. [Emphases added.]

That means that, following Lott’s rigorous refutation of those inflated statistics, just five out of more than half a million permit holders were involved in a criminal case in that three-year period.

That latest information from Florida just confirms what Lott had discovered years ago: Carrying reduces crime. Wrote Lott: “Armageddon never happened … in state after state when right-to-carry laws have been adopted, the entire debate quickly becomes a non-issue within a year.”

The time is almost here when carrying a concealed firearm is so commonplace that it won’t even be worth commenting on. Florida and Professor John Lott have led the way.

A graduate of Cornell University and a former investment advisor, Bob is a regular contributor to The New American and blogs frequently at www.LightFromTheRight.com, primarily on economics and politics. He can be reached atbadelmann@thenewamerican.com.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/14859-florida-update-concealed-carry-permits-up-violent-crime-down

UN passes gun-control Arms Trade Treaty

Is the Obama regime going for gun control via an international treaty that was just passed in the United Nations (UN)?

David Sherfinski reports for The Washington Times, April 2, 2013, that the UN General Assembly today approved by a 155 to 3 vote, the long-debated United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) — a sweeping, first-of-its-kind treaty to regulate the international arms trade. 

The Obama regime supported the final draft of the ATT. Iran, Syria and North Korea voted against it.

The ATT requires countries to regulate and control the export of weaponry such as battle tanks, combat vehicles and aircraft and attack helicopters, as well as parts and ammunition for such weapons. It also provides that signatories (countries who approve of the treaty) will not violate arms embargoes, international treaties regarding illicit trafficking, or sell weaponry to countries for genocide, crimes against humanity or other war crimes.

But American gun rights advocates say the treaty is riddled with loopholes. Especially troubling is the treaty’s inclusion of “small arms and light weapons” in its list of weaponry subject to international regulations. They do not trust U.N. assertions that the pact is meant to regulate only cross-border trade and would have no impact on domestic U.S. gun laws and markets.

Critics of the treaty were heartened by the U.S. Senate’s resistance to ratifying the document, assuming the POS even sends the treaty to the Senate for ratification, which of course is required by the U.S. Constitution. In its budget debate late last month, the Senate approved a non-binding amendment opposing the treaty. The amendment is the brainchild of Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Oklahoma), and has the support of all 45 Republican senators as well as 8 Democrats.

Sen Inhofe notes that the ATT could “disrupt diplomatic and national security efforts by preventing our government from assisting allies like Taiwan, South Korea or Israel when they require assistance.”

Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kansas) made an eminently sensible point when he points out that passing a treaty Iran, Syria and North Korea will just ignore will only serve to constrain law-abiding countries like the U.S. In other words, Moran is invoking an international variant of “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.”

Both Inhofe and Moran also argue that the Arms Trade Treaty violates our Constitutional rights, vowing that if the Obama regime supports the treaty — as appears to be the case — “members of the U.S. Senate must continue to make clear that any treaty that violates our Second Amendment freedoms will be an absolute nonstarter for ratification.”

Groups in support of the ATT include Amnesty International and the American Bar Association. The latter released a white paper arguing that the treaty would not affect Second Amendment rights.

Read the rest of the Washington Times article here.

Indeed, according to an analysis of the ATT by the Heritage Foundation, the treaty has at least two major flaws:

1. The treaty is impractical because it’s unenforceable: By seeking to regulate everything from manufacturing technology to ammunition to small arms to aircraft carriers, the treaty’s scope would be so wide, any effort to honestly assess whether signatories are upholding it would be an exercise in futility. It will provide endless opportunities for activists to demand additional treaties and regulations when the contemplated treaty fails to work.
2. The treaty poses a serious risk to our Second Amendment gun rights. For example, the treaty requires signatories to “take all appropriate measures to prevent the diversion of exported arms into the illicit market,” which could be held to require internal controls on the civilian transfer and sale of firearms. That, in turn, can lead to restrictions on the sale and transfer of guns within the United States.

~Eowyn