“All it’s lacking is a spark,” McEntire said in the report.
The BATF love giving sparks and so does the FBI. I bet they have a match waiting to light.
so-called “sovereign citizens”
Freaking morons. it is Citizens, not citizens. Also, I bet this reporter never heard of We the People. Yes, Sovereign Citizens. They hold the power. Read the constitution before?
that article is SO full of distortions its sickening.. hard to believe that altruistic ignorance is speaking.. i suspect their deceptive words are intentional, but many times in my experiences with friends/family/etc shows that the brainwashing and teaching of incorrect principles over several decades is whats at play.
Yeah the first sentence alone is enough to get people all paranoid about these militias with “gripes against the government.” Don’t forget the economy! The sheople are going to beg for martial law.
You need to learn more about sovereign Citizenship.
I have watched this first video and it is phenominal on teaching what is a “person” and does the government have jurisdiction over you.
I havent watched the 2nd video yet and I cant wait to see it.
Even though this is in the UK, most of it still applies to the USA.
Its an Illusion Part 1
Its an Illusion Part 2
Watch this story of a guy who refuses to give jurisdiction to the Police “Officers” and the “courts”.
This should help even more when learning about jurisdiction.
Don’t understand! (stand under) – legal language meaning is not the same as everyday meaning.
Dammit the video is having buffering problems!! I saw 5 seconds of it and now it just loads forever.
I’m going to have to check this out after work tonight.
Alright it finally loaded. The guy did make a point but it really wasn’t effective in my opinion. The cops were pretty calm and tried to reason with the guy too. Yelling doesn’t accomplish much. Just like the previous thread!!
We never asked anyone to start yelling. We simply said the word “socialist” and it obviously struck home with some.
JC, did you not watch the whole thing?
The cops were calm, obviously, they were on camera. Not all cops are out of control and violent.
They did not try to reason with the guy. They were trying to get jurisdiction on him. He talked about that in the video.
Maybe you don’t understand jurisdiction and that is why the video doesn’t make sense to you.
Let me tell you of something I learned and then how I applied it.
I took a class with the local police department. Here is one thing they taught.
If a police officer is driving down a street and they see someone but have no reasonable cause, they can get jurisdiction by simply talking to the person they see. If the person engages the office (talks to them, responds), they now have jurisdiction.
If the person walks away and ignores the officer, the office has to disengage.
That is jurisdiction.
Let me give you another thing I learned.
They had a city attorney that teaches the police officers come and teach. I asked her, if a police officer pulls someone over, and there is a passenger in the car, does the passenger have to give the police office their ID?
The answer? NO.
When my girlfriend was pulled over for having a light out, the police office wanted my drivers license. I said, am I required to do so? He said no. Then he said you aren’t trying to hide anything are you. I said no.
He took her license, came back and we left.
When you learn about your rights and jurisdiction, you exercise them and begin to retrain the servants of the Sovereigns.
I forgot to say, when the officer said no, I am not required, I said I rather not and did not give it to him.
I can feel it coming in the air tonight.
Doyel – I didn’t mean you were. You jut posted that ode but most of got real heated in our debate.
TJ – Yeah I only saw one and then I had to go to work. That’s some real interesting stuff about jurisdiction and talking to the cop giving them jurisdiction. Even you don’t talk back they’ll just make up some suspicious circumstance and beat/tase the shit out of you for not cooperating.
BlackSwampGhost – LOL I think I need to post the Phil Collins bone Thugs collabo in keeping up with yesterdays music interlude! Enjoy!!
Man Brings Firearm to Obama Town Hall, MSM Goes Nuts
Good one, Charles.
Glad to see this happen. Everyone needs do start doing it everywhere they go. A show of force is a good thing, especially for the sissified sheople who are petrified at the sight of a gun. And especially the politicians need to get an eyeful of the armed populace struttin’ around with their guns. They need to be sent a message. They need to be reminded that we are still here and we still have what it takes.
Finally got to watch all three of the videos. Chris Matthews stood up well against that screaming yelling crazy reporter. Bravo, Bro’. Well done anti-socialist rhetoric. Hard hitting sign and signal. Heard you loud and clear. Chalk one up for Liberty. And don’t forget it. Big old yellow rattler right up there on the front page tellin’ it like it is.
No one got hurt. Just your average American struttin’ around with his privately owned firearm. I carried mine all day today. The greatest of Rights exercised daily will keep us Freemen.
Screw the economy. Eat less, buy more bullets. Right up there on the front page. Keep it nice, and keep it going. Bravo show of arms.
I do not know guys. I think the whole thing was staged. Chris Matthews and the guy with the gun were doing the hegalian dialectic again.
(problem) The guy brings a gun.
(thesis) The guy says its okay to bring a gun, join the anti-government movement.
(antithesis) the reporter says guns are dangerous, points to other gun related incidents.
(synthesis) half the public trusts the reporter, half the public trusts the guy. A conflict is born. American sheeple are again divided, sheered, and led to the slaughter.
LOL! Did you notice the guy say he voted for Ron Paul? The same Ron Paul who said Osama Bin Laden was responsible for the 911 terrorist attacks. Give me a break…
Yeah the MSN reporter got pretty excited. The one on the scene seemed to have more of a brain though. I think their age has a lot to do with it.
I can understand both sides. As if the president being out in the open isn’t dangerous enough, he is the first black president. We all know of this country’s deep rooted bigotry and the countless lives it took. The fucking Klan still operates in this day and age!
The presidential aids and advisers who planned this outing should all be fired. Why put the president at risk? You know NH’s gun rights! If you don’t you should have done the homework! Have the meeting in a surrounding where you can lawfully control the possession of firearms by the people.
The whole point to the discusssion was that ‘bama was never in any danger to begin with. Two hundred of us could have been standing there with guns and there would still be no danger to your beloved braak ‘bama.
You think that whole thing was staged? Again, I would have to ask you to come up with some proof of that claim. And, just like the last time I asked you for proof of your claim — you don’t have any. What you have is just some more of your ignorant talk.
I’m glad this happened. Bravo, Mr. Matthews. You’ve just helped me to expose a couple more socialists on this board who are ‘bama supporters and who are ignorant enough to believe that somehow guns are dangerous.
Ted, think of it from a Secret Service agent’s point of view. How can they possibly protect the president from 200 people armed? You say there would be no danger. Can you guarantee that? No one can. So my point is Obama should never have been there to begin with.
I look at Obama as any other politician. Nothing more, nothing less. Yes he is the first black president, and to me that is a good thing because it wasn’t that long ago when MLK got assassinated and lynchings were common place. America needs to be honest with her racist history and tackle the issue head on.
That one guy with the loaded sidearm had every right to be there. The local police also did a great job respecting his right. I think we need to give credit to the NH police. This guy knew he was going to cause a scene. His mission is accomplished.
I believe we all have a right to defend ourselves and own firearms. The 2nd Amendment is every American’s right. You also need take into consideration that when it was written during the days of the musket, the rate of fire and accuracy made it possible for everyone to react in a reasonable time. Shit is hectic now and we got Americans from students to cops killing innocents. This is why it’s important that all Americans have the right to arm themselves. Most people seem to equate gun control to mean gun reduction.
In one sentence you rant about protecting your fellow socialist, braak ‘bama, and out of the other side of your mouth you spout about our rights.
If it is my right, it really don’t matter who’s around, does it?
A right is something that cannot be taken away. If it can be taken away, it is not a right, but considered a privilege.
I understand you… so long as the “president” is around, guns are a privilege. When the “president” is not around, the guns are a right. Which translates to: guns are a privilege and the Secret Service, the media, and screaming, shouting, idiot television reporters and popular opinion will decide when and where we can carry guns.
What’s more is Chris Matthews wasn’t even anywhere near the “president”, and was on private property with express permission to be there.
Flaming ignorant stupidity, ie., Socialism.
NH: Gun activist open carries into Manchester police station
And your point with posting the video is?
Ted you’re not hearing me. I said Obama should never have been there since it was unlawful to take away that guy’s firearms.
Like it or not Ted, you and I don’t mean shit when it comes time to protecting our president. He is our president for the time being and you better learn to live with that. His safety trumps your Constitutional rights in situations like this. There was no reason for this guy to bring his gun. You can try to say all you want that it shouldn’t matter who is around but it does. The cops didn’t trust that guy, plain and simple. I don’t blame them. You or that guy’s civil rights are not worth the risk to the president’s life. I’d rather make the call if I was the cop to violate your rights and take the matter to court rather than have a possible killer on the grounds when the president speaks.
I understand you perfectly, JC.
And getting back to the main idea of this post. I took Doyel’s advice and started in on the PsyOps Series from HOTT. Man, what a great bunch of recordings! I’m hooked! This series is a must have!
Gun Facts – Your Guide to Debunking Gun Control Myths
JC, Everyone should of had guns. If you don’t exercise your Rights, they will take them. Just look at what has happened.
The criminals don’t obey the law. They don’t open carry guns. Those that assassinate presidents were part of a conspiracy.
I fail to see anything in the constitution that says, you have the right to bear arms, except when a president is near, or except when another person decides you shouldn’t.
No rights are infringed when carrying lawfully.
I’m just saying that from a law enforcement point of view, that guy was not worth the risk when president Obama came to speak. There are psychos everywhere.
Ted – you keep calling me a fellow socialist, what’s the deal with that? Because I agree with the cops in this case? I think you’re getting too militant. That guy wanted to create a scene. Everyone else came unarmed. Don’t try to make him an innocent victim here. The guy had the sign about liberty and blood and all that implies violence.
Right on, Mr. Chambers. You understand 2A All The Way– no exceptions.
For those of you who still cling to your socialist tendencies and still don’t quite get the Second Amendment, I suggest you read “Hope” by Aaron Zelman and L. Neil Smith. They give a most excellent perspective on how the Masonic Secret Service can handle an armed population and still protect the president.
JC, He is saying you are being a socialist because you think there are exceptions to Rights.
What does the II Amendment say in regards to the Right to bear arms?
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a
free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall
not be infringed.
Well, from what I see, the constitution says, it shall not be infringed. So, people need to exercise their Right whether they like it or not.
If the police don’t like it, then they need to tell the President to either stay at home or deal with it, or don’t go where the Armed People are.
The answer is not to take Rights away. If they are taken away in 1 circumstance, they will make up more to take them away.
A city and State are safer when all the Citizens (notice C not c) are armed to protect.
Furthermore, the president himself should be setting a great example for all of us, and should be carrying a gun of his own, and so too should his staff.
Come back, Andrew Jackson! Help us beat the banksters and the Brits and take our country back!
2A All the Way!
If they are that afraid of the Obama being killed, then put him in the pope mobile. That way, no Rights are infringed.
You see, there are ways around it and you so easily give up rights where the constitution says not to be infringed.
That is one of the reasons this country has so many problems. People buy into what they hear no matter the consequence.
That’s right. If the Usurper and his bodyguards don’t like the lay of the land because of too many guns and Freedom Lovers around, or whatever his reason, he can take his worthless, homosexual, puppet, usurping, lying, filthy ass elsewhere–and he can take his squaw with him as he goes on his merry commie way.
Socialists think we work for the establishment and that we need to be wary and careful of it.
Freedom Lovers know We, the People run this show, and that it is they who need to be wary of us.
I agree with you guys about the right to bear arms with no exceptions so that is why I said, OBAMA SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN THERE. Plan a meeting where you can lawfully control the possession of firearms.
What I’m also saying is that a decision had to be made. The president was already there and I agree with law enforcement’s decision to get that one guy out of there. In a perfect world where guns are only used for self defense then YES it would be completely safe if every attendee came armed. But this is not reality.
Once again, it’s very simple, you can have your rights or you can have your ‘bama — but you can’t have both.
You’re going to have to ask yourself which is most important to you and stand by it.
And JC, that is why you are siding with the socialists. You are only partially for the 2nd amendment. You think it is ok to up hold the 2A only when justified. How can I say such a thing?
“The president was already there and I agree with law enforcement’s decision to get that one guy out of there.”
His right was infringed and you agree to it.
Was there any danger? I know of no danger that day. You bought into the propaganda. You should get the psyops series and study it.
Ted I bet you hate Obama even more than every other flunky politician simply because he is black. That’s the impression I get. The same type of attitude klan members and white supremacist give off. You focus on Obama only and blame him for this country’s current state.
TJ, you keep saying there was no danger. Can you guarantee that there would have been none if the guy was allowed to stay? Every other person felt there was no need to bring in a gun but this guy wants to play the so called revolutionary by going against the grain. There’s a time and place for doing that but this was not one of them.
Dude, you guys need to chill the fuck out. Some douche bag thought that bringing in a gun while holding the “Liberty/flow/blood” sign was actually an intelligent thing to do when the president came into town. This is how you lose the debate in gun control.
Let get this correct JC, you were at the event and you interrogated every other person and verified that they felt there was no need to bring a gun?
If you werent there, then the only way you would know that is through the news psyops you were fed.
Just come out and say it. You dont like the 2nd amendment that says, it shall never be infringed.
JC, you are much worse off than I imagined.
This conversation is over.
Yeah fuck you too then Ted.
TJ, I don’t understand how you keep missing my point. You need to really look at it from both sides and stop viewing this as an “us against them” scenario. You’re not going to change and hearts and minds of the people you view as the enemy with that kind of attitude. I trust no one and I expect the same attitude towards me. That guy with the gun is to be trusted just because he holds a sign and claims to fight for freedom and liberty? Law enforcement can’t take chance.
Saying that 2A has no exceptions is saying that 1A should give me right to yell out FIRE in a crowd when there is none, you know, because I have the right to. This fucking douche bag with the gun is a detriment to the movement to restore our Republic. That’s my view and he gets no respect from me.
TJ, I don’t understand how you keep missing my point. You need to look at both sides here and stop this “us against them” mentality. You aren’t going to change the hearts and minds of the ones you view as the enemy with that attitude. The cops didn’t take his weapon away so you’re blowing this out of proportion. They made him leave, big deal. I trust no one and I expect the same attitude towards me. This guy is to be trusted just because he claims to believe in our Republic? Law enforcement can’t take that risk.
You keep arguing on technicalities. 1A gives the freedom of speech but you can’t yell out FIRE in a crowd when there is none. You need to apply common sense to 2A as well. This guy with the gun is a detriment to the movement to restore our Republic. That’s my view and he gets no respect from me.
“You need to really look at it from both sides and stop viewing this as an “us against them” scenario. You’re not going to change and hearts and minds of the people you view as the enemy with that kind of attitude. I trust no one and I expect the same attitude towards me.”
Well said. Love your enemies. Why do we always forget what Jesus Christ said?
“Saying that 2A has no exceptions is saying that 1A should give me right to yell out FIRE in a crowd when there is none, you know, because I have the right to. This fucking douche bag with the gun is a detriment to the movement to restore our Republic. That’s my view and he gets no respect from me.”
Not only is that guy a douche bag, but he is a sheeple. Vote and support Ron Paul was enough for me to figure out that the guy was a sheeple. Who would want to vote and support a member of CON-gress anyway? Sheeple…
skywrath, That is not what Jesus was talking about.
Love your enemies. Why did he say that? Because there was a sect that said, if you are not part of us, then you are our enemies and we hate you. If you are part of us, then you are our neighbor and we love you.
Even though they were all part of the same religion and serving the same God and living in the same land, that is how this group viewed things.
So that is why this was said,
43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
Most people dont understand what Jesus said in the first place.
Flash Player 10 is needed!Click to upgrade...
The stream is currently OFFLINE