Global Warming is a Hoax

 

“The difference between animals and humans is that animals change themselves for the environment, but humans change the environment for themselves” Ayn Rand

     Wading into the more than 4 feet of compressed snow atop my garage, I jammed my fortified snow shovel down into the morass with both arms overhead like I were spear fishing the Amazon. A thin, 1 foot flake fell forward. The realization of just how much time and effort would be needed to finish this little project had me questioning my resolve to continue homesteading the mountains of Idaho. My son's cheerful glee from being able to slide all the way from the roof to ground broke through my thoughts, and I was reminded of at least one reason why we moved up here: Pristine wilderness, fresh air, water not poisoned with fluoride, doing as I please on my own land, and becoming as self-sufficient as possible.  Still, this was a helluva lot of snow. It is the first of April now and we are watching the last of the snow melt. We are experiencing record runoff and flooding. This kind of snowfall has not been seen for at least 32 years, and one record involving amount of snowfall between December and January from the late 1800s was broken.  First of all, I would like to make a prediction: We will be seeing these kinds of winters for some time to come. Sure, I could be wrong, but I don't think I am.
I may be fairly new to the mountain, but I've lived my entire life in Idaho, with the exception of leaving for awhile and returning in the winter of '03. In the early 80s, we had severe winters all the time and regularly saw 3' of snow to the east and west of Boise. Then, times changed.
One consistent thing about climate is that......it changes. On average, when you think about it, you will see somewhere around 30 year cycles. We have had a great deal of mild winters. Expect that to change.

   Did you know that many of the same scientists who have been preaching a global warming in the 90s were also the ones preaching a coming age of global ice and cooling effects in the late 70s?

True story.

One of the greatest hoaxes of all time has been to convince society that we face a global meltdown. We do not. The glaciers are not melting, the ozone layer is not fading, the seas are not rising, and carbon is not making the earth hotter nor is carbon killing plants. In fact, it is carbon levels which follow the ebb and flow of global heat signatures, and it is carbon which plants use for their crucial process of photosynthesis....yes, carbon monoxide too.

There is no such thing as so called "greenhouse gas". What they are referring to is large quantities of water vapor with a scant bit of various elements mixed in. Of that vast layer of water, a miniscule amount is actually carbon, and of that a very inconsequential amount is anything that could be construed as contributed by man.

It is the sun's activity which changes the planet's climate, and it is the slight differences in our orbit that bring different degrees of actual changes.

Simple.

No need to levy carbon tax upon industry. No need to tax methane emmissions from a rancher's cow.
No need to regulate diesel and gas engine manufacturers into oblivion.
No need for alarmist talk and fear mongering.
No need to focus the children on "saving the earth" rather than excelling in dominating it.

   "Contrary to the ecologists, nature does not stand still and does not maintain the kind of equilibrium that guarantees the survival of any particular species - least of all the survival of her greatest and most fragile product: man.” Ayn Rand

      Interestingly enough, during the writing of this short blog post, I became embroiled in a debate through email thread involving several people over this exact same subject. As a result, I've been forced to peruse reams of convoluted data and papers attempting to back up climate alarmist thinking. It was a real hoot. Consequently, I thought it good to include some more scientific explanation of a few things during this thoughtful foray into the subject. 

Global cooling has changed to global warming and has now changed to climate change.

This is the epitome of pseudo-science because climate is ALWAYS CHANGING.

Guess what the solution has always been for global cooling, global warming, and now the ever ambiguous climate change? 

The solution from political liberals has always been and continues to be massive government control of the economy, the energy sector, and every area of our lives. Thanks, but no thanks.

  The amount of lies and disinformation coming out of the green movements is stunning. The NOAA itself has been caught red handed altering global temperature data. We need the truth.

  

    The truth is that in 1900, 99.97% of the Earth’s atmosphere contained gas molecules other than CO2. Today, it’s 99.96%. And the 99.96% vs. 99.97% atmospheric gaseous concentration doesn’t even address the oceans–which is where 93% of the heat energy in the climate system is contained and/or subjected to variation.

         This is important. There is no CO2 warming signal in the whole satellite temperature data. No CO2 warming signature anywhere.

During my aforementioned debate, I put a question to my interlocutors, one an irrational social activist and the other a liberal scholar. The question presented was this: CAN YOU PRODUCE A PAPER THAT SHOWS EMPIRICALLY THAT CO2 CAUSES WARMING IN A CONVECTIVE ARMOSPHERE?

Literally.....crickets. 

They ranted and raved about the evils of capitalism and the poison of fossil fuels, but they could not answer the question. This wasn't a case of me not accepting an answer or trying to get them to define meaning. I mean they literally ignored the question and refused to answer.

The reality is that what the world needs is not decreased fossil fuel use but increased use with careful control of conventional pollutants using conventional controls where needed and justified. Conventional controls are much less expensive and much more certain to be effective than attempting to reduce fossil fuel use in order to reduce conventional pollution.

Check out this quote from a man named Alan Carlin. Mr. Carlin was heavily involved in environmental activism in the Sierra Club and was over 45 years working as an analyst for the EPA.

 About ten years ago, he realized he could no longer endorse the energy use/CO2 reduction objectives by the environmental movement.

He said this:

////The much maligned carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, as EPA and Obama claim, but rather a basic input to plant photosynthesis and growth, which is the basis of life on Earth. Decreasing atmospheric CO₂ levels would decrease plant productivity and therefore the food supply for the rest of the ecosystem and humans, and vice versa. Further, attempts to reduce it will prove enormously expensive, futile, harmful to human welfare, and in the longer run, to environmental improvement. It is now increasingly evident that efforts to reduce CO₂ emissions by governmental coercion will have important non-environmental adverse effects in terms of loss of freedom of scientific inquiry, economic growth and development, and the rule of law.///

Fascinating. Here is a man who set out to make a change in caring for our environment. What did he find? 

Nothing but Marxism re-packaged.

This is the reality we face in the onslaught of the biggest hoax ever played upon society at large. 

Hey, don't get me wrong, if you step outside your house in L.A. and look up at a sky full of smog soup, yeah it is a good idea to start a recycle program.
However, because you are all crammed up in one place and can't breathe, doesn't make it a global pandemic.

We need to take a step back, think about what we are being told, and refuse to abide by strangulating regulations that seek to destroy American ingenuity, motivation, creativity, industry, and success.

For us here in Idaho, we will need to get used to these kinds of winters, because it seems like it is time for some real climate change. Don't worry though, in time it will change.

"City smog and filthy rivers are not good for men(though they are not the kind of danger that the ecological panic-mongers proclaim them to be). This is a scientific, technological problem--not a political one--and it can be solved only by technology. Even if smog were a risk to human life, we must remember that life in nature, without technology, is wholesale death." [Quoted from "The New Left: The Anti-Industrial Revolution", 1971]

Killing Justice: A Look at Lavoy Finicum and his Detractors

It is with pained empathy that I strive to make my own entry regarding the execution of Lavoy Finicum. In my attempt to keep this as absolutely brief as possible, we are going to be reviewing a particular article and consequently it may take a bit to do. Now, there is so much I could be writing about with regards to this "Man vs. Government" issue, however this article in question has been used continually to validate the claim that FBI agents were only acting as per their duty, and it just simply cannot go unchecked.
Unfortunately, it is fallacious reasoning and anti-truth propaganda such as this piece that so badly needs addressed, which takes up a great deal of precious space and time that could be better devoted elsewhere. Nevertheless, with much pressing of the olive, we can often get some fine oil, so lets dig in...

     It should be noted that just because something has the words "rights" or "freedom" or "liberty" tagged onto it, doesn't mean it is necessarily good. Such is the case with the website we will take a look at called Bearing Arms dot com. The man who operates it is named Bob Owens, and he gets a fair amount of traffic to his website. I've spent a little time studying him, but suffice to say he is an agitated, cynical man who can at times come across as pretty obnoxious. No doubt he has had to work on some personal rough edges in order to be a better online presence. It is with an obvious strained conceit, that he films his narcissistic approach to reporting on his versions of truth. I've so far suffered through his two videos on Lavoy's death, and "biased" is an understatement. He pretends to talk about the police state, but then never gives any kind of critical analysis of it, at least not in what I have seen. Indeed, we will look at two very specific statements he makes in the article-in-question to highlight this evident waffling; one in reference to a deceased boy named Tamir Rice and the other his morbid use of the word "squirters". 
Without overtly attacking his person in place of our actual beef with the argument of Bob Owens, it is important to note that his kind of reporting only serves to terribly muddy the waters and at the end of the day land his audience squarely in the lap of the State which he pretends to critique.
In light of all the liberty-based views he claims to have, it is a mystery as to why he is so bent on determining this incident as legal and just, with nary a bit of real, critical journalism.

     Sorry Bob, I would plead with you to take off your rose colored glasses, and come join the actual liberty movement.

     Let me say right out of the gate that what has taken place in Malheur Co. is not the best way to have gone about things.

    Frustration, anger, weariness, and an outright hatred of lies, deceit, and the blatant criminal activity of the syndicate-calling-itself-government often leads men to desperate measures. The truth is that because of three patsy operatives only one of whom I will name, the Bundy's, as well as Lavoy Finicum, were persuaded to take the refuge. These three government stooges have the very intimate ear of the Bundy's.
It is entirely no coincidence that Ryan Payne was allowed to exit Lavoy's vehicle prior to the execution.

     Unfortunately, much of the really detailed data on the three provocateurs mentioned above has been scrubbed from the net(by the authors themselves), but there is still enough that you can research a bit on your own, and if you are truly interested beyond just calling me out for the appearance of no references, then contact me through this blog and I will provide you the names of certain militia who will spell things out quite clearly for you.

Full Definition of agent provocateur

plural agents provocateurs \ˈä-ˌzhäⁿ-prō-ˌvä-kə-ˈtər, ˈā-jən(t)s-prō-\

1. :  one employed to associate with suspected persons and by pretending sympathy with their aims to incite them to some incriminating action

     So, assuming you've got some working knowledge on the situation outside Burns, Oregon, let's get into this article.
Bob Owens runs a site called BearingArms. He says he is devoted to guns, patriots, saving liberty, and saving lives. Well Bob, I am not sure what your definition is of saving liberty, but you've sure dropped the ball in your reporting on Levoy Finicum. What I'll be doing is selecting a few paragraphs from the article and then refuting them line by line. Mr. Owens' words will be red.

      In case you think I'm taking anything out of context, you are free to visit his site, I am just not going to provide you the link here at my blog. The name of the article is "Lavoy Finnicum was not Murdered. He Forced Oregon Police to Shoot Him." You can also watch his outrageous videos, one of which is entitled "Lavoy Finnicum: Patriot, Patsy, or Fool?" If you haven't already, go take a look at the article. 
That will bring various things I am about to say into even sharper focus.

     The beginning of the article has Bob saying he was "stunned at some of the responses..." to his initial coverage on what happened. Yeah, it is just so stunning to see people appalled at the summary execution of a man with his hands up. Now, the whole point of Mr. Owens as well as others is that they believe Lavoy went to draw a weapon, therefore there is every reason he is now dead. I submit to you that what is actually "stunning" is the blatant disregard by Bob Owens of the fact that Lavoy stepped out of the vehicle with his hands in the air!! Tell me, if you really think that Lavoy wanted himself a shootout at the OK Corral, do you honestly believe that this author, horseman, marksman, loving husband, doting father, and highly intelligent patriot would not step out of the truck with his gun already drawn?

     Give me a break. Those of you who are espousing Bob Owens' view need to admit that what you are saying is that Lavoy Finicum committed suicide by cop, or in this case FBI agent. Now do you really believe that this man who had so much responsibility resting upon him in the form of duty, family, and honor would really have not tried to "take a few with him" if indeed his mindset was as you are saying?
Do you really believe this man simply "committed suicide"? Really?
Maybe you deserve the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps you have not researched and listened to this man as much as I have. If not, I strongly encourage you to do so. Despite what you think happened on the side of that road, you can certainly learn a great deal from Lavoy Finnicum. He left us quite a legacy. Look him up on YouTube. This man was the real leader behind the opposition to government land grabbing. He was a huge thorn in their side and he had been fighting them tooth and nail through legal means, and he worked very efficiently behind the scenes during the Bundy ranch standoff and also outside Burns. Yes, he was on record talking about placing freedom over his life. The truth is many, many of us love to echo the founding fathers in saying, "Live Free or Die". It is a powerful statement. What a perfect target. He was most definitely a marked man. 

    In Bob's unchecked zeal to paint the FBI as loving and congenial, he spends a few sentences about how they allowed people to come and go from the refuge, and then says that a mere week earlier Ammon had left to meet with the FBI and then returned to the refuge safe and sound.
He is right! these types of meetings are on video. This was happening repeatedly! Ask yourself, if they wanted them so badly, why didn't the FBI take these men peacefully. Is it because Ammon and the rest left Lavoy back at the refuge during those meetings? Or is it simply because the FBI never do anything peaceful at all? 

     Whatever the case, the "authorities" clearly wanted a raw and violent ambush scenario where they could no doubt be justified in killing whomever they so desired. Bob Owens actually makes the statement that the group of men were headed to John Day to rally more support for their cause since there was so little support for them in Burns. Really? Again, is Bob Burns a critical journalist or not? He sounds more like a member of the presstitute media as one wades through his lines of BS. For one, where did you get that little tid-bit Bob? Because it is well known from everyone on the ground that close to 90% of that town was behind the cause and message of the men. The Hammond's themselves were very much behind them since no one likes to be unjustly jailed and have their lands stolen! The Feds simply made an offer that the Hammonds could not refuse and so they had to distance themselves from Finicum and Bundy.
Additionally, we have a very moving, intimate video with Lavoy where he is speaking together with several men. At one point, he exclaims with his arms outstretched, "We have more than enough people!" 
Here is the link to the video. 

Listen to Lavoy and others Explain the Truth of Things
    

     So here is what Bob tells us next.

/////One of those vehicles was driven by Mark McConnell, Ammond Bundy’s bodyguard.

The other vehicle was driven by LaVoy Finicum.

On the two-lane highway between the Malheur NWR headquarters and John Day, officers with the Oregon State Police and agents of the FBI conducted simultaneous felony stops of both vehicles, separated by several hundred yards. Everyone in the vehicle driven by McConnell surrendered peacefully and were detained without issue./////

     Good 'ol Mark McConnell. Who is this guy? We have a huge issue that no one seems very interested to address. If you go to YouTube, and enter Mark McConnell, you will find his self-made video describing events exactly contrary to what we later saw from the drone. I have no doubt he never thought for a million years they would release any of their footage. McConnell said Lavoy "charged the FBI.." He is a liar.
The government stooge Ryan Payne was in Lavoy's vehicle and he then exited the vehicle to "go talk to the FBI". Uh-huh.
At that point we have eye-witness testimony from two different women who were in the truck that as Lavoy stuck his head out of the window and actually said that he was unarmed, he was fired upon. At this point, he was less willing to comply as perhaps you might be, and so he then decided to keep going, not realizing this entire ambush was going just as planned.
I've provided a 12 minute video where you can see Lavoy stick his head and hands out. Then you can actually detect muzzle flashes. The video corresponds directly with the women's testimonies.

     Please explain to me why, after the truck is clearly stopped, Ryan Payne walks over to the costumed goons, and Lavoy literally sticks his head and hands out of the window, why is it that none of them walk over to the vehicle and perform the text-book stop?
I submit to you it is because they wanted Lavoy to continue down the road into their deadly ambush. That is why their close-quarter shots missed.

     The more I study this guy's words, the harder it is to treat him with any level of respect.
Bob Owens then says this:

/////The road in this section of the forest is a series of gentle curves. Finnicum accelerates down a short straight section of road faster than he can control into on-coming traffic, almost completely over the centerline. Fortunately, Oregon State Police had already stopped traffic flowing in the other direction, or Finicum very well could have killed a father and daughter in Jeep who became witnesses to what happened next./////


     What? What are you doing Bob? Bob Owens has just speculated and further cast shadow on Lavoy Finicum by saying that he "very well could have killed a father and daughter..."!?
What's going on here? We have absolutely no idea where and when Lavoy would have met any oncoming traffic. To include this in one's article is nonsense and smacks of ulterior motives. Furthermore, when we watch the video, once he is really moving, Lavoy only barely crosses the line a couple of times(not, "almost completely over the centerline"), and then with decent line of sight. I guarantee you that he was well qualified to have adjusted if need be for any oncoming traffic. It is called being an operator of a vehicle, rather than someone who just steers, the latter category I would at this point likely place our friend Bob Owens.

            We continue....

/////Oregon State Police had thrown several pickups and an SUV across the road in a hasty blocking position, and sent agents into the woods on each flank in positions to catch “squirters.” in case there was a foot pursuit. They clearly didn’t anticipate Finicum driving as fast as he did in questionable conditions. Finicum came flying around the curve at 9:15 into the video—just 1 minute and three seconds into his escape attempt—and turns into the snowbank on the inside of the curve./////


     Now, it is here that we see the true colors of this self-professed "patriot". He has just used the term "squirters". You likely do not know what that refers to. I am at an utter loss of words as to why he would use such language, unless he truly is a paid shill. William R. Grigg had some things to say about the word "squirters", so I will just let him speak.

      " It’s reasonable to expect that, before long, joystick-controlled missile platforms will become part of the standard SWAT arsenal. We should also anticipate learning that the term “bugsplat” has entered the law enforcement lexicon. That term, which was coined by Pentagon’s war planners prior to the Iraq war, was the name of a computer program intended to estimate the percentage of civilian casualties that would result in a given bombing raid.

The same lexicon of long-distance mass murder that gave us the term “bugsplat” offers another newly minted term to describe the terrified civilians who can be seen frantically running for cover: “Squirters.” The vaguely pornographic overtones of that expression are appropriate, given the ubiquity of what Dr. P.W. Singer of the Brookings Institution calls “predator porn” – footage of drone attacks proudly circulated by the purported heroes responsible for the carnage."

     Predator porn. Yep, that's what we love, scared civilians running for cover. Chattel scurrying around who actually make really good exploding targets. Bob Owens just used the term "squirter" as a label for anyone fleeing into the woods.
Just let that sink in.
Owens highlights "questionable conditions". The roads were dry there Bob. I myself have driven that road a number of times, and like so many other roads in existence, the actual speeds one can do are far, far above posted limits, but I digress. He speculates on what the Fed "anticipated". Why? I believe it is far more reasonable to see that the Feds anticipated a very unsuspecting Lavoy driving right into their ambush after he had already been shot at. Then Owens highlights the fact Lavoy was "flying around the curve..." Why does he do this? Of course he was moving. He was trying to get away from corrupt agents of the state who had just fired upon him. He did not realize they had it all planned out. Listen carefully, Lavoy believed he was bound for a meeting with many supporters, including a sheriff. He obviously wanted to get there where there would be plenty of witnesses, and I am convinced that he believed he could make it.

    In respect of brevity, I'm going to skip over and otherwise summarize a bit of the article and then we will get to more quotes.
Bob Owens starts going through frame by frame in order to elaborate on his opinion that the "officers" were simply acting accordingly and Lavoy Finicum presents a clear and present threat to them. Now, it is no secret that we have a massive problem with trigger happy, even rogue police in this country believing themselves to be the law, rather than upholders of law. We don't have time to discuss this issue but it is well worth mentioning that when you are the one with all the training, all the high tech gear, all the authority, you would think a bit more discretion could be used. The problem is, number one protocol for these LEOs is always "officer safety". Officer safety overrides any and all other protocols that these guys may have, every time, all the time. Due to this, innocent people are regularly gunned down.
Now, what is notable is that in Owens' frame by frame analyses, he leaves out two very crucial frames. The frames he leaves out are covered very professionally by a YouTube user. I've provided the video clip below. In it, we clearly see that a man steps out and shoots Levoy while his hands are raised, which causes him to grab himself, and he then points at the man, likely exclaiming, "he shot me!"
These two frames, Levoy being initially shot while his hands are raised, and then Levoy simply pointing at the man, are both extremely crucial, yet Bob Owens conveniently leaves them out of his analyses. Hmmm...
This drone video that we have can easily be used to make it seem as if Lavoy is drawing his weapon. That is the only reason the FBI actually released it!
However, on closer inspection, we do not see Lavoy drawing his weapon, but in fact we see him being mercilessly gunned down by clumsy, frightened goons.
Watch this 4 minute video. It is an extremely important one.

Here we have another great video specifically highlighting the frames Bob Owens left out, showing Lavoy pointing at the man who shoots him while his hands were still up.

Bob Owens just can't understand why people don't see it his way. 
Well Bob, perhaps it is because we are actually being critical of the entire incident as well as this bone that was thrown to us by the very syndicate you say you oppose.
The bone I speak of is of the course the low resolution drone video. Bob Owens speaks about everything becoming clear just as soon as we get to see the autopsy reports and just as soon as we get to find out how many bullet holes are in Lavoy's truck.
Sure Bob, let me know how that all pans out for you.
Mark my words, it will be a freezing cold day in hell before that autopsy ever gets released to the public, and the sun will cease to crest the horizon some fated morning before we ever hear from "authorities" how many bullet holes are in that truck.

    We continue....

/////Finicum drops his hands a final (time), and turns towards the officer who is now moving forward out of the treeline. He is making movements consistent with drawing a weapon, what is typically known in legal circles as a “furtive gesture.” He’s doing almost exactly what got Tamir Rice shot in Cleveland./////

      Lavoy Finicum exited the vehicle immediately with his hands instantly raised. No one had to tell him to do so. Again, why would he not have had his weapon already out if his intention was to die? Lavoy did not pose a threat to these mind-washed knuckle-draggers, yet I have no doubt they were scared out of their minds. A man clearly crawls out and shoots Lavoy in the gut, and then scurries away with no care of turning his back on a supposedly armed man. Lavoy grabs himself and then points to the man. Realizing he is to be gunned down like an animal, Lavoy is turning around in the snow, using his hands for balance, and then again grabs himself.
In one of Owens' asinine videos he says Levoy could not have gotten shot, because you go down when shot.
 Well Bob Owens, I've no doubt you yourself would fall down, but we are talking about a hardened working man, who likely had tendons like cables from throwing hay all his life, had a resolve that few men ever taste, and adrenaline rushing through his obviously fit frame.

                                             He stood firm.


      Then we have possibly the single most idiotic thing that ol' Bob has said yet. He literally has the sick, twisted nerve to bring up Tamir Rice. Tamir Elijah Rice is the 12 year old boy who was playing in his local playground with a toy gun on November 23rd, 2014. A nearby elderly man called 911 to report Tamir, not to say that the kid was threatening him mind you, but that he was waving around the TOY GUN. The man specifically says that Tamir has a toy gun. When the cops show up, they come flying up onto the grass next to the gazebo where Tamir is sitting down, and as the kid stands up, the passenger goon gets out and center punches him, killing him deader than a hammer. In less than a second, this tax-feeder executes Tamir Rice for playing with a toy gun in the park.
This is the example that Bob Owens wants to draw from? I think this is enough to discredit this pretend patriot, and his sheer stupidity is enough to warrant a couple of "furtive gestures" that I could think of. Seriously, I do not like this guy. As a Christian I am called to love him and pray for him, but I do not like him.


    We continue.....

/////Finicum pulls his jacket open with his left hand and reaches inside with his right hand as he continues turning towards the officer emerging from the treeline. This is a man who has been told repeatedly to keep his hands up, who knows he is being covered by two police officers with guns, intentionally reaching into his clothing in a motion that anyone with defensive firearms training would consider an attempt to acquire a weapon./////


     Our view is from above. We have no idea whether Lavoy "pulls his jacket open with his left hand and reaches inside with his right hand". What "this" is, is a man who has just been shot. It is far more likely that he is turning and holding himself where he had sustained the bullet impact.
He does indeed know he is being covered in a cross-fire situation, and that the odds are unwinnable. Why then would Lavoy Finicum choose to commit suicide, when he would have a powerful case in court? Let's say he was going for his weapon. Might that not be the natural reaction of someone who had just been shot while trying to surrender? The bottom line is that with this overhead footage, we just can't make the kinds of concrete assertions that Bob Owens wants to make about what Lavoy was doing with his hands. Critical journalism is a thing of the past in mainstream media, and when we see such a blatant disregard for this staple of honest reporting, we have every reason to hold the independent pressman suspect.
As far as what these LEOs were "considering" at the time, we may never know the truth of, since any ground footage, autopsy, or LEO statements will never be forthcoming.

     Bob Owens several times moves to discredit Victoria Sharp, one of the women in the vehicle with Lavoy. He says this...

////It is very obvious from the position of the officer’s muzzles so quickly after Finicum went down that the claims of Victoria Sharp that he was shot multiple times while down are an abject lie. There are simply no guns pointed at him at this time.

It is also sadly clear from the video that Victoria Sharp, the young woman who claimed that Finicum was shot while his hands were up was lying.  It is also clear that her claim that 100 rounds were fired at the truck is also a bald-faced lie./////

     One thing is for sure. If you take Mark McConnel's testimony, and overlay it on the video, it does not match up. However, when you take Victoria Sharp's testimony and overlay it on the video footage, it is a much closer match. There are in fact several guns still pointed at Lavoy after he has been put down. Watch again there Bobby. The reality is, we have it now on record from the family members, that Lavoy was shot 9 times! One of those rounds they put right in his face. Watch this 9 minute video.

As far as the fact he was shot while his hands were up, we have reasonably established that was indeed the case from simply looking at the frames that Bob Owens left out of his little critique.

/////The rest of the video from the circling aircraft is routine. There is no sign of any other gunfire at all..../////

Wrong again Bob. Tufts of snow reveal continued fire being directed toward the vehicle.

/////It is later said that a 9mm pistol was recovered from the inside left pocket of Finicum’s coat./////

     Lavoy told them he was unarmed during the first stop. It looks very probable that he had actually left his weapon back at the refuge, because he was on his way to talk with a very peaceful gathering of over 400 people which included a very sympathetic sheriff. The family says they have the serial number of the 9mm the FBI says they pulled off Lavoy. It comes back stolen. Uh-huh.

     Well, the remainder of Owens' article is a jumbled mess of accusatory and inflammatory remarks toward Lavoy as well as heaps of more unfounded speculation and disinformation. I believe I have unhanded his arguments sufficiently to cast serious doubt upon any further reasoning he provides.
Levoy was indeed ambushed.
Levoy Finicum was trying to comply with a very hostile entity. It is no secret just how lethal cops have become. My family knows not to call the cops. Calling the cops always invites more death in my perspective. Lavoy Finicum knew his life was in grave danger. He attempted to carefully comply. They shot at him and purposely missed in order to goad him into fleeing right into the arms of the deadly roadblock.

     Let's be clear, that was a textbook "deadly roadblock". Parking those cars in such a way as to force a crash is standard op when you have an unpredictable felon fleeing to the unknown.
The problem is, they knew exactly where the vehicle was going, they knew exactly who they had, and they intentionally chose this remote area with no witnesses.


     My friends, we must be critical in our investigation of events like these. The entire practice of critical journalism has been lost on today's media. Journalism can literally be defined as "asking the questions nobody wants you to ask". Critical journalism can be found within the pages of the internet and the independent pressman that are waging the information war against the powers of the State and the Banksters behind it. Men like this Bob Owens are not doing the fight for liberty any favors. There is such a danger of government plants and patsies like Ryan Payne that even bright men such as Lavoy Finicum are fooled by such evil schemes. Lavoy Finicum was a devout lover of freedom. A simple, hardworking man, he was moved my conviction and passion that few ever act upon. The futile pleading and laboring with the juggernaut of the State over his own land led him to believe that a harder stand must be made. As he purveyed the landscape of our nation and beheld such utter insanity and hopelessness, he was bound by his own conscience to expose the wicked and unchecked powers of the State. He actually accomplished that.

     We lost a powerful and influential leader in the stand against tyranny when Lavoy Finicum was heartlessly gunned down. No one will ever have to answer for their crimes, but we can honor the man by at least speaking to others about the wrong-doings of the State, by doing everything you can to be self-sustaining, and  by striving for a critical and honest journalistic approach to the event that surround us from day to day.
     May the Lord shine His truth down upon you, and may you find grace upon grace as difficult trials bring you face to face with the Creator and you are found overwhelmed in the boundless flow of His life-giving love.

Vaccinations: Myth and Reality Part 2

  Oftentimes, when we go about our business of the day, we find ourselves at particular crossroads of what decision to make. Everything from how to solve challenges at work, whether to take your child to the park, whether to eat out or stay in, what movie to watch, or perhaps what car to buy are all decisions among many that face us on a daily basis. The obvious factor in our deciding is INFORMATION.
We are creatures of thought and study, albeit some more than others. 
 
As such, we require good and true information in order to participate in the very best choices for our family and ourselves.

     Even when someone makes a poor decision, it was initially based on a particularly informed action that seemed good to the decider at the time. What if that challenge at work had to it a particular path that ended up with you being fired, i.e. the wrong choice? Would you want to have sufficient information of how to tackle the challenge ahead of time? What if that park your kid wanted to play at was currently a hotbed for Hepatitis? Would that matter to you? What if your finances were at zero and you were headed to the restaurant? Would you like to have checked your bank account?

     Recently, my wife and I thought to rent a movie with Matthew McConaughey entitled "Killer Joe". We knew nothing about it, and at the outset it seemed like a good flick. Since it only said "not rated" I decided to research it. I quickly punched up a Christian movie review site and proceeded to discover that the movie was full of the most vile scenes from start to finish. We will watch violence and language from time to time depending upon context, but the sadomasochistic pornography in the film had earned it an actual NC-17 rating. This was not a movie we desired to view. I gained information before making my decision. Have you ever wanted to know the quality of a film before watching it?  How about that new car? What if the car you chose had massive factory defects and was failing on the road at high speeds? Would that piece of information be important for you to know?

    The information we receive matters a great deal to us, even when we are not really thinking about it. Over and over again, we decide what to do, based upon what we know. Just imagine if all those scenarios I mentioned actually had those exact terrible outcomes and consequences, and you were headed right into them not only without the necessary information, but wholly unable to even gain it? I suspect you would not be thrilled, after all, this is America right?! We are free and able to determine our own choices and destiny completely unhindered by external forces right?! We have all the important and relevant information right at our fingertips for making the very best decisions right?! What if you weren't really free to get the right information pertinent to your decision? 
Well, a great man named Johann von Goethe once said,

          "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who                                        falsely believe they are free."
    That's a quote worth dwelling upon. When it comes to information being right at our fingertips, this is certainly true, but most of us take that for granted and neglect the time and research it may take to break free from the scripted speeches we are fed by marxist systems of government, corporations, and media. This brings us to my point.
Today we face a massively aggressive onslaught of a very powerful stratagem of agendas to push, bully, coerce, and otherwise frighten people into accepting a plethora of vaccines for themselves and their children, no matter the age.

    Here is what I would like for you to think about. The pro-vaccine community absolutely, positively does not want you to have any information whatsoever about the other side of this discussion. In fact, there is no discussion according to them. To them, it is a foregone conclusion. Creating foregone conclusions is literally a tactic of politics and media. Whether it is a particular bill that needs passed, a war to be started, a politician to gain office, or even the best vacation spot, foregone conclusions are pushed upon us all the time. In other words, if people feel that something is already going forward despite their personal view, most of the populace is likely to throw in with it. Those few stragglers that remain stubborn get railroaded by the masses. It is extremely effective.
 
     Have you ever noticed how aggressive the vaccine pushers are? They absolutely demand that vaccines are the best choice for you, and they are utterly appalled at any contrasting view to this, making no qualms to label dissenters to their view as quacks and crazies bordering on the criminal. A large majority of society has been affected by this mindset, and therefore speech against vaccines is usually seen as taboo if not dangerous. Many of us have experienced this first hand. If you have never dealt with this issue, or are wondering what is the best decision for yourself, I strongly encourage you to study the facts.
By all means, make the choice you think is best, but please, for the love of family and truth, study the information that is available.
This will not be an exhortation you receive from conventional medicine. The cold reality is that they will actually do everything in their power to ensure that you do not get the whole picture.

    At the most prestigious hospital in the country, The Mayo Clinic, we find a strong advocacy for vaccines. One of the leading doctors pushing the vaccines is Professor Robert M. Jacobsen M.D. He made a power point together with the CDC to be shown to other doctors in order for them to learn how to coax parents into vaccinating their children. Here is a bit of the wording from that power point. I've provided a link at the bottom so you can look at it yourself. (1)

CDC Information

•Don’t plan on printing and giving to parents 

•Don’t plan on emailing them the links 

•Instead read and remember to make your CASE

I find this teaching to be very deceptive.
The CASE acronym stands for Corroborate, About me, Science, and Explain.
This is literally a covert tactic to teach doctors how to squelch concerns, to be reassuring, and to sound informative without ever really divulging any damning data surrounding vaccines.

Here is another bit towards the end of the power point.

Summary

•Persuade rather than inform –CASE 

•Corroborate → About Me → Science → Explain/Advise –Aristotelian Rhetoric 

•Pathos → Ethos → Logos → Pathos 

•Know your sources of information –ACIP and its recommendations –CDC and its resources

    What is your real response to the idea that you should be persuaded rather than informed? You should be outraged quite frankly.
The truth is that authentic persuasion of someone to a particular way of thinking involves all necessary and relevant information. It involves honesty and transparency as the position is presented to the other person in compassion and truth.
The above has nothing to do with persuading anyone. It has everything to do with coercion.
They want desperately to coerce you to the idea of accepting vaccines no matter what it takes, rather than engaging in actual persuasion because the truth of the matter is extremely disturbing.
    
   Fear is a commonly employed tactic, and they make no bones about it. Quoted in the New York Times in 2004, Dr. Lance Rodewald, director of the CDC’s Immunization Services Division, said this:

"Frightening parents about the consequences of failing to vaccinate their children will most likely be part of the campaign. For that task, meningoccal meningitis is ideal"

    You may be interested to learn you won't find a shred of reporting over at the mainstream news channels dealing with a recent horror in Mexico involving vaccines. The Mexican Social Security Institute, or IMSS, administered the BCG (tuberculosis), rotavirus and hepatitis B vaccines at the hospital in Simojovel as part of the National Vaccination Program. The aftermath left 2 babies dead, 14 children in serious condition, 1 in critical condition, and 22 in stable condition. (2) There were a total of 52 kids vaccinated making the percentage harmed a staggering 75%.

    I'm not sure if you gamble, but in Vegas those are considered poor odds. The issue here is that your M.D. will tell you that vaccines are 100% safe. 
                                              Reams of data exist that show otherwise.

     Endless accounts like the one above could be provided that if you weren't left completely abhorrent of vaccines, it would be at least apparent that "100% safe" is the very last thing they are. Don't you owe it to yourself to find out? Don't you owe it to your kids?

   You may wonder why in the world the CDC would not want you to hear all the facts. Well, for one the CDC is also the biggest customer of pharmaceutical companies when it comes to purchasing vaccines, as they purchase more than $4 billion worth of vaccines every year. This creates a huge conflict of interest for an agency that is supposed to be overseeing vaccine safety. 
Not surprisingly, Dr. Anne Schuchat and the CDC’s position on vaccines is that they are ALWAYS safe ALL the time and should be injected into everyone they feel should have them, by force if necessary. If you've never heard the name Dr. Anne Schuchat, she is the director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). She is an Assistant Surgeon General holding the rank of rear admiral in the United States Public Health Service Commissioned Corps. Dr. Schuchat could quite possibly be the most powerful person in the world when it comes to setting vaccine policy. She told congress that vaccines do not cause autism. You may have also listened to NPR news, or CNN, or FOX and heard the same thing. The fact is, you cannot learn about vaccine safety from the mainstream media.


    You need to research. 
The authorities think you are stupid. They have placed the data right in the vaccine inserts. That is a great place to start.
On the FDA’s website where package inserts for all vaccines are published, autism is actually listed as an “adverse event” as recent as 2005 for the diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccine. (3) This package insert is still on the FDA website (at the time of this writing), and it states:

Adverse events reported during post-approval use of Tripedia vaccine include idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, SIDS, anaphylactic reaction, cellulitis, autism, convulsion/grand mal convulsion, encephalopathy,  hypotonia, neuropathy, somnolence and apnea. Events were included in this list because of the seriousness or frequency of reporting.

     Did you know that in 1980 1 in 10,000 kids had autism. Today, 1 in 50 kids are autistic. Vaccinations have also increased exponentially. Coincidence? In an upcoming post, we'll be looking very closely at the link between vaccines and autism. However, those pieces of information alone should get you scrambling to find out more! 

    Are you aware that a Federal Vaccine Court has been created to "deal with" the largely unknown world of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP)?
Since 1989, and as of Jan. 2013; over 2.5 billion dollars have been paid out from this vaccine caused injury and death compensation fund.  $2,550,640,666.73 is the current total figure paid out from this federal court system; which  includes attorney fees, (paid out, win or lose the case). Since the first Vaccine Injury Compensation claims were made in 1989, 3,110 compensation payments have been made, $2,389,329,250.45 disbursed to petitioners and $94,604,103.72 paid to cover attorney’s fees and other legal costs.
To date, 9,785 claims have been dismissed. Of those, 3,982 claimants were paid $52,680,057.05 to cover attorney’s fees and other legal costs.













 You may be surprised to learn that the number one injury-causing vaccination paid out on by the Vac court is the Flu vaccine.  This is just a sample. Click on the clink below for the full government report. (4)

        Not only is the flu vaccine utterly useless, it is extremely dangerous. It is impossible to test a vaccine that changes every year. So the flu vaccine is basically an experimental vaccine that they want to give out to 300 million people every year. There are also zero studies showing the safety of giving the flu vaccine to the same person every single year. The consequences of this nightmarish procedure have been horrific as the records show.

     Hopefully, something you've read here has caused you to wonder if perhaps you are not as informed as you should be when it comes to vaccines. Perhaps your everyday decisions don't include whether or not to inject yourself or loved ones with chemicals and viruses. What about your neighbor? Do you care if they have sufficient information to make the best decisions for their family?
For those of us who already know, this is a rallying cry that we are indeed in an information war. The rage and paranoia of the pro-vaccine community is deafening. You had better know your stuff when you enter the arena to oppose vaccinations, because I can assure you, the establishment has all the power and means necessary to not only make sure you don't get what you need to know, but to force you to dose your children "for the good of society", even when you may disagree.

    What will it take for America to wake up? Repent, and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ! Plead with Him to grant you the wisdom and knowledge to do the right thing.

(1)  C.A.S.E. Power Point

(2) Mexico Vaccination Fatalities

(3) Vaccine Insert Admits Autism Possible

(4) Federal Vaccine Injury Reports