Did the UN and the Obama Administration kill LaVoy?

 

If you look at the article I put out a couple of days ago you will read where Officer 1 is making the statement that they changed their location to Harney County from Grant County because they all knew that Grant County is UN FREE ZONE. So that got me to thinking and all of a sudden a light went off. If you remember back on Sept. 29, 2015, Loretta Lynch stood before the UN and made the announcement of the “Strong Cities Network”. In her own words she explained, “…we have continued to see violent extremists emerge from within our own communities – from terrorists inspired by groups like ISIL to fanatics motivated by hatred against religious or ethnic factions.  Some aspire to travel overseas to train or to fight.  Others plot attacks on targets within their homelands.  But all are antithetical to the shared vision and common cause that joins us here today in this renowned international forum: commitment to collaboration; dedication to peace; and devotion to the cause of justice within our nations and throughout the world.” “As residents and experts in their communities, local leaders are often best positioned to pinpoint sources of unrest and discord; best equipped to identify signs of potential danger; and best able to recognize and accommodate community cultures, traditions, sensitivities and customs.  By creating a series of partnerships that draws on the knowledge and expertise of our local officials, we can create a more effective response to this virulent threat. “ [1]

 

Did we just see this take place on that back country highway 395 between Burns, Oregon and John Day? Was it for sure the FBI that did the “takedown”, as they said themselves, of LaVoy and the leaders of the protest at the Malheur Refuge?

Continue reading

Advertisements

UN free zone? That is what he said…

I have one major question  What would it matter to the “FBI” if Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer did understand that the federal government can’t own the land that the refuge is on?  What would it matter if he knows that he is the ultimate authority within the county and can kick the FBI, BLM, and other federal agencies out if the county doesn’t want them there?  What would all that matter in the supposed “traffic stop” and shooting of LaVoy Finicum.  Officer 1, who through his various testimonies and the testimonies of other officers I believe was the “liaison” with the FBI as well as being the one that fired the shots at LaVoy’s truck as he approached the “kill box” (in my opinion), and he shot LaVoy twice.  So why would he say that, “I knew going into it there was a sheriff in Grant County that was supporting the movement or the ideology behind what they were pushing.  I knew that there was a large amount of community members in Grant County that supported their beliefs, and that had similar Constitutional beliefs, and to the point of the Grant County making it clear that they are a UN FREE ZONE (emphasis mine), and so that knowledge was known to all of us, that for a very simple way to put it, they were not friendly to law enforcement conducting any enforcement actions, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the federal agencies…” which appeared on page 111 of the redacted police report.  So, my question is, who exactly are these people who were passing themselves off as FBI?  If they were not doing anything illegal then why would they worry about the sheriff not supporting their agenda?  Furthermore, why would they consider Sheriff Palmer a “security risk” as stated by those who are making claims against him and demanding an investigation so they didn’t even tell him about the operation they had planned.

I look forward to all the facts coming out in this case and to finding out just who these people really are.  Some are saying that they are UN troops, some are saying they were blackwater mercenaries with the IMF out of France.  Will be interesting to find out.
UN free zone.png

Is your sheriff Constitutional?

USA Constitution Parchment

USA Constitution Parchment

The sheriff is the ultimate law enforcement power in any state and it is the duty of the “elected” sheriff to protect the people of the county from all enemies both foreign and domestic. So when Sheriff Glenn Palmer of Grant County, Oregon tells the federal agencies that they are not welcome in his county or he refuses to bow down to the UN, he is literally doing the job he was elected to do. Same goes for any sheriff of any county in the united States.

“In Mack/Printz v USA, the U S Supreme Court declared that the states or their political subdivisions, “are not subject to federal direction.” The issue of federal authority is defined even further in this most powerful Tenth Amendment decision. The two sheriffs who brought the suit objected to being forced into federal service without compensation pursuant to some misguided provisions of the Brady Bill. The sheriffs sued the USA (Clinton adm.) and won a major landmark case in favor of States’ Rights and local autonomy. In this ruling by the Supreme Court, some amazing principles were exposed regarding the lack of power and authority the federal government actually has. In fact, this is exactly the issue addressed by the court when Justice Scalia opined for the majority stating, “…the Constitution’s conferral upon Congress of not all governmental powers, but only discreet, enumerated ones.”

Continue reading

LaVoy Finicum autopsy report.

lavoy hand up dont shoot.jpgJust got my hands on the autopsy report for LaVoy performed by the state investigators.  Posting the link here.  Will report more when I get a chance to read all of it, but the first thing I want answered is WHY WOULD THEY HANDCUFF A DEAD MAN?  LaVoy autopsy report

 

 

03/14/2016   Update:  Thank you to one of my followers for posting the link below which explains why they would handcuff him.  http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/04/why-cops-handcuff-dead-people.html

Justified or Murder?

Justified or Murder?lavoy with daughter

Today, the powers that be in the state of Oregon decided that they would make the claim that state police and the FBI’s Hostage Rescue Team were “justified” in shooting and killing Robert “LaVoy” Finicum. They also released a video in which they synched the FBI video with the video taken by Shawna Cox, from inside the truck, to show their justification. http://video-embed.oregonlive.com/services/player/bcpid1949055967001?bctid=4791943438001&bckey=AQ~~,AAAAPLpuSqE~,a1DdoZJH5WQo4iWaJj1w_CktvJfhQVVG

During the news conference they also released what they claim is the autopsy picture of where LaVoy’s gunshot wounds were. They said that he was shot three times and the picture shows one In the shoulder, one in lower right back, and one in the neck. If this is supposed to be an accurate accounting of the autopsy then where is the shot that pierced his heart as they say in the article? [i]   According to this video of said picture. http://video-embed.oregonlive.com/services/player/bcpid1949055967001?bctid=4791625826001&bckey=AQ~~,AAAAPLpuSqE~,a1DdoZJH5WQo4iWaJj1w_CktvJfhQVVG

Continue reading

What LaVoy stood for.

We all know that LaVoy was murdered (at least in most reasonable people eyes) by the powers that be, but hear his wife talk about the situation and how they are being kept out of the know when it comes to the legalities of this situation. Her attorney cannot get to the truck to see the evidence; she can’t release the autopsy report until the FBI releases their report (which I doubt that they will do until after the state rules on whether or not they HAVE to release the name of the officer that murdered him.) We all know not to believe what comes from the main stream media in anything, but the fact that they have treated this group of individuals as terrorist when they were the ones that were caught slithering around the armory. I don’t doubt they were also the ones that were following the town’s people and harassing them. To many times they call them names, and tried to put them down, but once the murder happened, the FBI really showed their true colors. Reports that you didn’t see on msm were the locals being forced out of their vehicles by the FBI, they were put to on the ground, handcuffed, their cars searched, they were searched, and then made to walk to the next check point while an agent drove their car there….all these reports are coming from the locals mind you. They were threatened with being beaten in the groin with the butt of their guns if they didn’t stop talking. They threatened them up until the last 4 left the refuge. Then they still have blockades in the area while they did wrap up the situation. This was a police state…when they follow you in town and stop you if you have an out of state tag as some of the locals were also reporting. When did it become OK for a police state to happen in America? All because the federal government thinks that they own some land, which indeed they cannot own by order of the Constitution Article 1 section 8 clause 17 (Government[i]) specifically says, “To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;—And” Which means that they can not own any land outside of the ten square miles of DC without approval from the state legislature, and then only to be used for bases, military forts, etc. They DO NOT OWN THE LAND, yet they are taking peoples land from them every day and because it has happened for so many years everyone thinks that it is OK. The people of America either do not understand the Constitution or they don’t realize that WE THE PEOPLE are in charge and that the government works for us, not the other way around.

[i]   US Government, Constitution Transcript, “To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;—And” accessed Feb. 24, 2016   http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

Militant, Militia, or Patriot?

What is the difference and why does it matter in the Oregon situation?

Let’s start with the word “militant”, which conjures up visions of ISIS, Al Qaeda, Boko Horom, and other militaries trying to control the world and injure as many people as possible. According to Merriam Webster a militant is defined as “engaged in warfare or combat :” a militant person. [1]

Why is this so important in the Bundy situation at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge? If the President can get everyone to address those at the refuge as militants, then the President can use drones to kill off those that will not comply as per this article, “The Obama administration, Holder said, rejected the use of military force where “well-established law enforcement authorities in this country provide the best means for incapacitating a terrorist threat.” But in theory, it’d be legal for the president to order such an attack under certain circumstances, Holder said.”[2]

Militia is defined my Webster as: “: a group of people who are not part of the armed forces of a country but are trained like soldiers”. [3]

Cornell Law defines militia as: 10 U.S. Code § 311 – Militia: composition and classes

“(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are—

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval     Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.” [4]

 

Militia then is a group of individuals who are trained like soldiers, but not part of the military. They can be called out by the county sheriff to assist in the community should there be a need for them, to help secure and protect. If for example there is a small disaster in the county and the all of the police, sheriff, and deputies have already been dispatched, but help is still needed, the militia would then be called out. Then should more assistance be needed the governor could call in the National Guard.

 

The patriots in each state would be the 3%, the Oathkeepers, and others with different names in other states such as the Pacific Patriots Network (PPN) in the Pacific area of the country. The mission statement of the PPN says, “”The mission of Pacific Patriots Network is to provide a comprehensive and integrated response that coordinates community resources to protect life, liberty, property and the environment of our communities through mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery from all natural and man-made hazards that may impact our communities. We are our communities first responders.” [5]

As you can see, the terminology used by the President, the main stream media, and others who report the news of the Oregon situation can determine how those patriots and militia who were there to fight for the rights of all Americans are thought of.  The fact is that once the media started calling them “militants” they put them on the wrong side of the situation and deemed that people should hate them, when the reality is far from that.  Those people were there to fight for the rights of not only the ranchers who were having their land stolen by the BLM according to their reports, but to fight for every American to own and keep their land protected from the federal government over reach.

 

 

[1] Merriam Webster definition of “militant”, “engaged in warfare or combat”, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/militant
[2] Eric Holder: Drone Strike To Kill U.S. Citizen On American Soil Legal, Hypothetically
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/05/us-drone-strike_n_2813857.html
[3] Merriam Webster definition of “militia”, : a group of people who are not part of the armed forces of a country but are trained like soldiers”, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/militia
[4] 10 U.S. Code § 311 – Militia: composition and classes, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311
[5] Pacific Patriots Network Mission Statement, http://www.pacificpatriotsnetwork.com/about.php