The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for NOlathe.net.

Here’s an excerpt:

4,329 films were submitted to the 2012 Cannes Film Festival.  NOlathe.net had 20,000+ views in 2012. If each view were a film, this blog would power 5 Film Festivals

Click here to see the complete report.

Read Full Post »

After Tucson: Why Are the Mentally Ill Still Bearing Arms?

By Nathan Thornburgh Monday, Jan. 10, 2011

When the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the handgun ban in the nation’s capital in 2008, Representative Gabrielle Giffords applauded the ruling, calling gun ownership “an Arizona tradition.” That she had co-signed a congressional amicus brief against the ban came as no surprise: she has always been pro-gun, and she represents a state with a history of proud gun ownership and lax gun laws.

So there is at least a touch of irony to the fact that her name is being invoked, following her attempted assassination on Saturday, in calls for tighter gun control. Paul Helmke, head of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, offered prayers for Giffords and decried “easy access to high-powered guns.” New York Representative Carolyn McCarthy called the shooting “an illustration of why we must all work together to fight gun violence in America and keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of the wrong people.” (See one survivor’s account of the Tucson massacre.)

Gun-rights supporters see a different moral to the shooting. “It shows more than ever why people need to have the tools of defense,” says Charles Heller, founder of the Arizona Citizens Defense League. As for additional gun-control laws, Heller says, “It doesn’t need to be any more illegal than it already is to shoot a Congresswoman in the head.” (See TIME’s photoessay “Mourning the Victims of the Arizona Shooting.”)

The real question in Tucson, though, is why the alleged shooter, 22-year-old Jared Lee Loughner, was allowed to buy the murder weapon in the first place. Beyond the clearly delusional nature of online videos ascribed to him, Loughner was suspended last year from Pima Community College apparently because of mental problems. According to the college, he was told he could return only if he obtained “a mental health clearance indicating, in the opinion of a mental health professional, his presence at the College does not present a danger to himself or others.” The Army also denied Loughner’s application for unspecified reasons. It’s unclear what other organizations or agencies might have been aware of Loughner’s dangerous mental state. Still, he passed a background check, and late last year legally bought the 9-mm Glock 19 semiautomatic handgun allegedly used in the shootings. (Read “What Motivated Giffords’ Shooter?”)

As far back as the Gun Control Act of 1968, there have been federal laws against selling weapons to mentally ill individuals. But the Virginia Tech tragedy in 2007, in which the shooter Cho Seung-Hui was able to pass two federal gun background checks even after a state court ruled that he was dangerously mentally ill, highlighted the need for better record-keeping and interagency communication to enforce those laws. (More than 30 people died in the incident.) Saying that unstable individuals are disqualified from buying firearms is meaningless if the national background-check system, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), has no record of their illness. That’s why the Brady organization was proud to announce on Friday, just a day before the Tucson shootings, that the number of records of mental illness in the NICS database had more than doubled since Virginia Tech, to more than 1 million records. (See TIME’s complete coverage of the Tucson shooting.)

But there’s a problem with that: there should be more than 2 million records in that database, if all the states cooperated fully. According to the Brady organization’s records, Arizona was not even the worst offender — at least the state ramped up its reporting somewhat in the wake of Virginia Tech. But still, Arizona’s own estimate is that the state has 121,700 records of disqualifying mental illness that should go into the NICS database. From the beginning of 2008 to October 2010, however, it submitted only 4,465 records. Worse than Arizona were states like Louisiana, which submitted only one record during that time frame, and Nebraska and Pennsylvania, which didn’t submit any. (Did violent rhetoric contribute to the Giffords attack?)

The battle over gun control is not often fought in the bureaucracy, however. It’s fought in the public square. Saturday’s shooting comes after several years of increasingly high-profile appearances by armed Second Amendment supporters at political events. In August 2009, at the height of the health care reform furor, a man showed up at a speech President Obama gave to veterans in Phoenix with an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle slung around his shoulder. That same month, a protester outside an Obama town-hall meeting in New Hampshire wore a handgun strapped to his leg and carried a sign that said, “It’s time to water the tree of liberty,” a reference to Thomas Jefferson, who suggested that particular tree should be watered with blood.

In the end, however, what those protesters demonstrated — safely, as it turned out — was that they could bring properly licensed weapons to political events without endangering the public. Gun-control advocates may see the Tea Party protesters as the face of provocation, but it’s the quiet, grim paranoiacs like Loughner who represent the real danger.

Loughner, according to eyewitnesses, hid his weapon until the moment before he opened fire. But his mental illness had been on display for many to see in the weeks and months before the shooting. So Giffords’ gun politics are not relevant at the moment, nor are the larger questions of liberty or societal violence. The most pressing questions now: Who else knew of Loughner’s mental illness? What obligations did his college have, and which ones did they fulfill, to report Loughner to other agencies? Most of all: Why is Arizona (along with other states) so far behind in reporting disqualifying mental illness to the federal background-check system? If there is anything that both sides should be able to agree on, it’s that unstable individuals should not have access to any kind of weapon, much less the so-called fourth-generation semiautomatic Glock 19 that Loughner bought. This time, the price for bureaucratic torpor was too high.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2041448,00.html#ixzz2HaFmypgH

Read Full Post »

Hillary Clinton Pledges U.S. Support for Newly-Elected Government in Meeting With Egypt’s Islamist President

• Posted on July 14, 2012 at 11:22pm by Erica Ritz
• http://www.theblaze.com/stories/hillary-clinton-pledges-u-s-support-for-newly-elected-government-in-meeting-with-egypts-islamist-president/

Read Full Post »

I received these three articles separately and independent of each other.  When I consider this all occurring in the same week well let’s pray these events are completely coincidental and victim of bad timing.

March 12- http://www.homelandsecuritynewswire.com/dr20120313-atk-awarded-contract-to-supply-ammo-to-dhs   Department of Homeland  Security issues contract to ATK  to purchase 45,000,000 rounds of .40 caliber jacketed hollow points over the next 5 years or 9,000,000 each year.

• Jacketed hollow points are for deadly use at close range.  They are banned by NATO and The Hague Convention because they are so deadly. 
• But when used in an urban environment, they are perfect as the round expands inside the target and stops.  Law Enforcement does not want to shoot the bad guy and have the round go through the target, through the wall behind the target and hitting a child eating dinner in the next apartment. 
• The use for Law Enforcement is understandable, but how many rounds does DHS fire in any given year in conjunction with a specific mission?  Maybe 10?  100?  1,000?  These rounds are not practice rounds, they are much more expensive then a full metal jacket normally reserved for practice.
• .40 caliber is an upclose in your face round used in both tactical pistols and rifles.  John Wayne would not have done well in Sands of Iwo Jima with this round.
• Deliveries are expected to begin in June.

March 13- http://blog.dhs.gov/  The White House announces new plans for a “Civilian Army“. 

• Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) now has the authority to hire and train 1,600 members beginning in August, 2012

March 16- http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/16/executive-order-national-defense-resources-preparedness  President Obama rewrites and reissues “Executive Order — National Defense Resources Preparedness“

• PART VIII – GENERAL PROVISIONS
• Sec. 801. Definitions. In addition to the definitions in section 702 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2152, the following definitions apply throughout this order:
• (a) “Civil transportation” includes movement of persons and property by all modes of transportation in interstate, intrastate, or foreign commerce within the United States, its territories and possessions, and the District of Columbia, and related public storage and warehousing, ports, services, equipment and facilities, such as transportation carrier shop and repair facilities. “Civil transportation” also shall include direction, control, and coordination of civil transportation capacity regardless of ownership. “Civil transportation” shall not include transportation owned or controlled by the Department of Defense, use of petroleum and gas pipelines, and coal slurry pipelines used only to supply energy production facilities directly.
• (b) “Energy” means all forms of energy including petroleum, gas (both natural and manufactured), electricity, solid fuels (including all forms of coal, coke, coal chemicals, coal liquification, and coal gasification), solar, wind, other types of renewable energy, atomic energy, and the production, conservation, use, control, and distribution (including pipelines) of all of these forms of energy.
• (c) “Farm equipment” means equipment, machinery, and repair parts manufactured for use on farms in connection with the production or preparation for market use of food resources.
• (d) “Fertilizer” means any product or combination of products that contain one or more of the elements nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium for use as a plant nutrient.
• (e) “Food resources” means all commodities and products, (simple, mixed, or compound), or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals, irrespective of other uses to which such commodities or products may be put, at all stages of processing from the raw commodity to the products thereof in vendible form for human or animal consumption. “Food resources” also means potable water packaged in commercially marketable containers, all starches, sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats and oils, seed, cotton, hemp, and flax fiber, but does not mean any such material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or agricultural product.
• (f) “Food resource facilities” means plants, machinery, vehicles (including on farm), and other facilities required for the production, processing, distribution, and storage (including cold storage) of food resources, and for the domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer (excluding transportation thereof).
• (g) “Functions” include powers, duties, authority, responsibilities, and discretion.
• (h) “Head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense” means the heads of the Departments of State, Justice, the Interior, and Homeland Security, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the General Services Administration, and all other agencies with authority delegated under section 201 of this order.
• (i) “Health resources” means drugs, biological products, medical devices, materials, facilities, health supplies, services and equipment required to diagnose, mitigate or prevent the impairment of, improve, treat, cure, or restore the physical or mental health conditions of the population.
• (j) “National defense” means programs for military and energy production or construction, military or critical infrastructure assistance to any foreign nation, homeland security, stockpiling, space, and any directly related activity. Such term includes emergency preparedness activities conducted pursuant to title VI of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5195 et seq., and critical infrastructure protection and restoration.
• (k) “Offsets” means compensation practices required as a condition of purchase in either government to government or commercial sales of defense articles and/or defense services as defined by the Arms Export Control Act, 22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq., and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, 22 C.F.R. 120.1 130.17.
• (l) “Special priorities assistance” means action by resource departments to assist with expediting deliveries, placing rated orders, locating suppliers, resolving production or delivery conflicts between various rated orders, addressing problems that arise in the fulfillment of a rated order or other action authorized by a delegated agency, and determining the validity of rated orders.
• (m) “Strategic and critical materials” means materials (including energy) that (1) would be needed to supply the military, industrial, and essential civilian needs of the United States during a national emergency, and (2) are not found or produced in the United States in sufficient quantities to meet such need and are vulnerable to the termination or reduction of the availability of the material.
• (n) “Water resources” means all usable water, from all sources, within the jurisdiction of the United States, that can be managed, controlled, and allocated to meet emergency requirements, except “water resources” does not include usable water that qualifies as “food resources.”

Read Full Post »

“WERF research examines the social, economic, and environmental aspects of challenges confronting wastewater and stormwater facilities.”  from WERF footer.  (Agenda 21 Triple Bottom Line)

WERF website http://www.werf.org/livablecommunities/tool_principles.htm  continually uses the key words “green” and “sustainable”.

Apparently joining ICLEI has made our County Engineers stupid and incompetent of designing storm water run off methods. So our Komrad Kommissioners will pay $125,000 for this-

Or better question, did joining ICLEI create a dumb Board? (Did a dumb Board create ICLEI?) Joining ICLEI only costs $3,500 annual dues. Using ICLEI guidelines costs millions, a few hundred thousand at a time. And it goes on and on and on.

Read Full Post »

Resolution Exposing United Nations Agenda 21

 WHEREAS, the United Nations Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control that was initiated at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992; and,

WHEREAS, the United Nations Agenda 21 is being covertly pushed into local communities throughout the United States of America through the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) through local  ”sustainable development” policies such as Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, and other “Green” or “Alternative” projects; and,

WHEREAS, this United Nations Agenda 21 plan of radical so-­called “sustainable development” views the American way of life of private property ownership, single family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices, and privately owned farms; all as destructive to the environment; and,

WHEREAS, according to the United Nations Agenda 21 policy, social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment which would be accomplished by socialist/communist redistribution of wealth; and,

WHEREAS, according to the United Nations Agenda 21 policy National sovereignty is deemed a social injustice; now therefore be

RESOLVED, the Republican National Committee recognizes the destructive and insidious nature of United Nations Agenda 21 and hereby exposes to the public and public policy makers the dangerous intent of the plan; and therefore be it further

RESOLVED , that the U.S. government and no state or local government is legally bound by the United Nations Agenda 21 treaty in that it has never been endorsed by the (U.S.) Senate, and therefore be it further

RESOLVED, that the federal and state and local governments across the country be well informed of the underlying harmful implications of implementation of United Nations Agenda 21 destructive strategies for “sustainable development” and we hereby endorse rejection of it’s radical policies and rejection of any grant monies attached to it, and therefore be it further

RESOLVED, that upon the approval of this resolution the Republican National Committee shall deliver a copy of this resolution to each of the Republican members of Congress, all Republican candidates for Congress, all Republican candidates for President who qualify for RNC sanctioned debates, and to each Republican state and territorial party office.

Chief Sponsor:

Helen Van Etten    Republican National Committeewoman for Kansas

Co-­Sponsors:

Carolyn McLarty     Republican National Committeewoman for Oklahoma

Kim Lehman      Republican National Committeewoman for Iowa

Paul Reynolds      Republican National Committeeman for Alabama

Demetra DeMonte    Republican national Committeewoman for Illinois

Solomon Yue    Republican National Committeewoman for Oregon

Donna Cain   Republican National Committeewoman for Oregon

Cindy Costa    Republican National Committeewoman for South Carolina

John Sigler   Republican State Chairman for Delaware

Steve Scheffler   Republican National Committeeman for Iowa

Peggy Lambert   Republican National Committeewoman for Tennessee

Jim Bopp   Republican National Committeeman for Indiana

Bruce Ash  Republican National Committeeman for Arizona

DeMarus Carlson    Republican National Committeewoman for Nebraska

NCResolutionExposingUnitedNationsAgenda21_1207112Final-1

Ed Eilert ed.eilert@jocogov.org

At-Large District

Chairman of the Board     (Term expires January 12, 2015)

1) Do you individually support the ICLEI agenda?

2) Do you individually support Agenda 21?

3) Do you individually support providing “in state tuition” to illegal immigrants?

4) Do you individually support JoCo funding to oppose illegal immigration reform?

 

5) Do you individually support “sanctuary status” within JoCo?

 

6) Do you individually support “proof of citizenship” to receive JoCo funded benefits?

 

C. Edward Peterson ed.peterson@jocogov.org

First District     (Term expires January 12, 2015)

1) Do you individually support the ICLEI agenda?

2) Do you individually support Agenda 21?

3) Do you individually support providing “in state tuition” to illegal immigrants?

4) Do you individually support JoCo funding to oppose illegal immigration reform?

 

5) Do you individually support “sanctuary status” within JoCo?

 

6) Do you individually support “proof of citizenship” to receive JoCo funded benefits?

 

Jim Allen jim.allen@jocogov.org 

Second District     (Term expires January 14, 2013)

1) Do you individually support the ICLEI agenda?

2) Do you individually support Agenda 21?

 

3) Do you individually support providing “in state tuition” to illegal immigrants?

 

4) Do you individually support JoCo funding to oppose illegal immigration reform?

 

5) Do you individually support “sanctuary status” within JoCo?

 

6) Do you individually support “proof of citizenship” to receive JoCo funded benefits?

 

David A. Lindstrom david.lindstrom@jocogov.org

Third District     (Term expires January 14, 2013)

1) Do you individually support the ICLEI agenda?

2) Do you individually support Agenda 21?

 

3) Do you individually support providing “in state tuition” to illegal immigrants?

 

4) Do you individually support JoCo funding to oppose illegal immigration reform?

 

5) Do you individually support “sanctuary status” within JoCo?

 

6) Do you individually support “proof of citizenship” to receive JoCo funded benefits?

 

 

 

 

Jason Osterhaus Jason.Osterhaus@jocogov.org

Fourth District    (Term expires January 12, 2015)

1) Do you individually support the ICLEI agenda?

2) Do you individually support Agenda 21?

 

3) Do you individually support providing “in state tuition” to illegal immigrants?

 

4) Do you individually support JoCo funding to oppose illegal immigration reform?

 

5) Do you individually support “sanctuary status” within JoCo?

 

6) Do you individually support “proof of citizenship” to receive JoCo funded benefits?

 

Michael Ashcraft Michael.Ashcraft@jocogov.org

Fifth District     (Term expires January 12, 2015)

1) Do you individually support the ICLEI agenda?

2) Do you individually support Agenda 21?

 

3) Do you individually support providing “in state tuition” to illegal immigrants?

 

4) Do you individually support JoCo funding to oppose illegal immigration reform?

 

5) Do you individually support “sanctuary status” within JoCo?

 

6) Do you individually support “proof of citizenship” to receive JoCo funded benefits?

 

Calvin Hayden calvin.hayden@jocogov.org

Sixth District       (Term expires January 14, 2013)

1) Do you individually support the ICLEI agenda?

2) Do you individually support Agenda 21?

 

3) Do you individually support providing “in state tuition” to illegal immigrants?

 

4) Do you individually support JoCo funding to oppose illegal immigration reform?

 

5) Do you individually support “sanctuary status” within JoCo?

 

6) Do you individually support “proof of citizenship” to receive JoCo funded benefits?

 

Read Full Post »

America is deservingly and increasingly looking for her soul, misplaced over recent decades of separation and dependence on government for guidance and life’s answers.  That little experiment didn’t work out so well and fortunately Americans are returning to the land of their birth.

A very large Church/School near my little farm has been flying a tattered American Flag for weeks.  I stepped inside their office last Friday, explained who and why I was there and gave them a new American Flag.  They seemed embarrassed but understood and were grateful.  This morning Americans were greeted with a proud Flag.

As we approach Veterans’ Day and the most stressful Soul searching year in our lives, if you are aware of a Church, veteran or veteran’s family in need of economic assistance to display our Flag, please have them contact me.

Read Full Post »

I thank God for Westboro Baptist “Church”

The engines of the processional vehicles provided the only sound to an extraordinary scene as a respectfully silent crowd lined the streets of Olathe, KS. Young and old, an estimated 10,000 stood en masse waving Old Glory, offering condolence to the family and friends of a local hero whilst demonstrating support for those yet fighting for the freedoms we as Americans continue to enjoy today.

It was exceptional and memorable. It made us proud to be Americans. It was the least we could do. 

The men and women fighting every day in our stead deserve our respect and appreciation. They voluntarily place themselves in harm’s way to ensure our lives, as civilians, are not. Knowing and willing, they pledge a duty and burden the prospect of ultimate sacrifice. SPC Spencer Duncan, one of over 2.5 million active and reserve military personnel, deserves to be recognized and lauded for his service and sacrifice. It is because of his dedication (and so many others like him) that we are able to enjoy the freedoms spelled out in our Constitution.

There exists 27 Amendments to the United States Constitution—some more recognizable than others. The First Amendment, probably the most familiar, establishes protection for freedom of religion, speech and the press, as well as the right to assemble and petition the government. Absent this tenet, or at least the support of such, the 10,000 plus assembly on Tuesday would not have been possible—a noble display of the freedom we too often take for granted.

During the final journey of a fallen hero’s return home, the followers of the Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) like to remind us of the rights we have as citizens of our great Nation. Their irrational protests serve as a reminder to all of us the rights our fallen hero gave the ultimate sacrifice to protect. WBC reminds us that The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law that would interfere with the right to peaceable assemble or limit the freedom of speech—a display of the freedom we too often take for granted, yes. Is it noble? I think not.

WBC’s use of First Amendment to degrade and disrespect the final journey of America’s fallen heroes is vile and despicable. I for one cannot comprehend the rationale for such demonstrations. Call it fanaticism, call it insanity, call it what you like (personally, I believe the latter). Whatever the case, these people have the same protections under the law as those patriots who lined the streets of Olathe on Tuesday to provide support and grieve an individual whose job it was to safeguard the right to demonstrate.

Our Nation is the greatest in the world in part because of the protections set forth within The Bill of Rights (of which the First Amendment is contained).The beauty of the Bill of Rights is that it defends the liberties that have been given by God to all of us, even the lunatics from WBC.

We participated out of respect and love for SPC Duncan and his family, but you have to wonder what role WBC’s reminder played in the turnout. WBC ignited the patriotic fire in the bellies of our citizens, influenced the number of supporters who showed this past Tuesday, and helped foster God’s love to be shown by many. And for that, I thank God for Westboro Baptist Church.

One may wonder if WBC’s very existence intensified the passion and patriotism displayed. One may wonder if those senseless few understand that by protesting our fallen champions they are reminding us all why we fight even when the cost is so severe. One may wonder, but I know—we showed to support, comfort, and to thank SPC Duncan and his family. We showed, because the men and women like SPC Duncan continue the fight to secure our basic freedoms. We showed because men and women like SPC Duncan have made it so we could. And we owe them for that.

Ron Ryckman

Olathe, KS

Read Full Post »