The Sedition Act of 1798, 1 Stat. 596.
From: New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 273 (U.S. 1964)
(Justice Powell) (Lexis):
"…
If neither factual error nor defamatory content suffices to remove the constitutional shield from criticism of official conduct, the combination of the two elements is no less inadequate. This is the lesson to be drawn from the great controversy over the Sedition Act of 1798, 1 Stat. 596, which first crystallized a national awareness of the central meaning of the First Amendment. See Levy, Legacy of Suppression (1960), at 258 et seq.; Smith, Freedom's Fetters (1956), at 426, 431, and passim. That statute made it a crime, punishable by a $ 5,000 fine and five years in prison, "if any person shall write, print, utter or publish . . . any false, scandalous and malicious [*274] writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress . . . , or the President . . . , with intent to defame . . . or to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them, or either or any of them, the hatred of the good people of the United States." The Act allowed the defendant the defense of truth, and provided that the jury were to be judges both of the law and the facts. Despite these qualifications, the Act was vigorously condemned as unconstitutional in an attack joined in by Jefferson and Madison. In the famous Virginia Resolutions of 1798, the General Assembly of Virginia resolved that it
"doth particularly protest against the palpable and alarming infractions of the Constitution, in the two late cases of the 'Alien and Sedition Acts,' passed at the last session of Congress . . . . [The Sedition Act] exercises . . . a power not delegated by the Constitution, but, on the contrary, expressly and positively forbidden by one of the amendments thereto -- a power which, more than any other, ought to produce universal alarm, because it is levelled against the right of freely examining public characters and measures, and of free communication among the people thereon, which has ever been justly deemed the only effectual guardian of every other right." 4 Elliot's Debates, supra, pp. 553-554.
Madison prepared the Report in support of the protest. His premise was that the Constitution created a form of government under which "The people, not the government, possess the absolute sovereignty." The structure of the government dispersed power in reflection of the people's distrust of concentrated power, and of power itself at all levels. This form of government was "altogether different" from the British form, under which the Crown was sovereign and the people were subjects. "Is [*275] it not natural and necessary, under such different circumstances," he asked, "that a different degree of freedom in the use of the press should be contemplated?" Id., pp. 569-570. Earlier, in a debate in the House of Representatives, Madison had said: "If we advert to the nature of Republican Government, we shall find that the censorial power is in the people over the Government, and not in the Government over the people." 4 Annals of Congress, p. 934 (1794). Of the exercise of that power by the press, his Report said: "In every state, probably, in the Union, the press has exerted a freedom in canvassing the merits and measures of public men, of every description, which has not been confined to the strict limits of the common law. On this footing the freedom of the press has stood; on this foundation it yet stands . . . ." 4 Elliot's Debates, supra, p. 570. The right of free public discussion of the stewardship of public officials was thus, in Madison's view, a fundamental principle of the American form of government. (FN15)
[*276] Although the Sedition Act was never tested in this Court, (FN16) the attack upon its validity has carried the day in the court of history. Fines levied in its prosecution were repaid by Act of Congress on the ground that it was unconstitutional. See, e. g., Act of July 4, 1840, c. 45, 6 Stat. 802, accompanied by H. R. Rep. No. 86, 26th Cong., 1st Sess. (1840). Calhoun, reporting to the Senate on February 4, 1836, assumed that its invalidity was a matter "which no one now doubts." Report with Senate bill No. 122, 24th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 3. Jefferson, as President, pardoned those who had been convicted and sentenced under the Act and remitted their fines, stating: "I discharged every person under punishment or prosecution under the sedition law, because I considered, and now consider, that law to be a nullity, as absolute and as palpable as if Congress had ordered us to fall down and worship a golden image." Letter to Mrs. Adams, July 22, 1804, 4 Jefferson's Works (Washington ed.), pp. 555, 556. The invalidity of the Act has also been assumed by Justices of this Court. See Holmes, J., dissenting and joined by Brandeis, J., in Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616, 630; Jackson, J., dissenting in Beauharnais v. Illinois, 343 U.S. 250, 288-289; Douglas, The Right of the People (1958), p. 47. See also Cooley, Constitutional Limitations (8th ed., Carrington, 1927), pp. 899-900; Chafee, Free Speech in the United States (1942), pp. 27-28. These views reflect a broad consensus that the Act, because of the restraint it imposed upon criticism of government and public officials, was inconsistent with the First Amendment.
FOOTNOTES
15 The Report on the Virginia Resolutions further stated:
"It is manifestly impossible to punish the intent to bring those who administer the government into disrepute or contempt, without striking at the right of freely discussing public characters and measures; . . . which, again, is equivalent to a protection of those who administer the government, if they should at any time deserve the contempt or hatred of the people, against being exposed to it, by free animadversions on their characters and conduct. Nor can there be a doubt . . . that a government thus intrenched in penal statutes against the just and natural effects of a culpable administration, will easily evade the responsibility which is essential to a faithful discharge of its duty.
"Let it be recollected, lastly, that the right of electing the members of the government constitutes more particularly the essence of a free and responsible government. The value and efficacy of this right depends on the knowledge of the comparative merits and demerits of the candidates for public trust, and on the equal freedom, consequently, of examining and discussing these merits and demerits of the candidates respectively." 4 Elliot's Debates, supra, p. 575.
16 The Act expired by its terms in 1801.
..."
AVT (March, 2012)
See also:
11-11-11 Day, Repeal the Eleventh Amendment, I say!
and,
A Just Government Fears Not…
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Monday, March 19, 2012
They told me: ‘Whatever you do , Adam, Don’t go to Needle Park!’
As one that has always been fascinated with urban centers and the study thereof, and being of a non-diminutive stature (physically) as well as knowing no real fear - at the time, needless to say, my youthful curiosity was piqued when I was advised to stay clear of Zurich’s Needle Park during an early mid-1990s journey to Switzerland. I was told in no-uncertain-terms by all those seemingly in the know, to ‘stay well clear of Needle Park,’ when in Zurich.
So..., what did I do? Of course..., I had to go take a gander at Needle Park! Armed only with my somewhat youthful ignorance… (To be continued when I have some more time.)
AVT
(March, 2012)
So..., what did I do? Of course..., I had to go take a gander at Needle Park! Armed only with my somewhat youthful ignorance… (To be continued when I have some more time.)
AVT
(March, 2012)
April 22nd, 2016 (Addendum):
Several years ago when I traveled to Zurich, Switzerland for
business and against warnings, I went to view Zurich’s Needle Park. For starters, the City of Zurich appeared
almost immaculately clean, by U.S. standards at the time. Moreover, the majority of the Swiss people in
the City of Zurich did not seem as very imposing figures either. As I had been living and working in the
greater Philadelphia area for several years at that point in time, I thought,
how bad can this Needle Park place really be?
So, I drove the little Opel rental car by the park and looked down into
it.
It was, like…, one of the scariest places I’ve ever
seen! Those folks/heroin-addicts in the
park appeared so strung-out and desperate that they would likely take the
eyeglasses off someone’s face if they could get any bit of money for those
stolen eyeglasses. To have large numbers
of them congregating there at the park during any given time of day struck me
as quite common-place for the park as well.
Needless to say, I didn’t get out of the car and the thought of seeing
that place again during my visit to Zurich never again crossed my mind – not once!
Now that Switzerland has a state-sponsored heroin program,
however, according to the news reports, people walk their dogs and jog where
Needle Park had previously existed. No
longer does any fear of crime prevent the mainstream and law-abiding populace
from enjoying the park.
I can’t help but to forever wonder: How much would such a
decrease in heroin/drug-related crime be worth to our society? No more dead cops. No more dead citizens or dead babies due to stray
bullets from drug-dealers fighting each other in the streets.
To our nation’s leaders, I say: Lead or get out of the way! Throw in the towel on the drug war, ‘cause I,
for one, am tired of paying for it!!! Where
have the nation’s decades-long drug policies left us? How much money and what other external
costs have been nearly wasted to those ends to date?
AVT
See:
SWISS
HEROIN-ASSISTED TREATMENT 1994- 2016: SUMMARY
(Believe it or not, there’s actually more to this story
which took place after I returned to Philadelphia. Maybe I'll write some more about it, before too
long.)
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Sovereign Citizen Movement and the L.A. Times Article.
Feb. 25th, 2012
After reading an article in yesterday’s (Friday’s) Los Angeles Times about the ‘sovereign citizen movement,’ I decided to blog and chime in with my thoughts on any such movement and the newspaper’s condemnations thereof. The article, “Contempt for the law,” by Brian Bennett, Feb. 24th 2012, page A1, continues on page A15 under the heading “ ‘Citizens’ hold themselves above the law.” (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb/23/nation/la-na-terror-cop-killers-20120224) Given the history of the printed source of the article (The Los Angeles Times), this newspaper’s weakly masked political leanings typically displayed in its articles, and the reality of modern-day political tactics, I would tend to doubt much of the conclusions stated in this article. Furthermore, I would tend to doubt these conclusions regardless of the source. Because, in a nutshell, for any group to call for a strict interpretation of the U.S. Federal Constitution should not qualify that group as 'domestic terrorists.'
To begin with, the article speaks of how the Sovereign Citizen movement is now classified as a domestic terrorist organization as a result of “…two recent unpublished studies [wherein] the Homeland Security Department and the National Counter-terrorism Center ranked the sovereign citizen movement as a major threat along with islamic extremists and white supremacists.” The article also spoke of six police officers having been killed as a result of clashes with members of the movement. The movement is credited in the article as having 100,000+ members.
I don’t know a great deal about the Sovereign Citizen movement; but from what I know of it, the members don’t consider themselves to be above the law. From what I have been told, members of the Sovereign Citizen movement typically and exclusively recognize the U.S. Federal Constitution as the only law of the land – which could be a valid argument. They often contend that the Constitution and the Founding Fathers of the nation intended the inhabitants of the United States of America to be as sovereigns (or kings). As such, many laws outside the Constitution would therefore be more-or-less unjust. However, what I consider to be the Sovereign Citizen-type movement could ultimately be different from that which is addressed in the article – as I have never heard of any of the ‘Sovereigns’ being violent. So, there could exist varying degrees of this movement and varying degrees of tactics employed by the different elements of any such group, one would have to suppose.
Additionally, as I understand, the Sovereign Citizen movement takes issue with the current tax and revenue generating arms of the government – including as an example The Federal Reserve System – as it would appear that such may not have been authorized by the Constitution either. Nevertheless, as far as I can tell, the Sovereign Citizens might have a valid argument concerning the applicability of the Constitution in addition to their views leaning towards the possible absurdity of many other 'laws.' (See: Thomas Jefferson and the Federal Reserve System. See also: 11-11-11 Day, Repeal the Eleventh Amendment, I say! )
Similar to the Anti-Wall Street protesters and somewhat in-line with the Tea Party folks, the Sovereign Citizen movement, from my limited knowledge, seems to speak of how the nation’s banks appear to control OUR government and of how OUR government seems to consistently only endeavor for the banks and financial industries. And, as OUR government and the value of OUR currency continually display, there has been no significant change concerning the ‘policy regime’ of the Federal Reserve System in recent decades other than to implement policies that were to the apparent further detriment of the American people – regardless of any advertised or superficial calls for ‘change’ by any recently elected politician. The grass-roots movements, then, seem well-justified in illuminating this matter for the apparently blind (or banker-supported) politicians. To be clear, as an example, the Federal Reserve System is a private banking cartel that has absolute control over the U.S. nation’s money supply – which would seem unconstitutional. Clearly, the Federal Reserve System maintains no fiduciary responsibility to any entity other than itself. (If you don’t believe me, try and find something to contradict such a statement in the Fed’s website: http://www.federalreserve.gov/ and http://www.federalreserve.gov/pf/pf.htm ). (See also: Concerning the Federal Reserve System and Fiduciary Responsibility…. , and, Allow the Federal Government to Control America’s Currency, and, Definition of Terms: "Shred The Fed".)
WE are all aware of the typical propaganda efforts long disseminated from our governments regarding any group or individual opposed to the power structure as it currently exists. Such a gathered opposition to seated government officials and opposition to the current affairs of government would likely then have their names included on some fascist-type government list of those to be ‘black-listed.’ Given the often un-forthright and self-centered nature of OUR government entities, agencies, and officials, should the government types label a group as one to be avoided appears to this blogger as more of an unofficial endorsement that those blacklisted folks are probably worth hearing to some extent. In other words, it is difficult to believe OUR government (and press) about anything stated regarding groups of which the government does not approve. (See: “No-Fly List,” Safeguard or Political Weapon? And, Is the Nation Under Siege? Could We Trust the Nation’s Press to Tell Us? See also: Military Weapon Causes Annual Bird Kill From Arkansas Sky?)
The point of this blog entry is to highlight that when a coalition of ‘citizens’ (with 100,000+ members) questions the validity of the status quo of OUR government and the validity of the current - and often apparently dysfunctional - political power structure by way of a lawfully posed question, it seems illogical that such a commonly-held viewpoint/question necessarily makes that group ‘terroristic’ in nature. To call for the return of the Constitution as the ultimate - if not the only - law of the land is not terrorism; regardless of the extent to which the group demanding such is despised within the halls of OUR bloated and constitutionally-challenged government(s). As an example, there is nothing in the Constitution which might allow for the control of the nation’s money supply to be given to a non-government entity such as the Federal Reserve. Yet, our government has allowed such a situation to continue for the better part of a century. Then, to question such an unconstitutional enumeration of power to control the nation’s money supply does not appear as terroristic; at least not in my opinion. To the contrary, when an often self-serving national government that appears to work mostly (if not exclusively) for the financial industries (and the likes) is faced with a growing citizen-based group that opposes (among other things) the current and arguably unconstitutional situation whereby a banking cartel controls the nation’s money supply as well as the cartel’s control of the government, for the government to label such a group as terroristic realistically appears more as an endorsement of the likely just cause championed by any such group and therefore the group may be worth hearing.
IN the end, I can only wonder, by my voicing my opinion on matters such as these and by possibly displaying any sympathy or support for any such “Sovereign Citizen Movement” as I understand any such movement, would such an opinion make me a ‘domestic terrorist” as well? (See: Prepare to Defend Yourself from the Thought Police. And, The Thought Police Might Be on the Move. ) I don’t think I even want to know what the likely answer is to such a question. Regardless, A Just Government Fears Not…
Adam Trotter / AVT
See:
After reading an article in yesterday’s (Friday’s) Los Angeles Times about the ‘sovereign citizen movement,’ I decided to blog and chime in with my thoughts on any such movement and the newspaper’s condemnations thereof. The article, “Contempt for the law,” by Brian Bennett, Feb. 24th 2012, page A1, continues on page A15 under the heading “ ‘Citizens’ hold themselves above the law.” (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb/23/nation/la-na-terror-cop-killers-20120224) Given the history of the printed source of the article (The Los Angeles Times), this newspaper’s weakly masked political leanings typically displayed in its articles, and the reality of modern-day political tactics, I would tend to doubt much of the conclusions stated in this article. Furthermore, I would tend to doubt these conclusions regardless of the source. Because, in a nutshell, for any group to call for a strict interpretation of the U.S. Federal Constitution should not qualify that group as 'domestic terrorists.'
To begin with, the article speaks of how the Sovereign Citizen movement is now classified as a domestic terrorist organization as a result of “…two recent unpublished studies [wherein] the Homeland Security Department and the National Counter-terrorism Center ranked the sovereign citizen movement as a major threat along with islamic extremists and white supremacists.” The article also spoke of six police officers having been killed as a result of clashes with members of the movement. The movement is credited in the article as having 100,000+ members.
I don’t know a great deal about the Sovereign Citizen movement; but from what I know of it, the members don’t consider themselves to be above the law. From what I have been told, members of the Sovereign Citizen movement typically and exclusively recognize the U.S. Federal Constitution as the only law of the land – which could be a valid argument. They often contend that the Constitution and the Founding Fathers of the nation intended the inhabitants of the United States of America to be as sovereigns (or kings). As such, many laws outside the Constitution would therefore be more-or-less unjust. However, what I consider to be the Sovereign Citizen-type movement could ultimately be different from that which is addressed in the article – as I have never heard of any of the ‘Sovereigns’ being violent. So, there could exist varying degrees of this movement and varying degrees of tactics employed by the different elements of any such group, one would have to suppose.
Additionally, as I understand, the Sovereign Citizen movement takes issue with the current tax and revenue generating arms of the government – including as an example The Federal Reserve System – as it would appear that such may not have been authorized by the Constitution either. Nevertheless, as far as I can tell, the Sovereign Citizens might have a valid argument concerning the applicability of the Constitution in addition to their views leaning towards the possible absurdity of many other 'laws.' (See: Thomas Jefferson and the Federal Reserve System. See also: 11-11-11 Day, Repeal the Eleventh Amendment, I say! )
Similar to the Anti-Wall Street protesters and somewhat in-line with the Tea Party folks, the Sovereign Citizen movement, from my limited knowledge, seems to speak of how the nation’s banks appear to control OUR government and of how OUR government seems to consistently only endeavor for the banks and financial industries. And, as OUR government and the value of OUR currency continually display, there has been no significant change concerning the ‘policy regime’ of the Federal Reserve System in recent decades other than to implement policies that were to the apparent further detriment of the American people – regardless of any advertised or superficial calls for ‘change’ by any recently elected politician. The grass-roots movements, then, seem well-justified in illuminating this matter for the apparently blind (or banker-supported) politicians. To be clear, as an example, the Federal Reserve System is a private banking cartel that has absolute control over the U.S. nation’s money supply – which would seem unconstitutional. Clearly, the Federal Reserve System maintains no fiduciary responsibility to any entity other than itself. (If you don’t believe me, try and find something to contradict such a statement in the Fed’s website: http://www.federalreserve.gov/ and http://www.federalreserve.gov/pf/pf.htm ). (See also: Concerning the Federal Reserve System and Fiduciary Responsibility…. , and, Allow the Federal Government to Control America’s Currency, and, Definition of Terms: "Shred The Fed".)
WE are all aware of the typical propaganda efforts long disseminated from our governments regarding any group or individual opposed to the power structure as it currently exists. Such a gathered opposition to seated government officials and opposition to the current affairs of government would likely then have their names included on some fascist-type government list of those to be ‘black-listed.’ Given the often un-forthright and self-centered nature of OUR government entities, agencies, and officials, should the government types label a group as one to be avoided appears to this blogger as more of an unofficial endorsement that those blacklisted folks are probably worth hearing to some extent. In other words, it is difficult to believe OUR government (and press) about anything stated regarding groups of which the government does not approve. (See: “No-Fly List,” Safeguard or Political Weapon? And, Is the Nation Under Siege? Could We Trust the Nation’s Press to Tell Us? See also: Military Weapon Causes Annual Bird Kill From Arkansas Sky?)
The point of this blog entry is to highlight that when a coalition of ‘citizens’ (with 100,000+ members) questions the validity of the status quo of OUR government and the validity of the current - and often apparently dysfunctional - political power structure by way of a lawfully posed question, it seems illogical that such a commonly-held viewpoint/question necessarily makes that group ‘terroristic’ in nature. To call for the return of the Constitution as the ultimate - if not the only - law of the land is not terrorism; regardless of the extent to which the group demanding such is despised within the halls of OUR bloated and constitutionally-challenged government(s). As an example, there is nothing in the Constitution which might allow for the control of the nation’s money supply to be given to a non-government entity such as the Federal Reserve. Yet, our government has allowed such a situation to continue for the better part of a century. Then, to question such an unconstitutional enumeration of power to control the nation’s money supply does not appear as terroristic; at least not in my opinion. To the contrary, when an often self-serving national government that appears to work mostly (if not exclusively) for the financial industries (and the likes) is faced with a growing citizen-based group that opposes (among other things) the current and arguably unconstitutional situation whereby a banking cartel controls the nation’s money supply as well as the cartel’s control of the government, for the government to label such a group as terroristic realistically appears more as an endorsement of the likely just cause championed by any such group and therefore the group may be worth hearing.
IN the end, I can only wonder, by my voicing my opinion on matters such as these and by possibly displaying any sympathy or support for any such “Sovereign Citizen Movement” as I understand any such movement, would such an opinion make me a ‘domestic terrorist” as well? (See: Prepare to Defend Yourself from the Thought Police. And, The Thought Police Might Be on the Move. ) I don’t think I even want to know what the likely answer is to such a question. Regardless, A Just Government Fears Not…
Adam Trotter / AVT
See:
"Madison prepared the Report in support of the protest. His premise was that the Constitution created a form of government under which "The people, not the government, possess the absolute sovereignty." The structure of the government dispersed power in reflection of the people's distrust of concentrated power, and of power itself at all levels." (Justice Powell,
From: New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 273 (U.S. 1964) (Lexis))
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Monday, January 2, 2012
Military Weapon Causes Annual Bird Kill From Arkansas Sky?
January 2, 2012
For the second New Years Day in a row, dead black birds have fallen from the sky in the town of Beebe, Arkansas. And again, the press seems eerily quiet on the matter while officials predictably again blame ‘fireworks.’ As I wrote extensively on this happening last year, I could not resist commenting on the matter again today.
Last year, State of Arkansas fish and game officials reportedly stated that the deaths of the birds were due to the birds’ impact with the ground. So, something apparently did cause the birds to become disorientated during the night such that they would leave their roost and fly immediately to their deaths by colliding with the ground.
Again this year and par for the course of apparent disinformation, officials seem quick to blame fireworks for the deaths of the blackbirds yesterday – even though the town of Beebe reportedly imposed a moratorium on fireworks as soon as the birds started falling to their deaths. What’s more, if fireworks were to cause the mass deaths of birds, it would seem that upon returning from every Fourth of July celebration in the nation WE would have to dodge the never-ending collection of dead birds on the streets and sidewalks of our towns. So fireworks as the cause of the current birdkill sounds like a bullshit excuse of disinformation, in my opinion.
Oddly enough, no one is questioning the large object (or magnetic disturbance) reportedly detected on radar over the town of Beebe during the time immediately prior to the beginning of the birds’ final flights – flights which ended with the deaths of the birds upon collision with the earth below them. Even more odd, only an Australian newspaper (and maybe one other) reported on one eyewitness from Beebe who mentioned that for whatever reason he had his magnetic compass out when the carnage began and the compass spun in circles and was unable to find magnetic north. (See link and quote from The Australian below.) Furthermore, WE are now aware how many birds have internal compasses as part of their innate navigation system.
As such, WE can surely surmise that this latest birdkill is again the likely result of some magnetic weaponry being tested or utilized by the death-mongers of the war machine. In other words, the bird kills are a likely result of the Defense Department testing a new weapon which appears to be magnetic in nature. As one that worked for these type of war-mongers for nearly fifteen years, I can tell you that they often like to test their weaponry at unusual times of day and at unusual days on the calendar as well with the apparent prevailing thoughts being that if the general public is distracted with some other goings on, the public may not notice the strange happenings associated with any weapons testing. From my first-hand experience as a prior employee of DoD, I can also attest the fact that the individuals connected to the Defense Department will habitually tell any bold-faced lies to anyone if the lies are perceived to better the ends of the liar or the Defense Department. And, of course, WE are all aware of the potential for the war machine to test its weaponry on innocent and unsuspecting civilians anywhere on the globe. Ultimately, those who hold themselves above the law seem commonplace at nearly all levels within DoD.
As WE will likely never know the truth of this matter because the government-empowered Defense Department and those who work for it put their own agenda and needs above any concerns for the Taxpayers and above the welfare of the general public, in the end and as to the bigger picture, this matter again seems to show WE can not rely on our press to report the whole truth, WE can not rely on our Defense Departments to be honest, nor can WE seem to trust our governments to be forthright on any level.
///
Okay..., Okay. Let me a step back in light of the increasing numbers of news stories on this birdkill. Even if my distaste for those that endeavor to build weapons to kill people has colored my objectivity on this matter and even if my condemnation of the bastion of lawlessness that often is DoD has influenced my analysis of this latest birdkill in Beebe, if it were merely fireworks that caused the birdkill, why had it not happened every year prior to last New Year’s Day? Why have no locals from Beebe mentioned any massive blackbird-kills that would have accompanied every prior New Year’s celebration wherein fireworks must have also appeared as commonplace? And, finally, if in fact some creep intentionally and unlawfully set-out to recreate (or try to debunk) the massive birdkill of last year with fireworks this year, why did so few a number die this year when, as is currently being reported, such a birdkill was an intentional act? In other words, any intentional act from this year to incite a massive birdkill with such comparatively small results only makes last year’s birdkill look all the more ominous, in my opinion. Also, what of the massive fish kill and the unusual tornado that also accompanied these events last year?
This matter just amazes me in that it seems WE can not believe any source of information in this matter - least of which being DoD or OUR governments across the land.
Adam Trotter / AVT
PS. Might I again suggest that WE repeal the 11th Amendment to the Constitution and also get rid of the typical money-grubbing sell-outs that we continually elect to run our nation - as well as those who run the departments such as DoD. For more information on this suggestion, start reading my blog. (I am no communist nor am I any socialist, either, btw.)
See:
Dead birds fall from the sky in Arkansas
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/dead-birds-fall-from-the-sky-in-arkansas/story-e6frg6so-1226235102967
“Kevin McKinney, a Beebe resident, claimed something else must have been happening on Saturday night.
"Fireworks going off all night and all day - no problems!" he told KTHV. "But when the birds started dying, I had my compass out: it went crazy, spinning and unable to find north." ”
Arkansas town probes ‘intentional’ New Year’s blackbird deaths
http://gantdaily.com/2012/01/03/arkansas-town-probes-intentional-new-years-blackbird-deaths/
Blackbird killings in Arkansas believed intentional
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/02/us-blackbirds-idUSTRE8010WI20120102
A comment worthy of note from the Reuters report:
Blackbirds are protected migratory birds. So to intentionally attempt to kill them would surely appear as illegal. Per: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Program. http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/RegulationsPolicies/mbta/mbtandx.html
The Migratory Bird Treaty Acthttp://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/webapp?area=home&subject=ecrc&topic=waf-ma
16 U.S.C. 703; § 703. Taking, killing, or possessing migratory birds unlawful.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_16_00000703----000-.html
If you think I am merely over-reacting to this matter, watch the video of former Governor Jesse Ventura when he tried to find out what was going on at the HAARP Project in Alaska. Not that I blindly believe anyone these days and I am aware that civilians can not just show up at a military installation and expect to be granted entry, but...
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jesse+ventura+haarp
and:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDfwHU7Cw6g
See also:
What of Electromagnetic and Directed Energy (and Similar) Weaponry and Recent En Masse Animal Deaths?
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2011/01/what-of-electromagnetic-and-directed.html
Much of the Mainstream Press Appear to Grow Quiet As En Masse Animal Deaths Continue to Occur Throughout the World!?!?
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2011/01/much-of-mainstream-press-appears-to.html
11-11-11 Day, Repeal the Eleventh Amendment, I say!
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2011/11/11-11-11-day-repeal-eleventh-i-say.html
A Just Government Fears Not…
http://poetrybyadamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2011/03/just-government-fears-not.html
FOLLOW-ON POST, November 18th, 2014
Interesting that the television show "Unsealed: Alien Files" said in 12:30 AM show yesterday (Nov. 17th, 2014) on KTLA that a UFO "Mother-ship" was in the sky over the southern USA the night of the massive bird-kill in Bebe Arkansas back in December 2010. See: http://www.unsealedfiles.com/
For the second New Years Day in a row, dead black birds have fallen from the sky in the town of Beebe, Arkansas. And again, the press seems eerily quiet on the matter while officials predictably again blame ‘fireworks.’ As I wrote extensively on this happening last year, I could not resist commenting on the matter again today.
Last year, State of Arkansas fish and game officials reportedly stated that the deaths of the birds were due to the birds’ impact with the ground. So, something apparently did cause the birds to become disorientated during the night such that they would leave their roost and fly immediately to their deaths by colliding with the ground.
Again this year and par for the course of apparent disinformation, officials seem quick to blame fireworks for the deaths of the blackbirds yesterday – even though the town of Beebe reportedly imposed a moratorium on fireworks as soon as the birds started falling to their deaths. What’s more, if fireworks were to cause the mass deaths of birds, it would seem that upon returning from every Fourth of July celebration in the nation WE would have to dodge the never-ending collection of dead birds on the streets and sidewalks of our towns. So fireworks as the cause of the current birdkill sounds like a bullshit excuse of disinformation, in my opinion.
Oddly enough, no one is questioning the large object (or magnetic disturbance) reportedly detected on radar over the town of Beebe during the time immediately prior to the beginning of the birds’ final flights – flights which ended with the deaths of the birds upon collision with the earth below them. Even more odd, only an Australian newspaper (and maybe one other) reported on one eyewitness from Beebe who mentioned that for whatever reason he had his magnetic compass out when the carnage began and the compass spun in circles and was unable to find magnetic north. (See link and quote from The Australian below.) Furthermore, WE are now aware how many birds have internal compasses as part of their innate navigation system.
As such, WE can surely surmise that this latest birdkill is again the likely result of some magnetic weaponry being tested or utilized by the death-mongers of the war machine. In other words, the bird kills are a likely result of the Defense Department testing a new weapon which appears to be magnetic in nature. As one that worked for these type of war-mongers for nearly fifteen years, I can tell you that they often like to test their weaponry at unusual times of day and at unusual days on the calendar as well with the apparent prevailing thoughts being that if the general public is distracted with some other goings on, the public may not notice the strange happenings associated with any weapons testing. From my first-hand experience as a prior employee of DoD, I can also attest the fact that the individuals connected to the Defense Department will habitually tell any bold-faced lies to anyone if the lies are perceived to better the ends of the liar or the Defense Department. And, of course, WE are all aware of the potential for the war machine to test its weaponry on innocent and unsuspecting civilians anywhere on the globe. Ultimately, those who hold themselves above the law seem commonplace at nearly all levels within DoD.
As WE will likely never know the truth of this matter because the government-empowered Defense Department and those who work for it put their own agenda and needs above any concerns for the Taxpayers and above the welfare of the general public, in the end and as to the bigger picture, this matter again seems to show WE can not rely on our press to report the whole truth, WE can not rely on our Defense Departments to be honest, nor can WE seem to trust our governments to be forthright on any level.
///
Okay..., Okay. Let me a step back in light of the increasing numbers of news stories on this birdkill. Even if my distaste for those that endeavor to build weapons to kill people has colored my objectivity on this matter and even if my condemnation of the bastion of lawlessness that often is DoD has influenced my analysis of this latest birdkill in Beebe, if it were merely fireworks that caused the birdkill, why had it not happened every year prior to last New Year’s Day? Why have no locals from Beebe mentioned any massive blackbird-kills that would have accompanied every prior New Year’s celebration wherein fireworks must have also appeared as commonplace? And, finally, if in fact some creep intentionally and unlawfully set-out to recreate (or try to debunk) the massive birdkill of last year with fireworks this year, why did so few a number die this year when, as is currently being reported, such a birdkill was an intentional act? In other words, any intentional act from this year to incite a massive birdkill with such comparatively small results only makes last year’s birdkill look all the more ominous, in my opinion. Also, what of the massive fish kill and the unusual tornado that also accompanied these events last year?
This matter just amazes me in that it seems WE can not believe any source of information in this matter - least of which being DoD or OUR governments across the land.
Adam Trotter / AVT
PS. Might I again suggest that WE repeal the 11th Amendment to the Constitution and also get rid of the typical money-grubbing sell-outs that we continually elect to run our nation - as well as those who run the departments such as DoD. For more information on this suggestion, start reading my blog. (I am no communist nor am I any socialist, either, btw.)
See:
Dead birds fall from the sky in Arkansas
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/dead-birds-fall-from-the-sky-in-arkansas/story-e6frg6so-1226235102967
“Kevin McKinney, a Beebe resident, claimed something else must have been happening on Saturday night.
"Fireworks going off all night and all day - no problems!" he told KTHV. "But when the birds started dying, I had my compass out: it went crazy, spinning and unable to find north." ”
Arkansas town probes ‘intentional’ New Year’s blackbird deaths
http://gantdaily.com/2012/01/03/arkansas-town-probes-intentional-new-years-blackbird-deaths/
Blackbird killings in Arkansas believed intentional
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/02/us-blackbirds-idUSTRE8010WI20120102
A comment worthy of note from the Reuters report:
Blackbirds are protected migratory birds. So to intentionally attempt to kill them would surely appear as illegal. Per: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Program. http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/RegulationsPolicies/mbta/mbtandx.html
The Migratory Bird Treaty Acthttp://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/webapp?area=home&subject=ecrc&topic=waf-ma
16 U.S.C. 703; § 703. Taking, killing, or possessing migratory birds unlawful.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_16_00000703----000-.html
If you think I am merely over-reacting to this matter, watch the video of former Governor Jesse Ventura when he tried to find out what was going on at the HAARP Project in Alaska. Not that I blindly believe anyone these days and I am aware that civilians can not just show up at a military installation and expect to be granted entry, but...
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jesse+ventura+haarp
and:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDfwHU7Cw6g
See also:
What of Electromagnetic and Directed Energy (and Similar) Weaponry and Recent En Masse Animal Deaths?
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2011/01/what-of-electromagnetic-and-directed.html
Much of the Mainstream Press Appear to Grow Quiet As En Masse Animal Deaths Continue to Occur Throughout the World!?!?
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2011/01/much-of-mainstream-press-appears-to.html
11-11-11 Day, Repeal the Eleventh Amendment, I say!
http://adamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2011/11/11-11-11-day-repeal-eleventh-i-say.html
A Just Government Fears Not…
http://poetrybyadamvernontrotter.blogspot.com/2011/03/just-government-fears-not.html
FOLLOW-ON POST, November 18th, 2014
Interesting that the television show "Unsealed: Alien Files" said in 12:30 AM show yesterday (Nov. 17th, 2014) on KTLA that a UFO "Mother-ship" was in the sky over the southern USA the night of the massive bird-kill in Bebe Arkansas back in December 2010. See: http://www.unsealedfiles.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)