Cops have a secret, unaccountable system for tracking you by your cellphone, and they abuse it like crazy


MFP Commentary:
THis is why I have a radio blocking cell phone case and a phone that lets me take out the battery
~MFP



Securus Technologies markets a product to law enforcement that taps into realtime cell-tower data from mobile carriers to produce fine-grained location tracking of anyone carrying a phone; it is nominally marketed to find parolees and wandering https://boingboing.net/2018/05/12/extraordinary-access.htmAlzheimer’s patients, but because it has no checks or balances, cops can query it willy-nilly to find anyone’s location.

That’s what, Cory Hutcheson, ex-Sheriff of Mississippi County, MO, is accused of doing; prosecutors say that for three years, Hutcheson abused Securus’s system to track all kinds of people — even a local judge — without a warrant.

Securus claims that it restricts the use of its system to legally permitted surveillance, requiring users to upload warrants or court orders prior to use; but it does not vet or review those orders before granting access. Securus also does not make the alleged court orders visible to carriers before it queries their databases, meaning that the phone companies have to take Securus’s word for it.

The carriers, meanwhile, are exploiting a loophole in privacy laws that nominally prohibit selling this kind of data: by burying “consent” to the sale of your location data in their lengthy, never-read agreements, the carriers are able to circumvent the law; primarily to sell your data to marketers, but also to surveillance companies like Securus……  Read More

Why We Can’t Ignore the “Militia” Clause of the Second Amendment


MFP Commentary:
As a long standing member of the state sanctioned  Missouri Militia, I find that just like the general public, militia members, as a rule do not understand the Constitution nor the principles that this country was founded upon.  Ironically many are past members of the one organization that the militia is there to protect us from if necessary:  A standing army as the founders called it. The US military.   None seem to realize this.  Most have a strange infatuation with the US military, and want to emulate it regardless of whether it makes any sense whatsoever for the militia to do so.

They sell the Militia to the public,  and to it’s members as something that it primarily is not!  They sell the milita as “Disaster Relief, State Defense & Community Service”.      I have never heard anyone delve into what they mean by “state defense” because most  don’t even know what it means, and those that  might,  don’t want to go there.  We have a politically correct militia that IMHO is close to useless because they do not even know why they exist, nor understand our founding documents.

Most also do not recognize the other standing army that is in our midst, one that I think the founders would be very alarmed about.  We now have a standing arm of  soldiers  that wear blue uniforms, and proudly proclaim that they are “order followers”.   Just like their brothers at the Auschwitz concentration camp in Nazi Germany.    They will, and brag about it, enforce any “law” that the psychopath in the legislature commit to paper.

We were never meant to have neither standing army.  A free people should not be lorded over by standing armies.   As envisioned by the founders, you and I, the  militia,   are and were “the police”.   And during times of peace we were the only military on the continent. (Spare the Navy which is authorized by the Constitution during times of peace)

Spoiler alert:    This is the heart of the this article IMHO:

In his book Eagle and Sword: The Federalists and the Creation of the Military Establishment in America, 1783–1802, Richard Kohn writes:

“No principle of government was more widely understood or more completely accepted by the generation of Americans that established the United States than the danger of a standing army in peacetime. Because a standing army represented the ultimate in uncontrolled and controllable power, any nation that maintained permanent forces surely risked the overthrow of legitimate government and the introduction of tyranny and despotism.”

~MFP


08/22/2018 

While many defenders of private gun ownership recognize that the Second Amendment was written to provide some sort of counterbalance against the coercive power of the state, this argument is often left far too vague to reflect an accurate view of this historical context surrounding the Amendment.

After all, it is frequently pointed out that private ownership of shotguns and semi-automatic rifles could offer only very limited resistance to the extremely well-equipped and well-armed United States military.

It is often, therefore, just assumed that the writers of the Second Amendment were naïve and incapable of seeing the vast asymmetries that would develop between military weaponry and the sort of weaponry the average person was likely to use.

Was the plan really to just have unorganized amateurs grab their rifles and repel the invasion of a well-trained military force?1

The answer is no, and we know this by looking at the wording and reasoning behind the Second Amendment. The text, of course, reads “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Gun-rights advocates often fixate on the second half of the amendment, claiming that the phrase about a militia is just something that provides a reasoning for the second phrase. Many opponents of gun control even suggest that the only phrase here of key importance is “shall not be infringed.”

The Second Amendment as a Guard Against a Standing Army

Looking at the debates surrounding the Second Amendment and military power at the end of the eighteenth century, however, we find that the authors of the Second Amendment had a more sophisticated vision of gun ownership than is often assumed.

Continue reading “Why We Can’t Ignore the “Militia” Clause of the Second Amendment”

Chemtrails Are Dramatically Lowering Crop Yield


MFP Commentary:
Just in case you are one of those uniformed people that don’t know the reality of the over 50 year old program, take a look at the following 2 documentaries and the authoritative  web site that is devoted to  research and reporting on the topic:

What in the World Are They Spraying? (Full Length HD Version)

Why in the World are They Spraying? (Full Length) HD

Dane Wigington’s:  GeoEngineering Watch

 

~MFP


 

By Dave Hodges:
The perfect storm is currently taking place. From Fukushima to chemtrails, the globalists are hitting the people with every deadly geoengineering plot known to man. Chemtrails are responsible for an 18% reduction in sunlight reaching the earth. This is severely limiting crop yield over time. Is the plan to starve humanity into submission? Will mankind survive?  …….. Read More

Chemtrails Are Dramatically Lowering Crop Yield

BLOG: Missouri Firearms Coalition


MFP Commentary:

 

Become a Member  Here

About Missouri Firearms Coalition 

Let me play devil’s advocate, for a minute, by pointing out my concerns about  the statement:    “law abiding gun owners” made on the above “about” page:  (FWIW  every gun group , and owner, almost without exception,   accepts this  anti liberty “group-think” slogan , so I am not picking on MGC in particular.)

This is the text that I have a concern with:
1.) “While professed pro-gun legislators have a majority in both chambers, Missouri lags behind many other states in protecting the rights of law abiding gun owners.”

Why do  people that claim to be educated in the concept of liberty, assert that if someone is not “law abiding”  (such as maybe being a christian in some countries)  that somehow your right to self defense disappears?   Do any of these people think before they type?     Doesn’t this imply that law breaking  gun owners have no rights? (It’s foundational in Western law that everyone has rights, all of the time.  Even “lawbreakers”)

If these group thinkers carry their logic forward  they would also use terms like “law abiding parents”, where they believe that if a parent breaks a law, that they would forever lose their right to be a parent or to conceive children.  Aren’t they saying the exact same  nutty thing about gun owners?   I guess a law breaking food shopper would perhaps be banned by law for life from entering a grocery stores.  Think outside of your normalcy bias and group think and you will clearly see how nutty all of these assertions are to anyone that believes in inalienable rights.

groupthink
a pattern of thought characterized by self-deception, forced manufacture of consent, and conformity to group values and ethics

Let’s continue, if  a gun owner is not law abiding, to the extent that he is incarcerated, his weapons, are kept from him, by the fact that he can’t bring them into the prison.   However the day this person gets out, even if a convicted 1st degree murder, he get’s access to his guns back that very same day.   At  least  that is the way this country worked, and was supposed to work, until the US Congress, instituted the Nazi gun Control Act in the US and renamed it the “1968 Gun Control Act”.    Americans up to that point understood that the right can ever be taken away (or regulated for  that matter) as that is the very definition of a right.  Close to 100 years of government monopoly schooling has produced individuals that have no clue as to what their rights are, or the proper function of government, according to the founders and our founding documents. That is how over the top, disgusting slave-speak like:  “law abiding gun owners” get into the lexicon.  Isn’t this an oxymoron of the highest level?  What does following the law have to do with a right, since a legitimate law can not take a right away)

 

2.) “In 2015 year alone, numerous states signed Constitutional Carry into law and made progress in advancing Stand-Your-Ground law – yet both of these bills died again this year in Jefferson City.”

“Laws” do not give us our rights.   The second amendment recognizes the fact that we had and still have a pre existing right of self defense.  We need no “laws” to tell us this.  Further “Laws” can do nothing but restrict this right. People that speak and act like this,  are again very clearly illustrating that they do not even understand the basic concept of a right. This is scary, when the more educated of us, are still missing the philosophical  elephants in the room.

The solution IMHO, the only real one that will get us off of the hamster wheel of trying to enact legislation is to educate the public as to what their rights are.   Passing legislation is nothing more than licking your masters boot, for a few permissions, as government can not grant rights.

Think about it, and I welcome your comments below.

Lastly please  contact this group with your thoughts, and if their answers convince you that they are philosophically on firm ground, then buy a membership, and support them.

While I despise the machiavellian compromises, that they are making, perhaps it is necessary, but that does not mean that we should not have a less myopic, longer term goal and methodology planned out.(Like educating the public about their rights perhaps)

I plan on purchasing a membership, even if we may have a difference of opinion.  These are not the times for a house divided.  Not at all, and after all they are keeping the wolf from the door for the time being, as expedient as the method may be.

In Liberty!
~MFP

What it Means to be a Law Enforcer . .

It is no accident that police have become more brutal – in appearance as well as action – since they became law enforcement.

The term itself is a brutal syllogism. The law exists and must be enforced because it isthe law. I am just doing my job, only following (lawful) orders. People were hanged for using such reasoning to justify the enforcement of vicious, evil laws and went to the gallows baffled as to why…..  Read More

 

What it Means to be a Law Enforcer . . .

In the Age of Petty Tyrannies, You May Already Be a Criminal

Published on Jul 11, 2018

What happens when bureaucrats run the show and the rule of law becomes little more than a cattle prod for forcing the citizenry to march in lockstep with the government? Overregulation and overcriminalization. In this episode of On Target, John W. Whitehead examines the petty tyrannies and senseless laws that are turning everyday Americans into criminals.

Jeff & Dane Wigington – GeoEngineering And Chemtrails Killing Millions Of Trees


MFP  Commentary:
It’s happening here in MO folks!
Wake up before its’ too late.

I also hate to break it to you but killing trees is not the only danger of
these toxic sprays. Here is another MFP article on chemtrails:

Chemtrails are not a “theory”: CIA whistle blower Cody Snodgres
Chemtrail search results on this site: here

~MFP


Jeff & Dane Wigington – GeoEngineering And Chemtrails Killing Millions Of Trees:  here

 

 

The CSS-Daisy Luther-The Agenda 21 Takeover Is Nearly Complete


MFP Commentary:
For a period I sat in on our local city council.  I discovered that the entire group was one of the lowest IQ, totally uninformed groups, that I had ever encountered. (this is what the US political system insures gets into office) 

One thing stood out.  They all too often would handle issues  that were clearly inspired by the globalist agenda 21, they would do what the globalist wanted them to do, and they had no clue whatsoever what they were involved with, nor the consequences of their actions.

~MFP


I recently interviewed Daisy Luther about the UN’s Agenda 21. The penetration all the way down to the local level is nearly complete. Can it be stopped? How will our lives change. This is a dramatic interview that reveals how close we are to actually losing all freedom of choice when it comes to energy usage and a variety of civil liberties….. Read More

 

The CSS-Daisy Luther-The Agenda 21 Takeover Is Nearly Complete