No products in the cart.

News

What Pisses Me Off About The Ariana Grande Terrorist Attack

What Pisses Me Off About The Ariana Grande Terrorist Attack

Stefan Molyneux unloads about the Ariana Grande concert attack.

From the video description:

Stefan Molyneux breaks down the necessary courage needed in the world to help prevent future attacks like the one at the Arianda Grande concert in Manchester, England. Stop changing your avatars, stop praying for X – start talking about real problems in your country and society. Your choice is clear: popularity or survival.

[ot-video type=”youtube” url=”https://youtu.be/mzAQwATXZ4o”]

0

Shorty Dawkins

Oath Keepers Merchandise

2 comments

  1. Some thoughts…

    Was it the peoples choice there? Really? Is it the same type of “choice” that has happened here? Because I remember Brexit, which really ticked off the people in power BECAUSE the people chose to leave. They are still there, because it really was not their choice, the “leaders” thought they had the people cowed enough they would do what the “leaders” recommended. They went against what the leaders wanted, and it still went on.

    Do you think that the corporate media over there does not choose who they ask the questions to on the street so as to get the “proper” answers? You know, like they do here.

    No one here chose safety over security, there was not a vote, it was installed with our “leaders” saying that the people chose it. What the people chose was to not take up arms (yet) to remove the scum working against them. Here, for now. I believe that is what is going on in Europe.

    Add to that, most “terrorist” attacks here, and quite probably there, are our own CIA, FBI, etc. Along with Mossad, etc.

    Remember these scum are out to “RULE THE WORLD” by whatever name you wish to use. Same old meme, different methods. Instead of open armies that one can knowingly fight, it is TRAITORS from within.

    THIS –> Cicero, 55 BC: “A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.”

    So now the next step is for the people of Europe to be armed and trained. As it is required to be here. How can they fight their enemies from within, if we, knowing who a lot of them are, do nothing, not even bring charges as is required of us by the US Constitution. WE are the “teeth” of the US Constitution – Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15. Or are we all toothless now? As Americans, if we have no teeth, we use dentures. If we have no dentures, then make wooden teeth.

    Our framers wanted the world to learn from OUR ACTIONS, not from us sending military over to attack foreign nations. It seems the world needs to see us charge those we know who committed crimes with those crimes. Remember, the Grand Jury Investigation is a tool of the people, WE send out those we choose to go investigate and gather the evidence. Not those who serve within our governments. WE call up Grand Juries when needed, and I am sure that we can find a constitutional judge if need be, though that search might be difficult. How about we start with the one that first said the NDAA was not lawful, and the domestic enemies of our nation that serve within our government went and got another “opinion” – as they always do now.

    Grand Jury – “The grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It is a constitutional fixture in its own right. In fact the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people”.

    “Thus, citizens have the unbridled right to empanel their own grand juries and present “True Bills” of indictment to a court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding. Our Founding Fathers presciently thereby created a “buffer” the people may rely upon for justice, when public officials, including judges, criminally violate the law.” (Misbehavior, “Good Behaviour” requirement)

    “The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside, we think it clear that, as a general matter at least, no such “supervisory” judicial authority exists. The “common law” of the Fifth Amendment demands a traditional functioning grand jury.”

    “Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the judicial branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm’s length. Judges’ direct involvement in the functioning of the grand jury has generally been confined to the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together and administering their oaths of office. The grand jury’s functional independence from the judicial branch is evident both in the scope of its power to investigate criminal wrongdoing, and in the manner in which that power is exercised.”

    “The grand jury ‘can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not.’ It need not identify the offender it suspects, or even “the precise nature of the offense” it is investigating. The grand jury requires no authorization from its constituting court to initiate an investigation, nor does the prosecutor require leave of court to seek a grand jury indictment. And in its day-to-day functioning, the grand jury generally operates without the interference of a presiding judge. It swears in its own witnesses and deliberates in total secrecy.”

    “Recognizing this tradition of independence, we have said the 5th Amendment’s constitutional guarantee presupposes an investigative body ‘acting independently of either prosecuting attorney or judge”

    “Given the grand jury’s operational separateness from its constituting court, it should come as no surprise that we have been reluctant to invoke the judicial supervisory power as a basis for prescribing modes of grand jury procedure. Over the years, we have received many requests to exercise supervision over the grand jury’s evidence-taking process, but we have refused them all. “it would run counter to the whole history of the grand jury institution” to permit an indictment to be challenged “on the ground that there was incompetent or inadequate evidence before the grand jury.” (Nor would it be lawful of them to do so.) Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority said In the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992)

    1. I would say that is some pretty accurate and compelling thoughts there Cal.
      I couldn’t agree more. So here are a few thoughts from me:
      Should not the next step be for us to get busy. Because there are a lot of people who are hiding from their crimes, right here amongst us, and should be brought forth to answer for their crimes. I’m talking about crimes against the people of this nation, as well as crimes committed against the peoples of the world. I for one would be honored to serve on the grand jury! I would happily provide a few pairs of handcuffs as well.
      How about we start with people who are so aware of their guilt, that they dare not even travel outside the boundaries of our country, for fear of being arrested and brought to The Hague to answer for their crimes. That seems to me to be a good starting point.
      There are, of course, many others, but by this action, this starting point, I believe the message would be sent that “we have had all we are going to take”, and we are prepared to take the necessary corrective actions. It would also send a clear message to those aggrieved, all around the world, that we are willing to police our own. I further believe that by showing the world that small measure of justice, it might just have the effect of minimizing the blowback. {At the very least, it is the right thing to do, and it might just create positive results.}
      How many bad actors do you suppose would find it paramount that they leave our jurisdiction, as quickly as seemed prudent?
      Does this shock some of you? Why?
      Is this not in accordance with the oath we all swore? Is this not what we are instructed to do by our constitution? I believe it is, and I further believe that Cal has pointed that out, many times, and with exacting clarity.
      Unfortunately, this would have little to no effect on the monsters created by the CIA, MI-6, and The Mossad, to frighten the citizens of once peaceful nations into allowing them more and more power to wage further corruption, theft, and evil. And thereby, help to identify those who truly feel aggrieved, (and who, out of frustration, take their vengeance out on the innocent), from those created to instill fear within the masses, in order to enrich the few.
      So, there you have it. A few thoughts from me concerning actually working to correct some serious wrongs. All done legally and in accordance with the Constitution for the united States of America.
      Who, I ask, other than a corrupt politician or a crooked lawyer, could argue with that?
      I’ve said it before, and I’m saying it again. It is time for us to get busy if we ever want to see the corruption end, and our rights and freedoms restored to us.
      FtR,
      David

Comments are closed.