Rep Lauren Boebert Trolls Democrats with Video About Her Glock

Off-duty police officer shoots man during alleged attempted carjacking on West Side

CHICAGO (WLS) — An attempted carjacking has left one man injured during a shooting Friday afternoon involving an off-duty Chicago police officer in the city’s Lawndale on the West Side, according to police.

The shooting happened in the 1300-block of South Kedvale Avenue in the city’s Lawndale neighborhood.

The off-duty officer shot the man who he claims was trying to steal his car.

“The police just opened fire on him. And my brother got to running, and who is gonna stand there while the police are shooting at you,” said the suspect’s sister, Iesha Brown. “Now I’m just trying to figure out, like, how they are trying to clean that thing up, trying to make it seem like a carjacking. This man ain’t ever carjacked nobody in his life.

The man was shot in the arm and taken to Mt. Sinai hospital in fair condition, according to a CFD spokesperson.

Two other suspects were also taken into custody from the incident, police said.

The shooting comes just hours after Chicago police release crime statistics showing that while overall crime is down, carjackings in Chicago have increased over 100%, and the number of murders and shootings have significantly increased compared to last year.

According to CPD data, in 2020, there were 1,362 vehicular hijackings in Chicago compared to 663 vehicular hijackings in 2019.


Fort Worth homeowner shoots suspected vehicle burglar

FORT WORTH (1080 KRLD) – A south Fort Worth homeowner shot a teenager who was allegedly breaking into his vehicle.

“I guess he met the wrong homeowner last night,” says Fort Worth officer Tracy Carter of Braxton Criddle, 19.

It happened at around midnight last night outside a home on Hunting Green Drive.

The homeowner ended up shooting Criddle in the leg.

“The male (Criddle) was taken to the hospital to be treated, and I’m going to say he’s probably not going to want to do that again,” says Ofc. Carter.

Criddle is now facing a charge of burglary of a vehicle, a class A misdemeanor.

As for the homeowner, it’s unlikely that he will be facing any charges.

“He was very cooperative with the detectives and officers once they came out,” says Carter, “and he will not be facing charges at this time.”

Will Utah become the next state to drop concealed carry permit?

A Utah lawmaker is furthering his bid to make Utah the next state to allow concealed carrying of firearms without a permit.

And in case that doesn’t work, another lawmaker is looking to suspend that permit requirement amid a declared state of emergency — whether that be for an earthquake, a flood and, yes, a pandemic.

Rep. Walt Brooks, R-St. George, is sponsoring HB60 in the Utah Legislature’s upcoming 2021 general session, set to begin Jan. 19. The bill’s language mirrors legislation he filed in the final days of the 2020 session, which would remove the state’s requirement for law-abiding Utahns over the age of 21 to have a permit to lawfully carry a concealed firearm.

“Every single person has the right to protect themselves,” Brooks said, arguing that right should extend to people uncomfortable with openly carrying firearms. “It’s allowing a law-abiding citizen to be allowed (to put their gun) under their jacket or a wife to put it in her purse.”

Currently, 16 states allow concealed carrying of firearms without a permit: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Vermont, West Virginia, North Dakota (residents only) and Wyoming (residents only). Four others allow permitless concealed carry with certain limitations: Illinois, Montana, New Mexico and Washington.

Continue reading “”

Fear is the socialist, communist, collectivist left’s greatest weapon

Leftists love fear.

In a choice between persuading by logic and pressuring by fear, leftists will go for fear every time. Why? It’s the go-to motivator for the nonthinking crowd.

It’s the means of moving mountains without having to do all that hard thinking stuff. Or more to point, it’s the means of moving mountains without giving opportunity for the masses to do all that hard thinking stuff. Quick, do as you’re told — no time to think!

So it goes with the coronavirus, and how the Democrats in positions of power across the United States have managed to keep free citizens in shutdown mode — by catering to the nonthinking squawkers who are blown this way and that, all by fear.

So it goes with social media, and how the petulant progressives and whiny snowflakes and secular socialists and all those of that lower-to-zero thinking class ilk have managed to censor conservative speech — by demanding the removal of all countering opinions that might put a dent in their delicate delusions and force a reevaluation that circles back to, once again, that hard thinking stuff.

It’s all about the fear.

Generate enough fear and there’s no end to what might be accomplished. Changed. Reformed.

Destroyed.

Continue reading “”

It’s not rocket science. The military lets 18 year old service members -with some supervision- do it. The hard part is figuring out what’s wrong when the things malfunction so you don’t waste your time, or parts.


DIY: Building an AR-10-Style Rifle.

It was bound to happen. We’ve shown a number of AR-15-based builds over the years here at Shooting Illustrated, and it’s long past time to add the larger-receiver AR-10 to the mix. Our Rifles editor offered a primer on what to look for in a 2018 article, and we’ve decided to follow his excellent advice for our first AR-10 build.

From the rifle built it can easily be deduced that we opted for an LR-308 pattern large-frame AR. Both upper and lower receivers are from Aero Precision – given the ambiguity in swapping back and forth with manufacturers as Adelmann details, we figured it would be prudent to obtain the upper and lower from the same manufacturer. We’ve used and had excellent experiences with receivers from Aero Precision, so a matched set of the company’s excellent M5 upper and lower receivers were ordered for this build.

Continue reading “”

Marine Corps begins widespread fielding of suppressors

MARINE CORPS BASE QUANTICO, Va. —

Marines risk their lives to protect others.

Many are trained to locate, close with and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver, or repel the enemy’s assault by fire and close combat. They engage adversaries in any clime and place, no matter how arduous the conditions.

Marine Corps Systems Command is tasked not only with enhancing the lethality of warfighters. The command also strives to protect them.

MCSC has taken another step toward increasing lethality and protection for Marines. In December, the command began the process of fielding thousands of suppressors to infantry, reconnaissance and special operation units for employment on the M27, M4 and M4A1 rifles.

Small arms suppressors are designed to reduce a weapon’s noise, flash and recoil. They are also time-efficient, as attachment and detachment only takes a few seconds. The mass fielding of the suppressors, and their myriad benefits, represents a monumental moment for the Marine Corps.

“We’ve never fielded suppressors at this scale. This fielding is a big moment for the Marine Corps.”

Maj. Mike Brisker, MCSC’s Program Manager for Infantry Weapons’ weapons product manager

Continue reading “”

The Biggest Threats To 2A Rights In 2021

We’ve finally put 2020 in the rear view mirror, but unfortunately there’s more rough road ahead for those of us engaged in the fight to protect our Second Amendment rights. From an anti-gun administration ready to seize power in just a few weeks to gun control advocacy groups that will spend millions of dollars this year on legal lawfare aimed at turning our rights into privileges, the coming months will challenge gun owners and gun rights activists on a number of fronts.

Despite the dozens of Republicans in Congress who have vowed to challenge the results of the Electoral College on January 6th and the last minute lawsuits filed by the Trump campaign, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are almost certain to be sworn in later this month. Biden’s already indicated he plans to use executive actions and the power of the regulatory state to target both legal gun owners and the firearms industry, and if Democrats capture both of the Georgia senate seats up for grabs next Tuesday, there’s potential for anti-gun legislation to make it through Congress as well.

I think Biden’s plan to ban and “buy back” so-called assault weapons and ammunition magazines is still going to face long odds in the short term, even if Democrats have control over both chambers of Congress. Legislation to mandate background checks on all private transfers of firearms, however, could get enough support from Republicans like Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania that even with the legislative filibuster in place a bill could squeak out of both the House and Senate if gun owners aren’t mobilized in opposition.

Continue reading “”

Assault, robbery victim shoots 2 suspects in Phoenix

PHOENIX – Police say two suspects have been hospitalized after being shot by a man that they assaulted and robbed in Phoenix.

According to the Phoenix Police Department, the shooting happened on Dec. 31 at 1:40 a.m. near 48th Street and McDowell Road.

When officers arrived at the scene, they found two men who had been shot. Both men were taken to a hospital for treatment.

At the scene, officers also found a man and woman who said the man shot the two suspects while being assaulted and robbed.

The victim was injured during the assault, however, his injuries are not considered to be life-threatening.

 

83 House Members Reject Democrat Plan to Prevent Lawmakers From Carrying Firearms on Capitol Hill

More than 80 members of the House of Representatives are taking a stand against a Democrat plan to end lawmakers’ eligibility to carry firearms on the grounds of Capitol Hill under current regulations.

The effort is being lead by Representative Lauren Boebert (R-CO) who says she refuses to give up her ability to carry a firearm while spending time in the crime ridden District of Columbia.

“I refuse to give up my Second Amendment rights,” Boebert said in a statement, adding:

Continue reading “”

The preceding gets this:

This is the same kind of historical revisionism that tries to paint the 2nd Amendment as some slave patrol scheme in the vein of the Aptly named Dr. Bogus whose revisionist history “The Hidden History of the Second Amendment” includes Section 1, part K literally titled: “The Absence of Direct Evidence”.

Advocates of such false history also try to misconstrue the statements of Patrick Henry before the Ratifying Convention in Virginia from June 5th, 1788.

You can read the full speech here.

You’ll see none of what Bogus suggest regarding the 2nd Amendment being for slavery present there.

All the Judicial, Statutory, and Historic evidence from the 17th Century to Modern day supports the individual right to keep and bear arms unconnected to militia service.

Being a direct descendant of the English colonies American law is based off of the English model. Our earliest documents from the Mayflower compact to the Constitution itself share a lineage with the Magna Carta. Even the American Bill of Rights being modeled after the English Bill of Rights.

The individual right, unconnected to militia service, preexists the United States and the Constitution. This right is firmly based in English law.

In 1689 The British Bill of Rights gave all protestants the right to keep and bear arms.

“The English right was a right of individuals, not conditioned on militia service…The English right to arms emerged in 1689, and in the century thereafter courts, Blackstone, and other authorities recognized it. They recognized a personal, individual right.” – CATO Brief on DC v Heller

Prior to the debates on the US Constitution, or its ratification, multiple states built the individual right to keep and bear arms, unconnected to militia service, in their own state constitutions.

“That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State” – chapter 1, Section XV, Constitution of Vermont – July 8, 1777.

“That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state” – A DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OR STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, Section XIII, Constitution of Pennsylvania – September 28, 1776.

Later the debates that would literally become the American Bill of Rights also include the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

“And that the said Constitution never be constructed to authorize Congress to infringe on the just liberty of the press, or the rights of the conscience; or prevent of people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless when necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceful and orderly manner, the federal legislature for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers, or possessions.” – Debates and proceedings in the Convention of the commonwealth of Massachusetts, 1788. Page 86-87.

The American Bill of Rights itself was a compromise between the federalist and anti-federalist created for the express purpose of protecting individual rights.

“In the ratification debate, Anti-Federalists opposed to the Constitution, complained that the new system threatened liberties, and suggested that if the delegates had truly cared about protecting individual rights, they would have included provisions that accomplished that.  With ratification in serious doubt, Federalists announced a willingness to take up the matter of  a series of amendments, to be called the Bill of Rights, soon after ratification and the First Congress  comes into session.  The concession was  undoubtedly  necessary to secure the Constitution’s hard-fought ratification.  Thomas Jefferson, who did not attend the Constitutional Convention, in a December 1787 letter to Madison called the omission of a Bill of Rights a major mistake: “A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth.”

In Madison’s own words:

“I think we should obtain the confidence of our fellow citizens, in proportion as we fortify the rights of the people against the encroachments of the government,” Madison said in his address to Congress in June 1789.

Madison’s first draft of the second Amendment is even more clear.

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country; but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.”

Ironically it was changed because the founders feared someone would try to misconstrue a clause to deny the right of the people.

“Mr. Gerry — This declaration of rights, I take it, is intended to secure the people against the maladministration of the Government; if we could suppose that, in all cases, the rights of the people would be attended to, the occasion for guards of this kind would be removed. Now, I am apprehensive that this clause would give an opportunity to the people in power to destroy the Constitution itself. They can declare who are those religiously scrupulous and prevent them from bearing arms.” – House of Representatives, Amendments to the Constitution 17, Aug. 1789

Please note Mr. Gerry clearly refers to this as the right of the people.

This is also why we have the 9th Amendment.

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

Article I Section 8 had already established and addressed the militia and the military making the incorrect collective militia misinterpretation redundant.

Supreme Court cases like US v. Cruikshank, Presser v. Illinois, DC v. Heller, and even the Dredd Scott decision specifically call out the individual right to keep and bear arms, unconnected to militia service.

This is further evidenced by State Constitutions including the Right to keep and bear arms from the Colonial Period to Modern Day.

“The Constitutions of most of our states assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, both fact and law, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person; freedom of religion; freedom of property; and freedom of the press. in the structure of our legislatures we think experience has proved the benefit of subjecting questions to two separate bodies of deliberants; …” – Thomas Jefferson’s letter to John Cartwright, on June 5th, 1824

Cornell is being purposefully mendacious.

 

Cornell’s article was a republished one on Yahoo.
Of interest is the last informational paragraph which notes:

As a researcher at the John Glenn School of Public Policy at Ohio State, Cornell was the lead investigator on a project that was funded by a grant from the Joyce Foundation to research the history of gun regulation. Part of the research cited in this essay was done under that grant.

The Joyce Foundation is well known as a rabid antigun group. Cornell is known for it too. With such open bias, why should anyone expect any other ‘results’?


Anti-Gunners Attempt To Re-Write 2A History

What did the Founding Fathers think about our right to keep and bear arms? According to historian Saul Cornell, founders like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and James Madison would be far more likely to side with Everytown for Gun Safety than the National Rifle Association if they were alive today, because in Cornell’s view, the early republic was chock full of restrictions on gun owners.
In a new piece at The Conversation, Cornell lays out five types of gun laws that he says the Founders wholeheartedly embraces, starting with gun registration laws.
Today American gun rights advocates typically oppose any form of registration – even though such schemes are common in every other industrial democracy – and typically argue that registration violates the Second Amendment. This claim is also hard to square with the history of the nation’s founding. All of the colonies – apart from Quaker-dominated Pennsylvania, the one colony in which religious pacifists blocked the creation of a militia – enrolled local citizens, white men between the ages of 16-60 in state-regulated militias. The colonies and then the newly independent states kept track of these privately owned weapons required for militia service. Men could be fined if they reported to a muster without a well-maintained weapon in working condition.
What Cornell is describing isn’t a registration of privately owned firearms, and he provides no evidence whatsoever that the various colonies actually kept track of the rifles and muskets owned by militia members. Cornell is correct when he says that those mustering for militia service could face fines if their firearm wasn’t well maintained, but that has nothing to do with any sort of registration or list of guns in the hands of private citizens.
Next, Cornell claims that the Founders loved the idea of restricting the right to carry. For this argument, Cornell reaches way back to English common law and claims that there was no “general right of armed travel” at the time of the adoption of the Second Amendment. Were there any actual bans on traveling while armed? Cornell doesn’t cite any specific examples, though he is correct when he points out that by the mid-1800s many states had either banned or limited the practice of carrying concealed. What he doesn’t point out is that by attempting the manner of carrying arms, those same lawmakers were tacitly acknowledging a more general right to carry.
The Fordham University historian also argues that the Founders would also have been opposed to “stand your ground” laws, even though the Castle Doctrine had been a part of common law for centuries by that point.
The use of deadly force was justified only in the home, where retreat was not required under the so-called castle doctrine, or the idea that “a man’s home is his castle.” The emergence of a more aggressive view of the right of self-defense in public, standing your ground, emerged slowly in the decades after the Civil War.
I’m honestly not sure where Cornell gets the idea that deadly force was only justifiable in the home. I can think of one very famous case from the 1770s where that wasn’t the case. Most of the British soldiers who opened fire on a crowd of angry Bostonians who were throwing chunks of ice and razor-sharp oyster shells at them on March 5th, 1770 were ultimately found not guilty of murder because a jury found that they were acting in self-defense (two others were convicted of manslaughter).
Cornell goes on to claim that the Founders were on board with storage laws, based solely off of a 1786 ordinance in Boston that required guns had to be kept unloaded. His last assertion is that “the notion that the Second Amendment was understood to protect a right to take up arms against the government is absurd. Indeed, the Constitution itself defines such an act as treason.”
To wage an offensive war against the United States is indeed treason, as defined by Article III of the Constitution. To take up arms in defense of a tyrannical federal government, on the other hand, was most certainly acknowledged as a right of the people by the Founding Fathers. Here’s James Madison writing in Federalist 46.
Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence.
Saul Cornell has likely forgotten more history than I’ll ever know, but he’s off-base in asserting that the Founding Fathers embraced the idea of restricting the right to keep and bear arms. There’s simply no evidence to support the idea that the laws pushed by gun control activists today, like bans on commonly-owned firearms or magazines; gun licensing; gun rationing; or bans on carrying firearms would have found favor with the Founders or the early Americans who argued against ratifying the Constitution until a Bill of Rights was included and the pre-existing right of the people to keep and bear arms was protected.

Thousands of Colorado Residents Without Heat After Attack on Gas Service

The FBI has joined a criminal investigation of what police said appears to be an “intentional attack” on gas service lines in Aspen, Colorado, that left thousands of residents and businesses without heat as temperatures in the skiing mecca plunged to near zero degrees.

Work crews are scrambling to restore gas service, and local authorities handed out electric space heaters to residents still without heat Tuesday, as a storm is forecast to bring up to 8 inches of snow in the Rocky Mountains region this week. Temperatures are forecast to fall to 2 degrees in Aspen on Tuesday night, according to the National Weather Service.

Aspen police said the apparently coordinated acts of vandalism occurred Saturday night at three separate Black Hills Energy gas line sites, one in Aspen and two elsewhere in Pitkin County.

At one of the targeted sites, police said they found the words “Earth first” scrawled, and investigators were looking into whether the self-described “radical environmental group” Earth First! was involved.

NURSE WHO TOOK COVID-19 VACCINE TESTS POSITIVE FOR COVID-19

It’s still 2020, and you cannot make this stuff up.  A nurse who has already taken the COVID-19 vaccine has tested positive for the COVID-19 virus over a week after taking the vaccine that is allegedly supposed to prevent this “disease”.

According to a report by NCTV, Matthew W., a nurse at two different local hospitals, said in a Facebook post on December 18 that he had received the Pfizer vaccine. He went on to tell the ABC News affiliate that his arm was sore for a day but that he had suffered no other side-effects. Until now.  Now, the side effect of the COVID-19 vaccine appears to be COVID-19.

Six days later on Christmas Eve, he became sick after working a shift in the COVID-19 unit, the report added. He got the chills and later came down with muscle aches and fatigue.

He went to a drive-up hospital testing site and tested positive for COVID-19 the day after Christmas, the report said.

Christian Ramers, an infectious disease specialist with Family Health Centers of San Diego, told the ABC News affiliate that this scenario was not unexpected. –NCTV

So did the World Health Organization doctor finally tell the truth?

WHO Chief Scientist: There Is NO EVIDENCE That The Vaccine Will Prevent Infection

If you’ve been paying attention, you know by now that this vaccine has nothing to do with health or prevention of disease, and everything to do with control and manipulation of the mass of humanity.

But the authoritarians say that the nurse just needs a second shot of this DNA altering vaccine and then he’ll be protected from COVID-19.  “We know from the vaccine clinical trials that it’s going to take about 10 to 14 days for you to start to develop protection from the vaccine,” Ramers said. “That first dose we think gives you somewhere around 50%, and you need that second dose to get up to 95%,” Ramers added.

Notice the use of the words “we think”? They don’t know. And they don’t care. They just need everyone to line up for two shots. Anyone who somehow still believes this vaccine was created for a statistically irrelevant virus to protect them from the .05% chance of dying so they can have a much bigger chance when taking this vaccine may be a lost cause at this point.  If you haven’t figured this out yet, you may never do so.

Dawn Wells, Mary Ann on ‘Gilligan’s Island,’ Dies at 82

Dawn Wells, the girl-next-door actress and former beauty queen who played the sweet Mary Ann Summers on the iconic CBS sitcom Gilligan’s Island, died Wednesday morning. She was 82.

Wells died in Los Angeles of causes related to COVID-19, her publicist announced.

Other than Tina Louise, Wells was the last surviving member of the regular cast of the Sherwood Schwartz-created show, which featured three women and four men marooned on a desert island after their three-hour boat tour off the coast of Honolulu went inexplicably awry.

Continue reading “”

A Perfect Storm Seeks Destruction of the US.

As 2021 dawns, the war on our culture moves into high gear.

The opportunistic intersection of the resistance to the Trump presidency, the rise of the monopolistic tech giants, the spurious panic over the psychologically weaponized CCP virus in the form of COVID-19 and its concomitant loss of personal freedom, the neo-Marxist hijacking and worsening of race relations, and the legalistic undermining of U.S. laws and institutions have all evolved into a perfect storm of destruction that not only threatens the future of the United States, but actively seeks its destruction.

Call it cancel culture writ large…………

As I’ve long said, on the left there is no idea too stupid or inimical for them to take seriously and act upon—that’s the very essence of so-called Critical Theory—and we ignore these lunatics at our continued peril. For them, too much is never enough, and once they’ve fixed a destructive “principle”—Homer must go!—in their minds, there is no other cultural destination than straight off the cliff and into the wine-red sea for everybody.

Again, no surprise: The ideological bowdlerization of our cultural patrimony has been going on for decades; as a young critic nearly 50 years ago I observed that, once started on their project of revisionism and revenge, the iconoclastic cultural sappers wouldn’t rest until they had exhumed all the deceased objects of their animosity and hanged their corpses. I stand by the prophecy.

I’m often asked: Once they’ve accomplished the destruction of Western civilization in the name of the “marginalized,” with what do they propose to replace it? Ancient Chaldea? Ming Dynasty China? Wakanda? Or the Amazonian wonderland of Wonder Woman?

My answer, like Michael Corleone’s to Senator Geary, is this: nothing. Or, to quote another famous movie line, “Some men just want to watch the world burn.”

And so, in the name of “health,” they mask and muzzle us, restrict our freedom of movement and faith in the open defiance of the Constitution, vilify our culture, proscribe our words and thoughts, erase the canons of our arts and literature, destroy the middle class and their sources of livelihood, and tell us it’s for our own good. Because we’re so incorrigibly bad.

They’re not just trying to cancel Odysseus, or Shakespeare, or even Trump anymore, they’re trying to cancel youWhat are you going to do about it?

This is ‘hubris’. The arrogance of excessive self confidence. It’s often seen in the ultra-ultra wealthy because they believe their success is due to their total genius. It’s seen in Bloomberg’s, Gates’, and other gazillionaire’s gun control mania . They think that because they’ve been super successful in one venue that they certainly should be in anything else and they should be a greater voice in how society is ‘managed’. If asked, their standard reply is a variation on the theme; ‘If my idea is so stupid, why am I so rich?’
Well, just because they got rich marketing computer software, or financial dealing doesn’t mean they have answers to all the worlds problems. It merely means the ones who think they do, have had a major character flaw exposed.


Bill Gates Had a Plan to Stop Global Warming—Until Science Got in the Way

For some reason, the corporate media and global foundations believe Bill Gates has the answer for everything. They listen to him talk about epidemiology and vaccines. I am not sure becoming a billionaire by stealing someone else’s operating system and requiring outside help to build it makes you an expert in either of these areas, especially after you’ve put out a product as bad as Windows Vista.

But that is not all. In addition to yammering about COVID-19 and how we need to change the world as a result of a pandemic that was less than the Chinese Communist Party would have us believe, now Gates believes he can block out the sun—to save the world from global warming, of course. Is there nothing he can’t do? According  to Reuters:

Harvard University scientists plan to fly a test balloon above Sweden next year to help advance research into dimming sunlight to cool the Earth, alarming environmentalists opposed to solar geoengineering.

Open-air research into spraying tiny, sun-reflecting particles into the stratosphere, to offset global warming, has been stalled for years by controversies – including that it could discourage needed cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.

In a small step, the Swedish Space Corporation agreed this week to help Harvard researchers launch a balloon near the Arctic town of Kiruna next June. It would carry a gondola with 600 kg of scientific equipment 20 km (12 miles) high.

The Harvard Project is called the Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment (SCoPex). To most of us, it sounds like a project that will severely tick off the stratosphere. And opponents of the project fear it will. They fear these projects will lead to attempts to engineer climate with artificial sunshade. The sunshade would essentially consist of blowing a bunch of dust into the stratosphere.

No one knows what this could do to life on earth because it is an insane proposition. We could end up living in a world that looks like the set of Dune. Or causing unknown changes to weather patterns. Dust is a well know respiratory irritant. What if it floats back down to earth?

Or we could freeze our tails off since we are in what is called a solar minimum, projected to last from now until 2053. The last time this happened, in the Middle Ages, we went through what is known as the Little Ice Age. But the geniuses in the climate cabal want to assure you that means nothing; we will still see global warming. Never mind that science can’t accurately predict the weather, and none of them were around in the Middle Ages. They just know, so shut up.

Continue reading “”

Attempted home invasion robbery leaves 2 fatally shot, 2 others wounded in Riverside County community

Gunfire exchanged between residents and people who broke into their home in La Cresta, west of Murrieta, early Saturday morning left two people dead and two others wounded, authorities said Monday, Dec. 28.
Investigators believe a number of suspects — it wasn’t immediately confirmed how many — forced their way into a home on 37000 block of Calle de Lobo and attacked one of its residents, Riverside County Sheriff’s officials said in a news release. Shots were fired during the altercation, and four people were hit.
Deputies were summoned at 4:01 a.m., and found two people dead when they arrived, Sheriff’s officials said. One decedent was a suspect in what the agency called a botched home invasion robbery. Information was not immediately released on the second person who was fatally shot.
A second suspect in the robbery and one other person who was shot were taken to a hospital. Details regarding the severity of their wounds was not immediately available.
Sheriff’s officials believe at least one more suspect fled in a car. A detailed description of any possible outstanding suspect or vehicle was not available Monday afternoon.
Those shot were identified only as males, their ages were not immediately disclosed.
Authorities asked anyone with information regarding the shooting and robbery to contact Sheriff’s Investigator Stites at 951-245-3300, or Investigator Button at 951-955-2777.
The identities of those who died were withheld pending the notification of their relatives.


Woman shot during break-in at Kenmore storage facility

KENMORE, Wash. – A woman was shot early Monday during a break-in at a Kenmore storage facility, sheriff’s officials said.

The incident unfolded at about 12:45 a.m. as deputies and medics responded to a report of a shooting at People’s Storage in the 6900 block of NE 181st Street in Kenmore, said Tim Meyer of the King County Sheriff’s Office.

A woman was found at the scene with a non-life-threatening gunshot wound. She was taken to Harborview Medical Center in Seattle for treatment.

A preliminary found that the resident caretaker at the facility interrupted the woman as she was attempting to break in and steal items.

At some point, the woman pulled out a gun. The caretaker, who was also armed, responded by firing a single shot and striking the woman in the shoulder, Meyer said.

The woman will be booked into the King County Jail once she is released from the hospital.