Nemo Me Impune Lacessit

Wednesday, 24 April 2019

The Former Soviet Union as a Force for Good?!

Filed under: History, Politics, Principles — Tags: , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 2:43 AM (02:43)

Just when you thought there was no one left to advocate for the former Soviet Union —

No, that wasn’t posted by some 90-year-old veteran of the Great Patriotic War.

That picture of “Captain USSR” was most likely posted by an American twentysomething or thirtysomething, and then was “re-tweeted” by another American thirtysomething, one Matt Kuehnel, who had previously fronted for the “Libertarian Socialist Caucus” in the Libertarian Party.

No, I’m NOT making any of this up.


NOTES

  1. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Diaspora* / Ello / Facebook / Gab / Liberty.Me / Minds / Twitter / VK
    2. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Twitter / WordPress

Advertisements

Thursday, 24 January 2019

Comments on the “Rocket Docket” of Victim Disarmament Legislation

Filed under: Politics, Self-Defense — Tags: , , , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 6:47 PM (18:47)

From: Mike Blessing
To: Elizabeth “Liz” Thomson (D-24), Representative Andrea Romero (D-46), Representative Candy Spence Ezzell (R-58), Representative Angelica Rubio (D-35), Representative Gregg Schmedes (R-22) [1]
CC: Representative Antonio Maestas (D-16) [2], Representative Patricia Roybal Caballero (D-13), Representative Debra M. Sariñana (D-21), Representative Miguel P. Garcia (D-14), Representative Joy Garratt (D-29), Representative Daymon Ely (D-23), Representative Deborah A. Armstrong (D-17), Representative Linda M. Trujillo (D-48)
Date: Thursday, January 24, 2019, 12:00 PM MST
Subject: Comments on the “Rocket Docket” of Victim Disarmament Legislation

Honored Members of the Committee:

First, I am writing to say that some of the legislation under consideration by the committee is not properly labelled as “gun control.” Gun control constitutes the safe, proficient, and proper use of a firearm — the four safety rules, stance, grip, sight alignment and picture, breathing, trigger operation, target selection, etc.

Rather, the legislation in question (HB 8, HB 40, HB 83, HB 87, HB 130) is more properly called “victim disarmament,” in that the people most likely to be affected by it are the people who have the most reason to own and carry firearms for self-defense — the little old lady or the paraplegic who lives alone in a bad neighborhood, the five-foot-nothing 100-pound woman being stalked by a six-foot 200-pound deranged ex-boyfriend.

The bad people (the criminals, terrorists, and violence-inclined mental defectives) whom the proponents of this legislation say will be disarmed by it most likely will not be affected in the least. If they want access to a firearm, they will have it, by hook or by crook.

You see, the bad guys have found this massive loophole in the existing restrictions on private civilians’ rights to own and carry weapons called “breaking the law.”

There are already 20,000 to 25,000 existing restrictions upon the pre-existing individual, civil, Constitutional, human right to own and carry weapons, which are supposed to be guaranteed against State infringement by the Second Amendment and Article 2, Section 6 of the State Constitution. None of these anti-liberty statutes has stopped a bad guy from obtaining a firearm when they want it.

Laws already exist that prohibit felons, domestic abusers, foreign terrorists, incurable drug abusers and alcoholics, and mental defectives from obtaining, owning or carrying firearms.

Laws already exist that prohibit the use of firearms (and other objects) to harm other people (murder, assault with a deadly weapon, etc.).

I think it’s safe to say that all these laws have done is keep honest people honest, the same way locks on doors do.

Those who propose further infringements upon individual liberty aren’t truly looking to improve the human condition at all, but seeking more power over others for whatever reasons. No good will come from these infringements — no good has ever come from these sorts of laws, and no good ever will.

Specifically —

House Bill 8[3], so-called “universal background check” legislation sponsored by Representative Debra Sarinana, would ban all private firearms sales between law-abiding individuals. Gun owners will be forced to pay undetermined fees and obtain government approval before selling firearms to family members, friends, neighbors and co-workers, or fellow hunters, competitive shooters and gun club members. This proposal will have no impact on crime and is unenforceable without gun registration. [4]

House Bill 40[5], by Representative Miguel Garcia, would require criminal records checks on private firearms sales at gun shows — a perennial target of the gun control crowd, even though studies show that these events are not a source of crime guns.[6]

House Bill 83[7], extreme risk protection order or “red flag” legislation sponsored by Representative Damon Ely, would authorize the seizure of firearms and ammunition from individuals without due process. Unchallenged statements made by a petitioner before a judge, alleging that someone is a danger to themselves or others in an ex parte proceeding — prior to any formal court hearing at which the respondent can be represented by counsel and present counter evidence — would be sufficient for law enforcement to enter that person’s home and confiscate their private property.[8]

House Bill 87[9] by Representative Deborah Armstrong expands the state’s “prohibited person” firearm law by purportedly incorporating federal firearm disqualifications. The bill would prohibit individuals convicted of certain domestic violence misdemeanor crimes or who are subject to a domestic violence protective order from purchasing or possessing a firearm, with violations being a criminal offense. However, the bill goes beyond the prohibited categories in federal law in several significant ways. The state law definition of “household member” — unlike federal law — specifically includes a person who is or has been a continuing personal relationship, which applies to dating or intimate partners who have never lived together. The bill would include, as firearm-prohibiting offenses, nonviolent misdemeanors with no physical contact between the parties (like harassment by telephone or email, or criminal damage to the property or jointly owned property of a “household member”). Unlike federal law, this bill would require anyone subject to a protective order to surrender any firearms they own, possess, or control to law enforcement within 48 hours of the order. Not only does this bill impose a mandatory surrender, it authorizes law enforcement to seize any guns that are in plain sight or are discovered pursuant to a lawful search. Similar legislation had passed the Legislature in 2017 but was vetoed by Gov. Susana Martinez. Significantly, the 2017 legislation contained other options for affected parties to comply with the firearm surrender requirement, including storing their guns with licensed firearm dealers, or transferring the guns to a qualified third party. These key alternatives are not contained in this bill.[10]

House Bill 130[11], sponsored by Representative Linda Trujillo, would make gun owners criminally and civilly liable if a child gains unsupervised access to an unsecured firearm. New Mexico already has a first degree felony child abuse statute on the books to hold adults accountable for putting children’s lives or health at risk in any manner. The tools exist to charge and prosecute parents or guardians in appropriate cases. Education is the key to protecting gun owners and their kids, not a state mandate on how one stores a firearm in his or her home.[12]

If you truly want to stop violent crime and terrorism, find out what motivates criminals and terrorists to hurt others, and address those concerns.

Thank you for listening to my concerns.

FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. House Consumer & Public Affairs Committee — The committee in which this legislation is sitting at present.
  2. I presently reside in House District 16, of which Antonio “Moe” Maestas is the present State Representative.
  3. HB 8 BACKGROUND CHECK FOR FIREARM SALES, sponsored by Debra M. Sariñana and Patricia Roybal Caballero
  4. NMSSA commentary about HB 8
  5. HB 40 BACKGROUND CHECKS AT GUN SHOWS, sponsored by Miguel P. Garcia
  6. NMSSA commentary about HB 40
  7. HB 83 EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER ACT, sponsored by Daymon Ely and Joy Garratt
  8. NMSSA commentary about HB 83
  9. HB 87 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & FIREARM POSSESSION, sponsored by Deborah A. Armstrong
  10. NMSSA commentary about HB 87
  11. HB 130 ADDITIONAL FIREARM CRIMES & PENALTIES, sponsored by Linda M. Trujillo
  12. NMSSA commentary about HB 130

NOTES

  1. Published at The Libertarian EnterpriseNumber 1,005, 27 January 2019
  2. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Diaspora* / Ello / Facebook / Freedom Vine / Friendica / Gab / Google Plus / Liberty.Me / Minds / Oneway / Twitter / VK
    2. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Twitter / WordPress.com
    3. Absurdist Discordian Party of New Mexico Facebook page
    4. Albuquerque Liberty Forum Facebook page
    5. KCUF Media Facebook page
    6. New Mexico Dissent and Expose Facebook page
    7. Vote Dumpster Fire Facebook page
    8. Vote the Air Facebook page
    9. Wood Chipper Facebook page
    10. A Bias Toward Liberty Facebook group
    11. Freedom Rally Point New Mexico Facebook group
    12. Gun Owners of New Mexico Facebook group
    13. Independent Insights Facebook group
    14. New Mexico Gun Rights Facebook group
    15. New Mexico Lest We Forget (voters remorse) Facebook group
    16. New Mexico Libertarians Facebook group
    17. Pink Pistols – Albuquerque Facebook group
    18. Sons and Daughters of Liberty New Mexico Facebook group

Monday, 7 January 2019

A Partial List of Pre-Filed Legislation [2019]

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 1:17 AM (01:17)

List of pre-filed legislative bills

Two things about this list page —

  1. To populate the list page, you have to click the blue “GO” button on the left after the page is done loading.
  2. What follows below this paragraph is a PARTIAL list, just to give you an idea of what it’s like. To see the full, current list, go to the actual official page.

HB 8 BACKGROUND CHECK FOR FIREARM SALES

HB 35 FIREARMS LICENSEE STOLEN GUN CHECKS

HB 40 BACKGROUND CHECKS AT GUN SHOWS

HB 83 EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER ACT

HB 85 UNION SECURITY AGREEMENTS

HB 87 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & FIREARM POSSESSION

HB 101 NO FINGERPRINTS TO RENEW CONCEALED CARRY

HB 105 ENHANCED PENALTY FOR FIREARM USED IN CRIME

HB 112 DOUBLE VEHICLE INSURANCE MINIMUM COVERAGE

HB 129 SCHOOL SECURITY PERSONNEL & DEADLY WEAPONS

HB 130 ADDITIONAL FIREARM CRIMES & PENALTIES

SB 8 FIREARM SALE BACKGROUND CHECK

SB 59 PROHIBIT CERTAIN LEGAL DEFENSES

SB 79 ISSUANCE OF LIQUOR DISPENSER’S LICENSES

SB 148 FORMER OFFICERS AS SCHOOL SAFETY PERSONNEL

SB 159 PROHIBIT CERTAIN LEGAL DEFENSES


Tuesday, 24 April 2018

Victim Disarmament Advocate Commits Act of Bare-Handed Violence at Kent State

Filed under: Education, Politics, Self-Defense — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 5:08 AM (05:08)

Next Friday (4 May) marks the 38th anniversary of the Kent State shootings.

Gun Control Advocate Assaults Student for Supporting 2nd Amendment (full video)

Help Assaulted Student Get New DSLR

Liberty Hangout: Gun Control Advocate Assaults Student for Supporting the 2nd Amendment, by Justin Moldow

Campus Reform: Conservative student assaulted during ‘change my mind’ event, by Ezry Bennett, The Kent Conservative

The Kent Conservative: Conservative student assaulted during ‘change my mind’ event, by Ezry Bennett


Wednesday, 25 October 2017

Stupidity, Insanity and Evil in LP Land, Part the Nth

Filed under: Politics, Principles — Tags: , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 5:23 PM (17:23)

Recently, Governor Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown (D-KKKalifornia) signed a bill making it no longer a felony to knowingly infect someone with HIV [1].

Whatever happened to government being the defender of our lives, liberties, properties and pursuits of happiness[2]?

Instead, government is becoming more and more a plunderer and pillager of that which it’s supposed to protect[3].

What particularly irks me about this is that there are some who call themselves “libertarians” who prefer to let the State (in this case, Moonbeam Brown) not only define their ethics and morality, but then insist that they’re the ones abiding by the Zero Aggression Principle

I guess this is what you get when you lower your standards and insist that “everyone is a Libertarian, they just don’t know it yet.”


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. Los Angeles Times — Knowingly exposing others to HIV will no longer be a felony in California by Patrick McGreevy

    CNN — California lowers penalty for knowingly exposing partners to HIV by Alaa Elassar and Laura Diaz-Zuniga

  2. The Declaration of Independence
  3. The Law, by Frédéric Bastiat

Wednesday, 12 October 2016

“Mine” vs. “Yours”

Filed under: Politics, Principles, Self-Defense — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 12:27 AM (00:27)

From what I’ve seen in thirty years of being involved on the public scene, there seem to be two basic mindsets towards life, liberty, property, pursuit of happiness, money, time, effort, you name it, where politics is concerned.

First is the “what’s mine is mine, what’s yours is yours” way of thinking. This is the dominant mindset amongst libertarians. Some conservatives subscribe to it, as well.

But not the neo-conservatives and social conservatives, who seem to be perfectly OK with government at every level getting bigger, more intrusive, more expensive, just so long as they approve of the ways it gets bigger, more intrusive, and more expensive. The issues of abortion, same-sex relations, gambling, drugs and prostitution are examples of this.

Or said “conservatives” are concerned with getting “their fair share” of time at the public trough – contracts for the various social-welfare programs, construction contracts, and such.

Which brings me to the other prevailing mindset on the political scene, that of “what’s mine is mine, what’s yours in negotiable (and ultimately mine).”

These are the people who get all kinds of pissed off when their money or personal property is damaged or taken without their consent. Yet if yours is similarly taken or damaged, especially when done by governmental edict, well, it’s your job to “suck it up for the common good.” Or “for the children,” “for the Earth,” or whatever.

For example, this picture of someone complaining that her Bernie 2016 sticker was stolen:

Seriously, folks, since when has Bernie Sanders EVER supported the rights of private property owners?

I would assume that anyone supporting his failed presidential bid would be in line with his views of “let’s take from the rich.” Am I out of line by suggesting that?

Another point – despite Bernie’s rather “strident” rhetoric about “soaking the rich,” he didn’t have any problem plunking down 575,000-600,000 for a lakefront dacha in Lake Hero, Vermont.

Does anyone care to guess what will happen to any vagrants who should wander onto the property?

You mean he won’t put them up in the guest bedroom for a few days, til they’re ready to move on?

What do you mean, his protective detail from the Vermont State Police will have said vagrant taken away in handcuffs?

Another instance of this:

Back in January 2013, Santa Fe City Councilor Patti Bushee and ProgressNowNM Executive Director Pat Davis[1] supported “assault weapon” bans of various kinds, and then campaigned for the State of New Mexico to recognize same-sex marriages as legal[2].

So according to Bushee and Davis, my individual, pre-existing right to own and carry weapons isn’t really a right at all, merely a government-granted privilege, revokable upon the whim of a bureaucrat (the “yours” of this instance). At the same time, they insist that the rights they cherish (same-sex marriage — the “mine” here) to be taken as sacrosanct.

Well, America, which mindset do you prefer? Pick one and stick to it, please.


NOTES

  1. Bushee is no longer a City Councilor in Santa Fe, while Davis is currently “representing” District 6 on the Albuquerque City Council. No doubt that Bushee has been replaced with someone equally looney.
  2. Patti Bushee and Pat Davis Hinder, Not Help, the LGBT Cause

    Not that such an ordinance would have actually survived a court challenge, as New Mexico has a pre-emption clause in Article II, Section 6 of the State Constitution:

    No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms. (As amended November 2, 1971 and November 2, 1986.)

    But Bushee had to have her warm fuzzy (and no-charge advertising media coverage) for the moment that she “got something done” and “made a difference,” so she sponsored the ban anyway.

  3. Approximate reading level – 13.4
  4. Published in The Libertarian EnterpriseNumber 894, 16 October 2016
  5. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Diaspora* / Facebook [page / profile] / Google Plus / seen.life / Tea Party Community / Twitter / VK / WordPress.com
    2. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Twitter / WordPress.com

Copyright © 2016 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

Thursday, 8 October 2015

Book Review — Incompetence by Rob Grant

Filed under: Fun, Humor, Reading — Tags: , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 12:05 AM (00:05)

A literary counterpart to Mike Judge’s Idiocracy

Incompetence is a literary counterpart to Mike Judge’s Idiocracy, a movie in which the stupid and clueless end up on top. In Idiocracy, the scene is America. In Incompetence, it’s Europe.

The laughs start on the first page when “Harry Salt’s” misses the airport (“Harry” is the narrating protagonist, and it’s not clear that “Harry” is his real name.) because the pilot forgets where to land (and to lower the landing gear). So he has to catch a cab to Rome, which would have cost him a bundle (if the cabbie had remembered to charge him). Also, gotta love the Italian police captain with anger management issues, who gives one of the best lines of the book while cussing out “Salt” :

“Your first mistake was being born, you dumb punk. Your first mistake was crawling out of the abortion clinic trash can, where your hooker momma left you. . . .”

Then there’s the dinner party which turns into a puke-fest, the living-dead farmer, the car with no ignition switch (and useless operator’s manual), the hotel room with no bed or bathroom, among others.


NOTES

  1. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Amazon

Copyright © 2015 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++ and KWrite.

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

Saturday, 11 April 2015

A Question for Judge Malott (Letter to the Editor)

Filed under: Media, Philosophy, Politics, Principles — Tags: , , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 6:00 PM (18:00)

From: Mike Blessing
To: Editorial Page Editor, Albuquerque Journal
Date: Friday, 3 April 2015
Subject: A Question for Judge Malott

In today’s op-ed piece about discrimination, Judge Malott states that as the trial judge in Elane Photography v. Willock[1], he ruled that it’s illegal for people to discriminate against others on the basis of sexual orientation, and that Elaine Hugenin was wrong to refuse service to Vanessa Willock on that basis.

This begs the question of why it was so important for Willock to force herself upon Hugenin, but I digress.

The question then for Judge Malott is this: is it against the law for a gay-owned business to refuse service to straight people simply because they’re straight?

If the answer is “yes,” then the Judge is saying that people should be forced to associate with others that they would prefer not to, and freedom of association goes down the toilet.

If “no,” then the judge is saying that politically-protected segments of society get to lord it over to those deemed unworthy of such protection, and the question isn’t about the offending conduct, but “who” does to “whom.”

I’m having trouble deciding which answer to this is worse. In the end, I’d prefer that individuals be free to associate with others of their own choice, period.

To the LGBT folks — If you want someone to take pictures or video of or bake a cake for your commitment ceremony, why would you force yourself upon those who don’t want your business when some of their competitors will happily do business with you?


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. Elane Photography v. WillockBing / DuckDuckGo / Google

NOTES

  1. Approximate reading level – 13.8
  2. As published in the Albuquerque Journal
  3. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Facebook / Google Plus / Twitter
    2. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Google Plus / Twitter / WordPress

Copyright © 2015 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

Monday, 2 March 2015

An open letter to Ladd Everitt at CSGV

Filed under: Correspondence, Dark Side, Fun, Humor, Politics, Principles, Resistance, Revolution, Self-Defense — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 4:32 AM (04:32)

Mr. Everitt –

As we all have noticed, you have a rather disconcerting obsession with the penises (penii?) of firearm owners and are constantly comparing them to the size of those who do not own guns. This particular fetish for penis size comparison is quite interesting, very much so to be honest. With that in mind we’d like to ask you a few questions.

  1. How long have you been meat gazing?
  2. Do you also compare the dick size of minors who enjoy guns?
  3. Is your comparison based on erect or flaccid penises?
    1. If erect to you give out a handie before measuring?
    2. If you give a handie do they get a happy ending or do you leave them with blue balls?
  4. Do you go “hands on” or just guesstimate?
  5. Do you ask to check penis size or do it surreptitiously?
  6. How many dicks have you measured over the years?

Considering your penis fetish, as displayed on your Facebook page, we feel these are valid concerns. We are most concerned with question #2 as most of our sons also enjoy the shooting sports and the fact you are checking out their dick size is rather troubling. As a matter of fact there is a word that describes adults who groove on checking out the genitalia of children.

Anyway we await the answers to our queries and thank you for your cooperation.


NOTES

  1. Approximate reading level – 8.3
  2. Original article

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

Saturday, 4 October 2014

Spam, Spam and More Spam

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 6:04 PM (18:04)

Another bit of spam circulated to me from the infrared-emitting meat-puppet (R) in the Billingsley “vs.” Bregman turd-polishing contest commonly referred to as “the U.S. Senate race” :

9/27/2014 6:26 AM:

From the Weh campaign, Albuquerque

“Why is long-time entrenched career politician Tom Udall running negative campaign ads? Because he doesn’t want you to know the facts.

Udall’s new attack ad today claims we want to deny seniors their healthcare. Who is he kidding?

He’s the only candidate in this race that voted to cut Medicare by $716 billion when he cast his deciding vote for ObamaCare! He cast a deciding vote to rob Medicare to help pay for it. “Tom Foolery” at its best!

So the GOP plan to “support health freedom” is to complain about Obama’s 21st century scheme of medical national socialism by saying it will take away from Lyndon Johnson’s 1965 scheme of medical national socialism?

They do know that Lyndon Johnson was a Democrat? One of the people that they say they’re against, correct?

So much for the GOP supporting those Tea Party ideals of free markets, limited government and individual rights.

But the reality of campaign advertising is that it can influence voters — even if it’s not true. And Udall’s ad is not only NOT true, it’s almost a joke! But now we have to quickly craft an ad to reply to this false attack, and that costs money we hadn’t planned on.

What’s the matter? Did Weh run out of funds from his profiteering shell-game known as “CSI Aviation” ? Not enough taxpayer FRNs coming in from We The Fleeced to count as “contributions” ?

He can always pass the hat to Slick Willard Romney.

But Weh has a two-shot here – after Weh responds to the latest Udall attempt at mudslinging, then Weh can do another ad telling us how great that ad was – isn’t that how it works?

Please help us respond to Udall’s attack so we can get the real truth out to our voters. Please give $75, $150, or $250 to help us stand up to Tom Udall.

Ask David Clements for some cash.

 


Who owns you? Who runs your life? Who wipes your ass? Who should – you or someone else?
Freedom is the answer – what’s the question?

“An elephant: A mouse built to government specifications.”
“Anything free is worth what you pay for it.”
“Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors – and miss.”
“In a mature society, ‘civil servant’ is semantically equal to ‘civil master.'”
“Place your clothes and weapons where you can find them in the dark.”
“Taxes are not levied for the benefit of the taxed.”
– Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love, The Notebooks of Lazarus Long

“Government is the disease that masquerades as its own cure.”
– Robert LeFevre

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
– Samuel Adams, speech at the Philadelphia State House, August 1, 1776.

“If you wanna live long on your own terms
You gotta be willing to crash and burn”
– Motley Crue, “Primal Scream”


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. From The Weekly Sedition:

    Coverup in the Bernalillo County GOP [1] (Shortlink: http://wp.me/p12LUf-9z)

    Weh v. Clements, Part 2 (Shortlink: http://wp.me/p12LUf-9F)

NOTES

  1. Approximate reading level – 8.3
  2. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Facebook / Google Plus / Twitter
    2. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Google Plus / Twitter / WordPress
  3. Current mood: pissed, predatory
  4. Listening – From the Underground and Below by Overkill

Copyright © 2014 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++ and KWrite.

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

Older Posts »

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: