Archive for November, 2015




This Colorado Shooting story is getting stranger and stranger.
Of course the Lame Stream Media, immediately started saying that it was a TEA PARTY, RIGHT WING, Republican guy. Then they announced his name;

Robert Lewis Dear, Jr.


And he’s got some North Carolina connections too. But that’s not relevant. He lived in a shack with no power nor inside plumbing. Nothing wrong with that.



Now, once we found out his name, folks started digging into his background. They found his VOTER Registration in Colorado — It states that he is a FEMALE!  Our 1st “Hummm” of the list of peculiarities…







Then, if you go today, and try to look him up on the ‘Colorado Voter Search Site’, you’ll find that he has been scrubbed from the interwebs. 404 Error, Not Found. 2nd Hummm…




Then WRAL TV-5 out of Raleigh NC gets a comment on their web story pointing out his voter gender issue item, and they go into attack mode stating that this guy is a Jr, but the Shooter was a Sr. The authorities have already stated he is 57 years old. I guess WRAL believes that Father AND Son are both 57 years old. 3rd Hummm…






Then, if you look up his address — 809 Ouray Court, Hartsel, Co. — You find that the address is a ‘Vacant’ piece of property in the middle of nowhere. 4th Hummm….




Update November 30, 2015: The news media critters on Sunday now state that Mr. Dear is, and was, against Planned Parenthood & their selling of fetal tissue. I also find this odd from a gentleman who lives without ‘Electricity & Indoor Plumbing’. I guess he has his finger on the PULSE of Technology via the internet & the recent release (Online Only I might add) of the dozen or so ‘Undercover Videos’ posted on Youtube & other sites. [Note the sarcasm in the last statement]

Some other websites are reporting, from witnesses at the scene, that this whole ordeal STARTED at a Bank that was close by the Planned Parenthood facility and that he had fled the bank — then ran to the P.P. clinic. I wasn’t there. I do not know what is fact, and what is fiction.  

Respectfully submitted by SilenceDogood2010 this Twenty Ninth Day of November in the Year of our Lord, Two Thousand and Fifteen.

Read Full Post »





Refugees and the LAW


With all the news of the ‘Widows & Orphans’ being denied access to come here, I thought I would delve into what the actual law states. For your convenience, I have taken a few screen grabs from the law itself. This might help you with your ‘Low Info Friends’ too — since they can’t seem to comprehend what they read.

Please review the embedded links thoroughly — Don’t just take ‘MY WORD’ for it.

1st – Allow me to DEFINE what a refugee IS — According to the Actual LAW;







(42) The term “refugee” means:

(A) any person who is outside any country of such person’s nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, is outside any country in which such person last habitually resided, and who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, or

(B) in such circumstances as the President after appropriate consultation (as defined in section 207(e) of this Act) may specify, any person who is within the country of such person’s nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, within the country in which such person is habitually residing, and who is persecuted or who has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. The term “refugee” does not include any person who ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. For purposes of determinations under this Act, a person who has been forced to abort a pregnancy or to undergo involuntary sterilization, or who has been persecuted for failure or refusal to undergo such a procedure or for other resistance to a coercive population control program, shall be deemed to have been persecuted on account of political opinion, and a person who has a well founded fear that he or she will be forced to undergo such a procedure or subject to persecution for such failure, refusal, or resistance shall be deemed to have a well founded fear of persecution on account of political opinion.



So we’ve defined the term ‘REFUGEE’ — Now we will look at what the law says about INELIGIBLE Individuals.
















(3) Security and related grounds.-

(A) In general.-Any alien who a consular officer or the Attorney General knows, or has reasonable ground to believe, seeks to enter the United States to engage solely, principally, or incidentally in-

(i) any activity (I) to violate any law of the United States relating to espionage or sabotage or (II) to violate or evade any law prohibiting the export from the United States of goods, technology, or sensitive information,

(ii) any other unlawful activity, or

(iii) any activity a purpose of which is the opposition to, or the control or overthrow of, the Government of the United States by force, violence, or other unlawful means, is inadmissible.



The ‘Center for Security Policy’ states, in this press release from June 2015 — A majority of muslims living the U.S.A. think Sharia Law should be enforced throughout the country.





According to a new nationwide online survey (Below) of 600 Muslims living in the United States, significant minorities embrace supremacist notions that could pose a threat to America’s security and its constitutional form of government.

The numbers of potential jihadists among the majority of Muslims who appear not to be sympathetic to such notions raise a number of public policy choices that warrant careful consideration and urgent debate, including: the necessity for enhanced surveillance of Muslim communities; refugee resettlement, asylum and other immigration programs that are swelling their numbers and density; and the viability of so-called “countering violent extremism” initiatives that are supposed to stymie radicalization within those communities.
More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. “


SD2010 Summary:


The law says that anyone who is in ‘Opposition’ to the Constitution (the LAW of the Government of the United States) – Is INELIGIBLE to be admitted to the United States.


I think it is safe to say, and the law is on our side on this one — That we must deport and remove ALL Muslims from the United States of America. It is against the LAW for them to be here to begin with. And that law has been on the books since at least 1952 — It states this in the INA Act of 1952.

And lest we forget ‘Taqiyya & Kitman’ that is practiced by all muslims.



Nor should we forget the LAW that prohibits ‘Aiding & Abetting’ and ‘Encouraging’ those who are here Illegally. It prohibits ANYONE, including the President, an Adviser, a Cabinet Member, a Mayor and even a DOG Catcher from engaging in these actions.



Title 8, U.S.C. § 1324






Respectfully submitted by SilenceDogood2010 this Twenty First Day of November in the Year of our Lord, Two Thousand and Fifteen.


Read Full Post »

Refugee Math is Hard



OK — Time for Math Class


Let’s start with 10,000 unknown people, with NO Documents, or possibly faked documents at best. Now, let us think about these so called INTERVIEWS (the vetting process) done via DHS / USCIS / State Department or other bureaucracy. How many “Certified Refugee Verification Agents” (CRV) do you think we have currently employed by the various agencies?


Each of these ‘CRV’ agents MUST be ‘Thoroughly Trained’ to;


a) Detect Falsified Documents from all over the entire globe (in 100’s of different languages too)
b) Be trained in Psych Ops to detect when people are lying (Perspiration, Eye contact, body language, etc)
c) Be medically trained to detect outward appearances of various diseases (Malaria, Typhoid, Tuberculosis, etc)



Each interview takes, lets say 2 hours. [Yes, I’m being very lenient here] If one person was to work 10 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, it would take 2,000 days to process the entire batch of 10,000. If we have 2 CRV agents = 1,000 days: 3 CRV’s = 667 days: Let us assume we have 30 of these CRV’s, already trained and ready to ‘Hit The Floor Running’, that would take 67 days.


10,000 refugees X 120 Minutes = 1,200,000 minutes of time consumed.

We can process 5 refugees in one day — 120 min X 5 people = 600min

1,200,000 min ÷ 600 min (10 hours) = 2,000 days to process 10,000

2,000 days ÷ 365 days in a year = 5.48 years


Now, Professor Barry, & his pet boys John Kerry & Jeh Johnson, are wanting to bring in 100,000 of these unknown carbon life forms. That is 10 TIMES the original number.


So, IF we have 30 CRVs, it would take 1.8 years to vet 100,000 Refugees.


That’s working 365 days a year. Let us subtract the 104 days for the weekends, and the 10 Federal Holidays, the 10 days of Vacation Time allotted to each employee, and the 6 days of SICK TIME they use on average.


365 – 130 = 235


2,000 days ÷ 235 actual working days in a year = 8.5 years

Now, allow me to expand on this — I want to be VERY REALISTIC here.

I’m going to go back to the original 10,000 refugee number for this next example, & an 8 hour workday instead of the 10 hour I used above.

Using 1 CRV agent:

In an 8 hour day, they use 2 hours for each interview so they can each process 3 Refugees a day. You have to figure in potty breaks, printing forms, getting a cup of coffee, calling for verification on this issue, or that issue, etc. That eats up the other 2 hours of their 8 hour day.

We established above that there is 235 Federal working days in a year.


235 days X 3 Refugees = 705 Refugees processed by 1 CRV agent in a single year.


30 CRV agents X 705 = 21,150 refugees processed each year.



Misc Links




Respectfully submitted by SilenceDogood2010 this Twentieth Day of November in the Year of our Lord, Two Thousand and Fifteen.

Read Full Post »

Ballot Box

Ballot Box

A little update on the Voter Challenge — November 10, 2015

I called Amos Johnson this morning at the XXXCo Board of Elections. I told him I was just ‘Following Up’ on the Voter Challenge that was filed on Friday. Today is ‘Canvass Day’ by the way. They will ‘Certify’ the election as official.


The Board met last evening and reviewed the info I had supplied. Amos informed me that the Board ruled that there WAS “Probable Cause” enough to require a full ‘Challenge Hearing’. That hearing will take place sometime in Mid-December.


Today, they will ACCEPT her vote as valid during the canvass. Yes it will be counted OFFICIALLY!


Below are some images of the Evidence (edited for posting here) that was supplied to the XXXCo BoE. Click any image to enlarge it.


ICGPretrialReleaseOct29PublicVersion ICGMagistrateOrderOct29PublicVersion ICGMagistrateOrderOct29PublicVersionZOOMEDInRespectfully submitted by SilenceDogood2010 this Tenth Day of November in the Year of our Lord, Two Thousand and Fifteen.

Read Full Post »

Board of Elections Event

Ballot Box

Ballot Box

Note: This story is COMPLETELY TRUE. The ‘Names and Addresses’ have been changed due to this being an ongoing voter challenge.


The Back Story: On October 29, 2015, several protesters were arrested for Blocking Traffic & resisting an Officer. They were protesting a new law that OUTLAWS Sanctuary Cities & makes Law Enforcement enforce our current Immigration Laws.

One of those protesters happens to live very close to me and I discovered that she gave the Magistrate (on the arrest documents) an ‘Address’ that was out of State. Then I discover that she has voted in our local election. She Voted on Saturday October 31, 2015. Less than 48 hours after she claimed to the Magistrate that she lived out of state, yet she claims to the XXX County Board of Elections (BoE) that she lives here in the State of NC.

Who is she telling the TRUTH to? The Magistrate or the XXX County BoE?


The Timeline of Events


Election Day — November 3, 2015 @ approx 1pm – I go to cast my ballot in our Local Municipal Elections. I talked w/ Jane Smith & Clarence Jones (XXX County Election Judges, Pct. XX) and asked to file an OFFICIAL Voter Challenge. Was told by them, that I needed to contact Amos Johnson (XXX County BoE Director) and that I might need to schedule a hearing w/ the XXX County Board.


November 3, 2015 @ approx 2:45pm – I called Van Thompson (XXXCo BoE Board Member) and left a voice message.


November 4, 2015 @ approx 10am – Called XXXCo BoE Office and asked for Amos. Got sent to his Voicemail. No VM left. — Called again @ approx 2:30pm and did leave a voicemail for Amos Johnson. Briefly explained the scenario on VM.


November 5, 2015 @ approx. 11am – Amos Johnson called me back. We set up an appointment for November 6, 2015 @ 1:30pm to discuss and for me to file the ‘Official Challenge’.


November 6, 2015 @ approx 1:30pm, met w/ Amos Johnson of the XXXCo BoE at the BoE office. No Recording devices allowed on the premise – either Audio or Video. During the meeting, I showed him the Magistrate’s Arrest docs and the fact that she stated her address was out of State on Oct. 29th, and then approx. 48 hours later, she voted in XXX County and stated her address was 123 Main Street in Anytown NC within Precinct XX.


Amos looked over the Magistrate’s arrest documents and made the following comments:




* 1 document states ‘Mailing Address’ so she could very well have a mailing address in another state.


* She will be sent a ‘NOTICE’ via the XXXCo BoE that her ballot has been challenged and all she needs to do is reply, and state, that she DOES in fact live in Anytown at the Main Street address. There is NO Vetting, required proof of her residence that she must supply to the XXXCo BoE. Just her Word. At that point, the Challenge will be rejected by the Board.


* I do have a right to an Appeal if the above happens.


Amos & I reviewed the ‘Challenge Form’ and decided that I should use the last option. To only challenge her most recent ‘Absentee Ballot’ that she cast on Oct. 31st. We completed the form and then I was asked to show a PHOTO ID to prove who I was.


Note: I jokingly asked Amos if he saw the problem with this — That I had to PROVE, via a Photo ID, Who I was to Challenge a vote, but yet to cast a ballot, there is NO SIMILAR requirement! He politely agreed with me.


The Challenge Form was then ‘Notarized’ and Mr. Johnson, then stamped all of the associated Documents that I had provided as Rec’d in the BoE office. He then ran copies and gave me a set. This ended our meeting.


Approximately 45 minutes later, Mr. Johnson called me back and said that we needed to check ‘ANOTHER Box’ on the ‘Challenge Form’ — He gave me 3 options to choose from. I chose the ‘Precinct’ option.
Apparently, he’d been in contact with the NC State BoE folks and this is what they told him. During this phone call, he also said that there was some ‘TIME LIMITATIONS’ on when Challenges could be filed and that ‘Board’ typically approves absentee ballots on Election Night. I reiterated that I TRIED to file the Challenge on Election Day, but that I was told by the Precinct Judges that I couldn’t do that there at the Precinct. I also inquired as to WHO TRAINS the Precinct Judges on procedures and he responded that HE, Amos Johnson, was the one who did that training for ALL of the XXX County Election Officials. I politely suggested his ‘Training Methods’ needed some review and maybe some adjustments.




§ 163-89. Procedures for challenging absentee ballots.

(a) Time for Challenge. – The absentee ballot of any voter may be challenged on the day of any statewide primary or general election or county bond election beginning no earlier than noon and ending no later than 5:00 P.M., or by the chief judge at the time of closing of the polls as provided in G.S. 163-232 and G.S. 163-258.26(b). The absentee ballot of any voter received by the county board of elections pursuant to G.S. 163-231(b)(ii) or (iii) may be challenged no earlier than noon on the day following the election and no later than 5:00 p.m. on the next business day following the deadline for receipt of such absentee ballots.

(b) Who May Challenge. – Any registered voter of the same precinct as the absentee voter may challenge that voter’s absentee ballot.


Respectfully submitted by SilenceDogood2010 this Eighth Day of November in the Year of our Lord, Two Thousand and Fifteen.

Read Full Post »