Germanwings Air Disaster: What We DON’T Know.

I looked at the newspaper with horror: another commercial airplane crash. That makes five in one year. Is air travel becoming less safe? Is something sinister afoot that we are not being told about? What’s going on? Then the news: the co-pilot crashed the plane himself in an act of suicide that took 149 innocent people with him. Oh my God. That’s inhuman. Are they sure? They must be. He had his hands on the controls and he drove that plane into the ground. So awful. Nothing to think about, nothing to talk about, just sad, really sad. What’s that, Wolf? The plane was on autopilot? The autopilot crashed the plane into the mountain? So how can they be absolutely positive it was a mass-murder-suicide? Slow down!

But they didn’t slow down, they sped up, and Andreas Lubitz will go down in history as a selfish, heartless mass-murderer. Is he? We will never know for sure because the powers that be made up their minds that this was the story before actually conducting an investigation. Because of this bad faith, I’m going to deny them the benefit of the doubt in all unanswered questions and all answers they offer that are not backed up by verifiable evidence.

Who am I to insist on answers? I’m the one paying the bills (and so are you). And I’m not paying the bills to be lied to for the purpose of some power elite agenda, I’m paying the bills so I can understand my risks and ensure my safety. As usual, I’d rather be able to shop around for someone who will actually do the job for me, but I’m stuck with a coercive, monopoly government with the power to tax and to regulate and my only recourse is to try to hold their feet to the fire when they steamroll an investigation and railroad a suspect before all the evidence is in.

What are my doubts about the official narrative? Here are my top ten…

1) Why is the flight data recorder missing? What happened to it? Is there any way to really know what happened without it? If it reappears, can we trust what’s on it now that the chain of custody has been broken? This is enough to blow up this entire story. Flight data recorder memory chips don’t just go missing and without it, the truth will never be known about what happened to this plane.

2) Where are the numerous “witnesses who told the French Air Force they heard an explosion and saw smoke coming out of the doomed Germanwings’ A320 passenger plane shortly before it crashed into the mountains near Digne, southern France?” (h/t JQ)
Continue reading


The Germanwings Crash – Fastest Air Accident Investigation of All Time? Podcast of March 28, 2015 Show

“The authorities’ explanation doesn’t ring true for Peter Ruecker (pictured above), another pilot who knew him from the flight club. ‘Knowing Andreas, this is just inconceivable for me,’ Ruecker told the Reuters news agency.”

Why haven’t we heard from Andreas Lubitz’ parents, grandparents or fiancee? Why haven’t his doctors been named or his records been released to support the unsubstantiated allegations that he was hiding a mental illness from his employer? Where is the flight data recorder memory chip? These are just a few of the many unanswered questions that have been glossed over in the rush to judgment against Andreas Lubitz.

Here’s my first take on this awful tragedy and why the truth matters.

Hour 1

Hour 2

Hour 3

For more on this story, check out my most recent article here.

This is a picture of pilots in the cockpit of the A320. Note the headphones.

German Wings Crash: Not the full story?

In the picture above, A320 pilots wear headphones in flight.

Article by Joe Quinn
Sun, 29 Mar 2015 17:09 UTC

When I heard about the crash of Germanwings Flight GWI9525 in the French Alps on the morning of March 24th, I was shocked, but to be honest, not that shocked. It’s not that I expected it to happen, but this was the fifth such incident in the last year. If that frequency is maintained, the statistically-very-low chances of meeting an untimely end on a commercial flight will have to be recalculated.

In the immediate aftermath of the crash I, like many others around the world, waited patiently for the details. What could possibly cause a modern, albeit a little aged, first-generation Airbus A320 to suddenly drop out of the sky and slam into a mountain side? I had a few theories, among them the incapacitating effects of an ‘EMP’ from an exploding overhead space rock. The shocking rise in fireball/meteorite sightings over the past 10 years makes this plausible, and might well have been the cause of the crash of AF447 into the Pacific ocean in 2009. But I waited, and I expected to wait because investigations of this sort can, and should, take quite a while to complete.

When dealing with airplane crashes, the most important information, even more important than the cockpit voice recordings, is the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) or ADR (Accident Data Recorder). The FDR records instructions sent to all electronic systems on an aircraft, including the auto-pilot and the security system for the entry to the cockpit.

Whatever information might be provided by the conversation between the pilot and co-pilot in the cockpit would have to be corroborated or confirmed by the hard data from the FDR. Analyzing this data naturally takes several days or weeks, so it was surprising that, within 24 hours of the crash, the New York Times had cited an unnamed “senior French military official” as saying that one of the pilots was locked out of the cockpit by the other and that was what caused the crash. The NY Times quotes the military official:
“The guy outside is knocking lightly on the door, and there is no answer,” the investigator said. “And then he hits the door stronger, and no answer. There is never an answer. You can hear he is trying to smash the door down. […] what is sure is that at the very end of the flight, the other pilot is alone and does not open the door.”
The precipitous release of this information appears to have undermined the official investigation that is being conducted by the French ‘Bureau of Enquiry and Analysis for Civil Aviation Safety’ (BEA) a civilian, not military, agency of the French government responsible for investigating aviation accidents, and established a narrative that has become the official truth of what happened to the plane – it was deliberately crashed by co-pilot Andreas Lubitz.

As the NY Times went to print on Wednesday, the head of the BEA was giving a press conference that was rightly cautious. BEA head Remi Jouty told reporters that while the CVR had yielded sounds and voices, there was not the “slightest explanation” of why the plane crashed and that days or weeks would be needed to decipher them. “There’s work of understanding voices, sounds, alarms, attribution of different voices,” he said.

Despite this, one day after the premature conclusions of the military official as revealed by the NY Times and the cautious comments of the BEA chief, public prosecutor Brice Robin agreed with the military official’s conclusion and decided to open a criminal prosecution case, saying: “the intention was to destroy the plane”. This is a disturbingly premature approach for a public prosecutor to take and it makes us wonder if someone wanted to quickly establish a narrative that would become the official story rather than wait for the results of a thorough investigation. Indeed, the act of declaring the crash a criminal case means that the investigation will no longer be primarily conducted by the BEA.

Whether or not a full investigation by anyone can even take place has, however, been thrown into doubt with the revelation that the all-important data card from the FDR is apparently missing. Given that the FDR itself has been found, the missing card is hard to explain unless someone deliberately confiscated it. <continue reading>


Is Yemen’s Fall a Sign that America is Losing Control? Saturday’s Show Regular Time 3-6PM ET on WSB…

What is America’s role in the world?
Is anyone’s regime up for grabs – except ours? Is that what American Exceptionalism really means?
Can we be trusted to pick friends and enemies?
Was taking out Qaddafi and Hussein the right thing to do?
Will ousting Assad or restoring Yemen’s al Qaeda-friendly govt be in our national interest?

These are very serious questions that deserve our time and attention. They’ll be getting it on Saturday’s show. I’ll read your comments & take your calls 3-6PM ET on WSB


What Really Happened to Little Madeleine McCann?

I just finished watching this more than four hour documentary on the truth about Madeleine McCann, the three-year-old British girl who was allegedly kidnapped in Portugal in 2007. According to this meticulous documentary (that’s why it’s four hours long – the story itself could be told in an hour, but laying out all the proofs took a while), the parents’ story is false and the British government and media helped cover up the truth. It’s a gripping tale and one you can listen to without watching if it’s more convenient. (h/t JJ)

After watching the documentary, I was left wanting to know more about WHY this story unfolded the way it did and what really happened. The only source would be the Portuguese investigator who wrote a book on the subject called The Truth of the Lie. At the time of the documentary, the book was translated into every major European language except, bizarrely, English. I just found a site with the book in English. Click here for that.

The True Story of Madeleine McCann – Buried by Mainstream Media


The Strip: ISIS militants skimming hundreds of millions of dollars of US funds: “A Dilemma for US & Bagdhad”

The only two installments of my “weekly column” The Strip appeared almost a year ago! I guess I’ll call it an annual column and consider myself ahead of the game! In any case, The Strip is about getting to the meat of the matter and stripping out the propaganda from a particularly egregious mainstream media story. Yesterday, such an article appeared in The Wall Street Journal, begging me to give it The Strip. Here it is…

The Propaganda

The article titled, Militants in Iraq Siphon State Pay: Islamic State skims funds headed for government employees in occupied areas, creating a dilemma for U.S. and Baghdad, reports that the US is giving hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to the Iraq government and one of the things the Iraq government is spending its money on is cash payments to government employees operating in captive ISIS territory. One or two thousand ISIS militants holding the city of Mosul in Iraq are forcing government workers there to remit 30% of their pay to the Islamic State. The White House is not comfortable directing the Iraq government to stop this flow of funds because “people can’t starve.” Continue reading


LAST CHANCE TO STOP HB310…All you need to do is make a single phone call

From Garland Favorite of voterga.org

UPDATE: For live links and videos of the hearing, click here.

The Senate Public Safety Committee passed the HB310 “Big Brother” bill late
Monday afternoon over unanimous objections from the general public who
testified during a grueling double session that was postponed after the
first hour and resulted in all witnesses being forced to return two hours
later. Rep. Alan Powell, who sponsored the bill contended that:
* the bill was simply an “unplugging and replugging” of criminal
defense functions,
* there were no new police powers granted,
* that no issues were raised in the House hearing and
* that recent new opposition was suffering from “paranoia”.
Attorneys Catherine Bernard and Rose McConnell started the unanimous public
opposition with detailed critiques of the bill by refuting these claims. The
session included some heated exchanges after Attorney Catherine Bernard
repeatedly told the committee that Rep. Alan Powell had misrepresented the
bill to the committee and her contention was supported by VoterGA founder,
Garland Favorito, who knew Rep. Powell personally. Powell later complained
to the Committee that Attorney Barnard was merely an indigent defense lawyer
who had called him a liar.

Testimony focused on the massive expansion of power that the governor had
incorporated into the bill even though that power was unnecessary to
implement the criminal justice reforms that the bill contained. This
* The massive expansion of government that is allowable in the bill
(including what could become hundreds of new community supervision units and
thousands of new community supervision employees)
* The potential for a governor to politicize the newly proposed
Department of Community Supervision with centralized decision making and
politically generated contracts rather than the current criminal justice
model that supports more localized control
* Scenarios of how a governor could use the new police powers to
arrest those who disagree with his policies and then to impose sanctions
against them in a new pre-trial release program even though they had never
been convicted of a crime

The Senators had little or no response for the issue of how a Governor could
use his newly defined police powers against political adversaries. Some
Senators implied that since the governor presides over most of the current
departments there would not be a significant risk of politicizing other
aspects of the new Department of Community Supervision. However, Hank
Sullivan of the Lanier Tea Party countered eloquently about how the
centralization and consolidation of locally controlled power and decision
making will lead to the Department of Community Supervision becoming a
political arm of the governor. Some Senators also contended that the
legislature could control the expansion of government through
appropriations, however, that argument lacks credibility. It is based on the
assumption that they would suddenly muster enough courage to challenge the
governor’s demands when they don’t even have enough courage to vote against
the bill now when it is overwhelming opposed by the general public. Former
U.S. Senate candidate Derrick Grayson explained to the committee that this
bill did not benefit the black community despite claims to the contrary and
Dave Rittenhouse closed with an historical analogy entailing similarities
between HB310 and regulations implemented in Nazi Germany prior to World War

Senator Harold Jones was not present for the vote since the meeting was
rescheduled for the exact same time that he had a previously scheduled
Non-Civil Judiciary Committee hearing. All of the remaining Senators who
voted for the “Big Brother” bill were inundated prior to the hearing with
calls and Emails from the general public opposing the bill. Ironically,
Republicans were responsible for passing the bill even though all of the
opposition testimony came from Republicans or Independents. John Albers
voted for the bill after two of his own constituents testified against it.
Michael Williams voted for the bill even though his recent campaign had
benefited from supportive videos made by Nydia Tisdale whose testified
against the bill.

The passage of HB310 is a definitive measure of what is wrong with the
Republican Party. At least three witnesses admonished the Senators that most
of them ran on a limited government platform but were growing the government
dramatically by voting for this bill. Witnesses also explained how the bill
could jeopardize their constituents’ freedom, which they were obligated to
protect. But it was all to no avail. HB310 now moves to the Rules Committee
and will likely receive a floor vote unless Majority Leader David Shafer or
chairman Jeff Mullis, decide not to move the bill this year because of
public opposition. You can contact them and your Senators to voice your
concern either way.

Majority Leader
Sen. David Shafer (404) 656-0048, david.shafer@senate.ga.gov
Rules Chairman
Sen. Jeff Mullis (404) 656-0057, jeff.mullis@senate.ga.gov

Senate List

770 993 3622



Public Safety Committee

Harper, Tyler tyler.harper@senate.ga.gov (404) 463-5263 Chair
Albers, John john.albers@senate.ga.gov (404) 463-4161 Vice Chair
Dugan, Mike mike.dugan@senate.ga.gov (404) 656-7454
Seay, Valencia valencia.seay@senate.ga.gov (404) 656-5095
Williams, Michael michael.williams@senate.ga.gov (404) 656-7127
Watson, Ben ben.watson@senate.ga.gov (404) 656-7880
Jones II, Harold V. harold.jones@senate.ga.gov (404) 463-3942 (not present
for vote)


Campaign for Liberty Wants You!

I was tickled to find that Mary Barbee, a fan of the show and a local political activist, decided to open a Bartow County Chapter of the Campaign for Liberty, the organization founded by Ron Paul in 2008 to keep the momentum going after his inspiring presidential bid. Dr. Paul also established the Foundation for Applied Conservative Leadership (FACL) to teach conservative and libertarian principles across the country. Mary and C4L want to bring FACL here, all they need is a small group of people interested in attending and they will come to us. Here’s more from Mary…

Campaign for Liberty offers one-day classes for liberty-lovers like you! Classes are taught by highly effective leaders, all experienced members of the Foundation for Applied Conservative Leadership.

Normally, you might have to wait for months for a class near your home town, but the
Foundation for Applied Conservative Leadership has agreed to come to US if we can gather a group of twenty or more interested participants.

In the class, you will learn how to become an effective grassroots leader, making a real
difference in your community, and ultimately the nation, by controlling your local political environment.

Please contact me so that we can add your name to a growing list of individuals with shared conservative values. Then we will decide on a date that works for everyone.

Thanks, and hope to hear from you soon!

Mary Barbee
Bartow County Chapter
Campaign for Liberty


know your rights

What is THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SUPERVISION? Podcast of March 21, 2015 Show

Hour 1

Hour 2

Hour 3

Here are some links relevant to the show….




Catherine Bernard

Know Your Rights

James Madison implied that it was paranoid to think Congress would use the general welfare clause to overstep its bounds. Do you think he should have been less trusting of all-powerful government to limit itself without strict parameters of authority? I think so.

If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare,
they may take the care of religion into their own hands;
they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish
and pay them out of their public treasury;
they may take into their own hands the education of children,
establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union;
they may assume the provision of the poor;
they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads;
in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation
down to the most minute object of police,
would be thrown under the power of Congress…. Were the power
of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for,
it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.

Now that we have a Department of Education, Department of Transportation, Interstate Highways, Food Stamps, Welfare, etc., we know Madison & the rest should have more clearly defined the power of Congress just as the Georgia legislature should more clearly define the limits of the Department of Community Services, or better yet, not create it in the first place.

A note on Zach’s call in hour 2…he points out that roadblocks are legal and I failed to respond that this is the ultimate consequence of allowing the government to involve itself in commerce. If the government did not seize a monopoly over the roads (as Madison said they would never do!), they wouldn’t be able to claim the right to police them in this way. Before the Civil War there were hundreds of private road companies. If roads were not provided and subsidized by the government, energy companies, real estate developers, automobile manufacturers and the like would build them out of self-interest. That’s just one way of looking at how the road system would exist without government. Similarly, if we didn’t take away by force people’s right to use recreational drugs of their choice (rather than limiting the choice solely to varieties of the highly dangerous drug alcohol), we wouldn’t have an excuse to militarize the police or allow no knock raids. Libertarians aren’t against government overreach because we’re greedy or debauched, but because we know that every area the government controls it uses the only tool at its disposal: force.