Not Just ANother Example Of Unconstitutional Expansion Of The TSA

Well shake me silly and call me stupid. The TSA is at the GOP convention. I'm pretty certain thats NOT a transportation hub unless you consider human legs a mode of transportation. Then again if you did that would certainly give the TSA the technical right to frisk you anywhere and everywhere you go and not just at the airport.


BTW - I looked and looked for the post but could not find where someone posted (in reply to post) asking where in "Transportation Security Administration" does it limit the TSA to just airports. My response to that commenter is "where in the definition of transportation would you find a convention listed"? The fact is the TSA is the modern day American equivalent of the political goon or thug whose empowered (albeit illegally) with the power to molest you as you move from place to place. Here in Texas the State government had enough and was moving forward with legislation to ban the TSA from the airports but backed down after the Feds threatened to use military force (a blockade of Texas airspace) .


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=E7Ky9ws7LYQ

Whether you think the NWO conspiracy is real or not, the Feds are encroaching more and more on our rights and freedoms from using the bogus threat of terrorism, when was the last authentic terrorist act on American soil after 9/11, to merging military and Federal law enforcement with local & state police to get the public a custom to a military presence on the streets of America.
Just the other day in Minneapolis the residents found out that Black Hawk military helicopters flying low over Minneapolis are part of an exercise being overseen by the U.S. Special Operations Command. Apparently only nut-jobs and wackos (according to debunkers) would ever be concerned that this kind of ongoing domestic based military training could be an attempt to prepare Americans for a state of martial law. The problem is when it turns out that the debunkers were wrong, when they enact martial law, it will then be too late to do much of anything.


http://www.infowars.com/black-hawk-helicopters-over-minneapolis-worry-residents/
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
Uhh...we have Blackhawks and twin rotors (CH-46s?) flying in our area all the time. Why is that? Because our terrain is very similar to that encountered in Middle East countries. Also because we have bases that they can fly to and from between the Southern border and places in CA. Excellent training...and the guys stuck in Yuma get to spend a night at another base.

Spec Ops? They do urban ops...maybe flying around cities and suburbs is a bit of training as well? You do realize there are reserve troops that fall into the Spec Ops community?

Last year before our tiny air show...AF F-16s flew across the main part of town. People were convinced the end had come...some claimed they flew at 100 ft at near supersonic speed. Not even close....over 1500 ft and only about 350 kts.

I'd imagine TSA guys, if offered some overtime pay to cover something would jump at the chance wouldn't they?

legislation to ban the TSA from the airports but backed down after the Feds threatened to use military force (a blockade of Texas airspace)

Any viable proof of that? You do realize that would be completely against the Constitution? Use of military forces in this manner I mean?
 

cheeple

Member
TSA was there at a Paul Ryan event also, they are everywhere, I dont even go to Pier 39 in SF anymore cause they are there sometimes patting people down, no one refuses since they've been indoctrinated by the Federal Board of Education to submit to gov't authority even if it's unconstitutional.
whats funny is according to the new FBI Definition of rape TSA are serial rapists

[URL="http://www.naturalnews.com/034354_FBI_rape_definition.html"]"Rape" is: [/URL]...penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim."

And they do penetrate women vaginaly, then they threaten them with a $500,000 lawsuit for defamation when they report it by blog.

Nearing the end of this violation, I sobbed even louder as the woman, FOUR TIMES, stuck the side of her gloved hand INTO my vagina, through my pants. Between my labia. She really got up there. Four times. Back right and left, and front right and left. In my vagina. Between my labia. I was shocked -- utterly unprepared for how she got the side of her hand up there. It was government-sanctioned sexual assault.


And dont even think about bringing a couple Silver coins with you

The worse has got to be TSA Agent Harold Rodman who flashes his badge to a 37 year old woman then proceeds to rape and Sodomize her as reported on Mainstream news ABC7

I could post stories like this all day but every story here will just get rationalized as being for the greater good.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Why is the TSA presence unconstitutional? I'm no TSA fan,I think it's all security theater, but is it the presence itself that is unconstitutional, or the things that they do (grope pat-downs?)
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
Right....sure that happened. That was in a blog from over a year ago...and have we heard anything since? Personally I don't fly much since I don't travel far enough to make it cost effective. But my SIL and wife do...and they have never had any issues. Have you?

Second link "via infowars" is of course suspect...but basically he was questioned. "why are you carrying coins?" A few answers and he's on his way. You find that repulsive somehow?

You last link is no different than a mall security guard who did the same thing. Bad apples in every barrel.
 

cheeple

Member
Why is the TSA presence unconstitutional? I'm no TSA fan,I think it's all security theater, but is it the presence itself that is unconstitutional, or the things that they do (grope pat-downs?)

TSA is unconstitional on many levels but I'll list a few

1. A Federal court has ruled that TSA Naked Scans are unconstitutional, and just for you I did a little extra searching looking for a "credible" source, not sure how you feel about Forbes
2. They have Illegitimate authority to detain people, refuse a radiation scan and you will be detained and questioned without the constitutional right to have an attorney present.
3. TSA uses racial profiling but not in the way you may think, sure a man with Arab features may set off a red flag but what they consider to be a bigger terrorist threat is anyone with an American Flag, or even worse a Gadsen flag, they view anyone with any type of Liberty countenance as a threat.
4. Everyday they break the 4th Amendment you can see this video by Patriot Judge Napolitano
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95FjNosyp-0
I want to get this response up, I can give you more examples later if you want.
 

cheeple

Member
Right....sure that happened. That was in a blog from over a year ago...and have we heard anything since? Personally I don't fly much since I don't travel far enough to make it cost effective. But my SIL and wife do...and they have never had any issues. Have you?

Second link "via infowars" is of course suspect...but basically he was questioned. "why are you carrying coins?" A few answers and he's on his way. You find that repulsive somehow?

You last link is no different than a mall security guard who did the same thing. Bad apples in every barrel.

thats exactly what I thought would happen, everything gets rationalized, we dont have to explain why we have a few silver coins nor do we have to divulge the value, silver eagles are legally valued at $1.00 each.

and look at the standard we have for government workers, a man uses his authority to rape and sodomize a woman and you call him just a "bad apple".
 

cheeple

Member
Any viable proof of that? You do realize that would be completely against the Constitution? Use of military forces in this manner I mean?

You say that as if the Constitution is still recognized by the govt.
1.Law Abiding citizens unconstitutionally disarmed during Katrina violation of the 2nd amendment
2 American citizens killed without due process of the law Violation of the 4th amendment
3. NDAA iand indefinate detention violation of the 1st and 5th amendment
4. Only gold and Silver may be used as legal tender, therefore Fiat currency is a violation of the 9th amendment
5. We can only enter into a treaty with another Country or government, our affiliation with the United Nations is a violation of the 10th amendment.

I could go on and give alot more examples, this is all just from memory.
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
look at the standard we have for government workers, a man uses his authority to rape and sodomize a woman and you call him just a "bad apple".

Well Yes....I do. There have been Police, Navy, Marines, Sheriffs, etc etc that have done the same thing (as well as mall security guards)....they are indeed bad apples.

He didn't use his authority....he intimidated someone with a badge and uniform.

Sure...Silver Eagles are $1...can you buy one for that? Any person carrying relatively large quantities of precious metal (coins, jewelery, bullion) would be questioned. That was true 20 yrs ago (though not domestically...I admit).
 

cheeple

Member
He didn't use his authority....he intimidated someone with a badge and uniform.
LOL!!!!

Sure...Silver Eagles are $1...can you buy one for that? Any person carrying relatively large quantities of precious metal (coins, jewelery, bullion) would be questioned.

The point is you dont have to report anything unless it's over $10,000 USD, if someone wants to carry $600 in silver coinage which works out to be around 20 1 ounce coins or in other words $20, now this is the TSA if you refuse you will be taken into a room and detained, questioned, if you ask for a lawyer and still refuse you will never able to fly again.
 

AJA

New Member
An Address to The United States House of Representatives by The Honorable Ron Paul - Sorry Mr. Franklin, we're all democrats now: http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=297&Itemid=60

I thought you guys might find this interesting. I'll post more later.



Adding this - Ron Paul speaking out against the TSA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQMuKMzijIM

And this - Ron Paul speaking out against the NDAA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=fvwp&v=1R-qKWMA_7M

Its really a shame that so many of our so called leaders are such cowards. Ron Paul is a hero.
 

GuitKitty

New Member

Do I really need to point out that managing to get your hand between a woman's labia through her clothes in no way constitutes penetration of the vagina? (If you're so inclined, look up the difference between the vulva and the vagina.) I don't want to be overly graphic here, but there is no way a TSA worker forced the side of her hand into a woman's vagina through her pants.

I am sorry that this woman felt violated, but to call this "penetration", and therefore rape as defined above, doesn't make sense. I guess you might make the argument that it constitutes an instance of abusive sexual contact, defined (quoted from the Federal Criminal Code here: http://www.musc.edu/vawprevention/research/sa.shtml) as: "when no sexual penetration actually occurred but when the intentional touching…of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person occurs." But that depends on the intentions of the TSA employee.
 

cheeple

Member
Do I really need to point out that managing to get your hand between a woman's labia through her clothes in no way constitutes penetration of the vagina?

Thats the FBI's definition of rape, not mine, and yes you can still penetrate an orifice even through clothes.
 

GuitKitty

New Member
Thats the FBI's definition of rape, not mine,.

Not to sound like a certain somebody, but I didn't say that was your definition. I said "as defined above". Maybe I should have said "as quoted above", just to be clear.

and yes you can still penetrate an orifice even through clothes.

Really? With the side of the hand? I'll concede that in certain rare circumstances which include the wearing of very loose clothing and particular underwear (again, not to get overly graphic) there can be vaginal penetration (though I don't see this happening with the side of someone's hand). Can you concede that you and/or she perhaps misunderstood the difference between the vulva and the vagina? It's a pretty common mistake/misstatement.

(Mick, please give me a heads-up if this is getting too off-topic and/or graphic. I'm trying to keep it PG.)
 

Charlie Primero

Active Member
>...legislation to ban the TSA from the airports but backed down after the Feds threatened to use military force (a blockade of Texas airspace)

Any viable proof of that? You do realize that would be completely against the Constitution? Use of military forces in this manner I mean?

That was an interesting little publicity stunt last year. You don't remember?

The Texas state legislature was considering a bill which would outlaw some types of TSA searches.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/28/texas-tsa-bill-pat-downs_n_885905.html

The Federals said they would stop allowing airliners to land at Texas airports if the bill passed. Alex Jones called out his supporters who protested at the Capitol Building to support the bill. The bill did not pass.

There was big hyperbole on both sides. That makes for good entertainment. Good rhetoric has been an art form for thousands of years.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hyperbole is the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech. It may be used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, but is not meant to be taken literally.

Hyperboles are exaggerations to create emphasis or effect. As a literary device, hyperbole is often used in poetry, and is frequently encountered in casual speech. An example of hyperbole is: "The bag weighed a ton". Hyperbole helps to make the point that the bag was very heavy, although it is not probable that it would actually weigh a ton.

In rhetoric, some other opposites of hyperbole are meiosis, litotes, understatement, and bathos (the 'letdown' after a hyperbole in a phrase).

While so unlikely as to border on silliness, it is true that the Federal government would ultimately have to use military force to stop flights in and out of Texas.
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
Sorry...should have been more clear. What US Military force did any of the things you describe?

1. Police chief made that decision and police carried it out. Unconstitutionally..I agree. Wasn't the military or the Federal Gov.

2. If you mean the drone killing of a US citizen who had taken up arms against US troops in the service of a foreign militia, he made that choice himself.

3. Hasn't been used and is being challenged.

4. Not sure how "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people" affects currency. Please explain.

5. Since almost every country has ratified the charter of the UN...it's basically a treaty between all those countries.
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
TSA is unconstitional on many levels but I'll list a few

1. A Federal court has ruled that TSA Naked Scans are unconstitutional, and just for you I did a little extra searching looking for a "credible" source, not sure how you feel about Forbes
2. They have Illegitimate authority to detain people, refuse a radiation scan and you will be detained and questioned without the constitutional right to have an attorney present.
3. TSA uses racial profiling but not in the way you may think, sure a man with Arab features may set off a red flag but what they consider to be a bigger terrorist threat is anyone with an American Flag, or even worse a Gadsen flag, they view anyone with any type of Liberty countenance as a threat.
4. Everyday they break the 4th Amendment you can see this video by Patriot Judge Napolitano
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95FjNosyp-0
I want to get this response up, I can give you more examples later if you want.


Not sure if this is the article you meant or not? http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmir...ules-that-tsa-naked-scans-are-constitutional/ That covers 1 and 2. If you refuse the scan...you have the option of a pat down. If you refuse that...you won't be catching your flight.

3 is in your mind. I doubt any TSA agents even know what a Gadsden flag is.

4 is his opinion.....other courts have ruled differently. See the article above.
 

cheeple

Member
Sorry...should have been more clear. What US Military force did any of the things you describe?

1. Police chief made that decision and police carried it out. Unconstitutionally..I agree. Wasn't the military or the Federal Gov.

If you agree it was unconstitutional just leave it at that.

2. If you mean the drone killing of a US citizen who had taken up arms against US troops in the service of a foreign militia, he made that choice himself.
Anwar al-Aulaqi never took up arms and wasn't killed for that, he was killed because he allegedly was giving "Motivating Speech", he was born in Denver and is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

3. Hasn't been used and is being challenged.

Once again if you agree NDAA is on the books and is unconstutional just agree it's unconstitutional


4. Not sure how "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people" affects currency. Please explain.

I refer to my previous statement "Only Gold and Silver shall be legal tender", it's still on the books


5. Since almost every country has ratified the charter of the UN...it's basically a treaty between all those countries.
Your rationalizing but I refer to my previous statement, we can only enter into a treaty with another Country or Government.
.
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
I asked you to explain how paper money violates the 9th amendment (what you referenced)....not some law that may still be on the books. And please tell me where anything about treaties is mentioned in the 10th?
As to taking up arms.....I meant that figuratively...not literally...
According to U.S. government officials, he was a senior talent recruiter and motivator who was involved with planning operations for the Islamist militant group al-Qaeda
.
 

cheeple

Member
Alright them...my mistake. Please explain how Fiat Currency Violates the 9th.

Only Congress has the authority to coin money and regulate the value there of, they signed over those rights which they dont even have the authority to do without amending the constitution, now the Federal Reserve which is not a branch of government regulates the value of our dollar, they can strengthen it or weaken it whenever they want and they set interest rates which benefit themselves, they are a Private for profit bank, that it not up for debate, the main shareholders of the federal reserve are not disclosed only a couple things are for sure JP Morgan, the Rockefellers, the Rothchilds and maybe a handful of Foreign Banks but thats it, Please read "The Creature from Jekyl Island".

Fiat Currency has no inherit value, it's not backed by Silver and Gold and has lost 98% of it's value since the inception of the Federal Reserve in 1913 taking us off the Gold Standard and devaluing our money through inflation. This system of Fiat currency imposed on us by a handful of elite bankers is debt based, every single dollar you have was created out of debt, which is why we can never pay down the debt, it would crush the dollar through deflation, the only other option is to keep printing the money and crush the dollar through inflation, there is no win here, when it's time for the Govt to pay the interest it owes to the federal reserve where does it get the money? more debt has to be created in order to simply pay the interest on the debt, so what happens the next month when it's time to pay the interest payment? they HAVE to create more debt, I don't want to argue these principles, if you wont take my word for it, take it from my main man Thomas Jefferson....

[h=1]“The central bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the Principles and form of our Constitution. I am an Enemy to all banks discounting bills or notes for anything but Coin. If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered. ”[/h]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
Fine...I understand how you feel about the currency and the Fed........now...please answer the question....how does it violate the 9th?
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
 

cheeple

Member
Fine...I understand how you feel about the currency and the Fed........now...please answer the question....how does it violate the 9th?
Oh my bad, LOL!
Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution explicitly forbids the states from issuing "bills of credit" (paper or "fiat" money) or making anything but gold and silver coin legal "tender",
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
Your own link....and you didn't read it?

What part of "expressly forbids any state government (but not the federal government[63])" is unclear?

This is saying States cannot do these things.....

Perhaps if you had referenced Section 8...you might have something......but even then...do you expect members of Congress to actually run the presses?

How many more chances do you need to come up with something that shows our currency is unconstitutional?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Oh my bad, LOL!
Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution explicitly forbids the states from issuing "bills of credit" (paper or "fiat" money) or making anything but gold and silver coin legal "tender",

The key word there being "states", i.e. it does not apply to the federal government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articl...Constitution#Section_10:_Limits_on_the_States

And since none of the states are doing that, what's your point?
 

cheeple

Member
The key word there being "states", i.e. it does not apply to the federal government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articl...Constitution#Section_10:_Limits_on_the_States

And since none of the states are doing that, what's your point?

You gotta be kidding me, States do not have the right to have their own currencies, the states have an obligation to only allow legal tender in their state issued by the federal govt, this is a weights and measures issue the founding fathers put in place so that no Fiat Currency would ever be coined by the Federal Government. Every single State was supposed to refuse it.

 

cheeple

Member
Notice the text you quote says "but not the federal government".

keep reading

but not the federal government[63]) from "making a tender" (i.e., authorizing something that may be offered in payment[64]) of any type or form of money to meet any financial obligation,[65] unless that form of money is coins made of gold or silver.


Every word is important, even the fate of the 2nd amendment as the courts interpreted it hanged on a comma.
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
In cases like this....I take the entire sentence/paragraph/statement and eliminate anything in parentheses...then read it for the root meaning.



States may not exercise certain powers reserved for the federal government: they may not enter into treaties, alliances or confederations, grant letters of marque or reprisal, coin money or issue bills of credit. Furthermore, no state may make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts, which expressly forbids any state government from "making a tender" of any type or form of money to meet any financial obligation, unless that form of money is coins made of gold or silver.


Notice the use of the different terms "coin" and "make". Coin would be "produce" and make would be "authorize" the way I read it. Nothing here says that the only form of legal tender is gold or silver. All it says is not only can't States produce their own money or enter treaties etc...they can't make laws saying some item or product can be used to pay debts...puka shells for instance...or goats...or crops.
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
It's quite clear, fiat currency is unconstitutional as it is not coined with the backing of Gold and Silver.

Well....no it's not quite clear....it's just what certain groups of people believe to be clear. The courts appear to disagree. Do you have anything to back up your claim that it's unconstitutional? If not...then it is just your personal belief. Perhaps TJ might agree with you...I'm sure there are others that do as well.....it does not mean it's a fact.
 

cheeple

Member
In cases like this....I take the entire sentence/paragraph/statement and eliminate anything in parentheses...then read it for the root meaning.

Notice the use of the different terms "coin" and "make". Coin would be "produce" and make would be "authorize" the way I read it. Nothing here says that the only form of legal tender is gold or silver. All it says is not only can't States produce their own money or enter treaties etc...they can't make laws saying some item or product can be used to pay debts...puka shells for instance...or goats...or crops.

Puka Shells, Goats, and Crops are barter items and legal, It's quite clear only Gold and Silver are legal tender.

It's ok to agree, sheesh just let the chips fall where they may.
 

cheeple

Member
Well....no it's not quite clear....it's just what certain groups of people believe to be clear. The courts appear to disagree. Do you have anything to back up your claim that it's unconstitutional? If not...then it is just your personal belief. Perhaps TJ might agree with you...I'm sure there are others that do as well.....it does not mean it's a fact.



I have no opinion, The constitution says only Gold and Silver are legal tender.
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
They are indeed barter items...I was using them as examples.....the States cannot decree that a goat is an acceptable form of payment for a debt....but if both buyer and seller agree...that's another story.


You said it again "It's quite clear only Gold and Silver are legal tender"....but have nothing of proof other than your belief of that. Maybe you should just throw IMO on your statement...because thats all it is, IMO....lol.

I'm not sure if you are asking me to agree with you on your concept, but multiple court cases (and my own opinion) say it is incorrect.


The Constitution is actually written pretty simply compared to the current laws based on it. Of course the wording and grammar is a bit different from what people would say now...but it doesn't affect the meaning. Please...show me anywhere in it that says.....legal tender must be gold or silver. An entire amendment might only be a few sentences.... some of the most basic rights are only one. It should say in there somewhere that the only legal tender for payment of debts will be gold or silver. No mention of states or banks or anything else...just those basic words written in the language of the day.
 

cheeple

Member
They are indeed barter items...I was using them as examples.....the States cannot decree that a goat is an acceptable form of payment for a debt....but if both buyer and seller agree...that's another story.


You said it again "It's quite clear only Gold and Silver are legal tender"....but have nothing of proof other than your belief of that. Maybe you should just throw IMO on your statement...because thats all it is, IMO....lol.

I'm not sure if you are asking me to agree with you on your concept, but multiple court cases (and my own opinion) say it is incorrect.


The Constitution is actually written pretty simply compared to the current laws based on it. Of course the wording and grammar is a bit different from what people would say now...but it doesn't affect the meaning. Please...show me anywhere in it that says.....legal tender must be gold or silver. An entire amendment might only be a few sentences.... some of the most basic rights are only one. It should say in there somewhere that the only legal tender for payment of debts will be gold or silver. No mention of states or banks or anything else...just those basic words written in the language of the day.

I already showed you, only gold and silver may be used as legal tender.
how can you interpret that any differently?

This is like the anti 2a left who tell me the 2nd amendment only applies to government recognized State Militia.
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
No...you haven't shown anything, because no where in the Constitution is that stated. You just lifted certain phrases or explanatory statements, just like I can quote you like this...

the 2nd amendment only applies to government recognized State Militia.

I agree that that statement is wrong, and courts have upheld my opinion, but there are still people that hold it to be true.


Ok...I'm done with this debate...
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
cheeple, I think your problem here is that you feel your own personal interpretation of the constitution is somehow more valid than that which has been hammered out, refined, and updated in the courts over 200 years.

Constitutional case law IS THE LAW.
 

cheeple

Member
cheeple, I think your problem here is that you feel your own personal interpretation of the constitution is somehow more valid than that which has been hammered out, refined, and updated in the courts over 200 years.

Constitutional case law IS THE LAW.

It has been considered "Legal" because it's never been contested but it's never been lawful, it's still on the books! no amendment has ever been made, anything can be made "legal" if some guy writes it on paper and it's signed by some other authority figure but that doesnt make it lawful.

Is indefinate detention lawful? it is legal but is it lawful according to our constitution?
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
gargamel Another Scandinavian "USO" (not really, surface feature, Sweden) Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 1
J Another sun path claim Flat Earth 4
Rory Debunked: "You must love yourself before you love another" - fake Buddha quote Quotes Debunked 7
Whitebeard Another suspected Novichok incident in Salisbury UK Current Events 4
P Another photographic anomaly [Long exposure of plane lights] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 2
Mick West Contrail Shadowing another Contrail Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 1
Trailblazer Another photoshopped chemtrail poster: Michael J Murphy Contrails and Chemtrails 1
derrick06 Another Google Moon Anomaly General Discussion 1
Charlesinsandiego Another triangular aircraft, this time in Kansas [B2 Bomber] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 25
JRBids (Another) secretly recorded video of a "chemtrail pilot" "confessing". Contrails and Chemtrails 5
Steve Bucky Rogers: Another anti-NWO domestic terrorist caught before the final act. Conspiracy Theories 6
HappyMonday Another Chemtrail Lawsuit Contrails and Chemtrails 11
Trigger Hippie Another TV Documentary Worth Viewing Contrails and Chemtrails 3
BlueCollarCritic Another Anti-CCW (C0ncealed Carry Weapon) Video Conspiracy Theories 1
Nighthawk Another site Contrails and Chemtrails 0
lamentiraestaahifuera.com Another one about chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 6
F Example of a Boeing 737 "Tic Tac" (video) UFOs and Aliens 9
BlueCollarCritic Federal Gov Illegal Actvity Example #37 - Violation Of Federal Contracts 23% Rule Conspiracy Theories 4

Related Articles

Top