Stevens County Sheriff Duputy Schwimm ignores drug pickups & deliveries on unoccupied parcel across from us/Guarded by LJ- warrant for his arrest 2014!


R,
Post this:
This unoccupied parcel is a drug pickup destination….
Sani Cans up to 3 times a week in & out!
Motorhomes, boats, kyaks/canoes on top of SUV’s
Septic tanks full of drugs produced here around me, picked up for distribution for the “Protected” drug cartels & Lucifarian Pedofile Global Drug Mafias/Shadow Govts.
Just 5 minutes ago, Huge U-Haul up Orient Cutoff Rd, like a few days ago “as big as a house” FedX moving van, came down two whole days later…
Definitely not tourists!
UPS & FedX continues pickups like clock work daily, far into the night!
Small planes flying in…
Trains to & from Canada day & night running constantly!
Port of Entry 395 open 8:am to 8:pm….who is letting everything through?
Avista boom trucks doing pickups/Deliveries photographed Crack Shack Stanley’s & for Kettle Falls 5, retired California Cops in Colville & Grand Forks, BC.
Motive for murder…intent, access, opportunity using dirty electricity Avista/Dickey’s/Greve & co-conspiritors!

About Looking Back Woman-Suzanne Dupree

Tetuwan Lakota scholar, educator, historian, Sun Dance participant, Cannunpa carrier, cultural & spiritual preservationist, journalist-writer and fraud investigator.
This entry was posted in SPIRITUAL AWAKENING. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Stevens County Sheriff Duputy Schwimm ignores drug pickups & deliveries on unoccupied parcel across from us/Guarded by LJ- warrant for his arrest 2014!

  1. Auto corrected…
    Suppose to read Stevens County Duputy Sheriff Schwinn ignores drug trafficking & pickup destination!

    Like

  2. “We ask the police to do too much,” Obama said yesterday, “and we ask too little of ourselves.”
    July 13, 2016

    ‘We Expect Too Much of the Police’

    “We ask the police to do too much,” Obama said yesterday, “and we ask too little of ourselves.”

    It’s the only sentence I found digestible within Obama’s speech at the memorial service of the five slain Dallas police officers. But, of course, I probably interpreted it a little differently than Obama meant it.

    Nevertheless, it’s true. We do. We expect too much of the police.

    We pay officers of the law to, simply, enforce the law. Nothing less. Nothing more. And that’s precisely what they do. They enforce the law. At every chance they get.

    Whether it’s another man accosted and killed for selling cigarettes on the sidewalk (Garner), or another accosted and killed for selling CDs and reportedly having a gun (Sterling), or yet another accosted for a broken tail-light and killed for… what exactly, I’m not sure (Castile).

    The officers risk life and limb not to keep citizens safe, or protect their lives, liberty or property. Officers risk their lives to enforce the law.

    They do what they have to to enforce the law. Because most police officers, it seems, are led to believe that blindly enforcing the law is the same as maintaining peace and order.

    The law, then, is where we begin to strike at the root of the problem. Just behind your friendly neighborhood jackboot, there it is. The law. A code of conduct backed by the barrel of a gun. Mostly arbitrary guidelines of how a society should function made visible by barbaric iron-fisted tactics unfit for a truly civilized society.

    Police are not paid to be moralizers. They’re not paid to step up on a soapbox and pound their fists at the nation’s injustices. They are paid, simply, to make sure citizens conform to what the law says. They are paid to get citizens to “stop resisting” the long arms of lawmakers. And that’s what they do.

    “The law perverted!” Bastiat wrote in what must be one of the most profound pamphlets ever penned on the subject. “And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish! If this is true, it is a serious fact, and moral duty requires me to call the attention of my fellow-citizens to it.”

    Bastiat defined the law as “the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.”

    We can all agree that each individual has the right to protect his or her person from harm. Nobody can take your kidney away, for example, simply because Bobby, some young ski-bum in Saskatchewan, had his snatched away by an evergreen in a third-attempt frontflip.

    Even those who spout “property is theft” from their dorm rooms would agree that Bobby has no right to take their kidney away by force, no matter how badly he needed it.

    That kidney is yours. It is your private property. And you have the right to defend your property from those who would try to steal it from you. (I pity the fool!)

    The proper role of government, then, if there is one at all, is to defend your right to life and property.

    That’s it. Nothing less. Nothing more.

    “If a nation were founded on this basis,” Bastiat writes, “it seems to me that order would prevail among the people, in thought as well as in deed. It seems to me that such a nation would have the most simple, easy to accept, economical, limited, non-oppressive, just, and enduring government imaginable — whatever its political form might be.

    “Under such an administration,” Bastiat goes on, “everyone would understand that he possessed all the privileges as well as all the responsibilities of his existence. No one would have any argument with government, provided that his person was respected, his labor was free, and the fruits of his labor were protected against all unjust attack. When successful, we would not have to thank the state for our success. And, conversely, when unsuccessful, we would no more think of blaming the state for our misfortune than would the farmers blame the state because of hail or frost. The state would be felt only by the invaluable blessings of safety provided by this concept of government.

    “It can be further stated that,” Bastiat adds, “thanks to the non-intervention of the state in private affairs, our wants and their satisfactions would develop themselves in a logical manner. We would not see poor families seeking literary instruction before they have bread. We would not see cities populated at the expense of rural districts, nor rural districts at the expense of cities. We would not see the great displacements of capital, labor, and population that are caused by legislative decisions. The sources of our existence are made uncertain and precarious by these state-created displacements. And, furthermore, these acts burden the government with increased responsibilities.”

    The lawmakers, of course, are more than happy to oblige our desires to control one another’s actions through the creation of new laws. New laws legitimize the lawmakers and make them feel important. Plus, unlike us plebeians, the lawmakers are normally immune to the blowback of the laws they create. So, for them, it’s a positive-sum game.

    The blowback, though, even in its subtlest form, is unsettling. It’s the nervous tension we feel as our right to self-determination drains from our bodies the moment a cop pulls up behind us. It’s the uneasiness we feel while we pull our vehicles to the side of the road, knowing we are powerless if things go south.

    Even if the cop is a crook, dangerous, or mentally unstable, he is empowered by the laws we beg our lawmakers to make. Our only “proper” role in this relationship is not to resist. It’s true that have a right to be silent, but there’s no right to safety from harm at the hands of a public servant who is enforcing the law, however unjust that law might be.

    And then, on the other end of this absurd spectrum, we have humans who put their lives on the line to make sure that other humans smoke the right plants, buckle the right straps, and don’t collect rainwater in their yards or feed the homeless.

    For what? Not for our safety. Not for our freedom. But for the whims of the law.

    To dig further, we invite Joey Clark, contributor at FEE.org, to explain why pedaling back our reliance on lawmakers is the key to eradicating the Police State.

    Read on…

    Over-Policing is Rooted in Over-Reliance on Politics

    Following the July 7, 2016 shooting of several police officers in Dallas, DPD Police Chief David Brown has been thrust into the national spotlight, and understandably so. Chief Brown not only has aremarkably tragic personal story — in 2010 his 27-year-old son was shot by Dallas police on Father’s Day seven weeks after he became chief of the DPD — the reforms he has advanced during his tenure as head of the Dallas police have been praised by the likes of Radley Balko as a “national model for community policing.”

    So, whether Chief David Brown likes it or not, he has become the face of law enforcement in the on-going debate over police brutality. And yesterday, he flipped the script of the debate in a way not often suggested by police unions or civil rights activists, saying,“We’re asking cops to do too much in this country. We are. We’re just asking us to do too much. Every societal failure, we put it off on the cops to solve.”

    Brown went on to say since there is not enough “funding” for mental health or drug addiction, the cops are expected to solve the issue. Failing schools and broken homes are supposed to be remedied by the cops too, Brown suggested, as he called for “other parts of our democracy” to help and “not put that burden all on law enforcement.”

    I welcome Chief Brown’s suggestion with a qualifier. Indeed, the police are doing “too much” in this country.

    Yet, I worry Brown along with many civil right activists are caught in a catch-22. The more they call on our democracy to “do something” and pass more laws, the more the burden will necessarily fall upon the police to enforce such laws.

    For instance, when the Congressional Black Caucuscalled for gun control after the shootings in Louisiana, Minnesota, and Dallas, did they somehow think their calls for Congressional action would lead to fewer intrusive actions by the police?

    How will passing more laws that make potential criminals out of more Americans ease the tension between police and citizenry? How will stripping Americans of more of their freedoms and wealth to fund government programs lead to greater freedom for the people?

    More Laws, More Violence

    Thus, though the police may be the face of law and order, behind their blue eyes rest the marching orders of politicians riddled with this presumption — that the law is the best tool for bringing order to a society facing complex problems.

    Let’s not give the politicians too much credit though. They, of course, are elected by “the people” to presume as much.

    As Mencken wrote, “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard,” and though I do not think the common people deserve to be victims of police brutality, I am not surprised they have become the victims of their “representative” government.

    Indifferent to freedom, the people have forged their own chains and have given “themselves” the reins by empowering their government and its agents.

    That said, I’d like to amend Chief Brown’s statement about the cops being asked to do too much and solve every societal problem. More than relying on the cops, we are relying too much on politics to solve our problems.

    Every societal failure, real or merely perceived, is expected to be remedied by some new law or political program. Whether on the issue of drugs, health, education, broken families, or broken windows, the American people seem unwilling to voluntarily solve such societal problems themselves when they are more than capable of doing so. They would rather rely on political action and new laws leading to more enforcement. They are in no mood to spare the populace the proverbial rod of authority, yet we seem spoiled all the same.

    Somehow the people have forgotten the law is not some benign tool or harmless guideline for the social engineering of society. They have forgotten that the law is always backed by the threat of force, and when a person understandably resists the law, even an unjust law, that person will most likely suffer and potentially die for upsetting “the will of the people” as carried out by law enforcement.

    An Over-Politicized Society

    I contend if we continue to drift in this direction, becoming more and more obsessed with finding political solutions to our societal failures, the less and less moral, prosperous, and free our society will be. Morality, prosperity, and liberty cannot be fostered at the point of a gun draped in democratic demands. Such things can only come from within the hearts and minds of real, flesh-and-blood individuals on the ground, acting to build family, fellowship, and community based upon enthusiastic individual consent.

    Once family, fellowship, and community come to be represented by the government then what is sure to follow is the folly of state power: a permission-based society full of entitled masters and passive serfs where what is true, just, and beautiful takes a back seat to the trappings of state power and those who wield it.

    In such a society, consent is not enthusiastic and individual but passive and general to the point where violence becomes institutionalized, opaque, and ultimately self-destructive for the vast majority of the population such violence is supposedly meant to defend. In taking up our causes, the state transforms our personal, explicit, and voluntary responsibilities to one another into general, vague, and outright coercive duties, hammering our natural “plowshares” into swords to be wielded by those with state power.

    This is no petty point, for when we regard serving our fellow man as a personal responsibility, we posit a society of born-free individuals who are equal under the law and must help one another through voluntary aid and association. On the contrary, when we see our obligation to serve our fellow man as coercive state duty, we posit a society of rulers and subjects—rulers who need to instill in their subjects a “sense of virtue” by violently imposing whatever duties the state, as demanded by the people, deems desirable.

    And in such a society, the cops will certainly be asked to do too much.

    Positive and progressive change will not come from passively consenting at the ballot box or raucously marching to the sound of demagogues’ marching orders and laments. Change must come from within, person to person, day by day, helping to build the beautiful mosaic of community piece by piece.

    So let’s remove the burden from the police and the impositions on the populace at the same time by repealing all laws that do not explicitly defend life and property. After that, there will still be many problems to solve, but at least we will then know most, if not all, societal failures are for us as individuals to solve and not the province of the state.

    Like

  3. Reblogged this on Looking Back Woman-Suzanne Dupree blog and commented:

    A Global Drug/Pedofile mafia exposed…
    Controlled by Illuminati Lucifarians NWO crime families Rockefeller/Rothschild/Oppenheimer…Gold/Oil//Diamonds!
    With it appears warrants for the arrests of Soros, Obama, Clinton-Bush Crime families…the Illuminati, themselves who control the World & World Finance…with 12 Trillion missing from Federal Reserve, & Bernakie threatening Congress “No Audit” or we will Collapse the Global Economy!
    More lawsuits against Goldman Sachs & JP Morgan/Chase 2004-2007 fraud….causing the economic crisis no one has received from & only the 10% Elitists made money off!
    Treason & Impeachment is on the lips of the World…
    Obama & co-conspiritors near complete agenda to destroy America & the World for the NWO!

    Like

  4. Pingback: Evil Prevails when the Faithful to God/CREATOR fails to Recognize Evil & Act to DESTROY It & the Men & Women behind It! UPDAYED July 16, 2016 Read it ASAP! | Looking Back Woman-Suzanne Dupree blog

  5. Reblogged this on richardboydenreport and commented:
    Here is what the DEA is IGNORING along with the other FED COMPLICITY outfits… Right Jodie Underwood…MISS DEA LIAR!

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s