Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Frodo Lives!

Bob Wenzel wonders: "Will America's young people put Ron Paul in the White House?"

He quotes a note I wrote him about the age breakdown in two new state-wide polls of Montana and Oregon. Ron Paul got a solid 10% in both polls, a standing that seems to hold true across the entire country. Last week, a Dick Morris poll placed Paul at 12% nationwide. After I wrote to Bob suggesting he inspect the fascinating age breakdown in both polls, he posted the numbers, which I reprint here:
Oregon breakdown:
18 to 29: 20%
30 to 45: 15%
46 to 65: 11%
Older than 65: 3%

Montana breakdown:
18 to 29: none polled
30 to 45: 15%
46 to 65: 8%
Older than 65: 10%
Strangely, the Montana poll failed to include any voters in the 18-29 age group, but he scores double his statewide numbers among those 18-29 polled in Oregon. What do these numbers mean? Considering Paul also has notably higher poll numbers he gets even among those 30-45, it seems safe to call him the candidate of American youth. Young people overwhelmingly support Ron Paul for president.

Clearly many of these young people are realizing the danger of centralized power. The Lord of the Rings movies, surely the only exposure many in this digital age have had to Tolkien's brilliantly anti-socialist tome, did a good job illustrating the value of decentralization. I believe it has dawned on many young people today that it's best not to give the ring of power to a single all-powerful king.

Not surprisingly, those on the dole support Sauron's centralized state. It is notable that the only place where Paul's numbers are significantly lacking is among those receiving Medicare (for which one must be 65) and those on Social Security (which begins at 62). What this tells us is that if we want to get him elected, then those who will inherit this country absolutely must turn out to vote him in far greater numbers than those who gave us this country's problems.

I said as much to Lew Rockwell, who also posted about the polls. In response, he wrote: "Yes, but young people do not, on balance, vote." Perhaps, Lew, perhaps. What do you think, America's youth? Will you fail to hand the White to President Paul?

The good news is that Frodo lives! Ron Paul is trudging towards Mount Doom to destroy the ring of power for our sake. He'll return power to the Congress and, even more importantly, return power to the states. Middle-Earth may have been allied, but Gondor, Rohan and the Shire were all sovereign states.

It was Sauron, after all, who sought to absorb the diverse people groups of Middle-Earth into the uniformly drab national culture of Mordor. He did this by trying to unite the land into an empire governed by a strong centralized power and policed by orcs and trolls intent on telling everyone what they couldn't do.

Thursday, June 16, 2011

Canadians rampage after losing hockey game

This is apparently the level of civil unrest to be expected when the Vancouverites' home team loses a major hockey game. Thousands rioting in the streets, smashing banks, going toe-to-toe with cops without consideration for the repercussions, setting fires in the streets and torching the vehicles of the authoritarians.

What will they do if runaway inflation means they can no longer buy food? When trucks stop trucking and welfare checks can't be cashed, how bad will the violence get then?



See the rest of the photos (there's plenty of them) here. Thanks to Robert Wenzel.

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Romney: "Return Afghanistan to the Taliban"

Romney wants to give Afghanistan back to the Taliban. Meanwhile, Ron Paul realizes that the Constitution gave control of the military to a civilian commander-in-chief, not the military generals. In the June 13 Republican debate, Romney had this to say about his foreign policy:
Romney: It's time for us to bring our troops home as soon as we possibly can, consistent with the word that comes to our generals that we can hand the country over to the Taliban military in a way that they're able to defend themselves.
Paul, on the other hand, understands the definition of "command." As president, he would be in authority over the generals, not subject to waiting upon their go ahead. That's why he responded:
I served five years in the military. I’ve had a little experience. I’ve spent a little time over in the Pakistan/Afghanistan area, as well as Iran. But I wouldn’t wait for my generals. I’m the commander in chief.

I make the decisions. I tell the generals what to do. I’d bring them home as quickly as possible. And I would get them out of Iraq as well. And I wouldn’t start a war in Libya. I’d quit bombing Yemen. And I’d quit bombing Pakistan. I’d start taking care of people here at home because we could save hundreds of billions of dollars.

Sunday, May 29, 2011

Picture a private industry delivery-person doing this

Like American cops, postal workers apparently don't get fired for shit:
The incident happened last month at a home in southeast Portland and a neighbor, Don Derfler, captured the man in the act with his camera.

Derfler had been waiting for his babysitter when he saw his mailman acting odd at his neighbor's house across the street. The postal worker then pulled down his pants and that's when Derfler began snapping pictures.

"We trust people like the postal service and meter readers and people of that nature," Derfler told us when we interviewed him in April. "To come on to our property and to defecate - it's just wrong."
The postal employee was given a temporary unpaid vacation before "a decision was made" to allow him to continue delivering packages on "a different route."

Gone on a signing spree

Posted by Obama's Autopen at its Twitter account:
"Woke up with a pounding headache, TOTUS [Teleprompter of the US] is AWOL, and a stack of kill orders I don't recall signing on the floor. What happened last night?"

The framers didn't use robo-pens

Congressman Tom Graves, a freshman representative from Georgia, is hopefully flying his true colors by demonstrating he knows how to read, unlike other American politicians. He's expressed curiousity over how Obama managed to misinterpret the plain speech of the U.S. Constitution, which mandates as the final requirement for enacting legislation: "Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a law, be presented to the President of the United States; if he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it."

Concerning Obama's robo-signing of the Patriot Act, the Los Angeles Times reports:
That didn't sit well with Rep. Tom Graves (R-Ga.), who is fairly sure the Framers didn't use autopens. He wrote a letter to Obama Friday asking him to cite the legal authority for using an automated pen instead of the real thing.

"I thought it was a joke at first, but the president did, in fact, authorize an autopen to sign the Patriot Act extension into law," Graves said in a statement Friday. "Consider the dangerous precedent this sets. Any number of circumstances could arise in the future where the public could question whether or not the president authorized the use of an autopen. For example, if the president is hospitalized and not fully alert, can a group of aggressive Cabinet members interpret a wink or a squeeze of the hand as approval of an autopen signing?  I am very concerned about what this means for future presidential orders, whether they be signing bills into law, military orders, or executive orders."

For its part, the White House insisted that the automated signing was necessary to avoid any lapse in the Patriot Act's investigative provisions.

"I have requested that President Obama provide a detailed explanation of his authority to delegate this responsibility to a surrogate, whether it is human, machine, or otherwise,” Graves said.
When will Congressman Graves pursue this line of thought further by inquiring how the constitutional phrase "the Congress shall have power… to declare war" can possibly be interpreted as permitting that power to be either delegated by Congress or commandeered from it?

Silver-spooned emperors simulate servants

After Obama (the first president whose name rhymes with Alabama) got the year wrong — by a full three years — when signing Westminster Abbey's guestbook and flubbed his toast to the queen by giving it as "God save the Queen" played, he still found time this week to pose for a photo-op with British PM David Cameron as the two "helped to grill and serve a range of BBQ fare." It appears the president successfully managed to fulfill the requirements of that task — "stand here and hold this." Yet while one wonders just how much of the meal for "150 military guests" these pair of jokers actually cooked, it's certainly a relief to learn the heads of state of the two most domineering nations in modern history qualify to staff the back kitchen of a McDonald's franchise.

The good news is that others see through the charade. In The Telegraph, British commentator Peter Osborne concludes "this week's visit by Barak Obama has been a national embarrassment" while offering some encouragement:
So while this week’s formalities looked antique, we actually witnessed something that is wholly contemporary. When the relationship between Britain and the United States really was the hinge on which the world was constructed – think Churchill and Roosevelt, Macmillan and Kennedy, Reagan and Thatcher – nobody needed grand state ceremonial occasions to make the point. Now that it matters very much less, we do.
A perfect illustration of "government efficiency" is that it takes two to feed one.
Although opting out of the state is what we ought to do, one should never ignore it, but rather ever ridicule it. As Obama clowns about the world on his taxpayer-funded campaign junket, it is only correct to question the very necessity of these "official state visits," especially as this one is "estimated to cost in the region of £10m." That's a drop in the bucket compared to the officially projected $1.5 trillion budget deficit to be sure, yet hardly chump change.

Yet while American police brutalize American citizens, including veterans, for dancing on Memorial Day weekend and the ongoing collapse of the dollar continues to impoverish normal people, at least the state's leading enforcer has chosen to occupy himself elsewhere. His absence has encouraged fissures in the federal government's happy-face veneer, such as awkward announcement that the president uses a robo-pen to sign new legislation and even the genesis of a dancing revolution.

A USD Index chart shows a 15% loss in the dollar's value over the past 12 months.

Saturday, May 28, 2011

"Capital of the world police state"

Lew Rockwell comments on the use of police brutality against Dancemaster Kokesh and others, saying:
Protesters will always be brutalized in the capital of the world police state. Nothing good is to be expected from DC, let alone its self-worshiping religious memorabilia. Love liberty? Avoid the Beltway like the plague it is. (Thanks to Sam)
You're welcome, Lew.

Also, Kokesh has asked people to send Drudge a news tip about the Youtube video so he will hopefully feature it over this Memorial Day weekend. Scroll down to view the lower-right where it says "Send News Tips to Drudge" and then please do just that.

Incidentally, this author heard one military supporter of Kokesh offer an awfully common sense perspective, saying: "The question is not, 'why would they dance at the jefferson memorial if they knew it was illegal?' the question is, 'why would the government pass a law banning dancing in a public place?'" In response to this, he quoted Henry David Thoreau, who said: "‎Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once?"

Obama's robo-pen "signs" renewed Patriot Act

To ensure there wasn't even a moment's lapse of its tyrannical bill, the feds robo-signed the renewal. At least, that's the peons have been told happened:
With Obama currently in France, the White House said the president would use an autopen machine that holds a pen and signs his actual signature. It is only used with proper authorization of the president. Minutes before the midnight deadline, the White House said Obama had signed the bill.

"The passion of our hearts will be raised with our fists!"

This Memorial Day, remember an American Marine who fights for true liberty. Adam Kokesh is an enemy of tyranny who has promised that he will never back down no matter "if it takes the last full measure of devotion." From the Revolution March of 2008, Dancemaster Kokesh speaks:
It has been said that when in the course of human events, an oppression so revolts its subjects, it becomes necessary to alter or abolish the means of that tyranny.

Is it that time when our Bill of Rights is defiled every day?

When our adventures abroad threaten our security at home?

When the Federal Reserve keeps our free nation enslaved by debt?

When the people of the world tremble under the thumb of corporate imperialism?

And now our nation is drifting dangerously from freedom to fascism.

So I have to ask, is it time?

The time is now, the threat is clear, the bands of tyranny are tightening around America, and it is our duty to resist!

As empowered patriots, let us take stock of our commitment to the ideals upon which this country is founded.

America without her freedoms is like a body without a soul. The challenge before the Freedom Movement is no less, than to bring about a revolution of values, inspire a renaissance of American politics, and breathe new life into the tortured body of our nation.

We will meet that challenge with courage and love, and as always, we the people, will prevail!

To rally the troops of the Revolutionary Army in the winter of 1776, Thomas Paine said,

"These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot, will in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered."

As Iraq Veterans Against the War, we are resisting an occupation that we once risked our lives for. We swore to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, but we found out the hard way that the greatest enemies of the Constitution are not to be found in the sands of some far off land, but rather right here at home!

We are your new winter soldiers and we are still defending America.

Gangmembers choke and arrest an American veteran

On Memorial Day weekend, U.S. Park Police assaulted peaceful, unarmed civilians for dancing within the Jefferson Memorial. After these thugs threatened dancers that they would "spend a week in jail" and refused to respond to respectful inquiries about what law dancing would violate, here's what they did:


Distributed by Adam Kokesh's "Adam Vs. The Man," the video linked above contains a couple of additional and much better camera views than the video linked by this author earlier. For instance, there are some closeups of the badged boy in bicycle shorts throwing American veteran Kokesh to the floor and choking him with gloved hands.

All of this prompts the question: why do enforcers in the District of Claptrap hate the Constitution, its freedoms and all that once made America great?

Bicycle cop choking resistance hero Kokesh.

Freedom of expression banned at Jefferson Memorial

Here's more background about the ban from another article concerning the arrest of Adam Kokesh and others for the crime of dancing in the wrong location:
In April 2008, a group of less than 20 young people came to the memorial as part of a flash mob where they would dance to music played through their headphones.

U.S. Park Police then told the dancers to leave, and eventually arrested one woman on misdemeanor charges, Mary Oberwetter.

Oberwetter fought the charges in court, arguing that dancing was protected free speech, and noting that groups of noisy school children are routine at the memorial.

She lost that case, with the courts agreeing that the U.S. Park service has a duty to maintain decorum at the nation's monuments, and no demonstrations are allowed inside the monuments.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld the earlier decision.

The group that gathered at the monument Saturday was there in protest of the upheld ban.

"This is a police state"

Mere hours ago, Adam Kokesh (an honorably discharged Marine Corps veteran) and several others were arrested for silently dancing in the Jefferson Memorial. According to this source, here's the background:
A district court judge recently upheld a lower court ruling that dancing at the Thomas Jefferson Memorial in Washington, DC is illegal. As a result of the recent court ruling, disobedient dancers planned to gather at the monument today at noon, prepared to defy the judge’s ruling.
Kokesh and the others were immediately arrested upon beginning to dance. As police handcuffed the dancers while screaming at them, one cop body-slammed Kokesh onto the hard marble floor of the monument. A courageous videographer is then approached by an overgrown badged boy in bike shorts who snaps: "You're not allowed to video record in here… if you continue to record, you're going to be arrested." Watch the video:


These outlaw dancers are reportedly currently being held at Anacostia Station (District Five) located at 1901 Anacostia Drive SE, Washington, DC 20019, which has can be reached at 202-610-8703. Please bear in mind that calling in protest of their arrest, while admirable and recommended, may get you placed on a watch list.

Romney: "Shut up, sit down and let me drone"

"Save your opinions and act professionally and don't be argumentative with the candidate." That's what Eric Fehrnstrom, the plastic candidate's Traveling Press Secretary, told an AP reporter who was uppity enough to challenge Mitt Romney's claim that lobbyists are not helping run his campaign. Here is the video:


Lobbyist Kaufman has been deeply involved with Romney since 2005 and is definitely a Washington insider as reported here:
The chair of the Cape Cod National Seashore Park Advisory Committee, Ron Kaufam (sic), is helping our occasional Governor in his quest to follow George Bush at the White House. Mr. Kaufman is a lobbyist with close ties to the Bush administration, and he took control of the CCNSP Advisory Commission a year ago March, despite opposition from the Cape Cod environmental community and park supporters.

...Mega-lobbyist Ron Kaufman made a big connection when he married the sister of ex-lobbyist Andy Card, who became the present President Bush’s chief of staff. Both men are both from Holbrook MA. After Kaufman directed the campaign of the first President Bush, that president appointed him deputy White House personnel director.
If these attempts to silence and intimidate the slightest attempt at real journalism are the tactics witnessed from Romney in a primary, imagine the fascist methods he might employ as president. This man will not allow as negligible a thing as the press to interfere with conveying his unique vision for America, which as stated in the video is: "I'm going to Washington to make things happen… I'm going to Washington to help the American people, and that's what this campaign is all about."

Friday, May 27, 2011

Peeving Tom

Why won't Congressman Tom McClintock endorse Ron Paul for president? In 2008, Ron Paul endorsed McClintock's first congressional campaign, which he then won by only 1800 votes. The freshman congressman has since proven he possesses neither gratitude nor any real ideology of liberty. If otherwise, why would McClintock not demonstrate his bonafide belief in liberty by supporting Ron Paul's presidential campaign?

First he suggested Chris Christie would be a great candidate at a recent town-hall and now he says "it's a very good idea" for pro-bailout Congressman Paul Ryan to run. Linked at Hot Air is a National Review story featuring the congressman blowing hot air:
"It's a very good idea," says Rep. Tom McClintock (R., Calif.). "Paul Ryan would make an excellent candidate and an excellent president." If Democrats are intent on making the House Republican budget the central issue of the 2012 campaign, who better than that budget's author — and most capable defender — to be the GOP nominee? Other members certainly feel the same, McClintock said — you won't find too many Republicans with a negative opinion of Ryan — but he insisted there isn't a concerted effort among members to urge Ryan to get in the race. "I've not heard any rumors that he's seriously considering it," he said. "But I still think it's a pretty good idea."
Apparently McClintock can't quit jonesing after blowhards. People understandably love politicians capable of being succinct, but the problem with blunt-styled Ryan, just like Christie, is that he fails to grasp the comprehensive nature of liberty. As Ron Paul said on Chris Matthews' "Hardball" show a couple weeks ago: "Personal liberty, foreign policy and economic liberty - it's all one package."

McClintock and those like him, though, don't understand this and merely want to streamline the state to allow smooth business as usual. Under the budget proposed by Ryan, the feds would only cut spending over the same 10 year period from Obama's desired $46 trillion down to $40 trillion. As Rand Paul remarked: "The president adds, I think, 11 trillion to the gross debt and Ryan's plan adds eight trillion." The problem is that these congressmen have zero real interest in addressing the underlying cause of the American loss of liberty, which is the abject failure to restrain the federal government from crossing its constitutional boundaries. Because they lack a comprehensive ideology, they refuse to condemn the American empire, reexamine the existence of socialist swindles like Social Security and other entitlement programs, oppose the War on Drugs, rebuke police brutality or oppose the deliberate devaluation of the dollar.

Only when McClintock and those like him quit searching for accounting solutions to balance the books and begin questioning the system itself (which hasn't the slightest resemblance to a Constitutionally obedient system) should they be taken seriously by the liberty-minded. If McClintock is not a libertarian who confesses to the supreme power of individual thought over the holier-than-thou notion that a single anointed gang can plan with greater infallibly than millions of independent minds, then one can only conclude he accepts authoritarianism as the best solution. As this author stated exactly 10 days ago:
What is left to consider? Ron Paul is the most consistent person in the American Congress. He's proclaimed the exact same ideology of liberty for over 30 years. His book, Liberty Defined, paints a stark picture of what that ideology really means as it explicitly answers for liberty on 50 major issues. Whatever issues he might not have mentioned would be given an identical answer, as summed up in the introduction to his book: "Liberty means to exercise human rights in any manner a person chooses so long as it does not interfere with the exercise of the rights of others." Ron Paul is the only candidate who believes this. Either you agree with him or you don't, McClintock.
Update: Daniel Larison writes: "On many other issues apart from budget questions, Ryan has unformed or merely conventional views that he has hardly ever had to defend." On fiscal policy, Larison invokes Ryan's uncomfortable record, noting that "Ryan voted for the TARP… and he voted for Medicare Part D." As he puts it: "On the two biggest, most controversial votes of the last decade relating to the financial sector and entitlements, Ryan was on the wrong side, and if they are at all serious about fiscal responsibility many, perhaps most, conservatives would hold these votes against him if he ran. Compared to this, Mitt Romney’s health care liability is barely noticeable."

Why would Tom McClintock support a pro-bailout socialist for president? There's clearly a serious disconnect between the vacillating representative's mind and his mouth, as just over two months ago he harshly decried the anti-capitalist bailouts, saying:
Bailouts subsidize bad decisions and assure we get more of them… A bailout is the use of one person's earnings to pay for the bad decisions of another. The hundreds of billions of dollars we’ve lost to bailing out people’s past bad decisions (and the trillions of dollars we’ve placed at risk) pale in comparison with what we’re spending to encourage people to make bad decisions in the future.

Mindless violence in the national swamp

As mentioned yesterday in a post by this author, a pair of parasites in blue recently tore a man from his wheelchair, slammed his face into the pavement so that it was slick with his blood and then harassed those trying to film their criminal actions. This was done, said the tax-fed gorillas, because the wheelchair-bound man had "assaulted an officer." The video is well worth watching:


Update: This video clearly shows two police officers in the District of Claptrap physically pick up a man from his wheelchair and slam him face first onto the sidewalk. Well, this mealy-mouthed article from the Washington Post describes the incident thus:
The video begins with the man in the chair, two officers alongside. A few seconds later, all three have pitched forward and are prone. Still later, the officers are standing while the man remains on the ground, with off-camera voices appearing to express dismay.
By their own admission, police proved the aggressors, an enlightening fact the weasel-brained Martin Weil manages to report:
In the statement, Metro said transit police on routine patrol at the U Street Metrorail station in Northwest Washington on Thursday spotted the man in a wheelchair "drinking an alcoholic beverage."

When asked to leave, the man refused, Metro said. The officers tried to issue a citation, but he "refused to comply." The officers then told him that he would be placed under arrest, and he resisted, the statement said.
Having spent some time in Dublin, this author avows that none of the men who loll about that city's streets openly guzzling bottles of whiskey appeared in need of arrest. All of Europe handles public drinking in a similarly relaxed fashion. On street cars, national and international trains, city streets and in public parks, countless people casually consume alcoholic beverages of all sorts. The failure of European police forces to crack open the skulls of the physically disabled — or the fully bodied, for that matter — for the harmless act of drinking a beverage of their choice has so far not caused the downfall of European society.

Not looking away

For those concerned about consciously reshaping their body language to be more confident, assertive and open, Vox Day has some eye-opening remarks about how to handle eye contact with other people. If you dislike being a downtrodden type with downcast eyes and bowed head, you may find his post helpful, as it states:
Deltas, Gammas and Omegas habitually avoid eye contact, especially with the opposite sex. Alphas, on the other hand, tend to turn it into a dominance game. Therefore, to communicate high status to the opposite sex, it is important for men to not look away when a woman happens to notice them looking at her. This doesn't mean one should leer or stare, (and by all means, do not smile), all that is necessary is to hold eye contact for about one second before deliberately blinking, then looking away. It is important to blink first, before looking away, as this sends the clear message that one is consciously deciding to break eye contact, not instinctively or reactively showing embarrassment at being "caught". The slower one blinks, the more deliberation it conveys.
Another simple and yet revolutionary body language change to consider is to acknowledge people with an upward nod of the head rather than a submissive downward nod.

Thursday, May 26, 2011

Secret laws for secret police

Describing Rand Paul the only senator opposing the Patriot Act was slightly incorrect. Ron Wyden, a senator from Oregon, has not been nearly as forceful, yet heals spoke out against that bill on the Senate floor this week. The primary objection he voices is one this author had not previously heard, yet which is perhaps one of the most shocking of all the reasons for opposing the act. Unelected bureaucrats in the executive branch are those tasked with actually interpreting real-world application of policies contained within the Patriot Act and forbid most of the democratically elected representatives of the people from knowing any particulars of their interpretation. In an article challenging the act's renewal, Senator Wyden wrote in part:
As members of the Senate Intelligence Committee we have been provided with the executive branch's classified interpretation of those provisions and can tell you that we believe there is a significant discrepancy between what most people - including many Members of Congress - think the Patriot Act allows the government to do and what government officials secretly believe the Patriot Act allows them to do.

… Congress and the public are prevented from having an informed, open debate on the Patriot Act because the official meaning of the law itself is secret. Most members of Congress have not even seen the secret legal interpretations that the executive branch is currently relying on and do not have any staff who are cleared to read them. Even if these members come down to the Intelligence Committee and read these interpretations themselves, they cannot openly debate them on the floor without violating classification rules.

On freeing the peacekeeping industry

In the most reasoned and yet impassioned terms possible, Anthony Gregory utterly condemns the American policing system, noting that almost as many Americans have been executed by their blue-clad overlords since the September 11th attack as died in the attack itself. Policing, as Gregory also points out, was non-existent at the time of the nation's founding. Rather than defenders of liberty, they "are the henchmen of all the totalitarian regimes we see on the History Channel," many recent examples of which are listed by Gregory:
We can cite some of the most gruesome and high-profile outrages of recent years, such as the murder of Oscar Grant on New Years Day, 2009, a young man shot by a Bay Area cop in the back while lying face-down on the ground; or the brutal beating of Alexander Landau, a college student who dared to ask Denver cops for a warrant before they searched his trunk; or the plight of seven-year-old Aiyana Stanley Jones, who was murdered last May in Detroit as she lay on her family’s couch while the cops raided the home, tossed in a flash-grenade that set her on fire and then shot her in the head.

Any one of these incidents should set off as much anti-government anger as the Boston Massacre, but some will object that I am cherry picking. So let us limit ourselves to just the last couple months to illustrate the depth of the problem. Last month, police in Trenton shot and killed an unarmed man, saying he was reaching for his waistband. In Orlando, police tased a man to death for being disorderly in a movie theater. In Derby, Kansas, a police officer broke a teenager’s arm because he dared to talk back after getting in trouble for wearing sagging pants.

On May 5, police in Tuscon stormed into Jose Guerena’s home around 9 AM, and shot him 71 times. Yes, fearful for his family’s safety, he was holding an AR-15 in self-defense, but didn’t get a shot in, despite lies to the contrary – yet there was no evidence found of any wrongdoing or illegality on his part. In Alabama, a police officer beat an 84-year-old man for reporting a car accident and daring to put the offender under "citizens arrest" – a more civilized version of what police do routinely – and then the officer turned an ambulance away, insisting the elderly victim didn’t need medical help. Louisiana cops tased Kirkin Woolridge at a traffic stop on May 18, and he soon died of complications in jail.

Just in the last week, we have the DC cops who brutally beat up a defenseless man in a wheelchair. In Moore, Oklahoma, innocent residents are upset that police shot at their homes indiscriminately in attempting to chase down an "armed suicidal subject." In Fort Collins, Colorado, a police patrol car seriously injured a bicyclist, but unlike nearly any other collision between a bike and car, it is being blamed on the bicyclist.
Like every other service of the free market, the keeping of the peace cannot possibly be provided either efficiently or humanely by the state. It is consequently essential to end the state monopoly on this industry and thus allow it flourish as desired by local populaces. As Gregory says: "If the market is really better than socialism, abolishing the police outright shouldn’t be a problem." Consumers innately crave protection of their lives, liberty and property and will find solutions to those needs if left to themselves. Cutting all federal funding of local law enforcement is the first step to achieving this necessary correction.

The dirty little secret about Ron Paul

Giving therapists a reason to exist

Speaking of Vox Day, he made a fascinating observation yesterday. Apparently, the suicide rate of high-school age children drastically drops during the summer months, when they are temporarily freed from the bullying of their peers and the repression of their superiors. Specifically, Vox notes that "summer vacation reduces the teen suicide rate from 6.22 per 100,000 to 4.71" and therefore "banning public school would save 1,092 lives per year." The article he links states:
In a careful and persuasive paper released last fall called "Back to School Blues: Seasonality of Youth Suicide and the Academic Calendar," Benjamin Hansen and Matthew Lang point out that suicides for 14- to 18-year-olds drop abruptly during June, July and August.

"The decrease in suicides for 14- to 18-year-olds during the summer months is stark, while the 19- to 25-year-olds see a slight rise in suicide rates during the summer," the authors point out.

"The fact that 15- to 18-year-old suicide rates decrease in the summer, but the 19-year-old suicide does not, suggests that the high-school calendar is playing a prominent role in youth suicide," they conclude.
Well, at least these schools offer complimentary busing. Any child placed at significantly greater risk of killing himself at least deserves a free ride within a massive yellow cage on wheels whenever he's forced to attend the institution he loathes so much he'll commit suicide because of it, eh?

Homeschool or yellow bobbies will kill your kid

On Thursday, it was an 84-year-old man who was brutally beaten by blue-robed bulls for the vexing act of reporting a drunk driving accident and performing a citizen's arrest upon the offender. Now in news from Monday, there are updates about the fatal shooting — some term it an execution — of a 14-year-old, unarmed boy in November 2010. After witnessing Derek Lopez acting out at school by punching a fellow student, Officer Daniel Alvarado disobeyed a direct order to stay and help the victim rather than chasing down the suspect, which produced the following results:
It is the time after Alvarado radioed in and when a single shot rang out on the city's west side that is now at the center of an investigation.

According to NISD documents, Officer Alvarado had been reprimanded seven times and suspended from the force three times in less than three years.

According to these records, on May 29, 2008, the NISD Police Department even considered terminating Officer Alvarado.

In the days after the shooting, the district released Officer Alvarado's account of the shooting.

Alvarado says he followed the teen to a neighborhood, pursuing the teen into a backyard. The officer claims the teen, who was a student at the Bexar County Juvenile Justice Academy, was hiding in a shed and burst out, slamming the shed door into his face.

That's when Alvarado fired a single shot, hitting the 14-year-old in the abdomen. Lopez would die at the scene.
The officer's insistence that he fired at point-blank range after being startled by Lopez has been cast into great doubt by the autopsy, which revealed "no evidence of close-range firing."

Alvarado is an NISD officer, meaning he's assigned to the Police Department of the Northside Independent School District. The school actually has its very own dedicated gang of armed rule enforcers to keep the children in line. In the spirit of Vox Day, that truly is a reason for parents to assume individual responsibility for the education of their own progeny and therefore "homeschool or die."

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

Rand Paul would not a bondsman be

Thus despotism is already triumphant, and the genius of liberty is on the eve of her exit, is about bidding an eternal adieu to this once happy people.

The Huffington Post reports on Rand Paul's courageous filibuster to prevent renewal of the Constitution-shredding "Patriot Act," saying:
Kentucky Republican Rand Paul, a freshman and tea party favorite, all but ran the Senate for three days this week in defiance of leaders of both parties trying to extend the Patriot Act before parts of it expire at midnight Thursday.

Using filibuster tactics, Paul has delayed action on the intelligence-gathering measures, contending they should expire because the Patriot Act gives the government too much power to monitor people's lives. He spent most of the week demanding that Majority Leader Harry Reid make good on a promise earlier this year to allow him to offer amendments to the post-9/11 law.
Speaking on the Senate floor in the video linked below, Dr. Paul the younger presents a brilliant summary of the dangers inherent in the Patriot Act's assault on the Fourth Amendment:


Dr. Paul opines in his opening remarks:
There’s been a lot of discussion of the PATRIOT Act, and we’re told basically we wouldn’t be able to capture these terrorists if we didn’t give up some of our liberties; if we didn’t give up some of the Fourth Amendment and allow it to be easier for the police to come into our homes.

We were so frightened after 9/11 that we readily gave up these freedoms.

We said, well, the Fourth Amendment is not that important. We’ll just let the government look at all of our records and we’ll make it easier for the government to look at our records.
The senator provides straightforward facts about what the feds can do to any American citizen they desire, including tap his phone, snoop through his financial records and so forth, all without a warrant. Of course, as he points out, obtaining a warrant is basically a formality anyways and takes mere minutes. Requests are never turned down, which is a problem in and of itself. Towards the conclusion of his speech, he expresses sentiments that should stir the blood of every free-breathing human, stating:
The bottom line is I don’t want to live in a country where we give up our freedoms, our privacy. I don’t want to live in a country that loses its constitutional protections that protect us as individuals.

We do have a right to privacy. You have a right not to have the government reading your Visa bill every month. We do have rights and we should protect these, but we shouldn’t be so fearful that we say well, I’m a good person, I don’t care, just look at my records.

If you do, you’re setting yourself up for a day when there will be a tyranny, when there will be a despot who comes into power in the United States and who uses those rules that you said oh, I don’t have anything to hide.
During his agitation for a Bill of Rights (which sadly only delayed the inevitable), Patrick Henry warned this day of despotism would arrive, saying:
The officers of Congress may come upon you now, fortified with all the terrors of paramount federal authority. Excisemen may come in multitudes; for the limitation of their numbers no man knows. They may, unless the general government be restrained by a bill of rights, or some similar restriction, go into your cellars and rooms, and search, ransack, and measure, every thing you eat, drink, and wear. They ought to be restrained Within proper bounds.
In his 18th-century anti-Federalist writings, Centinel spoke of the same public hysteria which undergirds all arguments in support of the tyrannical Patriot Act. The ruling elite are swift and merciless in taking advantage of such an emotionally-based form of governance, as Centinel wrote:
The wealthy and ambitious, who in every community think they have a right to lord it over their fellow creatures, have availed themselves, very successfully, of this favorable disposition; for the people thus unsettled in their sentiments, have been prepared to accede to any extreme of government; all the distresses and difficulties they experience, proceeding from various causes, have been ascribed to the impotency of the present confederation, and thence they have been led to expect full relief from the adoption of the proposed system of government, and in the other event, immediately ruin and annihilation as a nation.
Of course, the anxious Huffington Post folks are just the sorts of which Centinel spoke, fretting as they do in another article about Dr. Paul's heroic stand that "the basis of Paul's objections and the reaction to them does provide a window into how difficult it has become to manage personalities and get legislation passed in an undramatic fashion in both chambers." This is a grossly erroneous perspective on the purpose of government, which is to be restrained rather than empowered. Corralling the legislators into calmly, quietly and subserviently passing new bills doesn't have a damn thing to do with the originally intended purpose of the American way of governance, yet the other 99 ruling aristocrats appear to have bought into just such a fake paradigm. As the only senator with that magic mixture of principles and guts, Dr. Paul's exception to the norm makes him shine as bright as a copper penny.

Men of reason are understandably often lost for words in searching for an appropriate response to the frenzied justifications of the ruling elite and their sock puppets. Yet the Bard proved himself capable of clear-headedness, penning against shackles as he placed words in the mouth of Brutus, who enquired: "Who's here so base, that would a bondsman be? If any, speak; for him have I offended."

Sunday, May 22, 2011

Nepotism in local government

From reader Charlie Therman comes a report about corruption in local law enforcement. Sorry, Charlie, but I removed the identifying information from your email:
The other evening, an acquaintance who works [as a member of a county-level law enforcement department, but not a sworn officer] in [a major American metropolis] told me from his own lips that he had just sold a used, older model smart phone to his sergeant after buying the latest version. His sergeant was "so happy" that he gave the guy this Sunday as a paid day off. The real kicker is that this member of law enforcement will be marked as on duty while he's enjoying his taxpayer-funded vacation day. He told me his shift will be marked as "PTO admin time" so he won't have to burn any time for the weekend day he gets to take off under the table.
Thanks for the heads-up, Charlie. This sounds typical. Records are altered to conceal that some wannabe cop is getting a paid vacation on the the taxpayer's dime. Grandma, this is what the property taxes paid out of your fixed income are used to fund. It's also relevant, I think, that this metro gets a significant amount of federal money because of its political importance, which affects grandpa, kids, grandchildren and everyone else who pays the federal taxes that are funding this guy's happy, work-free weekend.

Saturday, May 21, 2011

Fear the establishment

It appears that relying on federally funded and regulated emergency industries, in nearly all forms, is more dangerous than handling a problem on your own. This holds true with the medical field, for which a July 26, 2000 article in the Journal of the American Medical Association offers vivid statistics proving that "medical errors may be the third leading cause of death in the United States." Written by Dr. Barbara Starfield of Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, the report states:
There are 2,000 deaths/year from unnecessary surgery; 7000 deaths/year from medication errors in hospitals; 20,000 deaths/year from other errors in hospitals; 80,000 deaths/year from infections in hospitals; 106,000 deaths/year from non-error, adverse effects of medications - these total up to 225,000 deaths per year in the US from iatrogenic causes which ranks these deaths as the # 3 killer. Iatrogenic is a term used when a patient dies as a direct result of treatments by a physician, whether it is from misdiagnosis of the ailment or from adverse drug reactions used to treat the illness. (drug reactions are the most common cause).

Close the federal spigot to free local cops

A May 19 article from Russia Times demonstrates, yet again, that calling 911 is a greater hazard to the health of the caller than simply choosing not to involve "law enforcement" authorities, reporting:
An Alabama police officer beat an 84-year-old man after he called 911 to report a car accident outside of him home that involved an intoxicated driver.

Dorsey Henderson called 911 to report the accident after he noticed that the driver was severely drunk. Henderson told the driver that he was under citizen’s arrest and told him to remain near the vehicle until the police arrived.

Minutes later Fairhope Police Officer Trent Scott arrived. Henderson explained the driver appeared to be very intoxicated and had been acting belligerent, and that he placed him under a citizen’s arrest. The officer however scolded Henderson and told him there is "no such thing as citizen's arrest in Alabama," and to "get out of the way, old man," according to the Courthouse News Service.

The man said he was merely trying to help. But, the officer did not care. He responded to Henderson’s aid by grabbing him and throwing him to the ground breaking both his nose and glasses, all while Henderson’s wife watched helplessly from her wheelchair inside the home.

His wife, on the phone with 911, told the dispatcher that the cop was "beating the hell out of my husband."

...When an ambulance arrived the officer sent it away, telling the medics that the "old man" had no need for medical assistance.

Sometime later a superior officer arrived at the scene and ordered the ambulance to return. After Henderson was taken to the hospital he was found to have a broken nose, multiple contusions and a torn rotator cuff.
According to the article, Officer Trent Scott "remains on duty without reprimand from the department." Should these news reports prompt the department to react, here is exactly what they will almost certainly do. The officer will be placed on "paid administrative leave," meaning he gets a paid vacation, while the department conducts an "internal investigation." After it is done investigating itself, the department will conclude that the officer followed the department's policies and no wrong was committed. He will be returned to duty after an extended period during which he collected a paycheck without having to work.

This is a pattern which has been repeated in hundreds of cases throughout the country. Perhaps Mr. Henderson will be monetarily compensated, very quietly and without involving media, for his pain. Yet brutal, sadistic and authoritarian cops are virtually never fired, fined, imprisoned or in any way penalized. In the very unlikely circumstance that Scott is fired, he will travel a few miles down the road until he finds another department willing to hire him.

Of course, these gorillas in blue may wear a local department's insignia, but they bear no loyalty to their specific region. They suckle instead from the great sow's teat, which is why local areas such as cities and counties no longer receive the level of law enforcement their inhabitants personally desire. After all, where stands the waterhole, there will gather predators and prey alike and whence flows the spring of green, there lie the loyalties of its recipients. Having first rooted every choice truffle from soil belonging to the people, the great sow doles out her stolen wealth to her offspring.

How else could a city like Fairhope, AL, home to barely 12,000 people, afford to keep a liability like Scott on the payroll? The answer to that is found in the federal government's ham-handed attempt — in this case, through the means of the Federal Justice Department — to expand the swamp of Washington into a national sty. A March 24 article in the Chicago Sun-Times reported:
The U.S. Department of Justice’s proposed budget for 2012 is far from its final form, but it does point to two possible changes that could affect Northwest Indiana.

One proposal is to double the money — from $300 million to $600 million — that is given to local police departments to hire more officers.

"I just think it appears to be on first light a very positive outlook for local law enforcement," Porter County Sheriff David Lain said.
Imagine a world where Northwestern Indiana, rather than receiving $600 million of taxes forcibly collected from Alaskans, Puerto Ricans, Texans and Montanans, instead fielded the constabulary for which Northwestern Indianans were willing to pay. There is one ray of good news shining from Illinois, however, since a May 11 bit of news suggests the mud may be too dry to permit further wallowing:
When the federal government slashed $38 billion from its budget last month, among those feeling the pain most acutely were local police departments.

The loss of hundreds of millions in U.S. Justice Department grants — a casualty of the 11th-hour spending compromise — will affect everything from obtaining bulletproof vests to maintaining already dwindling police forces for some struggling Chicago-area law enforcement agencies.
The local police can only be controlled by restricting them to local funding. For the sake of police accountability, the health of the public and the well-being of American society, federal funding of all city, county and state-level law enforcement departments must end. Just consider how quickly the federal deficit and debt might be reduced with the continued decline in the U.S. Justice Department's ability to manipulate local law enforcement through federal funding.

Amerika's Gestapo

Mike Adams, in an article reprinted at LRC, warns that the TSA is becoming the Gestapo:
TSA agents have been caught stealing items out of peoples' luggage and, planting fake cocaine in their bags, feeling up infants and now running bomb scares right in the middle of an international airport, with innocent people standing around and potentially in harm's way. What's next for this rogue agency? Are they going to run LIVE bomb drills and demand they start carrying their own pistols and rifles?

You are watching the rise of the secret police

The American people don't get this yet, and the mainstream media is totally clueless about this, but what's really happening right now is that we are watching the rise of the new Amerikan Secret Police. They are the TSA. They're already expanding into train stations and stadiums. Soon, these government goons will be the people checking your papers at every street corner, lifting cash out of your wallet or feeling down the pants of young women just because they can.

If we don't stop the TSA right now, they will rise up to become the new Nazi criminals in America.

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

McClintock's philosophical problem

At his town-hall on Tuesday, McClintock is reported to have pushed Paul Ryan's so-called "Path to Prosperity" as the answer to the debt crisis. He also mentioned that he won't vote for a long-term extension of the debt ceiling before doing a complete about-face, caving to the federal puppetmaster by saying he does support a 60-day extension.

There's a basic difference between how people like McClintock and Ryan view government and how people like Ron Paul view it. The former type are the accountants described by Paul:
"We are dealing with a problem in Washington as a budgetary accounting problem and that’s not it. It’s a philosophy problem. What is the philosophy of government? What should the role of government be?”

The Congressman went on to question the role of government in the economy and welfare system. “(Paul) Ryan doesn’t reject (the) notion (of a government-run welfare system). I do.”

Congressman Paul also criticized spending on “maintaining our empire” and “being the policeman of the world.”
It's not about having an efficient government. It's about restraining the government to protect our rights, whether that's the right to a market sans manipulation, the right to the produce of my own labor or the right not to have armed thugs order me how to live my life. Besides, who likes accountants?

Although, if you are one for looking at the numbers, Robert Wenzel's take on Ryan's "path" is spot on:
Ryan's "radical" budget would only reduce government spending to 20% of GDP by 2015. Obama wants to cut it to 23%. It is currently at 25%. In other words, there's only a 3 percentage point difference between Ryan's proposal and that of wild spending Democrats. And, this of course is before all the Congressional horse trading that goes on that would surely boost spending levels.
Responding from a more philosophical angle, he also wrote:
The only real way to deal with the budget is to cut it far, far below expected revenues. These walking on the edge of the knife budgets are irresponsible thinking, even for those who think government needs to play a significant role in the affairs of a country.

Vote for Romney in 2012

And this is what you'll get — watch this video on Youtube to see the most beautiful summary of Romney on the issues (embedding is annoyingly disabled, so click through to watch the video). Want to know what Romney thinks about healthcare, gun control, abortion and what his presidency would be like? Seriously, watch the video and witness a true politician at work.

Update: link corrected.

Molding minds from malleable ages

Corruption of your thoughts, destruction of your soul. Don't let them mold your mind, they wanna control mankind. Seems like their only intention is to exploit the earth. Yeah. And you trust in their deceit, your mind causes your defeat. And so you become an in invention to distort this earth. ~ Damian Marley

Those who doubt their government sling much gab concerning a variety of conspiracy theories. Of course, a conspiracy is merely a group of people colluding together to covertly influence affairs in one direction or another, which happens all the time. Even those public schooled kids can grasp that concept. Though many are outlandish and a great more are totally ludicrous, the definition of a conspiracy precludes theories about them from always being hysteria. So for you, reader, I'm going to spin a theory grounded in reality.

The federal government controls the minds of the American people. Government schools are the instruments of this villainy. The method is in requiring every child from the age of six to 18 attend a federally funded facility for instruction in a universalized curriculum passed on by a central bureau that is stocked with civil servants who influence the department for decades on end. Maintaining this monopoly hold on education for generations has been the key to ensuring the success of this massive social experiment by the central government.

The effect, not surprisingly, has been an apathetic, ignorant and compliant people. They can most assuredly be woken up and intellectual second births occurs constantly, but it takes a real jolt to reach most, which is because the desired effect has taken hold. These people have been informed on a daily basis for 12 years by government employees, whom society and their parents demand they view as heroes, that the government is the source of all good and will provide the solution to every problem. This naturally immunizes the mind against arguments for restraining the leviathan.
VYMARK9SY7U2

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Tom McClintock fails to endorse Ron Paul

Having first ingested copious amounts of boggle gum, a strain as sticky as it sounds, I discovered from a confidential source that Congressman Tom McClintock held a town-hall meeting tonight. My source attended and reports that the atmosphere was confused and muddled, though he was clear-headed himself.

Angry over massive debt, the strangling tentacles of federal control and the debasement of their dollars, the public was lucid enough to strongly applaud one local who suggested the Department of Education should be scrapped. McClintock soundly endorsed this idea, agreeing that control of education should revert not just to the states but to local districts. That remark drew applause, though no one clapped when he responded to a question about his favorite presidential candidate by waxing lyrical about Chris Christie. This was not officially an endorsement, as McClintock deftly avoided commitment by noting: "The candidates who are running 17 months before the election are often not those who will be running 17 days before the election."

These United States desperately need a man who can teach the nation how to live through thin times. Chris Christie may have the bellicosity of a New Jersey bull and may deserve some credit for his refusal to go quietly into the good night, yet it seems to me that a gentleman who has mastered the art of blunt graciousness might be a superior choice. Apparently someone at the event had some sense as one man asked: "Chris Christie is not yet a declared candidate, as you said, but there is one candidate who is actually running who has been warning for decades about the debt, the coming collapse of the dollar and America's over-expansion overseas, so will you consider endorsing Congressman Ron Paul for president in 2012?"

McClintock acknowledged that Ron Paul is a worthy man for whom he holds affection, saying: "I have lunch with him weekly in his office and he is high on the list of candidates I am considering. I supported Fred Thompson in 2008, but he was not running by the time of the California primaries, so I voted for Ron Paul."

What is left to consider? Ron Paul is the most consistent person in the American Congress. He's proclaimed the exact same ideology of liberty for over 30 years. His book, Liberty Defined, paints a stark picture of what that ideology really means as it explicitly answers for liberty on 50 major issues. Whatever issues he might not have mentioned would be given an identical answer, as summed up in the introduction to his book: "Liberty means to exercise human rights in any manner a person chooses so long as it does not interfere with the exercise of the rights of others." Ron Paul is the only candidate who believes this. Either you agree with him or you don't, McClintock.

Several people also complained about the weakness of the dollar, with one man noting that the Canadian dollar was "doing well," which he attributed to the Canadian government's supposed policy of tax and spend. Of course, since all national currencies are issued by fiat and their values measured against each other rather than an objective standard, the weakness of one in no way indicates the strength of another. Anyways, McClintock refuted this idea, pointing out that Canada is actually taking a hard fiscal right. In fact, as reported by Business Week on May 3:
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper won a majority of seats in Parliament for the first time, giving his Conservative Party a mandate to bolster the economic recovery with additional tax cuts and erase the country’s deficit with curbs on government spending…. Canada reduced the federal rate by 1.5 percentage points to 16.5 percent on Jan. 1, and it will fall to 15 percent in 2012 under legislation passed in 2007.
People at the town-hall event were obviously ready for change, though they were puzzled as to what form that change must take. While appearing to largely concede the need for austerity measures and a return to decentralized, local control, they lacked a comprehensive ideology of liberty. More than that, they lacked a leader who can firmly and unfailingly preach the truth of freedom through peace and love. McClintock is fond of quoting the founders and shows flashes of a deeper understanding of liberty. So far, however, he inexplicably fails to support the one man who knows how to cinch the belt tight so that we might live. Chris Christie envisions a stream-lined government reduced for the sake of efficiency, yet  Ron Paul grasps that the real problem is not lack of efficiency but rather a dire threat to our basic human rights.

At its core, the real danger of an unrestrained state is not that it believes 1 dollar plus 1 more dollar equals 10 dollars available to expend but rather that oligarchs in Washington think they can plan the futures of 300 million people. The total violation of individual sovereignty which has occurred is not surprising considering the central government has reconciled itself to the moral obscenity of imperialism. Such an ideology can only be spread through bloodshed, will invariably infect even its most liberty-minded advocate and will inevitably cause a police state in the empire's home country.

Clearly, McClintock does not fully comprehend this. He ended the town-hall with a jingoistic quote from that great American dictator, Abraham Lincoln, about the staggering power and wisdom of the American people, but neglected to clarify that Lincoln voiced his view long before government school became mind control, a reality which severely impairs the ability of Americans to think independently. Regardless, if there is a single comment from the man whose hands are stained with the blood of hundreds of thousands that deserves repetition, it is one Lincoln made in defense of self-determination when he rose in opposition to the Mexican-American War. On January 21, 1848, during a speech in the U.S. House of Representatives which was boldly titled "Arraignment of President Polk for War Against Mexico," he stated:
Any people anywhere being inclined and having the power have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right—a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can may revolutionize and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit. More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority, intermingled with or near about them, who may oppose this movement. Such minority was precisely the case of the Tories of our own revolution. It is a quality of revolutions not to go by old lines or old laws; but to break up both, and make new ones.

Monday, May 2, 2011

American soldiers want to come home now

Soldiers in Afghanistan react to Osama's execution in the Army Times:
Another soldier, Spc. William Baxter, a parachute rigger with the 101st Sustainment Brigade, was more succinct with his thoughts.
“OK, he’s dead, can we go home?” he asked.
His thoughts were echoed by Spc. Wesley Gibbs, from Division Signal Co. H&H Battalion.
“I'm happy,” Gibbs said. “Maybe this process will go a little bit faster now, and we can all go home to our families.”

"The press conferences keep on lyin"

Paul Craig Roberts, a former Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, is a man who's seen much of the guts and inner-workings of Babylon in his day. He pens:
This morning’s headline has the odor of a staged event. The smell reeks from the triumphalist news reports loaded with exaggerations, from celebrants waving flags and chanting "USA USA." Could something else be going on?
No doubt President Obama is in desperate need of a victory. He committed the fool’s error or restarting the war in Afghanistan, and now after a decade of fighting the US faces stalemate, if not defeat. The wars of the Bush/Obama regimes have bankrupted the US, leaving huge deficits and a declining dollar in their wake. And re-election time is approaching.
The really good news? Light up your lighter, cause now that Osama is dead, the wars will end, right? All you American boys and girls in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Pakistan and elsewhere, be of good cheer, you're coming home!

A luxurious mansion

Linked from this site, here's a picture of the expansive, resort-like mansion where the Saudi scapegoat allegedly lived out his last days in largesse:


Perhaps whoever inherits the structure will find a living offering concrete hovel design tips to rich Americans who could clearly use a few pointers, like Donald Trump. From a CNBC slideshow, here's his sorry excuse for a home (he sold it last year):

Lynch mob justice

Word from the regime is that Osama Bin Laden was buried at sea in keeping with Islamic burial law. Conveniently, Bob Wenzel links his readers to the actual Islamic laws, one of the most interesting of which is this:
623. * If a person dies on a ship and if there is no fear of the decay of the dead body and if there is no problem in retaining it for sometime on the ship, it should be kept on it and buried in the ground after reaching the land.
The American government has only experienced the international shipping of human carcasses approximately 6,000 times in the past ten years, so feelings of inadequacy in preventing "the decay of the dead body," thus compelling a sea burial, are quite understandable.

Of course, after having hidden the man's body in the sea and assuring the world that their covertly conducted DNA not only really happened, but actually proved it was Osama who they summarily executed, the American regime announces that they might not release pictures of the body. For once, a U.S. "Kill Team" may not release its trophy photos! Why? Here's the cockamamie explanation from ABC News, one of the regime's many mouthpieces:
The argument against releasing the pictures: they’re gruesome. He has a massive head wound above his left eye where he took bullet, with brains and blood visible.
See, the public may have the tolerance for photos like the one below, but really gruesome stuff, like an eliminated CIA asset named Osama, that's just stomach-turning. The eyes of America's adults must be protected from their beloved nanny state, just as the same entity must shield their minds from the dangers of logical thought. So let's all close our eyes, link hands, commission a few million more kilotons of bombing and chant: "USA is Number ONE, USA is Number ONE, USA is Number ONE!" Maybe if we scream loud enough, Andrew Holmes, the gentleman posing in the gruesome photo below, will join in.
An anonymous, yet clearly heavily armed and well-equipped, Afghani killed by Andrew Holmes, who turned one of the dead guy's fingers into his own personal rabbit's foot. Thank Jah such brave, corn-fed men and women in uniform are dedicated to protecting American soil from the dire threat of invasion by skinny brown guys in red t-shirts.

Sunday, May 1, 2011

May Day death

Not only is it terribly convenient for PR purposes that Osama's killing was announced on May Day, but that date has a couple of other ironic connections. As pointed out here, Hitler's death was announced on that day, as was (I'm sure totally coincidentally) Bush's infamous "Mission Accomplished" message. From Wikipedia:
1945 – World War II: A German newsreader officially announces that Adolf Hitler has "fallen at his command post in the Reich Chancellery fighting to the last breath against Bolshevism and for Germany."
2003 – 2003 invasion of Iraq: In what becomes known as the "Mission Accomplished" speech, on board the USS Abraham Lincoln (off the coast of California), U.S. President George W. Bush declares that "major combat operations in Iraq have ended."
Perhaps a more suitable May Day to celebrate is May 1, 1328, the day when the aggressing state of England stopped trying to occupy Scotland, ending the Wars of Scottish Independence by signing the Treaty of Edinburgh-Northampton and so recognizing Scotland as a sovereign, independent nation. History is probably silent on the matter, but no doubt most Scottish suicide bombers laid down their vests upon the English king's concession.

A blast from the past

Way, way back when, in the year 2001, which is ancient history to anyone indocrin-cated in a federal brainwashing facility for youth, when Bush initiated the first of America's two — no, three (or do Pakistan and Yemen also count?) — current wars, he demanded that the Taliban "hand over" (assuming they were capable of doing so) Osama Bin Laden. Exactly one week after U.S. warplanes started killing Afghanis, on Oct. 14, 2001, the Guardian carried this juicy tidbit:
President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden if the United States ended the bombing in Afghanistan.
Returning to the White House after a weekend at Camp David, the president said the bombing would not stop, unless the ruling Taliban "turn [bin Laden] over, turn his cohorts over, turn any hostages they hold over." He added, "There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's guilty". In Jalalabad, deputy prime minister Haji Abdul Kabir - the third most powerful figure in the ruling Taliban regime - told reporters that the Taliban would require evidence that Bin Laden was behind the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US, but added: "we would be ready to hand him over to a third country".
Remember how this was plastered all over CNN, MSNBC and Fox and all the other mainstream American news channels? Or, wait, no it wasn't and it's certainly guaranteed Prawn Hannity and Rush Limburger never mentioned it to their attentive audiences. To be honest, even I'll admit ignorance of this story till just now, though I've closely followed news relating to American foreign policy for years. Not that there's anything newsworthy about Bush turning down a chance to get his hands on Osama, supposedly the very reason for attacking Afghanistan, and choosing instead to "stay the course" for a fucking decade.

"Staying the course" implies some sort of race, but every race must have a goal or finishing point, and since the U.S. could have completed "the [race]course" just days after it began yet refused to do so, that begs the question of just what is the real purpose of said course? After 1,420 American troop fatalities and an unknown (because no Western sources want to track the figure) number of "accidentally" murdered Afghani civilians, that seems like a question deserving an answer.

As for the number of slaughtered Afghani civilians, God only knows what the total is, but in just the few months after the war began, here's an estimate published by UPI:
Carl Conetta, co-director of the Project for Defense Alternatives, which researches security policy and its challenges, estimates anywhere from 1,000 to 1,300 Afghan civilian deaths were due to U.S. aerial bombardment between Oct. 7, 2001, and Jan. 10, 2002.
No doubt the children, grandchildren and various other descendants of those thousand-odd Afghanis will toast Bush's good health, fondly pondering his wisdom in killing their ancestors rather than negotiating the apprehension of Osama, all while basking in the warm, fuzzy freedom glow of democracy.

Paul Hip-hop by Rise, Consise & Krookid

An Obama reelection stunt?

As all the news groups are now reporting, Osama Bin Laden is said to be dead. From the WSJ:
Osama bin Laden is dead, said a person familiar with events.
Surely there's no coincidence between this and Obama's supposed order to reemphasize finding Osama, as reported by the Huffington Post three days ago:
The president and his national security team have quietly instructed the CIA to intensify its efforts to hunt down, capture, or kill Osama bin Laden.
What a huge surprise! Obama ordered the CIA to track down a creature of that organization's own creation and it happened swiftly. Of course, this happens mere days after he realigned CIA leadership by announcing he'll replace Defense Secretary Gates with CIA chief Leon Panetta and replace Panetta with regime yes-boy Petraeus.

Phew. We can all breathe so much easier now — chill, enjoy our freedoms, and hey, even bring the troops home (right?) — knowing that this wealthy Saudi Arabian man has been eliminated for his crimes of… Well, here's what the FBI apparently believes they can definitively accuse him of on their "Most Wanted" list:
Murder of U.S. Nationals Outside the United States; Conspiracy to Murder U.S. Nationals Outside the United States; Attack on a Federal Facility Resulting in Death
...Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world.
Update: Lew Rockwell has added his two golden cents, noting:
Every time the US waves the bloody shirt of Osama, it has a purpose. Obama has been drastically weakened in recent months, and the US has been hurt by murdering Gadaffi’s family members. The mass-killing in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, etc. is not going well. The economy is a wreck. Dollar debasement is speeding up. Gasoline prices are high. So…tah-dah…the body of Osama bin Laden for our edification and distration. It may even be true. Certainly the CIA will assure us that its DNA test proves it. 

Fucking do-gooders

"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely executed for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~ C.S. Lewis

Saturday, April 30, 2011

Killing the Gaddafi kids

Underwrite the dictators for decades and then murder their kids; perhaps the "Freedom to Bomb" is one of the specific freedoms for which "they" hate "us." From the Washington Post today:
A NATO missile strike killed Moammar Gadhafi’s youngest son and three grandchildren on Saturday but the Libyan leader survived, a government spokesman said.
Gadhafi and his wife were in the Tripoli house of his 29-year-old son, Seif al-Arab Gadhafi, when it was hit by at least one bomb dropped from a NATO warplane, according to Libyan spokesman Moussa Ibrahim.
As for the one gang of malignant bastards bankrolling the other, here's a March 24th Fox News article:
While President Obama calls Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi a threat to his own people, just one month before attacking Libya the president asked Congress to increase U.S. aid for Qaddafi's military to $1.7 million. 
Of course, that's small potatoes (or peanuts, take your choice) compared to what the Federal Reserve gave the Libyan leader — money they, no doubt, digitally "printed." The author of an April 4th Time blog post reveals:
In the 18 months following the collapse of Lehman Brothers, a foreign subsidiary of the bank of the government of Muammar Gaddafi received a cumulative $35 billion in short-term loans from the Fed. Libya's Central bank received the loans through a foreign subsidiary called the Arab Banking Corp., which has a branch in New York. At the time of the financial crisis, the bank was 29% owned by the Libyan government. But since then the Libyan government has upped its stake in ABC, as it is known, to 59%. So the main beneficiary of the Fed's help is the Libyan government.