The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions." --American Statesman Daniel Webster (1782-1852)

Thursday, June 30, 2011

Seattle Jihadi's

STRATFOR Weekly Intelligence Update
Security Weekly

The Seattle Plot: Jihadists Shifting Away From Civilian Targets?

On June 22 in a Seattle warehouse, Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif pulled an unloaded M16 rifle to his shoulder, aimed it, and pulled the trigger repeatedly as he imagined himself gunning down young U.S. military recruits. His longtime friend Walli Mujahidh did likewise with an identical rifle, assuming a kneeling position as he engaged his notional targets. The two men had come to the warehouse with another man to inspect the firearms the latter had purchased with money Abdul-Latif had provided him. The rifles and a small number of hand grenades were to be used in an upcoming mission: an attack on a U.S. Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) in an industrial area south of downtown Seattle.
After confirming that the rifles were capable of automatic fire and discussing the capacity of the magazines they had purchased, the men placed the rifles back into a storage bag intending to transport them to a temporary cache location. As they prepared to leave the warehouse, they were suddenly swarmed by a large number of FBI agents and other law enforcement officers and quickly arrested. Their plan to conduct a terrorist attack inside the United States had been discovered when the man they had invited to join their plot (the man who had allegedly purchased the weapons for them) reported the plot to the Seattle Police Department, which in turn reported it to the FBI. According to the federal criminal complaint filed in the case, the third unidentified man had an extensive criminal record and had known Abdul-Latif for several years, but he had not been willing to undertake such a terrorist attack. read more

unusual events and calenders

Calendar for July 2011  








































Money bags

This year, July has 5 Fridays, 5 Saturdays and 5 Sundays. This happens
once every 823 years. This is called money bags. So, forward this to
your friends and money will arrive within 4 days. Based on Chinese
Feng Shui. The one who does not forward......will be without money.

Kinda interesting - read on!!!

This year we're going to experience four unusual dates.

1/1/11, 1/11/11, 11/1/11, 11/11/11 and that's not all...

Take the last two digits of the year in which you were born - now add
the age you will be this year,

The results will be 111 for everyone in whole world. This is the year of
the Money!!!

The proverb goes that if you send this to eight good friends money will
appear in next four

days as

it is explained in Chinese FENGSHUI.

Those who don't continue the chain won't receive.......

Its a mystery, but its worth a try. good luck.

lets win

As I was surfing around I stumbled across this and I decided to shamelessly copy and paste it to my blog.  there is a lot of good info and stuff to think about.  This is from the Western rifle shooter blog.  I will copy the entire thing including the comments.

The people in this country who truly cherish freedom in all of its manifestations (thought, guns, speech, religion, association, private property, etc.) had better darned skippy get used to the idea that we are a cursed minority and will be for the foreseeable future.
The simple formula is this:
- We’re screwed
- There’s gonna be a fight
- Let’s win
Your posts on the courts and freedom issues in general mean that I don’t have to make the case for “we’re screwed” with you.
BTW, thanks for all that you have taught me through your writing.
So we move to “there’s gonna be a fight”.
Ain’t no way that the transnational socialists can leave an armed, educated, defiant remnant intact to cut and slash at their Utopian schemes at every opportunity. The tranzis have to do everything in their power to disarm (literally, perhaps, but certainly educationally and psychologically; see generally Snyder, walters mitty's second amendment) everyone they can.
The reality is that the fight has been on for some sixty (or more) years.
You know that, per your writings.
So on to the fun part – “let’s win”.
Step one in “let’s win” is to refuse any further collaboration in our demise. That’s Billy Beck’s point – delude yourself all you want with your participatory democracy fantasies, but leave me the hell out of it.
Withholding collaboration takes many forms, however. It involves getting physically, mentally, and emotionally prepared for the really hard stuff. Specific steps include the following:
1) Fix teeth
2) Lose weight
3) Start walking at a fast pace regularly (1 mile 4x weekly)
4) Start working 25 yard jogs into your walks
5) Eat less and eat better
6) Get a complete physical
7) Stockpile any needed maintenance drugs
 8. tart weightlifting by doing rifle dry-fire snaps (start with rifle at low ready, bringing up and dropping hammer just as sights align on light switch) 25 reps for strong side and weak side 3X/weekly
9) Integrate a light (20 lb.) pack into your walk/jogs
10) Bring one’s spouse along as much and as quickly as possible.
- read and assimilate the resistance canon (Heinlein, Ross, Vanderboegh, Bracken, Suarez, Royce, von Dach Bern, etc.)
- read and assimilate the economic canon (Hayek, von Mises, etc.)
- read and assimilate the political canon (DoI, USC, BoR, Spooner, DiLorenzo, Bovard, etc.)
- Get square with God as you understand Him. Even if atheist or agnostic, one needs a Larger Context in which to place the upcoming suffering and struggle.
- Sort the sheep from the goats in one’s immediate circle. In some cases, that may mean divorce/separation, estrangement from children, parents, or other relatives, and the loss of friends. Better now than when the excitement has begun.
- For those remaining, get them up to speed on all fronts as much and as quickly as they can handle. Your associates’ ability to digest all of the bitter medicine that they must swallow will no doubt be a source of frustration. Keep trying.
- Understand, at a profound level, how our lives as mortal creatures are both fleeting and as meaningful or as meaningless as we make them. Commit to yourself and to your ideals that you will spend the remaining days of your life wisely and in furtherance of those eternal truths.
Now, compared to that list, do you really think it matters whether one votes for McCain, Obama, Barr, or the write-in candidate of one’s choice?
I respectfully submit that it matters not one whit.
Declare yourself into freedom, just as the Founders did 232 years ago.
Then do everything you can to defend that freedom, even unto death.
And I mean everything.
Remember too the cannibal’s paradox – that the time spent in overcoming a taboo can so debilitate the prospective actor that the action taken fails for being too late.
Keep bashing on, amigo.

OK, but what is the average John Q Public to do?
The list above is a pretty good start, and I would add the following elements upon further consideration:
Psychological Toughening/Stress Inoculation: Start to wrap your brain around the fact that you will likely be committing multiple felonies, misdemeanors, and regulatory violations as part of your personal path to victory. Those folks who plan to survive in the new reality but currently pride themselves on being good, law-abiding citizens had best get over that silliness forthwith. After all, as Ayn Rand pointed out more than fifty years ago in Atlas Shrugged:
The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
Look around and tell me that we have not crossed that legal Rubicon.
Given the current situation, ’tis best to get on with your new life as a criminal. As a warm-up exercise, I’d suggest violation of at least one malum prohibitum law per day — be it speeding, tax avoidance, unauthorized concealed carry of a deadly weapon, removing the flow restrictions on showerheads and faucets, tossing a rock through an appropriate statist window, or any other of an almost-infinite number of other meaningless rules.
Embrace the life of a malum prohibitum criminal every day, and insist that others in your tribe do the same.
I am not going down the list path in this post, other than to remind you that you’d best be getting your “Six Bs” finalized before the the current “rip-your-face-off” suckers’ rally ends in the financial markets.
What are the Six Bs?
Beans: food for a minimum of one year for each member of your tribe.
Bullets: A bare minimum of a long arm capable of killing a man at 100 yards for every tribe member over the age of 10, along with a bare minimum of 1000 rounds of ammunition for each long arm. Every adult (16 and above) should also have a centerfire pistol and no less than 500 rounds of ammunition for the sidearm. Holsters, slings, and webgear will be essential as well.
Bandaids: Medical supplies to allow your tribe to survive disease and/or injury without reference to existing medical systems.
Brains: Training and reference works to operate and sustain all of the bean/bullets/bandaids elements above.
Balls: Courage and sheer willpower will be dispositive. Strengthen yours and that of each tribe member.
Buddies: You will need a minimum of 14 like-minded people to stand even a basic lookout watch on a 7/24/365 basis. Got real friends? You’re gonna need ‘em.
The bug-out/bug-in debate is handled ad nauseum elsewhere. My point here is that wherever you are, you’d best have a detailed plan (along with several back-up plans) for how you and your tribe are going to defend your space. Remember, too, that defending space (i.e., fixed positions) is how hajii has been dying in droves in Iraq and Afghanistan; many of the people coming to hurt you will have had experience in the “fix ‘em and then kill ‘em” tactics used by the .mil in those struggles. Ergo, best to have a “going mobile” component to your plan — or, as a wise man once told me, “Don’t plan on being where they know you live if you want to keep living.”
When John Q Public is squared away on those items, I’ll bet this blog’s smart readership will have other “to-do” lists to keep the Public tribe moving towards victory.
And defining “victory”?
1) Survive the first die-off.
2) Keep your kids alive.
3) Kill the enemy.
4) Keep fighting.
5) Stay alive.
Any questions?

Wednesday, June 29, 2011

When to Use a Handgun vs. a Shotgun for Home Defense

I got this from USA Carry, there is a link on my blog.  I have a Smith&Wessen Sigma and a Remington 870 police.  The shotgun has combination of slugs and OO buck.  That is my home invasion setup.  Now if I have time to prepare, I will have an AR-15 to add to the firepower.  I have stressed in that situation that my wife will get in the bathtub along with our son with the other revolver and the cellphone calling 911 while I keep an eye on the stairs.  As long as they don't go upstairs I will not go after them.  If they go upstairs, here in GA we have the castle doctrine and I will defend my family.

When to Use a Handgun vs. a Shotgun for Home Defense
When to Use a Handgun vs. a Shotgun for Home Defense
If you wake up at 2:00am to the sound of a window being smashed and you hear someone entering your house, here’s what you should ideally do: Gather all of your family members together in the same room, lock the door, call the police and have your gun ready in case the intruder should try and enter that room.
However, we don’t live in an ideal world so it’s much more likely that if you hear someone breaking into your home at 2:00am you’ll have to go confront them or at the very least, you’ll have to go to the top of your stairs and make sure the intruder doesn’t make it past you to get to your family members.
So, if the above ever happened to you, should you use a handgun or shotgun for home defense? Well, to tell you the truth, it depends on the situation. For instance, let’s say you’re a prepared homeowner and you’ve already rehearsed a “home invasion” plan with your family. So they know if they hear you shout a special code word they’re supposed to quickly run to your master bedroom.
And let’s pretend…

That one day someone did try to break into your house and since you were prepared you were able to safely get all of your family members into the designated “safe room.” For this particular situation I would want a shotgun. I would want to be able to have my family in the bathroom (out of the line of fire) and I would find a good piece of cover and just sit there with my shotgun pointed at the bedroom door. My shotgun of choice is the trusty Remington 870 and my ammo of choice is 00 buckshot. (But be very careful with 00 buck. If others are in the house – besides the intruder – you’ll want to consider birdshot.)
On the other hand, if I weren’t able to get my family in the “safe room” and I had to go confront the intruder and clear my house, I would definitely want a handgun. Here are a few of the reasons why:
First off, there are a lot of corners in a house.
And the last thing I want to do is have my long shotgun barrel sticking out around a corner so that an intruder can grab it and perhaps take my gun away. Also, if you have to enter other bedrooms on the middle floor or basement floor it’s much easier to open a door and bring a handgun to the “close contact firing position” than to clumsily open a door with the shotgun sticking out for a person to grab.
Let’s not forget, if you’re trying to be “stealth” and sneak around your house so the intruder doesn’t know you’re coming, there’s a much better chance you’re going to knock your shotgun into a wall or hit something, especially if you haven’t practiced clearing your house with a shotgun, which most people haven’t. That’s why my handgun of choice for this situation is my concealed carry gun, the Glock 19.
Of course, the gun you have at the time of a home invasion is the one you use whether it’s a shotgun, rifle, or handgun. But whatever gun you decide to go with I would practice the two scenarios above: Gathering your family in the safe room and clearing your house.

About Jason Hanson

Jason R. Hanson is a former CIA officer. He’s also an NRA Certified Instructor, a Utah Concealed Firearms Permit Instructor and an Eagle Scout. Jason believes there are few things in life as important as being able to protect yourself and your loved ones. That’s why he’s giving away a free report titled, “Insider Secrets of Buying Your First Concealed Carry Firearm” at www.ConcealedCarryAcademy.com.

looking for a job?

Soup Kitchen Line from the Great Depression photo
Soup Kitchen Line from the Great Depression
Yeah … we’ve been here before.  Here I go yammering about Barack Obama again.  Fact is, I just cannot believe that this guy has turned out to be as hideously bad as he clearly is.  Certainly he telegraphed what kind of a president he was going to be during the 2008 campaign, but the human spirit is such that you still want to hold out a bit of hope – until hope becomes delusional.
Do you understand just how bad our economy is?  Let me share just a few statistics with you.  There have been several economic recessions since the end of World War II.  Every recession, of course, has been followed by a recovery.  The Joint Economic Committee has studied recoveries from previous recessions and compared them to the current situation.  We are now 38 months past the beginning of the recession.  When past recessions are studied the Joint Economic Committee found that at the 38-month marker employment would be about 3.7% higher than it was at the beginning of the recession.  This, though, is the Obama recovery.  Employment is now – at the 38-month mark – 5% below what it was at the start of the recession.  This is the worst recovery from a recession since World War II.
Stephen Moore of the Wall Street Journal shares another statistic with us.  In previous recessions our economy enjoyed an average growth of 9.9% over 13-quarter period since the beginning of the recession.  Where are we now?  Our GDP has grown by 0.8% over that same 13-quarter period since the beginning of the 2008 recession.  There’s the ObamaRecovery for you.
Are these numbers boring for you?  Well if you’re looking for a job, or worried about keeping the job you have, you should be digesting these numbers and addressing the cause --- and the cause is Barack Obama.
The American economy is a private sector economy.   If you’re looking for a job in the private sector:
  • You’re looking for a job in that sector of our economy that Barack Obama refers to as the “enemy.” 
  • You’re looking for a job in that sector of the economy that must endure tax increases so that, in the words of Obama’s Treasury Secretary, the federal government won’t have to spend less. 
  • You’re looking for a job in that sector of our economy that is suffering an unprecedented regulatory assault from Washington DC. 
If you’re looking for a job your greatest hope is in making sure that Barack Obama is not a two-term president

    I borrowed this from www.boortz.com

     He is a talk show host and I was listening to him in the early 90's right after the assault weapons ban was pushed through.  I was fairly apolitical until that crappy assault weapons ban was pushed through along with hillerycare.  I became politically active.  When I first heard him speak, this was before the internet.  For the first time I felt like I wasn't alone in my beliefs anymore.

Obummer is clueless.....

When Barack Obama was running for president, he put forward the idea that the war in Iraq had been no more than a distraction from the just war in Afghanistan.  I, on the other hand, who was running for nothing, put forward the idea that he had gotten this just the wrong way round.  Afghanistan is a tribal wasteland that can’t be tamed without unthinkable effort, whereas securing Iraq as an America-friendly democracy situated on the borders of Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia might actually be an important victory in the fight against Islamo-fascism. But of course, as we know, Obama is uncomfortable with the word “victory,” because as a student of history, he’s reminded of when Emperor Hirohito surrendered to General Westmoreland aboard the USS Ronald Reagan. Or, you know…  something historical like that.
So now, after instituting policies that increased the number of American casualties in Afghanistan five-fold, Obama begins a withdrawal that can only reverse any gains those policies achieved. The Taliban aren’t idiots. They will bide their time and return to slaughter anyone who stood against them the moment we’re no longer there to defend them. The Afghan security forces on whom Obama is counting will ultimately join whatever side seems most likely to win. I really don’t see how this can turn out any other way.
This is not to say I think we should stay. I didn’t think we should have surged in the first place. I thought we should have drawn down our forces in Afghanistan and focused them instead on securing the victory in Iraq, thus insuring the presence of an ally in the region and encouraging a democratic trend to the Arab spring…  instead of what’s probably going to happen now.  I don’t think it’s “isolationist,” to pick your fights.
But Obama can’t do what’s right overseas anymore than he can do what’s right here because his thinking is based on incorrect premises, and those premises are kept in place by the political power of his left-wing base. Bush mishandled the war in Iraq for far too long, it’s true, but he had — or was developing — the right idea. The War on Terror is not a state-based war but an ideological one. It will be won, if it is won, by establishing and maintaining oases of better ideology in the midst of the enemy.  I have no doubt our military could do that in Afghanistan given enough money and men and time, but I think the price is too high and we shouldn’t pay it… not when we’ve already done the job in Iraq. As with the economy, so with the war, Obama hasn’t really a clue.
All right, it’s just one man’s opinion.  But while I’m at it, here’s another:  Whether I’m right or wrong, whether he’s ultimately right or wrong, Obama’s speech was a drab business, a purely political statement meant to cast blame on Bush and nab war credit for himself while at the same time positioning himself as a peace-nik in time for the election.  While there are men still out there getting shot and killed, I say:  Nuts.

default? or hyperinflation?...the budget woes continue

 I shamelessly ripped this off PJ Media

The chatter today has been all about Lawrence Lindsey’s WSJ column about our dire financial situation Excuse me — the meaningful chatter. The meaningless chatter has been about Michele Bachmann, and whether she’s the Gaffe-O-Matic or merely gaffetastic. After watching her embarrassing campaign launch yesterday, I can’t say I much care. Honestly, it was the worst GOP presidential announcement since the last one. Bachmann and Jon Huntsman might turn out to be the Dueling Flame-outs, bookending the left and right of the party.
But I digress, and we have serious business to cover. What Lindsey says about our spending problem comes down to: We are so screwed.
Some facts and figures for you:
The president’s budget of February 2011 projects economic growth of 4% in 2012, 4.5% in 2013, and 4.2% in 2014. That budget also estimates that the 10-year budget cost of missing the growth estimate by just one point for one year is $750 billion. So, if we just grow at trend those three years, we will miss the president’s forecast by a cumulative 5.2 percentage points and—using the numbers provided in his budget—incur additional debt of $4 trillion. That is the equivalent of all of the 10-year savings in Congressman Paul Ryan’s budget, passed by the House in April, or in the Bowles-Simpson budget plan.
Here’s what I got out of that: If the Ryan or Bowles-Simpson budgets were to become law, our economy would quickly right itself — and the resulting increase in interest rates would eradicate all the savings.
Did you get that? Without seriously drastic cuts — cuts that would make Paul Ryan blanch — we can’t fix this economy without wrecking the government. Or maybe it’s the other way around.

The unexpected keeps happening..........

I got this from PJ media

If an irresponsible teenager repeatedly crashed his car into a tree whenever he had a few beers, we would never say his accidents were “unexpected.” Rather, they would be foreseeable consequences of driving while drinking. Similarly, we shouldn’t let journalists get away with describing as “unexpected” the foreseeable negative consequences of bad government policies.

   Read more of it here

weekly history

This Week In History

One Madman's Legacy

It was on June 28, 1914 that a single act of violence led to one of the greatest bloodbaths the world had ever seen.

The perpetrator was someone you probably never heard of: Gavrilo Princip. He was a Serbian nationalist who, on that day, murdered Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, and his wife, Sophie.

Within a month, World War I started in Europe. Before it was over, the Habsburg dynasty (the reigning power in Europe for six centuries) would be deposed, deficit spending to finance the war would destroy most countries' currencies and end the gold standard, the income tax was adopted in the United States to pay for the war and the seeds would be planted for the rise of communism in Russia, Nazism in Germany and fascism in Italy.

It's amazing what one madman's deed led to, isn't it?
 It's amazing what one madman's deed led to, isn't it?    

Can it happen here?

 I got this from here

   I will highlight certain key passages that I believe are pertinent and relevant.



Blood In The Streets

June 29, 2011 by John Myers
Blood In The Streets
On June 15, riots broke out in Athens, Greece. On Tuesday, violence erupted again.
The headline above once pertained to bear markets and the pounding investors would take.* Nowadays, real blood is being spilled in Western democratic cities like Vancouver, Canada, and Athens, Greece. With America’s economy stuck in recession and with the dismal and arrogant leadership provided by President Barack Obama and Congress, it is not hard to imagine similar violence in American cities.
Such an idea would have seemed preposterous four years ago. But that was before the financial crisis of 2008. For three years, anger has been building — and not just in places like the Middle East where violence is as much a part of their culture as the Quran.
On June 15, riots broke out in Athens, the birthplace of democracy. On Tuesday, violence erupted again. The outbursts were ignited by further austerity measures ordered by the Greek government.
The free lunch Greek citizens have been getting for decades is being ripped off the table. The country has already gobbled up the first $139 billion European Union-led bailout. Any talks on a second bailout for Greece hinge on a further belt-tightening. The people of Greece, raised on socialist handouts, are in no mood to stay on a diet.
On June 15 and again Tuesday, protestors poured onto the streets throwing rocks at Parliament. Riot police finally quelled the unrest, but more violence is expected.
Last week, Greece was hit by rolling blackouts as workers at the main power utility began 48-hour rolling strikes to protest the company’s privatization, part of austerity plans needed to avoid a national debt default.
Selling off assets in the utility is a step the socialist government in Athens must take in its $71 billion privatization plan, which must be completed by 2015. The Greek people don’t want spending cuts and higher taxes. But the Greek Parliament is staring down the barrel of a gun. If it doesn’t implement changes by the end of the month, the country will not get the last $17 billion of bailout money.
To ease the crisis in Greece, EU finance ministers agreed to raise the amount of money they will provide for countries drowning in debt. The move is a last-ditch attempt to keep Greece’s financial crisis from spreading to Ireland and Portugal.
All of this has international bankers worried. Last week, Canada’s finance minister, Jim Flaherty, warned there is still “a real danger” of contagion from the ongoing debt crises in Europe, including the possibility of some damage to the country’s banking system.
“Canada is not an island — no country, any more, is an island — our economies are clearly interrelated,” Flaherty said at a breakfast appearance in Toronto following emergency discussions with other G7 countries.

It’s All Greek To Me

Flaherty should also worry about Canada’s homegrown rioters.  The same day Athens was burning, so was Vancouver.
On the evening of June 15, the team favored to win Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals, the Vancouver Canucks, lost. The Cup went to the Boston Bruins, who did not cheat their way to the NHL Championship or get help from the referees. They simply were the better team.
Like most sports fans, I am often brokenhearted. At the conclusion of most seasons, I say, “Wait until next year!” But thousands of Vancouver Canuck fans didn’t say that. Instead, they said things like: “Let’s blow up cop cars; let’s beat up bystanders; and let’s throw bricks though windows!” And that is exactly what they did.
More than 100 rioters were arrested by Vancouver police; as many as 1,000 people could face criminal charges. The dragnet will be aided by the audacity of the looters who photographed and videotaped their rampage and then displayed it on social media websites like Facebook.
The physical cost for the few hours of rioting is more than $1 million, but experts say the long-term damage to Vancouver’s tourist industry could be billions of dollars.
As in Athens, the rioters in Vancouver were mostly gangs of youths bent on creating chaos. This begs two questions:
  1. What would happen in a city like Vancouver if the fledgling economic recovery collapses and the citizens face hardship?
  2. What are the chances this kind of violence will erupt in the United States?
On FoxNews.com, Bill O’Reilly wrote: “The question is: Could this kind of thing happen in America? And the answer is yes. About half the population here now believes income redistribution is the right thing to do. We’re setting the table for violence in this country. Once people start depending on the government for their livelihood, for essentials, and then those essentials are taken away, you’re going to have violence. Also, the more loons there are, the more potential for violence there is. Those anarchists want to burn down everything.
“So we can watch this stuff in Vancouver and Greece, but we shouldn’t think it can’t happen here. The pinheads in America are mounting.”

Before you dismiss O’Reilly as a fearmongering right-wing extremist, it is worth noting that someone on the far left is also frightened of chaos coming to America. Democratic strategist James Carville spoke out about civil unrest that might spring from a still-sick U.S. economy on Don Imus’ syndicated radio show, Imus in the Morning.
“(The recession) is a terrible thing that has happened to people’s lives… If 54,000 (new) jobs is the new norm – this is going to be very, very tough. Some people say it just might be one more thing. We don’t know.”
Carville added that the consequences of America’s continuing financial crisis will not be limited to politics, and he warned of civil unrest because of the bleak economic situation.
“People, you know, if it continues, we’re going to start to see civil unrest in this country. I hate to say that, but I think it’s eminently possible.
Carville and O’Reilly have agreed on something. If you don’t believe in the possibility, you would have to be naïve. Economic collapse almost always leads to civil strife. What the Vancouver riots demonstrated is that citizens today are spoiled and think they are entitled to whatever they expect.
I have a feeling the world’s staggering economic recovery is about to fall over dead. And not just for Greece. When that occurs, punks like those who rioted in Vancouver will have a lot more to be upset about than the fact their hockey team didn’t win.
Action to take: Take precautions for you and your family should there be violence in and around your neighborhood. Store extra food and water and have your home well secured. Also take whatever defensive measures you feel are prudent. Secure cash on hand and safely inside your home as well as physical gold and silver.
Yours in good times and bad,
–John Myers
Editor, Myers’ Energy & Gold Report

Monday, June 27, 2011

email from Dad

My Dad sends me occasional e-mails that are political in nature.  Well I figured I would post one.
David Kaiser is a respected historian whose published works have covered a broad range of topics, from European Warfare to American League Baseball. Born in 1947, the son of a diplomat, Kaiser spent his childhood in three capital cities: Washington D.C. , Albany , New York , and Dakar , Senegal .. He attended Harvard University , graduating there in 1969 with a BA. in history. He then spent several years more at Harvard, gaining a PhD in history, which he obtained in 1976.. He served in the Army Reserve from 1970 to 1976.

He is a professor in the Strategy and Policy Department of the United States Naval War College . He has previously taught at Carnegie Mellon, Williams College and Harvard University . Kaiser's latest book, The Road to Dallas, about the Kennedy assassination, was just published by Harvard University Press.

Dr. David Kaiser

History Unfolding
I am a student of history. Professionally, I have written 15 books on history that have been published in six languages, and I have studied history all my life. I have come to think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is simply a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes these exist, but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus..

Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about ten to fifteen years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two.

We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people we know they can never pay back? Why?

We learned just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has "loaned" two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms. That is our money. Yours and mine. And that is three times the $700 billion we all argued about so strenuously just this past September. Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of "we the people," who loaned our powers to our elected leaders. Apparently not.

We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy... Why?

We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why?

We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it simply wants marriage to remain defined as between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?) We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose?

Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, social security is nearly bankrupt, as is Medicare and our entire government. Our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and I know precisely what I am talking about) - the list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth.. It is potentially 1929 x  ten...And we are at war with an enemy we cannot even name for fear of offending people of the same religion, who, in turn, cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so.

And finally, we have elected a man that no one really knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla , Alaska .. All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary (Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? Oh, of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe are more important.)

Mr. Obama's winning platform can be boiled down to one word: Change. Why?

I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now.

This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different power structure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again.

And that is only the beginning..

As a serious student of history, I thought I would never come to experience what the ordinary, moral German must have felt in the mid-1930s In those times, the "savior" was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing. What they should have known was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory. Conservative "losers" read it right now.

And there were the promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and frowned and waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his "brown shirts" would bully and beat them into submission. Which they did - regularly. And then, he was duly elected to office, while a full-throttled economic crisis bloomed at hand - the Great Depression Slowly, but surely he seized the controls of government power, person by person, department by department, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The children of German citizens were at first, encouraged to join a Youth Movement in his name where they were taught exactly what to think. Later, they were required to do so. No Jews of course,

How did he get people on his side? He did it by promising jobs to the jobless, money to the money-less, and rewards for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe , and across the world. He did it with a compliant media - did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and ... change. And the people surely got what they voted for.

If you think I am exaggerating, look it up. It's all there in the history books.

So read your history books. Many people of conscience objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and ridiculed. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lordsin England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though. And the world came to regret that he was not listened to.

Do not forget that Germany was the most educated, the most cultured country in Europe . It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And yet, in less than six years (a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency) it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors. All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them.

As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions, I have a choice: I can either believe what the objective pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me cringe with disgust); I can believe what history is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope I am wrong by closing my eyes, having another latte, and ignoring what is transpiring around me..

I choose to believe the evidence. No doubt some people will scoff at me, others laugh, or think I am foolish, naive, or both. To some degree, perhaps I am. But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe-and why I believe it.

I pray I am wrong. I do not think I am. Perhaps the only hope is our vote in the next elections.

David Kaiser 
Jamestown , Rhode Island
United States          

the fix is in.....

 I was a member of a union while I was at Ford Motor Company, I was also a shop steward or committeeman.  With few exceptions My day was spent with 5% of the workforce causing 95% of my workload.  Basically they wanted to not work but get paid.  These same people would always say"Ford owes me"  But when I would go into the parking lot they would be with the new foreign cars, I asked them" what about loyalty to Ford Motor Company?"  The reply usually was " fuck ford, this is MY money."  I would then comment that loyalty is a 2 way street, and you are hypocritical."   My experiences in a union have been educational.  From my opinion was that the union  has strayed from its origional intent for worker protection, to basically coddling the sorry employees.  I had a lot of  issues with this.  Most of the workforce had issues with the coddling of the sorry emnployees.

How far will President Obama go to advance the interests of organized labor? Awfully far. We know this not only from the effort to keep Boeing from building a plane in a right-to-work state, South Carolina, but also from the way Delta Airlines is being railroaded into recognizing unions its employees have repeatedly rejected.
Obama carrying the unions
In June alone, the Obama administration adopted rules likely to discourage employers from hiring law firms that specialize in thwarting union organizing drives, and moved to shorten union certification campaigns, long a goal of organized labor.
But the targeting of Delta stands out. Following Delta’s merger with Northwest Airlines in 2008, its flight attendants voted against joining the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA), and other employees decided against signing on with four separate unions of the International Association of Machinists and Aero-space Workers (IAM).
That didn’t end what has become a union crusade against Delta, abetted by Obama. Now, from all appearances, the fix is in—against Delta. It starts with the National Mediation Board, which governs labor relations in the airline and railroad industries. Obama stacked the NMB deck by putting two former union senior executives on the three-member board, Linda Puchala of the AFA and Harry Hoglander of the Air Line Pilots.
That tilted the board sharply against Delta. At the urging of the AFL-CIO, the NMB changed the rule for airline and railroad union elections. For 75 years, a majority of the entire cohort of workers was required in a vote to unionize. The board reduced it to a majority of those voting.
And the two unions were tipped the change was imminent. They had filed for elections under the old rule. Then, just before the NMB’s decision, they withdrew those requests, only to reinstate them later in order to have the more union-friendly new rule apply to the Delta elections.
The unions lost anyway. In the case of the flight attendants, it was the third time they had voted against the AFA. But the AFA and the IAM have doggedly refused to take “no” for an answer.
There are three reasons for their persistence. First, the vote was an embarrassing defeat for organized labor, already shrunken to the point of representing only 6.9 percent of the private sector workforce. Union leaders were unwilling to give up on what has been, at Delta, the biggest organizing drive since 70,000 workers at Ford Motor Company were unionized in 1941.
Second, 17,000 Northwest employees, inherited in the merger, had been union members. But they will become nonunion if the rejection of unionization by Delta employees is certified by the NMB. (Delta pilots have been union members for years.)
Third—and most important—the unions know they now have an indispensable ally, the pro-union majority on the National Mediation Board. To take advantage of this, both the AFA and IAM have accused Delta of illegally interfering in the union elections and asked the board to overturn the results and order a new election.
The board took the first step in June when it announced it would investigate whether Delta had acted improperly in opposing the unions. Should it decide Delta had, the NMB would call for still another election.
This could go on and on. Unions routinely accuse employers of using coercive tactics in elections, insist employees were denied a free choice, and demand a new round of voting. The AFA and IAM are counting on the board to go along.
The unions haven’t made it easy for the NMB. Their formal complaints make an exceptionally weak case. Their argument boils down to the fact that Delta vigorously opposed unionization and made the case that both the airline and employees would be better off without the unions. Nothing illegal about that.
The unions argue that Delta went beyond simple opposition and committed “gross interference.” But their detailed complaints are flimsy, some of them downright absurd.
The first offense cited in the IAM complaint was that Delta told employees they “must vote.” Indeed they must, Delta said, if they want to vote against the union. This was to distinguish the old rule, under which employees not voting were counted as having voted “no,” from the new rule in which only an actual “no” vote will count, the airline said.
That wasn’t the only allegedly wrongful conduct the IAM cited on this issue. Delta CEO Richard Anderson, in an audio message to employees, “sounded very militaristic,” the IAM said. Maybe so, but it’s not illegal either.
This was another IAM objection: “Delta engaged in a massive and omnipresent anti-IAM campaign designed to so overwhelm employees that their free choice was suppressed.” Is the IAM oblivious to how stupid and impressionable this makes Delta employees look? Chances are, the Delta workers noticed that unionized Northwest employees made less money.
     The AFA took up this matter as well, saying Delta “transformed” the election into a “mandatory directive to vote ‘no’ against AFA.” The airline “so overwhelmed the atmosphere that one flight attendant thought the election was a ‘company sanctioned event.’ ”
With such dubious arguments, the unions have put the National Mediation Board to the test. If it’s open-minded and unbiased, as the board claims to be, it’s bound to reject the bid for new elections. If it’s a tool of organized labor, it will go along.
Obama won’t play a direct role in the decision. But he created the pro-labor majority on the NMB, just as the folks who run the Department of Labor and control the National Labor Relations Board are his people. So he’s responsible for elevating unions to a privileged status.
You might suspect he aims to change the Democratic party into the Labor party. If that’s the end he has in sight, he’s taking all the right steps. There’s an alternative explanation: Obama is just kowtowing to one more liberal pressure group.