A Goal For 2009

I have decided that I will go an learn a few trade skills - partly for fun and partly because when I retire to my new gentleman's farm I want to be able to do a lot of things for myself. There are several things I have toyed with over the years that I am not particularly good at. My father always seemed to be good and most everything - perhaps this resolution for next year will be dedicated to his memory and they way he always impressed me with "stuff".

What do I plan to learn you might ask?

Well for starters I want to take a course in small engine repair, and one in welding also - I can do a little of both but it has been a long time since I put those skills to work. I also would like to become more proficient at gunsmithing and perhaps even learn to reload my own ammunition - my cousins are good at that. I know guys that can replace and even fabricate broken springs - I would like to be able to do that.

Of course there are many things I need to learn about solar power systems - I do not plan to live off the grid but being a little self-sufficient is in my plans and I would like not to have to pay someone to install it all.

I just subscribed again to Mother Earth News and I am very excited about that. I will probably determine that there are many more things I must add to my list to learn and relearn.

My experience with farming has been limited all these years in the military - consisting of tomato plants in the back yard in the years I was home enough to tend to them. My childhood and teen years were spent under the demanding eye of my father making me work his fields like a slave but I have probably forgotten much of what I once knew. My reading list has slowly gravitated toward the subject and I expect over the coming months that will increase.

It is odd that I always envisioned that I would likely teach after I retired from the military but as the time approaches my desires lean more toward learning traditional tradeskills for my own benefit and hobby. I have been wise and thrifty so needing to work was never in my plans but wanting to be useful is a human requirement.

On a related note, I read a article a few days ago that suggested that young people are duped by the notion that they must go to a four year institution to be successful and perhaps we have a "university bubble". I have always thought as much, standards it seems must diminish with more people accepted and colleges acting essentially like businesses filling up seats.

The article suggested the best thing most young people could do out of high school is learn a trade skill. If the economy tanks more the trend will be to repair instead of replace.

This suggestion makes a great deal of practical sense. I do not believe most college students learn very much anyway - they are not mature enough for higher learning at 18-20. Now if that same kid learned a tradeskill, learned the value of hard work and then later went to a four year college - I suspect they would actually learn something.

Oh yeah - one more goal for 2009 is to mail off for one of those Dr. Div. degrees from the "One Big Church of the Immaculate Prefecture" so y'all have to call me Dr. before I have to call IKANTSPEL "Doctor" (his will be real BTW but it will not matter because mine will arrive in the mail first and as Nathan Bedford Forrest said "firstest with the mostest" is what counts)

Stumble It!

Ammunition Accountability Act

From Charleston Voice

Well the Liberal Gun Grabbers are at it again. Now they want to fingerprint your bullets. They will charge you more. They will make it a crime to possess bullets that do not bear a serial number. Your name and designated serial number ammo will be stored in a sweet ol' database, of course. Tricky bastards are running this game at the state level, trying to fly under the radar and avoid national outrage. Probably there is legislation pending in your state right now.The 2008 Legislative session has begun, and the Ammunition Accountability Act is being introduced across the country. Below is a summary of legislation that has been introduced throughout the United States. To view the bills' status click on the links to the individual bills. Sample Legislation:

The Ammunition Accountability Act-Alabama, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Washington.

I am amazed but not surprised. Contrary to all the debates carried on for years that our gun rights would be stripped Janet Reno style in midnight raids (providing us the opportunity to shoot some of the criminals in the door jam, on the stairs and just outside the bedroom before they kill us) it is all going down by degrees- "sneaky-like". Notice if you will that a vast majority of the states considering this are southern states.....We have lost our minds and our way.

Stumble It!

Preamble to Social Mayhem

From a piece by Tim Case

Given also that the society that elected the president-in-waiting is dominated by blind nationalism, trendy savior-worship, an unending ignorance of history, economics and philosophy and devoid of a critical thought process, I fear history will say of this moment, "the civilization of the modern world suffered final collapse."

Stumble It!

Not With a Bang, But With a Whimper

This is How The World Ends - Part IV

If, as I have contented in the first three parts of this series of post, the following is true -

1. We Americans are woefully ignorant of our rights, our Constitution and political philosophy in general
2. Our Constitutional Republic from those nice stories in history books is long dead
3. Our election process is completely incapable of fixing any of this (or our other massive problems of wars, failed economies etc. etc.)

Then what does the future hold and what are the solutions (or coping mechanisms if no solution is apparent)?

Some talk of a revolution in our future - but revolutions are a complicated business. Middle classes do not start revolutions or even participate or support them until they are well under way and almost over. Sure the middle class often provide the intelligentsia of a revolution but that is a small part of the bigger requirement. The rich do not start violent revolutions - they buy what they want in influence and power. The true foot soldiers of any revolution are the dispossessed, the poor and down-trodden.

Therein lies the fix, the poor and downtrodden in the US are riding pretty fat and happy (by relative standards of poor and downtrodden) on a US government gravy train. There are enough people within government that are capable of reading that understand the key ingredients in civil discontent. So long as a willing and compliant middle-class exists to consume and pay taxes the government will be able to buy the happiness and contentment of the poor. It is as simple as that.

In any event, no sane man looks to revolution with glee. Anyone that believes the War of American Independence was a revolution simply does not understand what the term really means. It was a separatist, nah a secession movement, not a revolution.

The foot soldiers (those poor and down trodden) are apt to follow the banner of any fool with a plan and a promise once the shooting starts. Change for the sake of change is something rationale people fear, particularly considering the history of revolutions.

No, the government will keep the poor placated, and in the event they occasionally rise up in violent riots the government will put them down and the middle class will rejoice that their welfare was protected.

There are probably many in the middle class that would like the idea of change, even if it involved violence. They probably also have a solid idea of what they would do to put everything back the way it was meant to be. But, when the rubber hit the road as they say the mad middle class guy has a house, a mini van and he really does not have time to start a revolution because he has to be at work by 9am in the morning. Middle-classes almost always trade safety and security for rights and freedoms.

Secession then you say. Well as an strong advocate of the legality of secession and a proponent of states' rights you might think I would say this is the solution...I doubt it.

First, if we are honest about it there is but one government now. Our states have lost all of their rights and all of their will to attempt to assert any rights. Government down to the local level is intertwined via federal grants and regulations. In cases where the federal government has not overtly asserted some control or influence many of our state and local government officials deffer to the question of "what is the national standard".

Second, our states no longer have any semblance of a heterogeneous culture or common polity. A woman from Arkansas can be a Senator from New York for goodness sakes. People move, leave familial and cultural bonds in pursuit of paper money and trinkets. A secession movement would have a very hard time in any state with such a mix of people.

Third, the middle class is bought and paid for just as the poor - it is called social security. Until it fails people expect to get what is coming to them - secede and lose that...never. A soul sold for 30 pieces of silver.


Pretty grim stuff and I am simply not wise enough to see a way out of this. Early on in this series of post I used comparisons of the German people from 1933 on to relate to some of our traits. We talked about the coup attempts on Hitler's life and the fact that a real revolution was never a possibility in Germany. Hitler may have died in one of the coups but nothing essential would have changed. The undoing of the Germans had already occurred, they were powerless (I did not say blameless) to alter their fate. I fear we are in the same boat. We cannot vote our way out of this mess now (too may accommodations in the past), revolution is not a realistic possibility and neither is secession.

I like optimist, they inspire people. Doomsayers just scare the heck out of folks. Yet, I find it difficult to muster optimism about our future.

I will now do something I have never done in my life, quote Martin Luther King Jr.

I call on the young men of America who must make a choice today to take a stand on this issue. Tomorrow may be too late. The book may close. And don't let anybody make you think that God chose America as his divine, messianic force to be a sort of policeman of the whole world. God has a way of standing before the nations with judgment, and it seems that I can hear God saying to America, "You're too arrogant! And if you don't change your ways, I will rise up and break the backbone of your power, and I'll place it in the hands of a nation that doesn't even know my name. Be still and know that I'm God

This was from a speech called "It's A Dark Day In Our Nation" explaining why he opposed the Vietnam War but the words are applicable for any number of events in our recent and not so recent history.

We have done wrong. We have allowed greed, lust, gluttony, sloth, wrath, envy and pride to rule us. We have even turned those vices into virtues of sorts. We have abandoned the wise teachings, learned through history, of our forefathers in preference for our perceived enlightened wisdom of modernity. We have traded liberty and freedom for safety and security.

Commenting on the American experiment Alex de Tocqueville said, "America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great." and "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money."

Pretty astute for a Frenchman in the mid 19th century but correct nonetheless.

And thus the world we thought we always knew, in the final analysis, ended not with a bang but with a whimper.

Stumble It!

Elections Will Not Fix Things

This is the Way the World Ends - Part III

Say what you will about the Ron Paul supporters the fact is those loyal souls that got into the trenches and went to the Republican Convention as delegates to cast their votes appear to have received the ultimate rebuff.

...20 Ron Paul buttons and a handful of other things, he was stopped by security which called on upon an apparent supervisor, who directed all the materials to be confiscated. She told him, "You can't bring that in here, this is McCain territory. (Federal Jack)

This is but one small account of the hundreds reported during the primaries. The point here is that the two-party system is not receptive to any sort of real challenge or change. I would be curious to see the results of a future historians analysis of the "Ron Paul Revolution". At a casual glance it seems odd to me that the man was able to raise so much money from ordinary people and yet garner less than, at best, 10% of the primary vote count.

Many claim there was widespread hanky-panky afoot, I am not inclined to accept conspiracy theories but with the proven pattern of corruption prevalent in all areas of politics I would not be at all surprised if something nefarious occurred. The web is full of alleged evil-doing committed against the Paul campaign. Of course the Nader folks claim the same thing. My point in highlighting Ron Paul above is to demonstrate a perception (perhaps reality) that the major parties will simply not tolerate a real maverick.

Outside of the "for us or against us", intellectually dishonest two-party system Americans have become accustomed to all sorts of other frauds and perceived fraud within our electoral process. We simply cannot have an election without the taint of scandal.

Here again, it does not particularly matter if these perceptions are based wholly or partly on reality. Ours is essentially a system built upon trust. We the People delegated certain enumerated powers to the government in exchange for an expectation of, if not good government, at least tolerable government. Within the scope of tolerable I believe most reasonable men would include trustworthy. Without trust all the government has to retain legitimacy is propaganda, special interest payouts and coercion. Without the trust of the people government ceases to be tolerable or legitimate.

Americans know that elections and elected officials are frauds, yet 54% of us still pick a team and cast a ballot as if it were American Idol or some such trivial nonsense. A percentage of that group still hopes that a few good men of character and principle might change things yet even that voter block realizes that most of our representatives are influenced primarily by monied interest and their own desire to keep getting elected. We know DC corrupts all but the incorruptible.

I would be guessing but I would put the percentage of voters that believe that real change might be brought about by Mr. Smith going to Washington at below 25%, my observation of the rest is that they are mere party people (i.e. team supporters) that see politics as a duality.

What of the 46% that do not vote? These people have given up, either by ignorance or painfully informed knowledge. They do not trust that a difference can be had, by extrapolation they do not trust the system and have opted out.

In one way or another this 46% has come to realize something that the rest of us have yet to learn. That is the system is broken so completely that no element of the system itself can be used to fix it. It is akin to having a virus on your computer that has corrupted you anti-virus software - you will not fix the system without something new and external to the present system.

The sad commentary on all of this is that the 46 percenters have opted out without a plan of action. They have accepted taxation without representation and government not of their consent. To a government that has lost trust these are the perfect sorts of serfs - perfectly willing to work the plantation without getting uppity.

Considering that another 25% or so (might be a low number) are perfectly willing to play the game and cheer one of the establishment teams along the small minority of us that really see a need for change and want to do something about it are inconsequential.

If on the off chance that one of ours might get more than 1-2% of the votes in say a primary it is too easy to marginalize these "radical views" and perhaps (as suggested in some of the links listed above) outright lie, cheat and steal to keep the system under control.

Voting will not save us from out eventual end -- a few candidates of principle rising up occasionally serve to keep the truth out there and prove the futility of voting but that is about it.

We will happily vote ourselves into our ultimate destruction...as have so many other people that lived under tyranny since the practical application of democracy.

Stumble It!

Gaza

You notice I have been silent on the entire Gaza thing - what is there to say really? Bush the Second thought the answer to all the problems in the world was to give everyone democracy - Hamas gained power thought the ballot box. Mob rule is strange like that.

Now the Israelis are pounding Gaza with US weapons, technology and munitions with the world-wide impression they they do not act without US approval.

Really I do not see how this might affect us at all...nah we are good, nobody will hold any ill will toward the US for this.

Joshua is tracking the actual intelligent commentary on this event...go there.

Stumble It!

This is the Way the World Ends - Part II

Have you ever stopped to consider that The Glorious Revolution was really not that glorious. I am serious, the last ruling Stuart monarch did his family name no service by running to France in the face of William III of Orange but the events that followed were certainly less impressive from a constitutional perspective. The end result, the monarchy replaced via methods completely outside of the scope of constitutional means - in effect establishing a de facto government in the Kingdom of Great Britain. Ok, it is all water under the bridge and perhaps does not matter, unless you are a stickler for the rule of law, then this little historical fact has some merit.

Have you ever considered deeply that The War For Southern Independence (or Second American War of Independence or even the American Civil War if you absolutely must) played a key role in fundamentally altering the nature of our republic - to the degree of perhaps eliminating legitimate government of law, de jure, and replacing it with a de facto government not of consent but of conquest?

Ok I see a few of you raised your hands on the last issue, but I would venture to bet that of the minority that understand that last point few think it matters much to our modern situation.

What about FDR and his New Deal? Are you like most Americans in the belief that he did what he had to do in hard times to set things right?

I could go on, the list could occupy my writing each day for many years on the examples and reasons why we have lost hold of the foundations of legitimate government and why it matters. It mattered in Britain in 1688 - pragmatist made decisions that they thought best in the short term with the result of involving Britain in continental wars that were not of their interest. These things matter here as well as our noble idea of Republic has deteriorated into something much less wholesome.

Most Americans are unwilling, or unable, to look at our past to see why these things might matter.

In my last post I talked about the crimes of the German people in relation to their enabling of Hitler. These were crimes born of pragmatism, i.e. we want someone to fix "this" now, and a fundamental ignorance of issues related to rights and constitutional law. The German people were educated beyond their European peers on most matters but woefully ignorant of key elements of western political philosophy. I say, without fear of contradiction, that the American people are today infinitely more ignorant of such ideas.

These things matter, yet the masses do not know. In the words of that evil Rumsfeld, they do not even "know what they do not know".

How is it that Americans accept, without riots, protest and yes even revolt The Patriot Act? How do we accept reinterpretation of the Posse Comitatus Act and allow troops to patrol our streets alongside increasingly belligerent and dangerous militarized police?

The same way we accepted the IRS, Social Security, federal police forces, a steady erosion of states rights and any number of of other clearly unconstitutional things that our Federal government took upon itself to do and in doing so added powers unto itself it was never given by us or our states. We accepted it, a few spoke out and then it passed into yesterday's news.

We have a pretty good track record of a few voices crying out, "hey that is not right" when government does these things and then moving on with life. I ask you, what is the point in having a contract, having laws and rules, if one party redefines the rules as it wishes and the other party never actually does anything to set things right?

Some say this is why we have elections but apparently the election process has done nothing to stem the tide of government, specifically the federal government, assuming any powers unto itself it desires.

These things matter, they matter when the population is too ignorant to know when wrong is done to them or too scared to do anything effective about it on the rare occasion that they do realize.

When the world as we know it finally passes from current knowledge into a fabled history it will be in large part because of the sloth, ignorance and avarice of the population.

Stumble It!

This is the Way the World Ends - Part I

With Valkyrie now in theaters the History Channel predictably aired a special feature on the historical events surrounding the story. One statement at the beginning of the show troubled me especially, just as it has every time I have ever heard it stated.

To paraphrase: "The German people did not generally support Hitler or the Nazi's and really had no choice but to go along with what occurred...they were innocent".

I disagree with this for many reasons. My views might have been in vogue 60 years ago but no more - everyone is a victim it seems, so too the German people.

Yes there were resistance movements - my favorite is that of the White Rose (die Weiße Rose). Much is now made of the resistance from the officers in the Army. As I discussed in my post When Is Disobediance a Moral Imperative General Ludwig Beck is perhaps the only senior officer that might really be considered to have actually resisted. Many of the other generals may have considered the Nazi's and Hitler dangerous but they still commanded their corps, divisions, air wings and armies in following Nazi orders. In reality the only time that senior officers seriously considered removing Hitler was after it became obvious that he was going to lose the war for Germany.

I do not believe the officers of the German army should receive any sort of pass - they did not resign en masse and more importantly they did not refuse to carry out Nazi orders. If all the senior officers had simply said "no" the Army would not have moved at all in 1939. A leader that nobody will follow is just taking a walk - they could have made Hitler invalid.

Of the numerous lieutenants, captains, majors and colonels that participated in various plots to kill Hitler we should remember and reflect - however, their actions and bravery does not exonerate the German officer corps as a whole.

What of the German people - is it as the History Channel and so many others have tried to portray over the years? Do they get a pass a mere victims?

We can say that Hitler was pretty clear in his ideology, writing it down and publishing in in 720 pages in 1925. Anyone that has attempted to navigate Mein Kampf has no doubt that Hitler did not hide his goals and objectives. The German people could have known if they looked.

It was the German people in 1928 acquiesced to the Law on Firearms and Ammunition under the Weimar Republic. This law was geared toward the Nazis and the Communist. Of course the Nazis were much better armed than the Communist by 1928 and neither group gave up any weapons - only the ordinary citizen complied with the law. With everyone disarmed SA was indeed a pretty scary force on the street.

So here we have the first crime of the German people. In the parlance of the modern American gun-rights movement the Germans were all prags (pragmatist), willing to give up their individual gun rights for some notion of a greater good or simply because the government said they should. After all they were allowed to keep that antique hunting rifle so they still had gun rights, what is the big deal.

The second crime of the German people is obviously their stupidity at the ballot box. In 1930 the Nazi's ran a media and entertainment campaign par with any modern US presidential campaign - all show with the substance below the surface. The Germans elected the Nazi's, and this must never be forgotten. They voted for change, they voted on emotion and for showmanship. (Is our election process any different?) The German people, during difficult times, gave the keys to the kingdom to Hitler, it is impossible to later claim innocence for his actions.

The third crime? They did not rise up and either passively or actively resist when it became apparent what Hitler intended to so with his power.

Is there modern relevance to all of this? Indeed there is - this is how our world ends, the world we grew up understanding. More in part II.

Stumble It!

Militarized Police

Rubicon in the Rear-View, Part I: Militarizing the Police I just read again a post by William Norman Grigg from last Oct. that meshed well with some things that have been on my mind lately.

First, if you go to YouTube and search for Katrina or Iowa floods and cop abuse you will find buried in there several examples of what I can best describe as - beefy, bald, junior college linebacker looking cops. Ignore for a minute the actions you may see on these videos that might upset your sense of right and wrong, just focus on the cops themselves.

Then consider this quote from Grigg's article -

"I served in the U.S. military and after I got out I ended up becoming a cop in 2002," recalls Bill, who was Battalion Soldier of the Year in 1999 and "Top Gun" in his police academy class. Bill shared his experiences in reaction to a podcast I recently did with Lew Rockwell examining the emergence of America's unitary, militarized Homeland Security state.

At the time he joined the force, many of the veterans "were old school, having started in law enforcement before I was born. They were tough but fair. They treated people with respect."

However, the "old school" officers "were forced out of the department [and it] took on a military feel," Bill continues. "You were expected to take [a] `just follow orders and obey the [department administration attitude], no matter what, regardless if it was constitutional or not. The amount of force used during arrests went through the roof."

Consider that for a minute...these "beefy, bald, juco linebackers" do not look anything like the "old school officers" we grew up being taught to call officer and sir. If we had only this quote from a guy that Grigg quoted we might say it was an isolated thing. It is not. It is real and happening everywhere.

Consider that the police operated for years by simply asking for compliance (which they likely received readily from law-abiding citizens). Do a search for Taser on YouTube or elsewhere. The grim reality is now cops do not ask you they tell you and then count to 2 or 3 in their head and if you have not complied with their demand to lay down in the street in your good clothes they torture you by shocking you until you comply. It does not matter if you are an 80 year old woman in a wheelchair either (yeah Google it).

And what of the growing propensity to kick first ask questions later. There are too many cases recorded by news outlets all across the land of SWAT teams kicking in doors to homes in the middle of the night for trivial matters or worse kicking in the wrong door entirely. A chaplain friend of mine had that happen to his family while stationed in DC. Cops do not even bother to knock during reasonable hours anymore - even for folks that would not present a threat. Kick door, shoot dog, terrorize family - that is standard now.

Here is an interesting piece by Paul Craig Roberts.

Perhaps it is a form of social justice. Black folks have half joked around me all my life that they do not trust the police - over the last several years I have come to not to trust the police. I have never had a run in that is "YouTube worthy" (I suspect if I had such a run in I would be dead now and not writing this) but whenever I am pulled over for a speeding ticket I wonder if the guy behind the lights will do something to me that will force out my fighting side. Maybe the black folks had it right all along - maybe we are all losing our civil liberties because we stood by and let some of us lose theirs. I sound way too liberal right there but perhaps there is some truth to that. A right denied to some is a right that all will eventually lose.


I tell you I would feel a lot safer in a town that did not have a SWAT team, where the police carried service revolvers instead of Glocks, had shotguns latched to the dash instead of SMG's and the police department never accepted Federal money for anything. Oh and by the way - I would much rather deal with Officer Bob, a 30 year veteran with a warm smile, than these young fat boys that seem to be so much in vogue for door kicking and civilian abuse. Anyone know of such a town?

One wonders what it will take to break this cycle? Would the thought that perhaps they might not go home safe and sound after kicking in the door of a family (without even checking to see if knocking would have worked) or tasering a motorist because said motorist had the audacity to ask why they were being told to lay down (a reasonable question if they knew they were not doing anything wrong). I suspect that might make a few thugs think twice, it would make the rest of them comfortable in the knowledge that their methods were "required" to compel compliance for our own safety.

After all, it is all about our safety...right?

I know there are still good cops out there worthy of being called officer - but they are a dying breed.

Stumble It!

A Very Good Read

En Route to Military Rule by William Norman Grigg is a must read. At first glance one might take the concepts of this article to be just a bit over the top. As I reflect upon my professional knowledge of the subject coupled with what I observe elsewhere I do not find it so implausible. Frightening that...

I found it interesting that a link within Grigg's post references a 1992 article by one GEN Dunlap, "The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012," Interesting not only for the read but the date of 2012.... The "Homeland Security Brigade" will be operational by 2011, this guy writes in 1992 a fictional account of a coup that occurs in 2012...all the new agers are up in arms about some big event in 2012 (you know the Mayan calender and all that)...I am kidding really, no worries I do not buy into all that stuff- I just mentioned it as it is odd.

(I also found it interesting the Grigg was a Patton admirer in 1999 but has reconsidered, I can count myself in that small number)

Stumble It!

Rattling of Sabers

It is interesting in these times of economic introspection (i.e. that is all we care about) that so little discussion is occurring on the blogsphere about the saber rattling along the Indian-Pakistan border.

In all honestly, from my worldview, such events do NOT hold the same importance as they do to those that see the role of the US as some sort of global interventionist entity. I do realize the fact that we are under our past, present and future leadership a global interventionist entity - I just do not accept that as the right answer even if it is the current fact.

Saber rattling is often just that but in this case we have two nuclear armed nations with weak governments playing this game of brinkmanship.

In terms of what this all means to Obama's stated strategy of "getting an easy win" in Afghanistan it does not bode well. With Pakistan pulling 20,000 troops off an already porous Afghan border the prospects of an "easy win" become infinitely more problematic.

Can the governments of India and Pakistan exercise enough positive control over their forces facing each other across an increasingly militarized border? If they cannot prevent the predictable "cross-border incidents" can they then prevent an escalation? More importantly what will our interventionist thinkers come up with to mitigate and "control" such a situation?

This is worth watching.

Stumble It!

Truth

This blog is called "Sell Civilization Short" for a reason. Civilizations do not fade out peacefully, as a rule. When they crumble, they expose the ugliness of rot.

...and I agree, a simple survey of just a sampling of headlines on a daily basis supports this claim

Stumble It!

Baltic Dry Index Falls 93%

Stumble It!

Ron Paul on Martial Law

Sigh

Stumble It!

"Great News" at Christmas

As I mentioned in a previous article my family and I were in the market for a piece of rural/farm property. I thought going into my search that I would find what we were looking for at a reasonable price. I assumed that there would not be a lot of other people competing for the land.

Several of the real estate agents I talked to told me that their phones were ringing off the hook with people calling (and buying) from out of state. I was beat out on two of the most wonderful properties by such competition. Several others disappeared over night before I had the chance to even talk to anyone about them.

I blame it on two things. First, there may be people just like me that want a place that they could live sustainably if they had to. Second, and more troubling, is the end result of our own government interfering with the free market - by lowering interest rates to reignite the mortgage boom. This article talks about the very real possibility that a vast availability of financing and low interest rates will cause property prices to increase rapidly - the same thing that caused much of this mess in the first place.

I feel personally injured by this. If the people I was "competing" with to buy this land were simply opportunist using low interest loans made available by the government using some of my own money I can only say in the simplest of terms - I was screwed.

I made an offer to buy a place yesterday that has less land than I hoped to get (but is also a lot less that what I was planning and willing to pay). It has all the things I wanted, rural, plenty of acreage, two ponds a stream, some woods, some pasture and a little cabin. It was not my first or second choice, but I am happy all the same. I am still angry at our meddling government - but that is nothing new.

Perhaps that "opportunist" that bought that piece of land adjacent to the piece I just bought will be happy to sell it to me in a few months if the bad news keeps on rolling in -perhaps I will get it pretty cheap too.

Reports on consumer spending, jobless claims, durable goods show more weakness is likely

U.S. falls deeper into recession

Stumble It!

Reply to a Comment

In response to my post "When is Disobedience a Moral Imperative", Gibbons writes:

I've read both the Patton Papers and the Rommel Papers. "Infantry Attacks" by Rommel, writing of his experiences in World War I, is one of my favorite books.

I understand the admiration of Rommel. But I don't understand your comment about Patton. There's a recent article suggesting Patton was killed because of his "dangerous" opinions about the Russians. If so then he's very much like Rommel, who lost his life because of his breaking with Hitler's program.

I'd be interested to read more about why you think Patton is the worst sort of human being.

I admit I made a statement of opinion as fact without providing sufficient evidence to support my position. I can say this from my understanding of and study of Patton. He was selfish, self-centered, profane, and more than likely a little bit unhinged mentally. Judged by the standards of his contemporaries it cannot be argued that he was not profane - although that may be only a relatively minor vice. I believe, and trust that in academic terms it could be easily proven, that Patton was motivated his entire professional career by what he thought was best for Patton. He all but bribed superiors that could do him favors and spared no opportunity to put his peers down to his own benefit. That is my opinion of the man and the reason I think so lowly of him.

He was successful on the field of battle because of his audacity, and the well-known fact that by the time America entered the war the German army was stripped of all its former advantages. I believe his audacity was born of his desire for Patton to personally succeed - he believed the myth in his mind. I certainly would not have wanted to serve in one of his units as a private soldier.

I agree with you that he had it right about the Russians. One might say that even a broken clock is right twice a day. I tend to believe that while he was certainly capable of seeing the Communist for what they were, he was probably also very happy to see another enemy that might offer him the opportunity to command in battle just a little longer. That is never the right or moral reason for a soldier to support war. Perhaps he was killed for these opinions but I am not sure his opinions on this matter arose from the most noble of places.

Make no mistake, as a child and young man I idolized Patton. As you see, my views have soured over the years.

Essentially as I compare and contrast Patton and Rommel it boils down to this. Rommel believed audacity saved the lives of his soldiers in the long run. Patton believe audacity won victories that might attach to his name.

Stumble It!

I Promise I wrote mine first

I penned my last post before going to bed last night only to find this post ('Question 46,' Revisited) by Norman Grigg on the Lew Rockwell site this am. It might appear that my thoughts were spurred by his but that is not the case. In any event his is a good read and amplifies and corrects a misstatement I made about this 1994 survey (I actually thought more Marines said "yes" tot he most nefarious questions).

I am glad other people are saying these things, otherwise you might just think I am making it all up....

Stumble It!

When Is Disobediance a Moral Imperative

I mentioned previously that I have just completed reading a book titled "Patton and Rommel". I do not have it near by so I apologize for not knowing the author. I essentially skipped all the chapters about Patton as there is nothing about the man that I want to know that I do not know. He was, in my opinion, the lowest sort of man.

Rommel fascinates me. Not so much for his successes and failures on the field of battle but rather for the actual story of his life. Here is a man that counted himself lucky to have a job in the economic turmoil of the Weimar Republic during the 20's, a job that he loved no less.

I find it truly engaging to imagine the thoughts of a thoroughly professional German officer (professional in the real sense) as events unfolded and the Nazi's gained power. A middle-class family man that had spent his entire adult life in uniform probably did not see a lot of other options, resigning in disgust meant poverty. Principles are hard things to live up to and Rommel was no exception to the rule. He remained in uniform with the same hope many German officers held - "the Nazi's are just a phase".

My wife and I were discussing many matters today, most theoretical. We talked of the events in Greece and elsewhere and the predictions of greater gloom on the economic front here. We discussed the ugly "what-ifs". As a man that has spent his entire adult life in uniform with just a wee bit more to go before I am allowed to take it off I think deeply about the worst-case what-if's. I told my wife at one point "you know there have been many things I have done that I did not understand or agree with but there are others that I simply will not do". These are words I did not have to speak, she knows, but I uttered them all the same. I will never be part of any of the business we have done in Iraq in the US, never.

I recall a survey conducted among Marines back in the 1990's that asked something along the lines - "if ordered to disarm American citizens would you follow orders". A vast majority said yes. This was long before we had a precedent of the National Guard and the Coast Guard disarming citizens after Katrina. This was before our military had seven years experience as a constabulary force on foreign soil. Such a survey is not even required today, we know the answer.

In 1993 the Command and General Staff College highlighted a paper written by Major (General Staff) Dr. Ulrich F. Zwygart entitled "How Much Obedience Does an Officer Need?". It is discouraging that I cannot find an example, dirivative or offshoot of this topic written and published by any US Officer. I recommend this paper to anyone interested in what the professional officers in the German Army did and failed to do about the "constitutional crisis" in Germany in the 1930's. in Zxygart's words "Conscience, which regulates man's impulsive aggressive action, is diminished, however, when man enters a hierarchical structure".

Not so for Chief of the General Staff General Ludwig Beck --

Beck criticized Hitler's aggressive plans for territorial policy that could only lead to defeat and reduction of Germany. Beck renounced a brilliant career, preferring to resign in protest rather than serve a regime that did not act in favor of its people. His opposition was rooted in a firm Christian faith and in a conservative attitude that believed legality, integrity, ethics, and responsibility were crucial for the servant of a nation. When Beck resigned in 1938, he was motivated not only by "professional and political knowledge" but also by the "dictate of conscience" --believing that
"obedience ends where knowledge, conscience, and responsibility prohibit the execution of an order." Doubtless, the conspirators, civilian and military, held him in high esteem and looked to him as their true leader.

Several officers junior to him made the same brave choice - others silently plotted, while most gave in and played along. I am not certain that we have many men of Beck's character serving in our military today. And while I do not find it conceivable that our government could become as overtly murderous as that of the Nazi's I do not find it inconceivable that it could radically and fundamentally change our very concept of freedom amidst some major crisis. One needs only look at the radical redefining of rights over the last few years to understand how that could go. One need only look at the evaporation of posse comitatus by degrees to understand the government's willingness and intention to use the military to retain control and power is said crisis "requires" it.

To resign amidst this economic turmoil and the much worse troubles that would precipitate a conclusion that "obedience ends where knowledge, conscience, and responsibility prohibit the execution of an order." That is harsh, forfeiting an earned retirement is harsh - but there are some orders I simply will never follow. I pray I never receive such orders and have to follow my conscience into personal ruin.

Stumble It!

Sustainability, Survivalist Seeking Like-minded to Join

I have pondered doing this for a few weeks and finally came down on the side of action for reasons I cannot exactly pin-point -simply because I do not fully know myself. I am writing this more for the potential like mind that may some day stumble across this post though a Google search. I decided to do this because I know there must be someone out there with the same dreams, hopes, fears, values and morals as I. Maybe this will work.

A disclaimer to anyone that may find this and be interested in further discussions (my truth in advertising bit here). I do not adhere to any general conspiracy theories. I do not hold any sort of apocalyptic views based upon a specific date or spiritual event (i.e. 2012, "quickening" or any other that are out there). I do not believe the history of the rest of my life will be any different that a sampling of the history of mankind - periods of relative calm separated by wars, plague, poverty, starvation and death. I prepare based solely on that understanding of the human condition and our history.

I am a Christian of the Protestant persuasion (if you read that right I accept that there will be some Catholics and others in Heaven, I have to add that beacuse some do not accept such). My religion is inner, personal and reasonable. I accept that all things made by man can be and are corrupted, thus I know that the Catholic Church, Baptist denomination and every other "church" made of man has gotten some things wrong. I am therefore not a fanatic over doctrine - like I said God is personal to me and that is what is important to me, all the rest is what people argue over.

I have served in the Military for 23 years but in the words of Robert E. Lee "I will never again raise my sword except in defence of my home". Therefore I will never join in a rebellion or civil war (on the "right" or "wrong" side). One may call me selfish in this regard but I have had enough of such business. If you are a militia minded, save the republic sort you may not enjoy my current attitude. My family is my future and my priority now. Don't be confused by that though - I am no pacifist. Dastardly acts by an oppressor might convince me otherwise but my intent is to never participate in any "troubles", to steal an Irish term.

Also know up front, character, values and morals are much more important to me in a relationship of this sort than skills, capabilities and equipment. That means that even though I am seeking out a potential working relationship with others I will not join with anyone based solely on the tangibles they bring to the table - the man is more important to me than the "stuff".

I am 41 years old (in good health and physical condition), married with two children.

What are we looking for? Another family or families (no more than two) that mesh on enough of our core values to merit a discussion about combining preparation planning and resources. We are looking for honest, hardworking family people, with reasonable views of the world. It is as simple as that.

We are in the process of looking for/purchasing land. I own a place in SC but the surrounding area has grown into suburbia. Within the next few months - sooner if we find the right place - we will buy no less than 100 acres. We have several candidates already, just working out the details. We are using standard and accepted survival/sustainability criteria for the land

My thoughts are that by the time someone that is interested, motivated and morally qualified finds this post we will already own the land. I would be perfectly happy if my wife and I retired there, lived a sustainable lifestyle and nothing ever happened. However, I know that in the event something ever did happen (economic crash etc.) than there is power in cooperation. Thus I am "throwing" out there for consideration.

I imagine that with the right family we could discuss all sorts of ways to work together, the land I plan to buy could easily support three families - after much discussion we could work all that out.

If you are interested in discussing this further please contact me at southernnationalist at gmail.com. If you are like me, and really that is the only way this could proceed, then subsequent conversations after initial discussion will necessarily be many and detailed - this is the future safety of our families we are discussing. I, like you, will not jump on board with just anybody.

Stumble It!

Protectionist dominoes are beginning to tumble across the world

From the Telegraph:

Greece has been in turmoil for 11 days. The mood seems to have turned "pre-insurrectionary" in parts of Athens - to borrow from the Marxist handbook...

We are advancing to the political stage of this global train wreck. Regimes are being tested. Those relying on perma-boom to mask a lack of democratic or ancestral legitimacy may try to gain time by the usual methods: trade barriers, saber-rattling, and barbed wire...

"... social unrest may happen in many countries, including advanced economies. We are facing an unprecedented decline in output. All around the planet, the people have reacted with feelings going from surprise to anger, and from anger to fear," he said...

This crisis has already brought us a monetary revolution as interest rates approach zero across the G10. It may overturn the "New World Order" as well, unless we move with great care in grim months ahead. This is where events turn dangerous.

The last great era of globalisation peaked just before 1914. You know the rest of the story.

And the good news just keeps rolling in.

Stumble It!

Cops Gone Wild

Read this article and then pay special attention to the comments - Police Get The Wrong House In Galveston, Allegedly Assault 12-Year-Old Girl. It seems people are growing ever more tired of this nonesense.

This is of course not a new sort of story - there have been far too may, some heavily reported others not. The fact is our local police have become something of a clear and present threat to us, the regular people.

I am always amazed watching "cop" shows, Youtube videos and basically any other footage of cops reacting to someone they perceive has a gun. I recall seeing a Youtube video not long ago of an old woman that the New Orleans police had broken into her home to check on her "safety". She proceeded to show the 15 cops in her home all her food and explain the fact that her house had never been under water and had no structural damage. When they were unconvinced she showed one of them her unloaded pistol. She was gang tackled. An old woman in her home, not breaking any law - tackled, subdued and bruised by a gang of thugs in the name of "law and order"...in America.

No matter what you think of US Soldiers and Marines in the Middle East I can assure you they demonstrate a lot less fear and over reaction to the presence of a weapon in most cases. Everyone is armed, they are guaranteed a right to keep a gun. Much as I thought Americans were. Just pay attention the next time you see cops on video talking to someone, all is relatively calm, the cops outnumber the citizen but the second these fools think there is a gun present that is not on their hip - well just watch.

Do not give me any nonsense about the job being dangerous and they needing to protect themselves. I have done dangerous work, I know what it is all about. They are supposed to keep the peace, not rough people up in the name of protecting themselves.

Read these cases of folks using self-defense against cops out of control and walking away free. Perhaps more people ought to exercise the basic right to self-defense when assaulted by government thugs.

Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1
Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903
State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260

Stumble It!

What Would Ron Paul Do

Imagine if you will a congruence of circumstance, however bizarre required, that had instead of Obama as our current president elect but Ron Paul.

Ok hold that thought.

When the Senate was debating the auto bailout "Buckshot" Cheney chided the republican senators something to the effect that their inaction was "Herbert Hoover all over again". The implication being that inaction, i.e. letting the free market run its course would spell political doom for the party.

Admittedly real conservatism in the US as a viable alternative died in the 1930's as a result of - well the debate continues. Cheney it seems would say it died because it failed to become statist, socialist and liberal. It took one major event for old right conservatism to be repudiated by the masses, replaced in name only just to keep two teams on the field.

There were of course a few notable conservative voices here and there but never again has the nation had a viable conservative alternative. Of course the death of conservatism in the 1930's was not a single party event, both moved left of center and just redefined in their own minds at least where center was.

Fast forward 60 years and we see that then and only then did even a minority of the population begin to fundamentally see the major flaws in the left of center shift and the true cost of "liberalism" and "conservatism". Move forward 18 more years and for the first time do we see any real, passionate talk with vocal support of true conservatism.

Essentially it has taken 78 years or so for even a minority of the population to understand the flaws of our Liberal/more liberal party system and the destruction caused by an ever larger government and foolish monetary and foreign policies.

Imagine then if you will if Ron Paul were younger, more handsome and capable of talking in 10 second sound bites. Imagine that by the same media/Hollywood tricks all politicians use he were able to win the 2008 presidential election. (in this imaginary world he is still the same small-government, literal Constitution guy, just much more camera/sound bite friendly).

What on Earth would such a "victory" have done to the infant conservative movement, particularly now? Real conservatism is best adapted to keeping a nation out of the very messes we are currently in. Sweeping government programs and fixes are just not in a real conservative's bag of tricks. Real conservatism maintains a system that nourishes stability in the long run, not fluff for election cycles.

Ron Paul did us all a service - akin to John in the desert.

Just as old right conservatism died in a crisis it may come back after the next crisis (i.e. the one we are in) as more and more people come to see the 78 year social experiment for what it was and is, an abomination. Liberalism may just have less than a decade more to rule over us, a right center shift may come - if we are wise and see our recent past for what it really was.

Stumble It!

Russell Means Speaks the Truth

Joshua points us to Russell Means' latest video offering and update about the Lakotah Republic. The thing that has impressed me all along with Means is that he presents a picture of a man that is not unhinged, rather a man unencumbered by wrong-thinking.

The strategy employed by the Republic thus far seems workable if rather unremarkable. I say unremarkable only in the sense that by the measure of what we have come to expect in political movements the Lakotah strategy appears calculated, paced and prudent - thus it is really not unremarkable at all but perhaps incredibly wise.

It is true the "victories" they have won over the last year in efforts to reassert sovereignty were victories in which the Federal and State governments essentially decided not to take the field on. Some might dismiss this as no progress at all.

I am not an insider into the thinking behind this paced strategy but I presume that these victories are not so much geared toward establishing boundaries of sovereignty - I think the leadership up there realizes that each victory cold be easily stripped away quickly if the Federals wanted. I think these are designed to show the Lakotah themselves that victories are possible, thus garnering support for the notion that this nation could indeed be free and sovereign again. In that I think it is a wonderfully wise approach.

Some may question the Lakotah Republics willingness to seek outsiders into the Republic. After all one may question might this not pollute the culture. To a paleoconservative such as myself this is a valid question.

To those with such questions I would ask this. What of the real Lakotah culture still exists after confinement to government run reservations? When Means talks about recruiting folks to help establish sustainable living solutions it seems to me this is a paleoconservative approach - it appears the only way to return the culture to some of its previous core values. Values lost in the imprisonment on reservations.

It saddens me that the majority of the Lakotah people do not yet embrace what appears their best option to live as a free and sovereign people that has come round in a long time. Perhaps with more small victories and perseverance this will change.

Stumble It!

Not in America You Say?

Little by little, step by step we are accepting the mechanisms of our own demise...

(From DUI Blog) The U.S. Marines have landed…and are apparently manning "sobriety checkpoints" in San Bernardino County in California. Yes, Marines. Yes, civilian DUI roadblocks.

From an official December 10th California Highway Patrol public relations release:

CHP to Conduct Sobriety/Driver’s License Checkpoint

"The Morongo office of the California Highway Patrol (CHP) in conjunction with the San Bernardino Sheriff’s Department and the USMC military police will conduct a joint sobriety/driver license checkpoint on Friday, December 12, 2008, somewhere in the unincorporated/incorporated area of San Bernardino County."

As an American citizen, not to mention a former Marine, I find this troubling — particularly in view of the clear wording of the Posse Comitatus act of 1878, described in Wikipedia.

A follow-up call to a Marine Corps public affairs sergeant resulted in assurances that the Marines would be there "as observers". Hmmmm…..military observers. Isn’t that how it all starts?

Stumble It!

Bill of Rights Day

December 15 was Bill of Rights day - it came and went without notice much as our actual rights seem to have passed into a distant memory.

The Freeholder comments - "Some people have asked the rhetorical question "What is worth fighting for?" I'd say that these are as deserving of our "life, liberty and sacred honor" just as much now as they were then. And we'd better start getting ready to fight for them again."

And I agree.

Stumble It!

Prepare to Defend Thyself

This will be my last post in this series. I imagine that from time to time I will revisit the subject but my original intent was merely to highlight the subject in what I hope was a reasonable and rational way.

When I left the topic last I promised to talk about guns, but before that there are, I believe, other elements that must be addressed.

First take a good look at you, by that I mean your physical condition. Good grief you say "now he is going to preach some physical fitness regime, I thought we established several posts ago that becoming Rambo was not required". And in that last assumption you are correct.

But...

Before we talk any further about preparing for anything we should talk seriously about preparing for life in its many and varied forms. Life is not all about the sedentary or semi-sedentary. Your chances of surviving anything from a car crash to a nuclear holocaust to old age are greatly improved with better physical condition. In honesty I suppose old age will get you eventually no matter your physical condition but of course the length and quality might be significantly improved.

Ask yourself - can you perform even moderate physical tasks over an extended duration (say a few days) without "throwing out your back", having a heart attack or just plain giving out?

If you were in a "scuffle" with someone else would you be out of breath in less than a minute? True story. I was in Europe and we were conducting a joint exercise with NATO forces and my unit billeted near a German unit. This was back when the Army Combatives was first coming out and some of our NCO's arranged to show the Germans what we knew. Several of our Soldiers and theirs went through drills in what amounted to matches. I recall thinking these guys could not be the descendants of the mighty Wehrmacht. These fellows seemed too fat and out of shape. The commander of the unit was 8 years my junior, I was only recently introduced to combatives, I had not practiced Judo since college and it had been just as long since I had wrestled in a match. I was induced by pride to accept the prodding of the NCO's to challenge this guy. Long story short, not 45 seconds into our little engagement this fellow was out of breath and holding his chest. This does not speak to my "tremendous martial skills" but rather to his physical conditioning. He was carted off by medics to be checked out.

The point is "scuffling" which is what most physical conflicts turn into is tasking on the cardiovascular system as it engages major muscles all over the body.

I use this only as an example of things a person ought to think of if they envision ever having to deal with the nastier side of human nature, particularly if that is brought on by panic and desperation of a world out of whack.

You can imagine for yourself the scenarios that might place you in a "scuffle" in the various situations we have previously envisioned in other posts. Ask yourself if you are even able to load your car in a timely manner, haul things to and from your house or board up windows at a pace much faster than a leisurely Saturday afternoon project.

Can you pull up your on body weight? Could you carry an injured person to safety? You see where I am going with all of this, so I will leave it alone with one last word. Get out and take care of this foundational requirement - put an image in your head of your loved one in danger and you huffing and puffing unable to help them. If you never have to use your increased stamina for such an endeavor you will still enjoy the associated benefits.

On the subject of "scuffling" I often see a lot of discussion on survival forums about taking up a martial art. Well here is a story for you - I spent several years practicing tae kwon do as a child/teenager, I wrestled in high school and college and took judo in college and boxed a little to boot. That is a lot of time invested. I learned more in the Marine Corps LINE combat system and the Army Combatives system than all others combined - think of that before going to the local training center and investing 3 nights a week for two years.

While in Korea, my wife and two children earned their first degree black belts in tae kwon do and as my wife bragged to me one day of her new kick butt skills I told her plainly "she had learned enough to get hurt". That was not to diminish her accomplishment but rather to point out a simple fact. Unless you have an enormous amount of time or are interested for other reason I see no point in taking up a martial art as an adult. Work on your fitness level and if you are ever forced to "scuffle" simply be aggressive about it.

So I promised my last post would be about guns and here it is.

Ignore all the talk about semi-auto pistols with high capacity magazines. Why? Less safe for most people, the springs in the magazines "get tired" over time and may not feed when you want it too, are more complicated to disassemble and clean, and for most models are hard to conceal. Do I own semi-auto pistols? Yes. Do they have a task and purpose? Yes. They should not be your first purchase or your only purchase.

This should -A double action revolver in calibers .38, .44, .45 or 356

I like the Tarus Judge MODEL 4510 .45/.410 because it chambers both a .45 for longer range and a .410 shotgun shell for close work (good for a nervous shooter in close quarters), and it is inexpensive.

The discussion could go on but I recommend the Tarus because it is a perfect pair with the shotgun I recommend--

The Moosburg HS .410 Home Defender. Comes with an integrated laser sight and a barrel designed for spread at 5-25m. The ballistics of the .410 are better that .44 at the intended range and the shot is less likely to penetrate secondary walls. All good for less than expert shooters.

I can already read the hate mail in my mind about the .410 cartridge but ballistic test have proven its effectiveness in close quarters and that is what we are talking about for new shooters. I do not want or suggest a new shooter attempt to "snipe" and get themselves killed. I would rather they hide and hope they are not found and shoot only if they are. The HS 410 serves that role well.

Folks seems to get too worked up about guns, what kind, how many etc. - the two above are a good start for anyone without guns - if you decide on different models I would definitely stick with a double action revolver and a pump action shotgun. Unless you plan to actually practice more than once a year I don't see the point in recommending a rifle (if I were to recommend one it would be the mini-14, it fires US military cartridges).

And there you have it - the discussion of guns could go on and on - if you want that go find a forum where folks argue endlessly about the merits of their stash versus someone else's.

I hope these posts have forced you to think a bit and perhaps even motivated you to act. I may add additional posts on related subjects in the future as I am about to buy a piece of property that I hope will become my "retirement/survival" retreat. The area around my little farm in SC has grown up too much in the years I have been away in the Army.

Stumble It!

First Southern National Congress

I did not ignore all the email in my box on this subject - I was just negligent in bringing the issue up, a situation I will now correct.

December 9, 2008 – Over one hundred Southern men and women, from all walks of life and from fourteen States, gathered near Hendersonville, NC December 5 through December 7 to convene the First Southern National Congress (SNC). This historic meeting at the Kanuga Conference Center in the shadow of the Blue Ridge was the first all-South congress since 1861.

In the words of Dr. Thomas Moore:

The U.S. Government no longer represents the people’s interests; it represents the interests of the highest bidder, the big corporations and money power. We Southerners have been among the most loyal and patriotic Americans, but in sadness we must acknowledge that Washington, DC has forfeited its moral authority by its folly and its unlawful acts. Now the people of the South who still love liberty and justice have no choice but to withdraw their consent from this corrupt Regime.

As the little boy on the playgroud says, "those are fight'n words". I have stated often that many men of principle in the US have very legitimate grivances and a lot of justifiable anger.

In keeping with its mission to speak for Southern interests, the SNC debated and passed a number of resolutions called “Remonstrances and Petitions for the Redress of Grievances.” These resolutions petitioned the Federal Government to cease its abuses, usurpations, and unlawful acts in the following areas:

· Failure to secure the borders and promoting of mass immigration that threatens to overwhelm our communities;
· Just law, protection of liberty, and the threat of rogue government;
· Just war and lawful defense, including proper (Constitutional) declaration of war;
· Southern agriculture and the rights of smallholders vs. corporate agribusiness;
· Sound money, economic policy, and Government crimes against our livelihoods;
· States’ sovereignty over their natural resources, especially along the Gulf Coast;
· The individual citizen’s unalienable right of armed self-defense.

Of this event eminent historian and South Carolina Delegate (and my hero) Dr. Clyde Wilson said:

“The SNC will reclaim the political legacy of great Southerners like Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and John C. Calhoun. That legacy is individual liberty and a small central government limited to its enumerated powers; and which is the creation, the servant, and the agent of the sovereign people acting through their respective States. But these principles enacted in the Constitution of 1789 have been violated. The Federal Government today is engaged in ‘a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evincing a design to reduce us under absolute Despotism,’ to borrow the words of Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence.”

May God lead, guide and direct men of wisdom and principles in these dark days and darker days yet to come.

Stumble It!

Fire Up The Presses

We all said it and now they admit it - although I suppose there is proof that this has been going on for some time. LET THE MONEY PRINTING BEGIN.

DOLLAR TANKS AS FED SAYS IT WILL PRINT MONEY

"Since September, the Fed’s balance sheet has expanded from about $900 billion to more than $2 trillion as it lends money to new programs." (ETF Trends)

The drop to 0-5% rates it seems might have another effect (if banks use the money to lend money and reinvigorate the housing bubble). Here is one description --

Here’s something kind of funny: This current economic collapse can be largely traced back to the 2003-2004 1% Fed Rate era that fueled the housing boom by making absurdly inflated real estate prices “affordable” because these interest rates — both fixed and the evil adjustable ones — hadn’t been so low in half a century.

While it was sloppy/greedy “stated income” no-doc teaser-rate reverse-equity 105% loans that enabled Juan Drywallhanger and his old lady, Amber Asstattoo, to “buy” a 2,800-square-foot stucco monstrosity on a 3,000-square-foot lot in the Adobe Falls development behind the Sunburst Towne Center’s (now closed) Bennigan’s and Linens ‘n Things in the first place, it was the artificially cheap borrowing costs that made the option-ARM introductory payments on a $579,000 “Tuscan inspired” vulgarity briefly plausible for people making $40,000 per year and already buried in credit-card and SUV debt.

I thought that too funny of a description not to include even if I would not have articulated it just so.

So what are the results of all this printing of money (have you read about the Weimar Republic?)

According to CNN-

But there is a dark side to quantitative easing: inflation. The government has backed all of this new debt by selling Treasurys, which have been the golden asset of the credit crisis. They have been the only liquid security of late, reaching historic highs as their yields have hit all-time lows...

"The end result of all of this could be the next major problem: the crisis of confidence in the dollar," said Baumohl. "At some point, foreign investors are not going to come to the table to buy U.S. debt, leading to a dollar decline."

Of course add to all of that nonesense this - Drop in consumer prices is most since 1932.

And then the most asinie statement of a bizzare year:

"I've abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system," Bush told CNN television, saying he had made the decision "to make sure the economy doesn't collapse." Bush the Second

Doing a little (or much) evil to do a little percieved good. And this from a "conservative"

What a mess

Stumble It!

To Arms!

Here is a parable taken from "House of Saddam", supposedly told to Saddam as a boy - but there is truth in it.


"A troublemaker walks through a village, drawing the ire of the people. Finally an old man confronts the outsider saying 'why are you here causing trouble'. To which the outsider replies, 'I am not causing trouble, I am unarmed, I do not have a gun or a knife or any other weapon'. The old man looks squarely at the outsider and states plainly, 'exactly, because you are unarmed you are inviting trouble where ever you go.'"


The moral of the story seems plain and true - the meek may inherit the Earth but the weak and defenseless will get walked on, trampled, robbed and perhaps killed.

Consider this from a recent article:

In the coming months, mental health experts expect a rise in theft, depression, drug use, anxiety and even violence as consumers confront a harsh new reality and must live within diminished means.

"People start seeing their economic situation change, and it stimulates a sort of survival panic," said Gaetano Vaccaro, deputy clinical director of Moonview Sanctuary, which treats patients for emotional and behavioral disorders. "When we are in a survival panic, we are prone to really extreme behaviors."

The America of today is not the America of 1929. There are significant elements within our society across all cultural, ethnic and racial lines that are immoral at their base. These people are probably incapable of behaving morally in difficult situations. The difference between now and 1929 is that there is so many more of them relative to the rest of the population. A 15% unemployment rate today could result in a social/crime/unrest situation far worse than the 25% of the Great Depression.

Should you own a gun? I cannot help but believe the answer is yes; if you are truly willing to use it to defend your life, your family and your property. There is no point in spending the money if you are too squeamish of the notion of using the thing.

There is a term that began to float around in the military after the invasion of Afghanistan and gained a lot of traction after Iraq. At first I disliked the term but eventually I came to terms with it, understood it, and accept it as part of the human condition. "Some people just need killing". In military parlance this refers to hardliners that refuse to put down their arms, back down or accept any part of the coalition program.

In considerations of defending your property, family or yourself this term has meaning as well. There are some people in the world that in the right circumstances, at the right moment will do you harm. I think we should accept that. The only thing preventing wholesale brutality by our growing immoral class is the trappings of order provided by society. Thus most of our would be violent criminals constrain their immorality to forms of criminality and immorality in the business world. As you can see I am not talking about the 850,000 gang members and other already violent criminals in the US at this point - I am talking about the middle-class guy that cheats at business, on his wife and on the golf course. It is that selfish type that will join the other criminals in hard times to threaten you and yours. Anyone with such a lack of morals and ethics in an ordered society will join the ranks of potential "people that need killing" when things go bad.

It is not an un-Christian view to think like this - God gave parents stewardship over children, a man responsibility to his wife and her to him. Exercising the right of self-defense is not contrary to Christian teachings.

As I said earlier I believe, based upon my observations that for most ordinary people living in hard situations the requirement to use a gun to defend yourself is probably at worst a once in a life time event. I believe that, certainly depending upon a persons location and luck that number may change for the individual. The point is, even if it happened just once - that one moment is life changing one way or the other - being prepared determines who has a bad day (you or the thug).

Of course you should be armed.

In the next post we will talk about weapon selection.

Stumble It!

Dystopia By Good Intentions

If a dystopian nightmare of the totalitarian state finally arrives in the United States, it will be the result of a compromise, and there will be people around until the very end who will insist that we should be grateful because it could be much worse...

There is only one sure way that you can know you are on the right side of history, and that is by saying what is true and defending what is right, without exception. It is not left to intellectuals to play political games. Intellectuals are supposed to tell the truth, regardless of the moment. That means, in these days, completely opposing all increases in state power under the cover of "countercyclical policy."

Let evil people take responsibility for their evil policies. Those who know better should stick to the right and true. (Lew says "Don't Cave")

There are indeed many existing and emerging justifications for the revolt Celente spoke about....to those of us in our 30's and 40's our grandparents fought fascism and tyranny - shame on us for allowing those evil ideologies to win via compromise.

Stumble It!

Gerald Celente and Our Future

I am not too keen on prognosticators in general - specifically the kind that make predictions based upon "visions" such as this "prophet" that predicts disaster before Obama takes office. Perhaps this is bit hypocritical of me as it would appear most of the time that I appear to fancy myself something of a prognosticator.

Gerald Celente is a bit different in that he predicts trends rather than specific events. His trend analysis and predictions are based partly on observation and partly upon extrapolation of those observation. His previous success at predicting trends include: the 1987 stock market crash, the fall of the Soviet Union, the 1997 Asian financial crisis, and the subprime mortgage crisis. In 2007 he described 2008 as the year the economic giants would fall. His observations about what 2008 would hold are pretty dead on looking back now.

In an article by Kurt Nimmo, Truth News, Nov.24, 2007, "U.S. Dollar Will Fall By 90% ", Celente remarks on the current disaster taking place in our economy :" We are confronting " dollar plummeting hysteria, monumental levels of debt, foreclosure, bankruptcy, unemployment, energy depletion, skyrocketing gas and fuel prices, illnesses treated without medical insurance coverage- or just not treated, unprecedented levels of homelessness, and by all indications, within a few months into 2008, America will be well on the road to a re-run of 1929 - or something inconceivably worse... " "

Celente said this over a year ago ! Yikes ! What else does this modern day Nostradamas have to say ? Plenty, and it isn't pretty (Surviving Ourselves)

What does this trend predictor see next?

Celente says that by 2012 America will become an undeveloped nation, that there will be a revolution marked by food riots, squatter rebellions, tax revolts and job marches, and that holidays will be more about obtaining food, not gifts....

“We’re going to see the end of the retail Christmas….we’re going to see a fundamental shift take place….putting food on the table is going to be more important that putting gifts under the Christmas tree,” said Celente, adding that the situation would be “worse than the great depression”.“America’s going to go through a transition the likes of which no one is prepared for,” said Celente, noting that people’s refusal to acknowledge that America was even in a recession highlights how big a problem denial is in being ready for the true scale of the crisis...

More and more economic voices are beginning to talk about depression as a possibility - not the kesynians of course, they denied we were in a recession for four quarters even though the ordinary man knew this was a fact.

“There will be a revolution in this country,” he said. “It’s not going to come yet, but it’s going to come down the line and we’re going to see a third party and this was the catalyst for it: the takeover of Washington, D. C., in broad daylight by Wall Street in this bloodless coup. And it will happen as conditions continue to worsen.”

“The first thing to do is organize with tax revolts. That’s going to be the big one because people can’t afford to pay more school tax, property tax, any kind of tax. You’re going to start seeing those kinds of protests start to develop.”“It’s going to be very bleak. Very sad. And there is going to be a lot of homeless, the likes of which we have never seen before. Tent cities are already sprouting up around the country and we’re going to see many more.”

I have said many times that there are numerous groups with justifiable grievances against the current system that have gone unanswered and ignored. These provide a foundation for revolt and a catalysts for anger but will never provide the spark of revolution. The spark for a revolution can only come when the safety, security and welfare of enough people are threatened enough to turn the ideological anger from a list of grievances into man pulling triggers. There are enough men of conscience in America that are pretty mad about a lot of things the government has done or failed to do - it will only take the spark of a failing economy and a real threat to security and welfare to turn these angry men into real man of action.

“We’re going to start seeing huge areas of vacant real estate and squatters living in them as well. It’s going to be a picture the likes of which Americans are not going to be used to. It’s going to come as a shock and with it, there’s going to be a lot of crime. And the crime is going to be a lot worse than it was before because in the last 1929 Depression...

And that, my friends is sufficient fuel and spark for the embers that burn so dimly on the edges of our society right now.

Next post we will get back to talking about you and your family weathering all of this.

Stumble It!

Bugging Out: How, Where, Why

When last we left the subject we had begun to think about what we would need to bug out from our urban home. We developed a list of scenarios that would cause such a bug out (that was your homework) and we developed a tentative plan (your homework also).

Let us assume then that the scenario you have developed for yourself is occurring but to add a bit of fun to the discussion I will add an atmosphere akin to the LA riots in the early 1990's along and surrounding your escape route.

What in your plan covers such a contingency? Did you plan to take both cars? Who is driving and who is riding shotgun (renewed meaning to the word)?

The argument could go a dozen ways over whether to take both cars or one; I come down on the side of one for this reason. In the husband and wife team likely only one of you is the better driver - in this case I am talking about the person that can make split-second decisions, rapid maneuvers if required and avoid at all costs stopping the vehicle anytime and anywhere you do not choose. Maybe it is the man, maybe the woman but it is probably not the person you as a married couple have determined that when driving causes the least amount of arguments - it just might be the most offensive driver in ordinary times that gets this job. Two cars, with a nervous driver in a bad situation might get you all killed.

Whichever of you is the choice, you need to talk about it in advance and the other person needs to fully understand their job as well. No matter what the circumstances of your evacuation when you decide to leave your driveway you should consider the trip a "combat patrol" from the onset. You cannot predict human behavior in any other terms than to say that people do nasty things to other people in nasty times. Leave thinking that way and travel that way.

The driver in in complete control of the space in and around the vehicle for 100 yards or so; meaning specifically that in any high stress situations that arise the very last thing needed is an additional driver shouting instructions. Everyone in the vehicle should be alert to all around them and they should verbalize things they see, but not to the point of telling the driver to do X or Y. You have to get that point - if need be, in the proper situation - the driver's job is to keep the vehicle moving. Minor fender damage or an casual approach to traffic regulations do not matter at that point if the potential exist for folks to be yanked from vehicles like a scene from 1992 LA.

The person riding "shotgun" is the navigator, responsible for the next turn, and for space beyond 100 yards. You have to get this division of labor down to routine. This person needs to be able to read road maps, operate the GPS and if you are inclined to take my sage gun advice - shoot to kill.

Of the two the driver is most important, he/she must be the coolest under pressure and the quickest thinker. And remember this is absolutely no time for road rage - and it is no time to allow yourself to get pinned in between the car in front of you and behind you. The driver has to be very aware and attune to his surroundings.

So what are you driving? Well obviously one of what you own and unless you plan to make a purchase at some point you have what you have. One of my cars is a Jeep Wrangler and although it looks pretty cool with the storage racks I have installed it would not be my bug out vehicle. It looks too much like I am prepared, thus a target. My wife's SUV will do fine.

I would argue that a 4WD is very important for a bug out vehicle. Many will argue the point but here is how I see it. Any interstate used for an evacuation will get bogged down by numerous things. I would like the option of turning off the interstate, going up that embankment and moving on and away from that crowd. A 4WD is perfect just for that. The upside is that so many folks already have SUV's with 4WD - that they never engage - this piece of advice is just a bonus. A SUV is not terrible to sleep in and it is easy to pack with your stuff without advertising like my Jeep.

Now for a dynamic that kills preparation - one of the couple gets it and the other may not. I am about to suggest a few items that ought to be standard in the escape vehicle, but if this happens to be your wife's SUV - well good luck.

-CB Radio - to ease the pain of this look at one of the micro versions you could hide in the glove box (MIDLAND 75-822 MICRO HANDHELD CB RADIO). My wife laughed that she was "not a trucker" and would not have one of these things until I found the micro version.
-Full size spare tire
-Roadside repair kit with full jack and fixaflat
-Motorola UHF Radios -one per family member (T9680RSAME Rechargeable Two-Way Radio) for mom and dad, (Mini USB Car Charger) x 2, (FV700R NiMH Rechargeable Two-Way Radio) for the kiddies. Never leave the car without communication, never leave the car without someone in the driver seat with car running, and pistol close by.
-an AC/DC power inverter
-an extra 12v battery
-snow chains? only you know where you live

Putting extra fuel in the vehicle is problematic and suggesting to the wife that you want to mount brackets for fuel cans on her SUV could be deadly, but stowing them on the luggage rack when the time comes - that is just good business. The extra tire can go there as well.

That covers how, remember it is a "combat patrol" from the time you leave your house until you get to a place that you feel safer. Every stop, every vehicle on the road with you, every encounter with someone else in the "panic zone" must be addressed by your SOP discussed above and worked out in detail- be ever vigilant. Remember constant radio communication between vehicle and the person outside the vehicle when you stop, leave a driver in the vehicle with the engine running, every time, everywhere until you are out of the craziness.


So where are you going? That depends upon your level of preparation and the level of the event you are running from. I believe it prudent to resolve early on that you will not become a refugee, you will not go to a shelter or a camp.

Here are two suggestions that you may do with as you please. (this assumes you do not want to go so far as to buy a survival retreat)

Buy a used travel trailer and store it at a self storage facility several miles outside of your city. When you bug out, go first to your storage lot and pick up your new temporary home. One of these things can be had very cheaply, remember you are not looking to impress the neighbors at the campsite with your home on wheels, you just need shelter that is not provided by the government. Map out in advance campsites near your storage area but away from the panic zone.

Many will say that this is an inadequate solution, particularly in a long-term national crisis such as an economic collapse but I argue that for those that do not want to go full into the survival mode this is a viable alternative. Even if the plan is to travel on to relatives and stay there, you would likely be more comfortable with the option of occasionally sleeping away from the crowd (love nest anyone?)

An alternative to this plan is to rent storage space at the facility mentioned above and cache items that you may not bring with you or may lose/use/damage along the way, extra tires, clothes, storable food. I would go so far as to suggest stocking this place with cots, a heater, and blankets in the event you decide to bed down in your storage space after a long trip out of the city.

A third option is to do both of the above. Pre-stage a cheap camper and rent storage space for a cache of good to have items. This is all dictated by budget but $4-5K for a camper and $38/month for a storage container does not seem like a lot. Just make sure you get your escape vehicle configured to haul the camper long before you need it. Also ensure to rent from a place with 24 hour access, and preferably not via a caretaker who may not be there when the panic comes.

Lastly - why exactly are you leaving? You must know this, depending upon the circumstances it may be obvious. Other times it may not be. Decide to leave only if you know or reasonably expect that where you are going is better than where you are. Think about that. Recommended evacuations and panic are not reasons to leave - particularly if you do not have a good plan. Becoming a refugee is your fate without a plan. There could be benefit to weathering the initial rush to leave in place - so long as you can provide for your family and defend yourself. This is of course situationally dependent but you have to be prepared to ask yourself why you are considering a particualr option and you have to prepare to actually give yourself a second option.

Next post will deal with the bane of the entire subject (to some) - To Arms!

Stumble It!

First Things First: The Bug-Out-Bag

If my modest readership will permit me I shall continue down this rabbit hole I have begun to traverse....

If you thought deeply, or at all about my last post then perhaps you are ready to ask yourself a few questions - some of which I can list, others that only you can ask because of your specific knowledge of you, your family and the exact environment in which you live.

What sorts of scenarios do you foresee (buy into) for your particular geographic area? Are these just natural disasters with the potential for the occasional two-legged misbehavior? Do you believe it possible that someone, somewhere might actually use one or a hundred of the thousand(s) nuclear weapons around the world - do you think your city would be a target - do you believe you would have warning?

Do you plan to leave your city? Where would you go? How would you communicate with your family and those that would go with you if you decided that leaving right now was necessary? What if the cellphone and landline networks were clogged as in the aftermath of the NYC attacks?

What if you could not get money out of an ATM and your tank was on empty? I bet at least one of your cars is below half full right now isn't it. How much cash do you have in the house right this second? Leaving in a forced or rush evacuation might get a little ugly with those facts being real.

Do you have a 72 hour kit? A spare pair of glasses, a supply of your required prescription meds? Important documents? Do you know where all this and could you grab it and go? Don't worry, most Americans could not either.

Before your turn off the terms survivalist and prepper think about the simple and straightforward things.

(Insert here any reasonable reason why you and 10 million or so other people in your area have to leave your homes very fast)

Imagine yourself if you will, sitting on a interstate with all traffic going away from your city. Your half a tank of gasoline is edging ever nearer to empty. You are far behind the rush because it took you a very long time to get hold of your wife, as the cellphone network was jammed with people doing just what you were. You spent way too much time at home, running around trying to figure out what to grab.

You took a chance at one exit on what you considered the perimeter of the city to attempt to buy gasoline. After leaving your place in the long line of cars leaving the city and waiting in another long line at the pump you find out that: One, they are experiencing the same problems with phone lines as everyone else and are selling via cash only; Two you cannot get cash from the ATM for the same reason - and in any event if it did work it would have been sucked dry by now anyway; Three, because you rely almost exclusively on your plastic (debit or credit cards) neither you or your wife have enough cash to make a dent in the tank anyway.

We could go on with this...you and your family stuck now on the side of the road with others that prepared as well as you. Imagine spending the night out there with angry, scared people -- would you sleep very well thinking of what COULD happen to your family? In any case where the heck are you driving anyway? If this is just a local or regional thing then one assumes most people have family everywhere. If it is more national than regional - did you just become a refugee? We will talk about that.

___

First things first - if you will continue to journey down this path with me is to build/do the following:

1. Make a plan
2. Carry around kit
3. 72 hour kit (Bug out Kit)

Make a Plan:
The news says any number of events on the list you develop occur (or heaven forbid the news outlets are silent in the very worst-case sorts of scenarios). You plan assumes that cell communication may be spotty or unavailable. Your plan allows you to begin execution of key tasks; i.e. pick up the kids, ensure the car in filled with gasoline, everyone meets at home (or where ever makes sense and grabs the 72 hour kits). At this point you are able to make wise informed decisions about your next move. Such a plan might, I say might, include a rendezvous point outside the city if everyone does not get home when expected and contact cannot be established. (You dead on the subway is no reason for your family to die waiting for you if your plan is to displace). ---This topic probably deserves a lot more discussion, in a future post I will point to areas where people are already discussing this a great length

Carry Around Kit:
A small backpack that should be with you at all times and contains essential items that you just might want to have if you are at the office, on the subway etc when things start going all wrong. Moving across a city in chaos could be perilous and will take time.

72 Hour Kit (Bug-out Bag)
This is everything you and each member of your family needs to survive for 72 hours (you need one bag per family member). Many suggest having one or more of these bags at different locations (work, office, car) effectively doing away with the "Carry around bag". There is merit to this because setting up a 72 Hour Kit is not inexpensive and while it is not overly bulky it is not terribly small. While I was in Korea I opted for a smaller "carry around bag" simply because I did not want to haul a full kit on the subway with me - it is a personal risk assessment decision that you have to make.

At a basic minimum, your kit at home should contain all the document, or copies of such, you would need to establish critical elements of who you are in addition to your prescriptions, food, water, clothes etc. (remember this is the stuff you use to allow you to get to where you are going and make good decisions along the way - not desperation decisions).

Just google Bug out bag - the discussions and options are too many to list here.

No mater what you read and what you decide I think the following ought to be in your bag:

Multitool, meds, First Aid kit, cash, small flashlight, matches, fleece jacket and cap, working gloves, charged prepaid cell phone, copies of important papers, photos of family (for missing persons boards), maps of your route and surrounding area, compass, rain parka, small AM/FM radio (or better), antiseptic hand wash (use it often, as an old field Soldier I can tell you what happens if you do not), can opener, toilet paper, headache/painkiller, nodoze/caffeine pills, small bottle of water purification tablets, water bottles (72 hour supply), baby wipes, duct tape, plastic trash bags x4, 100 foot parachute chord, energy bars

You can fit all of that nicely in back pack (here and here are nice ones but cheaper models will do)

That is the cheap man's version basic kit - many will suggest more; Motorola Talkabouts, GPS, pistol and I would too, but the above list is a nice starter for anyone - whether you stay in place a few days or bug out that kit ought to save a lot of burden.

Next Post: Where are you going and why?

Stumble It!

What Will You Do?

I think I will become Catholic - this is not the subject of this post but sitting in church this morning I could not prevent my mind from running to other subjects. Why you may ask? Contemporary worship - everybody seems to think that is how it must be done. Since I am posted in the middle of nowhere I have only one protestant choice (well two I guess if I considered the Gospel service a real option). Perhaps more on this later...

I was thinking how little I like the term "survivalist" - it is too open ended in its possible meanings and too closed in its perceived meaning. The term in vogue in many places is "prepper" - that just sounds silly to me. I do not yet have an alternative to these terms but let it be noted I like neither and use them only as a frame of reference for anyone that my Google the topics I speak of.

The ideologies encompassing "survivalist" are many and diverse - almost religious in nature. To be certain the reason many become survivalist/preppers in the first place is based upon a religious viewpoint. I am not just talking about Mormons in this regard. There is a large New Age segment in the survivalist community, folks looking to avoid the pain of what they call the "quickening" (and all this time I thought that was something from a Highlander movie).

Of course many people do not become survivalist/prepper for religious reasons as well. We all "know" that America is the Lion and that we have a prime place in the coming end and that all Christians will be pulled out before things get bad. So why prepare for anything at all if one holds that sort of religious world view.

I have my opinions about all three groups listed above and will only say that I do not fall into any of those groups. I think if I had to apply a term to describe me it would be something like "Future Homesteader of America", or maybe more accurately "Pragmatic realist determined not to go hungry or cold a single day on account of massive government stupidity". Yeah that is me - that sums it up - do you think the term will catch on? Probably not.

Despite the ideological and religious differences that cause most people to prepare the benefit to the community as a whole is increased knowledge. There are a lot of people out there figuring out how to do certain things and also figuring out what does not work. This saves everyone money and time.

The thing is, everyone ought to be a "prepper" of some sort. Even if it is nothing more than the "I can live fairly comfortably for a week without power and no access to the grocery store". Of course we are not there and never will be there - but it seems to me that every family should at the least be that prepared.

If, on the other hand, you are interested in going further - just how far? First to put away a couple of images and then ask a few questions.

Up front and right now put away the images of a family or single individual living in a secure cabin in the woods on a southern exposed ravine. For now dismiss the images of you as the hero or a story yet to be written fighting off mobs of two-legged predators hell-bent on taking your food, raping your wife and carting off your children. Forget the images of you as Daniel Boone, bringing home game and skin for your wife to cook, clean and preserve. Put all that away because the reality is that most of you because of age, physical condition or skill-set know you will never be Robinson Crusoe/Rambo/Daniel Boone all wrapped into one. That is a realistic approach, but not a reason to dismiss survivalism altogether. (later we will talk about all those things but for now put them away - they many never apply to you)

Forget, for the moment, that becoming a survivalist means you have to stockpile enough weapons and ammunition to outfight a rifle company. My theory, based upon having been to two war zones more than one time each - a place where everyone has guns and food/water/medicine/government control are not always present - is this. For most people, the required use of a gun to defend their lives, the lives of their family or their property is on average at worst a once in a life-time event.

Hold the hate-mail.

I believe this is the average for a reasonable man even in a terrible situation. Should everyone own a gun, and reasonably know how to use it - darn right. My point is this, for most that might wish to survive most events most of the time the requirement to "gun up" is no greater than the ordinary common-sense requirement to defend one's home in regular times.

Starting from those two points then ask yourself, are you ready to survive most of the circumstances that might face you and your family most of the time (remember no plan is perfect and people die even with good planning - so for sanity and economical reasons we are looking at the "most situations most of the time survival goal").


I will address the rest of this to most of the population - not to the folks living in the country but those in large cities and in the surrounding suburbs. And that is for the next post.

Stumble It!

The Potential Geopolitical Crisis Nobody Wants or Needs

Pakistan Says Indian Planes Entered Airspace

The fall out from the Mumbai attacks have received some press but not enough analysis or thought of what this could ultimately mean. If Pakistan and India were not both nuclear armed I am certain that many would welcome a full-on Indian invasion of Pakistan. As a side note that very fact might not go unnoticed to other nations that wish to develop their own nuclear capability. Pakistan as a US ally is a nation that we are essentially ready to throw to the dogs - if only we knew how. Our military efforts have been successful at rooting out terrorist in Afghanistan and then Iraq and then Afghanistan again when they came back in force but really all we are doing is forcing their base of operations to shift.

Under our current ROE US troops and other ISAF forces routinely cross the Pakistan border in pursuit of insurgents, we also fire into Pakistan. We are of course limited to going just so many miles (a fact well known by all involved). And therein lies the problem. We cannot get to the operational bases - we have to wait from newly trained insurgents to leave the little insurgent factories. I am sure many would welcome an Indian invasion for this very reason.

Here is a Pakistani view of why war might be inevitable...

Stumble It!

Crisis Points or Same Stuff Different Day

In an environment where crisis is the order of the day and the Government is the organization with the answers to crisis the items I list below seem nothing more than the standard, ordinary fare.

Maybe, maybe not, but worth consideration all the same.

U.S. now only 2 states away from rewriting Constitution

The Ohio legislature is considering a joint resolution "[a]pplying to the Congress of the United States pursuant to Article V of the United States Constitution to call a constitutional convention for proposing amendments." Should this resolution pass both state houses, only one more state is required before a convention must be called. (Mises)

This started as a conservative idea in the 1980's, most of the states that have passed a resolution calling for this convention in the last 27 are Southern States. The folks behind this had the best of intentions but this was a bad idea from the get-go and now perhaps it could get infinitely worse. From the WND article:

"Don't for one second doubt that delegates to a Con Con wouldn't revise the First Amendment into a government-controlled privilege, replace the 2nd Amendment with a 'collective' right to self-defense, and abolish the 4th, 5th, and 10th Amendments, and the rest of the Bill of Rights," said the warning from the American Policy Institute.

A brief review of the history of the last Constitutional Convention ought to inform anyone that believed they can control the genie once outside of the bottle that this is not the case. Obama might just be the man to lead the discussion of fundamentally changing our Republic and doing away with the nasty trappings of the old republic.

Further, WND also reported Obama believes the Constitution is flawed, because it fails to address wealth redistribution, and he says the Supreme Court should have intervened years ago to accomplish that.

Obama said in a 2001 radio interview the Constitution is flawed in that it does not mandate or allow for redistribution of wealth.Obama told Chicago's public station WBEZ-FM that "redistributive change" is needed, pointing to what he regarded as a failure of the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren in its rulings on civil rights issues in the 1960s.

The Warren court, he said, failed to "break free from the essential constraints" in the U.S. Constitution and launch a major redistribution of wealth. But Obama, then an Illinois state lawmaker, said the legislative branch of government, rather than the courts, probably was the ideal avenue for accomplishing that goal.

"Redistributive Change", a constitutional convention would certainly provide the opportunity to effect such change in words that Old Republic Constitutionalists could no longer dispute.

Then there is this...

WTP Obama Citizenship Challenge or if you like watch the We The People Press Conference.

The honest truth is if people really read, understood and got righteously indigent about the realities the We The People Foundation point out reference a number of issues a real shooting revolution would be well under way, and that I honestly mean. But, revolutions and insurgencies simply do not grow out of simple truth. Only the core, the die-hard, fight over simple truth, the rest fight or not related to economics or safety/comfort.

Nothing will come of this, as many point out the fact that this all may be highly irregular and unconstitutional will not stop the conspiracy of silence and get the questions about Obama's birth answered, and considering the history of irregular and unconstitutional acts we ought to expect no more.

Of course all of this is just "silly Constitutional stuff"...it is all about the economy stupid and there is plenty there to cause a real crisis....

Stumble It!

Planning to Failure or Failure to Plan

"The fact that our culture’s only vision of someone who is prepared is the survivalist curled up in a shack with his stash of guns suggests that we fundamentally think that preparation for negative outcomes is on the whacked out side." - Sharon

Add the negative image of those that prepare to our current cultural aversion to saving anything and it is no wonder that the circumstance she describes about the recent power outages in her area are true.

And this leads to a painful reality - despite the fact that winter power outages happen out my way all the time, we know for a fact that the extended outages in my region there will leave us with people who are freezing, and hungry, isolated and unable to cope. They won’t have the batteries for their flashlights, or any strategy for cooking or eating. At best, they will come out of this traumatized and miserable. At worst, some of them may actually die.

Of course she is talking of simple, predictable things like power outages resulting from winter storms and people living in areas prone to such still not preparing.

Stumble It!

Make Your Survivalist Friend Happy at Christmas

HT to Robert for doing the research for the original list

15 Survival Gadgets for under $40 for your Christmas Wish list (or gift giving).

-Leatherman 830032 Blast Multitool with Leather Sheath
-Ultimate Survival StrikeForce Fire Starter
-Gerber 04171 Suspension Butterfly Opening Multi-Plier, with Sheath
-Gerber 22-80012 Infinity Ultra Task LED Flashlight, Black
-Eton FR400 Self-Powered Water-Resistant AM/FM Radio with NOAA and TV-VHF (Defender)
-Fiskars Pro Chopping Axe #7858
-Fiskars Brush Axe #7860
-Survive!: Essential Skills and Tactics to Get You Out of Anywhere - Alive
-SAS Survival Handbook: How to Survive in the Wild, in Any Climate, on Land or at Sea
-US Army Survival Manual: FM 21-76
-Klean Kanteen Stainless Steel Water Bottles
-Nightstar Magnetic Force Flashlight Hi-Tech Clear
-Ultimate Survival Technologies BlastMatch All Weather Firestarter (orange)
-Ultimate Survival Technologies SaberCut Saw (Black)
-Crystal River Travel Fly / Spinning Rod

Most of the items would make a nice addition to any one's "carry around bag" (this is the essential item you carry with you everywhere because if you live in the real world and get out and about for work or pleasure - how stupid would you feel to be stuck in a bad situation without a simple 5-10lbs bag handy with a few goodies?)

Clearly you notice that most of these items are not "offensively" survivalist in nature and perhaps a good way to give a gift that will get someone thinking.

I would suggest also "The Official Handbook for Boys" for anyone that was not fortunate enough to have actually of been a Boy Scout. Or the 1911 edition for those that were and have perhaps forgotten what it meant and what they learned. My son and I have been spending weekends and free days going through the various skills taught in that fine book to ensure that he completely gets it. Scouting is a fabulous organization but more importantly the skills they teach are those every man should have. Anyone that does not know these basic skills would do well to study this book. I personally think the 1911 edition would be a great gift for a former scout (hint, hint to those that read this and love me). Be Prepared!

FM 21-76 is one of the finest Army manuals written - you can buy it in hardback from any major book seller. I read this entire book before I was 12 and went out and practiced many of the skills taught therein. My poor son is now feeling that same "pain". This is another basic primer that any man ought to be familiar with.

The two books mentioned are of course not the sum and total of the knowledge required to get a person and his family through a SHTF situation - but I would bet money that if you do not know those skills as a base any and all other preparations would be worthless in the long-run.

Stumble It!

No Bailout, What Does It Mean?

Firstly. I must admit I am not as astute as I fancy myself. Why and how the the Senate Republicans found it within themselves to to do something right - and this was no small thing. I was certain the Federal Government would give in on this issue. I was wrong.

My thought was that this bailout was a given and would be passed - with some wringing of hands and clamoring of distaste but passed all the same. I assumed this would but one of many more such events to come over the next months or years in an effort to fight off the inevitable.

Of course these things are not "over" until they are over - there are more than one way to skin any cat. If the results of Big 3 bankruptcy gets to bad this could get another look, or perhaps the current or the new administration will find a way to move funds around to accomplish the same goal as the original bailout - time will tell.

What dies this all mean?

SEOUL (Reuters) - The collapse of a proposed bailout for U.S. automakers has raised fears of a deeper economic slowdown and further financial shocks that may jeopardize worldwide efforts to ease a global recession.

Any failure or bankruptcy of General Motors Corp, Ford Motor Co or Chrysler LLC could cost tens of thousands of jobs, hit credit markets and disrupt the auto industry's global supply chain, economists said on Friday...

Some economists warned that any failure of U.S. automakers could cause a fall in the dollar and U.S. Treasuries, further hitting the country's battered financial system and economy. "A jump in U.S. corporate bankruptcy may prompt investors to flee the dollar and U.S. Treasuries amid concerns over a bubble in Treasuries," said Park Sang-hyun, chief economist at HI Investment & Securities.

That is certainly one perspective, perhaps absolutely correct. For how long and how deep could this recession reach? Depression levels? Further opinion -

Dec. 12 (Bloomberg) -- A bankruptcy filing by General Motors Corp. or Chrysler LLC might send the U.S. economy into chaos within weeks if it led to a shutdown at the companies.

Industry experts and economists say the automakers would close plants, fire tens of thousands of workers and cut production. That would cause many of their suppliers to collapse, triggering more job losses, straining the cities and states where the car and parts companies operate, as well as federal safety-net programs...

“It would be unprecedented,” says Stephen Stanley, chief economist at RBS Greenwich Capital in Greenwich, Connecticut. “So it’s hard to say exactly what would happen.”

Still, a GM or Chrysler bankruptcy “would be the start of a cascade of failures,” says Dennis Virag, president of Automotive Consulting Group in Ann Arbor, Michigan. “The economy will be in chaos within weeks.”

The "trickle down" theory in reverse.

I find it hard to believe the Federal government will not do something un-Constitutional before things reached such a level. From the same article we find...

The Bush administration said today it will consider using money from the $700 billion bank-bailout fund to prevent GM and Chrysler from “collapsing.”

Of course if Bush is unwilling to violate the Constitution one more time before leaving office I suspect that Obama will do the job pretty quickly.

I believe that we should take one thing away from this - the Federal Government still can and will head this off. Moving debt and failure from one place to another is still an option. As ugly as the prospects of this collapse are it will happen someday. The more we stall it, the more the delay the bigger the eventual fall. Just pause to think what it would mean to you right now today if the chaos and turmoil predicted by a collapse of these three companies would mean to you and your family.

This will be our reality, later if not now, and when it comes it will be bad. This is why I am determined to write on the issues surrounding surviving a SHTF scenario...

More for your consideration (and to spur your desire to prepare)

Car Vote May Tip US Into Depression
U.S. weekly jobless claims jump to 26-year high
Homelessness rising as economy slides

Stumble It!

Foundations and Fundemental SHTF Beliefs of Fact

There are several points of fact that I believe it is important to establish before we proceed down this path of discussing dark and gloomy matters. Some may argue these are just my beliefs, I will freely debate any point below in detail if anyone wishes. I stand that these are facts.

1. Throughout history governments have fallen and societies have collapsed for reasons not dissimilar to what we face. These are seldom bloodless events, the governments seldom go quietly into the night without a few last kicks. People survive, they come through on the other side, but many die and most suffer.
2. Conspiracies are not to blame for what is likely to occur. Sure various groups, probably many groups have objectives they keep secret but there is no overarching secret conspiracy. If you want something to blame try the seven deadly sins.
3. Your local police are not your friend in an emergency (great or small SHTF). Look at the gun grabbing and door kicking after Katrina - it was not an anomaly. Police in a medium sized town such as Cedar Rapids pursued the same sort of tyrannical behavior after this year's floods. This is now standard practice - your rights, your property, ultimately your individual safety mean nothing. The goal is control.
4. The American populace is, on a whole, completely unprepared to provide any degree of self-sufficiency to itself during a short or long term difficulty.
5. The myth of the self-capable Southerner or Westerner is in large part just that now, a myth replaced by a reality of overweight "good ole boys" that still fancy themselves capable of man's work but are instead suburbanites with a few toys and hobbies.
6. Our reliance on "super-stores" has all but eliminated the local economies in most locales, just-in-time inventory will be a bit too late I think in the times ahead.
7. FEMA camps, shelters and holding areas are crime-ridden, disease-filled cesspools.
8. Extraordinary times will call for extraordinary measures - did you get upset about the Patriot Act? At least you were able to complain about it at the time.
9. The US gang population consists of 31,000 gangs in all 50 states comprising 850,000 members. These folks may not be prepared to survive but they would easily present a large group of two-legged predators in a serious crisis situation for anyone living in their path.
10. Americans demand and expect their government to fix things (at least the majority and they will be the ones causing all the trouble). Government fixes will last as long as the government can print money and float loans - when that no longer works effectively? You know what, rigid control, martial law, riots and disorder - essentially two possibilities a breakdown of our society or a rapid march toward an Orwellian society.

I think 10 will do as an initial foundation - just so you know where I am coming from in my belief of the facts.

Stumble It!

A Dark Direction

I must apologize in advance in a way. It seems I see the world situation but one way presently and the reality is no matter where I look I find further evidence that my position is correct.

Looking to the right you see that the "sole purpose [of this blog is] to sound the clarion call of resistance against all tyrants, the thought police and those that would rob from one man (money or liberty) to benefit another." In the past Johnny and I in addition to IKANTSPEL have written on various topics related to our limited (relative term) knowledge of geopolitics, military issues, government, economics, history and culture. Obviously some of us had more expertise than others in those areas (me I just filled up space with words).

Johnny is again is school, IKANTSPEL off pondering deep mathematical issues and problems - for now it is just me.

When topics come to my mind that I want to write about one comes to mind - where are we headed and how tough will the ride be, and related to that how will my family fair in all of this?

_____

By pure chance I have been reading a book about the life of Erwin Rommel. We can only assume by his decision to participate in a plot to kill Hitler that Rommel was a man of some principles. His early life indicates this as well. Many aspects of Rommel's personality and life make him a man I can identify with. I found his life during the hard times of the Weimar Republic and his subsequent difficulties of remaining a professional officer in an Army serving an increasingly unconstitutional regime under the NAZIs. Rommel had a family to feed, a career he had dedicated his life to - he like most German professional officers thought the NAZIs and Hitler would soon go away and they would remain to protect Germany as always.

I read a post somewhere today (I forget where) than mentioned that many in Washington had begun to read books about the Weimar Republic in the possible preparation for such circumstances here related to economic difficulties. I am not sure if this is true or how the poster would know but it seems a reasonable enough comparison as far as such comparisons can be taken. Perhaps those in power are reading such books. If true this would add only to my personal inner conflict.

I have long said that we no longer live in a Constitutional Republic - little by little, step by step over the course of 140+ years that document has been trampled in small and great ways. Chuck Baldwin recently wrote a post on this subject and the other day I pointed out an applicable term coined by Sorbran, Post-Constitutional America.

If I were truly a principled man, or a complete fool, I would stand and say that the government I serve no longer abides by the Constitution I have sworn to defend. If I were single that is perhaps exactly what I would do. The problem with values and principles is that they sometimes become difficult to balance. In the final equation the safety and security of my family rules the day. I find myself making the same decisions that Rommel made 70 or so years ago. If there is hope it is the sort of hope he had, that the Republic will self-correct and men of principle will still be required to defend it.

The reality is that if hard times come I am fairly protected - my job is one that will not go away easily, not of the depression/riots/jobless/rioting sort of hard times some predict. However, even for me there is a conceivable point where my loyalty to the concepts of our original republic, our Constitution or my Christian values and beliefs would make it impossible to keep my current career. I will never disarm US civilians obeying the law or allow any man I command to do so - I could foresee that becoming a problem. Then of course there is the very real possibility that the worst of what is to come will wait until I am a retired in a few short years (if it is to come that is what I pray for).

In either case, I find myself thinking more and more of these issues, not obsessed by any means, but the topic of what is happening and how we as a collective and individuals will deal with it is what I want to write about.

Perhaps this new line of posting is not taking the blog too far from what the purpose statement to the right indicates this is all about. These are dark and pessimistic subjects, filled with doom and gloom. It is, however, what I feel compelled to write about for the foreseeable future. And there you have it. I hope you stick around.

Stumble It!

Those Pesky Tribes

I recently attended a seminar put on by the Naval Postgraduate School on the subject of Iraq. Before I continue you must understand that while the majority of the presenters held PhD.s from Berkley the NPS is a "government" school. By that I mean its express purpose is to educate military and foreign service folks on hefty matters in line with the company story. Therefore, the presenters may have grown up in a liberal environment but they sing a neoconservative tune now.

At one juncture we were discussing the role of tribes in Iraq and the presenter made the comment that "so long as religion and tribalism play a key role in the lives of the Iraqi people democracy will not take hold".

I could not let that pass without a challenge. I asked the logical question, i.e. is the suggestion then that a secular society divorced from centuries old familial ties is the solution to achieving the desired end state of democracy (I abhor that word and concept).

After all it took a couple hundred years of "evolution" in the US for us to transform from a representative republic into what the masses believe now to be a democracy. And in the big scheme of things we are but youngsters on the world stage. Why should we expect the Iraqis to evolve to our sophisticated political level so quickly (tongue inserted in cheek).

Tribalism predates Islam in Iraq, it functions to serve many roles we take for granted in the West. A tribe is part union (they will get you a job), insurance company (no commercial firms exist, you run over someone and have to pay - they help you), small claims court (have a dispute with someone in another tribe, the elders will work it out and get you a remedy), mortgage firm (you need a house, only your tribe can help, no mortgage crisis in Iraq), dating service, divorce court and much, much more. Tribalism is family on a very large scale. How on earth could one possibly suggest that this centuries old institution is the problem, it is ingrained in the culture - there we go, that is the dirty word.

Culture seems to be the stumbling block to all the neoconic and liberal big-thinkers. That is to say some cultures are more equal than others. If we are talking about multiculturalism in the PC sense then sure that is a good thing - it in fact serves to break down and diminish other cultures that possibly stand in the way of "progress".

I am not advocating that traditional Iraqi culture is good or bad, only that it is their culture. Who are we to say that democracy is a better answer?

Later in the discussion I asked the question where the presenters thought that sovereignty for the current Iraqi government came from. Their answer was the elections in 2005 of course. I have not thought much on the sovereignty issue previously and had to pace my discourse accordingly. I challenged them and got them to agree that all sovereignty comes from the people. I asked again, how de jure sovereignty could have come from the people voting in an election for a government that was essentially already established. (I would also argue that Iraq has NEVER had a de jure government since the British imposed a monarch and boundary lines in 1920, so it seems high time the people spoke via the only real governments they know)

I did not and would not now make this the center of my argument but I believe that the only way in Iraq to establish a de jure government based upon the consent of the people was and is to allow the tribes to come together and establish said government. When Saddam fell and the country was without a government the tribes continued to rule their local areas. Many parts of Iraq did not see US troops for months after the fall and there was certainly no Iraqi forces in the area. Chaos did not reign. To an Iraqi the tribe has always been the center of authority in his life - Saddam tried to dislodge the tribes in the 80's and ended up with a rebellion - he changed his mind in 1992 and embraced the tribal system. The tribes are the voice of the people in Iraq in all but the most urban areas.

In any event, the point of this post was not to point out wrong thinking - we know our government thinks wrong on many subjects - but rather bad ideology. The ideology that says centuries old tribes and religion are bad for our policy in Iraq also threatens any and all of us that hold dear our family values, personal freedom and religion and do not buy into the idea that secular democracy, internationalism and all that are good things.

Stumble It!

The Headlines Read "Nationalization"

WASHINGTON -- Congress and the White House inched toward a financial rescue of the Big Three auto makers, negotiating legislation that would give the U.S. government a substantial ownership stake in the industry and a central role in its restructuring.

This was predictable and yet I am still speechless.

Corporatism = Socialism (according to AnarchoCatholic)

perhaps more accurately

Corporatism + Socialism + Nationalism = Fascism (for clarity if I wrote that today I would replace "nationalism" with "statism", I believe misplaced nationalism is bad but statism sums up what I meant better)

Here is a wonderful term "Post–Constitutional America” or as Sorbran put it a condition in which the "U.S. Constitution poses no serious threat to our form of government". (read the article)

Nationalization of significant portions of an entire industry must have been on one of the missing pages of my copy of the Constitution.

Stumble It!

Discombobulation

I have taken to observing the Lakota as a microcosm of what is wrong in so many other places; i.e. churches, political/cultural movements etc.

Take my last post for instance. I assumed, as did many obviously, that this new bank had something to do with the Lakota nation. As Russell Means states clearly it does not.

In fact, if you dig and read a little some of the people in the Lakota Nation movement state that Russell Means has nothing to do with them and then of course some of the BIA approved chiefs say that the Lakota nation people have nothing to do with them.

Principles are important, key really to a life well lived. So long as one is really standing on principle and not something else. I remember my early church experience as a youngster witnessing churches divide over "principle". How silly and un-Christian, since these were not disputes over real principle but rather personality conflicts.

I am still on several "Southern" mailing lists and recently read a thread where someone was pronouncing they would not support the Southern National Conference because the SNP was supported by the League of The South. The posters real beef seemed to be with Dr. Micheal Hill specifically but the point is the same - like minded people with similar goals refusing to work together over what they call principle.

I have several friends that remain very angry at me to this day, and specifically even more angry at me that Obama is president. To them it is my fault and the fault of all the other conservatives that refused to vote for McCain. Perhaps they think my point of view is not principle based - who knows. Maybe they would think this little post hypocritical. I would say that was in fact a matter of principle.

My point is, the dudes on the other side are many and organized. Anyone with different ideas can only hurt their cause by subdividing themselves into smaller and smaller minorities. Standing on principle is important and should never be compromised -dividing up based upon silly personality conflicts is defeat.


Y'all think about it, whoever "y'all" may be as this applies to you. Teamwork is a good thing if it does not compromise one's real principles. It takes a thinking man to see the difference.

Stumble It!

Just Another Piece to The Puzzle

I have not commented on this for many reasons but make of it what you will...

20K US troops to be deployed domestically - Dreher has commentary and links to others with more commentary.

This is simply not a step in the right direction but instead a move forward down the road we have been traveling - one that will inevitably lead to a circumstance in which we today simply can not fathom what America in several years will look like.

And Joshua you are correct - it is no surprise.

Stumble It!

Free Lakota Bank

From the website:

The Free Lakota Bank is the world's first non-reserve, non-fractional bank that issues, accepts for deposit, and circulates REAL money...silver and gold. All of our deposits are liquid, meaning they can be withdrawn at any time in minted rounds.

I wonder if they are getting serious up there..or if this entire sovereignty thing was a hoax? This seems for real but time will tell.

Stumble It!

After The Fall

It seems that sometimes events conspire to occur at the same time as to force one to think again about old issues. First, over the last two weekends my wife and I watched "Jericho" season one and two. Second, a few days ago I come across an article discussing a prediction by Igor Panarin predicting that the US will collapse and fall into six parts as a result of our economic malfeasance. Third, The National Bureau of Economic Research declares what most already knew the US is in the midst of a recession. Fourth, some economists have begun to predict the possibility of a depression. And then of course there is the fact that even Icelanders are rioting over their economic woes Icelanders, good grief. Lastly, my experience with after Thanksgiving shoppers reminded me of the greed at the base of humankind, and made me wonder what these animals would do if they were hungry and not merely looking for bargains.

As a student of history I know that old orders always pass away, sometimes quietly, sometimes violently. There is no reason not to assume the current order will fare any different. The question is all about when and how.I know in the past we had a few survivalist minded folk as regular readers here and I suppose that what I am about to write will appear rather bothersome to several widely held beliefs within that community. Bear with me.

Firstly, I think Panarins predictions are a bit premature even if taken over a rather long view of say 10-15 years. Economic collapse is not something that our Federal government would accept as a verdict on its policies and ideologies. It would not simply close up shop and pass away, admitting defeat and stepping aside for a better system to replace it. No, I am afraid they will deficit spend, borrow from foreign creditors, devalue the dollar when we can no longer make good on foreign debt and exact taxes at a rate unfathomable right now simply to remain in power. The grasping at power will be a long slow death, one that shall take us all on a willy-nilly ride to the edge of the abyss. And, sadly, we will go along for the ride with only minor disruptions along the way. In such a scenario there will certainly be riots and disturbances along the way but these will not be motivated from the perspective of a desire to change the system they will rather be demands for goods and services from the government to ease the pain of the ride.

Such disturbances and cries for help will serve only to validate the tyranny that will surely become part and parcel of our daily lives. If one thinks that the patriot movementfolks have it all wrong today with their warnings of growing tyranny I suspect that in the years to come the rational man will bow his head and sign if I only knew.

Even in this most dire of situations most people will consider their current happiness, safety and comfort paramount to all else - fixing the system at its core be damned.

Such a ride could last 20-30 years or in a scale of one human lifetime a virtual eternity. A central government determined to retain power can do so, at great cost it is possible.

Many in the survivalist community foresee a future in which our government, faced with economic collapse and social turmoil simply could not stand. If only it were true, for if this worst case scenario were to play out it would be our Federal Government that has brought it about and it would not deserve to stand. But history teaches us that power vacuums never exist, governments never go quietly into the night. I have studied data collected by the Ark Two people and I am convinced that even in the event of a large scale nuclear attack on say 20 US cities the Federal Government would survive. Perhaps the scenario would play out much like in Jerichoand it would take a few months for men with guns to arrive to your town and state we are from the government and are here to help....but someone with guns would show up. So even in the worst case the power vacuum would exist for no more than a year at most, probably much less (not saying survival preparations are not important, just the notion of an end to the world and a few rugged survivors rebuilding a agrarian utopia is unrealistic).

And why do I believe that our Russian prognosticator is wrong about the US breaking up into six parts in the short-term is wrong (beyond the facts stated above that the Federal Government would cling to ever last bit of power).

Simply stated...will

There are no regions in the continental US that are homogeneous in culture and philosophy to assert themselves as a separate entity for some time. Perhaps Hawaii if the tourist dollars stopped flowing, maybe Puerto Rico if the economic benefits stopped. Who else? Not the South we have forsaken our heritage. Alaska maybe independent minded and oil-rich. New England perhaps and maybe the only candidate in the lower 48. Nobody else has the will or identity to ask to get off the ride before it stops. Put aside your hopes of a free this or that while I am still a young man. Much education and much culture building must occur first and I am not sure that the simple principles of good culture can actually compete with the illusion offered by pop-culture.

Insurgency you say surely there would be good men willing to promise their lives, liberty and sacred honor to the cause of watering the tree of liberty.

Lets talk about that. The fact is the US military has become pretty good at COIN (counterinsurgency operations). Dont believe the hype, right or wrong, we are winning the counterinsurgency fight in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Our primary problem is that new fighters keep rolling into the fight. We plugged the border pretty well in Iraq and the fight has shifted t0 the Stan with a much more porous frontier. We have even reconfigured our formations we are in fact a constabulary Army. The new brigade combat teams are agile and efficient in a low-intensity fight and police work. They would get pummeled in a high-intensity brawl but that is not the point. Ten years ago we could not spell COIN....now we are pretty good at it.

And if you are thinking that without high-tech gear and constant resupply the Army would simply stall I propose that this in not the case. To be certain operating motorized as opposed to mechanized, without many of the toys would be less efficient, but it would be effective. Even in hard times the military would still be a formidable adversary to a domestic insurgency.

That is not to say it would be unbeatable and herein is the problem. We have no basis for an insurgency in the US. In the Middle East the foe we fight has tribal and religious ties that transcend any artificial government. As a people we have little understanding of history or political philosophy - hard to build a movement without ideas.

The center of gravity of American sentiment is based upon nothing more than temporary safety, comfort and happiness. American troops in the counterinsurgency fight in the Middle East have become very adept and non-kinetic operations designed to quell a village of discontent. You would be amazed at the friendship water and power can buy. Americans with no other loyalties than to themselves would be easier to buy.The counterinsurgency fight is all about the center of gravity and Americans are too accustomed to accepting empty promises if they appear to benefit them personally. No insurgency could survive in those conditions.

In any event successful insurgencies require 10% of the populations support (if there is foreign aid) and a significantly higher percentage without foreign assistance. The American Revolutionwas supported by 25-33% of the population and tremendous support from France at the critical points at the end. Just think about that 10% of our population (30,113,994) willing to become criminals andsacrifice their welfare and safety for an ideal not going to happen I am afraid.

What to do? Stop voting for commercialized talking heads, pray, pay off your debts, learn to grow a small garden, buy a few guns, read history, learn sustainable skills and find friends in your community that get it. Basically prepare to hunker down and ride out the storm and hope that the worst case does not come to pass. I for one believe it is inevitable.

Stumble It!

The Great Fall

Yesterday I wrote about the theory that some economist hold (few but growing) that a depression is perhaps in our future. Today two announcements:

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) The National Bureau of Economic Research said Monday that the U.S. has been in a recession since December 2007, making official what most Americans have already believed about the state of the economy .

Down we go again: Fourth-worst drop ever for Dow -- The stock market suffered one of its worst days since the financial meltdown Monday, slicing 680 points off the Dow Jones industrial average as Wall Street snapped out of its daydream of a
rally and once again faced the harsh reality of a recession.

The voices for another, more robust, stimulus now clamour as loudly as ever. Such a typical Keynesian response. Deficit spending to "correct" a problem created by deficit spending and uncontrolled credit is, well simply stupid. It makes sense only in a world where people are more concerned with present and temporary safety and comfort in exchange for a long-term solution.

Then of course there is this prediction by Igor Panarin, a Russian political analyst.

Professor Igor Panarin said in an interview with the respected daily IZVESTIA published on Monday: "The dollar is not secured by anything. The country's foreign debt has grown like an avalanche, even though in the early 1980s there was no debt. By 1998, when I first made my prediction, it had exceeded $2 trillion. Now it is more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid that can only collapse." ....

When asked when the U.S. economy would collapse, Panarin said: "It is already collapsing. Due to the financial crisis, three of the largest and oldest five banks on Wall Street have already ceased to exist, and two are barely surviving. Their losses are the biggest in history. Now what we will see is a change in the regulatory system on a global financial scale: America will no longer be the world's financial regulator."

He predicts a break-up into six parts but I will discuss that later, specifically what I think he got wrong and right. I think talk of a break-up is premature, even if looking at a ten-year cycle. Dragons die slow deaths and generally have one surprises in them, if history teaches us anything about these things that is a fact we know.


Talk of if we will have a robust stimulus is pointless -- we will. What does that mean? You full-well know or should know. It is in fact a step closer to tyranny for that money must eventually come from somewhere. History again teaches us of the depths that our central government will go to to in dire circumstances. Look to the depression years and the aftermath of all of those social programs and utter abandonment of solid constitutional principles. Our Federal government will do what ever is required to stem the tide of this current emergency - to hell with the long-term cost.

Occasionally systems need a natural reset, the time is now for such a reset. Painful for a while, yes. Sad for some, yes. That is the natural order of an economic system - if left alone this situation would come and go and in the end the system would be stronger - if and only if the government stayed out of it.

But as we know it will not - they will instead move us ever nearer to a bad end.

Stumble It!

Peak Oil or Depression

Both it seems...

I have attempted to wrap my mind around the real reason that gas prices have fallen so drastically since I "left the world". It seems that the answer, or at least a reasonable theory that serves is an answer is decreased demand resulting from other economic woes. That is such a simplistic answer (albeit it is riddled with economic mysticism at its core) to be beautiful. Peak oil has not gone away you see, oh no far from it. The over all product in the ground has not increased, production facilities to suck up those pesky hard to get drops in untapped places have not been developed. Supply remains the same, demand has decreased.

Peak oil has not gone away....

But depression - that is deflation right. It is hard to see deflation in prices anywhere right? Perhaps if we look at the "good retail season" and all the deep discounts out there. Folks are rejoicing that Black Friday was a success but maybe this is a two-edged sword. If people are buying because prices are cut so deeply could that not be the initial stages of a deflationary period. What happens in Febuary or March after everyone has used up their disposable income (or last bit of their credit line) on deeply discounted merchandise? Do retailers then discount things even further? At what point are companies moving products at so deep a discount just to generate some cash flow that they cannot continue to produce/procure?

From The Automatic Earth

Thanks to a credit boom that dates back to at least the early 1980s, and which accelerated rapidly after the millennium, the vast majority of the effective money supply is credit. A credit boom can mimic currency inflation in important ways, as credit acts as a money equivalent during the expansion phase. There are, however, important differences. Whereas currency inflation divides the real wealth pie into smaller and smaller pieces, devaluing each one in a form of forced loss sharing, credit expansion creates multiple and mutually exclusive claims to the same pieces of pie. This generates the appearance of a substantial increase in real wealth through leverage, but is an illusion. The apparent wealth is virtual, and once expansion morphs into contraction, the excess claims are rapidly extinguished in a chaotic real wealth grab. It is this prospect that we are currently facing today, as credit destruction is already well underway, and the destruction of credit is hugely deflationary. As money is the lubricant in the economic engine, a shortage will cause that engine to seize up, as happened in the 1930s. An important point to remember is that demand is not what people want, it is what they are ready, willing and able to pay for. The fall in aggregate demand that characterizes a depression reflects a lack of purchasing power, not a lack of want. With very little money and no access to credit, people can starve amid plenty.

According to the author credit, or more accurately an uncontrolled credit boom is the problem. Of course at the root of that is a prevailing sense of entitlement and greed. The author is kind in their description calling it "high expectations" - perhaps - greedy and materialistic fit too I believe.

I must admit, even when I try to read and stay connected to the world I live far from it. I currently leave on a small Army post in the middle of the desert, before here I was stationed in Korea and between here and there I have been back to the middle east. I have been away from home all of my adult life - I do not really know what goes on in the lives or regular people. My wife tells me from time to time that she talked to so-and-so and that they are losing their job or that their company is cutting back etc. My mother told me on the phone the other day that our local paper back home had six pages of foreclosures. These are things I cannot connect to or understand. I do not have debt, I do not worry about losing my job, I do not know anyone who does (well I have had troops get into debt problems but that is not really what I meant - their issues are generally related to too much stereo equipment and not enough paycheck, they will still have a place to live regardless).

I do know that I have been searching very hard for a piece of land way out in the boonies. I have not been able to help but notice that land is cheap.

I suppose this is all worth watching - as I have suggested before it seems high time to prepare to secede from things because if predictions of doom and gloom are correct and deflationary times are coming the man that can provide for himself and his family will be infinitely better off. And maybe, just maybe, come March that laptop that crazy woman ripped from my hands will go on deep, deep, deep discount.....

Stumble It!

Human Nature and The Meaning of Christmas

Some say, mistakenly, that Christmas is a time that brings out the very best in us. After all we have the chance to drop change in a bucket outside of all the mega-stores. We send cards of joy and love to people we care about and to some that we really do not care about at all. We eat, spend time with family and friends and give gifts.

It sounds wonderful, as children we actually believed it was wonderful - perhaps ultimately that is part of the root of the problem. I will not go into a long rant about the meaning of Christmas and all that because truth be told - in our day and time Christmas is about the economy stupid. To corporate America it is all about retail sales during the ever increasing period of time from Halloween to New Years. (and I will not talk about the annoying fact that each year that retail season seems to expand just a little bit more).

My wife wants a new laptop, so being a thrifty sort of guy I pointed out that one could be had at an after Thanksgiving sell for $250. I was perfectly willing to venture out at 12 midnight on friday after thanksgiving to procure this inexpensive device. I have never done anything like that and I thought the idea seemed appealing - a little exciting. It was something atypical for me, a chance to experience something new, see something new and in the end get a cheap laptop.

We stood in line for three hours, shivering and hugging for warmth. It seemed that for two hours and fifty minutes of my wait everyone remembered the simple lessons we all learned in kindergarten about forming a line and staying in line. Ten minutes prior to the store opening almost everyone forgot those lessons. I witnessed people exiting their warm cars and rushing to the door, erasing any remnant of the orderly line that had previously formed.

At this point, my blood pressure rose a bit. After all, I had arrived early, stood in the cold and was willing to take my chances on actually getting a laptop with those that had arrived before me. I did not at all like the idea of people arriving late, or worse, sitting in warm cars and then breaking in line.

I cooled myself with the thought that this was a wonderful opportunity to observe human nature and use it as opportunity to discuss with my wife my theory about the future of our land.

Once the store employees opened the door things were just as you probably imagine that they were going to be at this point in this little story - bedlam. Grown people running through a store, pushing, shoving, etc. etc. I arrived at the counter that was distributing the laptops sometime after the initial rush. I was distracted along the way watching parts and pieces of the mob peel off to converge on various "bargains" along the way. I suppose people had an idea of what they came for and they were not going to allow something as silly as civility to get in the way at that point. I also refused to run, in a store, for any reason other than life or limb. To my surprise I found that when I asked the girl behind the counter for one of the laptops she said "yes sir, we have one left" smiling and handing me the box.

I was further surprised when a woman behind me reached over me and grabbed it out of my hand. That is right, she literally came over my back and grabbed it.

I have a lot of PTSD issues I have worked on in various ways over the years. I am not ashamed to admit that I have had nightmares, that I have on occasion stopped dead in my steps at a sight, sound or smell. I have worked though most things and am left simply with what I think any normal man should be left with after seeing the worst of the human condition too many times. One thing I have never been able to get rid of is a powerful fight or flight response when I am startled or my personal space is invaded too quickly. My wife never startles me anymore, we have just adjusted to that.

This woman, coming over my back like that startled me. It was God in heaven that prevented me from laying her out on the floor. All of the physiological reactions took place, but thank goodness when I spun around I was able to quell the impulse.

There is of course, a much larger issue here. That woman doing that to me was just one of probably thousands of such instances across the country. I know I witnessed several other such events that very morning in that very store. I could not help but think to myself "what if these people were hungry". After all, if people are so willing to abandon civility over a silly electronic device what would they do if they were hungry.

Christmas is all about retail sales and materialism it seems and my little foray into the shopping world only served to remind me of just how far we have fallen. It is a sad state of affairs.

Stumble It!

Once Again Into the Fray

Over the last nine, yes I believe it has been at least nine, months I have been divorced from the world almost entirely. This was partially by choice, and partly by circumstances. That is not entirely true, to be certain my work took me "out off and away" from the real world but it was my choice to make no attempt to stay connected. If you are an old reader then you know full well what I do as a profession and I have no intention on commenting on any of my activities or thoughts related to those activities here and now.

I do not know for instance any of what occurred in the election. I did vote for Chuck Baldwin via absentee ballot but as for the rest of that nonsense I do not have a clue. I know that gas prices soared and have now fallen and that the misinformed masses now rejoice. I have a theory as to what has occurred but I have not read anything or heard anything proposing a theory supported by facts. (I suspect that the administration dug into the strategic reserves prior to the election but I could be off base). I do not know what songs are popular ( I have enjoyed my select music on my IPOD when time permitted but those are things written and sung long ago). I could not begin to tell you anything that occurred in the sports world, I know the olympics occurred but that is it. I have not looked at a newspaper, read a blog, searched news on the net or even engaged in a conversation about current events outside of my bubble for several months. That is the strike me down right here truth.

I have read several books, all by long dead authors. I have thought a lot. I am not even certain that I still retain whatever feeble skills at conveying thoughts in writing I might once have had. Everything I have written over the last several months has been short, concise and primarily bulleted.

One thing has become infinitely clearer to me as I have thought of things great and small during quiet and not so quiet moments these last few months. All problems and issues can be essentially boiled down into one fundamental issue; immorality. The seven deadly sins have essentially been turned into virtues respected by our society.

Of particular note is our redfining meaning ofredefined sloth. Do not misread me, the others are genuinely disturbing, but sloth has engendered a sense of entitlement. Self-reliance, self-responsibility and self-discipline are no longer required - we are lazy and expect that someone else will fix it, whatever "it" is in any particular situation. We so easily accept the notion that bigger is better as applied to any circumstance. I see this in my job continually, in large and small things. This is of course just a micro view of the prevailing attitude almost everywhere. As a collective we look askew at the individual that stands up in his little piece of the world and states that he can handle his own issues.

I decided not to stay connected to the world because I know that fundamentally it is impossible to argue with almost anyone about the state of the world so long as they live and breath inside the paradigm of how things are. To most the world is made up of simplicities - a political system that presents two teams, complete with mascots; and a view of the economy that revolves around their paycheck, their petroleum bill and their welfare.

Who wants to talk about fundamental issues? Most that understand them tune out the truth in the secure knowledge that nothing at all can be done to change things.

I do not know the answer to that question - but the truth is out there and it should be stated over and over by as many as have a voice to state it. So I am back, and that is all I have to say about that.

Stumble It!

Vertical Huckabee

David Limbaugh is troubled by Huckabee

That's why it troubles me when the ostensibly conservative Mike Huckabee tells Jay Leno he wants us to abandon "horizontal politics. Everything in this country is not left, right, liberal, conservative, Democrat, Republican. I think the country is looking for somebody who is vertical, who is thinking, 'Let's take America up and not down.'"

It's perfectly fine for Mike Huckabee to make such pronouncements. I just hope conservatives understand that what takes America "up" are conservative principles – and that it will always be necessary to fight for those principles against those who don't fully understand them or who are committed to their defeat. read more

The idea that conservative principles do not apply to each and every decision we make in our public and private life is - well compromise of the sort we need no more of. It is simply incomprehensible that a true conservative would be willing to compromise on any matter of principle. Men and times change but principles never to paraphrase Stephens.

What does Huckabee mean by "going vertical" and what part of real conservative philosophy has ever taken America down? Huckabee continues to prove that the term Huckster is aptly applicable.

Stumble It!

Paul's Family Values

Campaign for Children and Families, a leading West Coast pro-family organization that researches and advocates for the natural family, is pleased to announce the Report Card on the Natural Family to inform voters where the leading Republican presidential candidates stand on protecting the basic family unit.

“While all of the leading Republican candidates claim to embrace family values, let the record show that they’re marching to different drummers on marriage rights, adoption, schoolchildren, and the destructive ‘LGBT’ agenda,” said CCF President Randy Thomasson. “Many pro-family voters will be surprised with the results of this carefully-researched report card. But as always, what a candidate does means much more than what they say. Facts are stubborn things.” see the report

Paul and Huckabee scored 7, McCain 4, Thompson 3, Giulliani 1 and Romny 0. Family is the most important aspect of conservative philosophy. Who says that Ron Paul's brand of political philosophy is not truly conservative? He is the only real conservative in the race.

Stumble It!

Silver Tounged Devil

As I sat and listened to Barack Obama's speech after winning the Iowa caucus I thought to myself (half-seriously actually) "this guy sounds exactly how I think the antichrist will sound when he shows up." Ok out of curiosity I googled 'Barack Obama antichrist' and good grief was I shocked. Apparently a lot of people have had this thought before; some have extensive websites with proof of their suspicions.

Well who knows, I seldom speculate on points of Biblical prophecy and I am very wary of those that do - particularly that make such a thing their trade. However, I suppose if I were going to write down a list of attributes Obama has the "silver tongue" required skill-set down pat.

I fear that despite the ideological holes in almost everything he stands for; granted it is hard to pin the man down on positions from his speeches but one can certainly get a picture of his ideological basis from his dancing words; the American polity will eat up what he is serving.

Nothing any of the GOP front-runners are saying will sell at all with anyone other than the lock-step GOP faithful in a general election. People are sick and tired - rightfully so - of the same old GOP story line related to a failed foreign policy. Continuing the course is not an option for the ordinary American - the Democrats are preaching "change" and the American public is ready to say 'amen".

The GOP had a chance to stop the election of Bill Clinton in 1992 (or at least run a candidate that really stood for what the American people really wanted and really needed). Patrick Buchanan (like him or not) stood firm for the change that America needed. The GOP faithful failed to see that and instead decided to try something old again. Bush the Elder represented everything that has always been wrong with the GOP - he was out of touch with conservatism, he represented not the people but special interest. His world view was akin to some profane merger of Teddy Roosevelt and Lincoln. His economic policy was abysmal. George was the GOP's man - Pat's warnings were ignored.

We ended up with eight years of the Clinton dark years - forget the sexual exploits, - Clinton was a horrible president. You simply must recall Janet Reno and her gestapo troops in Waco, Ruby Ridge, down in Florida with the Gonzalez family. You must remember the North American Free Trade Agreement (not really free trade at all), Operation Desert Fox (the precedent for regime change in Iraq), the ridiculous war against Serbia, the Brady Bill, the Iraq Liberation Bill, and the silly 'Don't Ask Don't Tell".

We know now, if we are honest we should know, that America was indeed in the midst of a cultural war in 1992. Sixteen year later we see the results of unchecked illegal immigration, in the coming years we will see more and more the follow-on effects of the erosion of culture that this will have on our society. Ask yourself this, is America a more or less moral place today than it was in 1992. The answer to that, if honest, clearly shows that we have been involved in a war we are losing. In Pat's words:

But the cultural war is broader than two battlegrounds.
We see it in the altered calendar of holidays we are invited - nay, instructed - to celebrate. Washington's Birthday disappears into Presidents Day. States, like Arizona, that balk at declaring Martin Luther King's birthday a holiday face political censure and convention boycotts. Easter is displaced by Earth Day, Christmas becomes Winter break, Columbus day is now a day to reflect on the cultural imperialism and genocidal racism of the "dead white males" who raped this continent while exterminating its noblest inhabitants.

Secularism's Holy Days of Obligation were not demanded by us; they were imposed on us. And while Gov. Cuomo may plausibly plead ignorance of the culture war, the Hard Left has always understood its criticality. Give me the child for six years, Lenin reportedly said, quoting the Jesuits, and he will be a Marxist forever. J.V. Stalin, who was partial to Chicago gangster films, thought that if only he had control of Hollywood, he could control the world.

Too many conservatives, writes art critic James Cooper, "never read Mao Tse-tung on waging cultural war against the West. [Mao's] essays were prescribed reading for the Herbert Marcuse-generation of the 1960's, who now run our cultural institutions... Conservatives were oblivious to the fact that ... modern art - long ago
separated from the idealism of Monet, Degas, Cezanne, and Rodin - had become the purveyor of a destructive, degenerate, ugly, pornographic, Marxist, anti-American ideology." While we were off aiding the Contras, a Fifth Column inside our own country was capturing the culture.

The battle is lost and the few Republicans that still believe it can or should be fought at the national level are simply confused. Mike Huckabee is a glimmer of hope for these confused people - they believe supporting a man that claims evangelical Christian beliefs can right all that has occurred. Wrong - perhaps in 1992 there was a slim chance, no chance what-s0-ever exists for this possibility now at the national level.

The American people are ready for a change but what they are really interested in is change that benefits them personally. The only option at all to correct what is wrong is to attack the very core of the belief system that says it is ok to use the Federal government for "good". As we have seen power in the hands of the Federal government is never used for real good.

The only real counter-argument to the noxious touchy feel-good ideas spread by Obama, Edwards and Clinton is the dish Ron Paul is serving up. Everything every other GOP candidate is preaching is defeatism, the same oldism status quo that has failed so miserably thus far.

The only hope for America is to restore the republic, return all of these critical "hot-button" issues that Federal Government has no Constitutional power to act on back to the states. Let us salve the complicated social issues at the local level and keep the Federal Government out of the business of "doing good".

Stumble It!

What of Huckabee?

I respect the fact that the man stands up for what he claims as his religious beliefs. I myself am a Christian of the Baptist persuasion (Southern Baptist to be exact). However - there is something significantly dangerous about some of the ideology that many evangelical politicians and "leaders" hold dear.

I know enough about how ordinary Christian folks think and vote to understand why good folks in Iowa placed their voted for Huckabee. I also know enough about the ideology that Huckabee represents and how dangerous it really is.

I will tell you this much, without the probably required data to support my position - Mike Huckabee is a dangerous man, dangerous in the way George Bush, Hillary Clinton, Romney, McCain and Guilliani are dangerous. It is simple enough to rip apart Huckabee from his ideological core - I think between my colleagues here we have done that more or less over time. (see CHRISTIANS NEED TO BEWARE OF MIKE HUCKABEE, The Huckster and Education , Totalitarians Among Us, Sound and Fury, Debate Round-Up to read some of the things we have said about the man).

I am not sure that Iowa means a lot - other than it is refreshing and encouraging that Paul seems to be set to place ahead of Gulliani, Thompson seems to be out of funds and momentum, McCain will self-destruct and Romney and Huckabee will invariably keep beating each other about.

Ron Paul is the only Republican candidate that can run a successful campaign against the Democrats - mark it down and put my name beside it!

Stumble It!

National Treasure 2

Last night I saw this film - again because the wife wanted to. It was what I expected; filled with odes to the Lincoln mythology. The villain of the film is a Southerner, a descendant of General Albert Pike. (creative huh).

It is not worth discussing the film other than to comment on a couple of points. First, there are several points where the characters state something to the effect, "imagine if the Confederates had got their hands on all that gold".

Imagine what? Would it really have been so terrible for a new nation to gain its freedom because that is what the people of that nation wanted? I failed to get it each time one of the characters in the movie made such a silly statement. I guess secession got in the way of manifest destiny and all that.

The plot of the film revolves around the fabled city of gold. It ends up being located in the Black Hills, almost under Mt. Rushmore (Six Grandfathers before the Federal Government took it over). Apparently the entire Rushmore project was conceived (according to the story) to hide the city of gold. At one point the dialogue in the movie talks about finding this piece of Indian culture (the use the non-preferred "native american" term).

It is interesting to note that once they find it I did not notice one single Indian there cataloguing and collecting all of the treasure. I suppose it was all headed off to the Smithsonian for "safe-keeping". All of that gold sure would set up the Lakotah Nation up nicely don't you think?

Which of course brings us to sic semper tyranus, the idea that tyrants always should get the (knife, gun, bomb etc.) the only problem with that is that killing a tyrant only allows a worse tyrant to replace them. Killing Lincoln (clearly a tyrant by any real definition) simply allowed the most radical Republicans to implement their policies. Killing tyrant did not even work in Rome, they tried it, over and over and simply kept finding new tyrants ready and wiling to fill the job.

*Lincoln deserved to die, he should have been impeached, tied and hanged for prosecuting unjust war, suppressing Constitutional rights and subverting due process - that is the fate tyrants should face; not to be revered on coins and monuments.

The real problem in the acceptance of the precepts of tyranny. It is those concepts that must be killed to actually "kill" tyrants, i.e. keep them in their place.

Stumble It!

A Majority in 32 States Agree

With Ron Paul that Lincoln was wrong to start and prosecute a war against the southern states when they seceded from the union. An act not prohibited to them by the Constitution - the act of going to war against states exercising their reserved rights is not a power delegated to the executive branch or the federal government in general. I challenge anyone to provide evidence to the contrary. Apparently the majority of folks in the less metropolitan states understand this concept.

Take a gander at the map of the poll results - everywhere that people still live with some degree of that quality that has been considered historically "American" the majority agree that Lincoln was wrong.

Samuel Chase (a signer of the Declaration of Independence) and Justice of the Suprime Court stated in Ware v. Hylton (3 Dallas 199 at 224 U.S. 1798)

In June, 1776, the convention on Virginia formaly declared that Virginia was a free, soveriegn and independent state and on the 4th of July 1776, following, the United States in Congress assembled declared the thirteen colonies free and independent States; and that as such they had full power to levy war, conclude peace etc. I consider this as a declaration, not that the United States jointly in a collective capacity were independent States etc. but that each of them was a soverign and independent State, that is each of them had a right to govern itself by its own authority and its own law, without any control from any other power on earth. [emphasis mine]

The Treaty of Paris 1783, concluding the American War of Independence, supports this conclusion:

His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and independent states, that he treats with them as such, and for himself, his heirs, and successors, relinquishes all claims to the government, propriety, and territorial rights of the same and every part thereof.

Notice that Great Britian acknowledhes the independence of thirteen individual states as free and independent nations - not simply one joint government. The United States as a government was born from a contract between free and independent States and it was given only limited power to do specific things. As the 10th Amendment clearly states:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The president did not and still does not have the power the use force against a state or states exercising their reserved rights - i.e. all rights of free and independent nations not specifically delegated to the Federal Government under the terms of the Constitution. Free and independent states are by definition free to enter into contracts and agreements and when they believe those agreements are no longer in their best interests they are free to leave those agreements. That is the meaning of being free and independent - any other definiton would inply that the states were captive and not free at all.

Alexis de Tocqueville the foremost observer of the creation of the American Republic, in Democracy in America, said:

The Union was formed by the voluntary agreement of the States; and in uniting together they have not forfeited their nationality, nor have they been reduced to the condition of one and the same people. If one of the States choose to withdraw from the compact, it would be difficult to disprove its right of doing so, and the Federal Government would have no means of maintaining its claims directly either by force or right.

President James Buchanan stated succinctly in a speech before Congress, December 1860 that the Constitution does not delegate to the Federal government the power to use force against a state:

The question fairly stated is, Has the Constitution delegated to Congress the power to coerce a State into submission which is attempting to withdraw or has actually withdrawn from the Confederacy? If answered in the affirmative, it must be on the principle that the power has been conferred upon Congress to declare and to make war against a State. After much serious reflection I have arrived at the conclusion that no such power has been delegated to Congress or to any other department of the Federal Government. It is manifest upon an inspection of the Constitution that this is not among the specific and enumerated powers granted to Congress, and it is equally apparent that its exercise is not " necessary and proper for carrying into execution " any one of these powers. So far from this power having been delegated to Congress, it was expressly refused by the Convention which framed the Constitution.

Lincoln himself spoke highly of secession at one point in his career (when it was pragmatic and met his own ideological objectives)

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 which 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 so much of the territory as they inhabit.

This excerpt is taken from Lincoln's "If You Can Secede You May" (Mexico) speech, cited in Rupert Emerson, From Empire to Nation (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1967), p. 450.

Clearly Mr. Lincoln was wrong to wage war against the South - he did not do it to free slaves for he never freed a single slave under his actual sphere of influence. Furthermore, slaver ended in every other Western nation without war, it was an intsitution destined to end in America as well without warfare. He invaded the South outside of his constitutional mandate and beyond his delegagted power to act. His actions caused the death of 400,000 Americans and in the minds of the uneducated and more nefariously those that wish to use the Federal Government for purposes that is was never created for changed our Republic into an empire.

Ron Paul was brave to answer Tim Russert correctly but it is more encouraging to see that many of my fellow Americans still understand history and the Constitution.

Stumble It!

AOL on Lincoln and Paul

Not that this is scientific at all but the results of this "poll" have been interesting to watch. Nationally, 57% disagree with the following "Ron Paul says Lincoln was wrong to fight the Civil War."

What is encouraging is that in the South (ten states), Vermont, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho and Alaska the numbers run in the majority in agreement with Dr. Paul. These are the states where the League of The South, the Second Vermont Republic, the Alaska Independence Party, and the Lakota Nation live and operate.

Perhaps, despite an egregious education system that does not teach the truth there is indeed hope for devolution and independence. If one can see how wrong that Lincoln was then it is not a great step forward toward seeing what is wrong with all that resulted from his actions.

My question - what is wrong with Texas, Missouri and Hawaii? (Places where people ought to vote differently) Do y'all like living under the yoke of an illegitimate empire?

Stumble It!

Half-Naked Vixens

Robin Garrison, an off-duty 42-year-old firefighter, was walking in Berliner Park in Columbus, Ohio, in May when he saw a woman sunbathing topless under a tree.

He approached her and they started talking and getting comfortable, the woman smiling and resting her foot on his shoulder at one point. Eventually, she asked to see Garrison's penis; he unzipped his pants and complied. Seconds later,undercover police officers pulled up in a van and arrested Garrison; he was later charged with public indecency, a misdemeanor....[Read More]

Wow, I am not advocating that people ought to get naked in public parks (unless of course the community thinks that is an ok thing to do). I do not at all believe that the scenario above is "good" police work. A half-naked woman, touching and flirting with a guy is a powerful incentive - many a man has fallen for such a thing. This is clearly entrapment. Bad cops! Bad cops!

Stumble It!

That Lincoln Fellow

Anthony Gregory has penned a fabulous piece on the backlash from Russert's attempt to trip Ron Paul up with a question about Lincoln's War.

George W. Bush and the Republican establishment are, if nothing else, Lincolnian,
regardless of what anyone might say. The party of corporatism, imperialism,
centralism, economic fascism, dictatorship, aggressive war, militaristic duplicity, conscription, direct taxation, cronyism and police statism has never strayed much from its 1860s roots. And it has always advanced despotism in the name of liberty and national honor, from Lincoln to Teddy, from Nixon to Reagan, from the Bushes to Benito.

The fact that "conservatives" have flocked to and supported the GOP over the last half century is really more a result of the Democrat parties abandonment of its roots than any real redeeming conservative principles in the GOP itself. I have voted Republican in with the only excpetions a couple of votes for Libertarian and Constitution Party candidates when I had an option. The legacy of Lincoln is written all over the GOP and if it does not shake that legacy, renouncing it outright it deserves to fall and crumble.

But Ron Paul has done something that no presidential candidate of any prominence has done in many, many years — he has challenged the cult of Lincoln, the ideological godhead of the modern American regime. The Federal Reserve, the Income Tax, the Wilsonian empire and now the Lincolnian central state have all
become national issues of discourse again. Thanks, Ron Paul. Once again, you
have told the American people what they need to hear. If we want America to become a free country, we must go further than overturning the legacy of George
W. Bush. We must overturn much more, and replace it with liberty itself. We are
closer to that goal than ever, as the ideological basis for the modern American
system is crumbling at every moment of exposure to Dr. Paul's truth serum.

Indeed he has, but who really wants to listen? To listen to such truth requires a fundemental change in the way one sees the world. It is too comfortable to accept the status quo, not to ask the hard questions and not to hear real truth. No real conservative, no real lover of liberty could look at Lincoln as anything more than a murderous tyrant - a man that simply ignored the law off the land to force his idea of a perfect union upon the people via force.

Stumble It!

Paul on Lincoln's War

Tim Russert asked Ron Paul last Sunday on Meet the Press about Mr. Lincoln's War to which Paul said: "No, [Lincoln] shouldn't have gone, gone to war. He did this just to enhance and get rid of the original intent of the republic."

Anyone that is honest in their study of history knows that Lincoln did not declare war on the Confederate States to end slavery and that he himself never freed a single slave while president. These are facts. What he did do is redefine (by force) the original republic and to do so inaugurated slavery of another sort (the draft). He started the war and invaded the South for the same reasons nations have always invaded other nations - power, control and economics.

What an asinine thing of Russert to attempt, what a brave and noble answer from Paul.

AOL wants you to speak on the issue, go here to express your opinion (vote) on the issue. They ask a simple question "Ron Paul says Lincoln was wrong to fight the Civil War. Do you agree?"

I am amazed at the results - the failure of our civics education is obvious. I am more disturbed at the numbers coming in from the South. Obviously a lot of morons have voted in this poll thus far.

Stumble It!

Lambs and Lions

Tonight I saw Lambs and Lions. I did not know anything about the movie, did not really want to go in fact. Movies on post are cheap, really cheap, and my wife wanted to go so off I went. I am darn glad I did.

Robert Redford directed the film and played the part of a political science professor at an unnamed university in California. The movie has three interconnected plots occurring. One is a dialogue between Redford and a clueless, well-heeled, lazy and apathetic college punk that thinks everything in the world is screwed up but has no intention of doing anything about it. The related plot revolves around two of Redford's former students that joined the Army after college and find themselves assigned to the 11th Cavalry Regiment in Afghanistan participating in yet another "new" plan to win the war. The third plot entails a dialogue between Tom Cruise (a young and up and coming senator) and Meryl Streep ( am experienced reporter). Cruise's character asked Streep's character for the interview to entice her into writing "the truth" about this new strategy for winning the war.

My primary take-away from the film was the same thing I was struck with the other night when I watched a History Channel special on "The real Charlie Wilson". My thought is when did it become alright for Senators and Congressmen to become involved in "special projects". The interaction between those in the Legislative Branch and the Executive Branch should be limited to what the Constitution intended. The crafters of our Republic never intended that our legislators should act like pontiffs, peddling power and meddling in executive functions. There is a significant difference in finding facts, i.e. getting out and seeing what the money that Congress appropriates is spent on and the very un-Constitutional circumstance of getting hands on in the business of execution.

This is one of the minor aspects portrayed in the movie, Cruise at one point takes a phone call receiving a direct report from the commander in Afghanistan tactical information related to the "new strategy". Of course if you read a little about some of the antics of various congressmen over time you know full well this sort of business is not unheard of - perhaps even common place. Congressmen and Senators often take a special interest in their favorite projects - so much so that their power and access to money makes them the de facto managers of these projects. That is just plain wrong.

It was not so much different in the Roman Republic/Empire. I am continually amazed and humored by the similarities between our Republic and that of Rome. It is not a cliche to make that comparison - culturally and politically we are Rome. Our currency has even begun to collapse like Rome in her middle period.

Back to the movie. Streep's character is conflicted after her discussion with the senator. Cruise's character argues that she has to write the story because we "have to win" and that the news media is just as guilty as the administration for the mistakes of the last six years. His argument is that in 2001 the media outlets covered the story 24/7 with headlines like "America Attacked", "America at War" etc. etc. He called the news organizations nothing more than "wind sockets" showing whatever the people wanted to see to increase ratings.

I have never given a lot of thought to that but there is truth there. Remember back on September 12 2001, what about October 7 2001 or March 18 of 2003? Every news channel covered the story with an excited frenzy. Sure it was news but where was the real reporting back then? Who really asked about the WMD's that we originally invaded Iraq to find? Who asked what we were going to do after we beat the standing armies (such as they were). Did anyone in the MSM remind the American people of the travails of Alexander, the British at the Kyber Pass, the British in Iraq in the early 20th Century, the Soviet Empire in Afghanistan? Did anyone in the MSM stop to read the real objectives of the Wahbism and the real reason that Bin Ladin attacked the US? Nope, none of that back then when the fourth estate was supposed to do its job - they only got a conscience long after the fact.

I recommend the movie, it makes one think.

Stumble It!

Pillars of Conservative Thought

It seems increasingly obvious that the very definition of what constitutes "conservative" is is doubt. That is at least the case with many that claim to be conservatives yet hold values and ideas that are progressive and even liberal or radical. Some claim, erroneously, that there is no true conservative tradition in America - that the United States was born amidst the liberal ideology of the enlightenment and that all we are is a derivative of liberalism. Liberal historians have painted this picture and we conservatives have been all too willing to accept it - we have accepted in large part that liberals have in their linage men such as Jefferson. We (by that I mean confused conservatives) are left to accept that Adams, Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt must be part of our lineage. This is of course false - the last three of those men do not belong in the paragon of conservative heroes (more on that is some later post). Adams perhaps, as a political philosopher for sure as a politician perhaps not.

When we abandon Jefferson as one of the key figures in the development of a uniquely American version of conservative political philosophy we abandon conservative philosophy in its historical context on this continent altogether. We are then left with but the scrapings of conservative thought without the underpinnings - we are let with the makings of an ideology. That is in essence what conservative thought has become, yet another -ism.

What is true conservative thought in terms of the uniquely American style and form? Is there such a creature as a true American conservative?

Clyde Wilson in a 1969 essay entitled The Jefferson Conservative Tradition theorizes that the essential elements of American conservative polity are Republican, Constitutionalist and Federalist in nature. ¹

Republican describes the idea that sovereignty rests in the people but is expressed in the rule of a qualified majority within the bounds of law. The constitutionalist element deals with the notion of the law protecting the people from the government and the individual from the people. This idea is further expressed in the notion that government exists only via delegated powers. The federalist aspect of American conservative thought deals with the decentralized nature of our government, and the indestructibility of the component states.

Within these three pillars all the entire universe of conservative thought may comfortably thrive. If one removes one pillar from the structure the philosophy falls into the trash heap of mere ideology.

Consider that to be a true republican (small "r") one must inherently view the community as supreme to the state, In a republic citizens of the republic must first be capable of self-governance before they can take an active role in governing others. This means they must become responsible members of the community, contributing in their own way to the common good. A republican sees the true nature of government to serve the community. Individual rights are guaranteed by membership within the community. To a republican sovereignty rests with the people and is exercised by a qualified majority through the states primarily and secondarily through the central government and the limited powers delegated thereto. A republican is a conservator that is in constant battle between the forces of aristocracy and democracy - preserving a fine balance between the two.

Community is the basis of all that is worthy of conserving and a true conservative realizes that a republican government is the best qualified of all forms to preserve community within American culture. It is thus that at various points in our past we accepted religious tests before allowing someone to hold an office of public trust. We did this not because ours was a government formed on religious principles but precisely because it was created to serve a religious community. That community was formed on religious principles and those that wished to be active members of the community accepted as much even if they did not personally adhere to all of the beliefs of the community at large.

Within the concept of community personal responsibility, a key element that must be present in a people that wish to be free, was always expressed profoundly. Moral, financial, familial, business and ethical responsibility were traditionally the hallmarks of those that wished to achieve and maintain community membership. These are the traits that a person must demonstrate to be truly self-governing, without such responsibility a person is unfit to govern others (i.e. participate in the political process).

Property qualifications come to mind as a historical benchmark for full investment in the community. Certainly this was one sure method of ensuring that those that voted had ownership of the solutions they supported. Perhaps this notion has no place in our current system (then again it sounds pretty good to me) but certainly the idea that those on the receiving end of government programs and hand-outs are not "fully qualified" members of the community holds true in my conservative mind. This is exactly the sort of shift in thinking that is required if we are to truly regain the fruits of conservative philosophy. Instead of talking about the benefits of some new program or modifying existing programs the true conservative would ask "who is participating in the conversation and why". Perhaps the answer to many of our woes might best be found in simply asking different questions and attacking different problems altogether. So long as we participate in debates that have as their origin liberal ideology we can and will never be true conservators of our republic.

On the subject of responsibility we must also address the issue of rights. Conservatives view individual liberty as existing in an ordered society. This again requires diligence and a constant balancing act - as conservators this is the role of true conservatives. It is libertine and dangerous to presume that man has natural rights outside of the community. We were not created (nor did we evolve) as solitary creatures. There is a natural order to the universe, there exists natural law and under that law man lives and has always lived as a social animal/creature/being. Our freedom and liberty springs from the culture and community that we belong to. God gave us certain rights to be utilized responsibly within our communities, our communities give sanction to governments to protect those rights. There is no other way to view rights/responsibilities and remain within the conservative paradigm.

We have failed as conservatives primarily because we have failed to act as the conservators of our community. By this I am speaking of culture, heritage, values, traditions and families. The issue of immigration is a simple on to a conservative. We welcome those that wish to join our community - meaning follow our laws, learn our language, respect our customs and traditions and contribute to society. Anyone that proposes anything other than deportation for that that have not attempted to meet these criteria is not a conservative.


To be a true American conservative one must be a federalist. We may depart from those that termed themselves Federalist during the 1790's and early 1800's and we may agree more with the Antifederalist but in principle we agree that a system of government that results in a decentralized government with certain specific delegated powers is best. Conservatives view the federal union as a compact between indestructible states. True conservative thought in America has always held that states retained certain powers unto themselves at the formation of the United States - the term states' rights is possibly a misnomer in this regard because these are not rights at all but inalienable powers never given to the Federal government at all, therefore the states do not need a right to exercise such powers as such a right is inherent in the sovereignty of the states. For clarity the term states' rights suffices however. A conservative knows instinctively that the federal government has no authority whatsoever dealing in issues such as education, health care, retirement programs, directly taxing citizens, speed limits, seat belt usage and a plethora of other initiatives.

Why then do so-called conservatives speak to these issues in terms of modifying existing programs? Why not simply read the Constitution and state unequivocally that any program that the Federal government is involved in that encroaches upon areas reserved to the states should not be modified but eliminated? Beware of anyone proclaiming the mantle of conservative that cannot fathom this point.


Which of course brings us to the constitutionalist pillar of American conservative thought. Despite that fact the the 18th century Federalist violated their charter to simply modify the Articles of Confederation they sold us a document that is the law of the land. As such a conservative realizes that this document is not a means to an end but rather a necessary result of building government - which of course is a necessary evil but a requirement of an ordered society. The Constitution is intended to protect the people from the rulers and the individual from the people. It is also a compact, a contract between the states and the central government that the states gave birth to. A true conservative views the Constitution in the sense that it was written and reads it plainly and literally. A conservative will not stand for altering interpretations of the document depending upon the mood of the polity - there are mechanisms established to alter the wording of the document without subjecting it to various interpretations.


What does all of this say for the current state of conservative thought in our present political arena? It says that there are not many conservatives among us and very few running for political office.

Stumble It!

Another Strike at Freedom

The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act (HR 1955) passed through Congress in October without any MSM attention and very little real discussion on the blogshphere. However, this is yet another significant piece of legislation in terms of strengthening the government and stripping the freedom of the people.

Positive Universe summed up the danger within the text of this bill:

...it is important to read the actual bill because it is proposing to study thought not implement actions against persons, yet. The controversial aspects are 1) whether the government should study its citizens thoughts and beliefs as potential threats against itself; 2) the public and even the legislators themselves are not yet engaged in that debate; 3) a lack of clarity as to who wrote and wants the bill; and 4) what sets of actions might subsequently be implemented by such a study. The bill does use provocative terms, and it does make some dangerous assumptions, such as the finding that American citizens are susceptible and gullible to internet-based, terrorist propaganda.

The FBI has historically defined domestic terrorist by their criminal acts. Consider the circumstances surrounding the Aryan Republican Army. Sure these people had what could rightly be termed a radical ideology and they acted to in criminal ways to further that ideology. They key is they became criminals (bank robbers). They were thwarted based upon their criminal behavior - none of their efforts truly furthered their cause. The FBI's stance has been to treat such groups as criminals (when they break the law). They have never attacked the thought process of these groups, instead focusing on the criminal behavior itself.

As far as approach has gone it has worked. There have been no examples of domestic terrorist successfully acting out without a connection to criminal activity. Oh, but you say what about the Oklahoma City bombing. Well perhaps that was an anomaly of one or two ideologues. Then again there is strong evidence that can trace McVeigh to Elohim City.

In any event, just like almost every piece of legislation passed by our Federal masters, the cure is worse than the disease. Let us assume that the cost of true freedom is an occasional wacko in our midst, would we prefer to sacrifice that freedom for the hope of security? Surely we would gain neither in such a case. This bill is nothing more than an additional sacrifice of freedom at the alter of faith in the government - statism no less.

Consider the wording of the bill, read it. They intend to look at thought prior to action as a tool to stop the domestic terrorism that has yet to really materialize. That is enough, in and of itself, to make any freedom loving patriot cringe.

Here is another snippet of interest to anyone interested in States' Rights and the notion that our states can in fact at some point stand up to the Federal Government they created if that government goes too far in violating the compact and usurping too much power unto itself.:

The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

Here we have it, an anti-secession bill in point of fact. The wording may be deceptive at first glance but consider the implications. This gives specific protection to the Federal government from any that would oppose it - that would include the duly elected members of a state government if there were ever to be a real disagreement over the precise meaning of the meaning of delegated and reserved powers.

If for instance Vermont of Hawaii were to actually secede (in Hawaii's case merely reestablish independence) and subsequently restrict the action of Federal agents within their borders the elected officials of the state and the agents of that state could be deemed terrorist.

Perhaps you say a nation should have the right to protect its own existence - but from its own people or from the states that gave it birth? We could look at the example of the signers of the Declaration of Independence and the peril they faced for that act. That is a pretty sad example for the Federal Government to follow - Britain was an Empire jealously clinging to power despite the wishes of the people. Is that what our Republic has become - an empire fearful of the thoughts of its own people? Apparently so.

This bill is less interesting because of the freedoms it threatens (we have plenty of those to rail against). No this is significant because it truly represents an act of an empire in self-protection mode. This is what we have become, this is what drunken hubris has wrought.

Here is what some others have said of this bill (via Positive Universe)

OpEdNews, PA: Telling the Truth Is About To Be Criminalized 2007-12-01 If you are trying to change this messed-up world with your radical educational actions (even if they are pacifist in nature) you will be guilty of facilitating ideologically-based violence, for which you can be prosecuted. If you share your unapproved thoughts with other people and make them think like you do, then all of you are liable to be hauled-off for thought-crimes. Passage of this legislation to control the thoughts and communications of dissident Americans makes clear why our government needed to build all those FEMA camps.

GovExec.com, DC: Rights advocates target domestic terrorism bill in Senate Nov 29, 2007 The National Lawyers Guild and the Society of American Law Teachers also issued a joint statement Tuesday, saying they strongly oppose this legislation because it will likely lead to the criminalization of beliefs, dissent and protest, and invite more draconian surveillance of Internet communications.

Columbus Free Press, OH: S 1959 Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007? must be stopped 2007-12-01 If this bill is passed, and becomes law, your words and actions could be considered terrorism. Bill S 1959 EVISCERATES FREE SPEECH, and empowers the govt. to declare ANYTHING they deem an extremist belief system, instantly makes you a terrorist, resulting in stripping of US citizenship, torture, and/or execution, with no habeas corpus rights, no ability to challenge, even in the US Supreme Court.

Northwest Progressive Institute Official Blog, WA: McCarthy would have loved SB 1959 2007-12-01 The bill would establish a commission similar to Joseph McCarthys House Un-American Activities Committee and could potentially make any sort of political dissent or controversial religious display illegal. Even thinking about such things could get you in trouble.

Stumble It!

Tyranny via Paranoia

I do not read the Huffington Post but I ran across a well written piece on the The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act
. He nails all of the key points.

Harman's bill contends that the United States will soon have to deal with home grown terrorists and that something must be done to anticipate and neutralize the problem. The act deals with the issue through the creation of a congressional commission that will be empowered to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and designate various groups as "homegrown terrorists." The commission will be tasked to propose new legislation that will enable the government to take punitive action against both the groups and the individuals who are affiliated with them. Like Joe McCarthy and HUAC in the past, the commission will travel around the United States and hold hearings to find the terrorists and root them out. Unlike inquiries in the past where the activity was carried out collectively, the act establishing the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Commission will empower all the members on the commission to arrange hearings, obtain testimony, and even to administer oaths to witnesses, meaning that multiple hearings could be running simultaneously in various parts of the country. The ten commission members will be selected for their "expertise," though most will be appointed by Congress itself and will reflect the usual political interests. They will be paid for their duties at the senior executive pay scale level and will have staffs and consultants to assist them. Harman's bill does not spell out terrorist behavior and leaves it up to the Commission itself to identify what is terrorism and what isn't. Language inserted in the act does partially define "homegrown terrorism" as "planning" or "threatening" to use force to promote a political objective, meaning that just thinking about doing something could be enough to merit the terrorist label. The act also describes "violent radicalization" as the promotion of an "extremist belief system" without attempting to define "extremist."

That nails it, a commission (remember Joe McCarthy?) to anticipate and root out bad thoughts among the American populace. I still have to ask - where and who is the threat that we are rooting out? When and where has this threat reared its ugly head?

It has not, else all of us regular and mundane citizens would know about it. After all it is impossible to live in a country rife with real sedition, rebellion and terrorism and not actually know about it. Perhaps folks that question the validity of conducting preemptive war (contrary to proper Constitutional controls) are the ones the supporters of this bill are afraid of. Perhaps it is those that actually believe that the Constitution means what it says. It could be anyone that seriously disagrees with the "truths" our masters feed us.

Giraldi continues...

As should be clear from the vagueness of the definitions, the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act could easily be abused to define any group that is pressuring the political system as "terrorist," ranging from polygamists, to second amendment rights supporters, anti-abortion protesters, anti-tax agitators, immigration activists, and peace demonstrators. In reality, of course, it will be primarily directed against Muslims and Muslim organizations. Given that, there is the question of who will select which groups will be investigated by the roving commissions. There is no evidence to suggest that there will be any transparent or objective screening process. Through their proven access both to the media and to Congress, the agenda will undoubtedly be shaped by the usual players including David Horowitz, Daniel Pipes, Steve Emerson, and Frank Gaffney who see a terrorist hiding under every rock, particularly if the rock is concealing a Muslim. They and their associates will undoubtedly find plenty of terrorists and radical groups to investigate. Many of the suspects will inevitably be "anti-American" professors at various universities and also groups of Palestinians organized against the Israeli occupation, but it will be easily to use the commission formula to sweep them all in for examination.

Of course the focus will initially focus on the "usual suspects" but if you read the bill closely you see that the paychecks of the commission are tied directly to their findings. The longer they find bogey men to investigate the longer the commission exists and the longer the paychecks keep rolling in. It is thus with much that the government does - "results oriented" longevity is the thing that has kept many useless programs alive in our system. You can bet you bottom dollar that the targets of this commission's investigations will indeed turn toward many non-terrorist but righteously indignant groups.

The view that 9/11 has "changed everything" is unfortunately all too true. It has unleashed American paranoia, institutionalized mistrust of foreigners, and created a fantasy universe in which a US beset by enemies must do anything and everything to counter the alien threat. If it were a sane world, it would be difficult to imagine why anyone would believe that a Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act is even necessary. The United States has spent hundreds of billions of dollars in strengthening law enforcement and intelligence capabilities against terrorists and has every tool imaginable to investigate and make arrests. It has created a whole new bloated and dysfunctional branch of government in the Department of Homeland Security. What is not needed is groups of congressionally empowered vigilantes roaming the country at will looking for "homegrown terrorism."

The only thing that 9/11 really changed was the pace of evolution from Republic to Empire started by Adams, Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt, Johnson etc. Bush is merely an heir to this bad ideology. Paranoia, blind faith in a defunct system, and general ignorance of basic civic responsibility and history among the population are the factors that have combined to make this all possible at this point in time. There is no reason for bills like this unless those in power actually realize that something is terribly wrong with the system and they truly fear that one day the mass of zombies occupying the land might just wake up and want to change things (with our without the consent of the rulers).

Stumble It!

WSJ "not" on Ron Paul

In case you missed it, Friday’s Wall Street Journal ran an article on "Dr. No’ on it’s front page. No, it was not about Ron Paul. The article was written by Sarah Lueck.

It was about Senator Tom Coburn, from Oklahoma, and how he has caused gridlock in the Senate this year. I expected at the very least a mention of Ron Paul the Presidential candidate who is better known as "Dr No" from the House of Representatives. No mention at all.

If you Google "Ron Paul" and "Dr. No", there are over 23,000 pages found. Google "Tom Coburn" and "Dr. No", and you will find 620 pages.

[...]

In the middle of a primary season, the WSJ runs an article on a politician who is not running for reelection, who upon a casual glance, appears like another candidate who is running for president? Is this a coincidence? No. No to the highest degree. It's difficult to comprehend how the editorial board of the WSJ justified front page space for a politician not even seeking the attention, while the most important race in our nation starts January 3, 2008. (from Speak Up Now)

This is really not a surprise but all the same it is disappointing. A significant portion of the American polity has already spoken with their money, time and dedication in regard to Dr. Ron Paul. How can the MSM still ignore him, or in this case make an obvious case to do him a disservice? Perhaps there is not organized conspiracy to corrupt our political system but there certainly is a lot of collusion.

It becomes more apparent all the time that the only solution to repairing our system and restoring the republic is something beyond an election.

Stumble It!

We Support Our Friends

TUNCELI, Turkey, Dec 22 (Reuters) - Turkish warplanes bombed Kurdish guerrilla targets in northern Iraq on Saturday in a new cross-border offensive, the General Staff said.

The Kurds were the friends of the Empire, right? See what that gets you?

Stumble It!

Just a Slight Rumble

Perhaps you read my post on the Lakota Freedom Delegation's declaration that treaties between the US and the Lakota Nation are null and void and were essentially non=plussed. That is understandable, we have seen events in the not so distant past that could be compared to this event. We know about the Freemen, we know about the Republic of Texas and what became of their attempts to establish sovereignty and independence. You might say, "what is the difference"?

After all we have what appears to be a group of people that do not hold formally elected positions (within the de facto government of the Lakota Nation) declaring independence and threatening to set up a shadow government, issue liens on land and abjuring the Federal realm. What is the difference you say? This will all just fade away and possibly end up with a few folks arrested.

Perhaps so, then again maybe not.

The fact that Russell Means in not the current president of his tribe it can be argued that the tribal leadership of the Sioux is held illegitimately - you can read about the the history of tribal governments in general and the Sioux and Lakota in particular. I come down on the side of accepting the current governments as de facto indeed but perhaps not de jure and certainly not legitimate in terms of doing what governments are supposed to do - that is serve the best interests of the people it represents.

Tribal governments have done a fabulous job of keeping Indians on the reservation; drunk, unemployed and sick with diseases that the most of rest of the world has long since eradicated. It seems that if their governments are legitimate they have have done a poor job of representing the people.

If the Lakota people (and the people of the affected states in general) get behind this movement it will be legitimate. One must remember that the signers of the Declaration of Independence were not legitimate either, and at the time of the signing there was not a great upwelling of public support. Big things can occur from small beginnings.

Having said that, there is another angle. In 1974 traditional elders of the Lakota Nation sanctioned this action - long before there was a Western style representative form of government the Lakota people were governed by their elders - there is legitimacy to all of this.

Here is the other point that the MSM is ignoring and the State Department hopes will not materialize (but I suspect will occur). Venezuela will likely recognize a free Lakota Nation. You say this is a (half) given and means nothing, granted. What about Bolivia? That nation does not have an axe to grind with the US, per se. Bolivia would receive no great benefit from recognizing the Lakota's bid for freedom. However, I predict that Bolivia will indeed recognize the movement diplomatically (unless the State Department buys off Evo Morales).

This all could be much bigger than folks want to pretend - for the sake of freedom everywhere I hope the Lakota people have the resolve to get behind this movement, no matter that it may mean their shipments of government cheese are disrupted.

Stumble It!

Tancredo - No

Several of my friends supported Tancredo a year ago when he put out feelers in consideration for a presidential run. It seems they were wrong on all counts considering that Tancredo today backed out of the race (a good thing) and endorsed Romney (a monumentally stupid thing).

Stumble It!

Descendants of Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse break away from US

WASHINGTON (AFP) — The Lakota Indians, who gave the world legendary warriors Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse, have withdrawn from treaties with the United States, leaders said Wednesday.

"We are no longer citizens of the United States of America and all those who live in the five-state area that encompasses our country are free to join us," long-time Indian rights activist Russell Means told a handful of reporters and a delegation from the Bolivian embassy, gathered in a church in a run-down neighborhood of Washington for a news conference.

A delegation of Lakota leaders delivered a message to the State Department on Monday, announcing they were unilaterally withdrawing from treaties they signed with the federal government of the United States, some of them more than 150 years old.

They also visited the Bolivian, Chilean, South African and Venezuelan embassies, and will continue on their diplomatic mission and take it overseas in the coming weeks and months, they told the news conference.

Lakota country includes parts of the states of Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana and Wyoming.

It is about time someone took the first step, and who better than those that felt the boot of the American Empire most profoundly. Visit their website, if they are serious about making this stick they deserve our support; self-determination is supposed to be an "American" thing is it not?

Stumble It!

"I am Legend"

I had the chance to attend a pre-screening of "I am Legend" tonight. This movie is loosely based upon Richard Matheson's 1954 novel. I was always fond of the Charleton Heston adaptation "Omega Man", but that version departed from the novel fairly radically.

The movie begins in New York City in the year 2009. Someone has developed a "cure" for cancer using a modified version of the measles. Fast forward three years and we find Will Smith - Dr. LTC Neville - as the last man on Earth (along with his trusty companion Samantha - a German Shepard).

Neville spends his days doing what one might expect in such a circumstance - growing food, scavenging for supplies and diving an assortment of new automobiles (free of an insurance payment or bank note).

Minor Spoiler Alert



Neville is not the last man on Earth. The modified measles virus did in fact cure cancer but in the process it killed 90% of those injected with it. Furthermore, nine percent developed some pretty nasty symptoms - aversion to UV light, a thirst for blood and hostility. Essentially these nine percenters became vampires in the classical sense, moving at night, holding up by day in dark recesses of buildings.

If you have seen "Omega Man" you will expect certain events based upon minor allusions to occurances in that movie. I thought it was a nice touch to keep us all guessing based entirely upon preconceived notions.

I will not ruin any more of the movie, you should see it if you enjoy the "end of the world/survival genre". I will say that the folks up in the SVR ought to raise a little cain at their exclusion at the end; it would have been a nice touch to see the flag at the Vermont location being that of the SVR but all the same we can imagine.

I thought this t be a pretty good film - no gratuitous sex, drugs or language - the science was no so far off to be unbelievable and the story was engaging. It is tough to pull of a movie with one actor for half the film.


Of course I cannot help but comment that the infection might never have spread past New York City at all if the regular people there were ARMED - also the film showed what we know to be true in real life during events like Katrina. That is the government is worthless at actually doing what it was created to do - protecting the people. All those years and all that money spent on doing things the government is not supposed to do meant that when push came to shove the people were left out flapping......Vote Ron Paul.

Stumble It!

Zombie Apocalypse

87%

Austin Dating

I was surprised that I scored so low. I have always enjoyed "end of the world" type movies and I hate to admit it Zombie movies are my favorite in the genre. I was certain that I would have scored much higher - perhaps it was that question relating to if I would try to help a group of strangers. This is obviously just a flawed quiz - I would help the group of strangers and still be ok - head shots to all zombies.

Stumble It!

Insane McCain

Here we have one of the more insane things said in the debate the other night; spoken by the unhinged John McCain.

I have already addressed the fact that it was Wilsonian intervention that led to WWII, not post war isolationism - the die was alread cast Mr. McCain.

I would add also, as an active duty military officer - I gave Dr. Paul another donation today. You do not speak for us John McCain.

Stumble It!

But that we could only live such

Solid advice from a lady:

~ Don't always make yourself the hero of your own stories.

~Don't show a disposition to find fault or depreciate. Indiscriminate praise is nauseating; but, on the other hand, indiscriminate condemnation is irritating....

~Don't be sulky if you imagine yourself neglected. Think only of pleasing; and try to please. You will end by being pleased.

~Don't show repugnance even to a bore. A supreme test of politeness is submission to various social inflictions without a wince.

~Don't fail in proper attention to elderly people. Young persons are often scandalously neglectful of the aged, especially if they are deaf or otherwise afflicted. Nothing shows a better heart, or a nicer sense of true politeness, than kindly attention to those advanced in years.

~Don't wear out your welcome by too long a stay; on the other hand, don't break up the company by a premature departure. A little observation and good sense will enable you to detect the right time to say "Good-night."

Stumble It!

A Hawaiian Responds to George Will

George Will:
That was quite a spin you've created. Too bad you are not knowledgeable about Hawa'is history and issues. It's best to get the true facts and then expouse on them. Much of your statements are false and twisted besides being inconsistent. You and others being insistent with the falsehoods and deceit does not make them the truth. This proves that most US Americans do not know what the truth is and promotes the myths and lies as if they are the truth. I can see why there is a lot of controversy among all of you who try to spin with vacuous arguments.

We get weary of your self-proclaimed truths to white-wash the facts. The feeble arguments you bring up are irrelevant to the facts. So let's go over some of the misstatements you and many others have made:

Blood quantum is a US American created policy. There is a reason it was done. You have jumped from 100% Hawaiian Polynesian blood to the "one-drop" rule. Amazingly, you seemed to have flunked math by inferring only 7,000 are full-blooded and the rest have one-drop, which would then be the mass majority of the Hawaiians.

You make a claim that 94 % Hawaiians, Including majority of Native Hawaiians voted for statehood. This is confusing and misleading since you are using the word Hawaiians in different meanings. You all need to get it straight or you will confuse yourselves. Initially, Hawaiians were referred to the Polynesian group who live in Hawaii and of whom it is their homeland, their nation-state. Only recently are you people labelling anyone who lives in Hawaii as Hawaiians. Why not Locals or Hawaiian Islanders, or just islanders. You on the mainland love to redefine and redefine the same labels incorrectly and confuse yourselves thereby giving the wrong impressions.

The more correct statement is only 22 percent of the population voted in the so-called plebiscite for statehood of which 94% voted for statehood. Of the 94% military personnel and their families who resided or stationed in Hawaii for at least a year, were eligible to vote. US Americans were allowed to vote; some Native Hawaiians were barred from voting and those who felt they were still Hawaii Nationals refused to vote. The irregularities of the voting and the contents and wording of the ballot was enough to deem it null and void. Only two choices were on the ballot: 1) - remain a territory (taxation without representation) and 20 - become a state (to have a voice in government and vote for the US president). How clever! There was no choice for total independence nor a commonwealth or free-association. There were no international observers to witness the process; only the word of the USA (and we know how good their word is, don't we?).

When ex-press secretary for Bush stated,"..a resolution is non-binding", it brought to mind the Newlands Resolution. This means that resolution for annexation of Hawaii was non-binding, but a wishlist. The Hawaiian Nationals petitioned the US to restore the Queen, her government, and our nation-state back to them. Over 96% percent of the nationals signed that petitions against annexation in 1897 and presented it to the US Congress. That's partly why the Bill for annexation failed and a lack of a treaty of annexation by the legitimate government of Hawaii. Thus the influential powers in Washington resorted to the Newlands Resolution.

Those in Washington, D.C. that were against statehood was afraid of too many Asians in Hawaii and feared their sympathies were communistic and socialistic in nature. Also the Chinese were barred from immigrating to the USA through an act passed in Washington was still fresh in their minds. There again it was racists-motivated.

Here again is your little spin in deception using the term Hawaiians as majority against the Akaka Bill and ill-defined the bare majority of "Native" Hawaiians that support it. Contrary to the spin is that Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians are for and against the Akaka bill and not divisive by their race or ethnicity. Most everyone again fails to recognize the Hawaii Nationals opposition to the Akaka Bill for legitimate reasons. Hawaii Nationals of today stem from the bona fide nationals at the time of the US invasion and occupation.

According to the 1890 census, 84.4% were "Native" Hawaiians/Kanaka Maoli and 15.6% were of foreign origin/multi-ethnic. The Hawaii Nationals comprised of 50.1% of the total population living in Hawaii. The other 49.9% of those residing or working under contracts and of foreign citizenship were mostly from the USA and Asia and the rest were from Europe and various parts of the world.

The only ones that could have and will create racial disharmony have been the overwhelming majority of those from the continental USA who are ignorant of Hawai'is past history and the USA's involvement and what they established to soften and wipe their slate clean. Technically, the Hawaiian Kingdom still exists albeit under US belligerent occupation; this is a fact. We Hawaii Nationals know this and that's why we oppose the NHGE which is a US entity trying to usurp the Hawaiian Kingdom's jurisdiction and authority. The US needs the NHGE as an assemblance of the real thing to make believe it is legitimately negotiating "lands, natural resources, assets, criminal and civil jurisdiction, and historical grievances." We Hawai'i Nationals find this repugnant and criminal.

So let's get this straight once and for all; it would not be secession but de-occupation. Please do some serious research before drawing errant conclusions. The US deep conspiracy, covert and overt actions, the invasion, fake revolution, belligerent occupation, US-established puppet government, non-binding resolution to annex Hawaii, the Ku'e petitions from the Hawaii Nationals protesting against annexation and US actions, violations of the laws of occupation and disregard of Hawaii's neutrality status, US revisionists of the Hawaiian incidents, and the unlawful and illegitimate Statehood Act all lead up to a major cover-up and hoax being passed off as truth.

Your sarcasm is well-noted and taken in disgust. If you were knowledgeable, the seeds of the weed you mentioned began overtly in the 1880s. Your revision of facts are seditious to say the least. It was not Hawaiian residents (as you flip flop the definition) but actually US Americans foreigners in Hawaii involved in the US conspiracy to overthrow the Queen. How quaint that you mention a 2000 court case relating to a separate specific issue. This we won't get into since it deserves to be discussed separately because of a narrow question in the complaint of a complex issue established by the US government. It would be too lengthy to do it here.

It is hypocritical to reference the constitutionality of things implemented by the US government when it still continues to disregard the constitution. I might add that treaties between countries, once ratified, become the supreme law of the land; thus the treaties between the USA and the Hawaiian Kingdom fall into this US Constitutional law. One of the conditions for statehood was part of the state's revenues from Hawaiian lands (not American lands) would go for the betterment of the Native Hawaiians (Kanaka Maoli). The Hawaiian Homestead Act of 1921 was a failure but still kept in the Statehood Act as a guilt-ridden necessity to pacify the Native Hawaiians because of the US criminal actions. This was done to aid in disarming the native population and international outrage while showing US paternalism.

Your following paragraph shows a paltry lack of understanding and knowledge of out government. Say, "Constitutional Monarchy". Now look it up! Hint: The government system of United Kingdom/Great Britain. I surmise that it wouldn't interest you to know that Hawaii Nationals elected two of their monarchs. Your sanctimonious criticism of our country is outlandishly stupid and plain gibberish. What can I say, you're correct that the Queen (and her people) were more enlightened than Akaka, you, and the rest of the US Americans who still think Hawaii is legitimately part of the USA. For us, it is a national/international issue; for you and the rest of US America it is a racist WASP/State (domestic/internal) issue. That's why you are all confused and in La-La Land.

You get a point for this since this is what we've been saying all along but your corporate media and US congress have promoted Akaka's legislation that would create a Native Hawaiian "tribe" as a nation within the nation. Our Hawaiian nation-state still exists and was a multi-ethnic country. The US Akaka Bill shuns a portion of our Hawaiian Nationals as irrelevant and invalidates their existence. The US omits this fact to skirt around the truth that Hawaii is a nation-state and not a part of the USA. To acknowledge them is to recognize once again that the Hawaiian Kingdom's status as a fellow nation as a peer to the USA and other world nations.

You are truly an ultracrepidarian critic with no sense of the facts. It's pathetic that you believe the revised history to further promote it. Hawai'i was taken by force and against the wishes of the Hawaii Nationals. It's like saying the US didn't invade and occupy Iraq but went there to liberate them. How arrogant and asinine of you! By now you should have learned from me that we never chose to be under the racist WASP society of the USA nor your alleged statehood. Get real and don't speak for us.

"The tribal concept simply has no place in the context of Hawaiian history."... because we are a nation-state that was recognized as such throughout the world. We had treaties with more than 25 countries; over 96 legations and consuls throughout the world. We have been established and recognized as a nation-state part of the family of nations which included the USA.

Just because the Native Americans were comprised of one ethnic group doesn't mean they were not a nation, in fact, they adopted and accepted people not of their ethnicity. Israel is comprised of one people who are Jews, a tribe in their history. Splitting hairs with semantics is idiocy. Dhina is a nation; not a tribe. Japan is a nation. UK is a nation although they have clans or "tribes".

Finally, this has nothing to do with the Native Americans, Hispanics, Vermont, Texas, and the Man in the Moon. This has to do with the Hawaiian Kingdom, its people searching for justice and freedom, and the US belligerent occupation of our country, its violations of the laws of occupation, its treaties, its disrepect of Hawaii's neutrality status, and USA crimes. How long will the USA make a mockery of justice, liberty, honesty, freedom, and honor? We love our country as much as you US Americans love yours. The USA must de-occupy Hawaii or it makes a mockery of your own US Pledge of Allegiance.

We, Hawaii Nationals, say "NO!" to the Akaka Bill for obvious reasons.

He Hawai'i au,
Tane AKA: David MK Inciong II
Pearl City, Hawaii

Stumble It!

Rolling Stone: Ron Paul: A Republican Takes the Lead Against the War

His anti-war stance has not only helped him bank more campaign cash than Iraq-backer John McCain, it has garnered him more contributions from military families than any candidate in the race.

read more | digg story

Stumble It!

Judge removed after jailing entire courtroom

A US judge has been removed from the bench for jailing 46 people after none of them admitted responsibility for a ringing mobile phone in his courtroom. Wow...hubris gone wild!

read more | digg story

Stumble It!

Firemen Being Trained to Report Citizens Unhappy with the US Government

Why firemen? Because they can enter your property without a warrant, for inspections, etc... // Next up: Firemen will be trained to carry flamethrowers, find banned books... // Note to any firemen: _thank_you_ for doing your real job, saving lives. Being discontent with creeping fascism doesn't threaten society, but it does threaten the fascists...

read more | digg story

Stumble It!

The Choice is Obvious

A Ron Paul presidency will:

let Americans keep more of their own money.

end the IRS.

stop the central bankers’ “inflation tax.”

stop unconstitutional spending leading us to bankruptcy.

stop the financial dependency on China, Saudi Arabia, and other foreign governments.

oppose trade deals and groups that threaten American Independence (incl. the UN, GATT, NAFTA, NAU, WTO, CAFTA, ICC).

protect our privacy and stop the national ID card.

protect our constitutional rights and end the “Patriot” Act.

secure our borders and end illegal immigration.

end “birthright” citizenship for illegal aliens.

bring our troops home from no-win “police actions.”


Ron Paul has:

never voted to raise taxes.

never voted for an unbalanced budget.

never voted to raise congressional pay.

never taken a government-paid junket.

never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

voted against regulating the Internet.

not participated in the lucrative congressional pension program.

repeatedly been named the “Taxpayers’ Best Friend” in Congress.


Congressman Ron Paul is serving his 10th term in the U.S. House. Dr. Ron Paul has delivered over 4000 babies. He served his country as a Flight Surgeon in the Air Force and the Air National Guard. Ron has been married to his wife, Carol, for 50 years. They have five children and 18 grandchildren.

A True Conservative.

Since my return to SC to attend to my father's affairs I have reevaluated my previous disgust with the small showing of support for Dr. No. Perhaps my neighbors were shamed into putting out their Ron Paul signs by my pleadings a couple weeks ago. I can say honestly and unequivocally that in my part of SC the Ron Paul signage is currently running 20:1 over anything else. In fact I can only think of one example of a sign for another candidate (Romney) and that is in front of the only Mormon household in the area. My mother received a nice mailing today from the Paul campaign - those contribution dollars seems to be well spent. Now that most of my other business has been attended to I plan to visit the campaign headquarters in the nearest city tomorrow to meet a few of the ground troops and make a donation in person.

I told a fellow today - half jokingly - that Ron Paul is the only man to throw his hat in the ring actually qualified to be president since Thomas Jefferson. I thought about that a bit after our conversation and I think I was actually correct - no half joke required. (Alan Keyes and Pat Buchanan excepted perhaps)

Stumble It!

Debate Round-Up

I will comment on just a few items from the CNN/YouTube Republican debate.

McCain's claim that isolationism was the direct cause of WWII was ludicrous. It was Wilsonian interventionism that allowed the punitive outcome of WWI that caused WWII. Get your facts straight.

Huckabee's praise of his program to give scholarships to children of illegals was interesting - in an decidedly wrong sort of way.

The idiotic conspiracy question directed at Ron Paul was trivial and low. Paul handled it as well as it could be fielded in 90 seconds.

McCain with the near tear in his eye as he described illegal aliens as "God's Children" in need of our help. I thought that is what our generous foreign policy was all about - to help all of God's children in their lands - not when they come to ours and break our laws.

Romney proved at almost every point that he is not a man I would vote for to hold the office of dog catcher. Guilliani was what we should expect - a wolf attempting to wear sheep's clothing. It was slightly interesting to see Romney and Guiliani beat each other up but ultimately that just wasted air time that could have been better utilized allowing someone with real conservative ideas to speak.

Huckabee talked a good game for the most part but his comments about spending what was necessary on the space program demonstrate that he does not grasp the predicament we are in.

Thompson looked cadaverous but did not say anything really offensive that I can recall. I thought it a bit inane of him to waste his 30 seconds for a commercial about him and his position attacking two of the other idiots.

Seven of the men seem to believe that radical Islam is really a threat - a bigger threat than say the Soviet Union with thousands of nuclear weapons pointed at us for half a century. It is amazing that we faced that demon down without war but seven of the eight are all for globe-trotting adventures aimed at routing out a few thousand radicals that cannot even successfully rule backward nations such as Afghanistan or Somalia. They think these people are actually a threat to us. Let them build their caliphate, build an army and a navy and a economic system to support it and then threaten us and I will personally call for the crusade. As it stands they do not have a chance to do anything more than cause trouble here and there on a relatively small scale.

Only one candidate had the chance to talk about the pending DC Gun ban case going before the Supreme Court and that was Gulliani. He had the nerve to state that he believed the 2nd Amendment was intended as an individual right but with restrictions. Talk about speaking to both sides of an issue. We found out that Romney, Gulliani and McCain do not actually own firearms. (but Gulliani does own matching stiletto heels for his black dress that could count as a weapon you know).

Finally, I am not sure why CNN decided to include the question about the Confederate Battle Flag - perhaps to try and place someone in what would seem to be an untenable position. After all the status of the flag is not the purview of the president or the federal government. However, they included the flag question any way. Romney bit off on it and stated something to the effect "that flag should not be shown, it is divisive". Perhaps he needs a history lesson - maybe he should read Lieutenant Colonel Frematle's (of Her Majesty's Royal Dragoons) account of the Army of Northern Virginia's march into Maryland and Pennsylvania. As Clyde Wilson once wrote (and I paraphrase) "It would be wonderful if black Americans viewed their heritage as a diverse experience rather than merely that of slavery and oppression". If "That" flag is divisive it is because folks do not know of the sacrifice that blacks and whites in the South made under that banner. The question had no place in the debate but it was there and Romney proved himself a moron in his answer. Thompson handled it fairly well but I presume and assume that Ron Paul would have said something to the effect "That flag is part of the history of many of our states and their people and the place the flag holds in those states is up to the states and the people to determine, not the federal government or the president."

John McCain proved himself to be wholly unqualified for further service in elected office - I recall during the campaign of 2000 in a debate in SC where Alan Keyes mopped the floor with McCain on simple constitutional issues - so much so that McCain actually lost his composure.

It is a shame that there are so many candidates at this point - so many that those on the left and right of the stage are not heard enough. Tancredo has it right on immigration but wrong on much else, notably the war; leave him off the invite list. Duncan Hunter - thanks for building the wall but don't show up any more please. I can see why some of my friends are misled about Thompson, I think we need to leave him in future dialogues to unravel what is wrong with him for them. The three front runners you have to leave obviously (not counting McCain as per above). I would love to see three hours of just those men and Ron Paul hosted by Lou Dobbs, Alan Keyes and Pat Buchanan with questions from ME and a few select friends. I would love to see everyone explain how their ideas are 1) conservative 2) constitutional 3) really good for America.

Stumble It!

A Reader Responds To My Last Post

Dear Author,

I'm curious as to why you make the parenthesized inclusion 'send me your hate mail' after the comment 'the system will not allow such'. (refering to a Ron Paul victory)

The old media does not provide me with current information, historical information or articles that would inspire me to vote for my candidate of choice which is Ron Paul.

I get that from articles such as yours that I read on the internet. Why would I send you hate mail?

I would say that everything from the old media to vote tampering to even worse things can happen to prevent the election of Ron Paul as President. That would be a realists point of view. But then that would just be acknowledging the hurdles that need to be overcome to achieve the reality of victory.

If evil triumphs when good men do nothing, then we better do something. That's the correct reality. It also requires the correct estimation of effort. But of course we want to agree there's such a thing as failure so that we can have a reason to fail, so we don't have to be cause.

There is no excuse for any failure that ever occurred any place in history, except this: There was just not quite enough carry-through or push-through. That is all that is necessary for this which is a just cause. That is my reality.

Stumble It!

Time For A Change

I read a post the other day and I cannot now recall where or by who but the point that the author made was that the Ron Paul Revolution will be short lived. Those disaffected souls that now support Dr. No will not throw their support behind any of the other GOP candidates and there is not another Ron Paul on the horizon to galvanize the troops and keep the revolution alive (assuming that Dr. Paul does not win the election).

Without discussing those assumptions much further I will simply say that I agree for the most part - what the author proposed is probably a realistic outcome. The fact is real conservatives do not have a home in either party. There is nothing conservative about the Republican or Democratic approach. One wishes to curry favor with the masses by transferring wealth through government programs, the other wishes to curry favor with big business by providing subsidies and protection. The end result of both approaches is bigger government, each approach is progressive, neither approach conserves anything that was or should be in our society.

In the 1980's many believed that conservatism had been vindicated after the failed attempts of Barry Goldwater in 1964 to win the presidency and not only thwart the Great Society but push back the nefarious New Deal.

My father was a Goldwater Republican (I was even named after Mr. Goldwater), I was a Reagan Republican. However something significant occurred between 1964 and 1980. Two significant things in fact. First, the real roots of the Republican party were always there. The GOP owes its very existence to the Federalist/Whig brand of ideology that is responsible for so much of what is wrong with he republic today. It was the Federalist that abandoned their charter to alter the Articles of Confederation. The Federalist gave us the Alien and Sedition Acts, the first legislated tyranny since the revolution. It was the Republican Party that single-handily redefined the Constitutional limits of federal power and killed States' Rights and Federalism. Republicans annexed Hawaii against the will of their monarch and people. The Republican Party played a large role in the idiocy of prohibition - something any conservative knows the Federal Government has no authority or role in. It is the Republican Party that has again passed tyrannical legislation in the form of the Patriot Act and redefined jus ad bellum to include the noxious notion of preemptive war. It is the Republican Party that champions the rights of non-human, soulless corporate entities.

For all of the evils and nonsensical ramblings of the socialist democrats and their flaky ideas regarding nationalized medicine and other inane ideological blunders - the Republican Party is not one inch more Conservative. The two major parties are just different sides to the same coin.

Many of my kin, blood and cultural, rejoiced in the 1980's with the rise of the Religious Right -"Finally, we will put things right". For all of the good intentioned notions of the rank and file followers of the Moral Majority and other similar groups the result and impact on American politics was even more disastrous than the nonsense surrounding prohibition. If the Religious Right was a truly conservative movement - in terms of conserving what America was and should be - their efforts at social conservatism would have been focused almost exclusively at the state and local level. Their national efforts would have focused on true conservatives that understood the Constitution, the 10th Amendment and the nature of federalism and states' rights. Instead of acting as conservatives these groups acted as progressives, seeking to use the political system to effect change, change that required an increase in the role and power of the federal government. That was certainly not a conservative approach.

One day they will see that what you give to the federal government it is hard to take back. Perhaps there was a moral majority in the 1980's but what happens when there is an "immoral majority" that seeks to use that very same federal government power that they foolishly established? You wanted to define marriage, tell states about abortion, define prayer - would you want a majority of heathens doing the same? It will happen because of foolish progressivism in the name of "doing good" and we will be powerless to stop it if the precarious majority fails.

Religious conservatives dismiss Ron Paul because he will not come out and say things like -"If I were president I would work for (insert whatever moral legislation you wish)". This is precisely because Paul understands the Constitution and the dangers of progressivism. It seems we Christians are much happier supporting a reformed Rudy (hey Robertson says he is ok), or one of the other fellows because they take a stand on a moral issues (they talk a good game). We are missing the point, it is not the place of the federal government to regulate these issues, we ought to seek a man that would put these issues back where they belong - with us at out state houses.

Perhaps the Ron Paul revolution will be short lived - then again perhaps the pundits are wrong. Perhaps, just maybe true conservatism will again thrive, perhaps the supporters of Paul will not just fade away (win or lose). Third parties in the 20th Century have not fared well therefore maybe it is high time that the Republican Party became relegated to third party status. If folks that call themselves conservative fully understood what being a conservative meant there would not be a Republican Party - it would have been thrown on the ash heap of history in 1864 or soon thereafter and certainly it would not enjoy the support from otherwise good intentioned folk it counts on today.

If there is the be a Ron Paul revolution (i.e. conservative revival) I welcome it, I sincerely hope it shakes the very foundation of the current political system of a bad choice and an awful choice. It is unlikely that the Republican machine can or will be reformed from within as so many have hoped for - the basic ideology is just all wrong, their heritage of wrong is written all over the party. The only hope is to throw the system away and start anew.

I pray that Ron Paul wins the election but I am prepared for the possibility that the system will simply not allow such (send me your hate mail). This makes me no less of a supporter, it makes me a realist, it means I am committed for the long haul. I am fully prepared to adjure the realm, weather many moons of socialist democratic rule to stand true to conservative principles. A philosophy such as conservatism cannot die so long as people remember. It is time to stop compromising with a system that respects neither the law upon which our nation is built or the principles that gave that law birth.

I challenge you, if you are a true conservative, if you are truly an heir to the legacy of Jefferson and those men that envisioned a republic, not a socialist mobacracy then you must examine your entire concept of politics in America. If you continue to be blinded by the dog and pony show presented by the faux conservative GOP you are either a fool or an enabler.

It is time for a revolution (although it is not a revolution at all it is merely a revival of our conservative heritage and right thinking about the role and nature of our central government). Turn off the talking heads, read the Constitution and support Ron Paul and come what may refuse to ever go back to the role of loyal subject to a party that is neither conservative nor right.

Stumble It!

December 1937 - November 2007

In the midst of my family's journey across the North American continent I was awoken at midnight last Monday in a small town in western Kansas by my wife - my father had died an hour earlier.

We had to continue on to California - it was complicated but for various reasons the best course of action was to drive on and then fly back home. I sit now in a hotel room waiting for my flight tomorrow, the first available.

Death is inevitable, we all know this. My father was the strongest man I knew. He had a stroke several years ago, just months after retiring early in order to enjoy full-time the outdoor activities he enjoyed most. The after affects of the stroke restricted his activity greatly, he never drove again. Subsequent strokes took away his dignity, privacy and independence. Earlier this year he was diagnosed with ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease).

When I left for Korea two years ago my father suffered from the affects of his strokes but he could still get around. He could still do things and we could pretend that he was still the man he had always been. I could take him fishing or take him out to work on things and even though we both knew he was not the same we never admitted it to each other. He would tell me point blank to give him the keys and let him drive and I could play it off by saying,"daddy you may be able to stand up to mama but I cannot, if I give you the keys she will get me." He could not do the work he had always done but I could always pretend that he could and make up for the rest myself. He never let on for a minute that he was diminished in anyway and I never viewed him as anything other than the man I had always knew.

When I returned from Iraq the last time I had terrible nightmares. I spent much of my leave at his house, my boyhood home. Even though he suffered as he did, when I closed my eyes at night at his house I felt safe - safe in a way I did not feel at my own house. It was not realistic but as a then 37 year old combat veteran I felt that my 67 year old disabled father was somehow protecting me from the demons in the world just as he had when I was a child. I slept better hearing him snore down the hall and knowing he was there.

When I returned from Korea last month after an absence of two years my father was much changed. Although he was just diagnosed with ALS he was already into the process of the disease by a couple of years. If you do not know about ALS I can tell you simply it is a terrible affliction. Your mind remains but slowly your muscles and nerves fail you. The changes, the deterioration can be dramatic and noticeable over just a few months. I cannot describe the agony of seeing the man you most respect, fear and admire tremble and shake trying to lift his hand to his mouth.

I left South Carolina with assurances from his doctor that my father would be there this December when I planned to return with my family for our last Christmas together. We are never promised a tomorrow - I will not have that last Christmas with my father.

My father was a man's man - a Marine, an avid outdoorsman and hunter. He could and did work me into the ground on many occasions. He never let anyone within his circle of concern go without. If something was broke he was going to fix it or get someone to fix it. If something needed doing, he just did it. He was never one to sit still often, he worked and that was his recreation. I do not mean that he abandoned his family for material gain - not at all. He made sure to get home for supper - after supper he always worked; in the garden, in his shop or doing something for someone.

His Christianity was simple and sincere. We disagreed from time to time precisely because I made my Christianity too complicated. He always ensured that I was in church as a child and young man and he always lived his beliefs. He did not drink or swear (often) and was never profane. He treated my mother with respect,took care of her and loved her.

My mother always said he was proud of me but I never really achieved the feeling that he respected me, perhaps he did or maybe he remembered that kid that screwed things up. He was always there to pick me up from any mistake - and there were many over the years, a heck of a lot of them between the time I was 16 and 25. He never abandoned me, no matter that I should not of been doing what I did, he probably told me not to and it was just stupid of me in any case.

I cannot do justice to this man in words I might write. He did not change the world but by his hand and example he changed me and made me who I am. I will miss him. He has gone on to a better place but I will miss him all the same.

Stumble It!

Irony

Earlier today my family and I began our journey from my home in South Carolina to the foreign Republic of California to report for my next assignment. I mentioned in an earlier post my frustration with the changes that have occurred over the last two years in my home and my disappointment with the pace at which ordinary, otherwise good people have accepted - lock, stock and barrel - the lifestyle of the empire. By that I mean of course the live for now consumerism that so defines "American" culture. The sort of thing that allows a person to be happy selling their soul for a mortgage in a subdivision, commuting a hour or more to a job that keeps them away from the important things in life, i.e. home and family. I am talking about the sort of attitude that sees nothing wrong with blind loyalty to an institution that no longer follows its own rules or serves the people that it was created to serve. Yes I am talking about a people forsaking wholesale the legacy their ancestors bequeathed them in in turn accepting the lifestyle and values of their conquerors.

Look, I am a realist. I know that the South no longer exists anywhere but in small, scattered pockets and even in those enclaves the influence of a foreign value system in obvious. I hold out no real hope or dream of a free or independent South in my life time. At the same time I am not a defeatist. I do believe it is possible for a people to reclaim their heritage and live true to their historical heritage.

I mentioned previously how disheartened I was during my visit when I tried to discuss issues of culture, values and priorities with otherwise good people in my home. I moved my departure date up by a few days in part because of my disillusionment. Therein lies the irony - and here is the story.

I was supposed to finally meet, face to face, my compatriot on this blog - IKANTSPEL. My early departure and scheduling difficulties made this impossible. Thus, my family and I packed up the truck and headed north for a quick visit with relatives in North Carolina and then on toward California.

As we traveled through a town called Traveler's Rest I noticed a store named "Dixie Republic" and simply had to perform a u-turn and investigate. There was a tremendous amount of activity - they flew several flags out front. I thought it would be a grand opportunity to pick up a couple of items with my beloved Palmetto tree and crescent moon. I also hoped they would have a book or two I have not read that I could add to my collection.

I found the Palmetto trinkets I sought, I enjoyed a bowl of brunswick stew while listening to a live bluegrass band and I found a couple of books I have not read. I also had the the distinct pleasure of meeting and talking with Dr. Clyde N. Wilson who was there signing books and enjoying himself. The thing about this gentlemen is that I agreed with him before I knew of him or had read anything he has written. I defer to his age, his experience, his "letters" and his intellect but my agreement with him is not a mere acolyte arrangement. I consider him one of my living heroes his voice and ideas but my admiration is not hero worship.

I must admit, however, I was a bit nervous when I first met him. My nine year old daughter remarked on that fact later. I am not certain as to why - but I was.

I found him to be as interesting in person as on paper. Our conversation was easy and natural. I honestly felt as if I knew him and had known him for some time. It was as if were had been singing from the same hymn book for years previous.

Other folks of note were there as well. I was privileged to meet again Robert Hayes, chairman of the SC LOS. I also had a lively discussion with Walter Brian Cisco, author of War Crime Against Civilians. This is of course not to mention all the good folks perusing the store, eating stew and listening to the band.

The North Carolina border is just a few miles north of the store. As I pulled away and out of my home state I was struck with the irony of it all. I began my journey disillusioned. I left when I did because of the disillusionment and because of that I happened up this store at that hour. Life is strange.

Stumble It!

Corporatism = Socialism

AnarchoCatholic reminds us that "[a] potentially undying legal entity which separates ownership from control, is created by, sustained by, and subject to the state, and removes liability from human beings conducting affairs which affect all of society doesn't seem to jive with anything resembling a free market"─Corporations Aren't Capitalism. (via Western Confucian)

Of course I would add that Corporatism + Socialism + Nationalism + Militarism = Fascism

Stumble It!

Watch This

Must see, this young man describes things that many of us feel inside - the demons we carry.

I was in Fallujah in 2004 when this young Marine became so famous for his smoking picture. His story is really not that uncommon - his pain is not uncommon.

Stumble It!

What Happened to My Home?

My visit to my native South Carolina has been disheartening to me, to phrase it mildly. The advance of suburbia that I mentioned in an earlier post is more profound than I first surmised in my initial survey. It seems that everywhere I go I see massive changes in the landscape. Everyone seems to be in the business of selling the family farm to make way for some new profane subdivision.

When I look at a field or patch of woods that I hunted as a child/young man and see now houses for 100 or more families I am bewildered. Something like that occurring here or there is significant but when it occurs over and over it is bound to fundamentally change the very nature of the culture. Country roads that were once quiet and peaceful are now torrents of traffic as silly commuters make their way to silly jobs each day. This is simply an unsustainable way of life - folks will realize this someday when they no longer have the option of paying $70 to fill up their glorified mini-vans (I guess they call them SUV's but I just see boxes on wheels with very little sport or utility involved).

I have been most disturbed with conversations I have had with otherwise good people about Pat Robertson. Around here most folks are evangelicals and they are the sort that generally believe a man if he simply says he is a good Christian. It is because if this that I know of several good people that over the years sent money to the likes of Oral Roberts, Jim Baker and now Pat Robertson. A lot of these same folks believe that Bob Jones is square in his biblical teachings. I have found it impossible to point out that Robertson is obviously a fake, a man deluded by the power he has come to wield. How on Earth could any moral man, much less a Christian support a man that endorses someone like Giuliani? I just don't know.

More disturbing is that most of the people that should be squarely behind Ron Paul have never heard of him. I have to blame this on the generational differences in how folks acquire information.

I visited a Wal-Mart today - because I found that the two hardware stores I patronized in the past are now out of business. It is not an exaggeration to state that 30% of the customer base in the store when I was there was Mexican. This is in a small (historically rural) town in South Carolina. I cannot get over the change two years has wrought.

I am seriously considering cutting my vacation short and leaving within the next two days for my next duty assignment. I know at least that weird things are to be expected where I am going. I do not have the heart to see the changes in my own home firsthand.

Stumble It!

Rifleman's Prayer

Oh Lord, I would live my life in freedom, peace and happiness, enjoying the simple pleasures of hearth and home. I would die an old, old man in my own bed,
preferably of sexual overexertion.

But if that is not to be, Lord, if monsters such as this should find their way to my little corner of the world on my watch, then help me to sweep those bastards from the ramparts, because doing that is good, and right, and just.

And if in this I should fall, let me be found atop a pile of brass,
behind the wall I made of their corpses. (ht Freeholder)

Ok either you get it or you are running away in the belief that I am a murderous, bloodthirsty sociopath. I get it. I see both the truth and the humor of this. - On other unrelated notes-

Today I returned to my native land after an absence of over two years. Much has changed. Apparently I need to brush up on my Spanish - the small Mexican enclave in the small town near my home has grown tremendously while I was away. Amazing that!

I was encouraged to hear Ron Paul advertisements on the radio - on my way to the gun shop. As I said I have not been able to purchase a new "toy" in two years. I treated myself to a Bulldog Pug .44 revolver and Winchester lever action 30-30. The wife was not please but after paying for her to bask in Hawaii for 6 days her protestations were semi-muted. It is all good!

An absence of two years is just enough time to measure and gauge the spread of "sprawl". I did not count but I noticed numerous instances of long time businesses that are now gone - replaced by cookie cutter shops, restaurants etc. A place loses its character when this happens.

When I was in a little town on the North Shore of Oahu last week I noticed little signs and bumper stickers stating "Keep the Country Country". Perhaps Mr. Wendell Berry's influence is greater than I imagined or maybe people everywhere realize the importance of maintaining their little piece of the world.

I plan to spend the next several days before heading out on the second phase of our move ( a cross country drive), hunting, sleeping (vacations are tiring) and trying to talk my fellow South Carolinians into supporting Ron Paul.

Stumble It!

Hawaiian Independence

I had a chance to day to visit with a friend involved with the Hawaiian Independence movement that I have communicated with for some time. I may totally disagree with much of the politics of the movement but my eyes were opened anew today. I was able to visit areas that most tourist never see - the places that real Hawaiians live and work. The millions of tourist dollars that flow into this land never reach the actual owners - the kanaka maoli.

The fact is Hawaii was annexed under dubious circumstances - the Kingdom of Hawaii never surrendered its sovereignty freely. If it were not for the meddling of a few pre-neocons the Kingdom would still be free today.

As I said, I may disagree with their politics, but the Hawaiian people deserve a chance to determine their own destiny. (Of course Hawaiians do not like the term "secession" because they make a solid case that they never joined the union de jure - I agree, but the concept of freedom is the same)

Stumble It!

Remember the 5th of November

Remember remember the fifth of November
Gunpowder, treason and plot.
I see no reason why gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot...

Remember remember the 5th of November
1 day ago from Do you ever have one of those years where 'one of ...every day?
Remember remember
4 hours ago from Missmalice Knits
Fizz Bang Whizz Pop Fit Fit Fit!
15 hours ago from Behind The Child
Guy Fawkes Day, Nov. 5
5 days ago from Holiday for Everyday
This 5th of November
2 days ago from The Warriors’ Way Academy
Remember, remember the fifth of November
3 days ago from NUJ New Media
Angry Yet? Remember the Fifth of November
7 days ago from The New Liberty
Three Days
2 days ago from Key Words
Remember the Fifth of November !
Paul Girl and Remember, Remember the Fifth of November
5 days ago from Preserving Freedom

Stumble It!

Fascist Pigs

I hate to fly; I enjoyed traveling years ago. I enjoyed the whole process of packing up all the things I might need and feeling really prepared. Not so anymore - almost anything and everything I might want to place in my backpack are now forboden. A decent person cannot even carry a bottle of water - although everyone knows that proper hydration is key to avoiding "jet lag".

Every time I fly within the United States I get - well pissed off. Foreign carriers with destinations in other lands are not so offensive. I remember one time, way back in 1997, when I was flying from Kuwait to Germany and I purchased a sword in the duty free area of the Kuwait City airport - I had no choice but to take it on the plane with me. Nobody questioned me, nobody thought twice about it. Air travel back then was fun and adventurous. I amused myself that if I were ever to become a character on a show like "Lost" I would be prepared with the things I carried in my pockets. I still try to live the Boy Scout creed of being prepared. (the show did not exist back then but you get what I mean).

You know the drill now, just try to exercise your God given right to travel freely within your own country - you find yourself subjected to the most ridiculous sorts of nonsense. It always seems to take me 20 minutes to get through the screening. I am almost always singled out for "random" questioning. I was even pulled aside and questioned on my last return flight from Iraq. The little imp informed me that I had set off their explosives detector - "well of course you moron", I am sure that there was residue from a lot of nasty things lingering in my clothes and equipment. That did not matter to them - they don't look at people and apply common sense - they use a big fly swatter and in the process offend the rights of a lot of good people.

Two days ago I sat in the international terminal at Inchon, South Korea - waiting to board a Korean Airlines flight to Hawaii. Over the loud speaker a friendly voice informed us that "per a request from the Transportation Security Agency we would have to undergo a second security screening". This was for everyone on the flight, we had all passed though an initial screening - the full Monty in fact - prior to entering the international concourse. I had undergone one previous to that before boarding a domestic flight within Korea enroute to Inchon.

I thought to myself, as I prepared to subject myself to another unnecessary intrusion into my personal space - "what nerve". Why would the Korean government subvert its own sovereignty to the "requests" of the TSA? Why would they allow their own citizens as well as guest in their country to be subjected to the paranoid delusions of a two bit bunch of wanna be tyrants? I don't know the answer to this - I have theories but those are not important.

It seems that America truly is leading the world - into fear, overreaction and bad judgment. You may say that these little "inconveniences" are necessary; I say that they are just part of conditioning people to accept that the government has the "right" to stick its hands in our pockets whenever and wherever it pleases. This is a dangerous precedent to allow to stand and a tragic course for a "free people" to follow.

I don't think terming the people that think these things up as "fascist pigs" is too harsh or hyperbole - I think it is a description that hits the nail right on the head.

I am done venting and plan to enjoy the rest of my vacation in Hawaii - today was grand, we went snorkeling, I got back on a board for the first time in years and I enjoyed cuisine I have been deprived of for two years.

Stumble It!

Vacation

I am off to Hawaii for a week and then a return to my home state for a month before heading out to other things. My blog contributions will be light. Have fun.

Stumble It!

Bomshel

I saw these ladies in concert last night and was able to talk with them after the show. They are a whole lot of fun - country/rock, with powerful vocals and a darn good fiddler.

My wife could not help but notice that I was entranced with the little fiddle player - she was just too darn cute bouncing around. Great show, pleasant girls - listen to them when you have a chance.

Stumble It!

Rudy, Rudy, Rudy

Pat sums up Rudy about as well as it can be said:

A Giuliani presidency would represent the return and final triumph of the Republicanism that conservatives went into politics to purge from power. A Giuliani presidency would represent repudiation by the party of the moral, social and cultural content that, with anti-communism, once separated it from liberal Democrats and defined it as an institution.

Rudy offers the right the ultimate Faustian bargain: retention of power at the price of one’s soul.

We could dissect Rudy's stance on issues and all that but it seems a trivial pursuit - he is the antithesis of conservative principles. There is no point in discussing him, no real conservative would or will support him.

Stumble It!

So Long Joe

There is, of course, nothing romantic or enviable about war. It is something that brings out the very worst and the very best in people - a man's true character is exposed for all to see. I know that war has always been and always will be part of the human condition. In a world without war, considering all