The "Racist" Dr Paul

In case you, dear reader, haven't noticed, the long knives are out for Ron Paul. Among the mud and feces being thrown at this humble and honorable man by the political elite of both of the major parties is the charge of "racism". The ruling class is becoming afraid, very afraid.



h/t Claire Wolf

Whoda Thunk This?

When we first learned of the tragic Christmas day shooting in a Fort Worth, Texas suburb, mental alarm bells went off. Few details of the incident were released and we expected a press release from the Brady bunch demanding stricter gun control. Sound of crickets chirping.

We now know the probable reason for the organized gun grabbers silence. The names and identities of the victims and the shooter were withheld until the 26th. As details of the shooting are becoming available we learn the shooter and his dead family members were of the Islamic persuasion and the shooter's 19 year old niece who was among the dead was dating a non muslim.

Political correctness is a wondrous tool of the left and involves a hierarchy: in the interest of "diversity" concealing societal issues involving cultural incompatibility trumps the exploitation of the citizen disarmament agenda.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Down and Dirty

More and more of what this writer observes of the current and apparently permanent presidential campaign convinces him that there is little of substance to differentiate the two major political parties here in the US. The now four decade long descent into a collectivist/fascist dictatorship has been presided over by all three branches of our government and under the aegis of both Republicans and Democrats. Should you, dear reader doubt it, I would hasten to call your attention to this evidence. It is a rather long read containing researched data and devastating in its logic.

The evolution of our republic into an empire of global dimensions has resulted in the emergence of an executive who not only wages war without the niceties required by our constitution but now claims the power to detain and/or execute citizens by merely declaring them to be terrorists or "enemy combatants" in a never ending "war on terror" waged at his discretion.

The complicity of both of our major political parties which are in reality only one party obsessed with exercising power is evidenced by the fact that one candidate (Mr Gingrich) has implied he would seriously consider support for the candidate of the supposed opposing party should his own party nominate Dr Ron Paul.

Do you, dear reader need further evidence of the validity of George Wallace's remark that "There's not a dime's worth of difference between Democrats and most Republicans"?

Please excuse this old Greek while he retires to the Imperial vomitorium.

cross posted at: Eternity Road

We Are Totally Screwed

Like most of you I have had difficulty wrapping my mind around the numbers casually displayed and quoted in the media recently. This video may be able to help you all get a handle on the deep doo doo we are in.

An Outlaw Government

For the better part of 2011 the mainstream media (which was by the way only dragged kicking and screaming into reporting on it) the scandal designated "Fast and Furious" by the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (BATF) has been reported as a "botched sting" operation. No such characterization of the operation could be further from the truth. A "sting" operation in law enforcement parlance involving known contraband must of necessity in its planning and execution include a system of observation either electronic or visual of the contraband in order to maintain an unbroken chain of control ultimately linking it to a suspect. There is no evidence such a method of observation was a part of the F&F operation. Indeed, when ATF field agents attempted to initiate such a chain they were ordered to refrain from doing so by supervisory personnel. Understand, dear reader, that the "contraband" in F&F consisted of items capable of causing death and mayhem when wielded by dangerous criminals i.e. Mexican drug cartels.

Fast and Furious involved the willful and knowing transportation of firearms across an international border a violation of Title 23 Section 150 of the US Code. It is impossible such an operation could be carried out without the authorization of the highest level of ATF's parent cabinet level department, the Justice Department yet the Attorney General Eric Holder would have us believe he was unaware of it and testified to that effect before Congress.

The following is an open letter to Mr. Holder from a US government agent operating in Mexico. The letter was posted at the whistleblower site CleanUpATF on 9 December 2011:   

Posted 09 December 2011 - 11:47 AM
An Open Letter to Attorney General Holder

Dear AG Holder:

From deep inside Mexico, thanks to streaming video, I was able to watch and listen to the entire House Judiciary Committee hearing. I'm a registered
Independent - not Republican and not Democrat, so this is a non-partisan commentary. As I write this, my life, and the lives of my family members are more
at risk because of the reckless actions of you and your ATF buddies allowing, facilitating and even paying for firearms to be smuggled into Mexico for
criminals.

Wow! You really made points with us when you refused to acknowledge you were under oath.

How many times did you answer "I don't know"? You must be the most "know nothing" Attorney General in history.
Funny, you had the answers for all the other issues brought up during the hearing.....

You said those who created "Fast & Furious" will be held accountable, but you still don't know who did it and no one will be fired? You have to consider
their overall service to the department???? Do you consider their overall service for any other crime?

It's been nearly a year since you assigned the investigation of Fast & Furious to the DOJ IG, although not in writing. Interesting. So, the DOJ is
investigating itself? How long does it take for the IG to investigate? Is this the same IG that cooked up the false $16 muffin story? Is this the same IG
that took (as gospel) ATF's word that 90% of the guns recovered in Mexico and traced came from the U.S. - statistics later discredited - by ATF themselves?

We watched and listened as you and your Democrat sycophants on the Committee parroted the same tired scripted mantra praising you for advancing gun control
and begging for more gun regulations and more ATF funding. The same old figures were quoted about how many guns were traced from Mexico. Did your figures
include all the duplicate traces from Mexico? All the.22 rabbit rifles and farmer's shotguns that Mexico traced? Did they include 100 year old guns used by Pancho Villa? Did you explain that the average age of those guns traced from Mexico is over 14 years? ATF calls that "time to crime", but may have nothing to do with a crime.

Did you explain that as far back as 1992, and as recently as 2009, the Congressional Research Service warned against the use of statistics from ATF's
tracing system? Did you also not read their warning, "The ATF tracing system is an operational system designed to help law enforcement agencies identify the
ownership path of individual firearms. It was not designed to collect statistics."? Or did you simply ignore it?

Did you explain that the new multiple rifle regulation which you are so strongly supporting would not have stopped a single Fast & Furious gun from being
smuggled to Mexico? And won't stop any future smuggling? And the multiple rifle purchase report requirement is so overly-broad that it includes 50 to 100 year
old rifles of interest only to collectors - which will now be reported as 'crime guns'? What's with that? Oh, yeah..... Those sales are now permanently 'registered'
in ATF registration databases. Was this supposed to be "under the radar", too?

Did you explain why your buddies at ATF are reporting personal information (name, address, height, weight, date of birth, drivers license number, etc.) of
totally innocent American gun owners to corrupt Mexican cops - through eTrace? Enough information for ID theft? These gun owners may have disposed of the guns
many years ago - but ATF still reports the original owner as a 'suspect' to Mexican cops. Thanks a lot. That makes me feel really good while I'm here in Mexico.....
Have you forgotten that in Mexico, you're guilty until proven innocent?

So this is the "Most Transparent Administration" in history? Well, on that issue, that's right. With your performance in front of the Committee, and your
obstruction of justice and obfuscation of the issues, you were completely transparent. Everyone could see right through you. And you're refusing to release
any more documents? What could be more transparent than that? Wow!

Watching you in front of the Committee, for the first time in my life, you make me ashamed to be an American. Hell, Watergate was easier to understand....., and people didn't die. How many people are going to be killed as a consequence of Fast & Furious?

How do I explain to my Mexican friends and associates why ATF has illegally armed Mexican criminal gangs? And no one has gone to jail, or been fired, or
suspended, or even identified.....? Isn't that great for international relations.....

Mr. Attorney General, you will be held accountable - by the American People.

Sincerely,
(Name Withheld - still in Mexico)

Incredibly, Democratic members of Congress and their mainstream media cheer leaders insist on the need to enact more stringent gun laws affecting private law abiding US citizens as a result of the criminal actions of a government bureaucracy. Only in the fevered minds of gun grabbing hoplophobes and leftist politicians; but I repeat myself.


ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Seasonal Observations

Readers of this observer's postings are doubtless aware of his libertarian proclivities. Like most of you gentle readers I have continued the search for a politician or opinion leader whose positions are congruent completely with my own views. Not surprisingly, the quest has been thus far in vain. Pursuant of that end I have regularly frequented one of the most visible libertarian sites on the web, Lew Rockwell.com.  Please feel free, gentle readers to suggest any additional fertile areas of research.

Yesterday, on the above linked site the following blog posting appeared without comment by Mr. Rockwell and was entitled: No War Toys for Christmas

Father Emmanuel Charles McCarthy suggests that if your parish collects toys for Christmas gifts, you might ask your pastor to note that war toys are not wanted. "It could be explained in the bulletin why toys that fill children with the spirits of homicide and enmity and self righteousness do not fit into the meaning and purpose of Christmas."

 Is it truly toys and not moral teachings that influence our young? I have no knowledge of the identity of Father McCarthy nor of the sect or diocese he represents, but responded to the posting as follows:

Re: No war toys for Christmas

What is a "war toy"? I would submit that such items are merely non functioning children's versions of tools that are used for military purposes. McCarthy's implication is that all military purposes are evil and must be discouraged. This is the logic of those who would disarm law abiding citizens thus preventing them from engaging in self defense.

Would Father McCarthy decline toy guns used by defenders of the constitution or toy cannon such as used in our revolutionary war?

Objecting to and imputing morality to mere tools borders on idiocy. Are toy guillotines also to be banned? Ultimately it is human intent which should be the subject of moral condemnation. Was it Jesus in Luke 22:36 who stated: "Let him without a sword sell his cloak to buy one"?

As of the time of this posting, Mr Rockwell has neither responded to nor posted my comment on the blog. Having said that and in the spirit of a lively libertarian discussion I am pleased to report that one of the contributers to Mr. Rockwell's site with which this writer almost totally agrees is Dr. Walter Block; closely followed by Drs. Thomas DiLorenzo and Thomas Woods.

Tangentially apropos the subject, one of the practices disturbing to this writer is the recent characterization by the mass media of all military personnel especially those wounded or killed in the  current conflicts as "heroes".  Having served previously in the military wherein extraordinary heroic actions were a requisite for that designation, it seems to me a disservice to genuine heroes to assign the title to those who's only misfortune though tragic, is to have suffered the consequences of warfare.

In any event, to quote an ancient philosopher: "Only the dead have seen the end of war". For now I, for one would council keeping one's powder dry and compiling a list of candidates for the future decoration of lamp posts á-la signore Mussolini.

Merry Christmas

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

A Deliverance?

As this posting is being composed an unconstitutional "super committee" of Congress is wrestling over the issue of "solving" the crisis of debt which threatens the very survival of our nation. This writer posits that the premise upon which this so called committee was instituted is false. The current US national debt now exceeds $15 trillion with the annual budgetary deficit projected for the coming decade to be $1.3 trillion. The committee is charged with reducing the annual deficit by a total of $1.3 trillion over the next 10 years.  That supposed "reduction" amounting to $130 billion per annum  accepts an actual expenditure increase by the federal government of $1.170 trillion per year. Only in the fevered minds of Washington political operatives' "baseline budgetary" calculations can such a figure be characterized as a budgetary "cut".

Underlying the sturm und drang of this issue are the philosophical assumptions of the two major antagonists in our society: the collectivists and the individualists, and the divide has seldom been more pronounced and divisive.

The collectivist position is currently represented by the extreme left wing of the Democratic party as espoused by the current occupant of the presidency who considers himself an heir to the New Deal legacy of Franklin Roosevelt. In Roosevelt's State of the Union Address of 11 January 1944 he proposed the following "Economic Bill of Rights":

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.

Each and every one of the above "rights" envisions the seizure of private property in the form of labor, capital or property from individual citizens of our nation in violation of the black letter of the founding documents dully ratified by the people of the United States.
Opposing the collectivists in this epic struggle are the so called individualists who advocate:

A free market economy – an economy unhampered by political regulations, rigid controls, bureaucratic guidelines, high taxes, mandatory racial quotas, compulsory minimum wage rates, redistribution programs, and other coercive distortions – presupposes the principles of self-ownership and private property rights in peaceful adult citizens. The Left attacks freedom and civilization at this crucial foundation level by denouncing and undermining private property rights at every opportunity, from the income tax and antitrust laws to the Supreme Court’s infamous Kelo decision..
And since the related principles of Self-Ownership and Private Property are the bedrock core of the political perspective known as libertarianism, the Left’s ultimate target is individual liberty and it assiduously fights any significant movement in the direction toward true libertarianism. Libertarianism is the ultimate ideological opposite to Leftism and the Left’s anti-property, anti-individualist Orwellian agenda.
The Left often postures as being in favor of "tolerance" – but only in such superficial matters as skin color, not in the realm of ideas. The Left’s long-time and continuing ideological monopoly in America’s universities seethes with anti-conservative and anti-libertarian bigotry and intolerance much uglier and much more unrelenting than the personal prejudice of any stereotyped Southern racist.
Leftists also claim they are for freedom – but it is not the freedom from coercive interference with peaceful adults for which libertarians stand. No. The leftists clamor for freedom from want, freedom from deprivation, freedom from poverty, freedom from being disadvantaged, freedom from discrimination, freedom from having one’s feelings hurt, freedom from the real world, and other such bogus "freedoms" which, if they can be achieved at all, come only at the forced expense of productive peaceful adult citizens. They think people have a "right" to "free" medical care, food, schooling, retirement funding, disability assistance, housing subsidies, etc. – all to be paid for by the forced expropriation of other people. In other words, they believe that some people have a "right" to violate the rights of others.

In view of the fundamental divergencies in the stated philosophies of the two groups on the "super committee" this writer feels safe in predicting that a further attempt will be made at "kicking the can further down the road" which will be the case even should the minimum requirements of the committee be realized.
     

Save Us Obi Ron! You're our Only Hope

Your humble blogster found this video on LewRockwell.com who credits Paul Craig Roberts. Please steal it and make sure it goes viral.

Especially note the prolog and the credits.



ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Worth a Thousand Words

...and an orange jumpsuit for Eric Holder?

Time is Running Out

The recent interview of Mr. Alessio Rastani on BBC and embedded below is jaw-dropping on many levels. Non Keynesian economists have been warning of the approaching storm for years and for their troubles have been soundly ridiculed. Here for the first time to my knowledge in the main stream media is spoken the unvarnished truth. The wonder is: how many will take him seriously?


"In wartime [and the run-up to revolution] truth is so precious that she should be attended by a bodyguard of lies." Winston Churchill

No End in Sight?

It will soon be a decade since the United States military first engaged in the Afghan operation. We have been assured that Osama bin Laden now sleeps with the fishes in the Indian Ocean. In spite of having achieved the stated objective of this undeclared "war" the killing and dying continue. May one be excused for asking: "to what further purpose"?

How long will our leaders insist on the continuation of this expenditure of blood and treasure?
This humble writer posits that the insanity will continue until it can no longer be economically sustained or alternatively, that our political leadership is replaced by sane adults.
President Obama has recently signed on to regulations requiring us mere mortals to conserve fuel while The Afghan "war" consumes 22 gallons of fuel per diem for every one of our personnel in that theatre. The fuel costs $400.00 per gallon to be delivered.

Collectivists Progressives and the Bloody 20th Century

by William L. Anderson

As one who has written on the Progressive movement that began in the late 1800s and still continues today, I am struck by the way that people have institutionalized the "reforms" and creations of Progressives to the point where they become something even beyond articles of faith. There can be no discussion on anything Progressive governments enacted, not matter how much damage these "reforms" have caused, and even to suggest that these "reforms" are not essential to our very existence is [to] want to repeal life itself.

The latest hysterical "They Want to Repeal the 20th Century" screed comes from Steven Pearlstein, an economics columnist for the Washington Post, who lays out an interesting line of thought and in the end seems to claim that the mass of government programs and agencies created during the last century carries the same aura of truth as does the Law of Gravity. He writes:

These folks are actually talking about repealing the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and the Environmental Protection Agency, created in 1970s.
They’re talking about abolishing Medicare and Medicaid, which passed in the 1960s, and Social Security, created in the 1930s.
They reject as thoroughly discredited all of Keynesian economics, including the efficacy of fiscal stimulus, preferring the budget-balancing economic policies that turned the 1929 stock market crash into the Great Depression.
They also reject the efficacy of monetary stimulus to fight recession, and give the strong impression they wouldn’t mind abolishing the Federal Reserve and putting the country back on the gold standard.
They refuse to embrace Darwin’s theory of evolution, which has been widely accepted since the Scopes Trial of the 1920s.
One of them is even talking about repealing the 16th and 17th amendments to the Constitution, allowing for a federal income tax and the direct election of senators – landmarks of the Progressive Era.
What’s next – repeal of quantum physics? (Emphasis mine)

As I read through this litany, I realize that his line of argument is terribly fallacious, but to Progressives, all their talk of science and logic does not apply to their own methods of reasoning. Pearlstein is claiming that the very creation and continued existence of agencies like the EPA and the provisions of the Clean Air Acts and Clean Water Acts, along with the Income Tax and direct election of U.S. Senators, Medicare and Social Security are proof of their truth.

Furthermore, he equates these legislative acts, along with the Keynesian theories and accompanying policies as having the same legitimacy as laws of quantum physics. Just as one cannot debate the existence of gravity, so one cannot even debate anything that fits within the Progressive agenda.

As I read through the article, I come to the conclusion that Progressivism at its heart is a religion, one in which the State is God and Abraham Lincoln, Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson are its Holy Prophets. John Maynard Keynes is the savior. To question anything that they said or did is to require banishment not only from polite society, but from the very universe altogether.

If there is a Golden Era of Progressivism, it is the 20th Century, and while many decent people are repulsed at the government-initiated slaughter of innocent people that characterized those 100 years, Progressives see, well, progress. Where some see the butchering of 10 million men in the execrable trenches of World War I and ask who could have ordered this needless destruction of lives, Progressives see "progress" in the destruction of the European monarchies and the establishment of the U.S.S.R. (Yes, the U.S.S.R. during the 1920s and 1930s was a darling of U.S. Progressives, and their effusive praise of the regime, and especially of Josef Stalin, is well documented in Paul Hollander’s Political Pilgrims.)

Furthermore, World War I in the USA led to military conscription, high income tax rates, destruction of the classical gold standard (and replacement with fiat paper money), Prohibition, and government takeover of the railroads and government control of business, all of which were highly-sought by Progressives for years before World War I brought their goals to fruition, which was aptly noted by Murray N. Rothbard in his classic essay, "World War I as Fulfillment." Thus, to Progressives, the bloody human sacrifice that characterized that conflict was "worth it" because the postwar world was much more to their liking.

It is hard to understand why anyone would prefer the bloodshed and social turmoil that was World War I and its aftermath to the relatively peaceful western world that existed before Europe stumbled into massive warfare in August 1914, yet Progressives believed (and still believe) that the destruction of ancient institutions and replacing them with edicts from the state was a good thing. And when people pointed out that the Russian Revolution was bringing death and destruction, the typical Progressive response was, "If you want to make an omelet, you have to break some eggs."

The Great Depression was the next event that solidified the Progressive hold on U.S. policies, and like World War I, it provided Progressives the opportunity to make permanent changes in the nation’s political economy, or at least bring permanent changes to the legal institutions that set the boundaries for private enterprise. Furthermore, in the name of "bold action," the government engaged in activities from cartelizing U.S. industries (the idea that reducing output would reduce layoffs, which would reduce unemployment) to hiring vast number of people to do chores from writing propaganda for the Roosevelt administration to digging drainage ditches in U.S. cities.

That the nation’s unemployment rate still was in double digits in 1940 did not discourage Progressives from pursuing their various agendas, as they claimed that unemployment would have been greater had the government done "nothing." Meanwhile, the Great Depression spread from the United States to the rest of the world and led to political and social upheaval that ultimately exploded into World War II.

Because Progressive policies (laid out in detail in Murray Rothbard’s classic America’s Great Depression) created the economic calamity that created the rest of the turmoil, one can say that World War II also was a Progressive’s war. Not surprisingly, Progressives jumped at all of the "opportunities" that war brought, including military conscription, government control of the economy, further destruction of sound money, price controls, forced unionization of firms that did business with the government, military destruction of cities in Japan and Europe, and the creation of an international monetary system that would collapse in less than three decades and lead to the ultimate Progressive goal: worldwide fiat money.

World War II ended in 1945, but not before more than 50 million lives had been snuffed out, and the reach of Stalin’s Soviet Union extended, along with the establishment of what would be the Cold War. Unfortunately, the end of World War II was not the end of the mass murder of which either Progressives would directly influence or, at least approve. Wars in Southeast Asia killed millions of people, and the killing escalated after U.S. Progressives in Congress and the White House committed millions of conscripted troops to the region to prop up existing non-communist governments.

It is hard to know how many innocents died in these Progressive conflicts, but it is clear that the so-called vision that these We-Want-To-Remake-the-World that Progressives demanded resulted in slaughter and calamity that is hard even to describe, and when one thinks of the vast human displacement, the use of concentration camps, and the state-sponsored violence that was endemic, the only things that remotely resemble what happened were the Thirty Years War and the Assyrian and Babylonian conquests of the ancient world. Yet, when one speaks to Progressives about World War I and World War II, we are told that the first "made the world safe for democracy" and the second was "the good war."

Now, some Progressives might agree that these wars were bad – although they will claim that the Progressive Agendas had nothing to do with them – but then they will point to the "accomplishments" of the 20th Century, specifically the establishment of the Welfare State and the expansion of government agencies and programs that ostensibly were created to save humanity from the alleged horrors of capitalism. Pearlstein’s screed, for example, lists a number of Progressive "reforms" and creations, from the EPA to Social Security and the Income Tax.

The idea is that their very creation proves their necessity, and that our society would collapse and fall into chaos and death without them. Not only is the State central to our existence, in the Progressives’ viewpoint, but now that the state is all-pervasive, we cannot survive unless the state is nurtured and expanded, for "reforms" always involve the expansion of government, and anything less is to do away with civilization altogether.

Such thinking hardly is new. Frederic Bastiat more than 150 years ago anticipated Pearlstein when he wrote:

Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain

Substitute "Progressive" for "socialist," and you can see that nothing has changed. (While it is true that many Progressives do not claim to be socialists, both believe that all improvements in the human condition come about as the result of the expansion of the State. There really are no exceptions.)
In the end, we are supposed to ignore the slaughter and destruction of the world wars, the exponential growth of the surveillance (read that, domestic spying) state, the choking taxation, and all of the wars fought since in the name of "liberation" and "progress." Furthermore, if any of us would like to repeal all of that, or if we wish it had not happened, something is wrong with us.

Progressives, as stated earlier, love to use the "break eggs to make an omelet" analogy to justify the destruction that has accompanied their Great Visions. To be honest, I’d rather not eat what they are trying to force down my throat.

Copyright © 2011 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Obama's STIMULUS IV "Jobs Bill"

stolen from: Grouchy Old Cripple

More Smackdown

The following is one of the finest smackdowns of a mind-numbed bureaucrat by a libertarian infiltrator of the US political system to date. Attention my anonymous reader in Culver City, Kalifornia. You too can escape the Peoples Republic.


All the best.

Gotcha "Journalisn" Backfires

This humble blogster heartily enjoys a good smackdown. The brief clip below is one such example. Full disclosure: ΛΕΟΝΙΔΑΣ is NOT a fan of Fox News' chief bloviator.

My; How Times Have Changed

Caption this.

An Interesting Experiment

Above is pictured a quarter dollar minted in 1950. It consisted of 90% silver and 10% copper. If you carried a paper dollar (silver certificate) to any US bank in that year you could exchange it for four of these quarters. Also in 1950 this writer with one dollar purchased 4.9 gallons of gasoline i.e. just under 20 cents per gallon for his first automobile, a 1936 Ford 5 window coupe.

Beginning in 1965 the US mint discontinued issuing quarters containing silver and substituted other base metals. Coincidentally, paper dollars although closely resembling the earlier silver certificates, miraculously morphed into what all US paper currency is today: “Federal Reserve Notes” i.e. 1 a :  a written promise to pay a debt;

On Friday last, 19 August 2011 that 1950 quarter was nominally worth $7.76. What seems to be transpiring here can only be categorized as theft and deception. Our coinage has been debased by the government mint to the status of trolly tokens and our fiat paper currency is produced by printing presses and computer keystrokes backed by nothing but promises by a “private” central bank called the Federal Reserve. Meanwhile legal tender laws enacted by avaricious politicians force us to accept these bits of junk and wood pulp under penalty of imprisonment.

Meanwhile, the media is wall to wall “election” coverage of an event 15 months in the future. Dr Ron Paul who is virtually ignored is the only presidential candidate mentioning this problem and when even discussed is dismissed as a “crackpot”.

Sign at Ashland, Oregon Gas station May 2011

We are in deep trouble.

Murphy's Law: What to expect from a government bureaucracy

The saga continues.

Last week we completed Mrs. Leonidas' application for renewal of her expired "permanent" resident card. The forms were meticulously completed with every electronic field filled in and the fee electronically submitted.

Yesterday we received email confirmation that the application had been received by the appropriate bureaucracy with a PDF document completed by the concerned bureaucrat to be proofread. Sure enough, in the field labeled "middle name" where we had carefully inserted NONE due to Mrs Leonidas having none, the bureaucrat had entered the initial "N".

These documents need to be letter perfect in order to avoid rejection or even prosecution for violating an obscure and arcane regulation. We followed the directions for correcting the document; which is telephoning the number of a government office and finally, after 12 minutes on hold and listening to instructions in Spanish after pressing 1 for English a sentient semiliterate humanoid answered the phone.

The ensuing conversation was quite bizarre due to the bureaucrat having only a rudimentary command of the English language. Many common words had to be spelled out phonetically for him. God willing the process will proceed.

The Moral Blame Game of WW II

Yesterday, 14 August was the 66th anniversary of official notification to US citizenry that the Imperial Japanese government had agreed to a nearly unconditional surrender. This action ended WW II hostilities which had really commenced in 1931 with the Japanese invasion of Manchuria.

Much ink and many electronic bytes have been spilt supporting this or that motivation for the Japanese decision to capitulate. Most of what this writer has read, especially by leftist and libertarian "pundits" hastens to assign moral culpability to US political leadership for the employment of weapons of "mass destruction" against "innocent civilians". Those who subscribe to that position offer compelling and cogent arguments against the impersonal raining down  from high altitude horrific and indiscriminate death on young and old members  of a belligerent nation's population.

By accident of birth this writer not only has living memory but reached the so called age of reason during the most destructive war of written history. He therefore can recall having participated in not only such activities as air raid alerts and buying war bonds and stamps but collecting scrap material for the "war effort". It did not evolve in the US that the cottage, backyard industry of machining and assembling military weaponry occurred as was common throughout Japanese society in 1944 45. Had such been the situation, can any of the morally righteous essayists of recent history on that basis be excused from condemning a Japanese policy of not only launching jet-stream driven incendiary balloons on the US Northwest but the shelling from submarines of the US coastal areas of California?

Overwhelming evidence supports the position that the antagonists in the Pacific theater of operations during the war of 1941 45 represented vastly different cultural philosophies. The actions and policies of Japan's military during its conquests and occupation of parts of China 1937 1945 as well as Southeast Asia and the Philippines are compelling evidence of a society whose civilian culture spawned an absence of regard for humanitarian values. During the period December 1937 and February 1938  hundreds of thousands of Chinese civilians and disarmed soldiers were murdered and 20,000–80,000 women were raped by soldiers of the Imperial Japanese Army.  "The stark differences in reported death rates for U.S. soldiers and civilians in German vs. Japanese camps dramatize the nature of the experience of Japan's camps for POWs and internees. Dr. Stenger's figures  list 93,941 U.S. military personnel captured and interned by Germany, of whom 1,121 died (a little over a 1% death rate), and 27,465 U.S. military personnel captured and interned by Japan, of whom 11,107 died (more than a 40% death rate)"

In view of these facts, can any scholar logically assert that were the fortunes of WW II reversed, the imperial Japanese war machine would have hesitated to visit a nuclear holocaust on San Francisco or Seattle? I would therefore advise those who have hastily assigned moral culpability for the unfortunate Japanese casualties of late 1945 to president Truman to rethink their condemnation.

We can all agree that war in all of its manifestations is man's most horrendous evil. However, as Plato observed concerning human nature: "Only the dead have seen the end of war". 

Heads We Win; Tails Y'all Lose

As we witness the ongoing economic and financial collapse of our formerly cozy and apparently secure existence there is occasionally here and there an example of ironic levity usually generated by our ruling elite. As one example, we learn that during the recent London "riots" as British subjects have been effectively disarmed by Her Majesty's constabulary, shopkeepers and local residents have had occasion to resort to the employment of sporting equipment in an effort to defend their lives and property.  As a result, a brisk (6000% increase on Amazon UK) trade in baseball bats has emerged with the aluminum variety selling for USD $28.00.

The Turkish shopkeepers observed by the police wielding these implements have been advised that it is allowable to utilize them inside their shops defensively but are subject to arrest if caught threatening a "youth" outside preparing to launch a brick or molotov cocktail. You can't make this stuff up.

Meanwhile, on this side of the pond our very own Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) which falls under the aegis of the Department of Homeland Security, on its web site and in various pamphlets  advises us to be prepared for all variety of emergent situations by assembling "kits" containing useful items such as: food, water, waterproof matches, flashlights with spare batteries etc. As ATMs and cash registers are likely to be inoperative due to the crashing of the power grid, cash and coins should be available for emergency purchases. Additionally Ms Napolitano's Department alleges that "...lone wolves and small terrorist cells embracing violent rightwing extremist ideology are the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States." Ignore those jihadists enrolling in flight training classes skipping the instructions on landing and takeoff.

On the other hand, the FBI's Bureau of Justice [sic] Assistance has recently disseminated a briefing for the proprietors of military surplus businesses and gun stores to be on the lookout for persons making bulk purchases of among other items: weatherproofed ammo cans, match containers meals ready to eat, night vision devices, night flashlights etc.  The surplus store operators are urged to: "require valid ID from all new customers, keep records of purchases and make note of suspicious statements, people and vehicles." Particularly suspicious are customers insisting using cash for their purchases.

It seems that if one follows the advice of one department of our rulers' bureaucracy he runs the risk of being scrutinized by another as a possible "terrorist".

As our descent into the abyss continues, we would be well advised to maintain a sense of humor.