Saturday, February 26, 2011

Sunday, February 20, 2011

Sunday, February 13, 2011

"Who You Gonna Believe, The Government or Your Lying Eyes? UPDATED

It has been many years since this writer first observed the aphorism: "Don't steal; the government hates competition". At the time, the admonition fit nicely onto a bumper sticker and elicited a smile and a chuckle. Likewise, almost everyone is familiar with the proverb regarding 'the only sure things in life are death and taxes". To those two categories could doubtless be added a corollary: the ruling government elite lies systematically in the furtherance of its various agenda items. The case for this assertion is presented convincingly by Judge Andrew Napolitano in his recent publication Lies the Government Told You.

The government consistently promotes its agenda of disarming the U.S. population and  relies heavily on the "mainstream" media outlets by touting the meme that the narco terrorists in Mexico are obtaining their arms and weaponry from the same suppliers who sell guns legally to law abiding US citizens e.g. mom and pop gun stores and gun show venders in the southern tier of states.
Since early last year, the [ATF]’s press releases have constantly made mention of the so-called Iron River. Call it branding, sloganeering, or the Big Lie. Say something often enough and people believe it. If the federal agency charged with policing American gun sales keeps talking about an Iron River of illegal gun sales, if the media repeats the menacing meme like a well-meaning mantra, an iron river there must be.
Not a trickle. A river. A steady flow of weapons, moving from Bob’s Gun Stores (or similar)  to Los Zetas drug cartel (or similar). A river that must be dammed! Because we’re damned if we don’t. Damned by a personage no less prominent than Felipe Calderon, the President of Mexico. Damned, chided and publicly humiliated for our inability to staunch the flow.
 Such assertions are eagerly spread from government agency press releases by graduates of leftist journalism schools who are both lazy and anxious to further the government's citizen disarmament agenda.

I recently posted on the likelihood that the ATF was attempting to "pad" the statistics on private US sources for weapons recovered from Mexican drug gangs in order to justify its budget requests. Consider that as it seamlessly dovetails with Parkinson's Law to what has been learned of  "Project Gunwalker" especially as evidence surfaces  via WikiLeaks that our lying government has known from the get-go that the real main source of the weaponry in the hands of the Mexican cartels is in fact the Pentagon. (scroll up as the link is to the bottom of the posting)

Ask yourself, dear reader how many of the types of weapons displayed in the above graphic are sold at your local gun shop or gun show. If the truth of the matter is ever revealed, the minute trickle of gun shop arms making their way south into Mexico will turn out to be ordinary Mexican citizens attempting to defend themselves from the Zetas and the Sinaloa drug cartel.

UPDATE:  TUESDAY 15 FEB 2011  10:05 HRS

[T]he 90 percent number [touted by the agenda driven ATF] was derived from a June 2009 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report to Congress on U.S. efforts to combat arms trafficking to Mexico.

According to the GAO report, some 30,000 firearms were seized from criminals by Mexican authorities in 2008. Of these 30,000 firearms, information pertaining to 7,200 of them (24 percent) was submitted to the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) for tracing. Of these 7,200 guns, only about 4,000 could be traced by the ATF, and of these 4,000, some 3,480 (87 percent) were shown to have come from the United States.
his means that the 87 percent figure relates to the number of weapons submitted by the Mexican government to the ATF that could be successfully traced and not from the total number of weapons seized by Mexican authorities or even from the total number of weapons submitted to the ATF for tracing. In fact, the 3,480 guns positively traced to the United States equals less than 12 percent of the total arms seized in Mexico in 2008 and less than 48 percent of all those submitted by the Mexican government to the ATF for tracing. This means that almost 90 percent of the guns seized in Mexico in 2008 were not traced back to the United States.

The remaining 22,800 firearms seized by Mexican authorities in 2008 were not traced for a variety of reasons. In addition to factors such as bureaucratic barriers and negligence, many of the weapons seized by Mexican authorities either do not bear serial numbers or have had their serial numbers altered or obliterated. It is also important to understand that the Mexican authorities simply don’t bother to submit some classes of weapons to the ATF for tracing. Such weapons include firearms they identify as coming from their own military or police forces, or guns that they can trace back themselves as being sold through the Mexican Defense Department’s Arms and Ammunition Marketing Division (UCAM). Likewise, they do not ask ATF to trace military ordnance from third countries like the South Korean fragmentation grenades commonly used in cartel attacks.

Of course, some or even many of the 22,800 firearms the Mexicans did not submit to ATF for tracing may have originated in the United States. But according to the figures presented by the GAO, there is no evidence to support the assertion that 90 percent of the guns used by the Mexican cartels come from the United States — especially when not even 50 percent of those that were submitted for tracing were ultimately found to be of U.S. origin.

Latin America is awash in weapons that were shipped there over the past several decades to supply the various insurgencies and counterinsurgencies in the region. When these military-grade weapons are combined with the rampant corruption in the region, they quickly find their way into the black arms market. The Mexican cartels have supply-chain contacts that help move narcotics to Mexico from South America, and they are able to use this same network to obtain guns from the black market in South and Central America and then smuggle them into Mexico. While there are many weapons in this category that were manufactured in the United States, the overwhelming majority of the U.S.-manufactured weapons of this third type encountered in Mexico — like LAW rockets and M60 machine guns — come into Mexico from third countries and not directly from the United States.

Mexico's Gun Supply and the 90 Percent Myth is republished with permission of STRATFOR.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

cross posted at: Eternity Road

Monday, February 07, 2011

A Short-Notice Invitation

For those readers within puking reasonable traveling distance of the District of Criminals Columbia, you are invited to:
The historic first hearing of Chairman Ron Paul's monetary policy [sub]committee, to expose the Fed as the prime creator of unemployment and so much human suffering, will take place at: 10:00AM on Wednesday, February 9, 2011, in Room 2128 of the Rayburn House Office Building, the main hearing room of the Financial Services Committee. The witnesses include the eloquent Austro-free-market stars Thomas DiLorenzo of Loyola College and Richard Vedder of Ohio University.
Source

Friday, February 04, 2011

Glimmerings of a Eureka Moment

More evidence emerges daily supporting the assertion engendered in my previous post as evidenced by the below embedded video produced by the main stream financial media. Heretofore the fiat currency dots were connected only by such "fringe" voices as Peter Shiff, the followers of Ludwig VonMises and the Austrian school of economics.

The so called "main stream" economic scholars are beginning to understand that the recent and ongoing unpleasantness in the middle east is driven by the planet's largest central banks causing inflation in the commodity (food) markets by running the printing presses in overdrive. As the talking head in the video points out, the poor in the Arab world must spend 80% of their income on food and food prices continue to rise exponentially. The populations of those countries are lashing out at their only available targets, the oppressive regimes tormenting them which in most instances are propped up by the American Empire.

Until recently the US through military and economic aid to tyrants in the region has been able to precariously maintain the political status quo. Those days are swiftly coming to an end as the US treasury is effectively bankrupt. We are very likely beginning to reap what our corrupt rulers have sown.



cross posted at: Eternity Road

Friday, January 28, 2011

The End Game Begins

Recent postings and comments here as well as on other sites appear to be assuming a somber note. Can it be that the citizenry is at last awakening to the precarious nature of Western culture in general and the American empire specifically? We are now beginning to hear even the "One" speak of the "unsustainability" of our present economic and financial direction. However, can he be taken seriously when in the next breath he proposes we "invest" additional (borrowed) treasure in a rail scheme which has already been proven bankrupt?

If one does not have his head buried in either the sand or his rectal cavity he should be beginning to consider individual options for dealing with the deteriorating situation. What continues to amaze this observer is the debate on how the now ongoing collapse can be reversed by "cutting expenditures" on this or that government "program" by some miniscule sum. By miniscule, we continue to insist on defining such "cuts" as mere billions of dollars (Federal Reserve banknotes) of increases in future growth.

The time is now past when such a discussion is relevant to the real world. The Empire has begun collapsing around us and academic debate over which interest group's sacred cow is to be slaughtered and whose is to be spared serves little objective purpose. We have been overtaken by events. An example would be the back and forth over reductions in the "defense" budget. It may or may not be advisable to maintain hundreds of thousands of military personnel and hardware thousands of miles from our shores. More importantly, how can such policies be pursued when the means for supporting them is borrowed from our likely competitors? As in the later part of the fourth century Roman empire, the legions will be retreating from the periphery whether or not it pleases the emperor.

If you look at what they pay, you will think them abundant in riches, but if you look at what they actually possess, you will find them poverty stricken. Who can judge an affair of this wretchedness? They bear the payment of the rich and endure the poverty of beggars...



It now behooves individual families to consider which tools will be useful in addressing the cascading of events. The only sure wager is that the world of 5-10(?) years hence will be substantially changed from what obtains today. For example, will that hoard of gold bullion coins and bags of junk silver serve to ameliorate the dearth of what are  now considered necessities? Will we be able to defend from predators consisting of starving mobs of our fellow citizens or a desperate and dying government the meager means of continuing a brutish existence? Only those of the remnant either blessed or cursed by experiencing these most dangerous of times will be equipped to record the events for the enlightenment of future generations. Make no mistake, just as a wounded beast is the most dangerous of creatures, a dying empire is a most murderous enemy of the lives, liberty and property of its subjects.

If there is a God may he have mercy on us all. Meanwhile, keep the powder dry and sell your liberty as dearly as possible.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

cross posted at: Eternity Road

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Historic Parallels

Tonight we will be treated or subjected (depending on your viewpoint) to the Kabuki theater performance known as the "State of the Union" address by the President of the United States. Rumor has it that POTUS will be pushing for increased "investment" in national infrastructure and "research" in order to "restore" competitiveness. It is further rumored that POTUS will acknowledge the negative impact of excessive regulation on the nation's economy and in addressing the situation will impose additional regulations. In other words: "the beatings will continue until morale improves".

The President will doubtless urge the Congress to increase the national debt ceiling by at least another trillion dollars in order to "buy time" to implement "deficit reduction". Have we heard this before? Since Congress first enacted a debt ceiling has it EVER failed to raise that ceiling in order to accommodate the increased spending investment? I thought not. Why not simply repeal the so called debt ceiling and continue borrowing until our creditors finally wise up and refuse to finance the spending addiction? It is only a matter of time until the inevitable day of reckoning arrives. The question answers itself. The current political class assumes the collapse can be postponed until they are safely retired.

Additionally, there is always the Federal Reserve which will; and is arguably now acting as the lender of last resort by buying government bonds with freshly created banknotes and electronic digits.  This practice is already resulting in the inflation that government hastens daily to deny, understanding that the booboisie will eventually realize that the 2% Fed inflation target (soon to be spiraling upward) is in fact a tax. The government profits from inflation when it prints additional banknotes by being the first to spend them before their inflationary impact works its evil on the rest of the serfs. This is an ancient practice dating from at least the later Roman Empire where taxes were required to be paid in unclipped gold coins but imperial expenditures were paid in clipped or debased coins at face value.

The government schools of recent decades when deigning to teach history at all, which is increasingly rare, offer up a sanitized version of past "civilizations". These versions generally designate the fall of the western Roman empire in Europe as A.D. 476 when a descent into the "dark ages" occurred. This factual distortion conveniently obscures the economic/cultural situation which obtained in fourth and fifth century Europe.
One of the great weaknesses of standard accounts of the Middle Ages is that they compare the poverty of the provinces with the wealth of the city of Rome in the early Empire. This is completely misleading. The comparison should be between the provinces in the first century with the provinces five centuries or more later. Here, the typical serf was better off under the manorial system of the so-called "dark ages" than the slave had been in Augustus' day. Farming was more efficient, due to crop rotation. Metallurgy was more advanced. Road building was not, but the roads had been more for military control than trade.

Economic historian Robert Latouche as far back as 1956 argued that, in comparison to the heartland of Western Europe in the early Roman Empire, economic conditions were better during the dark ages. Another economic historian, Rondo Cameron, two decades ago wrote that "medieval Europe experienced a flowering of technological creativity and economic dynamism that contrasts strongly with the routine of the ancient Mediterranean world.

During the rule of the later Roman emperors citizens were legally bound to their taxing districts and sons were forced to enter the trades and occupations of their fathers. We see the beginnings of such a system today in the US where income earned outside of the country by expatriate citizens is taxed as if it were earned within the US.

Another measure of what our government has wrought is comparing the value of our (infinite) currency today to the purchasing power of a finite commodity such as gold. During the reign of Augustus Caesar in the first century an ounce of gold bought a quality robe/toga or a suit of armor.  The services of a Roman scribe-messenger could be obtained for the better part of a month for an ounce of gold. In 1910 an ounce of gold equalled US $20.00 which was the price of a quality man's suit. In 2011 an equivalent man's suit is priced at $1,300.00 about equal to an ounce of gold or the wages of an urban messenger for the better part of a month.

This is the work of the Federal Reserve Bank whose enabling act of 1913 stated its purpose as "stabilizing" the value of our currency. How's that working out?

cross posted at: Eternity Road

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

End of a "National" Monopoly?

I hope it would not be overly presumptuous of this humble blogster to assume that you, dear readers (all three of you) are aware that there are several states in this once perfect union who are in dire financial straits due to having overspent their budgets by substantial sums. California, Illinois, New York and New Jersey come immediately to mind with the attendant handwringing on the part of their spendthrift politicians.

That sigh of relief by residents of more parsimonious states who have assured themselves that the inevitable economic pain will be confined to the populations of the bankrupt states are in for a rude awakening.

The actions of the central bank, The Federal Reserve, are not controlled by a Congress who, due to the political climate revealed by last November's mid term elections may decline to bail out the spendthrift states. If Mr Bernanke elects to purchase the soon to default state and municipal bonds of these entities (naturally at face value) those bonds will soon join the worthless "assets" lounging on this or that  taxpayer guaranteed "balance sheet".

As disastrous as the above described nightmare scenario is, imagine the following: California resorts to printing "legal tender" dollars at its printing presses in Sacramento. Preposterous you say? Compare such a national disintegrating event with what we just learn is happening in the European Union:

In news reports that have thus far not attracted much attention, the Irish Central Bank has been printing euros out of thin air to prop up its ailing banks. The whole of Europe will pay for this action, as the result will be increased euro-zone price inflation. We can only imagine the reactions of Germans if this continues – though apparently the Irish action is legal from the EU's standpoint so long as the ECB is "informed" in advance and approves. As is often the case, we doubted our reaction to the news, so we went trolling the ‘Net to see if anyone shared our instinctive reaction that this was overwhelmingly bad news for the euro. Here's one comment we found:
"Wait... have I just slipped into a parallel universe? Is this some sort of early April's fools joke? Doesn't this defeat the entire point of a single currency and the ECB? Were the rules changed on the quiet without anyone noticing?"
The nations (states) who responsibly "lived within their means" will be handed the bill for profligate states' irrational policies. This is the stuff of which revolutions are made. We are indeed living in "interesting" times.

Got food and ammo?









cross posted at: Eternity Road

Thursday, January 06, 2011

US Government Bureaucracy Smuggling Guns to Mexican Drug Cartels?

A thread running through much of the reporting of violence along and mostly south of the Mexican-US border is that most of the weaponry used by the Mexican drug cartels is supplied by private sources in the US and smuggled south.
"Federal authorities say more than 60,000 U.S. guns of all types have been recovered in Mexico in the past four years, helping fuel the violence that has contributed to 30,000 deaths. Mexican President Felipe Calderon came to Washington in May and urged Congress and President Obama to stop the flow of guns south."
The Washington Post article quoted above refers as you can see to, "Federal authorities" who are charged with gathering and collating statistics relating to firearms. Enter BATFE, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. After examining the statistics published by the "authorities" several US gun rights groups whom the Post refers to as "the gun lobby" found several problems and inconsistencies. Firstly, only an unknown portion of the weapons seized in Mexican crimes were sent to the US for identification and the "authorities" claimed that "80-90% of them could be traced to private sources in the US e.g. licensed gun dealers. When these statistics were challenged and it was pointed out that the cartel members, especially those involved in the Acapulco Police Massacre and similar crimes prefer fully automatic weapons such as AR 16s and AK 47s which are not available from non governmental US sources, the ATF simply discontinued publishing the statistics.

Recently and since the death of a US Border Patrol agent in a shootout  in Arizona, allegations have surfaced that the source of the weapon used in the agent's death was possibly the ATF field office in Phoenix and it's attempt to "pad statistics" by transferring weaponry into Mexico without consulting the Mexican government:
    •    ATF’s Phoenix office allowed the guns to go across the border.
    •    The ATF office in Mexico was denied permission to share this information with their Mexican counterparts.  Believing this was wrong, they went over the heads of the Phoenix office and requested permission directly from headquarters in DC.
    •    The higher-ups sided with the Phoenix decision to withhold the information from Mexican authorities.
If this is true, there are some federal bureaucrats that are in need of serious jail time.

It is common knowledge that the Mexican drug cartels pay their "employees" substantially more than the Mexican military and law enforcement. Thus the desertion rate of Mexican police and military trained personnel is extremely high and these deserters take with them the issued automatic weaponry which was originally supplied by US military and law enforcement agencies.

The efforts by lapdog mainstream media and federal bureaucracies to paint gun dealers in the US as complicit in the ongoing bloodbath in Mexico is one of a piece with the gun control lobby's effort to disarm law abiding US citizens. The apparent attempt by ATF bureaucrats to pad gun trafficking statistics in order to defend their fiefdom and pursue a citizen disarmament  agenda needs to be investigated by an independent agency. It is also time to end the failed "drug war" which like most prohibitionist projects only serves to increase the price of the prohibited product thus generating lucre for criminals.

Tuesday, January 04, 2011

Déjà vu all Over Again

One of the first orders of business for the 112th Congress which will convene this week will be a debate on increasing the national debt limit. As of today the national debt surpasses $14 trillion. The statutorily imposed limit of $14.294 trillion was signed into law on 1 June 2010 a mere 7 months ago by President Obama. The president appears anxious to sign a new and increased debt limit as soon as it is passed by Congress in order to avoid what one of his advisors characterizes as a catastrophe involving a government default on its obligations and an inability to borrow more money.

The debate is likely to become contentious as "Some Republicans in the new Congress have said they'll seek to block an increase in the Debt Ceiling unless a plan is in place to significantly reduce federal spending and unfunded government liabilities on entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare." Your humble blogster's bluff detector has just gone off. Regardless of the sturm und drang, the political game of chicken will end with a hefty increase in the debt ceiling and the can will continue to be kicked down the road to the point of collapse wherein there will be no fools left other than the printers at Mr.Bernanke's Fed willing to bid on U.S. Treasury bonds.

Nevertheless, plan on hearing political speeches such as the following in the halls of the Capitol: 
“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”

The above are the words of Senator Barak Hussein Obama on 20 March 2006. Boys and girls; we are in DEEP doo doo.

Thursday, December 30, 2010

Swedish Man Loses His (other) Head


In the socialized medicine health care reform debate the president has taken a bit of flack from socialists progressives for not expending more political capital in order to achieve "single payer" health care here in the US. In point of fact, "single payer" as it refers to the progressives' concept of health care is a gross misstatement. A true single payer system would consist of the health care consumer paying for it out of pocket whereas the progressives would have the taxpayers (that's multiple payers) pick up the tab. The following is an interesting but not surprising outcome of socialized single payer lack of health care.  
A Swedish man was forced to have his penis amputated after waiting more than a year to learn he had cancer.
The man, who is in his sixties, first visited a local clinic in Blekinge in southern Sweden in September 2009 for treatment of a urinary tract infection, the local Blekinge Läns Tidning (BLT) reported.

When he returned in March 2010 complaining of foreskin irritation, the doctor on duty at the time diagnosed the problem as a simple case of inflammation.

After three weeks passed without the prescribed treatment alleviating the man’s condition, he was instructed to seek further treatment at Blekinge Hospital.

But it took five months before he was able to schedule an appointment at the hospital.

When he finally met with doctors at the hospital, the man was informed he had cancer and his penis would have to be removed.

It remains unclear if the man would have been able to keep his penis had the cancer been detected sooner.

"If it's any consolation, he's probably better off without it. Given what we've learned about Swedish law from the Julian Assange case, those things just get you into trouble over there."

h/t: James Taranto 

Government Agencies at Work

Warning: R rated narration!



H/T William L. Anderson

Sunday, December 26, 2010

Something to Ponder on Boxing Day

Even an intensive study of history can result in no more than an absorption of limited data. The known "facts" available to us do not constitute even a miniscule quantity of the fund of human history. We are therefore forced to develop a philosophy of history as even the data which have survived the ravages of time were recorded by fallible human beings who viewed events through the prism of their own prejudices and cultural biases. This has been the case in the view of this writer for even such meticulous historians as Herodotus, Thucydides, Polybius, Josephus, Plutarch, Tacitus and Sozomen to name but a few of the more scrupulous historians of the ancient Mediterranean world.

Enough of the works of the above scholars as well as others have however survived to supply us with at least an imperfect view of the great historical powers including their ascendancy and decline.  Perhaps one of the most important literary works on the subject is Edward Gibbon's classic "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", the first Volume of which was published beginning in 1776, eerily concomitant with the US Declaration of Independence. The following is an excerpt from Vol. I chapter 3:
The [western] Roman government [seated in Ravenna after 402 AD] appeared every day less formidable to its enemies, more odious and oppressive to its subjects. The severe inquisition, which confiscated their goods and tortured their persons, compelled the subjects of Valentinian [III] (425-455 AD) to prefer the simple tyranny of the barbarians, to fly to the woods or the mountains, or to embrace the vile and abject condition of mercenary servants. They abjured and abhorred the name of Roman citizens, which had formerly excited the ambition of all mankind. If all the barbarian conquerors had been annihilated in the same hour, their total destruction would not have restored the empire of the West: and if Rome still survived, she survived the loss of freedom, of virtue, and of honour. [Gibbon uses the term "severe inquisition" in referring to the Roman equivalent to our Internal Revenue Service.]
Do you, gentle reader note any similarities to the conditions now obtaining here in "the freest nation on earth"; a nation that requires a submission to illegal searches as a precondition for air travel, criminal penalties for ingesting or even possession of proscribed substances which cause no injury to third parties? The US and its provincial "states" today exhibit many of the characteristics which evinced the decline of the Roman Empire. These conditions to mention but few, include the debasement of the currency by the creation and exponential augmentation of fiat, unbacked paper/electronic money in the US as compared to the coin-clipping and precious metal debasement by Roman emperors as well as the proliferation of obscure and arcane laws. As in the declining era of the Roman Empire, our citizens are precluded from engaging in any enterprise except by the leave of the federal and/or local government and the payment of a myriad of arbitrary fees as well as submission to countless stifling regulations put in place at the behest of the new priesthood of environmentalists by our nanny state rulers. Real property is for all practical purposes owned by the state and deeded (leased) out to private entities in exchange for payment of unilaterally determined rents (taxes). The lower orders of the populace are purchased and kept quiescent by the means of seizing wealth from the industrious and transferring it to the indolent or failing that, borrowing the largess from foreign potential foes. Infiltration of the borders by foreigners who decline to assimilate into the host culture is also a condition existing in both the later Roman Empire and the United States of recent decades. Continuing proposals here such as the (for now) defeated "DREAM" act mirror the gradual displacement of Roman citizens in its legions by foreign tribesmen.

Fitzroy McLean sums up succinctly in this quote what he observes as the collapse of western civilization as we now know it:
In the very near future the only truly admirable and moral profession will be a smuggler. There will be genuine heroes that ply that trade moving goods and people in service of humanity, although it will be illegal. This goes to the death rattle of the nation state, which will almost certainly be violent and oppressive. The US and Europe will have an underground railway and covert information highway.
The insidious metamorphosis of our nation into a collectivist state seems to go unnoticed and unremarked by the bulk of our younger population which appears to have been indoctrinated into its acceptance of and by a government "education" system controlled by a ruling elite primarily concerned with enjoying the perquisites of power.

The question arises: can the inexorably approaching collapse be averted? It is the view of this writer that the tipping point has already been passed and is apparent in the disregard by both ourselves and our rulers of the restraints placed upon government by the founders of the Republic. The interregnum following the collapse is likely to be bloody and tumultuous with a restoration of the status quo ante as regards liberty, unlikely. Western culture previously endured  nearly a millennium before an awakening and given the most optimistic outcome, those living today are unlikely to experience the next one. These are the views held by one who approaches threescore and fifteen years of observing the descent and he would be overjoyed to be proven overly pessimistic.

Merry Christmas

This is the original 1943 (WW II) version of the song written for the musical Meet Me in St Louis and it brought tears to the eyes of grown men who were often far from home and dying for their country.


Wednesday, December 22, 2010

STEAL THIS POSTING!!!

It has been some time since Leonidas was a grunt (formerly dogface) in the Army of the United States (hint: the term refers to the conscripted Army). It appears however, that some things haven't changed substantially. The following essay describes the practice of "over classification" of documents. It has been going on for at least decades but has taken an ugly turn since the emergence of highly politicized and undeclared wars:

American Soldiers Should Be First in Line To Defend Bradley Manning

by Andrew Mason and Mark R. Crovelli
 
 
One of the most curious facets of the ongoing Wikileaks saga is the conspicuous silence of the American military about the Bradley Manning case. The military’s silence is absolutely deafening, for example, on the pages of Stars and Stripes, where only two articles in the turbulent month of December have even deigned to mention Mr. Manning. One would expect that, in a case involving the largest leak of classified documents in the history of the world, the armed forces would be staking out a concrete position on this case for the entire world, and especially the armed forces, to see. After all, it was one of the armed forces’ own who allegedly released the documents to Wikileaks, and other active-duty servicemen with access to classified documents may be considering doing the very same thing as Manning.
This silence emanating from the armed forces regarding Manning raises a fascinating and important question: What position should the armed forces take with regard to the Manning case? We all know what stance the Pentagon is likely to take, given that many of the embarrassing documents actually refer to people in the Pentagon, but the question that truly needs to be answered concerns the position the armed forces should take – especially the position that average soldiers should take on Bradley Manning.
The answer, it turns out, cannot be discovered by facilely pointing out that it is illegal under military law for soldiers to release classified information to the public. This is true, because the document classification system has been manipulated by political and military elites in a way that is extremely prejudicial to average soldiers. Ironically, this fact has itself been revealed by the Wikileaks releases, because it is clear that political and military elites are over-classifying documents in order to protect their own asses. They have been classifying documents "secret" even when they involve nothing more than gossip about foreign diplomats and royalty, for example. Peruse the Wikileaks files for two minutes and you will get a good sense of just how absurd the document classification system in the United States has become.
Insofar as the document classification system in the U.S. has been absurdly extended and abused, this has created a serious moral problem for conscientious soldiers in the armed forces. For, by over-classifying documents, political and military elites are able to hamstring their subordinates and make the exposure of what they are doing virtually impossible, unless it is leaked. Any unsavory, illegal, untruthful or even just plain embarrassing information can be hidden from public view simply by stamping the offensive document "secret." It is also a way for political and military elites to avoid prosecution for crimes in the United States by claiming that their defense involves "sensitive" or "secret" documents that cannot be revealed in open court. This strategy is so common in our corrupted day and age that it even has a name: "greymail."
In essence, then, the document classification system in the United States has warped into an instrument of intimidation against average, conscientious soldiers who might be appalled by their superiors’ words or deeds. Superior officers and civilian bureaucrats can preempt dissent by simply stamping incriminating documents "secret," and use that tiny word as a threat against conscientious soldiers that they had better keep their mouths shut – or else. This threat is all the more unconscionable while two wars are going on that are killing average American soldiers, not political and military elites, in droves. When lies are used to get American soldiers killed, and soldiers are intimidated to preempt the exposure of those lies, you have a recipe for tragedy on a massive scale.
It is important to bear in mind, moreover, that we are not talking about documents upon which the safety of the United States rests. No high-ranking officers would be stupid or reckless enough to share such sensitive documents with low-level officers and enlistees. If they were that mind bogglingly idiotic, then the entire Pentagon and officer corps ought to be forced to resign for incompetence immediately. In addition, the fact that people in Washington routinely leak documents to the press that are far more sensitive to national security than those Manning released, like the National Intelligence Estimate, testifies to the existence of a revolting double standard being applied to political and military elites as compared to the standard being applied to average soldiers like Mr. Manning.
Bearing these observations in mind, it ought to be obvious that average soldiers should celebrate Bradley Manning as a hero who stood up to this unconscionable intimidation from above. He didn’t just reveal to the world that the upper echelons of the political and military establishment are engaged in outright crimes and deception; he revealed and took a stand against conscientious soldiers being silenced by asinine document over-classification. He is, in other words, a defender of the honor and integrity of the average soldier and the Army’s own core values, which stands in stark contrast to the depravity of the political and military elites that we meet in the Wikileaks documents, and who are now trampling on the constitution even in their detention of Mr. Manning.
Thus, average soldiers ought to be the first in line to defend Bradley Manning. They ought to insist that he only be punished if it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the documents he released were indeed of vital importance to the security of the United States. If this cannot be proven, then Mr. Manning ought to be immediately and unconditionally released. (Proving this in Mr. Manning’s case will be extremely difficult, however, given that Defense Secretary Gates has already asserted that the documents have harmed no one, and the fact that the Pentagon didn’t even think it necessary to redact names from the documents). The assumption going forward, now that we know for a fact that documents are being over-classified in abundance by political and military elites, is that any released document is not vital to national security until conclusively proven otherwise. If average soldiers were to operate under this assumption, moreover, political and military elites would be forced to take the time to actually hide any truly sensitive documents from the view of hundreds of thousands of people, as they should have been doing from day one.
It was long overdue for someone to stand up against the practice of over-classifying documents in order to intimidate average soldiers. Bradley Manning has courageously done so, and all members of the armed forces should rejoice for it.
December 22, 2010
Andrew Mason is a former corporal in the U.S.M.C. Mark R. Crovelli [send him mail] writes from Denver, Colorado.
Copyright © 2010 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Sunday, December 19, 2010

Adiós Madams Liberty and Justice

As is the case these days with most of us connected to the internet, this blogster receives a fair number of forwarded emails in addition to the usual spam. This morning's harvest of such missives included a message forwarded by the widow of one of Leonidas' army buddies with whom casual contact has spanned many years. The following is excerpted from that forwarded message:
11.  It's the Veteran, not the reporter, who has given us the freedom of the press.
It's the Veteran, not the poet, who has given us the freedom of speech.
It's the Veteran, not the community organizer, who gives us the freedom to demonstrate.
It's  the Military who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag.
It is reasonable and appropriate to harbor feelings of gratitude toward those who participate in the defense of our nation and communities, but I am driven to disagree with the assertion that persons who have participated in defending the national interests have "given" us such liberties that the government deigns to refrain from denying us. Indeed, the liberties that we yet retain are inexorably diminishing as I type this essay and one need only consider the many thousands of pages in the Federal Register to understand the magnitude of the loss.

Military conscription in the US ended most recently in 1973 and for that reason one must more or less volunteer (hopefully based on informed choice) to subject ones self to the body of laws consisting of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) governing members of the military. These laws, in the interest of discipline, differ in some procedural respects from civilian legal usages.

Having noted the distinctions between the two justice systems, one is forced to be curious as to precisely what rights are forfeited by members of the military. Let us consider the provision in the VI th Amendment to the Constitution requiring a "speedy...trial": An army private first class, one Bradley Manning "was arrested on July 29 ... for allegedly downloading... classified material while serving on an Army base outside Baghdad." It is duly noted that UCMJ does not provide for bail pending court martial proceedings, however the conditions under which Manning has been detained would seem to argue against a prolonged delay based on humanitarian considerations.
"At 5:00 a.m. he is woken up (on weekends, he is allowed to sleep until 7:00 a.m.). Under the rules for the confinement facility, he is not allowed to sleep at anytime between 5:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. If he attempts to sleep during those hours, he will be made to sit up or stand by the guards...PFC Manning is held in his cell for approximately 23 hours a day...The guards are required to check on PFC Manning every five minutes [day and night] by asking him if he is okay. PFC Manning is required to respond in some affirmative manner. At night, if the guards cannot see PFC Manning clearly, because he has a blanket over his head or is curled up towards the wall, they will wake him in order to ensure he is okay...He is not allowed to have a pillow or sheets. However, he is given access to two blankets and has recently been given a new mattress that has a built-in pillow...He is not allowed to have any personal items in his cell...He is prevented from exercising in his cell. If he attempts to do push-ups, sit-ups, or any other form of exercise he will be forced to stop...He does receive one hour of “exercise” outside of his cell daily. He is taken to an empty room and only allowed to walk. PFC Manning normally just walks figure eights in the room for the entire hour. If he indicates that he no long[er] feels like walking, he is immediately returned to his cell...When PFC Manning goes to sleep, he is required to strip down to his boxer shorts and surrender his clothing to the guards. His clothing is returned to him the next morning."
According to a computer researcher who has bi monthly contact with Manning:..."he is starting to deteriorate. Over the last few weeks I have noticed a steady decline in his mental and physical wellbeing," he said. His prolonged confinement in a solitary holding cell is unquestionably taking its toll on his intellect; his inability to exercise due to [prison] regulations has affected his physical appearance in a manner that suggests physical weakness."

May I remind you dear reader that this individual, a citizen of these United States has not been convicted as yet of any crime. The reasons offered by our government for confining PFC Manning under these conditions are due to his being held on "Prevention of Injury (POI) watch". Is it any coincidence that we learn: " Justice Department officials are said to be looking for evidence of collusion between him and Assange to build a case against the 39-year-old WikiLeaks founder...and that the U.S. had offered Manning a plea bargain in exchange for his naming Assange as his co-conspirator"? But then we all know that our "federal rulers" would never suborn perjury; especially in order to obtain a conviction against one who has seriously embarrassed them (wink wink nudge nudge).

cross posted at: Eternity Road

Friday, December 10, 2010

The Lynch Mob Gathers

Greetings gentle readers. For some time there has, in the opinion of this humble blogster, been a pernicious myth permeating our society. The myth involves the idea that our nation is the beacon of "freedom" on the global stage. Indeed, when compared to many nation states as well as super-national conglomerations such as the European Union and the Russian Federation the US citizen enjoys a measure of (but vanishing quantity of) liberty.

Prior to the days of "diversity", the national security state, zero tolerance, progressivism and environmentalism our society was a much freer one. Indeed, in order to institute national alcohol prohibition in 1920 our rulers, finding no such authorization in the constitution, proposed and the several states ratified the XVIIIth amendment. How times have changed! It is not fantasy to conceive that recent Congresses (Congri?) would legislate such a prohibition without recourse to the amendment process and when questioned would reply: "Are you serious"?

Until the advent of the United Nations in 1945 it was inconceivable that our nation would engage in warfare lacking legitimately declared hostilities under Article I sec 8 of the Constitution. The last time the US legally declared a state of war was 5 June 1942. In June of 1950 our military forces were committed to hostilities on the Korean peninsula under the auspices of a United Nations "police action" resolution. Since that time all armed conflicts involving the US military have proceeded sans the legal niceties described in our constitution but with the occasional sanction of a congressional resolution or a perfunctory genuflection toward the "War Powers Act".

This is all understandable as historically the public has countenanced violations of constitutionally "protected" liberties during declared hostilities e.g. the Palmer raids  subsequent to WW I enforcing the Espionage Act of 1917 and the ordered internment of US citizens of Japanese ancestry in 1942. We have now descended progressed to a public outcry amounting to blood lust demanding the trial/execution/assassination of a foreign national for "treason".

Strangely enough, the previous outcry against the WikiLeaks dump last summer involving the Iraq and Afghan files failed to generate the level of outrage accompanying the recently published State department unredacted cables. Can it be that the previous releases were less embarrassing to the ruling class but now their subterfuge, arrogance and incompetence are revealed for all to view?  Just askin'.

In any event is it not ironic that Mr Assange was finally taken down for sex "crimes" committed in the Feminazi Republic of Sweden and we now await Eric Holder's efforts to discover an appropriate crime to utilize for the show trial? Perhaps Mr Assange can plead honorary membership in the New Black Panthers in order to quash the  investigation. It is all reminiscent of Leventry Beria's statement to Stalin: "Show me the man and I will find the crime".

cross posted at: Eternity Road

Friday, December 03, 2010

Enemy of the State Updated

If any of you gentle readers were entertained and or amused by the cinematic 1998 production "Enemy of the State" starring Will Smith and Gene Hackman this humble blogster would hasten to call your attention to the present and ongoing saga of Julian Assange, an Australian citizen and founder of the notorious web site Wikileaks. Last year Wikileaks released many thousands of electronic documents dealing with the ongoing conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The documents had been "classified" by agencies of the US government and were at variance with many official information releases. It was asserted that the publication of these sensitive documents could/would result in retributive actions on "innocent" assets of intelligence agencies of the US and its allies.

When recently questioned, Admiral Mike Mullen chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff was unable to cite one instance of an intelligence asset being harmed as a result of wikileaks' document dumps. Conversely:

"The major government players such as the CIA and the Pentagon do not stop at just Julian but also target many WikiLeaks volunteers or associates. Two volunteers and an American WikiLeaks spokesperson have been detained and questioned in the United States along with other individuals alleged to be participant to his publishing activities ... The result is a constant need for legal and political support and managing this from afar and throughout many continents is no small task. Furthermore Julian Assange does not take these matters lightly having been privy to bad experiences in the past - while working on the extra judicial assassinations taking place in Kenya, two WikiLeaks' affiliates [were] assassinated."

The most recent instance of political harassment of Mr Assange is the issuance of an interpol warrant for his arrest, by the government of Sweden; not for espionage or theft of documents but for "Sex by Surprise"(???) which involves a fine equivalent to US $715.00. The warrant arises from incidents occurring in August 2010 involving:

"The strange tale of Assange's brief flings with two Swedish women during a three-day period...and decisions by three different prosecutors to first dismiss rape allegations made by the women and then re-open the case...

[O]ne of Assange's accusers sounds tailor-made for those who think Assange is being set up in Sweden by dark CIA-backed operatives who want him smeared or silenced for his document dumping. She's a 31-year-old blond academic and member of the Social Democratic Party who's known for her radical feminist views, once wrote a treatise on how to take revenge against men and was once thrown out of Cuba for subversive activities."  Assange arrived in Sweden on Aug. 11 to speak at a weekend seminar sponsored by the Social Democratic Party and arranged to stay at a Stockholm apartment belonging to the event organizer, a member of the branch of the party who would become one of Assange's two accusers.

According to a police report obtained by the Daily Mail in August, she and Assange had sex, and at some point the condom broke. While she was apparently not happy about the condom breaking, the two were seen the next day at the seminar, and nothing appeared amiss.

Another woman at the seminar, a 27-year-old art photographer, said in her police statement that she'd come to hear Assange's lecture because of her fascination with him and his work. She can be seen in video footage on the Internet sitting in the front row during Assange's lecture, wearing a pink sweater and snapping pictures of him.

According to the police report, the woman managed to get an invitation to go out for lunch with Assange and his entourage after the seminar. They spent time together before he went back to stay at the event organizer's apartment.

Two days later, on Aug. 16, they reconnected by phone and the woman invited him to her apartment, more than 40 miles outside Stockholm. She paid for the ticket since Assange apparently had no cash and doesn't like to use credit cards because they could be traced.

She complained in her police statement that during the train ride to her hometown, "he paid more attention to his computer rather than me." She also said that by the time they arrived at her apartment, "the passion and excitement seemed to have disappeared."
 You can't make this stuff up.

It should be pointed out that none of the released wikileak documents have been challenged as unauthentic but are extremely embarrassing to many high powered players on the global political scene including US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.

For this writer, the most disturbing issue of this entire sordid situation is the blood lust by many supposed conservative defenders of the rule of law.  There have been calls for Assange and his associates to be declared "terrorists" and enemy combatants indicating they should be dealt with outside the law. Jonah Goldberg, a conservative syndicated columnist asked "why wasn't Julian Assange garroted in his hotel room years ago?"

Enemy of the State indeed. It would appear that sunshine and truth are serious crimes in our Brave New World.

UPDATE 4 Dec 2010 12:13 hrs EST

As an update for anyone interested in evidence that the Swedish charges are a frameup please visit here and here. The "authorities" wish to have Assange returned to Sweden and enact Ex Post Facto legislation in order to criminalize acts which were at the time not  illegal. Sweden has no constitutional prohibition against bills of attainder or ex post facto laws.

cross posted at: Eternity Road

Thursday, November 25, 2010

Evil But Not Stupid

Faced with the likelihood of massive resistance to the outrageous and demeaning process of obtaining government permission to board a commercial airline flight, what is a tyrannical bureaucracy to do? Answer: simply remove (temporarily) the triggering source(s) of the resistance i.e. the porno scanners and sexual groping. Voila! It worked, and nary a single aircraft was brought down or hijacked by a terrorist.

On one of the busiest traveling days of the year there were no reports of disruptions at any of the airports caused by travelers "opting out" of being irradiated and thus "requiring" to be groped and fondled by the TSA gestapo perverts.

Gee. Do any of you gentle readers now understand that the major reasons for implementing the recent procedures were not really to improve "security" but only to create the illusion of increased safety while enriching special interests and encouraging us to surrender more of our liberties to the all powerful government?

As for this aging Spartan, he will resume domestic commercial flights when he is not denied his right of self defense against criminals and terrorists while hurtling through the troposphere in an aluminum tube.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!!

cross posted at: Eternity Road

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

From Pete Blome on the TSA

As this is not cited as an official Libertarian Party of Florida communication, I will take this as a personal transmission, albeit with a request for wide distribution. 
Consider it distributed.
All 22 quotes are attributed.
Are we going to sit for this?  If we are, then we're no longer citizens.  We're cattle, and the stun gun is right around the corner.  Mark my words.
(ed: In response to the question in the subject line below, our President has never seen a piece of the Constitution he's not willing to wipe his ass with... oh, and speaking of which, you will be happy to know that he's "making a list" of all who "resist" this new Neo-Nazi crap.  Assuming that report is accurate (and I have no reason to believe it is not) I stand proudly on it along with Ron Paul, Rush Limbaugh, Neal Boortz and millions of other red-blooded Americans who believe in the Constitution, The Rule of Law and our unalienable rights - rights given by our Creator.  Government may not grant that which it never possessed; rights and privileges are often confused as I noted yesterday on Blogtalk.   I, for one, will not go willingly into the gas-filled showers of the American version of Auschwitz.)


Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 16:48
Subject: Violations of the 4th Amendment

Or doesn't that matter anymore?
The following are 22 quotes about enhanced pat downs and TSA groping.  They are presented without commentary because they speak for themselves.  Please share these quotes as widely as possible.  If Americans do not wake up now, when will they ever wake up?….
#1 Blogger Erin Chase:
I stood there, an American citizen, a mom traveling with a baby with special needs formula, sexually assaulted by a government official. I began shaking and felt completely violated, abused and assaulted by the TSA agent. I shook for several hours, and woke up the next day shaking.
#2 ABC News producer Carolyn Durand:
“The woman who checked me reached her hands inside my underwear and felt her way around.”
#3 Wendy James Gigliotti:
“She said ’spread your legs.’ And then she took her full palms and started at my neck and ran all the way down my body, full palms, constant contact. And when she got down to my feet, she was in constant contact from my ankles all the way up to my groin, across my groin, and down the other leg. And she did that twice.”
#4 Female air traveler Ella Swift:
“The female officer ran her hand up the inside of my leg to my groin and she did it so hard and so rough she lifted me off my heels.”
#5 Flight attendant Cathy Bossi:
“She put her full hand on my breast and said, ‘What is this?’.  And I said, ‘It’s my prosthesis because I’ve had breast cancer.’ And she said, ‘Well, you’ll need to show me that’.”
#6 Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano:
“I think we all understand the concerns Americans have. It’s something new. Most Americans are not used to a real law enforcement pat-down like that.”
#7 A 61-year-old bladder cancer survivor:
“One agent watched as the other used his flat hand to go slowly down my chest. I tried to warn him that he would hit the bag and break the seal on my bag, but he ignored me. Sure enough, the seal was broken and urine started dribbling down my shirt and my leg and into my pants.”
#8 An anonymous TSA worker:
“Molester, pervert, disgusting, an embarrassment, creep. These are all words I have heard today at work describing me. …These comments are painful and demoralizing.”
#9 Robert Colella:
If some total stranger walked up to you in the street and said “I am either going to see you naked or touch your genitals”, What would be the likelihood of that person walking away from that encounter?
#10 CNN employee Rosemary Fitzpatrick:
“As an experienced traveler for work who was in tears for most of the search process, I have never experienced a more traumatic and invasive travel event!”
#11 Meagan Quinn:
I will not board an airplane in America until the TSA body scanners are gone. No one is seeing my naked body unless I let them. I will also not settle for being GROPED in public as an alternative.
#12 A lawsuit filed on behalf of a female college student from Amarillo Texas:
“As the TSA agent was frisking plaintiff, the agent pulled the plaintiff’s blouse completely down, exposing plaintiffs’ breasts to everyone in the area.”
#13 Bruce Sargent:
The sexual humiliation of detainees at Abu Ghraib is not so very different then the sexual humiliation being heaped on American air travelers at airports. Why is TSA torturing us to protect us?
#14 A 37-year-old Texas woman who had her nipple ring removed with a pair of pliers before she was allowed to pass through security:
“My experience with TSA was a nightmare I had to endure. No one deserves to be treated this way.”
#15 A soldier returning from Afghanistan:
“So we’re in line, going through one at a time. One of our soldiers had his Gerber multi-tool. TSA confiscated it. Kind of ridiculous, but it gets better. A few minutes later, a guy empties his pockets and has a pair of nail clippers. Nail clippers. TSA informs the soldier that they’re going to confiscate his nail clippers.”
#16 A flight attendant named Megan:
The agent went up my right leg first and then met my vagina with full force….the same on the other leg with the same result. She then used both of her hands to feel my breasts and squeezing them. At this point I was in shock.
#17 Jay Glover:
I spend on average $30K per year on business travel. The airlines get the bulk of this but hotels, car rentals, meals and miscellaneous expenses add up as well. Where I can cut travel, I will. When those associated with airport travel feel the financial pinch just watch how fast this all will change.
#18 Paul Craig Roberts:
It is difficult to imagine New Yorkers being porno-screened and sexually groped on crowded subway platforms or showing up an hour or two in advance for clearance for a 15 minute subway ride, but once bureaucrats get the bit in their teeth they take absurdity to its logical conclusion.
#19 Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when asked if she would like to go through the new pat-downs:
“Not if I could avoid it. No. I mean, who would?”
#20 TSA Administrator John Pistole during a Congressional hearing:
“If you are asking me, am I going to change my policies? No.”
#21 U.S. Senator Jay Rockefeller to TSA chief John Pistole:
“I Think You’re Doing A Terrific Job.”
#22 Congressman Ron Paul:
I introduced legislation last week that is based on a very simple principle: federal agents should be subject to the same laws as ordinary citizens. If you would face criminal prosecution or a lawsuit for groping someone, exposing them to unwelcome radiation, causing them emotional distress, or violating indecency laws, then TSA agents should similarly face sanctions for their actions.

Via Karl Denninger