Saturday, December 31, 2011
Be always at war with your vices, at peace with your neighbors, and let each new year find you a better man. ~Benjamin Franklin
Every man should be born again on the first day of January. Start with a fresh page. Take up one hole more in the buckle if necessary, or let down one, according to circumstances; but on the first of January let every man gird himself once more, with his face to the front, and take no interest in the things that were and are past. ~Henry Ward Beecher
People are so worried about what they eat between Christmas and the New Year, but they really should be worried about what they eat between the New Year and Christmas. ~Author Unknown
We will open the book. Its pages are blank. We are going to put words on them ourselves. The book is called Opportunity and its first chapter is New Year's Day. ~Edith Lovejoy Pierce
I wish you all the best! May this New Year bring you peace, good health, happiness, and prosperity.
Saturday, December 24, 2011
the love and warmth of the season.
Peace to you, one and all.
"I will honour Christmas in my heart, and try to keep it all the year." ~ Charles Dickens (A Christmas Carol)
Christmas is not as much about opening our presents as opening our hearts. ~ Janice Maeditere
What is Christmas? It is tenderness for the past, courage for the present, hope for the future. It is a fervent wish that every cup may overflow with blessings rich and eternal, and that every path may lead to peace. ~ Agnes M. Pharo
Friday, December 23, 2011
What is the definition of a uniform?
It is a set of standard clothing worn by members of an organization while participating in that organization's activity.
There is a reason that uniforms are worn in the military.
It is part of military discipline.
When the government starts making exceptions to military discipline - especially requirements in clothing worn, you begin down the slippery slope into military chaos. To quote on e commenter on this article "Military disipline--proven over hundreds of years--is the corner stone of success. When you start allowing people to inject their own personal religious beliefs or culture into the system it falls apart. If they want to wear the costumes of their religion, then go back to the Middle East. What if Jews what to wear beards and costumes of their religion?? What if Chinese want to wear the costumes of their various beliefs? What if cowboys want to wear cowboy hats and chaps?"
Apparently the Jr ROTC is now allowing hijabs and turbans to be worn (perhaps in camo color too)!
The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has announced that the Department of Defense will now allow Muslim and Sikh students participating in Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC) to wear headscarves and turbans while in uniform.Makes me wonder why such practicing religious people are in the military to begin with.
The decision, announced Thursday, followed an October incident in which Muslim teen Demin Zawity quit JROTC when her commanding officer at a Brentwood, Tenn. high school would not allow her to wear her hijab in the homecoming parade.
CAIR later wrote to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta requesting “constitutionally-protected religious accommodations for the girl and for future Muslim JROTC participants.”
In a letter to the Muslim organization sent on Panetta’s behalf, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army Larry Stubblefield explained that based on the incident that led Zawity to quit JROTC, the Army will now be making more accommodations for religious headwear in the training program.
“Based on your concerns, the Army has reviewed its JROTC uniform policy and will develop appropriate procedures to provide Cadets the opportunity to request the wear of religious head dress, such as the turban and hijab,” Stubblefield wrote in the letter, made public by CAIR. “This change will allow Miss Zawity and other students the chance to fully participate in the JROTC program.”
Army spokesman George Wright confirmed Stubblefield’s letter to CAIR and explained to The Daily Caller that while JROTC is affiliated with the Army, it is not actually a part of the Army. The new procedures will provide JROTC with a exemption method more similar to current Army procedure mandated through the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993.
That law allows soldiers on active duty to apply for religious accommodation if they want to alter their uniforms in accordance with their religious beliefs. The exemptions are applied on a case-by-case basis. Soldiers who are transferred must reapply.
Shouldn't they be against war and destruction and military activity in general?
and aren't these women following Sharia supposed to be forbidden from mixing the sexes and being away from home, and engaging in this type of activity?
Meanwhile - American service women in Afghanistan are encouraged to wear headscarves while out in public...
and another article about the Few - the Proud - the Hijabed.
What's next? allowing military personnel to wear sandals and beards? or maybe burkas in camo color!
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Well, there are certainly many reasons not to support, Mitt, the bankers best friend.
This article, that I came across, pretty much sums up why Romney would be a terrible choice for POTUS:
He looks like a president and he speaks very well. But when you look at what he really stands for that is where things become very troubling. The truth is that Mitt Romney is either very wrong or very "soft" on every single major issue. It would be a huge understatement to refer to Mitt Romney as a RINO ("Republican in name only"). When you closely examine their positions, there is very, very little difference between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama. Sure, Romney and Obama will say the "right things" to the voters during election season, but the reality is that a Romney administration would be so similar to an Obama administration that you would hardly know that a change has taken place.
Mitt Romney is a "politician" in the worst sense of the word. As his past has demonstrated, he will do and say just about anything in order to get elected. The positions he has taken during this campaign season have been carefully calculated to help him win both the Republican nomination and the general election.
The following are 16 reasons why Mitt Romney would be a really, really bad president....
#1 Obamacare was one of the worst pieces of legislation ever passed by the U.S. Congress. Mitt Romney says that he would repeal Obamacare, but the reality is that Romneycare was what Obamacare was based on. In fact, a recent MSNBC article brought to light some new information about the relationship between Romneycare and Obamacare....
Newly obtained White House records provide fresh details on how senior Obama administration officials used Mitt Romney’s landmark health-care law in Massachusetts as a model for the new federal law, including recruiting some of Romney’s own health care advisers and experts to help craft the act now derided by Republicans as “Obamacare.”
#2 During his time as governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney significantly raised taxes. ... Romney and lawmakers also approved hundreds of millions in higher fees and fines during his four years in office.
#3 Government spending in Massachusetts increased significantly under Mitt Romney. An advocate of smaller government he most definitely is not.
This was especially true for the last two budgets passed under Romney. In fiscal year 2006, government spending in Massachusetts increased by 7.6 percent. In fiscal year 2007, government spending in Massachusetts increased by a whopping 10.2 percent.
#4 It turns out that Mitt Romney is a believer in the theory of man-made global warming. In fact, Al Gore recently praised on Mitt Romney on his blog. In a post entitled "Good for Mitt Romney -- though we've long passed the point where weak lip-service is enough on the Climate Crisis", Al Gore lavished the following praise on the former Massachusetts governor....
"While other Republicans are running from the truth, he is sticking to his guns in the face of the anti-science wing of the Republican Party"
#5 If Mitt Romney becomes president, we may actually have "cap and trade" shoved down our throats. While campaigning for president in 2007, Mitt Romney said that he would support a "cap and trade" carbon tax scheme for the entire world....
“I support Cap-and-Trade on a global basis but not the USA going alone. I want to do it with other nations involved and on a global scale.”
#6 Mitt Romney had a horrible record of creating jobs while governor of Massachusetts. According to Boston Herald business reporter Bret Arends, only one state in the entire country was worse at creating jobs while Romney was in office....
“During the four years Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts, it had the second worst jobs record of any state in America…it wasn’t a regional issue. The rest of New England created nearly 200,000 jobs.”
#7 Mitt Romney was a very enthusiastic supporter of the Wall Street bailouts. When the time comes for more Wall Street bailouts it seems almost certain that Mitt Romney will bail them out again.
#8 If Romney becomes president, get ready for a flood of liberal judges. While he was governor of Massachusetts, there were actually significantly more Democrats among his judicial appointments than there were Republicans.
#9 Mitt Romney is incredibly soft on illegal immigration. Back in 2007, Mitt Romney made the following statement....
“But my view is that those 12 million who've come here illegally should be given the opportunity to sign up to stay here”
#10 While he was governor, Mitt Romney received advice on global warming and carbon emissions from the man who is now the top science adviser to Barack Obama. His name is John P. Holdren, and he has some very, very disturbing ideas. For example, he once wrote the following....
"A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men.
#11 Mitt Romney has been a huge supporter of gun control laws. When he was running for governor in Massachusetts, he made the following statement....
"We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts- I support them...I believe they help protect us, and provide for our safety."
#12 Mitt Romney once claimed that he was more "pro-choice" than Ted Kennedy, but now he claims that he is pro-life. In a recent article for WorldNetDaily, Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt explained why so many voters are still skeptical....
This year he's the only major Republican presidential candidate who has yet to sign the Susan B. Anthony List pledge to defend life and defund Planned Parenthood nationwide. Candidates Bachmann, Perry, Gingrich, Paul, Pawlenty and Santorum all signed the pledge, although it should be noted Herman Cain supports everything in the pledge except the Fetal Pain Act. (Cain is not fully pro-life, either.) And who can forget Mitt's famous 2002 campaign debate bragging repeatedly that he's more pro-choice than Ted Kennedy?
#13 During this campaign season, Mitt Romney has stated that he only supports partnership agreements for gay couples and not gay marriage, but what Romney actually did while governor of Massachusetts suggests otherwise. In the WorldNetDaily article referenced above, Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt detailed how Mitt Romney aggressively implemented gay marriage in the state of Massachusetts....
When the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decided in 2003 to recognize homosexual "marriage," ignoring the voters and the Constitution, the court admitted it did not have power to issue licenses or force participation by justices of the peace to solemnize the weddings. But as governor, Romney didn't wait for the legislature to act, he just ordered the marriage licenses and weddings to go forward, all by himself. Earlier this month, Romney said in New Hampshire, "What I would support [nationwide] is letting people who are of the same gender form – if you will – partnership agreements."
#14 As late as 2007, Mitt Romney was a member of the Republican Main Street Partnership. The following is what romneyexposed.com says about this organization....
They often work in conjunction with the pro-abortion group, Republicans for Choice, and the Republican homosexual group, the Log Cabin Club. They also opposed the nomination of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and set up a 527 campaign committee that received funding from far left funder George Soros.
#15 According to the Huffington Post, Mitt Romney has raised more money from lobbyists than all of the other Republican candidates combined.
So if Mitt Romney becomes president, who do you think he is going to listen to - the American people or the lobbyists?
#16 Mitt Romney is a big time Wall Street insider. It is estimated that Romney has a personal fortune of approximately a quarter of a billion dollars, and Wall Street money is being absolutely showered on his campaign.
In a recent article entitled "The Big Wall Street Banks Are Already Trying To Buy The 2012 Election", I detailed how numbers compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics show that Mitt Romney is getting far more money from the "too big to fail" Wall Street banks than all of the other Republican candidates combined. The following is an excerpt from that article that shows how much money employees of those banks (and their wives) have been giving to Romney so far this year....
Mitt Romney: $352,200
Barack Obama: $49,124
Tim Pawlenty: $25,000
Jon Huntsman: $6,750
Rick Perry: $5,500
Ron Paul: $2,500
Mitt Romney: $184,800
Tim Pawlenty: $41,715
Barack Obama: $28,225
Rick Perry: $20,750
Jon Huntsman: $9,750
Newt Gingrich: $1,000
Ron Paul: $1,000
Herman Cain: $500
Bank of America
Mitt Romney: $112,500
Barack Obama: $46,699
Tim Pawlenty: $12,750
Jon Huntsman: $4,250
Ron Paul: $3,451
Rick Perry: $2,600
Thad McCotter: $2,000
Herman Cain: $750
Michele Bachmann: $500
Newt Gingrich: $250
Mitt Romney: $107,250
Barack Obama: $38,039
Rick Perry: $27,050
Tim Pawlenty: $16,750
Jon Huntsman: $7,500
Ron Paul: $5,451
Mitt Romney: $56,550
Barack Obama: $36,887
Tim Pawlenty: $5,300
Rick Perry: $3,000
Herman Cain: $1,465
Michele Bachmann: $1,000
Ron Paul: $702
As you can see, no other Republican candidate even comes close to Romney at any of these big Wall Street banks.
In fact, of the candidates that are left in the Republican race, Mitt Romney has raised 13 times as much Wall Street money as anyone else has.
The following are the overall donation numbers from employees of the big Wall Street banks and their wives....
Mitt Romney: $813,300
Barack Obama: $198,874
Tim Pawlenty: $101,515
Rick Perry: $58,900
Jon Huntsman: $28,250
Ron Paul: $13,104
Herman Cain: $2,715
Michelle Bachmann: $1,500
Newt Gingrich: $1,250
These numbers paint a very disturbing picture. Even though Romney's poll numbers are in the mid to low 20s most of the time, employees of the big Wall Street banks gave him $813,300 during the first 9 months of this year and they only gave $105,719 to the rest of the Republican candidates combined.
It is quite obvious that the "establishment" is in love with Mitt Romney.
But if the American people elect Mitt Romney, they will get someone who believes in big spending, big government, bank bailouts, health care mandates, climate change legislation, liberal judges, gun control laws, amnesty for illegal aliens and making things as comfortable for the fatcats on Wall Street as possible.
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
This certainly doesn't make ME want to donate anything to UNICEF!
Not that I would anyway - seeing as they are just another Leftist organization.
It's a horrible ad.
But not surprising coming from a globalist United Nations (and Agenda 21 promoting) entity.
But, let's take a look at UNICEF
Currently active in 191 countries, the United Nations Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) was created in 1946 by the United Nations, "to work with others to overcome the obstacles that poverty, violence, disease, and discrimination place in a child's path." UNICEF is a member of the OneWorld Network, an umbrella organization of more than 1,500 leftwing groups that seek "to promote sustainable development, social justice, and human rights."The same article from National Review states:
One notable recipient of UNICEF funding is the Palestinian Youth Association for Leadership and Rights Activation (PYALARA), a student-run Palestinian NGO that consistently condemns Israel and supports Palestinian militants. UNICEF has chosen PYALARA as a “major strategic partner in Palestine.”
According to National Review Online:
"UNICEF has been a major financier of Palestinian “summer camps” which encourage children to become suicide bombers. One such camp is named for Wafa Idris, a female suicide bomber.
"During the late 1990s, UNICEF served as a propaganda organ of the Saddam Hussein regime. Relying solely on Iraqi government statistics, UNICEF and the Saddam government co-authored a report asserting that over a million children in Iraq died because of U.N. sanctions. A map on the first page of the report depicted Kuwait as a province of Iraq."
According to UNICEF, the major cause of child poverty in the world is the free market—even though countries with free markets have vastly lower levels of child poverty than do the kleptocratic, statist economies extolled by UNICEF....
UNICEF’s executive board includes China (whose forced abortion policy is neither pro-life, nor pro-choice, nor pro-child) and Bhutan (where children are among the many victims of the regime’s human rights abuses). UNICEF has doled out unaccountable money to the North Korean regime.
I'd choose Santa Claus over these Leftist UN globalist monsters anytime.
Monday, December 19, 2011
This article by Tim Carney just about sums it up ... the GOP will not allow a Ron Paul nomination... and so the anti-Paul propaganda is already in gear.
The Republican presidential primary has become a bit feisty, but it will get downright ugly if Ron Paul wins the Iowa caucuses.
The principled, antiwar, Constitution-obeying, Fed-hating, libertarian Republican congressman from Texas stands firmly outside the bounds of permissible dissent as drawn by either the Republican establishment or the mainstream media. (Disclosure: Paul wrote the foreword to my 2009 book.)
But in a crowded GOP field currently led by a collapsing Newt Gingrich and an uninspiring Mitt Romney, Paul could carry the Iowa caucuses, where supporter enthusiasm has so much value.
If Paul wins, how will the media and the GOP react? Much of the media will ignore him (expect headlines like "Romney Beats out Gingrich for Second Place in Iowa"). Some in the Republican establishment and the conservative media will panic. Others will calmly move to crush him, with the full cooperation of the liberal mainstream media.
I am already seeing the re-runs of articles and other stories that claim Dr. Paul is a racist and here is even an old clip with Wolf Blitzer talking about some old newsletter:
You can expect to see more attacks on Ron Paul as his campaign gains more and more steam. The globalists and elites on the Left and the Right cannot tolerate having someone who would dismantle the FED and pare down government and end wars that are profitable to them.
Interestingly enough - Zerohedge writes, "Newspaper Chaired By Private Equity Head Shockingly Endorses Mitt Romney For President" - Mitt Romney was endorsed by the Des Moines Register:
A few hours ago the Des Moines Register threw its support behind the Bain Capital founder, and the man now known to have actively destroyed any trace of his public "service" before his 2007 Massachusettes office handover (with a pending response to a Reuters FOIA, which will disclose just what it was that Romney was so tenuously shredding). Because according to the Iowan newspaper, Mitt Romney "is the best to lead" America, although into what, is not quite clear - perhaps the biggest Fed funded LBO (with a Bain Capital $1 mezz piece) of all time, that of America? We don't know. And neither does the Register's editorial board. What they do know are hollow adjectives, such as "sobriety", "wisdom" and "judgment" which somehow are applicable to Romney, if not so much "betting" and "shredding." Those looking for a late night laugh can read the OpEd below (link to tomorrow's front page here). And ironically, while likely set to provide a very short-term boost to Romney's chances, it is the baseless ongoing accusations against Ron Paul that will likely solidify the groundswell behind the Texan, with such desperate platitudes as "Ron Paul's libertarian ideology would lead to economic chaos and isolationism, neither of which this nation can afford." Because what America certainly needs is more of that old ideology of doing everything just the same and hoping for the best, because if there is anything Romney's would be predecessors have taught us is that hope apparently is a credible strategy. But perhaps most relevant is the reminder that the Des Moines Register is a Gannett company whose Chairman just happens to be one Marjorie Magner, whose bio reads:"
Ms. Magner, 61, is Managing Partner of Brysam Global Partners, a private equity firm investing in financial services firms with a focus on consumer opportunities in emerging markets founded in January 2007. She was Chairman and CEO of Citigroup's Global Consumer Group from 2003 to 2005. She served in various roles at Citigroup, and a predecessor company, CitiFinancial (previously Commercial Credit), since 1987. Ms. Magner currently serves as a director of Accenture Ltd. and Ally Financial Inc. and served as a director of The Charles Schwab Corporation from February 2006 to May 2008. Ms. Magner has broad business experience and financial expertise from the various senior management roles she held with Citigroup."
The banksters must be worried about Ron Paul's popularity.
The anti-Ron Paul propagandists no doubt will be working overtime.
Their mission will be to discredit - and take down - the only candidate that is consistent in his support for Liberty, Freedom and the Constitution.
...in the meantime watch this if you like Ron Paul but don't agree with his foreign policy:
Thursday, December 15, 2011
"A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular; and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inferences." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1787. ME 6:388, Papers 12:440
Today is Bill of Rights Day. To Americans, the Bill of Rights are key amendments to the U.S. Constitution, that protect our individual rights.
On March 4, 1789, the Constitution of the United States of America was ratified by the (former) 13 colonies, and went into effect. States and individuals were concerned that the Constitution did not properly cover and protect a number of rights of individuals. The Constitution was signed by the original 13 states with the requirement, or understanding, that a Bill of Rights would be created, amending the new U.S. Constitution.
On September 25, 1789, the First Congress of the United States proposed to the state legislatures 12 amendments to the Constitution. 10 of these amendments were added to the Constitution on December 15, 1791.
Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.
ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
Amendment I - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Government can neither impose a state religion upon you nor punish you for exercising the religion of your choice. You may express your opinions, write and publish what you wish, gather peacefully with others, and formally ask government to correct injustices.
Amendment II - A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Individuals ("the people") have the right to own and use weapons without interference from the government.
Amendment III - No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
The government cannot force you to house its agents.
Amendment IV - The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
You may not be arrested or "detained" arbitrarily. No agency of government may inspect or seize your property or possessions without first obtaining a warrant. To obtain a warrant, they must show specific cause for the search or seizure and swear under oath that they are telling the truth about these reasons. Furthermore, the warrant itself must state specifically and in detail the place, things, or people it covers. Warrants that are too general or vague are not valid; searches or seizures that exceed the terms of the warrant are not valid.
Amendment V - No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
No one outside the military may be tried for a serious crime without first being indicted by a grand jury (of citizens). Once found not guilty, a person may not be tried again for the same deed. You can't be forced to be a witness or provide evidence against yourself in a criminal case. You can't be sent to prison or have your assets seized without due process. The government can't take your property without paying market value for it.
Amendment VI - In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Trials cannot be unreasonably postponed or held in secret. In any criminal case against you, you have a right to public trial by a jury of unbiased citizens (thus ensuring that the state can't use a "party-line" judge to railroad you). The trial must be held in the state or region where the crime was committed. You cannot be held without charges. You cannot be held on charges that are kept secret from you. You have a right to know who is making accusations against you and to confront those witnesses in court. You have the right to subpoena witnesses to testify in your favor and a right to the services of an attorney.
Amendment VII - In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
The right to trial by jury extends to civil, as well as criminal, cases. Once a jury has made its decision, no court can overturn or otherwise change that decision except via accepted legal processes (for instance, granting of a new trial when an appeals court determines that your rights were violated in the original proceeding).
Amendment VIII - Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Bail, fines, and punishments must all fit the crime and punishments must not be designed for cruelty.
Amendment IX - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
You have more rights than are specifically listed in the Bill of Rights.
Amendment X - The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The U.S. federal government has only those specific powers granted to it by the Constitution. All other powers belong either to the states or to individuals.
The Ninth and Tenth Amendments, taken together, mean that the federal government has only the authority granted to it, while the people are presumed to have any right or power not specifically forbidden to them. The Bill of Rights as a whole is dedicated to describing certain key rights of the people that the government is categorically forbidden to remove, abridge, or infringe. The Bill of Rights clearly places the people in charge of their own lives, and the government within strict limits - the very opposite of the situation we have allowed to develop today.
On this Bill of Rights Day, COTG hopes that you spend a few minutes reflecting upon the freedoms that you enjoy and take for granted. These freedoms do not exist in many countries of the world.
It is also a time to reflect on how many of those freedoms have already been infringed upon by unconstitutional laws put in place by our Government, and what you will personally do to restore the protection of those rights and stop the further erosion of these rights; If not for yourself, then surely for your children and grandchildren.
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent"- Thomas Jefferson
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, questions Attorney General Eric Holder during a House Judiciary Committee hearing on December 8, 2011.
Congress is currently investigating "Fast & Furious".
Attorney General Eric Holder has already been caught making at least one false statement under oath.
Many are calling for Holder's resignation.
This article claims that Congressman Ron Paul is the first to say that Holder should be tried and should be fired.
Today, Texas Congressman Ron Paul became the first GOP president candidate to call for criminal charges against Eric Holder.
Speaking to syndicated radio talk show host Alex Jones, Paul called for Holder to be "immediately fired." Paul went on to say "I think it was criminal," and called the operation a "false flag." He said that there needs to be an immediate investigation into Holder himself, and said Holder "deserves charges."
Paul went on to discuss a now infamous memo from White House lawyers who claim Obama has the right to assassinate American citizens anywhere in the world. Paul stated that Obama is trying to "legalize Martial law."
They should add Hillary to the indictment list as well....
In recent months, allegations have surfaced that the State Department’s US Direct Commercial Sales Program and DDTC may have directly shipped arms to the Zetas, the Gulf Cartel’s hit squad. The Zetas were at one time trained and supplied with American weaponry by our own 7th Special Forces Group in the early 1990s. These claims against the State Department arose even after the DDTC recognized the Americas Region in 2009 as having the highest rate of unfavorable traces for their Blue Lantern Program. The Blue Lantern Program involves traces performed by the DDTC to ensure exported military weaponry does not end up with an unauthorized nation or organization. For the Americas, 80% of traces where unauthorized end users were identified involved small arms. Data specifically for Mexico was unavailable from the State Department.
From 2008 to 2009, when President Obama entered office, Defense Department expenditures to Mexico have increased from $12 million to $34,000,000 and State Department expenditures increased from $7.2 million to $356 million. While 2010 data is currently unavailable, it appears our foreign aid to Mexico has continued to increase for 2011. These statistics imply the State and Defense Departments may very well be the top suppliers of small arms to Mexico’s drug cartels and not civilians. Only the information obtained from ATF Firearms Traces will tell. However, those records are not public. After the DOJ and the White House knowingly pursued attempts at new gun control legislation, we are left to ask the question; is this just another case of government stupidity or is this something more premeditated?
I hope Congress continues its digging into this matter, and that Holder and others are dealt with as our law dictates.
This scandal is BIG!
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Here is a rundown of the status of that legislation - posted at Campaign for Liberty.
The bill is headed for committee to reconcile what was passed in the House and what was passed in the Senate.
Now - Take a look at what can happen if the bill remains as it was passed in the Senate:
Excellent commentary by Chris Powell, managing editor of the Journal Inquirer in Manchester, CT.
SUSPEND HABEAS CORPUS AND ENACT MARTIAL LAW?
Americans seem ready to forfeit their most basic civil liberty -- actually, all their civil liberties -- without a whimper.
By a vote of 93-7 the Senate this month approved a military appropriations bill empowering the government to designate any U.S. citizen within the country as a terrorist and to have the military hold him indefinitely without trial and without the right to habeas corpus, the right to be brought before a court for a judgment on the legality of one's imprisonment.
In effect the legislation is a declaration of martial law throughout the country.
The bill still has to be reconciled by a conference committee with a different version passed by the House of Representatives. But even Connecticut U.S. Rep. Joseph D. Courtney, a liberal Democrat and a member of the committee, plans to support the martial law provision and expects it to be enacted. Courtney, who used to be a lawyer, cites as consolation the money contained in the bill for Connecticut military contractors, tens of millions of dollars for jet fighter engines manufactured by the Pratt & Whitney division of United Technologies Corp. in East Hartford and for nuclear submarines made by the Electric Boat division of General Dynamics in Groton.
At least Connecticut's junior senator, Richard Blumenthal, was one of the lonely seven senators who voted against martial law. Connecticut's senior senator, Joseph I. Lieberman, who also used to be a lawyer but now is the Senate's foremost advocate of perpetual imperial war, voted for it.
The Constitution prohibits suspension of the right of habeas corpus "unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it." While habeas corpus was suspended in certain circumstances during the Civil War, there is no rebellion or invasion now and no impairment of the criminal-justice system, and the mere danger of terrorism does not constitute rebellion or invasion.
President Obama is threatening to veto the legislation but not so much for its suspension of habeas corpus. Rather, the bill is objectionable to the president because it would prevent the government from transferring terrorism suspects from the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to installations in the United States, even for trial.
If the bill becomes law the president and his successors will gain dictatorial power, the power exercised by the worst tyrants in history -- Hitler, Stalin, and Mao -- the power to kidnap anyone off the street or out of his own home and lock him away incommunicado forever. The president will be able to do that even to members of Congress themselves, and while it would suit them right for enacting such an abomination, Americans better rise up and stop it if they don't want the country to slip into totalitarianism as Germany did in similar circumstances in 1933.
First the German people were demoralized and deprived of economic security by hyperinflation and depression. Then they were frightened into submission by the burning of the parliament building in Berlin, which was opportunistically depicted by the National Socialist-dominated coalition government as Communist Party terrorism and used as the pretext for a proclamation, issued the next day, suspending all civil liberties, including, specifically, habeas corpus. Three weeks later the Nazis persuaded parliament to surrender its power through the infamous Enabling Act, allowing the Nazi chancellor to rule by decree. He did so for 12 more years.
Eventually one of those decrees was the "Night and Fog" decree, under which people across Europe simply disappeared, never to be seen again.
Americans may have some vague awareness of the horror perpetrated by Germany back then. But do they have any idea of how closely they are following the Germans in what led to it? Our politicians don't seem to have any idea.
Republicans who scream about the supposed oppressiveness of a government that would require everyone to have medical insurance are rushing to give that government the power to make people disappear. And Democrats who chafe at the government's refusal to recognize same-sex marriage are ready to forfeit the longest-established and most substantial liberties because a free society can never eliminate the danger that someone can plant a bomb somewhere -- though a totalitarian society can't eliminate it either.
No amount of military contracting in Connecticut can be worth even a day without due process of law. The purpose of military contracting is to protect the country, and without due process of law the country will not be worth protecting.
This piece of legislation is Anti-American.
It is against everything our Constitution stands for.
This must be reversed!
Or we have become this:
Monday, December 12, 2011
Federally-funded high-tech street lights now being installed in American cities are not only set to aid the Department of Homeland Security in making "security announcements" and acting as talking surveillance cameras, they are also capable of "recording conversations,"
'Intellistreets' brings privacy threat to a whole new level.
Oh, but it's for your safety and security - don'tcha know.
One Texan commented about this video by saying that if these are put up anywhere in Texas they will make excellent shooting targets.
It's all surveillance and being disgustingly packaged as "keeping you safe"... but it's really to keep you under control.
Friday, December 9, 2011
Thursday, December 8, 2011
In this article it states:
According to statistics from the US State Department, around 6.4 million Americans are either working or studying overseas, which Gallup says is the largest number ever for such statistic....
the number of Americans between the ages of 25 and 34 living abroad managed to surge from barely 1 percent to over 5.1 percent. For those under the age span wishing to move overseas, the percentage has jumped in the same amount of time from 15 percent to 40.
... Other industries, significantly American, have been relocated as well; the ending of NASA’s space shuttle program this year left many intelligent US citizens with little choice but to continue in their field outside of the States.
It's pretty sad really - the brain drain that is going on.
I wouldn't have ever thought that our youth would find better opportunities outside of the US - and yet that has come true.
Washington's policies have created this and have essentially sent our youth and our businesses packing.
It doesn't bode well for this country at all.
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
File this under - "Sounds like something the Nazis would do".
Imagine dead baby boomers being used to run your TV!
In Durham, England, corpses will soon be used to generate electricity.
A crematorium is installing turbines in its burners that will convert waste heat from the combustion of each corpse into as much as 150 kilowatt-hours of juice — enough to power 1,500 televisions for an hour. The facility plans to sell the electricity to local power companies.
Some might find this concept creepy. Others might be pleased to learn that the process "makes cremation much greener by utilizing its by-products," in the words of cremation engineer Steve Looker, owner and chief executive officer of the Florida-based company B&L Cremation Systems, which is unaffiliated with the Durham enterprise.
In Europe, tightening regulations on crematorium emissions, coupled with the high price of energy, will lead more and more facilities to go the way of Durham in the future, Looker said. Will crematories in the United States follow suit?
According to Looker, whose company is currently testing different methods of utilizing cremation waste heat, the expensive turbine systems being installed in Durham are not yet economically viable for crematories here. "In the U.S., most crematories don't have enough throughput," he told Life's Little Mysteries. "Cremation in some parts of Europe is over 90 percent, but it is not over 50 percent yet here." That is, less than half of Americans opt for cremation. Most are buried.
Consequently, while burners in Europe typically run 24 hours day, ones in America operate only eight hours each day, Looker said. "A typical turbine system would cost somewhere between $250,000 to $500,000. If it's running 24 hours a day, that's a five-year payback. If it's running eight hours a day, that's a 15- or 20-year payback, which isn't feasible," he said.
However, Looker is hopeful that the situation could change in the near future. "Over the next 10 years, with the baby boomers coming through, cremation is going to reach 75 to 80 percent. Then, this might be feasible."
Furthermore, a turbine designed by a company called Thermal Dynamic Engineering, which produces just 50 kilowatt-hours of energy but is much less expensive to install than the Durham system, will be available in the near future, Looker said.
Thus, it may indeed come to pass that deceased baby boomers will someday help power your household appliances.
Where is the respect for human death?
Have we become nothing more than commodities?
I find this very - very - disturbing.
If this comes to America, everytime you flick on a light... wouldn't you think of cremated bodies?
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
Use the letter below to forbid smart meter installation (or modify the letter to demand the meter be removed).
Energy Customer's Name
City State Zip
City State Zip
Date of letter
NOTICE OF NO CONSENT TO TRESPASS AND SURVEILLANCE, NOTICE OF LIABILITY
Dear (Energy Provider) and all agents, officers, employees, contractors and interested parties,
If you intend to install a "Smart Meter" or any activity monitoring device at the above address, you and all other parties are hereby deny consent for installation and use of all such devices on the above property. Installation and use of any activity monitoring device is hereby refused and prohibited. Informed consent is legally required for installation of any surveillance device and any device that will collect and transmit private and personal data to undisclosed and unauthorized parties for undisclosed and unauthorized purposes. Authorization for sharing of personal and private information may only be given by the originator and subject of that information. That authorization is hereby denied and refused with regard to the above property and all its occupants. "Smart Meters" violate the law and cause endangerment to residents by the following factors:
1. They individually identify electrical devices inside the home and record when they are operated causing invasion of privacy.
2. They monitor household activity and occupancy in violation of rights and domestic security.
3. They transmit wireless signals which may be intercepted by unauthorized and unknown parties. Those signals can be used to monitor behavior and occupancy and they can be used by criminals to aid criminal activity against the occupants.
4. Data about occupant's daily habits and activities are collected, recorded and stored in permanent databases which are accessed by parties not authorized or invited to know and share that private data by those who's activities were recorded.
5. Those with access to the smart meter databases can review a permanent history of household activities complete with calendar and time-of-day metrics to gain a highly invasive and detailed view of the lives of the occupants.
6. Those databases may be shared with, or fall into the hands of criminals, blackmailers, corrupt law enforcement, private hackers of wireless transmissions, power company employees, and other unidentified parties who may act against the interests of the occupants under metered surveillance.
7. "Smart Meters" are, by definition, surveillance devices which violate Federal and State wiretapping laws by recording and storing databases of private and personal activities and behaviors without the consent or knowledge of those people who are monitored.
8. It is possible for example, with analysis of certain "Smart Meter" data, for unauthorized and distant parties to determine medical conditions, sexual activities, physical locations of persons within the home, vacancy patterns and personal information and habits of the occupants.
9. Your company has not adequately disclosed the particular recording and transmission capabilities of the smart meter, or the extent of the data that will be recorded, stored and shared, or the purposes to which the data will and will not be put.
10. Electromagnetic and Radio Frequency energy contamination from smart meters exceeds allowable safe and healthful limits for domestic environments as determined by the EPA and other scientific programs.
I forbid, refuse and deny consent of any installation and use of any monitoring, eavesdropping, and surveillance devices on my property, my place of residence and my place of occupancy. That applies to and includes "Smart Meters" and activity monitoring devices of any and all kinds. Any attempt to install any such device directed at me, other occupants, my property or residence will constitute trespass, stalking, wiretapping and unlawful surveillance and endangerment of health and safety, all prohibited and punishable by law through criminal and civil complaints. All persons, government agencies and private organizations responsible for installing or operating monitoring devices directed at or recording my activities, which I have not specifically authorized in writing, will be fully liable for any violations, intrusions, harm or negative consequences caused or made possible by those devices whether those negative consequences are justified by "law" or not..
This is legal notice. After this delivery the liabilities listed above may not be denied or avoided by parties named and implied in this notice. Civil Servant immunities and protections do not apply to the installation of smart meters due to the criminal violations they represent.
Notice to principal is notice to agent and notice to agent is notice to principal. All rights reserved.
Monday, December 5, 2011
Black Friday sales of firearms were up a whopping 32% over last year!
Even as Joe Sixpack was maxing out that last credit card on useless gadgets (but not flat screen TVs as Corning was so nice to warn), he was making sure to have enough in store for that one final Plan Z purchase. Guns. As KNDU reports, "Gun dealers flooded the FBI with background check requests from shoppers, smashing the single day record with a 32% increase from last year." USA Today has more: "Deputy Assistant FBI Director Jerry Pender said the checks, required by federal law, surged to 129,166 during the day, far surpassing the previous high of 97,848 on Black Friday of 2008." And in reality, the number is likely far greater: "The actual number of firearms sold last Friday is likely higher because multiple firearms can be included in a transaction by a single buyer.
The British warn the US:
"Freedom is only for those who have the guts to defend it."
Friday, December 2, 2011
Welcome to the Police State.
61 senators betrayed you. They authorized, as an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act, the indefinite suspension of habeus corpus. We are now officially a police state. Their names are as follows: