Thursday, January 12, 2012
Samuel Adams
Samuel Adams
1722-1803
Representing Massachusetts at the Continental Congress
by Ole Erekson, Engraver, c1876, Library of Congress
| Born: | September 27, 1722 |
| Birthplace: | Boston, Mass. |
| Education: | Master of Arts, Harvard. (Politician) |
| Work: | Tax-collector; Elected to Massachusetts Assembly, 1765; Delegate to the First Continental Congress, 1774; Signed Declaration of Independence, 1776; Member of Massachusetts State constitutional convention, 1781; Appointed Lieutenant Governor of Mass., 1789; Elected Governor of Massachusetts, 1794-'97. |
| Died: | October 2, 1803 |
Samuel and John Adams' names are almost synonymous in all accounts of the Revolution that grew, largely, out of Boston. Though they were cousins and not brothers, they were often referred to as the Adams' brothers, or simply as the Adams'. Samuel Adams was born in Boston, son of a merchant and brewer. He was an excellent politician, an unsuccessful brewer, and a poor businessman. His early public office as a tax collector might have made him suspect as an agent of British authority, however he made good use of his understanding of the tax codes and wide acquaintance with the merchants of Boston. Samuel was a very visible popular leader who, along with John, spent a great deal of time in the public eye agitating for resistance. In 1765 he was elected to the Massachusetts Assembly where he served as clerk for many years. It was there that he was the first to propose a continental congress. He was a leading advocate of republicanism and a good friend of Tom Paine. In 1774, he was chosen to be a member of the provincial council during the crisis in Boston. He was then appointed as a representative to the Continental Congress, where he was most noted for his oratory skills, and as a passionate advocate of independence from Britain. In 1776, as a delegate to the Continental Congress, he signed the Declaration of Independence. Adams retired from the Congress in 1781 and returned to Massachusetts to become a leading member of that state's convention to form a constitution. In 1789 he was appointed lieutenant governor of the state. In 1794 he was elected Governor, and was re-elected annually until 1797 when he retired for health reasons. He died in the morning of October 2, 1803, in his home town of Boston.
SOURCE
III Percenter patch
Donate $10 or more and get your III Percenter patch.
Go here to Kerodin's place to learn about our Cause and how you can help.
Hey, this is a quality patch - heavy duty and velcro backed with an included pad so you can attach it to your lid, ruck, or jacket.
Quit being the grey man. Show motherfuckers who you are and that you're tired of taking government shit. Be proud.
Food for thought
One day, Nancy Pelosi lands in her private jet and is escorted to her limo. She gets in. It pulls out, and the doors lock. A cell phone jammer is employed to keep her from calling out and the limo drives to a location not where she wanted to go. Henry Waxman also disappears.
For the entire post, check out The Anti-Liberal Zone
Thanks to Luke for sending me the link.
For the entire post, check out The Anti-Liberal Zone
Thanks to Luke for sending me the link.
Would you like to wish Mooch-elle a happy birthday?
Ever since I joined AttackWatch.org so I could turn myself in, I get hammered with emails asking for money from the Obamessiah's campaign.
This morning I woke up to something a little different - a nice email from the High Sheriff His Own Self, asking me to join him in wishing Mooch-elle a happy birthday.
If you'd also like to tell her happy birthday, go ahead and click on the link in the email. But be warned: You'll be placed on their mailing list.
From: Barack Obama (info@barackobama.com)
To: Ken
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 9:16 AM
Subject: Not the only Michelle Obama fan out there
Ken –
Michelle’s 48th birthday is this Tuesday. (Really? I thought she was much older than that.)
Every day I’m more impressed and in love with Michelle — and thankful that I had the persistence to keep asking her out until she said yes. (She only married you because nobody else would put up with her)
I also know that I’m not the only Michelle Obama fan out there. (Naw, there's billions of people on earth so there's bound to be a couple more out there somewhere.)
Will you join me in wishing Michelle a happy birthday? (Are you sure you really want me to do that?)
http://my.barackobama.com/For-Michelle
Making the decision to be part of this campaign was personal for a lot of people, and Michelle and I were no exception. Through all of this I've been awed by her steadiness and commitment because she believes in me and you and what we're trying to do. (She doesn't believe in you, you're just her meal ticket and that's a tall order to fill.)
This next year will be the toughest yet. I know she'd love to hear from you today. (Like I don't have anything better to do, like cleaning a toilet, right?)
Thanks for your support, (Dream on, motherfucker.)
Barack (Mooch's Coffee Bitch)
This morning I woke up to something a little different - a nice email from the High Sheriff His Own Self, asking me to join him in wishing Mooch-elle a happy birthday.
If you'd also like to tell her happy birthday, go ahead and click on the link in the email. But be warned: You'll be placed on their mailing list.
From: Barack Obama (info@barackobama.com)
To: Ken
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 9:16 AM
Subject: Not the only Michelle Obama fan out there
Ken –
Michelle’s 48th birthday is this Tuesday. (Really? I thought she was much older than that.)
Every day I’m more impressed and in love with Michelle — and thankful that I had the persistence to keep asking her out until she said yes. (She only married you because nobody else would put up with her)
I also know that I’m not the only Michelle Obama fan out there. (Naw, there's billions of people on earth so there's bound to be a couple more out there somewhere.)
Will you join me in wishing Michelle a happy birthday? (Are you sure you really want me to do that?)
http://my.barackobama.com/For-Michelle
Making the decision to be part of this campaign was personal for a lot of people, and Michelle and I were no exception. Through all of this I've been awed by her steadiness and commitment because she believes in me and you and what we're trying to do. (She doesn't believe in you, you're just her meal ticket and that's a tall order to fill.)
This next year will be the toughest yet. I know she'd love to hear from you today. (Like I don't have anything better to do, like cleaning a toilet, right?)
Thanks for your support, (Dream on, motherfucker.)
Barack (Mooch's Coffee Bitch)
The miracles of modern medicine
The warehouse where I work is kicking my ass.
I started having sinus problems about a month ago - maybe I should say work has been giving me sinus problems seeing as I feel fine (normally) when I am not at work, but as soon as I get in the door my sinuses slam shut. Working in a warehouse in an agricultural area, this is understandable due to the huge amount of dust in the air.
Understandable doesn't make it any easier.
This morning it all caught up to me. I woke up this morning about 2 with a sinus headache, managed to get back to sleep for another 2 hours, then woke up at 4 (my normal time) hurting so fucking bad I couldn't keep both eyes open at the same time. Fuck this. I called in sick.
Now I'm one of those dumbasses that refuses to take anything for pain, preferring pain management (which pretty much consists of bitching and moaning) to actually doing something about it, such as going to the doctor or even to the store for some over-the-counter shit. I mean, if I still have all my appendages and ain't bleeding from the nose, ears and eyeballs, it can't be that serious.
But I damned sure had my ass down to the Walgreens this morning at 4:30 with all the tweekers and drunks trying to find some some nasal decongestion spray and sinus headache relief. It must've worked. My headache is now tolerable, my beard is soaked and I gotta take a dump.
I started having sinus problems about a month ago - maybe I should say work has been giving me sinus problems seeing as I feel fine (normally) when I am not at work, but as soon as I get in the door my sinuses slam shut. Working in a warehouse in an agricultural area, this is understandable due to the huge amount of dust in the air.
Understandable doesn't make it any easier.
This morning it all caught up to me. I woke up this morning about 2 with a sinus headache, managed to get back to sleep for another 2 hours, then woke up at 4 (my normal time) hurting so fucking bad I couldn't keep both eyes open at the same time. Fuck this. I called in sick.
Now I'm one of those dumbasses that refuses to take anything for pain, preferring pain management (which pretty much consists of bitching and moaning) to actually doing something about it, such as going to the doctor or even to the store for some over-the-counter shit. I mean, if I still have all my appendages and ain't bleeding from the nose, ears and eyeballs, it can't be that serious.
But I damned sure had my ass down to the Walgreens this morning at 4:30 with all the tweekers and drunks trying to find some some nasal decongestion spray and sinus headache relief. It must've worked. My headache is now tolerable, my beard is soaked and I gotta take a dump.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
I prefer the word "Bitch"
From The Daily Mail Online
Michelle Obama's claim she's being branded an 'angry black woman' underlines White House desperation
Oh dear. A female New York Times journalist who is very well-disposed towards the Obama family writes a book about the First Couple, their marriage and the White House that portrays the President and his inner circle as dysfunctional.
What does the Obama administration do? Frantically trying to blunt the coverage about the book, including revelationS of f-bombs from Robert Gibbs, then Press Secretary, and lavish parties during a recession, it puts Michelle Obama on television to state this:
There are parallels with Hillary Clinton's claim as the Monica Lewinsky scandal was unfolding that there was a "vast Right-wing conspiracy" to get her husband. Certainly, Bill Clinton had determined antagonists on the Right but the reaction of most ordinary Americans to Hillary's conspiracy claim was: "Yes, but your husband was having sex with an intern."
You can watch the CBS interview with Michelle Obama here. It's worth watching the whole thing because it's a train wreck right from the moment at the outset where the First Lady claims she hasn't read the book (she's on television to rebut things in a book - of course she's read all the relevant excerpts).
She then states she's "never had a cross word" with Rahm Emanuel. The now Mayor of Chicago is one of the most combative men on the planet. If she's never had a cross word with him, she's almost unique in Washington and Chicago.
If anything, Michelle Obama's evocation of a racist conspiracy is even less plausible than Hillary's claim.
I listened on NPR yesterday to an interview with Jodi Kantor about her book. You couldn't imagine a person less likely to initiate a racial attack on Michelle Obama. Almost everything she said was positive and complimentary about the Obamas. She even talked about how unfair the "angry black woman" label was.
The book, however, is dynamite. It portrays Obama's inner circle as riven by dissent and jealousy. Gibbs is quoted as saying that Valerie Jarrett, a long-time Obama friend who is so close to the couple that she holidays with them, was a liar and not someone he subsequently took "at all seriously as an adviser to the President of the United States".
And although Kantor clearly admires Michelle Obama there is much fodder for critics and many passages that will raise eyebrows. The First Lady is portrayed as often unhappy and sullen and on occasions fiercely critical of her husband and his aides, who are fearful and unwilling to confront her.
Obama is quoted as being reluctant even to run for president ("I don't need this. I don't need anything.") and as looking forward to his post-presidency. During a debate preparation session, she told her husband: "Barack, feel - don't think!"
There a part which describes Obama's delight at being in Norway, suggesting he found Scandinavians much more appealing than Americans. The trip to pick up his Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 "passed like a brief, happy fantasy for the President, a Nordic alternate reality where citizens were learned and pensive, discussions were thoughtful, and everyone was a fan".
And at times she comes across as peevish and hard to please:
To seek to trash a book that is anything other than pure hagiography has become standard White House practice. But it is also foolish and counter-productive because it only draws more attention to the things they don't like. Playing the race card will backfire.
Michelle Obama's claim she's being branded an 'angry black woman' underlines White House desperation
Oh dear. A female New York Times journalist who is very well-disposed towards the Obama family writes a book about the First Couple, their marriage and the White House that portrays the President and his inner circle as dysfunctional.
What does the Obama administration do? Frantically trying to blunt the coverage about the book, including revelationS of f-bombs from Robert Gibbs, then Press Secretary, and lavish parties during a recession, it puts Michelle Obama on television to state this:
"You know, I guess it's more interesting to imagine this conflicted situation here and a strong woman and a, you know, but that's been an image that people have tried to paint of me since, you know, the day Barack announced, that I'm some angry black woman."I'm sorry but it simply won't wash. It's an attempt to change the subject. It's a way to say that any criticism of the Obamas - or even any truthful warts-and-all portrayal - is racist and therefore unacceptable. And people will see through it.
There are parallels with Hillary Clinton's claim as the Monica Lewinsky scandal was unfolding that there was a "vast Right-wing conspiracy" to get her husband. Certainly, Bill Clinton had determined antagonists on the Right but the reaction of most ordinary Americans to Hillary's conspiracy claim was: "Yes, but your husband was having sex with an intern."
You can watch the CBS interview with Michelle Obama here. It's worth watching the whole thing because it's a train wreck right from the moment at the outset where the First Lady claims she hasn't read the book (she's on television to rebut things in a book - of course she's read all the relevant excerpts).
She then states she's "never had a cross word" with Rahm Emanuel. The now Mayor of Chicago is one of the most combative men on the planet. If she's never had a cross word with him, she's almost unique in Washington and Chicago.
If anything, Michelle Obama's evocation of a racist conspiracy is even less plausible than Hillary's claim.
I listened on NPR yesterday to an interview with Jodi Kantor about her book. You couldn't imagine a person less likely to initiate a racial attack on Michelle Obama. Almost everything she said was positive and complimentary about the Obamas. She even talked about how unfair the "angry black woman" label was.
The book, however, is dynamite. It portrays Obama's inner circle as riven by dissent and jealousy. Gibbs is quoted as saying that Valerie Jarrett, a long-time Obama friend who is so close to the couple that she holidays with them, was a liar and not someone he subsequently took "at all seriously as an adviser to the President of the United States".
And although Kantor clearly admires Michelle Obama there is much fodder for critics and many passages that will raise eyebrows. The First Lady is portrayed as often unhappy and sullen and on occasions fiercely critical of her husband and his aides, who are fearful and unwilling to confront her.
Obama is quoted as being reluctant even to run for president ("I don't need this. I don't need anything.") and as looking forward to his post-presidency. During a debate preparation session, she told her husband: "Barack, feel - don't think!"
There a part which describes Obama's delight at being in Norway, suggesting he found Scandinavians much more appealing than Americans. The trip to pick up his Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 "passed like a brief, happy fantasy for the President, a Nordic alternate reality where citizens were learned and pensive, discussions were thoughtful, and everyone was a fan".
And at times she comes across as peevish and hard to please:
"The First Lady's complaints about the president's team in the White House tended to sound a lot like Michelle's personal complaints about her husband over the years. Not planning, not keeping her informed, focusing on his own needs, taking on risky projects without seeing their potential for failure - they were all charges she had leveled against him since the beginning of their union".These are certainly things the White House might not wish to see in print but overall the book is complimentary rather than derogatory.
To seek to trash a book that is anything other than pure hagiography has become standard White House practice. But it is also foolish and counter-productive because it only draws more attention to the things they don't like. Playing the race card will backfire.
Fuck you, Janet.
From The Atlantic Wire
It's unclear exactly why, but the Department of Homeland has been operating a "Social Networking/Media Capability" program to monitor the top blogs, forums and social networks online for at least the past 18 months. Based on a privacy compliance review from last November recently obtained by Reuters, the purpose of the project is to "collect information used in providing situational awareness and establishing a common operating picture." Whatever that means. Either way, the list of sites reported by Reuters reveals in a Wednesday afternoon exclusive is pretty intriguing:
It's unclear exactly why, but the Department of Homeland has been operating a "Social Networking/Media Capability" program to monitor the top blogs, forums and social networks online for at least the past 18 months. Based on a privacy compliance review from last November recently obtained by Reuters, the purpose of the project is to "collect information used in providing situational awareness and establishing a common operating picture." Whatever that means. Either way, the list of sites reported by Reuters reveals in a Wednesday afternoon exclusive is pretty intriguing:
Social Networks
- Myspace
Blogs
- The Drudge Report
- The Huffington Post
- The New York Times's Lede blog
- Wired's Threat Level
- Wired's Danger Room
- ABC News' investigative blog The Blotter
- "blogs that cover bird flu … news and activity along U.S. borders … drug trafficking and cybercrime"
Multimedia
- Hulu
- YouTube
- Flickr
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Big Sis is watching
Homeland Security monitors journalists
Freedom of speech might allow journalists to get away with a lot in America, but the Department of Homeland Security is on the ready to make sure that the government is keeping dibs on who is saying what.
Under the National Operations Center (NOC)’s Media Monitoring Initiative that came out of DHS headquarters in November, Washington has the written permission to retain data on users of social media and online networking platforms. (Emphasis mine)
Specifically, the DHS announced the NCO and its Office of Operations Coordination and Planning (OPS) can collect personal information from news anchors, journalists, reporters or anyone who may use “traditional and/or social media in real time to keep their audience situationally aware and informed.”
According to the Department of Homeland Security’s own definition of personal identifiable information, or PII, such data could consist of any intellect “that permits the identity of an individual to be directly or indirectly inferred, including any information which is linked or linkable to that individual.” Previously established guidelines within the administration say that data could only be collected under authorization set forth by written code, but the new provisions in the NOC’s write-up means that any reporter, whether someone along the lines of Walter Cronkite or a budding blogger, can be victimized by the agency.
Also included in the roster of those subjected to the spying are government officials, domestic or not, who make public statements, private sector employees that do the same and “persons known to have been involved in major crimes of Homeland Security interest,” which to itself opens up the possibilities even wider.
The department says that they will only scour publically-made info available while retaining data, but it doesn’t help but raise suspicion as to why the government is going out of their way to spend time, money and resources on watching over those that helped bring news to the masses.
The development out of the DHS comes at the same time that U.S. District Judge Liam O’Grady denied pleas from supporters of WikiLeaks who had tried to prevent account information pertaining to their Twitter accounts from being provided to federal prosecutors. Jacob Applebaum and others advocates of Julian Assange’s whistleblower site were fighting to keep the government from subpoenaing information on their personal accounts that were collected from Twitter.
Last month the Boston Police Department and the Suffolk Massachusetts District Attorney subpoenaed Twitter over details pertaining to recent tweets involving the Occupy Boston protests.
The website Fast Company reports that the intel collected by the Department of Homeland Security under the NOC Monitoring Initiative has been happening since as early as 2010 and the data is being shared with both private sector businesses and international third parties.
SOURCE
Shit, tell me something I don't already know. Washington DC, McClean VA, Ft Huachuca AZ, Bethesda MD, Quantico VA - all them mysterious places show up on my sitemeter fairly regularly. Big Fucking Deal. But if they monitor bloggers, they're damned sure checking up on Donnie Ray Baker that writes for the Oakdale Bi-weekly Penny Saver (free at your local market).
Freedom of speech might allow journalists to get away with a lot in America, but the Department of Homeland Security is on the ready to make sure that the government is keeping dibs on who is saying what.
Under the National Operations Center (NOC)’s Media Monitoring Initiative that came out of DHS headquarters in November, Washington has the written permission to retain data on users of social media and online networking platforms. (Emphasis mine)
Specifically, the DHS announced the NCO and its Office of Operations Coordination and Planning (OPS) can collect personal information from news anchors, journalists, reporters or anyone who may use “traditional and/or social media in real time to keep their audience situationally aware and informed.”
According to the Department of Homeland Security’s own definition of personal identifiable information, or PII, such data could consist of any intellect “that permits the identity of an individual to be directly or indirectly inferred, including any information which is linked or linkable to that individual.” Previously established guidelines within the administration say that data could only be collected under authorization set forth by written code, but the new provisions in the NOC’s write-up means that any reporter, whether someone along the lines of Walter Cronkite or a budding blogger, can be victimized by the agency.
Also included in the roster of those subjected to the spying are government officials, domestic or not, who make public statements, private sector employees that do the same and “persons known to have been involved in major crimes of Homeland Security interest,” which to itself opens up the possibilities even wider.
The department says that they will only scour publically-made info available while retaining data, but it doesn’t help but raise suspicion as to why the government is going out of their way to spend time, money and resources on watching over those that helped bring news to the masses.
The development out of the DHS comes at the same time that U.S. District Judge Liam O’Grady denied pleas from supporters of WikiLeaks who had tried to prevent account information pertaining to their Twitter accounts from being provided to federal prosecutors. Jacob Applebaum and others advocates of Julian Assange’s whistleblower site were fighting to keep the government from subpoenaing information on their personal accounts that were collected from Twitter.
Last month the Boston Police Department and the Suffolk Massachusetts District Attorney subpoenaed Twitter over details pertaining to recent tweets involving the Occupy Boston protests.
The website Fast Company reports that the intel collected by the Department of Homeland Security under the NOC Monitoring Initiative has been happening since as early as 2010 and the data is being shared with both private sector businesses and international third parties.
SOURCE
*****
Shit, tell me something I don't already know. Washington DC, McClean VA, Ft Huachuca AZ, Bethesda MD, Quantico VA - all them mysterious places show up on my sitemeter fairly regularly. Big Fucking Deal. But if they monitor bloggers, they're damned sure checking up on Donnie Ray Baker that writes for the Oakdale Bi-weekly Penny Saver (free at your local market).
You've gotta be shitting me
(The Hill) — President Obama has picked a strong advocate of immigration reform to head the Domestic Policy Council.
The White House announced Tuesday that Cecilia Munoz, a former senior vice president of the National Council of La Raza, to replace Melody Barnes at the top of the council. White House press secretary Jay Carney announced the appointment during his press breifing.
Munoz is now serving as the White House’s director of intergovernmental affairs and is in charge of outreach to state and local governments.
“The president has asked, she has accepted,” Carney said.
Munoz is an immigration expert who worked for the Naitonal Council of La Raza, the largest Latino civil rights and advocacy organization in the U.S., until 2009 when she joined the administration. The group works to improve opportunities for Hispanic Americans and advocates legislation that would provide a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants.
And La Raza is involved in actively seeking reconquista. That and flat-out open borders, among other things.
I swear to God above, that fucking socialist son of a bitch isn't happy just letting them in, now he wants to give our Nation to the Mexicans and let them turn it into the shithole Mexico is.
The White House announced Tuesday that Cecilia Munoz, a former senior vice president of the National Council of La Raza, to replace Melody Barnes at the top of the council. White House press secretary Jay Carney announced the appointment during his press breifing.
Munoz is now serving as the White House’s director of intergovernmental affairs and is in charge of outreach to state and local governments.
“The president has asked, she has accepted,” Carney said.
Munoz is an immigration expert who worked for the Naitonal Council of La Raza, the largest Latino civil rights and advocacy organization in the U.S., until 2009 when she joined the administration. The group works to improve opportunities for Hispanic Americans and advocates legislation that would provide a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants.
*****
And La Raza is involved in actively seeking reconquista. That and flat-out open borders, among other things.
I swear to God above, that fucking socialist son of a bitch isn't happy just letting them in, now he wants to give our Nation to the Mexicans and let them turn it into the shithole Mexico is.
WTF?
Okay, I don't know what the fuck is going on here but I can't upload any pictures from my folders. Is this blogger fucking with me again?
Monday, January 09, 2012
Uncle Ted speaks
NUGENT: Diversity perversity
Diversity is America’s greatest strength, according to the left and its socialist, Marxist, commie cohorts and co-conspirators running rampant across the country.
If you listen carefully to these America-hating, social-engineering liberals, virtually all behavior, conduct, morals and beliefs make America stronger.
This, of course, is toxic, brain-dead logic that leaves ordinary Americans shaking and scratching their heads in confusion and disgust. We recognize bull dung when we hear, see and smell it, and we have no desire whatsoever to embrace it.
The left’s definition of diversity does not make America stronger. It is weakening and destroying America. Let’s be bold and honest: The left’s version of diversity is repugnant.
Hey, I’m your biggest supporter if you want to swan-dive naked into a pool of goat urine. What I will never support is trying to make it mandatory for everyone to do it.
Read the rest of this ass-kicking article HERE.
Diversity is America’s greatest strength, according to the left and its socialist, Marxist, commie cohorts and co-conspirators running rampant across the country.
If you listen carefully to these America-hating, social-engineering liberals, virtually all behavior, conduct, morals and beliefs make America stronger.
This, of course, is toxic, brain-dead logic that leaves ordinary Americans shaking and scratching their heads in confusion and disgust. We recognize bull dung when we hear, see and smell it, and we have no desire whatsoever to embrace it.
The left’s definition of diversity does not make America stronger. It is weakening and destroying America. Let’s be bold and honest: The left’s version of diversity is repugnant.
Hey, I’m your biggest supporter if you want to swan-dive naked into a pool of goat urine. What I will never support is trying to make it mandatory for everyone to do it.
Read the rest of this ass-kicking article HERE.
The Big Bad Wolf
Got these pictures of wolves taken on Idaho tags in an email from Orbitup the other day.
If you're a PETAphile or one of those folks that believe that there are no predators in the world and we can co-exist with nature, don't even bother commenting. For one, I don't want to hear your fucking opinion and #2, you ain't gonna say nothing I haven't already heard before from a dozen other cowardly anonymous motherfuckers.
Obama's Militarization on the Homefront
In July 2008, presidential candidate Barack Obama vowed to create a “civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the U.S. military.
Apparently no one else in the national press found that promise newsworthy, because I was the first to call it to the attention of the public days later. Interestingly, the pledge had been stricken from transcripts of the speech handed out to media.
Whatever happened to the “civilian national security force” initiative? No one in the press has dared to ask that question.
But two recent developments suggest Obama may have found an innovative way to achieve his objectives to militarize the homefront without creating a new national security force:
Read the rest here at WND
Apparently no one else in the national press found that promise newsworthy, because I was the first to call it to the attention of the public days later. Interestingly, the pledge had been stricken from transcripts of the speech handed out to media.
Whatever happened to the “civilian national security force” initiative? No one in the press has dared to ask that question.
But two recent developments suggest Obama may have found an innovative way to achieve his objectives to militarize the homefront without creating a new national security force:
Read the rest here at WND
Final Implementation of Obama Dictatorship in Progress on all levels
From an article I read at Canada Free Press
I have warned and written about this particular subject for over three years—since before Obama was elected—aka “coronated.“ It is only now that many others finally seem to be getting the message. However, this is not something to be criticized. It is to be applauded, as it means they are finally and inexorably awakening to the truth. They are to be applauded and not insulted. I noticed this morning that—after a few of the latest Obama assaults on the US Constitution and liberties of We-the-People—some in the media (not the Obama media of course) appear to at last to have come to the realization that Obama is and has been a dictator.
Even some members of our feckless and Obama-accommodating Congress are at last saying that Obama is acting in an “extra-Constitutional” (aka “illegal”; “unconstitutional”) and “dictatorial” manner.
Even though it seems to have taken an inordinate amount of time for even these to ultimately admit that we are in a police-state crisis, I applaud them for having the insight—albeit VERY delayed—to admit the destructive force that is working daily to eliminate the United States of America. We need all of the help we can muster.
Obama’s latest shredding of the US Constitution and replacing the USA’s 3-Branch Equal-Powers Federal Government system with his own dictatorship include, but are hardly limited to, the following:
The plain truth—no matter how uncomfortable or painful it may be—is that we have already lost our country to a band of thugs who have looted our treasury (that which all taxpayers used to own), burned our US Constitution and is in the process of decimating the rest of the USA at and on every level. And the biggest problem is that some of us have allowed—even welcomed—it to happen. The country that my ancestors fought and died to build has been annihilated. The only question remaining is: Are there real humans left who crave liberty, freedom and God enough who want to fight for and rebuild it? Are there?
“If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.”—2 Chronicles 7:14
Canada Free Press
I have warned and written about this particular subject for over three years—since before Obama was elected—aka “coronated.“ It is only now that many others finally seem to be getting the message. However, this is not something to be criticized. It is to be applauded, as it means they are finally and inexorably awakening to the truth. They are to be applauded and not insulted. I noticed this morning that—after a few of the latest Obama assaults on the US Constitution and liberties of We-the-People—some in the media (not the Obama media of course) appear to at last to have come to the realization that Obama is and has been a dictator.
Even some members of our feckless and Obama-accommodating Congress are at last saying that Obama is acting in an “extra-Constitutional” (aka “illegal”; “unconstitutional”) and “dictatorial” manner.
Even though it seems to have taken an inordinate amount of time for even these to ultimately admit that we are in a police-state crisis, I applaud them for having the insight—albeit VERY delayed—to admit the destructive force that is working daily to eliminate the United States of America. We need all of the help we can muster.
Obama’s latest shredding of the US Constitution and replacing the USA’s 3-Branch Equal-Powers Federal Government system with his own dictatorship include, but are hardly limited to, the following:
- Removing local police presence from communities and replacing them with a federally-paid (that’s US taxpayer-paid) Obama-controlled National Police force. It is starting—in earnest—in Detroit
- Obama is stepping up his issuance of illegal Executive Orders, INCLUDING the Dream Act that was voted down by Congress and opposed by a majority of the American people. Nevertheless, in June 2011, Obama issued an Executive fiat to ‘create’ it. Congress did nothing and still does nothing today
- Obama is now making “recess appointments” of unacceptable candidates when there is no Congressional recess. The applicable paragraph in Article I, Section 5 of the now-badly hemorrhaging US Constitution reads:
“Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.”
Neither the House nor the Senate had adjourned. In order to get what he wanted (and now everything he wants toward his explicit mission of the total destruction of the United States of America) Obama continues to patently and illegally further shreds what was left of our US Constitution—now obviously not his. - The Obama/Holder “Operation Gunwalker: Fast & Furious” was and is directly attributable to Dictator-in-Chief Obama. Since shortly after the C-span2 video was published in 2009, in my columns I have referred to Deputy Attorney General Ogden’s statement on said video that he was “directed” by “the president” to “take action” against the drug cartels. This action began as “Operation Gunrunner” and its name was changed to the infamous one we know today. However, the operation was never planned to fight against the drug cartels. Instead, it was developed as a means to fight WITH the cartels against the US citizenry. The operation was affected (and don’t forget “directed“) by Obama and his Attorney General Eric Holder to do one thing: Remove legally-owned guns from US citizen under the Obama-manipulated premise that guns were being illegally sold to the drug cartels by Americans.
Note: The only problem with this was/is that the Seller was the Obama government and the Buyer was/is the Sinaloa drug cartel leadership. The Obama syndicate openly chose the “winner” in the Mexican drug wars (which have spread to and are now being fought in the USA) to be the Sinaloa Drug Cartel over the Los Zetas cartel. Therefore, thousands of guns have been supplied by Obama, Holder, the ATF etc. to the Sinaloa gang. All of the murders and mayhem created by Obama and his syndicate have been enacted as a false excuse/reason to remove guns from US citizens so that they would be enslaved more easily or exterminated without being able to fight back against their oppressors. This is what ALL totalitarian plots have affected in world history and this is the reason Stalin and Mao were able to murder tens of millions of humans. This—and the lies believed when the truth was too ‘scary’ and painful for the German people to accept—was the reason Hitler was able to round up Jews, place them in train cattle cars and take them to their executions…with little more than whimpers. - Obama announces plan to share military secrets with Russia. This is another item that used to be called and prosecuted as Treason. I wonder whatever happened to that concept
The plain truth—no matter how uncomfortable or painful it may be—is that we have already lost our country to a band of thugs who have looted our treasury (that which all taxpayers used to own), burned our US Constitution and is in the process of decimating the rest of the USA at and on every level. And the biggest problem is that some of us have allowed—even welcomed—it to happen. The country that my ancestors fought and died to build has been annihilated. The only question remaining is: Are there real humans left who crave liberty, freedom and God enough who want to fight for and rebuild it? Are there?
“If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.”—2 Chronicles 7:14
Canada Free Press
Try again, folks
The Postal Services created a stamp with a picture of President Obama on it.
The Postal Service noticed that the stamp was not sticking to envelopes.
This enraged the President, who demanded a full investigation.
After a month of testing and $1.73 million in congressional spending, a special
Presidential commission presented the following findings:
1.The stamp is in perfect order.
2. There is nothing wrong with the glue.
3. People are spitting on the wrong side.
-Pat
A monster wolf
From an email that Josh sent me:
I found your blog via the GOC with your hippie gassing post and have read daily ever since. By reading I know you like this kind of shit. CD (my blog brother) sent me this one, and I figured you would like it.
This may interest you. I talked [not me] with this young lady yesterday afternoon. This is what she told me. She had been bow hunting using a cow call near Headquarters, Idaho. She changed her position and was crossing an open meadow when the wolf appeared at the edge. It saw her and the wind was blowing directly from her to the wolf. She raised her arms and waved them to catch it's attention and it came straight for her. The bow was dropped and the S&W M-29 .44 Magnum was deployed. She made the first shot at about 10 feet, hitting it above the left eye. It dropped and changed direction, trying to get away after the shot. She shot it again in the lungs, then a third time in the neck. It took two men to lift it into the pick-up.
I found your blog via the GOC with your hippie gassing post and have read daily ever since. By reading I know you like this kind of shit. CD (my blog brother) sent me this one, and I figured you would like it.
This may interest you. I talked [not me] with this young lady yesterday afternoon. This is what she told me. She had been bow hunting using a cow call near Headquarters, Idaho. She changed her position and was crossing an open meadow when the wolf appeared at the edge. It saw her and the wind was blowing directly from her to the wolf. She raised her arms and waved them to catch it's attention and it came straight for her. The bow was dropped and the S&W M-29 .44 Magnum was deployed. She made the first shot at about 10 feet, hitting it above the left eye. It dropped and changed direction, trying to get away after the shot. She shot it again in the lungs, then a third time in the neck. It took two men to lift it into the pick-up.
She's a tall women, about 5' 11" and pretty tough. She hunts bear and cougar with hounds - her own hounds! Her husband is a long range shooter and is adept at making 600 plus yard-shots. The lady, however, is the one who busts' the brush with bow or rifle. The wolf's size comes into perspective when you compare her size to it.
Another report received this week arrived from Tim Johnson of Fishhawk Guides in Clarkston. [the fellow who donates fishing trips to our Elmer Keith Shoots each year.] He reports: "One of my Idaho Outfitter friends hunted a group of out-of-state elk with archery hunters from the Great Lakes region last week and they called in a pack of 17 wolves by cow calling.
None of the hunters had a sidearm or wolf tag and it was a very traumatic experience as the wolves surrounded them! All hunters went home early very disturbed... encountering these wolves was very different from the Great Lakes wolves, as they claimed "these Idaho wolves actually hunt you, and are not afraid!" Outdoor adventures have definitely taken on new dimensions of excitement.
*****
I've got some more pictures of these monster wolves sent to me by OrbitUp that I'll post within the next day or so.
Formation and Organization of Resistance Movements
Found this article on the Formation and Organization of Resistance Movements a little while ago over at NousDefions and I think it's well worth the read.
Here's a teaser for you:
You can find the rest of the article HERE. And while you're there, go through his site and read as much as you can. Lots of goooood shit there.
Here's a teaser for you:
The ultimate key to progressing from increasing discontent to active insurrection is the belief by the populace that they have nothing to lose by revolting, combined with the belief that they have a genuine chance to succeed. Additionally, there must be some sort of catalyzing trigger event that ignites popular support against the regime’s power and a dynamic resistance leadership that can exploit the situation when it arises (Critical Note: this apparent focus on leadership within the resistance should not be construed to invalidate the concept of “leaderless resistance.” The concept of leadership should not be relegated to some shadowy, mythical central controlling party of the resistance, but rather, that individual cells should have the ability and willingness to take advantage of any key trigger events to leverage the already present discontent to begin active operations to win the support of the populace.).
Once the resistance begins to act out against the regime, there are two types of initial resistance: Clandestine resistance and overt resistance.
You can find the rest of the article HERE. And while you're there, go through his site and read as much as you can. Lots of goooood shit there.
I must be getting predictable
Sitting here watching the news while Miss Lisa read her book, the Obamessiah appeared on the TV screen like an annoying pop-up.
I turned towards Lisa and said "You know what?"
"Yes dear, you hate that motherfucker" without even looking up from her trashy romance novel.
I turned towards Lisa and said "You know what?"
"Yes dear, you hate that motherfucker" without even looking up from her trashy romance novel.
Sunday, January 08, 2012
A must-have accessory for every III Percenter
A 550 cord bracelet with a handcuff key in the clasp.
How fucking cool is that?
Get your very own right here.
Or you can just duct tape one to the inside of your belt like I do......
How fucking cool is that?
Get your very own right here.
Or you can just duct tape one to the inside of your belt like I do......
Concerns about North Korea's new leader
I am really concerned about North Korea's appointment of the "dear leader", Kim Jung Ill's youngest son to be the new leader of North Korea-- a nuclear power!
After all, Kim Jung Un had NO military experience whatsoever before daddy made him a four-star general in the military. This is a snot-nose twerp who has never accomplished anything in his life that would even come close to military leadership: he hasn't even so muchas led a cub scout troop, let alone coached a sports team or commanded a military platoon.
So, setting that aside, next they make him the "beloved leader" of the country. Terrific!!!
Oh, crap! I'm sorry. I just remembered that we did the same thing here, We took a community organizer who has never worn a uniform and made him Commander-in-Chief; a guy who has never led anything more than an ACORN demonstration and made him the leader of this country.
After all, Kim Jung Un had NO military experience whatsoever before daddy made him a four-star general in the military. This is a snot-nose twerp who has never accomplished anything in his life that would even come close to military leadership: he hasn't even so muchas led a cub scout troop, let alone coached a sports team or commanded a military platoon.
So, setting that aside, next they make him the "beloved leader" of the country. Terrific!!!
Oh, crap! I'm sorry. I just remembered that we did the same thing here, We took a community organizer who has never worn a uniform and made him Commander-in-Chief; a guy who has never led anything more than an ACORN demonstration and made him the leader of this country.
Never mind.
- Balloon2
To hell with the masses - let's PAR-TAY!!!
This story is so fucking typical of Mooch-elle and the African ignoring our Nation and doing whatever the fuck they want on our dime that I'm not even going to comment on it.
Oh wait, I just did.
*****
It was the tea party the Obamas just couldn’t resist.
A White House “Alice in Wonderland” costume ball — put on by Johnny Depp and Hollywood director Tim Burton — proved to be a Mad-as-a-Hatter idea that was never made public for fear of a political backlash during hard economic times, according to a new tell-all.
“The Obamas,” by New York Times correspondent Jodi Kantor, tells of the first Halloween party the first couple feted at the White House in 2009. It was so over the top that “Star Wars” creator George Lucas sent the original Chewbacca to mingle with invited guests.
The book reveals how any official announcement of the glittering affair — coming at a time when Tea Party activists and voters furious over the lagging economy, 10-percent unemployment rate, bank bailouts and Obama’s health-care plan were staging protests — quickly vanished down the rabbit hole.
“White House officials were so nervous about how a splashy, Hollywood-esque party would look to jobless Americans — or their representatives in Congress, who would soon vote on health care — that the event was not discussed publicly and Burton’s and Depp’s contributions went unacknowledged,” the book says.
However, the White House made certain that more humble Halloween festivities earlier that day — for thousands of Washington-area schoolkids — were well reported by the press corps.
Then the Obamas went inside, where an invitation-only affair for children of military personnel and White House administrators unfolded in the East Room.
I have a program for you, asshole......
The Dorkfish Express
And because his life is obviously more valuable than yours, I'll bet big bucks that he owns and carries an evil gun.
They're just NOW figuring this out?
Obama Has Dissolved the Separation of Powers
. . . In sum, Obama dissolved the separation of powers, the framers’ ingenious bulwark against any government branch’s seizure of supreme power — and thus the Constitution’s bulwark against tyranny. The president claims the power to appoint federal officers without the Senate’s constitutionally mandated advice and consent. He does so by claiming unilateral powers to dictate when the Senate is in session, a power the Constitution assigns to Congress, and to decree that an ongoing session is actually a recess. This sheer ukase, he says, triggers the part of the Constitution we’re keeping because he likes it — viz., the executive power to fill vacancies without any vetting by the people’s representatives.
Mind you, a president is the only government official constitutionally required to swear that he will “preserve, protect and defend” that Constitution. We are talking here not just about Obama’s characteristically breathtaking arrogance. These are profound violations of his oath and of our fundamental law. But rest assured he will get away with them. For that, Republicans can thank themselves and their surrender to statism.
For the entire article, go here to the National Review
. . . In sum, Obama dissolved the separation of powers, the framers’ ingenious bulwark against any government branch’s seizure of supreme power — and thus the Constitution’s bulwark against tyranny. The president claims the power to appoint federal officers without the Senate’s constitutionally mandated advice and consent. He does so by claiming unilateral powers to dictate when the Senate is in session, a power the Constitution assigns to Congress, and to decree that an ongoing session is actually a recess. This sheer ukase, he says, triggers the part of the Constitution we’re keeping because he likes it — viz., the executive power to fill vacancies without any vetting by the people’s representatives.
Mind you, a president is the only government official constitutionally required to swear that he will “preserve, protect and defend” that Constitution. We are talking here not just about Obama’s characteristically breathtaking arrogance. These are profound violations of his oath and of our fundamental law. But rest assured he will get away with them. For that, Republicans can thank themselves and their surrender to statism.
For the entire article, go here to the National Review
Why 2012 is starting to look like 1984
~ Between SOPA, NDAA, telecommunications surveillance, and people's willingness to share endlessly via social networking, will 2012 mark the year consumers irreversibly surrender their privacy and freedoms? ~
Read the rest of the article here.
Thanks to DeNihilist for the tip.
Read the rest of the article here.
Thanks to DeNihilist for the tip.
Give me Liberty or give me death!
In March 1775, at the third Virginia convention, held in St. John's Church in Richmond, to discuss relations with Great Britain, Patrick Henry made his timeless "Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!" speech. King George had declared all 13 North American colonies to be in a state of open rebellion. Lord Dunsmore, the Royal Governor of Virginia, had ordered all the gunpowder in Williamsburg seized and stored aboard his ship anchored in the Virginia harbor, to keep it out of the hands local patriot forces.
Patrick Henry, then a Virginia militia Colonel, with his militia troops faced down Lord Dunmore, forcing the British Governor in the famous "Gunpowder Affair" to return the large quantity of gunpowder which had been set aside for the Virginia militia by the Colonial legislature. For this action, Patrick Henry became thereafter "Public Enemy No. 1" in the eyes of the British.
Ever since those days, the Bill of Rights 2nd Amendment "Right to Bear Arms" (including gunpowder) has been a precious liberty and guarantee of freedom for Virginians and all Americans. It has been and is the defense against despotism and tyranny by government, then and now.
No man, Mr. President, thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very honourable gentlemen who have just addressed this House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful of those worthy gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before this House is one of awful moment to the country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom, or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I should wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the members of this House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies?
No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope.
If we wish to be free -- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending -- if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained -- we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us.
Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!
Patrick Henry
March 23, 1775
SOURCE
Patrick Henry, then a Virginia militia Colonel, with his militia troops faced down Lord Dunmore, forcing the British Governor in the famous "Gunpowder Affair" to return the large quantity of gunpowder which had been set aside for the Virginia militia by the Colonial legislature. For this action, Patrick Henry became thereafter "Public Enemy No. 1" in the eyes of the British.
Ever since those days, the Bill of Rights 2nd Amendment "Right to Bear Arms" (including gunpowder) has been a precious liberty and guarantee of freedom for Virginians and all Americans. It has been and is the defense against despotism and tyranny by government, then and now.
*****
No man, Mr. President, thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very honourable gentlemen who have just addressed this House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful of those worthy gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before this House is one of awful moment to the country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom, or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I should wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the members of this House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies?
No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope.
If we wish to be free -- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending -- if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained -- we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us.
Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!
Patrick Henry
March 23, 1775
SOURCE
Saturday, January 07, 2012
Pandering to the illegals again
I'm going to put all the shit that pisses me off in the story below in italics.
Obama expands “hardship” waiver for illegal immigrants
The Obama administration on Friday proposed new hardship rules that would make it easier for illegal immigrants to apply for legal status and stay in the country if they have a spouse or parent already living here legally.
Immigrant-rights groups called the move a “tremendous” victory while those who favor a crackdown on illegal immigration said it is another step in what they describe as administrative amnesty.
Homeland Security officials, who announced the change in the Federal Register, said the change only applies when an illegal immigrant has a family member living in the U.S. legally and who would be subject to “hardship” if they were separated from each other.
Under the current system, it takes an average of six months for the government to judge waiver cases, and illegal immigrant applicants are required to go home during that period. The new rule means the illegal immigrant can stay in the U.S. during the adjudication period.
“The goal is to reduce the time of separation and alleviate the extreme hardship to a United States citizen, as the law currently intends,” said Alejandro Mayorkas, director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
SOURCE
*****
Obama expands “hardship” waiver for illegal immigrants
The Obama administration on Friday proposed new hardship rules that would make it easier for illegal immigrants to apply for legal status and stay in the country if they have a spouse or parent already living here legally.
Immigrant-rights groups called the move a “tremendous” victory while those who favor a crackdown on illegal immigration said it is another step in what they describe as administrative amnesty.
Homeland Security officials, who announced the change in the Federal Register, said the change only applies when an illegal immigrant has a family member living in the U.S. legally and who would be subject to “hardship” if they were separated from each other.
Under the current system, it takes an average of six months for the government to judge waiver cases, and illegal immigrant applicants are required to go home during that period. The new rule means the illegal immigrant can stay in the U.S. during the adjudication period.
“The goal is to reduce the time of separation and alleviate the extreme hardship to a United States citizen, as the law currently intends,” said Alejandro Mayorkas, director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
SOURCE
Nowhere to cut spending? Bullshit!!!
Check all this shit out.
Wastebook
Be patient, it takes a little bit to load.
Thanks to Don for sending in the link.
Wastebook
Be patient, it takes a little bit to load.
Thanks to Don for sending in the link.
More from the emails, and Sammy's pissed
I swear to god I have a life...
...I really do...but your blog seenms like a legit outlet for pointing out the fed's bullshit, warts and all,
instead of puking the "post-spin" shit that circulated the most widely.
This pissed me off.
Strikes me as EXACTLY something that the guv would've done to the peasants in Mother Russia back in the day.
Is this where we're headed, do you think?
Y'know, I wonder how many lists I'm gonna wind up on before this shit's over...
Anyway, like I said, this is gay as hell and the biggest fear to me is the "Fuck you, we'll do to you what we want and voting means dick because we can make the results look like whatever we want them to be." attitude. The 2000 Ohio election proved it, but I still thank god Gore didn't wind up in the WH. But I digress.
Here she is:
My prayers to those poor folks.
Thank you for your blog, brutha.
"Arf!" to Charliegodammit
From the emails
why do you fuck up a good threeper site with jokes and pictures? stay on subject please.
mike iii
My snappy reply:
Just trying to maintain a good sense of humor, Brother. Looks you need to spend a lot more time on here. Life ain't all doom and gloom.
Seriously though, this was a humor site long before it was a Threeper/Political/Fuck Obama site - go back and check the archives and you'll see there were NO politics on here at all in the beginning. Nothing but jokes, pictures, thoughts and funny stories about my life.
It wasn't until we started getting shit rammed down our throats that I started getting vocal about my political views.
mike iii
My snappy reply:
Just trying to maintain a good sense of humor, Brother. Looks you need to spend a lot more time on here. Life ain't all doom and gloom.
Seriously though, this was a humor site long before it was a Threeper/Political/Fuck Obama site - go back and check the archives and you'll see there were NO politics on here at all in the beginning. Nothing but jokes, pictures, thoughts and funny stories about my life.
It wasn't until we started getting shit rammed down our throats that I started getting vocal about my political views.
The 1000 yard coyote
Greybull Precision
Thanks to Irish of The Feral Irishman for sending me the link.
*****
Damn, that's a long shot.
I shoot a crappy ol' Bushnell 3x9 on my 22-250 and I can count the times on 1 hand that I've taken it off 3 power. Missed both times, too.
My shots are pretty much limited to 300 yards tops, due to terrain and my own shooting abilities and at 300, the bullet only drops an inch and a quarter with a 200 yard zero, so I can pretty much just hold dead on to that range. Besides, that 22-250 starts to bleed off pretty rapidly after that.
Resist. Always resist.
SOURCE
"Never give in, never give in, never; never; never; never - in nothing, great or small, large or petty - never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense"……..Winston Churchill, Oct 29, 1941
I do not know the author of the following article but he has a point. Surrender is not an option and this article make a good case for that position.
The Phases of Surrender
The first phase of surrender is failing to be armed, trained and committed to fight. We are prepared to surrender when we are unprepared to resist.
The second phase of surrender is failing to be alert. You must see trouble coming in order to have time to respond. The warning may be less than one second but it will be there and it must be recognized and acted upon immediately.
The Third phase of surrender is giving up your weapons.
The last phase of surrender is up to the monsters who have taken control of your life and perhaps the lives of your loved ones. The last phase of surrender is out of your hands.
Surrender during war
During the American Revolution 12,000 Colonists captured by the British died in captivity on prison ships, while only 8,000 died in battle. Had the 12,000 who surrendered continued to fight many would have survived and they could have done great damage to the British and likely shortened the war.
Civil War prisoners were treated so badly that some 50,000 died in captivity. More Americans have been killed by Americans than by any foreign army in any war. Six hundred eighteen thousand (618,000) Americans died in the Civil War.
As many as 18,000 captured American and Filipino prisoners died or were murdered at the hands of the Japanese during the six days of the "Bataan Death March." Had most of these soldiers slipped into the jungle and fought as guerrillas they could have tied up elements of the Japanese Army for months or years and perhaps more of them would have survived the war.
Of the Americans who actually reached Japanese prison camps during the war, nearly 50,000 died in captivity. That is more than 10 percent of all the American military deaths in the entire war in both the Pacific and European theaters combined.
In addition to the 50,000 captured Americans who died in Japanese prison camps an additional 20,000 were murdered before reaching a prison camp. If those 70,000 Americans had continued to fight, they could have provided time for the United States to build and maneuver its forces, perhaps shortening the war and saving even more lives. Some of them would have likely survived the war. If they had all died in battle their fate would have been no worse.
During the early stages of the Battle of the Bulge American soldiers were massacred by the German troops who captured them.
During the Vietnam conflict many American Prisoners Of War were tortured daily for years by the Communist North Vietnamese. Many Americans died during the process. Only Officers (Aviators) held in North Vietnam were ever repatriated. Enlisted Americans captured in South Viet Nam were routinely tortured, mutilated and murdered by the Communists. As a combat soldier and knowing my fate should I be captured, I was committed to fighting to the death. I made specific plans to force the enemy to kill me rather than allow myself to be captured.
In recent years, American troops captured by Islamic terrorists groups have virtually all been tortured and murdered in gruesome fashion. If I were fighting in the Middle East, I would make a similar vow and plan to fight to the death. Under no circumstances would I allow myself to be captured by our Islamic enemies.
Death by Government
R.J. Rummel, who wrote the book, "Death by Government" states that prior to the 20th Century; 170 million civilians were murdered by their own governments. Historians tell us that during the 20th Century perhaps as many as 200 million civilians were murdered by their own governments.
Some of the Nations where the mass murder of civilians occurred during the 20th Century include Russia, Ukraine, Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, The Congo, Uganda, Armenia, Viet Nam, Cambodia, Nigeria, Laos, China, Cuba, Manchuria, Iraq, Iran, Biafra, Rwanda and many others. The slaughter of civilians by governments appears to be as common as not.
Most of these slaughters were only made possible by disarming the victims before killing them. Had these people resisted, their fate would have been no worse and perhaps better. Resistance is much more difficult after the government has already taken the means of resistance away from the people. Planned genocide has been the primary reason for weapon confiscation throughout history.
Jews and others who surrendered to the Nazis were murdered in slave labor camps by the millions. Had all the Jews in Europe resisted when the Nazis started rounding them up they could have made the Nazis pay an enormous price for the holocaust. The fact that Hitler confiscated guns in 1936 made resistance far less feasible.
Had the Jews in Germany resisted, the outcome may have been the same but the world would have learned about the holocaust years earlier and may have intervened. Most people would prefer to die fighting and trying to kill their oppressor, than be taken off to a death camp and starved to death or murdered in a gas chamber.
William Ayers, former leader of the Terrorist organization The Weather Underground, and close friend of Barack Obama, told his followers in the Weather Underground, “When we (Communist Revolutionaries) take over the United States, we will have to kill 25 million Americans.” He was referring to those who would never submit to a Communist takeover. Those who would refuse to deny and reject the Constitution would have to be murdered. If this sounds impossible, remember that Genocide by Government was the leading cause of death in the last Century.
Surrendering to Criminals
The Onion Field Murder in California was a wake up call to Law Enforcement Officers everywhere. On March 9, 1963, two Los Angeles Police Department officers were taken prisoner by two criminals. The Officers submitted to capture and gave up their weapons.
They were driven to an onion field outside of Bakersfield.
One Officer was murdered while the other Officer managed to escape in a hail of gunfire. The surviving Officer suffered serious psychological case, having been unable to save his partner. As a result of this incident, the LAPD policy became, “You will fight no matter how bad things are.” “You will never ever surrender your weapons or yourself to a criminal.”
Consider the Ogden, Utah record store murders. Read the book if you do not know the story. The manner in which the criminals murdered their young victims cannot be described here. Resistance might have been futile. Compliance was definitely and absolutely futile.
The courts in this country have ruled that the police have no legal obligation to protect anyone. Why do Law Enforcement Officials always tell civilians not to resist a criminal, while they tell their Officers to always resist and never surrender? Police administrators fear being sued by a civilian victim who gets hurt resisting. Furthermore, the police, like all government agencies derive their power by fostering dependence.
According to Professor John Lott's study on the relationship between guns and crime, a victim who resists with a firearm is less likely to be hurt or killed than a victim who cooperates with his attacker. His book is titled "More Guns, Less Crime."
The Doctor and his family in Connecticut complied and cooperated, meeting every demand of the home invasion robbers to whom they had surrendered. The Doctors wife and daughters were tortured, raped, doused with gasoline and burned alive. How did surrender and cooperation work out for them?
In another home invasion robbery, a kindly couple with 9 “adopted, special needs children,” surrendered to the robbers. The victims opened their safe and did not resist in any way. When the robbers where finished ransacking the home and terrifying the children, they shot both parents in the head several times before leaving. How did surrender and complete cooperation work out for them?
Handing over your life by surrendering to someone who is in the process of committing a violent crime against you is a form of suicide. Some survive but many do not. The monster gets to decide for you.
We have heard brutalized victims say, "The robber said that he would not hurt us if we cooperated." Why would you believe anything that someone who is committing a crime against you says? He will be lying if he speaks. As we say in law enforcement, “If a criminal’s lips are moving while he is speaking, he is lying.” Criminals by definition are dishonest and should never be trusted or believed.
You have no doubt heard friends say, I would not resist a criminal, after all why would he kill me? This is stupid and naive. In law enforcement, we call these people “Victims by Choice” (VBC). There could be a long list of reasons why a criminal would kill you despite your cooperation.
You may be of a different race, thus a different tribe. Only members of his tribe are actually human in his mind. He may feel hatred toward you because you have more than he does. Gratification from being in a position of total power is reason enough for some.
Criminals are sometimes members of a Satanic Cult who worship death such as the “Night Stalker” in California. Eliminating a potential witness is often cited as a reason to kill a victim. Sometimes criminals simply enjoy causing suffering and death. There are people who are in fact, pure evil. I have heard criminals say, “I killed her just to watch her die.”
A victim who begs for mercy can give his attacker a tremendous feeling of power which many criminals seem to enjoy. You cannot expect mercy from someone who does not know what mercy is.
Resist!
We each have a duty to ourselves, our loved ones, our neighbors, our community, our city, our state and our country to resist criminals. Reasoning with a thug who believes that his failures are because of people just like you is not likely to be helpful. Pleading with a terrorist who has been taught from birth that his salvation depends on murdering people like you is a doomed plan. Resist!
Resist! His gun may not be real. After you are tied up it will not matter. His gun may not be loaded. After you are tied up it will not matter. He may not know how to operate his gun. After you are tied up it will not matter. Resist!
Statistically if you run and your assailant shoots at you he will miss. Statistically if you run and he shoots and hits you, you will not die. Bad guys shooting at the police miss 90 percent of the time. The odds are on your side. Better to die fighting in place than to be tied up, doused with gasoline and burned alive. There are things worse than death. Surrender to a criminal or a terrorist and you will learn what they are. Resist!
If you resist with a commitment to win you may well prevail, especially if you are armed and trained. If you lose it is still better to die fighting in place than to be taken prisoner and have your head cut off with a dull knife while your screams gurgle through your own blood as we have witnessed on numerous videos from the Middle East, brought to us by the “Islamic practitioners of peace.”
Some who have refused to surrender.
History is filled with brave people who refused to surrender. Some of these men and woman have won their battles despite what seemed to be insurmountable odds. Others have gone down fighting and avoided being tortured to death. Some fought to the death to help or save others. Many have fought to the death for an idea or a belief.
When General Santa Ana (also the President of Mexico at the time) ordered 180 "Texacans" to surrender the Alamo, Col. Travis answered with “a cannon shot and a rebel yell.” Eventually General Santa Ana was able to build his troop strength to ten thousand. The Mexicans then swarmed the defenders and killed them all.
The battle of the Alamo delayed the Mexican Army long enough for Sam Houston to build his Texacan Army, which met and defeated the Mexican Army and captured General Santa Ana. General Santa Ana traded Texas for his life and the sacrifices of the Alamo defenders changed history.
Frank Luke was a heroic aviator in WWI. Shot down and wounded he refused to surrender when confronted by a German patrol. He killed 4 German soldiers with his 1911 Pistol before being killed. Luke was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor.
When his unit was pinned down by German Machine Guns and all of the Officers and non commissioned officers in his company were killed or wounded, Alvin York never considered surrendering. Instead, he attacked hundreds of German soldiers killing about 25 with his rifle and pistol and then captured 132 others by himself!
Most of the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto (Poland) surrendered to the German Army. They were taken off to death camps and murdered. Between 400 and 1,000 Jews refused to surrender and armed with only a few pistols, revolvers and rifles, they held off the German Army for three months before dying in battle.
During the “Battle of the Bulge,” the 101st Airborne was surrounded by the German Army and ordered to surrender. Faced with overwhelming odds, the Commanding Officer of the 101st sent this reply to the Germans. "Nuts." The Americans refused to surrender and they stopped the German advance. Most of the Americans troops survived.
On Sept 2, 2010, 40 armed criminals took over and robbed a train in India. Some of the robbers had guns, others used knives and clubs. When they began to disrobe an 18 year old girl for the purpose of gang raping her, one of the passengers decided to fight. He was a 35 year old retired Gurkha soldier. He drew his Khukasri knife and attacked the 40 robbers. He killed three of the robbers and wounded 8 more despite his being wounded in this 20 minute fight. The remaining criminals fled for their lives leaving their stolen loot and eleven comrades dead or wounded on the floor of the train. The eight wounded robbers were arrested.
How does one man defeat 40? How does he summon the courage to fight such odds? He utilized all of the Principles of Personal Defense: Alertness, Decisiveness, Aggressiveness, Speed, Coolness, Ruthlessness, and Surprise. He was skilled in the use of his weapon. Most importantly, He refused to be a victim and allow evil to triumph!
If this one inspirational soldier can defeat 40 opponents using his knife, it would seem that we should all be able to defeat a group of armed criminals by using our firearms if we are professionally trained as was this heroic Gurkha soldier.
Final thoughts
How will you respond if you are confronted by evil as some of us have been in the past and some of us will be in the future? If you have not decided ahead of time what you will do, you will likely do nothing. Those who fight back often win and survive. Those who surrender never win and often die a horrible death. Have you made your decision? Remember, no decision is a decision to do nothing.
"Never give in, never give in, never; never; never; never - in nothing, great or small, large or petty - never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense"……..Winston Churchill, Oct 29, 1941
I do not know the author of the following article but he has a point. Surrender is not an option and this article make a good case for that position.
The Phases of Surrender
The first phase of surrender is failing to be armed, trained and committed to fight. We are prepared to surrender when we are unprepared to resist.
The second phase of surrender is failing to be alert. You must see trouble coming in order to have time to respond. The warning may be less than one second but it will be there and it must be recognized and acted upon immediately.
The Third phase of surrender is giving up your weapons.
The last phase of surrender is up to the monsters who have taken control of your life and perhaps the lives of your loved ones. The last phase of surrender is out of your hands.
Surrender during war
During the American Revolution 12,000 Colonists captured by the British died in captivity on prison ships, while only 8,000 died in battle. Had the 12,000 who surrendered continued to fight many would have survived and they could have done great damage to the British and likely shortened the war.
Civil War prisoners were treated so badly that some 50,000 died in captivity. More Americans have been killed by Americans than by any foreign army in any war. Six hundred eighteen thousand (618,000) Americans died in the Civil War.
As many as 18,000 captured American and Filipino prisoners died or were murdered at the hands of the Japanese during the six days of the "Bataan Death March." Had most of these soldiers slipped into the jungle and fought as guerrillas they could have tied up elements of the Japanese Army for months or years and perhaps more of them would have survived the war.
Of the Americans who actually reached Japanese prison camps during the war, nearly 50,000 died in captivity. That is more than 10 percent of all the American military deaths in the entire war in both the Pacific and European theaters combined.
In addition to the 50,000 captured Americans who died in Japanese prison camps an additional 20,000 were murdered before reaching a prison camp. If those 70,000 Americans had continued to fight, they could have provided time for the United States to build and maneuver its forces, perhaps shortening the war and saving even more lives. Some of them would have likely survived the war. If they had all died in battle their fate would have been no worse.
During the early stages of the Battle of the Bulge American soldiers were massacred by the German troops who captured them.
During the Vietnam conflict many American Prisoners Of War were tortured daily for years by the Communist North Vietnamese. Many Americans died during the process. Only Officers (Aviators) held in North Vietnam were ever repatriated. Enlisted Americans captured in South Viet Nam were routinely tortured, mutilated and murdered by the Communists. As a combat soldier and knowing my fate should I be captured, I was committed to fighting to the death. I made specific plans to force the enemy to kill me rather than allow myself to be captured.
In recent years, American troops captured by Islamic terrorists groups have virtually all been tortured and murdered in gruesome fashion. If I were fighting in the Middle East, I would make a similar vow and plan to fight to the death. Under no circumstances would I allow myself to be captured by our Islamic enemies.
Death by Government
R.J. Rummel, who wrote the book, "Death by Government" states that prior to the 20th Century; 170 million civilians were murdered by their own governments. Historians tell us that during the 20th Century perhaps as many as 200 million civilians were murdered by their own governments.
Some of the Nations where the mass murder of civilians occurred during the 20th Century include Russia, Ukraine, Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, The Congo, Uganda, Armenia, Viet Nam, Cambodia, Nigeria, Laos, China, Cuba, Manchuria, Iraq, Iran, Biafra, Rwanda and many others. The slaughter of civilians by governments appears to be as common as not.
Most of these slaughters were only made possible by disarming the victims before killing them. Had these people resisted, their fate would have been no worse and perhaps better. Resistance is much more difficult after the government has already taken the means of resistance away from the people. Planned genocide has been the primary reason for weapon confiscation throughout history.
Jews and others who surrendered to the Nazis were murdered in slave labor camps by the millions. Had all the Jews in Europe resisted when the Nazis started rounding them up they could have made the Nazis pay an enormous price for the holocaust. The fact that Hitler confiscated guns in 1936 made resistance far less feasible.
Had the Jews in Germany resisted, the outcome may have been the same but the world would have learned about the holocaust years earlier and may have intervened. Most people would prefer to die fighting and trying to kill their oppressor, than be taken off to a death camp and starved to death or murdered in a gas chamber.
William Ayers, former leader of the Terrorist organization The Weather Underground, and close friend of Barack Obama, told his followers in the Weather Underground, “When we (Communist Revolutionaries) take over the United States, we will have to kill 25 million Americans.” He was referring to those who would never submit to a Communist takeover. Those who would refuse to deny and reject the Constitution would have to be murdered. If this sounds impossible, remember that Genocide by Government was the leading cause of death in the last Century.
Surrendering to Criminals
The Onion Field Murder in California was a wake up call to Law Enforcement Officers everywhere. On March 9, 1963, two Los Angeles Police Department officers were taken prisoner by two criminals. The Officers submitted to capture and gave up their weapons.
They were driven to an onion field outside of Bakersfield.
One Officer was murdered while the other Officer managed to escape in a hail of gunfire. The surviving Officer suffered serious psychological case, having been unable to save his partner. As a result of this incident, the LAPD policy became, “You will fight no matter how bad things are.” “You will never ever surrender your weapons or yourself to a criminal.”
Consider the Ogden, Utah record store murders. Read the book if you do not know the story. The manner in which the criminals murdered their young victims cannot be described here. Resistance might have been futile. Compliance was definitely and absolutely futile.
The courts in this country have ruled that the police have no legal obligation to protect anyone. Why do Law Enforcement Officials always tell civilians not to resist a criminal, while they tell their Officers to always resist and never surrender? Police administrators fear being sued by a civilian victim who gets hurt resisting. Furthermore, the police, like all government agencies derive their power by fostering dependence.
According to Professor John Lott's study on the relationship between guns and crime, a victim who resists with a firearm is less likely to be hurt or killed than a victim who cooperates with his attacker. His book is titled "More Guns, Less Crime."
The Doctor and his family in Connecticut complied and cooperated, meeting every demand of the home invasion robbers to whom they had surrendered. The Doctors wife and daughters were tortured, raped, doused with gasoline and burned alive. How did surrender and cooperation work out for them?
In another home invasion robbery, a kindly couple with 9 “adopted, special needs children,” surrendered to the robbers. The victims opened their safe and did not resist in any way. When the robbers where finished ransacking the home and terrifying the children, they shot both parents in the head several times before leaving. How did surrender and complete cooperation work out for them?
Handing over your life by surrendering to someone who is in the process of committing a violent crime against you is a form of suicide. Some survive but many do not. The monster gets to decide for you.
We have heard brutalized victims say, "The robber said that he would not hurt us if we cooperated." Why would you believe anything that someone who is committing a crime against you says? He will be lying if he speaks. As we say in law enforcement, “If a criminal’s lips are moving while he is speaking, he is lying.” Criminals by definition are dishonest and should never be trusted or believed.
You have no doubt heard friends say, I would not resist a criminal, after all why would he kill me? This is stupid and naive. In law enforcement, we call these people “Victims by Choice” (VBC). There could be a long list of reasons why a criminal would kill you despite your cooperation.
You may be of a different race, thus a different tribe. Only members of his tribe are actually human in his mind. He may feel hatred toward you because you have more than he does. Gratification from being in a position of total power is reason enough for some.
Criminals are sometimes members of a Satanic Cult who worship death such as the “Night Stalker” in California. Eliminating a potential witness is often cited as a reason to kill a victim. Sometimes criminals simply enjoy causing suffering and death. There are people who are in fact, pure evil. I have heard criminals say, “I killed her just to watch her die.”
A victim who begs for mercy can give his attacker a tremendous feeling of power which many criminals seem to enjoy. You cannot expect mercy from someone who does not know what mercy is.
Resist!
We each have a duty to ourselves, our loved ones, our neighbors, our community, our city, our state and our country to resist criminals. Reasoning with a thug who believes that his failures are because of people just like you is not likely to be helpful. Pleading with a terrorist who has been taught from birth that his salvation depends on murdering people like you is a doomed plan. Resist!
Resist! His gun may not be real. After you are tied up it will not matter. His gun may not be loaded. After you are tied up it will not matter. He may not know how to operate his gun. After you are tied up it will not matter. Resist!
Statistically if you run and your assailant shoots at you he will miss. Statistically if you run and he shoots and hits you, you will not die. Bad guys shooting at the police miss 90 percent of the time. The odds are on your side. Better to die fighting in place than to be tied up, doused with gasoline and burned alive. There are things worse than death. Surrender to a criminal or a terrorist and you will learn what they are. Resist!
If you resist with a commitment to win you may well prevail, especially if you are armed and trained. If you lose it is still better to die fighting in place than to be taken prisoner and have your head cut off with a dull knife while your screams gurgle through your own blood as we have witnessed on numerous videos from the Middle East, brought to us by the “Islamic practitioners of peace.”
Some who have refused to surrender.
History is filled with brave people who refused to surrender. Some of these men and woman have won their battles despite what seemed to be insurmountable odds. Others have gone down fighting and avoided being tortured to death. Some fought to the death to help or save others. Many have fought to the death for an idea or a belief.
When General Santa Ana (also the President of Mexico at the time) ordered 180 "Texacans" to surrender the Alamo, Col. Travis answered with “a cannon shot and a rebel yell.” Eventually General Santa Ana was able to build his troop strength to ten thousand. The Mexicans then swarmed the defenders and killed them all.
The battle of the Alamo delayed the Mexican Army long enough for Sam Houston to build his Texacan Army, which met and defeated the Mexican Army and captured General Santa Ana. General Santa Ana traded Texas for his life and the sacrifices of the Alamo defenders changed history.
Frank Luke was a heroic aviator in WWI. Shot down and wounded he refused to surrender when confronted by a German patrol. He killed 4 German soldiers with his 1911 Pistol before being killed. Luke was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor.
When his unit was pinned down by German Machine Guns and all of the Officers and non commissioned officers in his company were killed or wounded, Alvin York never considered surrendering. Instead, he attacked hundreds of German soldiers killing about 25 with his rifle and pistol and then captured 132 others by himself!
Most of the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto (Poland) surrendered to the German Army. They were taken off to death camps and murdered. Between 400 and 1,000 Jews refused to surrender and armed with only a few pistols, revolvers and rifles, they held off the German Army for three months before dying in battle.
During the “Battle of the Bulge,” the 101st Airborne was surrounded by the German Army and ordered to surrender. Faced with overwhelming odds, the Commanding Officer of the 101st sent this reply to the Germans. "Nuts." The Americans refused to surrender and they stopped the German advance. Most of the Americans troops survived.
On Sept 2, 2010, 40 armed criminals took over and robbed a train in India. Some of the robbers had guns, others used knives and clubs. When they began to disrobe an 18 year old girl for the purpose of gang raping her, one of the passengers decided to fight. He was a 35 year old retired Gurkha soldier. He drew his Khukasri knife and attacked the 40 robbers. He killed three of the robbers and wounded 8 more despite his being wounded in this 20 minute fight. The remaining criminals fled for their lives leaving their stolen loot and eleven comrades dead or wounded on the floor of the train. The eight wounded robbers were arrested.
How does one man defeat 40? How does he summon the courage to fight such odds? He utilized all of the Principles of Personal Defense: Alertness, Decisiveness, Aggressiveness, Speed, Coolness, Ruthlessness, and Surprise. He was skilled in the use of his weapon. Most importantly, He refused to be a victim and allow evil to triumph!
If this one inspirational soldier can defeat 40 opponents using his knife, it would seem that we should all be able to defeat a group of armed criminals by using our firearms if we are professionally trained as was this heroic Gurkha soldier.
Final thoughts
How will you respond if you are confronted by evil as some of us have been in the past and some of us will be in the future? If you have not decided ahead of time what you will do, you will likely do nothing. Those who fight back often win and survive. Those who surrender never win and often die a horrible death. Have you made your decision? Remember, no decision is a decision to do nothing.
Avoiding da hood
Microsoft has been granted a patent for its “avoid ghetto” feature for GPS devices.
A GPS device is used to find shortcuts and avoid traffic, but Microsoft’s patent states that a route can be plotted for pedestrians to avoid an “unsafe neighborhood or being in an open area that is subject to harsh temperatures.” Created for mobile phones, the technology uses the latest crime statistics and weather data and includes them when calculating a route.
*****
Damn, that would cut traffic considerably in Detroit, Chicago, Oakland, Atlanta....... fuck, any city with a population over 20,000. Thanks for that, Obama.
Nothing important, Moochie. Just junk mail.
In a scathing letter sent to Barack Obama this morning, Senator Marco Rubio said that under the President’s first term in office, “more and more people have come to believe that America is becoming a deadbeat nation.”
Rubio went on to pledge that he would challenge any further increase in the debt ceiling, arguing that “we [Congress] need to make it routine to actually spend no more than we take in.” In the letter obtained by HUMAN EVENTS, the Florida Senator said that President Obama’s upcoming request to increase the debt ceiling by a whopping $1.2 trillion will cause the nation’s public debt to surpass the $16 trillion mark.
“I will oppose your request to continue borrowing and spending recklessly.”
Rubio went on to pledge that he would challenge any further increase in the debt ceiling, arguing that “we [Congress] need to make it routine to actually spend no more than we take in.” In the letter obtained by HUMAN EVENTS, the Florida Senator said that President Obama’s upcoming request to increase the debt ceiling by a whopping $1.2 trillion will cause the nation’s public debt to surpass the $16 trillion mark.
“I will oppose your request to continue borrowing and spending recklessly.”
*****
Don't know why he'd pay attention to Rubio, he never heard a fucking thing the American people tried to tell him.
That's right, I'M A WINNER!!!!!!
Finally, somebody realizes my talents for what they are. I'm not just some anonymous Charlie Manson looking motherfucker that skulks around in the middle of the night shooting coyotes. I am now an officially recognized internationally known blogger and Charlie Manson looking motherfucker that skulks around in the middle of the night shooting coyotes.
And here it is:
Welcome to the first annual Zilla Awards for Awesomeness in the Dextrosphere! Conservative Bloggers may be the Chopped Liver of the Right, but in my eyes they are the finest cuts of the very best red meat, and now it is time to recognize the bestiest of that best. Here are your winners of the Zilla Awards for Awesomeness in the Dextrosphere who kicked ass all over the interwebz in 2011:
Best Blogs from Kick-ass U.S. Military Vets: Knuckledraggin my life away and The Anti-Liberal Zone
And there it is, folks, in black and white and red. Indisputable proof. And I didn't even have to pay Mare to mention me.
Seriously, it is nice to get some recognition. I do appreciate it very much. Thank you, Mare, You Rock.
For the rest of the list, go to here to Zilla of the Resistance. While you're there, check out the rest of her blog and if you like what you see (and I know you will) drop a buck or two in her tip jar.
Mare's one of those people that is suffering because of the economy but instead of laying over and whining about it and waiting for the government to come and make her life all better, she's using the tools she has to fight back.
And here it is:
Welcome to the first annual Zilla Awards for Awesomeness in the Dextrosphere! Conservative Bloggers may be the Chopped Liver of the Right, but in my eyes they are the finest cuts of the very best red meat, and now it is time to recognize the bestiest of that best. Here are your winners of the Zilla Awards for Awesomeness in the Dextrosphere who kicked ass all over the interwebz in 2011:
Best Blogs from Kick-ass U.S. Military Vets: Knuckledraggin my life away and The Anti-Liberal Zone
And there it is, folks, in black and white and red. Indisputable proof. And I didn't even have to pay Mare to mention me.
Seriously, it is nice to get some recognition. I do appreciate it very much. Thank you, Mare, You Rock.
For the rest of the list, go to here to Zilla of the Resistance. While you're there, check out the rest of her blog and if you like what you see (and I know you will) drop a buck or two in her tip jar.
Mare's one of those people that is suffering because of the economy but instead of laying over and whining about it and waiting for the government to come and make her life all better, she's using the tools she has to fight back.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)