konane's Blog

"Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading

Am sure I posted an article or two about his position about abolishing our Second Amendment Rights to bear arms.  One increment at a time it's being legislated away while MS-13 and similar gangs arm themselves to the teeth, take over, take us hostage and take what they want just because they want it. 

Liberal-think ... eliminate any faction that opposes them by any means available ... allow gangs to do it for them while saying they're fighting them.

Can't remember which channel did a documentary about this gang but they're unbelievable ..... and they're here in the US.

"With cliques in Washington DC, Oregon, Alaska, Arkansas, Texas, Nevada, Utah, Oklahoma, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Maryland, Virginia, Georgia, Florida, Canada, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, and several other South American countries, the MS-13 gang is truly "international" and on the verge of becoming the first gang to be categorized as an "organized crime" entity.


MS13 Gang

http://www.altereddimensions.net/crime/MS13Gang.aspx

______

 

"Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading

-- Even BB guns could be on the chopping block
Tuesday, April 21, 2009

"Remember CANDIDATE Barack Obama? The guy who "wasn't going to take away our guns"?

Well, guess what?

Less than 100 days into his administration, he's never met a gun he didn't hate.

A week ago, Obama went to Mexico, whined about the United States, and bemoaned (before the whole world) the fact that he didn't have the political power to take away our semi-automatics. Nevertheless, that didn't keep him from pushing additional restrictions on American gun owners.

It's called the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials. To be sure, this imponderable title masks a really nasty piece of work.

First of all, when the treaty purports to ban the "illicit" manufacture of firearms, what does that mean?

1. "Illicit manufacturing" of firearms is defined as "assembly of firearms [or] ammunition ... without a license...."

Hence, reloading ammunition -- or putting together a lawful firearm from a kit -- is clearly "illicit manufacturing."

Modifying a firearm in any way would surely be "illicit manufacturing." And, while it would be a stretch, assembling a firearm after cleaning it could, in any plain reading of the words, come within the screwy definition of "illicit manufacturing."

2. "Firearm" has a similarly questionable definition.

"[A]ny other weapon" is a "firearm," according to the treaty -- and the term "weapon" is nowhere defined.

So, is a BB gun a "firearm"? Probably.

A toy gun? Possibly.

A pistol grip or firing pin? Probably. And who knows what else.

If these provisions (and others) become the law of the land, the Obama administration could have a heyday in enforcing them. Consider some of the other provisions in the treaty:

* Banning reloading. In Article IV of the treaty, countries commit to adopting "necessary legislative or other measures" to criminalize illicit manufacturing and trafficking in firearms.

Remember that "illicit manufacturing" includes reloading and modifying or assembling a firearm in any way. This would mean that the Obama administration could promulgate regulations banning reloading on the basis of this treaty -- just as it is currently circumventing Congress to write legislation taxing greenhouse gases.

* Banning gun clubs. Article IV goes on to state that the criminalized acts should include "association or conspiracy" in connection with said offenses -- which is arguably a term broad enough to allow, by regulation, the criminalization of entire pro-gun organizations or gun clubs, based on the facilities which they provide their membership.

* Extraditing US gun dealers. Article V requires each party to "adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offenses it has established in accordance with this Convention" under a variety of circumstances.

We know that Mexico is blaming U.S. gun dealers for the fact that its streets are flowing with blood. And we know it is possible for Mexico to define offenses "committed in its territory" in a very broad way. And we know that we have an extradition obligation under Article XIX of the proposed treaty. So we know that Mexico could try to use the treaty to demand to extradition of American gun dealers.

Under Article XXIX, if Mexico demands the extradition of a lawful American gun dealer, the U.S. would be required to resolve the dispute through "other means of peaceful settlement."

Does anyone want to risk twenty years in a sweltering Mexican jail on the proposition that the Obama administration would apply this provision in a pro-gun manner?

* Microstamping. Article VI requires "appropriate markings" on firearms. And, it is not inconceivable that this provision could be used to require microstamping of firearms and/or ammunition -- a requirement which is clearly intended to impose specifications which are not technologically possible or which are possible only at a prohibitively expensive cost.

* Gun registration. Article XI requires the maintenance of any records, for a "reasonable time," that the government determines to be necessary to trace firearms. This provision would almost certainly repeal portions of McClure-Volkmer and could arguably be used to require a national registry or database.

ACTION: Write your Senators and urge them to oppose the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials.

Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center to send your Senators the pre-written e-mail message below. .......  "

http://gunowners.org/a042109.htm

Entry #1,119

"Chinese police training manual offers tips on the best way to beat up offenders

Interesting how China treats political dissidents and protestors.

_________

"Chinese police training manual offers tips on the best way to beat up offenders
A Chinese law enforcement agency has been using a training manual which advises officers on how to use violence without leaving incriminating evidence behind.

By Malcolm Moore in Shanghai
Last Updated: 12:02PM BST 23 Apr 2009
Source Telgraph.co.uk

"Chinese police training manual offers tips on the best way to beat up offenders

At the end of March, several thousand people in Nanchong, in Sichuan, rioted after a Chengguan officer seriously injured a student Photo: REUTERS

"In dealing with the subject, take care to leave no blood on the face, no wounds on the body, and no people in the vicinity," states the manual, entitled Practices of City Administration Enforcement.

The book was reportedly designed as a training guide for the Chengguan, a type of police force that is charged with targeting anyone it feels is disrupting the peace, ridding China's cities of illegal street hawkers and unlicensed taxi cabs, and checking permits.

*
New video of torture exposes Chinese brutality in Tibet
*
China says Tibet torture video is 'a fake' as it blocks YouTube
*
The Chengguan are widely reviled in China, and their heavy-handed methods frequently result in serious injuries or death. At the end of March, several thousand people in Nanchong, in Sichuan, rioted after a Chengguan officer seriously injured a student.

Three years ago in Shanghai, Chengguan officers beat Li Binghao, a 39-year-old man who intervened in a dispute, to death, according to Xinhua, the state news agency. "Officials who use violence are rarely investigated or held accountable," said the goup China Human Rights Defenders in reference to the Chengguan.

According to the Southern Metropolis Daily newspaper, an official with the Beijing municipal bureau of city administration and law enforcement confirmed that the training manual was genuine and had been used in official training sessions.

Several portions of the book were leaked onto the internet and have caused a furore. "Who put it up on the net? How did internal material come to be discussed outside?" the unnamed official asked the newspaper.

The published sections of the manual explain that officers must quell any dispute swiftly. "Without letting go of the subject, several officers shall act together and in a single move take the individual under bodily control," it said. "Each action must be effective so as not to give the subject any pause for breath."

The manual also told officers they should not consider whether they are a physical match for the subject or whether they could harm the subject. "You must become a resolute law enforcer staunchly protecting the dignity of city administrative regulations," it reportedly said.

Zhao Yang, a junior officer in Nanjing told the Southern Metropolis Daily: "These things used to be spread by word of mouth, but now they're out in the open. Things like how to protect yourself and how to hit people."

In Shanghai, hawkers said they had heard of several cases of abuse by the Chengguan, who they described as generally uneducated thugs. Chen Juan, a 28-year-old hawker who sells trinkets and hairbands, said: "They are different throughout the city. The ones near the centre of town are very violent. They do not always beat you up, but they intimidate us and usually confiscate and stomp on our goods. I was once chased down the street by a gang of them and that left me quite rattled."

However, another vendor, who asked not to be named, said it was easy to "play the game", suggesting that casual bribery took care of most problems.

"The problem is that many hawkers are doing this because they have nothing else. So when the Chengguan confiscate their goods, they put up a fight. That's why they get beaten up."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/5199325/Chinese-police-training-manual-offers-tips-on-the-best-way-to-beat-up-offenders.html
_________

"New video of torture exposes Chinese brutality in Tibet
The Tibetan government-in-exile, led by the Dalai Lama, has released a video that appears to show Tibetan monks being tortured by Chinese security forces.

By Malcolm Moore, Shanghai Correspondent
Last Updated: 10:30AM GMT 27 Mar 2009
Source Telegraph.co.uk

"Video footage from Tibet is extremely rare. The film, which shows violent scenes from the March 2008 riots, is the clearest evidence yet that Tibetans were subject to police brutality as China struggled for control in Lhasa.

In the seven-minute film, exerpts of which are shown above, Chinese police kick and beat apparently defenceless Tibetan protesters and monks after they have been handcuffed and are lying on the ground.

The Tibetan government-in-exile, which is based in Dharamsala in India, said the treatment of the captives violated international norms and amounted to torture.
Until now, the only video evidence of the riots in March was shot from long-distance and showed clashes in the streets of Lhasa but not evidence of torture.

"This is the first footage which visibly proves the use of brutal and excessive force against Tibetan protesters. It clearly challenges official Chinese statements that disproportionate force was not used on unarmed protesters," said Stephanie Brigden, the director of the international campaign group Free Tibet. "......

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/tibet/5023967/New-video-of-torture-exposes-Chinese-brutality-in-Tibet.html

Entry #1,118

"Drama at GE shareholders meeting 'Open hostility' toward execs over MSNBC's 'leftward tilt'

"Drama at GE shareholders meeting
'Open hostility' toward execs over MSNBC's 'leftward tilt'

By Paul Bond

Source THR.com

April 22, 2009, 06:38 PM ET

Updated: April 22, 2009, 07:28 PM ET

Jeff Immelt in 2007 (Getty Images photo)

Things got testy Wednesday at the GE shareholders meeting courtesy of several complaints about political bias at its media division, NBC Universal.

Just don't expect to see the fireworks at the company's webcast of the event, which contains prepared remarks from CEO Jeff Immelt and CFO Keith Sherin but leaves out their interaction with shareholders.

A GE spokesman clarified that the corporation doesn't typically broadcast the shareholders meeting in its entirety.

Just before GE board members were re-elected, shareholders asked about 10 questions of a mostly political nature concerning the viewpoints of MSNBC and CNBC, according to attendees.

First up was a woman asking about a reported meeting in which Immelt and NBC Uni CEO Jeff Zucker supposedly told top CNBC executives and talent to be less critical of President Obama and his policies.

Immelt acknowledged a meeting took place but said no one at CNBC was told what to say or not say about politics.

During the woman's follow-up question, her microphone was cut off. Later, during the umpteenth question about MSNBC, another shareholder's microphone was cut, according to multiple attendees.

"The crowd was very upset with MSNBC because of its leftward tilt," one attendee said. "Some former employees said they were embarrassed by it."

One specific complaint about MSNBC concerned Keith Olbermann's interview of actress Janeane Garofalo, who likened conservatives to racists and spoke of "the limbic brain inside a right-winger."

"They were upset that Olbermann didn't bother to challenge her," one GE shareholder said.

Immelt said he takes a hands-off approach to what is reported on the company's news networks, which prompted a shareholder to criticize him for not managing NBC Uni effectively.

"My biggest surprise was the open hostility to MSNBC," another shareholder said. "It was noticeable and loud. I don't remember any of this going on last year."

One shareholder at the Orlando, Fla., meeting was Jesse Waters, a producer of "The O'Reilly Factor." Waters asked a question at the meeting, then turned on the Fox News Channel cameras outside the venue and interviewed other shareholders who attended the meeting."

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i888016761f9ec824f862a5c265de605c

Entry #1,117

Napolitano "crossing the (Mexican) border is not a crime per se."

Wow it just gets better!!!

________

"OBAMA'S WORST CABINET APPOINTMENT
By Neal Boortz Permalink |
@ April 22, 2009 8:28 AM
Source Boortz.com
 
"After careful analysis, and many instances of mind-numbing stupidity ... I have determined that Janet "Nitwit" Napolitano is Barack Obama's worst cabinet appointment. Just take this little moment she had over the weekend. An interview on CNN has Napolitano explaining why Democrats want to investigate Sheriff Joe out there in Maricopa County Arizona. See if you can catch what is so blatantly wrong with this statement:

Well, you know, Sheriff Joe, he is being very political in that statement, because he knows that there aren't enough law enforcement officers, courtrooms or jail cells in the world to do what he is saying.

What we have to do is target the real evil-doers in this business, the employers who consistently hire illegal labor, the human traffickers who are exploiting human misery.

And yes, when we find illegal workers, yes, appropriate action, some of which is criminal, most of that is civil, because crossing the border is not a crime per se. It is civil. But anyway, going after those as well.

Did you catch it? Ok, I'll spell it out for you: "crossing the border is not a crime per se." And this is from our head of Homeland Security? Hey, Amigos! All you people down there on the border just waiting to cross! Forget about visas! Forget about going to those pesky and troublesome little checkpoints. Just walk on over! It's not like that is illegal or anything! Viva Napolitano!"

http://boortz.com/nealz_nuze/2009/04/obamas-worst-cabinet-appointme.html

Entry #1,116

How did Napolitano get her job??

First issuing a report stating anyone who didn't march lock step with the current administration was subject to being watched .... especially veterans ..... now this.  Any bets how long before she's replaced????  Hope with someone who knows what they're doing and can sound intelligent.
__________
"The border for dummies

National Post editorial board

National Post  Published: Wednesday, April 22, 2009

U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, in January 2009.Chip Somodevilla/Getty ImagesU.S. Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, in January 2009.

Can someone please tell us how U. S. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano got her job? She appears to be about as knowledgeable about border issues as a late-night radio call-in yahoo.

In an interview broadcast Monday on the CBC, Ms. Napolitano attempted to justify her call for stricter border security on the premise that "suspected or known terrorists" have entered the U. S. across the Canadian border, including the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack.

All the 9/11 terrorists, of course, entered the United States directly from overseas. The notion that some arrived via Canada is a myth that briefly popped up in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, and was then quickly debunked.

Informed of her error, Ms. Napolitano blustered: "I can't talk to that. I can talk about the future. And here's the future. The future is we have borders."

Just what does that mean, exactly?

Just a few weeks ago, Ms. Napolitano equated Canada's border to Mexico's, suggesting they deserved the same treatment. Mexico is engulfed in a drug war that left more than 5,000 dead last year, and which is spawning a spillover kidnapping epidemic in Arizona. So many Mexicans enter the United States illegally that a multi-billion-dollar barrier has been built from Texas to California to keep them out.

In Canada, on the other hand, the main problem is congestion resulting from cross-border trade. Not quite the same thing, is it?"

http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.html?id=1520295

Entry #1,115

'Quiet Sun' baffling astronomers

Sun's not cooperating with the global-warming-tax-your-carbon-footprint crowd but they're sure trying to defend their theories.

_______

" 'Quiet Sun' baffling astronomers

 

By Pallab Ghosh
Science correspondent, BBC News
 

"'Still Sun' baffling astronomers

The Sun is the dimmest it has been for nearly a century.

There are no sunspots, very few solar flares - and our nearest star is the quietest it has been for a very long time.

The observations are baffling astronomers, who are due to study new pictures of the Sun, taken from space, at the UK National Astronomy Meeting.

The Sun normally undergoes an 11-year cycle of activity. At its peak, it has a tumultuous boiling atmosphere that spits out flares and planet-sized chunks of super-hot gas. This is followed by a calmer period.

Last year, it was expected that it would have been hotting up after a quiet spell. But instead it hit a 50-year year low in solar wind pressure, a 55-year low in radio emissions, and a 100-year low in sunspot activity.

According to Prof Louise Hara of University College London, it is unclear why this is happening or when the Sun is likely to become more active again.

"There's no sign of us coming out of it yet," she told BBC News.

"At the moment, there are scientific papers coming out suggesting that we'll be going into a normal period of activity soon.

"Others are suggesting we'll be going into another minimum period - this is a big scientific debate at the moment."

Images from Soho taken in 2001 (left) and 2007 (right)
Sunspots could be seen by the Soho telescope in 2001 (l), but not this year (r)

In the mid-17th Century, a quiet spell - known as the Maunder Minimum - lasted 70 years, and led to a "mini ice-age".

This has resulted in some people suggesting that a similar cooling might offset the impact of climate change.

According to Prof Mike Lockwood of Southampton University, this view is too simplistic.

"I wish the Sun was coming to our aid but, unfortunately, the data shows that is not the case," he said.

Prof Lockwood was one of the first researchers to show that the Sun's activity has been gradually decreasing since 1985, yet overall global temperatures have continued to rise.

"If you look carefully at the observations, it's pretty clear that the underlying level of the Sun peaked at about 1985 and what we are seeing is a continuation of a downward trend (in solar activity) that's been going on for a couple of decades.

"If the Sun's dimming were to have a cooling effect, we'd have seen it by now."

'Middle ground'

Evidence from tree trunks and ice cores suggest that the Sun is calming down after an unusually high point in its activity.

Professor Lockwood believes that as well as the Sun's 11-year cycle, there is an underlying solar oscillation lasting hundreds of years.

He suggests that 1985 marked the "grand maximum" in this long-term cycle and the Maunder Minimum marked its low point.

"We are re-entering the middle ground after a period which has seen the Sun in its top 10% of activity," said Professor Lockwood.

"We would expect it to be more than a hundred years before we get down to the levels of the Maunder Minimum."

He added that the current slight dimming of the Sun is not going to reverse the rise in global temperatures caused by the burning of fossil fuels.

"What we are seeing is consistent with a global temperature rise, not that the Sun is coming to our aid."

Data from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) shows global average temperatures have risen by about 0.7C since the beginning of the 20th Century.

And the IPCC projects that the world will continue to warm, with temperatures expected to rise between 1.8C and 4C by the end of the century.

No-one knows how the centuries-long waxing and waning of the Sun works. However, astronomers now have space telescopes studying the Sun in detail.

According to Prof Richard Harrison of the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Oxfordshire, this current quiet period gives astronomers a unique opportunity.

"This is very exciting because as astronomers we've never seen anything like this before in our lifetimes," he said.

"We have spacecraft up there to study the Sun in phenomenal detail. With these telescopes we can study this minimum of activity in a way that we could not have done so in the past."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8008473.stm

Entry #1,114

"everything that is old is new again cartoon from 1934

Steve Quayle Q-News posts some really good photos but they don't usually remain up for very long which is why this is posted below.  Pretty good likeness of Karl Marx, one might assume he's alive and well as a key advisor in Washington.

_______________

"Photo Of The Day" http://www.stevequayle.com/index1.html

Upper caption:  everything that is old is new again

ORIGINAL CAPTION: 1934 cartoon from the Chicago Tribune

 

Entry #1,112

"Bank bailout may hurt taxpayers, be open to fraud

Ya think?????????????????  Dead   What?   Skeptical   Naughty  Thud Unchedked spending made congress FEEL GOOD so 'it's a good thing' in liberal land.

________

"Bank bailout may hurt taxpayers, be open to fraud
Inspector general cites potential flaws in bank bailout, urges Treasury to adopt safeguards

Jim Kuhnhenn, Associated Press Writer
Tuesday April 21, 2009, 12:27 am EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Taxpayers are increasingly exposed to losses and the government is more vulnerable to fraud under Obama administration initiatives that have created a federal bank bailout program of "unprecedented scope," a government report finds." .................


http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Bank-bailout-may-hurt-apf-14979409.html?.v=8

Entry #1,111

"SPIN METER Obama's latest budget tightening effort hardly makes a dime's worth of difference

It was suggested by a friend that current insane spending is being done on purpose to bankrupt the US so that they can say they tried to save the economy.  Now bankrupt we get incorporated into the North American Union whether US citizens like it or not.  Sounds like what's happening, run away freight train down a steep grade, Republican fiscal conservatives stabbed in the back by RINOS enjoying $$$pecial interest perk$$$$.

Big woop to sudden spending consciousness.

___________

 

"SPIN METER: Saving federal money the easy way
SPIN METER: Obama's latest budget-tightening effort hardly makes a dime's worth of difference

Andrew Taylor and Calvin Woodward, Associated Press Writers
Monday April 20, 2009, 5:18 pm EDT

"WASHINGTON (AP) -- Cut a latte or two out of your annual budget and you've just done as much belt-tightening as President Barack Obama asked of his Cabinet on Monday.

The thrifty measures Obama ordered for federal agencies are the equivalent of asking a family that spends $60,000 in a year to save $6. ............."

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/SPIN-METER-Saving-federal-apf-14976290.html?.v=1

Entry #1,110

"Napolitano is Lying to Americans About Her Department's Rightwing Extremism Report; TMLC Files Suit

Just imagine the firestorm still be burning if John Ashcroft or Tom Ridge had issued a report like Napolotano just issued specifically targeting groups who don't toe the current administration line .......  Apologies and damage control way too late.

Live links.

_________

 

"Napolitano is Lying to Americans About Her Department’s Rightwing Extremism Report; TMLC Files Suit

Source ThomasMore.org

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced that yesterday evening it filed a federal lawsuit against Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.  The lawsuit claims that her Department’s “Rightwing Extremism Policy,” as reflected in the recently publicized Intelligence Assessment, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment,” violates the civil liberties of combat veterans as well as American citizens by targeting them for disfavored treatment on account of their political beliefs.  General - PDF Links Click here to read the complaint filed by the Thomas More Law Center.

Napolitano tried to blunt the public furor over the Report by a half-hearted apology to veterans, but she left out of her apology all of the other Americans her Department has targeted because of their political beliefs. In fact, officials in DHS now admit that their internal office of civil liberties objected to the language in the extremism report, but the Department issued it anyway.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center stated, “Janet Napolitano is lying to the American people when she says the Report is not based on ideology or political beliefs. In fact, her report would have the admiration of the Gestapo and any current or past dictator in the way it targets political opponents.  This incompetently written intelligence assessment, which directs law enforcement officials across the country to target and report on American citizens who have the political beliefs mentioned in the report, will be used as a tool to stifle political opposition and opinions.  It will give a pretext for opponents of those Americans to report them to police as rightwing extremists and terrorists.  You can imagine what happens then.”

The Report specifically mentions the following political beliefs that law enforcement should use to determine whether someone is a “rightwing extremist”:

  • Opposes restrictions on firearms
  • Opposes lax immigration
  • Opposes the policies of President Obama regarding immigration, citizenship, and the expansion of social programs
  • Opposes continuation of free trade agreements
  • Opposes same-sex marriage
  • Has paranoia of foreign regimes
  • Fear of Communist regimes
  • Opposes one world government
  • Bemoans the decline of U.S. stature in the world.
  • Upset with loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China and India
  • . . . and the list goes on

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of nationally syndicated conservative radio talk show host, Michael Savage, Gregg Cunningham (President of the pro-life organization Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, Inc (CBR)), and Iraqi War Marine veteran Kevin Murray.  The Law Center claims that Napolitano’s Department (DHS) has violated the First and Fifth Amendment Constitutional rights of these three plaintiffs by attempting to chill their free speech, expressive association, and equal protection rights.  The lawsuit further claims that the Department of Homeland Security encourages law enforcement officers throughout the nation to target and report citizens to federal officials as suspicious rightwing extremists and potential terrorists because of their political beliefs. 

Thompson added, “The Obama Administration has declared war on American patriots and our Constitution.  The Report even admits that the Department has no specific information on any plans of violence by so-called ‘rightwing extremists.’  Rather, what they do have is the expression of political opinions by certain individuals and organizations that oppose the Obama administration’s policies, and this expression is protected speech under the First Amendment.” 

The Law Center is asking the court to declare that the DHS policy violates the First and Fifth Amendments, to permanently enjoin the Policy and its application to the plaintiffs’ speech and other activities, and to award the plaintiffs their reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for having to bring the lawsuit.

General - PDF Links Click here to read the DHS extremism report.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life.  It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America.  The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities.  It does not charge for its services.  The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.  You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org. "

http://www.thomasmore.org/qry/page.taf?id=19

Entry #1,109

"Irreconcilable Differences Free-Markets and Interventions

"Irreconcilable Differences
Free-Markets and Interventions


By Barry A. Liebling 07 Apr 2009
Source TCS Daily

"The debate on how to address the economic crisis can leave you breathless. Discerning free-market advocates understand that government meddling contributed to the troubles and restricting the government to its proper function of protecting individual rights is the path to setting things right.

Interventionists take the opposite view. They are convinced that the problems are due to inadequate regulation and describe the last eight years of the Bush administration as being inspired by an "anything goes" keep-the-government-out ideology. They argue that if the government had used a stronger hand the current malaise might have been avoided. The long-term remedy is to increase government involvement in business.

Free-market enthusiasts counter that Bush's policies were not characterized by deregulation, "anything goes," or hands-off - but were marked by massive increases in government domestic spending. The United States has not had anything close to a free market at least since the Federal Reserve System was established in 1913. During the New Deal the government's muscular reach was prodigiously expanded and has been growing ever since.

We live in a mixed economy - where some activities are free-market while others are regulated by the government. So when things go wrong the mixture serves as a talking point for both sides. Free-marketers identify government interference as the culprit, while interventionists say that a lack of government supervision leads to pain.

Bring a principled free-market advocate and a committed interventionist together for a calm, unhurried discussion. Can they ever see eye-to-eye? Have them review the historical evidence, discuss the anticipated consequences of interventions and what they think public policy ought to be. What is the prospect that they will agree with one another about what should be done? Anorexically slim.

When you drill down, the conflict between conscientious free-marketers and interventionists is not about facts or about what people are likely to do. It is about values - what each regards as the way things should be.

The core premise supporting the free-market is individual rights. Every person has the right to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness. This means that all economic exchanges must be by voluntary mutual consent. No one has the right to anyone else's efforts or property without his or her permission. No outside force, whether bandits or a governmental body, can justifiably interfere with what terms you or your trading partners decide among yourselves. Government is essential for the maintenance of a free-market, and its role is protecting individual rights - prohibiting the use of force or fraud.

By contrast, the assumption of the interventionist is that society and the state take precedence over the individual. It is the group that counts and has rights. Thus, interventionists focus their attention on "social justice" which is different from genuine justice. They have antipathy for "unfettered" individual freedom because they realize that when people act according to their own judgement and preferences the outcome may not be to the interventionist's liking. Interventionists see wealth redistribution as a key function of government. Money should be taken from those they despise and given to those they favor.

How do the adversaries think differently about the creation of wealth? Both agree that free-markets have historically been highly effective engines for generating riches. The principled free-market advocate understands that individual freedom is the essential rationale for non-interference. It is true that free-markets create more prosperity than any regulated system, but that beneficial consequence is not the primary justification. If it were, it would open the door to meddlers who would endlessly propose schemes that violate individual rights in an attempt to crank out more wealth.

The interventionist understands that more freedom and less interference leads to greater productivity, so he does not want to institute too much of a command economy. Interventionists are perpetually searching for ways of encouraging producers to create lots of wealth that later can be confiscated for "the common good." The interventionist conundrum is how to squeeze the most out of producers without demoralizing them.

What do free-marketers and interventionists think about criminals? Both are incensed by thieves and fraudsters. The principled free-marketer knows that villains who violate the rights of individuals should be stopped in their tracks. This is where government should take a strong stand.

Interventionists are ambivalent about criminals. On the one hand they believe that force or fraud perpetrated by private individuals is odious and deserves penalties. But every time a criminal is exposed there is opportunity. The incident can be used as a rallying cry for more control of the economy. Interventionists can proclaim that in spite of any laws that are on the books, criminals are still doing mischief. And the solution is more laws, rules, and regulations.

Principled free-marketers and interventionists cannot reach consensus because they have incompatible visions about how people should live. Of course, interventionists might learn to understand and appreciate the value of individual rights. Don't hold your breath."

http://techcentralstation.com/

Entry #1,108

"Beyond Belief

Have left live links so you can view video. 
Looks like the tea party is a groundswell growing exponentially in dimension.  Definitely no accurate reporting from the lamestream media bent on delivering their point of view in place of the news .... which has become so obvious even those in denial can grasp it.
______

"BEYOND BELIEF

By Neal Boortz Permalink
@ April 16, 2009 8:22 AM
Source boortz.com

"I was wondering yesterday how the media would be responding to these anti-tax rallies across the country yesterday. I suggested that the leftist media would be presenting the protestors as rightwing extremist nut jobs who were motivated by greed and wanted to make sure that none of their money was ever used to help the (ugh) "less fortunate."

So, how did it turn out? Have you heard about this CNN reporter named Susan Roesgen? If you have the time and want to listen to her report from the Chicago tea-party you can click right    or watch below. If not, well ... let me tell you. This Roesgen person was, as I said, covering the Chicago rally. She picked out a rather inarticulate person from the crowd: "Ok, you're here with your 2-year-old ... why are you here today?" The protester said that he was here today because he heard the president say that he believed what Lincoln stood for and he then tried to explain Lincoln's attitude toward taxes. Rather than interviewing this guy, Roesgen started to argue with him: "Sir, what does this have to do with taxes? What does this have to do with your taxes?" Then she asked "Do you realize that you're eligible for a $400 credit ...?" At that point the man said "let me finish my point?"

Wait a minute! Read that again? This guy is protesting taxes, and this ignoranus CNN reporter asks him if he realizes that he is eligible for some type of $400 credit? What is she saying? I'll tell you what she's saying. This guy shouldn't be protesting taxes because he's going to be getting a check!

The interview proceeds. The man says that Lincoln believed that people had a right to the fruits of their own labor and that "government should not take it." Roesgen then stuck her finger in his face and said "Do you know that the state of Lincoln gets $50 billion dollars out of this stimulus, that's $50 billion dollars for this state." At this point someone in the crowd says something and the man becomes a bit frustrated. Roesgen turns away and starts talking to the anchor. Now listen to this gem from this wonderful, objective CNN reporter:

"OK, Cara, we'll move on over here. I think you get the general tenor of this. It's anti-government. Anti-CNN since this is highly promoted by the right wing conservative network Fox, and since I can't really hear much more and I think this is not really family viewing it's time to come back to you Cara."

The CNN anchor ... Cara or Kara or whatever ... then says "Wow, that is a prime example of what we're covering here. Susan pointed out everything plain and clear what she's dealing with."

Well .. there you have it. These tax protestors are "anti-government." The don't want to be taxed out of fifty percent of everything they earn .. and they're anti-government. They're also anti-CNN. Where did THAT come from? Do you know that Pew research did a poll last year and found that more Democrats and independents watch Fox News than Republicans? But to Susan Roesgen Fox is right wing and conservative.

The fact is Roesgen was saying just what the Democrats wanted her to say. Last night the Atlanta Journal-Constitution was reporting that "...critics -- especially Democrats -- have labeled the gatherings as frauds created by Republican advocacy groups with the backing of deep-pocketed lobbyists and Fox News." Yup ... these idiots at these rallies couldn't possibly have opinions of their own. They're just a creation of the Republican Party and Fox. Roesgen handled the Democrat message a little clumsily ... but handle it she did.

It was also rather odd that when Roesgen would look into the camera when she was talking about stimulus checks for Illinois. Why? Because she was making her own statement. She was the person being interviewed ... not the actual protestor. She wasn't really that interested in what this guy had to say ... she had her own opinions and she wanted to make sure they got aired.

There you have it folks. This is the way much of the liberal media will be covering the protests today. These are anti-government right-wing kooks

**** Video *****

http://boortz.com/nealz_nuze/2009/04/beyond-belief-1.html

Entry #1,107

"TARP the Life Insurers? This Is Nuts That's the heartland tea-party message to Washington

"TARP the Life Insurers? This Is Nuts
That's the heartland tea-party message to Washington


By Larry Kudlow 13 Apr 2009
Source TCS Daily

"Is bailout nation about to strike again? Sure looks like it. According to a bunch of front-page news stories, life-insurance companies are about to get TARPed. This is nuts.

The public is clamoring for an end to TARP and bailout nation. That's a key message coming from the heartland tea parties that are cropping up spontaneously around the country. This is turning into a real populist uprising against rising taxes (especially state, local, and property taxes), TARP, and all the federal bailouts -- and the trillions of dollars of deficits and debt being used for financing.

If Team Obama ignores this uprising, it has a political tin ear.

While commercial banks of all sizes are increasingly profitable and want to pay back their TARP money, the Treasury Department is now proposing to extend bailout funds to life-insurance companies, most of which are in no danger of failing. And for those that are in danger, surely it's time for a bankruptcy proceeding instead of more taxpayer money.

We are already on the hook for banks, GM and Chrysler, and lube jobs for guaranteed government-backed GM warranties. And the banks themselves may go to war against an Obama administration that wants to maintain control over the big-bank sector and prevent these financial institutions from paying down TARP. It's as if Team Obama is saying, "Don't worry about the taxpayers. Just keep expanding government control over the economy."

And now comes life insurance. But when will this country stop saving losers and start rewarding winners?

Meanwhile, no one has proven that life-insurance companies constitute true systemic risk to the financial system. No one. This is nothing but a bailout. Actually, it's a precautionary bailout, since none of these insurers has failed.

Despite the stock market rally and proliferating signs of an economic comeback, a new TARP regime is being prepared in case insurers lose more money in their stock portfolios, or their bond investments, or their residential- and commercial-mortgage purchases. (By the way, corporate bonds -- which are heavily owned by life insurers to pay out retirement contracts -- are rallying big time, with prices rising and yields declining.)

But for those insurers who may lose money on their investments, tough luck. A lot of these insurers own variable annuities, which are retirement products that guarantee minimum returns no matter what happens to the stock market. Most of these products won't come due for ten years or more. And the break-even point is something like 600 on the S&P 500 index, which is now above 850 and rising.

Not all life insurers would be eligible for bailout funds -- only those that own federally chartered banks or thrifts, like Hartford Financial, Genworth, Prudential, MetLife, and Lincoln National. But a recent Wall Street Journal article indicates that a number of life insurers are doing very well and still have triple-A gilt-edged ratings. These include MassMutual, New York Life, Northwestern Mutual, and TIAA-CREF.

A senior executive at a large Midwestern insurance company e-mailed me to say he's against an insurance-industry TARP: "Those that are in trouble, including Conseco, Genworth, Phoenix, The Hartford, etc., should go the way of the dodo bird. Imagine some Treasury bureaucrat investing your 401(k) or retirement-plan money, or worse setting prices on your insurance policy."

A recent Bloomberg accounting of the federal financial-rescue package puts the grand total at $2.5 trillion for taxpayers on the hook. That's a lot of future debt. And that total does not include the Federal Reserve's $1.7 trillion, which is about to grow by at least another $1.5 trillion. It's unclear right now how much money the life insurers might get from TARP. And with members of Congress on recess -- and undoubtedly hearing a mouthful from constituents who are fed up with bailout nation -- it remains to be seen if our elected lawmakers will actually back up the Treasury's life-insurance bailout.

But is there any limit to this administration's intentions to interfere and perhaps control large swaths of our economy? And do these life-insurance mavens know what they're getting into by going on the hook to Congress? And does anybody remember that free-market capitalism is about success and failure?

Just say no to expanded TARP for insurance companies or anybody else. That's the real message of the homegrown tea-party revolts against bailout nation and the higher taxes, deficits, and debt being used to finance it. Folks are trying to tell Washington on the April 15th tax day that enough is enough. They can't take it anymore."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article first appeared on Kudlow's Money Politic$. "

http://techcentralstation.com/

Entry #1,106

"Mind Programming - From Persuasion to Metaphysics

Awesome article all the way through, hope you enjoy!!!

_____

"Mind Programming - From Persuasion to Metaphysics

By Eldon Taylor April 13th, 2009
Source Dream Manifesto

"To get up each morning with the resolve to be happy . . . is to set our own conditions to the events of each day. To do this is to condition circumstances instead of being conditioned by them." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Imagine that within you was a genie, a veritable creation machine capable of bringing you anything you desired - good and bad. Let's imagine that you were unaware of this genie within or had heard about it but disbelieved. Perhaps you'd tried to believe and discovered that it was bogus - the whole thing about the genie within was just so much superstitious mumbo jumbo.

We're all familiar with such phrases as "the power of the mind," "mind over matter," and "the mind-body connection." We've heard of spontaneous healings and achieving or creating the life of our dreams. Most of us have even experienced some of this, even if it appears to be in very limited ways.

Almost everyone today has at least heard of the book and movie The Secret. They were marketed in an absolutely magnificent manner, and although they contain no real secrets, they nevertheless retold in new ways the inner mystical teachings of all ages. The Secret informed readers and viewers that one's mind was a genie of sorts, for whatever it held in sufficient detail it would attract or create, and these two words were actually interchangeable in this context.

Maybe you watched The Oprah Winfrey Show, Larry King Live, or some other program and heard of the magnificent wealth and abundance that people had attracted using The Secret. Perhaps you grabbed a book, CD, or DVD all about the Law of Attraction and pored through it to glean the exact hows, whys, and wherefores.

Now armed with the secret knowledge and the testimony of so many, you created a vision board and printed out affirmations that you pasted everywhere so you'd constantly see them. You began visualizing all the things you wanted to attract and even started down the road of daily meditation. You got on the Internet and looked up such terms as New Age and metaphysical. You subscribed to numerous mailing lists, tuned in to New Age Internet radio shows, and began to buy self-help books. Alas, nothing wonderful happened.

Unfortunately, that's the experience of most people who tuned in to the idea of the genie within. Some, however, found a different result. They manifested their home, a special relationship, or the like. Not many achieved this, mind you, but some. Why?

The mind is that genie, and it's the doorway to the manifestation process, although its role is often misunderstood. It's an entry point, a doorway, not the manifestation tool per se. The mind provides the pictures, not the feeling. It organizes our activity to build a vision board, post the affirmations, and so forth. It invests some learned belief (expectation) in the process. Actually, the mind's highest role is inhibition.

Let me say that again: The mind's highest role is inhibition!

The Human Mind
Like it or not, we're all the product of millions of years of survival evolution. Wired in every one of us, no matter what our calling-including the highest evolved of spiritual beings now walking the earth - are primitive mechanisms that respond to primitive and sometimes rather gross stimuli. Often, stimuli that we consciously claim as reprehensible are nevertheless processed subconsciously in ways that drive us toward seeking more of the same. Those mechanisms respond to fight and flight, taboo images, socially fearful rejections, and similar stimuli in a mechanical way - thus, the term mechanism.

The human brain is a marvel of evolution, and one of its most splendid developments as far as human consciousness is concerned is the cerebral cortex. One of my early teachers, Professor Carl LaPrecht, used to say, "Whenever you find something in nature in great abundance, pay attention. It is critical to the system." The cortex or gray matter is by far the largest part of the brain. And it's within the cortex that inhibitory power resides.

The cortex is the brake. Cortical power inhibits impulses that aren't in our best interest or the result of our best intentions. The cortex shuts off the television when the content is violent, suggestive of disease and illness, or otherwise contains matter that's purely garbage. Our minds are like large trash containers: we can put anything into them. And like Dumpsters, they're difficult to clean out. Dumpsters don't tip over easily, and to clean one requires climbing inside, perhaps with a garden hose, a bucket of hot water, cleaning products, brushes, and so forth. What a tedious and nasty job.

All of us have minds, of course, and evidence suggests that when we come into the world our minds aren't blank slates, despite the tabula-rasa argument by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant.1 No, it appears that certain predispositions and even some types of knowledge (cell memory and more) are already written in our minds when we make our first inhalation. Still, the content of our mind that's acquired following birth is the beginning of what we shall eventually hold as both our identity and our knowledge/beliefs.

The Law of Attraction
You may have heard of the three components of the Law of Attraction - ask, believe, and receive. This sounds really easy until you question the degree of your belief, and that's where most people fail. I actually divide belief into three components that must be activated in the proper sequence to manifest using the inner genie. These components are:

1. The emotional input that's passionate and convinced
2. The confidence/mental element that can simply and truly visualize something and then let it go, knowing it will happen
3. The spiritual sincerity that realizes at the deepest level of our beings that we're a gift from the Creator. Knowing that, we release our vision, for we believe this or something better, according to the highest good of all concerned.

Anything that would distract from thinking, feeling, and knowing these three components will, in direct proportion, sabotage our efforts at manifesting our desires.

Given this understanding, it becomes easier to see why some people first manifest their desires, only to lose their treasures and find themselves worse off than they were before, some fail to manifest at all, and others seem to manifest the opposite of what they're seeking.

With this under your belt, you might ask, as I did: Why do most people seem handicapped by the inability to use the genie within and create the reality they deserve?

The Dumpster analogy is the first clue to answering this question. The garbage some hold in their minds would be frightening if it were visible to the public eye. As Strongheart, the German shepherd hero of the movies, put it in his letters to Boone, "What a dreadful sight to see people's faces as incomplete as their minds." I would paraphrase: "What a horrible sight to see people's faces as grotesque as the worst in their minds."

I'd like to imagine a world full of joy, peace, balance, and harmony. That's truly difficult to do when nature seems so callous and carnivorous. As I think about this, I realize that I'm anthropomorphizing nature, so I turn my thoughts to humans, where I find such horrible acts that a lion killing a lamb is innocent in comparison. How do we truly find peace, balance, and harmony? How do we gain spiritual sincerity and merge this with the right balance of mental and emotional stuff to manifest a world full of peace, balance, and harmony?

For some, manifestation is about things such as cars, swimming pools, houses, riches, sexy this and that, and the gratification of other sensual desires. For the spiritually sincere, manifestation is first about peace, balance, and harmony and then about health and individual happiness. These are complex issues that labels alone don't cover, so we can let the subject rest with this: each individual has a purpose for being here; and when individuals seek to manifest according to their purpose, they're enlightening themselves and the world around them.

Back to the main point: the mind is both ignition and brake. First thing in the morning, I open my eyes and begin talking to myself. My thoughts may recognize a dream or immediately turn to the new day's itinerary.
The mind goes immediately to delivering the inner world of thoughts, beliefs, ambitions, goals, and so forth. That constant stream of consciousness-self-talk-informs us of our mood, attitudes, likes, dislikes, and so much more. It's this stream of consciousness that reflects the contents of our "Dumpster."

A Warning
We started this chapter by imagining a genie within. I believe that this inner genie actually exists, but if you don't, that's okay. What I intend to show you is that the genie has been creating all along, even if you think that it's only some concocted get-rich scheme. In fact, the worse your life might seem, the higher the probability that the genie is working hard at fulfilling your every fear (emotion), thought (expectation), and spiritual insight ("Life sucks, and then you die"). It's in precisely this way that your hopes and ambitions are slain. Thus, your mind has been turned into the slayer.

To adequately illustrate my point, I must make a case that will at times lead us into some dark areas. For years, I practiced criminalistics. During that time, I ran lie-detection tests, conducted investigations, did forensic hypnosis, and more. I remember well a case in which a young man was accused of murdering his mother after sexually abusing her. This was about as dark and sinister a crime as it was possible to work on.

Thoughtfully reconstructing all I knew about this case had (forgive the expression) its "upchuck moments." The accused son had been convicted of the crime when I became involved. The moral I wish to share with you is this: the boy didn't commit the crime, and we proved it. He's free today as a result. If I'd refused to explore that so-called dark side, things might well have been much different, because it was largely my findings and testimony that freed him.

Again, in order to make the case, we must journey through some nasty things just as detectives do. I wish there was another way, but there isn't. Indeed, there's so much misinformation that our arguments, either pro or con, must rise above the fray in all respects. Sometimes that means going to the proverbial horse's mouth.

There was a time in my life when I worked to have good street contacts (informants). Developing these contacts could mean going down to their hangouts and fitting in. If you stay with me, I promise that we'll come out of those places with a deeper understanding of ourselves and the world around us. I warn you, though, if you're totally innocent and wish to stay that way, don't come! Close the book now.

If, however, you're like most people and truly wish to understand how your choices have been programmed, how your thinking is often controlled, and how the art of persuasion is used against you and by you every day, then stay with me. This and much more will be found in the pages that follow.

One more warning: Parts of this book are not for children. Please keep it out of their reach. It isn't the Kama Sutra, and you're not going to find erotic adventures inside, but there are some brutal psychological facts and misuses that are visually portrayed. I'm certain that some of what follows will offend, and I apologize in advance. But I also know that you truly do have a genie within; and once you get the garbage out of the Dumpster, once you call upon the cortical power to stop the input processes that insert the junk, and once you see the easy antidotes to cleaning out the garbage, the journey will have been more than worthwhile.

The genie within is your birthright and
manifesting the glory of the Creator
by carrying out your purpose
is the highest and best gift
you can give the Giver.

Part of my purpose in life has been revealing and resisting improper uses of persuasion techniques while cultivating and developing their proper uses. I hope that when you've finished reading this book, you'll find that I've lived up to my understanding, at least in part.

Summary
Our minds are the source of our imagination and ambition. I've suggested a genie within as a metaphor for the ability our minds have to create the life of our choosing. Yet accessing this genie isn't quite that simple. Although we like to think of ourselves as being the most evolved of the animal kingdom, wired into our being are primitive mechanisms. Life, peer pressure, enculturation, and planned manipulations of these mechanisms all influence our inner genie. As a result, our lives can appear to be out of our control. How did the manipulation even begin?"

http://www.dreammanifesto.com/mind-programming-persuasion-metaphysics.html
_____________

Abraham-Hicks Daily Quote

" A bunch of weak people, even in numbers, aren't strong. Get a whole bunch of confused people together and see how much clarity comes out of it. In other words, you just can't add one more confused person to the pot, and expect to get any more clarity... One-standing outside of the confused group-who is clear, is more powerful than a million who are confused."

" If you know that all is well, you know all you need to know. And if you know life is supposed to be fun, you know more than almost anybody else knows. And if you know that the way you feel is your indicator of how connected you are to Source, then you know that which only a handful of Deliberate Creators, respective to the total population, really know. The beasts all know it. Your animals know that all is well. Your animals live in the moment. They understand the power of their now. They expect the Universe to yield to them. They don't worry or fret or conjure or make laws or rules or try to regulate. They are Pure Positive Energy. Your beasts vibrate more on the Energy scale of contentment than of passion. Their desire was set forth from Nonphysical, and continues to be set forth by those, like you, who want Energy balance, who want sustenance. The difference between the beast and the human is that the beast is more general in its intent. The human is usually less blended, usually less allowing of the Energy to flow, but is more specific. And that is why the human is seen to be the Creator while the beast is more the balancer of Energy."

" You live in a pulsating, vibrating Universe of advanced harmonics. Everything that exists, in your air, in your dirt, in your water, and in your bodies, is vibration in motion-and all of it is managed by the powerful Law of Attraction. There is nothing that exists outside of this vibrational nature, and as you learn to accept your vibrational nature, and begin to consciously utilize your emotional vibrational indicators, you will gain conscious control of your personal creations and of the outcomes of your life experience."

Entry #1,105