January 9, 2010
from Bloviating Zeppelin
Republican Chairman Michael Steele can go straight to hell.
First, he says the GOP has no chance of winning the House or Senate back.
Then he tells fellow Republicans and potential donors to "shut up" if we don't care for his tactics and actions.
This is a LOSER's mentality and Mr Steele needs to be fired, just as he suggests in an interview with St. Louis ABC radio station KTRS on Thursday. Steele said:
“I’m telling them and I’m looking them in the eye and say I’ve had enough of it. If you don’t want me in the job, fire me. But until then, shut up. Get with the program or get out of the way.”
Mr Steele, I'm sorry, it isn't "all about you." Here is the interview:
RNC Chairman Michael Steele Lashes Out at Critics on ABC News Radio from ABC News Radio on Vimeo.
Already the pundits are weighing in:
Mr Steele hasn't done the GOP any favors whatsoever. All this has done is make the GOP look incredibly foolish and has begged the perfect "setup question" for every Republican faced with their own interview: "So," the DEM/MSM interviewer will say, "Mr Steele thinks you're all losers."
Mr Steele? Go to hell. You're fired. You clearly don't want any cash from me in the future.
...This is a dead Whig horse. Tea party power activate!
Harry Reid's mind is full of screams and clanking chains. It's been places that would horrify a normal person. He's almost Dickensian, with his hangman haircut, cess-pool eyes, and hateful stare. He said THIS about Obama in 2008.
Naturally, libs closed ranks around him, even the light-skinned, negro-dialect lacking President, who absolved Reid of any incipient race-consciousness or color classifyin'. This, of course, is more evidence that race, color and identity is the club that liberals use on everyone else.
At his blog recently, Roger Simon posted "2010: A Year of Living Dangerously". Simon was on the barricades with other leftist radicals in the 1960's; over the years he's remained a classical liberal/libertarian and, for that reason, finds himself more friendly to conservatism than the reactionary liberalism of the present.
Roger mused - not in his words - that there's the smell of smoke in the air. 2010 is rumbling with changes, but not of the kind envisioned by the rigid liberal yokels in charge here and abroad. I agree, although I can't identify the causes - as one never can. Historians do that when the smoke clears.
The Left has tried for two generations to reduce everything in life to its smallest controllable dimensions, to miniaturize the large truths of human nature, which is like trying to hide giants in a land of pygmies. The symbols of the unconquered raise their hands and voices every day in this blog and thousands of others. Their blood is pooling in Iran at this moment.
Leftists have tried to disable the critical faculties through fear, re-education and the subversion of human aspiration, to make all other modes of thought impossible. They imagine a friction-free State with themselves turning the levers of power. But that seems to be coming to an end, because of the multiplying problems of reality on the ground. Suit up and be prepared.
If I had emigrated to Austria from, say, Turkey, or some more desolate region in the Middle East, I would think that some of the natives of my host country had gone mad.
The Vienna Vegetable Orchestra performs music solely on instruments made from vegetables. Using carrot flutes, pumpkin basses, leek violins, leek-zucchini vibrators (sic), cucumberphones and celery bongos, the orchestra creates its own extraordinary and vegetable sound universe...One could easily leap from here to a Get Out of Europe trope, and a Bring The Troops Home theme. Maybe I just did. Russian tanks charging through the Fulda Gap is a remote possibility, because what is there to seize?
Forty years ago, in opposing American military defense of Western Europe, the otherwise reprehensible Norman Mailer speculated that the Russians would occupy it, and [the Soviet Empire] would "die of indigestion".
Music experimentation with vegetables is a novelty, not an innovation (there is an enormous difference), and the dour conservative knows that art is about two things - discovery and recognition. What about a cucumberphone?
In some important way, humans are meant to be better than this.
Rhod, I post the following to remind you of America's version of this.
Number of long-term unemployed hits highest rate since 1948
Forty percent of all unemployed Americans, at least 6 million, have been out of work more than six months. Many are so discouraged they have lost hope that a job exists for them.
Christian Science Monitor
It is a national challenge: reduce the number of people who have been out of work for a long time. On Friday, in the December unemployment report, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said the number of people out of work for 27 weeks or more hit 6.1 million Americans, or 40 percent of all 15.3 million jobless. This is the most since 1948, when the data was first recorded, according to the Department of Labor. On average, it now takes 20.5 weeks to find a new job – double the amount of time in the 1982-83 recession.
Many of the long-term unemployed are older workers, but some are the very young who were the first fired. A significant percentage of them don’t have a college degree, but some do. And many of them are now so discouraged they have lost their belief that a job exists for them.
Many feel shut out of the system
“It’s a real risk to the workplace,” says John Challenger of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, the outplacement firm in Chicago. “We may be creating a permanent group of people who think there are no jobs out there, who feel they are shut out of the system.”
Part of the reason the nation has such a large number of long-term unemployed is related to the nature of the downturn, says economist Richard DeKaser of Woodley Park Research in Washington.
“This is not your typical cyclical downturn where hiring is just postponed until business improves,” says Mr. DeKaser. “This is really more about structural unemployment.”
Entire industries have been hobbled, such as construction, some elements of financial services, and the auto industry.
Another problem for the long-term unemployed is their inability to match existing skills to available jobs, says DeKaser. For example, 1.8 million construction jobs have been lost since December 2007. However, hiring continues in the healthcare and education fields.
“Your typical construction worker cannot migrate to those areas of the market,” says DeKaser.
Job competition favors those who've recently worked
The long-term unemployed also have another problem: explaining to an employer why they have been out of work for so long, says Mr. Challenger.
“Potential employers wonder why didn’t someone hire this person,” says Challenger. “As the economy recovers and someone who has been out of work for 45 days is competing against someone out of work for nine months, companies tend to take the person who is newly minted.”
Challenger wonders if the large number of long-term unemployed will result in the unemployment rate remaining high for some time. In fact, many economists expect that as the jobs market improves, some of the long-term unemployed (those no longer looking for work) will return to the workforce, pushing up the unemployment rate, now at 10 percent.
January 8, 2010
This number is from ORCHESTRA WIVES. At 0:15 you'll cacth a quick glimpse of Caesar Romero faking the piano followed by a young Jackie Gleason faking the bass.
Go to LibertarianPunk for your copy
FREE DOWNLOAD of Right Arm of Wyoming's KICK A** First album
1. GET OFF MY PROPERTY!
2. MY GUN KEEPS YOU HONEST
3. REDISTRIBUTION OF THEFT
4. GOVERNMENT IS A COLLECTIVE HALLUCINATION
5. GUN CONTROL GETS WOMEN RAPED
6. LIBERTY IN SHARDS
7. FREAKY LIBERAL MAMMAL SEX
8. FAKIN’ THE RACE CARD
9. SINGLE CRACKLING BLUE FLASH
10. WE ARE THE GOOD GUYS!
11. US Bill of Rights (read by Mrs. Dean)
12. LETTER TO A YOUNG ME (SPOKEN)
13. MY GUN KEEPS YOU HONEST – CLEAN VERSION FOR RADIO
...Even if Old school punk rock isn't your thing , You have got to love the attitude!
...Support the band and buy the hard copy if you like what you hear! Spread this good word far and near...
Here is some more Liberty tunes for the good old boy's. http://www.raystevens.com/
Working on the Big band request!
Hat Tip to Big Journalism
There are many things on the World Wide Web that are not suitable for public viewing but that should be required viewing for journalists and political figures to alert them to the horrors that exist in some parts of the world. This should not be to incite but rather to rinse away their naïveté in dealing with a hostile culture and our potential enemies.
It is apparent that the mainstream media has no interest in covering stories that shed an unfavorable side of Islam and, frankly, this smacks of cowardice.
The elite will instead claim that the “vast majority” of Muslims are peace-loving and are just as horrified at the acts of a small number of radical terrorists. That may very well be true but even a fraction of a billion is a very large number and that number is growing and gaining influence around the world thanks to the stupidity and cowardice of what should be called the “lamestream” press and those in our government today.
The Internet bloggers are doing the nasty job of covering the world of Islamic jihadists and it is truly chilling. The video of Daniel Pearl’s beheading could not be shown on the public airwaves but was easily available on the web. Gruesome as it was it cannot compare with this video of children training for Jihad beheading a man all the while praising Allah.
This video is shown on a site that monitors the growing influence of the radicals and frankly I had no stomach to watch more than a second of the film. As is noted here: “It’s the next generation of mujahideen who are expected to fight and kill infidels to establish global Islamic rule.”
Sharia law is now being accepted in British Courts. And I’d like to know why the feminist groups aren’t railing against this Koranic weapon against Muslim women. Sharia law permits honor killings and other atrocities against them and we are supposed to accept this as legitimate? Are we as nutty as the Brits?
Phyllis Chesler is a renowned feminist who earned the scorn of NOW and other groups when she admitted her support for George Bush. She knew first hand what happens to women under Islamic law as a young bride married to an Afghan and is appalled at the lack of reporting on this issue. Writing for pajamasmedia.com she is doing the job our press is neglecting.
January 7, 2010
''Same thing in 2005. We sat here in 2005, and SC was an unbelievable team, and I can remember Texas was soft. I can remember NFL guys are soft. I can remember we don't have a chance, and our guys played great that night. I also remember standing out on the field before the game and looking down at SC and seeing the horse and the band and all the good stuff about SC that all of us grew up with, and I saw Pete and talked to him for a while, and I was standing there, and Greg Davis, the offensive coordinator came up, and I thought, my gosh, they've got a great-looking football team. Look at those guys. He just patted me on the shoulder, and he said, "Well, turn around. Yours look pretty good, too.
''I thought that was pretty good. I'm not sure that we ever give ourselves enough credit. We've got a good team, too.''
Like the "invincible" '05 USC team, Alabama is in trouble.
Hook 'em, Horns.
January 6, 2010
From The American Thinker
Hat Tip to The Sipsey Street Irregulars
By James Simpson
Many are puzzled that Democrats persist in ramming unpopular and destructive legislation down our collective throats with no apparent concern for their plummeting poll numbers. A widespread belief is that the Democrats are committing political suicide and will be swept from one or both houses of Congress with unprecedented electoral losses next November. But since Democrat politicians rarely do things that will not ultimately benefit themselves, this column asked two weeks ago, "What do they know that we don't?"
We may have found out. It's called universal voter registration. The Wall Street Journal's John Fund described the Democrat plan recently at a David Horowitz Freedom Center forum. Watch the video here.
Fund describes the proposal as follows:
In January, Chuck Schumer and Barney Frank will propose universal voter registration. What is universal voter registration? It means all of the state laws on elections will be overridden by a federal mandate. The feds will tell the states: 'take everyone on every list of welfare that you have, take everyone on every list of unemployed you have, take everyone on every list of property owners, take everyone on every list of driver's license holders and register them to vote regardless of whether they want to be ...'
Fund anticipates that Congress will attempt to ram this legislation through, as with the health care bill. What a surprise! Fund covers the vote issue at greater length in his book, How the Obama Administration Threatens to Undermine Our Elections.
Leftist groups are already arguing that universal voter registration will solve all the problems with our voting system. But the left created most of these problems. The radical leftist Nation Magazine, for example, absolutely loves the idea of universal voter registration. This is the same magazine, however, that advanced Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven's Manufactured Crisis strategy. The Cloward/Piven strategy was designed to undermine government institutions by overwhelming them with impossible demands for services. Cloward and Piven focused on welfare, housing, and voting as the main targets of this strategy, and the radical group ACORN was specifically created for the purpose of executing it.
The Nation article enthusiastically lists Cloward/Piven-inspired organizations like Project Vote, the ACORN group where President Obama cut his teeth. It also discusses the left's efforts to push enforcement of the Motor Voter law and explains how universal voter registration could assist in these efforts. Cloward and Piven were the ones who crafted Motor Voter legislation in the early 1980s and pushed for its enactment until 1993, when President Clinton signed it into law.
Cloward and Piven considered Motor Voter to be their crowning, lifetime achievement. The picture above, from White House photo archives, shows Cloward (light gray suit) and Piven (green coat and navy dress) standing directly behind Clinton at the Motor Voter signing ceremony.
The left has predictably launched vicious smear attacks against John Fund for bringing universal voter registration to our attention. A Google search of the issue brings up any number of nasty ad hominem attacks. Most notable is Media Matters, the leftist group whose sole purpose seems to be to smear Republicans and defend the left's indefensible policies. They put up this gem: "Right-Wing Ass Weasel John Fund Doesn't Like Universal Voter Registration because of ACORN."
The problems with universal voter registration are numerous and obvious. Many states' lists include vast numbers of illegals, including some states which allow illegals to obtain drivers licenses; because many homeowners have more than one home, there will be duplicates; because so many people are on so many separate federal and state government agency lists, there will be duplicates; and because so many lists exist with little or no cross-checking capability, all of these duplicates are likely to go uncorrected. Add to this the fact that Dems hope to extend voting rights to felons, and the whole thing begins to look like a nationwide Democrat voter registration drive facilitated by taxpayers.
Universal voter registration will create massive vulnerabilities to systemic voter fraud nationwide, and if Democrats have proven anything in recent years, it is that they can win elections that way. The George-Soros-funded Secretary of State project (SOS) was designed to take advantage of such vulnerabilities and may have been developed in anticipation of the universal voter registration plan. Al Franken's stolen election in Minnesota was a trial run for the SOS project. Longtime ACORN friend Mark Ritchie was elected Minnesota Secretary of State in 2006 with Soros's SOS and ACORN money, and what followed in Norm Coleman's Senate runoff election was a frightening demonstration of just how far Democrats will go to win. Franken won the runoff, and the Democrats got their filibuster-proof sixty-vote Senate majority.
The Motor Voter law was correctly identified as a facilitator of vote fraud. One of the few legal issues Barack Obama actually participated in as a lawyer was a 1995 suit against the State of Illinois, which he brought on behalf of ACORN. Then-Republican Governor Jim Edgars saw the newly passed Motor Voter act as creating the potential for massive vote fraud and refused to implement it. With the assistance of the Clinton Justice Department, Obama's legal team won that suit. Obama himself actually participated very little, a strategy that seems to have served him well in life. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, after identifying himself in court proceedings, Obama sat back and let "the heavy-hitters at the Justice Department make the arguments."
It is not surprising that the Democrats are now choosing to push this new initiative, for universal voter registration will be Motor Voter on turbochargers. And who better to sign it into law than the president from ACORN?
...I cannot believe more people know and care about this. They will when the kids are hungry. By then it will be far too late...
Mike from Sipsey Street speaks for me in his closing comments.
"If this thing is rammed through the Congress and becomes law, it is a Casus Belli. Period. They think the Tea Parties were rowdy? Hold onto your hats, folks. You ain't seen nothin' yet."
For you non latin types; Click Here
GNN - Known Egyptian chicken-bomber Abu Nisharraf, was snapped by paparazzi before boarding a taxi outside Kennedy International Airport. He evaded security checks in Cairo, and apparently breezed through TSA checkpoints after landing in New York. He is believed to be in Manhattan with Semtex-filled chickens. President Obama described Nisharraf's presence in the US as "...another screw-up, but we have to be careful not to profile..." Federal authorities in New York have been alerted.
UPDATE: Robert Gibbs, answering questions about the TSA's failure to identify Nisharraff said "...there's no smoking chicken here..."
There are some national newspapers in the UK who are spinning madly in an attempt to keep the Global Warming-Climate Change sacre campaign going. This one is entertaining in its desperation.
Global warming is happening, even if it doesn't feel like it
By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor
The Independent (UK)
You might think the current weather conditions are almost Siberian – and you'd be right. Britain's most prolonged spell of freezing weather since 1981 is being caused by a huge mass of intensely cold air over north-east Russia, with easterly winds sweeping its glacial temperatures across northern Europe to the UK.
And just as in the 20th century's coldest ever winter in Britain, of 1962-63 – although not on such a severe scale – the cold is being held in place over the British Isles by what is known as a "blocking anti-cyclone", a static area of high pressure over Greenland which is preventing the usual warmer, damper westerly winds from reaching us across the Atlantic.
The present situation is known as an "Omega block" as it consists of two high-pressure systems which on a weather map resemble the two arms of the Greek letter Omega – the Greenland one, and the Siberian anti-cyclone itself (whose stillness and clear skies are causing its intense cold, as much as 48C below zero in some places).
So if it is the longest cold snap for 29 years, does that prove that the idea of global warming is a non-starter? Funnily enough, it doesn't. For once you look at current meteorological conditions across the whole world, a different picture emerges.
The map on the left from the UK Met Office (it is the most recent one) shows a global picture of land surface temperature "anomalies" last week – that is, temperatures which are above or below the seasonal average. The shading from blue to black shows temperatures that are below the 1961-1990 average, while yellow through to red shows temperatures which are above it.
There, clearly marked in black, is the intense Siberian cold, with some readings of 10C below normal or even more, and you can follow the freeze westwards through Scandinavia to Britain, parts of which are shown as more than 3C below the norm.
But look at the rest of the world – in north-east America and Canada, in north Africa, across the Mediterranean, through to south-west Asia, temperatures are very much above normal – in many places by more than 5C, and in parts of northern Canada, by more than 10C.
Closer to home, while we shivered yesterday, in Madrid the temperature was 10C against a seasonal average of 9C, and in Rome it was 13C, compared to an average of 11C. The weather's natural variability means it is impossible to draw long-term conclusions about a changing climate from any single episode, be it of hot, or cold.
January 5, 2010
Here's a troubling post from Ex-Hollywood Liberal. If you get a chance, stop by his blog and say hello.
Here's the latest smack on taxpayers. The city spent $32,000 on 70,000 fliers that tell you how to shoot heroin, complete with detailed tips on prepping the dope and injecting it into your arm.
The NY Post’s Brad Hamilton reports:
The Health Department handout has outraged New York's top drug prosecutors and abuse experts.
"It's basically step-by-step instruction on how to inject a poison," said John Gilbride, who heads the Drug Enforcement Administration's New York office.
“It's sick," said City Council member Peter Vallone Jr. (D-Queens)
"Foolish," said Columbia University drug researcher and treatment expert Dr. Herbert Kleber.The 16-page pamphlet features seven comics-like illustrations and offers dope fiends such useful advice as "Warm your body (jump up and down) to show your veins," and "Find the vein before you try to inject."
It even encourages addicts to keep jabbing if their needles miss the mark.
"If you don't 'register,' pull out and try again," it says.
The brochure sends the wrong message about the dangers of the drug, experts
"It concerns me that the city would produce a how-to on using drugs," Gilbride said. "Heroin is extremely potent. You may only get the chance to use it once. To suggest there is a method of using that alleviates the dangers, that's very disturbing."
Vallone, who chairs the council's public safety committee, vowed to shut down the distribution of the pamphlet.
"This is a tremendous misuse of city funds, and I'm going to see what I can do to stop it. It sends a message to our youth: give it a try," he fumed.
Gilbride and city drug czar Bridget Brennan noted that the manual does have some sound advice. It stresses the importance of kicking the habit, seeking professional help and not sharing needles. But it also spells out how junkies should ready their fix and the best ways to shoot it -- a bad idea when more New York teens than ever are trying heroin, they said.
"What we do not want to do is suggest that there's anything safe about shooting up narcotics," said Brennan, the city's special narcotics prosecutor. "No matter how many times you wash your hands or how clean the needle is, it's still poison that you're putting in your veins."
The guidebook, called "Take Charge, Take Care," has sections on overdosing, testing for HIV and hepatitis -- and how to "prepare drugs carefully" and "how to take care of your veins."
Kleber, a psychiatry professor, said the brochure could help save lives but that it was "foolish" for the city to include tips on how to shoot up.
The Health Department defended its brochure, saying it was helpful and necessary, and has been distributed only to addicts or those at risk of becoming abusers.
“Our goal is to promote health and save lives with this information," said Daliah Heller, assistant commissioner for the Bureau of Alcohol and Drug Use Prevention, Care and Treatment.
Asked why the handout tells people how to shoot up, Heller said, "From a health perspective, there is a less harmful way to inject yourself."
The flier fails to identify the city agency as its creator and distributor, and mentions only a group called LifeNet and the city's 311 help line as call-in resources to addicts.
LifeNet is run by the nonprofit Mental Health Association of New York City, which is heavily funded by the city. "It's certainly not ours," said association spokeswoman Beth Garcia.
Having arrested 2500+ heroin addicts, I've found that most street heroin (is there any other kind?) is about two-twelve percent pure and 88-98 percent filler that often includes feces, asphalt, salt, detergent, quinine and anything else you can imagine. Teaching addicts how to use clean syringes to inject street heroin is like teaching children how to use clean cups to drink sewage. That the Health Department of the most populated city in the US does this should also explain why our health department officials cannot be trusted to create policies regarding HIV or flu shots.
from Want Some Torture With Your Peanuts?
Hat Tip to Libertarian Punk
Just when you thought you’ve heard it all...
A senior government official with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has expressed great interest in a so-called safety bracelet that would serve as a stun device, similar to that of a police Taser®. According to this promotional video found at the Lamperd Less Lethal, Inc. website, the bracelet would be worn by all airline passengers (video also shown below).
This bracelet would:
• Take the place of an airline boarding pass
• Contain personal information about the traveler
• Be able to monitor the whereabouts of each passenger and his/her luggage
• Shock the wearer on command, completely immobilizing him/her for several minutes
The Electronic ID Bracelet, as it’s referred to, would be worn by every traveler “until they disembark the flight at their destination.” Yes, you read that correctly. Every airline passenger would be tracked by a government-funded GPS, containing personal, private and confidential information, and would shock the customer worse than an electronic dog collar if the passenger got out of line.
Clearly the Electronic ID Bracelet is a euphemism for the EMD Safety Bracelet, or at least it has a nefarious hidden ability (thus the term ID Bracelet is ambiguous at best). EMD stands for Electro-Musclar Disruption. Again, according to the promotional video, the bracelet can completely immobilize the wearer for several minutes.
So is the government really that interested in this bracelet?
According to this letter from DHS official, Paul S. Ruwaldt of the Science and Technology Directorate, office of Research and Development, which was written to the inventor whom he had previously met with, Ruwaldt wrote, “To make it clear, we [the federal government] are interested in . . . the immobilizing security bracelet, and look forward to receiving a written proposal.”
The letterhead, in case you were wondering, is from a U.S. Department of Homeland Security office at the William J. Hughes Technical Center at the Atlantic City International Airport, or the Federal Aviation Administration headquarters.
In another part of the letter, Mr. Ruwaldt confirmed, “In addition, it is conceivable to envision a use to improve air security, on passenger planes.”
Would every paying airline passenger flying on a commercial airplane be mandated to wear one of these devices? I cringe at the thought. Not only could it be used as a physical restraining device, but also as a method of interrogation, according to the same aforementioned letter from Mr. Ruwaldt.
Would you let them put one of those on your wrist? Would you allow the airline employees, which would be mandated by the government, to place such a bracelet on any member of your family?
Why are tax dollars being spent on something like this?
Is this a police state or is this America?
UPDATE: Lamperd Less Lethal Inc., the Canadian company that designed the EMD Safety Bracelet, has responded to the controversy as follows:
We wish to clear up any misconceptions regarding the EMD Safety Bracelet for Airline Security.
The bracelets remain inactive until a hijacking situation has been identified. At such time a designated crew member will activate the bracelets making them capable of delivering the punitive measure - but only to those that need to be restrained. We believe that all passengers will welcome deliverance from a hijacking, as will the families, carriers, insurance providers etc. The F-16 on the wing-tip is not to reassure the passengers during a hijacking, but rather to shoot them down. Besides activation using the grid screen, the steward / stewardess will have a laser activator that can activate any bracelet as needed by simply pointing the laser at the bracelet - that laser dot only needs to be within 10 inches of the bracelet to activate it.
* * * * *
UPDATE: From CheifBo in the comment section
I would like to inform all interested in the truth about Lamperd's involvement in this project [EMD safety bracelet]. I have personally been involved in the research and development of state of the art training programs and weapon systems with Lapmerd Less Lethal for the past eight years and have found them to be of the highest of integrity and concern for human life and the preservation of peace. Their mission is to develop and distribute the best products in the world when it comes to Law Enforcement, Security and Military applications within use of force. Having been a sworn law enforcement officer for nearly 27 years and a police trainer in Use of Force Management since 1993 I have observed alot of devices and gimmicks that have come and gone as the catch all in securing America.
Lamperd agreed in principal to assist in the development of this product for the patent holder [inventor]. Once this is established, then more research is placed on the actual application of the device. We conduct our training hands on, we do not farm it out as others do. So before we are ready to place a product on the market we know what it is expected to do and how it is expected to perform. We also go through great lengths to put in place a training program that will school even the novice in safely using any product used in applying force in any situation. I think alot of the readers have jumped the gun when it comes to this issue and this certain product. Lamperd is a publicly traded company that keeps its shareholders informed on its latest products and projects. I admire them for this and so do thousands of police, military and security personnel from all around the world that we have trained. Please feel free to peruse their internet site for continuing updates on products and its mission at www.lamperdlesslethal.com and be safe out there.
...So MUSLIM terrorists attack us, and we are turned into CRIMINALS because we want to use aircraft to travel. While MUSLIM MEN are the perps, The anti- Americans insist we all have to be turned into perps so we do not hurt MUSLIM feelings. The lisping Obot talking point machine says that profiling MUSLIMS would be racist and that will make things worse. Maybe the twits should be worrying about treating Americans as CRIMINALS who only crime is wanting to travel as Humans instead of livestock...
...And if you want to stop the terrible carbon footprint of air travel, why not make it so vile to do so your eco-madness aims are met without having to be the bad guy who bans it through law!!
Thank goodness our Homeland Security people are on the job after the EunuchBomber botched attack on Christmas Day. We certainly don’t want to have independent war correspondents passing through our airports without revealing their annual income:
Got arrested at the Seattle airport for refusing to say how much money I make. (The uniformed ones say I was not “arrested”, but they definitely handcuffed me.) Their videos and audios should show that I was polite, but simply refused questions that had nothing to do with national security. Port authority police eventually came — they were professionals — and rescued me from the border bullies.
When they handcuffed me, I said that no country has ever treated me so badly. Not China. Not Vietnam. Not Afghanistan. Definitely not Singapore or India or Nepal or Germany, not Brunei, not Indonesia, or Malaysia, or Kuwait or Qatar or United Arab Emirates. No county has treated me with the disrespect can that can be expected from our border bullies.
Jazz Shaw wonders what the hell is going on:
Very strange. Even if you’re into profiling, Yon would hardly fit one you’d be interested in. Of course, his passport, by now, doubtless has a list of countries stamped into it which could give an inspector pause, but that’s no excuse. Very, very strange. I expect this one will be high profile enough that you’ll see an apology coming from the government.
Unless there is more to this story, an apology would be the least owed to Yon. When an American citizen with a valid passport presents himself for travel, there should be some reasonable screening to verify identity and to determine whether there is a physical risk, ie, weapons and the like. Why should border security be interested in Yon’s annual income? How does that relate to national security and border protection? Unless this is an arm of the Internal Revenue Service, it doesn’t, and Yon was right to refuse to answer the question.
Instead of hassling American citizens about their income or watching the ice melt, how about paying attention to actual security and intelligence issues? Please?
Who is Michael Yon?
Michael Yon is a former Green Beret, native of Winter Haven, Fl. who has been reporting from Iraq and Afghanistan since December 2004. No other reporter has spent as much time with combat troops in these two wars. Michael’s dispatches from the frontlines have earned him the reputation as the premier independent combat journalist of his generation. His work has been featured on “Good Morning America,” The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, CNN, ABC, FOX, as well as hundreds of other major media outlets all around the world.
Michael had previously written a critically acclaimed memoir, Danger Close. He was authoring another book when two of his friends died on consecutive days in Iraq (one of them being Winter Haven native Scott Helvenston). Following accounts in the American press, Michael became concerned that we were losing the war. At the same time, friends in the military said that the media was not telling the whole story. Not wanting to take sides in the increasingly acrimonious argument over the war, Michael simply wanted to learn the truth for himself, and to report without fear or favor. He decided to go to Iraq, financing his trip from his own pocket for more than half a year, then eventually receiving generous contributions from readers of his online magazine: MichaelYon-Online.com. As early as February 2005, Michael described the violence in Iraq as a civil war. In 2006, he said we were losing in Afghanistan. In 2007, he was the first reporter to claim the success of “the Surge.” When he first voiced these opinions, they were extremely controversial. Now they are conventional wisdom.
In 2008 Michael published his second book, Moment of Truth in Iraq, which is packed with exciting and heart-rending tales from the battlefields.
Even as main stream media is quietly pulling their reporters from Iraq in the wake of a weakened economy, Michael is preparing to return to Afghanistan in 2009, and from his observations and insight, Afghanistan is going to be much worse than anything we saw in Iraq and the conflict there could continue for decades.
Reporting from a war zone is very rough on equipment, Michael is constantly having to have his equipment repaired and replaced. Without the continued support and contributions of readers it will be impossible for him to continue his mission in Afghanistan and reporting on the victory in Iraq.
...A REAL reporter (as in a reporter who reports stories, vs. a "MSM "reporter" who is a Obot spin doctor).
...Land of the free? MY A$$.
It's beginning to look like Yemen is the new Afghanistan - a failed Muslim state turned into an al Qaeda safe haven. The Christmas Day bombing plot was hatched there. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton declared yesterday that instability in Yemen poses a "global threat." The United States is conducting air strikes against jihadist militants. In a recent Fox News online poll, 60 percent of respondents agreed that this country should "organize an offensive in Yemen in response to Al Qaeda threats." Help is on the way from America, but unfortunately they are terrorist reinforcements.
Over the weekend, President Obama's top counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, reiterated the administration's intention to continue sending Guantanamo detainees back to Yemen. About a third of the remaining detainees at the U.S. military detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are Yemeni, the largest single national group being held.
Six Yemeni detainees were returned in December, and "several of those detainees were put into Yemeni custody right away," Mr. Brennan said.
But according to a report from Yemen monitored by the BBC, the freed fighters "arrived in Yemen in order to arrange for the release procedures, question them and make them sign the required pledges that they will not join Al Qaeda after they are released." Call us cynical, but we doubt that "taking the pledge" is going to stop these men from finding ways to continue the jihad.
One of the jihadists released in December is Faruq Ali Ahmed (Detainee No. 32), who, according to the October 2005 Administrative Review Board Proceeding, was accused of being one of Osama bin Laden's bodyguards while the terror mastermind was hunkered down in Tora Bora in December 2001. Mr. Ahmed denied having anything to do with bin Laden, saying he was in Afghanistan only to teach the Koran to children and was never involved with terrorism. Mr. Ahmed said that if he were released he would like to "play soccer, get married, get his own house and find a job in Yemen." He added that he "does not feel any animosity towards the United States." We hope that Mr. Ahmed settles down, gets a job, starts a family and plays a lot of soccer in his free time; but somehow we doubt it.
An Australian news site, News.com.au, treats us to a tabloid-style revelation. I know this is like watching a slow-motion car wreck, but this one is slo-mo tumbling down a cliff. Fore!!
TIGER Woods' betrayed wife has taken another chunk out of the love-rat golfer - a whacking great slice of his huge wealth.
Tough Swedish model Elin Nordegren revealed to friends how she extracted revenge when they asked what the shamed golfing superstar had given her for Christmas.
She coolly declared "Three hundred million dollars, thank you very much", Britain's News of the World reports.
Just two weeks ago reports said she had vowed to drive Woods out of her life with divorce and a 50 per cent slice of his $600m ($668m) fortune.
Now it looks like she got her way and piled on the agony by barring Tiger from seeing their two kids on Christmas Day and forcing him and his mum to post the children's presents instead.
Nordegren, who turned 30 on Friday and is currently on vacation in France, has now cut all ties with Tiger after sensational revelations linking him to 18 mistresses.
The Florida-based sports legend, 34, has not seen his daughter Sam, two, or 10-month-old son Charlie for almost a month due to Nordegren's concerns about his mental state.
She is now pressing ahead with the divorce plans and intends to start a new life near their old family home in Orlando within the next six months.
A source told the News of the World: "She's 100 per cent determined to split with Tiger.
"When she boasted of the $300m ($334m) Christmas gift and then laughed it was clear to everyone around her that she's more focused than ever about moving on with her life.
"She still has feelings for Tiger as the father of her kids, but now her only dealings with him will be to get her and the youngsters set up in a comfortable home with everything they need. And so far Tiger has just agreed to settle for an easy life."
The steely Swede has moved out of the family home and steered clear of her husband since child protection service agents visited them there in late November.
Read more about Tiger Woods and Elin Nordegren at the News of the World
January 4, 2010
Democrats Kill Another Successful Voucher Program
SusanAnne Hiller over at Big Government describes how Pro-Choice is a difficult concept for Democrats to grasp (unless it applies to murdering babies).
This is big government at its finest hour. The Democrats have officially killed a successful private school voucher program banishing more than 3,300 low-income children back to the DC schools they so desperately wanted to escape. The Heartland Institute reports:
The leaders of D.C.’s school choice movement, Kevin P. Chavous (former D.C. Councilman) and Virginia Walden Ford (executive director of D.C. Parents for School Choice), today issued the following statement:
“House and Senate Appropriators this week ignored the wishes of D.C.’s mayor, D.C.’s public schools chancellor, a majority of D.C.’s city council, and more than 70 percent of D.C. residents and have mandated the slow death of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. This successful school voucher program—for D.C.’s poorest families—has allowed more than 3,300 children to attend the best schools they have ever known.
The decision to end the program, a decision buried in a thousand-page spending bill and announced right before the holidays, destroys the hopes and dreams of thousands of D.C. families. Parents and children have rallied countless times over the past year in support of reauthorization and in favor of strengthening the OSP.
Yet, despite the clearly positive results and the proven success of this program, Sen. Dick Durbin, Rep. Jose Serrano, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, and Secretary Arne Duncan worked together to kill the OSP. Funding the program only for existing children shrinks the program each year, compromises the federal evaluation of the program, denies entry to the siblings of existing participants, and punishes those children waiting in line by sentencing them to failing and often unsafe schools.
The Democrats have effectively ended the voucher program. Obama only extended it into the 2009-2010 school year. He could have done more. He didn’t. Underpriveleged children–whom the Democrats
oppress “protect” from the greed and injustices of the Right had a chance to gain the social justice and fairness Obama continuously touts in his speeches.
The Democrats have spent trillions of our tax dollars so carelessly with failed stimulus pork payouts, cash for clunkers, auto bailouts, bank bailouts, and additional Fannie and Freddie bailouts, you would think they could spare an extra $50 million over five years to continue to educate poor children–especially minority children.
For the record, it was the Republicans in 2004 who started the voucher program and Republican Senator John Ensign (R-NV) who introduced an amendment to the omnibus appropriations bill to extend the voucher program. Democrats voted down the amendment 50-39.
Sorry, got football on the brain. It's the old receiver in me looking for the "hot" route.
Not much time here, as work and life beckon. However, just a few quick "hits", if you will:
1) Is it just me, or has there been a proliferation of underwear bombings, radical Muslims in the Army committing acts of terrorism, guys fleeing security in airports? Never mind. Slap me for even thinking that. There is not any difference in this Democrat Regime from the prior Republican Administration. Glenn Beck says so;
2) Chalk it up to bias, but I prefer my president to vacation at a ranch rather than Hawaii;
3) Chalk it up to ... caring about America, but I prefer my president to come back from the beach after jihadis attempt a hit on the U.S.;
4) Those of you who wanted to throw that piker Pres. Bush under the bus for spending too much ... have you ever seen a U-Haul behind a hearse?;
5) Get well, Rush;
6) Pres. Obama was right about one thing -- simply electing the fool caused the sham that is the Cult of the Feverish Globe to die of hypothermia. Baby, it's cold outside, even here in Texas; and
Quick, hit me. I'm open ...
7) Hook 'em, Horns. Beat Alabama.
Wait, I went for two ...
8) Hey Nick, check the Admin. I think you got a Toaster for Christmas.
Happy New Year, everyone.
January 3, 2010
from Web Warrior Online
Hat Tip to Western Rifle Shooters
A sobering essay by former Marine officer Tom Baugh, author of Starving the Monkeys.
Book review HERE
Books website HERE
"At ease, Marines, and be seated" orders the gruff Gunnery Sergeant. "Now turn to Chapter 8 in your Military Constitutional Law text," he continues. "Today we discuss the appropriate conditions for shooting a colonel who is issuing an order which would violate the Constitutional rights of American citizens. Our first scenario involves gun seizures..."
Absurd, isn't it, to think that this sort of education is conducted among our armed forces? Yet, millions of citizens indulge this unspoken fantasy each time they imagine that the military exists to preserve our freedoms.
When I was at the Naval Academy in the mid-80s, and a Marine officer in the late 1980s and early 1990s, discussion of such issues was considered taboo. One fellow junior officer even scoffed that "Congress can change that Constitution any time they like." This isn't to say that there wasn't an undercurrent among most of the warfighters that issues such as gun control and preservation freedom of speech might one day pose a crisis of command. Yet this undercurrent was kept carefully concealed, and tended to become a more and more uncomfortable subject as the ranks of one's company became more elevated. Fortunately, with the Soviets and the threat of global thermonuclear war, these issues seemed far removed and safe from serious discussion.
Not so today. In the aftermath of Katrina, armed and uniformed soldiers patrolled the streets and disarmed Americans. Some uniformed soldiers were captured on film lamenting that "I can't believe that we're doing this to Americans." Yet, they did it anyway, lamentations notwithstanding. But why?
To answer that, we need to understand the principles of military command and education. For veterans, this discussion is unnecessary. For the vast number of non-veterans, especially those who harbor that most dangerous and ill-advised fantasy of a Constitutionally-aware military, this discussion is essential to survival.
American military education is one of the most finely tuned and adapted mechanisms in the world for instilling knowledge into its students. No other school or university can come close to the efficiency at which military knowledge is imparted to novices. There are even courses, such as Principles of Military Instruction, for how to teach military courses. These courses even teach how to develop such courses from scratch. The famous John Saxon math courses, popular among homeschoolers, exhibit these techniques, courtesy of that former Air Force officer and academy instructor. Military courses developed along these lines tend to be highly effective at teaching motivated students. Students motivated to learn how to do things such as extinguish fires or shoot missiles. Or shoot you.
As a result, if it is worth teaching to soldiers, sailors, airmen or Marines, it is worth embodying in a course. Captured as a course or in official manuals, such instruction is available to all for review and comment to make sure that the correct instruction is given, and given correctly. Conversely, if it doesn't exist as a course, it isn't being taught. And if it isn't being taught, it isn't even on the radar of the military mind. At least not the minds of those in command. Good luck finding a course such as "When to Shoot the Colonels" in a military instruction catalogue.
Even basics such as reading and writing and math are available as courses. But not shooting colonels. What colonel would even authorize such a thing? Only a colonel who realizes that one day he might have to shoot a general, of course. But that would require a separate course for command grades, entitled "When to Shoot the Generals." And who would authorize that? We can keep climbing this chain all the way up, if we like, but at some point the absurdity makes its point. No one in a position of command or power is going to surrender that power for something as irrelevant as your rights.
And what if a particular soldier scored highly on such a course? What colonel would hand out high efficiency reports on his potential executioner?
Another aspect of this problem that needs to be clearly understood is that all modern American military officers are political appointees. Surprised? You shouldn't be. As a practical exercise ask one to read his commission document to you. Pay particular attention to the "follow lawful orders" part, along with the "serve at the pleasure of the President" phrase. Oath of office notwithstanding, nothing in that document says anything about what to do about unlawful orders. Or even lawful orders, such as "seize all guns because Congress authorized it," which haven't yet stood the test of the judicial branch to adjudge Constitutionality. And like that 1stLt said, enough Congressmen can get together and change that Constitution. The Constitution itself says so.
Besides, if some uppity colonel out there decided to start authorizing instruction about when to shoot the colonels, you can bet that pretty quick the President would no longer be pleased. Because he or she would know where that path must ultimately lead. Which is why uppity colonels don't stay colonels for very long. Political appointees, my friends. That vision you have in your head of the noble military protecting your rights is just a dangerous fantasy. A fantasy you have to get rid of right now, before it gets you killed.
"But wait," you say, "I know Sgt. Soandso, and he would never go along with a gun seizure." Maybe not, but then again, you might be surprised. To "not go along" would mean that he has to violate orders. This violation would at the very least be a career-killer, or possibly get him shot in an extreme situation. Shot by who? By all the other sergeants who don't want to get shot, of course. After all, the colonel only needs a handful of sergeants who are in it for a career, and a raft of lieutenants, captains and majors who one day want to be colonels. For you to have your rights protected would require that a sufficient number of each of these decide, simultaneously, to put on the brakes. It is easier just to shoot you for resisting and go about their day. Say it again, "political appointees."
Besides, if all of these people decide in unison to protect you, and in so doing put their own careers, freedoms and life on the line, who is going to protect them? You? And if so, how? You needed them to protect you in the first place. And if Sgt. Soandso gets shot protecting your rights, what about his family? Retribution aside, who takes care of them with him out of the picture? Worse, after Sgt. Soandso gets shot, some corporal will be there ready to pin on those chevrons. And you can bet that to that guy, you are a minor inconvenience in his day. You wouldn't get lucky enough to get a chain of noble soldiers to protect you. When the day arrives, all of those political appointees will have scrubbed the ranks of those pesky oathkeepers anyway. Those oathkeepers who remain hidden in ranks will be in an impossible situation.
And we haven't even discussed the false-flagging of dressing foreign troops in American uniforms to capitalize on the unwillingness of Americans to kill "our boys." I'll save that one for later.
So if the military doesn't exist to protect our rights and freedoms, why does it exist? The answer is simple. It exists to back our national will with force. Most of the time, that is a good thing, particularly when our national will is to not be attacked by jackasses who threaten us. But when the national will turns to taking your guns away, you will be the jackass who threatens "us." Then the military will execute that national will with cold, unthinking and bureaucratic efficiency. And wrap itself in the flag while doing so.
Want to have some fun? Walk up to any active duty serviceman you wish, shake his hand and thank him for his service. Then, before you release his hand, pull him toward you slightly, look into his eyes and tell him, "now when the time comes, don't forget what your oath really means." Do this ten times, and the reactions of that little informal poll will tell you everything you need to know. Having divested yourself of that little fantasy, maybe you will have a chance to survive that gun seizure for the real battle later. At the very least you will have looked into the eyes of some of the enemy, constituted of complacency and obedience, you may one day face.
...If this does not set off a debate firestorm nothing will. BUT, if you never look at both sides of a question or problem, and consider all outcomes, how can one say he has the answers? I pray we never get to find out how things come out if events ever take this truly terrible turn...
As I would prefer to believe, The troops showing their true colors...
from Sipsey Street Irregulars
If you treat a man like an enemy, if you presume him to be so, he will oblige you by being your enemy. To do otherwise would be foolish on his part.
I happen to know that despite Baugh's ominous presentation there are in fact many Oath Keepers in the military and police. As a matter of strategy, as well as simple civility - I want to win over as many people in our military as I possibly can. Needlessly insulting them and presuming they are all simply obedient Nazis will only make that supposed "truth" all the more true.
I have heard Stewart Rhodes, the founder of Oath Keepers, make this observation before: "Sometimes people become what you expect them to be, and are as you treat them. If I treat them as if they are courageous, patriotic men of conscience who will refuse to follow evil and unconstitutional orders, they are more likely to be thus."
I refer you again to the Ranger's last comment above. It is not too late to cause that affect. THAT is what Oath Keepers is about.
We are in a war for the hearts and minds of our military with unconstitutional elements within our own government. Our task should be easier than theirs because, although they brandish the big stick of the National Command Authority, in an unconstitutional grab for power, they will be asking our soldiers to enforce the NCA's will upon their own brothers, fathers, cousins, sisters, friends and neighbors within our own borders.
While Baugh's warning is correct, it should not be seen as a reason to write off as likely enemies our own flesh and blood who are soldiers and police.
Rather, we should look at it as underlining the necessity of winning the hearts and minds of people who are predisposed to be won over. From the tyrannical-tending NCA-of-the-future's point of view, we are encouraging the loss of "unit cohesion, good order and discipline." Indeed, this was the hook upon which LTC Cunningham hung the necessity for his 29 Palms survey -- that subordinating Marines to UN control or giving them unconstitutional missions such as arms seizures would destroy unit cohesion.
Or, if you want to be absolutely cold-blooded about it, Oath Keepers is infiltrating the ranks of the formations the tyrant intends to warp to his purpose, undermining the conditioning of his otherwise obedient muscle, and causing strategic uncertainty in the tyrant's mind.
It is classic Fourth Generation warfare, attacking your enemy at the moral level.
Western Rifle Shooters
Reprise on 'When to Shoot The Colonels'
Got a good deal of animated reaction to this post, So here's my take, in several parts:
1) I am not .mil, neither former or current. I am therefore pretty darned ignorant of military culture, be it enlisted, NCO, or officer.
2) I yield to no one in my admiration, respect, and support of Oath Keepers, its members, and its mission. Its function as an educational organization in the pre-conflict environment is indispensable, and its C4I (command, control, communications, computers and intelligence) interruption function once certain unconstitutional orders are given may well be decisive, if there are enough actual Oath Keepers come the issuance of those orders.
Therefore, if you want freedom to have the best chance, help spread the Oath Keepers message and support its mission.
3) Now, using the same generic "oath breakers (OB)" and "oath keepers (OK)" nomenclature from the comment string above, it is reasonable, I believe, to assume that there will be a very large (>50%) of Constitutionally-sworn non-military personnel (legislators, executive branch leaders, lawyers, judges, and law enforcement officers) who will continue to violate the Constitution. These OBs are responsible for, among other things, the unconstitutional bankster-bailout of the 2008 TARP plan, the federalization of GM and Chrysler, the 2009 stimulus I program, and the upcoming nationalization of health care. Once the legislative OBs enact each of these violations of the Federal government's basic charter, executive branch OBs sign the bills into law and then enforce those laws, while their oath-breaking comrades in the judicial branch affirm each law's alleged "constitutionality". In addition to their role as Constitutional violators via impermissible legislation, these same Congressional OBs control the budgets of all branches of the military via the House and Senate armed services committees.
4) That same Congressional purse power also affects the oath-keeping probability of every department in the Federal bureaucracy, as well as much of state and local government activity as well. Look around your home jurisdiction and ask yourself honestly how many government functionaries -- at the Federal,state, local, and tribal levels -- are ready, willing, and able to act in accordance with the Constitution's limitations, as written, on legitimate government activity.
Be honest with yourself -- is it 20%? 10%? Less? More?
And if you say more, be prepared to give supporting hard data in chapter and verse, because I am calling Bravo-Sierra in advance on any such claim.
5) Now, does the fact that the Congress has a massive proportion of our nation -- including the military -- by the financial short hairs mean that all is lost, even given that Congress is in the thrall of their party comrade, the socialist Comrade Soetero?
No, not at all. But it does mean that we have one hell of a problem, regardless of the clothes and insignia worn by each of us.
I have never said, nor would I ever say, that every police officer and every lawyer is an oath breaker. But, based on my experience in metropolitan New York, I am willing to bet that 50% or more will act unconstitutionally against their fellow citizens come the Crunch.
They are doing so today in New York, California, Massachusetts, Illinois, New Jersey, and elsewhere, so why would they change as the ratchet tightens?
That is a hell of a problem.
Conceding again my ignorance of American military culture, I too would never say that all -- or even most -- currently-serving military personnel will follow unconstitutional orders. Given what it takes to join and stay in the military, that actual ratio of OK to OB may go as high, as some have claimed, as 80/20.
But ask yourself these questions as you ponder the OK/OB ratio:
-- How many Navy ships will remain under civilian command once unconstitutional orders are given?
-- How many fixed-wing Air Force aircraft will remain under civilian command under those conditions?
-- How many rotary Army aircraft?
-- How much armor?
-- How many support, communications, medical, and intelligence assets?
-- How much logistics?
-- How many personnel?
In other words, assuming bad things happen and illegal orders are given, what amount of force will be able to be projected by the Bad People against the side of freedom?
I submit that the honest answers to those questions pose one hell of a problem, even if the OK/OB ratio is 80/20.
Once again, I am not suggesting any freedom advocate roll over onto his back, wet himself, and quiver. What I am suggesting is that people begin to wrap their brains around the actual size of the problems that we confront.
That was the rationale behind posting the "Colonels" essay. Can anyone, specifically and in detail, refute Baugh's premise that current military education at all levels does not adequately address the Constitutional issues to be faced by today's soldiers/Marines/airmen/sailors?
If so, I would be more than happy to publish that rebuttal.
In my not-so-humble opinion, the worst possible thing that the FreeFor could do is to assume that major elements of the .mil will not support the executive branch that commands it and the legislative branch that funds it. Notwithstanding the stellar character of all of the .mil folks that each of us know, we simply will not know how the armed services -- as a whole -- will jump until the event itself. It is a classic strategic planning error to simply dismiss contingencies that are unpleasant or difficult to counter, and I fear that many patriots are falling into the same trap.
Will individual soldiers/Marines/airmen/sailors defy illegal orders?
Will many, from all ranks, resign or desert?
You bet. A whole lot.
Will others "strike in place" or sabotage illegal actions by the chain of command?
Will senior officers relieve subordinates and keep doing so until they find someone who will execute illegal orders?
Bet on it.
Will there be enlisted personnel, NCOs, and officers who place job security and advancement over fidelity to the Constitutional oath?
And absent a lot more effective education to today's serving military and police on the topics of duty, obedience, and freedom, that fact is not going to change.
Please understand -- this is neither a theoretical nor a future consideration.
Unconstitutional legislation has been passed by this and prior Congresses, and signed into law by both the current and former Presidents.
Unconstitutional executive orders have been signed by this and former Presidents.
All of these unconstitutional orders remain on the books today, administered and enforced by the executive branch, which also commands the armed forces.
More unconstitutional legislation and executive orders will be forthcoming in the near future.
Those laws and orders will also be enforced by the agents of the executive branch and approved by the judicial branch.
To date, American citizens both in uniform and in mufti have done little or nothing but talk.
Why wouldn't Leviathan continue on the same course and speed?
Ask Michael New.
Leviathan ruined him over a powder-blue hat.
What do you think they will do to an enlisted man who refuses to man an "anti-terrorist" roadblock in rural Georgia?