The TSA and the Pussyfication of America

November 30, 2010

by Joe McCutchen

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has been anointed with more power than the “divine right of kings”. Americans are divided in their tepid thoughts regarding another attack on amendments 1, 2, 4, & 10. Those that are in sync with the activities of the TSA are indeed very shallow in their thought processes.

The TSA is filled with low I.Q. minimum wage automatons who will march unquestionably on any edict that has its genesis in Washington, D.C. There is a move afoot to unionize these derelicts that have no problem fondling, viewing and otherwise harassing travelers. When unionization takes place, and it certainly will, these jackboots, in a more forceful manner, will serve as yet another instrument in destroying what’s left of the American constitution and the Bill of Rights.

If any one of you is naïve enough to believe that law enforcement agencies, regardless of stripe are designed to protect American citizens, you are indeed foolish. These agencies are wards of politicians, bureaucrats and other elected and appointed hired guns and will heed only orders from government agencies federal, state, county, & city.

The time is rapidly approaching when numbers of freedom loving Americans are going to wipe off the mantle of political correctness, naiveté, and in all likelihood be propelled into civil unrest. How many, who knows? Violence should be the very last means of fighting for freedom. Secession is the only peaceful means to avoid physical confrontation if our elected and appointed officials continue to blot out civil rights. If secession materializes, in making it a viable option, secessionists should not be drawn into confrontation as was the case by Southerners in general, and South Carolinians specifically, in the war for Southern independence, which provoked the murdering psychopath Lincoln to precipitate a genocidal engagement. After all we are the United STATES (not state) of America and each state is part of a sovereign compact and is in no way obligated to remain in the compact if the citizenry is abused by the federal government ­which they are. The Founders shouted time & again it was the right of the states to secede if the federal burden became onerous.

Observe:
1. The unconstitutional activities by the TSA in airports across America. Most recently the introduction of body scanners and aggressive pat-downs. The government’s excuse for the personal invasions & the X-rays which have the capacity to cause cancer & genetic mutations is due, so they say, to the fact that an Arab last Christmas, wearing a diaper and a firecracker inside the diaper, has caused this entire ridiculously expensive hullabaloo. One Arab, dictating the tenor of business in a country with 300 million inhabitants is absolutely preposterous. Do the likes of Airport security czar John Pistole and the Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano not understand there are tens of thousands of other potential sabotage targets, i.e. Hoover Dam, sporting & entertainment venues, etc. if there were a real desire to harm us? The federal government is busily indoctrinating the American populace as if we were a nation of dullards. Are we?

2. The United States has a 1,969 mile national border contiguous with Mexico which literally permits millions of illegals to penetrate yearly and produces all manner of crime and the raping of our welfare, education, and health systems, yet the scholarly buffoons in D.C. refuse to implement existing U.S. statutes, i.e. 8 USC. This in itself vividly demonstrates the lie being perpetrated by the federal establishment re the “war on terror”.

3. The unconstitutional & undeclared preemptive wars that the U.S. is engaged in throughout the Middle East against sovereign nations in its pursuit of global hegemony. Is it any wonder that mid-eastern fighters are striking back in Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and soon to be, if the traitorous McCain’s, Grahams, et al have their way, Iran.

4. A bankrupt nation engaged in murder. 19 Arabs allegedly attacked the Towers; therefore why did Bush engage in a murdering war against Iraq? The smelly explanations and I am being kind, insult American intelligence.

The multitudes of policing agencies are nothing more than pawns operating at the behest of the corrupt central government and to a lesser degree, state and county.

The crackdown on American travelers is another federal exercise in Conditioning, Regimentation, and Submission.

If our leaders (all) were anything more than self-serving, traitorous, parasitic buffoons, this type of conduct and behavior would never be discussed, much less implemented.

To further illuminate the choking of American’s freedoms, the lame-duck Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously voted to move forward with censoring the internet via the COICA Bill. Listed below are a few of the neoconservative (eternal war for eternal peace/war forever) Republican Senators who applaud the strangulation of American citizens:

Orrin Hatch (UT); Jeff Sessions (AL); Chuck Grassley (IA), Jon Kyl (AZ); Lindsey Graham (SC): John Cornyn (TX); Tom Coburn (OK)

To further strike fear in American’s hearts the Obama administration on Nov. 8, 2010 argued before a federal court that it “should have unreviewable authority to kill Americans, the executive branch has unilaterally determined to pose a threat.” My friends, that is me or you, who on an Obama whim could be executed at any time.

It is interesting to note that former Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff (dual citizen/Israel firster) owns the corporation selling the body scanners. Of further interest, Chertoff’s name translates to “Son of the Devil”. George Schwartz (Soros) (another Israel firster) is a substantial stockholder in Chertoff’s company.

The end of an American civil society and not a peep.

Conclusion: Any American citizen who would allow themselves to be vulgarly groped and most especially their children, are indeed THE PERSONIFICATION OF THE PUSSYFICATION OF AMERICA.

Joe McCutchen

P.S. I would remind Boobus Arkanacus that their vote for Senate elect Republican John Boozman helped set the table for Obama’s strong-armed Marxist/Communist takeover of American. Aside from the Boozmans’ Obamaesque excessive international travel at taxpayer expense and his membership in NATO (the global police), he voted twice for the Patriot Acts, voted to neuter Habeas Corpus, Posse Comitatus, voted for the Military Commissions Act, and the treasonous Homegrown Terrorism Act. The above set the stage for the present outrages and the demise of the nation. A Buffoon? Or did he know well what he was doing?

November 23, 2010

http://www.arkansasfreedom.com

Submitted to the Federal Observer for publication by the author.


Money As Debt

November 29, 2010

We have been receiving comments from a woman named Mona. She is asking deep questions about money. She forwarded a link to a very well done video series named “Money As Debt.” I’ve split this 47-minute video up into 5 sections.

Watch this series and learn about money. Even better…have your children watch this series about money. Then discuss the series with them, and make plans how you and your children will avert the coming financial collapse.

Money As Debt Part 1 of 5

Money As Debt Part 2 of 5

Money As Debt Part 3 of 5

Money As Debt Part 4 of 5

Money As Debt Part 5 of 5


Fun with Fred and Lord John

November 28, 2010

Lord John Maynard Keynes is almost singlehandedly responsible for the economics practiced around the world today. You remember…the economics model that inflates currency endlessly and de-couples all currencies from any kind of real money like gold and silver. That economics model that tries to plan everything, which causes the boom and bust cycles that have been so much fun for the last 100 years.

And then there’s Frederick A. von Hayek, the Austrian born economist that championed the Austrian economic system…the one that melds monetary policy to precious metals forever, thereby preventing inflation and killing off the boom and bust cycles once and for all.

Well, here are two videos your your entertainment and education. Enjoy!!

The second video shows you how two major nations are shedding the Dollar.


Lets Invade Mexico

November 27, 2010

by Fred Reed

Almost forever, the record for stupidity was held by Lumbo, a Cambrian trilobyte born to an early family of retarded trilobites. Lumbo also had Down’s Syndrome. It ws an unbeatable combination. Nobody and nothing was as slow as Lumbo. It was thought that he would hold the record for all time, but then came the governor of Texas, Rick Perry. He thinks it might be a good idea to invade Mexico.

Lumbo doesn’t come close.

The governor thinks, barely, that such a martial lunge might help rid Mexico of drugs, or do something about immigration. He thinks it should perhaps be done with the permission of the Mexican government. It is my hope that Washington will not adopt the governor’s idea, but, given America’s penchant for lurching into catastrophic wars, perhaps we should examine the notion for advisability.

The governor’s wise plan begins by embodying the mistake the Pentagon always makes when it sets out to lose a war, which seems to be every time it holds a war. He, and it, begin by having no faint grasp of the people to be invaded, or of people at all.

Soldiers have difficulty with the notion of people, of citizens, of populations, who are mere impediments to the proper management of a swell war. The military longs for mechanized battle in which men in machines destroy other men in other machines, tank against tank, fighter plane against fighter plane, in a spirit of simple-minded adolescent romanticism. You know, battle-scarred tanks growling across the Algerian desert, against a flaming red sunset burning out to night, desert wind blowing scarves of heroic etc. People don’t figure in this dream, which is why the results are so regularly dismal.

Now, some practical considerations, a kind traditionally of little interest to military men:

You don’t just sort of invade Mexico as an abstraction. You have to invade an actual part of it. Which?

Well, you could try the cities thick with narcos: Tijuana, Juarez, Culiacan, Ciudad Victoria, all the gang. Good idea, that. As any intelligent officer will tell you – one was reported in Anhalt-Zerbst in 1654, but this was never confirmed – fighting in cities is not a lot of fun. The narcos have AKs and RPGs. They are expert at urban ambushes. They know the cities. They speak the language. They can fade into the population. Consequently frustrated GIs, quickly coming to view the population as subhuman, will begin killing people at random and…have we seen this before?

As an equally unwise plan, the good governor might advocate sending troops after the narcos in the wild, in the Sierra Madre Occidental, up around Copper Canyon, the Barranca del Cobre. Have you seen the barranca country? I have, on the Chihuahua Pacific railway from Los Mochis to Chihuahua. It is like Afghanistan, but with difficult terrain and tree cover. Roads are few. There are canyons in which you could drop the Grand Canyon and have trouble finding it the next day. Did I mention AKs and RPGs? Trees? Rocks? Things to hide behind?

Self-explanatory, I hope

What the Pentaloons don’t understand, being armed Boy Scouts who believe their own propaganda—“Ooo-rah! Yes sir! Yes sir! Can do, sir!” is that they usually can’t. The chief reason is that people really, really do not like American soldiers invading their countries, wrecking cities and killing their children. The military, which thinks at right angles, cannot wrap its mind around this difficult thought. Thus Americans invariably begin by thinking, “We are right. We are for democracy. We are trying to help these people. Therefore they will love us.”

The second step to disaster is to set up a puppet government, by purchase or intimidation, declare it an ally, and assert that America is helping the legitimate government of a beloved fellow nation. Think Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and note that the Governor Perry says he wants to invade “with Mexico’s permission,” which means puppetizing the government. Of course no government that supports invaders who kill Pablo’s three-year-old and her dog is going to enjoy a whole lot of legitimacy.

The approach doesn’t work, this being regarded as a minor defect by military minds. It’s the glory of the thing, the swoosh and bang and zowwee that count, not practical concerns like winning. But…does it seem salient to you that in all of our hobbyist wars, our locals…our Khmers, our Viets, our Afghans, and so on…fight poorly, while our enemies are passionate and stubborn? Note that after ten years our Afghan soldiers aren’t ready and disappear with their rifles, the Pakis collaborate with the Taliban and hate us, and the Iraqi police are permanently incapable.

Why might this be? Because, when you force part of a country to kill the other part, not too much enthusiasm ensues.

An essential ingredient in our wars is underestimation of the enemy, reflecting a general American contempt for everybody else. Cheese-eating surrender monkeys, that sort of thing. The Viet Cong were rice-propelled paddy maggots who didn’t have a single B-52. Iraq would be a cake walk, the Afghans were louse-ridden towel-headed farmers, and so on.

An infantryman's paradise, or gateway thereunto

Still, it is perhaps worth noting that as the US army lowers recruiting standards to reflect flabby American males, the Mexicans work construction. In the barranca country you find hard and hardy people, Tarahumaras and tough farmers who have trucks now thanks to the marijuana crop. Soft they are not. Mexicans have fought long and bloody wars—the Revolution, the Cristero War, the current drug wars in which 29,000 have died since 2006 in armed conflict (which suggests that there are a whole lot of them and not afraid to fight, doesn’t it?). Sound like Afghans?

Further: Mexicans, all Mexicans, are violently hostile to any invasion, on any terms at all, by the US. They’ve been down that trail before. I mentioned the governor’s idea to my (Mexican) wife. I’ve never seen her face so hard. This is universal. If you want to see a united Mexico, send the GIs.

The Mexicans are not as reliably hostile to the traffic in drugs, or to the traffickers, as Washington would like. The common attitude is that if the gringos don’t want drugs, why do they buy them? Why is it Mexico’s problem? The traffic has brought relative prosperity to places formerly without electricity. In a country not enamored of a corrupt government, the narcos not infrequently are seen as Robin Hoods. Various bands make a living singing narcocorridos, songs glorifying the traffoclers: Los Tigres del Norte, Los Tucanes de Tijuana, La Sombra Norteña.

Here we come to the final error of American military interventions: the belief that everybody wants to be like America, that they want democracy or are capable of it, that we just have to show them how we want them to live and they will gratefully do it. Ah, fond hope. We are going to make Afghanistan into a democracy, an idea as probable as making a frog into a television set. In Afghanistan the military invaded Marjuh and said it was going to impose a “government in a box,” whereupon an Afghan town would be just like a village in Iowa. Oh sure. Any day now. And in Mexico the Mérida Initiative is going to produce honest police and judges, whereupon Mexico will resemble Switzerland.

Oh God…Lumbo is back. Some good advice to the Joint Chiefs: Stay the hell out.

copyright 2010 Fred Reed.


Stop Worrying about Words on Paper

November 26, 2010

by Jeff Matthews

A recurring debate always arises when critics argue with proponents over the language included in various state-level nullification resolutions and bills. They argue over whether certain provisions are lacking, improper, will not be effective, etc. I, too, criticize such language from time to time. It is natural to do so when we think in terms of the “rule of law.”

However, the “rule of law” is only a fiction for some invisible, greater authority upon which our conduct is claimed to be justified. Let me explain it by this question: Are federal usurpations legitimized if legislative nullification efforts are not successful? Clearly, the continued ability to engage in a wrong does not make it right. So, if our rights to redress for our grievances do not end with our state legislatures, where do they end? In what way are our remedies bounded?

The most limiting aspect of the movement to reclaim state, local and individual sovereignty is that so many proponents are looking to the “rule of law.” The right words – the right concepts in the right place – seem to dictate so many thoughts on the “proper” strategy. Looking back at America’s procurement of its independence from Britain, where did all of our words take us? Britain did not read our declarations, our pleas, and our demands and conclude, “Well, my dear boy, we do believe that makes perfect sense. You shall have your independence. Cheerio!”

Words mean nothing. Popular sentiment means everything. Do not worry about the “why,” the “how,” and such, when it comes to scriveners’ attempts to accomplish our ultimate objectives. These are just acts of scriveners.

The Constitution says nothing about nullification. Nullification is simply implied out of the fact that there must be some remedy somewhere when the federal government usurps its powers. Most certainly, the Constitution does not prescribe a procedure for nullification. Madison and Jefferson simply made up the procedure they attempted to implement.

Where does it say that in responding to federal usurpation, we may only resort to measures which confine us to not treading on the sovereignty of the federal government? The Constitution is written with an assumption that our respective governments will operate within their confines. It says nothing about the rules of the game when the compact has been breached. It should be clear that in this paradigm, it is a “no-man’s land” where anything can go.

More particularly to this last point is a concept within contract law. Contract law principles are useful to those who view the relationships created by the Constitution as contractual or as a compact. Suppose Paul Plaintiff enters into a contract with Don Defendant to mow Don’s lawn for fifty dollars. Paul shows up with his equipment and is ready to begin when Don says, “I am not going to pay you.” Must Paul still comply with the contract and mow Don’s lawn?

The contract is breached. Once breached, the aggrieved party is no longer required to perform under it. Thus, our efforts to reclaim state, local and individual sovereignty are not restricted in any way. The Constitution does not limit the means by which we may redress our grievances. Therefore, bear this in mind when evaluating legislative measures proposed by local representatives.

Sure, they might be improved in ways that make them better reflect the people’s sentiments, but these words are not what count. What counts is whatever it is that happens when enough people have had enough of the overreaching, corruption and incompetence which emanates from Washington.

Jeff Matthews is a practicing attorney in Houston. He graduated from the University of Texas, School of Law in 1993 and was licensed that year.

Copyright © 2010 by Tenth Amendment Center


Before You Eat Your Thanksgiving Feast

November 25, 2010

The National Inflation Association has created a riveting little video about how things will likely play out some day soon. I have written scenarios in articles, but NIA’s scenario is done in video and audio. And, best (or worst) of all….it is very likely to happen….ANY DAY NOW!

Don’t enjoy this, but watch it and send it to everyone in your email address book. Who knows? This stuff could easily occur before next Turkey Day.


We Must Peaceably Dismantle The United States

November 24, 2010

by Rob Williams

courtesy of BurlingtonFreePress.com

Here’s a question I hear asked more and more by friends and neighbors in the Green Mountains of Vermont: How might we in Vermont create a more sustainable world for ourselves, and for our children, and for our children’s children, in a 21st century Age of Limits?

Let me answer by starting with first principles: I believe the United States is no longer a functioning republic, but a dysfunctional empire.

An “empire,” you ask? What is this — “Star Wars?”

Indeed, the United States is an “empire” comprised of more than 700 military bases networked together in more than 130 countries around the world, an “empire” that spends more on annual “defense” — $1 trillion (not including special war-spending earmarks) — than the next dozen countries combined, according to Chalmers Johnson’s book “The Sorrows of Empire.”

The “United States of Empire” makes possible an unsustainable and inequitable global paradigm: 8 percent of the global population — us, the people of the United States — are consuming 25 percent of the world’s resources.

And we, all of us on planet Earth, are living at a historical moment when the twin sisters of peak oil and climate change are ushering in a 21st century world of energy scarcity that will look quite different than the 20th century world of energy abundance.

I believe that for us to survive and thrive in a new century, we must peaceably dismantle the United States of Empire, and create a new political and economic paradigm.

The UNtied States.

Vermont is perhaps uniquely suited, out of all 50 states in the empire, to spearhead such a decentralist project. This is 21st century Vermont’s radical, sustainable imperative: to peaceably secede from the United States and re-invent ourselves as a more resilient and independent republic.

Why Vermont? First consider Vermont’s political origins and culture.

Vermont is the only state to exist prior to the creation of the United States as its own independent republic, from 1777-1791.

The state of Vermont, moreover, was front and center throughout 19th century New England’s secession conversations related to militarism, war and expansion. Vermont was the first state to outlaw slavery within its borders, and Vermonters still speak out against tyranny of all kinds — nuclear war, genetically modified seeds, the unlawful conscription of National Guard troops by the U.S. government for foreign invasions — every March during our annual Town Meeting Day.

Today, outsiders find it easy to pigeonhole tiny Vermont. The national corporate commercial “news” media think they have Vermont pegged as the bluest of Blue States, chock-full of Obama-loving, latte-drinking, Prius-driving, Birkenstock-wearing, trust-fund babies.

It is true that we have more than our fair share of Prius-drivers on Vermont roads, and that 70 percent of the Vermont electorate voted for Obama in the 2008 presidential election (if electronic voting machines, which even tiny and independent-minded Vermont possesses in some of our towns, are to be believed).

It is also true that Vermont political trends are not so easily understood. To wit: We were the first state to bless civil unions for gay couples, and, as a state of hunters and farmers, we have the most permissive gun-carry laws of any state in the country.

Rather than Red versus Blue, “radical” is my term of choice.

Culturally, historically and politically, Vermont, with its commitment to “live and let live tolerance,” its promotion of individual rights, when balanced with its attention to the common good (“Freedom and Unity” is our state’s motto) is a natural starting place for considering any state’s nonviolent secession.

The word “radical” is defined as “getting to the root cause of a thing.” And this thing called the United States is simply too big, too centralized, too corrupt, too inefficient and too impossible to govern anymore.

Vermont can help re-invent the United States as the UNtied States: decentralized, re-localized, with a small-is-beautiful paradigm as our guiding focus.

Free Vermont! Long live the UNtied States.

Rob Williams is a musician, farmer, historian, consultant, journalist and professor who teaches media and communications courses at Burlington’s Champlain College and serves as editor and publisher of Vermont Commons: Voices of Independence, a statewide independent multimedia newspaper (www.vtcommons.org). When he is not running, swimming, skiing or boarding in the Mad River Valley, he co-manages Vermont Yak Company (www.vermontyak.com), a farm business raising grass-fed yaks for meat and agri-tourism, and performs “pholkgospel grassicana” music with Vermont’s Phineas Gage Project, a “pherocious phour-part” acoustic power band.

Contact Rob Williams via his web site.