Update 2 May 2013: (gasping) Well, so not so nuts after all... The Great Gold Redemption
______________________________________________
This is from an IM conversation I had with a friend some time back... relevant today, perhaps alarming, and perhaps should be...
Obviously, this belongs in the "out there" category of just brainstorming for the heck of it, playing with the puzzle pieces to see how they might go together. The friend thought I should post it, so here goes! I hope you find it at least entertaining... not sure how ... errr... useful it might be!
Calling the post... WHAT IF:
01 May 2013
Was I channeling this guy?
http://www.thedailybell.com/28945/Anthony-Wile-From-Grammar-School-to-Battlefield-with-Richard-Maybury
Richard Maybury: ... The federal government has gone renegade, and if it is not returned to the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, the country will be destroyed.
Daily Bell: We seem to remember you writing elsewhere that the federal government's foreign policy boils down to poking sharp sticks at rattlesnakes.
Richard Maybury: I've been saying that for years, and I see no reason to change it. It's part of a strategy that power junkies have been using with great success since the days of the Roman Emperors. These people shout, "Rattlesnakes from everywhere are trying to bite us! We can't be safe unless we conquer the world!"
Daily Bell: Are you saying these rattlesnakes would behave if Washington would stop poking them?
Richard Maybury: No, no, no. There are lots of bad people. You can see bullies in any schoolyard. But don't provoke them. Leave them alone and arm yourself to the teeth. Be like a porcupine, gentle, quiet, calm, but always ready to put a big hurt on anyone who tries to get rough with you.
Daily Bell: You've said, instead of an imperial military − meaning a giant expeditionary force − have a whole nation of minutemen who can protect themselves, their families or their country if there is trouble.
Richard Maybury: Very good. Like the National Guard once was, or the Swiss still are to a large extent. A defensive military instead of an offensive military. What's wrong with America's foreign policy is not that we have a military, it's that we have...
Daily Bell: ... the wrong type!
Richard Maybury: Again, I see you've caught on to this way of thinking about the government's behavior. Yes, the US Empire, which grew to maturity in World War II, is a giant machine that makes enemies for America — for you and me. And the economy, the financial markets, the whole country will continue lurching from one disaster to the next because of this. For one thing, it's monstrously expensive. Unless I'm missing something, and I don't think I am, the only people who will prosper consistently in this political climate are those whose investments are set up to do well during wartime and currency debasement.Welp, not really a lot to add to that, but this is the kind of thing I've been on about here and everywhere for a long time.
13 April 2013
Rights, Legal and Natural. Not an option, but an obligation!
(update 4/17/2013 Tibor Machan on rights: http://www.thedailybell.com/28960/Tibor-Machan-The-Corruption-of-Individual-Rights ... I love it when it seems like luminaries like Machan and I are "channeling" the same general stuff)
I live in a rural area, lots of four-way stops. I have noticed that most people have no clue how to deal properly with them. At busy ones, most people have fallen into the bad habits so prevalent these days. This is a problem.
I want to address the problem per se, but I also see it as an example that can be used for a wider point I will make in the rest of this post.
I assume U.S. readers, so we're talking driving on the right side of the road, and U.S. rules. I will also refer to the vehicles and their drivers as "the guy" this and "the guy" that. Sorry, folks, no offense, but in the interest of clarity and... being a guy... that's what I'm gonna do.
I live in a rural area, lots of four-way stops. I have noticed that most people have no clue how to deal properly with them. At busy ones, most people have fallen into the bad habits so prevalent these days. This is a problem.
I want to address the problem per se, but I also see it as an example that can be used for a wider point I will make in the rest of this post.
I assume U.S. readers, so we're talking driving on the right side of the road, and U.S. rules. I will also refer to the vehicles and their drivers as "the guy" this and "the guy" that. Sorry, folks, no offense, but in the interest of clarity and... being a guy... that's what I'm gonna do.
31 March 2013
Servant to Master; Revolutionary to Tyrant
When I started reading this, I was chafing that he was missing what I thought was clearly the point. Yes, I was just being impatient; he was holding back, saving the truest for last.
This is a great article: Rappoport on the big turnaround. This excerpt is where I realized that, as usual, Rappoport is very nicely on target:
This is a great article: Rappoport on the big turnaround. This excerpt is where I realized that, as usual, Rappoport is very nicely on target:
The political Left promoted rebellion against the State as long as they saw themselves outside in the cold. But when they began to realize that they were, in fact, becoming the State, with all the power of the federal government, they dropped the idea of genuine rebellion like a hot potato. They praised big government, they assured everybody it was the solution, not the problem.This is hopeful statement, explanation, and cautionary tale; as the freedom movement expands and begins to return freedom and constitutional lawfulness to America, let's all make sure that it really is freedom. As I've implied before, I am quite concerned at the narrow-mindedness that some of the liberty movement comes with. There are some "blind spots" that need taming.
30 March 2013
Anatomy of One Kind of Psy Op
Anthony Martin Describes Propagandistic Diversion Tactics
I don't want to belabor this with much else to say, except that what he describes is a tried and true depredation on the public, a method for sidestepping public opinion and moving forward with disgusting, illegal action.
As far as I am concerned, every action by a politician that attempts to sidestep the Constitution, is to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the Constitution (if not to be a direct enemy of the Constitution) and is impeachable on grounds of treason. It may not be the hangin' offense of High Treason, but it's certainly impeachable and jail-able.
I don't want to belabor this with much else to say, except that what he describes is a tried and true depredation on the public, a method for sidestepping public opinion and moving forward with disgusting, illegal action.
As far as I am concerned, every action by a politician that attempts to sidestep the Constitution, is to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the Constitution (if not to be a direct enemy of the Constitution) and is impeachable on grounds of treason. It may not be the hangin' offense of High Treason, but it's certainly impeachable and jail-able.
28 March 2013
Ah, the Mockingbirds...
The SPLC Release that started the mockingbirds screaming
------
I went looking around SPLC's web site. There are a lot of themes that I resonate with. There are themes about freedom, themes about bad treatment of workers, and many others that really get ya right there. Even I, after knowing for years--no, it's decades--about SPLC and its manipulation of public opinion about guns and freedom, wondered if there wasn't something redeeming about the organization, based on the good stuff they put out there as, "See what good we do!"
One might even be inclined to think that SPLC could be a great ally of those of us who demand our rights and freedoms, and who really want to bring the country in line with its promises of freedom and of equality of all people before just and reasonable laws.
Not so quick, though... consider these:
------
MSNBC's Hardball: Right-Wing Extremist Groups On The Extreme Rise with Mark Potok of SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center) and Brian Levin of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at the California State University at San Bernardino. Notice how, even though Levin is mostly of one mind with Potok and Matthews, they treat him as if he were a right wing shill--probably because he's not as "married" to his hate for Middle America as they think he should be: he's actually interested in thought! Heaven forfend! Get with the PROGRAM, Brian!! Brian just didn't understand that he was supposed to support the meme!
A disgusting echo from the Los Angeles Times Mockingbird Media indeed......or are those magpies?
When the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) speaks, the MSM listen... or... rather, they mindlessly parrot and parrot and parrot. Oh, and sometimes they embellish.
I went looking around SPLC's web site. There are a lot of themes that I resonate with. There are themes about freedom, themes about bad treatment of workers, and many others that really get ya right there. Even I, after knowing for years--no, it's decades--about SPLC and its manipulation of public opinion about guns and freedom, wondered if there wasn't something redeeming about the organization, based on the good stuff they put out there as, "See what good we do!"
One might even be inclined to think that SPLC could be a great ally of those of us who demand our rights and freedoms, and who really want to bring the country in line with its promises of freedom and of equality of all people before just and reasonable laws.
Not so quick, though... consider these:
When a Protection Racket Turns Tail
I have said before that even good government is little else than a tamed protection racket. "Tamed" because it were principled: uses and enforces the non-aggression principle; forbids and punishes human-on-human predation; regards all persons as equal before the law ...and thus is not allowed to have an interest of its own, a mind of its own, or to favor some members over others.
This, of course, is quite different from an admittedly criminal protection racket, which is exactly "us vs them," and cronies vs commons, or "elites" (kings, lords, etc) vs The People. The problem is that everyone in a system of a tamed protection racket has to watch it closely and tirelessly, because there is always a risk of its going feral and thus criminal.
The idea of a tamed protection racket is exactly defense of the rights of the people: the natural rights which, when violated, are the basis of the breakdown of society, of the end of cohesiveness, of the end of the ability to live in proximity to one another in relative harmony and a respectable peace. By establishing tamed protection, we create a means for the people to deter, detect and respond to those disruptions.
And then we have this:
This, of course, is quite different from an admittedly criminal protection racket, which is exactly "us vs them," and cronies vs commons, or "elites" (kings, lords, etc) vs The People. The problem is that everyone in a system of a tamed protection racket has to watch it closely and tirelessly, because there is always a risk of its going feral and thus criminal.
The idea of a tamed protection racket is exactly defense of the rights of the people: the natural rights which, when violated, are the basis of the breakdown of society, of the end of cohesiveness, of the end of the ability to live in proximity to one another in relative harmony and a respectable peace. By establishing tamed protection, we create a means for the people to deter, detect and respond to those disruptions.
And then we have this:
10 March 2013
They Live ... ... ??
Ehehehehehehhhh... sometimes, one just has to wonder...
If you wanna buy the whole thing,
If you wanna buy the whole thing,
Mitt Romney Claims to Differ...
Yes, this is quite old now, with the election behind us. But I still chuckle when I watch it. So... enjoy...
Obama Deigns to Brag to Jefferson?
Well, this has been out there on youtube for some time, but just now getting around to posting it here.
A re-mix is in the works, slightly expanded and higher definition.
I hope you enjoy the real Jefferson!
A re-mix is in the works, slightly expanded and higher definition.
I hope you enjoy the real Jefferson!
Hang Together for Freedom? Or Hang Separately?
One message I've wanted to get out there for some time is that all of us who want particular freedoms must understand that we must scratch each others' freedom-craving backs if we want to succeed in protecting that, or those, freedoms.
Yes, I'll put it another way: I support protection and restoration of freedoms that I don't personally care about. It's because I understand that if I don't help you maintain your freedoms, why should you help me with mine?; if I want freedom but want to lay some authoritarian horse manure on you, how could I expect you to do any different with me?
Most people just want to be left alone by "society." That doesn't mean they're hermits; no, they just don't want someone in their business unless invited. This was the Jeffersonian message to the world, that a society that systematically refuses to intrude into private matters is a sustainable society, a working community, and a force to be reckoned with should anyone attack: specifically because they are not at odds with one another and will therefore stick together! That may seem counterintuitive, but that's the way it works.
Put another way: empathy breeds in a non-coercive environment. If empathy has been eroded in a community by capricious, controlling and insulting rules and laws, the community won't hang together unless something horrific occurs. They won't help one another unless it's life and death, and maybe not even then.
Let that digest for a minute. A key to societal success... to a community's or even country's ability to hang together... is to leave each other alone, not meddle in private affairs, NOT to try to standardize or legislate or regulate beyond a few key matters, to let people handle their own affairs as they see fit and still be held accountable for harm. This is societal sustainability.
---
Yes, I'll put it another way: I support protection and restoration of freedoms that I don't personally care about. It's because I understand that if I don't help you maintain your freedoms, why should you help me with mine?; if I want freedom but want to lay some authoritarian horse manure on you, how could I expect you to do any different with me?
Most people just want to be left alone by "society." That doesn't mean they're hermits; no, they just don't want someone in their business unless invited. This was the Jeffersonian message to the world, that a society that systematically refuses to intrude into private matters is a sustainable society, a working community, and a force to be reckoned with should anyone attack: specifically because they are not at odds with one another and will therefore stick together! That may seem counterintuitive, but that's the way it works.
Put another way: empathy breeds in a non-coercive environment. If empathy has been eroded in a community by capricious, controlling and insulting rules and laws, the community won't hang together unless something horrific occurs. They won't help one another unless it's life and death, and maybe not even then.
Let that digest for a minute. A key to societal success... to a community's or even country's ability to hang together... is to leave each other alone, not meddle in private affairs, NOT to try to standardize or legislate or regulate beyond a few key matters, to let people handle their own affairs as they see fit and still be held accountable for harm. This is societal sustainability.
---
"I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."Thus spake Zara.... errrr.... Jefferson. I'd ... call that... pretty... anti-authoritarian.
07 March 2013
Monetary High Jinks
JS Kim wrote a useful article for today's Goldseek.com page. Therein, he explains what happened (and happens) when fiat currency (money that's money because "the government said so," i.e., counterfeit money backed by nothing) takes over in a country. That is how it is in the U.S. today and since 1933, having gotten its first vestiges in 1913 with the illegal Federal Reserve Act.
If you are unaware of how real money got swapped for fiat currency in the U.S., or if you aren't sure you are aware of the terrible economic results of such changes, please read the article. It's really quite good, comprehensive enough that one who is as yet uninformed on the matter will come away with a respectable overview.
The link takes you to part 1 of the article; there is a part 2 due presumably soon. Watch goldseek for the second part, or I may post it here.
Excerpts:
If you are unaware of how real money got swapped for fiat currency in the U.S., or if you aren't sure you are aware of the terrible economic results of such changes, please read the article. It's really quite good, comprehensive enough that one who is as yet uninformed on the matter will come away with a respectable overview.
The link takes you to part 1 of the article; there is a part 2 due presumably soon. Watch goldseek for the second part, or I may post it here.
Excerpts:
06 March 2013
How the Market Isn't Free
D'Amato on Economic Fascism and the Power Elite:
"In the present day, following the maturation of the connections identified by Mills, Rothbard, Higgs and others, the economy has been “centralized . . . into a highly structured bureaucracy under the effective direction and control of leading business interests.”[11] We can in no way be said to have a free market, as the ties between powerful interests and the federal government are as strong as ever. Politics is an expensive, high-stakes game of favors and bribery, a fact that libertarians like Comte and Dunoyer saw clearly hundreds of years ago."
This is the summation of what he wrote in the rest of the linked article. Informative, useful reading for those who need to demonstrate that we do not have a free market economy.
What we have may be called "capitalism," but this is a word that has too many meanings. I prefer "free market" to describe a free market, because using the C word doesn't really clarify.
I hope you enjoy the article, and find the references useful!
"In the present day, following the maturation of the connections identified by Mills, Rothbard, Higgs and others, the economy has been “centralized . . . into a highly structured bureaucracy under the effective direction and control of leading business interests.”[11] We can in no way be said to have a free market, as the ties between powerful interests and the federal government are as strong as ever. Politics is an expensive, high-stakes game of favors and bribery, a fact that libertarians like Comte and Dunoyer saw clearly hundreds of years ago."
This is the summation of what he wrote in the rest of the linked article. Informative, useful reading for those who need to demonstrate that we do not have a free market economy.
What we have may be called "capitalism," but this is a word that has too many meanings. I prefer "free market" to describe a free market, because using the C word doesn't really clarify.
I hope you enjoy the article, and find the references useful!
Obama's Track Record
This needs to go viral, folks:
Washington's Blog, Obama's Track Record
As far as I'm concerned, most of this belongs in an indictment. It's time for Congress to grow a backbone and impeach this monster, this guy that's poking at tigers everywhere, hoping for worldwide and national upheaval (?) for... hmm... I can only suppose it's the end game for world depopulation and world government.
Why else would he repeatedly and viciously poke tigers domestically (attacking every protected and unprotected right of the American people) and worldwide (sabre rattling at China and Russia, drone attacks absolutely anywhere and everywhere, illegal wars overthrowing governments that are not doing us harm, etc., etc., etc.)? He could only want a ferocious response. And there could only be one explanation for wanting that response: he's doing the bidding of the would-be worldwide absolute masters. I wonder what his 30 pieces of silver is supposed to be, and whether he'll get it should he succeed. Is this .. effort ... what all that "Yes we can!" crap was all about? Is it really, "Yes, we can indeed throw the world into total chaos so that the masters can finally realize their world government ambitions"? Is that it?
Washington's Blog, Obama's Track Record
As far as I'm concerned, most of this belongs in an indictment. It's time for Congress to grow a backbone and impeach this monster, this guy that's poking at tigers everywhere, hoping for worldwide and national upheaval (?) for... hmm... I can only suppose it's the end game for world depopulation and world government.
Why else would he repeatedly and viciously poke tigers domestically (attacking every protected and unprotected right of the American people) and worldwide (sabre rattling at China and Russia, drone attacks absolutely anywhere and everywhere, illegal wars overthrowing governments that are not doing us harm, etc., etc., etc.)? He could only want a ferocious response. And there could only be one explanation for wanting that response: he's doing the bidding of the would-be worldwide absolute masters. I wonder what his 30 pieces of silver is supposed to be, and whether he'll get it should he succeed. Is this .. effort ... what all that "Yes we can!" crap was all about? Is it really, "Yes, we can indeed throw the world into total chaos so that the masters can finally realize their world government ambitions"? Is that it?
03 March 2013
That Awful Sequestration
Enough of this apocalyptic talk of sequestration!
For starters, Cato provides a look at what's real...
Now the The Gaslighter in Chief wants to pretend that sequestration wasn't his idea in the first place, as he tried (and continues to try) to set budget hawks in Congress at a disadvantage.
Well, the budget hawks in Congress are better described as chickenhawks. In fact they're more like pigeons, "rats with wings," as they talk big cuts and push none of it. This reduction of increase isn't a cut at all, so what's all the hullaballoo?
Worse, the budget hawk poseurs are usually also war hawk neoconnish folk, which means they have no intention of getting the country out of feckless imperial warmongering--where we're wasting $kazillions for... for what, actually? I wouldn't condone it if we were plundering countries conquered, but I'd understand it better.
The country has lots of cause to keep our aerospace and other weapons manufacturers in business, even if we don't have wars. Of course, executive bonuses might fall a bit short, but that's not a reason to keep the spending up at this dumping rate by blowing things and people up all over the world. No, national defense is the key function of a proper government...
...not this acquisition and spending and use of...
For starters, Cato provides a look at what's real...
Now the The Gaslighter in Chief wants to pretend that sequestration wasn't his idea in the first place, as he tried (and continues to try) to set budget hawks in Congress at a disadvantage.
Well, the budget hawks in Congress are better described as chickenhawks. In fact they're more like pigeons, "rats with wings," as they talk big cuts and push none of it. This reduction of increase isn't a cut at all, so what's all the hullaballoo?
Worse, the budget hawk poseurs are usually also war hawk neoconnish folk, which means they have no intention of getting the country out of feckless imperial warmongering--where we're wasting $kazillions for... for what, actually? I wouldn't condone it if we were plundering countries conquered, but I'd understand it better.
The country has lots of cause to keep our aerospace and other weapons manufacturers in business, even if we don't have wars. Of course, executive bonuses might fall a bit short, but that's not a reason to keep the spending up at this dumping rate by blowing things and people up all over the world. No, national defense is the key function of a proper government...
...not this acquisition and spending and use of...
17 February 2013
Comments Too Rich and Firestorms
No, my comments won't be too rich, but apparently Ron Paul's tweet about Chris Kyle was. Paul got all the info into that tweet that made it valid to a knowledgeable reader, but he didn't succeed in making it understandable to more than a few who are willing to take the time to grind out a proper apprehension of it.
It is the responsibility of all communicators to make themselves understandable and to understand. Choosing the right forum, understanding the probable way that a reader will grasp a comment, and collecting and assembling the right words are all part of good communication by someone trying to get a point across. Ron Paul's words were well chosen and assembled, but I will argue that such conciseness is not well suited to even the very thoughtful in a forum like Twitter.
Sadly, Paul's attempt to clarify really hasn't helped much. Laying out an illegal war as a crime, he appears to lay the illegality of the war firmly at the feet of the soldiers--one of the awful, wrongminded things that was done by many Americans to our returning Viet Nam vets.
But he doesn't do only that, although that's what I see the firestorm focusing on; what he also does is incriminate the whole of the body politic of those countries who are initiating and perpetuating wars on no legitimate provocation. This is a valid point, but doesn't really clarify what he said in the tweet. He's right, but still not communicating all that well or all that responsively.
Let's dissect the context of the original tweet a little. Here's Chris Kyle, admirably working with a guy with a blazing PTSD. His subject is in a very fragile state. It would seem logical to avoid situations where the subject could switch back into war mode, fading into delusion, wouldn't it?
It is the responsibility of all communicators to make themselves understandable and to understand. Choosing the right forum, understanding the probable way that a reader will grasp a comment, and collecting and assembling the right words are all part of good communication by someone trying to get a point across. Ron Paul's words were well chosen and assembled, but I will argue that such conciseness is not well suited to even the very thoughtful in a forum like Twitter.
Sadly, Paul's attempt to clarify really hasn't helped much. Laying out an illegal war as a crime, he appears to lay the illegality of the war firmly at the feet of the soldiers--one of the awful, wrongminded things that was done by many Americans to our returning Viet Nam vets.
But he doesn't do only that, although that's what I see the firestorm focusing on; what he also does is incriminate the whole of the body politic of those countries who are initiating and perpetuating wars on no legitimate provocation. This is a valid point, but doesn't really clarify what he said in the tweet. He's right, but still not communicating all that well or all that responsively.
Let's dissect the context of the original tweet a little. Here's Chris Kyle, admirably working with a guy with a blazing PTSD. His subject is in a very fragile state. It would seem logical to avoid situations where the subject could switch back into war mode, fading into delusion, wouldn't it?
10 February 2013
I Stand Corrected... and YES!! YES!!!! YES!!!!!!
Edwin Vieira Rips the Heads Off of Weak Pro-Gun and All Anti-Gun Arguments in the U.S.A!
...including my own, now recognized as not fully empowerd pro-gun argument, although I take some pride in having had my little brain hint the direction of his argument. WOWOWOWOWOW, I LOVE to be wrong like that!
A Shameless Self-Promotion: my previous words on the Second Amendment
PLEASE read the entirety of the article at The Daily Bell. It covers a LOT of ground in a fairly short space. If you want to understand the Constitution and the workings of those who really control the world, read the whole article; it's one of the best primers I've ever seen on all of that. And of course, the book is available on Amazon.
From The Daily Bell's interview, Vieira:
...including my own, now recognized as not fully empowerd pro-gun argument, although I take some pride in having had my little brain hint the direction of his argument. WOWOWOWOWOW, I LOVE to be wrong like that!
A Shameless Self-Promotion: my previous words on the Second Amendment
PLEASE read the entirety of the article at The Daily Bell. It covers a LOT of ground in a fairly short space. If you want to understand the Constitution and the workings of those who really control the world, read the whole article; it's one of the best primers I've ever seen on all of that. And of course, the book is available on Amazon.
From The Daily Bell's interview, Vieira:
27 January 2013
Important Rundown
YouTube vid discussing the Sandy Hook business
What amounts to a consolidated report on what's going on with the Sandy Hook busienss.
I don't have much more to add. Bad, bad business going on.
What amounts to a consolidated report on what's going on with the Sandy Hook busienss.
I don't have much more to add. Bad, bad business going on.
20 January 2013
What About It Isn't Tyranny?
Every time a tyrant feels insecure, s/he wants to take away your weapons, whatever may constitute them. "Never mind me and my tyranny and the fact that I'm bringing your rebellion and hostility on myself; it's your guns, your knives, bludgeons and... lord forbid... your argumentative points... that are causing problems. What I'm forcing on you is right."
This is Psycho 101, folks. Read about narcissistic personality disorder and borderline personality disorder: "We'll beat you into submission! It's for your own good." But it's not; it's for their own good, whether it be to feel good about themselves or for monetary or other gain.
--
PrezDent O'blamblam, Chief Gaslighter and Drone Attack Bringer, Destroyer of Whole Villages and Many Hundreds of Children, Terrorist to the World, said in his remarks announcing his "recommendations" for newish 2nd-Amendment-infringing law-like-things to save children... he said that some of us out here would be shouting about how he's after our guns and establishing tyranny, as if to imply that this is a wacky notion.
This is Psycho 101, folks. Read about narcissistic personality disorder and borderline personality disorder: "We'll beat you into submission! It's for your own good." But it's not; it's for their own good, whether it be to feel good about themselves or for monetary or other gain.
--
PrezDent O'blamblam, Chief Gaslighter and Drone Attack Bringer, Destroyer of Whole Villages and Many Hundreds of Children, Terrorist to the World, said in his remarks announcing his "recommendations" for newish 2nd-Amendment-infringing law-like-things to save children... he said that some of us out here would be shouting about how he's after our guns and establishing tyranny, as if to imply that this is a wacky notion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)