Thursday, December 31, 2009

INTERPOL POWER COMES TO AMERICA


In the dead of night on December 17, 2009, President Barack Hussein Obama placed the United States of America under the authority of the international police organization known as INTERPOL, granting the organization full immunity to operate within the United States.

Last Thursday, December 17, 2009, The White House released an Executive Order "Amending Executive Order 12425." It grants INTERPOL (International Criminal Police Organization) a new level of full diplomatic immunity afforded to foreign embassies and select other "International Organizations" as set forth in the United States International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945.



By removing language from President Reagan's 1983 Executive Order 12425, this international law enforcement body now operates - now operates - on American soil beyond the reach of our own top law enforcement arm, the FBI, and is immune from Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
What, exactly does this mean? It means that INTERPOL now has the full authority to conduct investigations and other law enforcement activities on U.S. soil, with full immunity from U.S. laws such as the Freedom of Information Act and with complete independence from oversight from the FBI.

In short, a global law enforcement entity now has full law-enforcement authority in the U.S. without any check on its power afforded by U.S. law and U.S. law enforcement agencies.

NEXT MEETING - January 7th

Hello Patriots!

Our next meeting will be on Thursday, January 7, 2010.

Time: 6 pm

Location:
Peter's Cafe
10 El Camino Real
Millbrae, CA
(Northeast corner of Millbrae Avenue & El Camino Real)


Directions:
Take 101 to Millbrae Ave (West)
Turn right on El Camino
Turn right immediately into first driveway and park.


Information:
Bob White from Independence Caucus will be the guest speaker.
Independence Caucus is a "Citizen's Movement to Take Government Back from "Big Money" Special Interests." They have an interesting strategy for beating the professional politicians at their own game—and winning elections!

See you there!

wtp

Monday, December 28, 2009

Symbols, Art and History

You must see THIS.

Hat Tip/Gloria

What do you mean I can't Google it???

Well, at least I'm not insane.

I thought I had lost all my internet skills...in the week and a half I've been preparing for Christmas, and mostly out of touch (except for those regular FAXES to legislators against Øbamacare, of course).

I've been searching unsuccessfully for a San Mateo County Precinct Map...without a single hit...no matter how I worded the search.

Finally, I broke down and called the registrar's office.And now I know why I can't find the information.

You have to DRIVE to the office. FILL OUT forms. PAY $20. And then they will provide the map.

County information is unavailable unless you show up in person and BUY it.

Unbelievable.

It annoys me beyond all reason. I'm not sure why. Perhaps I'm just too used to instant (and free) gratification of my informational needs. But doesn't this seem oddly archaic?

Goddamned gubmint.

Sooooo...I have to get out of my pajamas, take a shower, drive to San Mateo, and spend $20 to get the damned thing.

I ask you, what is the world coming to?

wtp

Political Quiz

Take the world's smallest Political Quiz.

Ten questions. Under a minute. Fun.

Carol

Become a Precinct Committeeman!

This is a reprint from: The Precinct Project

 Let's fill our Precinct Committees with 9.12/Tea Party Patriots!

This is the first step to revitalizing the Republican Party as the party of True Conservative Values!

It's up to us. There is nobody else. We are the New Founding Fathers...the ones the Future of Freedom is depending on!

Carol
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Neighborhood Precinct Committeeman Strategy, outlined below, entails a tried-and-true, peaceful, Constitutional, ballot box solution to our present political predicament. The procedures and system for this solution have been in existence for decades. Obama used them.


If you think you already have the solution for stopping the Democrats’ headlong rush to destroy our country, I don’t want to waste your time.

Stop reading.

Stop wasting your time and do not read any further if you will not go to a Republican Party meeting or walk a precinct on behalf of a candidate. If the future of your country is worth a few hours a month outside your comfort zone, read on.


Just one or two generations ago, our forefathers all knew their precinct committeemen. My dad did (I’m 53 and I remember, when I was knee-high to a howitzer, the Kennedy-Nixon contest – my dad was, alas, a Kennedy guy. But I still adored my dad. He was my “main hero.”) My dad was a precinct committeeman.

Obama Used The Neighborhood Precinct Committeeman Strategy To Defeat Billary.
Need more recent evidence that the Neighborhood Precinct Committeeman Strategy can work? Obama and his minions used this Neighborhood Precinct Committeeman Strategy to defeat Hillary and Bill Clinton and the Democrat Party establishment in the Democrat Party presidential primaries. Obama and his backers came out of nowhere to defeat the complacent “powers that be” of the Democrat Party. You don’t have to believe me – see the evidence with your own eyes. Search YouTube using the search words obama precinct captain. That search will bring back many videos of brand new Democrat Party precinct committeemen (also referred to in some states as precinct captains) explaining how they were recruited into the Democrat Party’s precinct committeeman ranks and how important their efforts will be for Obama to win the nomination.

Time to GET 'em!






















Let's make sure THEIR goose is cooked come November!

wtp

They drank their fill, then poisoned the well

Here's the dirt on the "rule change". Hat tip/Priscilla. These people have no shame about being tyrants...they're trying to make their own changes permanent, regardless of the wishes of future Congresses, and today's citizens. If this isn't a wake up call for action, I don't know what is:

"it shall not be in order in the senate or the house of representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection." 
Read the rest here: Reid Bill Says Future Congresses Cannot Repeal Parts of Reid Bill!

Don't let up on your contact with legislators against this outrageous bill.

Let's throw these bums out of office!

wtp

Friday, December 18, 2009

Lieutenant Colonel Allen West

Fellow Patriots:

Here is a great segment that is circulating around the net.  If you have not heard this man speak, you should.  Go to the following link for a little inspiration: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP2p91dvm6M

Leadership Desert in America


Remember Lee Iacocca, the man who rescued Chrysler Corporation from its death throes? He's now
82 years old and has a new book,
Where Have All
The Leaders Gone?

Lee Iacocca Says:

'Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where the hell is our outrage? We should be screaming bloody murder! We've got a gang of clueless bozos steering our ship of state right over a cliff ; we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even clean up after a hurricane much less build a hybrid car. But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, 'Stay the course..'

Stay the course? You've got to be kidding! This is America , not the damned 'Titanic'. I'll give you a sound bite:

'Throw all the bums out!'

You might think I'm getting senile, that I've gone off my rocker, and maybe I have. But someone has to speak up. I hardly recognize this country anymore..

The most famous business leaders are not the innovators but the guys in handcuffs.. While we're fiddling in Iraq , the Middle East is burning and nobody seems to know what to do. And the press is waving 'pom-poms' instead of asking hard questions.. That's not the promise of the ' America ' my parents and yours traveled across the ocean for. I've had enough. How about you?

I'll go a step further. You can't call yourself a patriot if you're not outraged. This is a fight I'm ready and willing to have. The Biggest 'C' is Crisis! (Iacocca elaborates on nine C's of leadership, with crisis being the first.)

Leaders are made, not born. Leadership is forged in times of crisis. It's easy to sit there with your feet up on the desk and talk theory. Or send someone else's kids off to war when you've never seen a battlefield yourself. It's another thing to lead when your world comes tumbling down.

Monday, December 14, 2009

Global Warming Science?


Except perhaps for health care, no other topic of public interest has attracted more misinformation, disinformation and outright falsehoods than global warming. One of the most pernicious is the assertion that science has proven the earth is getting warmer, and the human race is responsible. For example, back in January of this year, a poll of several thousand climate scientists showed a large majority agreed with the statement the earth is getting warmer as a result of human activity. Political figures, reporters and other laymen have then used the results of this poll to maintain the argument is over. Global warming caused by people is genuine. Science has proven it. And that poll represents real science.

Wrong. Science is not done by polls. Science is not a popularity contest. In fact, it is not even a democratic process. By itself a poll of scientists demonstrates nothing. Indeed the very concept that global warming is science is at best dubious. The problem here is not the growing evidence that global temperatures are cooling, as shown by snow in such unusual places as Jerusalem, New Orleans and Buenos Aires, Argentina. Rather global warming fails the most basic requirement of the scientific process. It explains nothing; it predicts nothing; and worse, it cannot be shown to be wrong, it cannot be falsified.

To see in contrast how real science works, let's look at two of the most famous (and successful) physics theories of the 20th Century, Einstein's theory of Special Relativity and his theory of General Relativity. It is worth remembering that in the vernacular a theory is an idea that someone thinks might be true, but that others find doubtful or dubious. By contrast, a scientific theory is a collection of ideas, concepts and assertions that are presented together with evidence that suggests or proves the theory is indeed correct. And a scientific theory needs to be falsifiable; it must be subject to some kind of test or experiment that could demonstrate conclusively the theory is wrong.

Einstein presented his special theory of relativity in 1905. It was based on the puzzling observation that the speed of light was always the same, regardless of the motion of the observer relative to the source of light. This contradicts our expectations from our experience. If I am riding towards you in an auto, and throw a softball at you, the ball travels much faster toward you than if I am standing still. If the auto is traveling away from you when I throw the ball, the motion of the car may be too much for the strength of my arm to overcome, and you would then see that ball traveling away from you, even though I threw the ball towards you. If I shine a flashlight towards you though, the speed of the light is the same, regardless of whether I am riding towards you, away from you, or just standing still.

Now it is true that Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism, discovered some 40 years earlier, also implied the speed of light was constant, again contrary to common sense expectations. Using this principle, Einstein derived even more bizarre results, including the prediction that a moving clock would tick more slowly than a clock at rest - time dilation - and the claim that nothing could move faster than the speed of light. Einstein thus made a whole pile of predictions, predictions that contradicted our experience, and challenged our view and understanding of space and time.

Time dilation though has been repeatedly verified, exactly as Einstein predicted. Unstable subatomic particles last much longer if they are moving close to the speed of light than if they are at rest in the physicist's laboratory. Time dilation has even been seen at ordinary speeds. Put an atomic clock on an airplane and fly it around the world. Even though special relativity predicts the time dilation effect is less than one microsecond - spread over several days - the atomic clock is accurate enough to record the effect. The famous twin paradox is no longer a subject for idle speculation and argument; rather it is an observed, quantified effect.

What is important is not understanding every jot and tittle of special relativity, notorious for being subtle and difficult. Rather, recognize that Einstein's theory made numerous predictions, many of which contradicted our common sense. And every one of his predictions has been verified. So if you polled 1000 physicists, all 1000 would agree, they accept special relativity as being correct.

Einstein's theory of general relativity is an even more striking example of how science works. Appearing in 1915, Einstein's new theory challenged Newton's Universal Theory of Gravitation, which had ruled for nearly 250 years. It made predictions that were even more counter to common sense. It claimed that near something massive, like the sun, space was curved. A straight line between two points, say the earth and a distant star, ceased to be a straight line if it grazed the sun. But in 1919 this effect was confirmed during a total eclipse of the sun. When the results were announced, and Newton's theory of gravitation was indeed overthrown, the ensuing publicity made Einstein world famous.

Unfortunately General Relativity's predictions were mostly so subtle and difficult to measure that no further confirmation was available for over 40 years. Scientists tended to accept General Relativity, since it conformed to some very basic principles - general covariance - they felt to be true. But additional experimental confirmation - the challenge of falsification - was lacking.

Starting about 40 years ago, astronomers began discovering things like neutron stars and pulsars that could only be understood in the context of general relativity. Newton's theory of gravity simply did not work. A binary pulsar was particularly noteworthy. Initial observations seemed completely puzzling, even confounding. Eventually researchers realized two neutron stars were orbiting each other. And their enormous density - millions of tons per cubic inch - bent and curved the space around them just as Einstein had predicted nearly 60 years earlier.

Scientists now have subjected General Relativity to numerous tests, and it has passed them all. More detail can be found in the book, Was Einstein Wrong, that provided a narrative of the challenges to and tests of General Relativity, presented with excellent scientific authority and at a level anyone can understand.

As with Special Relativity, it is not necessary to understand the details of General Relativity. Rather, the message here is this difficult and subtle theory made numerous predictions that violated common sense. And every prediction has been confirmed. Not one deviation has been found. And a lot of scientists have searched diligently for any deviation from General Relativity, because scientific fame and maybe even a Nobel Prize awaits the person who shows General Relativity to be wrong (the Nobel Prize in Physics retains its prestige, despite recent fiascos with the Economics and especially the Peace Prize).

Returning to global warming, the contrast could not be greater. Global warming explains nothing and predicts nothing. And it cannot be falsified. Regardless of the weather, global warming is always responsible. Is California suffering a drought? Global warming is the cause, and we can expect more and more desertification as the earth warms up. Is California getting too much rain? Global warming is the cause, and we can expect more frequent and more violent storms as the earth warms up. Did California get just about the right amount of rain? Well, just be patient. Global warming may not happen this year, but it certainly will happen next year, or the year after.

One of the core elements of global warming are the numerous numerical models of climate - and the constant tinkering and adjustments they receive. In this connection, I am reminded of a quote from the late Professor Richard Feynman, one of the truly great physicists - and teachers of physics - from the 20th century, on the subject of speculative theories:

In constructing a new theory, we should be careful to insist that they should be precise theories, giving a description from which definite conclusions can be drawn. We do not want to proceed in a fashion that would allow us to change the details of the theory at every place that we find it in conflict with experiment, or with our initial postulates. Any theory that is not completely absurd can be patched up at every point that brings up inconsistencies - and if we begin to believe in the talk rather than the evidence we will be in a sorry state. [Emphasis added.] Something of this kind has happened with the Unified Field Theories. For example it may be that one such theory said that there is a tensor Jμν which is “associated” with the electromagnetic tensor. But what does this “associated” mean? If we set the thing equal, the theory predicts wrong results. But if we don’t specify “associated,” we don’t know what has been said. And talk that this “association” is meant to “suggest” some new relation leads to nowhere. The wrong predictions are ascribed to the wrong “suggestions” each time, rather than to the wrong theory, and people keep thinking of adding a new piece of some antisymmetric tensor which would somehow fix things up. This speculative thought is no more to be believed than the talk of numerologists who find accidental relationships between certain magnitudes, which must be continuously modified as these magnitudes are measured with more precision, first relating units, and then smaller and smaller fractions of these units to keep up with the smaller and smaller uncertainties in the measured values.

If global warming was serving to justify something worthwhile, like lowering taxes or reducing the government’s intervention in our own lives, it would still need to be challenged. But the actual agenda behind it is the exact opposite – higher taxes and increasing government’s control over our lives. In the context of carbon emissions and their supposed effect on the environment, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said recently, “every aspect of our lives must be subjected to an inventory ... of how we are taking responsibility.” Pelosi has evidently drifted completely away from the traditional liberal suspicion toward the accumulation of arbitrary power. One wonders how far she would be willing to go against those who refused this proposed inventory, apparently compulsory. Fines, confiscation of personal property (vehicles, air conditioners, etc.), imprisonment?

The supposed truth that global warming exists, is caused by human activities, and is a threat, is also used to dismiss those who challenge it as global warming deniers, no more credible than Holocaust deniers, an appalling act of intellectual bullying.

It is the global warming advocates though who fear and avoid debate and inquiry. Recently a professor from Stanford was interviewed for a skeptical documentary on global warming, Not Evil Just Wrong. But someone apparently had second thoughts about this scientist contributing to a film with an opposing viewpoint. And so the Stanford legal department sent a letter to the people making that documentary demanding that the scientist’s interview be omitted. Think about this. A world-famous academic institution, supposedly dedicated to free inquiry, uses its power to suppress an interview freely made with one of its professors.

The next time someone promotes global warming as a threat requiring immediate drastic action, ask them when has this theory successfully predicted anything. And follow up by insisting they tell you what evidence would convince them global warming is not occurring. My guess is they will not have any answers. But until they do have answers to these questions, global warming fails to be science, no matter how many polls get taken.

Robert L.

Rules of Engagement Killing U.S. Soldiers



New Military Rules of Engagement 
ostensibly to protect Afghan civilians are putting the lives of U.S. forces in jeopardy,claim Army and Marine sources, as the Taliban learns the game plan based on the rules' imposed limits.

The rules of engagement, or ROEs, apply to all coalition forces of the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Their enactment is in response to Afghan President Hamid Karzai's complaints over mounting civilian deaths apparently occurring in firefights.

Despite the fact that the newly arrived U.S. commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, imposed the more restrictive ROEs to minimize the killing of innocent civilians, however, the Taliban is well aware of them and has its own forces acting in ways to counteract them.

The impact of new restrictions has created increasing frustration and concern among U.S. Army and Marine Corps troops who now are compelled to follow these rules despite the danger of letting the Taliban live to fight again another day.

Critics see the new ROEs being more oriented toward defensive rather than offensive operations, as evidenced by recent charges of murder against two U.S. Army snipers because they had targeted a Taliban commander who reportedly wasn't holding a weapon.

The actual ROEs are said to be classified U.S. and NATO secrets, but based on individual soldier accounts, those restrictions include the following:

No night or surprise searches

Villagers are to be warned prior to searches

Afghan National Army, or ANA, or Afghan National Police, or ANP, must accompany U.S. units on searches

U.S. soldiers may not fire at insurgents unless they are preparing to fire first

U.S. forces cannot engage insurgents if civilians are present

Only women can search women

Troops can fire on insurgents if they catch them placing an IED but not if insurgents walk away from where the explosives are.

Often, rules of engagement require varying levels of approvals before action can be taken. In one case, villagers had tipped off U.S. forces of the presence of a Taliban commander who was threatening village elders. To get permission to go after him, U.S. troops had to get 11 separate Afghan, U.S. and international forces' approval to the plan. The approval, however, did not come until well into the next day. By then, the Taliban commander had moved on, to the consternation of the villagers who had provided the tip. Observers have claimed that it can take some 96 hours to acquire all the permissions to act.

In other cases, the use of force against insurgents may be blocked if they lower their guns, only to have those insurgents return later to attack.

Also, ISAF troops cannot engage insurgents if they are leaving an area where an IED has been planted. In one case, insurgents planting an IED had detected the presence of U.S. forces and immediately began leaving the area, tossing evidence of their preparations along the way. U.S. forces could not fire on them.

The ROEs in some cases have gone beyond limiting ISAF troops in their operations. In one case, ROE restrictions were in effect when four U.S. Marines twice pleaded by radio for artillery support in combat action in Kunar Province in Afghanistan – and twice they were refused, before they were killed.

F. Michael Maloof
Former senior security policy analyst
Office of the Secretary of Defense

Sunday, December 13, 2009

The Legislation of Prosperity


"You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that, my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.”


Dr. Adrian Rogers

Friday, December 11, 2009

The War On Christmas

The War on Christmas



I’ve written before about how upset I get at all the politically correct prissies who refuse to let their salespeople or employees wish their customers “Merry Christmas” this time of year.

Because they’re afraid they might upset someone who doesn’t celebrate the holiday they insist on such mind-numbing platitudes as “Season’s Greetings” or “Happy Holidays.” I hear it over and over again—and always respond with a loud and cheery “and Merry Christmas to you!” Most of time, I get a cheerful “Merry Christmas” right back.

Sadly, the war against Christmas continues to gain ground. Public-school officials at Marysville Elementary School in Wilmington, N.C., decided not to allow the kindergarten class to sing “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” at the school’s annual Christmas—oops, scratch that—the school’s annual holiday show. Seems the parent of one student objected to the song because it contained the word “Christmas.” She didn’t want her little tyke exposed to something with “religious overtones.” So the school officials buckled.

What do they do at the public schools in your area?

Meanwhile, the battle against public display of anything religious claimed another victim, this time in Washington, D.C. The new visitor’s center at the United States Capitol contains a replica of the Speaker’s rostrum in the House chamber. It’s an exact copy, except for this change: The actual chair has the words “In God We Trust” engraved across the top. The phrase is missing from the copy. I wonder which scaredy-cat bureaucrat decided on that?

We’ve become so afraid of offending a tiny (but vocal) minority that it’s perfectly all right to ignore the wishes and beliefs of a huge (but silent) majority. I’ve heard this sad situation referred to as the tyranny of the minority. But I think a more accurate phrase is the cowardice of the majority. What a bunch of spineless sissies our leaders have become.

What the Constitution Actually Says

Permit me to rant for a bit about one of the biggest lies the anti-religious zealots have used against us. It is that “the Constitution requires the separation of church and state.”

Baloney. The Constitution requires no such thing.

Let me begin today’s lesson by asking you, what is the most important sentence in the U.S. Constitution?

I would submit that it’s the very first one. Do you remember how this marvelous document begins? Our founding fathers set the tone for everything they believed, and everything that would follow, in Article I, Section 1, sentence one. It reads, “All legislative powers herein granted are vested in Congress….”

A friend of mine who has lectured widely on the Constitution likes to stop at this point and ask: “Are there any math students present? Okay, maybe you can help me out. If ‘all’ lawmaking power resides in Congress, how much is in the Supreme Court? Right, none! How about the Executive Branch? Right, none again. Thanks for your help.”

There’s a very important principle here—one that has been deliberately obfuscated over the past 50 years. A Supreme Court decision isn’t supposed to be “the law of the land.” The Court has no Constitutional right to make law. All it is supposed to do is to decide “the law of the case.” Their decision should be binding on the plaintiff and the defendant … and no one else.

Instead, for most of my lifetime, layer upon layer of additional government has been sanctioned, and even initiated, by the black-robed justices of the U.S. Supreme Court—men and women who regularly and repeatedly ignore the very first sentence of the document they have sworn to uphold.

And let me digress for a moment to note that the very same principle applies to the Executive Branch. What lawmaking powers does the Constitution bestow on the President and all of the cabinets, agencies and commissions he oversees? Again, the answer is none. Yet we get Executive Orders, Presidential decrees, all sorts of new rules and regulations, and now dozens of new “czars,” for crying out loud. Each and every one has assumed powers that are nowhere granted in the Constitution. And no one dares challenge them!

With that as background, let’s turn to the First Amendment (the one used to justify arguments for “the separation of church and state”) and see what it actually says.

Here is how it begins:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

That seems pretty clear, doesn’t it? “Congress shall make no law,” either promoting a religion or prohibiting one.

According to the Constitution, what are the states allowed to do, when it comes to religion (or just about anything else)? The answer is, pretty much whatever they want.

Could a state require that the Ten Commandments be posted in every courthouse? Sure it could.

Could a city or county government install a crèche on its lawn every Christmas? Absolutely.

Could a governor encourage the citizens of his state to call on the Almighty to alleviate drought or do other good works? Without a doubt.

The framers of our Constitution expected the citizens of each state to decide for themselves how state and local affairs would be conducted. Would every state decide the same thing? Absolutely not. Our founding fathers expected differences to emerge between states. Some would be minor, some major. If one state passed laws you felt were onerous, you could vote to change them—or move to another state.

The idea that every law and every rule in every state should be exactly the same as the ones in every other state would strike our founding fathers as the height of absurdity. They believed that differences were good; that competition would reward good policy and punish bad.

The system worked pretty well for more than 150 years. It could work even better today, thanks to the vastly improved flow of information and transportation. If we choose, we can learn a lot about policies and procedures in other states. And if we like what we find out, we can get there a lot easier than our forefathers did.

Instead, we’ve permitted the tyranny of the minority to trample the rights of the majority. Maybe it’s time for the rest of us to demand our rights back.

My hat is off to the Bill O’Reillys, the Glenn Becks and the others across America who are fighting the good fight to celebrate Christmas this Dec. 25, and not just a “happy holiday.”

But I wish they would do more. I wish they would help us take the offensive against the liberal loonies who have gotten their way for far too long. How about a national campaign to explain and then restore the U.S. Constitution? That would be a Christmas present that would benefit the entire country.

And to all the sorry appeasers and retreaters out there, I hope someone roasts your chestnuts in an open fire. Bah, humbug, indeed.

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

Chip Wood

Tuesday, December 8, 2009

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness?

The New York Times, New York City, New York 08/14/09


American Rifleman Issue: 8/17/2009

  In broad daylight, four men, one armed with a 9-millimeter pistol, entered the Kaplan Brothers Blue Flame Corporation kitchen supply store in the Harlem neighborhood of New York City. Once inside the criminals attempted to handcuff two store employees, and the owner of the store, 72-year-old Charles Augusto Jr. As one of the men was handcuffing an employee, the employee resisted, resulting in the criminal pistol-whipping the employee in the head. After witnessing the criminal’s brutality, Augusto retrieved his 12- gauge shotgun and fired at the robbers. The first round struck and killed the robber armed with the pistol. A second and third shot wounded the other three criminals, one of whom made his way across the street before collapsing and dying before he could reach the hospital. The two other wounded robbers were picked up by police and taken to a local hospital where they are in stable condition. This was not the first time that Augusto’s store has been the target of robbers, a robbery thirty years ago is what prompted him to arm himself. Local residents were supportive of Augusto’s actions, with one stating, “You have to protect your workers and your family. Case closed.” Unfortunately, Augusto may be punished for protecting himself and his employees. New York City’s draconian gun laws require a permit to possess a shotgun, and police are mulling the possibility of charging Augusto with a misdemeanor for failing to obtain one.

Here's What We Do Now!

Dear Fellow Patriots,

As you know, WeDaPeeps has been in existence for just a few months. It all started with a few collected signatures on a signup sheet at the July 4 Tea Party.

We've come a long way in such a short time.

Our Goal is to: Dismantle the Imperial State & Restore our Constitutional Republic

At our very first meeting, I identified the three most urgent and critical actions necessary to forward that agenda:

1) Defeat Cap & Trade
2) Defeat ObamaCare
3) "Throw the Bums Out!"

My reasoning:

ObamaCare and/or Cap and Trade would institute an Imperial State in control of every aspect of our lives. No matter what other issues we care about—and there are many—if we allowed either of these two comprehensive programs to be instituted, we would lose the power to affect any of the others. We would, for all intents and purposes, be servants of the government, no longer its masters.

The third goal "Throw the Bums Out" is as necessary as the first two because it is the current crop of "bums" that has brought us to this brink of transforming the United States of America into a dystopian Socialist nightmare. They are no longer "of the people". They have become almost permanent rulers who disdain "We the People". And it's time for them to go.

During the last 5 months there have been so many assaults on our Liberty, so may outrages coming at us from so many directions, I fear that we have, in the attempt to deal with them all, somewhat lost sight of those original three goals and why they are so important.

I'd like to take the opportunity today to refocus and re-commit to them:

1) Cap & Trade

This has taken a somewhat unexpected turn. While unlikely to have passed the Senate on its own, it has been given new life by the EPA’s declaring CO2 to be dangerous to human health, and therefore within their jurisdiction to regulate. There is no doubt that the Obama administration will use this determination as a gun to the heads of Senators to pass Cap & Trade.

The fact is, the reason the EPA has this power is through the Clean Air Act— passed by Congress—so Congress can amend the act to take CO2 out of the hands of the EPA. However, they won’t do it on their own.

This Progressive Congress will use the EPA threats as political cover to pass Cap & Trade as a more benign regulatory regime than that which Obama’s EPA would impose by fiat.

Rather than allow Congress to pretend that they have no choice but to pass Cap & Trade to avoid more draconian regulations from EPA…we must demand that they amend the the Clean Air Act to deprive the EPA of this power – and NOT pass ANY version of Cap & Trade!

Unfortunately, this jobs-economy-liberty-free market killer is still very much alive.

Indeed, there is no doubt that this Progressive Congress is thrilled that it will have what it believes to be political cover to pass this monstrosity.

And I believe it will do so in spite of our continued and vociferous objections and the havoc it will create in the economy and in our lives.

2) ObamaCare

Has been passed by the House (with "aye" votes by our Congresswomen Speier and Eshoo) and is working its way through the Senate. Of course, we must continue our faxing campaign against it to Boxer and Feinstein, the Blue Dog Democrats and the Wavering Republicans, and to Speier and Eschoo to vote against the post conference bill (or the Senate bill if it is introduced without conference in the House) , but honestly, I consider the chances of influencing any of our four Left-Wing representatives against it to be slim and none.

I believe that in the end we will get a version of Cap & Trade and ObamaCare. It will be the worst Government Power Grab in the history of our nation. We will be living in a land that our Founders would not recognize. And our representatives will have proven that even though the majority of citizens are against these two devastating bills…they were willing to sacrifice the will of the people and the good of the country on the alter of Party, Power, Greed and Left-Wing, Collectivist Ideology.

That means we have but one alternative:


3) "THROW THE BUMS OUT!"

It is now time to turn our full attention to replacing these recalcitrant politicians. Our last chance to save our country is the 2010 elections. With a significant change in Washington we will signal that we are awake, and taking back control of our country.

If we cannot stop Congress using the EPA as cover for passing Cap & Trade, we must replace the weasels with Americans who will repeal Cap & Trade, and amend the Clean Air Act to defang the EPA.

If we cannot stop ObamaCare from passing, at least we can, with a big enough electoral victory, work to repeal it before it can take full effect.

This is now the most important thing we can do to save our Country.

The vipers in Washington are openly defying the American People. They are pushing these monstrosities through in spite of the fact that huge majorities of Americans are against them! If we don't teach them a lesson in 2010, if we do not punish them for their defiance, they will know there is NOTHING THEY CAN'T GET AWAY WITH.

And that will be the end of Freedom and of our Constitutional Republic.

Until the 2010 Elections...I want our group to be focused like a laser beam on defeating our National Representatives.

When we have affected the change in Washington that will begin the restoration of our Constitutional Republic—or at the least halt our march to Socialism, we can begin working on those other issues that are so important in supporting that effort, like reforming education, and transforming the media, and restoring the free market.

I hope that you will join me in this effort. Our country's future depends on it! And we have less that a year to get it done!

We will be concentrating on three races:

Jackie Speier
Anna Eshoo
Barbara Boxer

So…rather than our original topic for our next meeting, I’d like to start preparing for our last chance at saving America: the 2010 elections.

Please think about the following, and bring your ideas to the meeting:

1) Identify principled LIBERTY candidates (If necessary, enter our own candidates in the GOP Primary)
2) Campaign organizing
3) Internet campaigning
4) Opposition research
5) YouTube
6) Guerilla tactics, creativity
7) Engage the entire LIBERTY community in the campaign
8) Reach out to all the angry, disappointed, disillusioned, fed up citizens and get their VOTES!
9) Use the Tea Party ground swell

To all who have not yet joined us, THIS IS YOUR TIME! We have got to organize and work together if we’re going to take our country back!

The 2010 elections may be the most important in our history. The Progressives have determined to make our country into one ruled by an elite oligarchy—themselves—ignoring the will of the people and the limits of the Constitution. If they are allowed to get away with it without repercussion in 2010, they will know that they can do anything they want without consequences. And our Constitutional Republic will have died.

Now is the time to stand up and be counted. Your children and grandchildren will thank you for saving their freedom—or blame you for surrendering it!

Check the Calendar of Events for date and location of our next meeting.

Carol Negro
MyLiberty
The 9.12 Project
"Organizing the Liberty Community in San Mateo County, California"

Monday, December 7, 2009

Friday, December 4, 2009

Another Mad Hatter

Nice to know our governor has his ear on the pulse of the nation. And science.

Arnold Schwarzenegger unveils dramatic climate change map which shows flooded San Francisco of the future.
The map, named CalAdapt, which was revealed at a press conference on Treasure Island in San Francisco Bay by Mr Schwarzenegger and Google CEO Eric Schmidt, was created as part of a plan for the state to adapt to global warming.

'Within a century, Treasure Island, this place where we are right now, could be totally under water,' the governor said. 'It is technology in the end that will save us.'

Yeah....okay.

Somebody, give that man access to the internet.

Letters, FAXES, email, phone calls. You know the drill.

wtp

A REAL Scientist's Opinion

From the Wall Street Journal:

In contemplating the purloined University of East Anglia emails (L. Gordon Crovitz's "The Web Discloses Inconvenient Climate Truths," Information Age, Nov. 30), an illuminating and contrasting backdrop is this description of scientific conduct, given in 1974 by that scientist's scientist, Nobel laureate physicist Richard P. Feynman:
"There is one feature I notice that is generally missing in "cargo cult science." . . . It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty—a kind of leaning over backwards.

For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid—not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked . . . Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if you know them. . . . If you make a theory, for example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all the facts that disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it."

Turns out too many 21st Century "scientists" are nothing more than "high priests" of some sort of primitive Apocalyptic Nature Religion whose gods are bent on destroying the world unless they get sufficient human sacrifice.

Can't we just throw Al Gore into some heaving volcano and call it good?

wtp