Going Too Far

GOING TOO FAR afghanistan (Photo credit: The U.S. Army)

Last December, the US gov-co enacted the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).  This act ignited much controversy by allowing the indefinite detention of American citizens without judicial process.

Less appreciated was the NDAA’s proviso for imposing economic sanctions on Iran and its trading partners.  These sanctions include the power to prevent Iran’s trading partners from accessing US financial institutions.

The gov-co presumed that the world would be so terrified by the thought of being unable to trade with the US, that the world would abandon Iran.  However, some nations need Iranian oil more than US dollars and are therefore beginning to buy crude oil from Iran without fiat dollars and even pay with gold.

Some believe that when the NDAA becomes effective (June 28^th), China (the world’s second largest economy) will begin paying for Iranian crude oil with gold.

The economic implications are enormous.  The political implications are greater.  I suspect that the NDAA is evidence that the almighty forces of American empire have finally gone too far.

 

Ron Paul’s Delegate Strategy

Ron Paul taking questions in Manchester, NH (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

One inspirational video.  Three more that reflect Ron Paul delegate victories.  And one video that explains the Ron Paul delegate strategy–absolutely worth viewing.

We Shall Overcome    00:01:59  http://www.youtube.com/user/christianmalazarte

Ron Paul Wins Delegates:

Alaska   00:01:50   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsNEjR_9B_M

Louisiana    00:01:30   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03q1mCVLltc&feature=relmfu

Massachusetts   00:02:36     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWvn1ApnYVQ&feature=relmfu

Ron Paul Delegate Strategy–absolutely worth your time:    00:12:08   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8VaOgfIH5E

 

“I Think Ron Paul Just Won Iowa!” Rachel Maddow

Congressman Ron Paul at an event hosted in his honor at CPAC 2011 in Washington, D.C. Please attribute to Gage Skidmore if used elsewhere. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

According to Whiteout Press:

“Romney Nomination in doubt – Brokered Convention likely

“April 24, 2012. Des Moines. Two networks yesterday, CNBC and MSNBC, broadcast a little known fact – Ron Paul appears to be winning the Republican nomination for President. When the popular Texas Congressman repeatedly assured supporters that the race was about delegates, not beauty contests, he apparently knew what he was talking about. Now, after three more states locked in delegates to the GOP nominating convention – CO, MN and IA – indicators point to a brokered convention with a possible, even probable, Ron Paul victory. . . .  ”Keep in mind that every major US news outlet continues to show Texas Congressman Ron Paul in last place for the GOP nomination and with only 75 delegates. View Politico’s delegate tracker as an example. They show Rep. Paul winning 3 delegates in Colorado, 17 in Minnesota and 1 in Iowa. Those networks however, have based their numbers on which candidate each state’s delegates are pledged or likely to vote for. The more important number is who they actually do vote for. And in that race, the only race that matters, Ron Paul is shocking the political world.”

 

Des citoyens Américains expliquent pourquoi le monde déteste les Etats-Unis

Jules Naudet filmed the impact of Flight 11 as it crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

None of the following video is fun.  All of it–even the parts that may seem offensive–even the parts that seem exaggerated–are based on fundamental truths.

video

00:10:08

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GpBLO53f_k

 

US Surveillance State

big brother (Photo credit: Vince_Lamb)

Here’s a remarkable video describing the extent of government surveillance over internet, cell phones, etc.

Suggested remedies include Tor (http://www.torproject.org) which allegedly conceals your browser activity and gives you some degree of anonymity.  The speakers also recommends “Riseup.net” (which may provide some sort of email anonymity) and “Jitsi” as an alternative to Skype.

My take on secrecy in the internet age is that there is none.  I don’t care what you do, if you do it digitally over the internet. over your cell phone, or on your computer, I doubt that any program can provide you with true anonymity.  More, I wouldn’t be surprised if those who seek to employ anonymity software might even attract increased attention.

I don’t like the idea of being surveilled, but I don’t see any way to reliably escape surveillance other than some sort of a political revolution where we compel our politicians to compel the fascists in the CIA and National Security Agency (NSA) to get off our backs.  But even then, the technology needed for digital surveillance would continue to exist, would continue to be refined, and who will ultimately protect Americans from surveillance by China, France or Brazil?

One of the video’s interesting points is that the internet is an international device.  It’s entirely possible that an email sent from Chicago to Boston, might be routed through Canada, Mexico or England.  That’s important because, while the US has laws against domestic spying on the American people, once your email goes “international,” those laws no longer apply.

 

Consent

Founding Fathers. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The most radical statement in 2,000 years of western political history is found in the third sentence of the “Declaration of Independence”:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The Declaration that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights is the foundation for individual sovereignty and government as a public servant rather than a public master.

The third sentence of the Declaration is almost as profound:

“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

The first half of that sentence declares the fundamental purpose of government as envisioned by the Founders:  to secure to every man, woman and even unborn child their God-given, unalienable Rights.

The second half expresses another principle that is fundamental to freedom:  governments derive their “just powers from the consent of the governed.”  Thus, the concept of “consent” is fundamental to the foundation of governments established by the Founders.

But what, exactly, does consent mean?  Can I run stop signs if I don’t “consent” to obey traffic laws?  Can I avoid paying income taxes by simply withholding my consent to be bound by Title 26 of the United States Code?

The concept of consent is both fundamental our de jure form of government—and extremely hard to grasp and apply.  OK—you do have the right to consent or not to consent, but you don’t have the right to consent or not to particular laws . . . or do you?

The concept of consent is particularly important if a fundamental hypothesis advocated on this blog—the difference between The State (the States of the Union) and “this state” (an administrative division of a singular territory of the United States)—is valid.   If “this state” is a real governmental structure that exists as an alternative to The State, it appears that we may only be subject to the laws of “this state” based on some manifestation of our consent to submit to “this state”.

Thus, if we could more fully understand the concept of consent, we might be able to avoid being subject to the laws of “this state”.

 

To QE3 or Not to QE3? That is the Question!

Quantitative Easing (Photo credit: The Lakelander)

Matthew Bishop, the US Editor of The Economist was recently interviewed by the Wall Street Journal TV.  During that interview, Mr. Bishop predicted that governments will soon debase currencies such as the “paper dollar and “paper euro” “in a big way.”   He said that the weaker than expected March unemployment report is leading to further Wall Street demands for more stimulus plans and that Wall Street’s addiction to debt is leading to the continuing debasement of the dollar. Further Quantitative Easing (QE3)—which, incidentally, will support the price of gold—is virtually inevitable.

The slogan “QE3 to infinity” has caught on among gold gurus.  They argue that QE3 must start soon and essentially continue until the US economy crashes.

Richard Duncan, author of The New Depression: The Breakdown of the Paper Money Economy argues that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke will continue to “stimulate” the currently listless economy with massive infusions of fiat currency.  Therefore, “For the year 2012—Expect QE3.”

However, while I don’t doubt that there’s a QE3 in our future, I’m unconvinced that we’ll see QE3 this year.  But before I explain why, let’s explore the meaning of QE (Quantitative Easing).

 

Police Handcuff Children

Cartoon of students receiving the cane, 1888 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I just read an article entitled “10 Disgusting Examples of Very Young School Children being Arrested, Handcuffed and Brutalized by Police“.  The instances presented are gross and infuriating.

For example,

“At an elementary school in Baltimore recently, three nine-year-old girls and an eight-year-old boy were arrested for fighting and marched out of their elementary school in handcuffs. The police department is defending handcuffing these kids….  ”It’s our policy, regardless of age, when a suspect is arrested by police, they’re handcuffed.  And the reason is just not for the suspect’s safety but also for the officers’ safety.”

I’ve been handcuffed a time or two, and I’ve never felt that my “safety” was somehow enhanced.  The idea that anyone is handcuffed for their own safety is absurd.  We are handcuffed to protect the police or others, not ourselves.

But the idea that a child should be handcuffed for the officer’s safety strikes me as ridiculous.  There are instances reported that claim a 40-pound child was handcuffed, that a 5-year old was handcuffed.  Why?  For the officer’s safety?!  Are we to believe that our “storm troopers” are intimidated by 5-year olds?   If the cops are legitimately afraid of 5 and 10 year old kids, this country is truly screwed.

 

Utah Legalizes Use of Gold & Silver Coin for Paying Debts

Great Seal of the State of Utah (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

More Google hits than any other proposed Utah bill.

An idea whose time has come–again.

This could be reason to move to Utah.  Or maybe it’s reason to stay where you are and compel your state legislature to pass a similar bill legalizing the payment of debt in your state with gold or silver coin.

video

00:04:20

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCbrOzhwkXc&feature=player_embedded

 

The Lord’s Prayer

The Lord's Prayer (1886-1896) from the series The Life of Christ, Brooklyn Museum (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

When you study law, you begin to get a sense of history.  Not because the history of the law is merely interesting, but because it’s important to understand the historical context of any law or court decision.  Law does not mean the same thing at all times and places.  A law may mean one thing in A.D. 1900 and another thing entirely in A.D. 2000.

For example, something the Supreme Court said prior to A.D. 1933 may not carry the same weight as something the Supreme Court said after A.D. 1933.  More, the definitions of words change over time, and a word defined one way in Black’s Law Dictionary, 1^st Edition (A.D. 1891) might be defined somewhat differently in Black’s 4^th Edition (A.D. 1968) and completely opposite in Black’s 8^th (A.D. 2004)

• Historical context is similarly important when we talk about the principles and laws expressed in the Bible.   Given that the Bible, as a complete book, is at least 15 centuries old, everything within the Bible should be well fixed and incapable of “evolution”.  In terms of historical context, all we might really need to know is whether a statement was made in the Old Testament or the New.

But that leaves a very big question:  When did the Old Testament end and the New Testament begin?