Newsboy. Little Fattie. 6 years old. Been at it one year. May 9th, 1910. Location: St. Louis, Missouri. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Three current events plus a few of my offhand remarks (“hipshots”). Nothing profound, but possibly interesting.
• West Point Cadets Taught Patriots Are Terrorists According to Minute Man News, a new 148-page report is urging West Point students to consider many private Americans who claim to be “patriots”– and who are thus critical of government–to actually be American “terrorists”:
“This study, released by the United States Military Academy’s Combating Terrorism Center, is entitled “Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right.” Its author, Professor Arie Perliger, the Director of Terrorism Studies at the Combating Terrorism Center and Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Sciences at West Point, holds membership in the Council on Foreign Relations and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee . . . . Perliger warns that growing legions of conservative-minded citizens across the U.S. pose a serious threat to our nation’s safety.”
In fact, a recent survey by the Pew Foundation indicates that the percentage of Americans who distrust government has risen to 75%. Apparently Mr. Perliger is telling West Point students to ignore the public’s growing displeasure with the federal government and treat all such “dissidents” as “terrorists”. Contrary to Mr. Perligner’s assertions, these dissidents do not pose a threat to “our nation’s safety”–they pose a threat to our nation’s government. The government likes to argue that it’s best interests and the interests of our nation are one-in-the-same, but that’s not true. In fact, the nation’s best interests and the government’s best interest are frequently, usually, and even primarily antithetical. Thus, It’s entirely reasonable and generally inevitable that you be inclined to support your nation but resist your government.
“Perliger placed a bulls-eye on those who ‘espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government, believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional rights.”
How do you “espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government”?
By speaking out in public, on radio, on TV, and writing in books, newspapers, newsletters and blogs like this one. Thus, by condemning those who “espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government,” Perliger teaches West Point cadets that it’s OK to attack the “freedom of speech” and “freedom of the press” guaranteed by the 1st Amendment.
Perliger continues:
“Some groups are driven by a strong conviction that the American political system and its proxies were hijacked by external forces interested in promoting a New World Order. Even more specifically, Perliger asserted that other so-called extremists fall into the categories of anti-federalists, fundamentalist Christians, survivalists, gun-rights advocates, libertarians, pro-lifers, and those who oppose high taxation.”
Are Perliger and the West Point administrators on drugs? Have they ever read a newspaper? Don’t they recall George H.W. Bush (41) advocating a New World Order? Don’t the recall George W. Bush (43) working to unite Canada, Mexico and the US into a new, regional economy/government–without any borders between those three nations and without any constitutional authority to do so. Clearly, our government has be “hijacked” to a considerable degree by “external forces” interested in “promoting a New World Order” and thereby reduced The United States of America from a separate, sovereign nation to an economic region of of a global government.
Perliger’s list of “extremists” includes virtually all Americans—especially if an “extremist” is one who “opposes high taxation”. Virtually everyone hates higher taxes. So, how can the majority of Americans be painted as “extremists”?
The only real “extremists” in this country are the minority who favor a police state, increased government size, and unlimited powers and control.
Even so, Perliger offers a hint (wink, wink) on how you and I might keep government from labeling us as “terrorists”. All we have to do is “espouse strong convictions” in support of higher taxes and bigger government.
In fact, just to make sure gov-co doesn’t label us as “terrorists,” when we send our checks to IRS this April 15th, why not throw in an extra $1,000—no, no! make that $5,000!—to prove that we approve of higher taxation and bigger government—and then maybe the government won’t label us as “terrorists”.
They might label us as natural victims, weaklings and a fools—but as long as we continue to send mo’, mo’ money to the gov-co, perhaps they won’t label us as a “terrorists”.
To prove our loyalty to our modern despots, we might also cheer “Go, Government! Go! . . . Go, Government! Go! Yaaaay!” (And, of course, as “good little Germans” we do not mean “Go, Government! Go to Hell!” or “Go, Government! Go to some other country!”–we only mean “Go, Government! Go!”–right?)
.
• Will the US government intervene in your Retirement Savings?
Bloomberg recently reported in “Retirement Savings Accounts Draw U.S. Consumer Bureau Attention,” that the U.S. government has “expressed an interest in controlling the private pension savings of U.S. workers”:
“The U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is weighing whether it should take on a role in helping Americans manage the $19.4 trillion they have put into retirement savings, a move that would be the agency’s first foray into consumer investments.”
“Helping”? As in, “We’re from the government–and we’re here to help you”?
“Helping” in the same sense as government has helped the So-So Security Fund by draining it and spending virtually all of its assets?
“Helping” as in “helping” the US economy by shipping our industries and jobs overseas and running up a national debt that’s too big to ever be repaid and certain to eventually plunge the government into bankruptcy?
Is that the kind of “help” that government proposes to provide to those Americans who still have some savings?
Because if that’s the kind of “help” government is offering, Americans who saved $19.4 trillion are about to lose their assets. Government is not here to “help you”—it’s here to “help itself” to your savings.
“That’s one of the things we’ve been exploring and are interested in in terms of whether and what authority we have,” bureau director Richard Cordray said in an interview.”
Is the “authority” Mr. Cordray seeks like the “authority” G.W. Bush had to invade Afghanistan and Iraq? Is the missing “authority” like that which Obama contrived to use drones to assassinate people all over the world?
Government doesn’t need any real authority, Mr. Cordray. Government just shoots whoever it wants to shoot and takes whatever dollars it wants to take. It’s simply presumed that preserving the U.S. government is the most important objective in all of life, and therefore whatever government claims that it needs for “self-preservation” is sufficient “authority” to justify any shooting, bombing or taking.
“The bureau’s core concern is that many Americans, notably those from the retiring Baby Boom generation, may fall prey to financial scams.”
By “scams,” I presume that Mr. Cordray means “scams” by private hustlers, con-artists and thieves. He surely does not mean governmental “scams” like fiat currency, So-So Security, mortgage fraudclosure, or financial institutions that are “too big to fail,” “too big to jail” and too “connected” to gov-co to even indict.
In short, government will “help” you with your savings in order to insure that no private hustler steals your money before the government steals it.
Implication? If government is currently looking for ways to “help” those who have savings, and if you have savings that you haven’t protected against a taking by the US gov-co–then you haven’t really protected your savings, have you?
.
• Guillotine! Guillotine!
In the late 1780s, starving French peasants complained that they “had no bread”. Marie Antoinette (Queen of France) replied, then “let them eat cake”.
How droll. Must’ve gotten a big laugh from the Royals.
The starving French people—unable to find either bread or cake—were less amused. Therefore, they revolted, overthrew the French monarchy in A.D. 1792 and guillotined Mizz Antoinette in A.D. 1793.
Today’s Egyptian government apparently intends to go Ms. Antoinette one better. She joked that the starving peasants should “eat cake”. The Egyptian government is advising starving Egyptian peasant to “eat nothing”.
OK, OK—Egypt’s government isn’t actually advising its peasants to “eat nothing,” but, according to an article by David P. Goldman, it is advising Egyptian peasants (who live on $2 a day) to “eat less”.
Good LORD, there’s virtually no way that a man can live on $2 a day and not be starving. And yet, the Egyptian government advises such people to “eat less”. This must end badly.
“The trouble [food shortage], the government says, is that Egyptians are eating too much. The government [therefore] proposed to cut back its bread subsidy to three hand-sized loaves of pita bread per person per day, about 400 calories’ worth.”
The “Arab Spring” of A.D. 2011 was based on the slogan: “Bread, Freedom and Social Justice.” Bread is not taken for granted in the Middle East. To have bread means to live. Without bread, people die. Thus, the bloody civil disturbances that rocked Egypt earlier this month were food riots as much as anything else.
“The Obama administration is proceeding with the sale of 20 updated F-16s and 100 Abrams tanks to Egypt.”
Great! The Egyptian people are starving and Obama has leaped into this humanitarian crises by sending Egypt more tanks and fighter jets. To paraphrase Marie Antoinette, Obama has apparently said, “Let ‘em eat tanks.”
Not to be outdone, the IMF is instructing the Egyptian government on the “the need to reduce the budget deficit . . . by reducing food and fuel subsidies, which keep alive the more than 40% of Egyptians who are unemployed or underemployed.”
According to Mr. Goldman,
“We are watching something unique and terrible in modern history, namely the disintegration of a society of 80 million people, with the prospect of real hunger–a self-made famine brought about by social and political disaster rather than crop failure or war. It is horrific and dangerous.”
He’s right.
Now, we will watch to see if and when the starving Egyptians (advised to “eat less”) will emulate the formerly starving French peasants (advised to “eat cake”) by breaking out the guillotines to deal with the incompetent and/or callous Egyptian government.
Egypt is going to implode. Maybe soon.
