Sunday, April 13, 2014
Friday, April 11, 2014
FBI goons from the government of the United Statists of America swooped down recently upon the home of Donald Miller, an innocent 91-year-old Indiana man, and confiscated his entire private collection of thousands of cultural artifacts painstakingly acquired over eight decades from his travels around the world.
Miller, who was a local teacher and involved in the Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb during World War II, might also face criminal charges for innocently possessing his own personal property.
His collection includes artifacts from Native Americans, Russia, China, and many other nations. No one is claiming that any of the artifacts were stolen or smuggled. He’s insisting that he "absolutely" is the rightful owner and is cooperating fully with the investigation. "I have been in 200 countries collecting artifacts," he said. Now he can kiss his collection goodbye.
"I have never seen a collection like this in my life except in some of the largest museums," marveled Larry Zimmerman, a professor of anthropology and museum studies and one of several experts assisting the FBI agents in cataloging and preserving the collection. Since the items were assembled over several decades, it will likely take a lot of time to determine the age and origin of all of them.
"The cultural value of these artifacts is immeasurable," FBI Special Agent Robert Jones said at a news conference, but he refused to disclose details of any of the individual items taken from Miller's property. "Mr. Miller has made an attempt to safeguard and protect the items," he added, but claims that the collection was: “wrongfully” in Miller’s possession and that the items will be repatriated to their “rightful owners.”
In short, the government goons have decided to steal all the property now and ask questions later. The statists allege that some of the items were acquired “improperly,” but admit that most of it was obtained legally and before any laws affecting them were in existence. So just who are the so-called “rightful owners?”
If an innocent person has an artifact of which the statists believe has “cultural significance,” they simply deem the person a criminal and seize his property. Let’s say, for example, you are digging in your garden on your own private property and happen to find an ancient Native American skull. If the statist goons want it they’ll take it and perhaps brand you a criminal in the process if it suits their interests.
That’s the philosophy of government agents in the United Statists of America: What’s yours is mine, and if we want it, it’s ours, whether you acquired it legally or not.
Monday, April 7, 2014
In the Islamic kingdom of Saudi Arabia today the law specifies that peaceful honest atheists are considered terrorists. Saudi King Abdullah has decided to clamp down with force upon all forms of political dissent and even peaceful protests that could, in his mind, “harm public order.”
Article 1 of the “terrorism” law prohibits “Calling for atheist thought in any form, or calling into question the fundamentals of the Islamic religion on which this country is based.” Any such thoughts, including peaceful protests and all expressions, whether violent or non-violent, are deemed by this Islamic barbarian as “insult[s] to the reputation of the state.”
The law was introduced by royal decree without judicial oversight. Believe my fantasy or be a terrorist declared the King. Advocating freedom of thought makes one a terrorist says the King. The irony is that Saudi Arabia is a current and recently-elected member of the United Nations Human Rights Council. There is no such thing has human rights in Saudi Arabia.
Of course, the kingdom of Saudi Arabia already has a law requiring the death sentence for apostasy. Conversion from Islam to any other religion, or any expression of atheism was already unlawful and could lead to execution by the state. The lucky ones convicted of apostasy are forced at a minimum to disavow their views and undergo “re-education.”
Much of the king’s wrath is directed at a growing number of Saudis travelling abroad to take part in Syria’s civil war and then coming home with newfound training and ideas about overthrowing the monarchy.
You see, when some intelligent people are exposed to the light of reason they start getting “dangerous” ideas about the nature and purpose of Authority! They start to question the fantasy of religion. That’s what all religion is – pure fantasy -- fantasy with a purpose.
Deprived people begin to understand exactly how tyrants like King Abdullah have been using Islam for centuries to domesticate human beings just like it’s done with camels, sheep and goats. Then they start thinking that this statist monarchy under which the tyrant’s have them subjugated isn’t such a great idea after all, and maybe it should be overthrown. That’s what the king fears. He's terrified. That’s why he issues the royal decrees.
King Abdullah and all the princes and privileged elites within the royal house of Saud are not just a bunch of stupid individuals. They aren’t crazy. To the contrary; they know that they have a good thing going for themselves simply by convincing their subjects, if not willingly then by force, to adopt a 5th century mindset inside their conscious minds which renders them slaves to the religion.
Believe the fantasy or be a terrorist.
Thursday, April 3, 2014
President Obama and his socialist oriented Democrat administration hacks are claiming “victory” and running a ceremonial “victory lap” over the fact that 7 million hapless American suckers have reportedly signed up for ObamaCare as of the March 31, 2014 midnight deadline.
Seven million signup’s was the original goal for the program. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney exalted that the total number of sign-ups by the midnight deadline, despite all the problems with the very rocky website rollout, constituted a "remarkable surge in enrollment."
Victory; what victory?
The ObamaCare law has been an unmitigated disaster so far and the worst is yet to come. That so-called Affordable Care Act has not been affordable except, of course, for the poor, sick, old and previously uninsurable folks who will now get health insurance for next to nothing courtesy of the nation’s young affluent healthy people who’ll be forced to pay for it through the nose.
"This law is doing what it's supposed to do. It's working," the President crowed from his perch in the White House Rose Garden. "The debate over repealing this law is over," he boasted. The Affordable Care Act is here to stay… there's no good reason to go back.”
But we’re going to find out soon enough that, of that 7 million who signed up on the website, a big chunk of them didn’t pay any premium, so they signed up alright, but they’re not actually enrolled.
We’re going to discover that not enough young and healthy people signed up and paid their premiums to offset the huge cost of enrolling the poor, sick, and older customers who were uninsurable beforehand.
And the facts will show that most of the people who signed up did so only because the law required it, and/or they had their health insurance cancelled because of ObamaCare. In other words, many of these people already had health insurance they were happy with but were forced into signing up for ObamaCare because of the law mandating that they do so.
That’s a victory?
Hardly; It’s like the government claiming victory when, by the April 15th deadline for filing income tax returns with the IRS, most of the millions of taxpayers comply. Well, of course they comply; the law forces them to comply. If they don’t comply the IRS will slap a lien on their property and they might go to prison.
You see, statist government agents call it a “victory” when, after they mandate laws requiring this or that, most of the sheep comply because they have no practical choice but to comply. If the government erects a stop sign at a highway intersection, for example, and afterword most drivers stop, only because they don’t want to get a ticket and pay a fine for not stopping, the goons call it a “victory.”
The bottom line here is that if 7 million suckers signed up for ObamaCare, most of them did so because they felt compelled to do so. After all, ObamaCare is the law today and those who refuse to sign up will be forced to pay a fine.
Victory; what victory?
Monday, March 31, 2014
Hypocrisy is the status quo among statists, especially statist politicians, who think that they should get away with doing what they are commanding you and me not to do. That’s why most of us just don’t trust politicians. That’s why politicians occupy the lowest level of status in the social order; lower than used car salesmen and snake oil peddlers.
So it comes as no surprise to me that California State senator, Leland Yee, known for his outspoken views in support of gun control, was arrested by the FBI last week and charged with illegally trafficking in firearms along with multiple counts of public corruption.
Of course, the law presumes Sen. Yee not guilty of the crimes until the charges against him are proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law, so I’m not prejudging him here. However, this is the kind of thing that statist politicians have been doing since the dawn of human civilization.
The FBI affidavit claims that Yee offered to negotiate illegal firearms sales on multiple occasions in exchange for financial donations towards his campaign. He allegedly told an undercover FBI agent of his connections to firearms dealers in Asia and Russia, and that he knew an arms dealer who’d been shipping “cargo containers” of weapons to Muslim rebels in the Philippines.
That will have to be proved if Yee is guilty, but what we do know for certain is that this statist politician is ostensibly a rabid gun control advocate on behalf of his Democrat Party constituents. He sponsored legislation, for example, that would have closed a loophole in California’s ban on assault weapons.
Yee has repeatedly claimed to the public that he feels strongly about limiting access to guns by criminals. “This is not an easy issue,” he told reporters in 2012. “But I am a father, and I want our communities to be safe, and god forbid if one of these weapons fell into the wrong hands.”
His politics are about strict gun control but the FBI has shown evidence that his private business is running guns. It’s political hypocrisy pure and simple.
During the dark days of prohibition in America the statist politicians in Congress were all for banning the sale and consumption of alcohol to the public, but behind closed doors, in their congressional offices no less, these same politicians – the very people responsible for ratifying the constitutional amendment that banned alcoholic beverages -- enjoyed easy access to and a steady supply of their favorite booze.
George Cassiday, Congress’ favorite bootlegger, aka “the man in the green hat.” was the guy who kept the supply rolling. For 10 years he ran a bootlegging operation for Congress right out of the House and Senate office buildings.
“He kept them wet, even though they all voted dry,” explained Garrett Peck, author of the book “Prohibition in Washington, D.C.: How Dry We Weren’t,” during a news interview in the Prohibition-era wine cellar that once belonged to President Woodrow Wilson.
Cassiday estimated that “four out of five” members of Congress drank alcohol despite their votes in favor of Prohibition. “This whole idea that there was somehow a consensus to change the Constitution to ban alcohol, just turned out to be totally ridiculous,” says Peck. “Prohibition turned the whole country into a bunch of scofflaws, and a bunch of hypocrites, as well.”
It’s the same situation today with the War on Drugs.
Statist quo hypocrisy.
Thursday, March 27, 2014
Statist oriented government agents everywhere are not content with simply ruling over their captive subjects within the boundaries of the Constitution and laws of the land. No – they’re too often pathologically obsessed with controlling every detail in our lives, whether it pertains to marriage, healthcare, etc. and incredibly even when it comes to how we fashion our hair.
Earlier this year, for example, in my post: Hair Raising Public School Statists in Texas, I observed that many American public school statists think they have a perfect right to force human beings to comply with compulsory education requirements in violation of their constitutional rights, and at the same time dictate absolute conformance in all manner of personal behavior, dress, appearance and thought right down to the way children choose to express themselves with their own hair.
American kids are treated just like inmates in a state penitentiary; penalized for the slightest infractions. It is not enough that they are prisoners of the state; they’re expected to conform like sheep. A straight-A-student was punished by suspension simply for choosing a color for her hair that her statist school administrators didn’t like.
This week an 11-year-old Grand Junction Colorado third-grader was suspended for shaving her head in “violation” of the school’s unconstitutional dress code. The statists there think they have the right to punish little kids who choose to wear no hair at all or to fashion their hair in a manner at odds with an arbitrary dress code.
Not that it should matter, but this little girl chose to shave her head as a kind act of solidarity with one of her friends who lost her hair because of cancer and the necessity for chemotherapy. For this she was told that she couldn’t return to classes until her grew hair back.
Shaved heads are against the school’s dress code “which was created to promote safety, uniformity, and a non-distracting environment for the school’s students,” huffed the school board president, Catherine M. Norton in defense of her statist policies. The dress code also specifies that “radical changes in hair color during the school year are unacceptable.”
“Uniformity” – that says it all, doesn’t it? Uniformity and conformity -- that’s what it’s all about in American public schools nowadays. The children are treated like flocks of sheep.
But after this sad story spread over the internet, going viral, Ms Norton and her statist school board eventually caved in under the tremendous pressure of national outrage over what they did to this innocent little girl who wanted only to make her sick friend feel better. The board voted to let her come back to school.
How about that? They voted on the question of whether an American citizen may exercise her constitutional rights. Statists actually believe they have the right to do that. So they do it all the time with stuff like marriage, healthcare, and dress codes – whatever they feel like and whenever they feel like it.
Outside of America, the so-called land of the free and home of the brave, where else in the world is this kind of blatant in your face statism happening?
Yes, that’s right – North Korea.
"Male university students in North Korea are now required to get the same haircut as their leader Kim Jong-un,” according to recent reports. Haircuts in that bad place have been state-approved or not for a long time now. But before now at least the North Korean sheep were allowed by their dear leader to choose from 18 hair styles for women and 10 for men.
You see, North Korea's state TV some time ago launched a campaign against long hair, called "Let us trim our hair in accordance with the Socialist lifestyle."
Now we know for sure that our American government statists aren’t too far behind the North Koreans when it comes to the matter of: hair.
Monday, March 24, 2014
Federal prosecutors have their statist panties all in a bunch because their boss, Attorney General Eric Holder, has wisely decided that draconian mandatory minimum sentences for drug crimes aren’t working and should be rolled back.
Well, of course they do. These are the folks that make their living by prosecuting mostly innocent human beings in the failed War on Drugs. Their philosophy is to lock ‘em up and throw away the key. That’s why our federal prisons are full to the brim with non-violent offenders who are no threat whatsoever to society except for the fact that their mandatory prison sentences are unnecessarily costing the taxpayers billions.
Congress became afflicted with mandatory reefer madness about 30 years ago in the 1980’s under the Reagan administration when they passed into law extremely harsh guidelines and penalties for drug offenders of which judges were obligated to impose regardless of the circumstances. Innocent growers of pot plants in their basements have actually found themselves facing up to 20 years behind bars under those laws.
That’s just what the statist prosecutors want because it keeps them employed prosecuting easy cases -- shooting thousands of non-violent ducks in a barrel. The more dupes they lock up the more take their place and the Drug War just continues on and on unabated.
Eric Holder has finally come to realize that the Drug War is a losing cause. The consequences to society have been horrendous. Now he wants to overhaul mandatory minimums because incarceration rates for non-violent offenders are exploding, the harsh long term sentences have unfairly hurt low-income and minority communities, and the burden to taxpayers is unsustainable.
He’s calling on Congress to pass the “Smarter Sentencing Act.” "Such legislation could ultimately save our country billions of dollars in prison costs while keeping us safe," Holder explained. It would cut minimum sentences in half for many drug crimes, and give judges -- as opposed to prosecutors -- more leeway in sentencing offenders.
That prudent attitude doesn’t sit well with the National Association of Assistant U.S. Attorneys though. They wrote Holder a letter whining: "we consider the current federal mandatory minimum sentence framework as well-constructed and well worth preserving." They like the idea of non-violent offenders rotting in prison.
"Now that we have crime under control, this bill would see drug crime surge all over again," one of them sniffed, calling the bill a "terrible idea.” That’s a laugh. Does anyone really believe that our statist prosecutors have recreational drug use under control? They don’t what to lose their sledge hammer tool of coercion. That’s why they think rolling back mandatory draconian prison sentences is a terrible idea.
"Mandatory minimums work very well, when you have a drug offender who can provide information against a big, big player, or an organization, or a cartel," explained Doug Burns, a former federal prosecutor and Fox News legal analyst. "You turn around and charge him with 20 years of mandatory time, and the defense attorney knows the only realistic way out of that is cooperation."
That’s how it works in the War on Drugs. That’s why the prisons are full of non-violent offenders. That’s why the taxpayers are heaving under the weight of the tremendous unnecessary costs. The statists are losing the War but the prisons are full anyway and the conveyer belt of government coercion and intimidation keeps rolling along.
It’s mandatory reefer madness.