World News: Sep 10, 2011

Saturday, September 10, 2011

Re: Fwd: [PAG] 'Cyber 9/11': Serious Risk Or Inflated Threat?

Well said Mark!

On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 12:27 PM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:

No threat can be serious enough to lose one more iota of my guaranteed
but now ignored rights. When will people wake up??

On Sep 10, 7:28 am, Bruce Majors <majors.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From:
> Date: Saturday, September 10,
>
> _'Cyber 9/11': Serious Risk Or Inflated Threat?_
> (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/09/cyber-911-risk-or-inflated-t...
> cid=maing-grid10|htmlws-main-nb|dl13|sec1_lnk3|94192)
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> __._,_.___
> Reply to sender <
> texeejazzt...@aol.com?subject\x3dRe%3A%20%27Cyber%209%2F11%27%3A%20Serious%20Risk%20Or%2 0Inflated%20Threat%3F>
> | Reply to group <
> ProAmericaGrassro...@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dRe%3A%20%27Cyber%209%2F11%27%3A%20Serious%20Ris k%20Or%20Inflated%20Threat%3F>
> | Reply via web post <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ProAmericaGrassroots/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJx...>
> | Start a New Topic <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ProAmericaGrassroots/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJl...
>
> Messages in this topic <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ProAmericaGrassroots/message/51168;_ylc...>
> (1)
> Recent Activity:
>
> Visit Your Group <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ProAmericaGrassroots;_ylc=X3oDMTJlNGlyY...
>
> To invite someone to this list, have them email:
> ProAmericaGrassroots-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> MARKETPLACE
>
> Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get
> the Yahoo! Toolbar now. <http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15otq7933/M=493064.14543979.14562481....
>
> ________________________________
> A bad score is 598. A bad idea is not checking yours, at freecreditscore.com
> . <http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15oslnis5/M=791726.14854538.14596965....
>
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkdGIwZW5nBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycEl...
>
> Switch to: Text-Only <
> ProAmericaGrassroots-traditio...@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dChange+Delivery+Format:+Traditional>,
> Daily Digest <
> ProAmericaGrassroots-dig...@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dEmail+Delivery:+Digest>
> • Unsubscribe <
> ProAmericaGrassroots-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dUnsubscribe> •
> Terms of Use <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
> .
> __,_._,___

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Fwd: [PAG] 'Cyber 9/11': Serious Risk Or Inflated Threat?

No threat can be serious enough to lose one more iota of my guaranteed
but now ignored rights. When will people wake up??

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

fyi

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/09/pbs_alters_transcript_to_hide_obama_gaffe.html

Re: Michelle Malkin Is Upset

She's hot too

On Sep 9, 1:39 pm, Sage2 <wisdom...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 9, 1:04 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> Michelle Malkin ( as usual ) is spot on , while Laurence Vance
> has his head up where the sun don't shine.
>
> ***********************************************************************************************************************
>
>
>
> > Michelle Malkin Is UpsetPosted byLaurence Vanceon September 9, 2011 10:07 AM
> > She is upset about anew pollreleased this week showing that Americans today "are generally more willing to believe that U.S. policies in the Middle East might have motivated the 9/11 terror attacks on New York and the Pentagon."
> > I don't think I need to say that this comes as no surprise since she is one of the conservative movement's finest bloodthirsty warmongers.
> > xxxAll the Wrong 9/11 Lessonsby Michelle Malkin
> > 09/09/2011
> > Are your kids learning the right lessons about 9/11? Ten years after Osama bin Laden's henchmen murdered thousands of innocents on American soil, too many children have been spoon-fed the thin gruel of progressive political correctness over the stiff antidote of truth.
> >
> > "Know your enemy, name your enemy" is a 9/11 message that has gone unheeded. Our immigration and homeland security policies refuse to profile jihadi adherents at foreign consular offices and at our borders. Our military leaders refuse to expunge them from uniformed ranks until it's too late (see: Fort Hood massacre). The j-word is discouraged in Obama intelligence circles, and the term "Islamic extremism" was removed from the U.S. national security strategy document last year.
> >
> > Similarly, too many teachers refuse to show and tell who the perpetrators of 9/11 were and who their heirs are today. My own daughter was one year old when the Twin Towers collapsed, the Pentagon went up in flames and Shanksville, Pa., became hallowed ground for the brave passengers of United Flight 93. In second grade, her teachers read touchy-feely stories about peace and diversity to honor the 9/11 dead. They whitewashed Osama bin Laden, militant Islam and centuries-old jihad out of the curriculum. Apparently, the youngsters weren't ready to learn even the most basic information about the evil masterminds of Islamic terrorism.
> >
> > Mary Beth Hicks, author of the new book "Don't Let the Kids Drink the Kool-Aid," points to a recent review of 10 widely used textbooks in which the concepts of jihad and sharia were either watered down or absent. These childhood experts have determined that grade school is too early to delve into the specifics of the homicidal clash of Allah's sharia-avenging soldiers with the freedom-loving Western world.
> >
> > Yet, many of the same protectors of fragile elementary-school pupils can't wait to teach them all the ins and outs of condoms, cross-dressers and crack addictions.
> >
> > We pulled our daughter out of a cesspool of academic and moral relativism and found a reality-grounded, rigorous charter school where no-nonsense teachers refuse to sugarcoat inconvenient facts and history. Many of the students are children of soldiers and servicemen and women who -- inspired by the heroes of 9/11 -- have voluntarily deployed time and time again to kill the American Dream destroyers abroad before they kill us over here.
> >
> > There's no better way to hammer home the message that "freedom is not free" than to have your kids go to school with other kids whose dads and moms are gone for years at a time -- missing births and birthday parties, recitals and soccer practice, Christmas pageants and Independence Day fireworks.
> >
> > But instead of unfettered pride in our armed forces, social justice educators in high schools and colleges across the country indoctrinate American students into viewing our volunteer armed forces as victims, monsters and pawns in a leftist "social struggle."
> >
> > A decade after the 9/11 attacks, Blame America-ism still permeates classrooms and the culture. A special 9/11 curriculum distributed in New Jersey schools advises teachers to "avoid graphic details or dramatizing the destruction" wrought by the 9/11 hijackers, and instead focus elementary school students' attention on broadly defined "intolerance" and "hurtful words."
> >
> > No surprise: Jihadist utterances such as "Kill the Jews," "Allahu Akbar" and "Behead all those who insult Islam" are not among the "hurtful words" studied.
> >
> > Middle-schoolers are directed to "analyze diversity and prejudice in U.S. history." And high-school students are taught "Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs" - pop-psychology claptrap used to excuse jihadists' behavior based on their purported low self-esteem and oppressed status caused by "European colonialism."
> >
> > It is no wonder that a new poll released this week showed that Americans today "are generally more willing to believe that U.S. policies in the Middle East might have motivated the 9/11 terror attacks on New York and the Pentagon," according to Reuters.
> >
> > To make matters worse, we have an appeaser-in-chief who wrote shortly after the jihadist attacks a decade ago that the "essence of this tragedy" derives "from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others." A "climate of poverty and ignorance" caused the attacks, then-Illinois stateSen. Barack Obamapreached. Never mind the Ivy League and Oxford educations, the oil wealth and the middle-class status of legions of al-Qaida plotters and operatives.
> >
> > 9/11 was a deliberate, carefully planned evil act of the long-waged war on the West by Koran-inspired soldiers of Allah around the world. They hated us before George W. Bush was in office. They hated us before Israel existed. And the avengers of the religion of perpetual outrage will keep hating us no matter how much we try to appease them.
> >
> > The post-9/11 problem isn't whether we'll forget. The problem is: Will we ever learn?http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46057- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Fwd: [I-S] Hats off to Sherry Hackett

----------

</mail/u/0/s/?view=att&th=1323a2f2ef9c53fc&attid=0.1&disp=emb&zw>

Sherry Hackett, wife of the late Buddy Hackett, is a dyed-in-the-wool
Democrat. I would think that many other Democrats share her position...
This was written by …. Sherry Hackett, Buddy Hackett's widow

"WE NOTICED"… President Obama:

Today I read of your administrations' plan to re-define September 11 as
a National Service Day. …. Sir, it's time we had a talk.

During your campaign, Americans watched as you made mockery of our
tradition of standing and crossing your heart when the Pledge of Allegiance
was spoken. You, out of four people on the stage, were the only one not
honoring our tradition. …. YES, "We noticed."

During one of your many speeches, Americans heard you say that you
intended to visit all 57 states. We all know that Islam, not America has
57 states…. YES, "We noticed."

When President Bush leaned over at Ground Zero and gently placed a
flower on the memorial, while you nonchalantly tossed your flower onto
the pile without leaning over….. YES, "We noticed."

Every time you apologized to other countries for America 's position on
an issue we have wondered why you don't share our pride in this great
country.. When you have heard foreign leaders berate our country and our

beliefs, you have not defended us. In fact, you insulted the British Crown
beyond belief. …. YES, "We noticed."

When your pastor of 20 years, "God-damned America " and said that
9/11 was " America 's chickens coming home to roost" and you denied
having heard recriminations of that nature, we wondered how that could
be. You later disassociated yourself from that church and Pastor Wright
because it was politically expedient to do so…. YES, "We noticed."

When you announced that you would transform America , we wondered
why. With all her faults, America is the greatest country on earth.
Sir, KEEP THIS IN MIND, "if not for America and the people who built
her, you wouldn't be sitting in the White House now." Prior to your
election to the highest office in this Country, you were a senator from
Illinois and from what we can glean from the records available, not a
very remarkable one…. YES, "We noticed."

All through your campaign and even now, you have surrounded
yourself with individuals who are basically unqualified for the
positions for which you appointed them. Worse than that, the majority
of them are people who, like you, bear no special allegiance, respect, or
affection for this country and her traditions. …. YES, "We noticed."

You are 24 months into your term and every morning millions of Americans
wake up to a new horror heaped on us by you. You seek to saddle working
Americans with a health care/insurance reform package that, along with cap
and trade, will bankrupt this nation. …YES, "We noticed."

We seek, by protesting, to let our representatives know that we are not
in favor of these crippling expenditures and we are labeled "un-American",
"racist", "mob". We wonder how we are supposed to let you know how
frustrated we are. You have attempted to make our protests seem isolated
and insignificant. Until your appointment, Americans had the right to speak
out. …. YES, "We noticed."

On September 11, 2001 there were no Republicans or Democrats, only
Americans. And we all grieved together and helped each other in whatever
way we could. The attack on 9/11 was carried out because we are Americans.

And YES, "We noticed…"

There were many of us who prayed that as a black president you could help
unite this nation. In six months you have done more to destroy this nation
than the attack on 9/11. You have failed us. …. YES, "We noticed."

September 11 is a day of remembrance for all Americans. You propose to
make 9/11 a "National Service Day". While we know that you don't share
our reverence for 9/11, we pray that history will report your proposal as
what it is, a disgrace. …. YES, "We noticed."

You have made a mockery of our Constitution and the office that you hold.
You have embarrassed and slighted us in foreign visits and policy.

…. YES, "We noticed."

We have noticed all these things. We will deal with you. When Americans
come together again, it will be to remove you from office. Do Take notice.

If you agree with this, please pass it on. If not, I'm sorry.

__._,_.___
Reply to sender <crestln@erols.com?subject\x3dRe%3A%20Hats%20off%20to%20Sherry%20Hackett> | Reply to group <Individual-Sovereignty@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dRe%3A%20Hats%20off%20to%20Sherry%20Hackett> | Reply via web post <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Individual-Sovereignty/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJycGE0ZDc5BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0MjA3MzcEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MzAzMjkyBG1zZ0lkAzI0NjcxNARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNycGx5BHN0aW1lAzEzMTUyMzYxNjA-?act=reply&messageNum=246714> | Start a New Topic <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Individual-Sovereignty/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJlODdxaWszBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0MjA3MzcEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MzAzMjkyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUDMTMxNTIzNjE2MA-->
Messages in this topic <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Individual-Sovereignty/message/246714;_ylc=X3oDMTM4dnA0NDk5BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0MjA3MzcEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MzAzMjkyBG1zZ0lkAzI0NjcxNARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawN2dHBjBHN0aW1lAzEzMTUyMzYxNjAEdHBjSWQDMjQ2NzE0> (1)
Recent Activity:

Visit Your Group <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Individual-Sovereignty;_ylc=X3oDMTJlaDRob2cwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0MjA3MzcEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MzAzMjkyBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTMxNTIzNjE2MA-->
Report any problems, suggestions or abuse to Individual-Sovereignty-owner@yahoogroups.com

MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now. <http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15oqno712/M=493064.14543979.14562481.13298430/D=groups/S=1705303292:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1315243360/L=e4dd4ff2-d7d2-11e0-ae58-8bb9090f9eb0/B=kwX1QWKJiVM-/J=1315236160414634/K=N8luhBzbN.HXCjuDTjLByQ/A=6060255/R=0/SIG=1194m4keh/*http://us.toolbar.yahoo.com/?.cpdl=grpj>

<http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=e4dd4ff2-d7d2-11e0-ae58-8bb9090f9eb0&T=1c96auoep%2fX%3d1315236160%2fE%3d1705303292%2fR%3dgroups%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d3479712418%2fH%3dY29udGVudD0iUG9kY2FzdHM7TWVzc2FnZV9Cb2FyZHM7TmV3cztHbztGaW5hbmNlO1RWO0V2ZW50cztQZW9wbGU7WWVsbG93X1BhZ2VzO01hcHM7IiBkaXNhYmxlc2h1ZmZsaW5nPSIxIiBzZXJ2ZUlkPSJlNGRkNGZmMi1kN2QyLTExZTAtYWU1OC04YmI5MDkwZjllYjAiIHNpdGVJZD0iNDQ1MjU1MSIgdFN0bXA9IjEzMTUyMzYxNjAzOTMwODYiIA--%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d9D238962&U=13cfidndu%2fN%3dkwX1QWKJiVM-%2fC%3d493064.14543979.14562481.13298430%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6060255%2fV%3d1>
________________________________
A bad score is 579. A good idea is checking yours at freecreditscore.com. <http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15olgpvbq/M=791726.14847541.14590405.10835568/D=groups/S=1705303292:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1315243360/L=e4dd4ff2-d7d2-11e0-ae58-8bb9090f9eb0/B=kQX1QWKJiVM-/J=1315236160414634/K=N8luhBzbN.HXCjuDTjLByQ/A=6475085/R=0/SIG=1309nvt92/*http://www.freecreditscore.com/dni/default.aspx?SiteVersionID=997&sc=671266&bcd=YGROUPS_Bad579><http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=e4dd4ff2-d7d2-11e0-ae58-8bb9090f9eb0&T=1c94spdg1%2fX%3d1315236160%2fE%3d1705303292%2fR%3dgroups%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d1622419223%2fH%3dY29udGVudD0iUG9kY2FzdHM7TWVzc2FnZV9Cb2FyZHM7TmV3cztHbztGaW5hbmNlO1RWO0V2ZW50cztQZW9wbGU7WWVsbG93X1BhZ2VzO01hcHM7IiBkaXNhYmxlc2h1ZmZsaW5nPSIxIiBzZXJ2ZUlkPSJlNGRkNGZmMi1kN2QyLTExZTAtYWU1OC04YmI5MDkwZjllYjAiIHNpdGVJZD0iNDQ1MjU1MSIgdFN0bXA9IjEzMTUyMzYxNjAzOTMwODYiIA--%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d9D238962&U=13cntnapd%2fN%3dkQX1QWKJiVM-%2fC%3d791726.14847541.14590405.10835568%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6475085%2fV%3d1>
<http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/yg/logo/us.gif> <http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkamxvbjVrBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzI0MjA3MzcEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MzAzMjkyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMzE1MjM2MTYw>
Switch to: Text-Only <Individual-Sovereignty-traditional@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dChange+Delivery+Format:+Traditional>, Daily Digest <Individual-Sovereignty-digest@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dEmail+Delivery:+Digest> • Unsubscribe <Individual-Sovereignty-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dUnsubscribe> • Terms of Use <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
.
<http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=2420737/grpspId=1705303292/msgId=246714/stime=1315236160/nc1=5898810/nc2=3848627/nc3=4507179>
__,_._,___

Fwd: [PAG] 'Cyber 9/11': Serious Risk Or Inflated Threat?

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:
Date: Saturday, September 10,

_'Cyber 9/11': Serious Risk Or Inflated Threat?_
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/09/cyber-911-risk-or-inflated-threat_n_934272.html?1315578456&i
cid=maing-grid10|htmlws-main-nb|dl13|sec1_lnk3|94192)

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Reply to sender <texeejazztzus@aol.com?subject\x3dRe%3A%20%27Cyber%209%2F11%27%3A%20Serious%20Risk%20Or%20Inflated%20Threat%3F> | Reply to group <ProAmericaGrassroots@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dRe%3A%20%27Cyber%209%2F11%27%3A%20Serious%20Risk%20Or%20Inflated%20Threat%3F> | Reply via web post <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ProAmericaGrassroots/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJxcnU2Z2hhBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1MDkwNDUEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NDQ0NDkwBG1zZ0lkAzUxMTY4BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTMxNTYzNTAwNw--?act=reply&messageNum=51168> | Start a New Topic <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ProAmericaGrassroots/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJlYnVubzNwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1MDkwNDUEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NDQ0NDkwBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUDMTMxNTYzNTAwNw-->
Messages in this topic <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ProAmericaGrassroots/message/51168;_ylc=X3oDMTM2cmYzbnZhBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1MDkwNDUEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NDQ0NDkwBG1zZ0lkAzUxMTY4BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTMxNTYzNTAwNwR0cGNJZAM1MTE2OA--> (1)
Recent Activity:

Visit Your Group <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ProAmericaGrassroots;_ylc=X3oDMTJlNGlyY29zBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1MDkwNDUEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NDQ0NDkwBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTMxNTYzNTAwNw-->
To invite someone to this list, have them email:
ProAmericaGrassroots-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now. <http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15otq7933/M=493064.14543979.14562481.13298430/D=groups/S=1705444490:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1315642207/L=88736b44-db73-11e0-b7e9-df294803027d/B=BOhkRkPDhFI-/J=1315635007819545/K=7ZddZd8cnOU3Yz7OES_5Rg/A=6060255/R=0/SIG=1194m4keh/*http://us.toolbar.yahoo.com/?.cpdl=grpj>

________________________________
A bad score is 598. A bad idea is not checking yours, at freecreditscore.com. <http://global.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=15oslnis5/M=791726.14854538.14596965.10835568/D=groups/S=1705444490:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1315642207/L=88736b44-db73-11e0-b7e9-df294803027d/B=A.hkRkPDhFI-/J=1315635007819545/K=7ZddZd8cnOU3Yz7OES_5Rg/A=6449876/R=0/SIG=130kfcsn4/*http://www.freecreditscore.com/dni/default.aspx?SiteVersionID=997&sc=671020&bcd=YGROUPS_Bad598>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkdGIwZW5nBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1MDkwNDUEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NDQ0NDkwBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMzE1NjM1MDA3>
Switch to: Text-Only <ProAmericaGrassroots-traditional@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dChange+Delivery+Format:+Traditional>, Daily Digest <ProAmericaGrassroots-digest@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dEmail+Delivery:+Digest> • Unsubscribe <ProAmericaGrassroots-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dUnsubscribe> • Terms of Use <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
.
__,_._,___

Who Really Kept Us Safe After 9/11

Who Really Kept Us Safe After 9/11
The truth about homeland security
Steve Chapman | September 8, 2011

If there was any certainty in the weeks and months after the 9/11 attacks, it was that these were just the first in a campaign of terror on American soil. "You can just about bet on it," said Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), the ranking Republican on the Intelligence Committee. New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani said, "I anticipate another attack."

Gary Stubblefield, who directed the Naval Special Warfare Task Unit in the Pacific area, asserted that, as The Denver Post paraphrased, "the question is not if but when dozens of terrorist cells in the United States will unleash biological, chemical and perhaps nuclear weapons against U.S. cities." FBI Director Robert Mueller estimated the U.S. harbored "several hundred" extremists affiliated with Al Qaeda.

Americans had seen in Israel how a homegrown terrorist movement was able to kill hundreds of people with suicide bombings and other attacks. It seemed we could expect the same. A comment often heard was, "We are all Israelis now."

But the predictions have not come true. There have been very few attacks in this country by Islamic extremistsand nothing remotely on the scale of 9/11. The "sleeper cells" proved to be mostly nonexistent.

This surprising record has been attributed to excellent work by the FBI, CIA, and other law enforcement agencies, the war in Afghanistan, and the Bush administration's aggressive treatment of suspected terrorists. But on the list of those deserving credit, the first is a group hardly anyone would have predicted: American Muslims.

Millions of Muslims live in the United States. Had even a tiny percentage been radicalized enough to commit violence, they could have done immense damage. Despite all the efforts to upgrade security at a few crucial sites, it really wouldn't be hard for any group to kill lots of people.

A car bomb in a stadium parking lot, a couple of semi-automatic rifles in a shopping mall, a Molotov cocktail in a crowded bus, a bomb on a railroad track, a runaway pickup on a city sidewalkthere's an endless list of easy pickings.

There are too many targets to secure them all. It would have been a simple task for a handful of minimally trained volunteers to keep us in a constant state of fear.

But the volunteers, with rare exceptions, didn't come forward. Charles Kurzman, a sociologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, writes in Foreign Policy magazine that "approximately a dozen people in the country were convicted in the five years after 9/11 for having links with al-Qaida" and "fewer than 40 Muslim Americans planned or carried out acts of domestic terrorism."

That may sound like a lot, until you remember that there are 15,000 murders a year in this country. A report from the Rand Corp., a national security think tank, noted that of 83 terrorist attacks that took place between 9/11 and the end of 2009, only three "were clearly connected with the jihadist cause." Three!

We hear a lot of allegations of radical American imams preaching jihad. If so, they are not getting through. The simple fact is that most American Muslims don't sympathize with religious extremism and almost none are willing to practice it.

And why should they be? According to a recent poll by the Pew Research Center, "They are overwhelmingly satisfied with the way things are going in their lives (82 percent) and continue to rate their communities very positively as places to live (79 percent excellent or good)."

Suicide bombers may proliferate in places where followers of Islam feel oppressedas many living under Arab dictators do, as many living under Israeli control do. But worldwide, says Kurzman, global Islamic extremist organizations have been able to recruit "fewer than one out of every 100,000 Muslims since 9/11." Islam is not particularly fertile ground for growing terrorists.

That's especially true in the land of the free. Despite the suspicions they face from some of their fellow citizens, American Muslims clearly value what America offers them. They like living in a democracy that respects their rights. People with good lives are not inclined to throw them away in grisly acts of violence.

A decade ago, American Muslims were called by our enemies to rise up and slaughter their fellow citizens. Al Qaeda must be wondering why it never heard back.

http://reason.com/archives/2011/09/08/who-really-kept-us-safe-after

The Freedoms Defended Since 9/11

The Freedoms Defended Since 9/11
by Anthony Gregory, September 9, 2011

"Freedom itself was attacked this morning by a faceless coward," said George W. Bush on September 11, 2011. "And freedom will be defended."

President Obama apparently agrees that the U.S. government's response to 9/11 has been to defend freedom. This past Memorial Day he announced, "From Gettysburg to Kandahar, America's sons and daughters have served with honor and distinction, securing our liberties and laying a foundation for lasting peace."

We might wonder which freedoms the U.S. government, under both Bush and Obama, has defended since 9/11.

It doesn't appear to be the First Amendment's freedoms of speech and association. Otherwise it would be hard to explain the National Security Letters that forbid their recipients from telling anyone, even a lawyer or spouse, that the FBI is monitoring them. It would be difficult to understand the Bush administration's "free speech zones" that kept war protesters far from presidential appearances, or U.S. spying on peace activists under both administrations. It would be perplexing that Obama would detain Bradley Manning for the crime of releasing incriminating information about the U.S. warfare state, or that his administration's officials would hint that WikiLeaks's project of exposing government wrongdoing should be shut down.

Maybe the government has mostly been protecting Americans' right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. Then again, it would be confusing that both Bush and Obama would stand by the USA PATRIOT Act, which has eroded the Fourth Amendment, forced businesses to spy on their customers and hand information over to the Justice Department, loosened restrictions for wiretapping, and empowered agents to conduct special searches without alerting Americans right away that their property had been searched. It would also be a mystery why both Bush and Obama have stood by the National Security Administation's power to spy on American telecommunications without a warrant. Then there is the whole question of the Transportation Security Administration, which summarily searches American airline passengers, their luggage, and their persons, forcing them to go through invasive pat-downs and potentially dangerous irradiating "porno-scanners."

Perhaps the freedom being defended is the long-celebrated right to due process and habeas corpus for those detained by the government. That would be hard to reconcile, however, with the Bush administration's roundup of hundreds of innocent aliens right after 9/11, the "material witness" doctrine that allowed for indefinite detention without charge, or the "enemy combatant" designation that, when pinned on someone by the president, even on a U.S. citizen, means there will be a total disregard for traditional due process. It would certainly make a puzzle out of Guantanamo, where some detainees have been determined innocent of all wrongdoing but are nevertheless kept detained; and it would be hard to make sense of the military commissions that deprive subjects of both the standard protections of criminal suspects or those of prisoners of war. The secret evidence used in many cases in the last ten years certainly seems to be in tension with the right to confront one's accuser and the evidence laid against one. And Obama's very concept of "prolonged detention" and his administration's fighting the courts on numerous habeas corpus cases are a little bit of an enigma if indeed the right to due process is what our leaders have in mind when they're waging these wars for our freedoms.

Maybe it's the right not to be subject to cruel and unusual punishment that Bush and Obama have been defending! Although that would seem to be in conflict with the mistreatment of whisteblower Bradley Manning, the abuse that continues at Guantanamo, the waterboarding of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and the psychological and sexual abuse that became a regular interrogation practice throughout Iraq and other U.S.-controlled areas at the height of the war on terror.

Other freedoms that haven't seemed to be enhanced, much less defended by the war on terrorism, include the right to travel, financial freedom, the right to bear arms, and the right to a fair civil proceeding against government agents who have violated one's liberties. Economic freedom hasn't exactly blossomed since 9/11. Come to think of it, most of the freedoms that have been held as sacred for so long in this country aren't exactly easy targets for terrorists to undermine in the first place; free speech, due process, privacy, and other such civil liberties are much easier for governments to compromise than for terrorists to take away.

But there is a class of people whose freedom has surely been strengthened since 9/11, as a direct consequence of the wars fought abroad. That would be people at the top of the executive branch, and especially presidents themselves.

The right of the president to wage war unilaterally has been defended against enemies, both foreign and domestic. The right of the president to order torture and get away with it and to cover up for those who perpetrated such acts of barbarism has been secured. The freedom of the president to declare someone an enemy of the United States, and thus be fit to be jailed without any semblance of judicial oversight, or even be killed by a predator drone strike, has been affirmed. The president is now at liberty to spy on people's communications without even the flimsy standards adopted in the 1978 FISA guidelines.

In short, Bush was right that freedom would be defended after 9/11, and Obama is right to thank soldiers for fighting for "our freedom." The only confusion comes in thinking these presidents were speaking on the behalf of the American people, when in fact they were speaking only about the small class of Americans known as U.S. presidents, and their freedom to wage war, detain, torture, spy, and execute without restriction.

http://www.fff.org/comment/com1109l.asp

Scam and Sham

Scam and Sham
How the Media do that voodoo that's doo-doo
by Brian Wilson

Center stage for the "news media's" regularly scheduled kabuki: The Presidential Debates. These 60-90 minutes of low-grade drama and high-grade farce would have the viewer believe serious inquisition is going on here. In fact, all but the script is laid out in advance. Even the candidate placement is calculated to foment drama and entertainment, not a substantive "debate". The entire format is designed to embarrass, confuse, distract and entertain rather than provide honest, insightful answers to serious questions about governance and a vision for America's future. While serious formal debating always has a "timed" component, it is generally ample to allow serious presentation of position or fact. Not so much with these laughable Network Events. The "rules" require the candidates to force 10 lbs of You Know into a 5 lbs bag. Despite politicians' congenital desire to filibuster, it is ludicrous to expect conscientious voters to reach a well-founded decision on whom to support based on a 2 minute sound-bite response to dramatic, rhetorical, loaded "gotcha" questions, cleverly crafted to hog-tie the respondent. That's not an excuse for any candidate who steps in it with a poorly presented answer, but a level of awareness must prevail considering who asked what question of whom and how and what's heard in response.

Many have appropriately objected that Ron Paul is not asked substantive questions; that he is ignored in favor of anyone else on those rare occasions when serious issues are introduced. A large part of the explanation lies in the self-fulfilling fairy tale the MSM tells you: Polls show Romney, Perry and Bachman are the front-runners; voters, therefore, want to hear from them more than the Also-Rans. They conveniently leave out the part that those polls are of their own making. They pick and pay the polling company, pre-determine the response, dictate the questions, and see to it the methodology secures the desired results. They can then tell you with straight face: "This is what our polling data shows; this is why we ask more questions of the Front Runners."

The truth is Ron Paul's answers do not fit the Party Line. Every Paul position contains a reference to the United States Constitution, Constitutional authority, Constitutional principles. The unanswered question remains: what is so wrong with a Constitutionally obedient government that gives the other candidates hives? Put another way: what stands in place of a Constitutionally obedient government? The answer can be read in everyday's headlines. And, as noted in previous LRC scribbling, the Shooting Stars in the News Media Firmament can't handle such answers because they thoroughly debunk the currently approved and accepted narrative. They can't be trumped or demagogued without insulting the Rule of Law (which fortunately still has a serious fan base across the country). During the 2008 cycle of these "Presidential debates", Ron Paul was actively mocked and marginalized. This time, the media is pushing its patented "Ignore Button". To paraphrase the song lyric, "Ask him no questions/he'll just tell you truth". And we can't have truth and the Constitution mucking up a good ole media kabuki.

So the recent candidate staging of Romney-next-to-Perry wasn't for show and drama? Nooooo – it was just a natural consequence of independent polling (that we paid for). That they were also tossed the most contentious, red-meat questions was also justified by the polling (and we wanted some serious drama and smack-down action).

But wait! There's More Of The Same in the debates to come, regardless of the network sponsor.

Too often this skullduggery leads interested listeners and viewers to the unfortunate "Rejection! Candidate Not Perfect!" reaction. This seems curiously more prevalent in its application only to Ron Paul. Those familiar with Paul know the context of his references is consistently Constitutional. Due to the pervasive epidemic of Aggressive Ignorance coupled with the "debate's" limitations, it is difficult for a principled candidate to provide comprehensive answers. Yes it is easier for others because the narrative, composed of vacuous and glittering generalities, has been repeated so often, everyone knows it by heart; it is the anticipated response. When the sound bite contradicts it, the listener defaults back to the mythology of the narrative and leaps to a distorted, incorrect conclusion, rejecting the candidate on the basis of mis- and dis- information. The fatal result is the sacrifice of the Good for the Perfect. Since the Perfect doesn't exist, the voter clings to the familiar and ends up supporting precisely what he doesn't want simply because it's comfortable, easy and familiar. For the agenda-driven MSM: Mission Accomplished.

A listener wrote "After watching the debate, I have concluded Ron Paul, while perfect in the content of his answers, his manner keeps him from being taken seriously despite his superior knowledge of history, government and banking." With 14 months until November, it remains to be seen whether it "keeps him from being taken seriously" by the people who count: the voters. Meanwhile, look at the other candidates. If they are to be measured by the same standard, they all have serious baggage that should elimnate them from consideration immediately. Look at their records of Statism, pork and policy failures. Why aren't they summarily dismissed by an electorate demanding an end to "Washington's same old ways"? In part, because they don't have a Constitutional foundation that stymies "the Machine", so they are given the proverbial "pass". Every other candidate has skeletons, issues, other priorities. No other candidate has Ron Paul's spotless record and unrivaled fealty to the Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land and cornerstone of our Republic. What more could a voter want – especially at this time in our history?

To the Media, Paul and the Constitution are the Anti-Christ. Combined, they contradict everything the Media-Government complex stands, works and speaks for. Look for them to work their hardest to destroy his candidacy because even with the limited exposure Paul gets, the more the essence of his message is heard by those looking for the only way to save the Republic and preserve Freedom.

Ron Paul may not be an easy sell – but then, Liberty never is.

http://lewrockwell.com/wilson-brian/wilson-brian28.1.html

Could the Presidential Election Turn On a Dime?

Could the Presidential Election Turn On a Dime?
(Not if the WaPo Banksters Have Their Way)
by Bill Watkins

On Wednesday night during the debate among GOP Presidential candidates at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, some Establishment candidates were yammering on about the high price of gasoline under the Obama administration, and how they would rectify that situation if they were elected President.

And then it happened. A "game changer" moment that could transform the entire election, or perhaps American history, irrespective of the election results. Ron Paul had the impertinence to point out to a national audience that gasoline could actually be purchased RIGHT NOW for a mere ten cents per gallon!

Really? Now? Where? Congressman Paul explained that a SILVER dime is currently worth over $3.00, which is nearly enough to buy a gallon of petrol in the U.S. You remember those Mercury head dimes, don't you? What ever happened to those? And, come to think of it, why doesn't a dime minted in 2011 buy a gallon of gas?

Admittedly, it's a simple question. And that why it's so dangerous. This line of thinking simply can't be allowed to gain traction. It's crazy talk by Ron Paul who stubbornly clings to a bygone era of monetary policy (including relevant clauses of the Constitution) and who simply doesn't comprehend the modern wonders of "quantitative easing." Move along citizens, there's nothing here to see. Got it?

That's the thrust of an editorial written by Charles Lane and published in the WaPo on the morning immediately following the debate. Egad, the idea of SILVER currency is soooo "18th century" according to Lane. Never mind that dimes, quarters and half dollars minted by the U.S. government were comprised of at least 90% silver for the entire 19th century and for nearly 65 years of the 20th century too (i.e. until 1964). Mr. Lane apparently wasn't aware of such recent history.

Or was he? Of all the debate moments to critique, why did the WaPo deem it necessary to challenge this one particular point that was made so well by Ron Paul? Hmmm, let's see now. Why on earth would the WaPo attempt to ridicule anyone who poses a threat to the power structure that depends on the depredations of the FED? What animus could the WaPo possibly have against a 10 term Congressman who wrote a book entitled, End the Fed, and whose son was recently elected as a U.S. Senator?

Perhaps the WaPo editorial attack on Ron Paul can be explained by the following additional facts, which have previously been pointed out by Lew Rockwell, and which reveal the true agenda of the Establishment and their paymasters (the Banksters) who are terrified that the American public might actually begin to wonder who is responsible for the ongoing monetary devaluation that Ron Paul illustrated with such devastating effect during the debate:

The present publisher of The Post, Ms. Weymouth, is granddaughter of Katherine Graham (known as Katherine the Great), and great-granddaughter of Eugene Meyer, who bought The Post out of bankruptcy in 1933, and who was ….

….. wait for it …

Chairman of the Federal Reserve and the first head of the World Bank.
- Mr. Meyer was succeeded in this last post by John J. McCloy, later chairman of the Rockefeller's Chase Manhattan Bank, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Ford Foundation, and key member of the Warren Commission. He was widely regarded by wags in the know as "the Chairman of the Establishment."
- Ms. Weymouth's grandfather, Philip Graham, succeeded her great grandfather, Mr. Meyer, as publisher of The Post in 1946, and was married to Mr. Meyer's daughter, Katherine. The Graham's used to put on famous Georgetown soirees for the Beltway elites in journalism, intelligence circles, and the upper ranks of the Washington Nomenclatura, described in Hugh Wilford's book The Mighty Wurlitzer: How the CIA Played America.
- The term "the mighty Wurlitzer," coined by high level CIA official Frank Wisner, was used to describe the elaborate covert networks of propaganda, deception, and media manipulation sponsored by the Agency. A key player in this campaign of Cold War subterfuge and deceit was "the Golden Boy" Washington Post publisher Phil Graham (the husband of Katherine -- and Eugene Meyer's son-in-law), who later committed suicide (although some informed observers, such as the distinguished award-winning journalist and historian Sterling Seagrave, believe otherwise).
With a pedigree like that, it begins to make sense why the WaPo simply couldn't allow Ron Paul to speak the truth about our ongoing money devaluation without being given the "treatment". Former WaPo writer, Carl Bernstein, in his famous Rolling Stone article, The CIA and the Media, gave a further glimpse into the pedigree behind the WaPo propaganda platform that Ms Weymouth inherited, which he described as follows:

"When Newsweek was purchased by the Washington Post Company, publisher Philip L. Graham was informed by Agency officials that the CIA occasionally used the magazine for cover purposes, according to CIA sources. "It was widely known that Phil Graham was somebody you could get help from," said a former deputy director of the Agency. "Frank Wisner dealt with him." Wisner, deputy director of the CIA from 1950 until shortly before his suicide in 1965, was the Agency's premier orchestrator of "black" operations, including many in which journalists were involved. Wisner liked to boast of his "mighty Wurlitzer," a wondrous propaganda instrument he built, and played, with help from the press.) Phil Graham was probably Wisner's closest friend. But Graham, who committed suicide in 1963, apparently knew little of the specifics of any cover arrangements with Newsweek, CIA sources said.

None of this is conspiracy theory. Just plain old history. But, just for fun, consider that Katherine Graham's 1997 autobiography says that her husband (WaPo publisher, Philip Graham) was instrumental in getting Lyndon Johnson to be the Democratic Vice Presidential nominee in 1960. And, consider also that her father handed the reigns of the fledgling World Bank to Mr. Establishment (McCloy), who later became a member of the Warren Commission, which certainly tried its best to make sure that nobody would ponder the motives or means of anyone (beyond Oswald) or any organization that might be interested in seeing a certain V.P. become the POTUS.

And it's also interesting to reflect for a moment on the last 3 words of the excerpt from Bernstein's article which is quoted above. Bernstein is smart enough to "consider the source," but he doesn't appear to question the assertion of his CIA source in any way. Of course, if Mr. Graham didn't know too much about the CIA arrangements with Newsweek (owned by the WaPo) as the "CIA source said", there wouldn't be any need for his suicide to be arranged, would there? But, the same can't necessarily be said for Mr. Wisner, the deputy director of the CIA in 1965, who was the best friend of Mr. Graham, and who also apparently carried a heavy burden that ended in his subsequent suicide a mere two years later.

JFK was the last President who presided over coinage of 90% silver money that Mr. Lane at the WaPo holds in such contempt. In 1971, a mere 8 years after JFK was assassinated, President Nixon severed all ties between the U.S. dollar and gold, and the ensuing 30 years have witnessed the dramatic loss of purchasing power that was beautifully illustrated by Ron Paul's reference to one thin dime.

After the demise of the gold standard under Nixon, another GOP President was elected after serving as CIA Director. This President was descended from an executive of the investment banking firm, Brown Brothers Harriman, which according to at least one description, "is particularly notable because of the large number of influential American politicians, government appointees, and central bankers who have worked at the company since its foundation…" (To be fair, on the Democrat side of things, Obama's extensive ties to the Goldman Sachs investment banking firm demonstrates that both parties are beholden to the Banksters).

Ron Paul is not singing from the same monetary hymnal used by Richard Nixon, G.H.W.B. or Barry Goldman Obama. He dares to remind folks about what has been happening to our money since the days of JFK (and even before that). Perhaps Ron Paul should consider himself lucky that he has only suffered (so far) the indignation of the WaPo for speaking and writing about the depredations of the Fed and by running for the Presidency. His courage in doing so is remarkable in light of the recent history (post 18th century) that Mr. Lane would like to ignore, including the sorry history of the WaPo.

http://lewrockwell.com/orig9/watkins-b2.1.1.html

The PATRIOT Act Was Sold As Being About Stopping Terrorism

The PATRIOT Act Was Sold As Being About Stopping Terrorism
Bob Bauman (September 9, 2011)

The PATRIOT Act was all about stopping terrorism, right? We were told that special provisions that ate away at our civil liberties were needed specifically to catch dangerous terrorists and that the reason for such an abdication of our rights had nothing to do with simply giving the government more useful surveillance powers.

Aaron DeOliveira points us to a fascinating chart that shows how often law enforcement has been using "sneak-and-peek" warrants. These warrants let officials search private property without letting the target of the investigation know. Again, we were told that these expanded powers were needed to stop terrorism. So what have they been used for? Take a look:

Yup. They're all pretty much being used in drug cases. Now some might make the argument that it's important to go after drug dealers but that's not how the PATRIOT Act was supposed to be used.

http://sovereign-investor.com/2011/09/09/the-patriot-act-was-sold-as-being-about-stopping-terrorism-but%E2%80%A6/

Ten Years Later… We’re Still Paying the Price

Ten Years Later… We're Still Paying the Price
by Bob Bauman

What to say, on this tenth anniversary, about the horrible events that occurred on that beautiful, sunny autumn morning of September 11, 2001 – "9/11? as it is now universally known?

Listen to Edmund Burke, speaking in 1715: "No passion so effectively robs the mind of all its powers of acting and reasoning as fear."

Our second President, John Adams, warned: "Fear is the foundation of governments."

Yes, of course – most rational human beings want to feel safe and be secure. But with bipartisan agreement among the politicians, our fears have been exploited, dumping hundreds of billions of tax dollars into the bureaucratic maw under the banner of "homeland security."

What has 9/11 wrought?

Over the past decade a new and alarming system of government mass surveillance has been erected, and we know very little about it.

The massive Department of Homeland Security (DHS), an unnecessary conglomeration of 22 agencies and nearly 200,000 employees, together with an out of control FBI and CIA, engage in massive surveillance of all of us, not just suspected terrorists or criminals.

Our phone calls, our emails and website visits, our financial records, our travel itineraries, and our digital images captured on powerful surveillance cameras are adding to the mountains of data being mined for suspicious patterns and associations.

Osama Bin Laden Is Dead… But in Too Many Ways He Died Victorious

When Osama bin Laden caused those airplanes to kill civilians 10 years ago, he took a lot more from the United States of America than the lives of more than 3,000 of our fellow citizens and residents.

Within a matter of days, if not hours, eager American politicians adopted fear as their continuing motif, justifying the sacrifice of our constitutional rights and liberties as the price of alleged safety.

The centerpiece of their opportunistic politics is the grotesquely named PATRIOT Act that has destroyed personal and financial privacy in America, rendering meaningless much of the hard won Bill of Rights we had honored for the last 220 years.

Yet most Americans have been all too willing to purchase that illusive security without regard for its cost in terms of lost personal freedom and liberties.

In an interview on the National Geographic Channel last week, George W. Bush says his most painful memory of that day was seeing the horror of people falling or jumping to their deaths from the Twin Towers and knowing there was nothing he could do to help them.

It would be useless for an interviewer to ask Mr. Bush what he thinks about what he and his successor in the White House, the constitutional law professor, Barack Obama, have done to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. In pursuit of both terrorists and common criminals, Obama has perpetuated so many of the Bush administration's wrongful policies that their policies are indistinguishable in the destruction of civil liberties.

The inimitable Oscar Wilde wrote:

"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes."

As we observe the 10th anniversary of 9/11 this Sunday, the people of the United States have every reason to question whether their "leaders" really have learned anything from those thousands of needless deaths and the events of ensuing years.

Yet our leaders have sacrificed the very principles that they claimed to be defending.

I was one of the millions of horrified Americans watching television when United Airlines flight 175 crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center at 9:02:59 a.m., on 9/11/2001.

After my sensations of horror, disbelief, anger, sorrow for the victims, my friend and former House colleague, U.S. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, spoke for me in expressing my troubled thoughts:

"Times of tragedy and war naturally bring out strong emotions… Sometimes people are only too anxious to sacrifice their constitutional liberties during a crisis, hoping to gain some measure of security. Yet nothing would please terrorists more than if we willingly gave up our cherished liberties because of their actions."

Sad to say, Ron Paul's prediction has come to pass in too many ways. A short six weeks after the 9/11 attacks, a panicked U.S. Congress adopted the so-called "USA PATRIOT Act."

In my view, that "law" is the single most egregious example of an unconstitutional law ever enacted by Congress. I have spent 10 years chronicling the offenses that have been committed by U.S. government agents in its name.

So Who Is Winning – Freedom or Terrorism?

This raises the question… just how far are Americans willing to go in surrendering their liberty and their privacy? How much are we willing to pay for this promised, illusory defense? Are we willing to become Fortress America with Big Brother watching and listening to all that we say and do?

Americans had better put aside politically inspired fears, and start asking and answering that question – before we enjoy neither safety nor liberty.

More than one million Americans have died in all our wars. To observe that so many have sacrificed down through the centuries only accentuates the meaning and importance of the greater cause for which they died.

They died before their time, their promise unrealized, in the service of the country.

Ten years removed from 9/11, while thinking of the thousands of souls who died, we should consider President Abraham Lincoln's advice in closing his Gettysburg Address: "… that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain – that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom – and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

9/11 truly was, and continues to be, America's moment of truth. Whether we pass or fail this crucial test is yet to be determined.

Failure is what we should truly fear.

This 10th anniversary of 9/11 is a good time to ask questions and demand answers. We need concrete proof that those in power, and those who aspire to power, realize what America has lost and whether they are willing to restore our constitutional rights and liberties.

http://sovereign-investor.com/2011/09/06/ten-years-later-were-still-paying-the-price/

Fwd: WhateverReturns SMART KID

Fwd: [New post] Premonition?

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Fellowship of the Minds
Date: Saturday, September 10, 2011
Subject: [New post] Premonition?
To: majors.bruce@gmail.com

<http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/153551955f49be5fe553ad4b650996b1?s=48&d=wavatar&r=G> <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/author/eowyn2/>

Premonition? <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/09/10/premonition/>

Dr. Eowyn <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/author/eowyn2/> | September 10, 2011 at 5:00 am | Tags: 9-11 <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=9-11>, Grangemouth Community Education Unit <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=grangemouth-community-education-unit>, twin towers <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=twin-towers>, Willie Gardner <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=willie-gardner> | Categories: Art <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=4675084>, Terrorism <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=35034649>, United States <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=5850> | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-9hX

<http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/9-11-premonition.jpg?w=400&h=384#038;h=384> <http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/9-11-premonition.jpg>

This is NOT a painting commemorating 9-11.

Instead, it's a chalk drawing that was created by a Scotsman, Willie Gardner, more than 10 years before 9-11 -- in the 1980s.

Martin Robinson reports <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2035419/9-11-anniversary-Chalk-drawing-premonition-1980s-Twin-Towers-attacks-emerges.html> for the UK's Daily Mail, Sept. 9, 2011, that the decades-old drawing is displayed in the reception of the Community Education Unit (CEU) in Grangemouth, Stirlingshire, Scotland. The drawing shows a forlorn young girl flanked by two jet planes and twin towers. The falling locks of the child's hair spiralling downwards, look like fire and smoke billowing into the sky from one of the towers.

The drawing looks so much like 9/11 that people viewing the picture in the CEU thought it was a tribute to those who had perished in the New York terror attacks.

But Lex Cook of the CEU said he first saw the drawing 2 or 3 years before 9-11: "It was maybe 1988 or 1989 that I first saw Willie's drawing. The boss here at the time liked it and Willie kindly gave it to him for the centre."

The artist's daughter, Aileen Currie, 53, said she does know the drawing was done years before the twin towers were destroyed, and that while her father had artistic talent, he had no ability to see into the future.

The artist, Willie Gardner, died on November 27 last year at the age of 78, making it impossible to know exactly what inspired him.

~Eowyn

Add a comment to this post <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/09/10/premonition/#respond>

<http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com&blog=11081320&post=35709&subd=fellowshipofminds&ref=&email=1&email_o=wpcom>

<http://s.wordpress.org/about/images/logo-grey/grey-m.png>

WordPress.com <http://wordpress.com> | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage Subscriptions <http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=bc12420384128b0acc5d5cde9e47da77&email=majors.bruce%40gmail.com> | Unsubscribe <http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=bc12420384128b0acc5d5cde9e47da77&email=majors.bruce%40gmail.com&b=LQz1frCxM%3FJderL%2B.re.%2FcDcep%2C%3F%3DI%2BsSFmP.jptWgaNu%3DXb%7EY> | Express yourself. Start a blog. <http://wordpress.com/signup/>

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com

Why Do Our Rulers Hate America?

Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Why Do Our Rulers Hate America?

If you're in a fight with a really nasty guy who's attacked you without provocation, and your antagonist lands a solid punch, what is your reaction (assuming that you're hurt without being incapacitated)?

Do you:
a) Let out a loud groan as the blow connects, falling to your knees while complaining piteously about the unfairness of it all;
or
b) Shake it off and try to put the scumbag down?

If the answer is "a," you're either a professional wrestler trying to "sell" a phony punch or (what's much the same thing) William Shatner at his Virginia-cured, uninhibited best in a vintage Star Trek fight scene.

Or, to extend the principle just a bit, you're one of the people responsible for orchestrating yesterday's repulsive festival of collective self-pity.

If you're in a genuine fight for your life, the last thing you want to do is display vulnerability and weakness – which is exactly what our nation was told to do in memory of 9-11.

The official narrative of yesterday's 9/11+5 events runs like this:
We are a good and compassionate nation attacked without warning, provocation, or cause five years ago by people who irrationally hate us for our decency. That Enemy still seeks to destroy us and is stealthily acquiring the means to do so – and only by taking shelter in the heroic shadow of our Dear Leader, and making his will our law, can we be safe.

The whole two-day event was an American transliteration of similar rituals enacted in totalitarian states from Nazi Germany to Stalin's USSR to contemporary North Korea. It was vulgar and nauseating. And this exercise in choreographed collective lachrymosity illustrated – to me, at least – that we really don't confront an existential threat from a formidable foreign Enemy.

Assuming that we've been told any part of the truth about what happened five years ago today, and what is still going on today, there are legions of Evil-Doers lurking out at the tenebrous fringes of the Empire whose every waking moment is consumed with the desire to kill all of us they can in order to terrorize the rest.

Inflicting pain and terror on Americans, we are told, is the enemy's very meat and drink – the main course at every repast, and the desert after every meal.
Why, then, are our masters so determined to provide that enemy the satisfaction of seeing America indulge in protracted, ritualized grief, as opposed telling the public to put its game face on?

Some might see this as an illustration of the terminal Oprah-ification of America, which isn't a bad point, as far as it goes.

Others of more militaristic cast of mind would see in this saccharine spectacle proof positive of the liberal media's determination to weaken our resolve. That charge that would make sense were it not for the very visible efforts of the White House to orchestrate and exploit the observances.

This is not to say that the emotions so prominently displayed during the past two days are inauthentic, or unworthy. Thousands of families were deprived of loved ones, whole communities were torn apart, and our nation suffered a huge and lasting trauma on that terrible Tuesday morning.

But if our nation really were engaged in a death struggle with a devious and ruthless foreign adversary capable of destroying our way of life, today's grief-wallow would make no sense at all.

I do not mean denigrate those who lost loved ones on 9-11. I must confess, however, to be puzzled as to why the losses suffered on Black Tuesday are considered so much more painful than those – in terms of dead and wounded, as well as the mounting economic toll – inflicted on our nation by the Bush regime's demented war in Iraq.

More Americans have been killed and maimed as a result of the Iraq war than died on 9-11.

We're told that al-Qaeda is prepared to strike us again at the next opportunity, which may or may not be true. (Since this warning comes from the regime, I'm inclined toward skepticism.)

But we are told unambiguously that our Enemy in Washington fully intends to continue sending Americans abroad to kill and die in pointless wars, while continuing its campaign to build an American Reich.

Toward that end, the regime needs to propagate as much fear and pathos as possible, and is collaborating with our foreign "Enemy" to generate it. This is why rather than telling the public, "Butch it up!" our Rulers yesterday made it a pseudo-patriotic duty to revel in grief and helplessness.

Our Rulers need us to be scared. And they're the real Enemy. Nothing al-Qaeda or like-minded Jihadists could inflict on us – not "another 9-11," not even a mass terrorist attack an order of magnitude greater than that event -- could possibly rival the damage to our institutions of ordered liberty being done by the power-crazed people infesting our executive branch.

"We already absorb a great deal of tragedy and unpleasantness and still manage to survive," observes John Mueller of the Cato Institute in a detailed and thought-provoking assessment of the purported terrorist threat. "We live with a considerable quantity of crime, and the United States regularly loses 40,000 lives each year in automobile accidents. Moreover, countries have endured massive, sudden catastrophes without collapsing. In 1990 and then again in 2003, Iran suffered earthquakes that nearly instantly killed some 35,000 in each case. The tsunami that hit Indonesia and elsewhere in 2004 killed several times that many. But the countries have clearly survived these disasters: they constitute major tragedies, of course, but they hardly proved to be `existential' ones."

"Thus the country can readily absorb considerable damage if necessary, and it has outlasted far more potent threats in the past," Mueller concludes. "To suggest otherwise is to express contempt for America's capacity to deal with adversity."

The contempt of which Mueller writes was prominently on display over the past two days.

http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2006/09/why-do-our-rulers-hate-america.html

The Plan

The Plan
by L. Neil Smith
lneil@netzero.com

THE PROBLEM

The United States of America are in trouble. To some, it is a horrible surprise. Many others have helplessly watched it coming for years.

At the most fundamental levels, with regard to its continued national and cultural existence, in both economic and philosophical terms, this country is in vastly worse danger at this moment, than it was during the so-called Great Depression or the War Between the States. More and more, it appears that the destruction of the American economy and the civilization it supports was a deliberately calculated act.

No fewer than fifteen decades of federal government usurpation and mismanagement -- culminating in the most openly rapacious and criminal administrations in its history -- have brought the nation to this point. Of the ruling parties, the Democrats are arguably the worst offenders in this regard, relentlessly expanding the power and scope of government, invariably at the expense of the personal freedom and individual enterprise this country was supposed to have been all about.

The War Century was largely a Democratic century.

While Republicans properly criticize the many shortcomings of the Democrats, they systematically and hypocritically overlook or ignore their own part in the destruction of a civilization that once stood as the brightest hope for all Mankind. Both have conspired together to block any third party that might have set America on a different course, one more consistent with the dreams and aspirations of its Founders.

In any event, this essay is about what needs to be done, without regard to who might actually do it, Democrat, Republican, or anybody else, with the warning and understanding that if it doesn't get done, America is doomed, the rest of the world will inexorably follow, and our species is about to plunge into a long, dark night that may never end.

THE SOLUTION

It may come as an annoyance to individuals who think of themselves as "nuts and bolts" problem-solvers that in the field of practical economics, expectations can be just as important as actualities. To them, I'm sure that sounds indistinguishable from the very cynical observation that in politics, perception is more important than reality.

But the fact is that people in an economic context have to be able to plan, and to do that, they have to make guesses about a future which, at best, is always murky, and which, muddled by halfwitted, hamfisted, off-and-on government interference, becomes impossible to predict.

America is in a Depression, and more loans, to the banks or from the banks, more money-printingmore debtaren't going to get it out. Make no mistake about who is responsible for what happened. For decades, both parties spent vastly more than the government took in, creating debtwith interestthat had be paid by printing paper money and generating credit where there was no real wealth to back it up.

The mortal blow to America's future came when lending institutions were forced by Congress, first under the Carter Administration, and then again under the Clinton Administration, to make home loans to individuals they knew perfectly would be unable to pay them back. Naturally, as defaults and foreclosures started to pile up, the banks began to fail, which caused a cascadean avalancheof other failures.

It didn't help that by then, the country was embroiled in two illegal, expensive, and irrational wars in the middle east, initiated for the most cynical of reasons, using the atrocity of 9/11 as an excuse.

In any case, the financial collapse was in no way the fault of capitalism or the market system, as the opportunistic left which bears the real guiltand its whorish media presently claim, but of a command-and-control system which, no less than that of the late, unlamented Soviets, was doomed to collapse of its own unbearable weight.

The current administration has done nothing right and everything wrong; increasing numbers of individuals think it isn't any accident. What's actually needed is a stability of expectations, and an end to the lethal drain on the country's resources that government, in fact, represents.

TAXES

The first, most important thing that anyone in charge should do is declare a universal tax amnesty. All past debts to government at any level will be null and void. That alone would be sufficient to stop the plunge, trigger growth, and start businesses and industry hiring again.

Any government shortfalls caused by this policy should be dealt with, not by more deficit spending, but by serious reductions in government activity, by downsizing personnel, and by liquidation of assets.

And that's just for practice. The next step, to be announced at the same time as the amnestyaimed at restoring predictability to the market while infusing it with cash (or, rather, allowing it to infuse itself), without government loans or further inflationmust be a total moratorium on every form of taxation, for a period of at least one year, so that the economy can get back on its feet and recover from the damage the last several administrations have done to it.

Once again, when politicians and bureaucrats whimper, demanding to know who will "pay" for such a "program", they will be informed that they will. Government will do less. And it holds millions of acres of land and tens of thousands of buildings that can be auctioned off (once the original owners have been made whole), endless parking lots covered with vehicles, hangars full of aircraft, harbors full of boats and ships, vast warehouses stuffed with hardware and supplies that were obtained with stolen money and should be returned to the free market.

If all else fails, there are at least a hundredor perhaps a thousandtimes as many public employees as there ought to be. Some can be let go, as well. The recovering market should absorb them with ease.

During the tax moratorium, the details can be worked out on an innovative new two-tier systemin reality, simply another interim measureunder which no taxes of any kind may be levied against any object or activity protected by the Bill of Rights (establishing long overdue parity with the First Amendment protection afforded to churches and religion) or against any of the five fundamental human requirements of life, food, clothing, shelter, transportation, and self-defense.

Healthcare would be included under self-defense; a separate effort would be called for to establish a formal, Constitutional separation of medicine and state, exactly as there needs to be for science and state.

Another essential change is the permanent and total abolition of taxes on so-called "capital gains". Americans are always criticized, the world over, for not putting enough money in savings. The primary reason is basically Marxoid-inspired legislation against "unearned income".

Likewise, so-called "corporate taxation" is just another cynical shot at sucking the Productive Class drymostly with their own idiotic approval. No corporation pays taxes, they pass them on to their customers, doubling the price of goods and services. Abolishing corporate taxation would, in and of itself, create an historic economic boom that will change the course of Americanand worldhistory.

So-called "limited liability" must end, as well, along with the pernicious legal fiction that the corporation is a person, pulling a long overdue emergency brake on the size, wealth, influence, and power of corporations, and forcing their ownersthe stockholders who used to be in controlto take full responsibility for whatever companies do.

The ultimate goal, of course, must be the total elimination of all taxation. Abolitionists who struggled for three hundred fifty years to put an end to chattel slavery faced no more daunting a task. One of the problems this supposedly revolutionary country has always suffered is that its governmentno different from the stagnant European satrapies it should have differentiated itself from in this regardis financed by extortion and theft, the pervasive threat to beat non-compliers up, kidnap, or kill them. At the most charitable, it's a rotten example for teaching children proper behavior. It makes one wonder whether facing the slings and arrows of no government at all might be a better choice than paying government to protect us from itself.

HONEST MONEY

Along with freeing America from taxation, the nation must be free of government-issued fiat money, as well, allowing the market system to create, all by itself, many kinds of money from commodities with an intrinsic value, and imposing no coercive standard on anyone of any kind.

Money is, above and beyond everything, a medium of communication, conveying the vital datum known as "price"how much of a thing should be made, what should it be sold forthe lack of which killed the Soviet Union and spells ultimate death for any command-and-control economy. A government monopoly on money is censorship. And inflationprinting too much paper money or generating "air credit"is a lie.

REGULATION

At the same time, as taxes are being cut and abolished, something must be done about the mind-boggling, back-breaking burden of laws and regulations at all levels of government, federal, state, county, and municipal. Speed is of the essence if decades of damage inflicted by Democrats and Republicans is to be repairedyet, some estimate that there are in excess of fifteen million regulations at just the federal level.

Individuals must be freethey must be encouraged, in factto make what would amount to criminal charges against regulations and regulators on Constitutional, as well as other grounds. Government must be compelled to defend itselfand each and every item of regulationin purely Constitutional terms, or to abandon the given regulation altogether. In the end, a thorough sweep of regulations must be made, employing Article 1, Section 8which explicitly enumerates the very few acceptable functions of governmentas a broom.

JUSTICE

This plan would not be complete without mentioning certain items of "housekeeping" that must be done before this nation can begin to heal.

Foremost among those items is to bring a halt to the criminal mischief committed by the last two administrations under the guise of economic "stimulus". This "policy" must be brought to a halt now, and any unspent money returned to the general fund. Political cronies who were the actual beneficiaries of this giveaway scheme must be stripped of all their embezzled fortunes while the politicians responsible are removed from office and prosecuted for having violated their oath of office.

Other measures are called for if we are to get this recovery right and prevent our grandchildren from having to do it all over again. No lawyers, for example, should ever be permitted in the legislature or in any other lawmaking body. Their self-serving presence there today represents a massive conflict of interest that must be swiftly resolved.

The Founding Fathers' worst, most calamitous mistake must be corrected by giving the Bill of Rights a penalty clause with real teeth.

It might go something like this:

"Any official, appointed or elected, at any level of government, who attempts, through legislative act or other means, to nullify, evade, or avoid the provisions of the first ten amendments to this Constitution, or of the Thirteenth Amendment, shall be summarily removed from office, and, upon conviction, deprived of all pay and benefits, including pension, and sentenced to imprisonment for life."

The medieval doctrine of Sovereign Immunitythe vile notion that the King can do no wrongmust be dispensed with, once and for all.

Consistent with that, this nation can never heal fully until the criminals actually responsible for atrocities like the Philadelphia MOVE bombing, Ruby Ridge, Waco, and perhaps even the Oklahoma City bombing (to mention only four of many) are hunted down and brought to justice.

And at the end of the reform period, a greater Moratorium, against all further legislation of any kind for 100 years, must be appended to the Constitution. A notable single exception would be made for bills of repeal.

No discussion of economic reform and recovery can be considered complete without finally addressing two clusters of issues that have always impinged directly on this nation's economic health and wellbeing.

TRADE

The first, international trade, is relatively easy to dispose of. In a country that is truly freenot one that merely says it is, or pretends to beany decision about what to trade, or with whom, or for how much, does not rest with government, which can have nothing legitimate whatever to say with regard to "acts of capitalism between consenting adults", but with individual consumers, businessmen, and entrepreneurs.

Tariffs, a form of taxation that has been with us since America's beginning, have distorted markets, drained resources, made ill-gotten fortunes for the politically connected, and caused the War Between the States. There are many who argue that tariffs also cause international wars.

Businesses that try to use tariffs against foreign competitors are picking our pockets by denying us the benefits of free trade. They don't deserve to be protected by the law. And any "agreement" longer than half a page is not about free trade, no matter what it calls itself.

RATIONAL DEFENSE

Finally, there is the matter of foreign policy and war.

Throughout America's history, its government has managed to supply at least one war for each generation of old men to send young men off to fight for them, just as they were sent off in their youth to fight for their generation of old men. The cycle is insane and must be stopped.

Elsewhere, I have listed America's major conflicts and examined each to see if it could be called a "just war". The vast majority fail to pass the examination. Only the Revolution, the Mexican War, and the War Between the States pass muster, All the rest were irrational, fought to enrich some group or enhance their power, and could have been avoided altogether, along with the death and destruction they caused.

"Why those three wars in particular?" I pretend to hear you ask.

Well, pretty obviously, if there hadn't been a Revolution, there wouldn't be any United States of America. I have friendsmostly Britishwho think our War of Independence was unnecessary, but I doubt we'd have made the centuries-spanning leap, technologically, economically, and especially in terms of the philosophy of individual liberty, that we made had we remained a part of that mercantilist empire.

America had no choice about the Mexican War, which was declared by Mexico against the United States because it had annexed Texasthe independence of which politicians in Mexico insanely refused to recognize despite their defeat by Sam Houston at the Battle of San Jacinto and the utter humiliation of General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna. Mexico deserved what she got, her whimperings to the contrary, notwithstanding.

Finally, there is the matter of the War Between the States, commonly, but incorrectly, known as the Civil War. From a Northern point of view, it was as unnecessary as any other war the United States has involved itself in. (Contrary to Lincolnian propaganda and popular, public school belief, it had nothing whatever to do with black chattel slaveryif it had, then why do we have photographs of the Capitol dome being rebuilt throughout the warby slaves?) But for the South, there was no alternative. While Southerners represented only a quarter of the U.S. population, through tariffs imposed by the North, they were already paying 80 percent of the taxes. Lincoln and his orcs promised to triple the tariff, reducing all Southerners to serfdom.

And yes, I include the so-called "good war" as unnecessary. In fact it was an observation of my fathera gallant Air Corps veteran, former prisoner of war, and 30-year career Air Force officerabout the strange coincidence of a war for each generation, that made me think about the other wars Americans have fought to no good purpose.

It is impossible to estimate the degree to which all these wars, especially in the 20th century, distorted our history and retarded its progress. The trillions spent prosecuting them, the resulting waste of resources consumed and destroyed, the loss of human potential would be paralyzing, were we not thoroughly numbed to it by close historical acquaintance.

Just a single sobering thought: the genius who might have cured cancer died, instead, as a nineteen-year-old private or seaman in World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, the Balkans, or in Afghanistan.

And for what? The government and its useful idiots say it was for freedom. But not single American's freedom was ever endangered by any of these enemies. And not one of these wars prevented what happened on 9/11/2001.

No, for once I have not digressed. If America is ever to recover from this economic crisis, its leaders will have to give up their addiction to war, even though it is, indeed, the very "health of the state".

Two solutions come to mind. The first is what I call the "You Go First Amendment" under which (1) the War Powers Act is repealed so that no President can ever start a war again without a Congressional declaration of war, and (2) all those voting for such a declaration will immediately join the (now former) President who requested it, in uniform, on the prospective battlefield, ahead of anybody else in the military.

Finally, because taxation is the fuel of war, military spending, as we have experienced it since World War II, has to stop. If the country needs to be defended, let it be done as the Founding Fathers intended, by a network of well-armed, well trained, and well-supplied volunteer militiaspreferably organized and prepared at the county levelamong whom the technical means to defend America must be distributed.

Freed of being the "cops of the world" we will prosper as never before.

THE FUTURE

As to how we get from here to there, I believe showing people what "there" is like, may motivate them to work to change "here". That was the idea behind my novel, The Probability Broach, the only shortcoming of which is that so far it hasn't reached a sufficiently wide audience yet.

Of course it may, if things continue to get worse.

What happens next is entirely up to you. Every politician in the country, in every party and at every level of government, must be made familiar with "The Plan". None of themnot even the Libertarians or Tea Party Republicansare going to want to take the steps outlined here. They will attempt to pat you on the head or react hysterically. They will call you nameslike "radical" or "extremist"and threaten you. If you're reading this, you have already been identified by the unconstitutional Department of Homeland Security as a domestic terrorist.

It is up to you to hold fast through that period.

Then slowly, timidly, as these ideas start to spread, some will adopt portions of what's offered here, ultimately claiming it as their own.

Let them.

We will know the truth.

L. Neil Smith
Fort Collins, Colorado
March, 2011

(As to how we get from here to there, I believe showing people what "there" is like may motivate them to work to change "here". That was the idea behind The Probability Broach, the only shortcoming of which is that it hasn't reached a sufficiently wide audience yet. It may,if things continue to get worse.

http://www.down-with-power.com/theplan.html