Saturday, December 15, 2012
Homeland Security flunks
on guidelines for schools
What happened in Sandy Hook is, by definition, an "act of terror," whether by a crazed individual or a terrorist cell.
So, the potential for such a tragedy was well known. Yet, it appears, Homeland Security put out no realistic security guidelines for America's schools. Had the federal securocrats been doing their job, they would have strongly encouraged school systems to put in place basic security
measures. But the leadership just wasn't there.
Now there is no way to be sure that better security would have disrupted this event. But there's a fair chance of that.
Homeland Security wastes tax money harassing people who are too outspoken but doesn't do something as basic as encouraging proper school security, knowing full well schools are obvious targets of acts of terror.
Curious how much Homeland Security's strange lack of leadership is mirrored by the strange security lapses prior to the Benghazi fiasco.
Still, we must face the fact that a problem in America is the arms race in light weapons. Gun makers have an economic incentive to improve technology. Their business is to sell guns. Gangland usually snaps up the best stuff right on the heels of the military. The police say, "We've got to have equivalent firepower." The issue is the economic system itself coupled with that old standby: fear (aka sin).
Even so, we must remember that in Soviet Russia, criminals got nice jobs in the KGB, and had the best weaponry.
on guidelines for schools
What happened in Sandy Hook is, by definition, an "act of terror," whether by a crazed individual or a terrorist cell.
So, the potential for such a tragedy was well known. Yet, it appears, Homeland Security put out no realistic security guidelines for America's schools. Had the federal securocrats been doing their job, they would have strongly encouraged school systems to put in place basic security
measures. But the leadership just wasn't there.
Now there is no way to be sure that better security would have disrupted this event. But there's a fair chance of that.
Homeland Security wastes tax money harassing people who are too outspoken but doesn't do something as basic as encouraging proper school security, knowing full well schools are obvious targets of acts of terror.
Curious how much Homeland Security's strange lack of leadership is mirrored by the strange security lapses prior to the Benghazi fiasco.
Still, we must face the fact that a problem in America is the arms race in light weapons. Gun makers have an economic incentive to improve technology. Their business is to sell guns. Gangland usually snaps up the best stuff right on the heels of the military. The police say, "We've got to have equivalent firepower." The issue is the economic system itself coupled with that old standby: fear (aka sin).
Even so, we must remember that in Soviet Russia, criminals got nice jobs in the KGB, and had the best weaponry.
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Obama jobs czar says their system works
GE chief upholds China reds
Communist domination of Chinese business is an effective system, according to the chief of General Electric and top adviser to President Obama.
"It works," said Jeff Immelt, chief operating officer of GE and chairman of the White House jobs council.
Immelt, who said nothing whatsoever critical of communist rule in an interview with Charlie Rose broadcast yesterday, said he tells his managers to read the Communist five-year plan in order to keep abreast of business opportunities.
ROSE: China is changing. It may be being stabilized as we speak. What does that mean for China and what does it mean for the United States? Should it change expectations?
IMMELT: It is good for China. To a certain extent, Charlie, 11 percent is unsustainable. You end up getting too much stimulus or a mis-allocation of resources. They are much better off working on a more consumer-based economy, less dependent on exports. The one thing that actually works, state run communism a bit– may not be your cup of tea, but their government works
Immelt had no such high praises for the U.S. political-economic system, however.
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Secret no-fly power an affront to liberty
There are numerous reports of political activists, journalists and outspoken Americans -- U.S. citizens and others -- being put on a federal no-fly list after they became too critical of federal policies, or were considered to have beliefs that did not accord with the presumed political norm. I daresay that a statistical analysis would back up the claim of abuse of power by federal officials whose decisions can't be questioned. We have here a direct violation of a basic American freedom: the right to free speech without government penalty. Congress was not permitted to make a law that could be enforced so as to target outspoken citizens.
The due process clause of the 5th Amendment is also directly violated: if one is not at liberty to fly on a plane, then he has been deprived of liberty. The ability to move freely within America's borders and to enter and leave the country as desired have always been considered important liberties in America. In addition, blocking purchase or use of an airline ticket constitutes deprivation of property. Clearly, if he is unable to see the evidence against him and confront his accusers in court, he has been denied due process of law, a direct affront to the Constitution.
A recent federal maneuver to create a second list of people who can't use "EZ pass" to go through security checks is an extension of this sort of anti-American reasoning.
I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; OR ABRIDGING FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
V. No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, NOR BE DEPRIVED OF LIFE, LIBERTY, OR PROPERTY, WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW, nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
There are numerous reports of political activists, journalists and outspoken Americans -- U.S. citizens and others -- being put on a federal no-fly list after they became too critical of federal policies, or were considered to have beliefs that did not accord with the presumed political norm. I daresay that a statistical analysis would back up the claim of abuse of power by federal officials whose decisions can't be questioned. We have here a direct violation of a basic American freedom: the right to free speech without government penalty. Congress was not permitted to make a law that could be enforced so as to target outspoken citizens.
The due process clause of the 5th Amendment is also directly violated: if one is not at liberty to fly on a plane, then he has been deprived of liberty. The ability to move freely within America's borders and to enter and leave the country as desired have always been considered important liberties in America. In addition, blocking purchase or use of an airline ticket constitutes deprivation of property. Clearly, if he is unable to see the evidence against him and confront his accusers in court, he has been denied due process of law, a direct affront to the Constitution.
A recent federal maneuver to create a second list of people who can't use "EZ pass" to go through security checks is an extension of this sort of anti-American reasoning.
I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; OR ABRIDGING FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
V. No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, NOR BE DEPRIVED OF LIFE, LIBERTY, OR PROPERTY, WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW, nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Pssst... Clinton on way out
(as Libya debacle smolders)
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/21/world/asia/for-obama-and-clinton-a-partnerships-final-road-show.html
Also departing: Petraeus, head of the CIA, which effectively ran the Benghazi embassy:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2953615/posts
Join the conversation, a mix of politics and fun: https://www.facebook.com/paul.conant.39
(as Libya debacle smolders)
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/21/world/asia/for-obama-and-clinton-a-partnerships-final-road-show.html
Also departing: Petraeus, head of the CIA, which effectively ran the Benghazi embassy:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2953615/posts
Join the conversation, a mix of politics and fun: https://www.facebook.com/paul.conant.39
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Petraeus 'scandal' deployed
to push Libyagate offstage
The headline says nearly all, excepting the fact that the cooperation of major media is required for the bait and switch to work. BUT:
Lawmakers to press Benghazi probe
http://www.aim.org/guest-column/petraeus-resignation-wont-interfere-with-benghazi-probe-say-lawmakers/
The AIM writer says however that the House probers may change the witness list, calling someone else from the CIA to testify. A supplemental witness makes sense, but it makes no sense to refuse to take Petraeus's testimony merely because he was forced out over an indiscretion of the type common to mortals (would it have made sense to have refused to take Bill Clinton's testimony on some important matter because he'd had an affair with Monica Lewinsky?).
to push Libyagate offstage
The headline says nearly all, excepting the fact that the cooperation of major media is required for the bait and switch to work. BUT:
Lawmakers to press Benghazi probe
http://www.aim.org/guest-column/petraeus-resignation-wont-interfere-with-benghazi-probe-say-lawmakers/
The AIM writer says however that the House probers may change the witness list, calling someone else from the CIA to testify. A supplemental witness makes sense, but it makes no sense to refuse to take Petraeus's testimony merely because he was forced out over an indiscretion of the type common to mortals (would it have made sense to have refused to take Bill Clinton's testimony on some important matter because he'd had an affair with Monica Lewinsky?).
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Saturday, November 10, 2012
Anti-Obama video tells
of Marxist background
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-HqHSkYG-Y&feature=watch-vrec
The video found on Youtube is a bit out of date and in fact omits some interesting but damaging details.
Many will feel justified in rating it as scurrilous. But one important point remains: Under Obama, the mechanisms have been reinforced for the overriding of traditional American liberties and could easily be used to defend the socialist agenda from "rightwing reactionaries" who get too loud in their criticisms and start getting the ear of millions of loyal Americans.
of Marxist background
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-HqHSkYG-Y&feature=watch-vrec
The video found on Youtube is a bit out of date and in fact omits some interesting but damaging details.
Many will feel justified in rating it as scurrilous. But one important point remains: Under Obama, the mechanisms have been reinforced for the overriding of traditional American liberties and could easily be used to defend the socialist agenda from "rightwing reactionaries" who get too loud in their criticisms and start getting the ear of millions of loyal Americans.
No comments:
Post a Comment