Days after federal officials agreed to an $85 billion bailout of American International Group, the insurance firm spent more than $440,000 for a corporate retreat at a swanky California resort.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/1007083aig1.html
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Criminal Punishment
The below is quoted from Murray N. Rothbard and expresses the prosecution of crime in a true libertarian society. It is a notion that is never recognized or acknowledged by many individuals and institutions. Take a moment and consider it.
"The central thrust of libertarian thought, then, is to oppose any and all aggression against the property rights of individuals in their own persons and in the material objects they have voluntarily acquired. While individual and gangs of criminals are of course opposed, there is nothing unique here to the libertarian creed, since almost all persons and schools of thought oppose the exercise of random violence against persons and property.
There is, however, a difference of emphasis on the part of libertarians even in this universally accepted area of defending people against crime. In the libertarian society there would be no "district attorney" who prosecutes criminals in the name of a nonexistent "society," even against the wishes of the victim of crime. The victim would himself decide whether to press charges. Furthermore, as another side to the same coin, in a libertarian world the victim would be able to press suit against a wrongdoer without having to convince the same district attorney that he should proceed. Moreover, in the system of criminal punishment in the libertarian world, the emphasis would never be, as it is now, on "society's" jailing the criminal; the emphasis would necessarily be on compelling the criminal to make restitution to the victim of his crime. The present system, in which the victim is not recompensed but instead has to pay taxes to support the incarceration of his own attacker?would be evident nonsense in a world that focuses on the defense of property rights and therefore on the victim of crime."
http://mises.org/rothbard/newliberty.asp
"The central thrust of libertarian thought, then, is to oppose any and all aggression against the property rights of individuals in their own persons and in the material objects they have voluntarily acquired. While individual and gangs of criminals are of course opposed, there is nothing unique here to the libertarian creed, since almost all persons and schools of thought oppose the exercise of random violence against persons and property.
There is, however, a difference of emphasis on the part of libertarians even in this universally accepted area of defending people against crime. In the libertarian society there would be no "district attorney" who prosecutes criminals in the name of a nonexistent "society," even against the wishes of the victim of crime. The victim would himself decide whether to press charges. Furthermore, as another side to the same coin, in a libertarian world the victim would be able to press suit against a wrongdoer without having to convince the same district attorney that he should proceed. Moreover, in the system of criminal punishment in the libertarian world, the emphasis would never be, as it is now, on "society's" jailing the criminal; the emphasis would necessarily be on compelling the criminal to make restitution to the victim of his crime. The present system, in which the victim is not recompensed but instead has to pay taxes to support the incarceration of his own attacker?would be evident nonsense in a world that focuses on the defense of property rights and therefore on the victim of crime."
http://mises.org/rothbard/newliberty.asp
Fascism
The Republican Nation Convention last month demonstrated what has come and what is coming. Steps 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 in the 10 steps to fascism, as detailed in Naomi Wolf's book, The End of America were in full effect in St. Paul: 5) Surveil ordinary citizens, 6) Infiltrate citizens' groups, 7) Arbitrarily detain and release citizens, 8) Target key individuals and 9) Restrict the press.
It is happening, right here, right now in America, and not just in St. Paul. All 10 steps are now in force in America, including the last: Subvert the rule of law.
It is happening, right here, right now in America, and not just in St. Paul. All 10 steps are now in force in America, including the last: Subvert the rule of law.
The police are supposed to defend your right to peaceful protest and speech. Why has control and aggression been used when individuals reject the current path of warfare/welfare government?
Picture courtesy of http://thephoenix.com/Boston/News/69269-Among-the-Republican-thugs/?rel=inf
Monday, October 6, 2008
It has begun
The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent 35 of the last 60 months in Iraq patrolling in full battle rattle, helping restore essential services and escorting supply convoys.
Now they’re training for the same mission — with a twist — at home.
Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks.
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/
"The seamless integration of the military and law enforcement into a single "Internal Security Force" is the defining characteristic of a fully realized police state. Once this fusion is accomplished, the question becomes not "whether" a police state exists, but rather how acute its institutional violence against the subject population will become." - William Norman Grigg
Now they’re training for the same mission — with a twist — at home.
Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks.
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/
"The seamless integration of the military and law enforcement into a single "Internal Security Force" is the defining characteristic of a fully realized police state. Once this fusion is accomplished, the question becomes not "whether" a police state exists, but rather how acute its institutional violence against the subject population will become." - William Norman Grigg
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Bailout
I feel compelled to address the issues surrounding the current bailout of the economy that was passed this week. The bailout will not stop the market from falling. In fact, this bill is going to do more harm than good. The economic collapse was bound to occur; however, the government interfering with the economy in attempts to prevent the collapse is an attempted cure that most likely will result in death. The government involvement in a free economy will destroy the dollar in an effort to save the economy. As a consequence, they will destroy both. The free market / capitalism is what will save the economy. The market is attempting to fix the problem, but the government became involved and screwed it up. The government doesn’t like how a free market corrects problems because of the pain (unemployment, financial loss). Way too much spending and borrowing got us into this mess and no government program can fix the problem – it will only contribute to it. The government crashing the dollar through continued spending and borrowing will result in far greater pain than a free market correction. As the value of the dollar declines, unemployment, standards of living, harm, and crime will increase drastically.
"Now all of a sudden we're one government program away from a complete disaster, from a repeat great depression. These guys are lying. The reality is we are on the verge of that disaster because of the baiout. Now yes, if they don't do a bailout it is going to be difficult for American's to borrow money to buy stuff. Yeah, great! We're to broke to buy stuff. That's a good thing. You know, their saying that if we don't pass this bill nobody's going to be able to borrow money to send their kids to college. That's right, we won't be able to borrow money to send our kids to college, but you know what, that's a good thing. Because you know what that means? That means college tuitions are going to come way down. And that means we won't have to borrow money to send our kids to college because college will be cheap. The only reason tuitions are so high is because it is so easy to borrow money to go to school. The minute you can't borrow money to go to school, school is going to get cheap... (colleges) are going to find ways to cut their bloated overhead so that they can educate our kids for a reasonable cost. But the governement wants to keep us in debt. The governement wants to make sure everything is so expensive that we have to borrow money to buy it. This is nonsense!" - Peter Schiff
Friday, October 3, 2008
Wasted Funds
"The government doles out too much anti-terrorism money to towns and cities for emergency equipment that rarely gets used while cash-strapped police struggle with crime, according to a growing number of mayors, police chiefs and security experts.
Seven years after 9/11, some are asking the government to re-examine spending hundreds of millions of dollars on bomb robots, chem-bio suits and equipment that often gathers dust in warehouses.
"The simple truth is that average Americans are much more likely to find themselves victims of crime than of terrorist attack," the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) says in a new report that calls on the next president to shift money back to crime fighting.
Since 2003, when the Homeland Security Department was created, the government has given states and cities $22.7 billion for emergency preparedness. How that money is doled out has been controversial from the start. Big cities complained that too much was sent to remote towns; police complained that they couldn't use it for overtime.
This is the first time officials have called for a complete re-evaluation of the grant system.
Since 9/11, the IACP says, 99,000 people have been murdered in the USA and 1.4 million are the victims of violent crime each year. "In terms of day-to-day crime fighting, we're far worse off than we were before 9/11," IACP's Ronald Ruecker says...
continue reading: http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Find-Freedom.htm?At=039075
Seven years after 9/11, some are asking the government to re-examine spending hundreds of millions of dollars on bomb robots, chem-bio suits and equipment that often gathers dust in warehouses.
"The simple truth is that average Americans are much more likely to find themselves victims of crime than of terrorist attack," the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) says in a new report that calls on the next president to shift money back to crime fighting.
Since 2003, when the Homeland Security Department was created, the government has given states and cities $22.7 billion for emergency preparedness. How that money is doled out has been controversial from the start. Big cities complained that too much was sent to remote towns; police complained that they couldn't use it for overtime.
This is the first time officials have called for a complete re-evaluation of the grant system.
Since 9/11, the IACP says, 99,000 people have been murdered in the USA and 1.4 million are the victims of violent crime each year. "In terms of day-to-day crime fighting, we're far worse off than we were before 9/11," IACP's Ronald Ruecker says...
continue reading: http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Find-Freedom.htm?At=039075
Martial Law
Today, Rep. Brad Sherman says he has been told that there will be Martial Law if bill is not passed - FEAR MONGERING is how our laws are being forced on us.
Rep. Sherman, in the house of Representatives, stated that members of congress were threatened that “There would be martial law in America if we voted no.”(on the bailout bill)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaG9d_4zij8
Rep. Sherman, in the house of Representatives, stated that members of congress were threatened that “There would be martial law in America if we voted no.”(on the bailout bill)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaG9d_4zij8
Thursday, October 2, 2008
What are the rules?
I am rather disheartened as of late by the disastrous bailout proposition put forth by the government. Every congressman and senator that voted in favor of this crime against American taxpayers and citizens should be voted out of office. I thank those that have stood strong in opposition. The article below asks some very good questions and states some hard truths and even explains some frustration as of late...
"Should government abide by the same rules as the rest of us? Ask any random sample of the human race, and you’re likely to get 100 percent agreement with the proposition that it should. Even politicians who so obviously don’t believe it – witness their eagerness to fleece taxpayers to protect their pals on Wall Street from the consequences of their own bad business decisions, many of which were encouraged or even demanded by those same politicians – still give lip service to it, knowing that it’s the required answer.
When it comes time actually to apply this belief, however, it rapidly becomes apparent that very few people truly believe that all governments, and all persons in those governments, at all times must be subject to the same laws as the people they rule. Democrats will excoriate Republicans for minor infractions while excusing vast crimes by members of their own party, and vice versa. Individuals will gripe about Congress’s pork-barrel spending but reelect their own congressman on the basis that he brought home the bacon. Americans will mercilessly berate foreign governments for their transgressions while excusing, and sometimes even praising, their own government for doing the same or worse. Practically everyone is willing to permit the government to engage in all kinds of practices that he would never accept from a private individual, organization, or business...
"Clearly these individuals do not apply the same rules to government as they do to everyone else. They would never accept such justifications for a private citizen to engage in the same practices. If an accountant lied on a client’s financial report and was later tried for fraud, would this be excusable on the basis that his client had ordered him to do it? If the same accountant shredded the books and lied about his actions, would this be excusable on the same basis? If I drove a tank into South Central Los Angeles and started blasting away indiscriminately, would that be acceptable since I’m certain to kill a few gang members who probably have committed or will commit crimes? If I sold machine guns to both the Crips and the Bloods but did so in order to make money to send to alleged freedom fighters in Georgia, would that make everything okay?...
http://www.lewrockwell.com/tennant/tennant31.html
"Should government abide by the same rules as the rest of us? Ask any random sample of the human race, and you’re likely to get 100 percent agreement with the proposition that it should. Even politicians who so obviously don’t believe it – witness their eagerness to fleece taxpayers to protect their pals on Wall Street from the consequences of their own bad business decisions, many of which were encouraged or even demanded by those same politicians – still give lip service to it, knowing that it’s the required answer.
When it comes time actually to apply this belief, however, it rapidly becomes apparent that very few people truly believe that all governments, and all persons in those governments, at all times must be subject to the same laws as the people they rule. Democrats will excoriate Republicans for minor infractions while excusing vast crimes by members of their own party, and vice versa. Individuals will gripe about Congress’s pork-barrel spending but reelect their own congressman on the basis that he brought home the bacon. Americans will mercilessly berate foreign governments for their transgressions while excusing, and sometimes even praising, their own government for doing the same or worse. Practically everyone is willing to permit the government to engage in all kinds of practices that he would never accept from a private individual, organization, or business...
"Clearly these individuals do not apply the same rules to government as they do to everyone else. They would never accept such justifications for a private citizen to engage in the same practices. If an accountant lied on a client’s financial report and was later tried for fraud, would this be excusable on the basis that his client had ordered him to do it? If the same accountant shredded the books and lied about his actions, would this be excusable on the same basis? If I drove a tank into South Central Los Angeles and started blasting away indiscriminately, would that be acceptable since I’m certain to kill a few gang members who probably have committed or will commit crimes? If I sold machine guns to both the Crips and the Bloods but did so in order to make money to send to alleged freedom fighters in Georgia, would that make everything okay?...
http://www.lewrockwell.com/tennant/tennant31.html
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
The domestic police force has increased... to handle crime?
By Chuck Baldwin
October 1, 2008
NewsWithViews.com
According to the Army Times (dated Tuesday, September 30, 2008), "Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT [Brigade Combat Team] will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks."
The article continued by saying, "But this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to NorthCom, a joint command established in 2002 to provide command and control for federal homeland defense efforts and coordinate defense support of civil authorities.
"After 1st BCT finishes its dwell-time mission, expectations are that another, as yet unnamed, active-duty brigade will take over and that the mission will be a permanent one."
The Times column also reported that the Army brigade "may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control . . ." It seems that the Army's new domestic duties also include "traffic control" as well as subduing "unruly or dangerous individuals."
... just a few months after expunging Posse Comitatus, President Bush has authorized an Army brigade to be assigned the new role of dealing exclusively with domestic law enforcement and related duties. This evokes serious questions.
Who will give the order to send U.S. troops against American civilians, and under what circumstances? What will the rules of engagement be? How will "unruly" and "dangerous" be defined? How will soldiers be asked to deal with "crowd" or "traffic" control? And perhaps the biggest question is, Once we begin to go down this road, where will it lead?
For several years, the federal government has been accumulating to itself more and more authority that was historically understood to reside within the states and local communities. More and more, our police departments have taken on the image and tactics of the armed forces. And to a greater and greater degree, the rights and liberties of the American people are being sacrificed on the altar of "national security." It seems to me that to now ascribe law enforcement duties to the U.S. Army only serves to augment the argument that America is fast approaching police state status.
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin472.htm
October 1, 2008
NewsWithViews.com
According to the Army Times (dated Tuesday, September 30, 2008), "Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT [Brigade Combat Team] will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks."
The article continued by saying, "But this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to NorthCom, a joint command established in 2002 to provide command and control for federal homeland defense efforts and coordinate defense support of civil authorities.
"After 1st BCT finishes its dwell-time mission, expectations are that another, as yet unnamed, active-duty brigade will take over and that the mission will be a permanent one."
The Times column also reported that the Army brigade "may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control . . ." It seems that the Army's new domestic duties also include "traffic control" as well as subduing "unruly or dangerous individuals."
... just a few months after expunging Posse Comitatus, President Bush has authorized an Army brigade to be assigned the new role of dealing exclusively with domestic law enforcement and related duties. This evokes serious questions.
Who will give the order to send U.S. troops against American civilians, and under what circumstances? What will the rules of engagement be? How will "unruly" and "dangerous" be defined? How will soldiers be asked to deal with "crowd" or "traffic" control? And perhaps the biggest question is, Once we begin to go down this road, where will it lead?
For several years, the federal government has been accumulating to itself more and more authority that was historically understood to reside within the states and local communities. More and more, our police departments have taken on the image and tactics of the armed forces. And to a greater and greater degree, the rights and liberties of the American people are being sacrificed on the altar of "national security." It seems to me that to now ascribe law enforcement duties to the U.S. Army only serves to augment the argument that America is fast approaching police state status.
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin472.htm
Stealing another $700 billion
We often forget about white collar crime. Why would someone vote to send criminal companies $700 + billion? Perhaps because some of that money goes to them…
Top Contributors 2003-2008:
Barrack Obama:
Goldman Sachs $748,880
University of California $625,911
JPMorgan Chase & Co $493,469
Harvard University $473,669
Citigroup Inc $467,849
Google Inc $426,174
University of Chicago $424,539
UBS AG $423,045
Skadden, Arps et al $394,335
Lehman Brothers $393,324
National Amusements Inc $385,803
Microsoft Corp $380,735
Sidley Austin LLP $379,802
Kirkland & Ellis $376,164
Moveon.org $347,463
Morgan Stanley $341,320
Time Warner $338,677
Wilmerhale Llp $335,398
Exelon Corp $314,063
Latham & Watkins $299,650
John McCain:
Merrill Lynch $306,813
Citigroup Inc $277,251
Goldman Sachs $234,345
Morgan Stanley $234,272
AT&T Inc $192,557
JPMorgan Chase & Co $185,325
Credit Suisse Group $165,575
Blank Rome LLP $155,326
Greenberg Traurig LLP $148,787
UBS AG $138,665
PricewaterhouseCoopers $138,320
US Government $137,842
Bank of America $133,975
FedEx Corp $123,953
Wachovia Corp $123,096
Pinnacle West Capital $123,050
Lehman Brothers $120,600
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher $104,250
US Army $103,613
Bear Stearns $99,300
From http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00006424&cycle=2008
Top Contributors 2003-2008:
Barrack Obama:
Goldman Sachs $748,880
University of California $625,911
JPMorgan Chase & Co $493,469
Harvard University $473,669
Citigroup Inc $467,849
Google Inc $426,174
University of Chicago $424,539
UBS AG $423,045
Skadden, Arps et al $394,335
Lehman Brothers $393,324
National Amusements Inc $385,803
Microsoft Corp $380,735
Sidley Austin LLP $379,802
Kirkland & Ellis $376,164
Moveon.org $347,463
Morgan Stanley $341,320
Time Warner $338,677
Wilmerhale Llp $335,398
Exelon Corp $314,063
Latham & Watkins $299,650
John McCain:
Merrill Lynch $306,813
Citigroup Inc $277,251
Goldman Sachs $234,345
Morgan Stanley $234,272
AT&T Inc $192,557
JPMorgan Chase & Co $185,325
Credit Suisse Group $165,575
Blank Rome LLP $155,326
Greenberg Traurig LLP $148,787
UBS AG $138,665
PricewaterhouseCoopers $138,320
US Government $137,842
Bank of America $133,975
FedEx Corp $123,953
Wachovia Corp $123,096
Pinnacle West Capital $123,050
Lehman Brothers $120,600
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher $104,250
US Army $103,613
Bear Stearns $99,300
From http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00006424&cycle=2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
