Crocodile's Lament

Flying by the seat of my pants

Archive for December 2012

A Russian’s View of Gun Control

Americans never give up your guns

Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives, leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.

28.12.2012
 By Stanislav Mishin
 These days, there are few few things to admire about the socialist, bankrupt and culturally degenerating USA, but at least so far, one thing remains: the right to bare arms and use deadly force to defend one’s self and possessions.

This will probably come as a total shock to most of my Western readers, but at one point, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on earth. This was, of course, when we were free under the Tsar. Weapons, from swords and spears to pistols, rifles and shotguns were everywhere, common items. People carried them concealed, they carried them holstered. Fighting knives were a prominent part of many traditional attires and those little tubes criss crossing on the costumes of Cossacks and various Caucasian peoples? Well those are bullet holders for rifles.

Various armies, such as the Poles, during the Смута (Times of Troubles), or Napoleon, or the Germans even as the Tsarist state collapsed under the weight of WW1 and Wall Street monies, found that holding Russian lands was much much harder than taking them and taking was no easy walk in the park but a blood bath all its own. In holding, one faced an extremely well armed and aggressive population Hell bent on exterminating or driving out the aggressor.

This well armed population was what allowed the various White factions to rise up, no matter how disorganized politically and militarily they were in 1918 and wage a savage civil war against the Reds. It should be noted that many of these armies were armed peasants, villagers, farmers and merchants, protecting their own. If it had not been for Washington’s clandestine support of and for the Reds, history would have gone quite differently.

Moscow fell, for example, not from a lack of weapons to defend it, but from the lieing guile of the Reds. Ten thousand Reds took Moscow and were opposed only by some few hundreds of officer cadets and their instructors. Even then the battle was fierce and losses high. However, in the city alone, at that time, lived over 30,000 military officers (both active and retired), all with their own issued weapons and ammunition, plus tens of thousands of other citizens who were armed. The Soviets promised to leave them all alone if they did not intervene. They did not and for that were asked afterwards to come register themselves and their weapons: where they were promptly shot.

Of course being savages, murderers and liars does not mean being stupid and the Reds learned from their Civil War experience. One of the first things they did was to disarm the population. From that point, mass repression, mass arrests, mass deportations, mass murder, mass starvation were all a safe game for the powers that were. The worst they had to fear was a pitchfork in the guts or a knife in the back or the occasional hunting rifle. Not much for soldiers.

To this day, with the Soviet Union now dead 21 years, with a whole generation born and raised to adulthood without the SU, we are still denied our basic and traditional rights to self defense. Why? We are told that everyone would just start shooting each other and crime would be everywhere….but criminals are still armed and still murdering and to often, especially in the far regions, those criminals wear the uniforms of the police. The fact that everyone would start shooting is also laughable when statistics are examined.

While President Putin pushes through reforms, the local authorities, especially in our vast hinterland, do not feel they need to act like they work for the people. They do as they please, a tyrannical class who knows they have absolutely nothing to fear from a relatively unarmed population. This in turn breeds not respect but absolute contempt and often enough, criminal abuse.

For those of us fighting for our traditional rights, the US 2nd Amendment is a rare light in an ever darkening room. Governments will use the excuse of trying to protect the people from maniacs and crime, but are in reality, it is the bureaucrats protecting their power and position. In all cases where guns are banned, gun crime continues and often increases. As for maniacs, be it nuts with cars (NYC, Chapel Hill NC), swords (Japan), knives (China) or home made bombs (everywhere), insane people strike. They throw acid (Pakistan, UK), they throw fire bombs (France), they attack. What is worse, is, that the best way to stop a maniac is not psychology or jail or “talking to them”, it is a bullet in the head, that is why they are a maniac, because they are incapable of living in reality or stopping themselves.

The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from the same culture?

No it is about power and a total power over the people. There is a lot of desire to bad mouth the Tsar, particularly by the Communists, who claim he was a tyrant, and yet under him we were armed and under the progressives disarmed. Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives, leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.

So, do not fall for the false promises and do not extinguish the light that is left to allow humanity a measure of self respect.

Stanislav Mishin

$200 Tax on Your AR-15? Contact Congress Immediatel​y! We Stand As One!

NOTE: I do not have, nor will I accept advertising on this blog. I simply use it as a platform from which to convey my belief in, and support for, the Constitution and Bill of Rights as they were originally indended by the Founding Fathers of this nation.
If we lose our desire to stay vigilant and fight for the freedoms we have so long enjoyed we will lose them. The Second Amendment guarantees all the other rights and freedoms.

Email Your Contacts!

There is an old adage, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”   This week the media is trying to convince us that support for Senator Feinstein’s  anti-gun legislation is weak, but if we are not  PRO-ACTIVE, the legislation will pass as written.  You will wake up just in time for SHOT Show with new laws that make your AR-15 a Class 3 weapon. This means that if you want to keep your tactical rifles, you will have to register them, pay a $5-$200 tax, and notify the government if you intend to take them out of state.  You will also completely waive your 4th Amendment rights to reasonable search and seizure.  ATF will have the right to knock on your door and inspect the weapons anytime they want.  You will also see an end to standard capacity magazines.   This isn’t a threat. It isn’t political posturing.  Diane Feinstein and the anti-gun machine have already introduced the legislation, and it will be rammed through Congress and signed by the President if we do not Stand As One and act today.

Quick Links:

Find and Contanct your Representative in the US House by Zip Code: http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

Contact Your Senators : http://www.senate.gov/

Please contact your legislators immediately, and post the links above to your discussion boards.  Also please contact all of the gun companies you do business with and ask them to take action now and don’t sit on their resources in reaching out to the gunowners of America.  All of them have mailing lists, and all of them are sitting on them pretending that they don’t have any responsibility, while doing record business in the stuff that is going to be banned or regulated.  This 2nd Amendment crisis is not about KA-CHING.  We call out to Midway USA, Gunbroker,  Brownells, Sportsmen’s Guide, Cabelas and all the firearms and accessory manufacturers. If you have a list, use it.  We must Stand As One if we are to defeat this threat to our freedom.  Aside from one NRA-ILA email notifying us about the legislation, even the NRA has been silent.  Facebook isn’t enough.  Our testing has shown that the effectiveness of Facebook is very small. You MUST EMAIL YOUR LISTS THIS WEEK before the legislation gains public support.  We are about to enter a dark time in 2nd Amendment freedom and political wrangling from the NRA isn’t going to cut it this far out from an election.  The legislators need to hear from us, that we will work to defeat them in their next election bid.

This is not an alarmist position.  The anti-gun machine was prepared for this opportunity, and they are very well organized. Senator Feinstein herself admitted that she has been working since last year to investigate all of the loopholes from the last “Assault Weapons Ban” and eliminate them.  That means that this time there will be no thumbhole stocks, no sawed off flashhiders, no California “bullet buttons.”  It is almost as though the anti-gunners allowed the old ban to end in hopes of making a better one this time.  This legislation is extremely comprehensive and if it passes, every tactical rifle in America will instantly become a Class 3 weapon. No new guns will be produced at all, effectively shuttering every AR-15 manufacturer in the country.

Don’t be fooled by  the pollsters this time, for or against.  They key point in this legislation is that we are more than a year from the start of the next campaigns for the mid-term elections.  The anti-gun lobbyists, as you read this, are contacting the House and Senate members trying to convince them that American voters are not going to punish them for voting for new and sweeping gun control.  Few politicians actually stand for anything, so how we react is paramount to defeating this legislation.    Your must notify your legislators that you are watching their vote and that you will work to defeat them in their next election bid if they vote for any new gun legislation that comes out of the Sandy Hook shootings.  Over 500 people have been killed in Chicago this year, the most gun restrictive city in the USA.  We will not sacrifice our 2nd Amendment rights because the media is up in arms about the slaughter of 20 white kids by a mentally disturbed individual who stole his mommie’s guns.

Also don’t think that the Supreme Court is going to help us on this one.  The legislation clearly identifies the approach to grandfathered weapons as a tax, and the Supreme Court has recently dealt with this issue on Obamacare, and refused to strike it down.  Our swing vote, the George W. appointed Justice Roberts, has already demonstrated that he will not strike down major legislation from the bench if he can find a way to avoid it, and this tax approach to our guns won’t even make the Supreme Court.  You may think that the original 2nd Amendment guaranteed us the right to the same guns at the government (muskets at the time), but there is plenty of Federal case law from the 1986 machinegun ban that has laid the groundwork for this Feinstein bill. It will pass, and it will stand.

If we Stand As One this week, the legislation will be stopped.  Please contact your reps in the House and your Senators today.   Mobilize your friends and family.  Email everyone in your contact list.  And most importantly post the direct links above (not to GunsAmerica) to every single  discussion board, blog or forum to which you frequent.

As we have tried to explain already, GunsAmerica is all alone out here in this fight.  Please encourage the gun websites you do business with to join our Stand As One campaign and email their mailing lists to fight this game changing legislation.  We are all NRA Life and Endowment members here at GunsAmerica, yet nothing has come from NRA.  Our competitors Gunbroker have sent nothing, apparently content with the spike in business.  Midway USA has a huge list, yet nothing has come from them.  Brownells is in the news for selling 3 1/2 years of magazines in one day, yet nothing has come from their email list.  And worst of all, Cheaper Than Dirt actually announced that they would stop selling guns online, supporting the public opinion against our guns.    Sportsman’s Guide even had the nerve to send a happy go lucky “After Christmas” sale email on AR-15 accessories. Don’t boycott these companies. Contact these companies!  We have to stand together or we are going to lose.   Now is not the time to argue and sit on our resources of huge email lists to America’s gun enthusiasts. We Stand As One!

Some of you got upset at us calling Alex Jones a turd in the punchbowl of 2nd Amendment freedom, but it is the truth.   The conspiracy theory websites do not stand with us on this one, though they claim that they do.  A lot of young people are caught up in a conspiracy theory mindset  that is preventing them from seeing the forest through the trees.  2nd Amendment rights were never about hunting, and there has always been an out in the open “conspiracy” against them.  if you espouse big government control and oversight of all Americans, you obviously don’t want free thinkers to be armed.  It doesn’t take a conspiracy theorist to figure out that Diane Feinstein wants to watch and control all Americans, and disarming us is an important step for her and her ilk.  Alex Jones and his gang may seem well intentioned, but what they really want is internet traffic. They want to sell you the movies and the water purifiers and the survival food and the male enhancement pills, PERIOD.   Guns are just the latest thing on the conspiracy theory bandwagon because it “gets the buzz going.”   They may be gun loving Americans at heart, but what is driving them today is the almighty but ever weakening $$$ dollar.

Diane Feinstein doesn’t care how much survival food you have in your bunker .  But what she does have is the actual power to halt the production of an entire class of firearms and magazines, and she plans to do that, this week.   Get out of your armchair and get into action.

This quote from a recent article in the Russian newspaper Pravda urging us to not give up our 2nd Amendment freedom says a great deal:

Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives, leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.

We must Stand As One!

Facebook bans Gandhi quote as part of revisionist history purge

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles…)

(NaturalNews) The reports are absolutely true. Facebook suspended the Natural News account earlier today after we posted an historical quote from Mohandas Gandhi. The quote reads:

“Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.” – Mohandas Gandhi, an Autobiography, page 446.

This historical quote was apparently too much for Facebook’s censors to bear. They suspended our account and gave us a “final warning” that one more violation of their so-called “community guidelines” would result in our account being permanently deactivated.

They then demanded we send them a color copy of a “government issued identification” in order to reactivate our account. Our account was removed from suspension just minutes before InfoWars posted its article on this Facebook censorship, and the Facebook page is now functioning at:

www.Facebook.com/NaturalNews

This is a separate account from our primary Facebook account, which has nearly 250,000 followers at:

www.Facebook.com/HealthRanger

Logic is an enemy and history is a menace

That Facebook would choose to disable our account after we posted a Gandhi quote is incredibly shocking. The historical rise of oppressed Indian people against tyrannical British rule is apparently no longer allowed to be discussed on Facebook. The very IDEA of a free people overcoming tyrannical government rule now “violates community guidelines.” The removal of this content is akin to online book burning and the destruction of history.

This post was not in any way malicious, nor encouraging violence, nor even describing guns or the Second Amendment. It merely reflected the words of one of our world’s most celebrated rebel leaders who helped an entire nation throw off the shackles of oppression and British occupation. That Facebook would find this to “violate community guidelines” is nothing short of absolutely bewildering.

Here is the full image as originally posted on Facebook. Keep in mind that THIS is now considered unacceptable speech across the “Facebook community,” where any number of people can openly call for the murder of the NRA president and have absolutely no action taken against them:

InfoWars.com is also now reporting that Facebook is running an across-the-board PURGE of pro-gun accounts. A huge number of accounts are all being systematically disabled or suspended, with all content being wiped clean.

We have entered the era of the Ministry of Truth from George Orwell’s 1984 novel. And while Facebook assaults the First Amendment in America, Senator Feinstein is busy assaulting the Second.

Facebook declares war on human history

What’s especially alarming about all this is that Gandhi himself was of course a champion of resistance against tyranny. To banish quotes from Gandhi is much like banning quotes of freedom from Martin Luther King (who also openly supported concealed firearms, by the way, and who personally owned an entire “arsenal” of firearms).

What’s next? Will Facebook ban quotes by Thomas Jefferson and George Washington? Any and all patriots, founding fathers and liberty lovers throughout history might soon be stricken from the Facebook servers, and any who dare to post historical quotes supporting liberty, the Bill of Rights, or the Second Amendment risk having their accounts terminated and all content deleted.

Collectivist propaganda has now reached a point where you can’t even discuss liberty or anything out of history that supported the right to keep and bear arms. You are required to stay focused solely on celebrity gossip, sports stars, fashion distractions and tabloid garbage. Anyone who wishes to discuss actual American history must now go underground and speak softly in dimly-lit rooms, behind secret walls and drawn curtains.

The era of total oppression and collectivist mind control has fully arrived in America. This is not hyperbole… IT IS HERE NOW.

Memorize this quote, because it too shall soon be purged from the internet:

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” – Thomas Jefferson.

Learn  more: http://www.naturalnews.com/038484_Gandhi_quote_Facebook_censorship.html#ixzz2GUC35q6p

Hey Lefties! Here’s An Example Of The Need For “Assault Rifles”

OK, I used the term “assault rifles” in the title to get your attention.  Now let me explain that I do not believe they are assault rifles.  They are merely rifles capable firing many rounds quickly.  The Left gun control crowd has been saying that there is no need for these kinds of weapons, but my friends nothing could be further from the truth and I want to share with you just one instance that everyone should be able to understand just how needed these weapons are.

58852252

The year was 1992, twenty years ago, when following a jury trial, four Los Angeles Police Department officers were acquitted, in April, after being accused in the video recorded beating of a black American named Rodney King.

As a result, people throughout the Los Angeles metropolitan area rioted over six days because of the verdict.  They engaged in widespread looting, assault, arson, and even murder.  The damage these criminals caused was well over $1 billion!

The rioting finally came to a halt after the California National Guard, along with U.S. Marines from Camp Pendleton were called in to help stop them.

During the riots, more than 60 people were killed and over 4,000 were injured.

On April 30, the second day of the riots, Korean-Americans saw the police fall back from Koreatown, leaving them to defend themselves in the midst of heavy looting and fires.  A store owner at the time, Jay Rhee, told the Los Angeles Times, “we have lost faith in the police.”

The Times reported in May of 1992:

In the shadow of a flaming mini-mall near the corner of 5th and Western, behind a barricade of luxury sedans and battered grocery trucks, they built Firebase Koreatown.

Richard Rhee, owner of the supermarket on the corner, had watched as roving bands of looters ransacked and burned Korean-owned businesses on virtually every block.

But here, it would be different.

“Burn this down after 33 years?” asked Rhee, a survivor of the Korean War, the Watts riots and three decades of business in Los Angeles. “They don’t know how hard I’ve worked. This is my market and I’m going to protect it.”

From the rooftop of his supermarket, a group of Koreans armed with shotguns and automatic weapons peered onto the smoky streets. Scores of others, carrying steel pipes, pistols and automatic rifles, paced through the darkened parking lot in anticipation of an assault by looters.

“It’s just like war,” Rhee said, surveying his makeshift command. “I’ll shoot and worry about the law later.”

From tiny liquor stores in South-Central Los Angeles to the upscale boutiques in Mid-Wilshire, Korean store owners have turned their pastel-colored mini-malls into fortresses against the looter’s tide.

For many store owners, the riots have become a watershed in the struggle for the survival of their community.

The store owners shot off at least 500 rounds into the sky and ground to break up masses of people that were looting.  They could have only accomplished that with the types of weapons they were using.

By the end of that first day of defending themselves, they have killed four looters and beat back the mob that had moved into their area.

AR-15

Though they desperately tried to get the police to respond, even asking “Where were you when we needed you?” police would not show up for another 24 hours.  Additionally, it was reported that 200 police uniforms had been stolen and according to a Korean radio announcer at the time, “We cannot trust a person just because they are wearing a uniform.”

Eventually things were brought under control.  However, understand that the Clinton signed “assault weapons ban” was just two years later.  Imagine if that had been in place when the rioting took place.  It is highly possible that many of these Korean-Americans would not have been able to defend themselves, their property or their families and obviously the police were not very effective.

So I ask those who may read this article who are in favor of gun bans, more gun laws, and simply more control, are you willing to simply stand for government telling you how you can and cannot defend yourself, your family and your property?  You better think this through before you go calling for it.  After all, if the police in LA will abandon the people of Koreatown, what makes you think they won’t leave you to fend for yourself should something similar take place in your neighborhood?

MORE PIGFORD: GAO Report Confirms Pigford Designed for Undetectable Fraud

This article published in early December following up the September article below.

by: Lee Stranahan  -  8 December, 2012

An official government report released Friday admits that the Pigford “Black Farmers” Settlement was designed with no mechanism for objectively determining fraud but hid that shocking conclusion under pages of bureaucratic doublespeak.

“Burying the lede” is a journalistic term used to describe the act of hiding essential information by putting non-essentials in front of it. On December 7, 2012, the United States Government Accountability Office released report number GAO-13-69R, also known as “Civil Rights: Additional Actions in Pigford II Claims Process Could Reduce Risk of Improper Determinations.”

Just based on the title, you can already tell the report is needlessly wordy. This helps bury what should be the bigger story—that the Pigford settlement isn’t the mere victim of a few fraudsters but was, in fact, set up to make fraud not just rampant but also totally undetectable.

Breitbart News has been reporting for years now that the Pigford settlement allowed people to collect $50,000 just for claiming that they “attempted to farm” and that no other proof was needed. As a result, many claim that billions of dollars in fraudulent “attempted to farm” claims were paid out by the federal government. The new GAO report actually confirms what the late Andrew Breitbart pointed out time and again: the Pigford settlement is a massive swindle on the U.S. taxpayer, and it was designed that way from the start.

The GAO report’s conclusion seems like it bears good news; there are systems in place that would detect fraud. It says on Page 3:

Identifying and denying fraudulent or otherwise invalid claims among tens of thousands of claims submitted is a daunting task. The parties charged with carrying out the terms of the Pigford II settlement have designed and operated a system of internal control that, in general, provides reasonable assurance of identifying and denying fraudulent or otherwise invalid claims.

This “reasonable assurance” of denying fraud, however, is illusory. A tidbit buried in the middle of a wordy paragraph on the same page undermines this defense: “These design weaknesses, hence, cannot be modified by the implementing parties.”

Design weaknesses? Keep reading and you’ll find that it’s a “design weakness” that destroys the previous insistence on effective oversight.

For example, by the terms of the settlement agreement, most claims must be evaluated based solely on the information submitted by the claimants and, as a result, the adjudicator of these claims has no way of independently verifying that information.

Let’s go slowly through that paragraph. There are three main points it makes:

  1. “By terms of the settlement agreement” shows the fraud is baked right in. This is a feature, not a bug.
  2. “most claims must be evaluated based solely on the information submitted by the claimants” means that a majority of claims are judged based only on statements by the person who stands to collect a $50,000 check.
  3. “adjudicator of these claims has no way of independently verifying that information” means that there’s no way for the person judging the claim to check for fraud.

In other words, the lawyers and politicians who designed Pigford gave people judging a claim’s validity no objective way to determine whether it is actually fraudulent or not; they have to accept the claimant’s statement as truth. In a government payout program whose architects anticipated some level of fraudulent or duplicate claims, no one included oversight against such a contingency.

SOURCE: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/07/New-GAO-Report-Confirms-That-Pigford-Settlement-Was-Designed-For-Undetectable-Fraud

PIGFORD: New Obama ‘Pigford’ Farmers Settlements Designed for Fraud

This one “somehow” slipped through the boards back in September when it was published. Even that crack investigative news organ The New York Times didn’t catch this one.

 by: Lee Stranahan  -  25 Sep 2012

The Obama administration is rolling out a new USDA claims process that will allow Latinos, Hispanics or anyone of any race who is related to a woman (which means everyone) a $50,000 check if they’re willing to provide a couple of pages of paperwork and a notarized statement claiming that they or someone related to them “attempted to farm.”

This is a continuation of the Pigford “attempted to farm” payout scheme that was promoted, protected and perfected by Barack Obama and that has been the subject of a two-year investigation by Breitbart News.

The USDA said in a statement yesterday:

This Administration has made it a priority to resolve all of the past program class action civil rights cases facing the Department, and today’s announcement is another major step towards achieving that goal. In February 2010, the Secretary announced the Pigford II settlement with African American farmers, and in October 2010, he announced the Keepseagle settlement with Native American farmers. Both of those settlements have since received court approval. Unlike the cases brought by African American and Native American farmers, the cases filed by Hispanic and women farmers over a decade ago were not certified as class actions and are still pending in the courts as individual matters. The claims process provides a voluntary alternative to continuing litigation for Hispanic and female farmers and ranchers who want to use it.

Emphasis added to show that despite the fact that courts did not classify the women or Latino settlements as class action settlements. Instead, the Obama administration took it on its own initiative to make these payouts. The USDA was not forced into this settlement by court decision; President Obama built this.

To properly read between the lines in the bureaucratic doublespeak and intentionally dense legalese that makes up Farmers Settlement documentation, it is important to understand how fraud actually worked in Pigford. Fraud was not primarly people falsely claiming that they had farmed. It was actually much simpler than that. You did not need to prove that you actually farmed, only that you “attempted to farm.”

The low bar was a trick that the lawyers and politicians put into Pigford years ago; the “attempted to farm” standard. All you had to do was to say that you attempted to farm. In other words, you made the unprovable claim that you went to a USDA office and they did not even give you an application. Your lack of an application or any other documentary evidence became the proof that you had suffered discrimination.

This was explained in an interview nearly two years ago with Thomas Burrell, the head of the Black Farmers Agricultural Associate. ,In this video, Mr. Burrell explains that over 90% of the people who collected $50,000 checks in Pigford were ‘attempted to farm’ claimants.

So far, billions of dollars have been given away to people who never farmed a day in their life–and the upcoming Pigford II extension that was introduced by Senator Obama and subsequently signed by President Obama will add billions more. In addition to these direct cost of payouts to ‘attempted to farm’ claimants, there are also untold millions or billions in waste, lost time and bad loans that were forced through by the USDA.

The women and Latino farmer settlements extend this same process that will lead to billions of dollars in fraudulent claims by people who are unable to avoid the temptation of easy money. This same “attempted to farm” standard is literally built right into the women and Latino farm settlements that Obama Administration’s USDA is offering.

There’s over $1 billion currently set aside specifically to pay off “attempted to farm“ claimants. The attempteds are described in the new settlement as Tier 1(a) claimants. According to the official government website FarmerClaims.GOV, the standard includes.

If you are Hispanic, you farmed, or attempted to farm, between January 1, 1981, and December 31, 1996, or between October 13, 1998, and October 13, 2000;

If you are female, you farmed, or attempted to farm, between January 1, 1981, and December 31, 1996, or between October 19, 1998, and October 19, 2000;

You were the owner-operator or a tenant-operator of farm property, or you attempted to own or lease farm land, during the same time periods listed above;

You applied for a farm loan or for farm-loan servicing at a USDA office during one of the time  periods listed above; or for those seeking a Tier 1(a) payment only, you made a bona fide effort to  apply for a farm loan or for farm-loan servicing, and USDA actively discouraged the application  during one of those  time periods;

Please note that you don’t even have to it on the land. All you have to do is to claim that you attempted to own or lease farmland, which means you say you did.

The official application checklist makes the ‘attempted to farm’ standard requirements clear; all you need is a sworn statement from ‘a witness’ saying you attempted.

Tier 1(a) (Attempted Application Only)

A sworn, verifed, or notarized witness statement, OR a contemporaneous written discrimination complaint to USDA, OR a document from a non-family member to you, or from you to a non-family member that supports your contentions

Here’s how this works in practice. Let’s say your mother passed away 10 years ago. No problem, you can file on her behalf. In order to collect $50,000, you would need to file in her name and get a sworn statement from someone saying that she went to the USDA during the proper time period but the mean, racist, sexist people there would not even give your dear mother an application. Could you make that sworn statement yourself? I don’t see anything that would keep that from happening. However, with the lure of a $50,000 check to jog their memory, it shouldn’t be hard to find a witness or two.

Better hurry. You only have until March 2013 to file.

SOURCE: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/09/25/New-Obama-Farmers-Settlements-Designed-For-Fraud

Mis’sippi Mem’ries – Sleep Walkin’ – “I’ve awakened on the porch with lightning tearing at the midnight sky, my only thought being that the daisies in the hanging pot were calling to me of their thirst.”

SLEEP WALKIN’

by: Mis’sippi Annie

My eyes open to the darkness….darkness all around….save the liquid crystal glow of the alarm clock on the bachelor chest.  It reads 3:03 AM.  My feet are stiff with cold.  I shiver.   I’ve no notion of where I’ve been or for how long.

Russ is finally accustomed to my sleepwalking.  He no longer wakes during my nocturnal adventures.  But tonight he must have sensed my absence.  He has crept to my side of the bed likely in search of me, leaving a sliver of space for my return.  I sit down gingerly trying not to wake him.  But with so small a space, I accidentally nudge him…the briefest touch which in his dreams translated to some terrible fear. Startled he sits upright, twisting away, as though I had pierced him through.  He shouts to imaginary comrades:  “Never mind the Indians.  Shoot the dwarf.”  With that he collapses back on his pillow.  I lie down beside him.  We sleep.

Coming from a long line of sleep-walkers, sleep-talkers, and dreamers, I am surprised by nothing said or done in one’s sleep.  Members of my family never considered that we were afflicted by a sleep disorder.  This was long before sleep clinics existed.  To the contrary, in my family, sleep-walking was considered just another personal characteristic, such as big feet or curly hair, except that sleep walking made for more entertaining conversation over breakfast. 

It is true.  I have walked in my sleep for as long as I can remember.  While sleeping, I have removed the contents of an entire cupboard searching for something I could never remember in the morning…cinnamon for an apple pie, cardamom for tea, perhaps.  I’ve awakened on the porch with lightning tearing at the midnight sky, my only thought being that the daisies in the hanging pot were calling to me of their thirst.  Russ, who rises earlier than I, can follow my nocturnal journeys by the lights that I had turned on.  Such occasions are so common that we no longer speak of them.

The urge to walk the night comes from my mother’s family…although I don’t recall that my mother ever walked.  Charlie, my brother did.  I’m sorry to tell you that sleep walking brought a great disappointment to him.  His most enduring childhood dream was to join the Navy; but before he finished basic training, he was given a medical discharge.  Short of tying him to his bunk, the Navy could not keep him from sleep walking about the base…presumably in less than full dress uniform.  The potential of nightly “man over board” drills must have persuaded his superiors that Charlie would be an inconvenient sailor.  So he came home.  Those of us, who wander in the night, knew, of course, that angels on night duty protected us from harm.    The Navy was simply uninformed on such matters.  None of us had ever fallen in our sleep…much less fallen overboard…not that falling overboard would have occurred with any regularity in rural Mississippi where the deepest body of water was the old mill pond over on Boga Homa Creek.  The family remains indignant to this day over the slight. 

Charlie was not my first childhood experience with a family sleep walker.  Living with my Grandparents as a small child, I knew many; but the most noteworthy, and my favorite, was my Great Uncle George.  Uncle George was my Granny’s eldest brother.  Fifteen years her senior, he was as much father as brother to her since Granny’s own Daddy died when she was just a young one. 

Uncle George lived in Arkansas and visited us infrequently.  He claimed he couldn’t come as often as he liked because of the distance and his advanced years.  But the more likely reason was the chilly reception he received from my Granddaddy, who said Uncle George was “no count”.  Several folks in the community said Granddaddy could be right since it took one to know one.  But in spite of Granddaddy’s outspoken opinions, Uncle George counted greatly to me.  At 75 years old, he still caused quite a stir among the ladies with his rakish straw skimmer and perpetual smile.  He even smelled like a bon-vivant….violent bay rum and strong cigars…a manly scent that was not meant to entice but rather overwhelm.  I loved him dearly.  I loved him most of all because he made my Granny laugh, a sound of tinkling bells to my tiny ears, one that made my spirit bubble up and spill out of me in laughter of my own.  She laughed so rarely that I would close my eyes tight and squeeze my brain around the sound, trapping it inside my head to remember on darker days.

Granny loved her brother so much that she named her only son for him—George Leroy Alexander.  That she was able to do so suggests that Granddaddy was not present for the blessed event.  All the other children were named for Granddaddy’s relatives; and given Granddaddy’s opinion of Uncle George, it was not likely he would have acquiesced to my Granny’s wishes on the matter.  Even so, Granny won only half a victory.  Whether in retaliation for her opportunism or a fear that the name itself would inflict an undesirable personality on the namesake child, Granddaddy never called his son “George”, addressing him always by his second name, “Leroy”.  We all did the same. 

But I digress; I want to tell you about Uncle George.  He would always arrive unexpectedly.  I secretly suspected that Granny knew he was coming, but kept it to herself.  Otherwise Granddaddy would have slung a fit at the mere mention of a visit.  But a guest at the doorstep, no matter how unwelcome, could not be turned away by the dictates of Southern hospitality.  So Uncle George would pull up in front of the house and casually present himself like he was just driving through the neighborhood.  He knew he wasn’t entirely welcome.  Consequently, he never took the choicest piece of chicken or the last biscuit—even though they were always offered to him.  And he always refused the big airy guest room with the feather mattress, preferring instead the tiny cot that stood in the small closet-like chamber adjacent to my bedroom….the one Granny slept in when she was nursing me through some childhood illness.  I was glad for his nearness.  He had wonderful tales to tell…tales he was not permitted to tell me in front of Granny, who complained that I was already too high-strung.

Before Uncle George could retire, he would slip on out to his car for a dose of “nerve medicine” which he insisted he needed to shut out the racket of the insufferable country crickets.  I never understood that since the crickets were my lullaby.  I attributed it to one of those adult sensitivities that I could not understand, like an aversion to dirt or snakes.

While waiting for Uncle George to return from his medicinal ministrations, I’d decide which story I wanted to hear.  When I heard the old cot creak under his weight, I’d carefully whisper into the darkness, “Uncle, are you there?”  He would call out loudly enough for all to hear, “Goodnight, my darlin’ child.”  Then, giving the subterfuge just enough time to convince Granny that we had both settled down, he’d launch into one of my favorite ghost stories, made all the more chilling by his hoarse whisper.  I’d shiver and quake and stare into the dark corners of my room where “thousand eyes and bloody bones” was surely lurking. 

I never did hear the end of the story. I’d still be shivering and peering into the dark corners for monsters when Uncle’s voice trailed off.  His nerve medicine was finally taking effect.   I’d snuggle down into my feather mattress and let slumber find me.  But neither of us would rest long.  Some deep recurring horror would stir Uncle George from his bed.  It would drive him from the house to the pecan tree that stood beside my bedside window.  I would waken to the rustling of the leaves and the scraping of the branches against my window to see the white of his nightshirt gleaming in the moonlight.

I don’t remember the first time it happened.  I only recall now that I was never surprised by it.  Hence, I conclude that it was not an unexpected event.  As though resigned to my duty, I’d turn on my tummy, extending my tiny foot over the side of the tall bed until I could feel the safety of the floor with one toe.  Then I’d push myself off to land softly on my feet.  In the dark, I’d find my way to the front door, always standing ajar from Uncle’s escape.  Then onto the wiry grass, I’d tip toe around the bougainvillea at the corner of the house where I’d spy Uncle George standing in the pecan tree.  It wasn’t a big tree, but it was one that Granddaddy treasured for the fine nuts it bore….one he boasted of and nurtured.  Small as I was, I could just see Uncle’s scrawny legs beneath the hem of his nightshirt and his claw-like feet curled around the branch.  Although I could not make out his head among the leaves, I envisioned his back arched and his head thrust forward, cocked to one side as though listening for some distant sound.

Standing at the foot of the tree, I’d stretch tall, reach out my small hand and pat his foot.  In my softest most reassuring voice, I’d encourage, “Come down Uncle.  You’ll hurt yourself; and you’ll shake down Granddaddy’s pecans before their time.”  He would start at my touch, then hiss, “Quick, darlin’, get up here.  The pigs are coming.  The pigs going to get us.” No, Uncle, the pigs are not comin’,” I’d soothe him.  Then playing along with him, I’d reassure, “The pigs are miles away.  Besides they never come this way, Uncle.”  After several attempts to persuade me to climb to safety, he would at last succumb to my tiny earnest voice.  I would convince him that on that particular night he was safe.  Precariously, he’d crawl from the tree, often with his nightshirt caught on an errant twig.  I’d bat it down as best I could and we’d make our way around the bougainvillea and across the lawn.

Without speaking, we walked hand in hand toward the open door.  I would always wonder whether Uncle George continued to sleep as he walked or was merely silenced by his embarrassment. Of course, I could never humiliate him by asking.  Besides…I was not eager to be detained by conversation…never certain myself if the pigs were out there in the night, traveling fast, about to overtake us.

 

 

BENGHAZIGATE: Benghazi Penalties Are Bogus

By: Josh Margolin

The four officials supposedly out of jobs because of their blunders in the run-up to the deadly Benghazi terror attack remain on the State Department payroll — and will all be back to work soon, The Post has learned.

The highest-ranking official caught up in the scandal, Assistant Secretary of State Eric Boswell, has not “resigned” from government service, as officials said last week. He is just switching desks. And the other three are simply on administrative leave and are expected back.

The four were made out to be sacrificial lambs in the wake of a scathing report issued last week that found that the US compound in Benghazi, Libya, was left vulnerable to attack because of “grossly inadequate” security.

State Department leaders “didn’t come clean about Benghazi and now they’re not coming clean about these staff changes,” a source close to the situation told The Post., adding, the “public would be outraged over this.”

US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the Sept. 11 attack, originally blamed on a spontaneous demonstration against a US-made anti-Islam video that got out of hand.

That version was dismissed by an Accountability Review Board headed by retired Ambassador Thomas Pickering.

In response to questions from The Post, the State Department would only reissue the carefully crafted statement put out last week.

Spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton “has accepted Eric Boswell’s decision to resign as assistant secretary for diplomatic security, effective immediately.” What Nuland omitted was that Boswell gave up only the presidential appointment as assistant secretary, not his other portfolios.

The other officials — Deputy Assistant Secretaries Charlene Lamb and Raymond Maxwell, and a third who has not been identified — were found to have shown “performance inadequacies” but not “willful misconduct,” Pickering said, so they would not face discipline.

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) told The Post this is “yet another ruse about the tragedy of Benghazi.”

“State Department officials proclaimed . . . that heads would roll . . . Now we see that the discipline is a lie and all that has happened is the shuffling of the deck chairs

Source:  http://m.nypost.com/p/news/international/benghazi_penalties_are_bogus_ncP7RZx5uTIgDPbTp5WtoN

Post Mortem

Post-Mortem

 

by Laura Hollis

I am already reading so many pundits and other talking heads analyzing the disaster that was this year’s elections. I am adding my own ten cents. Here goes:

1. We are outnumbered

We accurately foresaw the enthusiasm, the passion, the commitment, the determination, and the turnout. Married women, men, independents, Catholics, evangelicals – they all went for Romney in percentages as high or higher than the groups which voted for McCain in 2008. It wasn’t enough. What we saw in the election on Tuesday was a tipping point: we are now at a place where there are legitimately fewer Americans who desire a free republic with a free people than there are those who think the government should give them stuff. There are fewer of us who believe in the value of free exchange and free enterprise. There are fewer of us who do not wish to demonize successful people in order to justify taking from them. We are outnumbered. For the moment. It’s just that simple.

2. It wasn’t the candidate(s) Some are already saying, “Romney was the wrong guy”; “He should have picked Marco Rubio to get Florida/Rob Portman to get Ohio/Chris Christie to get [someplace else].” With all due respect, these assessments are incorrect. Romney ran a strategic and well-organized campaign. Yes, he could have hit harder on Benghazi. But for those who would have loved that, there are those who would have found it distasteful. No matter what tactic you could point to that Romney could have done better, it would have been spun in a way that was detrimental to his chances. Romney would have been an excellent president, and Ryan was an inspired choice. No matter who we ran this year, they would have lost. See #1, above.

3. It’s the culture, stupid. We have been trying to fight this battle every four years at the voting booth. It is long past time we admit that that is not where the battle really is. We abdicated control of the culture – starting back in the 1960s. And now our largest primary social institutions – education, the media, Hollywood (entertainment) have become really nothing more than an assembly line for cranking out reliable little Leftists. Furthermore, we have allowed the government to undermine the institutions that instill good character – marriage, the family, communities, schools, our churches. So, here we are, at least two full generations later – we are reaping what we have sown. It took nearly fifty years to get here; it will take another fifty years to get back. But it starts with the determination to reclaim education, the media, and the entertainment business. If we fail to do that, we can kiss every election goodbye from here on out. And much more.

4. America has become a nation of adolescents The real loser in this election was adulthood: Maturity. Responsibility. The understanding that liberty must be accompanied by self-restraint. Obama is a spoiled child, and the behavior and language of his followers and their advertisements throughout the campaign makes it clear how many of them are, as well. Romney is a grown-up. Romney should have won. Those of us who expected him to win assumed that voters would act like grownups. Because if we were a nation of grownups, he would have won.

But what did win? Sex. Drugs. Bad language. Bad manners. Vulgarity. Lies. Cheating. Name-calling. Finger-pointing. Blaming. And irresponsible spending.

This does not bode well. People grow up one of two ways: either they choose to, or circumstances force them to. The warnings are all there, whether it is the looming economic disaster, or the inability of the government to respond to crises like Hurricane Sandy, or the growing strength and brazenness of our enemies. American voters stick their fingers in their ears and say, “Lalalalalala, I can’t hear you.”

It is unpleasant to think about the circumstances it will take to force Americans to grow up. It is even more unpleasant to think about Obama at the helm when those circumstances arrive.

5. Yes, there is apparently a Vagina Vote It’s the subject matter of another column in its entirety to point out, one by one, all of the inconsistencies and hypocrisies of the Democrats this year. Suffice it to say that the only “war on women” was the one waged by the Obama campaign, which sexualized and objectified women, featuring them dressed up like vulvas at the Democrat National Convention, appealing to their “lady parts,” comparing voting to losing your virginity with Obama, trumpeting the thrills of destroying our children in the womb (and using our daughters in commercials to do so), and making Catholics pay for their birth control. For a significant number of women, this was appealing. It might call into question the wisdom of the Nineteenth Amendment, but for the fact that large numbers of women (largely married) used their “lady smarts” instead. Either way, Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton are rolling over in their graves.

6. It’s not about giving up on “social issues” No Republican candidate should participate in a debate or go out on the stump without thorough debate prep and a complete set of talking points that they stick to. This should start with a good grounding in biology and a reluctance to purport to know the will of God. (Thank you, Todd and Richard.)

That said, we do not hold the values we do because they garner votes. We hold the values we do because we believe that they are time-tested principles without which a civilized, free and prosperous society is not possible. We defend the unborn because we understand that a society which views some lives as expendable is capable of viewing all lives as expendable. We defend family – mothers, fathers, marriage, children – because history makes it quite clear that societies without intact families quickly descend into anarchy and barbarism, and we have plenty of proof of that in our inner cities where marriage is infrequent and unwed motherhood approaches 80%. When Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, many thought that the abortion cause was lost. 40 years later, ultrasound technology has demonstrated the inevitable connection between science and morality. More Americans than ever define themselves as “pro-life.” What is tragic is that tens of millions of children have lost their lives while Americans figure out what should have been obvious before.

There is no “giving up” on social issues. There is only the realization that we have to fight the battle on other fronts. The truth will out in the end.

7. Obama does not have a mandate. And he does not need one. I have to laugh – bitterly – when I read conservative pundits trying to assure us that Obama “has to know” that he does not have a mandate, and so he will have to govern from the middle. I don’t know what they’re smoking. Obama does not care that he does not have a mandate. He does not view himself as being elected (much less re-elected) to represent individuals. He views himself as having been re-elected to complete the “fundamental transformation” of America, the basic structure of which he despises. Expect much more of the same – largely the complete disregard of the will of half the American public, his willingness to rule by executive order, and the utter inability of another divided Congress to rein him in. Stanley Kurtz has it all laid out here.

8. The CorruptMedia is the enemy

Too strong? I don’t think so. I have been watching the media try to throw elections since at least the early 1990s. In 2008 and again this year, we saw the media cravenly cover up for the incompetence and deceit of this President, while demonizing a good, honorable and decent man with lies and smears. This is on top of the daily barrage of insults that conservatives (and by that I mean the electorate, not the politicians) must endure at the hands of this arrogant bunch of elitist snobs. Bias is one thing. What we observed with Benghazi was professional malpractice and fraud. They need to go. Republicans, Libertarians and other conservatives need to be prepared to play hardball with the Pravda press from here on out. And while we are at it, to defend those journalists of whatever political stripe (Jake Tapper, Sharyl Atkisson, Eli Lake) who actually do their jobs. As well as FoxNews and talk radio. Because you can fully expect a re-elected Obama to try to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine in term 2.

9. Small business and entrepreneurs will be hurt the worst For all the blather about “Wall Street versus Main Street,” Obama’s statist agenda will unquestionably benefit the biggest corporations which – as with the public sector unions – are in the best position to make campaign donations, hire lobbyists, and get special exemptions carved out from Obama’s health care laws, his environmental regulations, his labor laws. It will be the small business, the entrepreneur, and the first-time innovators who will be crushed by their inability to compete on a level playing field.

10. America is more polarized than ever; and this time it’s personal

I’ve been following politics for a long time, and it feels different this time. Not just for me. I’ve received messages from other conservatives who are saying the same thing: there is little to no tolerance left out there for those who are bringing this country to its knees – even when they have been our friends. It isn’t just about “my guy” versus “your guy.” It is my view of America versus your view of America – a crippled, hemorrhaging, debt-laden, weakened and dependent America that I want no part of and resent being foisted on me. I no longer have any patience for stupidity, blindness, or vulgarity, so with each dumb “tweet” or FB post by one of my happily lefty comrades, another one bites the dust, for me. Delete.

What does this portend for a divided Congress? I expect that Republicans will be demoralized and chastened for a short time. But I see them in a bad position. Americans in general want Congress to work together. But many do not want Obama’s policies, and so Republicans who support them will be toast. Good luck, guys.

11. It’s possible that America just has to hit rock bottom I truly believe that most Americans who voted for Obama have no idea what they are in for. Most simply believe him when he says that all he really wants is for the rich to pay “a little bit more.” So reasonable! Who could argue with that except a greedy racist?

America is on a horrific bender. Has been for some time now. The warning signs of our fiscal profligacy and culture of lack of personal responsibility are everywhere – too many to mention. We need only look at other countries which have gone the route we are walking now to see what is in store.

For the past four years – but certainly within the past campaign season – we have tried to warn Americans. Too many refuse to listen, even when all of the events that have transpired during Obama’s presidency – unemployment, economic stagnation, skyrocketing prices, the depression of the dollar, the collapse of foreign policy, Benghazi, hopelessly inept responses to natural disasters – can be tied directly to Obama’s statist philosophies, and his decisions.

What that means, I fear, is that they will not see what is coming until the whole thing collapses. That is what makes me so sad today. I see the country I love headed toward its own “rock bottom,” and I cannot seem to reach those who are taking it there.

Another Violation Of The Presidential Oath Of Office?

Why a respected “proud Democrat” believes Barack Obama should go to jail
 

Thursday, December 20, 2012

From Washington’s Blog:

I am a proud Democrat, and part of the commitment that makes me such is my belief that any president who blatantly violates his oath of office would be committing an extremely grave crime, which deserves to be prosecuted as such.

In other words: I believe in equality before the law.

The presidential oath of office, as given in the U.S. Constitution, is:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

I shall here charge that President Obama violates his oath of office by systematically appointing, and supporting, appointees who carry out a rabidly discriminatory system of “justice,” which holds some people to be above the law; that is, above the U.S. Constitution, and free from its legal requirements.

This is an incredibly ironic accusation to bring against the first black president, but here is (after all, Obama’s being black doesn’t free him of any guilt for a crime that he is committing), my charge against Obama:

I charge him with systematically violating the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution…

The remainder of the case is presented by former federal regulator, and federal prosecutor, William K. Black – a Democrat like myself – headlining on December 17th, “The Second Great Betrayal: Obama and Cameron Decide that Banks Are Above the Law.” That case will now be summarized here.

Black notes that:

“It was DOJ [Department of Justice, under Obama's appointed head Eric Holder, who appointed its prosecutor Lanny Breuer] that described Bank of America’s control fraud as ‘brazen.’

“It was DOJ that filed a complaint alleging that senior officers were warned in advance that the incentive system for loan officers’ compensation would lead to widespread fraud, warned once the program began operating that it was causing widespread fraudulent loans [that produced the 2008 crash], responded to these warnings by covering up the evidence of fraud and increasing the perversity of the incentives for the loan officers, made false representations to Fannie and Freddie about loan quality, and then stonewalled them on the obligation to repurchase the fraudulent loans.

The actions described in the complaint were criminal frauds. The case could and should have been brought as a criminal prosecution rather than a civil case.

“But B of A is a SDI ['Systemically Dangerous Institution,' or too-big-to-fail in the view of Obama's appointed Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who was also the chief regulator of all of the mega-banks during the lead-up to the 2008 crash, and who was thus responsible for overseeing and allowing these very crimes – that's the man Obama selected as his Treasury Secretary].”

Most of Black’s article is devoted to exposing the fraudulence of the argument made by Obama’s “Justice” Department saying that because the mega-banks are “too big to fail,” no criminal prosecutions should be brought against any of the top executives who oversaw mega-bank crimes and who walked off with hundreds of millions of dollars or even billions in executive bonuses and other emoluments from them.

Basically, Black documents that Obama’s “Justice” Department’s reasons are bull – but you should see Black’s case there for yourself. Here will be discussed instead the gravity of the crimes that Obama essentially blocks from prosecution.

Regarding Obama’s “Justice” Department’s settlement with the biggest of all Europe’s banks, HSBC, here is Black’s summary:

Multiple U.S. government investigations concluded that HSBC:

“1. Laundered billions of dollars for some of the most murderous drug gangs in the world. These gangs have murdered many thousands of Mexicans and devastated much of the nation.

“2. Aided Iranian entities to evade U.S. financial sanctions on Iran. If Iran is actually developing a nuclear weapon [as the Obama Administration charges], and if it uses such a weapon to attack, it will kill tens of thousands of people, and HSBC and Standard Chartered will likely have proven useful to Iran in developing the weapon.

“3. Aided Hamas, Hezbollah, and Al Qaeda.

“HSBC was a profoundly and pervasively criminal enterprise for at least 15 years. Many of its fraudsters doubtless moved to other banks, often with promotions. DOJ and the regulators have not indicated any intention to prosecute them or remove them from office…

… What would happen if congressional Democrats brought charges against this president for his protection of mega-bank executives in violation of his oath of office and of his most basic obligations as this nation’s Chief Executive…

 

If . . . Then. Should Biden Become President?

Nixon had his Watergate and after all the lying, stonewalling and deception, he was forced to resign the Office of President when powerful Republican senators told him they would vote for his impeachment.

Now, Obama has Benghazi-gate.  Live video feed from drones flying overhead allowing the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate to be viewed in real time.  Orders to U.S. military leaders to ‘stand down’ and allow America’s representatives and two ex-Navy Seals to be killed . . . Those SEALS had violated orders and went to try to save the lives of their countrymen.  They died while saving many of our nation’s representatives.  A cover up followed using Secretary Hillary Clinton and Ambassador Rice giving disinformation to the American people.

There are two portions of the U.S. Constitution that are significant in this matter.  IF evidence comes to light that the President did in fact have knowledge of the terrorist attack and was in a position to prevent the loss of those lives, THEN the Congress ought to take immediate action.  As Republican senators moved to have Nixon resign, so should Democratic members of Congress move to correct a great wrong.

The oath of office of the president:  I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

 An attack on our consulate or an embassy is an attack against the United States.  That consulate and embassy are American soil.  The President has sworn to protect our country, our representatives and to defend our Constitution.  It is a contract with the American people. It is a freely taken obligation.  Failure to do so violates the oath of office and the Constitution of the United States.  Watching the event unfold in real time by TV broadcast and denying available military assistance is a high crime that is punishable by impeachment.

Impeachment means charges are brought in the House of Representatives which acts as a grand jury to hear charge(s) against an officer of the government of an impeachable  crime and then a trial before the Senate which acts as a  jury to hear the charges brought by the House of Representatives and then votes for removal from office if believed a high crime has been committed.

In Article 3, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution is the definition of Treason: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

“. . . or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid . . .”  Not responding to provide needed military assistance when it was possible to do so and potentially save those lives in the consulate, the ambassador and those brave SEALS amounts to ‘adhering to their Enemies’.  Not responding militarily when it was possible amounts to “ . . . giving them Aid . . . “.  Not impeding the efforts of the terrorists from carrying out their attack against our governments representatives, amounts to giving aid to our enemies to complete their murderous actions.

Now we find a variety of excuses being made to prevent Secretary of State Hillary Clinton from testifying before a congressional investigative hearing.  First, she had to make a trip to Australia; second, there was the illness; then the illness was a concussion.   Finally, there was the ‘final’ report of a special committee to make it look like there was nothing else to examin and contemplate. 

We may be witnessing an orchestrated series of events to prevent charges of impeachment being considered.  It appears that a serious breach of a presidential oath of office has been committed and it needs to be dealt with.

Peel-And-Stick Solar Panels: Decal-Like Application Process Allows Thin, Flexible Solar Panels to Be Applied to Virtually Any Surface

 For all their promise, solar cells have frustrated scientists in one crucial regard — most are rigid. They must be deployed in stiff, often heavy, fixed panels, limiting their applications. So researchers have been trying to get photovoltaics to loosen up. The ideal: flexible, decal-like solar panels that can be peeled off like band-aids and stuck to virtually any surface, from papers to window panes.

Now the ideal is real. Stanford researchers have succeeded in developing the world’s first peel-and-stick thin-film solar cells. The breakthrough is described in a paper in the December 20th issue of Scientific Reports.

Unlike standard thin-film solar cells, the peel-and-stick version from Stanford does not require any direct fabrication on the final carrier substrate. This is a far more dramatic development than it may initially seem. All the challenges associated with putting solar cells on unconventional materials are avoided with the new process, vastly expanding the potential applications of solar technology.

Thin-film photovoltaic cells are traditionally fixed on rigid silicon and glass substrates, greatly limiting their uses, says Chi Hwan Lee, lead author of the paper and a PhD candidate in mechanical engineering. And while the development of thin-film solar cells promised to inject some flexibility into the technology, explains Xiaolin Zheng, a Stanford assistant professor of mechanical engineering and senior author of the paper, scientists found that use of alternative substrates was problematic in the extreme.

“Nonconventional or ‘universal’ substrates are difficult to use for photovoltaics because they typically have irregular surfaces and they don’t do well with the thermal and chemical processing necessary to produce today’s solar cells,” Zheng observes. “We got around these problems by developing this peel-and-stick process, which gives thin-film solar cells flexibility and attachment potential we’ve never seen before, and also reduces their general cost and weight.”

Utilizing the process, Zheng continues, researchers attached their solar cells to paper, plastic and window glass among other materials.

“It’s significant that we didn’t lose any of the original cell efficiency,” Zheng said.

The new process involves a unique silicon, silicon dioxide and metal “sandwich.” First, a 300-nanometer film of nickel (Ni) is deposited on a silicon/silicon dioxide (Si/SiO2) wafer. Thin-film solar cells are then deposited on the nickel layer utilizing standard fabrication techniques, and covered with a layer of protective polymer. A thermal release tape is then attached to the top of the thin-film solar cells to augment their transfer off of the production wafer and onto a new substrate.

The solar cell is now ready to peel from the wafer. To remove it, the wafer is submerged in water at room temperature and the edge of the thermal release tape is peeled back slightly, allowing water to seep into and penetrate between the nickel and silicon dioxide interface. The solar cell is thus freed from the hard substrate but still attached to the thermal release tape. Zheng and team then heat the tape and solar cell to 90°C for several seconds, then the cell can be applied to virtually any surface using double-sided tape or other adhesive. Finally, the thermal release tape is removed, leaving just the solar cell attached to the chosen substrate.

Tests have demonstrated that the peel-and-stick process reliably leaves the thin-film solar cells wholly intact and functional, Zheng said. “There’s also no waste. The silicon wafer is typically undamaged and clean after removal of the solar cells, and can be reused.”

While others have been successful in fabricating thin-film solar cells on flexible substrates before, those efforts have required modifications of existing processes or materials, noted Lee. “The main contribution of our work is we have done so without modifying any existing processes, facilities or materials, making them viable commercially. And we have demonstrated our process on a more diverse array of substrates than ever before,” Lee said.

“Now you can put them on helmets, cell phones, convex windows, portable electronic devices, curved roofs, clothing — virtually anything,” said Zheng.

Moreover, peel-and-stick technology isn’t necessarily restricted to thin-film solar cells, Zheng said. The researchers believe the process can also be applied to thin-film electronics, including printed circuits and ultra thin transistors and LCDs.

“Obviously, a lot of new products — from ‘smart’ clothing to new aerospace systems — might be possible by combining both thin-film electronics and thin-film solar cells,” observed Zheng. “And for that matter, we may be just at the beginning of this technology. The peel-and-stick qualities we’re researching probably aren’t restricted to Ni/SiO2. It’s likely many other material interfaces demonstrate similar qualities, and they may have certain advantages for specific applications. We have a lot left to investigate.”

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:


Story Source:

The above story is reprinted from materials provided by Stanford School of Engineering, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.


Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.

SOURCE sciencedaily.com http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121220101933.htm

 

His Highness Obama Denies Protection For Other Families Kids

School Obama’s Daughters Attend Has 11 Armed Guards

Some interesting news has broken in the wake of the latest push for gun control by President Obama and Senate Democrats: Obama sends his kids to a school where armed guards are used as a matter of fact.

The school, Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC, has 11 security officers and is seeking to hire a new police officer as we speak.

If you dismiss this by saying, “Of course they have armed guards — they get Secret Service protection,” then you’ve missed the larger point.

The larger point is that this is standard operating procedure for the school, period. And this is the reason people like NBC’s David Gregory send their kids to Sidwell, they know their kids will be protected from the carnage that befell kids at a school where armed guards weren’t used (and weren’t even allowed).

Shame on President Obama for seeking more gun control and for trying to prevent the parents of other school children from doing what he has clearly done for his own. His children sit under the protection guns afford, while the children of regular Americans are sacrificed.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/23/School-Obama-s-Daughters-Attend-Has-11-Armed-Guards-Not-Counting-Secret-Service

 

Un-merry Christmas to Christians from Islam

Is Islam tolerant of Christianity? Muslims say yes, but what are the facts?

Mullahs around the world warn Muslims not to respond to the words ‘Merry Christmas’. If Jesus is the ‘prince of peace’, it makes Mohammed look bad. In the last years of his life, Mohammed led and commanded violent aggression every six weeks. Mohammed was the ‘prince of jihad’.

Muslims believe angels announced the birth of Jesus, but Muslims do not believe the Gospel where the angels said, “Peace on earth.” Peace with Kafirs is not possible. The Christmas greeting to Christians around the world is still the same as it was in 630 AD: “Aslim, Taslam!” (Surrender to Islam and be safe). Where Christians do not surrender to Islamic terrorists, their lives are now in danger.

For the Muslim, the world cannot be at peace until every government on earth follows the laws of Allah. The duty of Muslims is to create the conditions that drive non-Muslims into the arms of Sharia law, ‘whether by persuasion or by force’ as ibn Khaldun wrote.

If Christians won’t voluntarily change their laws to Shari’a, then it is the duty of every Muslim to induce Christians in three ways: violence, extortion or enslavement.

Muslims around the world are particularly aware of Christianity at Christmas time when they become even more determined to impose Sharia. This leads to jihad attacks in churches in Egypt, Pakistan, Nigeria and Indonesia. Attacking worshipping Christians is jihad. The purpose is to discourage them from their non-Islamic worship. In Nigerian churches, most women have been asked not to bring a purse and armed guards stand at the door with metal detectors to screen every worshipper. This is because jihadists are taught in the hadiths to lull enemies of Allah into trust before betraying them. Every person entering a church might be a jihadist.

The purpose of jihad is to implement discriminatory Sharia. Sharia is not benign to Christians.

The purpose of Sharia is to destroy Christian and other cultures and replace them with theocratic totalitarianism. Jihad is the method for imposing Sharia. Jihad is aggressive: it can take the form of deception or disinformation, robbery, lawsuits or it can be violent with the destruction of property or assassination of church leaders. All jihad is good because it is Mohammed’s sacred method.

Since 1990 in Nigeria, some 1000 Christians have been murdered by jihadists every year. Probably, the number is much higher with many jihad-motivated murders being put down as ordinary homicides or accidental manslaughters. Most of the jihad murders take place in northern Nigeria where Islamist want to impose Sharia law.

Nigeria has one of the highest scholarship rates in Africa. As Nigerians gain graduate and post-graduate degrees, they often leave Islam and switch to Christianity which they identified with Western progress. Islamists see going to university as the problem. Better to stay at home, memorize the Koran and remain loyal to Mohammed, the perfect man, than to learn to improve society, build infrastructure, services, health sciences or engineering in the country.

Boko Haram (meaning ‘Western education is taboo’) is the main Islamic terror group fighting the rapid Christianization of Nigeria. They are now allied with Al Qaeda. Their trademark is to attack congregation while they are worshipping or throw bombs into restaurants where Christians eat after services. This is ethnic cleansing and genocide. Mohammed ethnically cleansed the Jewish tribes in Arabia, so it is normative Islam. Boko Haram wants to ethnically cleanse Christians from northern Nigeria. Mohammed’s ethnic cleansing method goes like this: intimidate, humiliate and expropriate until you can annihilate.

Most of the countries that are now Islamic were once Christian. The Christian presence in Turkey is almost nil, and in most of North Africa it is tiny, but it was once close to 100% in all of them. What changed things was Sharia law. Under discriminatory Sharia law, Christians must live in an inferior social status to Muslims, they must wear clothing that humiliates them, they must never ride on a horse, they must pay a punitive tax, they must never speak about Islam or the Koran, they must never ring their church’s bell, they must never have an outdoor religious ceremony or speak to a Muslim about Christianity, they must move aside when a Muslim walks down the street. As well, no new churches may be built and old ones may never be repaired unless hefty bribes are given to the authorities. The policy of Sharia is to systemically make life difficult for Christians to practice their faith, all the while encouraging them to convert.

Then there is the ‘love jihad’. Mohammed started this with the comment ‘marry one woman (out of four wives) for the religion’. Muslim men have taken this as a commandment to abduct a Christian girl, confine her and then declare her to be married without her consent. The girl’s family is then told she has converted to Islam and they may never see her. Police do nothing, because it’s Sharia and Sharia trumps any man-made law. No one can estimate how many Christian girls have been abducted and sequestered in the ‘love jihad’, but the fact that many African Christians tattoo a cross on the forehead and cheeks of their girls speaks volumes.

The reason Christians were not substantially cleansed from Islamic countries until the Turkish genocides of 1915-1924 is because Christians were used for a supply of jizzya [dhimmi tax] and they were very useful in medicine, the arts, building and garbage removal. Turkey ethnically cleansed three million Armenian, Assyrian and Greek Christians to confiscate their wealth and properties for a government at war that was strapped for ready cash. The Young Turks were also jihadists hoping to make Turkey the capital of a global caliphate promoting Sharia law. Discriminatory Sharia law is like a ratchet that only tightens a bolt even though it apparently moves back and forwards. Sharia only benefits Islam.

So when Americans hear the church bells ring on Christmas Eve, remember that Christians worshipping in Islamic regions like northern Nigeria may hear the sound of bombs thrown in the church door, guns shooting down the main aisle or the sound of fire on the church roof.

Merry Christmas.

Written by Kenneth Roberts


Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam Permalink: /blog/un-merry-christmas-to-christians-from-islam/ copyright (c) CBSX, LLC, politicalislam.com Use as needed, just give credit and do not edit. www.politicalislam.com