Monday, December 31, 2012

HAPPY NEW YEAR (HOPE SPRINGS ETERNAL)


Just a bookmark to mark my presence
in an increasingly corrupt and disgusting
Obamaslamic biased America 
where "our" pResident is an active member 
of the terrorist Moslem Brotherhood
and America's most dangerous, 
ruthless, narcissistic enemy
operating against us
from inside our White House!

Thursday, December 06, 2012

OUR ENEMY WITHIN



Iran’s Revolutionary Guard is alive and well in the U.S. and the country’s law enforcement officials ignore them at their peril, according to former U. S. Air Force officer Steven O’Hern.

O’Hern says that the Revolutionary Guard, long an influential factor in the radical Islamic regime in Iran, does most of its surveillance and intelligence gathering through its proxy force, Hezbollah, considered by many to be a terror group.

“In the United States, the Revolutionary Guard uses more than one approach. Hezbollah operatives and sympathizers are present in large numbers in many parts of the United States and actively conduct reconnaissance missions that develop information, photographs, and diagrams of federal buildings, and infrastructure targets,” O’Hern said.

“Those targets include such things as water utilities or electrical substations, and other potential targets to give the Guard the ability to quickly order a terrorist strike in our homeland,” O’Hern said.

He explains that the Revolutionary Guard is working through Shi’a mosques around the United States as well as the nation’s Lebanese immigrant communities.

WND previously reported that a former Iranian official who has knowledge of Iran’s terror network estimated there are more than 40,000 of the regime’s security, intelligence and propaganda forces in the West, largely in friendly South American nations.

And WND has reported that Muslims are using mosques, including some in the United States, as terror command centers.

It is the Guards’ intelligence office that runs financing, recruiting and other strategies through Islamic centers and mosques, including some in New York and Ohio.

And as early as several months ago, the Guard threatened to bring its war to the shores of the United States.
O’Hern, who has written “Iran’s Revolutionary Guard,” about the issue, said the primary mission of the Iran Revolutionary Guard and its Hezbollah proxy is to weaken the U. S. national security.

“In the United States, the Revolutionary Guard and Hezbollah have a long-term mission of gathering intelligence on homeland targets and maintaining the capability to deliver multiple terrorist attacks if the IRGC chooses to do so,” O’Hern said. “I say ‘maintain’ because the Guard has already developed it.”

He said attacks could be ordered in retaliation if Iran’s nuclear program is hit, or, “Sleeper cells could even be ordered into action if economic sanctions were so successful that the regime was in danger.”

“Attacks against the U.S. homeland are only one place where the IRGC can strike – it also can attack U.S. troops and facilities in Afghanistan, Africa, Europe, all of which are closer,” O’Hern said.

O’Hern’s findings are affirmed by the analysis of a former Defense Department analyst who has asked not to be named for security reasons. The analyst points to the major Arab-American communities in the major cities, especially in Dearborn, Mich., and the San Francisco Bay area.
“It is my sense that IRGC will rely more on Hezbollah in the U.S. than having their own operatives here. The reason for that is Hezbollah presence is primarily through the concentration of the Arab-American communities, mainly Lebanese, throughout the U.S., such as in Michigan and elsewhere,” the source said.

Former FBI counterterrorism officer and Islam analyst John Guandolo agrees that the Revolutionary Guard has a presence in the United States, and it operates through the major Shi’a communities.

“This is the Iranian government’s military activity in the U.S,” he said.
Guandolo, who established Guandolo and Associates in 2012, says that when it comes to working to undermine non-Muslim countries, Shi’a and Sunni Muslims work together.

“We do know the Sunni and Shi’a groups that are hostile to the United States are working together. In Lebanon, Iraq, and other places we see Hezbollah, by Iran, and Hamas with al-Qaida, working together on the ground,” Guandolo said.

“In the United States, the largest Muslim Brotherhood organization, the Islamic Society of North America, put forth the ISNA Code of Honor which says Sunni Muslims will not challenge other Muslims, the Shi’a, on their Takfiri, their legitimacy,” Guandolo said.

“All Muslims are focused on a similar goal. In other words, the Muslim world is working towards one goal right now and they have written agreements and are working on the ground around the world together,” Guandolo said, “So, yes, Hamas, CAIR works with Hezbollah, which is basically the IRGC.”

The former Defense Department analyst says the Revolutionary Guard operates the same way worldwide.

“That is similar in Africa and Latin America. Like Iran, Hezbollah is mainly Shi’a, although it will have some Sunnis and even some Christian Lebanese who are sympathetic here,” the former Defense Department analyst said.

“There is a major Hezbollah contingent, for example, in Canada. It would be much easier for Iran to work through them and the extensive Lebanese communities throughout the U.S. than to seek to establish a major independent presence,” the Defense Department analyst said.

Still, he said, it’s possible that the IRGC itself may have operational units working in the United States.

“However, I don’t doubt that IRGC may have some operatives here acting as liaison with the Hezbollah elements here. In Lebanon, the IRGC presence is more open with representatives working out of the Iranian embassy in Beirut,” the Defense Department analyst said.

A former CIA station chief agrees, concluding that in the final analysis, Muslims will work together in combating their major enemy, the United States.

“Like al-Qaida in Sunni mosques, any Lebanese Shi’a or Hezbollah member here is a de facto Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps terrorist. Some 20 percent of all mosques in the U.S. are Shi’a, therefore they are de facto representatives of the Revolutionary Guard,” the former CIA station chief said.

O’Hern says that the IRGC and Hezbollah fund their operations through a set of illegal activities.

“Hezbollah harvests large amounts of money from the United States to support its operations – millions of dollars from criminal enterprises such as narcotics trafficking, the sale of counterfeit goods, and financial crimes are sent back to Hezbollah from our country every year,” O’Hern said.

WND reported in September 2011 that IRGC proxy Hezbollah had been suspected of funding operations by raising money through the network of U.S. Shi’a mosques located in cities with large Lebanese immigrant populations.

Former Air Force and State Department security officer Dave Gaubatz says it appears the reason for raising money is to give money to Hezbollah.

The FBI and the IRS were unavailable for comment on this story. Congressional representatives and federal regulatory agencies also contacted about the issue either referred WND to another office or refused comment.

OBAMA, IN HIS BIASED PRO-SLAMIC FERVOR HAS FORBIDDEN THESE AND OTHERS IN HIS ADMINISRATION FROM LINKING ANY FORM OF ISLAM TO TERRORISM OR EVEN MENTIONING IT IN TRAINING MANUALS, SO THOSE CHARGED WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT HAVE LITTLE OR NO ABILITY TO RECOGNIZE LET ALONE OPPOSE TERRORISM. OR IMPLEMENT COUNTER-MEASURES WITHOUT RISKING THEIR JOBS!


Sunday, November 25, 2012

RELIGION OF PEACE PUNISHES PREACHING PEACE


Muslim cleric preaches peace, Islamic supremacists promptly shoot him dead

Why we don't see more genuine Muslim reformers -- not that Kalimulla Ibragimov seems to have been much of one, anyway: "Russia Caucasus: Imam shot dead in Derbent, Dagestan," from the BBC, October 30 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):
Attackers have shot dead an imam and two of his male relations, as they drove to a mosque in the Russian North Caucasus region of Dagestan.They were shot on their way to morning prayers, close to the imam's home in the Caspian Sea town of Derbent, law enforcement sources told reporters.
The cleric was named as Kalimulla Ibragimov, 49, who is said to have delivered sermons calling for peace. 
Islamists have been blamed for attacks on moderate Muslims in the region. 
Dagestan, a mainly Muslim region, has been gripped by an Islamist insurgency since 1999, when militants backed by fighters from neighbouring Chechnya launched an offensive against Russian control. 
Three imams have been shot dead in the region since March, the Russian news website utro.ru reports. 
Mr Ibragimov is said by Russian media to have been a "Salafist", a term used for Islamic radicals. Nonetheless, according to utro.ru, he "often gave sermons and made appeals for peace and Muslim unity"....

9 Comments

You want peace rafadite dog, we will give you peace...
Allah didn't tell us to be peaceful you apostate, his book tells us to fight and kill until everyone worships him...You claim to worship Allah, but you really worship yourself...Did the Apostle tell us to be peaceful? Even with Jews? Are you mad? Well, you are not mad anymore, Allah now has you by your skinny little neck, and has big plans for you...
That's what you get for preaching peace...Allah willing, and he always is...
Why should we take any Muslim who says he wants peace sincerely?
Mahoundians want peace...They really do...But their peace is not the peace of kuffar, it is the Islamic fulfillment of Quran 8:39, and 2:193...Peace will come when all opposition to Islam stops and everyone worships Allah...
The big problem is, 'fight them until'...Since 'until' has no expiration date, perpetual warfare is the result...As an unintended consequence, if Islam ever gets that kind of peace, and there is no one to fight or kill, it shuts the door for jihadists to get at the virgins...The brothel in the sky will lock the door so no new dead jihadists can enter...keeping that door open is another reason for perpetual warfare...
Well, Muslims killing other Muslims is definitely preferable to Muslims killing non-Muslims but, oh man, Islam is so screwed up. It kidnaps the mind and often ensures bodily harm and for what? For Allah? The sanctity of the Koran? For Mohammed? What a waste. There's no reforming this monster of a "religion". It's got to go.
"Islamists have been blamed for attacks on moderate Muslims in the region."
What the reporter meant to say was:
"Wild hyenas have been blamed for attacks on unicorns in the region."
All seriousness aside, as Steve Allen used to say: This reporter is doing two things:
1) reporting the fact that one group of Muslims killed a Muslim cleric
2) inferring from this fact that the reason he was killed was because he preached "peace".
This reflex spasm of the reporter reflects the tendency of the PC MC template. It works like a machine: Whenever a fact presents itself, it already has pre-fab axioms which engage their gears into interpretive action.
Thus, a PC MC notices one group of Muslims killing another. Immediately, his PC MC brain releases the the killed victims must have been moderate Muslims, and the killers must have been 'Salafists' mechanism.
In this case, the victim was himself a 'Salafist'. No need for concern; it must have been a blip. And notice how the reporter just leaves that fact lying there like an undigested lump. He was so intent on interpreting all the other facts of the report, but now suddenly he has nothing ot say about this one.
Also, we have a glimmer into the truth of the matter in the fact -- also undigested -- that this preacher also preached, beside "peace" (which in Islam can mean many things we don't recognize as "peace"), "Muslim unity".
The far more reasonable interpretation to draw from the facts is that this was The Crips taking out a Blood.
"The cleric was named as Kalimulla Ibragimov, 49, who is said to have delivered sermons calling for peace." -- headline
Those belonging to the "religion of peace" kill a cleric over a sermon calling for peace?
Things that make you go hmmmm ...
I wouldn't jump to conclusions. Shooting in Dagestan is not news. There are plenty of insurgent groups, remnants of the civil war in Chechnya and Dagestan. Their motivations are usually far from religious ones. More like tribal or simply criminal. Besides, Kalimulla Ibragimov wasn't even official cleric according to Russian news media http://ria.ru/crime/20121030/907935827.html
"Their motivations are usually far from religious ones. More like tribal or simply criminal."
Since Islam is a Super-Tribe and a Super-Gang, then most of its violent activities are "tribal" and "criminal" in addition to being religious.
Thus, two flaws in the thought process of killdameatbag:
1) he assumes a religion must always be benign
2) he apparently can't pat his head and rub his stomach at the same time: i.e., an incident of Muslim violence can be both tribal/criminal and Islamic; one needn't stand off in the self-imposed corner of Either/Or.
I take the trouble to point this out because killdameatbag is not the only one in the "Counter-Jihad" to think this way.
This first flaw tends to underestimate the degree and quality of the fanaticism we face from this unique enemy.
The second flaw tends to bracket out innumerable acts of violence around the world from the problem of Islam.
Both flaws would undermine our ability to practice the #1 law of war to the fullest: Know Thine Enemy.
I suspect many more Muslims would opt for the peaceful path if they were not prevented by fear of violence from their more radical co-cultists.

Site Meter

Saturday, November 24, 2012

RUBE GAFFE OBUNGLER!



On his trip to Cambodia, a country he claimed didn't deserve a visit due to its strongman government, first lady Bun Rany greeted Obama with a traditional "sampeah" pressed-hands greeting reserved for servants, a little dig that was probably lost on him but not to Asians.


In his tour of Burma, billed as an historic first visit since Burma's 2007 move to democracy, it was clear he was in way over his head, even on small things. Obama repeatedly referred to the country's Nobel Peace Prize-winning leader Aung San Suu Kyi as Aung Yan Suu Kyi, an astonishing error given her global fame.

Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/112012-634213-obama-southeast-asian-trip-more-style-than-substance.htm#ixzz2DBP03RQt

SNIFFER

video

JAVID JAB INFO


China's new Princess - the daughter of Communist president Xi Jinping studying quietly at Harvard

  • Xi Mingze, 20, has been studying at the leading US university under a pseudonym since 2010

  • 'She is a bookworm, very quiet and studious'
  • Xi is said to have 24 hour protection from bodyguards
|
Demure: Xi Mingze has been studying at Harvard under a pseudonym since 2010

Demure: Xi Mingze has been studying at Harvard under a pseudonym since 2010

Demurely dressed in a high-necked jumper on a chilly autumn day, the pretty 20-year-old brunette could be any university student.

But this photograph posted on Facebook shows Xi Mingze, the new 'princess' of China.

As the cherished only daughter of China's new president Xi Jinping, Ms Xi, nicknamed Muzi, is being expensively educated 
in the US, where she has been enrolled under a pseudonym since 2010 at Harvard University, Massachusetts.

'She is a bookworm, very quiet and studious,' one of her acquaintances, a Chinese writer, told The Mail on Sunday last night.

Though she is said to be protected by bodyguards, she has shunned the party lifestyle of another Chinese 'princeling' at Harvard, Bo Guagua.

Mr Bo, whose mother Gu Kailai murdered British businessman Neil Heywood, was renowned at Oxford and Harvard as a playboy. His politician father, Bo Xilai, faces corruption charges.

In contrast, friends of Ms Xi say she devotes herself to her courses, which include political studies. She attended a discussion last spring about the political tumult convulsing China's Communist Party, where she reportedly listened 'intently' from the top row of the lecture hall.

Powerful: Xi Jinping became China's new leader last week

Powerful: Xi Jinping became China's new leader last week

Flamboyant: Xi Mingze's mother Peng Liyuan is a well known singer

Flamboyant: Xi Mingze's mother Peng Liyuan is a well known singer

Her mother, a flamboyant People's Liberation Army singer, Peng Liyuan, 49, is Mr Xi's second wife.

Ms Xi was said to have been sent to America because her father is an admirer of Western culture.

Friday, November 23, 2012

JAVID JABS


=======================================




The sophisticated underground rocket launcher system in Gaza has been exposed by the terrorist organization in a video it released Saturday.






====================================


In Burma, he called the country by what the generals used to call it, he badly mauled and miss-pronounced the name of leader of their democracy movement. Add to that, he kissed this single woman, which in their culture is an insult.....He gave credit to himself for the democracy movement there (the credit should go to the Bush administration and Laura Bush in particular ) and some are praising him, and fawning over this trip ! Oh , please...






=======================================



See Explanation.  Clicking on the picture will download
 the highest resolution version available.
Like a Diamond in the Sky
Image Credit & Copyright: Alex Cherney (Terrastro, TWAN)
Explanation: A dark Sun hung over Queensland, Australia on Wednesday morning during a much anticipated total solar eclipse. Storm clouds threatened to spoil the view along the northern coast, but minutes before totality the clouds parted. Streaming past the Moon's edge, the last direct rays of sunlight produced a gorgeous diamond ring effect in this scene from Ellis Beach between Cairns and Port Douglas. Winking out in a moment, the diamond didn't last forever though. The area was plunged into darkness for nearly 2 minutes as the Moon's shadow swept off shore toward Australia's Great Barrier Reef and out into the southern Pacific. Ranging from 1/4000 to 1/15 seconds long, five separate exposures were blended in the image to create a presentation similar to the breathtaking visual experience of the eclipse.
=======================================



How dumb do they think you are?

=======================================


A picture you will never see…


Found on the IDF Twitter feed, the video below depicts life in southern Israel under fire of the rockets that have rained down from Gaza: “Over the past 12 years, the residents of southern Israel have suffered over 12,000 rockets fired at them from the Gaza Strip. This is what their life has looked like over the years.” I think it’s safe to say you won’t be seeing this brief video compilation on the BCC or CNN either.
=======================================



Iran must be President Obama’s immediate priority

By Henry A. Kissinger, Published: November 16

Henry A. Kissinger was secretary of state from 1973 to 1977.
In the aftermath of an exhausting reelection campaign, the most urgent decision facing the president is how to stop Iran from pursuing a military nuclear program. Presidents of both parties have long declared that “no option is off the table” in securing this goal. In the third presidential debate, the candidates agreed that this was a matter of the American national interest, even as they described the objective alternately as preventing an Iranian “nuclear weapon” or “breakout capacity” (President Obama), or a “nuclear-capable Iran” (Mitt Romney). As Iran continues to elaborate its enrichment capacity and move it underground, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has announced a spring deadline for counteraction. In this fraught environment, what operational meaning should be given to America’s declared objectives?

The United States and Iran are apparently conducting bilateral negotiations through official or semiofficial emissaries — a departure from the previous procedure of multilateral talks. Negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program do not have an encouraging record. For more than a decade, Iran has stalled, first with the “EU-3” (France, Germany and Britain) and then with the “P5+1” (the members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany). It has alternated hints of flexibility with periods of intransigence, all while expanding, concealing and dispersing its nuclear facilities. If no limit is placed on this process, Iran’s tech­no­logical progress will dominate events. But at what stage, and in what manner, should Iran be deprived of a military nuclear capability? This has been the essence of the argument over “red lines.”

Three stages are involved in the evolution of a military nuclear capability: a delivery system, a capacity to enrich uranium and the production of nuclear warheads. Iran has been augmenting the range and number of its missile systems since at least 2006. Its enrichment capacity — long underreported to the International Atomic Energy Agency — has been expanded to thousands of centrifuges (the instruments that enrich uranium to bomb-grade material). The level exceeds any reasonable definition of peaceful uses authorized by the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The inevitable culmination is a nuclear weapon.

To draw the line at proscribing an Iranian nuclear weapon — as some argue — would prove unmanageable. Once the requisite amount of fissile material has been produced, constructing and equipping a warhead is a relatively short and technologically straightforward process, almost certainly impossible to detect in a timely fashion.

If so ineffectual a red line were to emerge from a decade of diplomacy by the permanent members of the Security Council, the result would be an essentially uncontrollable military nuclear proliferation throughout a region roiled by revolution and sectarian blood-feuds. Iran would thereby achieve the status of North Korea, with a military nuclear program at the very edge of going operational. Each nation that has a nuclear option would compete to minimize the time to its own full military nuclear capability. 

Meanwhile, countries within the reach of Iran’s military but lacking a nuclear option would be driven to reorient their political alignment toward Tehran. The reformist tendencies in the Arab Spring — already under severe pressure — would be submerged by this process. The president’s vision of progress toward a global reduction of nuclear weapons would suffer a blow, perhaps a fatal one.
Some have argued that even in the worst-case scenario, a nuclear Iran could be deterred. Yet this ignores the immensely costly, complex and tension-ridden realities of Cold War-era deterrence, the apocalyptic strain in the Iranian theocracy and the near-certainty that several regional powers will go nuclear if Iran does. Once nuclear balances are forged in conditions where tensions are no longer purely bilateral, as in the Cold War, and in still-developing countries whose technology to prevent accidents is rudimentary, the likelihood of some nuclear exchange will mount dramatically.

This is why the United States has insisted on limits on Iranian enrichment — that is, curtailing access to a weapon’s precursor elements. Abandoning the original demand to ban all enrichment, the P5+1 has explored what levels of production of fissile material are compatible with the peaceful uses authorized by the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The higher the level of enrichment, the shorter the time needed to bring about militarily applicable results. Conventional wisdom holds that the highest practically enforceable limit is 5 percent enrichment, and then only if all fissile material beyond an agreed amount is safeguarded outside Iran.

The time available for a diplomatic outcome shrinks in direct proportion as the Iranian enrichment capacity grows and a military nuclear capacity approaches. The diplomatic process must therefore be brought to a point of decision. The P5+1 or the United States unilaterally must put forward a precise program to curtail Iranian enrichment with specific time limits.

This does not imply a red line authorizing any country to go to war. However respectfully the views of friends are considered, the ultimate decision over peace or war must remain in the hands of the president. Why negotiate with a country of such demonstrated hostility and evasiveness? Precisely because the situation is so fraught. Diplomacy may reach an acceptable agreed outcome. Or its failure will mobilize the American people and the world. It will clarify either the causes of an escalating crisis, up to the level of military pressure, or ultimate acquiescence in an Iranian nuclear program. Either outcome will require a willingness to see it through to its ultimate implications. We cannot afford another strategic disaster.

To the extent that Iran shows willingness to conduct itself as a nation-state, rather than a revolutionary religious cause, and accepts enforceable verification, elements of Iranian security concerns should be taken seriously, including gradual easing of sanctions as strict limits on enrichment are implemented and enforced. But time will be urgent. Tehran must be made to understand that the alternative to an agreement is not simply a further period of negotiation and that using negotiations to gain time will have grave consequences. A creative diplomacy, allied to a determined strategy, may still be able to prevent a crisis provided the United States plays a decisive role in defining permissible outcomes.

2012 Tribune Media Services

More on this topic: A video interview with Henry Kissinger Henry A. Kissinger: Meshing realism and idealism in the Middle East David Ignatius: An interview with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Charles Krauthammer: Collapse of the Cairo Doctrine




American media yawns, and some of our own friends fawn over him about his insulting kiss.....







Insult: A photograph in June 2011 shows Broadwell watching as Petraeus and his wife Holly arrive for a Senate Select Intelligence Committee hearing on Petraeus' nomination to be director of the CIA




=======================================

60 Second Refutation of Socialism, While Sitting at the Beach

Last week, there were several comments in Carnival of the Capitalists that people would like to see more articles highlighting the benefits of capitalism. This got me thinking about a conversation I had years ago at the beach:
Hanging out at the beach one day with a distant family member, we got into a discussion about capitalism and socialism. In particular, we were arguing about whether brute labor, as socialism teaches, is the source of all wealth (which, socialism further argues, is in turn stolen by the capitalist masters). The young woman, as were most people her age, was taught mainly by the socialists who dominate college academia nowadays. I was trying to find a way to connect with her, to get her to question her assumptions, but was struggling because she really had not been taught many of the fundamental building blocks of either philosophy or economics, but rather a mish-mash of politically correct points of view that seem to substitute nowadays for both.
One of the reasons I took up writing a blog is that I have never been as snappy or witty in real-time discussions as I would like to be, and I generally think of the perfect comeback or argument minutes or hours too late. I have always done better with writing, where I have time to think. However, on this day, I had inspiration from a half-remembered story I had heard before. I am sure I stole the following argument from someone, but to this day I still can't remember from whom.
I picked up a handful of sand, and said "this is almost pure silicon, virtually identical to what powers a computer. Take as much labor as you want, and build me a computer with it -- the only limitation is you can only have true manual laborers - no engineers or managers or other capitalist lackeys".
Yeah, I know what you're thinking - beach sand is not pure silicon - it is actually silicon dioxide, SiO2, but if she didn't take any economics she certainly didn't take any chemistry or geology.
She replied that my request was BS, that it took a lot of money to build an electronics plant, and her group of laborers didn't have any and bankers would never lend them any.
All too many defenders of capitalism would have stopped here, and said aha! So you admit you need more than labor - you need capital too. But Marx would not have disagreed - he would have said it was the separation of labor and capital that was bad - only when laborers owned the capital, rather than being slaves to the ruling class that now controls the capital, would the world reach nirvana. So I offered her just that:
I told her - assume for our discussion that I have tons of money, and I will give you and your laborers as much as you need. The only restriction I put on it is that you may only buy raw materials - steel, land, silicon - in their crudest forms. It is up to you to assemble these raw materials, with your laborers, to build the factory and make me my computer.
She thought for a few seconds, and responded "but I can't - I don't know how. I need someone to tell me how to do it"
And that is the heart of socialism's failure. For the true source of wealth is not brute labor, or even what you might call brute capital, but the mind. The mind creates new technologies, new products, new business models, new productivity enhancements, in short, everything that creates wealth. Labor or capital without a mind behind it is useless.


Since 1700, the GDP per capita in places like the US has risen, in real terms, over 40 fold. This is a real increase in total wealth - it is not money stolen or looted or exploited. Wealthy nations like the US didn't "take" the wealth from somewhere else - it never even existed before. It was created by the minds of human beings.
How? What changed? Historians who really study this stuff would probably point to a jillion things, but in my mind two are important:
  1. There was a philosophical and intellectual change where questioning established beliefs and social patterns went from being heresy and unthinkable to being acceptable, and even in vogue. In other words, men, at first just the elite but soon everyone, were urged to use their mind rather than just relying on established beliefs
  2. There were social and political changes that greatly increased the number of people capable of entrepreneurship. Before this time, the vast vast majority of people were locked into social positions that allowed them no flexibility to act on a good idea, even if they had one. By starting to create a large and free middle class, first in the Netherlands and England and then in the US, more people had the ability to use their mind to create new wealth. Whereas before, perhaps 1% or less of any population really had the freedom to truly act on their ideas, after 1700 many more people began to have this freedom.
So today's wealth, and everything that goes with it (from shorter work hours to longer life spans) is the result of more people using their minds more freely.
Look around the world - for any country, ask yourself if the average person in that country has the open intellectual climate that encourages people to think for themselves, and the open political and economic climate that allows people to act on the insights their minds provide and to keep the fruits of their effort. Where you can answer yes to both, you will find wealth and growth. Where you answer no to both, you will find poverty and misery.
==============================================================

It says it in the Bible:
It all makes sense now. Gay marriage and marijuana being legalized on the same day!

Leviticus 20:13 - "if a man lays with another man, he should be stoned."

We've just been interpreting it wrong all these years!!!

======================================


Ugly uniform of the Steelers ! WASPS?
=======================================


Ross Mirkarimi Dresses Like General Eisenhower



rsz_sheriffs_in_uniform_by_luke_thomas.jpg
Luke Thomas
A sharp-dressed man...
Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi and District Attorney George Gascón aren't exactly seeing eye to eye these days. But if a common bond could be forged, perhaps the first step to take would be uniting the warring city officials over their shared sartorial senses.

As police chief, Gascón was far more likely than not to wander into police headquarters dressed like a lawyer. Gascón is a lawyer, and Mirkarimi is not -- but, in the limited amount of time the sheriff has been permitted to do the job he was elected to do, he's often outfitted like one.

So, it was a bit jarring to see Mirkarimi clothed in full sheriff's dress regalia during the weekend's Veteran's Day March. Decked out in a forest green uniform complete with gold-starred epaulets and gold bands on an Eisenhower jacket, the progressive sheriff looks like he ought to be leaping off a Jeep and warning us about the perils of the Military-Industrial Complex.

Yet while this uniform might be a head-turner, it's actually something of a California template.

Sheriff's department spokeswoman Susan Fahey said the "Class A uniform" -- worn to inaugurations, funerals, and other high-level events -- is essentially "standardized" throughout the state.

Even the longest-serving sheriffs couldn't remember wearing anything much different, other than a sea change in 1999 or 2000 when the department pulled the trigger and made the shift from British green to forest green. Those were heady times.

Calls to the California State Sheriffs' Association querying why sheriffs' duds look like a cross between military officers and park rangers have not yet been answered.

A quick glance at the association's board of directors, however, reveals that Fahey is right -- there is a fairly standard template of sheriff's dress uniforms.

More when we know more about this most pressing situation.
=======================================

Puke !!!

=======================================

Another Puke ! ! !
=======================================

Posted Image

Posted Image



Posted Image


Posted Image




Posted Image



Posted Image

ONE SLIM HOPE STILL THERE FROM NETTY NEWS


‘One Last Chance’: How Obama Can Still Be Stopped Through The Electoral College http://patdollard.com/2012/11/how-obama-can-still-be-stopped-through-the-electoral-college/ Last Ditch Effort 4 Electoral College 2 Save USA or Pledge 2 NEVER VOTE Again!




King: presidential election was ‘Santa Claus versus personal responsibility’ http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/18/king-presidential-election-was-santa-claus-versus-personal-responsibility/



Michael Savage: They’re Not Liberals! They’re Bolsheviks! http://www.westernjournalism.com/michael-savage-theyre-not-liberals-theyre-bolsheviks/