Thursday, December 31, 2009
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Watch this, there will be more (each section opens new window):
One of my sons serves in the military. He is
still stateside, here in California . He called me
yesterday to let me know how warm and welcoming people were
to him and his troops everywhere he goes, telling me how
people shake their hands and thank them for being willing to
serve and fight for not only our own
freedoms,but so that others may have them also.
But he also told me about an incident in the grocery store
he stopped at yesterday on his way home from the base. He
said that ahead of several people in front of him stood a
woman dressed in a burkha.
He said when she got to the cashier she loudly remarked
about the U.S. flag lapel pin the cashier wore on her smock.
The cashier reached up and touched the pin, and said proudly,
'Yes, I always wear it and probably always will..'
The woman in the burkha then asked the cashier when she was
going to stop bombing her countrymen, explaining that she
A gentleman standing behind my son stepped forward.
Putting his arm around my son's shoulders and nodding towards
my son, he said in a calm and gentle voice to the Iraqi woman:
'Lady, hundreds of thousands of men and women like this
young man have fought and died so that YOU could stand here,
in MY country and accuse a check-out cashier of bombing
YOUR countrymen. It is my belief that had you been this
outspoken in YOUR own country, we wouldn't need to be
there today. But, hey, if you have now learned how to speak
out so loudly and clearly, I'll gladly buy you a ticket and
pay your way back to Iraq so you can straighten out the
mess in YOUR country that you are obviously here in MY
country to avoid.
Everyone within hearing distance cheered!
Monday, December 28, 2009
As Senator Obama was quoted Yes[.] The United States should cooperate with ICC investigations in a way that reflects American sovereignty and promotes our national security interests.
So we really shouldn't be surprised he would think the international court could supersede our own constitution. That was the main reason President Bush rejected the ICC saying "it no longer considered itself bound to the jurisdiction of the ICC."
Here's a What If for you: we've been using drones in surgical strikes in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Unfortunately, there have been some civilian casualties. With the new powers recently granted Interpol by Obama (see previous post), they could come here, arrest the person operating the drone and haul him/her in front of the International Court.
Scary enough for ya?
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Update: Newt Gingrich brought this up on The Factor today, he seems to be as concerned as we are. Story also a "Nuze" item on Boortz. The word is getting around.
UPDATE: David Horowitz has given his analysis of this EO and has another angle that is just as disturbing if not more so:
Given the EPA’s recent license to regulate CO2 it is especially noteworthy that INTERPOL is tasked to seek and arrest EPA fugitives, defendants charged with environmental crimes who have fled the court’s jurisdiction. We will have to wait to see how the EPA criminalizes CO2 violations to determine the true risk of their ruling to American citizens.
Just when you thought it was safe to prepare for the holidays, another WH Bomb.
There are many sources reporting this story, Obama has issued an executive order rescinding Reagan's order
And it is indeed on the White House website: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-amending-executive-order-12425 as follows:
Executive Order -- Amending Executive Order 12425
- - - - - - -
AMENDING EXECUTIVE ORDER 12425 DESIGNATING INTERPOL
AS A PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION ENTITLED TO
ENJOY CERTAIN PRIVILEGES, EXEMPTIONS, AND IMMUNITIES
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and in order to extend the appropriate privileges, exemptions, and immunities to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 12425 of June 16, 1983, as amended, is further amended by deleting from the first sentence the words "except those provided by Section 2(c), Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of that Act" and the semicolon that immediately precedes them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlpBB4o8xq8 video from Alex Jones
What does all this mean? Breaking it down section by section.
Barack: Executive Order 12425 of June 16, 1983, as amended, is further amended by deleting from the first sentence the words "except those provided by Section 2(c)
What was Section 2(c) in the Reagan Executive order? Actually, both of these Executive Orders are revering to International Organizations Immunities Act from 1945.
Property and assets of international organizations wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, unless such immunity be expressly waived, and from confiscation. The archives of international organizations shall be inviolable.
That's the way the original Act read in 1945. That was not good. Reagan in Executive Order 12425 amended the International Organizations Immunities Act (IOIA for future reference) to exclude that privilege. Rational right?
Barack's Executive Order effectively reinstates their immunity.
IOIA original language: Pursuant to regulations prescribed by the Commissioner of Customs with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, the baggage and effects of alien officers and employees of international organizations, or of aliens designated by foreign governments to serve as their representatives in or to such organizations, or of the families, suites, and servants of such officers, employees, or representatives shall be admitted (when imported in connection with the arrival of the owner) free of customs duties and free of internal-revenue taxes imposed upon or by reason of importation.
Sure, just let them bring anything in!
Reagan amended it to delete the sections relating to customs duties and federal internal-revenue importation taxes. Obama again, gives them that tax & duty free status.
Section 4 and 5
He just says "Section 4"? Section 4 has subparts a thru i, so pardon me if I don't post the entire section here and just paraphrase, please feel free to click on the link above and verify my interpretation.
Section 4 and 5 are about the Internal Revenue tax code as it applies to international organizations. If I am reading it right, in the original IOIA, they were exempt from taxes on income in the form of wages, stocks, property, etc. That's not good! Reagan again, eliminated this privilege.
And Obama put it back? Is he crazy? Someone else please read this and tell me if I have it right.
Section 6 is basically the same language applied to property taxes, excluding them. Reagan takes away this language (they have to pay) and Obama puts it back.
The biggest thing about all this is how now Interpol has all the rights and privileges previously held for visiting dignataries of foreign governments, ambassadors and their staff, etc. Their records cannot be searched by ANY American authority. That is indeed a scary thing.
And the foreign dignataries, etc., no longer have to pay tax on anything earned while in the US????
Yet again, The White House moves while we are looking elsewhere, preoccupied with our daily lives.
Merry Christmas, I look forward to your comments.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
"and I quote -- "it shall not be in order in the senate or the house of representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection."
This is not legislation. it's not law. this is a rule change. it's a pretty big deal. we will be passing a new law and at the same time creating a senate rule that makes it out of order to amend or even repeal the law. "
Rule changes require a 2/3 vote. This bill is bypassing that requirement.
At the same time Senator Lindsay Graham is challenging the constitutionality of the "bribes" given for votes especially that for Nebraska. If the rest of us are going to have to subsidize them, seems that is against the Bill of Attainder and also the Regulate Commerce clause which is to "make regular" business between states. This gives Nebraska an unfair advantage.
Good for South Carolina. And now a word from our Georgia Senators.... cricket....cricket...
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
These are the people you need to tell "HELL NO" in the Judiciary Committee:
This committee has 40 members. Use the buttons below to see all of the members.
NOTE: right click to keep me open (OTR you are killing me)
Rep. John Conyers [D-MI14]
Rep. Lamar Smith [R-TX21]
Rep. Tammy Baldwin [D-WI2]
Rep. Howard Berman [D-CA28]
Rep. Frederick Boucher [D-VA9]
(no photo available)
Rep. Jason Chaffetz [R-UT3]
Rep. Howard Coble [R-NC6]
Rep. Steve Cohen [D-TN9]
Rep. William Delahunt [D-MA10]
Rep. James Forbes [R-VA4]
Rep. Trent Franks [R-AZ2]
Rep. Elton Gallegly [R-CA24]
Rep. Louis Gohmert [R-TX1]
Rep. Charles Gonzalez [D-TX20]
Rep. Robert Goodlatte [R-VA6]
Rep. Luis Gutiérrez [D-IL4]
Rep. Gregg Harper [R-MS3]
Rep. Darrell Issa [R-CA49]
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D-TX18]
Rep. Henry Johnson [D-GA4]
Rep. Jim Jordan [R-OH4]
Rep. Steve King [R-IA5]
Rep. Zoe Lofgren [D-CA16]
Rep. Daniel Lungren [R-CA3]
Rep. Daniel Maffei [D-NY25]
Rep. Jerrold Nadler [D-NY8]
Rep. Ted Poe [R-TX2]
(no photo available)
Rep. Mike Quigley [D-IL5]
Rep. Thomas Rooney [R-FL16]
Rep. Linda Sánchez [D-CA39]
Rep. Adam Schiff [D-CA29]
Rep. Robert Scott [D-VA3]
Rep. James Sensenbrenner [R-WI5]
Rep. Brad Sherman [D-CA27]
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz [D-FL20]
Rep. Maxine Waters [D-CA35]
Rep. Melvin Watt [D-NC12]
Rep. Anthony Weiner [D-NY9]
Rep. Robert Wexler [D-FL19]
Res.Com. Pedro Pierluisi [D-PR]
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Snow storms force Nancy away from Copenhagen early.
Surprisingly, this is not the first time her travels in relation to a climate meeting have been changed due to weather.
Don't mess with Mother Nature...
And that country was
So how is it they are more concerned than we are? Well, luckily, there was only an agreement, more verbal than anything.
Bet those nations wished they had our EPA!!!
Friday, December 11, 2009
So here's where my prediction comes in. Gold starting dropping when these "positive" reports started coming, closing today at 1115. Hong Kong and Sydney are still going but we'll settle for New York here.
Now we have Congress raising the debt ceiling another 1.8 trillion, which if they spend it all, will take our deficit to 14 trillion. The spending bill currently up for vote.... oh you didn't hear about that? Yeah Congress is about to run out of money so there is a 2500 page $400billion+ bill up for grabs ..... so anyway, when that goes through along with the increased debt ceiling, you'll see gold jump back up again on Monday. Don't know if it'll be at the 1215 again but I'll say 1150 by weeks end.
We'll talk again.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
During the 2008 Presidential campaign (now known socialist) Senator Barack Obama told audiences "Judge me by the people with whom I surround myself."
click on it, way easier to read
H2O is water. CO2 is carbon dioxide.
Lets see, CO2 + H20 + Light energy and photosynthisis strips the Carbon from the Oxygen in CO2, the Hydrogen from the oxygen in the Water, and gives Carbon and Hydrogen compounds (celulose or wood) + O (oxygen).
Later, when the lightning strikes, the oxygen recombines with the carbon and the hydrogen in the celulose (wood) and the rusulting fire gives you CO2 and water as the products of combustion. A natural carbon cycle.
Lots of CO2 and heat? Lots of plants and trees. Too many plants and trees? Lots of oxygen and fuel. One ligtning strike and the cycle repeats. Man is totaly unnecessary.
The FOOD CHAIN is dependent on that horible toxic chemical CO2? You mean CO2 may not be a polutant after all? It just might be necessary for life on earth as we know it? "Gaia" uses a CO2 cycle to produce life. The warmer the big bright thing in the sky makes things, the more CO2 gets driven out of soulution in the ocean.
Yes photosynthesis is working in the ocean as well. Remember phytoplankton? OK, ever see bubles come out of Coke as it warms up? Thats CO2 just in case you never took the time to think about it. And the big bright thing in the sky? Astronomers call it a variable star. That means it's heat output is not constant. Nor is our orbit around the sun a perfect elipse.
Ever have a top when you were a kid? It starts to wobble when the spin slows down right? Physics calls that precessional rotation. The earth does that. The rotational period is 23,000 years. The same ice age cycle that was noticed in the 1.5 mile deep ice core sample taken in Antartica that reads like tree rings going back 150,000 years. Yup, the traped gas bubles in the ice can be read for exact % of CO2, CH4, O and N in a gas chromatograph.
When the north pole is pointed more directly at the sun, the ice melts at the north pole. Simple enough. The list of things that give us climate change is very long and we have not even discoverd half of whats on it, none of which are caused by man. Most of the natural causes of our climate change make what man does on this earth laughably insignificant. One big forest fire puts out more CO2 than the UK can possibly tax in 10 years.
By the way UK, follow the money! Our climate is driven by the sun. Not by George Soros and his progressive team mates in the UN and our government.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
But most dramatic of all was what he omitted – any reference to ‘terrorism’ or ‘terrorists’.
Wow, who would have thought that word would not come out of an American President’s mouth in a foreign policy speech until 2030? Obama certainly has dramatically shifted the foreign policy tone of the Bush Administration.This shift in tone is highly welcome. Obama once again showed he has a grasp of using narratives and frames that his audience will accept. If you are speaking to an Arab group and state that Israel must dismantle its settlements, you immediately open them up to your message. That is one example of how Obama, by taking a more moderate and understanding tone, created the conditions necessary for his Arab listeners to even consider other messages, such as women’s rights.
It's that "using narratives and frames that his audience will accept" that first made me think hmmmm. Remember, he's creating a feeling. It's not so much what he says but also what he doesn't say and where he is leading you.
how Obama, by taking a more moderate and understanding tone, created the conditions necessary
Created the Conditions necessary. By not using the word terrorists, he had the Arabs actually listening.
How many times has he done that to us?
We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.
Oh we were all so tired of the Bush years and the lying Republican politicians, change sounded so good that we didn't stop to think that in order to "fundamentally" change the United States of America we would have to set aside our Founding Fathers vision of America since we no longer resembled that anyway. We didn't stop to think that in order to "fundamentally change" we would have to give up our liberty and freedom. Our property rights would be forfeited for "the common good".
The writer of the article thinks Obama may be pretending to be "centrist" (writers choice of words not mine) in order to make the Republicans look more extreme, to basically trick the moderates into giving him a second term. The writer thinks he is appeasing the Republicans. Again, don't know if I agree with that but this is interesting:
Will the American public pick up that nuance? Or will they buy the Republican rhetoric that Obama is a socialist dictator running our economy into the ground?
Even more so, will packaging progressive ideas in moderate language make more Americans open to progressive policies...
Open to Progressive policies! How marvelous!
This is not one of the movement's better writers, but was probably more open and honest than most, or even more so than they would like for us to see. This is why you have slowly heard more and more politicians and public figures talking about the necessity of a little bit of socialism, it won't kill ya!!!! Heard the expression "nickel and dime ya to death"?
I've always heard that the best way to defeat an enemy is to understand him. We all need to read more of their (gag) writings. Saul Alinsky for starters.
As an example of how ignorant the referenced writer is, here's a post blasting Bush for saying Iran has or ever will have nukes. Gee, just two years after and where is Iran with it's nuclear program now?
Unfortunately for us, not all their supporters are this inept.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Friday, December 4, 2009
Methane gas levels are a key element of Anthroprogenic Global Warming BUT they are NOT INCREASING as required by the Goracle's poition (how inconvenient):
And ocean tempatures are falling, as a result, sea ice amounts are increasing, which is not in the Goracle's plans (remeber the Polar Bears?
And finally, more truth about the debate in IRANIAN newspapers than the New York Times and other American newspapers.
Conclusion: If it weren't for the internet, The Goracle and his liberal allies would have won this argument through the control of information if it weren't for alternate information sources.
Much of our MEDIA HAVE TURNED INTO WHORES WHO PRODUCE OPINIONS RATHER THAN PRESENT NEWS AND FACTS.
Consensus among scientists? Hardly. 31,000 have said no.
Analysis on Cap & Trade by US House of Representatives, Oversight Committee:
And one of my favorite items:
A sub surfacing in open water - AT THE NORTH POLE! In 1959 no less.
We can and should continue to find sources of energy that are sustainable, cheap and non-polluting. But there is NO scientific consensus that we should run for the hills, under a table, quit eating meat, etc. Infact, the only reason man became an intelligent part of the earth was through the protein from meat and COOKING it! Ask any anthropologist. We NEED that meat. Course that could explain why libs are so stupid.... pardon me I digress.
NO to Copenhagen, NO to the crap & tax bill. That would destroy our economy and then where would we be, warming and cooking with charcoal and wood fires, now THAT is what is called an unintended consequence.