As much as I love ya’ll, this is not a project I plan to repeat any time soon. This is really time consuming! But I hope it’s helpful and you like it. I’m tired of seeing people living in fear due to a fraud. I’m not saying don’t use caution, but doing the normal things you do when you are around someone with the flu (basically) should have covered it. Destroying millions of lives was unnecessary.
As you may have noticed, this Wuhan flu is getting on my very last nerve. I’m not saying it’s not serious, it is. But the damage that has been done to the US by the choices made in dealing with Wuhan flu will never be undone I don’t believe. China and their dang virus is not the reason for massive unemployement, loss of businesses, homes, lives and the massive increase in tyranny. I heard somewhere that this “Shelter in place” model was the result of a high school project. But I couldn’t find anything on the net so it didn’t make the video. I’d believe it, it came from the mind of someone who doesn’t pay rent or buy food.
This KrisAnne Hall video should send some shivers. I’ve got the link set to start at the relevant part.
THIS! THIS is why I’ve been so focused on what is happening with the Wuhan flu and so angry about what I see. The clip about Dershowitz is saying you do not have a right to refuse the vaccine. They can physically haul you into a doctor’s office and jab a needle in you. That you don’t have a right to endanger others by refusing the vaccine. He didn’t comment on who would take care of your family if there was a reaction. That is what you see playing out, under the guise of public good; without a warrant signed by a judge. The mental health rapid response team member? Why if you don’t care about your health and beg to get the vaccine, you aren’t in your right mind, got any guns? I was right there judge, I witnessed them refuse to go to the hospital to be checked out. They don’t care about themselves therefore they are a danger to themselves and others. How many now terrified family and friends will download that contact tracing app? You may not, but others will. All from the media generated fears fed to them by Fauci and Birx. What data do you keep on your smart phone? Do you WANT to be tracked? The drones are now being used to ensure social distancing. Do you feel the people throwing rights and liberty at the government saying “We don’t need these things, just make us feel safe”! After all, if you don’t have your health you don’t have anything. /sarcasm. I don’t think there is any way to convince people now this whole debacle has been just that, a debacle. There is no reset switch.
There are some people working on legal remedies for small businesses to fight back against the tyrants. I was going to include a video from a lady explaining about some lawsuits going on, and if you are a small business owner, or know one, a website that has some forms that might be of interest.
However, that pillar of principles YouTube has taken the video down because it didn’t conform to their community standards. Lately that means it said something A) Conservative B) Pro-American C) Pro-business D) counter to the mainstream media hysteria. Choose your favorite or any combo.
My suggestion is the next time we have one of these “crisis” we forget following what the “government” says. I think the practice of epidemiology should be outlawed. My vote? Next time there is a “crisis” like this, we call in the Cajun Navy. But as you listen to this clip there’s a few things that caught my attention: The Cajun Navy was told by the government not to launch and go help those stranded; the three star general in charge of the scene had to yell at his troops to put their weapons down, apparently they were trained on the Cajun Navy; not mentioned is Kathleen Blanco, Governor at the time, refused help prior to the hurricane because it was offered by Former President George W Bush. Demoncrats have a long proud history of preferring to see their people die than allow a Republican help them. The Cajun Navy saved 10,000 people, and the government told them not to launch. Government is not the answer, it’s the problem.
“There are currently no vaccines available to protect against human Coronaviruses…”1
Won’t hurt a bit
I am fresh from my son’s orthodontist appointment where a stern faced dental hygienist, hidden behind a lab coat, oversized gauzy surgical mask, and opaque gloves confronted us before a locked door. As we began up the steps, she waved a spray bottle back and forth like a crazed gunman yelling something unintelligible. Seeing my lack of comprehension, she stabbed a Latex coated finger at a sign jutting from a flowerbed like an East German prison guard. Words in red letters ordered us to return to our car, telephone the orthodontist to announce our arrival, and then wait until we received a callback summons for my son to enter. Can I not tell you we are here, I asked. She shook her head and yelled “no”! We must follow the system. My response in English questioned the intelligence of this process but a phrase in French crossed my mind.
This is a polemic but not necessarily a dissertation on the science of Red China’s2 virus. After all, what exactly is the science? Is it the proclamations of government mouthpieces or the opinions of scientists censored by Face Book and other social media platforms? Claims to having the “science” are like moles popping up from numerous holes, no two alike. Science? My high school’s government course included a required unit on AIDS. On the one hand, teachers were to scare the bejabbers out of kids over how easy it was to contract AIDS so they would practice “safe sex”. I was relieved no one asked me to differentiate safe from unsafe sex. I thought it had to do with rhinestone cowboy boots, a unicycle, a giant kite, and a rope bridge spanning an Andean gorge. On the other hand, teachers were to stress how difficult it was to get AIDS in order to relieve homosexuals of further stigma. Science? Yeah, public education. Regardless of what the “science” is, reactions by Americans to China’s virus has been a revelation.
From the nation’s experts: politicians, movie stars, entertainers, and professional athletes, comes the rallying cry, “We’re all in this together”! What a joke. Who is this “we”? How are they suffering? If anything, the frenzied manner in which greedy grubby fingered savages ravage store shelves, hogging up the product de jour, demonstrates it is really, every man for himself. And it’s not even Black Friday. Reaction by the Great Unwashed provide us a peek as to how they will react in the face of a greater crisis.
In the very early days of the Wuhan Pandemic, American officials raced breathlessly to microphones announcing the virus did not originate from a laboratory nor had Commie scientists biologically modified or weaponized an existing virus. These premature declarations reminded me of government officials, following an explosion, mass shooting, or rental truck mowing citizens down in a city center, racing before news cameras to announce, “It’s not terrorism” even before the names of the injured or suspects were known. Okay, what did they say was its origin? It came from Chinese raw bat eaters who coughed on Chinese raw baby Koala bear eaters in Wuhan, China. Make’s sense, doesn’t it? Like ripples from a rock thrown in a pond, Red China’s virus continues to have reverberating consequences.
No Tourists
Years as policeman and teacher left me with a lifelong need to decompress. Peace and quiet in the outdoors, far from Thomas Harding’s Madding Crowd, has proven the best medicament. I spend a fair amount of time in the wild especially winter, my favorite season. For any outdoorsman/woman, the attraction is nature’s beauty, aroma of wild flowering plants, animals, birds, and the sound of wind rushing through branches absent the strident cacophony of civilization. All was good until government lockdowns spawned disastrous levels of people practicing unprotected tourism in the woods and along once tranquil trails.
New to the outdoors, CoronaTourists tend to be loud, obnoxious, and display self-centered ignorance with respect to trail etiquette (yield trails to runners and the mountain bikers who built them). They don jackets, coats, hats, and mittens to brave frigid 60-degree temperatures. Millennial CoronaTourists seem to drag every vestige of civilization along with them. Blaring radios, clouds of marijuana, screaming children, tampons, fast foot wrappers, baby binkies, Big Gulp cups, Happy Meal toys, condoms, cigarettes, Band Aids, undergarments, and beer cans are now parts of the “regular” landscape. For Pete’s sake, shouldn’t these people be crowding into stores fighting over the last roll of toilet paper and box of 9mm ammunition? With respect to Touristbasms, winter has proven the only effective disinfectant to clean them out of the woods.
Gimme shelter
Following a recent hike, I crossed a rural road to the above shelter perched in a lonely field surrounded by woods. A sign announced the shelter is closed. The incongruity of closing an outdoor shelter, in the middle of nowhere, in the wind, fresh air, and sunlight, as opposed to people cooped up in homes, apartments, and buildings rebreathing the same air, is unfathomable. County officials cannot trust people to limit gatherings to ten or less so, they closed the shelter. One size fits all rules with no appeal to common sense permitted. Typical bureaucrats. Suppose more than ten people gather beneath the shelter to commemorate a War Veteran’s passing, a child’s birthday, or a teen’s graduation. Who would know out there, unless someone snitched? Probably liberals. Would the Coronastapo come and round up these malefactors? Prior to all this, I accepted lockdowns, quarantines, and that millions of us were going to die. However, these incongruities caused me to begin asking questions about the efficacy and legality of the government’s response to the viral outbreak.
If only two people are in a store, one healthy and one infected with the virus, and the latter coughs on the former, the healthy person is now likely infected. Suppose there are two hundred people in the same store, and none infected, and those with a dry throat cough on others, how many will be infected with the virus? None. Stay with me now. Healthy people cannot transmit what they do not have. Why quarantine masses of healthy people? Why is it “safe” for ten or less people to congregate but add one more, and now they are all doomed? It makes no sense. There is one possible explanation however implausible. The Wuhan virus is super-intelligent and someone has taught it arithmetic. Loathing humans, nevertheless, it can tolerate up to ten people but if one more comes along, Red China’s virus goes berserk.
I began asking more questions. Before long, I discovered many Americans have so fallen in line with the government’s talking points that to ask questions makes them go berserk.
I texted a friend about a humorous incident. I found a surgical mask on a trail that is no more than a sliver of dirt, boot width wide, bisecting a large field. Facing the woods from the gravel parking lot, the field extends approximately one hundred yards to the left and a half-mile to the right of the trail. It is always windy out there. Instead of seeing the humor in the situation, like bicyclers and people in cars wearing surgical masks, my friend was outraged. He denounced people who do not wear masks and practice social distancing as “disgusting”, lacking in “proper education” who had probably been “born and lived under a rock” and needed hit over the head by one. He was ecstatic that our governor, Maryland Republican Larry Hogan, had “taken the bull by the horns” implementing “strict enforceable guidelines” and thanked G-d we had a governor with “insight and fortitude”. Considering Hogan is a RHINO, called a “closet Democrat” by the ultra-liberal Baltimore Sun,3 I thought he was joking. I asked if this was sarcasm and he replied with an emphatic “no”. I replied, “I’m sorry to say, I see it a bit differently”. His demand to know why was more emphatic than his no. We had never discussed politics and, not wanting to step on toes, I tread lightly.
Instead of specific arguments, I listed categories; lockdowns based on debunked models, Constitutional problems, and the efficacy of quarantining entire populations. I observed it was remarkable Governors closed down gun stores and churches but deemed pot shops, liquor stores, and abortion mills essential. That was it. My friend’s responses came so rapid fire I could not keep up. I was answering question one but he was on number four. I tried to explain the government based its rationale for shutting down entire countries first on Neil Ferguson’s Imperial College-London computer model predicting two-million dead and then the University of Washington’s model claiming several hundred thousand dead by sometime in April. Reality and the subsequent work by scientists obviated the need for shutdowns when they debunked both models.4 Ignoring this, my friend declared medical emergencies superseded my “constitutional theory” adding that the Constitution had been amended many times. I noted the Constitution was the law of the land and superseded by nothing. Uncertain as to the relevance of counting amendments, I pointed out it has been amended only seventeen times since 1792. I added no amendment had abolished the Bill of Rights or principle of federalism. He became angry and told me to pass an amendment overruling the virus. I asked, what is the rationale for shutting the country down for three weeks, why not four, and why six as opposed to seven? I asked how long should we be in lockdown and what was the rationale for his answer. What should happen if, when the government lets Americans out again, there is a spike in viral infections? Do we all go back into lockdown? Refusing to answer my questions, he instead accused me of treating him like a student in one of my classes and called me a “pompous ass”. It went downhill from there. Hoping we could emerge still friends, I did not descend into ad hominin attacks. Had he not ended the conversation abruptly, I would have explained this; the Constitution is a contract between government and the people. It lists specifically what governments, state and federal, may or may not do. It bars the federal government from engaging in any activity not authorized by the Constitution. The Constitution is also a restraining order against government to protect the people’s rights from infringement. If people accept an “exception” to the law in but one case, it establishes precedent for future exceptions made by those in power. Exceptions to one’s Bill of Rights. Witness now how quickly people rush to snitch on those daring to exercise their Bill of Rights. Google how many states are hiring folks to execute contact tracing surveillance schemes. Will the government and schools create National Antiviral Zealous Informer Youth Leagues to Narc on people, even their own parents?
The President’s powers are found in Article II of the Constitution and comprise but three paragraphs. Other than exercise of military powers in time of war, appointing listed government officials, and granting pardons, his/her only other function is to ensure “the laws be faithfully executed”.5 No mention is made of executive orders. At most, one could argue presidents may issue an executive order in furtherance of a constitutionally legal law or bill passed by the Congress. However, no such order could create law, directives, regulations, restrictions, and so forth, as those are the sole functions of the legislative branch. The Constitution does not authorize the president to shut down commercial businesses, confine people to their homes, restrict any legal activity, dictate what people must wear in public, social-distancing, or send taxpayer’s money as bailouts to businesses and individuals. Therefore, these activities are illegal. If true, cannot Congress do all this?
The Constitution lists the powers of Congress in Article I, Section 8, known as the Enumerated Powers. Seven of the eighteen deal with the military. The others cover land set aside for the capital, laws regulating immigration, post offices, coining of money, creation of federal courts, copyrights, punishing pirates, trade, and taxing and borrowing money to fund the above.6 Congress has no power, under the Declaration or Constitution, to shut down commercial establishments, schools, or confine people to their residences. It has no authority to appropriate the wealth of Americans and transfer it to others for any purpose whatsoever. Nor do Governors. These are grotesque violations of the Constitution. Regardless of what people, mostly liberals, say, there are no “for the public safety” or “for the common good” exceptions to the Constitution. America’s Constitution is over the government. The subordinate cannot overrule its superior. Does anyone care? No doubt, enemies of the Constitution will argue the Commerce Clause grants Congress authority to engage in illegal activities.
At the time [1787] delegates meeting in Philadelphia drafted and debated the proposed Constitution, States had established trade barriers against sister states. They taxed goods crossing their borders. Coastal states with ports added additional tariffs on goods from abroad. This led to a great deal of conflict between states. Delegates wrote the Commerce Clause to deny states the power to restrict interstate commerce in any way. Liberals disguise and lie about Congress’s power to “regulate commerce”7 by ignoring its 18th century common use meaning in favor of their redefinition. Regulate did not mean control, supervise, or make rules in any way. Regulate meant to keep “regular”. If states enacted taxes and tariffs restricting the flow of commerce across their borders, Congress had the power to knock them down. Congress has no authority to control any commercial activity simply because it crosses state lines. It has no authority to direct, regulate, restrict, or control commercial activity within any state whatsoever.8 American ignorance with respect to their own Constitution is appalling. Even a conservative Baptist preacher with whom I’m acquainted texted church members saying he had to obey the government’s order to close the church based on Romans 13: 1-2; (1) “Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from G-d. (2) “Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of G-d; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves”.9 I wanted to ask him what he would say to America’s Founding Fathers who rebelled against George III, King of England, King of the English Empire, King of the colonies, and Head of the Church of England. I held my peace.
Historian and theologian David Barton writes that the pastor’s opinion gave birth to the principle of “Divine Right of Kings”; the notion G-d selected every ruler who ruled, a principle eagerly embraced by monarchs and emperors. Regardless of how arbitrary, capricious, and tyrannical, people have to obey these rulers. French theologian Philippe du Plessis Mornay wrote in 1579 [Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos, A Defense of Liberty Against Tyrants] the government ordained by G-d referred to “the general institution of government” not each and every distinct form of government. G-d’s purpose expressed in Romans 13 was to oppose anarchy. Dissolution of society leads to lawlessness ending in rebellion against and ultimately rejection of G-d and His law. Therefore, G-d opposes rebellion if it leads to anarchy and chaos. Otherwise, people would have to obey the dictates of murderous Communist regimes.10 Another way to look at is this; if presidents, Congresses, and Governors violate their own Constitutions and state laws, are they preserving G-d’s order or provoking resistance? If the acts of political officials in violation of the law become so egregious, it sparks rebellion, whose actions then are leading toward anarchy, those of political leaders, or those of people attempting to restore the rule of law?
Red China unleashing yet another Coronavirus has revealed much. If government officials can scare enough people with claims a crisis menaces the United States, (global warming, murder hornets, viruses, etc.) then people will do what they are told without question even if to do so violates the Bill of Rights. If these officials can convince them it is their patriotic duty to obey, they will turn against their neighbors reporting those who do not comply. There is no longer a “we”. In a crisis, it is every man for himself. As Tucker Carlson would say, “I have to live in the same country as these people”? Finally, people who lust for power will always stoke fear, panic, and anarchy in order to promote their personal agenda that, throughout history, has always been to rule over others.
22 As a high school government teacher, during a “discussion” with colleagues over certain countries hosting symposiums on education (Cuba, Communist Vietnam, and Communist China) Jenny, a liberal colleague at a sister high school, became incensed over my use of the term “Red China”. After all Jenny said with rage, she had adopted two children from China and that made me a racist. Why would adopting children negate the nature of their country’s government of origin? I have no idea. Jenny had a map in her classroom with South America at the top and North America at the bottom stating the current north/south designation was “racist”. She also had pro-Obama posters hanging prominently. A few years later, one of my government students was telling me about the District sponsored student trip to China. She revealed that Jenny had personally attacked me, in front of the students, in China. My student thought my reaction would be anger. On the contrary. I smiled the remainder of the day basking in the glory of having been trashed out, by name, in a Communist Country!
88 Randy E. Barnett, “The Original Meaning of the Commerce Clause”, University of Chicago Law Review (Winter 2001), at http://www.law.edu/rbarnett/origins.html. See also Brion McClanahan, The Founding Father’s Guide tothe Constitution, (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2012), 38, 50, 54-56, 86. James Madison, The Federalists #42 Clinton Rossiter, Editor (New York, N.Y., A Mentor Book, New American Library, 1961), 267-68. John Taylor of Caroline Virginia, James McClellan, Editor New Views of the Constitution of the United States (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 1823/2000), 328-30.
99 Editors, New American Standard Bible (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan, 1995), 1081.
Yom HaZikaron, Yom HaShoah, Holocaust remembrance day was April 20th, one day after the 77th anniversary of the Warsaw ghetto uprising on April 19th. I’ve got a few random thoughts this year.
The Warsaw Ghetto uprising actually had 3 different resistance groups that were fighting. Most know of ZOB with Mordechai Anielewicz, The Jewish Fighting Organization. Less well known was the communists and Bund also fought against the nazis, and the other group was right wing, the Zionist youth movement “Beitar” the “Jewish Military Union” (ZZW). Beitar sound familiar? It was established by Zev Jabostinsky. My puppy’s middle name is Zev, that’s appropriate as it means “wolf”. Most of the fighters were younger, and I’m guessing had seen their families hauled off and knew what was coming.
The Wuhan flu Zoo
Locked in a ghetto and told they aren’t allowed to leave without a permission slip. Possibly like the one I’m carrying in my purse along with my name badge which will get me through road blocks should the be instituted. I shamelessly swiped this from a friend of mine, who also apparently likes Mark Levin
How far are you willing to go with this?
If they told you to load your families onto train cars so that you could be taken to Virus Protection Facilities for your own safety, would you do it?
YES. Yes, you would. That much has become painfully obvious to me. And the whole time, you’d be shaking your finger and yelling at those of us who refused, accusing us of being “a danger to society” and “not caring if people die.”
But they don’t have to load you onto train cars and take you to Virus Protection Facilities or force you to comply, because you do that voluntarily. They control your mind. They control you through fear. They control you by convincing you that the world is a scary dangerous place, but they’re here to protect you, care for you, and keep you safe, just as long as you OBEY.
They know that as long as you’re locked inside your comfortable home with Netflix, Hulu, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and a cell phone while dangling a $1200 check in front of you like a carrot on a stick, you’ll comply. No force is necessary for the majority of the herd.
YOU ARE IMPRISONED, willingly, and you’re too blind to see it.
By Mark Levin
Our country has been locked down, and I think there are some lessons worth mulling over. Parents are being hauled off in handcuffs in front of their children because they took them to a park. A public park. I’ve covered some of these abuses in other columns. I’m guessing you know by now that while I do believe the virus is absolutely real, I also believe the reaction has been way overblown.
Corona worries?
Better safe than sorry? For whom? The 22 million people now out of work? The business owners that have lost or are losing a business because of what Doctors Fauci and Birx have urged? Honestly I have no idea why anyone would ever start a business now knowing it can be yanked away and your life’s work and savings down the drain at the whim of a government. Their employees that now may well face losing their homes and struggle with trying to support their families all the while the government is forcing farmers to dump milk, eggs and vegetables. I’m pretty sure the food banks could use them about now. Food like knowledge, is power. What will people do to feed their hungry children? Government is seizing power, no doubt. Some governors like the governor of South Dakota and Wyoming pretty much left their states open while others like the governor of Michigan took the power given by the federal government and then became a tin pot despot. What happened after that disturbs me even more. When people protested, she threatened them for speaking out by saying she might extend the lock down. Free speech not permitted. Along with freedom to assemble or to worship.
The following videos make several points, but the reason I’m putting them in are those listed above. This is going on all over the world. I have to tell you when I heard those German voices yelling “Ack-TUNG” and hauling people away I got nauseated. Beating people, using tear gas on them, explain to me how this keeps them safe? I mean, that’s what this is suppose to be about right? Saving lives from the Wuhan flu? Another friend of mine wrote this is response to something I had posted on facebook.
“When the State tells you it’s safe to go to Home Depot to buy a sponge but dangerous to go and buy a flower, it’s not about your health.
When the State shuts down millions of private businesses but doesn’t lay off a single government employee, it’s not about your health.
When the State bans dentists because it’s unsafe, but deems abortion visits are safe, it’s not about your health.
When the State prevents you from buying cucumber seeds because it’s dangerous, but allows in-person lottery ticket sales, it’s not about your health.
When the State tells you it’s dangerous to go golf alone, fish alone or be in a motorboat alone, but the Governor can get his stage make up done, and hair done for 5 TV appearances a week, it’s not about your health.
When the state puts you IN a jail cell for walking in a park with your child because it’s too dangerous but lets criminals OUT of jail cells for their health- It’s not about YOUR health!
When the state tells you it’s too dangerous to get treated by a doctor of chiropractic or physical therapy treatments yet deems a liquor store essential- It’s not about your health!
When the State lets you go to the grocery store or hardware store but is demanding mail-in voting, IT’S NOT ABOUT YOUR HEALTH.
WAKE UP PEOPLE — If you think this is all about your health you’re mistaken! Please open your eyes! Stop being lead like blind sheep.
I should probably mention this was originally one video, YouTube censored it and someone else put it up in three parts, so hopefully you can still see it.
And these protests to open the states back up are going on all over the country. Who decides the value of a life? I take death very seriously. When people get towards the end of life, one of the things one often does is to give an “Advance Directive” meaning they state what they consider to be an acceptable quality of life, and if something medically happens they can not do those things they do not want heroic measures done to save them. Quality of life counts. At what point do we begin to care about the 22 million that have been forced out of work due to flawed models designed by a man who has yet to get one right.
Wuhan Flu we will survive, but this government seizure of power? When has government ever handed back power once it’s been seized? Your rights are suspended. I keep hearing that line from the video. How much further will it go? Who knows. Just like the left are hypocrites about guns denying citizens the right to defend themselves and their families all the while having armed guards they are out of touch with the pain the lock down is causing. Yes, I know it’s a Trump ad, but it still sums it up really well.
And the new paradigm is set. Had a Democrat been president, I shudder because Democrats are communist now. Power and control, never enough. What will happen the next time there is a “crisis” be it in the fall or next year? I heard another great video from a politician named Paul Curtman who has written a couple of books Don’t Tread On Me and Don’t Tread On Me! The Constitution and State Soverneignty. Paul’s video was talking about the role of government. He said people have the misconception the role of government is to keep your safe. It is not, the proper role of government is to keep you free. And while you chew that over, I will give you the Partisans Song, because I honor those that resisted and fought against the tyranny.
וגם בעברית
In his most recent radio program Phantom Nation, host Sha’i ben-Tekoa talked about how some criticize and look down on the Jews in Germany who didn’t fight back. But he asked the question if you have a young man of 20, who has a wife and maybe a couple of kids what realistically could he have done when they heard that forceful knock on the door at midnight and opened it to find 5 nazis with guns at the ready?
The best answer I can give is to not let things get to that point. To recognize the signs, see people clearly, especially politicians and vote accordingly. We can still vote in this country perhaps. Some of the actions are familiar from the past, but is history going to repeat?
“The governments of Europe are afraid to trust the people with arms. If they did, the people would certainly shake off the yoke of tyranny, as America did.”
—James Madison, The Federalist #46
You want to see tyranny? We got your tyranny.
The Green Raw Deal.
Ocasio-Cortez may be backtracking and trying to disavow her too-truthful “FAQ,” but it was published on her own site and the metadata lists Saikat Chakrabarti, Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff, as the author. The FAQ is consistent with the House Resolution she also published. The FAQ is simply a little blunter in stating their end goals.
If implemented, the GRD would fund the enslavement of the nation through hyperinflation. You would work for the government, or in whatever remaining government-approved jobs might survive her purge. You would live in approved government housing, subsisting on a vegetarian diet for as long as the food held out. Not long, since the nation’s power infrastructure would be gutted. But you might freeze to death in the winter first, as the wind gennie-powered electric heaters sit idle.
What land isn’t needed for “renewable energy” factories spewing out corrosive, toxic sludge that would horrify even the Chinese would be “afforested.”
Ocasio-Cortez and her merry band of psychopathic slavers have a plan for us that makes Ayn Rand’s Anthem look bright and cheery.
Of course the left-wing greenweenies want to disarm us. They learned that much of a lesson from Venezuela. And Stalin.
Compliance rates with their little registration and turn-in programs are already laughable. Do they expect better compliance now that they’ve explicity told what they mean to do to us?
I think not.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!
As a child growing up, most of the TV shows tended to portray law enforcement as heroes. They always got there in the nick of time, and if they were called in after the unfortunate event happened? They always knew what to do about that as well. They could do a dandy chalk outline of the corpse and then find out who made that happen to the unfortunate victim. And the really superior thing about law-enforcement back then is they could always make it happen in an hour. Minus the time for commercials of course. That’s not like the modern day shows that have running story lines. Like soap operas did when I was growing up. This is back before the day of “Cops as the bad guys”. Oh of course there have always been bad cops, it’s just they weren’t really so much a part of the TV land experience back then. We were taught to respect them, and if we were in trouble, look for a cop. TV shows where the guys stealing cars were the good guys didn’t happen. Nor was there near the amount of realism that you see in shows today.
Hospitals probably weren’t target rich environments back then, aka “gun-free zones”. But to be honest, I doubt that many people carried while at work either. It’s just that now the signs make it clear unless the crew of “Third Watch” happens to be in the ER waiting room they can pretty much be assured everyone will be doing what the medical staff was doing. Ducking, hiding, running, praying. Because throwing chairs, rocks and baseball bats don’t look to be a viable option to me there. No one is going to be firing back at them.
So if the crew of “Third Watch” happens to be in the ER waiting room, and 1-Adam12 has been dispatched to assist in response to Cruz’s call in for back up, how long will it take for Malloy and Reed to arrive on the scene?
“I would just call 911 for help.” There’s this false sense of security that we have created with the 911 system that has people believing that with a single call, a swat team will be dispatched immediately to save you and your family within moments of the call.
Unfortunately, this couldn’t be further from the truth. So what is the average-police-response-time to a 911 call?
According to American Police Beat, the average response time for an emergency call is 10 minutes. Atlanta has the worst response time with 11 to 12 minutes and Nashville comes in at a lightning speed of 9 minutes.
The Department of Justice, with their statistical prowess, reports that the best response time is 4 minutes and the worst over 1 hour. Interpretation? If you live in an upper income area you probably are privy to the 4 minute response time, while middle to rural areas will see a much longer response time.
Now here is where things get interesting. Even though the Department of Justice determined that the average police response time to a 911 call is 4 minutes, the average interaction time between a criminal and his victim is 90 seconds.
That translates to you being robbed/injured/maimed/raped/murdered and waiting for an additional 2 and a half minutes for the police to arrive. The truth of the matter is that the police will almost always arrive AFTER the crime has happened and the criminal has gone.
In rural areas the time can be even longer. A lot longer. Think 30 minutes, maybe more. It’s not that they are hanging out at donut shops, or trying to get someone at Taco Smell to take their order, there is a lot that goes into 9-1-1 calls, and a lot of calls can go into 9-1-1. The lady with the cat in the tree may have got a call in seconds before you were calling in about the guy fixin to come in through your back door.
There are four possible ways to mitigate the damage inflicted by an active shooter. You can harden the target, arm and train potential victims, strengthen prevention programs and suspect identification, and improve law enforcement response times. Each one of these steps is easier said than done because of the associated bureaucratic, political, and budgetary considerations.
Department of Homeland Security research reveals that the average duration of an active shooter incident at a school is 12.5 minutes. In contrast, the average response time for law enforcement is 18 minutes. That means it only makes sense for us to find ways to improve our response times. Working on our response times is about the only anti-active shooter measure that we can take at the operator level. We must find a way to shave off some time and in doing so, create some type of tactical advantage.
A little discouraging that political weighs into the mix making it harder. But when you consider two Buckets O’Chum in Florida were part of Barry’s social engineering project where by kids got a pass on criminal behavior to make statistics look better and law-enforcement agencies got money in return, I guess it’s the truth. Both of them had criminal actions in their backgrounds. Were they in jail? Juvenile court? Detention? Nope.
But you know what the bottom line on all of this is? They don’t gotta. What do I mean? They police do not have a duty to protect you, yours, your kith or your kin. Or Barbie either for that matter. I know, I know that’s what it says on the side of the Police cars, “To Serve and Protect”. Look, everyone needs a goal, a mission statement if you will. So think of it like that, it’s a goal, it’s their mission. Mine is to lose 7 pounds. They have equal chances of succeeding. They can’t be everywhere at once and fried okra still exists in the world.
This has become an issue again the wake of the actions of the law enforcement of Coward County Florida. Scot Petersen, not the Scott Peterson who murdered his pregnant wife, he’s still on death row, but the deputy who cowered outside as a Bucket O’Chum shot students in a Parkland school after security monitor Andrew Medina failed to confront O’Chum when he saw him or call a “Code Red” in the school. So, because Parkland is a safe gun-free zone and had the crack Coward law-enforcement on hand you have a massive #GunControlFail.
A judge has rejected a deputy’s claim that he had no duty to confront the gunman during the school shooting in Parkland, Florida.
Refusing to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the parent of a victim, Broward Circuit Judge Patti Englander Henning found after a hearing Wednesday that ex-deputy Scot Peterson did have a duty to protect those inside the school where 17 people died and 17 were wounded on Feb. 14. Video and other evidence shows Peterson, the only armed officer at the school, remained outside while shots rang out.
The negligence lawsuit was filed by Andrew Pollack, whose daughter Meadow was killed. He said it made no sense for Peterson’s attorneys to argue that a sworn law enforcement officer with a badge and a gun had no requirement to go inside.
“Then what is he doing there?” Pollack said after the ruling. “He had a duty. I’m not going to let this go. My daughter, her death is not going to be in vain.”
Bloom ruled that the two agencies had no constitutional duty to protect students who were not in custody.
“The claim arises from the actions of [shooter Nikolas] Cruz, a third party, and not a state actor,” she wrote in a ruling Dec. 12. “Thus, the critical question the Court analyzes is whether defendants had a constitutional duty to protect plaintiffs from the actions of Cruz.
“As previously stated, for such a duty to exist on the part of defendants, plaintiffs would have to be considered to be in custody” — for example, as prisoners or patients of a mental hospital, she wrote.
Police are not the only ones shielded from the consequences of the failure to protect. Another truly horrific case is that of DeShaney v. Winnebago County. That was a spectacular failure of a ‘child protection team,’ consisting of a pediatrician, a psychologist, a police detective, the county’s lawyer, several DSS caseworkers, and various hospital personnel, and the juvenile court. They returned a badly abused child to his custodial father. The father did not meet the requirements in the following year and the child protective services did______________nada, zip, zilch, zero, squat. Eventually the poor little four year old boy was beaten so badly he wound up in a institution for the rest of his life. His dad served less than 2 years in jail. And the child protection team? The department of social services that did nothing on their follow up visits? Nothing, nothing happened to any of them when the child’s mother attempted to sue. I’m thinking the court that awarded custody to the dad should be included in the list of shame there as well.
And what say the anti-gun, anti-self defense pink hatted faux feminists? Don’t get a gun, just go through the legal system. Get a restraining order and then sic the cops on him. And Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales will show you that works as well as the law enforcement team of Coward County. That resulted in 3 dead little girls at the hand of their loving father. The mother had begged police to go find the girls. Her ex walked right through the paper target.
This reality does belie the often-made claim, however, that police agencies deserve the tax money and obedience of local citizens because the agencies “keep us safe.”
Nevertheless, we are told there is an agreement here — a “social contract” — between government agencies and the taxpayers and citizens.
And, by the very nature of being a contract, we are meant to believe this is a two-way street. The taxpayers are required to submit to a government monopoly on force, and to pay these agencies taxes.
In return, these government agents will provide services. In the case of police agencies, these services are summed up by the phrase “to protect and serve” — a motto that has in recent decades been adopted by numerous police agencies.
But what happens when those police agencies don’t protect and serve? That is, what happens when one party in this alleged social contract doesn’t keep up its end of the bargain.
The answer is: very little.
The Mises Institute also makes another excellent point.
The taxpayers will still have to pay their taxes and submit to police agencies as lawful authority. If the agencies or individual agents are forced to pay as a result of lawsuits, it’s the taxpayers who will pay for that too.
Oh sure, the senior leadership positions may change, but the enormous agency budgets will remain, the government agents themselves will continue to collect generous salaries and pensions, and no government will surrender its monopoly on the use of force.
No government will surrender it’s monopoly on power? Well what I ask, could go wrong with that??
“Guns would have served as a vital pillar to remaining a free people, or at least able to put up a fight,” Javier Vanegas, 28, a Venezuelan teacher of English now exiled in Ecuador, told Fox News. “The government security forces, at the beginning of this debacle, knew they had no real opposition to their force. Once things were this bad, it was a clear declaration of war against an unarmed population.”
Under the direction of then-President Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan National Assembly in 2012 enacted the “Control of Arms, Munitions and Disarmament Law,” with the explicit aim to “disarm all citizens.” The law took effect in 2013, with only minimal pushback from some pro-democracy opposition figures, banned the legal commercial sale of guns and munitions to all – except government entities.
I’ve been trying to find this article in English, but for some reason, all I find is really crappy translations of what is actually written. Those of you who read Russian can head over to the first link.
Does this look a bit Big Brother-ish to you?
Bottom line: Russian President Vladimir Putin has created a “National Guard” (Нацгвардия), but it’s not like the National Guard we’re accustomed to. While Putin claims this armed force, which incorporates some of the Interior Ministry troops, is created specifically to address terrorism, transnational organized crime, and arms trafficking in the country, it as a way to continue consolidating power in the presidency. It is a ministry-level organization that falls directly under the control of the President.
“If you have noticed, this decision is not simply related to detaching the interior troops from the Interior Ministry. But this has been done so that this new structure will now concentrate all that is connected with firearms. This refers to various kinds of security provision and the authorization system [to get the right to possess firearms], ensure oversight of private security firms and this also refers to interior troops proper,” Putin said.
Yes, I know the translation sucks, but think about this for a moment. The Russian president, who already has been well on the path to grabbing power, censorship, stringent nationalism, and violating the sovereignty and territorial integrity of his country’s neighbors, is now creating himself a little army that’s focusing not just on terrorism and TOC, but also firearms trade. By the way, the Russian Federation in November 2014 eased firearms restrictions to allow its citizens to carry firearms for self defense, but now Putin is controlling some pretty powerful military troops who focus internally.
Call me crazy and untrusting, but I wouldn’t want any government – especially not an authoritarian crap weasel like Putin – having control of his own little army that can be used against the citizenry, and given Russia’s pivot back toward statism in the past few years, this Нацгвардия is more than concerning.
We view the right to keep and bear arms as a bulwark against tyranny. The fact that Putin has now created an armed entity, controlled solely by him, to focus on “all that is connected with firearms” should tell you everything you need to know about where that nation is headed internally. No, it is not becoming a free nation. Those of us who were mildly surprised and gratified when the Russian government loosened gun laws a year and a half ago can go back to being disgusted. Russia is still ruled by a cunning authoritarian with the aim of subjugating those around him to his will. And the best way to do that, is to use the military (I don’t care what you call them – internal troops, security troops, national guard, whatever) to ensure that the people’s right to keep and bear arms is tightly regulated and controlled.
Because as the Russian economy swirls the drain, and as Russia becomes a more and more aggressive force toward its neighbors, you can be sure that the regular people’s lives will be more controlled and more miserable. And the Russian government needs to ensure that the people don’t use their right to remove the source of their misery with armed force.
April 19th is the anniversary of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising.
For those that do not understand what Yom HaShoah and the Warsaw Ghetto uprising has to do with guns, look at all the hands in the photos. When there are hands in the air reaching skyward, you will see guns in the hands of those surrounding them. Guns are the defense against tyranny. For “Never Again” to be more than a slogan you need to be able to ensure that it isn’t by having the means to stop the attack.
At the memorial service I attended today the final speaker talked about something a holocaust survivor had implored him to do. To act, to scream, to talk to people, but no matter what, not to do nothing. To do nothing, to be frozen in inaction was to allow them (nazis) to succeed.
The Warsaw Ghetto Memorial at the JCC.
For the flame of liberty to continue to burn, there must be those willing to speak out against evil. There must be those willing to give their time, talent and treasure and pledge their sacred honor. Yes, that phrase comes from the American Revolution. The Battle at Lexington and Concord also occurred on April 19th. But if we do not show up and suit up in the battle for freedom, the flame of liberty becomes the Shoah, the holocaust, as well as the flames that devoured the Warsaw Ghetto, the other Ghettos throughout Europe and the death camps.
What do Yom HaShoah and the Warsaw Ghetto have to do with guns. Everything! The fearful cost of a disarmed people.
What happened exceeded our boldest dreams. The Germans fled twice from the ghetto. One of our companies held its position for forty minutes, while the other one lasted – upwards of six hours… I cannot describe to you the conditions in which the Jews are living. Only a handful will survive. All the rest will succumb, sooner or later. Their fate has been sealed. In almost all of the bunkers in which our friends are hiding one cannot even light a candle at night, for lack of air. Goodbye my friend. Perhaps we will see each other again. The main thing is this: My life’s dream has become a reality. I have seen the Jewish defense of the ghetto in all its strength and glory.
23 [21] April 1943 Mordechai Anielewicz
There is no need to ask “Why does this happen”. Nor is there a need to ask “How can something like this happen.” It’s a pattern, we know how.
One of our readers gave a link to a documentary, it is excellent and this is the longer version of it.
From Yad Vashem’s website, interviews with Fighters who survived the Warsaw Ghetto. What is the end result of Universal Background Checks and other “common sense” gun control? Listen, the survivors will tell you.
But I will leave you with triumph.
Zog nit kein mol- Jewish partisan song
Zog Nit Kein Mol in Hebrew
Jews. Guns. No compromise. No surrender.
Password Reset
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.
