November 20, 2017

Putin Spends 5 Million to “Spike” Clouds With Chemicals So It Wouldn’t Rain on His Parade

Vladimir Putin is preparing to play God and spike clouds with a chemical cocktail to prevent it raining on his vast Red Square military parade on Saturday.

Reports say the Kremlin is ready to splash out £5million to use Soviet technology which should guarantee sunshine for the commemoration of the 70th anniversary of the end of the Second World War in Europe – and Putin’s 15th year as Russia’s head of state.

Ahead of the parade, a fleet of Russian air force planes are on standby from around 6am to fly from an airbase north of Moscow to spray special reactant chemical agents over any thick clouds, causing them to release their rainfall in downpours before reaching the capital.<<<Read More>>>

And while this is going on, AND the U.S. continues it’s decades-long practice of pumping our atmosphere full of toxic chemicals, we hear from the totalitarian tyrant himself, ALGORE.

Al Gore’s $15 trillion carbon tax

While ALGORE burns up more fossil fuels that thousands of citizen slaves, schlepping around the world in his private jet, he stands to rake in trillions of dollars if he can accomplish his Carbon Tax Plan that would destroy the fossil fuel industry and bolster all the non fossil fuel energy companies of which he is heavily invested.

BUT DON’T GO LOOK!

“Al Gore wants to reverse modernity and save the world from itself through an elimination of its fossil-fuel-based energy system. During the final week of April, his newly created Energy Transitions Commission released a document setting forth a fool’s-errand pathway to “decarbonize” the world’s energy system.

If this sounds familiar, it is. Gore’s plan features a new, sophisticated, and expensive public-relations campaign, but it’s all based on his views on carbon dioxide first broached in his 1992 book Earth in the Balance, which he reissued in 2000 for his failed presidential campaign. The subsequent efforts made by Gore during the past 25 years have transformed little from their genesis, and he remains as tragically wrong today as he was when he first surfaced as an opponent of everything linked to carbon-dioxide.>>>Read More>>>

Share

Report: Putin Hacked NFC Playoffs

Share

Judges Meet, Plan To Outlaw Climate Change Denial

While President Obama tells the world that Russian President Putin isn’t representative of “leading” on issues dealing with terrorism in the Middle East, he boasts of his own “leadership” by claiming, “My definition of leadership would be leading on Climate Change.”

And is Obama’s “leadership” in agreement with outlawing any dissent on Climate Change?

“The fact that it could be seriously proposed in the highest courtroom in the land that the law should now be used to suppress any further debate on what has become one of the most contentious issues in the history of science (greeted with applause from the distinguished legal audience) speaks volumes about the curious psychological state to which the great global warming scare has reduced so many of the prominent figures who today exercise power and influence over the life of our Western societies.

“For perspective, we need only think of the likely responses to all this claptrap by China and India (which has just announced that it intends to triple its CO2 emissions by 2030). Not only have they already kicked into touch any chance of a “binding climate treaty” in December. At the thought of these self-important lawyers trying to force them to comply by international law, they will merely respond with inscrutable smiles, as they continue to rely on fossil fuels to power what will soon be the two largest economies in the world.”<<<Read More>>>

Share

You Can Touch That…Boy!

PutinMuscleFlex

Share

Deja Vu All Over Again: Historic Wellington House Ignorance and Propaganda BS

It has been said that if we don’t learn history we are doomed to repeat it. This is true except the vast majority of American Society believes they have been taught actual history – and they have except! Except that what they have been taught are enough lies designed to mislead a society for sinister purposes. This is called propagandizing. It is not new but we are convinced that the U.S. does not engage in false news reporting but other countries, like Russia, do.

The Wellington House was established at the onset of World War I. The purpose: to counter the massive and effective propaganda machine of the Germans. Lost in history are the facts about propaganda. Wellington House included an American writer, among other “Western” journalists, writers and experts on propaganda use. It’s purpose was to convince America, Great Britain and their allies to support the war effort. Do you think it ended in Britain and the U.S. after WWI?

Fast forward, and with a bit of research, we discover that the U.S. Congress amended the laws governing media lies to the public and made it a legal enterprise. But even without such an amendment, are we so smug and deliberately made blind that we cannot believe our own government, which through certain channels, controls all mainstream media, does not and will not propagandize their own people? And so it goes. But as I often say, “Don’t go look.”

Below are two statements. One is an actual statement made and published in the Wall Street Journal by a republican member of the House of Representatives and chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The other has had a five words replaced (one removed). My question is, which one of these statements is real AND which one of these statements is true?

“Vladimir Putin has a secret army. It’s an army of thousands of “trolls,” TV anchors and others who work day and night spreading anti-American propaganda on the Internet, airwaves and newspapers throughout Russia and the world. Mr. Putin uses these misinformation warriors to destabilize his neighbors and control parts of Ukraine. This force may be more dangerous than any military, because no artillery can stop their lies from spreading and undermining U.S. security interests in Europe.”

“Barack Obama has a secret army. It’s an army of thousands of “trolls,” TV anchors and others who work day and night spreading anti-American propaganda on the Internet, airwaves and newspapers throughout the United States and the world. Mr. Obama uses these misinformation warriors to destabilize his neighbors and control parts of the Middle East. This force may be more dangerous than any military, because no artillery can stop their lies from spreading and undermining security interests in Europe.”

Share

(America’s Unique) Definition of individualism

Individualism means the priority of sacred individual rights over the rights/power of the commune or of fascist Nationalism.

The word sacred refers to the descriptor God-given to describe rights that America recognizes as preceding the writing of the US Constitution.

The words commune and fascist Nationalism include the concepts of any region such as in regionalism, globalism, environmentalism and necessarily includes the concept of habitat.

Recalling the Nazis, Nationalism was the priority of the nation over the individual wherein the rights of the individuals were bound (root meaning of the word fascist) and individual rights were denied for the greater common good of Germany. [See attached photo.][“These dead gave their spirits for the glory of Greater Germany.”]

I’ve seen a corruption of the word individualism by Communists, Putin in particular, and a foreign misunderstanding of American individualism by at least one liberal or left-wing Australian Catholic. America’s Protestant roots might also explain why the expression of individualism of the French and American revolutions might not be well understood in the melting pot of America’s many cultures.

Personalism, an old (but not irrelevant) concept in the Catholic religious community is similar but seems to be more of a term of art in the religious/philosophical field, while American individualism, according to my understanding as of this writing, is a term of art in the legal rights/political field.

Individualism as I refer to it herein, relates not to the person rather to the rights (power) of the person as an individual in competition against the rights (power) of the Commune. The individual wins against the Government because of the priority of the God-given sacred fundamental right of the individual to Free Speech.

For example, let’s take a look at what the United States Supreme Court (Chief Justice Roberts) said about the God-given right to Free Speech in U.S. V. Stevens, 559 U.S. 460 (2010):
“The First Amendment itself reflects a judgment by the American people that the benefits of its restrictions on the Government outweigh the costs. Our Constitution forecloses any attempt to revise that judgment simply on the basis that some speech is not worth it. The Constitution is not a document “prescribing limits, and declaring that those limits may be passed at pleasure.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 178 (1803).” [Emphasis added.]

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-769.pdf

To understand the uniquely American concept of individualism use Livy’s dialectic by considering the statements of those who oppose American individualism. Hegel (hence Marx) states that, “Freedom is the recognition of the necessity of mutual coercion.” [Quote is attributed by adherent Hardin to Hegel.] Russian Communist Putin described individualism as dangerous. And Obama in his typically inexact and rambling way stated essentially that, Personal freedom is preserved by collective action. Similar remarks are attributed to Hillary Clinton.

Redefining individualism as similar to hedonism, egoism or anarchy defeats the connection between individual rights and God as against the all powerful centralized government. In order to counter the mischaracterization of individualism by foreigners who easily confuse individualism with hedonism, egoism or anarchy consider this: American individualism is not a concept that pits man against God.

Rather the concept of American individualism is God and man together against the otherwise overwhelming power of government. This is not some sort of anti-government conspiracy stuff. The automatically-arising competition between the power of government and the protection of God-given human rights (power of the individual) consumes the writers of both the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist Papers of the late 1700’s.

If the Founders were not cognizant of the overwhelming power of centralized government, then why would they devise the separation of powers so thoroughly? The Legislature is divided into two and its laws must survive a veto by a third party, the Executive. The Judiciary is divided into three courts with original trial, appellate review and then the Supreme Court. The Executive is one but may be removed by the Legislature. The Legislature (Congress) creates the law but may not interpret it. Expounding upon the law is the duty and function of the Judiciary. The Executive enforces the law.

Now think about the lack of separation of powers in agencies that make their own rules, interpret them, establish their own facts, enforce the result, and then, despite being a biased party in litigation, demand that the Judiciary to give them total deference.

The writers of the Constitution knew their history. The Magna Charta, now about 800 years old, is the basis of human rights, human freedom and thereby human dignity found in our federal and state Constitutions. It provided that humans would not be deprived of life, liberty or property without resort to a jury of their peers, yet that is exactly what bureaucratic agencies are currently allowed to get away with.

As the exCommunist noted in the ’50’s era book “The God That Failed”, the largest most controlling monopolistic corporation is but a mere pygmy when compared to the power of government. Consistent with that thought, consider that even the largest US corporations don’t operate SWAT teams but the smallest subdivision of US government can usually figure out how to get one called up if needed.

I heard someone say that the reason the expression of individualism in the French revolution failed, but the American experiment worked, was because Americans connected God to their individual rights. And the French did not. So, when God is taken out of government and schools, Constitutional rights simply become, as in any Communist country, an illegitimate Kaganesque ad hoc balancing test between the interest of atheist man in rights (powers) against the interest of atheist government in rights (powers). In such contests, the government always wins.

So to reiterate what Justice Roberts said:
“As a free-floating test for First Amendment coverage, that sentence is startling and dangerous. The First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech does not extend only to categories of speech that survive an ad hoc balancing of relative social costs and benefits. The First Amendment itself reflects a judgment by the American people that the benefits of its restrictions on the Government outweigh the costs. Our Constitution forecloses any attempt to revise that judgment simply on the basis that some speech is not worth it. The Constitution is not a document “prescribing limits, and declaring that those limits may be passed at pleasure.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 178 (1803).”

Without connecting God to our individual rights, we cannot as easily recognize the loss of our human dignity when human rights to property are taken away from us. In labor law, employment is a recognized property right the violation of which gives rise to a cause of action by the individual whose rights are violated. The Endangered
Species Act now centrally controls, outside of the three branches of government, our private property rights. Central control abolishes private property ala the Communist Manifesto. (Last two pages Chapter Two.) By signing the ESA, Nixon capitulated more than just Vietnam to the Communists. “Just following orders” was no defense to the Nazis and should be no defense to those “just following orders” in the various anti-American, anti-human liberation movements.

Individual rights should not be confused with group rights. Group rights violate our Founders’ doctrine of equality under the law and show up as corporate cronyism (that resemble Communist oligarchy) and as special rights for small politically well-connected groups of humans and of endangered animals.

The following describes individual rights, that is, individualism, the priority of the rights of the individual over the government and its bureaucracies. Some states’ rights are included. The following is not a verbatim recitation, rather the list of paraphrased rights is to demonstrate much of what we do not hear on today’s professional agitator propaganda media outlets. Capitalization is all over the map in the Constitution and was followed in some instances and ignored in others.

The people shall have the Writ of Habeas Corpus available except under certain circumstances.

The individual shall be free from Bills of Attainder and ex post facto laws.

Individuals shall have limits on taxation.

There shall be no preferences toward one state over another.

Appropriations by law are necessary to authorize withdrawal of federal money from the Treasury.

No title of nobility shall be granted by the US.

The trial of all crimes shall be by jury.

Each citizen shall have all privileges and immunities of one state in all the other states.

The United States shall protect each state from invasion.

Congress shall not establish a religion or prohibit the free exercise of religion or abridge the freedom of speech, or of the press, or to peaceably assemble.

The individual shall have the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

The people shall be free from the mandatory quartering of troops in their homes.

Individuals shall not be subjected to unreasonable searches and seizures.

No accusations of crime against individuals shall lie unless made in writing to give proper notice of the allegations and in order to provide for a proper defense.

No one shall be subjected to double jeopardy. [Regarding WOTUS, the central controllers at the EPA want fines up to $37,500 per day of violation.]

No one can be compelled to testify against oneself. [Compare that to certain administrative state proceedings that resemble the Star Chambers of old.]

No one can be deprived of life liberty or property without due process of law. [“Of law” has a special meaning that excludes the extralegal administrative state proceedings.] [“Due process” is a phrase of art for which whole books have been written. The concept includes substantive (authentic, my word) due process meaning the Constitutional creation of the law to include proper notice to the public, written notice of any alleged violations, and more.]

No property shall be taken for the governments’ purposes [of saving animals] without just compensation.

An accused shall have the right of speedy and public trial [No agency Star Chamber trials.] by jury where the crime was alleged to have been committed, to be informed of the allegation, to confront the accusers, to have compulsory process for providing defense witnesses and for a defense lawyer.

Where the amount of controversy shall exceed $20, a litigant shall have the right to demand a jury. [Again, environmental fine of $37,500 with no trial.]

The individual shall be free from excessive bail, excessive fines and free from cruel and unusual punishments. [$37,500 fine, daily.]

The individual’s rights set out shall not be disparaged by the numbering order set out in the Bill of Rights.

There shall be no slavery or involuntary servitude except as punishment for crime. [That is after conviction, not just because you decide to engage in a certain kind of regulated business.]

No state shall make or enforce any law that shall abridge the privileges and immunities of the individual. [Seems to me that economic rights are privileges and immunities of property ownership that should not be abridged simply by administrative rule that are not enacted first by law, that is, representative government.]

Equal protection under the law appears in three important places not including the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers.

The individual’s right to vote appears in several places also.

No where in there do I see any right of a small politically well-connected group of pinnated grouse, of tiny fish or of spotted owls to force an individual to give up human rights to private property or to private property self-employment rights. In fact, what I see is the establishment of a humans-first public policy that Congress had no right to alter by passing the Endangered Species Act.

Individualism

Share

“We Don’t Have a Strategy Yet”

This article first appeared in The Lubbock Avalanche-Journal online:

President Obama admitted at the White House on Thursday, “We don’t have a strategy yet”! Obama was referring to his absence of plans for neutralizing ISIL in Syria.

Last Thursday 21 August Obama’s Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and his Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Martin E. Dempsey stated that ISIS is the worst threat we have faced and we will need to attack vigorously, including in Syria. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad stated he would cooperate, so we anticipated President Obama would be leading the World in a determined defeat of ISIS

It seemed clear that the Pentagon had a plan. We expect the Pentagon to have plans for every possible situation. We expect that our President and Commander in Chief will be able to quickly decide how to act in a given military situation.

Yesterday 28 August Obama admitted, “We don’t have a strategy yet”! Why would a military leader admit such a problem? Why would our President and Commander in Chief want to advise an enemy of our deficiencies?

President Barack Obama is working on strategies to fight Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, and to continue to dissuade Russia from military involvement in Ukraine, he said Thursday from the White House.

Obama said he has directed Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to prepare a range of options to counter ISIL and has instructed Secretary of State John Kerry to travel to the region to build a coalition in opposition to the group. Though there have been reports suggesting that broader military action in the region is imminent, the president said he would take his time.

“I don’t want to put the cart before the horse. We don’t have a strategy yet,” Obama said from the White House press briefing room.

Obama has again decided it is best to dither. The White House and Pentagon struggled mightily last Monday to dial back the rhetoric and to justify Obama’s fear of engaging ISIS. Back in January Obama called ISIS the “JV” – the Junior Varsity. It turns out it is again Obama who is the lightweight in the conflict.

Obama’s answer yesterday was honest and embarrassing. Obama is off today for a day of fundraising. He spent the last three weeks vacationing and golfing, so it is little wonder Obama is not up to speed on our national security and the condition of the World.

When it came time to discuss the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Obama said he is going to do nothing to help Ukraine, not even military rations and blankets. This is coming from our President who as a United States Senator encouraged Ukraine to disarm and assured them the United States had their back.

In fact it was Senator Barack Obama and Senator Dick Lugar who pushed to continue disarming Ukraine in 2005. Then and in 2009, Obama told Ukraine he had their back and would protect them against invasion from Russia.

As a U.S. senator, Barack Obama won $48 million in Federal funding to help Ukraine destroy thousands of tons of guns and ammunition – weapons that are now unavailable to the Ukrainian army as it faces down Russian President Vladimir Putin during his invasion of Eastern Ukraine.

In August 2005, just seven months after his swearing-in, Obama traveled to Donetsk in Eastern Ukraine with then-Indiana Republican Senator Dick Lugar, touring a conventional weapons site.

The two met in Kiev with President Victor Yushchenko, making the case that an existing Cooperative Threat Reduction Program covering the destruction of nuclear weapons should be expanded to include artillery, small arms, anti-aircraft weapons, and conventional ammunition of all kinds.

After a stopover in London, the senators returned to Washington and declared that the U.S. should devote funds to speed up the destruction of more than 400,000 small arms, 1,000 anti-aircraft missiles, and more than 15,000 tons of ammunition.

Obama does not have Ukraine’s back. Obama has said he will not commit U.S. military forces or arms to help Ukraine. It seems Obama is still in denial that Putin is acting as a normal Russian KGB leader would be expected to act. Obama just does not seem able to grasp reality.

Share

Crimea River

CrimeaRiver

Share

Sochi: Obama/Putin Achieve Perfect Ice Dancing Score

HUMOR: From the East German judge!

ObamaPutinSkate

Share

Compare

comparisons

Share