Vietnam--Grabbing Defeat From The Jaws Of Victory

Table source

During the Vietnam War, I taught at Yale a cousrse on American National Security Policy and another on war. I also gave a number of speeches supporting the Vietnam War effort. I argued that defending the South and Cambodia was necessary to maintain the credibility of American Cold War defense alliances in Asia (of which South Vietnam and Cambodia were members), and elsewhere. We were committed to defend alliance members if attacked.

A second rationale was the great likelihood of a blood bath if South Vietnam and Cambodia fell to the communist North and Khmer Rouge. Both did in 1975. In the bloodbath which followed, the communists murdered millions. Remember the “Killing Fields. See my Statistics Of
 Vietnamese Democide and Statistics Of
Cambodian Democide . The above table gives the statistics for Vietnam.
Since then, the media have treated the communist takeover as an American defeat. This was not true militarily. Our forces actually defeated the North in every battle and overall destroyed their political/guerrilla front, the Viet Cong. But the Democrats who controlled our Congress succeeded in denying the South Vietnamese and Cambodian armies the supplies and air support needed to continue the fight. In effect, they handed Cambodia and South Vietnam over to the communists at a time when the North believed they were defeated and wanted to end the war.

Little has been written about this war won by our military and lost by the Democratic politicians and their supporting “anti-war” activists minority at home. Today many of these “anti-war” activist and communist supporters have influential positions in the academy, government, entertainment industry, and media. Now, Rear Adm. Jeremiah Denton has tried to correct this telling omission in his Vietnam War’s True Victory. Read it and understand what the Democrat’s would have done in the Iraq War, had President George W. Bush allowed them. He snatched victory from the Democrat’s jaws of defeat, and saved a successfully functioning, Iraq constitutional democracy.

A Picture of Democrat Nationalized Health Care

Chart source

Yes, Global Warming Is About Political Power

Cartoon source

See "The Global Warming Campaign Is Socialism's Last Stand" By Gary North, who says:

The global warming movement is not about global warming. It is about the creation of an international political control arrangement by which bureaucrats who favor socialism can gain control over the international economy.

This strategy was stated boldly by economist Robert Heilbroner in 1990. Heilbroner, the multi-millionaire socialist and author of the best-selling history of economic thought, The Worldly Philosophers, wrote the manifesto for these bureaucrats. He did this in an article, "Reflections: After Communism," published by The New Yorker (Sept. 10, 1990)....

...he called on his socialist peers to get behind the ecology movement. Here, he said, is the best political means for promoting central planning, despite its inefficiency. In the name of ecology, he said, socialists can get a hearing from politicians and voters.

After viewing the evidence of professional climotologist, one may well ask how global warming that is so wrong could have become an international and American policy that would cost trillions and badly effect everyone’s life Witness the illegalization of the Incandescent bulb. The answer is simple, as shown by Heilbroner. In my words, it enables the promoters of global wrarming to achieve a socialist-like control of capitalism, that is to seize power.

See Exposing The Global Warming Myth that says:

At December's U.N. Global Warming conference in Poznan, Poland, 650 of the world's top climatologists stood up and said man-made global warming is a media generated myth without basis. Said climatologist Dr. David Gee, Chairman of the International Geological Congress, "For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming?"

Not until this power grab is exposed for what it is.

The Great Labor Camp Mortacracy That Is North Korea

Cartoon source

North Korea is a border to border concentration-labor camp. Understandably, North Koreans attempt to flee it and if caught are murdered. As they are for trivial things we take for granted in the West, such as distributing the Bible. On this see "Report: North Korea Publicly Executes Christian Woman for Distributing Bible". See also "North Korea 'executes Christians'".

North Korea is a totalitarian communist country that totally controls its agriculture and food distribution, and thereby has caused the death of millions of its enslaved people by starvation. Overall, the government, that is, its dictator Kim Jong-Il, has murdered over 3,000,000 North Koreans. It is a sad commentary on our age, that the international community of democracies allows such a murderous and enslaving to continue to exist.

What is this "Tyranny Closing In"?

Source The Weekly Standard, 7/13/09

I have shown in a number of blogs here that tyranny is closing in on America. See nationalizing health and food, illegalizing dissension, squashing investigations, university leftism, unlimited preventative detention, and blog censorship.

What then is this tyranny as a government? I am, after all, a political scientist. In the context of my blogs, this is a most important question. What is this “closing in”?

First, note that there are two kinds of democracy -- electoral and liberal (in the sense of traditional liberalism). Electoral democracies have a near universal franchise, regular competitive and fair elections where voters can kick the “bastards” out of office. Liberal democracies are electoral democracies that also recognize human rights, such as freedom of speech, religion, organization, and the rule of law. As of 2008, there were 121 electoral democracies in the world, 90 of which were liberal democracies, such as Andorra, Cyprus, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mongolia, Nauru, Palau, South Africa, Uruguay, and the usually named Anglo-American and European democracies. Non-liberal electoral democracies include Bolivia, Guatemala, Liberia, Macedonia, Niger, Senegal, Suriname, and Turkey. (The source on the numbers and countries is the Freedom House Freedom IN The World 2008)

Now, tyranny is a negative term for governments that are undesirable from a democratic perspective. So dictatorships, fascist regimes, totalitarian systems—as were Nazism (Germany 1933-1945), Fascism (Italy, 1922-1944) communism (Soviet Union 1917-1991)—, absolute monarchies (Saudi Arabia), and military regimes (Japan, 1936-1945) are all tyrannies. Of course, we are nowhere near any such regimes. “Tyranny closing in on America” means the human rights we enjoy in our electoral democracy are becoming seriously compromised -- loss of much of our freedom of speech (just consider political correctness, hate crime laws, and the cost of criticizing Islam), religion (which already must bow to leftist secularism), and the increasing unfree market.

With our democracy gradually losing its liberal character, there looms the growing possibility of a one-party government where we can forget about fair political competition. One party control of the major avenues to power (as in Iran, Venezuela, and former communist countries) means fraudulent elections or referenda.

The power the Democratic Party now -- 72 million registered members versus 55 for the Republicans; its strong support among Blacks, Hispanics, homosexuals, employed women, and other minorities; its dominance of college faculty, the major media, labor, and the entertainment industry; 256 seats in the House versus 178 for Republicans; and a 60 seat filibuster proof majority in the Senate—could be fertile ground for a dictatorship. A war, a profound national security threat, a deep socio-economic crisis at home could provide the rationale to take over the country. One thing, and only one thing, would constrain this. It is the deep tradition of freedom in America as well as in the Democratic Party, the heir of classic liberalism for many of its members. This tradition limited the fascism of Presidents Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt and their Democratic Congresses during World War I and the Great Depression. Despite the power they and Congress had then, elections proceeded normally and fairly.

Our liberal democratic culture still exists. Judging by the alternative media, such as blogs, talk radio, and networking groups, it is healthy and active. But tyranny is closing in. Beware.

Tyranny Closing In—Blog Censorship

Cartoon source


The tyranny imbedded in the Sword of Damocles that is hovering over the U.S is moving closer. See ”The latest Obama crackdown; taming an unruly blogosphere” by Vincent Gioia. He says

The recent Obama intended appointment of Cass Sunstein, a Harvard Law professor, to the position of head of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs is the next nail in the coffin of the First Amendment. In this position Sunstein will have powers that are unprecedented and very far reaching; not merely mind-boggling but with explicit ability to use the courts to stifle free speech if it opposes Obama policies….

Sunstein wants a system that includes a “notice and take down” law that would require bloggers and service providers to “take down falsehoods upon notice,” even those made by commentators.

OMG, I Cannot Believe The Health Nationalization Bills

Image source

First, hear what Milton Friedman in Socialized Medicine, would have said about the current “health reform” bills before Congress.

Then read some contents of one or more of the bills: ”Shock: Inside the Healthcare Bill”. Some of what the bills contain are

Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benes u get

Pg 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill - YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED!!!


Pg 42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose UR HC Benefits 4 you. U have no choice!

PG 50 Section 152 in HC bill - HC will be provided 2 ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise

Pg 58HC Bill - Govt will have real-time access 2 individs finances & a National ID Healthcard will b issued!

Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access 2 ur banks accts 4 elect. funds transfer

PG 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan 4 retirees and their families in Unions & community orgs (ACORN).

Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating an HC Exchange 2 bring priv HC plans under Govt control.

PG 84 Sec 203 HC bill - Govt mandates ALL benefit pkgs 4 priv. HC plans in the Exchange

PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs for of Benefit Levels for Plans = The Govt will ration ur Healthcare!

Also see ”Obama Healthcare Step One: Killing Off the Old, Then They Are Going After Quadriplegics”. This points out that under the Health Nationalization Bills, your health and access to lifesaving medicine and equipment will be rationed. Government bureaucrats will put a dollar amount on your life, and if they deem it too costly, allow you to die. Your life or death is in their hands.

This raises the question as to whether this would be democide, for which the definition includes

that cause death by virtue of an intentionally or knowingly reckless and depraved disregard for life (which constitutes practical intentionality), as in a famine or epidemic during which government authorities withhold aid, or knowingly act in a way to make it more deadly.

If government willfully withholds medical treatment to the old or infirm who presumably do not deserve treatment in dollar terms, is it democide? If so, does this meet my prediction that as power grows at the center, democide is more likely?

We are even closer toward a deadly tyranny for America

No Matter A Socialist Economy Impossible, It Wins Power

Cartoon source

In my view, the best scholarly economic work on socialism is that by Ludwig von Mises, ”Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth”. For a summary and evaluation, See the Postscript ”Why a Socialist Economy is ‘Impossible’” by Joseph T. Salerno, to the above. Salerno says:

In “Economic Calculation in a Socialist Commonwealth,” Ludwig von Mises demonstrates, once and forever, that, under socialist central planning, there are no means of economic calculation and that, therefore, socialist economy itself is “impossible” (“unmöglich”)--not just inefficient or less innovative or conducted without benefit of decentralized knowledge, but really and truly and literally impossible.
At the same time, he establishes that the necessary and sufficient conditions of the existence and evolution of human society is liberty, property, and sound money: the liberty of each individual to produce and exchange according to independently formed value judgments and price appraisements; unrestricted private ownership of all types and orders of producers’ goods as well as of consumers’ good; and the existence of a universal medium of exchange whose value is not subject to large or unforeseeable variations.

Abolish all or ever one of these institutions and human society disintegrates amid a congeries of isolated household economies and predatory tribes. But not only does abolition of private ownership of the means of production by a world embracing socialist state render human social existence impossible: Mises’s analysis also implies that socialism destroys the praxeological significance of time and nullifies humanity’s uniquely teleological contribution to the universe

Nonetheless, socialism as an ideology and a program is a route to power, regardless of its universal failures and technical impossibilities. People are eager to help others, be part of a movement to do good, and to feel involved. Disguise the program with feel good rhetoric—social justice, equality, shared responsibility, hope, change, and helping the poor (Sound familiar?). Raise consciousness by characterizing the status quo as in crisis with impending disaster; as unjust and unfair; and as a system of exploitation. Then, socialism can win, as it has with Obama, be empowered, and then utterly fail.

How Could EMP Be the Death of America?

Source

I have pointed out an EMP attack is a real and possibly impending danger to the U. S.—it hangs over the country like the Sword of Damocles.Sword of Damocles. For more on the threat, see "’EMP 101’ A Basic Primer & Suggestions for Preparedness”

War is Coming

Photo source

Read this implicit threat against Iran. Iran nuclear arms worst threat to security: Gates from Secretary of Defense Gates. He said to the Economic Club of Chicago:

Iran is the one that concerns me the most because there don't seem to be good options (or a scenario) where one can have any optimism that good options will be found….

[The threat of Iran rests not only in Iran's apparent determination to seek a nuclear weapon, but in the] … inability of the international community to affect their determination to do that….

All of the outcomes are negative... If they achieve one, the possibility of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East is very, very real….

If something is done to prevent them from getting one, the consequences of that are completely unpredictable and frankly, very bad.

And Secretary of State Clinton warned Iran in her speech to the Council on Foreign Relations that:

“…to these foes and would-be foes, let me say: You should know that our focus on diplomacy and development is not an alternative to our national security arsenal. You should never see America’s willingness to talk as a sign of weakness to be exploited. We will not hesitate to defend our friends and ourselves vigorously when necessary with the world’s strongest military. This is not an option we seek. Nor is it a threat; it is a promise to the American people.”

There is a way around this dangerous impasse over Iran’s growing nuclear capability. It is an American approved, Israeli air strike on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. I predict this will happen.

The scenario has these stages.

(1) Israeli fighter-bombers attack Iran’s nuclear infrastructure using two Georgian airfields.

(2) Iran targets her surface to surface Shahab-3 missiles on Israel, and blockades the Strait of Hormuz with her naval and air forces.

(3) The U.S. moves its carrier task forces to keep open the crucial strait. About 17 million barrels of oil, more than any other oil chokepoint in the world, move through it daily and Iran cannot be allowed to close it.

(4) Military action between Iranian and American forces.

(5) Iran declares war on Israel and the U.S.

(6) Obama does not request a declaration of war from Congress, but does ask for a blank check to fight Iran. A huge majority approves.

(7) Obama appoints a “Military Czar” to oversee the undeclared war.

So What If A Lie?--It Is The Politics of Power

Cartoon source

In American domestic and foreign politics, lies abound. Their function is to gain, enhance, or secure power for the purveyors or their supporters.

The list of such lies—Bush lied, 9/11 was an inside job, the CIA and Vice President Johnson murdered Kennedy, America is an imperialist power, Israel has brutally suppressed the Palestinians, there is global warming, CO2 is causing global warming, only nationalization of the economy will cure the present economic crises, our health crisis demands nationalization of health—is endless. When these lies are imbedded in a structure of falsehoods and half-truths, and repeated often enough with conviction by the information/news gate-keepers in the major media, the public will believe them. Thus, lies become a source of power for the highest offices, for legislation, for court cases, for regulations, and for laws to control the American people.

This is how the power game is played. It was through incessant lies that fascism took root in Italy, Japan, and China (the Nationalist regime), Nazism in Germany, Communism in Russia, and China, all of one sort of socialism or another, and all tyrannies. Of course, we should not forget the American fascist tyranny under President Wilson, especially during WWI. (Surprised? Read your American history.)

These lies must be challenged with the truth, also repeated and repeated beyond count, by those who know it. Unless lies are shown for what they are, democracy itself is threatened again. For the power that such lies enable (increasingly obvious in the United States), can lead to a one-party state, a tyranny, where attempting to expose the lies can mean a heavy fine, ostracism, or even a prison sentence. This happened under Wilson and happens under all socialist governments. Punishment for telling the truth almost applies now to global warming, where journalists and scientists can be fired from their jobs for questioning this false claim.

This is now where we are headed. Republicans and conservatives are failing in their duty to protect democracy from socialist and progressive lies. They should be shouting the truth from the roof tops and out their windows. Perhaps a new party that will is timely and appropriate.

The Great Global Warming Power Grab

Cartoon source

First, see the two charts at"Global Warming Is A Scam For Power" that in themselves show how false global warming and its supposed connection to CO2.

Second, listen to this "The Great Global Warming Swindle."


You may not realize that this notion of Global warming does not fit scientific facts. What is claimed by global alarmists is not happening -- ice is not retreating, the earth’s recent temperature has not risen significantly, polar bears are not dying out, and oceans are not rising. Nor is there proof that human produced CO2 causes global warming. But the idea of global warming, even if glaringly false, is great for the socialists and progressive environmentalists. For if enough people (especially politicians) are made to believe this lie, it enables an incredible power grab. The idea can create, as it has, great fear. Purveyors of this lie can claim a global warming crisis. A disaster, unless we do something. And what must we do? Prevent CO2 emissions. Control capitalism at the root, of course.

Never mind the effect on the economy. These ideologues generally hate capitalism anyway. Now, the idea provides a means to power over capitalist industry and even activities in your home and at work. So they endlessly repeat the idea, and cunningly make it a social crime to deny it -- like denying the Holocaust.

Thus these ideologues have created, supported, and pushed for the so called Cap and Trade global warming, Bill. It narrowly passed in the House, and is being debated in the Senate.

If it does pass Congress, Obama will sign it. Then, unbelievable power will pass to the progressive socialists. And we will be much, much closer to tyranny because this lie was repeated so often that too many people came to believe it.

Tyranny Closing In—University Leftism

The Sword of Damocles hovering over the U.S. is getting closer.


Cartoon source
University leftism is on a relentless roll. Academic freedom? The hallowed halls where open debate and conflicting ideas flourish? The sanctity of civil discourse? Ha! Not anymore. One side now has the freedom to state its views; others do so at their peril.


Professor Thomas Klocek of DePaul University in Chicago is a case in point. Quoting from Joseph Farah’s "When 'academic freedom' fails" article,

Last Sept. 15, the man who has taught critical thinking, college writing and cultures of the world at the Catholic university’s School for New Learning for the last 15 years, Klocek made the mistake of debating the subject of the Middle East with some extremists partial to Hamas, the Islamic Jihad and Arab nationalists among the Students for Justice in Palestine and the United Muslims Moving Ahead at a student activities fair.


The informal debate was heated, with Klocek the sole defender of Israel and Middle East Christians in the room. But no blows were exchanged,
no verbal threats made. The spirited argument lasted between 15 and 20 minutes, according to everyone involved.


Nine days later, Klocek found himself the victim of an “emergency suspension” and unceremoniously kicked off the campus. No hearing by his peers. No formal complaints lodged against him. The unsubstantiated accusations by zealous students that Klocek made “racist” remarks was all that was needed to crush the claim of academic freedom at DePaul.


He was offered his job back if he agreed to apologize to the students and have his teaching monitored. He refused.


Now he has no job. . . .


You see, diversity is welcomed if, and only if, it agrees with what is the conventional wisdom in the rarefied atmosphere of academia. . . .Klocek’s students accused him of the unpardonable sins of “demeaning their ideas” and “dishonoring their perspective” and pressing erroneous assertions” and of using his power as a “professor over them” to force them to accept his arguments as true.


Exactly what did he say? He had dared to question the accuracy of literature asserting Rachel Corrie was “murdered by an Israeli bulldozer” and a verbal assertion that “the Palestinians are being treated by Israelis the same way Hitler treated the Jews.”

This is only one such story. There are volumes of horrific tales where the left have punished students and professors for their views, or in their mistaken belief in “academic freedom.”
Schools today are a major subversive force in our society undermining the idea of freedom, stealthily sliding us closer to tyranny. They indoctrinate our children and youth -- propagandize them into armies of “anti-war,” anti-globalization, anti-American, brain washed demonstrators and protestors. That is, before they eventually become teachers, businessmen, politicians and, of course, lawyers and judges, all to further, often unwittingly, leftist extremism.


What to do? Sunshine. Documentaries. Investigative journalism by blogs, talk radio, and the new media. Legislative hearings. Expose the truth. The left’s anchor to the schools -– tenure — could not survive an aroused silent majority.


Note this study."Leaning to the Left"
”Inside Higher Ed” (3/30/05 )
Three political scientists did a survey of 1,643 faculty members at 183 four-year colleges and asked them how they identified themselves politically. This article describes the results (full report not generally available):

Faculty members in the study were asked to place themselves on the political spectrum, and 72 percent identified as liberal while only 15 percent identified as conservative, with the remainder in the middle. The professors were also asked about party affiliation, and here the breakdown was 50 percent Democrats, 11 percent Republicans, and the rest independent and third parties.

That the contemporary American university is an anti-American, pro-socialist propaganda mill is suggested by the survey above, but the true meaning of this division and its dire consequences for individual freedom hits home only through personal experiences such as Professor Klocek’s, and my own.


I was a professor for about three decades in a Political Science Department composed of democrats, socialists and Marxists. As the lone libertarian and conservative, I experience the leftism and the personal cost of this in salary and influence, and witnessed the indoctrination of students who were getting nothing but left wing propaganda.


See also the article "Nearly all my professors are Democrats. Isn't that a problem?" Yes, it is, and so tyranny is closing in on the United States

Tyranny Closing In—Unlimited Preventive Detention

The Sword of Damocles hovering over the U.S. is getting closer.

Cartoon source
See Preventive detention by Nicholas N. Kittrie. They say:

Circulating in White House corridors and through Justice Department offices is a proposal for the creation of a controversial new national system of preventive detentions. This latest proposed anti-terrorism measure might be merely an attempt to better meet the "need to incapacitate dangerous people," or it might extend so far as to encompass the "full gamut of national security issues from intelligence gathering to prosecution."

Not since the infamous 1950 McCarran Emergency Detention Act, passed over President Truman's veto, has serious consideration been given in America to a program that would surrender to the executive branch the power to indefinitely detain security "suspects.”

See also The Back Door Way to Ignore the Bill of Rights
 which says:

Among the most shocking aspects of Barack Obama’s presidency so far has been his embrace of the power that George W. Bush assumed to incarcerate people suspected of terrorism for the rest of their lives, without a jury trial to determine whether they are in fact guilty of the offense. There is absolutely no reason why Obama and any future president cannot expand that power to other federal criminal offenses, including drug crimes and gun crimes.

And remember the Homeland Security Report that warned police departments of the rise in “right-wing” extremism. And then we have the proposal for preventive detention also circulating in the Obama administration.

Hmmm. A random coincidence?

The Democrats Continue to Kill American Security

Cartoon source

See U.S.: Reaction to the CIA Assassination Program by Scott Stewart and Fred Burton.

In April we discussed how some of the early actions of the Obama administration were having a chilling effect on U.S. counterterrorism programs and personnel. Expanding the minimum reporting requirements under the National Security Act will serve to turn the thermostat down several additional notches, as did Panetta’s overt killing of the covert program. It is one thing to quietly kill a controversial program; it is quite another to repudiate the CIA in public. In addition to damaging the already low morale at the agency, Panetta has announced in a very public manner that the United States has taken one important tool entirely out of the counterterrorism toolbox: Al Qaeda no longer has to fear the possibility of clandestine American assassination teams.

What the Democrats did in turning South Vietnam and Cambodia over to the communists, with a resulting bloodbath of several million, they are now unintentionally and stupidly doing to the United States. They might as well post a sign that says. "Islamofascists Welcome"

Will Obama Save American Democracy?

Cartoon source

As I have noted in previous blogs (see ”Tyranny Closing In—Nationalizing Health“, ”Tyranny Closing In—Nationalizing Food”, ”Tyranny closing in—Illegalizing Dissension”), a Sword of Damocles—EMP and Tyranny—hangs over America and it is closing in. Obama policies are responsible for this, but will he ultimately let the sword fall? Is tyranny under him our destiny?

Not necessarily. Obama is a 1960s peacenik. His most important policy goal is social justice --redistributing income and wealth to the poor and disadvantaged, thus promoting equality and social welfare.

To do this he needs the power of government. Political freedom and democracy (except for his own freedom and election) is secondary. The free market is a cesspool of greed and profit mongering. He has displayed these views in so many ways, as shown in the above linked blogs

Obama is not necessarily antidemocratic nor seeking a dictatorship. In his view, he is motivated by the most noble humanitarian impulses. He does not pursue power per se. But he must have socialist power to help the poor here and abroad. If tyranny is an unintended consequence, well, so be it. Government, after all, is a tool to be used. He is a creature of the French Revolution, not the American. For Obama, our Constitution, created to check and balance the power of government, is an inconvenient obstacle.

Some Foreign Policy Commentary Links

Cartoon source

Why We Don't Want a Nuclear-Free World
The former defense secretary on the U.S. deterrent and the terrorist threat.

Obama’s Moscow Retreat

Promoting democracy – with realistic idealism?

Numbering the Days of Dictators

Obama's Democracy Problem

The Abandonment of Democracy

The Dumbing Down of Democracy

Obama emphasizes democracy, human rights in Ghana

Text of Obama's Ghana speech

Obama—The 60s Peacenik

Cartoon source
Obama’s worldview and foreign policy are that of the 1960’s peacenik (as was his mother’s — his father was an acquaintance of mine at the University of Hawaii where I met the girl who became Obama’s mother). His pronouncements have been carefully scrubbed to align with those of liberal Democrats and the professional foreign policy establishment’s realist theory, but are radical nonetheless. He fails to promote democratic freedom and the idea of the democratic peace. He ignores the fact that democracy is a method of nonviolence and the way to world peace and human security.

As a peacnik, Obama’s underlying theme (as it is in professional peace studies) is social justice, whether in foreign or domestic policy. That is, one should promote social justice (a key Obama word)—equality, and thus socialism at home and abroad. “Justice” comes first, before democracy, before freedom, before human rights. He also is a firm believer in the moral equivalence of governments, and thus not particularly unhappy with Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Honduran President Manuel, and Evo Morales of Bolivia, who are all social justice, socialist promoters over democratic rule.

For Obama, there exists a moral equivalence between liberal democracies and socialist governments. After all, the latter use power to ameliorate poverty and underdevelopment.

As did the 1960s peacenik, Obama views previous presidents as having employed power to create an American empire—a military and capitalist empire that has cruelly dominated the world for profit and power. So he peppers his foreign policy speeches with apologies for what America has done to the world. In this he is not necessarily anti-American. He is simply a child nourished by the academic leftist culture.
It follows then, Obama the peacenik is antiwar. Never mind that we have sworn enemies bent on destroying us. He inherited the Afghan and Iraq Wars. He is withdrawing from Iraq and had to compromise with supporters of a surge in Afghanistan, but he has made it a limited and perhaps self-defeating one. He has severely cut the defense budget, refused to allow an upgrading of our nukes, and despite North Korea’s nuclear and missile developments, as well as Iran’s upcoming nuclear weapons, he has cut expenditures on our missile defenses and development. He is not hardening our military capability or civilian structures against a possible EMP attack. And he rejects the notion that we are war with Islamofascism. In his administration, the War On Terror is an “Overseas Contingency Operation”. Terrorists are merely another kind of freedom fighter with the possible exception of Al- Qaeda. They are “violent extremists”, if they are mentioned at all, which is rare.

Then there is our nuclear deterrence. He espouses antiproliferation and elimination of nukes as a global policy. He fails to recognize the importance of deterrence to our security and to our democratic allies. Elimination of all nuclear weapons would be disastrous for the democracies that then would have no nuclear deterrence against rogue nations or terrorist groups. This is where the fact of the democratic peace also is critical to policy. Democracies do not make war on each other, and so nuclear weapons in their hands only deter nondemocracies. They are no danger to other democracies. Nuclear weapons in the hands of Great Britain, France, and Israel are not the same as in North Korean or Iranian hands.

In sum, Obama not only endangers democratic freedom domestically, as shown in here (see ”Tyranny Closing In—Nationalizing Health“, ”Tyranny Closing In—Nationalizing Food”, ”Tyranny closing in—Illegalizing Dissension”), but he profoundly jeopardizes American security. Thus, these questions? How long will our threatened democratic freedoms survive Obama? How long before our enemies realize our vulnerability under him? When will the Sword of Damocles fall?

Iranian Ayatollah Montazeri Issues Fatwa Against the Regime

Source of cartonOn July 11, 2009, the liberal Iranian website www.khandaniha.eu published a fatwa by Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, the most senior contemporary Shi'ite cleric. The fatwa was issued in response to a series of queries submitted to him by Iranian intellectual and cleric Mohsen Kadivar, pertaining to the legitimacy of the current Iranian government.

Source of fatwa

The following are excerpts from the fatwa:(1)

Query: "What is the ruling regarding holders of government positions, whom shari'a law requires to act justly, honestly, and wisely... if they [do not fulfill] these requirements to any degree, but behave in a manner diametrically opposed to them?"

Reply: "If none of the requirements mentioned in this query are met, this automatically, and without any need for impeachment, brings about the de facto collapse of the velayat [the 'jurisprudent,' meaning Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei] and of the government that is in charge of administering social affairs [i.e. the government of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad] – and renders null and void all decrees issued by those who hold government positions...

"In the event of a breach of any article of the contract between the two sides – namely [the contract] between the position holder and the people, who appointed him – the people may remove the position holder from his post."

Query: "What is the religious duty of the people if these position holders insist on acting in ways that contravene the religious directive of 'commanding good and prohibiting evil?'"

Reply: "As I said, both religious law and common sense [dictate that] position holders who have lost the right to administer social affairs automatically lose their posts, and their rule is no longer legitimate in any way. If they remain in their position by means of force, fraud, or forgery, then the people must express their opinion regarding the illegitimacy and unpopularity [of these position holders], and remove them from their posts in the least harmful way...

"Obviously, this is a duty incumbent upon all [and not only upon specific individuals]... and none may evade it under any pretext. The elite [i.e. the clerics] have a special obligation [to carry out this task], since they are knowledgeable in religious and civil law, and have greater ability than [the rest of the people]. Their statements have greater influence and carry greater force; therefore, they bear a greater responsibility. They must present [the people]... with an alternative [option], while [preserving the people's] unity and ideological harmony, and establishing parties as well as public and private organizations."

Query: "Do the great sins listed below, and the [position holders'] insistence on committing them, contravene the 'principle of justice' and lead to the implementation of the 'principle of tyranny?'

"1. Ordering innocent people killed and causing their death;

"2. Ordering and being involved in an armed [campaign] of threats and intimidation, and of beating and wounding innocent people in the streets;

"3. The de facto prevention of senior ayatollahs from fulfilling their religious duty of 'commanding good and prohibiting evil,' by obstructing all reasonable and legal means of non-violent protest;

"4. Denying freedom and imprisoning anyone who acts or advises [others] to act [according to the religious precept of] 'commanding good and prohibiting evil,' and extorting false confessions through pressure;

"5. Censoring media and information…;

"6. Smearing all those who protested [following the elections]... and all those who opposed the position holders, [by calling them] 'mercenaries' and 'spies of foreign [forces]';

"7. [Spreading] lies, false testimony, and false reports on all matters concerning the rights of the public;

"8. Betraying the people's trust;

"9. [Practicing] tyranny, ignoring [the people's] opinion, and disregarding the clerics' counsel and warnings;

"10. Preventing rightful owners [i.e. the people] from taking possession of the common property – [that is,] the nation's destiny;

"11. Insulting Islam and demeaning religion by presenting Islam and the Shi'ia to the world as crude, illogical, aggressive, superstitious, and despotic."

Reply: "Committing the above sins, or insisting on [committing] some of them, is incontrovertible and clear proof of the absence of justice, and is [in fact] an essential characteristic of oppression and injustice… It is obvious that any sin committed in the name of religion, justice, or the law – and especially the [sins] mentioned above – [makes] evil increase, and also causes further distancing from the religion. [These offenses entail] the most severe punishment, in this world and in the world to come, since in addition to the evil sins of fraud and of distancing [people] from the religion, they also corrupt [the very principles of] justice and law.

"In cases where according to the position holders, the acts were just and within the law, while the majority of the people maintains that they were illegal... and [that they constituted] offenses against [the people's] rights, then there is a need to act according to a ruling by honest and impartial arbitrators agreed upon by both sides."

Query: "Does clinging to principles such as 'the supreme duty of preserving the regime' justify aggression against the legitimate rights of the people and the trampling of most of the moral directives and religious commandments, such as [the commandment to be] truthful and trustworthy? Can implementing justice be suspended... under the pretext of preserving the regime's interests? What is the believers' religious duty if some position holders confuse the regime's interests with their own, and insist on enforcing their mistake?"

Reply: "...Clearly, it is not possible to preserve or strengthen the Islamic regime via oppression – which contravenes [the precepts of] Islam. This is because the need for a regime stems [in the first place from the need] to dispense justice and to protect [the people's] rights – that is, to implement the directives of Islam. So how can injustice, oppression and [other] contraventions of Islam possibly [serve to] strengthen or preserve a just Islamic regime?

"A regime that uses clubs, oppression, aggression against [the people's] rights, injustice, rigged elections, murder, arrests, and medieval or Stalin-era torture, [a regime that] gags and censors the press, obstructs the media, imprisons intellectuals and elected leaders on false allegations or forced confessions... – [such a regime] is despicable and has no religious merit...

"The proud people of Iran know very well exactly how authentic [the detainees'] confessions are; they are like [confessions obtained] by fascist and communist regimes. The nation knows that the false confessions and televised interviews were obtained from its imprisoned sons with threats and torture, and that their aim is to cover up the oppression and injustice, and to [present a] distorted [image] of the people's peaceful and legal protest...

"The state belongs to the people. It is neither my property nor yours... When the Shah heard the voice of the people's revolution, it was already too late [for him]. It is to be hoped that the people in charge [today] will not let [themselves] reach the same situation, but will become more amenable to the nation's demands, and as soon as possible...

Query: "What are the religious indications for an 'oppressive rule [velayat, meaning Khamenei],' and what are the duties of the clerics and the believers [when faced with such a regime]?"

Reply: "...Society notices justice and injustice on the part of the rulers; the signs are clear to all... [Therefore,] it the responsibility of everyone to act in the face of injustice and in the face of the trampling of the people's rights – and to inform others of this responsibility. Furthermore, [both clerics and believers] must present ways to act in these circumstances... This is because it is inconceivable that someone would claim to be pursuing justice, but would in fact do nothing to implement it, under the pretext of fear or powerlessness..."

Where is Obama's Recognition of Freedom?

Photo source


The idea of social justice drives Obama’s policies, not freedom.

Missing the "freedom agenda" on the Fourth of July

By Kori Schake

This weekend we celebrate our country's independence and the courage of those brave men who met in congress in Philadelphia to chart a path to greater liberty. Despite the considerable effort Jefferson goes to in the Declaration to enumerate the crown's depredations, and the very real grievances Americans had against the British government, we stand now far enough from the colonial experience to acknowledge we rebelled against perhaps the most humane and legally responsible government of its time.
And yet we rebelled. We are a country founded on the belief that people have rights, and they loan them in limited ways for limited purposes to their government. We were made great by distrust of a largely beneficial British government, and we remain great by distrust of our own.
Which is what makes our president's response to Iran's elections so discouraging. America's reflex -- our natural position as a country -- is to stand with a people against their government when that government is infringing upon their natural rights. But our president chose the course of deference to an authoritarian government as it repressed its own people. More

Tyranny Closing In—Nationalizing Health

So, how is the Sword of Damocles Hovering over the U.S doing? Moving away, closer?
Closing in. Note this:

Cartoon source

Health Police Manufacture An Epidemic

No one likes being called "fat," "overweight," or -- most of all -- "obese." But the truth hurts, and the sooner Tom Cruise, Mark McGwire, Michael Jordan, and President Bush acknowledge their bloated physiques, the sooner they can trim down. What's that you say? These fitness fanatics aren't fat? They are indeed, according to the federal government's Body Mass Index (BMI) standard, which uses only height and weight to classify folks as obese, overweight, or government-approved….

The faulty Body Mass Index doesn't serve the health interests of Americans. It only serves the meddlesome interests of trial lawyers and food cops. Thanks to the BMI standard, we are incessantly bombarded with the misleading statistic that 61 percent of Americans are overweight or obese. Such figures are the weak statistical foundation on which food activists build their nutritional utopias, including arguments for fat taxes and obesity lawsuits. More

See also Steele warns of 'health police' who will enforce yearly physicals

Tyranny Closing In—Nationalizing Food

So, how is the Sword of Damocles Hovering over the U.S. doing? Moving away, closer?
It is closing in. Note this:


Cartoon Source

HR 2749: Totalitarian Control of the Food Supply

A new food safety bill is on the fast track in Congress-HR 2749, the Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009. The bill needs to be stopped.

HR 2749 gives FDA tremendous power while significantly diminishing existing judicial restraints on actions taken by the agency. The bill would impose a one-size-fits-all regulatory scheme on small farms and local artisanal producers; and it would disproportionately impact their operations for the worse. More

See also Not what the American people ordered – HR 2749, martial law and the enslavement of their farmers.

Tyranny closing in—Illegalizing Dissension

So, how is the Sword of Damocles Hovering over the U.S. doing? Moving away, closer?
It is closing in. Note this:

Attorney General To Classify Pro-Life, Pro-Gun Americans As Terrorists


07-07-2009 •
NWV News writer Jim Kouri’s revelation.

An amendment to a bill swiftly moving through the US Congress will allow the Obama Administration’s Attorney General to classify Americans as domestic terrorists if they are pro-life, pro-gun and anti-big government. More

Tyranny Closing In—Sqashing Investigations

So, how is the Sword of Damocles Hovering over the U.S. doing? Moving away, closer?
It is closing in. Note this:

Conyers Backs Off Probe Of ACORN

Mr. Conyers, Michigan Democrat, earlier bucked his party leaders by calling for hearings on accusations the Association of Community Organization for Reform Now (ACORN) has committed crimes ranging from voter fraud to mob-style "protection" racket.

"The powers that be decided against it," Mr. Conyers told The Washington Times as he left the House chambers Wednesday.
More here



Cartoon Source; studentnewsdaily.com

The Death of American Democracy

The most serious and realistic threats today to the United States of America are two. One foreign -- the threat of an EMP nuclear attack on the country. The other domestic -- that Congress and President Obama will turn the country into a one-party, authoritarian state—a tyranny. These threats are a sword of Damocles hanging over us all. If it falls it would be a death blow to democratic freedom as we have known it. I have written a blog on each threat. On an EMP attack, see ” EMP—The Most Deadly Threat to the U.S.” . On the danger of authoritarianism, see ”Authoritarianism On The Way”.

Authoritarianism On The Way

Mike Ramirez in the NY Post
I am particularly sensitive to signals that may foretell radical changes in our political system. First, I see that Obama has become a charismatic cult figure, much loved for who and what he is. His followers, including those in the media and schools, are devoted to him. He strokes this devotion with vague and comforting rhetoric that camouflages his lust for power. He will never admit to nationalizing health care. No, he will “reform our system by expanding coverage, improving quality, lowering costs, honoring patient choice and holding insurance companies accountable.” Who is going to oppose that?

Second, the Democratic Party, with Obama as its head, has a stranglehold on Congress. Hispanics, Blacks, gays, single and employed woman, unions, teachers, most foundations, thousands of lawyers, and the major media strongly support Democrats, in some cases by well over by 70-80% percent. Then there are the leftist groups and the very rich who provide many resources for the Democratic electoral campaigns. Need I mention ACORN?

Third, Democrats are blessed with an inept and hapless Republican Party which has been unable to provide meaningful and aggressive opposition. Republicans have no clear leader, being badly fractionated into supporters of Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, and perhaps a few others such as Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. Despite what the Democrats in Congress have been doing to the country and on taxes, its generic poll average is 40 percent versus 35 for Republicans. This is a testament to the power of the Democrat’s organs, and the deceptive major media which hides and lies about the doings of Obama and the Democratic Congress.

It is possible that Democrats may further overreach for power, create an abominable scandal, alienate the media, and create a huge backlash. The Republicans may get their act together, and recover as they have in the past. But, the current power grab by Democrats has no precedent. We are seeing here not a trend line, but seizure of power by leaps and bounds.

The consequence may be an authoritarian political system—a one-party state.

We have a new state religion—secularism. Government suppresses free speech for the sake of political correctness, global warming, energy efficiency, and electoral fairness. Were I teaching now, I would be fired for speaking out on things I believe are true. Businessmen are not free to fire and hire, or now, even to pay workers what they wish. Big business is at the mercy of big government.

At the last count, Obama has created directly under his control, responsible to no one else, twenty-nine czars with far reaching power over our social and economic affairs, including compensation, energy, borders, drugs, intelligence, regulations, climate, urban affairs, health, cars, AIDS, green jobs, weather, and on and on and on. Even the courts, including the strict constructionists, have become statists. The federal government now thoroughly dominates the states. State sovereignty is a mirage. In effect, the balance of power, checks and balance system, created by the Constitution is a theory for political science courses, but no longer a reality.

If you think I exaggerate, ask yourself. Are you freer today than you were years ago, even six months ago?

Relevant Link

”The New America” by David Warren

Global Warming Is A Scam For Power

For those who want to keep an open mind on global warming, or feel there is some truth to it and its association with CO2, the following plots may be helpful.


Note that there were many periods when the climate had become warmer than it is today without man generated CO2. Of course, man did come along, and the cave man did breathe and build fires. And in recent years as man’s industrial CO2 vastly increased, the climate has cooled however.

These plots are from the March 2009 research study, Proposed NCEE Comments on Draft Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act. This is the very study that the EPA tried to suppress. (See “The EPA Silences a Climate Skeptic” by Kimberley A. Strassel)

It is a flat contradiction of the mantra of the Obama Administration and supporting Democrats. It undercuts their attempt at the super regulation of not only industry but every American. Their Cap and Trade global warming bill barely passed in the House. But pass it did, and is now before the Senate. The size of this breathtaking power grab has no counterpart in our history. And those seeking it will not give up this lust easily.

This is not just another step toward an authoritarian government, it is a gigantic leap.

Three Cheers for the United States?

This was written over two years ago and posted on July 3, 2005 on the H-Genocide list, and someone reposted it on the Discussion group for the Association for Humanist Sociology. One discussant, William Du Bois, termed it "Bullshit." Alan Spector submitted a long list of American "evils," and democides, in rebuttal, and claimed I was "the most shallow sort of propagandist for U.S. imperialism." Chomsky, well known for his anti-Americanism, simply claimed I seemed "more like a small time thug than a leading scholar of anything."

Well, so as not to appear patriotic, excessive, right-wing, insensitive, or in whatever other way I hit people's hot buttons, I want to express the following as simply, yet as professionally, as possible. However, all this should have a question mark. Obama’s foreign policy is an old line realist and left wing one, and not the Forward Strategy of Freedom that was Bush/s.

There now is a force in this world systematically doing what we all want done: eliminating democide and its aggressive forces, while trying to supplant it with a way of preventing it in the future.

In 1999, the United States and its NATO allies saved Kosovo from the ongoing mass murder by the Milosevic regime. It had used its military and paramilitary forces to slaughter about 10,000 Kosovo Albanians and drive out of the country perhaps a million of these poor people. The American and allied intervention also paved the way for Slobodan Milosevic to be indicted by the International War Crimes Tribunal and extradited to The Hague in June 2001 to stand trial. We should cheer this.

In 2002, United States anti-terrorist war has reduced the number of terrorist attacks to 199, a 44 percent drop from the previous year; in terms of murdered, from 3,300 in 2001 to 725. We should cheer this.

In the last nineteen months, The United States and its allies have swept away two gangs of democidal thugs and prime supporters of terrorism. Saddam Hussein's gang perhaps murdered a million in war and democide; the Taliban gang murdered hundreds of thousands. About 50 million Iraqis and Afghans that were suffering the tyranny, torture, imprisonment, and murder of these thugs are now free and on the way to democracy [which has been achieved]. We should cheer this.

There have been democratic elections in Afghanistan and Iraq, and women have been given more freedom than they had before. We should Cheer this

In the memory of many of us still, the United States and its allies rid the world of the democidal fascist regimes of Japan (over 5 million murdered), Germany (over 21 million), and Italy (over 220 thousand); saved South Korea from the democidal prison-state of North Korea (so far many millions murdered), unsuccessfully tried to save South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia from murderous communist bloodbath (ultimately murdering many millions), and saved the world from the democidal horror of Soviet Communism (about 61 million murdered). We should cheer this.

Surely, those who hate democide and the lack of human rights will note that the United States is the best possible ally in our cause. Indeed, we could characterize the United States (its administrations, its congress, and its people) as the swiftest and most effective democide and ruling thug cleanser and human rights promoter we could have wished. We should cheer this.

And what historical regime but the United States would have Western Europe and Asia prostrate under its military power in 1945, and yet work to democratize its former enemies, democratize them, give them independence, and then pull out. By comparison, the Soviet Union, the only other world competitor after it recovered from the war, subjected to its total political control those nations it occupied militarily. Some will put it in these terms: the US is the only nation that tries to devise an exit strategy even before military action takes place. We should cheer this.

What international organizations, international law, and the plethora of intellectual and academic analyses and solutions have been unable to do, the United States with one coalition or another has done. It has often left in its wake democracy or the process of democratization -- the only solution to democide and war that we know of and has worked. We all are better for it. We should cheer this.

Of course, the US has committed excesses. Of course, there is much to criticize. Of course, its foreign policies have not been perfect or always on the side of the angels. Of course, it has domestic problems. It is of and by imperfect human beings. But no matter. As we should be proud and happy over a fireman that has saved families from a burning home, no matter his personal imperfections or that he was clumsy, misplaced his axe, and forgot about the families' valuable antiques, we should cheer over what the United States has done.

Three cheers for the United States?

American Exceptionalism

American Exceptionalism by Monica Crowley. She is quite right about the exceptional nature of America. She writes

American exceptionalism is grounded in the founding of the United States upon an idea, rather than upon the ambitions of men. Indeed, it was designed to be a nation of laws and specifically not of men, built on the concept of individual liberty and equal justice before the law, with freedoms ranging from speech to worship, and rights from gun ownership to assembly.

Multicultural, politically correct,comparisons to other nation do not apply, until maybe recently. And Obama is now doing his eloquent and policy best to erase that exceptionalism.

EMP—The Most Deadly Threat to the U.S.

This shows a single EMP weapon detonated at the northwest corner of Iowa at about 600 kilometers high. The blast would blanket all of the United States. Even at the margins of the United States, the blast is still 50%.
Source: Congressman Roscoe Bartlett, Nuclear Electromagnetic Pulse Speech, June 9, 2005.


This shows the Johnston Island test of 1.4 megatons at a height of 870 KM, which effected electrical equipment in Hawaii over 1300 KM away.

Some years ago I was so impressed by the danger to our country posed by electromagnetic radiation (EMP) that I wrote a blog on it . This danger is greater today, especially with North Korea ‘s development of missiles and nukes, China’s growing nuclear arsenal, Iran’s accelerated nuclear development, not to mention what terrorist groups may buy, steal, or acquire. We must prepare our military generally, our civilian infrastructure, and ourselves for an EMP attack.

The delivery of such nukes over the United States need not be by long range missiles. Short range missiles launched from an innocent looking freighter off the American shore will do the job.

A good summary of EMP is in the Wikipedia here.. EMP can be created by one nuclear weapon exploded high above the country. The resulting burst of electromagnetic radiation can destroy all electrical and electronic equipment on the ground if they are not hardened against it. Airplanes would crash, and cars would stop running. Computers, telephones, cell phones, radio, television and all other electrical and electronic equipment would not operate. Nor would refrigerators, lights, electrical stoves, air conditioning, and electrical heat. People would soon begin to starve and die from lack of medicine. In short, without all things that make for modern and not so modern living, cities and towns would become a state of nature—the survival of the fittest, or most savage. Law and order would collapse, roving gangs would form to scavenge food, weapons, and women, and neighborhoods would have to organize for their own defense. In effect, the country would be plunged back into the Dark Ages.

You need not imagine this scenario. William R. Forstchen’s novel, One Second After, presents this horrendous possibility for just one family and one town, and I highly recommend it for its realism.

What then is our government doing to avert this catastrophe? Any military or civilian planning? There is not a word of it today from Congress, the military, or the major media. Bit, it was once of some concern, and that resulted in the Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from
Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack. The report says in part

Electrical power is necessary to support other critical infrastructures, including supply and distribution of water, food, fuel, communications, transport, financial transactions, emergency services, government services, and all other infrastructures supporting the national economy and welfare. Should significant parts of the electrical power infrastructure be lost for any substantial period of time, the Commission believes that the consequences are likely to be catastrophic, and many people may ultimately die for lack of the basic elements necessary to sustain life in dense urban and suburban communities. In fact, the Commission is deeply concerned that such impacts are likely in the event of an EMP attack unless practical steps are taken to provide protection for critical elements of the electric system and for rapid restoration of electric power, particularly to essential services. The recovery plans for the individual infrastructures currently in place essentially assume, at worst, limited upsets to the other infrastructures that are important to their operation. Such plans may be of little or no value in the wake of an EMP attack because of its long-duration effects on all infrastructures that rely on electricity or electronics.


The ability to recover from this situation is an area of great concern. Automated control systems have allowed many companies and agencies to operate effectively with small work forces. Thus, while manual control of some systems may be possible, the number of people knowledgeable enough to support manual operations is limited. Repair of physical damage is also constrained by a small work force. Many maintenance crews are sized to perform routine and preventive maintenance of high-reliability equipment. When repair or replacement is required that exceeds routine levels, arrangements are typically in place to augment crews from outside the affected area. However, due to the simultaneous, far-reaching effects from EMP, the anticipated augmenters likely will be occupied in their own areas. Thus, repairs normally requiring weeks of effort may take much longer time than planned.


To the extent it is reasonably possible, we should prepare for and protect against the consequences of an EMP event. Cold War-style deterrence through mutual assured destruction is not likely to be an effective threat against potential protagonists who are either failing states or trans-national groups. Therefore, preparing to manage the effects of an EMP attack, including understanding what has happened, maintaining situational awareness, having plans in place to recover, challenging and exercising those plans, and reducing vulnerabilities, is critical to reducing the consequences, and thus probability, of attack. The appropriate national-level approach should balance prevention, protection, and recovery.

We have now no such preparation or national level approach. People should be preparing and stocking up on essentials much more so than they would for a deadly hurricane. They are not being told to do so. It is as though there is an official conspiracy of silence so as to not panic the public.

Of course, the possibility of such an attack is very small, but not zero. But, the most improbable does happen. Need I mention 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. However unlikely an EMP attack is, we must balance that risk against the cost to the country and to us if it happens.

$20.3 million to Settle Palestinians, including Hamas, In U.S.

Believe it or not. Here is Executive Order E9-2488 recently signed by Obama that will settle Palestinian refugees and "conflict victims" in Gaza at the cost to the taxpayer of 20.3 million dollars.

And here is the article by Thomas Costanzo  that drew my attention to this.

Expect this. It is Obama at work.

Democide Vs. Other Causes of Death

Democide Vs. Other Causes of Death

A question I often get is how all the murder committed by governments, virtually all by criminal dictatorships (sorry, that was redundant—I need only say dictatorships) compares to other causes of death, such as war and diseases. So, below I present such a comparison chart for the world’s average annual democide rate 1900-1987 to the world’s annual death rate from other causes (this is one of a number of my attempts to visualize the world’s democide toll— link here).



Note that governments murdered more people than all deaths combined due to traffic accidents, war, homicide, and alcohol.

The total murdered by governments over 1900-1987 was 170,000,000; a less systematic update of the toll brings it to 174,000,000 for 1900-1999. [I have had to update this democide to 262,00,000] Shocking, yes? Now, think about how little is said about democide in textbooks and the media. Even more astounding, isn’t it?

For a chapter long dissection of the meaning and definition of democide, see this link.

And so, democide goes on in North Korea, Sudan, the Congo, China, Laos, Liberia, the Ivory Coast, and dozens and dozens of other dictatorships, mainly not some big episode of murder that would make the news, but as the day-by-day operation of government agencies. In other words, murder is a normal daily operation of these thugdoms.

How do we account for this continuing carnage? In these post-Cold War years, it’s the bloody success of immoral noninterventionism and obsolete realpolitiks.. Stability trumps stopping the murderous thugs, you know.

---

Link of Note

”Congo death toll up to 3.8m” (12/10/204) Guardian Unlimited Special Report

“Six years of conflict in Congo have claimed 3.8 million lives - half of them children - with most victims killed by disease and famine in the still largely cut-off east, the International Rescue Committee said yesterday.

“More than 31,000 civilians die each month as a result of the conflict despite peace deals, the group said, citing mortality surveys prepared with the aid of on-site medical teams. The association has for years produced the most widely used estimate of deaths in the country.”

Much of this is democide. And it goes on. And on. And on.