It’s a good thing I didn’t tell anyone about that New Year’s resolution that I wanted to blog more.    Bang up job so far!  Dang, it’s almost February and I haven’t even wished my one or two viewers a happy New Year!

So, I’m inspired today because of a video I watched over lunch.  Now that our country is swinging back to left, it’s time to vigilantly guard our right to bear arms.  Rumors are a flying about gun bans and so forth and I thought I’d put a subtle reminder out there about why we have such rights to begin with.

This video is case in point why we will NEVER surrender them in this country.

Click here to view the video!

I also wanted to put my 2 cents in about the Obama thing now that he’s our President and all.  I haven’t quite gotten on board yet, but I must say that I appreciated his inaugural speech.  Of course, the words “LIE” and “You’ll never be able to do that” were coming to my head far too frequently while watching…but nonetheless, I listened and I want to believe the speech.

SOOOOOOO…for those of you who didn’t get it, what he’s telling us is that it’s up to US to do what he’s talking about.  He didn’t say, “Go back to your homes, watch your TV and let me take care of it.”  He said we need to ACT and I fully agree with him.

So all your Democrats and koolaid drinkin’ Republicans out there…let’s particpate in this Republic again.  Get educated.  Write a letter to Congress.  Join an activist group.  Start a cause.  Do something.  I say that as much for myself as I do any others that might come across this.  Let’s hold him to the fire!

You want to end the wars?  Make it known.  You want sound monetary policies because you see our nation spiraling into debt?  Demand it.  You want to keep every firearm in your arsenal?  Defend them.  You want end the corporate bailouts?  Protest them.

If WE don’t, WHO will????  Not the politicians, I can guarantee you that.

Out.

No related posts.

“All truth passes through three stages.  First, it is ridiculed.  Second, it is violently opposed.  Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”  -Arthur Schopenhauer

I’ve been talking about “world government” for almost a decade now.  At first, I met a high degree of scepticism and disdain…people called me a conspiracy theorist or a nut.  Later on, it became a concept that was tangible to the people – they could see it, but outright denied it.  Now, it would seem that the people and the media have outright accepted it’s plausibility.

I have noticed an alarming trend, as of late, that these ideas of global governance are now being widely reported in the media.  People are seeing how we’re facing a near perfect storm for such a thing to come into the light.

I suppose the concept of global rule, to some regards, is nearly inevitable.  As our economic and social backgrounds become ever more blurred through the advancement of technology, it becomes logical, if not even sensible, to embrace others around this world in common cause.  Anyone who’s read H.G. Well’s, “The Open Conspiracy” has likely gotten a good dose of the human-centric idealism that a lot of pro “one worlders” have in the back of their minds.

When thinking through these concepts with a critical eye, however, one must recognize some serious faults with the destruction of nationalism.  Is a homogeneous culture really beneficial to human kind?  What happens if one power gains a foothold and turns sour?  Once we traverse into this realm of unified governance, how can the people resist an oppressive regime?    How do we avoid the inevitable political and social conflicts that such a plan will create?  What if a mistake is made…is it too much to affect the whole world?  These are just a handful of questions that come to mind.

The following article, from the highly respected Financial Times, is a must-read for anyone that cares to know what’s going on.  I felt it to be an honest investigation into the plausibility of the plan to create a new world.

And now for a world government

I have never believed that there is a secret United Nations plot to take over the US. I have never seen black helicopters hovering in the sky above Montana. But, for the first time in my life, I think the formation of some sort of world government is plausible.

A “world government” would involve much more than co-operation between nations. It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a body of laws. The European Union has already set up a continental government for 27 countries, which could be a model. The EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability to deploy military force.

So could the European model go global? There are three reasons for thinking that it might.

First, it is increasingly clear that the most difficult issues facing national governments are international in nature: there is global warming, a global financial crisis and a “global war on terror”.

Second, it could be done. The transport and communications revolutions have shrunk the world so that, as Geoffrey Blainey, an eminent Australian historian, has written: “For the first time in human history, world government of some sort is now possible.” Mr Blainey foresees an attempt to form a world government at some point in the next two centuries, which is an unusually long time horizon for the average newspaper column.

But – the third point – a change in the political atmosphere suggests that “global governance” could come much sooner than that. The financial crisis and climate change are pushing national governments towards global solutions, even in countries such as China and the US that are traditionally fierce guardians of national sovereignty.

Barack Obama, America’s president-in-waiting, does not share the Bush administration’s disdain for international agreements and treaties. In his book, The Audacity of Hope, he argued that: “When the world’s sole superpower willingly restrains its power and abides by internationally agreed-upon standards of conduct, it sends a message that these are rules worth following.” The importance that Mr Obama attaches to the UN is shown by the fact that he has appointed Susan Rice, one of his closest aides, as America’s ambassador to the UN, and given her a seat in the cabinet.

A taste of the ideas doing the rounds in Obama circles is offered by a recent report from the Managing Global Insecurity project, whose small US advisory group includes John Podesta, the man heading Mr Obama’s transition team and Strobe Talbott, the president of the Brookings Institution, from which Ms Rice has just emerged.

The MGI report argues for the creation of a UN high commissioner for counter-terrorist activity, a legally binding climate-change agreement negotiated under the auspices of the UN and the creation of a 50,000-strong UN peacekeeping force. Once countries had pledged troops to this reserve army, the UN would have first call upon them.

These are the kind of ideas that get people reaching for their rifles in America’s talk-radio heartland. Aware of the political sensitivity of its ideas, the MGI report opts for soothing language. It emphasises the need for American leadership and uses the term, “responsible sovereignty” – when calling for international co-operation – rather than the more radical-sounding phrase favoured in Europe, “shared sovereignty”. It also talks about “global governance” rather than world government.

But some European thinkers think that they recognise what is going on. Jacques Attali, an adviser to President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, argues that: “Global governance is just a euphemism for global government.” As far as he is concerned, some form of global government cannot come too soon. Mr Attali believes that the “core of the international financial crisis is that we have global financial markets and no global rule of law”.

So, it seems, everything is in place. For the first time since homo sapiens began to doodle on cave walls, there is an argument, an opportunity and a means to make serious steps towards a world government.

But let us not get carried away. While it seems feasible that some sort of world government might emerge over the next century, any push for “global governance” in the here and now will be a painful, slow process.

There are good and bad reasons for this. The bad reason is a lack of will and determination on the part of national, political leaders who – while they might like to talk about “a planet in peril” – are ultimately still much more focused on their next election, at home.

But this “problem” also hints at a more welcome reason why making progress on global governance will be slow sledding. Even in the EU – the heartland of law-based international government – the idea remains unpopular. The EU has suffered a series of humiliating defeats in referendums, when plans for “ever closer union” have been referred to the voters. In general, the Union has progressed fastest when far-reaching deals have been agreed by technocrats and politicians – and then pushed through without direct reference to the voters. International governance tends to be effective, only when it is anti-democratic.

The world’s most pressing political problems may indeed be international in nature, but the average citizen’s political identity remains stubbornly local. Until somebody cracks this problem, that plan for world government may have to stay locked away in a safe at the UN.

No related posts.

Barry Cooper, former Texas police officer, has made it his mission to expose the heavy handed tactics that police are using these days to fight the war on drugs.  There are quite a few cops that have seen the light and now oppose the incendiary and ineffective war on drugs.

It was fantastic.  They rented a house and set up a couple of Christmas trees under high powered lights, similar to those used in a marijuana grow operation.  And then they waited.  Sure enough, 24 hours later, the cops came busting in the door – only to find benign Christmas trees and a lawyer waiting for their arrival.

One question.  Where’s the probable cause??????

I can pretty confidently say that pine trees and marijuana do not smell at all similar.  Obviously if a cop had *seen* the plants, he would have rightly come to the conclusion that they do not look similar either.  Interestingly enough, the Austin cops are refusing to release the search affidavit – which, in this case, is clearly full of lies and false statements.  Just to be clear, lying to get a judge to sign a search warrant is highly illegal and is very dangerous to a free society.

Click here to view the video!

For those that know me, you know that I support the libertarian viewpoint on drug legalization.  I say legalize ‘em all.  The argument is very simple and has three major points.

First, for over 30 years, the war on drugs has done very little to actually reduce the amount of drugs on the streets.  Instead, it has caused prices to rise, further increasing the alure for young kids and law-dodging entrepreneurs to make huge sums of money.  The underlying effect has been to actually increase supply.  It’s been proven over and over, especially during the times of prohibition, that when a “popular” thing is made illegal, it does not go away and it concentrates the activity into less-than-desirable underground movements.

The second is that legalization would do nothing to increase usage.  I ask every pro-drug-war proponent this question:  “If drugs were legalized tomorrow, would YOU go out and start dropping heroin and meth?”  The answer is by and large no, and that truth stands for me as well.  Those who will experiment will experiment, regardless of what the law says.  The difference is that legalization would bring things out in the open, where dangers could be warned against at the time of sale.

The fundamental argument is whether we are allowed to put whatever we want into our bodies, so long as it does not harm others.  The problem of addiction is a health matter, not a criminal one.  Causing harm to others is all ready against the law – so things like hurting another person or driving under the influence are illegal regardless of the status of drug legalization.

In conclusion, I give my props to Barry Cooper and his group KopBusters for performing this little stunt.  The trap they laid was awesome and will hopefully go a long way to expose the police, judges and other parties that were involved in this.

No related posts.

Are you on the terrorist list?  Think you’re not doing anything wrong and so you have nothing to worry about?  Well, as us watchdogs have been telling you for years, you don’t have to be doing anything wrong to be labeled as a terrorist in America these days.

I read this article from the LA Times this morning and it just further confirms that we must remain vigilantly on guard against being tossed down the path of being a “homegrown terrorist.”  Even if you’re a nun.

Spying on pacifists, environmentalists and nuns

Reporting from Takoma Park, Md. — To friends in the protest movement, Lucy was an eager 20-something who attended their events and sent encouraging e-mails to support their causes.

Only one thing seemed strange.

“At one demonstration, I remember her showing up with a laptop computer and typing away,” said Mike Stark, who helped lead the anti-death-penalty march in Baltimore that day. “We all thought that was odd.”

Not really. The woman was an undercover Maryland State Police trooper who between 2005 and 2007 infiltrated more than two dozen rallies and meetings of nonviolent groups.

Maryland officials now concede that, based on information gathered by “Lucy” and others, state police wrongly listed at least 53 Americans as terrorists in a criminal intelligence database — and shared some information about them with half a dozen state and federal agencies, including the National Security Agency.

Among those labeled as terrorists: two Catholic nuns, a former Democratic congressional candidate, a lifelong pacifist and a registered lobbyist. One suspect’s file warned that she was “involved in puppet making and allows anarchists to utilize her property for meetings.”

“There wasn’t a scintilla of illegal activity” going on, said David Rocah, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed a lawsuit and in July obtained the first surveillance files. State police have released other heavily redacted documents.

Investigators, the files show, targeted groups that advocated against abortion, global warming, nuclear arms, military recruiting in high schools and biodefense research, among other issues.

“It was unconscionable conduct,” said Democratic state Sen. Brian Frosh, who is backing legislation to ban similar spying in Maryland unless the police superintendent can document a “reasonable, articulable suspicion” of criminal activity.

The case is the latest to emerge since the Sept. 11 attacks spurred a sharp increase in state and federal surveillance of Americans. Critics say such investigations violate constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and assembly, and serve to inhibit lawful dissent.

In the largest known effort, the Pentagon monitored at least 186 lawful protests and meetings — including church services and silent vigils — in California and other states.

The military also compiled more than 2,800 reports on Americans in a database of supposed terrorist threats. That program, known as TALON, was ordered closed in 2007 after it was exposed in news reports.

The Maryland operation also has ended, but critics still question why police spent hundreds of hours spying on Quakers and other peace groups in a state that reported more than 36,000 violent crimes last year.

Stephen Sachs, a former state attorney general, investigated the scandal for Gov. Martin O’Malley — a Democrat elected in 2006. He concluded that state police had violated federal regulations and “significantly overreached.”

According to Sachs’ 93-page report and other documents, state police launched the operation in March 2005 out of concern that the planned execution of a convicted murderer might lead to violent protests.

They sent Lucy to join local activists at Takoma Park’s Electrik Maid, a funky community center popular with punk rockers and slam poets. Ten people attended the gathering, including a local representative from Amnesty International.

“The meeting was primarily concerned with getting people to put up fliers and getting information out to local businesses and churches about the upcoming events,” the undercover officer reported later. “No other pertinent intelligence information was obtained.”

That proved true for all 29 meetings, rallies and protests that Lucy ultimately attended. Most drew only a handful of people, and none involved illegal or disruptive actions.

Using the aliases Lucy Shoup and Lucy McDonald, she befriended activists. “I want to get involved in different causes,” she wrote in an e-mail, citing her interest in “anti-death penalty, antiwar and pro-animal actions!!!”

Max Obuszewski, a Baltimore pacifist who leads antiwar protests, said Lucy asked about civil disobedience, but didn’t instigate any. “She never volunteered to do anything, not even hand out leaflets,” he said. “She was not an agent provocateur.”

Greg Shipley, a state police spokesman, said that no one in the department had been disciplined in connection with the spying program. Lucy, who has not been publicly identified, would not consent to an interview, he said.

The surveillance, Shipley said, was inappropriate. And the listing of lawful activity as terrorism “shouldn’t have happened, and has been corrected.”

Most of the files list terrorism as a “primary crime” and a “secondary crime,” then add subgroups for designations such as antiwar protester.

Some contain errors and inconsistencies that are almost comical.

Nancy Kricorian, 48, a novelist on the terrorist list, is coordinator for the New York City chapter of CodePink, an antiwar group. She serves as liaison with local police for group protests, and has never been arrested.

“I have no idea why I made the list,” she said. “I’ve never been to the state of Maryland, except maybe to stop for gas on the way to Washington.”

Josh Tulkin, 27, a registered lobbyist with the Virginia state Legislature, is cited under “terrorism — environmental extremists.” Tulkin was deputy director of Chesapeake Climate Action Network, an environmental group that claims 15,000 members and regularly meets with governors and members of Congress.

“If asking your elected officials a question about public policy is a crime, then I’m guilty,” he said.

Barry Kissin, 57, a lawyer who ran unsuccessfully for Congress in 2006, heads the Frederick Progressive Action Coalition, a group that works “for social, economic and environmental justice,” according to his police file. Their protests “are always peaceful,” it added.

He was labeled “Terrorism — Anti-Government.”

Nadine Bloch, 47, runs workshops for protest groups that seek corporate responsibility and builds huge papier-mache puppets often used in street marches. Her terrorism file indicates she participated in a Taking Action for Animals conference in Washington on July 16-18, 2005.

Animal rights, Bloch said, is one of the few causes she doesn’t actively embrace. Besides, she was attending an educators conference in Hawaii that week as a contractor for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

“This whole thing,” she said, “is so absurd.”

No related posts.

I’m not going to go on and say that this year’s presidential election results were in any way influenced by voter fraud.  I don’t have to.  To quote the best summation I’ve heard of Obama’s campaign, “The campaign he ran against the entrenched Clintons was one for the history books, and when the battle shifted to the final contest, his well-orchestrated efforts made the McCain campaign look like a high school production of Camille versus Obama’s Tony Award-winning Broadway version.”  Democrats could have gotten on the mic and sneezed and the American people would’ve voted for them.

It is more out my interest to educate people out there on what I feel are the core issues facing our country.  The issue of voter integrity is paramount, for, if we don’t have an election process that can be trusted and verified, the entire process of citizen rule is undermined.  This topic is probably too little, too late…considering we just had our election.  But, ongoing awareness certainly wouldn’t hurt anything.

I recently spent 36 minutes watching this video.  It is, hands down, the best documentary I’ve seen yet on voter fraud issues here in America.  This is an excellent way to spend 36 minutes of your life.

Click here to view the video!

No related posts.

So, yeah, I’ve been quiet on here for a while.  Kind of a lot’s been going on lately.

First off, I’m sure some are interested in my take on the election.  Well…it is now known that Ron Paul will, in fact, not be our next president.  Instead, I’m seeing a euphoric and God awfully weird, manufactured messiahfest sweep across the nation.  I just hope these ignoramuses realize that if they want change, it’s the people that are actually going to change things.  I hope they’re prepared to make their chimp perform.  Sadly, I think the overwhelming majority of them think their vote is their highest civic duty and we’re going to see more of the same dressed up like “change” in the coming years.

Then again, we will likely be in for a bumpy ride here in the near future as we recoil from the effects of massive inflation caused by these serial bailouts, military occupations and seismic future obligations.  The way I see it, Obama’s going to be our escort into the New World Order.  Not exactly the kind of change I was looking for.

On a lighter note, my official home is now Missoula, Montana.  I made a decision to move here after being offered an opportunity to transfer within my company.  It’s a different world than Spokane, and I miss my many friends there…but a lot of things made sense about me moving to Montana.  Now that I live here, I can tell you it sucks and you would never want to live here. 

With that said, I’ve picked up my liberty and educational efforts here in my new state and have been actively participating in the Campaign For Liberty.  The new C4L site has proven to be a marvelous networking tool and could prove to be a game changer in coming years.  I’m just starting to get in touch with folks across the state, but this place is all ready starting to look like just as fertile ground for a statewide liberty coalition as Washington was.  There’s a lot of work that must be done to get there, though.

I’m conflicted about what else to write about…so, I guess I’ll call it a night and leave you with a video.

Click here to view the video!

No related posts.

The last year and a half of my life has brought about great transformation. Where I used to be a philosophical pessimist bent on arm-chair quarterbacking an ineffective bitch fest, I am now a decided and battle tested foe in the war against American civil liberties, personal privacy and individual freedom. What brought about this change?

Ron Paul.

It was with mixed emotion that I learned of the Ron Paul presidential campaign coming to an official end. On one hand, I have invested so much of my time, blood, sweat and tears as a grassroots activist for his bid for Presidency, and I’m wondering what I can do now that it’s clear that America has made two bad choices. On the other hand, though, I realized quite some time ago that mainstream America was not READY for Ron Paul and that this effort was more about the message than the man or a Presidential seat. It is an effort to steer America off this path of certain financial ruin, to preserve the original intent of our country and to stave off hundreds of powerful elitists that want as much control over mankind as possible.

I have been concerned for some time that this movement of freedom fighters inspired by Ron Paul would fracture into thousands of pieces and eventually and irrevocably be lost until the next great conservative comes along. I was hoping that Ron Paul would steer us in a right direction – a channel to funnel our energy into effectual change based around the principles we love and cherish. Freedom. Peace. Prosperity.

As I have frequently found the case, he and I share consistent concerns. I am happy to announce that Dr. Paul has done it right, yet again. He has announced phase two of his campaign – a much broader and
longer term project – the Campaign for Liberty. Essentially, it is an advocacy group to educate and inform the public, promote our common principles and insure the retention of this amazing network of some of the smartest people in America. There is no doubt there’s something amazing about this group – within 24 hours of the announcement of this new phase, almost 42,000 supporters have joined the new campaign and it’s growing by the minute.  These are numbers that can seriously change things, especially if they are a group that is paying attention, dedicated to the cause, and can focus their energy on the same things at the same time.

If you haven’t done so all ready, please consider joining the campaign. As always, keep learning.

Here’s the official announcement from Ron Paul:

Click here to view the video!

No related posts.

Something has come to our attention in the US lately…a so-called Trans-National corridor and the formation of what could be called the North American Union (NAU). The mainstream media has largely debunked these ideas as irrelevant conspiracy theories; conjecture by unwarranted kooks. They say the trans-national corridor is simply a highway maintenance project and the NAU, simply unfathomable. Or at least this is what they’d like you to believe.

See, the mainstream media works on the principle that the majority of their viewers will not research the information presented to them…and though this may be true, to a certain degree, I believe we’re in a time where the media is losing their grip on the American people.

After Ron Paul, GOP Presidential candidate, was asked whether he believed in such “conspiracy theories” at the CNN/YouTube debate last month…I took note that many of the organizations involved in said projects changed their public websites and, in one swooping effort, made a point to sweep the idea that there could be a conspiracy under the rug. The word “conspiracy” has been marginalized in our society…it is not often used for it’s true intent; an organized effort towards a common goal. The mainstream media backed this up by running story after story of how kooky people were that believed these things.

Well, I for one am NOT a kook and I’ve seen substantial evidence supporting the existence of such “conspiracies”. This article is by no means a complete documentation of all the available research and you are, of course, encouraged to come to your own conclusions by doing your own research.

As far as the trans-national corridor, you need only watch Canadian television to discover it’s truth:

Click here to view the video!

Ummmm…wait just a second. What was that? A mid-continent trade corridor, connecting trade markets throughout Canada, the US and Mexico??? Oh, wait, we all know how kooky those Manitoban Legislators are. Who would believe them? Oh, but then there’s the Canamex Corridor Coalition, essentially a lobbyist group for the project, that conveniently removed all mentions of NAFTA from their website after Ron Paul’s debate comments. Oh, wait, and then what’s this…a Mexican company, Cintra Concesiones de Infrastructuras de Transporte, S.A., will be collecting tolls from US citizens that use parts of the freeway?? Hmmmm…looks like there really is a conspiracy.

But what about a North American Union? Lou Dobbs, whom I suppose is a loon too, has reported about it a couple of times. You’d think something like this would be all over the newspapers and television news, but indeed, it wasn’t. Does the question, “Why?” come to mind? There’s a reason for that, too, but it’s outside the scope of this post.

Click here to view the video!

Click here to view the video!

The phrase “North American Union” is merely a phrase coined to describe similar principles by which the European Union was founded upon, only implemented in North America. It’s precise term is the “Security and Prosperity Partnership” and it’s a formal effort by the countries of North America to create a so-called partnership between the countries.

When one dives deep into the Security and Prosperity Partnership, we find some rather startling facts. While on the surface it might appear like a benign trade agreement…when you realize the scope of the plan and the meaning of their words, it becomes quite apparent that this is an alignment of commerce, military, legislation, regulation and policy. What concerns me most is that neither the Congress or the people voted on this agreement / alignment / union / whatever you call it…it was a private & secret agreement that has been forced down our throats.

The resistance to their plan has been so great, that they’ve taken it upon themselves to put together a myth vs. facts page (archive), where it reads like, “No there is no plan for a NAU,” “No, it won’t infringe on sovereignty,” “No there wasn’t an agreement signed,” no this, no that. It’s quite unimpressive to the inquisitive mind, really. Especially when a click away you can see their latest progress, which clearly shows a discrepancy over many of their supposed “facts” stated on their myths vs. facts page. It’s right out there in the open…an open conspiracy, if you will…that illuminates many additional interests other than just commerce involved in this partnership.

So, it would appear that Ron Paul and the other “kooks” that believe in the existence of this stuff aren’t so crazy after all. We’re just paying attention. I encourage you to look into these things…I believe these issues should be at the forefront of American discussion.

No related posts.

OK, I’ve had enough of reading about people getting tazered by the cops under the most ridiculous of circumstances. Now we have cops killing people with tazers for not speaking English. This needs to stop. This is the third time I’ve had to write about this crap in as many months. (Article one | Article two)

Twenty-four seconds after Canadian police approached Polish immigrant Daniel Dziekanski, police welcomed him to their country by jolting him with a tazer. Minutes later, the man died from the attack. Zofia Cisowski, mother of Daniel, grieves over the loss of her only living family member after spending months saving money to get her son into Canada.

Daniel, seeking a new life in Canada, had spent fifteen hours flying to his new home. As he spoke no English, he had previously arranged to connect with his mother at the airport. He proceeded through post-flight customs and then into a secondary customs check, standard procedure for an immigrant that doesn’t speak English. What happened after that defies explanation.

For ten hours, Dziekanski stayed in the Arrivals Hall trying to connect with his mother. Meanwhile, his mother paced the halls for six hours, trying to locate her son. After repeated attempts by the mother asking airport personnel where her son was, they were unable to locate her son. Eventually, Canadian airport personnel informed Daniel’s mother that he was no longer at the airport. Truth be told, he was probably less than 200 feet away from her. Thanks to nearly impenetrable airport security, the two were unable to see each other and received no assistance from airport security in locating one another.

Daniel, unable to communicate with anyone around him, became increasingly frightened and agitated in the busy Vancouver airport. He became increasingly disoriented and desired only to connect with the familiar, his mother, whom was less than a football field’s length away.

After 10 hours in the airport, police approached Daniel. Exactly what happened in the exchange is not entirely clear, but according to reports, twenty-four seconds after approaching Daniel, the RCMP (police) pulled their tazers in an attempt to disable and handcuff the man. He sustained “a couple shots” from a tazer, lost consciousness moments later and failed to receive medical treatment for at least 12 minutes after the attack. A few minutes later, Daniel died from injuries sustained by the ultra-high voltage tazer gun.

Here’s our security bureaucracy at it’s best – admittedly it’s not in America – but the same kind of thing could happen here just the same. Thanks to zero-tolerance police training and the human immigration process being buried by hundreds of layers of red tape, we have set the stage for killing people, simply because they are unable to speak English. It’s reasonably safe to assume that if the guy could’ve spoken English, the situation would have been quickly diffused, or more likely, never would have occurred.

My heart goes out to Zofia Cisowski, the mother. This never should’ve happened and I grieve for her loss.

What we’re doing here in “the war on terror” is not good. We have to find a better way.

No related posts.

When people find out that I’m an activist and write Congress constantly to share my viewpoints, I am often asked, “What do you write them about?” The answer depends on what I either support or oppose – but usually it’s a combination of facts that I know and an expression of my desires.

A lot of people don’t really know how to write congress or what to say when they’re doing so. You can get contact information for Congress quite easily online – and as far as what to say – whatever’s on your mind and is important to you. You don’t really have to be super eloquent, nor lengthy and you can go through the process of writing “old fashioned” letters, or of course, email, if that’s what you prefer. I choose letters because I like to get paper letters in return…for evidence.

You might be saying to yourself, “I don’t have time to write Congress letters…but I still want to be heard. What can I do?” Well, you can still make a difference. There are many websites promoting online petitions where all you have to do is find what you’re interested in and type your name. These websites have revolutionized the way people communicate with their representatives – it allows a large number of people to get behind a single issue; carrying with it the weight of all the signatory parties.

Since I would like to see more people get active and discover their own voice, I thought it might be helpful to share a number of my favorite letters that I have written. I hope this might inspire others to write their Congress in an effort to share their opinion and perhaps affect change. Just as jury duty is a civic duty and responsibility, so is participating in government and exercising your freedom to voice concerns to that government. This is especially true now that more and more critical legislation is handled by the legislators and never sees the light of a ballot.

For those inspired or interested in the good old fashioned letter writing, this will be a four part series: The first will deal with the potential war on Iran. The second has to do with the Federal Reserve and their decision to stop publishing the M3 data, essentially disguising a large portion of our economy. The third addresses my feeling on Real ID, the new national ID card that will be forced down our throats in 2009. The fourth, and final, covers what I do when I feel like I’m paying too much at the gas pump.

I hope they will both serve to educate and inspire! Happy reading!

No related posts.

April 28th, 2006

The Honorable Cathy McMorris
United States House of Representatives
1708 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-4705
(202) 225-2006

Jeff Whiteside
[Contact Informaton Redacted]

Dear Honorable Cathy McMorris,

I would like to express grave concern over the recent stance that our country is taking with the country of Iran. President Bush, Congress and the Department of Defense seem intent on starting World War III. It is quite clear that any action against Iran could bring about great conflict with the countries of Russia and China.

A UN report on November 15th, 2004 stated that all Iranian nuclear materials have been accounted for and there was no evidence of any nuclear weapons program. Reports also say that Iran is “years away from producing nuclear weapons,” yet makes no effort to show they have even begun a nuclear weapons program. Before we go to war with another country, can the American people please have some irrefutable proof that Iran is actually a threat?

Perhaps our government feels that we are ignorant on the subject, but Iran did sign the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty over thirty years ago which provided Iran the right to engage in a nuclear program. The United States also assisted Iran with the necessary education to begin their nuclear program.

The Bush administration has a track record of deceiving the American people about weapons of mass destruction, and it would appear that this latest conflict is no different. Rallying for support of the American people via unjustifiable scare tactics is morally, constitutionally, and fundamentally wrong. I have deep concern over the American policy of going to war based on faulty intelligence, which is effectively creating instability and further exposing America to the risk of terrorist attack.

The populations of Iran, Russia and China outnumber America five to one and starting a conflict with such odds should be a decidedly bad idea. While I do have concern for national security, a war with Iran could severely impact both the security of our nation and the world. I urge you to please help President Bush and Congress to keep a cool head and avoid a war with Iran at all costs.

Thank you for taking the time to read this and for any correspondence.

Sincerely,

Jeff Whiteside

No related posts.

April 21st, 2006

The Honorable Cathy McMorris
United States House of Representatives
1708 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-4705
(202) 225-2006

Jeff Whiteside
[Contact Information Redacted]

Dear Honorable Cathy McMorris,

I would like to express concern over the Federal Reserve’s recent decision, on March 23rd, to cease publication of their M3 monetary aggregate report. Though this reporting change has been touted as a “minor policy change,” there is growing concern that this bold move may have been done to cover up explosive monetary expansion. As the Federal Reserve is not run by elected officials, I feel it is critical to have a full release of all monetary details to allow oversight groups and individuals the ability to review all available data relating to our currency system.

The M3 monetary aggregate represents nearly three and a half trillion dollars of our total economy and is the only report that gives the “bird’s eye view” of our country’s economic health. Though many in these circles may consider three and a half trillion dollars as inconsequential and “not worth the effort” to track, I must disagree as it represents nearly one third of our total economic system.

As you are probably aware, we have seen a marked increase of silver and gold prices, energy prices, as well as continually rising interest rates. All of these items are indicating runaway inflation and a rapid devaluation of the American dollar. This should be a source of concern considering our monetary system’s declining value in comparison to currencies such as the Euro. In times such as these, the M3 data is critical to insure that the Federal Reserve is keeping our economy’s best interest in mind.

I would urge you to support the effort to force the Federal Reserve to continue publishing the M3 monetary aggregate report. Congressman Ron Paul of Texas has introduced H.R. 4892 in an effort to bring about this change, and I feel it is important enough to receive your attention and support.

Thank you for taking the time to read this and for any correspondence.

Sincerely,

Jeff Whiteside

No related posts.

February 9th, 2007

The Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers
United States House of Representatives
1708 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-4705

Jeff Whiteside
[Contact Information Redacted]

Dear Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers,

I am writing in fervent opposition to the new national identification,Real ID, which is currently set to take effect in May of 2008. You must know the overwhelming majority of American’s absolutely oppose a national ID at a fundamental level. Though you may have taken some initiative to see that this privacy-invasive, unchecked and unbridled identification will be a difficult sell into reality, you are under obligation to protect our Constitution, honor the people’s will and oppose this in every way possible, and the fact is, you’re not doing enough.

I am rather alarmed at the number of Americans that I speak with about the “Real ID” that weren’t aware this was going to happen and are shocked (sometimes horrified) to learn of it. After all, nobody asked us, the people that allow you to be.

I’ve actually read that Homeland Security is considering putting RFID chips, fingerprint/retinal data, and other highly personal data on the ID. They’re looking at installing RFID readers in strategic places to track our movements. They’re moving to privatize it so there will be no oversight or federal management over what can and cannot be tracked via this new identification.

Have we all lined up as for an Orwellian prison to get our eyeballs scanned and activities scrutinized? Are we really prepared to create non-persons out of people that refuse to participate? Should we be broadcasting highly personal data, no matter how secure we’re told it is? Where is the evidential proof that this will actually “secure” our nation and isn’t just a nefarious plan for all Americans to give up all our personal privacy and centralize it? When did “we the people” become the “target” anyway?

I, for one, will not get on the fascist boat to micro-chipping the people and a forgone notion of personal privacy. I’m doing what I can to oppose the “Real ID” because I feel strongly it’s not in the best interest of the people. As a leader of our State, a representative of the people and a person with great influence, what are you doing about it?

So far, all we can manage to do is struggle with the best way to imprison ourselves rather than consider the more important concept, is this really what we want? How about we stop talking about how much it will cost and follow Maine’s lead to outright reject it? If they take away our funding, we, your people, will step it up and take care of Washington. We will do this because it’s what is right and because we don’t want our children living in a world where “Big Brother” knows all and our every move is tallied in some supercomputer.

Thank you for taking the time to read this and for any correspondence.

Sincerely,

Jeff Whiteside

No related posts.

Here in the state of Washington, smokers have taken one of the worst legal blows seen in history. Initiative 901, which was recently enacted into law, provides 30 days for smokers to get a tape measure. A tape measure, you ask? Yes, Initiative 901 prevents smokers from “doing their business” within 25 feet of any public building, door, window, or vent. In fact, if you read the revisions to Section 3 of the new law, it outright prevents smoking in any public area, regardless of distances, buildings, or people. So one must only “light up” inside the privacy of their own home or risk a $100 fine.

This legislation is the most restrictive seen enacted by a state in the entire history of the United States. Smokers in the state are outraged as the realization of this law going into effect sweeps over them. I am outraged, not just as a smoker, but also as an activist for freedom. To add insult to injury, the law specifically addresses “cigar lounges” which will effectively kick these types of businesses to the street. Sorry, no choice, you are going out of business. Period. Should have chosen another type of business. Not that a non-smoker would have ever thought to grace a cigar lounge.

Previously, I felt that there was a good balance between smoking and non-smoking restaurants, bars, and other types of businesses. I even saw that the majority of these were non-smoking establishments. There’s no doubt that non-smokers had many choices where cigarette smoke would never infiltrate their precious little noses. No more, the anti-smoking Nazi’s have taken their millions of dollars and pressed their will upon the tens of thousands of smokers & business owners in this state. Not only that, but they have kicked them past the curb, into the rain and unsheltered area, far away from them.

Even worse, this will give the anti-smoking crusade just the power they need to be total pricks. I see it now – the smoking police people telling on us to the cops, creating an us-against-them type atmosphere. I see people calling police to report rogue groups of smokers that might be within 24 feet of a building. I see employers and cops having talks with people about how they’re not far enough from the building, that they must venture even further out in nasty -20 degree, 30 MPH wind weather. It’s just not enough, sorry, you must leave downtown to have a cigarette as there is NO PLACE within the inner-city that is compliant with this law.

As a final note, I would like to see a law on the next ballot that prevents non-smokers from coming within 25 feet of a smoker. Punishable by a $200 fine. I would also like to see provisions that if a non-smoker talks to a smoker about smoking that they must spend 30 days in jail and are punished by a $500 fine. Tit for tat the way I see it. The fines provided in Initiative 901 are far excessive considering the “crime” that’s been committed..I want to see the same thing against the now righteous anti-smoking pricks that have just the ammunition they need. Bring it on you anti-smoking Nazi, concentration camp creating, grassmoles.

No related posts.