Sunday, September 25, 2016

Self-Defense Protocols

SELF-DEFENSE PROTOCOLS
AGAINST CRIMINALS [OF ANY AGE] PRESENTING A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER OF DEATH OR
GREAT BODILY INJURY TO OTHERS

  1. From the FBI---"Two to the chest and one to the head”; OR,
    2.  From the SEALS/SAS---"A double tap to the head"; OR,
    3. From the "Old Sarge"---"Four inches with the point and twist the blade, REPEAT"; Or,
    4. From other sources--- "An intense strike to the temple, spine or "Adam’s Apple" with a heavy cane OR use of the point of a cane or umbrella or “teacher’s pointer” to the throat, groin, eyes or male genitals---Followed by a disabling/killing thrust to the base of the skull or spine; Or, Any of the common cuts in kenjitsu.


The only insurance that an attacker or bully or other tyrant is no longer a danger is when s/he has stopped breathing.






















Wednesday, September 21, 2016

Far Worse Than Ransom!!!

The payment of millions in paper currency to Iran is far worse than paying ransom.

All should now review some history lessons. On November 4, 1979 terrorist agents of Iran's Ayatollahs invaded the United States by violently occupying our Embassy in that tyrant ruled nation. They also took our Americans stationed there as hostages in gross violation of well established international law (eg As obeyed by the USA even after the December 7, 1941 Japanese sneak attack on Hawaii by safely transporting them out of the USA). Those Americans were freed only after a "Surrender Monkey Democrat" was replaced (On January 20, 1981) by Republican  President Ronald Reagan. 

As far as I know no Iranian, having Islamic or government authority, has ever apologized for those violations of law. As far as I know Iran has not paid reparations to those American victims of Islamist crimes or to our nation.

Since that Islamist takeover, Iran has been waging "undercover war" against the USA---Some by paid and foreign terrorists. Iran remains the enemy of the USA.

After a dispute in an international court, not selected even indirectly by the People of the USA, the Administration of Barrack Hussein Obama shipped (Under cover of darkness and via an unmarked aircraft) $400,000,000 in paper money directly to Iran.  Even some in that Administration admitted that some of those monies might be used to wage acts-of-war.

Giving Iran that huge amount of our money is, most certainly, giving “aid and comfort" to the enemy!

That "giving" is the core-subject of U.S. Code  Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 115  § 2381 AND that is based on Article-III, Section-3 of the Constitution (As overrides and nullifies any acts based on treaties OR foreign courts!). 

A formal "Declaration Of War" is not needed to make the above applicable to alleged violators.

We should wonder if there are any Members (Of either Party) of the House Of Representatives who have the courage and patriotism to apply Article-II, Section-4 of the Constitution to this matter [AND to formally look into what part, if any, Candidate Hillary Clinton (As Secretary Of State or supporter of B. H. Obama) had in this support of the USA's enemy.]

Sunday, September 18, 2016

A Typical "Police Shooting"



The Baton Rouge police shooting of a habitual criminal is very typical as he: Was armed with a firearm in gross violation of our democratically-enacted laws as he was a convicted felon; Was reported by a citizen as being armed and threatening others; Failed to obey lawful orders by uniformed police officers; Was not disabled by the "less-than-lethal" police use of a "stun gun" (Was he under the influence of some illegal drug as is PCP?); Thereafter continued to fight with those officers; And, may have been attempting to retrieve his illegally-possessed pistol from his pocket when shot.

For myself, I do not think it reasonable to expect police to wait until some already violent criminal has drawn a gun and has it in his hand before considering themselves "In clear and present danger of death or great bodily harm" as allows them (And all innocent citizens) to immediately use lethal force for self-defense.[This response is allowed by Statutory and Natural law.]  

Monday, September 12, 2016

Women Get Equal Pay---If ALL Factors Considered

For the simple minded and lying politicians, women are not paid equally with men.

However, those pimples on the body-politic do not consider the points provided below.

1.Women are far less likely to take the jobs that require time away from home and families as do provide those (Usually men) who take this such demanding positions as tend to pay more than those positions which allow spending evenings and weekends at home.
2. Women are also less like to invest their evenings in upgrading job skills which limits up-to-date job skills in this rapidly changing world.
3. This is even more applicable for women who take maternity leave.
4. With a very few exceptions, most women lack the upper-body strength required for many, well paying, positions in the trades and such positions as fire-fighters and police who often use that power rather than weapons.
5. Although there is some evidence to support the position that young women have an innate advantage in mathematics, few select careers in that field or such related fields as engineering or the "hard sciences".


Women who select the most high-paying areas of college studies, work exceptionally long hours, continually up-grade skills and are more-than-willing to work evenings/weekends or on out-of-town "jobs" seem unlikely to be paid less than men.

Friday, September 09, 2016

Obama Has Supported The Worst Muslims!

Mr. Obama was willing to send F-16s and our most modern armored vehicles to Egypt as long as the Muslim Brotherhood, supporters of violent Jihad against the USA,  all Christians (Most specially the Copts in Egypt)  other civilized peoples/nations, were in control of that nation.  Now that that terrorist-organization is out-of-power, his Administration is retreating from support for the Egyptian military, the only force capable of providing order, other than than inflicted by the followers of jihad, in that nation.

While the civil war in Syria was in doubt AND when there were revolutionaries there who were not controlled by Jihad supporting Islamists, Mr. Obama's Administration was unwilling to ship weapons to rebels. Now that there is a chance that the present and legal government may be overthrown AND revolutionary groups appear to be in control of Muslim terrorists, he may ship them such weapons (Including AA rockets which could easily bring down one of our air liners, over an American city).


Any Administration "excuse" that such a halt is only in obedience to a law prohibiting such shipments to, in this case Egypt, does not stand up to the many instances in which Mr. Obama and his co-actors have refused to obey-and-enforce other democratically enacted laws

History AND $400M Of "Aid & Comfort To The Enemy"

All should now review some history lessons. On November 4, 1979 terrorist agents of Iran's Ayatollahs invaded the United States by violently occupying our Embassy in that tyrant ruled nation. They also took our Americans stationed there as hostages in gross violation of well established international law (eg As obeyed by the USA even after the December 7, 1941 Japanese sneak attack on Hawaii by safely transporting them out of the USA). Those Americans were freed only after a "Surrender Monkey Democrat" was replaced (On January 20, 1981) by Republican  President Ronald Reagan. 

As far as I know no Iranian, having Islamic or government authority, has ever apologized for those violations of law. As far as I know Iran has not paid reparations to those American victims of Islamist crimes or to our nation.

Since that Islamist takeover, Iran has been waging "undercover war" against the USA---Some by paid and foreign terrorists. Iran remains the enemy of the USA.

After a dispute in an international court, not selected even indirectly by the People of the USA, the Administration of Barrack Hussein Obama shipped (Under cover of darkness and via an unmarked aircraft) $400,000,000 in paper money directly to Iran.  Even some in that Administration admitted that some of those monies might be used to wage acts-of-war.

Giving Iran that huge amount of our money is, most certainly, giving “aid and comfort" to the enemy!

That "giving" is the core-subject of U.S. Code  Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 115  § 2381 AND that is based on Article-III, Section-3 of the Constitution (As overrides and nullifies any acts based on treaties OR foreign courts!). 

A formal "Declaration Of War" is not needed to make the above applicable to alleged violators.

We should wonder if there are any Members (Of either Party) of the House Of Representatives who have the courage and patriotism to apply Article-II, Section-4 of the Constitution to this matter [AND to formally look into what part, if any, Candidate Hillary Clinton (As Secretary Of State or supporter of B. H. Obama) had in this support of the USA's enemy.]

Thursday, September 08, 2016

Dred Scot, Armed Blacks & Other Citizens---Then And Now

The famous/infamous Dred Scott decision (Dred Scott, Plaintiff in error v. John F. A. Sanford; 60 US 393 L. Ed. 961; December, 1856 Term; Supreme Court of The United States of America) is now recognized to have been morally wrong as it declared that a Black slave was property and not a citizen-person.

However, many (If not most) forget that that decision was the "law of the land" and that it took the bloodiest war we ever fought (Where almost every battle was a Tarawa or "Pork Chop Hill" or Iwo Jima) and Constitutional Amendments to overturn.

There were many (Convoluted as usual) legal arguments to support the Court's decision. There was, in fact, at least one practical reason for the Court's decision: That to rule otherwise would give Blacks the right to "carry arms where ever they went"---Including across State lines (Please see the quote below).

That view clearly demonstrates what the Supreme Court thought about the rights of citizens to bear arms, while traveling about the nation, at that time. Any study of history will clearly show that citizens then commonly kept such weapons concealed and that practice was considered normal and without offense to other citizens or to the Law.

It appears that time and the tyranny of legislative bodies and the courts have deprived US citizens of a right once considered normal and without fault.

." For if they were so received, and entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens, it would exempt them from the operation of the special laws and from the police regulations which they considered to be necessary for their own safety. It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went. And all of this would be done in the face of the subject race of the same color, both free and slaves, and inevitably producing discontent and insubordination among them, and endangering the peace and safety of the State." (Emphasis added)

(A White "racist" might point out the grossly disproportional, criminal, misuse of firearms by Blacks.)

Academic Freedom & Free Speech

Although private (Real & Corporate) persons and a limited number of public *** officials/employees may limit the content of "speech" in physical areas under their sole control, public speech, in public places, should only limited to that which "presents a clear and present danger of death or great bodily harm".

The best standard for "Academic Freedom" must not limit contrary positions [As to the "subject at hand"] from being peacefully expressed in classrooms at those times which allow questions or comments.. Any professor/teacher who fails to allow such, during, "comments/question" periods should be fired. Public officials who do the same during like periods at public meetings must be removed-from-office and, perhaps, charged with a "Violation Of Civil Rights Under Color Of Law".
That last does not exempt publicly supported university/college officials at such meetings..

***FOR EXAMPLE: Judges in their court rooms; Lecturing teachers where time constraints do not
allow for any questions/comments; Public officials (Including those in universities) in their private offices as too often occupied by mobs.

AND,  university students, faculty and administrators should welcome challenging or, even, "uncomfortable", speech/ideas. If they refuse to consider them or, worst yet, attempt to suppress them, they should transfer to some institutions in North Korea, The PRC or Cuba.

Wednesday, September 07, 2016

Stopping Rape On/Near Campuses

Many in academia have decried "sexual assault" on/near campuses. They grossly fail to:
1. Separate the very great violence and physical/emotional injury of real rape from some, perhaps, unwelcome comment or even a "pat on the butt";
2. Understand that a real rapist can be deprived of his sexual organs (Or. life) by gunfire or the effective use of an edged weapon; And,
3. Remember President Thomas Jefferson's comment, "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."; OR,
4. Mr. Ben Franklin's comment, “They who can give up essential liberty *** to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.


*** "Essential Liberty" can well be defined as the Natural Law and statutory right to defend self and others from those who present "a clear and present danger of death or great bodily harm"-----And, to the effective means of immediately enforcing those rights as now  means modern firearms or major other weapons (Best concealed until use to prevent criminals from preventing such a defense).

I Demand Segregated Housing For Asian Students!

Black students at a Left-Coast university have demanded-and-obtained racially segregated, on-campus, housing (A). [If I were a student as such a "reeducation camp", I would demand segregated housing for those with even "one drop" of Asian blood! (That includes me as my Slavic/Alpine ancestry appear to have a trace of Tarter or Mongol genes.)]  My ancestors coming to the USA were verbally abused, my elderly grandfather was physically attacked because he was "different" (The attackers required medical care, my grandfather did not) and lived in a "Ghetto"---By choice.

Those of Chinese decent are the inheritors of much greater abuse (B), but seemed to have overcome them by a variety of methods as resulted in such, collective, academic success that some higher-rated "Left Coast" universities have set quotas against them lest their schools become minority-majority schools "overwhelmed" by those of Chinese decent---AND to be vastly "under-represented" in our prisons and jails and among those murdered by members of their own race.

If my demand for racially segregated housing were met, those, "safe space", residents would have some added protection from Blacks who select out, on a basis of race victims of other races (Which are MACRO-Aggressions) at a rate many, many, times the reverse (C).

There are those who would deny my just demand on the basis that the "real world" has no protections of "Safe Spaces" or "Trigger Warnings". That radical position appears to be, most recently, generated at the University Of Chicago (Dvia a Dean's letter to all Freshmen.