Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Troops Back From Middle East??

There are good reasons to bring our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan and, thereafter, from the EU.

1. These battle hardened troops could be redeployed to our border with Mexico to insure border security (Against job-and-identity thieves, Middle-Eastern terrorists disguised as Latinos, "gang bangers", drug lords' "hit" and kidnapping squads, previously deported criminals and other such scum), prevent or react to a Pancho Villa style raid on US territory AND to complete an effective border-fence (Not less than four rows of razor ribbon required) by use of engineer units backed-up by regulars.
2. To be available to execute their right to vote (Well before the 2012 elections) , now often very difficult to those troops (Could keeping them overseas be part of Mr.Obama's plan for reelection?).
3. To let those unruly and Islamic terrorists of that region kill each other as they have for the last 1400-years rather than focusing on killing "unbelievers".
4. To be available to suppress Islamic violence in the USA, most specially in the "no go" (And probably heavily armed) Muslim enclaves in our nation.

After that, the US troops in the EU should be recalled to the USA to the savings of much of our tax dollars. If, and only if, the nations of the EU wish to defend themselves from the aggression of Czar Putin and the too many Muslims now living there they must then increase their armed forces and related spending (It would be best if they did not arm-and-train terrorists---Muslims).

The disadvantages of the above actions are based on the fact that such Middle-Eastern combat makes our troops (At a terrible cost in blood and treasure) battle hardened and the only remaining large military force in the world in that condition. (UK and Canadian troops are excellent; But, they are parts of very small forces. Also, it is better to fight the criminal-terrorist movement known as Islam away from our cities and fields.

Saturday, July 17, 2010

Jackson, Wilson, Obama, Mexico & Wrath

Florida was once the possession of Spain. However, Spain was unable to exercise its sovereignty and control its border with the USA and to prevent the Seminoles from raiding into the USA from their Spanish refuge. Andrew Jackson ordered US troops into Spanish territories and drove those raiders well away from our border.

During Mexico's early 20th century revolution, that nation was unable to exercise sovereignty over much of its land and its border with the USA. In 1916 "Pancho" Villa led a raid into New Mexico and murdered US Citizens. President Wilson ordered US regulars into Mexico in an unsuccessful attempt to capture Sr. Villa. Although unsuccessful in that effort, the raids into the USA ended----Until today's incursions by heavily armed smugglers, hit squads and kidnapping gangs.

It is very clear that the USA does NOT exercise sovereignty and control over much of its border with Mexico and, in essence, has turned over large parts of that area to Mexican outlaws. (Since those areas are effectively NOT within the control of governments, citizen militias and committees-of-vigilance should feel free to operate within them to suppress outlaws and terrorists---By any necessary means.) Certainly, equity and Natural Law denies governments any ethical recourse against armed parties (Government or others) who invade areas-outside-the-law to suppress banditry and terrorism.

To paraphrase: "Those who do not study and learn from history will be condemned to repeat it". To put it another way: Must we wait on a Pancho Villa style raid into the USA before we effectively and completely control our Southern border?

Perhaps, we should bring our battle-hardened troops back from Afghanistan (And leave the tribal leaders of that non-nation to kill each other as they have for 1000-plus years) and bring those men and women back to the USA where they would secure our border AND suppress banditry in the free-fire-zone which is much of Northern Mexico.

That would also make it more likely that their votes would be counted in the 2010 and 2012 General Elections as those Union troops did with their 70%-plus vote for Lincoln and the Republican Party in the 1864 election. (Hmmm! Is it possible that this may be a part of Mr. Obama's plans for those elections? His most left wing semi-supporters are critical of his troop use plans; But, may be underestimating the depth of his thinking/plotting.)

Those soldiers might then proclaim (Paraphrased): "If we should have to leave our bleached bones on these desert sands in vain, then beware of the anger of the legions!”

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

A Falseness Of Pacifism


Fahey, Joseph J.
War & the Christian Conscience: Where Do You Stand?
Orbis Books; Maryknoll, NY:; 2005
ISBN -13: 978-1-53075-583-5

This volume presents itself as a “fair and balanced” discussion of violence, conscience, war, pacifism and related issues. However, there are enough errors-of-fact, twisted facts and half-truths (Worse than lies in my view), neglected sources and like weaknesses to allow a fair reader any conclusion other than it is an apologia for pacifism. Some of these issues are provided below.
Fahey lumps together Jews, Christians and Muslims in a essentially like group, falling into a major error of this era.

The Jews entered into a “covenant” (A contract) with the Almighty one. Tyrants do not enter into such contracts; But, rule with total disregard as to the welfare of his subjects. G_d punished and punishes violators of that contract; But, Jews were known to complain to Him of His abuse of “His People”.
The teachings of the Christ presented a family model for the Faith, with a Father, Son, uniting Holy Spirit and, even a mother in Mary, The People were encouraged to consider themselves as part of the Body of Christ in a more intimate-than-family relationship. The Triune God is forgiving, but just, in his actions and judgments, allowing free will and its freedom to fail or succeed an inherent part of humanity.
Islam worships an Allah (So unlike that of Christian Arabs) who is arbitrary, not obeying even his own laws or pronouncements, full of violence and evil. The ideology of Islam teaches that it is allowed or encouraged, and sometimes commanded, to use murder, rape-and-enslavement, genocide, perpetual war with “unbelievers” and the other horrors inflicted upon the world by Mohammed.
Mr. Faley ignores the other two, just and essentially peaceful and monotheistic religions, that of the Baha'i and the Sikhs. The latter group, although being essentially peaceful, know that they have a Natural Law right to self-defense and a duty to defend others. Where the law allows they wear swords and knives to remind themselves of the above. (Their last Guru, in fact, died in the defense of Hindus.)

In discussion the De Laude Novae Militae of St. Bernard of Clairvaux (A “Doctor Of The Church”) Mr. Fahey was very selective in the one verse he selected. He might better have chosen” :The knights of Christ, I say, may strike with confidence and die yet more confidently, for he serves Christ when he strikes and serves himself when he falls. Neither does he bear his sword in vain, for he is God's minister, for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of the good. If he kills an evildoer, he is not a mankiller; But, if I may so put it, a killer of evil. He is evidently the avenger of Christ

Thursday, July 08, 2010

Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied

"Justice delayed is justice denied" is one of the basic maxims of our legal system---And the one most violated---Which increases contempt for the Law.

With special regard to current events, that applies to the lack of justice and enforcement of existing immigration laws by the Federal Government and to the like lack of prosecution in the "New Black Panther" case.

If the US Government abrogates its duties to enforce the laws, responsibility goes (In the following order) to: The States; Counties/cities; The General Militia; "Committees Of Vigilance"; And, individual citizens.

Oh yes: The Second Amendment (And its equivalents in most/all states) is the enforcement for the First Amendment---AND the Tenth!

Thursday, July 01, 2010

New Rules For Hunting Attorneys

While hunting has become a popular sport in many countries,
laws have to be developed to both keep the populations in balance
as well as to allow for a fair fight. New Rules and Regulations also
have to be legislated whenever new species become the object
of the hunt. With this is mind comes new regulations.

US Government Department of Fish and "WildLife"
Sec. 1200

1. Any person with a valid hunting license may harvest attorneys.

2. Taking of attorneys with traps or deadfalls is permitted. The use of currency as bait is prohibited.

3. Killing of attorneys with a vehicle is prohibited. If accidentally struck, remove dead attorney to roadside and proceed to nearest car wash.

4. It is unlawful to chase, herd, or harvest attorneys from a snow machine, helicopter, or aircraft.

5. It shall be unlawful to shout "whiplash","ambulance", or "free Perrier" for the purpose of trapping attorneys.

6. It shall be unlawful to hunt attorneys within 100 yards of BMW dealerships.

7. It shall be unlawful to hunt attorneys within 200 yards of courtrooms, law libraries, whorehouses, health spas, gay bars, ambulances, or hospitals.

8. If an attorney is elected to government office, it shall be a felony to hunt, "entrap", or possess it.

9. Stuffed or mounted attorneys must have a state health department inspection for rabies, and vermin.

10. It shall be illegal for a hunter to disguise himself as a reporter, drug dealer, pimp,female legal clerk, sheep, accident victim,bookie, or tax accountant for the purpose ofhunting attorneys.

(Maximum number of catches allowed per hunting season)

1. Yellow Bellied Sidewinder 2
2. Two-faced Tort Feasor 1
3. Back-stabbing Divorce Litigator 4
4. Small-breasted Ball Buster 3
(Female only)
5. Big-mouthed Pub Gut 2
6. Honest Attorney On the Endangered Species List
(Illegal to hunt)
7. Cut-throat 2
8. Back-stabbing Whiner 2
9. Brown-nosed Judge Kisser 2
10. Silver-tongued Drug Defender $100 BOUNTY