Ideas Have Consequences

 

Ideas Have Consequences

by Mustang

Many people think of the American Revolution as a war.  It was that, but it was much more than that.  There would not have been a war, with all of its associated risks and penalties, were it not for the ideas that preceded it.

What ideas?

Actually, there were more than just a few.  They came to our forefathers from three sources: (1) European Enlightenment, (2) Traditional British legal and political values, and (3) A unique “American experience.”  It was from these sources that we arrived at a distinctly American worldview, a unique American philosophy, and an exceptional set of values.  As an off-shoot of the European enlightenment, our founding fathers also incorporated a careful study of human history, from the ancient Greek through the Roman Republic and Imperial period, and finally pre-colonial British history.

Issaac Newton

The Enlightenment was an intellectual movement that began in the 1600’s.  It involved the greatest thinkers, such as Isaac Newton, who became key figures in modern history.  It also included the so-called Renaissance period, which evolved at different places, at different times, and in diverse ways.  The thinkers of the Enlightenment challenged old views, values, and traditions.  In particular, these men believed that in order for something to be factually valid, it must be rational, logical, debated, and carefully examined; it must not depend on superstition, or dogma, or simply matter of what has long been accepted.  Who were they, these thinkers?

 

 

They were, in addition to Newton, John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Francois-Marie Arouet (who was known as Voltaire), Denis Diderot (co-founder of the Encyclopedia), and Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de la Brede et de Montesquieu.  They questioned such things as the divine right of kings.  They championed humanity by developing such notions that mankind is essentially of good character and intelligence; they believed that such men (and women) were capable of self-government.

Were all the revolutionary ideas new?

King George III

Not all revolutionary ideas were new, however.  Some of our founding fathers believed that traditional British customs had value, as well.  These were values that our founding fathers believed had been ignored or corrupted by King George III and his parliament in the 1770s.  So that rather than introducing new ideas, some of our ancestors thought it might be worthy to reintroduce values and traditions that they knew had worked previously.  The First Continental Congress produced their Declaration and Resolves, which offered a discussion about the rights of colonists as “freeborn Englishmen.”  In particular, that they should be entitled to equality before the law and parliament, that they deserved protection from unfair taxation, and the absolute right not to be confronted by tyranny, misuse of standing armies, or any denial of their God-given right to liberty.

The people who occupied the British colonies in North America for 160 years prior to the American Revolution also developed a unique set of attitudes, gained from living in America.  From our frontier experiences, these Americans became fiercely independent, in thought and in deed.  It made the self-sufficient.  It made them capable of governing themselves; it taught them that they need not rely upon Parliament (or any other government body) for sustenance or survival.

They learned that the British government may not be able to protect them from the depredations of Indians or French troublemakers, but they could band together when necessary and protect themselves and the things they valued and cherished most.  The American experience came from people taking on a vast wilderness, one fraught with danger from natives, wild animals, natural storms, and frigid climates.  In that America, there were more landowners than there were tenants.  This gave people confidence in themselves, and it made them resistant to British (government) interference.

 

 

 

Boston Tea Party

 

Most of the early Americans were resistant to taxation without adequate representation in the United Kingdom.  Now, ordinarily, I might argue that if the British sent soldiers to protect the colonists from the French and their Indian allies, it makes sense that the people who received this protection ought to be willing to help pay for that protection.  This was certainly the view of the British parliament, but as the French and Indians burned their homes, raped their women, murdered the men, and kidnapped the children, Americans might have wondered, “What protection.”  These notions would lead citizens to imagine that they might just as well form their own American government—for certainly, these frontiersmen were capable of forming organizations for the common good (militias).

The Americans developed their own representative bodies where each voting citizen could see that his particular view could be channeled to the executive.  In the pre-Revolutionary period, the chief executive was a governor, the representative of the King.  Yet few of the resolutions passed by colonial legislatures were ever approved by the British Parliament.  In the absence of true representation, then how could there be a robust debate about anything?  By the way, this wasn’t unique to the American colonies.  The city of Manchester, England had no representation in Parliament, either.

Thomas Paine

Americans wanted sovereignty, particularly after 1774.  One may recall how eloquent Thomas Paine was about pressing the need for independence.  The American colonies had grown through trade and commerce, and the Americans owed much of this to England’s imperial protection, but with growth and economic strength, Americans realized that they no longer needed to depend on England.  Slowly, but steadily, Americans gained personal wealth through the effective use of America’s vast resources.  These were men who were politically mature and intellectually engaged.

Another unique American idea was a genuine concern about military rule and tyranny.  Great Britain hosted the world’s strongest military and naval force.  This army and navy were greatly feared by England’s enemies, and by the people who populated British colonies.  Since most American cities didn’t have a visible police force, what most people saw on any given day, was a military garrison and patrolling soldiers.  Americans came to view this situation as an imposition on “our” homeland.  The British Army oppressed Americans; it was the use of threats of violence to make the colonies obey British authority.

And then there was this notion of “natural rights.”  The ideas of John Locke became an integral part of the American revolutionary ideology.  We agreed with Locke: We are born with rights that no government, no king, no potentate, could ever take away—and these included the right to life, liberty, and property.  Americans came to believe that it was the duty of a responsible government to protect these rights—to guarantee their continuance to the people.

And so, the American Revolution was not a cause of, but the consequence of enlightened ideas that incorporated British traditions and our own unique experiences.  Today, there are other ideas floating around—ideas foreign to the American experience.  They are the so-called progressive ideas of the Democratic Party.  We should be willing to listen to these ideas, provide a platform or an environment whereby the people can debate their ideas, and we ought to consider them carefully —but we must at the same time understand that there are significant consequences to adopting Marxist ideas.

The question before the bar of the American people today is this: Do we change for the sake of change, or do we reject Marxism’s obsession with identity politics and cling to our God-given natural rights to remain a free and independent people?

Advertisements

Thousands of Iranian students here will benefit from “agreement”

Little coverage is out there on the so-called interim agreement the U.S. entered into with Iran on November 24, 2013. Reuters has a great piece on the full details, but let me focus on this little known factoid that we have thousands of Iranian students over here, “more than at any time…” studying… yep, Math and Science. Better yet, they are receiving stipends from their good friends the US of A for their tuition, housing and a portion of their living expenses. Sorry folks, this is my feel good story for a Sunday. The ignorance continues unabated. What could possibly go wrong with this? Anyone want to bet they get free healthcare? Here we go:

(Reuters) – When Mohammad Hamedi Rad arrived in the United States last year, he carried his Iranian passport, a hard-won student visa and a backpack containing $14,000 in hundred dollar bills, because there was no simpler way of getting money into the country.

Hamedi Rad’s experience is by no means unheard of among many of the thousands of high-achieving, mostly middle-class young Iranians who are coming to the United States to study in increasing numbers despite U.S. and international sanctions on their homeland.

Under the November 24 interim agreement, Iran agreed to halt its most sensitive nuclear activity in return for a 6-month respite from some of the sanctions that have crippled its economy.

As part of the bargain, the United States and its partners agreed to open up a channel between Iranian and foreign banks to enable “direct tuition payments to universities and colleges for Iranian students studying abroad.”

This year, 8,744 Iranians are in the United States on student visas, more than at any time since the late 1980s. Most are graduate students, many focusing on math and science, who are more likely than undergraduates to receive stipends covering a portion of their tuition and living expenses.

Full story at Reuters

NSA Utah Spy Center Holds Ribbon Cutting ceremony -Videos

UPDATE:  Snowden: I could have wiretapped anyone’s e-mails, including the president’s personal account.

Is it insane to think that a 29-year-old NSA/Booz IT guy could be reading Barack Obama’s private e-mails if he wanted to?

And just what did the Senators and Congressmen think where all of this spying info was going to be stored? In a two Billion dollar storage facility in Utah. Never approved by congress. Is it just the bloggers who are recording events?Whistle blower Binney has been out there for years telling us exactly what Snowden told us.

Buried deep in an unrelated story over at the Salt Lake Tribune, we find this gem. Earlier post of mine:  NSA Utah Spy Center Revealed: 100 years of data stored on Americans.

Ribbon-cutting schedule

Invitations have been sent to a select group of Utah politicians and dignitaries inviting them to the Utah Data Center ribbon cutting on May 30. The invitation says the event is unclassified and reporters will be there, but an NSA spokeswoman this week declined to discuss the festivities or say whether the event means the facility will be starting operations. The NSA has previously said the Utah Data Center would be online this fall.

The EFF wants the information because of its current lawsuit against the NSA (i.e. Jewel vs. NSA) that alleges the U.S. government operates an illegal mass domestic surveillance program. Three NSA whistleblowers—including William Binney—agreed to provide evidence that the NSA has been running a domestic spying program since 2001.

 The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is suing the Justice Department for details of last month’s ruling by a secretive U.S. court that National Security Agency’s domestic spying program violated the U.S. Constitution, Jon Brodkin of arstechnica reports.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) found that “on at least one occasion” the NSA had violated the Fourth Amendment’s restriction against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Filmed from Redwood Road, you can see the progress of the NSA’s Utah Data Center also called the NSA Spy Center. There are some quotes from various individuals who are knowledgeable or have worked for the NSA. Apparently they are far enough to hold a ribbon cutting ceremony.

The filmmaker Laura Poitras profiles William Binney, a 32-year veteran of the National Security Agency who helped design a top-secret program he says is broadly collecting Americans’ personal data. Chilling video and story link here: “The Program”

NSA Gov Site with their spin.

Other Sources: NY Times NSA Domestic Spying Center tells the tale of the mass surveillance of Americans.

Other posts I have done that may be of interest:

Barack Obama’s Surveillance Society.

Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

Obama” ‘Prolonged Detention”, otherwise known as FEMA Camps.

B-Ville Follow Bunkerville

The American military is using Chinese satellites

 

This is a head shaker isn’t it. We spend trillions on our military budget, yet we don’t have the money to have our own satellites? So not only that, we “rent” them from China? If we ever wondered about the intentional destruction of our military and our secrets, one need not go any further. Of course, better to give the money to the Chinese. Better yet, we are using other countries satellites as well. If we were at war, or these countries got into an angst with us they could shut them down. Here we go:

“I’m amazed. The agreement was announced openly, so the Chinese can not have doubts about who is using their satellites. They will probably save a copy of all the data,” said Dan Cheng, an analyst at the Heritage Foundation.

In his view, from past experience, the Chinese will certainly try to bite through security. Even if they do not break the code, the data has been handed to them, and will serve as valuable learning material.

Source: tvn24 – Amerykańskie wojsko używa chińskich satelitów. “Inaczej się nie dało” 

U.S. forces are so heavily saturated with different communication devices that if not transmitted by satellite would cause serious problems.

Data flow is so great that there are no adequate available satellites. The Pentagon has quietly hired a Chinese satellite, APSTAR-7, through which will flow communications with the army in Africa.

Information about buying Chinese satellite transfers arose at a meeting of one of the sub-committees of the U.S. Congress.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence for Space Policy Doug Loverro said that the Pentagon had paid 10 million dollars for a one-year contract with the Chinese.

Due to the embargo of military technology, it is ironic that the APSTAR-7 is used by he Americans, who are the leaders in the construction of satellites, but there is no satellite available from the USA.

The Pentagon hired a Chinese device to improve communication with the troops in Africa, because its own military satellites, and those already hired from other countries, lacked capacity. The capacity was only available from the Chinese, Mr Loverro said.

For a dce, the Pentagon has been forced to transfer military data by civilian satellites, because of the lack of capacity on the military satellites. There is no prospect of that changing in the future.

H/T: China Daily Mail

Obama and his tinkering with Miranda Rights

This is a part of a post I did back in 2011 with disturbing updates. We were concerned then, and we need to be more concerned now. Obama and Eric Holder have indicated that there is no need to Mirandize the Boston terror suspect right way. We will do some sort of a hybrid thing. No, not a military court but sort of a civil court with well……maybe 48 hours is permissible before he gets read his rights. Where does the constitution or court decision state this is “subject to interpretation.” But here is the concern. Recall that now Obama has deemed the whole of the United States a potential battlefield. Which means any of us could caught in his web. Worse, he now promulgates “Preventive Detention” and “Prolonged Detention”.

The Senate voted on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. Even Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised his concerns about the NDAA detention provisions during last night’s Republican debate. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself. UPDATE: The New American has a great analysis… Be sure and look at this ACLU link.

Then we have “Prolonged Detention” that even Rachael Maddow had a problem with.  “Prolonged Detention” is the term being used. This is not your father’s Gitmo.

Tinkering with Miranda… is this another step… “Obama can unilaterally change Supreme Court rulings should be concerning to all Americans”. Obama has contempt for the Supreme Court, the Constitution which he says is flawed, and Congress. “Domestic Terror” suspects…my guess he has in mind American Citizens who he may feel are a threat to his growing usurping of all powers which belong to other branches of government.If he gets by with this one, what will be the next change to Miranda or any law for that matter. What is your guess?

Obama has already given Miranda rights to foreign terrorists and Somali pirates waging jihad against U.S. soldiers and civilians.

Now Obama and Holder have revised Miranda rights for what the Wall Street Journal describes as “domestic-terror” suspects. The policy is so vaguely described here, if at all, and who the new Miranda policy applies to and how Obama can unilaterally change Supreme Court rulings should be concerning to all Americans. via Rights Are Curtailed for Terror Suspects – WSJ.com.

New rules allow investigators to hold domestic-terror suspects longer than others without giving them a Miranda warning, significantly expanding exceptions to the instructions that have governed the handling of criminal suspects for more than four decades.

The Supreme Court’s 1966 Miranda ruling obligates law-enforcement officials to advise suspects of their rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present for questioning. A 1984 decision amended that by allowing the questioning of suspects for a limited time before issuing the warning in cases where public safety was at issue.

The Justice Department believes it has the authority to tinker with Miranda procedures. Making the change administratively rather than through legislation in Congress, however, presents legal risks.

“I don’t think the administration can accomplish what I think needs to be done by policy guidance alone,” said California Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. “It may not withstand the scrutiny of the courts in the absence of legislation.”

More at Creeping Sharia

NSA Utah spy center revealed – 100 years of total data stored

This concludes the last part of my three-part post. Written for those who would dismiss true patriots with derision. These posts are well documented with reliable sources. You owe it to anyone who still disbelieves the unthinkable. Acquaint your self with what is out there. This final post should be the coup de grace. Video at end of post.

I first started out with Obama: ‘Prolonged Detention’ otherwise known as FEMA Camps

Obama talks about the FEMA camps and explains their purposes in the video. “Prolonged Detention” is the term being used. This is not your father’s Gitmo. Before the speech, one not to be missed, let us look at the new position that just might be the perfect fit. Rachael Maddow of all people does a surperb job of dissecting his speech at the post. For those who still doubt about detention without trial, this is for you.

Yesterday I posted Barack Obama’s Surveillance Society. Check out the excellent videos. Included in the post is Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

Obama mouthpiece suggested to Judge Forrest that concerns about the president’s detention powers were excessive as American citizens would,after all,have the ability to file a writ of habeas corpus should they be illegally or improperly jailed! “How long does [such a] petition take,” asked Forrest? When Torrance refused to answer,the Judge continued,“Several years,right”? (In Yesterday’s post, Obama seemed to think that ten years might be about right) -prolonged detention. Keep that phrase in mind.

So now, the final conclusion. Read it, and pass it on to anyone who still doubts what the future holds.

Filmed from Redwood Road, you can see the progress of the NSA’s Utah Data Center also called the NSA Spy Center. There are some quotes from various individuals who are knowledgeable or have worked for the NSA.

These are quotes and information about the Utah Data Center that has received serious scrutiny by many people. Let me know what you think.

Barack Obama’s Surveillance Society

Yesterday I posted a story Obama” ‘Prolonged Detention”, otherwise known as FEMA Camps. Even Rachael Maddow took him on. He posited that it was now permissible to detain without trial as a preemptive move.Now on to part two. Before we get to the heart of the matter via the video, here is a bit of History.

From August, 2012 post: Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

Obama fights the preliminary injunction granted to American Citizens against unlawful imprisonment. But Obama is not through with us yet. They are fighting it big time, and the rationale gets even more creepy. The argument goes something like this, if we are thrown in jail, we can always appeal, even though it may take years to prove our innocence. Guilty until proven otherwise, typical Marxist justice.

On May 16th,federal judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction to plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against Barack Obama and the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA),striking down those sections of the Act that provide the president the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without benefit of their 5th and 6th Amendment rights. As a reminder, keep in mind it was Obama that insisted that the language in the NDAA bill include Citizens:Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Under the terms of the Act,Obama had been given exclusive authority to direct members of the US military to arrest and imprison anyone he believed to have “substantially supported” al Qaeda,the Taliban,or “associated forces.” When pressed by plaintiff’s attorneys about the practical extent of this authority,government lawyers admitted “…the NDAA does give the president the power to lock up people like journalist Chris Hedges and peaceful activists,” admitting that “…even war correspondents could be locked up indefinitely under the NDAA.”

Yet incredibly,when pressed on the issue,this Obama mouthpiece suggested to Judge Forrest that concerns about the president’s detention powers were excessive as American citizens would,after all,have the ability to file a writ of habeas corpus should they be illegally or improperly jailed! “How long does [such a] petition take,” asked Forrest? When Torrance refused to answer,the Judge continued,“Several years,right”? (In Yesterday’s post, Obama seemed to think that ten years might be about right) -prolonged detention. Keep that phrase in mind.

Keep this in mind:

On July 2nd, 2008—Obama delivered a speech in Boulder, Colorado in which he promised the creation and establishment of a “Civilian National Security Force.” He further promised it would be “just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded as the US Military.”

It is well known amongst dictators, the world over, that a private army is necessary to control the great unwashed masses over which they force their rule.

We have seen Obama steadily assume dictatorial powers over apathetic Americans in just four and a half years. He has all but hushed the people’s voice in government, the US Congress, by simply by-passing them and ruling by executive order—just like any other two-bit dictator. Some feel even the US Supreme Court has lost the steel from its collective spine under withering pressure from our budding domestic dictator, Obama.
If one did not know better, one would think there is a move afoot to institute a complete Marxist insurgency in America with Obama at the top—and —at the leading edge.
“The things done in every Marxist insurgency are being done in America today.” … Retired Lt. General William G.”Jerry” Boykin says in a new video he has just released . Boykin is a decorated former Delta Force Commander, US Deputy Under Secretary for Defense, and a recipient of the Purple Heart

%d bloggers like this: