Via Brock Townsend:
Via The Last Refuge
For the past two weeks, Reason
, a magazine dedicated to “Free Minds and Free Markets,” has been barred by an order from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York from speaking publicly about a grand jury subpoena
that court sent to Reason.com.The subpoena demanded the records of six people who left hyperbolic comments at the website about the federal judge who oversaw the controversial conviction of Silk Road founder Ross Ulbricht.Shortly after the subpoena was issued, the government issued a gag order
prohibiting Reason not only from discussing the matter but even acknowledging the existence of the subpoena or the gag order itself. As a wide variety of media outlets have noted, such actions on the part of the government are not only fundamentally misguided and misdirected, they have a tangible chilling effect on free expression by commenters and publications alike.
Yesterday, after preparing an extensive legal brief, Reason asked the US Attorney’s Office to join with it in asking that the gag order – now moot and clearly an unconstitutional prior restraint – be lifted. This morning, the US Attorney’s Office asked the Court to vacate the order, which it did. We are free to tell the story for the first time.
So, it’s been decided.
The Confederate Battle Flag is coming down. Even Walmart, purveyor to all persons poor, Southern and cheesy, has opted out of sales of items depicting The Stars and Bars.
Why? Don’t you know?! It stands for segregation, racism and slavery! (Ideas of a non-federal Union and different, less-centralized government control to the contrary).
Because the South lost.
This is not unlike the (at one time) venerated swastika. A symbol of good luck! Used by Indians. Of the ancients quartering the universe into active and passive principles.
Of course, some guy named Adolph and people pushing an anti-fascist agenda changed all that.
God forbid something should have more than one meaning, or a deeper meaning than one interpretation.
Funny, we are told to allow Islamic folks (even the violent ones) to have their views, and that phony Westboro ‘Baptist’ church to have theirs, but persons proud of their Southern history and heritage – NOPE! Can’t have THAT!
Because we’re all idiots and need to be told how and what to think.
Because the South lost…
PS (on a different tack) – When will the first American Mosque be forced to perform a gay marriage? Just wondering…
PPS – THE QUOTE OF THE DAY!
Some psycho kills 9 people and the 10th victim is American History. – Mad Ogre
This whole brew-ha-ha over a White woman ‘passing’ as a Black woman in the Spokane chapter of the NAACP has me confused.
Or perhaps the emotion is WHO CARES?
The NAACP accepts members of all races. At least they used to, before they were compromised by the progressives. I don’t know the current qualifications. (see Democratic Party also re: compromise)
This is one reason I support CORE and not the NAACP. (That and CORE actively supports self-defense and firearms ownership for all, whereas the NAACP does not.)
I think this whole non-issue of a White woman ‘passing’ as Black can be dealt with with two questions:
1) Is her weirdness in acting this way detrimental to the organization?, AND,
2) What is the content of her character?
Of course, this doesn’t affect me.
And I still don’t care.
Yatta, yatta, yatta.
One of my favorite bloggers, wirecutter, gives us his take on the Supreme Court failing to follow through with their own decisions.
This week the Supreme Court passed up an opportunity to get the government out of the bedroom. Counterintuitively, the case involved an ordinance adopted by the famously tolerant and progressive city of San Francisco just eight years ago.
The puzzle is solved when you learn that the ordinance deals with guns, tools for exercising a constitutional right that is decidedly unfashionable in the City by the Bay. By declining to hear the case, the Supreme Court, which in 2010 affirmed that the Second Amendment binds states and cities as well as the federal government, undermines that principle, suggesting that the right of armed self-defense is constrained by local sensibilities.
San Francisco’s ordinance, enacted in 2007, requires that handguns kept at home be “stored in a locked container or disabled with a trigger lock” except when they are being carried. As the six residents challenging the ordinance pointed out in their petition asking the Supreme Court to consider the case, that requirement means “law-abiding individuals must render their handguns inoperable or inaccessible precisely when they are needed most, whenever they are not physically carrying them on their persons—including when they are asleep in the dark of night.”
My solution? A.C.E. ALWAYS CARRY EVERYWHERE
And let the constabulary try to figure out how they are going to determine the gun in your hand whose muzzle (flash) they are seeing when they breach your door wasn’t worn by you to bed!
And vote those anti-rights bastards out at the soonest possibility!
And change the stupid law.
Brock Townsend (of Free North Carolina) reports and comments…
The Army’s new camouflage uniforms are set to hit store shelves July 1 for beta-testing before being launched in solidarity Jan 2016.
Interestingly enough the new uniform appears to be printed in a woodland-type pattern and almost looks as if it would work perfectly domestically.
Additionally a few new features have been added for functionality.
Soldiers will be able to use the older Operation Enduring Freedom pattern until 2019, according to the Army although the new pattern is preferred.
It’s interesting to note that this new ‘domestic looking pattern’ will be available just before JADE HELM 15 kicks off mid-July.
‘Almost looks’. That may be true, but I’m curious as to whose original opinion this is.
The Texas governor has reportedly mobilized the National Guard to keep the JADE HELM folks under surveillance.
Are some folks over-reacting and fanning the flames, or…?
Whenever gun crimes are perpetrated, liberals love to point the finger of blame at law-abiding gun owners, but a list of mass shooters from the past 20 years proves that they all had one thing in common – and it wasn’t the weapons used. Evidence shows that the common factor in nearly every mass shooting is that all of the perpetrators were either actively taking powerful psychotropic drugs or had been taking them at one point before committing their crimes.
Multiple credible scientific studies going back more then a decade, as well as internal documents from certain pharmaceutical companies that suppressed the information show that SSRI drugs ( Selective Serotonin Re-Uptake Inhibitors ) have well known, but unreported side effects, including but not limited to suicide and other violent behavior.
One need only Google relevant key words or phrases to see for themselves.
www.ssristories.com is one popular site that has documented over 4500 “ Mainstream Media “ reported cases from around the World of aberrant or violent behavior by those taking these powerful drugs, according to the Liberty Crier.
The extensive list shows how psychotropic drugs are linked in every case of murder and suicide:
Now, I’m truly not disparaging chemistry. And many of the modern wonderful chemical miracles that are pervasive in our daily life. \ Imagine life without aspirin, ibuprofen, penicillin, other antibiotics. My roommate certainly would have passed by now, if it were not for asthma medications. And certainly these medications have helped thousands, if not millions of people.
But the pharmacological industry has somehow been able to develop these psychotropic medications and release them to the public, without them having been completely vetted or tested.
Or perhaps the ‘off the rails’ factor is calculated in, as with automobile safety equipment, food additives and other stuff?
And people are being killed.
h/t Brock Townsend
Except it wasn’t.
After I shot Bob’s (the former PI, gun store manager) Heckler & Koch 91, I knew I had to have one!
It took me over 10 years to acquire one. And it definitely wasn’t a G3 (the select-fire version). It wasn’t even really a Heckler & Koch 91 (the semiautomatic version).
She was a PTR91 (H&K parts, except a domestically-produced receiver, to comply with the spurious, unconstitutional and misnamed Assault Weapons Ban).
The good news is she shot similarly. Functioned exactly the same. And took same foreign parts. Expensive German-made H&K parts.
(Wait a minute – maybe this was the BAD news?)
I remember purchasing some different furniture and a sling for her at a gun show. At premium, President Clinton inspired prices! Fortunately, there were bazillions of cheap magazines.
The bad news was I could never afford the case lot prices for ammunition.
Which meant she was never shot very much.
AND, she was a PITA to clean and re-lube, for a neophyte like me.
Of course, she was stolen in the safe with the others. That’s what I get for deciding I liked rifles, too!
ASM826 (who continues to write on the Borepatch blog! :-)) has written a couple of recent posts regarding fighting back.
I commented on one that ‘we’ have been taught for a couple of generations now to NOT fight back.
Making most of society sheep to the f’ng slaughter!
I had a recent conversation with a female friend in Chicago who has enough infirmities to make me appear as a decathlete! She used to work physical security back-in-the-day at TMCCC (pre-infirmities).
And we discussed about how, if there had ever been an assault on the TMCCC building (people did fire guns at it, and one of the 911 terrorists did live across the street while taking flight training. This is a
credit card company collections facility, after all.) there were a number of us who would have been advancing toward the threat instead of hiding under our desks, waiting to die.
It’s how we were wired. Security, former cops and military, people who felt they had the duty to do something!
What if students had rushed the Columbine guys en masse, or the church shooter? Or thrown books and chairs, as the ASM826 post suggests?
Certainly, running openly against an armed assailant will probably get you shot or stabbed, but in a group assault response? A superiority of numbers?
Of course, if someone possessed a firearm and knew how to use it...
Sometimes, violence IS the answer.
Sadly, most of us who wanted to respond @ TMCCC are now in our 60’s and 70’s, and would resemble slow-walking zombies due to our infirmities if we responded.
While the young sheep were under their desks.
“An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it.” – Jeff Cooper
I really hope none of you thought that total surveillance of everyday Americans was going to stop, or bein any way curtailed.
Earlier this week, we noted that Senator Mitch McConnell, hot off of his huge flop in trying to preserve the NSA’s surveillance powers, had promised to insert the dangerous “cybersecurity” bill CISA directly into the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act). As we discussed, while many have long suspected that CISA (and CISPA before it) were surveillance bills draped in “cybersecurity” clothing, the recent Snowden revelations that the NSA is using Section 702 “upstream” collection for “cybersecurity” issues revealed how CISA would massively expandthe NSA’s ability to warrantlessly wiretap Americans’ communications.
Thankfully, like his PATRIOT Act games from a few weeks ago, this latest McConnell movehas fallen flat. The Senate rejected the attempt by a 40 to 56 vote. So, for now, it looks like the Senate isn’t going to be able to ram CISA through either which is good news.
Still, expect Congress to keep trying. But, each time, it’s important to ask some basic questions: what attacks would this bill actually stop (answer: none). And what laws are currently preventing the supposedly necessary “information sharing” from happening today?
(and here, my friends, is the line…)
Also none. At least as a practical matter, anyway. As with the rest of the permanent bureaucracy that really runs things, they’re going to do whatever they like, and there’s not one damned thing you, I, or anyone else can do about it.
(and how sad is THAT!?)
(Having said that, however, I’m gonna keep trying, however Sisyphean doing do may be!)
Bayou Renaissance Man (from whom I rarely
steal quote, as I’d be doing it DAILY! – translation – you should be reading him, daily!) expresses most eloquently this conundrum…
I’ve written about the military side of dealing with fundamentalist Islamic terrorism in these pages from time to time. The trouble is, a military solution isn’t a solution, because it can’t target the mindset that produces legions of suicidal fanatics. The Russians developed a very direct, pragmatic and utterly ruthless approach to Iranian-sponsored terrorism during the 1980’s. It worked, because those ‘at the top’ who were controlling the terrorists could be threatened into compliance. That doesn’t seem to be the case with an organization like ISIL in Syria and Iraq. When you believe – truly believe, with all your heart and soul – that death in battle, or by assassination, earns you a martyr’s reward in Paradise, death isn’t a threat. It’s a promise of greatness that you embrace eagerly. The same applies to Hamas and its extreme attitudes towards Israel. How can you reason with a movement that celebrates death in combat, that indoctrinates its youngest children with lessons about the praiseworthiness of martyrdom and hatred for Israel? There are many other fundamentalist Islamic terrorist groups who’ve adopted similar outlooks on life.
So, how do we deal with them? It’s easy to say “Kill them all” – but it’s also completely impractical. Despite losing thousands of its fighters in combat, ISIL appears to have a limitless supply of replacements. Young women in Europe and America even travel to areas it controls out of a desire to become brides of ‘jihadists’. Fanaticism is an inbred streak in the human race – not confined to Islam by any means – and as long as there are fanatics, there’ll be those driven to join fanatical movements. We can’t kill them all without killing the entire human race. Speaking as a member of that race, I have a profound objection to being included in that process! There is no way to completely destroy fanaticism.
The mistake politicians make is to assume that they’re dealing with rational human beings. Rationality is relative. ISIL’s leaders and its wannabe martyrs are entirely rational, according to their system of thought and belief. To change their behavior, we have to change that system. To do that, we have to radically reform the society and culture that have produced it. Attacking and militarily overrunning that society won’t inculcate contrary values – we’ve proved that time and time again, most recently in Iraq and Afghanistan. The solution has to include methods of changing the situation on the ground. However, that requires a long-term commitment and huge amounts of money, neither of which are available right now.
The only answer our politicians and leaders appear to have is to keep killing as many Islamist fanatics as possible in order to ‘control the infection’ in their society and culture, even though they must know that doing so will produce still more fanatics. Einstein defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”. That perfectly describes how we’ve tried to control radical Islam for the past few decades. When will we learn from our failures and try to find a better solution? Is there, in fact, a better solution? In my darker moments, I fear there may not be one at all. History suggests that may be the case, and that the struggle against fanaticism in all its forms may be a Sisyphean endeavor.
Your guess is as good as mine . . .