as stolen from Wirecutter:
Between 1989 and 2010, U.S. attorneys seized an estimated $12.6 billion in asset forfeiture cases. The growth rate during that time averaged +19.4% annually.
In 2010 alone, the value of assets seized grew by +52.8% from 2009 and was six times greater than the total for 1989.
Then by 2014, that number had ballooned to roughly $4.5 billion for the year, making this 35% of the entire number of assets collected from 1989 to 2010 in a single year.
Now, according to the FBI, the total amount of goods stolen by criminals in 2014 burglary offenses suffered an estimated $3.9 billion in property losses. This means that the police are now taking more assets than the criminals.
Now, assuming these statistics are close to accurate (and we all know about assuming), this is a sobering statistic!
Does ANYONE remember their American History? Life, Liberty, Property? Bueller? Bueller?
I really didn’t want to, but am compelled.
First and foremost – My thoughts and prayers go out to the innocents who were killed; their friends and family who survive them.
Second – as my dear friend Tomi the Art Historian posted: Aux armes, citoyens!
Sadly, I fear the French will not follow her recommendation. The French (and most of Europe) have followed America’s politically-correct example, and in the name of humanitarianism have opened their borders to the armies of refugees pouring in from The Middle East.
Many of whom appear to be young men of military age, unaccompanied by wives and children.
The amazing thing is that while we are preparing to open our borders even further, we’ve only had mostly little onesie and twosie terrorist attacks. Nothing of the scale of yesterday’s attacks in France.
And I must ask: WHY?
Certainly, we have more FREEDOM than the French? Perhaps the attacks were more about geographic location and convenience than freedom?
OH! I know! The French have very restrictive gun control laws. The civilians largely do not have the means, or the rights, to respond to violence as we do here in much of The United States!
And terrorists are largely cowards, who talk big behind their ski-masks about dying to meet 72 virgins, but in real life don’t want a violent response.
They want victims, not combatants.
So, I fear France will remain largely naked against the terror threat. And the attacks will continue.
There is a lesson in this United States! Are you listening?
Don’t let the government further disarm you! Lest we become as Europe.
I’d two encounters regarding drones the other night.
One was an episode of Madame Secretary, wherein the female Secretary of State co-opts her own brother to obtain information to locate and assassinate an American-born Isis member.
Via a drone strike in a foreign land.
(I’ve an ongoing discussion regarding this TV show – a friend thinks it’s a stalking horse to put Hillary Clinton in the White House. I disagree. The protagonist is a former CIA officer, married to a religious ethics professor at The War College, who is a part-time NSA guy. Hardly The Clintons!)
The second encounter was a TV commercial showing a drone package delivery (Amazon? – I don’t remember, we have The Hopper and fast-forward through most of the commercials! :-) )
Now, I don’t know if this was a planned placement of drones on commercial television to get us used to the idea of them flitting about, or serendipity, or what?
I do remember this administration’s last attorney general not ruling out the idea of drone strikes against American citizens on our own soil(!)
Two drones and The Hopper in one evening? Perhaps it’s just coincidental? Showing us how far technology has advanced?
(courtesy of ACTIVISTPOST, in part)
The UN Plans To Implement Universal Biometric Identification For All Of Humanity By 2030
Even after writing several articles about these new Global Goals, I still don’t think that most of my readers really grasp how insidious they actually are. This new agenda truly is a template for a “New World Order”, and if you dig into the sub-points for these new Global Goals you find some very alarming things.
For example, Goal 16.9 sets the following target…
By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration.
The United Nations is already working hard toward the implementation of this goal – particularly among refugee populations. The UN has partnered with Accenture to implement a biometric identification system that reports information “back to a central database in Geneva.” The following is an excerpt from an article that was posted on findbiometrics.com…
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is moving forward with its plans to use biometric technology to identify and track refugees, and has selected a vendor for the project.Accenture, an international technology services provider, has won out in the competitive tendering process and will oversee the implementation of the technology in a three-year contract.
The UNHCR will use Accenture’s Biometric Identity Management System (BIMS) for the endeavor. BIMS can be used to collect facial, iris, and fingerprint biometric data, and will also be used to provide many refugees with their only form of official documentation. The system will work in conjunction with Accenture’s Unique Identity Service Platform (UISP) to send this information back to a central database in Geneva, allowing UNHCR offices all over the world to effectively coordinate with the central UNHCR authority in tracking refugees.
I don’t know about you, but that sure does sound creepy to me.
To me, as well, Mr. Snyder!
He further states:
If you aren’t using cash, that means that all of your economic activity is going through the banks where it can be watched, tracked, monitored and regulated.
Every time the elite propose something for our “good,” it somehow always results in them having more power and more control.
I hope that people will wake up and see what is happening. Major moves toward a one world system are taking place right in front of our eyes, and yet I hear very, very few people talking about any of this.
Of course, pile this upon other agenda items (like ‘universal disarmament’ of the civilian population) and we’re back to the (one-world) governmental wish list of CONTROL.
Supporters of the U.N. are fond of claiming critics are paranoid, and that the U.N. does so much good. Here is a corrupt organization, made up largely of despotic regimes and poorer nations (sometimes conflated) mostly financed by The United States, and largely ineffective in resolving world conflicts.
Remember The Korean War? It still continues! And most of the time, the U.S. pays for most of the aid given poorer nations.
I remember seeing signs by the side of the highway intoning ‘Get Us Out Of The U.N.!’ in the 50’s.
Maybe it’s time we left…
As my dear, departed Father used to intone, “I used to be young and foolish – I’m not young anymore!”
When I was younger, I supported The
War Police Action in Vietnam. The rationale seemed simple. Our allies (the South Vietnamese) were under attack by the (Soviet Russian and Red Chinese communist supported) North Vietnamese.
It seemed to be a way to make The Cold War hot, without actually fighting Russia and China directly.
And we must not only defend out allies, but oppose communism wherever it rears it ugly head.
This was similar to the Korean
War Police Action Conflict a few years earlier.
(And we know how well THAT worked out!)
And I was prepared to voluntarily go and fight for my Country.
Except, with a fused hip, the military changed my draft status to IV-F. And I sat on the sidelines.
And we saw how well Vietnam worked out…
Since that time, there was Lebanon, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Grenada, Panama, the Balkans, then Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan (in part).
And there was always a rationale proposed by the government regarding why we needed to go to war. You may agree with some. You may disagree with some.
But, as I age, I am beginning to question governmental motives more.
YES, I do believe it was appropriate for us to fight the Nazis and the Japanese Empire in WWII. And I am still an anti-communist.
Vietnam, Germany, Italy and Japan are now trade partners.
And Red China rules our financial future. Whether we like it or not.
War for petroleum? Or to stop WsMD? That debate will probably continue.
We should defend our national interests. But, if we are being played by government (or corporate interests) to leap to that defense…(?)
The military-industrial complex President Eisenhower warned us about does exist. The question is how much of government is enmeshed in it?
Here richly, with ridiculous display,
The Politician’s corpse was laid away.
While all of his acquaintances sneered and slanged, I wept:
For I had longed to see him hanged.
War is a Racket by Smedley Butler is a famous speech denouncing the military industrial complex. This speech by two-time Congressional Medal of Honor recipient exposes war profits that benefit few at the expense of many. Throughout his distinguished career in the Marines, Smedley Darlington Butler demonstrated that true patriotism does not mean blind allegiance to government policies with which one does not agree. To Hell with war.
Smedley Darlington Butler (July 30, 1881 – June 21, 1940), nicknamed ” The Fighting Quaker “and ” Old Gimlet Eye “, was a Major General in the U.S. Marine Corps and, at the time of his death,the most decorated Marine in U.S. history.
During his 34 years of Marine Corps service, Butler was awarded numerous medals for hero ism including the Marine Corps Brevet Medal (the highest Marine medal at its time for officers), and subsequently the Medal of Honor twice. Notably, he is one of only 19 people to be twice awarded the Medal of Honor, and one of only three to be awarded a Marine Corps Brevet Medal and a Medal of Honor, and the only person to be awarded a Marine Corps Brevet Medal and a Medal of Honor for two different actions.
In addition to his military career, Smedley Butler was noted for his outspoken anti- interventionistviews, and his book War is a Racket. His book was one of the first works describing the workings ofthe military-industrial complex and after retiring from service, he became a popular speaker at meetings organized by veterans, pacifists and church groups in the 1930s.
The instantaneous Internet news cycle doesn’t help with our decision-making. ANYONE can post their ‘facts’ as news, making thoughtful political reasoning nearly impossible.
And EVERYONE seems to have an agenda!
from the Government…
The Senate intends to pass a new warrantless surveillance bill granting government broad new authorities for collecting your personal information from private businesses, and it’s up to you and me to stop them.
On Wednesday the Senate may hold its first vote on the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA), S. 754.
Promoted as a “much-needed” “cybersecurity” bill, Congress devised a new way for intelligence agencies to collect your emails and sensitive data.
The bill “encourages” private companies like Google, Facebook, and Yahoo to monitor their networks and share “cyber threat indicators” broadly with agencies like the FBI, NSA, and CIA.
Worse yet, the bill allows the government to share and use your information for reasons completely unrelated to cybersecurity!
And on top of all that, this bill grants companies immunity to ensure they give the government as much information as possible…
Without having to make any effort to redact your sensitive information.
Let that sink in for a moment…
The same government that can’t protect its own data on 22.1 million federal employees, contractors, and their families and friends wants private businesses to share your personal information freely with them.
And if (more likely, when) your information is misused either by government agencies, private businesses, or both, you will be unable to hold anyone accountable.
Guffaw, you and I can both see this isn’t going to end well.
CISA is justified as necessary to stop hackers…
But sharing your Google searches and emails with Homeland Security will not stop hackers.
In fact, nothing in this bill would stop any of the cyber-attacks publicized in the press this year.
When it comes down to it, this is nothing more than a new warrantless surveillance bill.
Congress should be rolling back intelligence agencies’ surveillance powers, not granting new ones.
Recently, the President of the American Library Association, Sari Feldman, spoke out against the bill saying,
“When librarians oppose a bill with ‘information sharing’ in its name you can be sure that the bill is decidedly more than advertised.”
Businesses like Twitter, Yelp, Facebook, and Google all oppose this bill.
You only need to look at who is sponsoring this bill to realize it isn’t for your benefit or mine.
Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Richard Burr (R-NC), two of the biggest surveillance state proponents in the Senate, are working diligently to ram this legislation through.
And that makes the first potential vote on Wednesday crucial.
Per standing Senate rules, the Senate needs 60 votes to proceed on the bill.
Senators Rand Paul (R-KY), Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT), have all vocally opposed this legislation.
But it’s going to take an outpouring of opposition from grassroots Americans like you to stop this warrantless surveillance bill from passing the Senate.
That’s why it’s vital you sign your emergency “Stop the Surveillance State!” Fax Petitions to your U.S. Senators today.
These petitions let your senators know you see right through the thin façade of “cybersecurity” and recognize this bill for what it is – a new warrantless surveillance bill.
At a time when Congress needs to do more to rein in the intelligence agencies to protect your privacy, many senators are trying to expand the surveillance state.
Let them know you’ll have nothing of it.
Please take action today, then forward this email to your friends and family and ask them to sign their emergency “Stop the Surveillance State!” Fax Petitions as well.
Public pressure matters. And if you remain silent, don’t look to blame others later for your lost liberties.
It’s time the American people stand up and say, “Enough is enough!”
Director of Legislation
P.S. After you’ve signed your emergency “Stop the Surveillance State!” Fax Petitions, please consider making a generous contribution to Campaign for Liberty to help defray the cost of this program to fight back against this new warrantless surveillance bill.
|Because of Campaign For Liberty’s tax-exempt status under IRC Sec. 501(C)(4) and its state and federal legislative activities, contributions are not tax deductible as charitable contributions (IRC § 170) or as business deductions (IRC § 162(e)(1)).www.CampaignForLiberty.org
This came my way, and I thought it worth sharing! – Guffaw
China is launching a comprehensive “credit score” system, and the more I learn about it, the more nightmarish it seems. China appears to be leveraging all the tools of the information age—electronic purchasing data, social networks, algorithmic sorting—to construct the ultimate tool of social control. It is, as one commentator put it, “authoritarianism, gamified.” Read this piece for the full flavor—it will make your head spin. If that and the little other reporting I’ve seen is accurate, the basics are this:
- Everybody is measured by a score between 350 and 950, which is linked to their national identity card. While currently supposedly voluntary, the government has announced that it will be mandatory by 2020.
- The system is run by two companies, Alibaba* and Tencent, which run all the social networks in China and therefore have access to a vast amount of data about people’s social ties and activities and what they say.
More @ Liberty Upward
*Alibaba is a Chinese company not unlike Amazon, with a partner component selling wholesale merchandise. It has made it’s founder and chairman Jack Ma, the richest man in China.
Welcome to the Brave, New World. A major multi-billionaire capitalist in charge of companies controlling a communist population.
Last week, law professor and Washington Post blogger Eugene Volokh, exposed how the District Attorney’s Office in Nassau County, New York, was unconstitutionally prohibiting its prosecutors from possessing handguns, even in their homes. We registered our disapproval as well. On Wednesday, mere days after the story broke, Prof. Volokh reported that the policy had been rescinded. Well, mostly rescinded.
Prof. Volokh’s Wednesday post includes a copy of a memo issued by Albert Teichman, Chief Assistant District Attorney for Nassau County. The memo notes the policy was enacted in 2006, and predates the tenure of current Nassau County Acting District Attorney, Madeline Singas. Although the memo doesn’t say so, it would also mean the policy predated the Supreme Court’s pivotal holdings in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago. Of course, those cases should be well-known to any lawyer, especially one working in law enforcement, so that does not excuse the fact that the policy persisted, even when it was clearly at odds with the high court’s statements on the Second Amendment.
The memo claims, unlike the explanation provided to Prof. Volokh when he inquired about the policy, that the restriction was enacted “to prevent friendly fire tragedies like those that have occurred in recent years in Nassau County and neighboring jurisdictions.” It then embarks on a litany of incidents occurring between 2006 and 2011 in which law enforcement officers were killed by other law enforcement officers in the New York City Metropolitan area. None of the incidents involved prosecutors or other officials who do not routinely carry as part of their law enforcement duties.
The memo concludes, “Upon review, the public safety interests served by the policy can be substantially effectuated though a less-restrictive means that does not preclude ADAs from owning handguns, but strictly prohibits work-related possession and use.” It goes on to recommend that assistant district attorneys be “strictly prohibited from carrying or possessing a weapon any time they are working … without the express written permission of the District Attorney or the District Attorney’s authorized designee.” Violations, it states, should be punishable by termination.
A follow-up memo, also dated Sept. 30, shows the policy being enacted “immediately” and superseding any previous policy. It also states, “Assistant District Attorneys are permitted to own and possess a legally registered handgun in their homes or for legally permitted activity unrelated to their employment and workplace.” Such employees are “encouraged” to take a firearm safety course. They are also required to provide copies of their “licensure and registration documentation to the DA’s office.”
We took Acting District Attorney Ringas strongly to task in our original remarks, as she is ultimately responsible for the policies of her office, whether she originally implemented them or not. We now credit her, however, with taking positive and expeditious steps to correct an obviously untenable situation. We certainly agree with her office’s recommendation that DAs who choose to own handguns take a firearm safety course, and NRA’s network of certified trainers – the finest in the nation – stand ready to assist in that regard. While we believe that any prosecutor lawfully able to do so should also have the option of remaining armed while operating their own private automobiles, we are glad to know that they will now be able to own and use handguns on their own time and for their own purposes.
More troubling is the office’s continued insistence that “[m]any neighboring jurisdictions impose handgun restrictions on Assistant District Attorneys.” We checked the hiring websites for the District Attorney’s Offices of Bronx, Kings, New York, Queens, and Richmond Counties. None of them mentioned any such requirements. Clearly, however, the use of public employment or civil service as a means of depriving individuals of their Second Amendment rights while they are at home or on their own time is a problem in any context. Public employees subjected to any such a blanket policy are encouraged to contact the NRA with their stories.
The original author of the Nassau County policy is former District Attorney and current U.S. Rep. Kathleen Rice (D-NY). Rice told the media through a spokesperson that assistant district attorneys “shouldn’t be walking around armed” when dealing with victims, witnesses, and defendants. Why she believed that necessitated banning prosecutors from owing handguns at home, however, is not explained. It suggests deficiencies not just in her grasp of the U.S. Constitution but in her legal drafting ability. Her NRA-PVFF-rating, meanwhile, indicates she takes a dim view of firearm ownership in general.
The Internet is replete with tales of doom and gloom.
Two of the more current (having appeared almost simultaneously) are (first)…
BERNIE SANDERS BECOMES THE NEXT PRESIDENT
Why? Because the expected Democratic front runner, Hillary Clinton is mired in all her illegal, dishonest and unethical mess – to the point where even the main-stream media couldn’t ignore it. So Bernie, who seems to be running strong, and is an avowed Socialist – became the candidate.
And Donald Trump, the RINO populist, who says what ‘the people’ want to hear (at least some people) and cannot be bought (as he is running on his own cash) scares the bejezus out of the Republican establishment. As they are not about to make him their candidate (because they cannot control him) he forms a third party. This splits the Republican base, and Bernie The Socialist wins!
Result? More editing and erosion of the Constitution, and increase in governmental power. And out-of-control spending!
WORLD FINANCIAL COLLAPSE
The People’s Republic of China (aka the PRC or ‘Red’ China), the communist behemoth to the East, is tanking financially. And our own system (Wall Street and The Fed) are failing as well. (the DJA dropped 1100 points in one day), AND, China holds our note (they are propping US up!) Translation – both East and West are preparing for a large financial hit. And failing in the preparation. International terrorism is rampant. And let’s not mention Europe and the tinder box in the Middle East (nuclear Iran – “I told you not to mention that!”))…
Quelle surprise TWO.
Expectations are (again, per the Internet-feeding your fears since 1994) that with a second, incompetent Socialist President, and a rapidly failing financial system, WORLDWIDE, the international banking system and what’s left of world stability will fail.
No access to your bank accounts, IRAs, profit-sharing funds, stocks, pensions, gold, jewels. You will be asked to bring in any valuables to the nearest federal collection station for ‘processing of your contribution’. Social Security, Medicare and disability payments will STOP.
And anarchy will ensue.
Need an Alka-Seltzer, yet?
Or a whiskey?
Me? I don’t buy into it. At least not yet.
I think the demise of the Republic will occur much more slowly and painfully, as it has been since, oh, 1930…
JDZ (of Never Yet Melted), tells us the following tale…
Statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oriel College, Oxford, where he was a student for one term in 1873. Rhodes left a portion of his estate to the college.
Last April, a statue of Imperialist hero Cecil Rhodes erected in 1934 was removed from the campus of the University of Cape Town. The statue had been previously desecrated with paint and excrement. When a crane lifted the statue away, celebrating students climbed up and danced on its plinth. Rhodes had to be removed, you see, because the 19th century figure was guilty of believing in African Inequality and was a renowned champion of British Colonialism.
The insistence upon the removal of prominent historical figures guilty by the present standards of the extremist left of politically incorrect behavior and opinions is not merely restricted to Third World countries where revolutionary regimes have succeeded to power.
In Oxford, in the heart of England itself, the campus left is following the South African example and demanding the removal of a statue of Rhodes from a niche on the facade of his own college. Newsweek
The Left’s war on history, as you see below, at Yale, has been underway for decades.
What could possibly demonstrate the intellectual and moral fatuity of today’s academic establishment than this kind of abject surrender to the worst kinds of left-wing extremism in response to emotionalist blackmail?
If the study of History produces any kind of wisdom at all, the most basic component of that enlightened understanding would have to be the apprehension that it is impossible to pass judgement on the beliefs and actions of people living in the past by the standard of conventional opinions of the present.
The stained glass picture of Vice President, Secretary of State, and political philosopher John C. Calhoun, Yale Class of 1804, ornamenting the Common Room of the Yale residential college named for the great man was deliberately broken by left-wing students during the 1970s. The window was restored, but portions of the window depicting a black slave in chains kneeling at Calhoun’s feet were removed officially in 1993, after a black student complained that he was personally offended.
I’m reminded of the recent kerfuffle regarding removal of flags of the Confederacy, and desecration of other historical items.
And, of this…
This is not to equate the teachings of the Buddha with those of the Confederacy, but to show that we need to remember history in it’s entirety to obtain the full message.
The First Amendment to The Constitution (at least in the United States) may apply, also.