Liberty is lived and not elected. Be Free

05/17/2017

https://www.libertarianinstitute.org/articles/be-free/

 By

Kym Robinson

Back off!

For many inside the liberty movement the need to convert the devout statist is an instinct that burns with righteous conviction. It is with frustration that one can observe so many recent and distant examples of government horror and yet nothing ever changes for the positive. In sharing these horrors, it is then assumed that those believers in the State, those enforcers of its deeds and laws will somehow see the ‘light’ and suddenly convert to the message of liberty. It is assumed that in somehow using the process of democratic governance that one can convince enough of the voters to see the message, to embrace liberty so that government can then be saved from itself. It is why perhaps many libertarians, anarchists, minarchists, voluntarists, whatever sect of liberty one belongs are the most deluded.

Whether the empirical evidence happens to be economic, moral or warfare it never seems to have the punch that many assume that it should. Instead it is often met with slight concern but ultimately a dismissive ignorance that often only sees more of the same vulgar violence repeated. All done in the name of elusive abstracts, beliefs that society and culture needs such coercion, needs so many wars and needs the intrusions. Evidence be damned. The believers in the State and government shall go on worshipping.

For the devoted Christian, the bible is the sacred testimony of God’s greatness. For many Greatness is not a moral positive. Inside its ancient and edited over time pages are stories of the early genesis of humanity and its relationship with God. It has examples of genocide, sacrifice, rape and slavery. All in the name of God. Yet, this God, is loved and adored regardless of the crimes found inside his own book. For the non-believer, it does not make any sense, for the believer it needs not to. Genocide is justifiable if in the end, it is benevolent.

For the patriotic American the history books, those biased and those more polemic have stories inked in blood of the early to recent examples of American greatness, led by a government of such rhetorically limit in scale yet its reach is imperially immense. All nations have this nationalist perspective, whether it is marred in Juche like those in North Korea to a more confused quagmire of shame and pride as experienced in modern day Germany, the history is full of graphic examples of cruelty and savagery yet from the pulpit of State leaders and intellectuals along with sanctioned historians and academics, help to explain the contexts of so much violence. And the institutions of nation, the very government with so much blood on its many loyal hands continues to reside so powerfully in both mind and heart of the devout patriots.

Despite the real examples versus the romantic depictions, many still worship and believe absolutely in the divinity of the Nation State. Its virtues seldom realized and what ones are apparent are their despite it and not because of it. Just like the God fearing who have read the bible the examples of mass death and torment are somehow viewed as a positive, after all the Lord works in mysterious ways. In the end so too does the government apparently.

The God in the bible does not need whistle blowers to reveal his apparent crimes-deeds. Those of us in the real world however do, when it comes to the deeds of State. Tuskegee, MK Ultra, the My Lai massacre, the Pentagon papers, those revelations made by Chelsea Manning and so on all are more famous examples of the real workings of the American State. And yet, despite this and so much more evidence the devout go on believing and in some cases, they attack those that revealed such bloody moments, as though in doing so they have endangered the heroic killers, the patriotic torturers, the protectors of the American State.

This is not exceptional to the United States, it occurs everywhere. Whether it is related to corruption and criminal scandals as is often the case from Sweden to Iran, or the knowing destruction of legal evidence in a rape case as was the focus of the Heiner affair inside Australia to the revelations that are made once they become historical and not contemporary such as the many massacres by death squads supported by various ‘free’ nations. The public, if any are interested at all, simply shrugs and disregards the evidence forsakes the pain of the victims and the courage of those revealing the information. It never ever seems to matter.

Many celebrity atheists spend so much time standing on stages or by selling books picking on the believers of ludicrously irrational myths. Whether those myths are ancient or more recent, the celebrity atheists poke and tease enjoying fame and wealth at the expense of the ‘stupid’ believers. It is easy to do, to attack belief. Especially when that belief is illogical and filled with so many examples in its own texts of a mean and jealous God. The outcome, the atheists feel smart and smug. The believers all that bit more alienated. The positions however remain the same. Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins devout statists, making exceptions for a flawed and irrational entity filled with ritual, riled in violence and horribly jealously guarding its possessions.

For those of us who hold dear the ideal of liberty and individualism the battle of atheist vs believer is harder. The believers have a monopoly. Their religion is heavily armed and active in each of our lives. No longer is it dangerous to condemn the God of the land or the Church, at least not in most countries. But it is still very dangerous to defy the State, to say No in action, not mere words, to the religious mob of Governance. Political atheism is unpopular and for many, it is considered dangerous.

The Government we are all taught in school is supposed to be filled with checks and balances, it is meant to have its own self-policing mechanics. It is after all democratic (for some) and this in itself reveals a problem in itself, and democracy somehow works out in the end. Except if you are not a part of the mob. Royal Commissions are expensive exercises into mostly matters of state, the outcome is somehow to reveal and shame the elite rulers. Yet besides paying lawyers a lot of money the outcomes are theatrical. Oversight hearings in the US are much the same but what if the problem is not solved by the clergy investigating the clergy?

How can one have justice and self-correction if the church and the notion of God is the problem itself? How can the liberty minded achieve its own renaissance, its own enlightenment? None of the historical atheists ever achieved such measures by hoping to use the church to spread their message. Instead they went on despite the presence of the church. They wrote and read, lived and died regardless of another’s God and his commands.

This is how liberty is spread. It is lived. It is not a case of conversion and it most certainly is not voted in or sought via the mechanics of governance. One does not cure cancer with a tumor. One hopefully seeks to eradicate it. Not by feeding it however benevolent it claims to be at the time. The greatest conversions among the everyday person is inspired by fellow citizens doing good, living freely and doing their preaching with a message heavy in actions and slight in hypocritical exceptions.

Many inside the liberty movement still cling with a childlike love to the notion of a perfect government or a system of laws that will somehow ensure freedom and human rights. It is supposedly why the Western Civilization is great. That word Great, is meaningless in virtue. And yet for many it is assumed that such great things are the cornerstone to ensuring liberty.

The West is seen as being great because of its enlightenment, though pogroms and sectarian conflict continued on up until recent times on such large scales that it shames any of the words penned by David Hume. Magna Carta? when has this ever stopped an agent of the State from breaking into private property to search for contraband? The constitutions of various nations, what good are they other than to suffocate liberty? All are words inked by imperfect men only to be used by other imperfect men to justify force and violence under the guise of some powerful greater good.

The many works of good men and women who advocated liberty need to be read alongside those who wanted to spread socialism, fascism, slavery, communism and so on. It is Great in its ability to colonize, to wage war on such a grand scale, to create a system of debt so immense and to legitimize genocide with the prose of wise legalese. And yet somehow with devout convictions many inside the liberty movement see the World in one half, and hold dear the religious texts that in the end are meaningless, especially to the many dead that they failed. The hemisphere of Taoism is somehow inferior to the West that conceived variations of practiced Communism?

Pragmatic solutions are often conjured up for short term ‘wins’. A siding with a political candidate or party that seems to be a lesser evil than their rivals. Though once elected they always prove to be rhetorical champions and practical despots. The need for a savior is not limited to liberty it is often the cause for misery among all spectrums of religion and ideology. Recently inside the United States the ‘Libertarians for Trump’ again proved how dangerous such an alignment can be, harming the movement in such a way that the damage to credibility will be longer lasting than many realize.

Voting for propositions or legislations that may allow individuals to do what they were often doing on the black market or regardless so that they can be taxed and regulated on these actions, is somehow a positive for liberty? Asking permission from the State to be free. Yes, it may limit the armed goons kidnapping, murdering and stealing yet so long as there is a state this will go on, in other sectors of the market and for other deemed threats to public safety. One Million individuals smoking a joint in front of parliament would send a greater message of liberty than ten billion petitions or votes. One hundred thousand individuals refusing to pay income tax will be of greater importance to diminishing the state and taxation than simply tweeting #taxationistheft one trillion times ever will.

Living liberty is frightening. It is hard for the public university professor with his tenured status and secure income to be an actual anarchist, though he is paid a lot of money to preach anarchy. Though he never lives it. Whether left leaning anarchist or right leaning, it does not matter if the message comes from a tenured academic who has no idea how any market works in practice. Having public officials sympathetic to the notions of liberty is sweet and charming. So is a politician kissing a baby, yet how many of the same politicians have signed the paper that makes it legal for thousands of babies to be blown to pieces.

One cannot pray to be an atheist. You cannot seek it from the Church. It is an individual decision, a living. Liberty is not granted by the State. It cannot be found in legalese or decided in an election. It simply is lived. Having the holier than thou attitude over the ignorant statist or laughing at the antics of the political class is nothing more than entertaining, especially while one enjoys the perks of government grants or obediently pays the State its extortion money.

Ultimately as is always the case the future and our legacy lies in our children. The pollutions of schooling and the meandering influences of popular culture shall always interfere with a child’s upbringing. But with philosophy and a consistently positive parent and familiar role models, the child will mature as many of us did. They will see the State and its deceit, its violence for what it is. They will recall the lies and the heavy-handed nature it had in their child hood and find a guarded sense about it. “I cannot hear you over what you are doing” is the most apt advice one can ever hear in regard to children. Many will see the positive and negative for what it is, so long as they are inspired and motivated with love and stimulation. Perhaps the cure lay inside of the youth and the unborn, provided we are wise and strong enough to plant the real seeds of liberty inside their hearts and minds.

So, if liberty is something that is important to you, then so be blessed by its cold individualized uniqueness. Do not expect to convert scores by your essays into abstract logic or in your articles on war crimes and genocide. No amount of evidence will ever change the mind of a devout believer. If they are going to convert then so be it, the State and its miserable reality does a good enough job of changing minds itself. Without a true alternative however, a living one, not an imagined utopia, individuals will keep on allowing it to exist. The alternative is in all of us. It is in us being free and liberty despite the State, despite law and despite the call for debate. Be free.

Olddogs Comments!

Liberty for all has never existed in the history of humans on any practical scale, and never will. However this putrid example of humanities history may be controllable if those of different beliefs would merge and defend their isolation. To demand, or expect any one philosophy to be accepted by all over a sense of right or wrong is lunacy. It is a shame that such a gifted writer such as Kim Robinson cannot see, or accept what is undeniable by a comparison of history to the scriptures below.

Romans 9

King James Bible

Paul’s Concern for the Jews

1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, 2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. 3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

God’s Sovereign Choice

(Genesis 25:19-28; Malachi 1:1-5)

6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: 7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. 8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. 9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son. 10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; 11(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) 12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. 15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. 17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. 18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

The Calling of the Gentiles

19Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, 24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.

26 And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.

27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved: 28 For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.

29 And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.

Israel‘s Unbelief

30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. 31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

33 As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

King James Bible

Text courtesy of BibleProtector.com

Section Headings Courtesy INT Bible

© 2012, Used by Permission

Bible Hub


Massive Global Cyber Attack Using NSA Hacking Tools

05/16/2017

Takes Down 45 000 Computers Across 74 Countries A Scale Never Seen Before”

http://sonsoflibertymedia.com/massive-global-cyber-attack-using-nsa-hacking-tools-takes-45000-computers-across-74-countries-scale-never-seen/

Written by: Mac Slavo

They’re calling it one of the biggest cyber attacks in history. Unprecedented in scale, Kaspersky Labs reports that some 45,000 devices have been compromised across 74 countries.

According to reports, America’s own National Security Agency (NSA) developed the very tools that have been used to break into computers around the world. The exploit, named “EternalBlue,” was released by a hacking group earlier this year and put up for sale.

It appears that someone took them up on the offer and is now using it to deliver Ransom Ware to target computers:

A hacking tool known as “eternal blue”, developed by US spies has been weaponised by the hackers to super-charge an existing form of ransomware known as WannaCry, three senior cyber security analysts said. Their reading of events was confirmed by western security officials who are still scrambling to contain the spread of the attack. The NSA’s eternal blue exploit allows the malware to spread through file-sharing protocols set up across organizations, many of which span the globe.

Ransom Ware is designed to stealthily compromise a target system, and once deployed, immediately locks down files by encrypting so that only someone with the key is able to unlock them. In most cases, the virus requests that the user send a certain amount of money, often using untraceable digital currencies like Bitcoin to cover their tracks. Failure to pay within the allotted time will render the files on the target system unusable.

The latest hack shows just how vulnerable our systems are. And we’re not just talking about personal computers. Today’s attack targeted the health care system of Britain. Similar reports have emerged from Spain and other countries.

For the time being, systems related to utilities, law enforcement, power grids, and the energy sector have not been hijacked, but as we’ve previously warned these are exactly the networks that rogue terror groups and other organizations could compromise at any moment:

It now appears that our interconnected smart grid is actively under attack, as evidenced by a new Stuxnet-style trojan that has been detected by major cyber security leaders Symantec and McAfee. Much like its predecessor, the trojan dubbed “Duqu” is designed to infiltrate the networks that control everything from power production facilities to oil refineries. It is not yet clear exactly how the trojan operates, what its intended purpose is, or who designed it (though it is believed that the code for Duqu and Stuxnet likely originated with U.S. intelligence agencies). Both Symantec and McAfee continue to investigate the threat:

Security researchers have detected a new Trojan, scarily similar to the infamous Stuxnet worm, which could disrupt computers controlling power plants, oil refineries and other critical infrastructure networks.

Full report: Major Security Firms Detect New Trojan Capable Of Disrupting Power Plants, Oil Refineries and Other Critical Infrastructure Networks

Trojans and viruses capable of taking down the very infrastructure upon which we depend in day-to-day life are getting more and more advanced.

Now, those viruses combined with NSA Zero Day tools capable of breaking through digital security protocols could deliver a blow to America’s cyber networks unlike anything we’ve ever seen before. Th combination can be extremely disruptive, perhaps even deadly.

Today’s cyber attack is a warning.

The next one could quite literally take down our entire power grid, at which point everything from the banking system to your local gas station will become inoperable.

Within about 48 hours of that scenario, should officials not be able to restore electrical grid services, you can expect a full breakdown of civil society as you know it today:

After the initial shock wears off  of the disaster, many will have difficulty in coping and adapting to what has just occurred. This is also what many refer to as the normalcy bias, and is actually a coping mechanism to help us process and deal with the changes that have occurred. Many will cling to any normal thought and habit until their brain begins to accept the changes it has witnessed. As they are  trying to wrap their thoughts around the severity of the disaster, their losses and what their future holds, local government leaders are scrambling for answers and trying to assess the situation, all the while dealing with their own normalcy bias issues.

At this point, the unprepared survivors will be expecting organizations and local government to step in to meet their immediate needs at any moment. The reality of the situation becomes more bleak when they realize that due to downed power lines or debris blocking roadways and access points, emergency organizations, emergency response and distribution trucks supplying food, water, fuel and other pertinent resources will be unable to get to the area. Once the realization hits that resources are scarce and the government leaders are incapable of helping them in a timely fashion, desperate citizens will take action into their own hands.

The breakdown has begun.

Source: The Anatomy of a Breakdown

We realize that sounds dramatic and sensationalist, but don’t take it from us. The chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security said just last year that U.S. cyber networks have already been compromised to such an extent that at any moment our stock exchanges, electrical utilities and other core nodes of the United States could be taken down for the count.

Further, former Department of Homeland Security head Janet Napolitano has not only warned of the imminence of a massive cyber attack, she also noted that it could take the government weeks to get it back online.

The outgoing Homeland Security Secretary has a warning for her successor: A massive and “serious” cyber attack on the U.S. homeland is coming, and a natural disaster — the likes of which the nation has never seen — is also likely on its way. 

In the meantime, there will be no food on grocery store shelves and the modern conveniences you enjoy today – things like refrigeration, air conditioning and television – will be non-existent, which is why preparing ahead of a major disaster is absolutely critical to survival.

Today hackers took down government healthcare systems and other important infrastructure components across 74 countries.

Tomorrow it could be the U.S. power grid.


Beware the Dogs of War Is the American Empire on the Verge of Collapse?

05/15/2017

http://us4.campaign-archive2.com/?u=f6eb78f457b7b82887b643445&id=3deb78ce1e&e=84f74f6a6a

By John W. Whitehead

Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes… known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.… No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare. — James Madison

Waging endless wars abroad (in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and now Syria) isn’t making America—or the rest of the world—any safer, it’s certainly not making America great again, and it’s undeniably digging the U.S. deeper into debt.

In fact, it’s a wonder the economy hasn’t collapsed yet.

Indeed, even if we were to put an end to all of the government’s military meddling and bring all of the troops home today, it would take decades to pay down the price of these wars and get the government’s creditors off our backs. Even then, government spending would have to be slashed dramatically and taxes raised.

You do the math.

The government is $19 trillion in debt: War spending has ratcheted up the nation’s debt. The debt has now exceeded a staggering $19 trillion and is growing at an alarming rate of $35 million/hour and $2 billion every 24 hours.  Yet while defense contractors are getting richer than their wildest dreams, we’re in hock to foreign nations such as Japan and China (our two largest foreign holders at $1.13 trillion and $1.12 trillion respectively).

The Pentagon’s annual budget consumes almost 100% of individual income tax revenue. If there is any absolute maxim by which the federal government seems to operate, it is that the American taxpayer always gets ripped off, especially when it comes to paying the tab for America’s attempts to police the globe. Having been co-opted by greedy defense contractors, corrupt politicians and incompetent government officials, America’s expanding military empire is bleeding the country dry at a rate of more than $57 million per hour.

The government has spent $4.8 trillion on wars abroad since 9/11, with $7.9 trillion in interest: That’s a tax burden of more than $16,000 per American. Almost a quarter of that debt was incurred as a result of the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and Syria. For the past 16 years, these wars have been paid for almost entirely by borrowing money from foreign nations and the U.S. Treasury. As the Atlantic points out, we’re fighting terrorism with a credit card. According to the Watson Institute for Public Affairs at Brown University, interest payments on what we’ve already borrowed for these failed wars could total over $7.9 trillion by 2053.

The government lost more than $160 billion to waste and fraud by the military and defense contractors: With paid contractors often outnumbering enlisted combat troops, the American war effort dubbed as the “coalition of the willing” has quickly evolved into the “coalition of the billing,” with American taxpayers forced to cough up billions of dollars for cash bribes, luxury bases, a highway to nowhere, faulty equipment, salaries for so-called “ghost soldiers,” and overpriced anything and everything associated with the war effort, including a $640 toilet seat and a $7600 coffee pot.

Taxpayers are being forced to pay $1.4 million per hour to provide U.S. weapons to countries that can’t afford them. As Mother Jones reports, the Pentagon’s Foreign Military Finance program “opens the way for the US government to pay for weapons for other countries—only to ‘promote world peace,’ of course—using your tax dollars, which are then recycled into the hands of military-industrial-complex corporations.”

The U.S. government spends more on wars (and military occupations) abroad every year than all 50 states combined spend on health, education, welfare, and safety. In fact, the U.S. spends more on its military than the eight highest-ranking nations with big defense budgets combined. The reach of America’s military empire includes close to 800 bases in as many as 160 countries, operated at a cost of more than $156 billion annually. As investigative journalist David Vine reports, “Even US military resorts and recreation areas in places like the Bavarian Alps and Seoul, South Korea, are bases of a kind. Worldwide, the military runs more than 170 golf courses.”

Now President Trump wants to increase military spending by $54 billion. Promising “an historic increase in defense spending to rebuild the depleted military of the United States,” Trump has made it clear where his priorities lie, and it’s not with the American taxpayer. As The Nation reports, “On a planet where Americans account for 4.34 percent of the population, US military spending accounts for 37 percent of the global total.”

Add in the cost of waging war in Syria (with or without congressional approval), and the burden on taxpayers soars to more than $11.5 million a day. Ironically, while presidential candidate Trump was vehemently opposed to the U.S. use of force in Syria, as well as harboring Syrian refugees within the U.S., he had no problem retaliating against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on behalf of Syrian children killed in a chemical attack. The cost of launching a 59 Tomahawk missile-strike against Syria? It’s estimated that the missiles alone cost $60 million. Mind you, this is the same man, while campaigning for president, who warned that fighting Syria would signal the start of World War III against a united Syria, Russia and Iran. Already oil prices have started to climb as investors anticipate an extended conflict.

Clearly, war has become a huge money-making venture, and the U.S. government, with its vast military empire, is one of its best buyers and sellers.

Yet what most Americans—brainwashed into believing that patriotism means supporting the war machine—fail to recognize is that these ongoing wars have little to do with keeping the country safe and everything to do with enriching the military industrial complex at taxpayer expense.

The rationale may keep changing for why American military forces are in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and now Syria. However, the one that remains constant is that those who run the government—including the current president—are feeding the appetite of the military industrial complex and fattening the bank accounts of its investors.

Case in point: President Trump plans to “beef up” military spending while slashing funding for the environment, civil rights protections, the arts, minority-owned businesses, public broadcasting, Amtrak, rural airports and interstates.

In other words, in order to fund this burgeoning military empire that polices the globe, the U.S. government is prepared to bankrupt the nation, jeopardize our servicemen and women, increase the chances of terrorism and blowback domestically, and push the nation that much closer to eventual collapse.

Clearly, our national priorities are in desperate need of an overhauling.

As Los Angeles Times reporter Steve Lopez rightly asks:

Why throw money at defense when everything is falling down around us? Do we need to spend more money on our military (about $600 billion this year) than the next seven countries combined? Do we need 1.4 million active military personnel and 850,000 reserves when the enemy at the moment — ISIS — numbers in the low tens of thousands? If so, it seems there’s something radically wrong with our strategy. Should 55% of the federal government’s discretionary spending go to the military and only 3% to transportation when the toll in American lives is far greater from failing infrastructure than from terrorism? Does California need nearly as many active military bases (31, according to militarybases.com) as it has UC and state university campuses (33)? And does the state need more active duty military personnel (168,000, according to Governing magazine) than public elementary school teachers (139,000)?

Obviously, there are much better uses for your taxpayer funds than trillions of dollars being wasted on war. The following are just a few ways those hard-earned dollars could be used:

$270 billion to repair U.S. public schools, and twice that much to modernize them.

$120 billion a year to fix the nation’s crumbling infrastructure. With 32% of the nation’s major roadways in poor or mediocre condition, it’s estimated that improving the nation’s roads and bridges would require $120 billion a year through 2020, although it will take “many trillions … to fix the country’s web of roads, bridges, railways, subways and bus stations.”

$251 million for safety improvements and construction for Amtrak.

$690 million to care for America’s 70,000 aging veterans.

$11 billion wasted or lost in Iraq in just one year could have paid 220,000 teachers’ salaries.

The yearly cost of stationing just one soldier in Iraq could have fed 60 American families.

$30 billion per year to end starvation and hunger around the world.

$11 billion per year to provide the world—including our own failing cities—with clean drinking water.

Use the $10 billion spent every year to provide arms, equipment, training and advice internationally to more than 180 countries to start paying down the overwhelming $19 trillion national debt. This figure doesn’t include the hundreds of billions spent each year on maintaining the U.S. military presence around the globe.

As long as “we the people” continue to allow the government to wage its costly, meaningless, endless wars abroad, the American homeland will continue to suffer: our roads will crumble, our bridges will fail, our schools will fall into disrepair, our drinking water will become undrinkable, our communities will destabilize, and crime will rise.

Here’s the kicker, though: if the American economy collapses—and with it the last vestiges of our constitutional republic—it will be the government and its trillion-dollar war budgets that are to blame.

Of course, the government has already anticipated this breakdown.

That’s why the government has transformed America into a war zone, turned the nation into a surveillance state, and labelled “we the people” as enemy combatants.

For years now, the government has worked with the military to prepare for widespread civil unrest brought about by “economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters.”

Having spent more than half a century exporting war to foreign lands, profiting from war, and creating a national economy seemingly dependent on the spoils of war, the war hawks long ago turned their profit-driven appetites on us, bringing home the spoils of war—the military tanks, grenade launchers, Kevlar helmets, assault rifles, gas masks, ammunition, battering rams, night vision binoculars, etc.—and handing them over to local police, thereby turning America into a battlefield.

This is how the police state wins and “we the people” lose.

Eventually, however, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, all military empires fail.

At the height of its power, even the mighty Roman Empire could not stare down a collapsing economy and a burgeoning military. Prolonged periods of war and false economic prosperity largely led to its demise. As historian Chalmers Johnson predicts:

The fate of previous democratic empires suggests that such a conflict is unsustainable and will be resolved in one of two ways. Rome attempted to keep its empire and lost its democracy. Britain chose to remain democratic and in the process let go its empire. Intentionally or not, the people of the United States already are well embarked upon the course of non-democratic empire.

This is the “unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex” that President Dwight Eisenhower warned us more than 50 years ago not to let endanger our liberties or democratic processes. Eisenhower, who served as Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in Europe during World War II, was alarmed by the rise of the profit-driven war machine that emerged following the war—one that, in order to perpetuate itself, would have to keep waging war.

We failed to heed his warning.

Yet as Eisenhower recognized, the consequences of allowing the military-industrial complex to wage war, exhaust our resources and dictate our national priorities are beyond grave:

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some 50 miles of concrete highway. We pay for a single fighter with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. This, I repeat, is the best way of life to be found on the road the world has been taking. This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.

Wake up, America. There’s not much time left before we reach the zero hour.

Olddogs Comments!

Yea I know! No one reads bad news because time is short and there is a lot to do just to keep the bills paid. Well for everyone of you who refuse to be involved in educating your neighbors just think for a minute what life will be like when the SHTF and your neighbors steal everything they can find in an effort to stay alive one more day. There is no denying that this country could be turned around and the scumbags in power taken care of on a slow and precise plan of action. But it means getting involved and taking a risk. So far I see little courage among the people to even try. For those of you who would rather die than admit their leaders are guilty of treason, you must have been born with your head up your ass.

 

 

This commentary is also available at http://www.rutherford.org.

ABOUT JOHN WHITEHEAD

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People (SelectBooks, 2015) is available online at http://www.amazon.com. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org. Click here to read more of John Whitehead’s commentaries.

PUBLICATION GUIDELINES AND REPRINT PERMISSION

John W. Whitehead’s weekly commentaries are available for publication to newspapers and web publications at no charge. Please contact staff@rutherford.org to obtain reprint permission. Click here to download a print quality image of John W. Whitehead.


Making Sense of the Super Fuse Scare

05/13/2017

http://www.unz.com/tsaker/making-sense-of-the-super-fuse-scare/

By The Saker

For weeks now I have been getting panicked emails with readers asking me whether the USA had developed a special technology called “super fuses” which would make it possible for the USA to successfully pull-off a (preemptive) disarming first strike against Russia. Super-fuses were also mentioned in combination with an alleged lack by Russia of a functioning space-based infrared early warning system giving the Russians less time to react to a possible US nuclear attack.

While there is a factual basis to all this, the original report already mislead the reader with a shocking title “How US nuclear force modernization is undermining strategic stability: The burst-height compensating super-fuze” and by offering several unsubstantiated conclusions. Furthermore, this original report was further discussed by many observers who simply lack the expertise to understand what the facts mentioned in the report really mean. Then the various sources started quoting each other and eventually this resulted in a completely baseless “super fuse scare”. Let’s try to make some sense of all this.

Understanding nuclear strikes and their targets

To understand what really has taken place I need to first define a couple of crucial terms:

  • Hard-target kill capability: this refers to the capability of a missile to destroy a strongly protected target such as a underground missile silo or a deeply buried command post.
  • Soft-target kill capability: the capability to destroy lightly or unprotected targets.
  • Counterforce strike: this refers to a strike aimed at the enemy’s military capabilities.
  • Countervalue strike: this refers to a strike on non-military assets such as cities.

Since strategic nuclear missile silos and command posts are well protected and deeply buried, only hard-target kill (HTK) capable missiles can execute a counterforce strike. Soft-target kill (STK) capable systems are therefore usually seen as being the ultimate retaliatory capability to hit the enemies cities. The crucial notion here is that HTK capability is not a function of explosive power, but of accuracy. Yes, in theory, a hugely powerful weapon can compensate to some degree for a lack of accuracy, but in reality both the USA and the USSR/Russia have long understood that the real key to HTK is accuracy.

During the Cold War, intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) were more accurate than submarine launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) simply because targeting from the surface and from a fixed position was much easier than targeting from inside a submerged and moving submarine. The American were the first to successfully deploy a HTK capable SLBM with their Trident D-5. The Russians have only acquired this capability very recently (with their R-29RMU Sineva SLBM).

According to the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists just a decade ago only 20% of US SLBMs were HTK capable. Now, with the ‘super-fuse’ 100% of US SLBMs are HTK capable. What these super-fuses do is very accurately measure the optimal altitude at which to detonate thereby partially compensating for a lack of accuracy of a non-HTK capable weapon. To make a long story short, these super-fuses made all US SLBMs HTK capable.

Does that matter?

Yes and no. What that means on paper is that the US has just benefited from a massive increase in the number of US missiles with HTK capability. Thus, the US has now a much larger missile force capable of executing a disarming counterforce strike. In reality, however, things are much more complicated than that.

Understanding counterforce strikes

Executing a disarming counterforce strike against the USSR and, later, Russia has been an old American dream. Remember Reagan’s “Star Wars” program? The idea behind it was simple: to develop the capability to intercept enough incoming Soviet warheads to protect the USA from a retaliatory Soviet counter strike. It would work something like this: destroy, say, 70% of the Soviet ICBM/SLBMs and intercept the remaining 30% before they can reach the USA. This was total nonsense both technologically (the technology did not exist) and strategically (just a few Soviet “leakers” could wipe-out entire US cities, who could take such a risk?). The more recent US deployment of anti-ballistic missile systems in Europe has exactly the same purpose – to protect the USA from a retaliatory counterstrike. Without going into complex technical discussions, let’s just say that this point in time, this system would never protect the USA from anything. But in the future, we could imagine such a scenario

1) The USA and Russia agree to further deep cuts in their nuclear strategic forces thereby dramatically reducing the total number of Russian SLBM/ICBMs.

2) The USA deploys all around Russia anti-ballistic systems which can catch and destroy Russian missiles in the early phase of their flight towards the USA.

3) The USA also deploys a number of systems in space or around the USA to intercept any incoming Russian warhead.

4) The USA having a very large HTK-capable force executes a successful counterforce strike destroying 90% (or so) of the Russian capabilities and then the rest are destroyed during their flight.

This is the dream. It will never work. Here is why:

1) The Russians will not agree to deep cuts in their nuclear strategic forces

2) The Russians already have deployed the capability to destroy the forward deployed US anti-ballistic system in Europe.

3) Russian warheads and missiles are now maneuverable and can even use any trajectory, including over the South Pole, to reach the USA. New Russian missiles have a dramatically shorter and faster first stage burn period making them much harder to intercept.

4) Russia’s reliance on ballistic missiles will be gradually replaced with strategic (long-range) cruise missiles (more about that later)

5) This scenario mistakenly assumes that the USA will know where the Russian SLBM launching submarines will be when they launch and that they will be able to engage them (more about that later)

6) This scenario completely ignores the Russian road-mobile and rail-mobile ICBMs (more about that later)

Understanding MIRVs

Before explaining points 4, 5 and 6 above, I need to mention another important fact: one missile can carry either one single warhead or several (up to 12 and more). When a missile carries several independently targetable warheads it is called MIRVed as in “multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle”.

MIRVs are important for several reasons. First, one single missile with 10 warheads can, in theory, destroy 10 different targets. Alternatively, one single missile can carry, say 3-4 real warheads and 6-7 decoys. In practical terms what look like one missile on take-off can turn into 5 real warheads, all targeted at different objectives and another 5 fake decoys designed to make interception that more difficult. MIRVs, however, also present a big problem: they are lucrative targets. If with one of “my” nuclear warheards I can destroy 1 of “your” MIRVed missiles, I lose 1 warhead but you lose 10. This is one of the reasons the USA is moving away from land-based MIRVed ICBMs.

The important consideration here is that Russia has a number of possible options to chose from and how many of her missiles will be MIRVed is impossible to predict. Besides, all US and Russian SLBMs will remain MIRVed for the foreseeable future (de-MIRVing SLBMs make no sense, really, since the entire nuclear missile carrying submarine (or SSBN) is a gigantic MIRVed launching pad by definition).

In contrast to MIRVed missile, single warheads missiles are very bad targets to try to destroy using nuclear weapons: even if “my” missile destroys “yours” we both lost 1 missile each. What is the point? Worse, if I have to use 2 of “mine” to make really sure that “yours” is really destroyed, my strike will result in me using 2 warheads in exchange for only 1 of yours. This makes no sense at all.

Finally, in retaliatory countervalue strikes, MIRVed ICBM/SLBMs are a formidable threat: just one single R-30 Bulava (SS-N-30) SLBM or one single R-36 Voevoda (SS-18) ICBM can destroy ten American cities. Is that a risk worth taking? Say the USA failed to destroy one single Borei-class SSBN – in theory that could mean that this one SSBN could destroy up to 200 American cities (20 SLBMs with 10 MIRVs each). How is that for a risk?

Contrasting the US and Russian nuclear triad

Strategic nuclear weapons can be deployed on land, in the oceans or delivered by aircraft. This is called the “nuclear triad”. I won’t discuss the aircraft based part of the US and Russian triads here, as they don’t significantly impact the overall picture and because they are roughly comparable. The sea and land based systems and their underlying strategies could not be any more different. At sea, the USA has had HTK capabilities for many years now and the US decided to hold the most important part of the US nuclear arsenal in SSBNs. In contrast, the Russians chose to develop road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missiles. The very first one was the RT-2PM Topol (SS-25) deployed in 1985, followed by the T-2PM2 «Topol-M» (SS-27) deployed in 1997 and the revolutionary RT-24 Yars or Topol’-MR (SS-29) deployed in 2010 (the US considered deployed road-mobile strategic missiles, but never succeeded in developing the technology).

The Russians are also deploying rail-mobile missiles called RT-23 Molodets (SS-24) and are about to deploy a newer version called RS-27 Barguzin (SS-31?). This is what they look like:

Russian road mobile and rail mobile ICBMs

SSBNs and road and rail mobile missiles all have two things in common: they are mobile and they rely on concealment for survival as neither of them can hope to survive. The SSBN hides in the depths of the ocean, the road-mobile missile launcher drives around the immense Russian expanses and can hide, literally, in any forest. As for the rail-mobile missile train, it hides by being completely indistinguishable from any other train on the huge Russian railroad network (even from up close it is impossible to tell whether what you are seeing is a regular freight train or a missile launching special train). To destroy these systems, accuracy is absolutely not enough: you need to find them and you need to find them before they fire their missiles. And that is, by all accounts, quite impossible.

The Russian Navy likes to keep its SSBNs either under the polar ice-cap or in so-called “bastions” such as the Sea of Okhotsk. While these are not really “no-go” zones for US attack submarines (SSN), they are extremely dangerous areas where the Russian Navy has a huge advantage over the US (if only because the US attack submarine cannot count on the support of surface ships or aircraft). The US Navy has some of the best submarines on the planet and superbly trained crews, but I find the notion that US SSNs could find and destroy all Russian SSBNs before the latter can launch unlikely in the extreme.

As for the land-based rail-mobile and road-mobile missiles, they are protected by Russian Air Defenses which are the most advanced on the planet, not the kind of airspace the US would want to send B-53, B-1 or B-2 bombers in. But most importantly, these missiles are completely hidden so even if the USA could somehow destroy them, it would failed to find enough of them to make a first disarming strike a viable option. By the way, the RS-24 has four MIRVs (make that 4 US cities) while the RS-27 will have between 10 and 16 (make that another 10 to 16 US cities vaporized).

Looking at geography and cruise missiles

Finally, let’s take a look at geography and cruise missiles. Two Russian cruise missiles are especially important to us: the Kh-102 and the 3M-14K(?):

  KH-102 3M-14K
Range: 5500km 2600km
Launcher: Strategic bomber Aircraft, ship, container
Warhead: Nuclear 450kt Nuclear (unknown)

What is important with these two cruise missiles is that the KH-102 has a huge range and that the KM-14K can be fired from aircraft, ships and even containers. Take a look at this video which shows the capabilities of this missile:

Now consider where the vast majority of US cities are located – right along the East and West coasts of the USA and the fact that the US has no air defenses of any kind protecting them. A Russian strategic bomber could hit any West Coast city from the middle of the Pacific ocean. As for a Russian submarine, it could hit any US city from the middle of the Atlantic. Finally, the Russians could conceal an unknown number of cruise missile in regular looking shipping container (flying a Russian flag or, for that matter, any other flag) and simply sail to the immediate proximity to the US coast and unleash a barrage of nuclear cruise missiles.

How much reaction time would such a barrage give the US government?

Understanding reaction time

It is true that the Soviet and Russian space-based early warning system is in bad shape. But did you know that China never bothered developing such a space based system in the first place? So what is wrong with the Chinese, are they stupid, technologically backward or do they know something we don’t?

To answer that question we need to look at the options facing a country under nuclear missile attack. The first option is called “launch on warning”: you see the incoming missiles and you press the “red button” (keys in reality) to launch your own missiles. That is sometimes referred to as “use them or lose them”. The next option is “launch on strike”: you launch all you got as soon as a nuclear strike on your territory is confirmed. And, finally, there is the “retaliation after ride-out“: you absorb whatever your enemy shot at you, then take a decision to strike back. What is obvious is that China has adopted, whether by political choice or due to limitation in space capabilities, either a “launch on strike” or a “retaliation after ride-out” option. This is especially interesting since China possesses relatively few nuclear warheads and even fewer real long range ICBMs .

Contrast that with the Russians who have recently confirmed that they have long had a “dead hand system” called “Perimetr” which automatically ascertains that a nuclear attack has taken place and then automatically launches a counterstrike. That would be a “launch on strike” posture, but it is also possible that Russia has a double-posture: she tries to have the capability to launch on warning, but double-secures herself with an automated “dead hand” “launch on strike” capability.

Take a look at this estimate of worldwide stocks of strategic nuclear warheads: While China is credited with only 260 warheads, Russia still has a whopping 7,000 warheads. And a “dead hand” capability. And yet China feels confident enough to announce a “no first use” policy. How can they say that with no space-based nuclear missile launch detection capability?

Many will say that the Chinese wished they had more nukes and a space-based based nuclear missile launch detection capability, but that their current financial and technological means simply do not allow that. Maybe. But my personal guess is that they realize that even their very minimal force represents a good enough deterrent for any potential aggressor. And they might have a point.

Let me ask you this: how many US generals and politicians would be willing to sacrifice just one major US city in order to disarm China or Russia? Some probably would. But I sure hope that the majority would realize that the risk will always remain huge.

For one thing, modern nuclear warfare has, so far, only been “practiced” only on paper and with computers (and thank God for that!)? So nobody *really* knows for sure how a nuclear war would play itself out. The only thing which is certain is that just the political and economic consequences of it would be catastrophic and totally unpredictable. Furthermore, it remains very unclear how such a war could be stopped short of totally destroying one side. The so-called “de-escalation” is a fascinating concept, but so far nobody has really figured this out. Finally, I am personally convinced that both the USA and Russia have more than enough survivable nuclear weapons to actually decide to ride out a full-scale enemy attack. That is the one big issue which many well-meaning pacifist never understood: it is a good thing that “the USA and Russia have the means to blow-up the world ten times over” simply because even one side succeeded in destroying, say, 95% of the US or Russian nuclear forces, the remaining 5% would be more than enough to wipe-out the attacking side in a devastating countervalue attack. If Russia and the USA each had, say, only 10 nuclear warheads then the temptation to try to take them out would be much higher.

This is scary and even sick, but having a lot of nuclear weapons is safer from a “first-strike stability” point of view than having few. Yes, we do live in a crazy world.

Consider that in times of crisis both the US and Russia would scramble their strategic bombers and keep them in the air, refueling them when needed, for as long as needed to avoid having them destroyed on the ground. So even if the USA destroyed ALL Russian ICBM/SLBMs, there would be quite a few strategic bombers in holding patterns in staging areas which could be given the order to strike. And here we reach one last crucial concept:

Counterforce strikes require a lot of HTK capable warheads. The estimates by both sides are kept secret, of course, but we are talking over 1000 targets on each side at least listed, if not actually targeted. But a countervalue strike would require much less. The US has only 10 cities with over one million people. Russia has only 12. And, remember, in theory one warhead is enough for one city (that is not true, but for all practical purposes it is). Just look what 9/11 did to the USA and imagine of, say, “only” Manhattan had been truly nuked. You can easily imagine the consequences.

Conclusion 1: super-fuses are not really that super at all

The super-fuses scare is so overblown that it is almost an urban legend. The fact is that even if all the US SLBMs are now HTK capable and even if Russia does not have a functional space-based missile launch detection capability (she is working on a new one, by the way), this in no way affects the fundamental fact that there is nothing, nothing at all, that the USA could come up with to prevent Russia from obliterating the USA in a retaliatory strike. The opposite is also true, the Russians have exactly zero hope of nuking the USA and survive the inevitable US retaliation.

 

The truth is that as far back as the early 1980s Soviet (Marshal Ogarkov) and US specialists had already come to the conclusion that a nuclear war was unwinnable. In the past 30 years two things have dramatically changed the nature of the game: first, an increasing number of conventional weapons have become comparable in their effects to small nuclear weapons and cruise missiles have become vastly more capable. The trend today is for low-RCS (stealth) long range hypersonic cruise missiles and maneuvering ICBM warheads which will make it even harder to detect and intercept them. Just think about it: if the Russians fired a cruise missile volley from a submarine say, 100km off the US coast, how much reaction time will the US have? Say that these low-RCS missile would begin flying at medium altitude being for all practical purpose invisible to radar, infra-red and even sound, then lower themselves down to 3-5 m over the Atlantic and then accelerate to a Mach 2 or Mach 3 speed. Sure, they will become visible to radars once they crosses the horizon, but the remaining reaction time would be measured in seconds, not minutes. Besides, what kind of weapon system could stop that missile type of anyway? Maybe the kind of defenses around a US aircraft carrier (maybe), but there is simply nothing like that along the US coast.

As for ballistic missile warheads, all the current and foreseeable anti-ballistic systems rely on calculations for a non-maneuvering warhead. Once the warheads begin to make turns and zig-zag, then the computation needed to intercept them become harder by several orders of magnitude. Some Russian missiles, like the R-30 Bulava, can even maneuver during their initial burn stage, making their trajectory even harder to estimate (and the missile itself harder to intercept).

The truth is that for the foreseeable future ABM systems will be much more expensive and difficult to build then ABM-defeating missiles. Also, keep in mind that an ABM missile itself is also far, far more expensive than a warhead. Frankly, I have always suspected that the American obsession with various types of ABM technologies is more about giving cash to the Military Industrial Complex and, at best, developing new technologies useful elsewhere.

Conclusion 2: the nuclear deterrence system remains stable, very stable

At the end of WWII, the Soviet Union’s allies, moved by the traditional western love for Russia, immediately proceeded to plan for a conventional and a nuclear war against the Soviet Union (see Operation Unthinkable and Operation Dropshot). Neither plan was executed, the western leaders were probably rational enough not to want to trigger a full-scale war against the armed forces which had destroyed roughly 80% of the Nazi war machine. What is certain, however, is that both sides fully understood that the presence of nuclear weapons profoundly changed the nature of warfare and that the world would never be the same again: for the first time in history all of mankind faced a truly existential threat. As a direct result of this awareness, immense sums of money were given to some of the brightest people on the planet to tackle the issue of nuclear warfare and deterrence. This huge effort resulted in an amazingly redundant, multi-dimensional and sophisticated system which cannot be subverted by any one technological breakthrough. There is SO much redundancy and security built into the Russian and American strategic nuclear forces that a disarming first strike is all but impossible, even if we make the most unlikely and far-fetched assumptions giving one side all the advantages and the other all the disadvantages. For most people it is very hard to wrap their heads around such a hyper-survivable system, but both the USA and Russia have run hundreds and even thousands of very advanced simulations of nuclear exchanges, spending countless hours and millions of dollars trying to find a weak spot in the other guy’s system, and each time the result was the same: there is always enough to inflict an absolutely cataclysmic retaliatory counter-strike.

Conclusion 3: the real danger to our common future

The real danger to our planet comes not from a sudden technological breakthrough which would make nuclear war safe, but from the demented filled minds of the US Neocons who believe that they can bring Russia to heel in a game of “nuclear chicken”. These Neocons have apparently convinced themselves that making conventional threats against Russia, such as unilaterally imposing no-fly zones over Syria, does not bring us closer to a nuclear confrontation. It does.

The Neocons love to bash the United Nations in general, and the veto power of the Permanent Five (P5) at the UN Security Council, but they apparently forgot the reason why this veto power was created in the first place: to outlaw any action which could trigger a nuclear war. Of course, this assumes that the P5 all care about international law. Now that the USA has clearly become a rogue state whose contempt for international law is total, there is no legal mechanism left to stop the US from committing actions which endanger the future of mankind. This is what is really scary, not “super-fuses”.

What we are facing today is a nuclear rogue state run by demented individuals who, steeped in a culture of racial superiority, total impunity and imperial hubris, are constantly trying to bring us closer to a nuclear war. These people are not constrained by anything, not morals, not international law, not even common sense or basic logic. In truth, we are dealing with a messianic cult every bit as insane as the one of Jim Jones or Adolf Hitler and like all self-worshiping crazies they profoundly believe in their invulnerability.

It is the immense sin of the so-called “Western world” that it let these demented individuals take control with little or no resistance and that now almost the entire western society lack the courage to even admit that it surrendered itself to what I can only call a satanic cult. Alexander Solzhenitsyn prophetic words spoken in 1978 have now fully materialized:

A decline in courage may be the most striking feature that an outside observer notices in the West today. The Western world has lost its civic courage, both as a whole and separately, in each country, in each government, in each political party, and, of course, in the United Nations. Such a decline in courage is particularly noticeable among the ruling and intellectual elites, causing an impression of a loss of courage by the entire society. There are many courageous individuals, but they have no determining influence on public life (Harvard Speech, 1978)

Five years later, Solzhenitsyn warned us again saying,

To the ill-considered hopes of the last two centuries, which have reduced us to insignificance and brought us to the brink of nuclear and non-nuclear death, we can propose only a determined quest for the warm hand of God, which we have so rashly and self-confidently spurned. Only in this way can our eyes be opened to the errors of this unfortunate twentieth century and our hands be directed to setting them right. There is nothing else to cling to in the landslide: the combined vision of all the thinkers of the Enlightenment amounts to nothing. Our five continents are caught in a whirlwind. But it is during trials such as these that the highest gifts of the human spirit are manifested. If we perish and lose this world, the fault will be ours alone.

We have been warned, but will we heed that warning?


Are You Ready to Die?

05/12/2017

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/05/11/are-you-ready-to-die/

Paul Craig Roberts

In George Orwell’s 1949 dystopian novel, 1984, information that no longer is consistent with Big Brother’s explanations is chucked down the Memory Hole. In the real American dystopia in which we currently live, the information is never reported at all.

On April 26—16 days ago—Lt. Gen. Viktor Poznihir, Deputy Chief of the Main Operations Directorate of the Russian Armed Forces, stated at the Moscow International Security Conference that the Operations Command of the Russian General Staff has concluded that Washington is preparing a nuclear first strike on Russia.

See:

https://www.rt.com/news/386276-us-missile-shield-russia-strike/ 

http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/04/us-forces-preparing-sudden-nuclear.html 

https://www.times-gazette.com/ap%20general%20news/2016/10/12/russia-china-to-mull-joint-response-to-us-missile-shield  

http://themillenniumreport.com/2017/04/us-forces-preparing-sudden-nuclear-strike-on-russia-moscow-security-conference/ 

The Times-Gazett in Ashland, Ohio, was the only US print media that a Google search could turn up that reported this most alarming of all announcements. A Google search turned up no reports on US TV, and none on Canadian, Australian, European, or any other media except RT and Internet sites.

I have been unable to find any report that any US Senator or Representative or any European, Canadian, or Australian politician has raised a voice of concern.

No one in Washington got on the telephone to tell Putin that this was all a mistake, that the US was not preparing a nuclear first strike on Russia, or ask Putin how this serious situation could be defused.

Americans do not even know about it, except for my readers.

I would have expected at least that the CIA would have planted the story in the Washington Post, the New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, and NPR that General Poznihir was expressing his personal opinion, nothing to be taken seriously. But apparently Americans and their European vassals are not to even know that such an accussation was made.

As I reported some time ago and more recently in my column about North Korea, the Chinese leadership has also concluded that the US intends a nuclear first strike against China.

Alone either Russia or China can destroy the US. If they act together, the destruction of the US would be redundant. What is the intelligence, if any, and morality, clearly none, of the US leadership that recklessly and irresponsibly invites Russia and China to preempt Washington’s attack on them with an attack on the US?

Surely not even insouciant Americans are so stupid as to think that Russia and China will just sit there and wait for Washington’s nuclear attack.

I lived through every stage of the Cold War. I participated in it. Never in my life have I experienced the situation where two nuclear powers were convinced that the third was going to surprise them with a nuclear attack.

I supported Trump because he, unlike Hillary, said he would normalize relations with Russia. Instead he has raised the tensions between the nuclear powers. Nothing is more irresponsible or dangerous.

We currently are in the most dangerous situation of my lifetime, and there is ZERO AWARENESS AND NO DISCUSSION!

How can this be? Putin has been issuing warnings for years. He has told the Western presstitute media on more than one occasion that they, in their dishonesty, are pushing the world to nuclear war. Putin has said over and over, “I issue warnings and no one hears.” “How do I get through to you?”

Maybe the morons will hear when mushroom clouds appear over Washington and New York, and Europe ceases to exist, as it will if Europe continues the confrontation with Russia as is required from Washington’s well-paid vassals.

Within the last several years I reported the Chinese government’s reaction to US war plans for a nuclear strike on China. The Chinese showed how their submarines would destroy the West Coast of the US and their ICBMs would finish off the rest of the country.

I reported all of this, and it produced no response. The Memory Hole wasn’t needed, as neither Washington nor the presstitutes nor the Internet noticed. This is insouciance to the thousandth degree.

In America and its subservient, crawling on their knees vassal states, the information never gets reported, so it never has to be put down the Memory Hole.

If you convince someone that you are going to kill them, they are going to kill you first. A government, such as what exists in Washington, that convinces powerful countries that they are targeted, is a government that has no respect whatsoever for the lives of its own people or the peoples of the world or for any life on planet Earth.

Such a government as Washington is evil beyond all measure, as are the media whores and European, Canadian, Australian, and Japanese vassal states that serve Washington at the expense of their own citizens.

Despite all their efforts to believe otherwise, the Russian and Chinese leaderships have finally arrived, belatedly, at the realization that Washington is evil to the core and is the agent of Satan.

For Russia and China, the Satanic Evil that rules in the West has reduced the choice for Russia and China to them or us.

Olddogs Comments!

Never in my wildest nightmares have I dreamed Americans could be so obtuse, uninformed, and unconcerned, yet here we stand on the edge of hell with only sex, violence, and money on our little minds. 

AMERICA! WAKE THE FUCK UP!


Common Law, COMMON LAW, English Common Law, American Common Law…. + For the Record, Rothschilds v. Rockefellers

05/11/2017

http://www.paulstramer.net/2017/05/common-law-common-law-english-common.html

By Anna Von Reitz

Just the title should clue you in that, like everything else, there’s common law, and then, there is COMMON LAW…..

The Masters of Deceit have been at work.

Common Law has its origins in the Stone Age.  It’s the tradition, often verbal, that a group or tribe has established as its standard of justice over time.  Please note that such a standard applied to a Zulu Warrior standing before a gathering of his tribal elders is just as much the “common law” for him as British Common Law is for a Brit.

Also note that English Common Law is different from British Common Law and they are both distinct from the Common Law of the United Kingdom…… and so on and so on.

It’s apparent, then, that “common law” is one of those catch-all or nearly all terms that can apply to tribal traditional law that is preserved as a verbal standard passed down generation to generation, or a written standard of law, code, or doctrine adopted by a tribe or a nation or even a commercial corporation.

It is also apparent that “common law” can exist in any jurisdiction.

“Ecclesiastical Law” is, generally speaking, the Common Law of the Universal Church, whereas “Canon Law” is a specific codification of Ecclesiastical Law used by the clergy.

There’s Military Common Law.  Commercial Common Law.  State Common Law.  County Common Law.

No doubt we can derive a Bird Common Law and Dog Common Law and Cat Common Law based on the Natural Law of their kind.

That’s why when someone starts talking about “common law” you should jump on them and grill them—- what common law?

Katie Courier, always a blind guide, has come up with her own definition which appears to be “any written law” is “common law”.  Many generations of jurists would beg to disagree, and in fact, it is a famous disagreement about the nature and definition of “common law” that lies as part of the major impetus behind the American Revolution.

When Lord Mansfield became Lord Chief Justice in Britain in 1756 he brought along both his experience as an Admiralty Lawyer and as a Scotsman.

At that time, English Common Law, which required actual wet-ink, two party, fully disclosed, equitable agreements based on a “meeting of the minds” expressed in writing by freely consenting parties, was deemed old-fashioned by Mansfield and not convenient for the conduct of modern business.

Instead, he advocated a system of “honor” by which full disclosure and consent to contracts should and could be merely implied by acceptance of some service or benefit  and which also favored giving judges the “discretion” to act “in equity”—allowing them to escape the “narrow confines” of a written law.

So, Lord Mansfield “merged” the Common Law into the Admiralty system and created a dreadful mish-mash that could be “interpreted” endlessly by the courts that were supposed to be administering justice in behalf of the people who instead became victims of what then posed as their own justice system.

It is from this “merger” of law forms that we get such horrors as “unilateral contracts” in which only one party signs and bears all responsibility, “victimless crimes” in which one may not harm anyone or anything and still be subjected to lengthy and arbitrary prison sentences, and abuses of “judicial discretion” in which the judge’s personal buddies and political betters receive the property of whoever the judge doesn’t like or isn’t paid to protect.

The Americans, rightly, objected strongly to this merger of English Common Law and Admiralty Law and all the abuses that logically follow from it.

The upshot is that English Common Law was hopelessly polluted, twisted, and made into a tool for the Bar Associations to screw everyone and everything else to the wall, at their “discretion”.

The American Common Law retained its separation from Admiralty Law, maintained its prohibitions against implied and unilateral contracts, and
“judicial discretion” and “equity decisions”.

But they are both still called “Common Law”.

Lately, we’ve been beset with US attorneys (all US courts including federated “State of State” and “STATE OF STATE” courts practice this horrific hybrid British “Common Law”) attempting to present their bastard as our “Common Law”.

Common Law, lamentably, it still may be called in Britain.

But it is not our American Common Law.  It is a shady, depraved, debauched, prostituted sister, a tool of feudalism and oppression since 1756.

So when you hear or speak of “common law” with respect to yourself, your family, your assets—- be sure to stipulate and identify your form of law as American Common Law.

See this article and over 500 others on Anna’s website here:

http://www.annavonreitz.com


 For the Record, Rothschilds v. Rockefellers

http://www.paulstramer.net/2017/05/for-record-rothschilds-v-rockefellers.html

By Anna Von Reitz

It isn’t the Rothschilds that are primarily responsible for the misery and defrauding of America. It’s the Rockefellers, Morgans, Mellons, and all the other Players named yesterday in my explanation of the fraud process used to undermine and commandeer our institutions including our governmental organizations.

The Rothschilds are businessmen. They are there to make a deal. If they can make money or leverage an advantage, they take the shot, they win or they lose. They are, for the most part (some noted exceptions) rather jaundiced and jaded, unimpressed with money and all it means, merely very, very adroit users of money as a tool — which is all that money is or was ever meant to be.

They, of all people on the planet, know what “money” and “credit” are, and also all the uses of “debt” and “securities”.

But taken on the whole as an entire family, the Rothschilds are not particularly malevolent or ill-intended. They generally take the tack that good business results in profit for everyone. They’d rather milk the Cash Cow than kill it for the insurance money.

And besides, their basic interests are rooted in Europe and expanded into the East and other spheres many, many years ago. America is a pie, to be sure, but far from the only pie on their table.

The Rockefellers are scions of the old corrupt, criminal, nasty, and ultimately suppressed Dutch East India Company, like the Roosevelts and Vanderbilts. The Dutch East India Company was far larger and more powerful than the British Crown and one day in the early 1700’s, it simply disappeared. Where did the largest merchant transport fleet in the world go?

America.

That’s how we had a vast merchant fleet but not a navy when the Constitution went down.

It’s the homegrown traitors that are the always the real danger, and this is no exception.

Just as you are 95 out of a 100 times more likely to be murdered by a friend or relative than a stranger, when it comes to being the victim of fraud or treason the same percentages apply. What has been done to us is an inside job, done by people who have lived in this country for generations, yet have not attached their loyalties or affections to it.

The worst of this current Mess hasn’t come to us from the Rothschilds. It has come from the Rockefellers and their allies. The French have profited from it—immensely. The British, too. But the cause of the problem, the root of the evil and treason at the bottom of the pile in this case is homegrown. It stems from people who grew up here, who went to school here, who should –rationally— care what happens to this country and their neighbors. And don’t.

Colonel House, the engineer of this enslavement and corruption, was an American born in Houston, Texas.

So, if you want to deal with the problem, deal with the problem.

Don’t get on the “Blame the Rothschild” bandwagon when your real beef is with Dutchmen called Rockefeller and Roosevelt, instead. And despite my disgust with the almost-equally depraved and unjust behavior of the British Monarchy and the British Crown— let’s own the fact that those responsible for the actual nuts-and-bolts of the Great Fraud grew up here, sat in Congress here, served as Governors here—- and betrayed us all, deliberately, with malice aforethought.

See this article and over 500 others on Anna’s website here:

www.annavonreitz.com

Olddogs Comments!

Just for Olddogs record, those of you who do not want to believe what Anna publishes have no standing in peoples minds who do study and learn. Not to say Anna is an expert on everything, but she sure as hell is way out front of those who ‘s brain farts are all they can believe. So if you can only believe truth  comes from Lawyers and your drug induced hiccups please keep it to yourself.


Save The USA – Abolish The IRS

05/10/2017

https://newswithviews.com/save-the-usa-abolish-the-irs/

Read More Articles by Ron Ewart

“The Internal Revenue Service is more ruthless than the Gestapo.  Abolish the IRS.  Stamp out organized crime.”  —Evel Knievel

By Ron Ewart

Many of our readers are aware of our continuing battle with the IRS and the many articles we have written taking them to task.  But we’re just one IRS story.  Millions, and we do

mean millions, of Americans have fallen victim to this rogue, inept, out-of-control, bureaucratic agency that is relentless in its pursuit of your tax dollars to the point of abuse, harassment, blackmail, coercion, bungling mismanagement, law-creating, law breaking, corruption and blatant criminality.  If you think you are protected from the IRS by the 4th, 5th and 14th Amendments against illegal search and seizures, violations of due process or constitutional rights, or protected against self-incrimination, think again.  Every time you sign the “Jurat” statement at the bottom of Form 1040 under penalty of perjury, you have abrogated your 4th and 5th Amendment rights and opened yourself up to being penalized or charged with a crime because the Internal Revenue Code is basically unconstitutional, complex and is rife with errors, omissions and conflicts.

Just how is it that the people can “be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures(4th Amendment) and how can the people not “be compelled to be a witness against himself” (5th Amendment) if the IRS can force each of us into disclosing all of our financial information (“papers”) without a warrant being issued by a judge “upon probable cause“, as required by the 4th Amendment?  The IRS has effectively repealed the 4th and 5th Amendments.

The U. S. Congress and the special interest lobbyists are wholly responsible and complicit for what the IRS has become.  The IRS is a tool of those special interests to herd you, the taxpayer, into the socialist cattle pens they want you to go.  The IRS accomplishes this with thousands of incentives, fines, penalties, or threats of incarceration, in tens of thousands of pages of pure un-intelligible “gobbledy gook.”

Since its creation out of the 16th Amendment in 1913, the IRS Act was reconstituted every two years by Congressional legislation. Then in 1939, the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) was codified into statute under Title 26 United States Code (USC).  Several machinations and revisions to the Code took place in the 50’s, then again in the 80’s and once more in the 90’s.  Congress has toyed with it, manipulated it, revised it and bastardized it at almost every Congressional session with new laws to placate some special interest group, advance some social or environmental goal, or enhance some banking, business or union interest.  Obama Care added countless more pages of regulations, fines and penalties and increased IRS employment by an estimated 16,000 new employees.

The Congress tried to rein in the IRS by making them comply with the “Fair Debt Collection Practices Act” (1977) and later with the “1998 Restructuring and Reform Act.”  Under the 1998 Act, it was up to the IRS to prove errors, mistakes, or wrong doing by the taxpayer.  In effect, the taxpayer was innocent until proven guilty by the IRS.  We can tell you from our own experiences, the IRS makes little effort to comply with these acts, as we pointed out to them in our affidavits.

This will give you an idea of the run-around we get from the IRS.  We send a letter to IRS Ogden, UT on an issue and we get a letter back from IRS Kansas City, MO.  We send a letter to Holtsville, NY and we get a letter back from Cincinnati, OH.  We send a letter to Memphis, TN and we get a letter back from Austin, TX.  We get letters from the IRS saying they will respond to our letters in 45-day, 60-day and 90-days, then we never hear back in the 45, 60, or 90 days.  We have no idea which office is handling our case.  Why isn’t it being handled by one IRS office?  Could it be intentional harassment?  Of course it is.

At a rally in front of the Washington DC IRS Headquarters on April 18, 2017, members of the Tax Revolution Institute ((TRI) started to read out loud the tax code, word by word and line by line, to demonstrate the ridiculousness and sheer volume of the code.  Calculating 1,000 words per page and 2.7 words per second to read out loud, it would take a person the better part of 53 years to read the entire code, reading 24 hours per day, without breaks of any kind.  In fact, in 10 hours the TRI members were only able to read well less than one percent of the code.

Dan Johnson, director of TRI, said this at the rally:  “Anyone who thinks that we’re going to fix the tax code instantly, or fix the tax code without basically setting it on fire, clearing it out, and starting from the beginning, they’re lying to themselves and they’re lying to you.”

The Code’s almost 75,000 pages of rules, regulations, limits and restrictions sets a hidden trap for every taxpayer that has no chance of ever understanding those rules, regulations, limits and restrictions.  Further, there is no guarantee that a tax preparer is any more qualified than you are to prepare your return.  Even if you asked ten different IRS agents a question about the Code, you are very likely to get ten different answers.  That’s not freedom ladies and gentlemen, that is government-instituted slavery.

For just these reasons, the Internal Revenue Service should be abolished.  But there is more.

In one of our affidavits that we sent to the IRS to challenge a tax due for two tax years, we included a set of 14 conditions in that affidavit to which, if the IRS responded to those conditions under penalty of perjury, we would agree to pay the tax.  In other words, we did not default on their demand, (a presentment).  We made our response (a presentment) conditional on their response, thereby complying with the provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), to which the IRS is legally bound.

In two separate tax years, rather than respond to the conditions in our affidavit, they sent us a NO TAX DUE letter.  The last four of those conditions in the affidavit are included below:

Condition 11 – Provide proof, under penalty of perjury, that the Internal Revenue Code (IRC)and the IRS booklet known as “1040 Forms and Instructions” as provided by the IRS to the taxpayer and upon which the taxpayer relies, (the “BOOKLET”) DO NOT contain any conflicts, contradictions, in-accurate or vague information that would or could lead a normal, reasonable and prudent person to improperly prepare their tax return, either by omission in the IRC or said BOOKLET, or by the IRC or the BOOKLET containing false, conflicting, or vague information.

Condition 12 – Provide proof, under penalty of perjury, that any and/or all IRS tax forms DO NOT contain any conflicts, contradictions, in-accurate or vague information that would or could lead a normal, reasonable and prudent person to improperly prepare their tax return, either by an omission or omissions in said forms, or by said forms containing false, conflicting, or vague information.

Condition 13 – Provide proof, under penalty of perjury, on how the AFFIANT can file an income tax return and by some stroke of blind luck not commit perjury when the AFFIANT does not understand all the tens of thousands of tax laws and has no way to know if the AFFIANT’s tax return is true or correct, even if a tax professional prepared it for the AFFIANT, therefore, the AFFIANT would be committing perjury to sign the tax return perjury statement when the AFFIANT does not understand all of the constantly changing tax laws contained in the IRS Tax Code, nor could the AFFIANT ever understand them in the AFFIANT’s lifetime.

Condition 14 – Provide proof, under penalty of perjury, that by the AFFIANT signing the tax return “perjury statement”, such signing would not violate AFFIANT’s 5th Amendment rights against self-incrimination, should said return turn out to be in-accurate because the AFFIANT did or does not understand all of the tens of thousands of constantly changing tax laws contained in the IRS Tax Code.

In fact, there is no way the IRS could respond to these questions with specificity, or without exposing the conflicts and confusion in the almost 75,000 pages of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) or the BOOKLET, or exposing the IRS’s negligence and incompetence.

This begs the question of why any allegedly free American citizen should be subjected to conflicts, confusions, contradictions, in-accurate or vague information contained in the tax code, or any law for that matter?  How is it possible for a normal, reasonable and prudent person to prepare their tax return if the information they are relying upon is rife with conflicts, errors and omissions?  How is it possible for that same normal, reasonable and prudent person to ever understand what is in the tax code when even the IRS will give conflicting and often opposing answers on a question submitted by a taxpayer?

America isn’t a nation of laws as politicians are so fond of saying.  It is a nation of slaves to law that is constantly changing, or subject to a thousand interpretations.  This is not freedom.  This is pure subjugation by government-perpetrated purposeful confusion on behalf of social, radical environmental, central bankers, corporate and union special interests.  Each American is just a number (social security number) whose lifetime earnings are pledged to pay America’s rising debt.  Your life is the collateral for that debt.  If you aren’t earning income, you are worthless to them, except for Democrat votes in exchange for government “goodies.”

For over 100 years, Americans have been led around by rings in their noses to feed a radical Progressive agenda that makes indentured servants of us all, using the ever-changing IRS tax code.

For these reasons and more, the Internal Revenue Service of the United States of America should be immediately abolished.  But since the Congress won’t do it, the job is left to the American people.

To that end and based on our intense but illuminating experiences with the IRS, we have decided to take them on with six different and specific actions, in a full court press to ABOLISH THE IRS.  If you are tired of being a slave to this gone-rogue, out-of-control, inept, bureaucratic agency known as the IRS that has no master, you would be wise to check out our efforts and add to them ….. that is if you don’t live in fear of the IRS.

Until we get rid of the IRS, all Americans will continue to be slaves to the IRS Master, in an ever-tightening noose around our necks.  Who among you will demand liberty over slavery?

Wouldn’t you LIKE to abolish the IRS?

© 2017 Ron Ewart – All Rights Reserved