Part Deux – The Task of the Remnant

The term “The Remnant” is a reference to the biblical book of Isaiah, a story of a prophet sent by God to warn the unheeding People of the coming reckoning. Alfred J. Nock wrote a wonderful essay about the story:

http://www.aapsonline.org/brochures/isaiah.htm

“…[T]here is but a very small Remnant,” he says, “of those who possess a saving force of intellect and force of character – too small [….] to be of any avail against the ignorant and vicious preponderance of the masses.”

The Task of the Remnant

The Remnant must do today what it had to do in the past:

1755, 1787, 1836, 1861, 1898, 1912, 1929, 1941, and 2008.

It has to maintain the argument that the use of government to redistribute wealth is immoral. As an immoral act, it has vast, negative consequences.

The end result is bankruptcy.

This government will sacrifice the People’s interests to save the big banks and big financial entities. This, the voters learned in 2008 and 2009. There should be no doubt.

The voters are yelling about the bailouts, but they are pragmatic. They still have jobs. They still have faith that the government can keep it together for another few years. Beyond a few years, voters don’t care. Politicians know this.

There is a small fringe of people who know that a day of reckoning is coming. They are few in number. They have no clout.

With no ability to affect a change, their job -and yours- is to prepare for the future.

That future will involve national bankruptcy.

The checks will bounce, or else they will be worthless.

In the first case, the Federal Reserve stops buying T-bonds. Without money, the government cannot write checks. Without checks, government programs stop.

In the second case, it continues to buy. There will be lots of money, but it will buy nothing.

The bankruptcy of the national government will create the revolution. This has not happened since 1755. This revolution will involve the transfer of power back to local governments. There will be a great decentralization.

But there is a problem. A serious problem.

There is no developed philosophy of decentralization.

There is some awareness of the benefits of economic decentralization, but only within the context of within the national government. The Austrian School preaches decentralization without bailouts, but it has little influence.

As for political philosophy, the best we have is state’s rights. But the states will be bankrupt, too.

What Americans need is a political philosophy based on county and city rights.

But we have never had this. Always, the colonial governments were considered sovereign.

The debate was colony vs. Parliament in 1765-75.

Then it was state vs. federal: 1783-88.

Step by step, the reach of government always gets long and more broad while centralizing itself;  logically to economic unity within and internal to the nation (Commerce clause) then to political unity within the nation (War between the States), then economic union with other nations  (EU and NAFTA), then political unity with other nations (Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) and EU) and then global economic centralization and world government (WTO, UN-ish like structure).

I do not believe the Western nations will accomplish some sort of world economic and government centralization before they go bankrupt. In this, Keynesian economic consequences will overrun the centralization of political power.

In the USA, the states have been absorbed into the national government. The governors go begging to Washington whenever state budgets must go through sacrifice. When a governor begs for a handout, he does not believe in state’s rights. But, neither do the People.

For as long as Washington’s checks don’t bounce, and the money buys something, there will be no fundamental change.

It is the job of the Remnant to keep reminding themselves and their peers that there are no free lunches in life, that the bills always come due, that debt is a great threat, and that central banks serve the needs of large commercial banks.

All over the world, the Remnant must operate. Most of the People do not believe this message. It takes stubbornness and courage to keep saying that consequence of debt will lead to bankruptcy.

The accountants have told us that the present system cannot go on indefinitely. This is a recent development. For decades, they said, “no problem.” Now they all say that there will have to be changes One of These Days, Real Soon Now.

But they never identify who must suffer or who must pay. They all know that politics is a game of deferring widespread sacrifice until the burden can be shifted onto some low-influence group.

We must proclaim the religious truth now:

“We will reap what we sow.”

“The borrower is servant to the lender.”

We proclaim the economic truth now:

“There is no such thing as a free lunch.”

We must proclaim the political truth now:

“County rights.”

Hardly anyone will listen.
Hardly anyone listened to Karl Marx and Frederick Engels in their lifetimes.
But Lenin did.
Mao did.

It takes time.
We have time, if we do not waste it spinning political wheels over Washington.

It takes effort to get out the message.
We have powerful outlets for the message, like the Internet.

It takes preparation for the future. This is rare. Very, very few actually prepare for the future, no matter how assured it will appear. One need only to remember hurricanes and Katrina – millions sat and waited, thinking maybe …. tomorrow.

When the sacrifices can no longer be deferred, there will be outrage against those who preached debt and wealth redistribution as a way of life.

I will take active leadership when the checks bounce.

That outrage and despair will be the rich soil of revolution.
Plant the good seeds today, or else the soil will fill with weeds.

Part Three: “How?”

Advertisements

Comments

  1. Pass the popcorn. I can’t wait. Let it collapse. I’m about as ready as I can get. While TPTB have been being greedy I’ve already…

    Been debt free (so to speak.can’t run from taxes)
    Taught my kids to not count on anyone but themselves
    Taught my kids about saving money
    Taught my kids to how to build and respect a fire
    Taught my kids how to tend a garden, how to fish, how to cook
    Taught my kids how to conserve ( water for example..only used 50 gallons running water the entire summer at my lake. Paid for port a john and came home for showers)
    Have collection of necesities..batteries, solar battery chargers, solar radio, shake-able flashlight, first aid supplies, fire starter, canned goods, plenty of TP 🙂

    Still need a cow , pig , and some hens.. eek! I guess I can learn to like venison.
    My biggest concern during a collapse would be how to make my money grow.

    This all seems so simple to me. It’s all about the difference between good and evil. When the collapse happens everyone will have to take a long look in the mirror and realize it’s “me” that has to change. I keep telling you guys I’m way ahead of yous… 🙂

    Taught my kids how to tend a garden

    • oops disregard last sentence.. wondered where that disappeared!

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Good Morning Anita 🙂
      If you need to learn to like venison, you are way behind the eight ball today. So being ahead of all of usss, is an over reacchh 😆

      How are you this fine day? Warmest day of the year here today! The few lefties up here had a heated debate last night about the warm weather, they couldn’t agree on whether it’s caused by global warming or the nuke meltdown in Japan. After much yelling, they decided to call Michael Moore and ask him. To their disappointment, he blamed Bush.

      Peace!

      • Buck the Wala says:

        When all else fails, Bush is a good go-to source of blame.

        🙂

        • gmanfortruth says:

          LOL, the poor guy has been bitch slapped by the left for so long he’s crossdressing. 😆

          • Buck the Wala says:

            interesting image there…

          • He’s been bitch slapped by the right, too..

            • gmanfortruth says:

              True, but his right cheek will always need more makeup.

            • Mathius

              Re Bush was a lousy President.

              By what standard??

              The primary job of the President is to oversee, as in manage, the Administrative or Executive Branch.

              I suggest you contact mid level Federal and State Govt managers and ask them which Administration knew how to “Govern”.

        • Give it another year Buck…….Obama will get it next.

        • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

          You all are idiots. The last good President was Jefferson, and the reason he was good is that he did not want the job.

          Any President that wants and actively seeks the job is a bad President (although some are far worse than others).

          Since Obama seems to be doing everything he can to hasten the demise of a broken system, I MIGHT actually have to classify him as a “good” President, but only for that reason.

          The only problem is, once the broken system meets its demise, getting through the resulting mess is going to be an awful process, and one in which the Remnant had better have some success.

          • Peter

            Come on my friend, you know Jefferson wanted the job. Hell he helped organize political parties while speaking against them.

            His name would not have been placed in nomination if he did not want the job.

            And once elected he did not govern according to his stated philosophy. He fell into the pit of compromise and pragmatism, just like all the rest.

            • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

              JAC,

              Yes, that is all unfortunately true. While claiming to not want the job, he certainly seemed to enjoy holding the office.

              While claiming to be against political parties, he helped to organize them.

              He often governed in a way contrary to his own philosophy.

              Another great example of political behavior. Had he tried quite a bit harder to govern according to his own philosophy, things might have been different, but who knows?

          • I would have went with Silent Cal for the last good one.

            They now have a poll comparing Obama, Palin and Charlie Sheen. I think there are different levels of idiots.

      • Warm here too G..has been for a couple days ..been preoccupied so far but hope to fire up the bbq and firepit tonight! YAY!

        re: venison..grrrr.. I can handle it in chili or spaghetii but as far as a venison steak..can’t handle it.

      • My gf came up with a fantastic venison recipe if you want to try it Anita 🙂

        • Considering I may have to deal with it..post it up..or get my address from USW

          • This is for a roast done in a crock pot or other slow cook method.

            Soak a roast or other large cut overnight in a solution of lemon juice, water, salt, and black pepper. The acid in the lemon helps kill the “gamey” taste. If, like me, you like gamey taste, you can skip that part.

            Chop up potatoes, bell peppers, onions, and garlic (quantities depend on how large a roast you have and how many potatoes you want.)
            Also add thyme, rosemary, and sage.

            Put the roast in first and put the vegetables on top. Add just enough water to almost cover the roast.
            Cook until it falls apart.
            Took about 4 hours for a small roast (enough for 2-4 people), but we have a small crock pot.
            If you need more detail in terms of measurements, I will have to get her to help me….

            • Thanks Jon.. I’ll give it a try. Have many friends with venison in the freezer. As far as the amounts…mom always said..”.You just know….”

    • Bama dad says:

      “I guess I can learn to like venison.”

      Nothing at all about learning to like it because it is delicious, your problem is you see Bambi in your mind when you think about eating venison, just think cow. I’ll put on some venison stew in the crock pot tonight and briefly think about you when I eat it tomorrow. Just remember mind over matter.

  2. Last month, members of the National Association for Business Economics provided yet another ominous warning. These economists identified

    the US budget deficit as the “gravest threat facing the economy, topping high unemployment and the risk of inflation or deflation.”

    We are on an unsustainable path of uncontrolled and wasteful spending that can devastate the United States. And what is Congress actually doing to effectively deal with this looming catastrophe?

    The delusional Democrats have proposed a microscopic $4.7 billion cut for the 2012 budget. That’s a ridiculous 0.1% of the total budget for 2012. It represents exactly 25 hours of spending by the government. Multiply that by 100 and it still falls short of the proverbial drop in the bucket. Clearly Democrats are not interested in helping this country avoid fiscal calamity. They’re more concerned with demonizing conservatives and maintaining power, instead of governing responsibility and rationally for the welfare and safety of all Americans.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/america_slouching_towards_fisc.html

    • So what cuts did the suggest on whom?

      …yep, none on anyone….

      As I pointed out, the “accounts” are singling a warning.

      They are not suggesting anything be done about it in any real sense.

  3. gmanfortruth says:

    Flagster
    Very good words of advice. I’m been pushing your advice for sometime. But you are right about one thing, few will be prepared. I did like this part: ” there will be outrage against those who preached debt and wealth redistribution as a way of life.”

    Anew and improved hunting season is on the horizon 🙂

  4. I think we are quite capable of sounding the alarm and working on the county, state, and federal level all at the same time. I think being prepared and acknowledging that if or when it falls-it is the county level that will be the most important to the life and protection of the people. But what does everyone think we are preparing for-some wonderful completely free orgasmic moment. If our economy completely collapses it will be hell on earth. People are going to die. So yes, prepare but I am not sure that our demise is written in stone-I will do what I can to try to change things-I will not stand by and just let it collapse-if it does -it does-but I’m not gonna sit back and help it happen.

    • V we’re talking global here. Something is going to go down. The only thing I see that we can do is keep sounding the alarm. In the meantime you better prepare for the worst.

      • I’m preparing for the worse-I simply don’t believe that we should sit at home and not vote or participate in this battle on all levels of government, which would simply allow the progressives to get even a bigger chunk of our freedoms and make a collapse come even quicker. Time is what we need-time to prepare-time to change-time is hope. A collapse is horrible to contemplate.

        • V.H.

          I am not seeing a collapse.

          I am seeing bankruptcy.

          The two are not the same.

          • As far as I can see we are already bankrupt-your article said no more checks-which means we can’t pay salaries-we can’t pay for imports -we can’t pay welfare-riots in the streets-all those knives removed at one time-so alot of chaos, no government power to speak of-unless everyone is gonna work for free. You have already said it would cause massive deaths if the knives were removed all at once. And if we get to the point where we are officially bankrupt-what is the difference. Officially bankrupt to me means collapse. I just don’t see much difference between the two-maybe I’ve missed something-but I see death and destruction either way and I am doubting our ability to prepare on a county basis-when so many don’t believe or refuse to believe there is a problem.

      • Prepare if you like. If the government falls, it’s going to take 2/3rds of the world population with it.

        Did you ever read The Stand by Stephen King? Very interesting. A super-flu wipes out 99% of the world population. But what’s interesting is a 20-ish page portion for a week or two afterward. LINK

        • I bet you could get some good hahrawn (sp?) in Grosse Pointe. That’s the high rent district ’round here.

          Far as the whole story..like I’ve always said..I can’t have shit..doesn’t mean I can’t keep trying!

        • Mathius

          And exactly how would our Government falling take out 2/3 of the worlds population?

          As I see it the world might grow because our Govt won’t be killing off so many.

          • So it’s your contention that if we TRY to prepare on a county level that a great deal of people would not die. If government just went away.

            • V.H.

              No. It is my contention that if Govt failed the impacts to most of us would only be an inconvenience.

              The only ones in jeopardy would be those who depend on Govt for free cookies.

          • Unfortunately, Google Books skips over a good chunk of the book. It skips the part where a man dies from appendicitis because he can’t find a doctor in time. It skips a diabetic who dies because he can’t get supplies of insulin. It skips.. well I forget, but it skips about a dozen more examples.

            We take for granted this amazing wonderful world of plenty, complete with supply chains stretching around the world, with inventories that never seem to run out. We take for granted that we can show up at the hospital and someone will be there to cure us. We take for granted that we can always buy the drugs we need to stay alive. We take for granted that we turn on the faucet and clean water will come out. Sans government, all these thing end.

            No, if the gov’t collapses, we are all screwed. The fall of the US gov would take pretty much every other gov with it. Tell me what happens in a place like China where there are a billion people all living on a single coast when the supply chains collapse and no one is there to keep the peace? US would probably have a 90+% mortality rate over 1 year, just because we are so pampered, with the highest rates in the north east and the lowest in places like Kansas. People in Congo would probably not even notice the change.

        • I do not see “government falling”

          I see government decentralizing.

          If you believe you need to prepare for a Stephen King scenario, you would be far better off mortgage your house, max’ing out your credit, and having a party for as long as you can aka Sheen-style. You will not survive Stephen King.

          Anything not Stephen King, you need to prepare.

          But what scenario to you prepare for?
          Collapse or Bankruptcy?

    • Free Orgasms?????????????

      I hope they are not Govt provided.

      Sorry my dear, I just couldn’t resist that one.

      🙂

  5. PeterB in Indianapolis says:

    Proud member of the Remnant!

    Do we get T-Shirts?

  6. PeterB in Indianapolis says:

    As we have said before:

    #1 Make sure that you and your family are as prepared and protected as possible.

    #2 Work on your friends – they might think you are crazy, but being your friends they might listen.

    #3 Work on your neighbors – they probably will think you are crazy, and they probably won’t listen.

    #4 Work on a local level – you will find a number of people locally that believe as you do and are willing to help.

    If enough people do #1 through #4, there is hope. We don’t need to worry about the State and Federal levels at all, we simply need to focus on what we can influence, and that (for the vast majority of people) stops at #4.

  7. PeterB in Indianapolis says:

    I have a question:

    Was there ever any possibility of any other outcome other than incredibly bad when the US allowed the creation of the Federal Reserve and allowed direct taxation of income?

    • No!

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        Agreed! The Treasury department has the sole Constitutional authority to issue coins and currency. Why this was voluntarily given to a “private” entity known as the Federal Reserve has always been a very dubious question in my mind. It would seem to be completely unconstitutional just on the face of it. It is also my opinion that the creation of the Federal Reserve was directly responsible for the creation of the Income Tax.

    • Peter,
      Rephrase your question

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        BF,

        There are many ways I could re-phrase the question, but I am not sure what specifically you are getting at with the request to do so (I didn’t get much sleep last night and I am a bit slow today!)

        • Peter

          I think he wants you to replace Fed Reserve and Income Tax with the word Government.

          • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

            Well I would imagine he does, he is Black Flag after all. However, that was not my point in asking the question. I was merely trying to point out that up until the creation of the Federal Reserve and the Income Tax, the government had actually been reasonably fiscally responsible and the national debt was either non-existent or pretty manageable. That all ceased after those 2 (linked) events.

            The statistic I have seen, which I believe to be pretty accurate, was that a 1913 dollar was worth about 93 cents compared to a 1793 dollar, but a 2011 dollar is worth about 6.5 cents compared to a 1793 dollar. If this is indeed true, then it took 120 years to errode the value of the dollar by 7%, but only another 98 years to errode the value of a dollar by a grand total of 93.5%.

            • Peter,

              What is the value of a Continental dollar?

              Yes, the FED is a prime cause of the economic turmoil today, but it does not exist in a vacuum.

              The US government has -many times- destroyed the value of the US currency, with or without a Central Bank.

              True, sometimes it holds better than other times – so what was the difference, say, between 1787 and 1905?

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

                1787: Largely individual and local control of damn near everything

                1905: Trending towards total centralized control of damn near everything

                Today: Centralized control of damn near everything, accompanied by mass spending of fiat money with reckless abandon, enabled by creation of the Federal Reserve system back in 1913.

                As you have pointed out, government debt was virtually non-existent, as late as the early 1920s, so the effects of the decisions of the teens were not necessarily immediate, and, in fact, were even POSSIBLY avoidable. However, it proved impossible to keep the hands of the people and the politicians out of the proverbial bottomless cookie jar. Now we are seeing that the cookie jar indeed has a bottom, and we are in grave danger of breaking through the bottom, if we have not already.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        I think that the people who created the Federal Reserve and subsequently the income tax were one in the same, and that they knew that this would be the eventual outcome, and that was the goal. I was merely trying to get other people to come to that conclusion via my poorly phrased question 🙂

        • Peter

          that they knew that this would be the eventual outcome,

          I do not believe they knew this at all.

          No man who believes they can plan other men’s lives, understand the unintended consequences that they create.

          Their focus was completely on protecting themselves. They had no care about anything else. As long as they were good, nothing else matters.

          Now, they are not good – they are under incredible threat – and they have no idea how to save themselves (in this, I mean they will try to save their elite status).

          One day, they will be faced with a choice: hang on a lamppost like Royalty, or lose their status and survive.

          I bet they chose the latter.

          • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

            BF,

            In some ways I disagree with this, in other ways I can see your point. So far, all strategies used by the Fed have served to enrich the rich (themselves) and impoverish everyone else. I believe that that has always been their goal, and the creation of the Fed helped them to do this. In that way I believe that they knew the outcome ahead of time, and it was the plan all along.

            What they did not plan for was the eventuality of global monetary collapse, which is the “unintended consequence” of what they have done. If they can find a way out of this mess with their wealth and status largely intact, you can bet that they will do everything they can to achieve that. However, you may well be right that they have no idea how to get out of the current mess, because it was indeed an “unintended consequence”, and as such, they may well face the choice that you have posed.

            • Peter,

              Fed have served to enrich the rich (themselves) and impoverish everyone else.

              Often, we in our own perception believe the actions of others are “out to get us”.

              But reality – they simply don’t care enough to have even considered you.

              They are enriching themselves and don’t care one way or another about you.

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

                BF,

                Good way to put it. Out to enrich themselves regardless of the consequences to others would probably be a better way to put it.

  8. Great part 2 BF. I concur with the path.

    It is funny that even the keynesians are starting to say that we have to reign in the spending eventually. The only scary thing to me is that they have gotten so good at moving money around and gotten so entrenched all over the world that the collapse will get delayed and delayed by various measures (which makes the doomsayers look less credible if we are not careful) all the while building the mass of the collapse. When it goes, it will go hard, and it will go everywhere. I looked at fleeing the country at one point, but there is literally no where to go.

    • Jon,

      I agree with your general perception.

      Bankruptcy will manifest differently at different time.

      This is not like you going bankrupt.

      Government go bankrupt when the merely renege on a financial promise.

      They stopping “pay for this”. As I said the checks bounce

      So services will no longer be provided – like Old Age Pension. One day, it will be clawed back, the next day, older age limits, the next day, none at all

      It could be Highways – one day, only primary infrastructure, next day “it’s up to the States to deal with the parts in their state, we’re done”

      It could be Health Care – triage, “your too sick to help”, or “heart attack? the doctor is taking appointments next month…will that be an morning or afternoon?”

      …in all these (and more) scenarios, bankruptcy is the failure to pay what is promised.

      In all these scenarios, the problem does not go away. Someone, somewhere has to pay.

      I suggest we figure out how to organize locally to be able to step in and claim these responsibilities. Federal government will begin to drop them – someone, I promise, will pick them up. If that someone is a Marxist, you will not be happy. It better be you, then.

      • Indeed, return to private market solutions. The only things we have to be careful of are:
        1) If we find a way to do it profitably, the government will steal it.
        2) Bankruptcy may stop services, but not regulations. There may not be a viable free market solution when a free market is not possible. If we use black market options, then we become enemy of the state.

        • Jon,

          1) Government will steal it via taxation – so consideration about tax issues in a decentralized model need to be addressed.

          2) Regulations that interfere with individual survival – and, as you are correct, give rise to black markets make the black market immune to government. It is one thing to have a law – it is wholly a different thing to enforce it.

  9. Sitting on pins and needles…..

  10. A question.

    “It is the job of the Remnant to keep reminding themselves and their peers that there are no free lunches in life, that the bills always come due, that debt is a great threat”

    Is the Remnant having success here at SUFA? Who thinks the Dem’s or Repug’s budget is the right path? Or Obama?
    Or other?

    I vote other. At least 200 billion in cuts for the remainder of the year. Next year we get really serious!

    • I don’t think anyone thinks we are on the right path-so what conclusions have you drawn from this fact.

      • I just wonder what the SUFA readers think on Flags warning.
        If he can’t convince the majority here that our bills are coming due, what chance is there of convincing a majority of Dem’s & Repug’s?

        Was hoping Matt, Buck & Ray would respond. I think all of us
        VDLG’er are convinced. I also think there is no convincing Charlie. (Not meant as an insult Charlie, you believe what you say)

        • LOI

          what chance is there of convincing a majority of Dem’s & Repug’s?

          They are convinced that they will come due.

          They are not convinced that it will come due in their lifetime.

          I also think there is no convincing Charlie. (Not meant as an insult Charlie, you believe what you say)

          Do not underestimate Charlie.

          • I am not insulted, guys. Not at all. I believe you believe what you all say as well. I have no doubt there will be a collapse of some kind (although it has always been my personal belief that we’ll somehow (the major powers) will suffer a nuclear before any kind of revolution, whether from the right or the left), but it would not surprise me if this country found itself bankrupt. I still do not believe the solution is necessarily a free market, but I understand the fear of government run anything (especially our government as it currently exists–corrupt and pretty much useless to those most in need [to me, the most in need are the middle class]).

            As to the remnant business … that’s a tough one to digest.

        • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

          The job of the Remnant is not to convince a “majority” of anyone of anything whatsoever. It would be nice if we convinced a majority of the people here at SUFA, but there is no expectation that we would ever convince the majority of either political party, or even a significant minority of either political party. That is not the purpose.

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      LOI,

      There will be no SIGNIFICANT cuts in the budget. No one has the political will to do so. Won’t happen this year, won’t happen next year, and probably not in our lifetimes, regardless of the glaringly obvious necessity.

    • LOI,

      Read Nock’s story:
      No one listens to the prophets nor the Remnant.

      Nock was very vicious in his condemnation of the masses – and ignorant, mindless, unthinking mess of human flesh eager to eat their seed corn to fill their bellies to bursting with no care on how to plant a crop in the spring.

      But Isaiah still went to preach, as he must. And as you must too.

      Why? Because in the mess of human mass, there are other Remnants – alone, scared, questioning and lost. It is to them that you are preaching – they are the ones in need of a message of hope – that there are more of them out there, that there still are men of morals and principles, and they are out there preaching preparedness.

      But you do not know who the Remnant are. You do not know how many.

      But each time their hear Truth, it causes them to contemplate and think. Then the hear it again, it begins to manifest in their minds, then again they hear it, it becomes clear – then one day, a principle is found – they think they thought of it themselves, they can’t remember where the seed was planted – but now it blossomed, and away they go, fixing the problems.

      That is the role of the Preacher – to repeat the message, no matter.

      The role of the Remnant – to think, contemplate, think, ponder and understand – then rebuild.

  11. PeterB in Indianapolis says:

    ““The borrower is servant to the lender.”” I guess that makes us all servant to the Federal Reserve.

  12. Yes……..I snipped this from another place. But it seemed to fit.

    Written by Rob Natelson on 12 March 2011

    Last week, Senator John Kerry (D.-Mass) was unhappy with a Republican plan to cut as much as $61 billion out of the federal budget. “I think it’s an ideological, extremist, reckless statement,” Kerry said of the plan.

    I hadn’t kept up on all the numbers recently, so I took a look at President Obama’s 2011 budget. My shock at the numbers was matched only by my shock that even Kerry could say something that demented.

    The fiscal situation America now faces is unutterably appalling. I don’t want to bury you in numbers, so I’ll just mention a few, rounding out to the nearest hundred-billion.

    First, the deficit is not just a few percentage points in the budget. Fully a third of all spending is now on borrowed money—that is, $1.3 trillion out of 3.8 trillion. That would be like spending $100,000 a year on a salary of $67,000.

    If the President has his way, this situation will not change any time soon. He projects deficits approaching the trillion-dollar-range as far as the eye can see. And those projections assume that (1) ObamaCare saves money and (2) income tax receipts go up steeply in the next few years. Hah!

    To balance the budget with more revenue, the federal government would have to take in 50% more cash. But if you raise taxes 50%, you won’t get 50% more money because the tax hike would hurt the economy, and people would find ways to avoid paying that much more. So to balance the budget with revenue, you’d probably have to double all federal taxes.

    Congress has put most federal spending on autopilot rather than reviewing and appropriating it from year to year. (The Obama budget jocularly calls autopilot expenditures “mandatory” spending.) Autopilot spending includes Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, and amounts to $2.1 trillion. The entire rest of the budget is $1.3 trillion ($800B for defense and security; $500B for social programs). If you immediately abolished everything not on autopilot, you’d only barely balance the budget.

    Even if we completely and immediately eliminated both Social Security and Medicare and kept their taxes in place we wouldn’t quite balance the budget.

    So you can check the numbers yourself, here are the principal expenditures, rounded to the nearest hundred billion:

    * Defense and other security programs – $800B
    * Appropriated social programs – $500B
    * Auto-pilot social programs – $2100B ($700B for Social Security, $500B for Medicare, $300B for Medicaid, and $600B for others)
    * Interest on debt – $300B

    Note that national security—the federal government’s first constitutional responsibility—absorbs only 21%. 79% goes to other programs, many of which are flagrantly unconstitutional. (This is in addition to state and local social spending.)

    Study these numbers and three things hit you:

    (1) The political and economic dynamics are such that balancing the budget will be forever impossible without radical change.

    (2) Cutting $61 billion—about two percent of expenditures when the deficit is 33% of expenditures—is only “extremist” or “reckless” in a way opposite to what Senator Kerry intended.

    (3) If we had honored the Constitution’s limits on federal power, this appalling situation never would have arisen.

    JAC— The only thing missing in Mr. Natelson’s commentary is that it would take another 2.3 trillion per year to pay off the outstanding debt/obligations in the next 50 years at an interest rate of about 3%.

    • But defunding Sesame Street should be a priority.. especially when you know damn well that there’s no chance the President is going to sign it.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        Mathius,

        By creating a debate over funding of NPR, PBS, etc. the politicians on both sides are deflecting. If they can cause a ruckus over something silly like this, then people are not paying attention to the real issue at hand. Politicians are great at this tactic!

        • I think the real reasoning is that Republicans have never been entirely comfortable with the Bert and Ernie situation..

          • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

            Is that anything like the Barney Frank situation? And if so, is that why many on the “religious right” fear a purple dinosaur on another childrens program?

      • Actually, in my opinion defunding the NPR should be a no brainer-it should just be done and not argued about-We have to cut spending and we should get rid of the unnessasary first-then argue over the ones that are actually gonna hurt people.

        • Let’s pretend your household is running a deficit of ten thousand dollars every month.

          Your husband loves a certain candy that costs about a dollar / month. It is his favorite candy in the world and it makes him very happy. Further, there’s going to be a big fight if you try to take it away. Doing so will piss him off and ensure that you can’t discuss any other cuts rationally.

          You also have an unnecessary private security force which costs you 3,000 / month.

          You have are supporting your neighbor financially, for no particular reason for 3,000 / month.

          You are living in a mansion which costs 8,000 / moth, but could get by in a house which costs 2,000 /month.

          OK, stage is set. Do you take away the candy that costs (in the grand scheme of things) absolutely nothing? Ensuring a fight that will make it impossible to address your other obvious excesses?

          Yes, you have to cut spending, but does it make sense to cut there? Or is there some other place that makes more sense?

          Big fight, negligible savings?
          Huge fight, significant savings?

          If you’re serious about balancing your home budget, is this the path you take?

          • Let me get this straight-because a political party is gonna act like a big spoiled baby-we must give into their request to spend millions of dollars to support an organization that is quite capable of supporting themselves. Instead of cutting all the “it’s just” items out of the budget. I really get tired of the “it’s just” arguments. Ever heard of the old saying-watch the pennies and the dollars will take care of themselves. Anyway I think you have it backwards-the dems. are the ones causing the argument on this one-it is apparent that there are things in the budget much more important than NPR.

          • Wow, 8,000/ moth in a mansion. How many moths are in this mansion?

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      According to http://www.usdebtclock.org/ those numbers are all going to end up a bit low, at least as far as expenditures go. The majority of expenditures fall into the 6 largest categories:

      Medicare/Medicaid (805 Billion fiscal year to date)
      Social Security (706 Billion fiscal year to date)
      Defense/War (693 Billion fiscal year to date)
      “Income Security” (euphemism for social programs/entitlements) (432 Billion fiscal year to date)
      Interest on National Debt (203 Billion fiscal year to date)
      Federal Pensions (203 Billion fiscal year to date)

      Notice that there will be NO political will to significanly cut any of these “Big Six” items! It just ain’t gonna happen folks.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        Also, please note that the “official” US Debt is 55 Trillion now. However, if you scroll down, the page also includes an entry for “Total Un-funded Liabilities” These are things we have committed to pay, but somehow do not make it into the “official” Debt figure. All of you should go visit the page. Add up the total “offical debt” with the “total unfunded liabilities” and see how you like THAT number!

        • Can we even trust the numbers Peter? So much money has been repaid or never spent..depending on who you talk to the numbers change…WTH? I know we’re in trouble but who really knows what the true numbers are?

          • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

            From the research I have been able to do, usdebtclock and shadowstats both have numbers as close to “reality” as we can ever hope to get. How close they are to “actual”… yeah, who knows?

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      “(3) If we had honored the Constitution’s limits on federal power, this appalling situation never would have arisen.”

      Who is the “we” of which you speak? Just exactly how was this “we” (whoever they are) supposed to have “honored the Constitution’s limits on federal power”?

  13. V.H.

    As far as I can see we are already bankrupt

    We are insolvent, but people are still accepting the IOU’s

    -your article said no more checks-which means we can’t pay salaries

    Government salaries

    -we can’t pay for imports

    You buy this, as long as YOU have money

    -we can’t pay welfare

    This is a government salary too. Whether a dollar goes to a government bureaucrat or a person sitting at home watching TV, if it comes from government –it is a government salary.

    Neither the bureaucrat or the welfare person supplied a good in trade for that dollar – that dollar was seized, either by direct theft (taxes) or theft by conversion (counterfeiting money).

    When you understand this point, you will have conceptualized raised yourself into a new understanding regarding “government employment”.

    -riots in the streets-all those knives removed at one time

    No, it will not happen all at once.

    It will happen in a scattering, it will be “claw back of SS from people of means” – means test to get Social security. Then, later, it will be “age limit increase”, then later “sorry, outta luck”

    Each step works to shrink the benefit population – it is not likely it will go from “here is your check” to “no one gets a check” at once.

    Also it won’t be all things at once. It may start with SS, but ,say, Medicare will be untouched for now. This is the “staggering” bankruptcy, some bills will be paid, but others not paid.

    This is why I a decentralization philosophy is necessary. All of this will not get “dumped” in one day. But if there is no plan to support the staggering withdrawal, the build up of suffering will tip one day.

  14. Here is an article worth pondering, my comments at the end:


    There’s talk of part of Arizona seceding from the state and forming a new one. Those looking for the exit are — wait for it — leftists.

    TUCSON, Ariz.—On the patio of a downtown bar here last Wednesday night, a handful of people gathered over pitchers of beer to plot the creation of America’s 51st state.

    With copies of the Arizona constitution before them, they debated how to turn Pima County—a liberal southern swatch of Arizona that borders Mexico and includes Tucson—into “Baja Arizona.”

    Baja Arizona (the working title) will almost certainly remain a dream, but it suggests the growing chasm between the state’s Republican leaders and its frustrated liberal minority.

    This story from the Wall Street Journal, which is now liberal about everything except corporate welfare, is questionable in its analysis.

    As a former resident of Tucson, I feel confident in saying that Pima County is not “a liberal southern swatch of Arizona.” Tucson is home to the University of Arizona, a pit of cultural Marxism as well as an assembly line of reconquista plans. The Mexicans in South Tucson are more involved in drug dealing than political action, but are reliably unfriendly to gringo interests, so I guess in leftist terms that makes them liberals. The daily paper, the Arizona Star, is one of the worst newspapers in a country of very bad ones, but it’s consistently left-wing (locals call it the “Red Star”).

    Other than that, it would be hard to dredge up more than a few hundred residents of Tucson or the county who’d want to become citizens of “Baja Arizona.” Most would just as soon drop kick the university into the part of the state with the most rattlesnakes. I used to feel my heart sink when I went near the campus, or into it to hear a concert — UA does get good touring jazz and classical musicians.

    But if Baja Arizona is a non-starter, I still welcome this development. When the liberals who dominate U.S. institutions start banging on about taking back local authority, it makes devolution that much more respectable.

    If Pima county was, in fact, the liberal stronghold the story claims, I’d be for it giving Arizona the kiss-off — provided conservative areas could do the same, and in other states as well.

    I am convinced that the break-up of the United States is inevitable. It has been a house divided against itself for four decades, with the official status of nationhood maintained only by the militancy of a federal government that is forever aggrandizing its power over states and localities, with an imperial judiciary, an elephantine bureaucracy, and a Congress whose strings are pulled by lobbyists. Voters in national elections are given a choice between right liberal and left liberal politicians.

    While times were pretty good for most people, there were plenty of government jobs to buy off the dissatisfied, and we could (so we imagined) afford the dosh to keep the rioting classes quiet with welfare, the house divided held together despite cracks in the foundation. Now the payoffs are becoming untenable amid a worldwide economic crisis and Greater Depression at home.

    The question about devolution is: can we devise a framework where it can be done peacefully and legally (granting that it will be a wrenching experience for many), or will it entail insurrection, local anarchy, and perhaps a savage Washington-directed suppression?

    I choose door no. 1. I’m happy to let Arizona’s “frustrated liberal minority” have their turf. One cheer for Baja Arizona.

    First, the sentiment of decentralization is more broad then we realize. It will grow as, just as the article suggests, more of the people become kicked off the government milk wagon.

    Second, the threat of “weeds”. Do not underestimate the organizational ability of the Socialists. Their appeal of “easy money” resonates strongly with those suffering financial destruction. It is no surprise that the first sparks of decentralization are coming from the Socialists/Marxists.

    Third, there is a large group of the masses that will stick with “government in bankruptcy” no matter what – who may be pliable enough to allow the rest to “leave”. In other words, we must consider the scenario where a Swiss-cheese of decentralized regions sit within a centralized model (whether it is independent counties, surrounded by State-manged ones…) – how do these entities interact with one another?

    • I’m more curious about how voting works if we allow sections of states to spin off. Does Baja AZ get two senators?

      Does the spin-off state have to assume a portion of the host-state’s debt as it’s own?

      Do we all have to redo our flags?

      Though, in general, I’m all for it. I wouldn’t want to be a liberal bastion completely subsumed in a red state or vise-versa.

      • I’m more curious about how voting works if we allow sections of states to spin off. Does Baja AZ get two senators?

        Why would it matter?

        Does the spin-off state have to assume a portion of the host-state’s debt as it’s own?

        Why would it matter?
        They can give 100% of it, but it still will not be paid.

        Do we all have to redo our flags?

        Black is a nice color

        Though, in general, I’m all for it. I wouldn’t want to be a liberal bastion completely subsumed in a red state or vise-versa

  15. Ray Hawkins says:

    Yesterday my wife received her annual “bonus letter” – she knew in advance the gross amount – this letter was to inform her of the “net” amount. She’d done much better this year than recent years due to her hard work, a good promotion and other favorable performance attributes. I have not yet received my letter from work – but I too will expect a nice “gross” but a far different “net”.

    The anger at seeing close to 40% of a hard earned bonus disappear in a litany of taxes should rest in the conscious mind for days and months and……

    Many of us in corporate America are now told that our higher base salaries place us in a position where annual comp increases are either barely at the level of inflation or worse or “0”. We’re told to work harder, make bonus and we’re still “whole”.

    I don’t consider myself “whole” in helping fund completely irresponsible spending. I don’t consider myself “whole” because liberal talking heads keep fanning the flames of class warfare – pitting a lower middle class against me because I am somehow “rich” and need to pay more of “my fair share”.

    If a candidate emerged that had the fiscal philosophy of early tea partiers sans the cultural warfare of later day TPers then they’d have my vote.

    • Ray

      You would vote for a man who would say “No more debt!”

      But would you ask “How will you do this?”

      If you do ask, expect dead air.

      • Dread Pirate Mathius says:

        Alas, Flag, you are too correct.

        They always like to promise eliminating waste, improved efficiency, etc. Or they cut insignificant (in dollar terms) programs like NPR. But do they ever mention the 900lb gorillas (note the plural) in the room?

        SS?
        DOD?
        Etc?

        And when (very rarely) they do mention these? Do they ever get elected?

        And when (almost never) they do get elected anyway? Do they change their minds after the fact?

        And when they don’t change their minds? Do they ever actually accomplish anything?

        Yea. That’s what I thought…

        • There are thousands of NPRs. They all add up. Why do you continue to knock them?

          • Sure they do.. but why go after highly contentious pennies when there are budget items that are actually worth fighting over?

            Red meat. That’s why.

            • Excuses, justify, deflect, yeah but, anything but CUT.

              Who’s afraid of the big bad wolf?

              CUT ALREADY !! Start with the department of talking heads. The Ben Bernank, then the Tim Geithner would be first to go if I was Queen! Don’t even replace them. Then cut one senator and at least one rep per state.. there, that’s a start.. now as for agencies….

              • I just don’t understand this type of reasoning-We are broke-but we should take the side of the ones demanding we pay for an unnecessary expense because they are gonna get mad and refuse to participate. We are talking about our supposed grown up representatives they are not supposed to act like spoiled children. It isn’t-their money-they are not allowed candy-just because they want it. And they shouldn’t get it just because they act like children.

              • I think she’s YELLING at you Matt!

              • I do not like to be yelled at.

              • I am not yelling. You just can’t hear my very reasonable tone. 🙂

              • Just for fun I’d like to say that if $451 million dollars is such a small percentage of our budget-that may be because our budget is too damn high. And if we can afford(which we can’t) giving a successful company $451 million dollars just because-lets look at the fact that there are approximately 300 million people in this country. Lets give it to them instead of NPR-We would make Charlie very happy. 🙂

            • Mathius

              Your continued examples defy reality and therefore your what ifs fail to stand with your conclusion.

              The point is that ALL programs are contentious and have their power brokers defending them.

              The reality is that NPR and all its cousins are outside the legitimate role of govt entirely and should be abolished. Post haste.

              The only thing standing in the way is the whining, sniveling, Democratic Party.

              So tell me. Where are the Dems who are willing to line up with the Repubs in cutting Soc Sec, Defense, Medicare, Medicaid, etc, etc.

              I hear CRICKETS………………….

              The only chance we have to to eliminate the small fry stuff as you call it. Until nothing is left but the big stuff. And then we the public sees it is not enough the politicians will no longer be able to divert the discussion by pointing at planned parenthood or NPR.

              NOPE………..SORRY FOLKS……those are all gone and we still have another 2 trillion to cut.

    • Dread Pirate Mathius says:

      I got a bonus of 90% of my base. Though my take-home was not insignificant, it fell well short of the bonanza that it should have been.

      I was not pleased.

  16. gmanfortruth says:

    Flagster,

    Great article and good advice for those who listen. I have an upcoming article on a plan to organize the community. By presenting the plan here, it can be refined to make a better product to present to my neighbors. Do you think this is a good idea and how wide of an area would you suggest?

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      gman,

      How wide do you feel your own sphere of influence is? Only you can be the judge of that. Others that you work with to organize the community will have slightly different spheres of influence than you do, and if they are a part of the remnant too, then it will generate a ripple effect, which is all you need to do!

    • Gman

      The third of this series, which also will be the first of a new series starts to discuss this

  17. PeterB in Indianapolis says:

    I tried to explain a lot of this stuff to my wife the other night. It is important in potential situations like this to make sure that at the very least your own family is on the same page. Happily, my wife is a smart and tough person, and she “gets” this stuff.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I’ve been fortunate to have my father on the same page for two years now. My mother is also aware, but don’t think it will happen. The rest of my family thinks I’m batshit crazy, but that’s OK, I won’t be hungry.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        My father is firmly on the same page. My mother doesn’t really want to know. Politics and ecomonics don’t interest her any more than basketball 🙂

        My mom and dad are 75 now, and they are prepared enough to make it through to whenever their lives end, regardless of what happens. They are working with me and my wife to make sure that we, and our kids are as prepared as possible. (My kids are only 7 and 5, so they don’t participate too much in the preparations and discussions yet, but they do get to participate in the preparation part to a degree anyway!)

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        I would rather be judged to be “batshit crazy” and have a full stomach and a good supply of water instead of being judged to be “sane” and dying of starvation and/or thirst 🙂

        • gmanfortruth says:

          I with ya on that! Tokyo should serve as an example, if the truckers can’t afford gas, no food on the shelves. I guess people think that it arrives via pixie dust.

    • My wife doesn’t want to hear about politics or economics either, but she doesn’t make me watch Dr. Phil, nor listen to what she is into. And as long as I stay in budget, humors me on gold, guns and other investments.

    • Mrs. Black Flag is a major component of my strategy; she is aware, involved, and active in our family plans.

      Lil’One, is intrigued, and helps a lot, but not quite of the age to understand the big picture.

  18. V.H.
    I want to address this comment:

    I think we are quite capable of sounding the alarm and working on the county, state, and federal level all at the same time.

    No, we are not.
    Each level takes incredible energy – and by attempting to address all levels will guarantee no level works.

    Further, action on the State/Federal level is completely futile. I have made this argument in my article. If you disagree with my assessment, I would honestly urge you to put your thoughts together in an article and have USWep post.

    I urge this because if you do not agree with my assessment, you will most certainly not agree to my strategies.

    • I agree with most everything you say in your article. But I do not agree that we should ignore the situation at the Federal level. That has been my only point of disagreement. We will see about your methods 🙂 because I do agree we need to prepare for the worse.

      As far as my reasoning-we must push to even get any cuts passed-All I have to do is look at the small little cuts they want to pass to know that without the people continuing to scream and demand-nothing will happen except more spending-then when the fall comes it will be quick and immediate and have a much worse effect on the people. I also can well envision the fall not coming for a long time because the liberals were allowed to tax us to death, take our property, control every business- because we all just stopped fighting them at the federal level.

      • V.H.

        situation at the Federal level.

        This has being going in the Federal level since 1936.

        Why do you believe you can rally enough political clout to radically change what has been the standard for 75 years?

        I insist you go back and read Part #1.
        When you are re-reading it, find what part of my argument that you do not agree with and articulate to me why you disagree, and your argument in defense of your position in contrast.

        As far as my reasoning-we must push to even get any cuts passed-

        With the threat of halting government, the success mounted to 25 minutes of expenditures of an entire budget year.

        But you believe you can mount the political power to cut 1/3 of the government budget.

        You are fantasizing.
        You do not have time to fantasize.

        • BF

          We do not have to cut 1/3 immediately.

          But we need to put it on an ARTICULATED and REAL path to reduction. This becomes the FLOOR.

          This will allay the short term fears of the investors, bankers, etc.

          Then we can go to work on gutting, er I mean cutting, the rest of the programs.

  19. Canine Weapon says:

    I don’t know if this has come up here before, but I thought I should point it out.

    LINK

  20. WOW!?! *sigh*

    So much “Doom and gloom” from our resident self-proclaimed Anarchist & member of MENSA . . . Not calling you names, BF, just quoting you.

    What I don’t get is why are you quoting from the book of Mormon? Mainstream Christians don’t buy into the Mormon philosophy at all, or so I am led to believe.

    Enough of the questions. Here is where I disagree with you and all of your faithful followers;

    THE COLLAPSE DOES NOT HAVE TO HAPPEN AT ALL!

    All “We The People” have to do is get our heads together and retake control of this country and bring it back to what the founders of this great nation intended and created it to be . . . A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC!

    If we allow anything other than that (as we have done recently) we lose, and lose bigtime.

    I know that all of you so-called Anarchists want this country to collapse and your brand of idiocy to take over, but you do not have any idea of what it is that you are wishing for, and if this collapse ever happens you will be the first to scream that this isn’t what you wanted in the first place.

    The ONLY way to save this country is for “We The People” to step up to the plate and hit one over the center field fence (we are starting with the “Tea Party” people), and if that doesn’t happen . . . well then I suggest that we all stick our heads between our legs and kiss our anus goodbye.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Holy Cow,

      Have you not been watching the events in Wisconsin? We the People are so divided, your fantasies of coming together is beyond a pipedream. Any other great ideas?

  21. Papa,

    “Doom and gloom”

    Not at all.

    It is envitiable. It is what it is.

    The difference: you know it is coming and can prepare for your benefit and your children’s benefit.

    This is not doom. It is opportunity.

    THE COLLAPSE DOES NOT HAVE TO HAPPEN AT ALL!

    I am not calling for a collapse.

    I am calling a bankruptcy

    All “We The People” have to do is get our heads together and retake control of this country and bring it back to what the founders of this great nation intended and created it to be . . . A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC!

    My question to you is the same as to V.H.

    Please re-read #1.
    Find what part you disagree with in my analysis.
    Post your disagreement and counter-argument.

    Do not fantasize.

  22. Papa, V.H.

    The Atlantic Home
    Friday, March 18, 2011

    The U.S. will ultimately spend $1 trillion for these fighter planes. Where’s the outrage over Washington’s culture of waste?

    The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II is an impressive aircraft: a fifth generation multirole fighter plane with stealth technology. It’s also a symbol of everything that’s wrong with defense spending in America.

    In a rational world, U.S. military expenditure would focus on the likely threats that the United States faces today and in the future. And at a time of mounting national debt, the Tea Party would be knocking down the Pentagon’s door to cut waste.

    But the only tea party in sight is the one overseen by the Mad Hatter, as we head down the rabbit hole into the military industrial wonderland.

    The F-35 is designed to be the core tactical fighter aircraft for the U.S. military, with three versions for the Air Force, Navy, and the Marine Corps. Each plane clocks in at around $90 million.

    In a decade’s time, the United States plans to have 15 times as many modern fighters as China, and 20 times as many as Russia.

    So, how many F-35s do we need?

    100?

    500?

    Washington intends to buy 2,443, at a price tag of $382 billion.

    Add in the $650 billion that the Government Accountability Office estimates is needed to operate and maintain the aircraft, and the total cost reaches a staggering $1 trillion.

    In other words, we’re spending more on this plane than Australia’s entire GDP ($924 billion).

    The F-35 is the most expensive defense program in history, and reveals massive cost overruns, a lack of clear strategic thought, and a culture in Washington that encourages incredible waste.

    Money is pouring into the F-35 vortex. In 2010, Pentagon officials found that the cost of each plane had soared by over 50 percent above the original projections. The program has fallen years behind schedule, causing billions of dollars of additional expense, and won’t be ready until 2016. An internal Pentagon report concluded that: “affordability is no longer embraced as a core pillar.”

    In January 2011, even Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a champion of the aircraft, voiced his frustration: “The culture of endless money that has taken hold must be replaced by a culture of restraint.”

    The F-35 is meant to be the future of U.S. tactical airpower, but the program harks back to the Cold War, when we faced an aggressive great power rival.

    So where is the outrage at the F-35’s outlandish cost?

    Some just don’t seem to care. When it comes to defense, Republicans are the champions of big government and massive expenditure. The F-35 is too big to fail.

    At the same time, many Democrats keep quiet for fear of looking weak on defense–unless, like Senator Bernie Sanders, they’re from Vermont.

    Other politicians are bought off with pork. Defense suppliers are spread throughout dozens of states, giving everyone a reason to look the other way.

    Any serious effort to balance the federal budget will require significant cuts in defense spending. And the F-35 is a prime target.

    The 2010 bipartisan Bowles-Simpson Commission on deficit reduction suggested canceling the Marine Corps’s version of the F-35, and halving the number of F-35s for the Air Force and Navy–replacing them with current generation F-16s, which cost one-third as much. This would save close to $30 billion from 2011 to 2015.

    The plan went nowhere.

    We used to be content to outspend Australia on aircraft.

    Now we literally spend Australia on aircraft.

    As the article suggests, if there is no political will to cut spending here, there is no political will anywhere to cut spending.

    To fantasize about leprechaun gold at the end of a rainbow that someone, somewhere will muster the political power that will –simultaneously– gain voters support for cutting the voter’s cash cow, overwhelm the dual-party-one-government system of bureaucracy, reverse over a century of political intrigue and pork barreling is the ultimate waste of energy and time

    I know SUFA was built as a place where like-mind people could whine about the Federal government and the Democratic party.

    I know this whining is the glue that keeps many here.

    But if SUFA -which means Stand Up not Sob Utterly– wishes to make a real difference, this site must Grow Up first.

    Are you ready?

    • Hmmm I’m beginning to wonder what your definition of a grown up is.

      Now as far as the republicans I think you would be hard pressed to find where I have sang them praises-I simply think they are better than the new socialist democratic party currently holding office. I do not support non stop military spending. I think there should be cuts across the board. And I think I have gotten alot better about not just putting down democrats in general. But bottom line I don’t believe I have to agree with you to be a grown up. I’m thinking you do 🙂

      I haven’t had time to go back and read your part 1 but I will try to make time this weekend. I do understand your passion BF-I know you want to save us all-but I don’t really have to disagree with your arguments to draw different conclusions.

  23. V.H.

    BF-I know you want to save us all-but I don’t really have to disagree with your arguments to draw different conclusions.

    …but you have to provide coherent argument to why you conclude differently.

    …and I am not interested in saving anyone. I am interested in saving my family and the future for my child.

    • Sure that’s why you now understand why people can cry over someone else’s child being hurt because you don’t care-try to make someone else believe that-I don’t

      • gmanfortruth says:

        We should all feel very lucky as of late. We are getting great information, having great discussions over some important subjects and Flags comments are not 1,638,452 words long 🙂

        • Gman,

          Thanks to USWep.

          By allowing me access to his soap box, I can condense my thoughts into a comprehensive post, instead of having to -inside a reply- rebuild first principles to justify my response.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Well, credit where it’s due, if not for your million word posts in the past, I may not understand your thinking as well as I think I do. I am glad you have condensed them, you’d have bad arthirits by now 😆

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Almost forgot. We just bottled 17 fifths of plum brandy (which is really tasty). Tomorrow, we bottle the red rasberry. We will have 80 fifths on the shelf, all homemade brandy of different flavors. THe garden will be in around June 1st. Looks like we may need some more shelving by the end of hunting season as well, our adjoining farmer is giving us 5 or 6 crop damage deer tags for this season. Preps are going very well, to the point of now working other areas of importance with more vigor.

      • V.H.

        Of course I care

        But I also know that -like Isiah- weeping over the masses -who by their own decisions will suffer- is pointless. It takes my focus away from the job at hand – saving the rest of us.

        The best way to save those that are prepared is to save my family.

        The oars that I strain to pull, carrying in the lifeboat my family, are strong enough to pull others who are in this boat.

        I cannot row the other boats, no matter how much I may wish to.

        In other words, the effort to save mine can save yours too – but only if you are prepared.

  24. If we assume for a moment that BF’s proposition is correct, regarding a “REMNANT” that has historically stepped forward in time of crisis, then I propose we can not ignore the Federal level.

    In fact BF’s proposition by its very construct should preclude us from ignoring any level of Govt.

    The problems with this nation are philosophical and political, and by their nature involve all levels. That is how the sickness took hold.

    We do not know who the remnant are or what they might do. So if we ignore any level we could be precluding a remnant from acting in the future that might actually benefit the federal, or state, or county.

    We need to tell the whole story. We need to offer hope at all levels with hard Core Principles as a starting point. How do we know that some action at the Federal today won’t slow the collapse enough to rally the army in time to save us all? We don’t. So why should we ignore that possibility?

    WE SHOULD NOT!!!!

    We need to set priorities where resources are limited. That is where I see the focus on family and then local. That is our first priority IF we can not address the others also. But as long as there are remnants who wish to focus on the Federal, we should encourage them.

    Sometimes we forget that OUR Govt, while suffering the ailments of all past govtsl, is in fact unique. I do not think it is as hopeless. That will depend on the PEOPLE, not the Govt.

    • JAC

      Sun Tzu:
      Defend where they cannot attack.
      Attack where they cannot defend.

      Action at the Fed level:
      An attack where you cannot win, which will take resources from where you need to defend.

      Yes, there maybe those that still will go to the Fed in the futility.

      I will not concern myself with them or that lost battle.

  25. A Puritan Descendant says:

    From PD above >

    “The ONLY way to save this country is for “We The People” to step up to the plate and hit one over the center field fence (we are starting with the “Tea Party” people), and if that doesn’t happen . . . well then I suggest that we all stick our heads between our legs and kiss our anus goodbye.”

    Mostly Agreed!

    However, because I have little doubt Peter B/G-man/others and especially BF, are generally correct, we had best heed their warnings and at least prepare for ourselves as best we can.

    I am skeptical of the county or community organizing ideas put out by Common Man/G-Man/BF. I need more convincing, only because the people in my area are so reliant on Government and set in their ways. BF’s Remnant idea takes time and I am not convinced we have the time required.

    From me, I do suggest starting with 3 things > Stockpile Food, Stockpile Food, Stockpile Food, then go from there.
    Later all, it is ‘escape from reality time!’ and I am Cracking another 5 Gallon Keg of Ice Cold Sparkling Cider ! (AND IT’s TAX FREE!!!!!!)

  26. gmanfortruth says:
    • gmanfortruth says:

      OH BOY! The HuffpoCrats didn’t take this very well! 😆

      • Hey G-what do you mean?

        • gmanfortruth says:

          I linked the article in the comments section on HuffPo, where they are discussing the recent court ruling. The comments on HuffPo that I got were less than kind, LOL. Them folks is nuts 🙂

  27. Black Flag:
    Good article. I find myself constantly talking to people about our bankrupt nation and principles of freedom and liberty. Many think I am just another conspiracy nut but some want to listen. I look forward to part 3. I must have missed your first part but will go back and read it when I have more time.

  28. Off subject-but this really irritates me. Get out of our schools-leave our children alone-we can handle these types of issues without the Federal government. And obviously treatment of these types of issues wouldn’t even be fair-based on the laws you want to use to enforce them.

    DOJ to white male bullying victims: Tough luck

    ← return to Water Cooler

    Kerry Picket

    Published on March 18, 2011

    * Print
    * Email
    * 0 Comments and 0 Reactions
    *
    Share

    Share

    The viral video sensation showing a bullying incident at an Australian school has brought the issue of bullying back into the spotlight. Here in the United States, the Obama administration has made school bullying a federal issue. Last week, President Barack Obama addressed an anti-bullying conference with First Lady Michelle Obama at his side. The administration’s anti-bullying campaign has been ongoing since the beginning of Mr. Obama’s term. The Department of Justice announced in December 2010 its intention to hold liable school districts that fail to protect students that are bullied.

    DOJ’s website states:

    The Civil Rights Division and the entire Justice Department are committed to ending bullying and harassment in schools, and the video highlights the Department’s authority to enforce federal laws that protect students from discrimination and harassment at school because of their race, national origin, disability, religion, and sex, including harassment based on nonconformity with gender stereotypes.

    The statement later says:

    The enforcement of the Equal Protection Clause, Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 in school districts is a top priority of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. Additional information is available at the Civil Rights Division’s Educational Opportunities Section website at http://www.justice.gov/crt/edo/.

    Here is the catch. DOJ will only investigate bullying cases if the victim is considered protected under the 1964 Civil Rights legislation. In essence, only discrimination of the victim’s race, sex, national origin, disability, or religion will be considered by DOJ. The overweight straight white male who is verbally and/or physically harassed because of his size can consider himself invisible to the Justice Department.

    Apparently, the Justice Department is going by George Orwell’s famous Animal Farm ending: “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.”

    “We can only take action where we have legal authority,” wrote DOJ spokeswoman Xochitl Hinojosa in a December 2010 e-mail to The Washington Times Water Cooler. She continues:

    “As stated in the website below, we are statutorily authorized to initiate suits under Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974, and under Title III of the American with Disabilities Act. More information on the Civil Rights Act, Equal Educational Opportunities Act, and the ADA can be found here:

    http://www.justice.gov/crt/edo/faq.php#3

    The Justice Department’s anti-bullying initiative is tantamount to bringing hate crime legislation to the public school system. Obviously, not only is the heterosexual white male student out of luck but inner city minority students lose out in this deal too.

    If a schoolyard bully is a straight black male and his target is another straight black male where does that leave the victim in the eyes of Attorney General Eric Holder? What about two female students of the same sexual orientation and race? Is the victim in the latter situation considered to be less equal in the eyes of Obama’s Justice Department than a minority student who is picked on by a heterosexual white male student with no disabilities?

    Unfortunately, the Justice Department is politicizing its priorities yet again. One must wonder why the administration believes it should be micro managing local school districts bullying problems. When the Justice Department is more interested in making ideological statements through seemingly sugar coated campaigns, no one should feel protected.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/mar/18/doj-white-male-bullying-victims-tough-luck/

    • VH,

      Good find! Makes me wonder if teaching there are no consequences to one group of kids has any effect on that group making up 80% of our prison population?

  29. gmanfortruth says:

    Good Morning SUFA 🙂

    After Black Flag’s warnings, two years aog, of an upcoming economic disaster, I reached out to numerous investment companies for free newsletter and updates on the economy, stock markets and commodities. I was skepticle of Flag’s warnings back then, but I was open minded enough to take heed and get smarter on the subject.

    A few month’s ago I linked a video by Stansberry Research that many of you have seen by now. Another company, Weiss Research, a leading bank grading firm, has also released a video. This video is very much in line with Flag’s warning of bankruptcy and explains in detail as to why this will occur.

    To Flag’s credit, he has been way ahead of the game on this. Those who may claim he is a “doom and gloomer” is the simple answer for not doing you homework.

    http://finance.moneyandmarkets.com/reports/SMR/4349/vsp-smr.php?s=J26&e=4351105

    • gmanfortruth says:

      The Dept of Defense briefed the President this morning.

      They told President Obama that 2 Brazilian soldiers were killed in Iraq.

      To everyone’s surprise, he collapsed onto his desk, head in his hands, visibly shaken, almost in tears.

      Finally, he composed himself and asked, ‘Just how many is a Brazilian?’

      This is not surprising, since he obviously has no understanding of billion or trillion either.

    • Time will tell.

  30. And Bush II on TV says: The people of Iraq need to be protected and we have a strong coalition force to do so, We are justified into going to Iraq.

    And Obama on TV says: The people of Libya need to be protected and we have a strong coalition force to do so. We are justified into going to Libya…..

    and the media and the left wing are silent.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Hey Colonel,

      I copied and pasted this on HuffPo (I’m bored today), here’s a response:

      LOL
      The difference is that Bush LIED.
      Bush did NOT have a “strong coalition” supporting his actions.
      The FACT was that the vast majority of the planet bitterly OPPOSED his invasion and occupation of Iraq.

      President Obama, on the other hand, HAS built a strong coalition of force and support for going in to Libya.

      We now have a responsibl­e and wise president.
      Back in 2003, we had a dishonest and reckless cowboy in the White House.
      Favorite (0) Flag as Abusive rick91: LOL The difference is that Bush LIED. Bush did NOT
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/rick91/the-labor-movement-wont-b_n_837927_81284265.html
      Permalink

      • Well let’s see……Bush coalition 8 with support from 6….and UN support.

        Libya coalition (that the US joined-did not set up)… 4 with support from 5 and UN support.

        The favorite line is Buish lied about weapons of mass destruction…..when ALL intelligence sources thought the same thing…

        Obama said in his TV address that Libya has weapons of mass destruction and should not be allowed to use them.

        Anti Bush line……big oil for his cronies.

        Ignored Obama line…..big oil for his cronies (Dutch Shell and Chevron)

        ME backing for Bush in Iraq….Saudi, Jordan, Egypt, UAE, Qatar

        ME backing for OBama in Libya…>Saudi, JOrdan, Egypt, UAE, Qatar

        BUt I am glad there are no similarities.

        • And….throw everything out on BOTH sides…….Obama ran on a platform of NON INTERVENTION…..here we are…Afghanistan and Libya with Bahrain next…you watch.

          • Yes, once we start it does seem like drawing lines and making distinctions would be hard. And as sorry as I feel for the people in Lybia, I feel like we are just being used-why don’t the Arab nations you listed defend them instead of always calling on us and then calling us occupiers.

          • D13,

            …and what happens when the criminal Saudi’s attack their own people?

            Will Obama put to risk America’s oil?

  31. What? Anti Obama sentiment in Rio? By the Socialist Workers Party?

    ……Rumors on the street and in the local press were that security officials were worried of a possible terrorist attack against Obama in open air in light of the UN Security Council resolution against Libya on Thursday. Obama endorsed military action against Libya following over a week of violence against anti-government rebels there. Moammar Gadhafi agreed to a cease fire.

    What is most ironic about the Brazil protests is that the PSTU is a hard core socialist party in Brazil. While anti-Obama protests in the US consider Obama a socialist, the socialists in Brazil consider him a yankee capitalist, the bane of the Latin American left.

    And then the article goes on with this…….

    ……Another complaint was that Obama wanted Brazilian president from the Workers Party, Dilma Rousseff, to sell Brazil’s newfound oil to the US. One of the world’s largest deep sea oil discoveries was made by Brazilian oil company Petrobras in the so called Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin off the coast of Rio back in November of 2007.

    So we gave Petrobas millions to drill for oil. Now we want to give them millions more to buy the oil.. How about we just drill for our own oil? Is that too much to ask?

    Regardless…Karma baby…not a good start for the Obama vacation.

  32. SUFA

    I have just finished watching the film “Inside Job”.

    It is now renting at Hastings and other movie outlets.

    I URGE EVERYONE TO RENT THIS AND WATCH IT CAREFULLY

    Warning: Do not allow the biased nature of the interviews get in the way of the general information provided. It does get distracting, in fact infuriating at times, but you will get an idea of what we are up against.

    As with all of what I would call sophisticated propaganda, there is much truth mixed with the message being conveyed. Try to ignore the message and just absorb the broader information.

    Perhaps in a few days we could discuss what you have seen and learned.

  33. 🙂 for comments and thankful to be reading them – even Charlie Stella’s! 😉

  34. PS:
    On another wordpress blog, I have found why we at times get all italicized (and it is probably my fault, since I’m typically the one who does most of this)

    But now we know – so if it happens, the next post merely needs to reverse the problem until WordPress permanently fixes the problem

  35. http://charlotte.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel11/ce031811.htm

    Thou shalt not compete with the almighty dollar even with real money!

    • Holy crap, this is a problem. He was not counterfeiting. He did not have anything to gain personally for getting liberty dollars out there, at least not compared to the amount he put in.

      What’s next, is this precedent for confiscating more than a certain amount of precious metals because it is a quantity high enough to be “intent to counterfeit”?

      • Us old folken still remember the sound of real silver on a counter. His coins were stamped with .999 fine silver. How anyone could confuse them is beyond me. How could any jury consider real silver coins as counterfeit US currency?

        • I am filing this under “key straws”. It may not be a last straw, but it will be part of the outcry package. Like “remember the Alamo”. I can see people in the know saying “remember the Liberty Dollar”.

        • I did a little more research on the coins. They are 1 Troy oz 0.999 fine silver. Pictures are available on ebay, just search Liberty Dollar. By comparison US Morgan dollars are 0.859 Troy oz of 90% silver 10% copper. The words Liberty, Trust in God, & USA do appear on the front. On the rear are $20, 800.New.Dollar, LibertyDollar.org, weight and purity, Twenty Dollars, and year. Later coins have the letters MSRP, and Not Legal Tender as well.
          So I will let you decide if this qualifies as counterfeit currency.

      • Jon…color me confused. Why is this not countereit regardless of the value of the coin? It is not legal tender and is not recognized as such…..just like you cannot walk into any store with a one ounze pouch of gold dust and claim it is worth what ever the price is…..I do not understand where you are coming from…but I am open to dialogue and understanding.

        • The problem was that it was not intended to be used as US currency. The coins were designed as a collector coin, or a way to have silver in coin form. It had nothing to do with trying to make a counterfeit coin.

          Now, certainly you cannot just go in a store and stuff with a chunk of gold unless the person you are trading with agrees. It is the same as using a gold coin from another country, you cant just go in a store and buy stuff with that either, unless, again, the store owner is fine with it and you both agree on a price. But people still buy them as investment peices.

          That is what these were designed for. He was issuing free coins with his investment book, etc, etc. Maybe there was some scam going on, its possible, but the scam was not counterfeiting. Counterfeiting is making a currency that is designed to pass as legal tender when it is not, and the counterfeiter is the beneficiary. This guy stood no receive no such gain.

          As far as I know this was a power grab, and a means to grab 7 million in silver.

          • Ahhh…if it is a collectoer coin…then I agree…..I was under the impression he was putting them into circulation as a form of currency. I only scanned the article….

        • I would think it would depend on how it is offered to the merchant. If it is offered as official US currency then that is fraud and could be considered a violation of the counterfeit laws. If is is offered as an unofficial 1 oz .999 fine silver coin, then it is clearly a barter based on the current world market value of silver. The receiver can negotiate value at that time. It would be no different then paying in chickens (funny looking raptors). It certainly has more intrinsic value than Federal Reserve Notes wholes only value is in the words “Legal Tender for all Debts Public and Private” and backed by the full faith and credit of the Federal government.
          If you took an old silver dollar into a store, would you exchange it for a crisp new $1 bill since it is marked $1 or for the current market value ~$34?
          If you read some of the articles on case, the DOJ is calling him a “domestic terrorist” for trying to undermine the value of our worthless currency.

  36. File this under

    WE ARE SO SCREWED

    The UN sanctioned “No Fly Zone” has expanded to directly attacking Libyan ground forces. One article on HuffPo declares that USA Stealth Fighter/bombers were used in these strikes. Here is a NY Times article this morning.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/21/world/africa/21benghazi.html?_r=1&hp

    So what do the idiots running this country think the reaction might be to the USA in the long term, by those factions in Libya that were attacked and killed?

    Given evidence that rabid anti American groups are among the supposed “rebels” we are “protecting” what do you suppose their reaction will be once they take control of Libya?

    • JAC…..seems I warned of this about three days ago…wait until we get to Bahrain. That is next…We havd a no fly zone over Iraq before the ground war and I am seeing no difference in the reasons for war than GWBII had….this is un friggin’ believeable…..except the left is now accepting it….the HEIGHT OF HYPOCRISY.

  37. Coalition anyone????????????

    As I have said before, we radical right wing liberals must be prepared to form coalitions with our adversaries when we agree on particular issues that are consistent with our core principles.

    Well here is such an opportunity. Clipped for M. Malkin so go to her site for the full commentary.

    ” A hard-core group of liberal House Democrats is questioning the constitutionality of U.S. missile strikes against Libya, with one lawmaker raising the prospect of impeachment during a Democratic Caucus conference call on Saturday.

    Reps. Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.), Donna Edwards (Md.), Mike Capuano (Mass.), Dennis Kucinich (Ohio), Maxine Waters (Calif.), Rob Andrews (N.J.), Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas), Barbara Lee (Calif.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.) “all strongly raised objections to the constitutionality of the president’s actions” during that call, said two Democratic lawmakers who took part.

    Kucinich, who wanted to bring impeachment articles against both former President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney over Iraq — only to be blocked by his own leadership — asked why the U.S. missile strikes aren’t impeachable offenses.”

    Where is the Paul Clan and their friends?????

  38. SK Trynosky Sr says:

    Never thought I would go with the commie-pinkos but I’m with them on this one. Stay the hell out of countries that are no threat to the US. Those that are should be dealt with in the Roman manner, swiftly and painfully. “Carthagio delenda est”.

    FYI one of my sons is out some $ 500.00 in 2005 dollars on the Liberty Dollar fiasco. Since both Morgan and Peace dollars are readily available at bullion prices, I never understood the need but, heck, if you want to issue a commemorative or tribute coin, that’s your business not Uncles.

    • SK did your son take the coins or the script. As I understand it, they started with script which was supposedly backed by bullion in a vault and redeemable as such. As long as the Liberty Dollars in circulation did not exceed the bullion in reserve, then the transaction was as fair any private script that anyone receives. Private script is a personal check backed by your deposits of Federal Reserve notes in a bank where 90% of that deposit has been loaned to others. Which sounds safer to you? In this case the Feds confiscated the bullion in reserve, hence anyone holding Liberty script is SOL. The coins are a different story. If they are marked as 1 oz .999 fine silver and assay as that, then there is no loss. They have intrinsic value unlike your Federal Reserve Notes.

      • SK Trynosky Sr says:

        I will ask him. I believe that he received some coins but has $ 500. worth of script too. He referred to himself as out of luck on that.

  39. That didn’t take long!

    Arab League condemns broad bombing campaign in Libya

    Video: The Pentagon held a briefing about operation “Odyssey Dawn.” Vice Admiral William Gortney gave statement on the specific goals of the operation and took questions from the media. (March 19)

    By Edward Cody, Sunday, March 20, 1:01 PM

    CAIRO—The Arab League secretary general, Amr Moussa, deplored the broad scope of the U.S.-European bombing campaign in Libya and said Sunday that he would call a league meeting to reconsider Arab approval of the Western military intervention.

    455

    Comments

    * Weigh In
    * Corrections?

    Video
    Gaddafi’s regime claims that at least 50 civilians were killed in NATO’s bombings on Libya’s army as allied forces begin Operation Odyssey Dawn. (March 20)

    Video: Gaddafi’s regime claims that at least 50 civilians were killed in NATO’s bombings on Libya’s army as allied forces begin Operation Odyssey Dawn. (March 20)

    Moussa said the Arab League’s approval of a no-fly zone on March 12 was based on a desire to prevent Moammar Gaddafi’s air force from attacking civilians and was not designed to endorse the intense bombing and missile attacks — including on Tripoli, the capital, and on Libyan ground forces — whose images have filled Arab television screens for two days.

    “What is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone,” he said in a statement on the official Middle East News Agency. “And what we want is the protection of civilians and not the shelling of more civilians.”

    Moussa’s declaration suggested that some of the 22 Arab League members were taken aback by what they have seen and wanted to modify their approval lest they be perceived as accepting outright Western military intervention in Libya. Although the eccentric Gaddafi is widely looked down on in the Arab world, the leaders and people of the Middle East traditionally have risen up in emotional protest at the first sign of Western intervention.

    A shift away from the Arab League endorsement, even partial, would be an important setback to the U.S.-European campaign. Western leaders brandished the Arab League decision as a justification for their decision to move militarily and as a weapon in the debate to win approval for a U.N. Security Council resolution two days before the bombing began.

    As U.S. and European military operations entered their second day, however, most Arab governments maintained public silence, and the strongest expressions of opposition came from the greatest distance. Presidents Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua and Evo Morales of Bolivia and former Cuban president Fidel Castro condemned the intervention and suggested that Western powers were seeking to get their hands on Libya’s oil reserves rather than limit the bloodshed in the country.

    Russia and China, which abstained on the U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing military intervention, also expressed regret that Western powers had chosen to get involved despite their advice.

    In the Middle East, the abiding power of popular distrust of Western intervention was evident despite the March 12 Arab League decision. It was not clear how many Arab governments shared the hesitations voiced by Moussa, who has said that he plans to run for president in Egypt this year. But so far only the Western-oriented Persian Gulf emirate of Qatar has announced that it would participate despite Western efforts to enlist Arab military forces into the campaign.

    The Qatari prime minister, Hamad bin Jasim al-Thani, told reporters that the kingdom made its decision in order to “stop the bloodbath” that he said Gaddafi was inflicting on rebel forces and civilians in opposition-controlled cities. He did not describe the extent of Qatar’s military involvement or what the mission of Qatari aircraft or personnel would be alongside U.S., French and British planes and ships that have carried out the initial strikes.

    Islam Lutfi, a lawyer and Muslim Brotherhood leader in Egypt, said he opposed the military intervention because the real intention of the United States and its European allies was to get into position to benefit from Libya’s oil supplies. “The countries aligned against Libya are there not for humanitarian reasons but to further their own interests,” he added.

    But the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies in the youth coalition that spearheaded Egypt’s recent upheavals took no official position. They were busy with a referendum Saturday on constitutional amendments designed to usher in democracy into the country. Similarly, the provisional military-run government took no stand, and most Cairo newspapers gave only secondary space to the Libya conflict.

    When the Arab League approved imposition of a no-fly zone, only Syria and Algeria opposed the decision, according to Egyptian officials. Syria’s Foreign Ministry on Thursday reiterated its government’s opposition, as diplomatic momentum gathered for the U.S.-European operation, saying the country rejected “all forms of foreign interference in Libyan affairs.”

    Al-Qaeda, which could be expected to oppose foreign intervention in an Arab country and embrace Gaddafi’s description of the Western campaign as a new crusade, made no immediate comment. This was probably due in part to the difficulty for the al-Qaeda leadership to communicate without revealing its position. But it also was brought to mind Gaddafi’s frequent assertions that al-Qaeda was behind the Libyan revolt and that he and the West should work hand in hand to defeat the rebels.

    Iran and its Shiite Muslim allies in the Lebanese organization Hezbollah, reflexively opposed to Western influence in the Middle East, also were forced into a somewhat equivocal position, condemning Gaddafi for his bloody tactics but opposing the Western military intervention.

    “The fact that most Arab and Muslim leaders did not take responsibility opened the way for Western intervention in Libya,” declared Hasan Nasrallah, the Hezbollah’s leader, in video speech Sunday to his followers. “This opens the way for foreign interventions in every Arab country. It brings us back to the days of occupation, colonization and partition.”

    At the same time, Nasrallah accused Gaddafi of using the same brutal tactics against his opponents as Israel has against Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

    The Iranian Foreign Ministry, which previously criticized Gaddafi’s crackdown, on Sunday expressed “doubts” about U.S. and European intentions. Like the Latin American critics, it suggested that the claims of wanting to protect civilians were just a cover for a desire to install a more malleable leadership in Tripoli and make it easier to exploit Libya’s oil.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/arab-league-condemns-broad-bombing-campaign-in-libya/2011/03/20/AB1pSg1_story.html?hpid=z3

    • gmanfortruth says:

      This is a perfect setup to take down the Saudi monarchy. They can no longer send in tens of thousands of security forces to quell discontent. They now know what the results will be. Libya is a pawn in the big chess game. Saudi is the check mate. Check!

      • G man….you are partly correct. Saudi is in the game but is only a Bishop or Queen…not the prize. The game is much bigger than this and I warned everybody on it a year ago but got poo poo’d in my analysis. It is coming true verbatim….and China is nothing more than an antagonist in this game. YOu watch…….remember the old domino theory? It is beginning to happen in the ME.

        Don’t you find it interesting that Hamas decided to mortar again at the same time?

        • Would you mind restating your analysis 🙂 I don’t know if I’m just tired this morning but I’m having trouble putting all the pieces together.

  40. Ray Hawkins says:

    I guess I am really confused now on what constitutes criteria for the Nobel Peace Prize.

    We do not belong in or near Libya.

    And who is footing the bill?

%d bloggers like this: