Saturday, September 11, 2010

the second-death pact

louis brandeis' closing remarks to his dissenting opinion in olmstead v. united states, 1928.

Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy [ed: obviously, chaos, not anarchy]. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means -- to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal -- would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face.

extra emphasis added, since today is september 11th.

if you read the full text, you will also be gifted with this little gem of legalism (the attempt to supplant grace, or to supplement grace with law or theory not derived analytically from the golden rule):

'Legislation, both statutory and constitutional, is enacted, it is true, from an experience of evils, but its general language should not, therefore, be necessarily confined to the form that evil had theretofore taken. Time works changes, brings into existence new conditions [277 U.S. 438, 473] and purposes. Therefore a principal to be vital must be capable of wider application than the mischief which gave it birth. This is peculiarly true of Constitutions. They are not ephemeral enactments, designed to meet passing occasions. They are, to use the words of Chief Justice Marshall, 'designed to approach immortality as nearly as human institutions can approach it.' The future is their care and provision for events of good and bad tendencies of which no prophecy can be made. [ed: sorry, john of patmos! fuck off!] In the application of a Constitution, therefore, our contemplation cannot be only of what has been but of what may be. Under any other rule a Constitution would indeed be as easy of application as it would be deficient in efficacy and power. Its general principles would have little value and be converted by precedent into impotent and lifeless formulas. Rights declared in words might be lost in reality.'

emphasis added.

rights declared in words will be lost in reality when their heart is humanistic trash masquerading as authentic revolution, and not the word of god: to engage in the former is to sign the pact for the second death, and i am sure you will find alexander hamilton there. to write its "graces" on your heart is to dance for the piped piper of state, while no music plays but the incantation of the lie is made again and again; a fiction of valour or honor for the solider, a fiction of wisdom or power for the bureaucrat, a fiction of love and hearth for the schoolteacher.

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

blood currency

economic hit men target main street, will grigg.

According to Perkins, the organs of international finance, such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, engage in what is essentially a global loan-sharking scheme. As an economic forecaster covertly recruited by U.S. intelligence in the 1960s, Perkins was dispatched to various countries — including Indonesia and Panama — as an "economic hit man," or EHM. His role was to help induce national leaders to take out huge World Bank loans to fund mammoth infrastructure programs.

Perkins claims that he was was just one EHM among thousands plying the same trade worldwide. If an EHM is successful, writes Perkins, "the [World Bank] loans are so large that the debtor is forced to default on its payments after a few years. When this happens, then like the Mafia we demand our pound of flesh. This often includes one or more of the following: control over United Nations votes, the installation of military bases, or access to precious resources…. Of course, the debtor still owes us money — and another country is added to our global empire."

Economic Hit Men aren’t the only weapons in the Power Elite's arsenal. Perkins also refers to "Jackals," who are sent to deal with the most refractory foreign leaders by fomenting revolutions, or staging assassinations.

"When the Jackals fail," Perkins continues, "young Americans are sent in to kill and die." These depredations aren't confined to the Third World, at least as that designation is conventionally understood.


war is a racket, smedley butler.

Until 1898 we didn't own a bit of territory outside the mainland of North America. At that time our national debt was a little more than $1,000,000,000. Then we became "internationally minded." We forgot, or shunted aside, the advice of the Father of our country. We forgot George Washington's warning about "entangling alliances." We went to war. We acquired outside territory. At the end of the World War period, as a direct result of our fiddling in international affairs, our national debt had jumped to over $25,000,000,000. Our total favorable trade balance during the twenty-five-year period was about $24,000,000,000. Therefore, on a purely bookkeeping basis, we ran a little behind year for year, and that foreign trade might well have been ours without the wars.

It would have been far cheaper (not to say safer) for the average American who pays the bills to stay out of foreign entanglements. For a very few this racket, like bootlegging and other underworld rackets, brings fancy profits, but the cost of operations is always transferred to the people – who do not profit.

Thursday, June 3, 2010

sticker price

how real-world corruption works, anonymous reddit user.

If the military wants a Mercedes, they just issue a spec that requires a hood ornament with three lines trisecting a circle, and see whichever car company meets the spec at the best price-- surprise!

tell me about it! this guy knows what he's talking about.

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

laugh out loud funny

un says case for saving species 'more powerful than climate change', guardian.

"We need a sea-change in human thinking and attitudes towards nature: not as something to be vanquished, conquered, but rather something to be cherished and lived within," said the report's author, the economist Pavan Sukhdev.

still trying to push an ideological economic agenda but can't get away with scouring the same old scientific fields for the one crank that will take government money to say whatever he already believes is true so you can amplify it a thousand times over with the mainstream media's obsession with celebrity politicians? just try a new angle! change! and i guess i'd better keep up with the change: instead of investing in gold, i'm going to invest in asphalt. but don't worry, i'll do due dilligence.

for instance, let's just ask the one and only serious question: just where does pavan sukhdev live? bangor, maine? the everglades? nope. london. population 7.5 million. population density 12.3k/mi2. he was born in new delhi. population 300k, density 24k/mi2.

hint: lots of asphalt there. so, my ETF will be going up on the exchange next thursday.

pavan holds a... physics degree. gee whiz! armchair economist with a hard-on for gaia and a degree in applied mathematics? that's funny, i seem to recall a whole lot of popular science eloi suggesting that a "scientist" (or engineer!) with a background outside of "climatology" or "climate science" isn't qualified to talk about climate change even casually. look closely: this is my "shocked and awed" face.

what do you think pavan makes of the asian giant hornet? oh well hold on, maybe he'll notice what living in the fucking wilderness is actually like once they're sporting a population density of 24,000 per square fucking mile. let's not get his opinion just yet.


pictured: a flavor of sriracha sauce, reportedly pleasing to the palate of most bears.

see, most of these nutjobs usually have batshit insane ideas about dealing with wildlife, but when they make their case it's always about "saving" vegetation and dead bug husks mixed with shit and grubs. this is never about keeping an existing park with awesome trees in it funded, of course. it's always and everywhere about taking control of someone else's land, and as pavan-the-economist has probably realized, any reason will do, but the reasons that have already fooled conservationist (read: deer-and-turkey-socialism) hunters in the US will probably do best. nobody ever seems to want to save the deer ticks, or the killer bears, or the giant hornets. hey but i thought everything was connected? well if you don't mind, then, i'm going to decide what lives and what dies on my own property.

shit, with a track record like we've seen from climatruthogists and enviro-mental-cases, who even believes the food chain model is accurate or complete, anyways?


note to americans: the whole rest of the world sees "UN says" and they hear "the USA's puppet says" -- particularly the poorer of the undeveloped countries. you're not supporting "global problem solving" here, you're supporting universal gentrification.

Thursday, April 22, 2010

expenditures

defense spending is much greater than you think, robert higgs.

Although many Americans regard this enormous sum as excessive, few appreciate that the total amount of all defense-related spending greatly exceeds the amount budgeted for the Department of Defense.

In fiscal year 2009, which ended last September, the Pentagon spent $636.5 billion. Lodged elsewhere in the budget, however, other lines identify funding that serves defense purposes just as surely as—sometimes even more surely than—the money allocated to the Department of Defense. On occasion, commentators take note of some of these additional defense-related budget items, such as the Department of Energy’s nuclear-weapons program, but many such items, including some extremely large ones, remain generally unrecognized.

just another note in my collection, here.

Saturday, April 17, 2010

Sunday, April 11, 2010

sample set

hilariously, ron paul lost the 2010 SRLC straw poll to mitt romney by a single vote, the day after a cbs poll running up to the event came up with results looking like this:

which do you think had the better sample set?

and listen closely to what ron paul spent his time talking about, and how people reacted.

then compare it to romney. oh, sorry, i guess nobody got any clips of romney's speech, because you can't find it on youtube. oh wait! that's because he didn't even show up.

couple this with the fox news treatment of obama's best act as president so far, and you can see the epic fail spin machine is in full effect to marginalize the actual conservative voices in the republican party, ensuring a two-term obama presidency. you think the tea parties will like that?

how about if i show you video evidence of mitt romney having bought the florida straw poll that ron paul's people showed up to en masse? how long do you think it takes to cast a ballot between all of three or four people in one question on one screen? and how many tickets do you think one person should be sold?