Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Peter King Introducing Gun Control Legislation

Peter King, the Republican from New York and House Homeland Security Committee chairman, will introduce legislation that will bar you from carrying a firearm within 1,000 feet of elected officials.  This follows on the heels of the Secret Service erecting free speech zones whereby dissent was quarantined away from presidential motorcade routes and elected officials.  Let's examine the absurdity of King's proposal for a moment: I can buy a pellet gun that covers 1,000 feet in a second.  A second.  

Moreover, if I'm the type of deranged individual who comes out to the local grocery store to shoot my representative and other attendees at a meet and greet, I doubt I'd give a damn about a federal law making it an offense to come within 1,000 feet of an elected official.  In point of fact, one lawfully armed individual within ten feet of Representative Giffords could have shot Jared Loughner in the head before he did attempted to lobotomize Representative Giffords with his pistol.  The world would have been a better place if there had been someone there with a concealed carry permit and a pistol of their own who had the will and the skill to aim it and waste Loughner on general principle.  

Thanks to Peter King's asinine bill, anyone who lawfully arms themselves while attending a political rally or event in order to have a fighting chance against a loon like Loughner will be committing a federal crime.  It's time for the GOP leadership to start dealing with loons, albeit the loons in their own party.  Peter King ought to be stripped of his chairmanship and railroaded to the fringe of the GOP.  

Posted via email from momus1978's posterous

Gates, Defense Spending Cuts, and Pure Hooey

Defense Secretary Robert Gates recently announced spending cuts of $78 billion, which translates to a per year reduction in spending of $15.6 billion from an annual budget of over half a trillion dollars.  Ultimately, the spending cuts translate to a decision to stop growing Pentagon spending at its current clip, and what's significant about the cuts is the disingenuous way which they were revealed: there is no actual cut taking place here, only a willingness to stop increasing projected spending.  Current spending will still grow, but it won't grow as quickly.  

One might take a moment to pause and reflect on the events of September 10th, 2001, when then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld strode to the podium at a press conference to announce that the Pentagon couldn't account for $2.3 trillion in spending.  That's right: $2.3 trillion in spending.  By coincidence, that's the total amount of accrued budget deficits from 1981-1992 (Chart III-1, US Budget FY 2001).   That's around $800 billion more than the entire federal budget for fiscal year 2001.  Think of it: from 1996 to 2001, the Pentagon lost more money than the entire federal government spent in an entire year for any of those years in question or beforehand!  

You'll have to forgive real fiscal conservatives and proponents of austerity if they don't buy that a commitment to hold off on a spending increase is somehow equal to an actual cut in current spending.  Let's call defense spending what it really is: welfare for defense contractors and their shareholders.  It's got about the same track record for waste and fraud as any social entitlement program ever had, or it has an even worse record if you really want to compare dollar amounts.  

We've all seen the waste in the form of toilet seats costing hundreds of dollars, and yet our Pentagon can't manage to cobble together enough money to provide adequate body armor for troops on the battlefield.  Reservists have to provide for their own toiletries out of pocket when deployed overseas.  We can't get the right armored vehicles into the theater in order to avoid troop casualties from IEDs.  It's absurd.  

What's more absurd is that the over half a trillion Gates is referring to does not include the actual funds for the war in Afghanistan, which adds an additional $159 billion in expenditures on top of the over half a trillion that represents the Pentagon's baseline spending!  That's a combined budget of over $708 billion to fight an enemy with no industrial base, no air force, no tanks or artillery, and no navy. We're spending more to fight a bunch of turbaned fanatics who live in caves and tents in West Pakistan than we spent to defeat the industrial juggernaut that was Germany in World War II, and Germany had Japan and Italy fighting in tandem with its own forces.  We're spending such sums through an institution which by its own admission has lost $2.3 trillion of the money it was allocated!  

Pentagon waste and fraud are two bigger threats to America's national security than North Korea, Syria, or Iran, which have a combined military expenditure that equals out to one-sixtieth of our national defense budget.  If we're seriously threatened by the likes of these banana republics, we need to be questioning what our investment in national defense is going towards.  Combined with the operational incompetence of our military on 9/11, the most glaring example of which was the failure of Andrews AFB to deploy fighters to intercept a jetliner before it smashed into the side of the Pentagon, the accounting failures of the Pentagon give rise to a legitimate inference that something is seriously wrong with our national defense infrastructure.  Andrews AFB is located a stunning eight miles southeast of the Pentagon, and if the military couldn't scramble jet fighters capable of covering eight miles in enough time to avert a strike on the Pentagon, we've got some problems with our air defenses.  

The simple reality is that a spending cut won't compromise America's national defense capabilities any more than they've already been compromised by fraud, accounting failures, and sheer incompetence in execution when it comes to defending America's airspace from terrorists hijacking planes.  It's time to take the corrupt culture of the Pentagon to task, and the incoming Republicans who took the majority in the House need to get serious about doing so.  With 80% of retired three and four star officers going to work for defense contractors between 2004 and 2008, and thirty-four of thirty-nine three and four star generals and admirals going to work for defense contractors in 2007 alone, we have a pervasive culture of incestuous relationships whereby former military officers use their access to gain information on defense procurement which they can then trade on in their capacity as potential employees of defense contractors.  

It's time to put an end to such arrangements, and to make a full-scale attack on Pentagon waste and corruption in order to begin restoring efficiency, accountability, and competence to our national defense.  Moreover, economic security and fiscal strength need to be seen for what they truly are: the bedrock of our national security. Without a strong economy and a government that operates within its means, the ability of America to defend its own shores will be further eroded.  Robert Gates needs to be raked over the coals for his useless gesture, and we need concrete and substantive proposals to reduce defense spending and waste.  Moreover, American security should not be interlinked with the fate of a heroin-pushing regime in Afghanistan that allows widespread child rape.  Give that $1 billion in humanitarian aid is siphoned off to the Taliban in the form of bribes for safe passage through rural Afghanistan while only 10% of the aid actually reaches the people of Afghanistan due to a culture of graft, we need to reassess what we're doing in Afghanistan in order to determine whether or not it relates to America's national security and strategic interests.  The pure hooey of Robert Gates and the business as usual attitude of Washington towards cutting government and spending is no longer going to work.  


Posted via email from momus1978's posterous

Researcher Finds Links Between Silicofluoride and Elevated Lead Levels in Blood

An excellent overview of the issues with mandatory fluoridation of water supplies can be found at Washington's Blog. The article was excerpted at Blacklisted News as well. I have included direct links to many of the research materials utilized in both the original article and its excerpted version at Blacklisted News in order to provide you with direct sourcing.  These are by no means all of the original source materials, so I highly encourage you to look into the Washington's Blog link for a most informative overview of fluoridation and the issues which arise out mandatory water supply fluoridation.  

As always, the documentation here is intended to serve a two-fold purpose: I like to demonstrate a chain of evidence that is closely sourced to the originals, and I like to provide a mirror for the original documentation in case it is removed from the links.  Should that become a problem here, I have duplicated this article on no fewer than three other mirror sites, one of which is http://screedofmomus.blogspot.com.  Every post is duplicated at Blogspot and elsewhere, and you should be able to simply search for the title or my name in order to retrieve anything I've posted . 


Research abstract here

HHS & EPA press release announcing recommendation for lowered fluoride levels here

Jennifer Luke's dissertation and 2001 abstract alleging accumulation of fluoride in pineal gland: 

Download now or preview on posterous
Lukefulltext.pdf (31187 KB)
2006 National Academy of Sciences corroboration of Luke's work here


Donald Miller's article on fluoridation at Lew Rockwell


Joel M. Kauffman's article Water Fluoridation: a Review of Recent Research and Actions

Download now or preview on posterous
kauffman.pdf (516 KB)


Posted via email from momus1978's posterous

Federal Reserve Ordered to Produce Documents Related to Federal Reserve's Gold Swaps in GATA lawsuit

Federal Reserve's 2009 Response

Original Complaint by GATA


GATA's press release outlining their suspicions and reasons for filing suit against the Federal Reserve.  

Posted via email from momus1978's posterous