S P E C I A L - N O T I C E S . . .
MARIZELA PEREZ IS STILL MISSING: For the latest news on the search for this young lady, please visit the special website that has been set-up: FindMarizela.com. Her cousin, Michelle Malkin has more pictures of her here.
For The Latest News on the KIMBERLIN / RAUHAUSER SAGA: Follow John Hoge's blog HOGEWASH. He's doing one huckuva job covering the story.
Bob's Message To Sarah Palin.
Instapundit’s latest column for USA Today is a damn timely read because it deals with a serious problem that has gotten quite worse in this age of The Digital Revolution:
… police often take it even more personally if you photograph them at work. As attorney Morgan Manning reported in Popular Mechanics, people who photograph police in the process of arresting — or beating, or shooting — suspected criminals often find themselves confronted by officers who demand that they hand over their cameras or delete the incriminating images.
Again, the police don’t have any authority to do that. In fact, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit has held in the case of Glik v. Cuniffe that the right to photograph police officers in public spaces is so clearly established that officers who break the law by interfering with citizens who do so can’t plead "good faith" immunity. Good-faith immunity is supposed to protect officers who have to act quickly in areas where the law is unclear. The right to take photographs of police officers in public places, said the Court of Appeals, isn’t unclear. (In fact, it’s so clear that the Justice Department has written a letter to law enforcement agencies making that point.) Now the same question is going before the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which includes New York City, in response to the New York Police Department’s practice of interfering with people who record its officers.
The question shouldn’t even be close. Leaving aside the fundamental unfairness of law enforcement agencies filling the skies with drones and the streets with cameras and license-plate scanners while objecting to being recorded themselves, there’s an even more significant reason: Unlike private citizens going about their personal business, police officers — and, for that matter, public buildings — are paid for by the taxpayers. The taxpayers should have a right to keep an eye on what their employees are doing.
Dead solid perfect.
Just as when the people of The United States in their local communities and in the Several States began allowing for the creation of police departments and never relinquished their right to self-defense or their right to exercise policing powers, merely delegating the day-to-day business of it to an organized [training came later in the 19th Century] group run by a government entity, so we also never relinquished the right to monitor those employed in our name by the governments of The United States at all levels.
The police have their supervisors, but we are their bosses.
Now, of course, as Glenn points out in another context in his column, we can restrict, through our elected representatives, picture-taking under certain conditions, such as ‘certain classified military facilities‘ and of certain police officers who are at the moment working undercover. But, outside of these few actual security and real safety considerations, we, The Sovereign People [I can't emphasis that phrase enough], have the prerogative to takes pictures or film our law enforcement officials [not just police officers] in the performance of their duties. In fact, we have a Moral Duty to record their actions if we believe they are violating the law and, thus, breaking their oaths and betraying the Trust we have placed in them.
Any unreasonable restrictions of this Power that we have retained are Despotic.
Last week, frequent Protein Wisdom commentator I Callahan remarked:
We live in a time where nobody is individual, and everyone is part of a “special interest.”
We live in a time where most everybody is lacking in Virtue, refusing to pull their shifts as Guardians Of The Republic.
‘Rational Self-Interest’ – HA! – it’s now: Slothful Self-Interest.
And The Republic, as constituted, is dead.
— A M E R I C A 2 0 1 4 —
As I do every third Sunday Evening…
I think this is one of the best versions of the this wonderful song.
There’s a better home a-waiting…
From the album Traditionals, which is a compilation album put together, it seems, in the Netherlands so I would say it is rather fitting.
I have been unable to find out much about this young lady, but she sure has a gift.
Can the circle be unbroken
By and by, Lord, by and by…
The headline of the post by Donald Douglas says it all:
The cowardly rat bastards mobbed him and he was assaulted when his phone was grabbed and thrown away, but that didn’t stop our Donald.
ITEM: The Very Healthy Colon Of The Jarrett Junto.
New data shows the White House has painted a false picture of the Central American migration by hiding a huge spike in “family units” who are illegally crossing the Texas border.
The data, which was dumped by the U.S. border patrol late Friday afternoon, shows that inflow of youths and children traveling without parents has doubled since 2013, to 57,525 in the nine months up to July 2014.
But the number of migrants who cross the border in so-called “family units” has spiked five-fold to 55,420, according to the border patrol’s data, which came out amid a storm of news about the shoot-down of a Malaysian aircraft in Ukraine, delays in failed U.S. nuke talks with Iran, and on Hamas’ continued war against Israel.
In the Rio Grande area where most of the migrants are crossing the border, the number of so-called “unaccompanied children” was actually outnumbered by the inflow by adults, parents and children in “family units,” according to the data.
The much-faster growth in “family units” has been hidden by White House and agency officials, who have tried to portray the influx as a wave of children fleeing abuse and violence.
Many of the men, women and children who cross the border in “family units” are temporarily held until they’re transported to cities where they have relatives or friends.
This Administration is very experienced in data dumps…and dumping, crapping, all over the American People.
As we now know, this was never about abused children.
Wake-up Glen Beck and Ted Cruz — you’ve been played for fools.
The “children” pic.twitter.com/fE5BCCGNIx
— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) July 15, 2014
ITEM: Cometh The White Horse.
From Bloomberg, Sonali Basak and Jennifer Oldham reporting, we learn [tip of the fedora to Iowahawk]:
Three more plague cases were found in Colorado, a week after the first infection of the deadliest form of the disease was reported in the state in a decade.
The man initially reported with pneumonic plague on July 11 is hospitalized. Two of the new cases also had pneumonic plague, while the third had a milder form. All four cases may be linked to the original man’s dog, which died from the illness, state health officials said.
Donald Douglas has a report from KNXV-TV – ABC-15 in Phoenix:
…this investigation, at ABC-15 KNXV-TV Phoenix, indicates the public health screening system is breaking down, and that chicken pox, influenza, pneumonia, viruses, staff infections, and tuberculosis are showing up across the Southwest.
With medical professionals overwhelmed by border chaos, illegal aliens are being sent across the U.S. without basic health screening, raising the prospect of epidemics of diseases once thought eradicated.
An internal Department of Defense memo obtained by ABC News reports that the director of refugee health at Health and Human Services “has identified a breakdown of the medical screening processes at the Nogales, Ariz., facility.” This may be just the tip of a medical-disaster iceberg.
Officials involved in moving the immigrants from Border Patrol processing centers to Health and Human Services facilities are, according to the memo, “putting sick (fevers and coughing) unaccompanied children on airplanes inbound for (Naval Base Ventura County) in addition to the chicken pox and coxsackie virus cases.”
Three unaccompanied minors were reportedly in the ICU at local hospitals in California, and two of them were diagnosed with strep pneumonia. The same naval base has experienced an outbreak of pneumonia and influenza among the unaccompanied minors at its detention facility.
The dispersal of illegal aliens, including unaccompanied minors, throughout the U.S. without proper medical screening is an appalling dereliction of duty by a president and an administration sworn to protect the health and safety of American citizens.
“Most of the border minors are being kept in overcrowded facilities ridden with poor hygiene,” Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet, a preventive medicine specialist, told Breitbart News recently, adding, “This is the ideal condition for a viral outbreak.”
“A public health crisis, the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime, is looming,” Vliet wrote recently for World Net Daily. “Drug-resistant tuberculosis is the most serious risk, but even diseases like measles can cause severe complications and death in older or immuno-compromised patients.”
Border Patrol agents in Murrieta, Calif., have tested positive for tuberculosis. Hand and foot disease and Chagas disease, a tropical parasitic illness, both previously eradicated from the area, are on the rise.
The possibility also exists in these conditions for diseases such as dengue fever to hit the U.S.
“We had one get bacterial pneumonia a couple days ago,” Border Patrol union vice president Chris Cabrera told host Martha MacCallum on Fox News Channel’s America’s Newsroom Monday. “A lot of our guys are coming down with scabies or lice.”
Donald has been doing yeoman’s work reporting on this Invasion. Do click here to read all of his posts on the subject.
The Jarrett Junto has shifted into high gear as if they intend to accomplish most of their ‘Fundamental Transformation’
before 20 January 2017.
So 3rd world invasion in Texas, bubonic plague in Denver, and water riots in Detroit. Can’t tell if it’s 399, 1399 or 1899.
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) July 18, 2014
Two can play at this game: Time To Get Medieval On The Left’s Asses.
ITEM: If This Is Not Treason, It Certainly Is Impeachable.
See my post from Friday:
To quote Patrick Henry:
Caesar had his Brutus, Charles I his Cromwell, and George III may profit by their example.
In post by Darleen Click, over at Protein Wisdom, Sdferr remarks in the Comment section:
There does seem a kind of principle beneath the appearances [of Obama and his Administration] though, right?
To give it a name or two: change. Or, chaos. The ground of tyranny. Arbitrary herky-jerky tyranny, intentionally stirring up trouble for want of any sort of stability, while gliding along accruing power for the sake of power (i.e. to enable more instability, to accrue more power, and repeat). Like a formula.
I and a few others, like Sdferr, have stated many times that the Left In America’s strategy is to sow and create Chaos in Society and then ride in like White Knights on white horses and restore order — a Totalitarian Order, but, hey, order and no more of that destructive uncertainty and wild bedlam.
But there is also another aspect to the Left’s strategy: while the Chaos is ongoing, while everyone is busy trying to keep up with the relentless barrage of latest incidents and outrages coming in from all directions, seize more Power And Control. Make damn sure you create the crisis and never let any crisis go to waste.
It doesn’t matter if it’s a small bit of Power And Control that’s seized because all the little bits add up quickly. To use another analogy: the accumulating of Power And Control is like a snowball rolling down hill, accumulating more layers, getting larger and bigger with each revolution [pun intended] of the snowball.
Here endeth the lesson.
UPDATE at 1903…
Sdferr in the Comments section:
It would be good, I think, particularly in light of the inadequate treatment I gave the subject at pw, to explore more fully the question of the trend regarding the border in ClownDisaster’s behaviors. To suggest roughly what I only dimly perceive about this, the border, or any border for that matter, is not simply a matter of a physical limit, but entails the identity of that “something” to which it makes a limit.
In other words, by means of muddying or erasing our border, the most fundamental identity contained within the border is itself brought into question — namely, the citizen or the meaning of the citizen. And yet, now that a defense of this fundamental being is made necessary, we see that heretofore no defense has been our practice, if only on account of the profound, wide-ranging agreement regarding the citizen, an agreement which hadn’t necessitated a defense. It just was, to our contentment.
However, now the mass (the polloi) who are utterly unaccustomed to making such a defense must rise to it, albeit that these are completely bereft of ideas how to proceed, for the mass has arrived back at the beginning and isn’t practiced in grasping beginnings. This will make for a very bumpy road as this mass attempts to regain its bearings.
Said Section reads, in full [emphasis mine]:
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
A big tip of the fedora to the lady, Velvet Hammer.
Clearly, what we are witnessing with the massive and uncontrolled influx of illegal aliens through our southern border is an Invasion of those states that border the Fascist state of Mexico.
It is the Constitutional Duty of the national government, per Article IV, to protect those border states against this Invasion.
Further, there is nothing in the definition of the word ‘invasion’ that requires it be solely conducted by armed forces of another country or by terrorist groups. The definition found in the Oxford English Dictionary:
1. An instance of invading a country or region with an armed force.
1.1. An incursion by a large number of people or things into a place or sphere of activity.
1.2. An unwelcome intrusion into another’s domain.
What is occurring now incontestably and undeniably meets that definition.
James Madison, speaking before the Virginia Ratifying Convention on 06 June 1788:
[W]ithout a general controlling power to call forth the strength of the Union to repel invasions, the country might be overrun and conquered by foreign enemies.
Are we not being overrun and conquered by people who have no intention of preserving, protecting, and complying with The Constitution? By their very first act — entering The United States in violation of our immigration laws, exhibiting contempt for our sovereignty — these people, no matter what their age, are signaling their disdain and disrespect for The Constitution and the Sovereign People who are it’s masters. That this Invasion is predominately a criminal one and not one being carried out by an armed force of another country [although, there is evidence that the governments of other countries are aiding and abetting these invaders] does not matter. It is an Invasion.
The Sovereign People of The United States have, either directly or indirectly through their elected representatives in the Several States, sought relief from the national government, from ‘the Union’, to enforce the existing Federal immigration laws. And the national government’s answer has been to treat The Sovereign People with contempt and derision or silence.
The President is charged with faithfully executing the Laws Of The United States and, regarding this Invasion, he has refused to do so.
His actions in this matter meet the definition of a Misdemeanor in the President Impeachment Clause [Article II, Section 4], as understood by the members of The Constitution Convention. As Stephen Presser has written in the Heritage Guide To the Constitution [emphasis mine]:
Some scholarly commentary at the time of the Nixon impeachment proceedings argued that the actual commission of a crime was necessary to serve as a basis for an impeachment proceeding. However, the historical record of impeachments in England, which furnished the Constitution’s Framers with the term "high Crimes and Misdemeanors," does not support such a limitation; at that time, the word "Misdemeanors" meant simply "misdeeds," rather than "petty crimes," as it now does. The issue was revisited at the time of the Clinton impeachment, when those who sought to remove the President from office, basing their arguments principally on the English experience and The Federalist No. 64, claimed that a President could be removed for any misconduct that indicated that he did not possess the requisite honor, integrity, and character to be trusted to carry out his functions in a manner free from corruption. As James Iredell (later Associate Justice of the Supreme Court) opined in the North Carolina ratifying convention, impeachment should be used to remedy harm "arising from acts of great injury to the community."
That this President is a Tyrant has been proven time and time again since he took office on 20 January 2009.
That he has not been Impeached and convicted of his High Crimes And Misdemeanors as of this date is a chilling sign that we have become a depraved and indolent people.
That whole practice of calling it the ‘Democrat’ Party instead of the Democratic Party was started by some fool in the GOP because they didn’t want the Dems to be seen as THE Party of Democracy.
I refuse to do it because they are believers in Democracy – which The Founding Fathers abhorred.
So, let the rat bastards have the term – it’s one of the few they use which is truthful.
On the other hand, refuse to use the term ‘Republican’ to describe the Quisling Party because to do so is to lie.
We are the actual republicans.
And we’re OUTLAWS.
Succinctly and accurately provided by Serr8d, in a comment over at Protein Wisdom:
Seems the history of our Republic might be visualized like the arc of a doomed Malaysian airliner..coming to a sudden end without the passengers being able to do a damned thing about it. Because we can’t.
The cake is baked, Obama was just the icing. All’s we need now is for Elizabeth Warren to pop out of it wearing nothing but a feathered headdress. Hissing
Oh…so…we’re all going to end up blinded just like in Day Of The Triffids?
Big Bang Hunter looks on the bright side:
I’d pay good money to see that if it would end with a dump truck dropping a load of manure on her.
‘Gay’ as in it’s proper, original, non-perverted meaning*…
By this Tweet, Lisa Graas earns herself a special place in Heaven:
— Lisa Graas (@CatholicLisa) July 16, 2014
Truth is a beautiful thing…as is Fair Lisa.
*OED: Light-hearted and carefree.
Special guest post by The Reverend David R. Graham, A.M.D.G.
Prayer Of Intercession
Oh God, my God, Almighty Father,
I trust You.
It is time You rise and take action.
Call the nations to tribunal and sort them out, the evil from the good, the proper from the improper.
Summon the presidents and prime ministers and legislators and the bureaucrats to bear witness to Your Glory.
Summon the clergy and professors to bend the neck and knee to You.
Bring all those to the place of judgement.
Make them undergo examination, charge, verdict and sentence.
Cast them down who refuse to bow, who mock Dharma.
Let them not rise again but remain forever dirt under the feet of beasts and food for vermin and vultures.
The nations are weary of management and crave leadership.
The people are sick of fear and mourning and crave laughing, dancing and singing.
Families are torn by rue, cynicism and chaos and crave unity and quiet.
The time is now to grind down the hags clutching and ripping the back of Duty Honor Country.
Give us leadership, O God, my God. Give us leadership.
You know who they are. Raise them up and put them in motion to triumph and serve.
Strong men who love goodness and courageous women who love their children.
By Your Grace, we will know them when we see them.
We need them now. We need You now, in the thick of things, to make order.
Grasp the whole world to Your Heart.
Cool the feverish minds and eliminate the mockers.
Judge the world, Your world. Now, O Lord.
I beg of You. This is the time for You to act in judgement.
Your will be done.
[Do check out The Rev's blog: Theological Geography]
I must say, I like the cut of Roger Kaplan’s jib [this is work quoting in full]:
There is a way to deal with the children, teenagers, and adults who are crossing the Rio Grande from Mexico into the United States.
It is simple. It is straightforward. It is efficient. It is politically, strategically, legally acceptable. I am not sure about morally, but who is sure about anything morally these days?
There is no law that says the Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona National Guards cannot be mobilized to protect the hundreds of miles on our southern border that are violated daily by illegal immigrants. Reports differ, but recent estimates have close to a hundred thousand entries since the beginning of this year, most of them, we are told, from Central American countries.
There is no law, and no political wisdom, that says that if persons refuse direct orders to halt at a border crossing, you cannot stop them forcibly. It is widely acknowledged the world over that national sovereignty includes the right to defend recognized international borders.
In a majority of countries, the defense of borders is understood to include the right, in fact the duty, to use force. That is why border police worldwide are armed. On many borders they are soldiers. Force may be lethal when the alleged perpetrators of illegal acts — as clandestine border crossings are universally defined — refuse to cooperate with police or any other legitimate authorities.
Strategically, this policy has several advantages.
In the first place, if carried out without qualms, scruples, or Miranda rules, it will work. A few salvos of grapeshot and the invasion — what else is it? — will be turned back. It will stop. Those who are present, who have been housed, fed, and given legal advice in various improvised shelters, should be rounded up, taken to the border, and told to walk or swim, as the case may be, back into Mexico. If they refuse to move, firepower can be used to encourage them.
Of course, there are a great many more illegal immigrants in the U.S. than the estimated hundred thousand who, reportedly, have arrived from Central America and Mexico in the last several months and are the focus of the current policy agonizing. Observe in passing that such agonizing is confined to Washington politicians and their attendants in the yak-yak classes. No one in the real country will object to something as clear and straightforward as shooting criminals, especially when the results are immediate and satisfying. However, while this policy is being deployed and executed, it would be sensible to ask federal and state authorities to organize the most broad sweeps possible of known illegal immigrants and bring them, too, to the border, where they, too, will be told to walk or swim in the direction marked “south” by signs put up for the occasion.
The idea is to send a clear message. Federal and state governments can then announce that anyone who is in the U.S. illegally has 72 hours to turn himself in or risk being caught in the continuing and increasingly popular roundups.
As they turn themselves in, these people can be, indeed should be, told that the choice is theirs now. What choice? The choice to obey the law or face immediate deportation without due process. Obeying the law — we can work out the details as we go along, for after all, has not our government lately been improvising on what the law says on who knows how many matters — means very simply that they must join a federal agency, at no pay but in exchange for room and board. Which agency? The Army. They can join the Army. This can be extended to other security agencies, as the need arises, but we can start with the Army.
If they are fit, they can be trained and shipped overseas — Afghanistan, Iraq, the Gaza strip, the Somali coast, the Saharan desert, the line between the two Koreas, and any other place on earth where American national interests are threatened by savages, political gangsters, or pirates.
Led by the toughest, bravest, wisest officers and noncoms in the U.S. Army, our F-force — the Foreign Force for Freedom, we can call it — will have a mission: put an end to our enemies’ ability to cause harm. This is, note, Clausewitz’s definition of war, and the cornerstone of the thinking of American strategists until 1945.
In return for a given number of years of service — how many can be discussed — either in the F-Legion or, for those who flunk boot camp, jobs in non-combatant support, our foreign legionnaires will be thanked, welcomed into American society, given citizenship, start collecting military pay (they cannot leave the military until and unless they have a solid civilian job offer), and pay their taxes.
We are always being lectured by bien-pensant liberals that we are a nation of immigrants. Of course we are a nation of immigrants. Everyone here is an immigrant or a descendant of immigrants, including the immigrants who preceded the immigrants and whom scientists believe came from Siberia, Polynesia, Melanesia, and, apparently (viz. their name), India. Well, if everyone has immigrant genes, we should be grateful for more. They are us. We be them. But the quid pro quo in these complex modern times is that you are expected to contribute to the growth of freedom and prosperity. This was always taken for granted — the railroads, the restaurants, the harnessing of the atom, breakthroughs in medicine, even the magic of American English — all gifts of immigrants.
In many lands, evidence of immigration came, still does, in the form of scorched earth, rapine, and plunder. In America, evidence of immigration comes in the form of the Empire State Building, the transcontinental railroad, amazing triumphs in every scientific field, and the sacrifices made by recipients of the Congressional Medal of Honor, who were willing and ready to go to strange and distant and barbaric places to defend the liberties and opportunities which they or their families sought and found here.
We want them. But we expect them to want us. What they want is not always a good idea — organized crime in our country historically and still today is largely the doing of recent immigrants — but in the large sweep of things it has worked out, the net consequences of a welcome at the border have been positive.
Without a serious immigration policy, the welcome has turned into a lottery run by mental cases who come up with different rules depending on the kind of night they had. It is scarcely surprising that the emigrants view el Norte not as a dream but as an entitlement. By restoring order, we will restore the unique greatness of the American Dream, you give and you get, you sacrifice and you earn.
Bravo to the man for having the guts to say what needed to be said.
And, if there are any violent and destructive protests by illegal aliens already in this country and/or their American Citizen allies and/or groups like The Race [La Raza], put the rubber bullets and pepper bags in storage, load-up the live ammo, and shoot a few of the insurrectionist bastards.
Enough is enough.
Author Brad Thor is one of ‘The Good Guys’, one of those Americans who is (1) a Constitutional Conservative and (2) understands the what’s at stake in our struggle against the Left.
In an interview with David Steinberg, over at PJ Media [which is well-worth a read], Mr. Thor, near the end, remarks [emphasis mine]:
I have talked to several people who I won’t name, but several who are being talked about as potential GOP presidential candidates for 2016. I’ve had excellent conversations with all of them. There are things I love about each, and there are things that make me say “oh, come on, seriously?” about some. I’m not going to get a perfect candidate to support. I know that and I am ready for that. I may be surprised, I may actually get the perfect candidate, but it’s a fool’s errand to think that you will. This is like getting married. If you’re hitting on four out of five cylinders, then grab that woman or man with both hands and get them to an altar. You’re never going to hit on five out of five. But — I know that this country, this republic cannot survive another Democrat presidency.
We cannot and will not survive that. It is incumbent upon us, even if we have to put in some wishy washy guy — and I am going to fight in the primaries to make sure we do not get the Republican in name only — but if that’s what it takes, than that person is better than putting a Democrat in. That being said, I think all of us are concerned about the direction of the GOP. This is the dilemma I have.
I believe America can always come back, can always be rebuilt. But I don’t want the GOP thinking they can just stick in another squishy candidate and that I will go vote for that person. I can’t tell you I would go vote for Hillary, but this is the dilemma we’ve got. The Republican Party needs to know that I will not just show up and pull the lever regardless of who they put in there.
That’s an issue for me, that’s a real dilemma. I’m looking at a GOP that takes my vote for granted. I hate the GOP with a passion. I used to be a big supporter, used to send money. Now I hate the GOP with a passion. Because the Republican Party isn’t about the American citizen. The Republican Party is about the Republican Party. The establishment GOP, of course, that’s what I’m speaking of.
So, he will vote for the GOP Presidential Nominee because doing so is ‘better than putting a Democrat in’ because ‘this republic cannot survive another Democrat presidency’. This is a legitimate position to hold and some of our fellow conservatives and Classical Liberals believe this is the strategy we must employ in 2016 — as regular readers of these Dispatches well-know, I am opposed to this approach.
In the second set of remarks I bolded, Mr. Thor contradicts himself by letting the GOP Establishment know, ‘I will not just show up and pull the lever regardless of who [you] put in there’.
Which is it? The answer is important.
Bonasera: Then let them-a suffer as-a she suffers.
The only way the GOP and Conservative Establishments are going to get our message is if we make them suffer greatly. We have spent decades seeking a more gentler means of redress and they have laughed at us, scorned us, and, especially in the last few years, sought to delegitimize us. Yet, like an physically violent husband, they have expected and demanded that we, The Base, stay married to them.
It’s Burning Bed Time.
[NOTE: This is a republishing of a post I originally ran a four years ago]
This is the Ipatiev House in Ekaterinburg, Russia…
It was code-named The House Of Special Purpose by the Bolsheviks. Lenin ordered that Nicholas II, ex-Tsar of all the Russias, and his family be imprisoned there, but that was not the ‘special’ purpose. This is the Tsar and his family:
Parents: Nicholas, Alexandra
Children [in birth order]: Olga, Maria, Tatiana, Anastasia, Alexis
On the night/morning of 16/17 July 1918, the family was awakened, told to dress quickly as they would have to leave in a hurry, ushered into a basement room, and were murdered by a bunch of local Bolsheviks. From Wikipedia:
Around midnight Yakov Yurovsky, the superintendent of The House of Special Purpose, ordered the Romanovs’ physician, Dr. Eugene Botkin, to awaken the sleeping family and ask them to put on their clothes. The Romanovs were then ordered into a 6×5 meter semi-basement room. Nicholas asked if he could bring two chairs for himself and his wife. A firing squad appeared next and Yurovsky announced:
“ Nikolai Aleksandrovich, your relatives have tried to save you, but they had not to. And we are forced to shoot you by ourselves… ”
Yurovsky then began to read the decision of the Ural Executive Committee (Uralispolkom), and Nicholas said “What?” As the weapons were raised, the Empress and the Grand Duchess Olga, according to a guard’s reminiscence, had tried to cross themselves, but failed amid the shooting. Yurovsky reportedly raised his gun at Nicholas and fired; Nicholas fell dead instantly. The other executioners then began shooting until all the intended victims had fallen. Several more shots were fired at the victims and the doors opened to scatter the smoke. Some survived the gunshots, so executioner P.Z. Yermakov stabbed them with bayonets because the shouts could be heard outside. The last ones to die were Anastasia, Tatiana, Olga, and Maria, who were wearing several pounds (over 1.3 kilograms) of diamonds within their clothing, thus rendering them bullet-proof to an extent. However they were speared with bayonets as well. Olga sustained a gun shot wound to the head while Anastasia and Maria were said to have crouched up against a wall covering their heads in terror until Maria was shot down, and Anastasia had been finished off with the bayonets. Yurovsky himself killed Tatiana and Alexei. Tatiana died from a single bullet through the back of her head. Alexei received two bullets to the head, right behind the ear. Anna Demidova, Alexandra’s maid, survived the initial onslaught but was quickly murdered against the back wall of the basement, stabbed to death while trying to defend herself with a small pillow she had carried into the sub-basement that was filled with precious gems and jewels. Military commissar Peter Ermakov, in a drunken haze, stabbed at the dead bodies of the former Czar and Czarina, shattering both their rib cages in a pool of blood.
The bodies were then loaded into trucks, taken into the woods, desecrated, and buried.
This is the room where they were slaughtered in the name of Leftism:
This brutal murder of a whole family was certainly not the first, nor would it be the last, such action perpetrated by Leftists in their various ‘glorious’ marches to bring about Heaven on Earth [hundreds of millions of souls cry-out to us], but in it, in this one action, is to be found the ultimate representation of where Leftism will always lead: to the slaughter of innocent human beings in the name of ideas — ideology. Logic dictates that there can be no other end.
As long as Leftism is allowed to thrive, to just exist, then the Olga’s, Maria’s, Tatiana’s, Anastasia’s, and Alexis’s of this world are not safe from the barrels of Bolshevik guns. If the Leftists were to control the world, they would turn the whole of it into a House Of Special Purpose.
SIDENOTE: The whole family have been declared Saints by the Russian Orthodox Church…they are certainly Martyrs of Freedom…
Requiescat in pace
NEW ADDITION for the 2013 POSTING…
In view of the tens of thousands of lives which the Cheka would claim in the years that followed the Ekaterinburg tragedy, and the millions killed by its successors, the death at its hands of eleven prisoners hardly qualifies as an event of extraordinary magnitude. And yet, there is a deep symbolic meaning to the massacre of the ex-Tsar, his family, and staff. Just as liberty has its great historic days —the battles of Lexington and Concord, the storming of the Bastille—so does totalitarianism. The manner in which the massacre was prepared and carried out, at first denied and then justified, has something uniquely odious about it, something that radically distinguishes it from previous acts of regicide and brands it as a prelude to twentieth-century mass murder.
When a government arrogates to itself the power to kill people, not because of what they had done or even might do, but because their death is “needed,” we are entering an entirely new moral realm. Here lies the symbolic significance of the events that occurred in Ekaterinburg in the night of July 16–17. The massacre, by secret order of the government, of a family that for all its Imperial background was remarkably commonplace, guilty of nothing, desiring only to be allowed to live in peace, carried mankind for the first time across the threshold of deliberate genocide. The same reasoning that had led the Bolsheviks to condemn them to death would later be applied in Russia and elsewhere to millions of nameless beings who happened to stand in the way of one or another design for a new world order.
—Richard Pipes, The Russian Revolution, Chapter 17.
But, perhaps, I should after watching one of my Grand Nieces play the game this Evening.
That’s where I’ve been and why no posts have been written today, along with the fact that work has been busy as Hell [Summer is not my slow season].
I should be back at it, guns a-blazing, tomorrow. Apologies.
FYI: My niece’s team [I call her 'Kiddo', after Beatrice Kiddo in the Kill Bill movies] got trounced — and deserved to. She made no excuses. I’m very proud of her.
Because Jeff Goldstein has a great strategy that will put you in The Whitey House:
It’s all about the love, you see. Right, Jeb?
Which raises the question: why do you even want to represent a party whose base (along with most independents and not insubstantial number of Dems) is at odds with both you and the Obama Administration when it comes to all that caring you exhibit about the noble Other?…
We’re a sick lot, Jeb. We TEA Party conservatives and constitutionalists are an horrific throwback, an amalgam of haters that you can’t and shouldn’t stomach. My suggestion? Take on Hillary and Liz in the Dem primary. I’m sure there are a few things you disagree on, even if you do agree on amnesty, Common Core, and the great need to “compromise” for its own sake, at least putatively (Hillary doesn’t believe that at all; but she’d happily mirror your own willingness to keep moving government leftward slowly, then move quickly once she beats you for having the name Bush).
Do it, Jebby; start now. Hell, I’ll send you a few pesos to get you started, Amigo.
JOHN ELLIS BUSHEZ
— Su cabeza se parece a un pene!
Fifty years ago this Summer, Barry Goldwater delivered a masterful speech as he accepted the Republican Presidential Nomination.
I happened, by chance, to catch a broadcast of it yesterday on C-SPAN’s American History TV and I was struck by how, with a few changes, it is something that we need to hear today, as we struggle to Restore our Freedoms and Liberties in this Post-Constitutional America.
I have taken the liberty of changing the word ‘Republican’ to ‘conservative, because I believe the GOP has become the Party of collaborators, Quislings who have made a deal with the Totalitarian Devil. Where ‘Republican Party’ was mentioned, I have substituted the phrase ‘conservative cause’.
By ‘conservative’, I include Classical Liberals and those who prefer the term ‘Constitutionalists’, because those who go by one of those three labels share much in common, most importantly in my opinion, that we all reject Ideology. Further, if I had used the term ‘conservative/Classical Liberal/Constitutionalist, the flow and rhythm of Mr. Goldwater’s speech would have become erratic, like some Modern Jazz ‘masterpiece’.
I have also removed references to events of the time where they interfered with the philosophical message.
I hope you will find this edifying and be inspired…
Barry Goldwater’s 1964 Acceptance Speech
Revised for 2014 by Bob Belvedere
From this moment, united and determined, we will go forward together, dedicated to the ultimate and undeniable greatness of the whole man. Together we will win.
…My fellow [conservatives], our cause is too great for any man to feel worthy of it. …I promise you tonight that every fiber of my being is consecrated to our cause; that nothing shall be lacking from the struggle that can be brought to it by enthusiasm, by devotion, and plain hard work. In this world no person, no party can guarantee anything, but what we can do and what we shall do is to deserve victory, and victory will be ours.
The good Lord raised this mighty Republic to be a home for the brave and to flourish as the land of the free — not to stagnate in the swampland of collectivism, not to cringe before the bully of communism [and the bully of Mohammedism].
Now, my fellow Americans, the tide has been running against freedom. Our people have followed false prophets. We must, and we shall, return to proven ways — not because they are old, but because they are true. We must, and we shall, set the tide running again in the cause of freedom. And this [conservative cause], with its every action, every word, every breath, and every heartbeat, has but a single resolve, and that is freedom — freedom made orderly for this nation by our constitutional government; freedom under a government limited by laws of nature and of nature’s God; freedom — balanced so that liberty lacking order will not become the slavery of the prison cell; balanced so that liberty lacking order will not become the license of the mob and of the jungle.
Now, we Americans understand freedom. We have earned it, we have lived for it, and we have died for it. This Nation and its people are freedom’s model in a searching world. We can be freedom’s missionaries in a doubting world. But, ladies and gentlemen, first we must renew freedom’s mission in our own hearts and in our own homes.
During [six-plus] futile years, the administration which we shall replace has distorted and lost that faith. It has talked and talked and talked and talked the words of freedom. … Failures proclaim lost leadership, obscure purpose, weakening wills, and the risk of inciting our sworn enemies to new aggressions and to new excesses. Because of this administration we are tonight a world divided — we are a Nation becalmed. We have lost the brisk pace of diversity and the genius of individual creativity. We are plodding at a pace set by centralized planning, red tape, rules without responsibility, and regimentation without recourse.
Rather than useful jobs in our country, people have been offered bureaucratic “make work,” rather than moral leadership, they have been given bread and circuses, spectacles, and, yes, they have even been given scandals. Tonight there is violence in our streets, corruption in our highest offices, aimlessness among our youth, anxiety among our elders, and there is a virtual despair among the many who look beyond material success for the inner meaning of their lives. Where examples of morality should be set, the opposite is seen. Small men, seeking great wealth or power, have too often and too long turned even the highest levels of public service into mere personal opportunity.
Now, certainly, simple honesty is not too much to demand of men in government. We find it in [a few]. [Conservatives] demand it from everyone. They demand it from everyone no matter how exalted or protected his position might be. The growing menace in our country tonight, to personal safety, to life, to limb and property, in homes, in churches, on the playgrounds, and places of business, particularly in our great cities, is the mounting concern, or should be, of every thoughtful citizen in the United States.
Security from domestic violence, no less than from foreign aggression, is the most elementary and fundamental purpose of any government, and a government that cannot fulfill that purpose is one that cannot long command the loyalty of its citizens. History shows us — demonstrates that nothing — nothing prepares the way for tyranny more than the failure of public officials to keep the streets from bullies and marauders.
Now, we [conservatives] see all this as more, much more, than the rest: of mere political differences or mere political mistakes. We see this as the result of a fundamentally and absolutely wrong view of man, his nature and his destiny. Those who seek to live your lives for you, to take your liberties in return for relieving you of yours, those who elevate the state and downgrade the citizen must see ultimately a world in which earthly power can be substituted for divine will, and this Nation was founded upon the rejection of that notion and upon the acceptance of God as the author of freedom.
Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies. Absolute power does corrupt, and those who seek it must be suspect and must be opposed. Their mistaken course stems from false notions of equality, ladies and gentlemen. Equality, rightly understood, as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences. Wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism.
Fellow [conservatives], it is the cause of [conservatism] to resist concentrations of power, private or public, which enforce such conformity and inflict such despotism. It is the cause of [conservatism] to ensure that power remains in the hands of the people. And, so help us God, that is exactly what a [conservative] president will do with the help of a [conservative] Congress.
It is further the cause of [conservatism] to restore a clear understanding of the tyranny of man over man in the world at large. It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the illusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don’t rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression — and this is hogwash.
It is further the cause of [conservatism] to remind ourselves, and the world, that only the strong can remain free, that only the strong can keep the peace.
Now, I needn’t remind you, or my fellow Americans regardless of party, that [conservatives] have shouldered this hard responsibility and marched in this cause before. …
It was during those [conservative] years that the thrust of Communist imperialism was blunted. It was during those years of [conservative] leadership that this world moved closer, not to war, but closer to peace, than at any other time in the [seven] decades just passed.
And I needn’t remind you — but I will — that it’s been during Democratic years that our strength to deter war has stood still, and even gone into a planned decline. It has been during Democratic years that we have weakly stumbled into conflict, timidly refusing to draw our own lines against aggression, deceitfully refusing to tell even our people of our full participation, and tragically, letting our finest men die on battlefields (unmarked by purpose, unmarked by pride or the prospect of victory).
And I needn’t remind you, but I will; it has been during Democratic years that a billion persons were cast into Communist [or Mohammedin] captivity and their fate cynically sealed.
Today in our beloved country we have an administration which seems eager to deal with communism [and Mohammedism] in every coin known — from gold to wheat, from consulates to confidence, and even human freedom itself.
The [conservative] cause demands that we brand communism [and Mohammedism] as a principal disturber[s] of peace in the world today. Indeed, we should brand [them] as the only significant disturber[s] of the peace, and we must make clear that until [their] goals of conquest are absolutely renounced and [their] rejections with all nations tempered, communism[/Mohammedism] and the governments [they] now [control] are enemies of every man on earth who is or wants to be free.
We here in America can keep the peace only if we remain vigilant and only if we remain strong. Only if we keep our eyes open and keep our guard up can we prevent war. And I want to make this abundantly clear — I don’t intend to let peace or freedom be torn from our grasp because of lack of strength or lack of will — and that I promise you Americans.
I believe that we must look beyond the defense of freedom today to its extension tomorrow. I believe that the communism [and Mohammedism] which boasts it will bury us will, instead, give way to the forces of freedom. And I can see in the distant and yet recognizable future the outlines of a world worthy our dedication, our every risk, our every effort, our every sacrifice along the way. Yes, a world that will redeem the suffering of those who will be liberated from tyranny. …
It’s a truly inspiring goal for all free men to set for themselves during the [first] half of the [twenty-first] century. …
I know this freedom is not the fruit of every soil. I know that our own freedom was achieved through centuries, by unremitting efforts by brave and wise men. I know that the road to freedom is a long and a challenging road. I know also that some men may walk away from it, that some men resist challenge, accepting the false security of governmental paternalism.
And I pledge that the America I envision in the years ahead will extend its hand in health, in teaching and in cultivation, so that all new nations will be at least encouraged to go our way, so that they will not wander down the dark alleys of tyranny or to the dead-end streets of collectivism. My fellow [conservatives], we do no man a service by hiding freedom’s light under a bushel of mistaken humility.
I seek an American proud of its past, proud of its ways, proud of its dreams, and determined actively to proclaim them. But our example to the world must, like charity, begin at home.
In our vision of a good and decent future, free and peaceful, there must be room for deliberation of the energy and talent of the individual — otherwise our vision is blind at the outset.
We must assure a society here which, while never abandoning the needy or forsaking the helpless, nurtures incentives and opportunity for the creative and the productive. We must know the whole good is the product of many single contributions.
I cherish a day when our children once again will restore as heroes the sort of men and women who — unafraid and undaunted — pursue the truth, strive to cure disease, subdue and make fruitful our natural environment and produce the inventive engines of production, science, and technology.
This Nation, whose creative people have enhanced this entire span of history, should again thrive upon the greatness of all those things which we, as individual citizens, can and should do. During [conservative] years, this again will be a nation of men and women, of families proud of their role, jealous of their responsibilities, unlimited in their aspirations — a Nation where all who can will be self-reliant.
We [conservatives] see in our constitutional form of government the great framework which assures the orderly but dynamic fulfillment of the whole man, and we see the whole man as the great reason for instituting orderly government in the first place.
We see, in private property and in economy based upon and fostering private property, the one way to make government a durable ally of the whole man, rather than his determined enemy. We see in the sanctity of private property the only durable foundation for constitutional government in a free society. And beyond that, we see, in cherished diversity of ways, diversity of thoughts, of motives and accomplishments. We do not seek to lead anyone’s life for him — we seek only to secure his rights and to guarantee him opportunity to strive, with government performing only those needed and constitutionally sanctioned tasks which cannot otherwise be performed.
We [conservatives] seek a government that attends to its inherent responsibilities of maintaining a stable monetary and fiscal climate, encouraging a free and a competitive economy and enforcing law and order. Thus do we seek inventiveness, diversity, and creativity within a stable order, for we [conservatives] define government’s role where needed at many, many levels, preferably through the one closest to the people involved.
Our towns and our cities, then our counties, then our states, then our regional contacts — and only then, the national government. That, let me remind you, is the ladder of liberty, built by decentralized power. On it also we must have balance between the branches of government at every level.
Balance, diversity, creativity — these are the elements of [conservative] equation. [Conservatives] agree, [conservatives] agree heartily to disagree on many, many of their applications, but we have never disagreed on the basic fundamental issues of why you and I are [conservatives].
This is a [cause], this [conservative cause], a [cause] for free men, not for blind followers, and not for conformists.
Back in 1858 Abraham Lincoln said this of the Republican Party — and I quote him, because he probably could have said it during the last week or so: “It was composed of strained, discordant, and even hostile elements” in 1858. Yet all of these elements agreed on one paramount objective: To arrest the progress of slavery, and place it in the course of ultimate extinction.
Today, as then, but more urgently and more broadly than then, the task of preserving and enlarging freedom at home and safeguarding it from the forces of tyranny abroad is great enough to challenge all our resources and to require all our strength. Anyone who joins us in all sincerity, we welcome. Those who do not care for our cause, we don’t expect to enter our ranks in any case. And let our [conservatism], so focused and so dedicated, not be made fuzzy and futile by unthinking and stupid labels.
I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.
The beauty of the very system we [conservatives] are pledged to restore and revitalize, the beauty of this Federal system of ours is in its reconciliation of diversity with unity. We must not see malice in honest differences of opinion, and no matter how great, so long as they are not inconsistent with the pledges we have given to each other in and through our Constitution. Our [conservative] cause is not to level out the world or make its people conform in computer regimented sameness. Our [conservative] cause is to free our people and light the way for liberty throughout the world.
Ours is a very human cause for very humane goals.
This [conservative cause], its good people, and its unquestionable devotion to freedom, will not fulfill the purposes of this campaign which we launch here now until our cause has won the day, inspired the world, and shown the way to a tomorrow worthy of all our yesteryears.
I repeat, I accept your nomination with humbleness, with pride, and you and I are going to fight for the goodness of our land. Thank you.
What a man. What a Patriot. What an American.