Thursday, February 12, 2009

National Guard officially claims to be "the militia" from colonial times

Sure, this is old news, but right now this seems to be a good pot to stir.

I sent this fax to several gun rights groups and look forward to hearing from them:

William E. Miller
(address)
(contact info)

February 12, 2009
RE: National Guard officially
claims to be “the militia”


To Whom It May Concern:

The following text (with my added emphasis) was retrieved on 2/12/2009 from the official National Guard Web site at http://www.ngb.army.mil/About/default.aspx :

About the National Guard

The National Guard, the oldest component of the Armed Forces of the United States and one of the nation's longest-enduring institutions, celebrated its 370th birthday on December 13, 2006. The National Guard traces its history back to the earliest English colonies in North America. Responsible for their own defense, the colonists drew on English military tradition and organized their able-bodied male citizens into militias.

The colonial militias protected their fellow citizens from Indian attack, foreign invaders, and later helped to win the Revolutionary War.

Following independence, the authors of the Constitution empowered Congress to "provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia." However, recognizing the militia's state role, the Founding Fathers reserved the appointment of officers and training of the militia to the states. Today's National Guard still remains a dual state-Federal force.

Throughout the 19th century the size of the Regular Army was small, and the militia provided the bulk of the troops during the Mexican War, the early months of the Civil War, and the Spanish-American War. In 1903, important national defense legislation increased the role of the National Guard (as the militia was now called) as a Reserve force for the U.S. Army. In World War I, which the U.S. entered in 1917, the National Guard made up 40% of the U.S. combat divisions in France; in World War II, National Guard units were among the first to deploy overseas and the first to fight.

Following World War II, National Guard aviation units, some of them dating back to World War I, became the Air National Guard, the nation's newest Reserve component. The Guard stood on the frontiers of freedom during the Cold War, sending soldiers and airmen to fight in Korea and to reinforce NATO during the Berlin crisis of 1961-1962. During the Vietnam war, almost 23,000 Army and Air Guardsmen were called up for a year of active duty; some 8,700 were deployed to Vietnam. Over 75,000 Army and Air Guardsmen were called upon to help bring a swift end to Desert Storm in 1991.

Since that time, the National Guard has seen the nature of its Federal mission change, with more frequent call ups in response to crises in Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, and the skies over Iraq. Most recently, following the attacks of September 11, 2001, more than 50,000 Guardmembers were called up by both their States and the Federal government to provide security at home and combat terrorism abroad. In the largest and swiftest response to a domestic disaster in history, the Guard deployed more than 50,000 troops in support of the Gulf States following Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Today, tens of thousands of Guardmembers are serving in harm's way in Iraq and Afghanistan, as the National Guard continues its historic dual mission, providing to the states units trained and equipped to protect life and property, while providing to the nation units trained, equipped and ready to defend the United States and its interests, all over the globe.

On that same page, one of the elements in their time line is entitled, “1636 The First Muster”.

My understanding has always been that the National Guard is not “the militia”.

If they are not, then strong and sustained action must be undertaken to compel the National Guard to remove this false, misleading, and even detrimental information from their Web site.

Such misinformation is even more detrimental as the people now face a President and a Congressional majority who are strongly and actively opposed to their civil rights of self-defense and gun ownership.

I look forward to your response. Thank you for your attention and consideration.

Best regards,
(signed)
William E. Miller

# # #

I hope I hear more than crickets...

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

The US Navy Hymn: Something to think about in these troubled times...

I've never been in the Navy, nor have I served in the military at all.

But this song (and military sacrifice in general) has always touched me VERY deeply.

Part of it is the overwhelming helplessness I feel at even the thought of ever being in trouble at sea.

Plus, being in trouble at sea is an archetype of one's being a lost soul, which of course we all are...

When I was a kid, a Terre Haute (Indiana) TV station I could pick up (from my boyhood home a few miles southwest of Indianapolis) in the wee hours played a Navy video with this song as one of the sign-off videos in their rotation.

It touched me so much that I wrote to the station to thank them for it - and I got a letter back from the program manager thanking me.

First, please look at the various versions of the lyrics and the back story of the Navy Hymn here: http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq53-1.htm.

After you read that, listen to this rendition of it:


This is one of those memories that one forgets until something triggers it...

In closing, let me say a heartfelt thanks to all of you veterans for your service to our country.

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Let's kill the so-called "stimulus package": A bridge to no hope!

Maybe Barack Obama isn't a stealth Muslim after all...

If he were, how could he possibly stand all that pork he and his cronies are peddling under the guise of an economic stimulus package??

Perhaps Obama's pork-laden plan should be called the "Bridge to No Hope".

Let's hope Congress slaughters this pig - before it takes a hunk out of our hides - quick and clean - like this:




Thursday, February 5, 2009

What's worse than a monster? Not talking to a monster? No, ignoring a monster.

Apparently no friend of the Jews or of Israel, Samantha Power has been brought into the Obama administration to be Senior Director for Multilateral Affairs at the National Security Council.

Bearing in mind that she once called Hillary Clinton "a monster", one next may wonder how she would (relatively speaking) classify the leaders of the major rogue nations and terror sponsors around the world.

Now let's see... what's worse than a monster...? Oh, right! Not talking to a monster!

In her June 2008 Time magazine piece, "Engage your enemies", Power wrote that,
"John McCain and President Bush have double-teamed Barack Obama (whom I formerly advised), attacking his willingness to talk to adversaries like Cuba, Iran and Syria."
Did she say "adversaries"? From their own actions and statements, I'd call them a little worse than that!

Regarding British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's 1938 dealings with Hitler, Power continues,
"He was unprepared, unsophisticated and ultimately unsuccessful in preventing World War II."
And, in what could be a premonition about Team Obama, she writes,
"Chamberlain's desire to be the man to save Europe blinded him to the impossibility of brokering 'peace in our time' with a man of Hitler's savage aims. He assured himself that Hitler could be trusted."
"Impossibility"? "Savage aims"? That sounds strangely familiar today.

Perhaps Chamberlain should have checked with his intelligence officials or simply stopped by a major library before trotting off to the belly of the beast. Well before 1938, Hitler's aims should have been crystal clear to anyone in power.

They had only to read an interview Hitler gave in 1922 (1922!) to journalist Josef Hell to learn his true aims.
Hitler's Conversation with Josef Hell, 1922
When Hell asked Hitler what he intended doing if he ever had full freedom of action against the Jews, his response was:
"If I am ever really in power, the destruction of the Jews will be my first and most important job. As soon as I have power, I shall have gallows after gallows erected, for example, in Munich on the Marienplatz-as many of them as traffic allows. Then the Jews will be hanged one after another, and they will stay hanging until they stink. They will stay hanging as long as hygienically possible. As soon as they are untied, then the next group will follow and that will continue until the last Jew in Munich is exterminated. Exactly the same procedure will be followed in other cities until Germany is cleansed of the last Jew!"

- (quoted in John Toland, Adolf Hitler. London: Book Club Associates, 1977, p.116)
Hitler spoke these words a full sixteen years before Chamberlain went to see him in Germany - a time when Hitler had already been in power (with dictatorial powers, no less) for five years!

When you look at a Holocaust time line, it's very interesting and disturbing to note what had taken place in Germany just during the five years before Chamberlain first went to Germany in September. A few things stand out:
  • January 30, 1933 - Hitler named Chancellor of Germany by President Hindenburg
  • March 22, 1933 - Nazis open Dachau concentration camp near Munich, to be followed by Buchenwald near Wiemar in central Germany, Sachsenhausen near Berlin in northern Germany, and Ravensbrück for women
  • Sept 29, 1933 - Nazis prohibit Jews from owning land
  • Oct 4, 1933 - Jews are prohibited from being newspaper editors
  • May 17, 1934 - Jews not allowed national health insurance
  • July 22, 1934 - Jews are prohibited from getting legal qualifications
  • Aug 2, 1934 - German President von Hindenburg dies. Hitler becomes Führer
  • Sept 15, 1935 - Nuremberg Race Laws against Jews decreed
  • February 10, 1936 - The German Gestapo is placed above the law
  • March 1936 - SS Death's head division is established to guard concentration camps
  • Nov 8, 1937 - "Eternal Jew" traveling exhibition opens in Munich
  • July 25, 1938 - Jewish doctors prohibited by law from practicing medicine
  • Sept 27, 1938 - Jews are prohibited from all legal practices
Fast forward to the present. In the less than five years since Mahmoud Ahmadinejad became President of Iran, some very interesting things have been said and done, too:
  • June 24, 2005 - Ahmadinejad "elected" President of Iran
  • October 26, 2005 - At a conference in Tehran called "The World without Zionism," Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad calls Israel a "disgraceful blot" that should be "wiped off the map." While many Western governments, including those of the U.S., Canada and Britain, were quick to denounce Ahmadinejad's words, most Arab leaders were silent. Ahmadinejad would later stand by his comments, calling the criticism from the West "invalid."
  • December 8, 2005 - Ahmadinejad says Israel should move to Europe
  • December 12, 2005 - Ahmadinejad says Israel will be "wiped out"
  • December 14, 2005 - Ahmadinejad provokes more international controversy by calling the Holocaust a "myth"
  • January 2006 - Iran breaks IAEA seals at its Natanz nuclear research facility
  • April 14, 2006 - During a conference in support of Palestinians, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad calls Israel a "rotten, dried tree" that is "heading toward annihilation"
  • February 2006 - Iran's best-selling newspaper, Hamshahri, launches the International Holocaust Cartoons Contest
  • November 2006 - A Moroccan is announced as the winner of Iran's Holocaust cartoon contest
  • December 2006 - Iran hosts a controversial conference on the Holocaust; delegates include Holocaust deniers such as former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke and French professor Robert Faurisson; Nazi sympathizers; and anti-Zionists such as British Rabbi Aharon Cohen. At the conference, Ahmadinejad says, "they have created a myth in the name of Holocaust and consider it to be above God, religion and the prophets"
  • February 2007 - IAEA says Iran failed to meet a deadline to suspend uranium enrichment, exposing Tehran to possible new sanctions
  • April 2007 - President Ahmadinejad says Iran can produce nuclear fuel on an industrial scale. IAEA says Iran has begun making nuclear fuel in its underground uranium enrichment plant. It also says that Iran has started up more than 1,300 centrifuge machines
  • May 2007 - IAEA says Iran could develop a nuclear weapon in three to eight years if it so chooses
  • October 29, 2007 - Iranian Revolutionary Guard general threatens suicide attacks in Persian Gulf
  • October 31, 2007 - Ahmadinejad says millions of Iranians ready for "martyrdom"
  • April 8, 2008 - Iran says it has begun installing 6,000 new centrifuges at its main nuclear plant in Natanz
  • July 2008 - Iran test-fires a new version of the Shahab-3, a long-range missile it says is capable of hitting targets in Israel
  • January 27, 2009 - Iran's top military commander, Maj. Gen. Hasan Firuzabadi, spoke openly in support of Ahmadinejad's reelection
Some write him off as a puppet of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. That may be true for now, but he has strong influence and support among the the military, the militias, and the Quds Force, which he reportedly helped found.

So even if he is not the supreme leader now, who's to say whether he or his supporters may stage a coup if they sense that the regime is in danger or weakened?

Even if an Ahmadinejad coup does not take place, and even if he is not reelected, the threat is no less severe. Consider these excerpts from the wide-ranging publication from the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs:
"Even before Ahmadinejad himself spoke about wiping Israel off the map, the Iranian regime used such expressions but did not leave any doubt about what stood behind this phraseology. By juxtaposing its call for Israel’s elimination with a Shahab 3 missile during a military parade, the Iranian regime itself has clarified that these expressions about Israel’s future do not describe a long-term historical process, in which the Israeli state collapses by itself like the former Soviet Union, but rather the actual physical destruction of Israel as a result of a military strike".
"Khamenei has made statements about Israel similar to Ahmadinejad. In a Friday sermon on December 15, 2000 (shown on Iranian TV), he declared: 'Iran’s position, which was first expressed by the Imam [Khomeini] and stated several times by those responsible, is that the cancerous tumor called Israel must be uprooted from the region.'"
"(General) Yahya Rahim Safavi, 55, one of the “hard-core” founders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and its former commander, is now senior advisor to Supreme Leader Khamenei. In a speech in February 2008, he said: 'With God’s help the time has come for the Zionist regime’s death sentence.'”
Yes, all this seems strangely familiar...

# # #

Ahmadinejad time line sources:

Friday, January 30, 2009

Obama's top 3 priorities?

Please tell me I'm wrong, but I think Barack Hussein Obama's
top three priorities are:

  1. get reelected
  2. create a positive legacy
  3. maximize post-Presidential speaking fees
Does this seem cynical?

If so, chew on this: Why do some of the long-shots (Dennis Kookcinich,
Christopher "I'll show 'em, Dad!" Dodd, etc.) run for President?

  • to make a difference?
  • because they feel they can win?
  • to get their issues on the agenda?
Or is it really just to drive up their speaking fees?

Sunday, January 25, 2009

Stopping Iran from getting uranium

The Times Online recently reported that Iran is running short of the yellow cake uranium it needs to produce a nuclear weapon.

I'm certainly no expert on nuclear non-proliferation, but I think it's a no-brainer that (if they haven't already) civilized countries should quickly look into forming a consortium that will promise to widely beat any price that rogue nations might offer for their uranium ore.

Sure, this will lead to lots of collusion and price gouging, but so what?!

If it prevents the bad guys from getting the hot stuff, the better off we'll all be.

Naturally, richer countries (like US) will shoulder a bigger burden in this enterprise, but don't we always?

But the more we pay, the more we get, and that means less is left for our rivals and enemies - even the undeclared ones!

Would somebody with access please fax this idea to Hillary?

I say fax, not e-mail, because a tangible piece of paper is a little harder to ignore, and I suggest sending it to Hillary because of her position, because she needs an idea like this, and she is just the right person to present it to His Holiness O!bama!

Thursday, January 8, 2009