BluegrassBulletin.com

Scrambling The Eggs In Syria? Obama Threatens To Bomb

The weekend saw a flurry of articles about the chemical weapon attacks in Syria.  First there was the news itself and all the horrific photos of dead children.  Then there was the expression of outrage by the USA and British governments.  Then came news that the US really doesn't own the high ground here.

Not only are there serious questions swirling around the attacks in Behghazzi which suggest that the outpost there was connected with a potentially illegal arms trade with the Syrian rebels, but the people being supplied the arms might have been Al Qaeda.

Then came the declassified news that Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons attack in the 1980's might have been carried out with help from the USA followed by a cover up of how much we knew about the attacks.

Then we were told that Obama was scouting out targets to bomb with cruise missiles, which of course sent the world on high alert and caused the Russians to weigh in.  Oddly enough the Russians, though not to be trusted, did provide at least some food for giving a missile launch a second thought.

Al Qaeda stokes the ire of Muslims angry at what they see as the defilement of their lands by the oil-seeking, infidel West

The West is drawing up a list of targets for Cruise missile strikes aimed at crippling the Assad regime.

How will Syria’s main allies, Russia and Iran, respond? Putin’s spokesmen deplore the poison gas attack, but suggest it might have been the work of the Syrian rebels, which include Al Qaeda elements. They point out that Assad’s military is winning and doesn’t need to resort to using illegal weapons, and suggest that only the rebels stood to gain from the international anger aroused by such an attack. [Gateway Pundit]

Considering that the targets might very well include any where evidence of the US supplying arms to Al Qaeda might be located, the decision to bomb could have less to do with unseating the Assad regime and more to do with scrambling the eggs to hide whatever it was that we were doing to supply the really bad guys who might themselves have been the source of the chemical attacks.

Gotta keep an open mind here folks.

Al Qaeda stokes the ire of Muslims angry at what they see as the defilement of their lands by the oil-seeking, infidel West. - See more at: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/#sthash.vSr6B6ic.dpuf

Where Is Your Humanity?

Last year I said that our duty as humans compels us to step in and protect our fellow man when we see him or her being assaulted.  I equated our situation, watching atrocities in Syria, with seeing a man beat his wife on the street. "It's none of our business" is a heartless, and cowardly dodge.  Now look what has happened.

Thousands of people have been brutally murdered.  Allegations accompanied by videos of children foaming at the mouth as they die a tortured death from chemical weapons and bombs being dropped on innocent citizens are images we cannot ignore.

Our national response has been to secretly arm opposition forces, which turned out to be Al Qaeda, and thus we have armed our own enemies.

Yes, Syria is a sovereign nation and no the torture of the poor people living there can only be tangentially connected with our own national security.  But where is your humanity, those who say we should not become involved?

It's not a "new world order" mentality to acknowledge that every human being is our brother or our sister, it is the oldest world order in history.

May God forgive us for standing by as thousands of humans are being tortured, starved, murdered, raped, and poisoned.  How can we do this unto others when we would not want this done to us?

Interesting Facts About Youthful Founding Fathers

At Slate.com there appears an interesting article about the youthfulness of our founding fathers.

“We tend to see them as much older than they were,” said John Adams biographer David McCullough in a 2005 speech. “Because we’re seeing them in portraits by Gilbert Stuart and others when they were truly the Founding Fathers—when they were president or chief justice of the Supreme Court and their hair, if it hadn’t turned white, was powdered white. We see the awkward teeth. We see the elder statesmen. At the time of the revolution, they were all young. It was a young man’s–young woman’s cause.”

So how old were they on July 4, 1776?  You might be a bit surprised. (An asterisk signifies that the individual was a signer of the Declaration of Independence. A double asterisk means that there is evidence that the person’s age is not precise, or only a birth year is known.)

• Andrew Jackson, 9
• (Major) Thomas Young, 12
• Deborah Sampson, 15
• James Armistead, 15
• Joseph Plumb Martin, 15
• Peter Salem, 16**
• Peggy Shippen, 16
• Marquis de Lafayette, 18
• James Monroe, 18
• Henry Lee III, 20
• Gilbert Stuart, 20
• John Trumbull, 20
• Aaron Burr, 20
• John Marshall, 20
• Nathan Hale, 21
• Banastre Tarleton, 21
• Alexander Hamilton, 21**
• Benjamin Tallmadge, 22
• Robert Townsend, 22
• George Rodgers Clark, 23
• David Humphreys, 23
• Gouveneur Morris, 24
• Betsy Ross, 24
• William Washington, 24
• James Madison, 25
• Henry Knox, 25
• John Andre, 26
• Thomas Lynch, Jr., 26*
• Edward Rutledge, 26*
• Abraham Woodhull, 26
• Isaiah Thomas, 27
• George Walton, 27* **
• John Paul Jones, 28
• Bernardo de Galvez, 29
• Thomas Heyward, Jr., 29*
• Robert R. Livingston, 29
• John Jay, 30
• Tadeusz Kosciuszko, 30
• Benjamin Rush, 30*
• Abigail Adams, 31
• John Barry, 31
• Elbridge Gerry, 31*
• Casimir Pulaski, 31
• Anthony Wayne, 31
• Joseph Brant, 33
• Nathanael Greene, 33
• Thomas Jefferson, 33*
• Thomas Stone, 33* **
• William Hooper, 34*
• Arthur Middleton, 34*
• James Wilson, 34* **
• Benedict Arnold, 35
• Samuel Chase, 35*
• Thomas Knowlton, 35
• William Paca, 35*
• John Penn, 35*
• Hercules Mulligan, 36
• Andrew Pickens, 36
• Haym Solomon, 36
• John Sullivan, 36
• George Clymer, 37*
• Charles Cornwallis, 37
• Thomas Nelson, Jr., 37*
• Ethan Allen, 38
• Charles Carroll, 38*
• King George III, 38
• Francis Hopkinson, 38*
• Carter Braxton, 39*
• George Clinton, 39
• John Hancock, 39*
• Daniel Morgan, 39
• Thomas Paine, 39
• Patrick Henry, 40
• Enoch Poor, 40
• John Adams, 40*
• Daniel Boone, 41
• William Floyd, 41^
• Button Gwinnett, 41* **
• John Lamb, 41**
• Francis Lightfoot Lee, 41*
• Paul Revere, 41
• Thomas Sumter, 41
• Robert Morris, 42*
• Thomas McKean, 42*
• George Read, 42*
• John Dickinson, 43
• John Glover, 43
• Benjamin Edes, 43
• Samuel Huntington, 44*
• Richard Henry Lee, 44*
• Charles Lee, 44
• Francis Marion, 44
• Lord North, 44
• George Washington, 44
• Joseph Galloway, 45
• Robert Treat Paine, 45*
• Friedrich von Steuben, 45
• Richard Stockton, 45*
• Martha Washington, 45
• William Williams, 45*
• (Dr.) Thomas Young, 45
• Josiah Bartlett, 46*
• Henry Clinton, 46
• Joseph Hewes, 46*
• William Howe, 46
• George Ross, 46*
• William Whipple, 46*
• Caesar Rodney, 47*
• John Stark, 47
• Mercy Otis Warren, 47
• William Ellery, 48*
• Horatio Gates, 48
• Artemas Ward, 48
• Oliver Wolcott, 49*
• Abraham Clark, 50*
• Benjamin Harrison, 50*
• Lewis Morris, 50*
• Lord Stirling, 50
• George Wythe, 50* **
• Guy Carleton, 51
• John Morton, 51* **
• Comte de Rochambeau, 51
• Lyman Hall, 52*
• James Rivington, 52**
• Samuel Adams, 53*
• Comte de Grasse, 53
• John Witherspoon, 53*
• John Burgoyne, 54
• Johann de Kalb, 55
• Roger Sherman, 55*
• Thomas Gage, 56
• James Smith, 56*
• Israel Putnam, 58
• Comte de Vergennes, 58
• Lewis Nicola, 59**
• George Germain, 60
• Philip Livingston, 60*
• George Taylor, 60* **
• Matthew Thornton, 62*
• Francis Lewis, 63*
• John Hart, 65* **
• Stephen Hopkins, 69*
• Benjamin Franklin, 70*
• Samuel Whittemore, 81

How Big Industry Conspired With The Goverenment To Destroy Hemp

I cannot vouch for the accuracy of this report, but it is worth a read.  If true, it shows once again how the government is really just the enforcement arm of many big industries.

Here's a taste:

In 1913, Henry Ford opened his famous automobile assembly line to start producing the Model-T.  In the 30′s, Ford opened a plant in Michigan where they successfully experimented with biomass fuel conversion, proving that hemp could be used as an alternative to fossil fuels. They extracted methanol, charcoal fuel, tar, pitch ethyl-acetate, and creosote all from hemp. What this meant for Ford was that they could now not only produce their own raw materials to make cars, but they could make the gas to run them as well. The discovery was horrible news for a man by the name of Andrew Melon, who owned much of the Gulf Oil Corporation; a company who had just recently opened their first drive through gas station.

Andrew Mellon was the Secretary of the Treasury under President Herbert Hoover, and owner of the 6th largest bank at the time, Mellon Bank. His bank was the primary financial support of a petrochemical company by the name of DuPont. DuPont was developing and patenting many different forms of synthetics from fossil fuels including the synthetic rubber, plastic, rayon, and paint that GM used on their cars. However, Mellon Bank was most heavily invested in DuPonts sulfer-based process of turning wood fiber into usable paper.

This investment began to look like a poor choice for Mellon in 1916 when U.S. Department of Agriculture chief scientists created paper from hemp pulp, and concluded that paper from hemp was, “favorable in comparison with those made with wood pulp.” The paper that is produced by hemp fibers did not yellow over time, unlike the chemical-drenched paper that was being produced at the time. In addition, an acre of hemp produces more paper than an acre of regular trees.  Strangely enough, the actual production of hemp fiber in the U.S. continued to decline until 1933 to around 500 tons per year.

This is no coincidence. In the 1930’s a man by the name of William Randolph Hearst, invested heavily in thousands of acres in timberland to make wood pulp for most of the newspaper industry. He was the owner of a large newspaper company that was read by more than 20 million U.S. citizens in 18 key cities, and arguably one of the most powerful men in American history. Since Hearst didn’t want any competition from the high-quality hemp paper, he had to do something. He soon teamed up with DuPont, who was providing Hearst with the chemicals he used to preserve his papers at the time. Together they would take hemp completely off the market.

The DuPont Corporation was persistently lobbying in Washington DC, while Hearst began a racist smear campaign in his newspapers. A quote from one of Hearst’s papers, “Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men’s shadows, and look at a white woman twice.” Hearst’s newspaper was the fuel to the fire for the prohibition of marijuana. He painted cannabis as an extremely dangerous drug in his “Yellow Journalism“, and convinced millions of Americans (and even congressmen) that the harmless plant is in fact, evil. Films like ‘Reefer Madness’ had the public believing that cannabis was responsible for everything from car accidents to death.

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL STORY

Remembering D-Day: My Interview With WWII Hero Bob Williams

I was fortunate to have had the chance to sit down and interview Bob Williams a few years ago for my radio program about his experiences on D-Day when he jumped as a paratrooper behind enemy lines into the midst of a hornets nest to save Europe from Hitler's flame.  Of course Bob went back and jumped again on the 50th anniversary making history once again.

If you have time sit back and listen.  CLICK HERE (my how young I look)

Obama: Strange Love Of An Iron Curtain

When I was a boy in school we stood and recited the Pledge of Allegiance everyday.  We prayed the Lord's Prayer.  Our fathers were still being celebrated as the heroes who saved Europe from Hitler's flame.  Our reading materials included a little newspaper called "The Weekly Reader."

America was locked in a very cold war with the Soviet Union.  We read about the horrid conditions "behind the iron curtain" where people were gathering in small groups to listen to "Radio Free Europe" a Congressional sanctioned broadcast providing news an information to countries where the free flow of information was banned.

We were told that children in those countries were being encouraged to turn in their parents if they knew of such small groups listening to these broadcasts.  We were told that people in those nations lived in fear of their government.  The world in which I grew up included images of families being rounded up and never heard from again.  The entire notion of free speech had been erased from their world.  My mind was imprinted very early to fight against anything that resembled the slightest restriction on freedom.

I'd like to encourage you to read an article written by Tim Carney for the Washington Examiner.  Hear these words:

Benghazi. The IRS targeting the Tea Party. Feds snooping on the Associated Press. These dizzying controversies around the Obama administration all carry the same lesson:

Watch what you say.

On Benghazi, set aside for a moment the dust-ups over State Department officials changing talking points, White House officials misleading the media, and congressional Republicans misrepresenting administration emails. Go back to what the administration was saying just after the deadly Sept. 11, 2012, attacks on the U.S. diplomatic facility.

Many administration officials -- although they may have known better -- blamed the attack, and thus the death of four Americans, on a bad YouTube video called "The Innocence of the Muslims."

Protests outside the U.S. Embassy in Egypt did use the video as a pretext, and White House spokesman Jay Carney responded by calling the video "reprehensible and disgusting." Obama publicly attacked the filmmaker as "sort of a shadowy character who made an extremely offensive video. ..."

Later that month, federal officials arrested this "shadowy character" for probation violations related to making the video.

From the administration falsely blaming the video for Benghazi, to the White House's repeated denunciations, to the federal arrest, the message is clear: Watch what you say.

On the IRS debacle, the speech being policed isn't even offensive -- unless you find it abhorrent to criticize big government or President Obama.

The queries the IRS rained on Tea Party groups in 2010 were aimed at discerning just how political these groups were. What books will your book clubs be discussing? Tell us about your donors -- will any of them run for office?

While targeting Tea Party groups was clearly inappropriate, some of the IRS' questions were actually in keeping with federal law, which restricts 501(c)(4) groups' freedom to oppose candidates for office. This is problematic in itself because it puts the IRS in the business of telling Americans, "Watch what you say about politicians."

Finally, the administration secretly tracked the phone calls of the Associated Press to root out who leaked the report of a drone strike. Then the CIA told AP to hold off on the story so that Obama could announce it first.

This has a chilling affect on journalists. But it's also the latest salvo in the Obama administration's war on whistleblowers. Liberal writer Jane Mayer wrote in 2011 that Obama has used "the Espionage Act to press criminal charges in five alleged instances of national-security leaks -- more such prosecutions than have occurred in all previous administrations combined."

The three scandals of the past two weeks differ in their severity and in the White House's level of culpability. But they all have the same message: "My fellow Americans, watch what you say."

I'll let the elected officials battle it out over how to control health care costs for a Government apparently committed to being the nanny for everyone.  I'll let the electoral process decide whether the best way to cure deficit spending is to cut taxes or raise them.  I trust the outcome of elections to the extent that bad results can be fixed in two or four years.  But when it comes to chilling my rights, and your rights to speak freely, think freely, share freely, assemble freely and to plot and plan legitimate ways to bring about the kind of changes we and those who agree with us would like to see in America, I will never entrust that battle to anybody else.

I am a lawyer.  I have taken an oath to defend the Constitution.  I take that vow very, very seriously.  And I have never shied away from a fight in defense of free speech.

Tim Carney is right.  Obama has shown more clearly in the past few weeks than in the past four year combined that his vision for America resembles much of what I was taught to hate about the Soviet Union.

It now appears very clear that he is determined to lower something which resembles an iron curtain over America, engender fear among people, put an end to small groups of freedom loving people who gather in the name of Liberty and to squelch free speech in all quarters.

For those of you who still remember the lessons of your youth, this time in our history should send a chill up your spine.  The kind of chill that makes you stand up and fight.

***CALL TO ACTION*** It's Boston Again

I am asking everyone who reads this post to please forward it, send it, email it, copy it, embed it and use it to tell as many people as you can what has just happened in Boston.  Forget opinions and conspiracy theories, due to modern technology you can trust your own eyes.  Watch this shocking video. Then answer this call to action by sharing this with everyone you know.

 

 

If you watched the above video what you have just seen is people being ripped from their homes at gunpoint.  You saw military uniforms, fully automatic weapons and the full fire power of an organized government trained on ordinary citizens as their homes are entered and searched (likely without a warrant).

What you saw with your own eys is exactly the kind of force against which our founders fought and the kind of abuses of personal liberty that they sought to prevent with the protections they embedded in the Bill of Rights, specifically the Second Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the Ninth and the Tenth Amendments.

We do not need to be told by commentators what this video shows.  This could just as easily have been a drill for Martial Law.  It just as easily could have been any type of enforcement action.  But what it is does not need explanation, just context.

This is a video, shot by a citizen, during the manhunt in Boston.  You can see it with your own eyes, thanks to modern technology and the Internet.

Now, for additional context.  This raid, caught on tape, came as the Manchin/Toomey amendment was about to receive a vote in the Senate.  It came within a year of an effort by the supporters of Barack Obama, Diane Feinstein, Joe Biden and many others to outlaw certain firearms, certain magazine capacities and to create a record keeping system which the National Institute of Justice said could only work if there was a national gun registry AND mandatory buy-backs of guns.

It came within a year of the worst shortage of ammunition available to ordinary citizens in the last 50 years.  And despite the arguments from the left that our founders could never have envisioned 30 round magazines and AR-15's, Senator Frank Lautenberg took the opportunity after Boston to call for background checks for the purchase of BLACK POWDER, the exact same propellant used by our founders in their muskets!

See what your eyes tell you.  Read the Second and Fourth Amendments. And then remember the words of Patrick Henry:

"The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston!"

It's Boston, again.

25-30 People With One Limb Missing

I won't re-publish the horrific photos from Boston, but one shows a man in a wheel chair being rushed away with nothing below his knee but a bloody bone and some tattered flesh.  Reports are that 25 - 30 people lost at least one leg, or ankle, or both.  What kind of brutal mind does this?  And what will come next?

Law enforcement is following leads, searched at least one apartment, is maybe holding one man in custody and will likely turn over as many stones as possible looking for clues.  In the end we all know it will be a madman who did this.

He might have become crazed on drugs.  He might have been crazed and then drugged.  He might have gone crazy with a religious zeal that twisted his mind into thinking that doing the devil's work was serving God.

In moments like these others who serve the devil's agenda will come forth, compounding the problem.  There will be calls for less liberty, there will be calls for spreading guilt to innocent people and there will be actions taken which in the end make us less safe, less able to defend ourselves against evil.

I was at the Jefferson Memorial this weekend.  Inside the base of the dome is this prominent inscription:

"I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

To inform those who have not studied the life and mind of Jefferson there is also this on one of the walls:

"God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever. Commerce between master and slave is despotism. Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free. Establish a law for educating the common people. This it is the business of the state and on a general plan."

The belief in God and that He is the source of our liberty was at the core of the men like Jefferson who formed this nation out of a world where these concepts did not exist except in theory.

Events like the one in Boston could result in any number of changes to the way we think, but I would hope that it would make us think hard about how little we do to educate people about the role of God in our lives and about our duty to preserve God's gift of liberty in tough times, in tough battles and in the face of evil.

Tyranny over the mind is worked when you lose sight of your principles and accept what you are being told without freely thinking for yourself.

Now is the time for all of us to think clearly, independently and to seek more of God's input than the input of other men. 

After all, tyranny is man made, liberty is a gift from God.

KKK Rally In Memphis Highlights Lingering Tension

The KKK held a rally at the Courthouse in Memphis Saturday to protest the decision of city council to re-name a city park.  "Nathan Bedford Forrest" park was to be re-named "Health Sciences Park" and the Klan opposed the change claiming that the city was erasing "white history."

But one writer who clearly stated that he is not a fan of the Klan, gave another view of what was going on, and suggested that maybe the Klan had a point after all.

I have cause to travel in the South pretty frequently these days and some of the cultural tug of war going on there is worth a look. I’ve yet to meet anyone who wants to bring back slavery or promote any sort of white supremacy, but I do talk to more than a few folks who harbor some strong, lingering feelings about The War of Northern Aggression. And some of them clearly don’t like the idea of the government doing things like this. It’s not that they agree letter and verse with everything that Jefferson Davis or Forrest believed in, but they also consider them important, historic figures who shouldn’t simply be whitewashed from the pages of history just because society has evolved. [HotAir]

Okay, history is history, but despite the need to preserve history what is being said as an undertone to the above comment is part of the narrative emanating from some parts of the TEA party movement.

You see, when people rally against government regulation, for smaller government and for more individual liberty some of that sentiment is born out of the old "war of northern aggression" mind set.

No, the TEA party is not a wing of the KKK or vice versa, but one thing is clear.  When people are given the freedom to speak their minds, what you might find lurking inside their brains are thoughts which have never evolved beyond some very dangerous ideas from the past.

Should we erase history, scrub any reference to our racist past or try to sanitize the world so cleanly that there is nothing left from which to learn?  Of course not, otherwise, what might appear as a new idea could take hold among people not properly inoculated against an evil disease from the past.

Is The Ron Paul Revolution Winning Over The GOP?

Ron Paul left Congress last year but he didn't leave a void.  POLITICO is saying that Justin Amash might be the new Ron Paul in the people's house.  POLITICO also names Kentucky's Thomas Massie and Rand Paul, Raul Labrador, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee as part of the movement working to change the face of the GOP.

Amash says in the piece that

"This next generation of liberty Republicans...we’re interested in making sure that … we re-brand the Republican Party as a place that is welcoming to people from across the political spectrum and follows the founding principles of our country: limited government, economic freedom, individual liberty.”

Please read that again.  Amash wants to re-brand the Republican Party as a place that is welcoming to people from "across the political spectrum".  He doesn't say that those people need to embrace the Republican Platform, hold dear republican principles, honor the tradition and foundation of the Republican Party or become republicans.  Rather he says that he wants the party to be more welcoming to people from "across the political spectrum" and that IN ADDITION his group wants the GOP to follow our founding principles.

Now I'm all on board with following our founding principles, but what Amash seems to forget in this kum ba yah comment is that we cannot let people from all across the "political" spectrum take over the Republican Party.

At one end of that spectrum are the skin-heads and neo-Nazis.  At the other are atheists and those who favor partial birth abortion and have a socialist agenda.  Now what might escape young Justin is the fact that in reality both ends of that spectrum came together once before in Germany in the 1930's.  Why would we want to welcome any of that into the GOP?

Sometimes this garbage talk from the Ron Paul kids sounds good as the bong water bubbles but there are better reasons why the GOP needs to stand on its own and not become the flop house youth hostel for every vagabond from anywhere along the political spectrum.

A lot of bad things were done in the name of "limited government" and "individual liberty" over the years.  Not that I am advocating for more government or less liberty, but don't forget that we fought a civil war in this country to guarantee liberty to African Americans as human beings against claims that telling slave owners what to do was "too much government" and interfered with "individual liberty".  It was the Republican Party that won that war.

And don't forget the actions of southern democrats after that war all the way up into the 1960's who perpetuated a culture that denied African Americans the full rights of citizens under the doctrine of "separate but equal".  Gun restrictions were imposed to deny African Americans the right to defend themselves from lynch mobs and it was the Republican party and its leaders that put an end to those policies.

Three fourths of the "nay" votes against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from the Democrats in the House.  Today's gun control measures are supported by far more progressive democrats than any republicans and calls for more social welfare programs, the removal of religion from society replaced by worship of the government are all moves which have much more support from within the Democratic Party than the GOP.  Why in the hell would we want to welcome those parts of the "political spectrum" into our party?  We need to work tirelessly to marginalize, minimize and ostracize those political notions, not sit and contemplate the possibility that they might have merit.

Maybe the Ron Paul revolution is winning over the GOP, but I'd like to think that it is the part of that revolution which calls for an audit of the Federal Reserve, balanced budgets, less military adventurism, lower taxes, less wasteful spending and a mature approach to the problems of the future with a healthy respect for the history which we share.

But if kids like Amash want to transform the GOP into a commune for "anything goes", I say the sooner the GOP rids itself of those ideas the better.

Related articles

The House's new Ron Paul