Quote of the day—Kim_Jung-Skill

It is bad for an imperfect government to be able to predict all crime. Some of the greatest steps forward in human history were only made possible by people being able to hide information from their government. If the church had access to Galileo’s research journals and notes we could be hundreds of years behind in our scientific growth. If the government had unlimited access to the networks of civil dissidents blacks may have never fought off Jim Crow. If King George had perfect information America would never have been a country. There is no government on earth that is perfect, and therefore there is no government on earth that can act responsibly with unlimited access to information. A government is unlikely to be able to distinguish between a negative and positive disruption to it’s social order and laws, and it therefore follows that an unlimited spying program can only hinder the next great social step forward. Don’t fear the surveillance state because you might have something illegal, fear the surveillance state because it is a tremendous institutional barrier to meaningful societal progress.

Kim_Jung-Skill
December 16, 2016
Reddit comment to Congress Slips CISA Into a Budget Bill That’s Sure to Pass
[Via email from Jaime.—Joe]


Those who need to know already know what this means:
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Quote of the day—Paul Koning

The goal of the Illinois criminal legislature isn’t to fix crime. They clearly could do that if they wanted to, but they do not want to. Their actual goal is to disarm honest people, to render them defenseless against criminals, and to make the impact of crime worse so they will have more excuses for more invasions on the people’s liberty. What they deserve is not just being kicked out of office, but also being swiftly charged with, convicted for, and hanged for treason. Treason it is, because treason is waging war against the people or giving comfort to the enemy, both of which they are doing.

Paul Koning
September 13, 2016
Comment to Quote of the day—Marshall Lewin
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jeff Snyder

With each additional gun control law, then, it becomes more and more apparent that our legislators, president and courts are fundamentally lawless, recognizing not authority higher than their own preferences and mere majority rule or, in the case of the courts, the personal beliefs of the judges. Laws enacted in such blatant disregard of a fundamental right make manifest the fact that politics is a confidence game in which the legislators and the courts capitalize upon and trade off of the people’s respect for the nations supreme law to establish legitimacy for their laws and rulings, a veneration and respect they themselves do not share. Gun control is thus providing the occasion for, and disposing  larger numbers of people to, recognizing the destruction of individual rights and the illegitimacy of the federal government. When this line has been crossed, it is not easily re-established.

Jeff Snyder
2001
Forward to Nation of Cowards page vii.
[And that line was crossed for me with Ruby Ridge.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Narayana Kocherlakota

Two government mechanisms prevent real interest rates from getting too negative. The first is cash: As long as people can hold currency, which loses its value only at the rate of inflation, they won’t buy safe assets that yield even less. The second is the central bank’s promise to keep the inflation rate low and stable — at about 2 percent in most developed nations. As a result, people have little reason to hold any asset that yields less than negative 2 percent (perhaps negative 3 percent, considering that cash is bulky and hard to store).

In other words, governments — by issuing cash and managing inflation — put a floor on how low interest rates can go and how high asset prices can rise. That’s hardly a free market.

What’s the fix for this problem? John Williams, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, has offered some ideas, such as increasing inflation targets — but these are partial work-arounds at best.

The right answer is to abolish currency and move completely to electronic cash.

Narayana Kocherlakota
September 1, 2016
Want a Free Market? Abolish Cash
[Via Michael Krieger who says:

Possibly the most idiotic article I’ve ever read.

See also The Sinister Side of a Cashless Society (via email from Lynn Z.).

Electronic cash would allow government to be so much more efficient. Just imagine how much easier it would be to find people who were trying to cheat on their taxes by not reporting their tips. And bribes would be easy to catch. And armed robbery of banks would cease to exist. It would be wonderful, right? Isn’t that what everyone wants, a more efficient government? Who could possibly object?

Oh, yeah. Now I remember. It fails The Jews in the Attic Test.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Nancy Grace Augusta Wake

In my opinion, the only good German was a dead German, and the deader, the better. I killed a lot of Germans, and I am only sorry I didn’t kill more.

Nancy Grace Augusta Wake
A.K.A.:
Heléne (SOE)
Andrée (French Resistance/SOE Identity)
White Mouse (Gestapo in France)
Witch (Operation:)
Awards:
Companion of the Order of Australia
George Medal
Officier de la Légion d’Honneur
Croix de guerre (France)
Medal of Freedom (United States)
RSA Badge in Gold (New Zealand)
See also here.
[H/T m.e.

Wake may have been a sociopath and was definitely a new force of nature. She left a trail of dead Nazis in her wake:

By 1943, Wake was the Gestapo’s most wanted person, with a 5 million-franc price on her head.

She also led attacks on German installations and the local Gestapo HQ in Montluçon. At one point Wake discovered that her men were protecting a girl who was a German spy. They did not have the heart to kill her in cold blood, but when Wake insisted she would perform the execution, they capitulated.

From April 1944 until the liberation of France, her 7,000+ maquisards fought 22,000 German soldiers, causing 1,400 casualties, while suffering only 100 themselves. Her French companions, especially Henri Tardivat, praised her fighting spirit, amply demonstrated when she killed an SS sentry with her bare hands to prevent him from raising the alarm during a raid. During a 1990s television interview, when asked what had happened to the sentry who spotted her, Wake simply drew her finger across her throat. “They’d taught this judo-chop stuff with the flat of the hand at SOE, and I practised away at it. But this was the only time I used it – whack – and it killed him all right. I was really surprised.”

Ahh… yes. Women, the gentle sex. Keep this in mind if you ever need help killing Nazis.—Joe]

Metadata is harmless…

… or so the government sometimes says.

OTOH, when you have Big Data, with enough MetaData, it turns into Creepy Data.

No, a shrink having her patients friending each other *based on FaceBlock’s reccomendation* isn’t creepy at all. It’s all totally harmless, and could never be misused, right? (and people wonder why I don’t do Book of Faces)

I wonder if they could sue FB for violating HIPAA?

Quote of the day—ISIS

To the filthy and coward non-believers and to the holders of the Christ emblem, we bring the good news, which will keep them awake, that a new generation in the Islamic State … that loves death more than life … this generation will only grow steadfast on the path to Jihad, stay determined to seek revenge and be violent toward them.

ISIS
August 30, 2016
ISIS spokesman killed in Aleppo, group says
[Read that carefully and remember this:

  • They think of you as a filthy and cowardly non-believer.
  • As long as you are a non-believer ISIS will be determined to be violent against you.
  • The new generation in the Islamic State loves death more than life.

It would appear to me they desire we make one of only two active choices. In either case we give them what they want. Although there is potential for other, long term, active choices if I were directly faced with making the decision on short notice I know what my choice would be.—Joe]

Quote of the day—John Hardin

So, Hillary now is the Reset Button?

John Hardin
August 26, 2016
Comment to Quote of the day—Liz Crokin
[I think this might be better rewritten as, “Hillary is the Reset Button.”

Back in the late 90’s, in the dark days of the Clinton presidency, I knew gun people who said we should vote for the most totalitarian administration imaginable, Hillary, for the next president. The thought was that the “water” would heat up so rapidly that “the frogs” would take action rather than die from the slow increase in temperature. There are people today saying similar things.

I don’t know whether that would have been the correct choice then or it is the correct choice now, but it might very well be the choice will be made for us. And if the election goes worst case for us it will be ugly. Not only are the anti-gun people openly talking of an “assault weapon ban”, and “the Australian example”, but also “a ban on semi-automatic firearms, which are often described as ‘assault weapons.’” Never mind semi-auto handguns were a significant component of the Heller decision and protected. As it stand the Heller decision is being essentially ignored. With another Clinton presidency it will be nullified in everything but our memories.

I’m preparing for the worst and hoping for an indictment of Hillary.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Liz Crokin

I began looking into how strong the bias and censorship runs in these forums after I did an interview on the pro-Trump podcast, MAGAPod. The show’s host, Mark Hammond, was disappointed Apple wouldn’t run his show without an “explicit” warning. Hammond’s podcast didn’t contain content that would be deemed explicit under Apple’s policy, and most other shows in the News & Politics category aren’t labeled as such.

On June 18, Hammond talked to Sandra, a representative from Apple. She explained that, since the description of his show is pro-Trump, his show is explicit in nature—because the subject matter is Donald Trump. So, an Apple employee concluded the Republican presidential candidate is explicit.

Liz Crokin
August 12, 2016
Tech Companies Apple, Twitter, Google and Instagram Collude to Defeat Trump
[H/T Michael Krieger.

Ry and I had breakfast together the other day and discussed some things tangentially related to this. I.E. Germany and Japan had culture issues that apparently could only be fixed by their complete surrender at the end of WW II and then the rebuilding of their government and social institutions with a different set of values.

Today there seem to be things in our society and/or government that appear to be so broken, corrupt, and/or deeply ingrained that they can’t really be fixed via normal means. One could make the case that a hard reset may be necessary.

[Heavy sigh]

I really don’t want us to go there.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alan Korwin

People in the United States of America want it understood that designating arms, ammunition and related accessories, which are currently legal to make, keep or bear in any state, which may later be declared illegal to make, keep or bear, or encumbered in any way by any means and for any reason, constitutes Second Amendment infringement.

Such actions are null and void, amount to prima facie violation of the oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, and are grounds for removal from office for failure to faithfully execute the duties of the office.

Any action or attempt by any person to enforce such infringement on property possessed in our state will be a class four felony for a first offense, and a class three felony for second and subsequent offenses.

County Sheriffs and law-enforcement agencies in this state will be authorized to enforce this Declaration and to deputize as many residents as may be necessary to enforce this Declaration.

This Declaration, circulated widely by people who support it, is provided as a courtesy and notice of protected civil rights to candidates, politicians and people working in any capacity in government. It will be introduced as state legislation to authorize peaceful enforcement of those civil rights. Model legislation is in the draft stage and will be circulated soon.

Consider yourselves notified of impending disaster, if the headlong rush to infringe the public’s right to arms — and all the other blatantly unconstitutional abuses — continues on its current path. Don’t shoot me, I’m only the messenger.

Alan Korwin
August 21, 2016
American Protection of Arms Declaration
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Gary J. Byrne

Terrorists can recognize the difference between actual security and it’s mere appearance. You think they can’t see past a gun free zone sign? It might as well say, “Terrorists welcome! Ready access to undefended scores of innocent children.” Please get over the gun-control distraction. Ask yourself, “What stops four men from going to a school with knives or bombs?” I know that by the time a threat reaches me on an airplane there is no time for hesitation, talk, quarter. I want to win more than I can tolerate losing.

In 2016 federal agencies are training their law enforcement personal to respond to active shooter scenarios. Concealed carry permits for civilians are going up. That’s great!

But we need a more honest discussion. By the time a terrorist or a criminal boards a plane with ill intentions we’re past the time for obfuscating their plans or negotiating them down. Either FAMS personal is on the plane when it takes off or its passengers and crew are marked for death and they better know it. The Federal Air Marshal, the passengers, the flight crew, and pilots are truly the last line of defense. Public spaces and schools need the same approach.

Let’s cut the feel good politics and recognize by the time someone with dangerous plans reaches your doorstep it’s too late to ponder root causes of anti-social behavior. It’s time to act. All of the thinking should have been done beforehand. And the level of commitment to stop grotesque violence in its tracks, stone cold dead, has to exceed theirs if protecting the principal is going to succeed.

Have no misconceptions. Any outcome at that point will be bloody, ugly, and lowdown. It’s like nothing you have seen in any Hollywood movie. It’s going to be bad breath and fingernail close. But it’s a fight that is coming our way whether we get ready for it or not.

Let’s get ready.

Gary J. Byrne
2016
Crisis of Character: A White House Secret Service Officer Discloses His Firsthand Experience with Hillary, Bill, and How They Operate
[I listened to this as an audible book so I probably have some punctuation messed up and maybe some spelling and other minor stuff. But it’s pretty close.

The book, as you can see, isn’t just about his time as a Secret Service Officer for the Clintons. It briefly covers his time in the Air Force, time with the Bush’s before the Clintons, testifying during the investigation by Kenneth Star, and time with the Federal Air Marshals.

There are some quotes I’m going to pull out about the Clintons too. But I thought this was higher priority. I really like it.

It’s a good book. I highly recommend it.—Joe]

Attitude

From here:

fruit-of-the-loom-cotton-t-131313

Interesting attitude. There are several ways to interpret this:

  • Don’t mess with us because…
  • We don’t want to go there because…
  • Civil wars are very messy so prepare yourself.

Jews in the attic test gets attention

I got a call today from someone who wanted to “reprint” my Jews In The Attic Test on her blog and give me credit for it. Of course I told her to go ahead.

Here is the result.

Update: And here.

Quote of the day—razorbacker

I’ve been on my knees, in the muck and mire, the stench in my nostrils. I’ll stand.

Unbeatable forces force me again down, but again I stand. Pain hurts, but despair kills. I’ll stand.

Do you think yourself alone, a minority of one? Still stand. One is enough, when one is all that there is. Stand.

To stand is to make a target of yourself. Stand.

You will not win. You are doomed to fail. Stand.

Better men than you have died standing, but all men must die. Stand. Do you not wish to be counted among the better men? Then stand.

Better to live a slave than die a freeman? If you ask the question, you cannot comprehend the answer. Stand.

Today is not the day? When, then? Are you so comfortable? Do your knees not ache? Man was not built to kneel, but to stand. So stand.

You were given a priceless gift, the gift of life. Do not waste it. Stand.

They will mock as you fall. All men must fall. It is a shorter fall from your knees. But fall from your feet, so as to make a resounding echo. Stand.

You can live on your knees. You will die on your feet. Choose for yourself; I will not judge. But as for me, I’ll stand.

razorbacker
January 31, 2016
Stand
[Via a comment from Andrew Benghazi.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Roberto Foa and Yascha Mounk

In the United States, among all age cohorts, the share of citizens who believe that it would be better to have a “strong leader” who does not have to “bother with parliament and elections” has also risen over time: In 1995, 24 percent of respondents held this view; by
2011, that figure had increased to 32 percent. Meanwhile, the proportion of citizens who approve of “having experts, not government, make decisions according to what they think is best for the country” has grown from 36 to 49 percent.

Roberto Foa and Yascha Mounk
July 2016
The Danger of Deconsolidation
The Democratic Disconnect

[This could be part of the explanation for our current candidates for U.S. President. Sometimes people get what they ask for.

Maybe I need a seaworthy boat instead of a farm in Idaho.—Joe]

Abuse of data

Via a comment by Paul Koning we have this commentary in the Wall Street Journal:

Doctor to Patient: Do You Have a Gun?

I cannot understand how my asking this question will help.

From a public-health standpoint, adding this question to the medical history must seem logical to policy gurus far removed from the trenches of primary care. According to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, 60% of the 30,000 Americans who take their own lives every year do so with a firearm. Ninety die every day from shootings—60 are suicide, 30 are murders.

Yet as horrified as I am by these losses, I cannot understand how my asking this question will help. If a patient’s answer is “Yes,” then what I am to say?

Of course, the platitudes: Guns can be a danger around the home, especially one with children. Make sure you use gunlocks or a special safe. Everyone knows this; it’s akin to telling patients that smoking is hazardous to one’s health. And now that my patient has admitted that he owns a firearm, this fact is duly recorded into the—secure, of course!—electronic medical record.

If my patient suffers from mental illness or substance abuse but is not, in my estimation, a danger to himself or others, then what? Report the patient to someone, some agency? Who might that be? Will my patient be harmed more than helped? What will it do to my ongoing relationship with my patient?

The obvious take-away from the article is that the suggestion that doctors ask patients if they own guns was not well thought out.

As Paul points out in his comment the data is required to go into an electronic records system which is susceptible to hacking (ask the DNC if you doubt me).

Another plausible point, as Paul pointed out in his email to me, is it is a “push for doctors asking about guns to be an attempt to spread hoplophobic disinformation”.

And as Paul hinted in his email one can extrapolate even further to see how these electronic records could be use to build databases of gun owners. Sure, the records are supposed to be private from government snooping except under certain conditions:

The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) states that protected health information may be disclosed if it “is necessary to prevent or lessen a serious and imminent threat to the health or safety of a person or the public and . . . is to a person or persons reasonably able to prevent or lessen the threat including the target of the threat.”

But we have laws in existence, right now, which require medical personal report people with, or had, mental health issues to the government so they can be prevented from purchasing guns. How much of a stretch is it to imagine a one or two line amendment to HIPAA which requires the reporting of self reporting gun owners?

And what does the government care about following original intent of the law? Census data has been abused by the governments throughout history:

The Civil War
Along with the benefits of census information for war planning, the census can be used for methods of destruction as a war tactic. General Sherman used census data to locate targets during the famed Civil War March though Georgia.
World War II and Japanese Internment
A specific example of the privacy risks of the US census can also be found in the 1940s. During World War II, Japanese-American citizens were rounded up and sent to internment camps. The Census Bureau might not have necessarily given out individual Japanese-American names or numbers, but the Bureau did work with US War Department to offer aggregated data about certain localities. Although there is still a lack of consensus concerning specific conclusions, the Census Bureau has issued a formal apology and now reports that the Bureau did not protect Japanese-Americans.
[It has been admitted the census bureau did give detailed info to the Secret Service.—Joe]
It has been recorded that even before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt ordered the Census Bureau to collect information on “American-born and foreign-born Japanese” from the Census data lists. Information was gathered from the 1930 and 1940 censuses on all Japanese-Americans and then given to the FBI and top military officials. These sources point directly to the census information as one of the reasons that led to the internment of almost 110,000 Japanese-Americans on the West Coast, two-thirds of whom were U.S. citizens.
United Kingdom
A recent example of abuse from abroad can be found in the United Kingdom. It recently has reached the public view that compulsory transfers were considered in Northern Ireland in 1972. A UK government top-secret memo has surfaced describing a plan to relocate Irish Catholics. The plan was written with census data. Although never implemented, the use of census data for non-statistical purposes has caused great concern in Europe.
Germany
Germany has a contrasting history in census reporting. The most extreme example of census abuse is Hitler’s use of the census to track minorities for extermination during the NAZI regime.

Germany not only used the census data (and gun registration data) of their own country but that of countries which they conquered for evil purposes. My general rule is that if the data exists then it will be abused by a government. Carefully consider the type and persistence of data you disclose to anyone.

Government thieves

From USA Today, DEA regularly mines Americans’ travel records to seize millions in cash:

Federal drug agents regularly mine Americans’ travel information to profile people who might be ferrying money for narcotics traffickers — though they almost never use what they learn to make arrests or build criminal cases.

Instead, that targeting has helped the Drug Enforcement Administration seize a small fortune in cash.

It is a lucrative endeavor, and one that remains largely unknown outside the drug agency. DEA units assigned to patrol 15 of the nation’s busiest airports seized more than $209 million in cash from at least 5,200 people over the past decade

current and former agents said, when it came to intercepting individual passengers, the goal was usually to find cash.

“We want the cash. Good agents chase cash,” said George Hood, who supervised a drug task force assigned to O’Hare International Airport in Chicago before he retired in 2007.

I’m remained of what I read in The Gulag Archipelago, Volume 2: An Experiment in Literary Investigation, 1918-1956 and commented on:

in the USSR the political leaders openly wrote about how the thieves “were allies in the building of communism”. This was because they were the enemy of those who owned property.

Quote of the day—Justice Robert Jackson

The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials, and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. . . . [F]undamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.

Justice Robert Jackson
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943).
Via George Will’s Constitution.
[It didn’t quite work out that way. Can we get a do-over? I think we need to have a mechanism whereby there are serious repercussions to the people who vote for a law that is found to be unconstitutional.—Joe]

A quick history lesson

Via Bill Davis:

AQuickHistoryLesson

We could also add in Jim Crow laws, Women’s suffrage, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (read about the filibuster by the Democrats which lasted two months). But who’s counting?

Check the sources

People have a strong tendency to believe what they want to believe. Sometimes it is a deliberate lie on the order of “Work makes you free”. Other times it could be more ignorance and with possible innocence intent such as “only bad people own guns”. Even when confronted with irrefutable evidence they are wrong many people will say crazy things like, “Fake, but accurate”.

If something is too good to be true, it probably is and you should check the sources.

I received a chain email today from someone recommending this video:

It would seem to be extremely damning evidence against Obama. I don’t think it’s true.

See also Snopes.

Here is, supposedly, the transcript of the portion of the speech which contains the words from the YouTube video above in bold:

Leaders and dignitaries of the European Union, representatives of our NATO alliance, distinguished guests, we meet here at a moment of testing for Europe and the United States and for the international order that we have worked for generations to build. Throughout human history, societies have grappled with fundamental questions of how to organize themselves, the proper relationship between the individual and the state, the best means to resolve the inevitable conflicts between states.

And it was here in Europe, through centuries of struggle, through war and enlightenment, repression and revolution, that a particular set of ideals began to emerge, the belief that through conscience and free will, each of us has the right to live as we choose, the belief that power is derived from the consent of the governed and that laws and institutions should be established to protect that understanding.

And those ideas eventually inspired a band of colonialists across an ocean, and they wrote them into the founding documents that still guide America today, including the simple truth that all men, and women, are created equal.

But those ideals have also been tested, here in Europe and around the world. Those ideals have often been threatened by an older, more traditional view of power. This alternative vision argues that ordinary men and women are too small-minded to govern their own affairs, that order and progress can only come when individuals surrender their rights to an all-powerful sovereign. Often this alternative vision roots itself in the notion that by virtue of race or faith or ethnicity, some are inherently superior to others and that individual identity must be defined by us versus them, or that national greatness must flow not by what people stand for, but what they are against.

I have probably been wrong, or at least not entirely correct, in the past when I have was extremely skeptical of something that was “too bad to be true” and it is possible I’m wrong this time. But please, don’t accept this video and spread it around until you are absolutely certain of its correctness. Fake, but accurate, just doesn’t cut it and discredits you in future debates.