Jerusalem Must Remain Un-Divided

In the following post the Mayor of Jerusalem clearly illustrates that the City needs to remain undivided and that its natural growth must be accommodated. The Palestinian argument that it is taking over the entire West Bank is a lie but one that the Western media-dogs happily repeat.

The Mayor gives a great history lesson and current facts of Israel itself, we present these here to try to balance the outrageousness of the opposition.

Jerusalem has been always Jewish and it It must remain so as it has been for some 3,500 years.

Conservative Tom

A Divided Jerusalem Will Not Stand

Nir Barkat - Wall Street Journal,  December 12th, 2012

Israel's government is under heavy criticism for recently approving building permits in what the international community calls “the settlements.” Yet places like Ramat Shlomo, Gilo and Givat Ha'matos are well within the municipal borders of Jerusalem, and the virgin hills of “E-1″—between the city of Jerusalem and Ma'aleh Adumim—have over three millennia of deep Jewish roots. Here in Jerusalem, we stand saddened and appalled by the European Union ministers who condemn these construction projects while ignoring calls from the leader of Hamas for the destruction of the Jewish state of Israel.

When the people of Israel left Egypt and came to this region 3,500 years ago, each of the 12 tribes received a piece of land on which they built their cities and developed their ways of life. The exception to the rule was the holy city of Jerusalem, which wasn't divided or given to any of the tribes. Jerusalem served all 12 Jewish tribes equally, as it did the people of other faiths who came to worship here.

Jerusalem became the de facto center of the world, managed by Hebrew kings for 1,000 years. All residents and pilgrims entering her gates were treated with honor and respect.

After the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in the year 70, the city traded hands from conqueror to conqueror—including the Babylonians, Assyrians, Turks, British and Jordanians—for two millennia. None of these rulers maintained the city's freedom of religion, Jerusalem's essence. These empires never adopted Jerusalem as their capital. The Jewish people, on the other hand—even in their darkest days, amid expulsions, pogroms, the Holocaust and waves of terror—have always comforted themselves with the saying: “Next year in Jerusalem.”

In 1967, Israel reunified its capital, Jerusalem, which had been divided between Israeli and Jordanian control since the Jewish state's founding in 1948. Since then the city has maintained freedom of access, movement and religion. Peace-seeking pilgrims of all faiths can again visit the holy places without limitation or restriction. Tourism to Jerusalem is thriving, as is the city's economy, and its per capita crime rate is among the world's lowest.

Yet Israel and her capital are once again facing trials. Now more than ever, Israel and Jerusalem need real friends and real leaders. The threat we face now isn't from foreign invaders, but rather from international diplomats seeking to locate a simple but incorrect solution to the complex relationship between Israel and the Palestinians. As far as Jerusalem is concerned, we must recall that no divided city in history has ever succeeded.

Isn't it ironic that many in Europe who recently celebrated 25 years of the reunification of Berlin are at the same time calling for the division of another capital on another continent?

Despite tremendous international pressure and internal political risk, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has stood up for a united Jerusalem.

By 2030, the city's population will expand to one million residents from 800,000 today (33% Muslim, 2% Christian and 65% Jewish). Where does the world suggest we put these extra 200,000 residents? The expansion of Jerusalem's residential areas is essential for the natural growth of all segments of our population. It enables Jewish and Arab families alike to grow and remain in the city. The capital of a sovereign nation cannot be expected to freeze growth rather than provide housing to families of all faiths eager to make their lives there.

As for “E-1,” this land has always been considered the natural site for the expansion of contiguous neighborhoods of metropolitan Jerusalem. “E-1″ strengthens Jerusalem. It does not impede peace in our region. The international alarm about planned construction is based solely on the misplaced dreams of the Palestinians and their supporters for a divided Jerusalem.

Jerusalem has been and forever will be the heart and soul of the Jewish people. It is also the united and undivided capital of the state of Israel. The Jewish people and the Jewish state have a bumpy road ahead. We appreciate the support of our friends, and only through continued bold leadership at home—leadership willing to stand up to pressure from foreign capitals—will we get through this challenging time.

Mr. Barkat is the mayor of Jerusalem.

US Stumbles With Palestinian Bid--Intentionally?

The Obama Administration once again shows its incompetence in handling foreign affairs in the Palestinian search for state recognition by the UN. Or was it the plan? How easy it would be to profess support for Israel while at the same time fumbling the approach to Palestinian statehood. Very!

Some Americans proudly point to the military hardware (bunker busting bombs for example) as evidence that the Administration supports Israel. However, this is a false flag. The US can send all sorts of equipment to the Jewish State and yet at the same time be cutting the legs out from under the leadership of that state when they have discussions with Hamas and Abbas.

No one in the Administration could come out and say "we support Hamas."  If they did, there would be a stampede of Congressmen toward the cameras to denounce the statement and a demand for the speaker's resignation.  On the other hand, if one gives "stuff" to the Israelis, stuff that is not needed at this time, it appears as if the US is being generous to its "friend."  

Believe us when we say, Obama is not Israel's friend. Actions, like dissing the Prime Minister, not visiting Israel as President yet going to numerous Arab countries, and demanding the return to 1967 borders with "negotiated changes" are all great examples. At the same time he does not condemn Hamas' irresponsible firing of rockets into civilian areas of Israel nor does he threaten to cut off aid to Gaza and the West Bank if any further rockets are fired? He is deathly silent except to say that "Israel has the right to defend itself" while telling its Ambassador to not go into Gaza.

Either Obama and his minions are incompetent or they are running a clandestine program against Israel. We believe the latter.  Time will tell if we are right.

Conservative Tom

U.S. Stumbles on Palestinian Statehood Vote

Shoshana Bryen and Stephen Bryen - PJ Media,  December 13th, 2012

The Obama administration is sending mixed signals again: their words point one way; their actions, another.

The White House stated its opposition to the Palestinian Authority (PA) bid for non-member state status in the UN, but declined to mobilize its and Israel's traditional allies. It also appears the administration pressured senators to reject three amendments to the Defense Authorization bill that would have penalized the PLO, the UN, and countries receiving U.S. foreign assistance that voted against the U.S. position. One rejected amendment would have shut off all PA funding if the Palestinians seek to take Israel to the International Criminal Court.

Thus while voicing support for Israel, the administration actually gave its backing to Mahmoud Abbas in his successful UN bid to change Palestine's status.

Our allies surely understood what the U.S. was doing. The U.S. supports and maintains the Palestinian Authority in crucial ways, particularly with money, but it also provides an American general, strategic intelligence, training, and backing for the security forces that protect Abbas (the IDF protects him from Hamas). While it is hard to imagine him flying in the face of serious American opposition, he didn't think he had any — and he was right.

However, the U.S. decision — coupled with its stumbling through the Egyptian political crisis and the Syrian civil war — may put Abbas and Palestinian statehood seriously at risk.

Hamas just declared a dramatic (though thoroughly false) victory over Israel. It has broken out of diplomatic isolation though visits from the emir of Qatar and his checkbook, from the foreign minister of Egypt, and from what may be new consideration from the European Union, although an EU spokesman has backtracked somewhat on that. Turkey's Prime Minister Erdogan is considering a visit to Gaza as well. Creating upgraded status for “Palestine” while Hamas is rising and Fatah is facing domestic disarray and a cash crunch creates almost irresistible incentives for Hamas to finish the 2007 civil war, to knock off Fatah, and to announce the extension of its rule over all of “Palestine.” In a further, odd boost to those hopes, Abbas just agreed that Hamas could hold a rally in the West Bank, something forbidden since their civil war.

The UNGA resolution appears to apply to both the West Bank and Gaza. While the resolution was “without prejudice to the acquired rights, privileges and role of the PLO in the UN as the representative of the Palestinian people,” it doesn't appear to care who rules on the ground. Fatah, Hamas, whatever.

Why would the U.S. have allowed or encouraged Abbas to take such a risk? Probably because the administration still lacks a clear picture of the wider implications of its actions in the Middle East.

The wealthy Arab emirates — particularly Qatar — and the Saudis see Iran's pursuit of Shi'ite domination as a threat to their interests. They believe the U.S. will support them as they create a Sunni pan-Arab approach to the region, and thus far, they're right. In addition, Erdogan, a savvy player, wants to be a leader in the new Sunni Caliphate. Operating at U.S. request and with U.S. assistance in Syria, they hope to break the (heterodox Shi'ite) Alawite-Iran axis and to unleash the Sunni majority, and they have visions of constraining Hezbollah and the Shi'ites in Lebanon. In pursuit of the goal, Gulf-state patrons have funded groups in Syria whose plans include not only the overthrow of Assad and a new Syrian government, but also international Sunni jihad. Deliberately or not, they have given new life to al-Qaeda in Iraq (Saudi Arabia, in particular, should be wary of AQ), whose members are crossing into Syria in small but important numbers.

In addition, the U.S. has made Muslim Brotherhood-led Egypt a pivotal player with the apparent intention of using Morsi as the Hamas interlocutor to break the Iran-Hamas axis and perhaps to open direct contact with Hamas. The president and secretary of State complimented Morsi for engineering the cease fire between Israel and Hamas (the Israelis were happy enough to have it, as they had already accomplished their primary objectives) and haven't said a word about Morsi's power grab or the heavy-handed response of Egyptian riot police to demonstrations of opposition.

Putting pressure on Israel, which the UN resolution does, is another way for Washington to polish its bona fides. The administration may well have intended to put Israel into a vise, but Israel is not the problem that should concern the United States.

The problem is that while Hamas is part of the Muslim Brotherhood, it and Iran are still joined at the hip, particularly regarding weapons and training. They had setbacks recently, but it is unlikely that Qatar, Turkey, and Egypt are going to try gunrunning into Gaza in Iran's stead. If Hamas does decide to eliminate Fatah on the West Bank, Iran will be right there with it. Even without immediately knocking out Abbas, Palestinian status as a “state” will lead to significant political changes and could facilitate the transfer of weapons from Gaza to the PA, first to Hamas' agents there. The IDF announced this week that Hamas is trying to reactivate “sleeper cells” on the West Bank that were shut down during the 2003 Operation Defensive Shield.

If missiles and artillery appear in the West Bank, Israel will have no option but war, and this one will have a lot of casualties — mainly Palestinian casualties. In effect the U.S. administration will have significantly strengthened Iran, even as the Iranians are losing in Syria. And, depending on the outcome in Syria (which is more likely chaos than a strong government of any single political stripe), there may be a second supply line to the West Bank. If war comes under that circumstance, the Iranians will do whatever they can to support their new friends. This might include Iranian troops, as there are in Syria, non-conventional weapons, fomenting revolution in the Gulf Arab states (beyond what they are already doing), and disrupting the oil flow in the Gulf.

Don't look for administration action to try to constrain Iran; the White House is engaged in negotiations with the mullahs and recently extended the waiver of oil-purchase sanctions for Iran's biggest customers, including China, to buy more time.

So, having concurrently encouraged the Fatah and the PA, Hamas, the Sunni-jihadist-but-not-Muslim Brotherhood-oriented Gulf states, Iran, and the Brotherhood, the U.S. has put itself, Israel, and its rather feckless European allies in a position that could spin out of control and lead to war, oil cutoffs, and economic dislocation in the Middle East and the West.

Permitting a change in the status of the Palestinians was a massive and unnecessary risk.

The Fall Has Started In America

The re-election of Barack Obama in 2012 encouraged his supporters and mystified his detractors.  We, at Conservative Musings,  knew it was going to occur for a multitude of reasons and wrote about it on the day prior to the election. However, since the election other very disturbing reports have surfaced regarding voter fraud. If true, these set a scenario which so anti-American , most will dismiss as crazy. They would be wrong.

To what are we referring?  It is the hundreds of  precincts in Pennsylvania and Ohio, to name a couple states, where Mitt Romney did not receive a single vote.  This stretches credibility into insanity. We could buy the fact that across the country there would be a few (count them on your hand) where either candidate might receive 100% of those voting.  However, when the number extends into the hundreds, we smell a rat.

Americans have always been proud of their elections and how (with exceptions like Chicago) votes are counted and whomever got the most votes was presumably the winner. There always have been challenges when the vote was close but after the recount was conducted, a winner was announced and the loser conceded.

We  have made a turn. Ever since the Bush-Gore contest in 2000 which ended in a Supreme Court decision, the losers (Gore etal) have continued to protest that Bush stole the election. Even today if you ask a Gore supporter, he will lament that their candidate would have been much better and had his election ripped from his hands.  The irony is that several news organizations (New York Times for example) did their own re-count of the Florida voting and found that Bush actually did get more votes.

From that contested election  in 2000, the losers have decided that winning an election legitimately is old hat and one must insure that their candidate wins regardless of the vote. This brings us to the voting in 2012.  It is so clear that even Ray Charles could see that this election smells to high heaven. 100% voting, missing ballots, machines that do not count the ballots correctly and machines that will not allow one to vote for the candidate of your choice is wrong.

We are not in China, Russia, Iran or some third world despot run country that has "elections" and glory be, the heads of the government gets re-elected by 97% of the population. We all laugh at that when we read this in these countries but here in the US we did it even better--100% voting for one candidate!

Without legitimate elections, a constitutionally governed republic fails. Necessary change cannot occur as the cards are stacked against those who wish to upset the status quo.

The US is at a tipping point. Will we have investigations into the precincts that went 100% for EITHER candidate or will we just let it be?  We think the latter will be the course of events. If that is so, our country and any hope of changing it for the better is lost.

Add to the voting, the following story by Bob Livingston about roving gangs attacking people in the streets, on  subways and in stores and you will begin to see that the collapse is beginning. We won't have to wait long now, the US as we have known it, is soon to be gone.

Conservative Tom

Signs Of Collapse: The Obvious And The Hidden

December 14, 2012 by Bob Livingston 

PHOTOS.COM

Societal collapse manifests itself in many ways. The clues are there for the discerning to see.

In America, societal collapse is evident through continued and escalating currency devaluation (quantitative easing to infinity), the collapse and non-recovery of the housing market, the growing number of individual bankruptcies, high unemployment and business failures. These things are at least making news headlines, though in a way that plays down their significance. Other signs — particularly the loss of civility; the glorification beyond all reason of athletic events, athletes and celebrities; and the increase in the “me-first” and entitlement mindset — aren’t discussed in the media.

One clue being missed by the masses is the growing lawlessness of the Nation’s youth — particularly black youth. That is by design. The whore media is intentionally overlooking, if not suppressing, the growing incidences of youth mob violence, particularly in cases of black-on-white crime.

But mobs, like the 44^th Street Crew in Southeast Washington, D.C., are becoming more prevalent and more dangerous. They and others are terrorizing riders of the Metro, and posting it to social media for all to see.

Just another isolated incident? Hardly. According to the Website UnsuckDCMetro (a blog dedicated to covering Metro events), reports of violence rarely make it to The Washington Post, even though they are occurring and have been for some time. One anonymous readerposted his experience in witnessing a group of six to eight teenagers assaulting a lone teenage girl. He said he called 911; less than a minute later, another girl was being assaulted.  Other reports are here, here and here.

When these websites post details of the incidents, commenters follow up with their own experiences. Sometimes these are as bad as or worse than the original incident.

Thomas Sowell writes that there is an uncensored race war in America and that incidents that are occurring across the country are being ignored or suppressed.

“What the authorities and the media seem determined to suppress is that the hoodlum elements in many ghettoes launch coordinated attacks on whites in public places. If there is anything worse than a one-sided race war, it is a two-sided race war, especially when one of the races outnumbers the other several times over,” he wrote last summer.

Black mobs are taking over stores, overwhelming them with sheer numbers and walking out with all the merchandise they can carry. They are engaging in uprovoked violence called “knockout games” where they calmly approach an unwary victim and cold cock him or her in an effort to render the victim unconscious.

Walter E. Williams writes that in addition to a growing number of black-on-white incidents, there are also an increasing number of black-on-Asian attacks. But also being ignored by the media is black-on-black crime.

This shouldn’t be surprising. Blacks are suffering disproportionally in the President Barack Obama economy. According to official (and doctored) unemployment numbers put out by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, unemployment in the black community is above 13 percent, almost twice the rate of all unemployment. For blacks under the age of 20, the official rate is 39.4 percent. Since real unemployment is above 22 percent (when all unemployed workers are counted), black unemployment may be near 40 percent and black under 20 unemployment is, no doubt, much worse.

As the collapse continues and escalates, look for violence to also escalate. People get more desperate as they get hungrier. Desperate people do desperate things. Arab spring was just a picnic.

Is Your 401(k) Going To Be Confiscated?

Earlier today we posted an article about 401(k), IRA confiscation. We had some time this afternoon and found a number of articles which speak to this issue.  You can "google" others also. We would suggest "nationalize 401k", or "confiscate 401k" , however things look like they are coming fast. 

We suspect that there will be changes either before or after the "fiscal cliff" which means that something will occur in the next couple weeks at the earliest or into early 2013 at the latest.  If you are not aware of what appears to be occurring, it is time.

For your convenience, below are a number of links of articles and videos as a starting point. Should you find others, please comment with the link! We all have to work together to get the news out!

Conservative Tom



http://www.24hgold.com/english/contributor.aspx?

article=4016437284G10020&contributor=Ranting+Andy

http://blog.milesfranklin.com/confiscation-of-401k-accounts

http://www.silverdoctors.com/obama-begins-push-to-confiscate-iras-401ks/

http://www.dailypaul.com/162209/next-ira-401k-confiscation-meeting-obama-needs-our-401ks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCSdx3N1Op0

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/mark-levin-sounds-the-alarm-on-governments-plan-to-nationalize-401k-plans-video/

Want To Save Social Security--Look To Your IRA

We have written here previously about the government's need to save "entitlements" and other sacred cow programs especially now with the fiscal cliff approaching.  So how does one save these programs without devastating  the economy?

Our belief is that the leadership in Congress and the White House have been looking at various choices, none of which will be good. However, one that has to be enticing is the "rolling over" of assets in your 401(k), IRA, 403(b) or 457 plan into Social Security.

As the following article indicates, these assets are in excess of $5 Trillion dollars. What a juicy target!  There are  a couple issues that Congress would have to resolve before this plan could go forward.  These assets are for the most part  pre-tax and therefore taxes have not been paid on them, so handling the taxation issue would be thorny. Could someone really be forced to pay taxes on dollars they would not receive until they went onto Social Security? Or would the taxes only be due upon receiving the benefit? 

Secondly, how would the increase in a participant's Social Security be calculated? Would it be based upon mortality tables? Would any interest be imputed into the length of time that the government held your money before you could collect?

Lastly, would Americans rebel at having their retirement assets "seized/confiscated" by the government even though it was saving Social Security? Would this cause the average Joe/Jane to get off their backsides?

The one issue that is also not discussed by those promoting this plan (we are not in that group) is that today, if you die, your retirement assets will pass to whomever you want. If they are moved to the Social Security system, would your beneficiaries be able to get them back if you die before receiving them or would they be moved to the beneficiaries Social Security account(s)?

There are lots of questions and few answers but with the amount of money on the table one can expect that it is getting intense attention. By the way in the past few years, there have been Congressional hearings on this idea. At that time nothing occurred, however, once an idea is broached, it rarely is forgotten.

We will continue to monitor the situation as we approach the cliff and beyond and should anything be reported, we will get the information to you.

Conservative Tom

Cerulli: IRA assets total $5.3 trillion in Q1 2012

BY WARREN S. HERSCH

DECEMBER 12, 2012 • REPRINTS

Share on twitterShare on facebookShare on emailShare on printMore Sharing Services6

Photo credit: KROMKRATHOG

Individual retirement account assets reached an estimated $5.3 trillion in the first quarter of 2012, a nearly 9 percent rise over the $4.8 trillion in estimated assets for 2011, according to a new report.

Cerulli Associates, Boston, released this finding in the November edition of “Evolution of the Retirement Investor 2012: Understanding 401(k) Participant Dynamics and Trends in Rollover and Retirement Income,” a Cerulli Special Quantitative Update. The report includes an analysis of defined contribution plan participants, individual retirement account (IRA) assets and the rollover decision, and the retirement income landscape.

Rollover contributions totaled $307 billion in 2011. Nearly two-thirds of the assets (65.4 percent or $207 billion) were rolled over through an advisor, the average balance of a rollover totaling $115,000. Of the $201 billion, 83 percent ($167 billion) was handled by an existing advisor. The balance ($34 billion or 17 percent) went through a new advisor, the research shows.

The remaining retirement assets were, the report adds, rolled over to a self-directed IRA ($105 billion) or a new employer’s plan ($2 billion.)

More than half of the survey participants (52.2 percent) indicated they rolled over their 401(k) balance“immediately after leaving” an employer-sponsored plan. Smaller percentages of plan participants took action within a year of leaving (24.7 percent), still hold an account with their employer (12.8 percent), waited more than years after leaving before taking action (5.8 percent) or acted within two years of their departure (4.6 percent).

More than 7 in 10 of the plan participants said either they were not sure whether their plan charges aninvestment fee (37.4 percent) or said there were no fees (35.3 percent). Fewer respondents noted their plan charges investment fees that also pay for administration fees (10.9 percent), investment fees and an additional administration fee (10.5 percent) or an investment fee only (6 percent).

When asked about factors to consider when determining how much to contribute to their 401(k) plan, almost half of those polled (48.6 percent) indicated a matching contribution by their company. More than 4 in 10 (42.3 percent) flagged their personal budget.

Let Syria Kill Their Own

Should America go into Syria? We already have destabilized the rest of the Middle East, save Israel with whom efforts are on-going. Why not let another domino fall?  American leadership believes that we need to be the world's  policeman. The only problem is that when we get troops into the country, we don't leave. For example we still have troops in Korea from 1953, in Kosovo from 1999, in Afghanistan since 2001 and Iraq since 2003. (Yes there still are troops there!!) Why can't we just leave when the work is done?

We seem to believe that we can do only good by being there. The problem with that philosophy is that we have spread ourselves so far.  In addition to the countries mentioned previously, we have troops in over 80 countries, Why?

Rome also spread itself so thin that when it came to defend itself, it could not. Additionally, the amount of money needed to keep troops and supplies in distant lands is expensive.  It could not be done 2000 years ago and it cannot be done today.

Also, many of the countries in which we have troops, do not have their own military as they have Americans to protect them. It is time we let them do their part in their own protection. It is time to pull back to only vital areas where the countries need our support and bring the rest of the troops home to defend the homeland. Maybe then we could patrol the southern border? Yes, we understand that is a bit drastic, however, America can no longer police the world.

So we are definitely against any military involvement in Syria, regardless of whether they use gas on their own people. It should not be our fight and we should not get involved.

That is our opinion. What is yours?

Conservative Tom

Not Worth The Effort

December 11, 2012 by Ben Crystal 

PHOTOS.COM

Last week, word filtered back from the Mideast: Syria, normally a veritable Shangri-La, loaded chemical weapons into warheads for deployment against rebels in the civil war which has torn the land asunder and absorbed billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives. While initial reactions focused on details such as the source of the weapons of mass destruction and/or how feisty Israel might respond to the news, the bigger question loomed: whither the United States?

Outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned the regime of Bashar Assad against doing an impression of Saddam Hussein circa 1988, cautioning him against crossing what she called a “red line.” Assad should be careful. After the “red line” comes the yellow line. Beyond that lies the dreaded fuchsia line… I think. Actually, Clinton’s warning on behalf of President Barack Obama is no laughing matter. If I were Assad, I’d be quaking in my keffiyeh.

Obama’s once-lauded stance against war has, ahem, evolved. And the installation of the Islamofascist Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and absolute chaos in Libya prove that Obama’s evolutionary progression is taking him farther from the Nobel Peace Prize he didn’t earn. He seems to have developed an enjoyment of war without any sense of responsibility for the outcome. Hell, he and his cronies are behind the deaths of no fewer than five Americans, including a U.S. Ambassador. And rather than admit that he and his accomplices hit the guardrail, he led an effort to leave the scene of the accident.

Should Syria — one of the world’s top supporters of terrorism — engage in chemical weapons attacks on its own people, the eyes of the world will turn toward the United States. Like Presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush before him, Obama has made it clear he won’t tolerate such tactics — hence Clinton’s “red line” remark.  But what form would the U.S. response take? As Libya taught everyone outside Obama’s coterie of cretins, aerial strikes and material support serve only to destabilize an already wobbly situation. Giving guns and ammo to the slightly less bad guys is the diplomatic version of kicking out a table leg. In a worst-case scenario (as Obama should have learned from Benghazi), covering up the murders of Americans at the hands of Islamofascists armed by America is a real hassle.

Eliminating half-assed regime change efforts — and we should — seemingly leaves only two options: do nothing or roll heavy into Damascus like we’re Notre Dame and they’re the Crimson Tide’s cheerleaders. However, dropping the proverbial house on Assad and his goons requires justification. We can’t really say it’s about human rights (ask George W. Bush how well that blarney flies). We can’t even really say it’s about securing oil; Syria is hardly a spigot — and the country’s intramural squabble has severely dented what little petroleum it does manage to squeeze from the bedrock. Heck, if we wanted oil that badly, we could invade Mexico.  Considering the success of the Democrats’ votes-for-amnesty-for-votes plan, invading our Southern neighbor would take considerably less effort; most of their population is seemingly on our side of the border already.

What about a third option? Perhaps we could give our boys and girls in uniform a break.  Instead of committing them to fighting in their third hellhole inside a decade, we could task them with securing a reasonable defensive perimeter around Syria (we could use some of those troops we’re pretending we don’t still have in Iraq). Then we can sit back and let the Islamofascists kill the other Islamofascists. That’s a win-win for the whole world.

Syria is a dump. Its leaders have wrecked their own economy, and the place is a mess. Think: Detroit with sand. Sure, there’s some cool old stuff; Jordan, Israel and Egypt have cooler old stuff. With a resurgent Russia, a still-sinister China and a host of other issues facing us here and abroad, let’s allow Syria to shake itself out… or apart.

–Ben Crysta

Ron Paul's Final Words To Congress

Ron Paul made a farewell speech to Congress in November. In the following link, you can listen to the last minute and a half. It is a spectacular finish to a very distinguished career and well worth the time to hear it. We only wish that the current administration would  understand what he is saying.

We might have disagreed with Dr. Paul's foreign policy but had hoped that he would be named Secretary of the Treasury had Romney won. Unfortunately for all of us, that did not occur.

Ron Paul has now retired but we hardly believe that he will go out to pasture. We expect that he will be writing and making speeches for years.

Have a great retirement, Dr. Paul and thanks for the final words.

Conservative Tom


Here is the link:
http://youtu.be/UBU1IYzrwyA

Cliff Threatens More Than US Finances

The financial crisis, while very important, threatens more than just the country's finances. If allowed to occur, it will destroy "the American Spirit" that made America what it is. 

What is the American Spirit? It is the nebulous dream of becoming successful based on your own work ethic and brains and not who your parents were or where you were born. It is the reason that immigrants have come to these shores. It is the story that every parent has told their child, that you can be or do anything you desire. It is the "house on the hill" about which Reagan spoke.

Those of us who were born here don't realize how special a place this country is and how important this feeling of American spirit is. It is what distinguishes America from every country in the world. 

We have always been a bunch of mutts here. None of us have titles or owe their place in society due to their lineage.  We revel in our independence, our freedoms and our "can do" attitude. All of which could be lost if we go over the cliff.

The following post by Jon Kraushar says it very well. Take the time to read it and let  us know what you think.

Conservative Tom

Forget the fiscal crisis, Obama's plans threaten our American spirit

By Jon Kraushar

Published December 11, 2012

FoxNews.com

• 
  Nov. 16, 2012: President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner meet at the White House. (AP)

America faces a philosophical "cliff" even more dangerous than the impending "fiscal cliff."

The highest stake in the game of chicken between President Obama and the Republicans isn’t money—it is mindset.

Throughout its history, America has been richer or poorer in money. But what has made our country so exceptional, from its founding, has been a constant store of philosophical wealth. In America, a person’s wealth (whether material or spiritual) used to be defined by a dedication to the virtue of striving.

What made every American great was a belief in potential—a belief that there are no limits to what an individual can produce for him (or her) self, instead of relying on a government to give away, take away and redistribute. It was a belief that abundance is virtually limitless in human capability, but it is unvirtuously limited by big government.

President Obama is trying to transform America from a society of aspiration to a society of envy.

-

In Obama’s new abnormal America, the national diet for many citizens is changing from high fiber ambition for upward mobility to high fat consumption of an ever-expanding gravy boat of entitlements, ladled out by ceaseless government spending. 

As The Heritage Foundation points out, “Today, more people than ever before—67.3 million Americans, from college students to retirees to welfare beneficiaries—depend on the federal government for housing, food, income, student aid, or other assistance once considered to be the responsibility of individuals, families, neighborhoods, churches, and other civil society institutions.” 

Federal entitlements consume 62 percent of federal outlays—the highest level in our nation’s history. The Declaration of Independence that created America is being distorted into a Declaration of Dependency encouraged by President Obama. This is not just a crisis of the wallet. It is a crisis of the soul.

What is happening now—the way in which Mr. Obama really wants to “fundamentally transform America”—is that he wants to use the fiscal cliff to propel us over a far more perilous philosophical cliff, which is bottomless in its destructive depth.

I can only conclude that the president is trying to transform America from a society of aspiration to a society of envy—and if that happens, America risks falling into a philosophical poverty that could starve our country’s uniqueness to death.

People who love our country should be advocating that we become an Opportunity Society. Resentment of achievement, resentment of success, resentment that people differ in their capabilities and acquisitions, fosters a Misfortune Society. That is a zero sum society, where anyone’s striving and accomplishment necessarily turns someone else into a victim. And in a Misfortune Society, victims must be made whole with pieces taken from so-called “unfair” victors, to be poured into more government spending and more entitlements to insure that voters keep “investing” in the big government that subsidizes them.

There is a difference between fair share and sharing fairly. America has a progressive system of the fair share that citizens give up to government, regardless of whether it is in the form of money or government control.

But President Obama wants to stretch that fair share to an unfair point.  Instead of citizens admiring success and thinking that with a combination of hard work and limitless opportunity they, too, could achieve the heights of others, Mr. Obama wants to create a citizenry that's indignant about the success of others. He wants people to believe that someone else’s wealth or possessions of any kind must be punished by being diminished and redistributed, according to the president's standards of “fairness.”

What is lost in this warfare of extraction is that you can confiscate and redistribute money or any other kinds of resources. But you cannot insure that wealth and resources will grow and perpetuate unless people have the philosophy—the mindset and attitude—that they will leverage opportunity to personally produce more and more of what they desire. Just as you cannot tax and spend your way to prosperity, you cannot tax and spend away the innate ambition of Americans and expect prosperity to flourish. 

America can survive falling off the fiscal cliff. But America cannot survive as the engine of hope, change, growth and leadership for the world if it falls down the philosophical cliff that President Obama wants to create.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/12/11/forget-fiscal-crisis-obama-plans-threaten-our-american-spirit/#ixzz2Erf3fWlJ

Great Depression Times Two

Fed Chairman Bernacke announced today  that he would add another purchase of US Treasuries bringing the total to nearly $4 trillion. That is nearly double the same amount held by  China and Japan and nearly as much as held by ALL foreign countries.  The September 2012 report from the Treasury (source below) confirms that both of the two largest holders had $2.285 trillion invested in our "junk".

For years, we have heard that China is buying us lock, stock and barrel and before we know it, we will all have to be speaking Chinese. What a piece of malarkey!  We have been sold a bill of goods and for one, Tom is tired of it. The reality is that China has been reducing its purchases over the past year, not greatly but the numbers have continued to fall.

Our government is on a spending binge that can only end the same way a drunken sailor's ends, bankrupt, penniless and in shambles.  We cannot tax our way out and spending cuts necessary to achieve our goals would be met with universal protest.  Folks, there is no way to solve the problem.

In the current crisis, the "leadership" in Washington will come up with some "fix" either before or after we go over the fiscal cliff. The problem is that  it only will put a band-aid on a broken foot. We will continue to face financial problems until there  is no longer a way out. Just like the drunk who promises that his ways have changed everything will be fine until he goes into the next bar which means the next budget plan by the government.

We, as a country, are spoiled. Our legislators have lavished generous plans on top of more benefits for years and now it has come time to pay for them and the cupboard is bare. ObamaCare, Medicare, Social Security, welfare, to name just a couple are drowning us. We need a major surgery and are willing only to take an aspirin.

It is time to prepare for the worst that your mind can conceive and then multiply it by ten! Think of the German economy in the 30's, that is where we are heading! It is not if, but when!

Conservative Tom


Here are the sources:
http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Documents/mfh.txt

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/fed-seen-pumping-assets-4-050000764.html

Unemployment Data Lies

We do not believe government numbers and in the following post by Paul Craig Roberts,  we being to understand why. He shows us how we really have Great Depression  unemployment numbers. Why is our government lying to us?  We blame the education system and the media and our lack of ability to think.

Our educators have not trained us to think, to divine,  and to pull together seemingly unrelated pieces of information. This ability to make up your own mind based on discovering data is not something that comes naturally, it must be learned. In schools, we do not work on readin' and 'writin, we work on feelings, cooperation and not recitation. A democracy, or in our case a  republic, cannot continue to exist with an uninformed, illiterate populace.

In times past, the news media  would go out and "dig up the skeletons". They would  discover the news behind the news. However in today's world, where all news is entertainment, spending dollars on reporters running around the country is expensive.  
Money can be spent on several sensational projects that will get the same viewership.  On top of that, the news media has forgotten that its role is to present both sides of the story and instead has become a promoter of the Democratic party and its mission.

So when you add up a country that is poorly educated and a news media that presents only one side of the story, is it any wonder that the government can come up with phony numbers and the lap dog press spews this drivel as if it was real.  

In the eyes of the press, there is no "story" here.  Numbers are boring and parsing the difference between U.3, U.6 and SGS would not make exciting entertainment. Yet that is where the real truth lies. If we still used the numbers of the 30's we would have nearly 23% unemployment. The difference is that in the 30's there was no unemployment compensation, social security, social security disability or welfare.  Today, we don't see the unemployed lining up for food or jobs, it is all done by computer. That is not sexy news and so the news media says "Ho Hum" and moves onto the latest story about the celeb who gets arrested for whatever.

So the government feeds us the slop and we eat it up. What else are they misleading us on? Who knows but if one expects the truth from government, we still have that bridge for sale in Arizona.

Conservative Tom

More Phony Employment Numbers

December 11, 2012 by Paul Craig Roberts 

PHOTOS.COM

Statistician John Williams (shadowstats.com) calls the government’s latest jobs and unemployment reports “nonsense numbers.”

There are a number of ongoing problems with the released numbers. For example, the concurrent-seasonal factor adjustments are unstable. The birth-death model adds non-existent jobs each month that are then taken out in the annual downward benchmark revisions. Williams calculates that the job overstatement through November averages 45,000 monthly. In other words, employment gains during 2012 have been overstated by about 500,000 jobs. Another problem is that each month’s jobs number is boosted by downside revision of the previous month’s jobs number. Williams reports that the 146,000 new jobs reported for November “was after a significant downside revision to October’s reporting. Net of prior-period revisions, November’s seasonally-adjusted monthly gain was 97,000.”

Even if we believe the government that 146,000 new jobs materialized during November, that is the amount necessary to stay even with population growth and therefore could not be responsible for reducing the unemployment rate from 7.9 percent to 7.7 percent. The reduction is due to how the unemployed are counted.

The 7.7 percent rate is known as the “headline rate.” It is the rate you hear in the news. Its official designation is U.3.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has another official unemployment rate known as U.6.
The difference is that U.3 does not include discouraged workers who are not currently actively seeking a job. (A discouraged worker is a person who has given up looking for a job because there are no jobs to be found.) The U.6 measure includes workers who have been discouraged for less than one year. The U.6 rate of unemployment is 14.4 percent, about double the headline rate.

The U.6 rate does not include long-term discouraged workers, those who have been discouraged for more than one year. John Williams estimates this rate and reports the actual rate of unemployment (known as SGS) in November to be 22.9 percent.

In other words, the headline rate of unemployment is one-third the actual rate.

The drop in the November headline rate of unemployment from 7.9 percent to 7.7 percent is due to a 20.4 percent increase in the number of short-term discouraged workers in November. In other words, unemployed people rolled out of the U.3 measure into the U.6 measure.
Similarly, a number of short-term discouraged workers roll out of the U.6 measure into Williams’ measure that includes all of the unemployed. Williams reports that “with the continual rollover, the flow of headline workers continues into the short-term discouraged workers (U.6), and from U.6 into long term discouraged worker status (a ShadowStats.com measure), at what has been an accelerating pace. The aggregate November data show an increasing rate of individuals dropping out of the headline (U.3) labor force.” In other words, the headline rate of unemployment can drop even though the unemployed are having a harder time finding jobs.

The U.S. government simply lowers the unemployment rate by not counting all of the unemployed. We owe this innovation to the Administration of Bill Clinton. In 1994, the Clinton Administration redefined “discouraged workers” and limited this group to those who are discouraged for less than one year. Those discouraged for more than one year are no longer considered to be in the labor force and ceased to be counted as unemployed.

If the U.S. government will mislead the public about unemployment, it will also
mislead about Syria, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Pakistan, Yemen, Lebanon, Palestine, Russia, China and 9/11. The government fits its story to its agenda.

A government that wants to cut the social safety net doesn’t want you to know that the unemployment rate is 22.9 percent. A government that wants to cut the social safety net when between one-fifth and one-fourth of the workforce is out of work looks hard-hearted, mean-spirited and foolish. But if the government reports only one-third of the unemployed and presents that rate as falling, then the government can present its cuts as prudent to avoid falling over a “fiscal cliff.”

If the “free and democratic” Americans cannot even find out what the unemployment rate is, how do they expect to find out about anything?

–Paul Craig Roberts

Say Goodbye To America's Superpower Status

When (not if) we go over the cliff, our superpower status will be decimated!  This has been the aim of the Obama Administration ever since he promised he would "change" America.  Goal number one will be accomplished!

Report: U.S. Will Lose Superpower Status By 2030

December 11, 2012 by Sam Rolley 

PHOTOS.COM

By the year 2030, the United States will no longer be considered a world superpower, but it isn’t expected to be replaced by another nation gaining superpower status, according to a National Intelligence Council report.

Power will shift, rather, to “networks and coalitions in a multipolar world,” according to the “Global Trends 2030” report.

The world of 2030 will be radically different from the world today in terms of power structure. By 2030, no country will be a hegemonic power.

The new divisions of power, according to the report, will lead to a reversal in the historic rise in Western power since 1750. This will be integral in “restoring Asia’s weight in the global economy and ushering in a new era of ‘democratization’ at the international and domestic level.”

The report says:

The diffusion of power among countries will have a dramatic impact by 2030. Asia will have surpassed North America and Europe combined in terms of global power, based upon GDP, population size, military spending, and technological investment. China alone will probably have the largest economy, surpassing that of the United States a few years before 2030. In a tectonic shift, the health of the global economy increasingly will be linked to how well the developing world does—more so than the traditional West. In addition to China, India, and Brazil, regional players such as Colombia, Indonesia, Nigeria, South Africa, and Turkey will become especially important to the global economy.

The report says that a best case scenario as global power shifts would be the United States and China becoming strong economic allies who collaborate on a range of issues. Less desirable outcomes, according to the report, would be that global shifts in power lead to conflict as nations seek to gather more resources.

Watch What You Write In Your Emails

Please remind me, isn't this the land of the free? Don't we have freedom of speech? It appears as if the FBI and a bunch of other federal agencies did not get the memo. They are monitoring all of our emails every day. This is not the way freedom is preserved.

To make sure they know what is going on, the government is building storage facilities to store all of  your emails even if you were writing to your Aunt Tilly. Can you imagine the amount of garbage they are storing? More frightening is the prospect that anyone, like us bloggers, will have our words come back to haunt us!  

Can you imagine an out-of-control government using word searches to convict people on trumped up charges of sedition?  Could you defend yourself from things you have written to a friend, no less a public forum like a blog? What if the President enacted a proclamation that says all guns needed to be collected and you said "I will go to jail before giving up my guns."  Do you think the government might come calling?

Or better yet, in a personal email to a friend, you write that the President should be convicted of treason or worse, do you think you might have just put yourself into the line of fire? 

The answer is you must self-monitor what you say. Yes, we mean self censor yourself unless you want the government to come after you.

Friends, we have a government which is storing emails which only means that they are going to use the information for something. Be smart and don't put yourself in the middle of a mess.  

Our freedom of speech is becoming very limited. Not only cannot you yell "fire" in a theater (a good reason for limiting speech) but more importantly, try to use any racial epithet or tell a joke about a certain group and if heard by the wrong person, you will find  yourself in a "sensitivity" class. What you say might have been really dumb, insensitive and make you look like a real idiot, however, isn't that each American's right? 

It is only a small step from where we are today to a time where it is made illegal to criticize any elected official, including the President.  We already have regulations that make it illegal to be within a 1000 feet of the President with a sign critical of him.

So watch what you write, Big Brother is watching!

Conservative Tom

The Government Has Your Emails, All Of Them

December 5, 2012 by Sam Rolley 

PHOTOS.COM

A National Security Administration whistle-blower said in a recent interview that the U.S. government collects massive troves of data about American citizens, which it could use against anyone it chooses.

Speaking with RT, William Binney, a former NSA mathematician and code breaker, said that the Federal government uses a powerful data collection tool to store the contents of virtually every email sent by anyone in the Nation.

“[T]he FBI has access to the data collected, which is basically the e-mails of virtually everybody in the country. And the FBI has access to it. All the congressional members are on the surveillance too, no one is excluded. They are all included. So, yes, this can happen to anyone. If they become a target for whatever reason — they are targeted by the government, the government can go in, or the FBI, or other agencies of the government, they can go into their database, pull all that data collected on them over the years, and we analyze it all. So, we have to actively analyze everything they’ve done for the last 10 years at least,” he said.

Binney said the government is collecting the information in bulk without any regard to whether the individuals whose information is being stored is subject to criminal investigation at this time or is considered a threat to national security. According to the former NSA agent, the data is collected with a powerful information technology device called Naris which is capable of collecting all information being sent over fiber optic cables in the United States. The information is then stored in vast data collection centers where it can be searched later by Federal agents.

This sort of vast data snooping by the Federal government was first brought to light when it was discovered that the NSA was working with AT&T to monitor customer phone and Internet activity via a secret office at the company’s headquarters. The discovery led to a lawsuit and much stonewalling by the Federal government.

Binney says government surveillance of data over fiber optic networks has increased since the first lawsuit was filed against AT&T for allowing Fed snoops to mine its data networks. He claims that under the Administration of Barack Obama the government has even had to build larger facilities to store all of the data it is collecting from Americans’ inboxes.

“They are doing more. He is supporting the building of the Buffdale facility, which is over two billion dollars they are spending on storage room for data. That means that they are collecting a lot more now and need more storage for it,” he said. “That facility by my calculations that I submitted to the court for the electronic frontiers foundation against NSA would hold on the order of 5 zettabytes of data. Just that current storage capacity is being advertised on the web that you can buy. And that’s not talking about what they have in the near future.”