Conservative Musings

Our goal is to have intelligent discussion of the topics of the day. We realize everyone has their opinion and they should be allowed to express it in a discussion forum without calling each other names. We learn from discussion and not from name calling or argument.We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. See details

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Is it Ron Paul's time?

In November last year we wrote in a post (November 23 entitled "Ron Paul Republican Candidate?" which is reproduced below), that we felt Paul could be around near the end of the campaign. It seems that we were on the right track. Interestingly, Santorum, Perry, Cain, Bachman et al are out of the race and who is still there--the missing man, Ron Paul! Will he continue to run until the convention? We believe so. Will he get more press coverage, doubtful. Will he win the nomination for Republican Candidate for President, again probably not. However, should Romney stumble, it is possible (10-25%) but highly unlikely.

That's my opinion, what's yours?

Conservative Tom

Time To Step Up For Ron Paul

April 11, 2012 by Bob Livingston

UPI FILE

Ron Paul is a more attractive candidate to independents and moderates than Mitt Romney.

With Rick Santorum (faux conservative-Pa.)officially “suspending” his campaign andNewt Gingrich (corporatist adulterer-Ga.)fading to inconsequentialness, now is the time for all those “anybody-but-Mitt Romney” Republicans to get behind the only true conservative in the race: Congressman Ron Paul.

Unlike Mitt the Flip, who never held a position he couldn’t change in an instant, Paul has been a consistent and rock-solid conservative his whole career.

He has run his campaign the same way. While other candidates have soared to the top of the polls only to flame out like a New Year’s sparkler, Paul’s campaign has plodded along, amassing delegates along the way. (Don’t believe the media’s delegate count. Paul’s people are working behind the scenes to capture uncommitted delegates and take over local Republican Party offices, much to the dismay of the Republican establishment.)

Unlike Romney, Paul holds truly conservative ideals. He has pledged to balance the budget in three years. He will cut $1 trillion from the budget in the first year and eliminate five cabinet departments (Energy, Housing and Urban Development, Commerce, Interior and Education). He will abolish the Transportation Security Administration, end corporate subsidies (corporate welfare), stop foreign aid and return most spending to 2006 levels.

According to a recent New York Times/CBS News Poll, 69 percent of Americans believe the United States should end its involvement in the Afghanistan war. Paul has said he’ll bring the troops home immediately.

Paul is more pro-gun, pro-Constitution and pro-liberty than Romney. Most importantly, while Romney wears Massachusetts’ Romneycare around his neck like a millstone, Paul has none of that baggage. And Paul is a more attractive candidate to independents and moderates than Romney.

There are still 19 States that have not held their primaries: Connecticut, Delaware, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Indiana, North Carolina, West Virginia, Nebraska, Oregon, Arkansas, Kentucky, Texas, California, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, South Dakota and Utah. There are still 1,152 delegates left to be awarded in those States. And while Paul will not win enough delegates before the convention to lock up the nomination, it’s important that Romney doesn’t either.

Then real conservatives can nominate a real conservative candidate that can beat Barack Obama in November.

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 2011

Ron Paul The Republican Candidate?

Can Ron Paul win? Can he get enough air time in the debates to show his abilities? Can he defeat Gingrich and Romney at a game where he is not slick? Is he a valuable commodity to the Republican race or a distraction? All of these are interesting academic questions and would make a great debate if one wanted to start one. Which I do!
As I see it Romney and Gingrich are both progressives in the Republican party. Neither is really conservative and both really do not see anything wrong with the country right now except that Republicans don't have their hands on all the handles of power. Would either be better than Obama, marginally. Not much would change if either were elected.
On the other hand, if Ron Paul would be the President, one could expect to see major departures in policy. We would see a major pull back in troop deployment around the world and a departure in who we pay foreign aid. In both of these areas, we believe he is on the right track. However, he also would propose major reductions in military spending, more than the SuperCommittee's lack of leadership has given us. We need to maintain our armed forces to be the best in the world and we don't think that is the same goal that Dr. Paul has.
Ron may be the last man standing when the dust settles. If Gingrich and Romney go after each other, they could destroy themselves and their opponent and that would leave Dr. Paul. Additionally, the way the Republicans have gone to proportional delegate counts and done away with "winner takes all', opens the door to a long Republican campaign. It might force the convention decide the winner. That would be fun!
The next year will bring all sorts of intrigue and for those of us who love the battle of politics, it is very interesting to see how it will play out.

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

More Ammo Purchases

We continue to find more purchases by different government agencies. Why?

There can only be one reason--they believe something bad is coming and that they will need this ammunition to control whatever is coming. Are they expecting an invasion of Martians?

One can only be left with one assumption, it is going to be used against Americans. Are things going to get so bad in the economy that there will be riots? Are they planning to have riots? Are they planning to take things from Americans that would cause them to riot?

We are not trying to scare anyone, however, with the purchases outlined in the following article, the purchases of bullet resistant guard booths, the relative poor state of the economy, and the overseas debt issues make us concerned with what might happen.

If you were in the government, why would you be buying all this ammo? (It's not for training!) We want to know. If you find out what it is used for, please let us know and we will publish. If you find out that there is a plan that would make even docile Americans pick up their pitchforks and go to the streets, let us know because we all need to know.

Conservative Tom

The US Government Has Ordered Over 750 Million Rounds of .40 Caliber Hollow Point Ammunition in the Last Three Years

35 Comments

The Intel Hub
April 4, 2012

In the last three years numerous domestic US government agencies have ordered a total of over 750 million rounds of .40 caliber ammunition.

That’s right, multiple government agencies that specifically operate primary inside the United States have gone on a literal ammunition spending spree in preparation for what they must believe will be some sort of violent event.

In 2009, Winchester Ammunition was awarded a contract to supply the Department of Homeland Security with 200 million rounds of .40 caliber hollow point ammunition.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Winchester Ammunition was recently awarded a contract by the Immigration, Customs and Enforcement (ICE) division of the Department of Homeland Security to supply a maximum of 200 million, 40 cal. rounds over the next five years. Source

This huge ammunition order was apparently only the beginning.

In early March 2012 ATK won an indefinite delivery contract to supply DHS with a whooping 450 million more .40 caliber hollow point rounds.

ATK has secured a major Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity deal to supply up to 450 million rounds of .40 caliber ammunition to the Department of Homeland Security.
The 1 year contract with four option years comes at a time when many Americans believe that DHS, along with certain aspects of the military, will soon turn their sights on the American people during some sort of martial law scenario.
“We are proud to extend our track record as the prime supplier of .40 caliber duty ammunition for DHS, ICE,” said Ron Johnson, the president of ATK’s Security and Sporting group,” reported a PR Newswire release.

The Department of Homeland Security is not the only US agency openly stocking up on .40 caliber ammo.

In November 2011 the FBI posted a request to the FBO.gov website for up to 100,000,000 rounds of hollow point ammunition.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reserves the right to make multiple award under RFP-OSCU-TD2WP7101 for a fixed price indefinite-delivery indefinite-quantity type contract.
The anticipated period of performance will be for one (1) base year and four (4) possible one-year options. The contractor will provide commercial, “off-the-shelf” .40 caliber ammunition compatible with pistols currently used by the FBI.

Not to be left out of the ammunition stocking spree, the US Forest Service recently purchased 320,000 rounds of ammo and, for their part, the US Fish and Wildlife Service is seeking an additional 13,500 rounds.

Added: Sep 28, 2011 5:15 pm
(1) 40 caliber, 180 grain, 120,000 rounds or equivalent,
(2) 9 mm, 124 grain, 50,000 rounds or equivalent,
(3) .38 caliber, 135 grain, 10,000 rounds or equivalent,
(4) .380 caliber, 90 grain, 6,000 rounds or equivalent,
(5) .223 caliber, 64 grain, 87,500 rounds or equivalent,
(6) 12 gauge 00 buck, 15,000 rounds or equivalent,
(7) 40 caliber frangible, 10,000 rounds or equivalent,
(8) 9 caliber frangible, 10,000 rounds or equivalent,
(9) .223 caliber frangible, 10,000 rounds or equivalent,
(10) 12 gauge 1 oz slug, 7,500 rounds or equivalent
The cartridges shall be delivered to Albuquerque, NM.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services require the following items, Exact Match Only, to the following:
1. Remington Frangible .40 Caliber Pistol Ammunition – 2,500 rounds
2. Remington .40 Caliber Pistol Ammunition (180 grain) Full Metal Jacket – 6,000 rounds
3. Remington .223 Caliber Rifle Ammunition (62 grain) Full Metal Jacket – 3,000 rounds
4. Remington FX Marking Cartridges (9 mm) – 2,000 rounds

Why is the US government buying millions of rounds of hollow point bullets specifically for use in domestic operations while at the same time attempting to label everyday gun owning Americans as possible terrorists?

Arab Spring Tolerance? Wrong

Those who thought the Arab Spring was a revolution of moderate or non-secular Muslims have to learn more about the peaceful religion of Islam. (Pardon me while we gag!) It is far from moderate as the events in Tunisia contained in the following report. We are not prognosticators but we surely can understand human nature and Islam. Our comment is, anyone who is living in an "Arab Spring" country who is not Muslim, will have their rights trammeled upon, will have their religion outlawed, and expect major killing sprees and church/synagogue burning in the name of Allah. Meanwhile, the world will watch and say "those are internal matters into which we should not involve ourselves."

The worst part is that most people will either consciously or unconsciously ignore the events as they unfold and say "what can I do?" The answer is simple, get involved. Read about the events that are occurring, make others aware, write comments and publish them on a blog (or send them to us so that we can), and call, write and make your leaders know that this is unacceptable behavior. We must stop the march of Islam before it is on our doorsteps!

If actions are not taken soon, Europe will be Islamicized and then the next step will be to the US. The question you have to ask yourself is, do I (or my children, grandchildren) want to live in an Islamic society? If we don't take action, we will!

Conservative Tom

Tunisia: Muslims Threaten Church, Cover Its Cross with Garbage Bags

Raymond Ibrahim - FrontPage Magazine, April 10th, 2012

According to Al Quds, last Tuesday it was revealed that the Christian Orthodox Church in Tunis, one of very few churches in the country of Tunisia, is being “abused” and receiving “threatening messages” from “Salafis.” Church members are described as “living in a state of terror,” so much so that the Russian ambassador in Tunis specifically requested the nation’s Ministry of Interior to “protect the church.”

The abuse has gotten to the point where “Salafis covered the cross of the church with garbage bags, telling the church members that they do not wish to see the vision of the Cross anywhere in the Islamic state of Tunisia.”

Among all the Arabic-speaking nations, Tunisia has long been described as one of the most “secular” and “liberal”; it was also the first nation where the much ballyhooed “Arab Spring” began. Now its very few churches are not tolerated, and their crucifixes abhorred. If this is “tolerant” Tunisia, what should one expect from the more “radical” nations? More evidence of the true nature of the “Arab Spring.”

Monday, April 9, 2012

Abbas Wants Statehood Via UN

Abbas wants statehood but at what price to Israel? Returning to the 1967 borders would leave the Western Wall under Palestinian control, something Israel should never agree to. Is Abbas bluffing or will he go ahead? We think the latter.

Your opinion?
Conservative Tom

Abbas to pursue statehood at UN assembly if no talks

Unknown - Ma'an News, April 9th, 2012

BETHLEHEM (Ma'an) — President Mahmoud Abbas said Sunday he will ask the UN General Assembly to recognize Palestinian statehood if Israel does not respond to his demands for the resumption of negotiations.

After Palestine's inconclusive bid for recognition by the United Nations Security Council in September 2011, officials in recent months revised their opposition to a lesser upgrade with the larger assembly.

The PLO — currently listed as an observer “entity” with no voting rights — applied for full membership of the UN on Sept. 23. An admissions committee said on Nov. 11 it had failed to reach an agreement on the bid.

It had been previously suggested that Palestine could instead seek upgraded observer status via the General Assembly to make it a non-member observer state, like the Vatican.

The president's confirmation on Sunday that he plans to pursue this path if negotiations with Israel continue to stumble, came as he met with the Geneva Peace Initiative and Palestinian-Israeli peace alliance in Ramallah.

He told the delegates that the letter he is writing to Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu is an attempt to break the deadlock in the peace process.

The missive will reiterate the president's position that Palestine will not return to peace talks until Israel stops all settlement expansion in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, accepts a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders, and releases Palestinian political prisoners, Abbas said.

Presidential adviser Nimir Hammad indicated earlier that Palestinian envoys would deliver the message next week, but negotiator Saeb Erekat told Ma'an on Sunday they were still waiting for Israeli confirmation of the meeting.

Israeli and Palestinian delegates met for five rounds of exploratory talks in Jordan during January, after the Quartet of international negotiators — the US, UN, Russia and EU — called for proposals by the end of the month.

The talks failed to lead to new negotiations. Palestinian envoys said they gave their briefs in early January, but Israel had not presented a serious proposal during the talks. They also refer to Israel's continued expansion of Jewish-only settlements on land needed for a viable Palestinian state.

Abbas on Sunday told Israeli members of the delegation — including former Israeli ministers Yossi Beilin and Amnon Shahak, and Chairperson of Meretz party Zahava Gal — to tell the Israeli public of Palestinians' desire for peace and dismay at the deadlock in talks.

Russia Meddling in Syria

Russia's Show of Syrian Force

Matthew RJ Brodsky - The Huffington Post, April 5th, 2012

While Western and Arab countries struggle to find a way to assist the Syrian people, Moscow is continuing to do all it can to save the Assad regime of Syria. Speaking on a trip to Azerbaijan, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said the Syrian opposition wouldn't be able to overwhelm government forces even if it was supplied with weapons from abroad. He warned that a foreign military intervention would lead to even more disastrous consequences for Syria and further urged other nations not to arm the Syrian opposition. Lavrov's statements came just days after Russia and China boycotted the latest “Friends of Syria” gathering in Istanbul — a weak diplomatic effort aimed at assisting the Syrian opposition.

That the U.S. and most Western nations are at odds with Russian policy should not come as a surprise. Nevertheless, the manner in which Moscow is shamelessly pushing its case demonstrates the seriousness with which they view the Syrian issue. Take, for instance, the Capitol Hill briefing on Tuesday afternoon held by the Russian embassy and hosted by Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL). Led by embassy officials Anton Vushkarnik and Sergey Kuznetsov, they refused to even acknowledge that Bashar al-Assad was killing his own people. They brazenly defended their ongoing sale of arms to the Assad regime by citing that there was no international law that prevents such sales — even though it was Russia and China that vetoed the very UN Security Council resolution that would have put the ban in place. In pressing their point, the Russian officials even dusted off the tired old canard and drew an equivalency between the killing of civilians in Syria and Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.

But Russia isn't merely using words to assist Assad or providing diplomatic cover as it wields its Security Council veto powers. They have sent Special Forces to Syria to conduct “anti-terrorism” missions and Russian military advisers are training the Syrian army. Russian Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly explained, “When we supply the weapons, we have to provide the training.” Then there is the deployment of a third Russian warship to the region — a guided-missile destroyer named the smetlivy, which is scheduled to dock at the Syrian port of Tartus in the coming days. Two other Russian warships arrived at the Russian naval base on March 19, joining up with a Russian naval reconnaissance and surveillance ship already anchored in Tartus. All of which follows the Russian ship that carried tons of munitions to Syria in January.

So much for the Russian “reset” President Obama has been doggedly pursuing since coming to office. In fact, Russian policy vis-à-vis Syria provides yet another stark example of Team Obama's inability to anticipate the diplomatic gridlock that was bound to arise. A year of moribund diplomacy with Russia was wasted on the Syrian file because the Obama administration was unable to accurately assess Russian interests.

First, there are economic interests. Russia's longstanding ties to Syria generate billions of dollars in arms sales. Moscow is the number one arms supplier in the Middle East, the world's second largest arms exporter, and it continues to supply Damascus with advanced missile systems. To put it in perspective, Russian arms sales to Syria and Algeria alone account for one-eighth of its portfolio of worldwide arms sales, which totals $48 billion a year. In fact, according to the independent Center for Analysis of World Arms Trade, Syria is Russia's seventh-largest customer with sales amounting to 10 percent of Russia's total weapons exports. UN sanctions against Syria could cost Moscow $5 billion in arms sales on top of the $4 billion of contracts lostwhen the UN placed an arms embargo on Libya last year. In addition to that, the only Russian naval base in the Middle East, Tartus, lies in Syria and Moscow has been restoring the base since 2008. Russia has also demonstrated a willingness to pay $2 billion to upgrade its aging Soviet weapons as well as sell Syria new ones. In 2005, Russia forgave 73 percent of Syria's $13.4 billion debt. New Russian-Syrian arms deals are predicated on Damascus not repaying its old Soviet-area debt in return for Syria's continued purchase of Russian weapons. Damascus has proven to be Moscow's loyal customer.

Then there is the geopolitical dimension. The year of Arab upheaval has damaged Russia's interests as regimes friendly towards Moscow have fallen. It sees the future options of either the rise of Islamist governments or the establishment of Arab democracies aligned with the West as troubling developments. Therefore, Syria and Iran represent the stopgap for Russian interests in the Middle East.

Moscow has an overriding interest to fashion itself as an influential power in the Middle East that competes with the West. That is why Iran and Syria are the two keys to Russia's regional relevance. And in the same manner that Syria defined its role in the Middle East as being the regional spoiler, so too has Russia defined itself as the country that can prevent the kind of progress Washington would like to see. Moscow's power initiative in the region is to make itself the mediator — and that makes Syria central to that strategy. Russian President Vladimir Putin understands that his relationship with Syria gives Moscow a seat at the table for any Middle East peace initiatives, guaranteeing that he will be able to punch far beyond his diplomatic weight.

Since the outbreak of the Syrian protests last March, Russia has undermined every possibility of external intervention. The fact that Russia is continuing to arm the Assad regime makes the Kremlin complicit in the growing list of Syrian government atrocities. Instead of wasting resources trying to convince Moscow to abandon its Middle East interests in order to press ahead with more UN resolutions, Washington would do well to assert its role as world leader and work with those countries that have a common interest in Syria.

Kofi Annan's plan and the “Friends of Syria” meetings are a slow start — coming as they did over a year since the protests began — but they are not enough. At the “Friends of Syria” gathering, U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton reiterated that “the world will not waiver, Assad must go, and the Syrian people must be free to choose their own path forward.” But non-lethal support and financial sanctions will not bring down the Assad regime. Absent the desire for a more kinetic military approach, the best option Washington has is to sidestep the Russian roadblock and begin training and arming the Free Syrian Army.