Clover Conditioning

Print Friendly

It is not enough that we break the heretic. We must make him one of us. Words to that effect, as spoken by the character O’Brien to Winston Smith in 1984. Or the off-duty cop running the Court-Community Corrections Program Driver Improvement course I attend this past Saturday. All eight hours’ worth.

I played the part of a good Clover for an entire Saturday – pretending to agree (obligatory) with every jot and tittle of “safety” drivel – in order to disappear a ticket I got a few months prior. Yes, even when you carry a V1 – the finest pork-detector on the market – you are not invincible. Sometimes, it’s just not your day. And then, it’s your turn. A guy in a big SUV pulled out right in front of my car, forcing me to brake hard to avoid him. Annoyed, I broke left and passed the SUV. At just that moment, Officer Stand and Deliver happened to be coming out of a nearby side street. He was perfectly positioned to see me exceed the ridiculous 35 MPH speed limit (50 yards behind me, this same stretch of road is posted 45 and of course traffic is moving closer to 50) as I maneuvered around the obese SmooVee. He painted me with his instant-on and though the V1 chirped furiously, it was already too late. Fifteen minutes later, I had a piece of payin’ paper. My first one in six years.

So, I went to court – because it is always worth going to court. Anything less than a pristine DMV rap sheet and you run the risk of an “adjustment” by your insurance company – no matter that you’ve never so much as scuffed a fender. So, fight every one. I do. And one strategy – or at least, an end run – is to try to get the judge to send you for a day of Clover Conditioning – oops, “driving school” – upon successful completion of which the ticket – and the record of it having ever been issued – goes away. You waste a day to keep the insurance company away. Or at least, keep their assaults on your wallet to a relative minimum.

So, on a perfectly fine Saturday morning at 8 o’ clock sharp, I found myself among 17 penitents awaiting expiation of our sins at the Cardinal Criminal Justice Academy, room 101 (well, ok, room number three – but you get the drift).

What do you spend the next eight hours doing? If you’re among the damned, you spend it listening to a clearly bored off-duty cop go through the mantra: Speed kills. All traffic laws, no matter how absurd (such as coming to a complete stop at the top of a slick hill in winter and thereby losing your momentum and becoming stuck or – worse – sliding backward – because there’s a “stop” sign at the top of the hill) must be obeyed always and every time. All laws are necessary – and righteous – laws. Never exercise judgment or initiative. Just… obey.

You know the drill.

We were each given a workbook of the short bus, fill-in-the-blanks variety. The cop/instructor going over each item in agonizing – because endless – detail. Some of the stuff was not idiotic – but it was idiotically obvious. Example: The following hazards are common in rural areas when driving:  Curves. Tractors. Wildlife and livestock. Hills.

At a green light you may go if the way is … (fill in the blank).

Seriously.

But the Clover Conditioning was the part that was interesting. Among the highlights:

* Informing the class – implicitly – that air bags trump controlling the car -

Remember the old Ten and Two hands-on-the-wheel sweet spot? For decades, student drivers were told to place their hands in those positions (coinciding with clock positions) because it was the best position for maintaining control of the car. It still is – but you’re now told to do otherwise. Eight and Four is where it’s at – because of the air bag that’s in the steering wheel. If you keep ‘em at Ten and Two and the bag goes off, you’re more likely to end up with a broken wrist and burns (from the explosive inflator in the air bag). I had to choke down the urge to ask the cop whether it might not be, you know, safer to keep one’s hands at the old Ten and Two – and thereby decrease the odds of the air bag going off in the first place.

* The Lies -

Our cop instructor told at least one outright lie. Or at the least, he was grossly misinformed. He was talking about traffic lights – and yellow signal timing. He said: “Yellow lights are designed to give you adequate time to come to an appropriate stop.” Apparently, our instructor was unaware of the fact that in numerous places all around the country where red light-running cameras have been installed, yellow intervals were reduced – with the result being that the driver faced the Hobson’s Choice of running the light and risking a ticket – or coming to an abrupt stop and risking being rear-ended by the car behind them. (See here, for example.) Sometimes, it’s safer to clear the intersection. But the fact is that “the law” – and revenue - often trumps safety.

That’s a fact Clovers should chew over a bit.

Our cop also instructed the captives – er, class – that they should “answer the officer’s questions fully and completely” when next they’re pulled over. In other words, be sure to help the cop obtain as much evidence toward your imminent conviction as possible. Throw the Fifth Amendment in the woods. The Fourth and First are already there anyway.

In fact, you should say nothing – nothing! – to a cop who’s pulled you over beyond the legally required minimum: Your name. And even that is not actually required. You may have to hand over ID and other paperwork. You do not have to answer his questions. Because anything you say will be used against you.  A shoulder shrug, an “if you say so” – anything noncommittal –  is what you’re obligation to yourself is. Our cop said nothing along those lines – but then, we know what team he plays for.

He also said: “DMV points are not associated with insurance.” I see. And gravity is not associated with falling, either.

There was also a lot of annoying – because arbitrary and so misleading – “statistics” and “facts” presented as the absolute truth. For example, that “hearing makes up seven percent of all driving knowledge.” Really? Says who? How?

Or, that if you are traveling 55 MPH, it takes “265 feet” to come to a stop. Well, maybe. It depends on the car – and the driver. Some cars have much better brakes than others – and this will have a dramatic effect on stopping distances. My 1976 Trans-Am, for instance, surely requires a lot more real estate to come to a stop from 55 MPH than a new BMW M3. Logical conclusion: The M3 driver is probably safer at 55 than I am in my Trans-Am at 45. But the ticket-writers make no distinction – and neither did our “instructor.”

Also, driver reaction times vary. Senile Sam or Texting Tammy might take longer to notice stopped traffic up ahead than Alert Andy. Which driver is more likely to wreck?

We didn’t get into it, but implicit in all traffic laws is the Law of the Dumbed-Down Average. The law – giving it the benefit of the doubt – assumes the least-able, the marginally competent – and bases its prescriptions accordingly. This may be ok for the marginally competent – but for the competent, it’s not unlike being required to never rise higher than the sixth grade even though you’re capable of graduate-level work. Alert Andy, for example, is probably less likely to cause an accident than Texting Tammy – even if Alert Andy is “speeding” and Texting Tammy isn’t.

We all know this in our guts (some of us, in our heads) and it’s why so much of what passes for “traffic safety enforcement” grates as much as it does. We know we weren’t driving unreasonably fast. We know we just had the bad luck to drive through a speed trap (as in my case).

We wish they’d just take our money – and spare us the Cloveronian lecture about “safety.”

The selective definitions of impairment also bugged me a lot. In my state, where the legal drinking age is 21, a person can be convicted of drunk driving if they are found to have a blood alcohol (BAC) level of .02 percent. Over 21 – and legally able to drink – and it’s .08 percent. So, the young man or woman – old enough to “fight for our freedoms” in the military with all sorts of dangerous equipment – who has the bad luck to roll up on on a Fourth Amendment Free Zone (that is, a “sobriety checkpoint”) and who blows a .02 – an amount so small it amounts to nothing in terms of meaningful impairment – gets a DWI on his rap sheet, with all that entails.

But the glaucoma-laden, Alzheimer’s addled old coot who drives 37 in a 55 is left unmolested. After all, “we’re all going to be old one day.”

A cop actually said this to me.

There was much more – including a detailed explication of the DMV’s points system, notable for its disproportionate punishments such as six points – held against you for 11 years – if you’re ever caught driving faster than 80 MPH… anywhere. Even on the highway,   where the speed limit is 70 – and everyone’s doing 75-80.

And then there was the absurd.

One guy – there’s one in every class – raised his hand (again) to ask what one should do – as a good Clover – when caught behind a tractor doing 5-7 MPH on a country road with a 55 MPH limit where there is a double line and so no legal passing zone. Even if it’s clearly clear for the next two miles – no opposing traffic coming – the cops said: Be patient. Do not pass.

Right. As if he would sit in his squad car doing 5-7 MPH in such a situation. For the next 5-7 miles, until the tractor gets where it’s going.

Similarly with regard to passing cyclists. The law says you must give the cyclist two feet of space as you pass. But of course, this is not possible sometimes without also treading the dreaded double yellow. The common sense thing to do – assuming the opposing lane is free of traffic – is to give the cyclist the space and briefly – for as long as it takes to execute the pass – allow your left side wheels to come into contact with the sacred double yellow. It’s safe – and it’s considerate. You pass the cyclist without getting dangerously close to him. And there’s no conga line of frustrated, getting angry drivers stuck behind the cyclist. Except of course, this is all against the law. Better to be a good Clover and obey. Even if it’s an affront to common sense.

And so it went – for hours.

Finally, four o’clock arrived and with it, the Final Exam. A “knowledge” test of all the foregoing points – or rather, an exercise in Repeat After Me:

Speed kills. All Laws are Good Laws. Cops are there for your safety.

Submit. Obey… .

Throw it in the Woods?  

Share Button

eric

Author of "Automotive Atrocities" and "Road Hogs" (MBI). Currently living amongst the Edentulites in rural SW Virginia. 

  282 comments for “Clover Conditioning

  1. Super Anonymous Joe
    July 9, 2012 at 2:33 pm

    I paid an illegal immigrant to sit through one of those classes for me-best $30 I ever spent.

    90% of the time they take attendance and never check drivers licenses. So you can sign up and then pay someone to show up and raise their hand when your name is called. I just told Jose’ that if they wanted to see a license, tell them he forgot to bring it(which to them is no “stretch”), get up and walk out and I’d sign up for the next class.

    Worked like a charm.

    • methylamine
      July 10, 2012 at 4:57 pm

      Oh excellent, Joe, thank you very much. I shall contribute to someone’s welfare in a similar manner when my “turn” comes around!

    • Terry
      July 11, 2012 at 4:43 pm

      Jose answers to the roll called name (mine) Terry Gallagher?

      Not sure that’s going to go over very well.

      • Super Anonymous Joe
        July 11, 2012 at 7:21 pm

        Very true, I have a name amenable to such things-so it worked out for me.

    • JS
      July 11, 2012 at 7:14 pm

      Can’t understand why Eric didn’t just do the online traffic school. I was done with that in about 30 minutes… cheaper too (at least here in CA).

      Unless he went to make a good story for his blog?

      • Super Anonymous Joe
        July 11, 2012 at 7:22 pm

        In my state online school for traffic school is just coming around now…

      • Al Sledge
        July 12, 2012 at 12:43 am

        We have on-line drivers school in Florida. You read a paragraph and click “next”. But the slides are timed so two sentences would be read in 10 seconds are put up for two minutes. In between slides they put up a picture with numbers and letters that are not easily machine readable and have you parrot the text back. This is to make certain I have not written a program to act as a robotic me. Wrong answer and you must start the class over. The 30 minutes (worst case) reading took 4 hours to complete. After I saw how it was progressing I made a pot of coffee and read about a quarter of Peter Schiff’s latest book, so the times was not an absolute waste.

        Also heard that a group of judges own the site (but I can’t comfirm this) and they charge less than the fines would be. Free enterprise at its greatest!

        • July 12, 2012 at 10:41 am

          In the physical class I took, it’s possible to discreetly snooze if you sit in a back row and use your hand to shade your face a bit…

  2. Mel Torme
    July 9, 2012 at 4:07 pm

    Oh, yeah, traffic school brings back memories … been three times:

    The first one was called The Lettuce Amuse You Traffic School, and it was in, wait for it, southern California. It was a good way to give a budding comedian a start, I will admit. The second time, it was an evening class, and we watched the Lakers in the playoffs (both nights), and discussed ways of avoiding tickets once pulled over (before game time). I found it worthwhile, though I was not sure I was legal to even drive over there to the class (got to drive everywhere in LA).

    Anyway, the last time was in a different area of the country, and this guy made a comment that makes your guy look like an MIT engineer. He says, to be dramatic, “look at the person in front of you and then the one behind you in this classroom. One of three people in the country will die from a traffic accident”. Yes, he said that. Anyway, while the rest of the class is just nodding in agreement of how serious this is, I’m doing the numbers in my head, and shaking it unconciously. The guy’s like “what, you don’t believe that”. “No, I sure don’t. That mean like 3 or 5 million a year, and it’s about 40,000 a year. Sounds way off.” The guy was decent enough to just shut his mouth on that point.

    Oh, and commenter 1, that was really cool. Sound like a win/win. It sounds similar to the way the rich Yankees would pay other men to go fight the Rebels for them during the late unpleasantness. Perfectly legal back then. BTW, did Jose get anything out of it, or does he still drive stone drunk. ;-)

    • KittenJuggler
      July 11, 2012 at 9:09 pm

      Mel Torme: There’s nothing illegal about hiring Mercenaries (Defense Contractors) to kill your enemies today either.

    • Richard+
      July 11, 2012 at 10:22 pm

      There are 300 million people in the country. One out of three (being killed in traffic accidents) would be more than 90 million. Which does seem a bit excessive.

      • Mel Torme
        July 12, 2012 at 2:23 am

        Oh, sorry for the late reply, but, no, you must look at it over a lifetime. He was saying that 1 in 3 would eventually die in a car wreck, not that year. So, I was just doing a quick estimate of 300 million people – if each lived 100 years (easier for my quick-in-my-head estimate) then you figure 100 million people over a 100-year span. That gives a very-approximate 1 million just for a quick check on the innumeracy of this guy. Then, I would call it 1 1/4 million based on a better life-span number of 75 years.

        So actually, I don’t know why I put 3-5 million above, it’d be between 1 and 2 million.

        I guess you are joking by saying “a bit excessive”. Hell, yeah, excessive. Too damn excessive to believe just based on common sense. Do you notice 1/3 of your dead relatives dying of car crashes?

        BTW, a better number would be obtained by getting stats on how many Americans die each year on average and how many are from wrecks, of course. I didn’t have a smart phone at the time to help me with this.

  3. Werner
    July 9, 2012 at 4:17 pm

    A friend of ours always drove with her hands on the tiller in the Ten and Two position. She t-boned a van which ran a red light and had both her arms and two ribs broken by the air bag! It was quite a few years ago when air bags contained enough power to knock a grizzly for a loop! Eight and Four might be safer.

    • July 9, 2012 at 4:26 pm

      Sure – safer in the event you crash and the bag deploys.

      I’d rather have more control of the car, myself. And preferably – no %$#!@!~! air bag at all!

      • methylamine
        July 10, 2012 at 5:11 pm

        Eric I’m looking at disabling my airbags.

        One, for my own safety; I’m always belted.
        Two, for my car’s safety; insurance companies love totaling perfectly good cars for the cost of replacing the airbags and the attendant dash/wheel damage.

        Any idea if this will affect the inspection status? I suppose if it’s just fuses to be removed I could pop them back in for inspection…

        • July 10, 2012 at 5:17 pm

          In my state, Virginia, during the annual “safety” inspection, the inspector is supposed to check that all federally mandated safety equipment is intact and working. As regards the air bags, that means checking that the SRS light lights up at start-up, then goes out. However, it’s such a small thing, he may miss it (the light). But if disabling the SRS system causes the OBD system to register a code – then you’re probably going to get caught.

          • July 12, 2012 at 6:55 am

            The other way is a phantom OBD that is a work of electronic fiction in its entirety.

            This very much confirms my general thesis that most of this is about artificially maintaining unsaturated markets for new motor vehicles. Every perfectly useful car scrapped after an airbag deployment helps the OEMs towards its critical volume threshold, and they’re chasing that up year by year. It’s insane, and the worst is, the cloverites don’t see it.

          • July 12, 2012 at 9:51 am

            Clovers don’t see it because they’re constitutionally incapable of seeing it – whether as a result of native stupidity or just effective conditioning.

            But you’re absolutely correct. I’ve pointed out in previous columns that tens of thousands of otherwise perfectly sound older vehicles are thrown away every year solely because the cost to replace a deployed air bag (or bags) is too high relative to the value of the car itself. A ten-year-old Corolla, for example, that’s worth about $4,500. The air bag goes off in a collision. The car is repairable – economically repairable, in terms of body damage. But the air bags will cost $3,000 to replace. The insurance company totals the car.

            Pretty much any vehicle with a current market value of less than $10,000 is in danger of being thrown away after an air bag deployment.

            People used to talk about “planned obsolescence” 30 years ago.

            Now it’s actually the case.

          • methylamine
            July 12, 2012 at 1:08 pm

            @Ned–

            “Phantom OBD”–NOW you’re talking! I thought it would be an excellent little side business selling such a thing; there are plenty of people with perfectly good cars throwing codes for bullshit reasons that would love to pass “inspection”.

            Are they already available or do I need to enlist my electrical engineer brother-in-law to start a company?

        • Texan Libertarian
          July 11, 2012 at 1:21 pm

          In Texas, you can still pass inspection with a disabled SRS. How do I know? My SRS is disabled and I’ve passed inspection for 9 years. Now, there are plenty of other inane laws so I guess you have to pick your poison.

          • anarchyst
            July 12, 2012 at 12:14 am

            Airbags can be disabled by someone with an electronics background that knows automotive systems. All it takes is placing the proper value resistors in the airbag circuit (after disconnecting the airbags) which makes the SRS circuit look complete and functional. To find the proper value of resistor, use a potentiometer and measure the resistance value when the SRS light goes out. Obtain the equivalent value of resistors and you are on your way.

        • Zach
          July 11, 2012 at 4:46 pm

          I have cars registered in Wyoming and Montana. What is a safety inspection?

      • Kira
        July 12, 2012 at 3:48 am

        I just got into a fender bender. Sure the fenders were bent, but this wasn’t an injury accident. However the airbag went off and my 6 year old (sitting in the middle of the bench seat of the truck was bruised very badly on his forehead and my whole chest was black and blue. Without the airbag we wouldn’t have been harmed a bit. Not only were we bruised up by the airbag, but it lets out this awful chalky fire retardant right into your face which we breathed in immediately. We were totally disoriented because the air bag impedes your vision and cuts off your ability to drive and because of the smoke like air I thought the car was on fire.

        • July 12, 2012 at 10:09 am

          Kira,

          The worst part is yet to come. Your insurance co. will very possibly “total” your truck as a result of the bags going off. If the truck is more than seven or eight years old, this is very likely. Because the cost of replacing the bags – about $2,000 or so is typical – will push the total repair costs above the threshold at which a vehicle is totaled out by the insurance co. This threshold is typically 40 percent of the vehicle’s current retail value.

  4. swamprat
    July 9, 2012 at 4:24 pm

    In order to get an insurance discount in Texas, you have to take clover school. The discount lasts for 3 years, ensuring that everyone gets clover training to save their money. I guess I’m going to do the same. I would rather be in a live class than do the online thing. I tried it and it was insufferable, because you can’t talk back to the computer.

    • July 9, 2012 at 4:25 pm

      But at least you can sleep – or go watch TV…!

      • BigDP
        July 11, 2012 at 7:14 pm

        You can usually bust out an on-line class in one to 2 hours max, and that includes time to get up and grab beer(s)!

  5. BrentP
    July 9, 2012 at 4:36 pm

    VA still has physical classes? Way behind the times. Illinois does this online and has done so for a decade or so. Running a capture program on it would provide a source of endless amusement for driving discussions. In one slide it stated that rather than exceed the speed limit, stop at the end of an on ramp!

    Back when there was physical class I had to attend one for a speeding ticket on Illinois’ under posted interstates. A speed that would be legal in most other states and probably one most clovers are comfortable with. Anyway… so I am in a class and I know more than the ‘instructor’. I challenge her on passing before a stop sign on a two lane road. She doesn’t believe me. Hands me the book. Takes me a while to find in a book. I was doing this stuff online then. This was probably 15 years ago or so. I find it and show her. Idiots. Like the cop in your class it is only repeating the mantras no understanding of the whys and whatfors or even the details of the vehicle code.

    Vehicle code is actually for the most part still written pretty well as are the supporting manuals like the MUTCD. Of course these things were initially written by private groups and absorbed by government over time. It’s the stuff that’s been monkeyed with or added that’s usually garbage. The ridiculous comes in with implementation and enforcement.

  6. Brad Smith
    July 9, 2012 at 5:15 pm

    In Michigan if you get a DUI you get all the classes or no license. One of the classes is “Catholic Human Services”. Luckily I only know about it second hand, but it’s supposed to be a complete farce. It’s expensive and worthless.

    One of my buddies wasn’t so lucky, he had to be bused down state for his lectures. He didn’t make it back. The bus or should I say oversized van, was in a accident in the snow and ice on I75. He was a Metallica nut and could play all their songs perfectly. I did my best to play “For Whom the Bell Tolls”, at his funeral. His Dad later gave me his stacks of sheet music and old Circus and Hit Parader magazines. I still have all of them and it’s always funny to flip through them and see bits of shake in the bindings.

    His DUI was for pot. He was hitting a bowl in a parking lot, so they dragged him in for a blood test. He never really drank and you could never really tell if he was high. We buried him with his old flying V Cort guitar. He would have had more sense then to drive in that crap and as far as I am concerned the fucking clovers killed him.

    RIP,(The Beave) Beaver.

    • July 9, 2012 at 6:43 pm

      That sucks.

      A guy harming no one ends up dead as a result of Cloverism.

      Cloverism is what kills. Ironic, isn’t it?

      • Brad Smith
        July 9, 2012 at 6:51 pm

        Yes Eric, it does suck. He never harmed anyone and now he is gone.

        • JS
          July 11, 2012 at 7:42 pm

          Sad story. I’ve heard of a number of folks doing the responsible thing instead of driving home after drinking and going to sleep in their car with the key ON THEIR PERSON (not in the ignition) and ending up with a DUI. Also heard of folks during the winter that turned the heat on and fell asleep in the back seat that were also hauled in for DUI.

          • kman
            July 11, 2012 at 10:58 pm

            There was a supreme court case here inMN a few yrs back. Cops responded to a noise complaint and caught a guy sitting in his driveway listening to the stereo in his new Tahoe. Charged him DWI and since he had priors they confiscated his day old vehicle. Court upheld it.
            Also local Marine recruiter went to get stuff out of his car at two am and caught a DWI while rumaging thru his own back seat. I guess you gotta unlock it and run hide the key nowdays. Individual liberty is long gone.
            K-

  7. MoT
    July 9, 2012 at 7:31 pm

    The last and only time I ever got a ticket was for “running” a stop sign that was so well concealed that the cop was parked out of sight of all who approached it. I even had to beg the guy to hit it with his flashlight to prove to me it even existed! Just goes to show they KNEW it wasn’t about safety but about entrapment. That was in Midland, Texas well nigh of 25 years ago. I took the “drivers ed” class and have to admit it was a ridiculous waste of time.

    • andy
      July 11, 2012 at 9:14 pm

      I’m sorry you were ever in Midland, TX. I truly am.

  8. July 9, 2012 at 9:55 pm

    I get to do the “clover school” thing in Arizona sometime within the next month as soon as I get back into town. My cardinal sin was to make a U-turn –one that I’ve executed hundreds of times over the last six years– on a main thoroughfare in front of a local shopping center. Officer Buzzcut swore that there was a “No U-turn” sign at the intersection, although neither I nor anyone else I’ve seen has ever noticed it in my six years of residence in the area and, for some reason, Buzzcut never busted me on any of my hundreds previous occasion that I’ve exercised my “Mr. Scofflaw” alter ego. Apparently it was a slow crime day (but aren’t they all?).

    I think I’ll take the class on line, just to see if it’s any more insufferable than the classroom torture I went through six years ago, where I swore I’d never repeat. I guess the only drawback to doing penance online, as swamprat points out, is that you can’t talk back to the oinktard “instructor” giving the indoctrination.

  9. July 9, 2012 at 9:58 pm

    I’m also wondering why some coptroll hasn’t yet visited this site to lecture us all with a “if you weren’t breaking the law in the first place, you wouldn’t be in traffic school” stream of bullshit. It inevitably happens on any website in which anyone in any way criticizes “The Law”[TM] or its application.

    • July 9, 2012 at 10:11 pm

      We’ve had that – but it’s usually hit and run!

      • BrentP
        July 9, 2012 at 11:33 pm

        Ahh the “coptroll”. That kind always had alternate universe explanations for things that we mundanes just wouldn’t know or understand. And always the reassurances that laws won’t be used to increase power and only used on bad people…

        The ones that are at least sort of regular can be fun at times. Especially to set them up and then pull out the examples.

  10. July 9, 2012 at 10:21 pm

    Yes, both my kids had to sit through the Cardinal Academy, due to sins committed during that “year while learning to drive” that all kids seem to contract these days. (What happened since I was a kid? We didn’t have the obligatory 1-2 accidents during our first year of driving like all the cool kids do now, what gives?)
    Keep up the great articles, Eric – you really cut to the chase! And, we’re practically neighbors down here in SWVA, I suspect!
    DR

    • July 9, 2012 at 10:21 pm

      Thanks, DR – I will!

  11. GW
    July 10, 2012 at 12:19 pm

    (1) “Never exercise judgment or initiative. Just… obey.”
    And what else where you expecting?

    (2)When riding my MC
    My hands are at 9 and 3
    What then does that make me?
    (please do tell from a clover viewpoint – should be worth a good laugh)

    (3)Riding my bike to work this morning on a 3 lane road (one side) – Clover in a Mini Vans pulls out of a (right) side street and proceeds to cross 3 lanes of traffic right in front of me and then crawls along – Not sure if they understood my single digit solute as I veered around their dumbass – I am sure I would have been in violation of saving my skin had the gestapo been around. Clover switched lanes so they wouldn’t be behind me at the next stoplight – fucking coward!

  12. Rob
    July 10, 2012 at 1:42 pm

    My 16 year-old daughter who just finished driver’s ed (mandatory in our state and $330) was taught 8 and 4 in class, I re-educated her to 10 and 2.

  13. Tinsley Grey Sammons
    July 10, 2012 at 2:03 pm

    QUESTION

    Do Driver’s Ed instructors ever mention Situation Awareness? SA has served me well.

    • Rob
      July 10, 2012 at 2:10 pm

      5 of my kids have taken Drivers Ed. Don’t think any of them have ever been taught anything like that. DE is basically a useless requirement that State mandates, especially the 30 hours of classroom work that is required. The 10 hours of driving has been ok, they do learn some things (parallel parking). But I spend a shit load of time teaching then real world driving. And what to do in certain situations and what they can get away with.

      • methylamine
        July 10, 2012 at 5:19 pm

        I’m going to teach mine in a stadium parking lot in the rain, with some cones. Get them drifting and teach them real car control.

        Then if we can afford it, I’ll take them to the kid’s courses at Bondurant–they’re excellent at teaching Situational Awareness. The best thing I ever learned there was looking ahead at least ten cars–saves you at least one crash every decade in Houston traffic.

        • Rob
          July 10, 2012 at 5:26 pm

          the “look ten cars ahead” rule is great. My 16 year-old is doing ok with learning the basics of driving but she is always focused on the car just ahead. i explain to her that that is fine and well but she needs to be looking up ahead and see what other cars are doing, what’s going on with stop signals, what the cars behind her are doing, what cars coming out of side-streets are doing, etc…..no if I just had a good drift-car :)

          • July 10, 2012 at 5:29 pm

            It’s not cheap, but a trip to Bondurant or Skip Barber is worth every last cent. She’ll learn vehicle dynamics and car control – you know, the things the DMV never even talks about. These courses are life-savers, especially for new drivers. Might be a good Christmas present. For her – and you!

          • D M Ryan
            July 11, 2012 at 10:09 am

            That’s one I figured out myself…

        • eightsouthman
          July 11, 2012 at 11:41 am

          Houston is one of the places that came to mind about stopping on the on ramp. As an old 18 wheeler driver take my advice and hit the barditch before stopping on the on ramp because that big truck has the hammer down, especially when the traffic is solid in all lanes so he has a place to blend in. Stopping in front of a truck on an on ramp is THE most stupid and dangerous move you can make. The trucker doesn’t have a chance unless he can make it into the barditch and neither do you if he hits you from behind at 60mph.

          • methylamine
            July 11, 2012 at 3:21 pm

            Houston distinguishes itself as the capital of the stupidest and rudest drivers in America.

            Zero lane discipline. Furious if you flash your high beams to pass. Obstructive, self-righteous left-lane hogs, ecstatic in their role as self-appointed speed cop going 5 over on the left. Texting. Applying makeup.

            There’s a three hundred mile radius around Houston where the stupidity density drops off exponentially; as I approach Louisiana, I notice people actually MOVE when I give them a quick polite flash. Moving toward Florida, people actually move before I have to flash; I suspect it’s because (gasp!) they watch their rearview mirrors and actually care to be considerate–hoping for the same courtesy in return.

        • Joe Milligan
          July 11, 2012 at 5:06 pm

          I didn’t learn to drive until two winters after I got my license, when the roads all froze over, and a couple friends and I all spent an afternoon trying to do an intentional 360 in a front wheel drive.

      • July 11, 2012 at 6:21 am

        If they wanted kids to learn how to drive, they’d just tell them to play Mario Kart, or probably any racing game. I’ve only had one incident in 11 years of driving, due to extenuating circumstance (falling asleep at the wheel after an all-nighter), and never had any problem besides.

        Video games can teach you most of what you need to be competent on the road. You are aware of what all the other drivers are doing. You look ahead at the track to see where to go. You are keeping an eye out for obstacles.

        I track what is happening in real life the same way I used to track the screen in Mario Kart when I was 10.

        • Alex
          July 11, 2012 at 4:07 pm

          Yeah I learned defensive driving from the GTA series. Running from the police and other criminals (in a game) makes you a pretty heads up driver.

  14. RICK
    July 10, 2012 at 2:36 pm

    Eric,

    Sometimes it is good to work the system. Here in MI my kids got their mo-ped licenses at 15 with no driving test and only a simple written test. By doing that the two year probation for driving started at 15 and was over at 17. The other kids that got there permit at 16 were on probation until 18. My kids never wanted a mo-ped, just to get a one year jump on their friends.

  15. Carl
    July 10, 2012 at 4:31 pm

    Hi Eric,
    I agree with you 100 percent on these so called traffic schools. They’re absurd. Years ago I received a ticket for failure to yield to an emergency vehicle. The circumstances are to long to go into here but suffice to say that as a police officer (now retired) I would never knowingly not yield to an emergency vehicle. I was given the choice of traffic school or points on my license. This after 30 plus years of unblemished driving. The school was useless and sleep inducing but it saved me a couple of points and a possible insurance rate hike.

    Liberantor I hope I changed your mind on trolling cops.

    Eric I hope you are well and I really enjoy your BMW articles and one of these days I’m going to buy that 3 series.

    Take Care,
    Carl

    • July 10, 2012 at 5:22 pm

      Hi Carl,

      Amen!

      I suspect the cop instructor would agree, too – in private, off the record. He did not seem like a bad guy. Just bored to tears, like the rest of us.

      Thanks on the BMW; VW Jetta TDI on deck!

  16. Brad Smith
    July 11, 2012 at 12:16 am

    They just had to go and fly a B2 Stealth Bomber over the All Star Game today after the National Anthem. 2 Billion dollars each not including maintenance.

    Yes this makes a statement. A statement of just how much money they are willing to waste on BS propaganda.

    • Mike in Spotsy
      July 11, 2012 at 12:30 am

      Saw that too, Brad, and had the same thought. In fact, the national anthem is kinda disgusting in itself. It doesn’t celebrate liberty, the country, or the people. It is instead a glorification of the military might of the empire.

      • Brad Smith
        July 11, 2012 at 12:52 am

        Right on. I won’t stand or put my hand over my heart.

      • July 11, 2012 at 9:58 am

        In looking back on the Fourth this year, I wish I had thought about just turning my back when the Pledge was read (I just stood there looking disgusted, without reciting the words or placing my hand over my heart). Maybe I should have just sat down. People would have noticed that.

        Probably, I’d have received a beating at the hands of all those freedom lovin’ Americans.

        • dren
          July 11, 2012 at 1:42 pm

          That is why I stand at sporting events; fear of being mobbed by a bunch of drunk “Patriots”.

        • Anti Federalist
          July 11, 2012 at 8:47 pm

          I think I may have mentioned this already, but it bears repeating.

          When “forced” to participate in a mass loyalty display, recite this instead:

          “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

          That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

          That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government

          When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce the people under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

      • July 11, 2012 at 11:56 am

        Dear Mike,

        It’s amazing how “reframing” one’s former worldview changes everything.

        I confess. Not that long ago I still felt the “patriotism” I was programmed to feel.

        Speaking of “clover conditioning,” I’ve noticed how I experience Hollywood action/adventure films very differently now.

        For example, the “hero” is chasing the villain. He points his pistol at an approaching motorist, and forces him or her to stop. He shouts something like “Police emergency! I’m commandeering this vehicle!” Or “FBI! I need your car!”

        He hops in the civilian’s car, and tears off in “hot pursuit.”

        The hapless car owner is left standing in the middle of the road with no way to get home. The “hero” then totals the car running the villain off the road. Usually after driving up a one way street and forcing other innocent drivers to crash.

        but it’s okay. It’s a “police emergency” ya know? It’s “exigent circumstances.” It’s “For the greater good.”

        The screenwriters of course expect us to laugh at the “hero’s” antics. In a clover inversion of right and wrong, we are supposed to laugh off the grotesque rights violations.

        A long time ago in a galaxy far far away I used to. Not any more. Now I just shake my head at how oblivious most sheeple are to the all pervasive nature of their “clover conditioning.”

        • MoT
          July 11, 2012 at 4:51 pm

          Good points, Bevin. I’ve a hard time now watching any sort of television “programming” (apt word isn’t it?) because of the very things you mention: guns drawn and pointed at someones head for the slightest disagreement. The “pointer” is somehow the logical and level headed while the “pointee” is being uncooperative. Get it? Do what we tell you or else, slave! I despise American cop shows, or anything that glorifies the imperial security organs, but English shows, while infinitely better written, paced, or acted, fall into this statist mindset, too. Movies are just as bad. Having spent the past decade deprogramming myself from the lies our culture forces down our throats, it makes my blood boil every time I see anyone in government, military, cops etc. glorified at the expense of your everyman.

          • July 11, 2012 at 6:30 pm

            Dear MoT,

            “Programming.”

            I like that. I’m going to steal it.

            It’s shot through and through with statist assumptions.

            For example, every SF film features a scene in which the sages within “The Government” declare with absolute certainty that the truth must be kept from the public to prevent universal panic.

            When I was a kid that sounded pretty reasonable.

            Now I that the people most susceptible to irrational panic are the ones in “The Government.”

          • July 12, 2012 at 12:01 am

            “it makes my blood boil every time I see anyone in government, military, cops etc. glorified at the expense of your everyman.”

            Amen to that!

            How many times have we seen movies or tv shows in which the cops or federal agents are shown mourning the death of “one of our own” and resolving to “get the SOB who did it” even if it means monopolizing all the department or agency’s resources to do so.

            I used to robotically cheer them on, as the screenwriter or tv writer intended. It was only much later that I started to say to myself, why the hell should I?

            After all, wasn’t their highest duty as “public servants” to “serve and protect” us civilians?

            So why are they suddenly abusing their authority settling private scores on the public dime?

            Why are we mere civilians supposed to empathize with their selfish bias when they are shown raging about “cop killers?”

            Shouldn’t they show the same or more outrage about “civilian killers?”

            The loss of any human life is a tragedy. But why should we grant them special, exalted status, and by logical extension, consign ourselves lower, inferior status?

            Until We the Sheeple break out of our old mindsets, we will never be free.

        • Mike in Spotsy
          July 11, 2012 at 8:22 pm

          Indeed, Bevin. It’s hard to believe that I once felt proud of having been a Marine, and that I actually enjoyed the “Law and Order” shows. All of that is now revolting to contemplate. To borrow MoT’s well stated sentiment: “I despise American cop shows, or anything that glorifies the imperial security organs.”

          • July 11, 2012 at 8:44 pm

            Cop shows = fascist porn!

          • Jeff Anderson
            July 11, 2012 at 9:03 pm

            There are getting to be more and more of us EX-Marines these days!

          • BrentP
            July 11, 2012 at 9:19 pm

            I think more people need to watch episodes of COPS made 20+ years apart.

            The differences are huge. Because in both cases it is showing cops in the best light possible I consider it a fair way to see how things have changed.

          • Mike in Spotsy
            July 11, 2012 at 9:47 pm

            I hear ya, Jeff. That “EX” feels pretty good.

          • July 12, 2012 at 12:21 am

            Dear Mike,

            I know what you mean. My father worked for “The Government” his entire life. He himself was no clover. But he was the exception and not the rule. I got to see what the clovers around him were like. It was not pretty.

            Re: being a former Marine

            In a free market anarchist society there will still be a need for Private Defense Agencies and personnel to fulfill the duties of what used to be the police and the military.

            There will be a more enlightened and proper role for police and military type personnel.

            There is a legitimate role in a free society for individuals who brave physical danger and who put their lives on the line as you once did.

            It merely needs to be non-coercive, hence privatized. When that happens, people can once again respect them and what they do.

  17. Brad Smith
    July 11, 2012 at 3:33 am

    Dear, Eric. I have an idea for a future article. The acronym LEO. Law enforcement officer. Really? What exactly does that mean? Often they break the law. They are under no obligation to stop a crime.

    What exactly does this mean? When did this become the new term, etc?

    • July 11, 2012 at 9:51 am

      Hey Brad,

      That is an interesting idea. I’m not certain when “LEO” became the preferred term but it seems to have happened sometime around the mid-late 1990s. When I was a kid in the ’80s and ’70s, it was just cops… or police. I can’t recall even having heard of a “LEO” during the ’80s. It’s kind of like “troops.” That one is new, too. It used to be “soldiers,” or “the army.”

      “LEO” is an accurate descriptor, though. That’s what they do: Enforce the laws. Like robots. Whatever the law is, the LEO enforces it.

      It’s the opposite of peace-keeping. Even ofcop – which I’ve heard is actually an old (circa 19th century) acronym: Constable on Patrol.

      These guys had the job of keeping the peace – not just enforcing the law.

      • July 11, 2012 at 10:37 am

        No. Acronyms like that are a fairly modern thing. “Cop” is actually a very old English word which has more or less lost its other, broader meanings: “to cop” means to catch, and “a cop” is someone who catches something or someone. The old meaning, with slightly different spelling, is buried in “cobweb”: a web – meaning something woven – used by the cob, here the spider, to catch flies.

        • July 11, 2012 at 10:41 am

          Oh, and “a cop” can also be a catch, as in British police giving evidence that someone they caught verbally admitted “it’s a fair cop” – not a comment about the policeman but a confession that they were caught for good reason. Google “verballing”.

        • sixMidgets
          July 12, 2012 at 1:25 pm

          To my understanding, cop came from “copper” (which is still used to this day to some extent), and its origins are in the “bobbies” of England who used to wear copper metal badges identifying them as police officers. This was taught to me in actual texas state-regulated basic clover/peace officer academy, so I haven’t verified it through other means.

      • David C.
        July 11, 2012 at 10:31 pm

        Eric, if you want to curdle your blood, read a book about the Milgram experiments.
        http://www.amazon.com/Obedience-Authority-Experimental-Perennial-Classics/dp/006176521X/ref=pd_sim_sbs_b_1

        2/3rds of all people from all walks of life will, if ordered to do so by a person they consider “in Authority,” torture another human being to DEATH.

        Even worse, the remaining 1/3rd who would balk at electroshocking another person at some point still NEVER tried to stop the “experimental protocol.”

        People are the same all over. They will do what they are ordered, no matter how heinous it appears in isolation.

        Fear the tribe. Fear the herd. Its members are MINDLESS.

    • Joe Milligan
      July 11, 2012 at 5:13 pm

      It’s probably because LEO is an encompassing term that doesn’t just refer to the constabulary. It refers to the FBI, the DEA, the ATF, certain IRS agents, the US Marshals, the Texas Rangers, Fish and Wildlife agents, Park Police, Game Wardens… you get the idea.
      Even my father was a LEO at one point… believe it or not, it’s when he flew helicopters for the Coast Guard.

    • Anti Federalist
      July 11, 2012 at 8:50 pm

      Good point.

      As already noted, years ago it was just “cops”.

      Now, every pot bellied authoritarian that can pin a tin badge on himself demands to be called an “officer”.

      And every time you turn around, it seems like there are more and more of them.

      • David C.
        July 11, 2012 at 10:39 pm

        Even the FDA and EPA have gun-waving “strike teams” and SWAT-style Rambo-units.

        People constantly ask if the cops or US soldiers would round up civilians, mistreat (or even kill) them, etc.

        The answer is YES. When faced with an order to do something profoundly wrong, but to object means ostracism, unemployment, perhaps prosecution, the cop or the soldier will do Exactly What He (or She) is Told.

        It’s the same here, or in Germany 1943, or Ukraine in the early 1930’s. When “officials” are ordered to slaughter men, women, and children, they DO it. They did it to Randy Weaver. They did it to the Branch Dividians. They’ll do it again and again and again. Remember what happened to the copter pilot who ordered his gunner to FIRE if needed to stop US soldiers at Mi Lai? The military crucified him.

        • Brad Smith
          July 12, 2012 at 12:12 am

          Have you seen the reports on the hundreds of thousands of rounds being bought up by Homeland insecurity?

          • dom
            July 12, 2012 at 12:20 am

            I think it’s pretty obvious what they’re gearing up for. Something I have noticed myself lately is one hell of a lot more helicopters flying around. The really really scary part is how quiet they are. I swear they are almost so quiet you can’t even hear them above you! Only reason I even notice them is because I look up a lot.

          • Mike in Spotsy
            July 12, 2012 at 12:35 am

            Actually, Brad, what I read was 450 million rounds of .40 cal hollow points. Here is just one of the articles: http://www.naturalnews.com/035649_DHS_ammunition_domestic_war.html

            That’s enough to take out a whole bunch of us dissidents.

          • methylamine
            July 12, 2012 at 12:44 am

            It’s ON.

            The sociopaths-in-charge are all-in at this point; they know full well it’s either win, or be hung.

            If they win, we’re in for decades of misery that will make being a Soviet circa 1970 seem delightfully cheerful.

            I suggest everyone shout it from the rooftops–or at least chat up every stranger you meet.

            Who cares if they think you’re crazy?

          • July 12, 2012 at 10:39 am

            Here’s a thought:

            If Mittens is (s)elected – and the inevitable happens – that is, nothing changes for the better; things in fact get worse… then you can be assured the fuse has been lit. People on the “right” will finally realize, large numbers of them, that voting GOP does nothing to advance their cause. Large numbers of people on the left have already realized it – as Barry is just another Chimp insofar as his polices are concerned.

            The system will not be able to hold together absent brute force, broadly applied.

          • dom
            July 12, 2012 at 1:01 am

            It’s more than a gut feeling at this point. I sure hope things get better though!

          • Mike in Spotsy
            July 12, 2012 at 1:05 am

            Hell, meth, sometimes I think I’m crazy my own self. lol. As Bevin pointed out elsewhere, life in the US is imitating Kafka to an alarming degree. Occasionally I have to wonder if I’m imagining it all, or at least exaggerating it. But knowing that my fiancee and my kids agree with me helps me keep my sanity, as do this site and LRC.

          • July 12, 2012 at 1:11 am

            Dear Mike,

            .40 hollow points?

            We’re no longer talking “cop killer bullets.”

            We’re talking “civilian killer bullets.”

            But don’t hold your breath waiting for some damned clover screenwriter to pen a script raging against that.

          • Mike in Spotsy
            July 12, 2012 at 1:24 am

            Yes, Bevin…ammunition that is outlawed in international warfare. Besides, DHS is not an organization dedicated to killing foreigners (the gummint has other outfits for that). So they are getting 450 million rounds to use against…hmmmm.

          • July 12, 2012 at 1:28 am

            Dear Mike,

            “Occasionally I have to wonder if I’m imagining it all, or at least exaggerating it.”

            Ditto!

            It’s funny. Many of us have been predicting these developments, based on our intellect and its capacity for pattern recognition.

            But then when it actually happens, exactly as we predicted, based on our understanding of cause and effect, we can’t quite believe it. Our guts haven’t caught up with our brains.

            We always wanted to be proven wrong. We never wanted to be proven right. We always wanted the best for society and for humanity.

            As a result our hearts sink when we are proven right.

          • July 12, 2012 at 1:40 am

            Dear dom,

            “Only reason I even notice them is because I look up a lot.”

            I have to admit I flashed on the famous scene in “Goodfellas” when Henry Hill, the Ray Liotta character, is coked out and constantly scanning for helicopters in the sky above him.

            These days it might be drones more than choppers, but the facts remain the same. Big Brother is watching.

            As Joseph Heller noted, “Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t after you.”

          • Mike in Spotsy
            July 12, 2012 at 1:44 am

            So true, Bevin. I started telling people in the 1980s that the US government had become totalitarian. Not in the sense that it had yet regimented every aspect of our lives, but in the sense that it recognized no limits on its power. Its only limitation was the practical one of what it could effectively control.

            Incidentally, that realization was closely followed by the resignation of my commission in the Marine Corps.

            Since then, government control has increased, slowly at first, quickly in the last few years, and still accelerating. As you correctly state, we can’t quite believe that we were right, and we really don’t want to have been right. But facts are facts, and right now they ain’t at all pretty.

          • dom
            July 12, 2012 at 2:01 am

            @Bevin

            I know… I’ve thought about that scene too! It’s bigger than that though. We’ve all been “weighted, measured, and found wanting.” I’ve had a few situations where coincidence was just completely out of the question. The number of events I would normally classify as coincidence has exponentially increased since I started hanging out with Eric on this site.

          • July 12, 2012 at 2:04 am

            Dear Mike,

            “Since then, government control has increased, slowly at first, quickly in the last few years, and still accelerating.”

            It’s the acceleration that has left even us iconoclasts and skeptics incredulous, let alone We the Sheeple.

            The watershed had to be 9/11. Mere months after that the national security state themed tv series “24” debuted, a telling indicator of the public mood.

            After which the belated suspicion/realization (take your pick) that 9/11 had to have been a false flag operation truly sends chills down one’s spine.

          • July 12, 2012 at 10:29 am

            This is why I always bring up WT7 when the subject of 911 comes up … if you can get a sleeper to consider the facts about what happened to WT7, he may just awake…

          • July 12, 2012 at 2:30 am

            Dear dom,

            “The number of events I would normally classify as coincidence has exponentially increased since I started hanging out with Eric on this site.”

            Okay. That does it. I’m outta here.

            To the CTU agents monitoring this forum, I was only kidding.

          • dom
            July 12, 2012 at 2:36 am

            @Bevin

            Hey, this goes for me too!

            “To the CTU agents monitoring this forum, I was only kidding.”

            Matter of fact, goes for all of “we.”

          • July 12, 2012 at 11:26 am

            Dear Eric,

            “This is why I always bring up WT7″

            Exactly. I used to be a registered architect. I was licensed in Tex-ass but also practiced in Kaleefonia.

            I’ve neglected my blogging for several years now. But I did manage to post an article on the 10th anniversary of 9/11.

            If anyone’s interested, it’s posted at:
            http://thechinadesk.blogspot.tw/2011/09/911-controlled-demolitions.html

            An excerpt:

            Among those who watched the events of 9/11 unfold in real time, right before their eyes, were many of my fellow architects and engineers.

            Closer scrutiny of the events of 9/11 in the 10 years since has led many of us to some disturbing but unavoidable conclusions. One of these conclusions is that the WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 towers could only have been brought down deliberately and with premeditation, by means of controlled demolition.

          • RICK
            July 12, 2012 at 12:47 pm

            Dear Bevin,

            I about heard about the controlled demo of those building.

            But I have not seen a demo plan written by a demo expert showing plans,of the placement of c-4, how to wire so no-one would see it, how to trigger it with the timming of airplanes, how much c-4 needed, ect,ect.

            On tv I see them demo buildings,cutting supports, taking out a lot of the supports, ect,ect. And still need a-lot of c-4 and a lot of wires.

            Have you see any actual demo plans for those building to show it can be done as you say?

          • July 12, 2012 at 1:06 pm

            That’s a separate issue, Rick.

            The “how” has yet to be determined.

            But the evidence is pretty compelling that – at least as regards WTC7 – the official story is a lie.

            We are told that WTC 1 and 2 collapsed as a result of airplane impacts that blew protective insulation off structural steel, which then fatigued as a result of being exposed to the intense heat of a jet fuel-fire. The buildings then “pancacked” into their own footprints.

            There are numerous problems with this story – among them that the vertical structural core of the twin towers could not collapse downward in that manner without “help.” But, let’s leave that aside for a moment.

            WT7 was not hit by an airplane; so the core structures did not have their protective insulation blown off. There was fire – but relatively low temperature (paper, office materials, etc.) insufficient to melt or even weaken structural steel. Yet WTC7 suffered a sudden, catastrophic failure of all its structural elements at the same moment – free-falling into its own footprint.

            This has never happened outside of controlled demolitions. There is no rational, scientific explanation for what happened to WT7 other than controlled demolition. Once you come to terms with this fact, you’ve taken the red pill.

            And you will never be the same.

          • July 12, 2012 at 1:17 pm

            PS: Traces of a compound called nano-thermite have been found in WTC complex dust/debris; also spherical objects that only form as a result of chemical reactions associated with the use of this material.

          • BrentP
            July 12, 2012 at 1:52 pm

            Eric, I don’t see large numbers of people who voted for Obama waking up. A few yes. But the vast majority are still about their team. They don’t see it. They don’t care. Their team is getting to impose things on others and that’s all that mattered. Team R fans did it all through eight years of GWB. They’ll do it with Romney too.

            I’ve come to the conclusion the vast majority is incapable or unwilling to even consider anything but the same old thing.

          • BrentP
            July 12, 2012 at 2:05 pm

            Eric, the government story of WTC 1 & 2 is that fire weakened the trusses which then brought down the building.

            The kicker is that the floor trusses were not structural elements to the building. The government pretends they were, but all they did was support the interior floors. Not the building. All the floor trusses could fail and the building would still stand.

            Ignorant people believe this fairy tale.

          • RICK
            July 12, 2012 at 2:53 pm

            Eric,

            Yes, I know the Gov is hiding UFO’s at area 51 and the Men In Black are telling all the demo experts to keep ther mouths shut.

            When one of those demo experts gets loose, have them right a plan and put in the web.

            The GOV gave their idea in detailed writings let us see a non-clover detailed
            demo plan on WTC7.

          • RICK
            July 12, 2012 at 3:55 pm

            Eric,

            Speeking of melted steel at th WTC7, come to the UP of MICH and I will show you a D-9 dozer, that was reduced to a pile of slag after our latest wild-fire went through. That was a simple wild fire.

          • BrentP
            July 12, 2012 at 5:03 pm

            Rick, in another 10 or 20 years if they do come forward what will you and others say?

            Usually what americans do is say they are lying or not even pay attention to learn what actually happened. Then they go believe the government in the present again.

            Right now people in the US federal government are playing the same scam they did to get into WW1, but this time with Syria. When German killing of children in WW1 was learned to be false did americans stop trusting what they were being fed? No. They instead fell for it again to enter into Gulf War 1.

            Remember the Maine? Fell for it again in the Gulf Tokin. Although the Iranian speed boat thing didn’t work. So maybe after being proven liars twice it didn’t work.

            But by and large people do eventually come out and prove the kooks correct or mostly correct in the long run. The reason kooks are so accurate is because they have to be. They cannot make up bullshit and have everyone believe it the way government does.

            The problem is by the time the kooks are proven correct, the american public doesn’t care anymore. That’s why those in government keep getting away with it. Practically nobody realizes they lied about X 20 years ago so they are probably lying about Y today.

            So who cares if someone hasn’t come forward yet? In the long run it doesn’t matter. E Howard Hunt comes out on JFK and the public doesn’t care. Others have too. It’s clear it was CIA and LBJ with some other help in the mix. But in the end this was about getting someone who was against war out of office immediately. The people have come out and the public doesn’t care. We kooks heard, but we are just konspiracy kooks. Who cares?

            1993 WTC bombing. FBI informant’s tapes are played in court to back up his testimony regarding FBI involvement. What was the public reaction? None. Only the kooks paid attention.

            So what would happen if an entire team of building demolition experts testified in court on a stack of bibles with videos of their meetings with government officials on taking out these buildings to back them up? -nothing- would happen. The public would continue to believe that it was crazy religious nutballs who hate us because we are free. Nothing would change. They are conditioned. They cannot accept they have believed a lie. They want their illusion. Someone like me could site that court testimony. Could play the videos on youtube and still be a konspiracy kook.

            Yes, I’ve played the ‘why has nobody come forward?’ game before on various topics. Sited those that did. Didn’t change things one bit. It’s like putting vehicle code and USDOT regs in front of Clover. Nothing changes. Clover goes on with its illusions. Clovers always keep their illusions. Facts and evidence do not generate re-evaluation. The conditioning prevents re-evaluation.

          • July 13, 2012 at 2:50 am

            Rick writes:

            “Have you see any actual demo plans for those building to show it can be done as you say?”

            Physics, Rick, physics.

            The issue is whether it is physically possible to turn a building into dust with a “building fire.”

            The issue is hardly whether I, an ordinary citizen, can become Jack Anderson and obtain copies of the demolition plans for the towers.

            I have to laugh at the feeble attempt to change the subject by diverting attention from the real issue.

            The real issue, in case Rick forgot, is: Can a steel framed high rise building disintegrate before our very eyes and fall to earth at free fall velocity?

            As I pointed out in my very short article:

            Modern steel high-rise buildings engulfed in flames may twist and bend out of shape. But they never spontaneously and miraculously disintegrate into thousands of fragments. They never fall straight down at free fall velocity inside their own footprints.

            A modern steel high-rise building will disintegrate into thousands of fragments and fall straight down at free fall velocity inside its own footprint, only if it has been subjected to controlled demolition. Only if thousands of cutting charges have been strategically placed and precisely detonated in close succession.

            As one critic of the official explanation of the events of 9/11 put it, in wryly roundabout fashion, “No building exhibiting all the characteristics of a controlled demolition, has ever not been a controlled demolition.” In other words, if it looks like a controlled demolition, it is a controlled demolition.

            This is the real question.

            And it has nothing to do with whether I can play detective and show Rick copies of the demolition plans.

          • July 13, 2012 at 9:47 am

            Thank you, Bevin, for tackling this!

            One aspect of the WTC “twin towers” not generally known is that the core was the structural element – not the floor trusses. How did the airplane impact/fire cause the vertical core – made of massive structural steel – to collapse straight down and be pulverized? One could maybe see some of the floor trusses giving way and falling (though not symmetrically). But the core should have remained standing, or fallen over to the side…. anything – except a progressive straight down plunge to the ground – which defies physics as well as common sense.

          • July 13, 2012 at 10:39 am

            Dear Eric,

            You are most welcome. I was a registered architect in Texas, who also practiced in California and on Taiwan. I simply had to say something.

            Actually Richard Gage, of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth has done a thorough demolition job (pun intended) on the official fairy tale with a 2 hour 20 minute documentary entitled, “9/11: Explosive Evidence — Experts Speak Out.”

            I urge every libertarian who contributes to or reads this forum to take the time to watch it, from beginning to end.

            The world class architects, engineers, and scientists featured in this film have taken every one of the Establishment’s sophistries and utterly demolished them, one by one.

            Once you watch this film, no propagandist for the official fairy take will be able to catch you off guard.

      • Brad Smith
        July 12, 2012 at 12:03 am

        Yep, I’m sure that is one part of it. It’s part of the whole self promotion BS. Like calling a garbage man a sanitation engineer. Although that is unfair to the garbage man.

  18. July 11, 2012 at 6:58 am

    I just got a ticket last night at 3am for 51 in a 35. Funny thing is when I saw the cop I looked at my speed and it was 41, I don’t hit the brakes – just let off the gas when I see a cop. So I couldn’t have been doing more then 45. Three lane highway with 35mph limit, ’cause its on federal land.

    • July 11, 2012 at 9:40 am

      Justin,

      Yup – been there/done that. It sucks! The one I got that led to the Traffic School adventure was just like that. Major thoroughfare; two wide lanes in each direction – traffic running 45-ish, speed limit 35. We even have a holdover from the old Drive 55 days here in Roanoke. The “beltway” – I-581 – that connects I-81 to Roanoke. It’s as much an interstate highway as I-81 (posted 70) but 581 is posted 55. Heavily patrolled by the local cops who have a field day nailing out-of-towners not hip to the scene. 76 MPH is sufficient to get you a “reckless” driving cite. Major bust.

      Hold onto your wallet!

      • dom
        July 11, 2012 at 11:45 pm

        Aight, so I got a ticket a couple months ago. Called to have my court date moved. They moved it to August 6th. I got a letter in the mail yesterday stating if I don’t pay the $200 dollar fine by August 6th I lose my license. That’s funny, because I thought I had a court date that day? Shit is fucked up.

        • July 12, 2012 at 12:03 am

          If they gave you a continuance, it means you haven’t yet had your court date, which means you haven’t been been found guilty – which means no fine. Not until the court finds you guilty. The assholes might demand immediate payment on the 6th, though – once you’re found guilty (assuming you are). But the usual deal is you get a week or so after the court date/guilty verdict to pay before they pull your license.

          • dom
            July 12, 2012 at 12:09 am

            According to the letter I got from the Goobermint my court date had come and passed and I was a no show. I called them on the phone and had my date changed (a month ago), even wrote it on the ticket. Shit is fucking obnoxious!

          • July 12, 2012 at 10:43 am

            Have you got any written proof of the continuance? Shit! I wish I had mentioned to you the importance of getting a document from them proving your date had been moved. I went to the clerk’s office in person to get my continuance – so the bastards couldn’t do that screw to me!

          • Mike in Spotsy
            July 12, 2012 at 12:40 am

            Obnoxious is right, dom. And it’s coming soon to a health care facility near you. Gawwwd, please let me survive just 3 more years in this stinkhole.

          • BrentP
            July 12, 2012 at 2:54 am

            Government is incompetent and their incompetence is your problem.

            Changing a court date over the phone is just asking for trouble. These government workers have little ability to do anything out of the routine and are often lazy and/or get enjoyment out of causing problems for people. That’s why they work there. Who would take such employment but people who enjoy making others miserable or those too lazy or stupid for other work?

            Either way the result is the same. Your date change request simply got lost or never entered.

          • dom
            July 12, 2012 at 3:00 am

            @Mike & BrentP

            Ya’ll are right! And BrentP, you nailed it!

  19. Doug
    July 11, 2012 at 6:59 am

    Eric.
    While I was still living in the Shithole State of Nevada, I attended Traffic School to receive a 5% reduction on Insurance. Since I had one Foreign and one other State driving license and the License I used for Insurance was not from Nevada, I had no problems voicing my opinion about Drivers and Driving Conditions in the US. Actually, the Instructor agreed with me on most points. It was my other classmates who had problems with me. The “Instructor” was a local Insurance Agent and not a Revenuer.

    As far as disabling your airbags, the newer the car the more difficult it is. Normally, side airbags can be removed and replaced with 4 Ohm resistors. The steering and dash bags can be replaced with resistors also. The PODS (Passenger Occupancy Detection Sensor) is more difficult. If it is a bladder type, I am told, rolling it up will show enough resistance to fool the system but you must also short the Passenger Seat Belt receiver. If it is the older printed circuit type, I beleive resistors will also keep the light off (it works on older BMW/Mini’s). If the light is on, the Airbag System is disabled (at least on German Cars).
    I’m not at all an expert but this is what I have learned while researching how to install Recaros in an Audi.

    • July 11, 2012 at 9:35 am

      Thanks, Doug – good stuff!

      On the air bags: I don’t know this for a fact, but I suspect that (at least in newer models) the SRS system may be tied into the OBD system such that a code is registered or the malfunction indicator (“check engine”) light goes off. Probably there’s a way around all this, too – but it becomes more and more elaborate all the time!

      • David C.
        July 11, 2012 at 10:45 pm

        My youngest owns a Hyundai Genesis Coupe R-spec and he tells me some enterprising folks already have piggyback devices for the ECU that are documented to add 50 wheel HP. They apparently game some of the calculations the ECU does.

        If this sort of thing continues to grow (and I think it will), as cars become more PC’d, clever people will develop plug-and-play work arounds for more and more things. Maybe a manual switch for airbags is on the menu somewhere. All it takes is demand….

        Ironic, isn’t it, that one goal of increasingly computer-controlled cars was to make them tamper-resistant, and instead it’s making it easier to screw with them via plug-ins.

  20. July 11, 2012 at 9:48 am

    Similarly with regard to passing cyclists. The law says you must give the cyclist two feet of space as you pass.

    Then the law is an idiot on this one – and, unfortunately, so is most people’s common sense understanding. Passing that close is dangerous to the cyclist, for two reasons:-

    – “Canal boat effect”, named after what happens when canal boats pass too close to each other. The cyclist will be pulled towards the car by the wind of its passage, since he and the car make a sort of venturi with lower pressure between them.

    – The cyclist balances dynamically, which needs lateral as well as forward movement. If he hits a bump, he won’t fall – but only because he will veer instead. So the space he is using is wider than he is. At least British law acknowledged this with “the cyclist is entitled to his wobble”.

    When I was riding a motorcycle, I used to stay well into the road (no doubt annoying overtakers), just so I could move away from overtakers and give them more space than they thought they needed.

    Question: can anyone think of a redesign for steering wheels so they can be used to steer safely and which eliminates airbag injuries?

  21. Wilhelm
    July 11, 2012 at 11:05 am

    Our village has one crossroad, no stop signs, and a 35 mph section two tenths of a mile long (one-tenth on the east and one-tenth on the west). I drove in my pickup past a state trooper with his head down doing paperwork or something and slowed down (from 55) to turn right. He came around the corner and said I was “…clocked at 52 in the restricted zone). I said politely – and good-naturedly – that was hard to believe since by the time that I passed him I was already slowing down for my right turn. I also said I lived just a half-mile from that corner. He gave me a ticket for going 17 miles over the speed limit and wrote on the citation that I had argued with him. In addition, he said I had claimed to be a farmer and had farm tags on my truck but did not appear to be one! I am sorry for not going to court but in our rural county, the “perps” never get off. Because we have an interstate that runs along one border of our very large county, the state police unit is located within our borders, and there are lots of troopers who live in our low-cost county. They are seen as an economic asset, and so the local judge is careful never to make them look bad. The sheriff and his guys are good people; the state cops are Gestapo.

    • Cogitator
      July 12, 2012 at 1:57 am

      It shouldn’t be hard to find where they live, and make them pay for their arrogance. As long as there are no consequences, nothing will change. The same goes for the judges. If the law will not punish them, it should be done another way.

  22. grunk
    July 11, 2012 at 11:57 am

    Red light cameras are completely safe. Bwahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!

    http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/07/10/md-town-to-deactivate-2-of-3-red-light-cameras/

  23. Pete
    July 11, 2012 at 12:09 pm

    Traffic courts are money-making scams. NEVER TALK TO COPS! I’ve heard a lot of people have had success beating traffic tickets in court using the info at marcstevens.net

    My Favorite is “impeaching the witness.” When you cross-examine cop, ask him a couple questions requiring legal knowledge to answer. The DA will object, “witness can’t answer question, because it calls for legal conclusion.” Judge sustains this objection 99% of time. You then object, move to strike ALL OF WITNESS LEGAL TESTIMONY FROM RECORD, INCLUDE WRITTEN LEGAL TESTIMONY ON TICKET, and move to dismiss because without officer’s legal conclusion, there is no valid cause of action (No reason for you to be brought before judge). Judge usually denies these motions, but now you have a great chance to win on appeal, because Judge has just committed a class-1 constitutional error by allowing testimony from an “impeached witness.”

  24. lee
    July 11, 2012 at 12:39 pm

    I attended one of these indoctrinations in “Free State” New Hampshire of all places. The format was less “how to be a better driver” than it was “how to have a better attitude.” They administered the Myers-Briggs Inventory and similar nonsense geared to make compliance seem pleasant and rewarding.

    We were informed that if a detaining officer should ask us to take a breathylizer test and we refuse and are subsequently convicted on other grounds (e.g. the officer’s testimony that we looked drunk), our refusal to take the test would add an AUTOMATIC six months onto whatever penalty the court might impose.

    Afterwards, I said to the instructor, “Doesn’t the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution prohibit the states from penalizing an individual for refusing to incriminate him/herself? Yet that’s what the AUTOMATIC extension of punishment for a criminal conviction does if the extension results from refusing to incriminate oneself by, for example, refusing to take a breathylizer test.”

    The instructor’s answer was eloquent and indicative to where things stand in the U.S. of A nowadays. She thought for a second and then went, “Yah, whatever.”

    • July 11, 2012 at 1:13 pm

      I’m grateful they didn’t try to psychoanalyze us… I think I’d have tilted their machine!

    • Mike in Spotsy
      July 27, 2012 at 9:41 pm

      The Myers-Briggs Inventory is useless. I had to take it during “management training” (another form of clover conditioning) in the ’90s. After completing it, I received a paper purporting to tell me all about myself. It was about as accurate as the horoscopes in the newspaper.

      But since it’s useless, I’m not surprised that the useless gummint uses it.

      btw, I agree completely with your comment to the instructor. Her response is indeed a powerful statement as to why gummint is such a failure at its basic function of protecting our natural rights.

  25. July 11, 2012 at 1:37 pm

    Eric, I’ve reading and enjoyed your articles for some time now (usually via lewrockwell.com) and I finally have to ask, ’cause it’s driving me crazy: What do you mean by a “clover?”

    I mean, it’s pretty clear that you use it the way many writers use the words “sheep” or “sheeple” to refer to people who are blind followers and/or are ripe for the shearing, but I can’t figure out where it comes from. Does it stand for something, like “cop lover?” Does it refer to the fact that some people are like clover, easily mowed down (by cops/the law/etc.)?

    I haven’t been able to find an explanation of the term on your site, though I’m sure you must have posted one at some point. Please put me out of my misery of wrestling (unsuccessfully) with this question every time I come here!

    Thanks.
    Steve

    • July 11, 2012 at 1:39 pm

      Hi Steve,

      Thanks!

      And, on Clover (and Cloverism), see here:

      http://clovercam.com/

      Click on “What’s a Clover?”

      Enjoy!

  26. Steve
    July 11, 2012 at 1:42 pm

    Hey, Eric — could you fix my first sentence in the comment I just left (currently in moderation). Please change “reading” to “read.” I’m sort of a grammar nazi, especially toward myself!

    Thanks. Also – you don’t need to publish this request as a comment!

    Steve

  27. Steve
    July 11, 2012 at 2:35 pm

    OK, I get the clover thing now – including where the term originated. That’s a relief!

    I even took your clover test. Glad to say I am not guilty of most of the behaviors you listed. However, I do sometimes “slow drive” with cars either piling up behind me or whipping around me with drivers’ middle fingers fully extended, but I think it’s defensible in the situation, usually one of these:

    1. I drive the speed limit on a road I know to be a police “revenue collection” location. It may be a road engineered for 70 mph, but if the cops there will yank you for driving 56, I’ll do 55 and let the passers get the tickets.

    2. I drive slower than the speed limit on my rural county’s back roads because of the (overpopulated) deer leaping out in front of cars. And if a deer passes in front of me, I will slow to a crawl, because where there’s one, there are usually more. My wife has totaled two of her cars in deer collisions. Most drivers around here are on similar deer alert. However, some aren’t (maybe they’ve never had an encounter). That’s why I particularly like a bumper sticker on one of my neighbor’s cars: “Go ahead and pass. YOU can hit the deer.”

    3. I sometimes drive, say, 60 on a 55-mph road — whatever feels right for me, my car, the weather. There are people behind me who clearly want to go faster, but between my gut feeling and other drivers’ impatience, I choose to be governed by the former. (And notice this is not the stereotypical 35-mph-driver on a 70-mph highway situation. I find that even if I drive 85, as I do on some Interstates, there are people who will be unhappy I’m not doing 90 or 100. I never feel obligated to go as fast as the fastest drive on a given road thinks I should.)

    Steve

  28. moe
    July 11, 2012 at 2:44 pm

    Just offer the cop some money for the retired cop fund to go away……oh, wait, you cannot do that BUT you could offer your local politician allot of money (campaign contribution) and that is OK?

  29. ExitTheMatrix
    July 11, 2012 at 3:03 pm

    Funny, I’m getting ready to have to appear in court for a minor fender bender. Yes, it was my fault… but definitely something that could have been dealt with MINUS the cops that were called simply because “it’s the law” where I live. The first peace (sic) officer to show up was a female member of the “accident response team” who arrived in a large crime scene investigation-style SUV. She was a real bitch. Definitely had something to prove. Next, her “back-up” (seriously?!). He was actually somewhat decent… complimented me on the fact that I had obviously lost an entire person since my I.D. was made (not sure if this is cool or creepy… they actually print your weight on I.D.s where I live) and then promptly wrote a me ticket and told me “It’s just one of those things. It will probably cost you $80 to $100. Chump change.” I thought to myself, maybe it’s chump change to you, buddy. But that’s a tank and a half of gas, or a small round of groceries for this single income household… chump change my ass. At any rate, I have to appear in court in August. Funny, I should have gotten a ticket for no insurance card and non-renewal of my driver’s license because we had a change of address. He decided to “let me off” of the insurance ticket and because he did that, he had no way of knowing that my address was not correct. So, I managed to weasel my way out of 2 extra tickets. But… now I have to update my license, which I had not planned on doing. Sigh… and I’ll probably be stuck doing defensive driving as well. :P

    • Pete
      July 11, 2012 at 3:14 pm

      EXIT THE MATRIX: Don’t be so defeatist! They have to prove their case against you in court. You get to cross examine the officer, and they’re very easy to impeach as witnesses.

      Go to marc steven’s sight and try his motion-to-dismiss template…its only $20. Over half of the time, the cop will not show up in court if you’ve filed the motion to dismiss. If cop doesn’t show, case is usual thrown out, rarely rescheduled.

      You can call into marc’s show saturday afternoon to ask more about it.

      • ExitTheMatrix
        July 11, 2012 at 4:13 pm

        Thank you for the tip, Pete!

  30. tbiggs
    July 11, 2012 at 4:50 pm

    When I was young and impetuous, I accumulated enough High Performance Driving Awards to lose my license. I had to take “driver school” before I could get it back. In NJ, it was taught by a State Trooper in full dress uniform. I knew the drill – I kept my own counsel, and regurgitated the party line when asked.

    But I couldn’t resist having a little fun once in a while. When the trooper asked “what should you do if someone is tailgating you?” he got the predictable responses. I raised my hand – “You know what works REALLY well? It’s something I discovered driving in snowy weather. You flick the steering wheel side to side, just enough to make the back end of the car weave, without losing control. The tailgater will almost always back WAY off, because they think you’re about to crash.” Silence. My “classmates” stared at me like I was some kind of idiot. (I probably am.) I swear the trooper had the very beginning of a smirk on his face – but he suppressed it, and said “well, that may work but I’m not going to recommend it to the class.” And moved immediately to the next topic.

  31. dom
    July 11, 2012 at 6:23 pm

    Doh…

  32. That One Guy
    July 11, 2012 at 8:07 pm

    Saw another oinker today who by all rights should be registering and preparing his tuition for Clover School, based on how he was driving. At least ten over, wheels on each side of the yellow line, cell phone on the ear.

    I see this so often it’s hardly noteworthy anymore. It only came to mind after reading this.

  33. KittenJuggler
    July 11, 2012 at 9:14 pm

    I took a driver retraining class in MA. It was mandatory. They offered a Spanish version so I took it. I figured if I had to take the class, I might as well get something educational out of it. I also had the added benefit of meeting a pair of Colombian hotties that I otherwise might not have met.

  34. charlie
    July 11, 2012 at 9:20 pm

    I take defensive driving online now. The course is harder when taking it online than when attending a class, but of course that is not saying much at all. It is nicer to be able to sit at home and take it. I also take it for my wife so we both get the insurance break.
    I also noticed the airbag BS when I took the course – the new 8 and 4 hand placement versus the correct 10 and 2. Had a good snicker at that.
    I noticed another piece of new BS they’re teaching, one that really irks me, is they are now teaching people not to pull out into the intersection when making a left turn. This of course came about because clovers are too dumb to know how to do this properly, and end up sitting out in the intersection holding up cross traffic. They also did it because almost all major intersections have protected turn arrows. What this amounts to is people sitting thru a green light waiting for the arrow, when there was plenty of room/time to go ahead and turn, but they are too scared, or think they are doing the right thing, because that is what they were taught.

  35. Guy
    July 11, 2012 at 10:00 pm

    Why not fight for your rights instead of giving in? All “traffic enforcers” are required to be USDOT certified, see Title49USC. Most do not have the certs. Get educated and stop feeding the beast!!

  36. farmer Tom
    July 11, 2012 at 10:27 pm

    Maybe some of you could help me with my latest encounter with the revenuers.

    I bought my Dodge Ram Cummins diesel crew cab 4X4 as a repo 4 years ago. I’ve been stopped twice in the last two months because of the tinted windows. They were tinted when I bought it, so nothing in almost 4 years till the last two months.

    Two months ago a revenuer pulled me over, and checked the tint with some kind of meter, which is supposed to check for the amount of light passing through. He got a reading of 27. Which according to him was within the limit. Because Iowa Code says the window tint must allow 70 percent light transmission. He was disappointed that he couldn’t give me a ticket.

    So last weekend, I get stopped again. This revenuer put his meter on my window, got a reading of 25, 26,25, 26. He kept trying over and over again. Then he gave me a ticket for 127.50 claiming that my windows did not meet the code requiring 70 percent light transmission.

    Using this bozo’s logic, my windows are blocking 74 percent of the light transmission.
    So here’s my question. I’m going to fight it, but what is the best way to do so.

    Do I take the lens from a welding helmet and ask the judge to have the guy check it with his meter.

    What grade welding lens would block 75% of the light?

    Thanks for the help.

    • YoOle Me
      July 12, 2012 at 9:10 pm

      I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY – My sense of moral turpitude could never sink that low; so I DO NOT OFFER “Legal Advice”!!! … If such is what you seek, please consult an attorney of choice! … Albeit:

      I am a freeman on the Land, sui juris in esse, and as such; I have prevailed in 8 of 10 instances in matters of No D/L; No Reg.; No Ins.; and the heinous crime of “Tag light out” — all predicated upon:

      a) demanding a “Pretrial hearing” to establish the Nature & Cause of the accusations (per 6th Amendment entitlement!), with;

      b) concomitant demand for Judicial Notice, predicated upon the following elements of law!!!

      “Transportation. The movement of goods or persons from one place to another, by a carrier. Railroad Co. v. Pratt, 22 Wall. 133, 22 L.Ed. 827; Interstate Commerce Com’n v. Brimson, 154 U.S. 447, 14 S.Ct. 1125, 38 L.Ed.1047; Gloucester Ferry Co. v. Pennsylvania, 114 U.S. 196, 5 S.Ct. 826, 29 L.Ed. 158.” [Black’s Law Dict. 5th Ed., p.1344.]

      NOTICE: Don’t let the simplicity of this “Transportation” definition, throw-you!!! – Except for “transportation” of criminals, by law enforcement agents: “Transportation” can only be conducted “by a carrier.” … WERE you a licensed bone fide “carrier,” or employed in operations for one at that time? … If NOT; you’re neither involved in transportation nor subject to its Code, except within the following Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) rulings & definitions: (for reasons too deep for here; You DO NOT HAVE “rights”, just “entitlements” as follows):

      In re: “Vehicle registration”, pursuant to U.C.C.:

      U.C.C. 9-109. Classification of Goods: “Consumer Goods”; “Equipment”; Farm Products”; Inventory”.

      Goods are

      (1) “consumer goods” if they are used or bought for use primarily for personal, family or household purposes;

      (2) “equipment” if they are used or bought for use primarily in business (including farming or a profession) or by a debtor who is a non-profit organization or a governmental subdivision or agency or IF THE GOODS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE DEFINITIONS OF inventory, farm products or CONSUMER GOODS;

      As UCC 9-109.1 defined “consumer goods” is applicable to any automotive means of travel is expressed in relevant UCC case history:

      “A state agency cannot require registration and payment of a ‘business use tax’ on ‘consumer goods’. Automobile purchased for personal and family use was ‘consumer goods’.”
      In re Rave, 7 UCC Rep.Serv. 258 (DC Conn Ref 1969); Bank of Boston vs Jones. 4 UCC Rep.Serv. 1021, 236 A 2d 484.

      “Automobile owned by a person not in business is ‘consumer goods’. Use of the vehicle, by its owner, for purpose of traveling to and from his employment is a personal, as opposed to business use as that term is used in UCC 9-109.1, .14, the vehicle will be classified as ‘consumer goods’ rather than ‘equipment’. The phraseology of UCC 9-109.2 defining equipment as goods used or bought for use primarily in business seems to contemplate a distinction between collateral automobile ‘in business’ and the mere use of the collateral automobile for some commercial, economic, or income producing purpose by one not engaged ‘in business’.” [Emphasis added]
      In re Barnes 11 UCC Rep.Serv.679 (Me Ref 1972)

      BOTTOM-LINE: IT IS THE PRIMARY USAGE FOR WHICH THE ITEM WAS PURCHASED, AND NOT ITS SHAPE OR FORM THAT DETERMINES ITS LEGAL & LAWFUL CHARACTER, under the code!!!

      If at all possible: Get a Black’s Law Dictionary — 5th or previous is best, since latter issues tend to suppress lawful vs. legal connotations in definitions to skew our understanding — and STUDY every word you do not clearly understand (which I respectfully submit; is virtually all, after “a” and “to”).

      ENJOY!!!!
      YoOle Me

      • BrentP
        July 13, 2012 at 3:00 am

        It doesn’t matter if you are right or wrong. Their ultimate position isn’t a matter of law. It is one of force. The scam is for the masses. For those who see through the scam, who look at the law, they use force.

        Keep appealing. Racking up fees. They might eventually drop it so the precedent doesn’t get set. You’ll be out a lot of money. Then they’ll start the process over again. And again. And again. And again. Why? Because they can use force.

  37. tony2
    July 12, 2012 at 12:08 am

    Legally speaking,”driving” is “transporting” goods or “passengers” for hire in a “motor vehicle”. If one is traveling in one’s private automobile(which does not require a license),one should avoid,object to, and rebut the previous terms in quotes as they are commercial in nature. Read your “transportation/motor vehicle” code. You may find it’s right there in black and white. However, understand that most cops and judges (especially municipal) are idiots. You may lose at trial,but you can always appeal. Just don’t let them tax you without a fight. Listen to logosradionetwork.com on Monday nights for more information.

    • July 12, 2012 at 10:47 am

      Hi Tony,

      This has been brought up before, many times. I agree with the principle (and legal arguments). But the fact is that, in terms of everyday reality, using that tactic is not viable for most people. Who wants to be subject to arrest (and vehicle impounding) every time one takes to the road? And they will arrest you. Then what? You either sit in jail – or bail out. Then you have to deal with the court battle. Which you’ll probably lose because the courts don’t listen to constitutional or natural law arguments anymore. Just case law – and their own random opinions.

      • YoOle Me
        July 12, 2012 at 11:51 pm

        Sir Eric. et.al.:

        You may care to go to http://www.scribd.com/doc/51354977/Trezevant-v-City-of-Tampa-741-F-2d-336 and study the case there, which – while certainly is in legalize, nonetheless; it is quite understandable if one maintains the fact, the whole thing is exactly about what has happened to our Iowa victim, and Me, and perhaps you, and many others of us here on the thread, albeit: in the “Trezevant” case, instead of “rolling-over,” hoping they’ll use “Vaseline,” we now, not only have “Trezevant” as precedent; when you consider the $25,000 jury award he received in pecuniary damages (not counting attorney fees, which are contested as that was his profession), but: you may then want to be out on the street LOOKING to get stopped & jailed!!! … As the old homily goes: “Freedom isn’t FREE!!! – But with knowledge, it can be PROFITABLE!!!

        This case is excellent example of WHAT we can have, when we but learn HOW to maintain our composure & lawfully present ourselves in moving lawful process up into that strata, where REAL Law is cognized – IF you but bring it there, and particularly involving the incarceration you have posited, as good reason to avoid such challenges to the armed-zombies. … As I learned in 30-months of mortal combat: Getting shot at, doesn’t mean you’re going to get hit; getting hit, doesn’t mean you’re going to die; but sitting on your butt, when you should be fighting: you’re damn-sure going to be captured sooner or later!!!

        Hell eric; you’re an automobile dealer; you certainly know how the Manufacturer’s Certificate of Origin (MCO) works in the entitlement process, and the attendant fraud within such, creating the delusion the purchaser actually owns the vehicle, when in fact & law it is property of the STATE, effectively leased for the annual registration fee!!! … I’ve almost reached the point where, when a person starts crying about “violation of their rights”, I’m compelled to say:

        If you’re carrying a VOLUNTARILY acquired “D/L”, in order to exercise your right to go freely upon the common way in pursuit of your Life, Liberty and Happiness (property), while “driving” a purchased for private-use, but VOLUNTARILY “registered motor-vehicle”, with proof of VOLUNTARILY acquired “Automobile Ins.” in the glove-box, etc., then: DON’T talk to Me about “violation of your rights”!!!! … You have ignorantly abrogated them by voluntary contracts, albeit: you were never told these were contracts, so they are acts of FRAUD on the part of the issuer[s]!!! …

        With that, I’ll leave you here, with ole-Samuel Adams, again:

        “Shame on the men who can court exemption from present trouble and expense at the price of their own posterity’s liberty!”

        God Speed,
        YoOle Me

        • July 13, 2012 at 12:10 am

          New thug scrum video:

          • Mithrandir
            July 13, 2012 at 12:32 am

            I hope that man can charge those thugs for their actions.

            Hopefully the PD uses that video as an example of how NOT to interact with the public.

            I guess the thugs wanted him to respect their authority.

          • July 13, 2012 at 12:43 am

            One of the (many) things that infuriates me about these scrums is the way these scrawny little fucks get to play Tough Guy. I’d give a lot – really – to put that little SOB in a ring, no gloves – and no badges, no guns – against his victim.

          • July 13, 2012 at 12:46 am

            The whole thing was apparently initiated by the “crime” of jaywalking. This escalated into multiple Taserings and a body slam to the pavement; probably also charges for “resisting” the thugs.

            This country is contemptible.

          • Brad Smith
            July 13, 2012 at 1:20 am

            This is why these little piss ants need a taser. This way three of them can take down a full grown man who doesn’t resist. Although I have a feeling if he had actually resisted the tasers would not have stopped him from kicking their asses.

            In the long run he is probably better off not having kicked their asses. It’s satisfying but very expensive.

          • July 13, 2012 at 1:36 am

            Yup.

            Those lawless jaywalkers show contempt for the law.

            Therefore they need to be shown respect for the law, by Law Enforcement Officers. Law Enforcement Officers know the law. They respect the law. They abide by the law. Therefore they have the right to enforce the law.

            Riiight.

          • July 13, 2012 at 9:55 am

            Yup.

            This incident is a prime example of authoritarian over-reach. A petty offense that in the past would have – at most – resulted in a ticket – now becomes the pretext for submission training. You can see the eagerness in that scrawny little pig’s face. He is practically turgid at the prospect of being able to mete out some summary judgment against a legally defenseless, unresisting person whose only “crime” is failure to Obey.

            What a piece of shit!

          • BrentP
            July 13, 2012 at 3:12 am

            When bicycling I have simply stated I didn’t have my DL. True. I didn’t. They did not ask for anything more. When I was walking they simply removed the wallet from my pocket. Of course to do anything would have been “resisting arrest”.

            Why do clovers almost never get cops screaming at them for the sake of their physicality and color of their shirt? My dinner got cold over that nonsense. Oh that’s right, clovers never do things like walk. Clovers always drive. Even if their destination is two blocks away.

          • July 13, 2012 at 9:42 am

            Also: Clovers do not mind showing their IDs (and submitting) to an orders-giving cop. They feel they are being “good citizens” by obeying – and by not objecting to having to obey. They like authority, however exercised. Because to a Clover, authority is – ipso facto – entitled to deference and respect.

          • July 13, 2012 at 11:19 am

            Dear Eric,

            The thugscrum was a classic case of the inner reality having nothing to do with the outer appearance.

            On the outside, several “Law Enforcement Officers” were doing their duty and enforcing the law.

            On the inside, some petty martinets drunk with power, seduced by the Dark Side of their psyches, were abusing their authority to show a mere commoner just who’s boss.

            On the outside, political illusion. On the inside, psychological reality.

            Scale this up, and presto, you are looking at “our” federal government in Washington.

          • BrentP
            July 13, 2012 at 2:03 pm

            In the last few years most of my cop encounters have started with the cop screaming at me because he considered something I did to be an affront to his authoritah. When I was walking home with my dinner a few years ago the cop was offended that I turned from the city sidewalk on to the walk on my property. To him this was me avoiding him.

          • July 13, 2012 at 2:55 pm

            Dear Brent,

            “the cop was offended that I turned from the city sidewalk on to the walk on my property. To him this was me avoiding him.”

            Gee, why would anyone avoid a cop who flies off the handle merely because others keep their distance from him?

            The nerve of them!

          • dom
            July 13, 2012 at 2:59 pm

            We all need to carry cameras and catch this type of activity and post it! Just like this.

        • July 13, 2012 at 12:39 am

          Good stuff, Yo – but, a caveat: I am not a car dealer! I do not sell cars for a living. I just write about them; try to tell people what I think based on my experience, knowledge – and a real-world test drive. That’s all.

      • tony2
        July 13, 2012 at 8:59 pm

        Eric, if you are pulled over while traveling in a car licensed and registered for “transportation,” you will be asked for your “driver’s license.” You can make it clear you aren’t operating commercially/transporting/driving and give him an ID. If you must,you can give him your driver license and tell him it is for ID purposes only. If he says you were “driving” or refers to the “vehicle,” simply state you weren’t driving and it isn’t a vehicle.
        Always record traffic stops(or any other encounter),preferably two ways. Carry 2 phones or an mp3 player with mic,or a digital recorder.
        If you get a Dui,especially if you drive for a living, get a lawyer who is qualified. You can find one at http://www.ncdd.com (national college for dui defense)

  38. Brad Smith
    July 12, 2012 at 1:38 am

    Dom, Mike and Meth. I do think they are gearing up for something big. I guess the term is martial law. It was this way in Panama during the invasion. My unit didn’t just disarm their military and police, but also civilians. It was interesting at first going door to door and grabbing cops and tossing them in their own jails. The people cheered. The cops down there were truly terrible in some places. Rubber hoses hanging from their bunks, torture chambers, etc. I felt a lot worse for the members of the military. We bombed the snot out of every barracks in the country and many of them were just young kids who needed money.

    However, after the cops, we went door to door after the people’s arms. I kicked in a lot of doors and dragged out men in front of their crying families. One time it was an old guy with a zip gun and three rounds he had wrapped up in cloth. Talk about feeling like a complete and total dick. The next day I walked past his house and it had been completely looted. (It wasn’t our job to stop looting)

    The interesting thing was that it didn’t work even in tiny Panama. They continued to fight back. My second time in Panama the people were tossing Molotov cocktails at us and sniping at us in the same towns that they once cheered us. Gee I wonder why? If you notice we eventually pulled our bases out for the first time in around a hundred years.

    • July 12, 2012 at 1:48 am

      Dear Brad,

      “I kicked in a lot of doors and dragged out men in front of their crying families. One time it was an old guy with a zip gun and three rounds he had wrapped up in cloth. Talk about feeling like a complete and total dick.”

      That’s one of the great things about this forum.

      First hand, straight from the horse’s mouth, eyewitness accounts of how the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

      Thanks for sharing that, Brad. Much appreciated.

      • Brad Smith
        July 12, 2012 at 1:56 am

        Thanks, Bevin. I think it needs to be told. It’s hard to do it, because I do feel like a dick. I guess it’s the least I can do, considering the crimes I committed.

        • July 12, 2012 at 2:19 am

          Dear Brad,

          My parents were repeatedly reposted in one country after another. As a result I never served in the military anywhere.

          I never found myself trapped in a collective that would force me to make the tough choices you, Mike, and others who served in the military had to make.

          Good to know that you guys are out from under that at least.

          Now all we have to do is get out from under Big Brother. Piece of cake.

      • July 12, 2012 at 10:33 am

        “Talk about feeling like a complete and total dick.”

        This is the light at the end of the tunnel – the evidence of humanity.

        I’ve mentioned previously that I could never be a cop – for precisely the reason stated above by Brad. Imagine what it would be like to spend your days cowing your fellow citizens, forcing them to grovel before you over various BS “charges” and “violations.” Handing them expensive fines – threatening them with deadly violence over non-crimes…

        No decent person could do that job, IMO.

        • Brad Smith
          July 13, 2012 at 1:40 am

          I actually loved being in the military. It was an amazing physical challenge. 25 miles marches with over a hundred pounds of equipment. Too max our PT test you had to do 82 push ups in under 2 minutes 92 sit ups and run two miles in under 11:52. I qualified on every small arms weapon in our arsenal. Plus rocket launchers and explosives. Land navigation, both day and night. The longest one was 100 miles over mountains. We learned hand to hand combat from experts in every field. We did MMA before they had a name for it. Driving real humvees and YZ 125’s baffled out so you couldn’t hear a sound but the shifting, amazing life saving techniques, rappelling from helicopter or down cliffs, Jumping out of C130’s I could go on and on.

          Then I was deployed and saw what it was really about, death and destruction, violating every basic human right you can imagine. It was sickening in the worst kind of way.

          • July 13, 2012 at 3:00 am

            Dear Brad,

            Truly fascinating.

            I agree.

            A great Jungian psychologist I knew, William Brugh Joy, used to speak of the “warrior archetype.”

            The archetypal warrior is not good or bad per se. It all depends on what ends he or she is put to.

            If one is strictly adhering to the non-aggression axiom and acting in self-defense, of one’s home or a free market anarchist society, then the warrior archetype can be a genuine, bona fide hero.

            If he or she is on the other side, and part of an invading, occupying force, then he or she is not.

            You were not wrong to be proud of your training and your ability. Nor were you wrong to regret what the occupying forces did overseas.

          • July 13, 2012 at 9:53 am

            The physical challenge stuff (and shooting skills) also appeals to me. But I have zero interest in harming people who’ve never done me any wrong – and probably just want to be left the hell alone, too. So, no military for me!

    • Mike in Spotsy
      July 12, 2012 at 2:06 am

      Brad, I agree that the gummint is planning something big, and that it will probably be martial law. I haven’t yet guessed what the excuse will be, but they will find one. The stage has been set with the Patriot (sic) Act, the most recent Defense Authorization Act, and the recent executive order announcing that the president can commandeer everything if he decides to. Note that the earlier version of that executive order said that the president could take control of all resources in the event of a national emergency, but the national emergency part of it was left out of this version.

      I could conjecture as to exactly how this will play out, but that would be a futile exercise. The point is that when it happens it will be brutal, and that it will target any of us who dare to resist. Makes me wonder if anyone who regularly posts on here doubts that they are on a list of people to be rounded up or even liquidated when the time comes.

      • dom
        July 12, 2012 at 2:12 am

        I think it will be combination of many smallish false flag events in an extremely short span of time. When it happens our heads will spin. The internet will be the first thing to go!

        • Brad Smith
          July 12, 2012 at 2:34 am

          With the exception of the internet they have total control of the media. Even on the internet they have a lot of control. Must of us hedge our statements out of fear.

          • July 12, 2012 at 10:18 am

            Absolutely. I can vouch for this from direct experience. Believe me when I tell you that no one remains employed in the MSM who does not toe the line.

        • July 12, 2012 at 2:48 am

          Dear dom,

          “The internet will be the first thing to go!”

          I don’t doubt that at all.

          It will of course amount to economic suicide. How can any technologically advanced nation remain economically viable without Internet freedom?

          It can’t. Not that it’s going to stop the statists from doing it anyway. If they gave a damn about economic viability they wouldn’t be where they are, doing what they are doing, in the first place.

          For me, one of the biggest ironies is these same statists have harped endlessly on how mainland China’s censorship dooms it to economic backwardness.

          They should have cc’d themselves.

          • dom
            July 12, 2012 at 2:53 am

            Interesting you mentioned “They should have cc’d themselves.” I often tell my friends and co-workers things I don’t intend/mean for them, but instead only to have them repeat it back to me when I need it. Maybe if enough people get together and remind these fuckwads running the show what they knew all along, things would change?

          • July 12, 2012 at 2:55 am

            Dear dom,

            “Maybe if enough people get together and remind these fuckwads running the show what they knew all along, things would change?”

            Maybe not.

          • July 12, 2012 at 3:01 am

            Dear dom,

            Actually, maybe it would. I was just being cynical.

            I truly do believe in “thought revolution” as opposed to violent revolution.

            If enough people become politically aware, in the sense that we understand politically aware, the ancien regime will collapse of its own weight, just like the Warsaw Pact governments did in 1989. Even East Germany, with its dreaded Stasi.

            Many of them didn’t even need to emulate Romania, where the Ceaucescus were lined up against the wall and shot.

            Little blood was shed.

          • Mike in Spotsy
            July 12, 2012 at 3:13 am

            Bevin, mainland China’s internet censorship is toothless. My daughter went to Nanjing University for a summer session of intensive instruction in Mandarin a couple of years ago. Her group of students were all on Facebook, which is banned in China, within half an hour of arriving at their dorm. All they had to do was subscribe to a vpn in Singapore or Hong Kong and they bypassed the restriction.

          • July 12, 2012 at 10:10 am

            The sad thing is the Chinese government may be less actually totalitarian than “our” government.

          • July 12, 2012 at 3:57 am

            Dear

            “Bevin, mainland China’s internet censorship is toothless.”

            I’ve heard that too. It’s probably more effective in keeping outsiders out than insiders in.

          • July 12, 2012 at 11:42 am

            Dear Eric,

            “The sad thing is the Chinese government may be less actually totalitarian than “our” government.”

            When I was younger, I was a libertarian. But I was also a Cold Warrior.

            I hated what the Chinese Communist Party did to mainland China. I looked to America for hope.

            Imagine my surprise when America and China began to undergo a role reversal!

            How sad that it has come to this.

          • July 12, 2012 at 12:42 pm

            It seems to me – based on the reports I read – that the average Chinese is more at liberty than the average American in terms of everyday things.

            For example, I gather that one does not have to be “buckled up for safety” in China – and can ride a bicycle without a helmet.

      • Brad Smith
        July 12, 2012 at 2:25 am

        It would be better to assume that we are on their list. However, I’m also guessing I’m small fry compared to most. One of the powers that the Stasi had was that everyone believed they were on the list. It’s also a big problem with their total information awareness program. They are trying to keep track of everything any of us say or do. I think that actually makes them unable to be effective. As I don’t advocate violent overthrown and I’m not dumb enough to fall for an agent provocateur, I think I should be ok. I just want to be left alone and if not I have a plan to keep what is mine or bug out.

        • dom
          July 12, 2012 at 2:31 am

          There is no way to your “I’m a small fry compared to most” argument. With a population comprised of 90%+ clovers, you/we/us stand out very well, mang!

          • Brad Smith
            July 12, 2012 at 2:43 am

            I think 90% is about right. That still leaves 3 million, or at least a million fully aware adults. I think there might even be more than that who are simply in hiding. What is hard to say is how many people will cower once confronted and how many people will actually either wake up or back down.

            I can’t honestly say what my reaction will be. There are simply too many variables. I guess the first thing I will do is get my family out of the way.

          • July 12, 2012 at 10:16 am

            Life is precious – and also the things we have, which we’ve worked hard for. But it’s true what those men of the late 18th century said: There are times when there’s no alternative but to fight.

            I am not religious, but I pray this will not become necessary – or rather, become impossible to avoid. It is my fervent hope that enough people will recover their senses in time to prevent what could prove to be the worst human cataclysm ever.

            But my pessimism is fed daily by the events occurring all around us – and by the passivity and indifference of the masses.

          • dom
            July 12, 2012 at 2:47 am

            I’ve been thinking about sending my wife and kid back to Japan. That is a serious kick though. I think once things do (if they do) go bad they might be okay either way. They are dual citizens. Wonder if that gets them a free ride the fuck outta here?

          • mithrandir
            July 12, 2012 at 2:52 am

            Brad,

            Minor point:

            30 million is 10% of 300 million.

            90% of 300 million is 270 million.

          • Mike in Spotsy
            July 12, 2012 at 3:00 am

            @Brad: “I guess the first thing I will do is get my family out of the way.” My sentiments exactly. My fiancee and I have decided to get out of Dodge. My older daughter will be moving to China in a few months, and my younger daughter understands the risks of staying in the US. But until she gets out of college, I can’t leave her. After that, it will be her adult choice to remain in harm’s way if she wants to, and I will be ok with leaving.

            The big question is when it will hit the fan. Will we get out in time? I sure hope so. If not, I will continue to nonviolently resist the encroachments on my natural rights and liberties.

          • methylamine
            July 12, 2012 at 3:56 am

            @Brad and @Mike in Spotsy:

            Where to?

            We’re looking hard at Panama, Belize, Chile…and even southwestern Mexico a little.

            Sure, it gets you out of the NWO’s main target–the US. But they’re after the whole thing; NWO plans are in place everywhere–Agenda 21, regulatory uniformity, “free trade” (what a sick joke that is), burgeoning police states, etc. It’s everywhere; it may be more peaceful immediately in those bug-out countries, but it will come.

            My only hope is that they’ll break themselves on America–and people elsewhere seeing the real face of tyranny unleashed by the NWO will wake up and save themselves.

            What’s ya’ll’s take on it?

            And where are you considering bugging out?

          • Mike in Spotsy
            July 12, 2012 at 9:42 pm

            @methylamine: Where to?

            Uruguay is at the top of our list. Among other reasons, it has very liberal gun ownership laws. I like the idea that I can have my guns shipped to me after acquiring residency there. Of course, a lot can change in 3 years, so that might not end up being the destination. If not, I’ll take another look at the usual suspects.

          • methylamine
            July 13, 2012 at 12:50 am

            @Mike in Spotsy:

            Yes I liked Uruguay too. I thought their gun laws were almost identical to Chile’s and Panama’s. I’m not sure on Belize.

            Doesn’t Uruguay frown on EBR’s (Evil Black Rifles) like Chile? Still, much can be accomplished with a Glock and an 870…though I’d miss my EBR’s terribly. There’s a reason governments fear them so much–I can think of two right now, Iraq and Afghanistan!

            A handgun is fine against home intruders. But an EBR puts ten times as much energy downrange, deadly accurately. Until handheld phasers are available, it will remain the premier tyranny-fighting tool.

        • July 12, 2012 at 10:22 am

          The time will come, I expect, when mere criticism of the government – or advocacy of liberty/defense of individual rights as ideas – will be regarded as tantamount to “terrorism.” This has already been suggested by several government-backed entities.

          • Mike in Spotsy
            July 12, 2012 at 12:03 pm

            It’s already happening, Eric. Remember that gummint report a couple of years ago saying, among other things, that Ron Paul supporters were potential terrorists? Now there’s another report saying that you might be a terrorist if you are suspicious of centralized federal authority, believe your way of life is under attack, or are reverent of individual liberty.

            Imagine that: if you believe in America’s founding principles, you are now a threat to America. wtf?

            This article contains a link to the PDF file of the report: http://www.infowars.com/homeland-security-report-lists-liberty-lovers-as-terrorists/

          • Brad Smith
            July 12, 2012 at 12:05 pm

            Eric, for now I think they believe they have a firm grip on the propaganda machine and that the internet is only a thorn in their side. I have to say it’s probably true to an extent. They are very good at marginalizing anyone who even suggests that the government is anything less than saintly. However, the number of people who refuse to believe the official narrative is growing fast. When this will be considered and actionable threat is very hard to say. For now we can speak our minds and it might make all the difference.

            If you look at the Soviets they did everything they could to shut people up. Yet some of the greatest authors wrote while in the Gulag.

          • July 12, 2012 at 12:27 pm

            Dear Eric, Mike,

            “It’s already happening, Eric.”

            Mike is right.

            As some of us were saying earlier, the statist totalitarians are now accelerating so fast we are having trouble keeping up.

            They have gone from “creeping tyranny” to “galloping tyranny.”

            Our dire predictions are no longer controversial speculation. They are yesterday’s news.

      • Scott
        July 12, 2012 at 9:15 am

        “Makes me wonder if anyone who regularly posts on here doubts that they are on a list ”

        I doubt I’m on a list but I’m pretty sure the guy I pretend to be is.

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          July 17, 2012 at 1:27 pm

          Scott, if the Powers That Be are interested in you they can easily discover your identity. I realized long ago that were I to be an active dissident I could not hide in a cave and have no contact with the outside world.

          • Tor Munkov
            July 17, 2012 at 2:33 pm

            Dear Tinsley,

            Could it be, that with trillions of dollars available on command, TPTB have created and uncreated millions of people at will?

            Witness protection technology could be used to achieve legitimacy for whatever shakedowns the Govt wants to engage in.

            Many government folks would sell their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for a pittance and pretend to die in a mass casualty event.

            Maybe the Saudis, Japanese, and Americans who supposedly died at Pearl Harbor and the Twin Towers were all US military actors in the grand domestic military theater?

            Maybe they were given big payouts and a new identities, unsung anti-heroes in the ignoble cause of the eternal war economy.

            Link is unrelated
            http://www.ted.com/talks/christopher_m00t_poole_the_case_for_anonymity_online.html

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        July 12, 2012 at 9:54 am

        “I think 90% is about right. That still leaves 3 million, or at least a million fully aware adults.”

        Brad, the key word here is “fully”. I have a simple Litmus Test for “fully” that consists of a single question.

        • July 12, 2012 at 10:05 am

          Stalin was able to dispose of several times that number during his reign. I suspect history will repeat itself – and be worse this time around – because there is no place to go. And escape within the system is much less viable, given pervasive technology that did not exist in Stalin’s time.

    • July 12, 2012 at 2:11 am

      The thing is, that invasion had forgotten or never learned a sneaky trick that worked. It’s what the French used when they first went into Indochina in the 19th century, when there were also local bad guys the locals mostly didn’t like (in that case, Chinese river pirates). The trick was, the French used gun registration, but they actually issued registered guns with the “price” that the recipients were encouraged to join a French-organised militia that helped suppress the pirates (working with French naval units in gunboats, etc.). So the locals weren’t scared off by the gun registration and were encouraged to get rid of older, unregistered guns of poorer quality; after that the locals had guns in the same way that the Swiss all have rifles, registered and subject to inspection. As the piracy went down, so too the French wound down the militia and took back the guns they knew where to find because of the registration. But by then there were practically only the issued guns.

    • methylamine
      July 12, 2012 at 3:49 am

      And they’re preparing to do it here, too. Katrina–a test bed. Just this month, St. Louis, MO–tanks in the streets “training” the drivers in “urban environments”; and a few firearms “sequestering” exercises.

      The scary parts are:
      1) The military will do this to us–Brad, can you tell me the military will refuse to confiscate guns from Americans?
      2) If they do it, it will be the last straw, and people will fight back.

      Americans are currently buying 5 million guns per month. They will fight back; and if only 1% fight back, the numbers will be catastrophic. Once the 1% fight back–and the State clamps down harder–the percentages will increase. It will be a bloodbath…as intended.

      After a protracted door-to-door civil war, the exhausted and decimated troops will be augmented with UN troops. Eventually, the plan modeled by the Rand Corp assumes total collapse and a populace ready to welcome peace…in any form.

      • July 12, 2012 at 4:50 am

        Dear methylamine,

        Not that long ago, the scenarios you describe would have sounded like some paranoid rant from Jerry Fletcher, the Mel Gibson character in the 1997 film “Conspiracy Theory.”

        But the controlled demolitions of WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 passed off as “building collapses” in 2001, and FEMA’s handling of Katrina in 2005, give them a chilling ring of truth.

        • methylamine
          July 12, 2012 at 5:28 am

          Thanks Bevin–I do feel crazy at times, because it’s difficult to believe we’ve come this far so fast. The Elites have broken their one-step-per-generation rule; it’s one a year now.

          I’ve exercised no imagination in the scenario I describe. These plans are publicly accessible documents of the Elites themselves; Rand Corp, Club of Rome, Council of 300, Rockefeller foundation, etc. They’re quite explicit in their machinations, and they seem to have some pathological need to telegraph their intentions.

          Did you know there was a made-for-TV movie shortly before 9/11 that posited that exact attack?

          This fight is beyond simple economics, or political philosophy, or accidents of history. It’s an intentional plan and the endgame is to eliminate the vast majority of humans…and leave the remainder under total subjugation.

          • July 12, 2012 at 6:25 am

            Dear methylamine,

            Ironic isn’t it?

            The conspirators have left conspiracy theorists behind by accelerating their timetable, and by becoming ever more brazen in their stated goals.

            Now our conspiracy theories are far too conservative. We are left stating the obvious. Who’d have thunk that would ever happen?

            I was never big on conspiracy theories. I always assumed that the conspiracy was merely one of shared values, and had no need of detailed master plans.

            I’m beginning to rethink that however. Project Northwoods and 9/11 were major revelations for me.

          • July 12, 2012 at 10:00 am

            It beggars belief, doesn’t it?

            We now live in a country where one must assume the “I surrender” pose and submit to an invasive groping of one’s genital area in order to board a commercial aircraft.

            In which the president may, on his say-so and without ever presenting evidence to any court, let alone obtaining a conviction for any crime in any court, put the name of any person he wishes on a “hit list” to be killed.

            In which police routinely Tazer (and beat) people who pose no physical threat to the cops – such as older people and women.

            In which armed government goons raid people’s homes because they are feeding their neighbors with meat or dairy products produced on-site, outside of the government’s “authorized” system.

            In which people will be forced- at gunpoint – to purchase the services of privately-owned, for profit cartels. The very definition of fascism.

            The above are not hysterical exaggerations. They are statements of fact. Beyond debate.

            In my youth, such things – in America – were inconceivable. They were the hallmarks of places like the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany.

            Now they are our reality.

            And most people just don’t care. Or, they refuse to deal with it.

            Perhaps because, like the people of early ’30s Germany, the things going on all around them – and what they portend – don’t bear thinking too much about….

          • July 12, 2012 at 11:04 am

            Dear Eric,

            “In my youth, such things – in America – were inconceivable. They were the hallmarks of places like the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. Now they are our reality.”

            Mind-boggling, is it not?

            Germany at that time was considered one of the most civilized nations on earth, just as the USSA is today.

            Yet it took less than a single generation for it to descend into a nightmarish totalitarian police state.

            Leonard Peikoff is a Randroid doctrinarian. Nevertheless the predictions in his book “The Ominous Parallels” may well be proved right.

            21st century America may well become the next Nazi Germany.

          • methylamine
            July 12, 2012 at 1:04 pm

            Speaking of America becoming the new Nazi Germany–I read a fascinating book, The Rise of the Fourth Reich by Jim Marrs.

            It’s well-researched, and makes the very compelling case that, while we defeated Germany and Hitler, we did NOT defeat National Socialism. Indeed, the progenitors were able to smuggle roughly 80% of the stolen loot out through hundreds of front companies.

            Too, the National Socialists were but a front for the very same banking powers taking over now; they were the “muscle”.

            Marrs argues that what’s happening in America is just the continuance of what happened in Germany–instigated by the same actors.

          • July 12, 2012 at 1:12 pm

            Indeed. I’ve read extensively along these lines.

            For more, read up on Nazi General Reinhard Gehlen’s FHO “gehlenorg” and the deal he struck with the victorious allies. See here:

            http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/gehlen2-a.htm

            Also “paperclip” – the smuggling out of Nazis such as General Dornberger and their incorporation into the US “defense” and “intelligence” apparatus.

            Not one in 10,000 Americans knows that Werner Von Braun held the rank of major in the SS.

          • July 13, 2012 at 1:29 am

            Dear methylamine,

            “while we defeated Germany and Hitler, we did NOT defeat National Socialism.”

            Right.

            We most certainly did not defeat Nazism.

            We adopted Nazism.

      • Brad Smith
        July 12, 2012 at 11:49 am

        I wish I could say the military would not confiscate guns, but I believe they would if given the proper reason/excuse. False flags or real riots, things like that, probably combinations. People love to loot, so any disaster could be used to their advantage. A complete failure of the US power grid would be a good one. They could easily say they are confiscating weapons so the looters don’t take them from you to use on others. It would be harder in places like the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Given a complete revolt I’m sure many soldiers would break ranks and you could even possibly see a military coup.

        As for your earlier question. If I bug out I have a few places to go. One is halfway from the UP to Alaska. There are many places where you can cross the border without hitting customs if you go off road. A few of my friends from the UP and from Alaska bought land there, so we can meet there if need be. Actually we simple were given the land so they can collect taxes on it. We might prefer to squat someplace far out of the way.

        The second place is in Belize. My Father in law (Vietnam vet) left my wife property there. He bugged out in the 80’s.

        Southern Mexico is also a consideration. We also have family there.

        I think everyone should have multiple plans, because it’s really impossible to guess what there plans are. In fact I would bet they have many plans as well.

        I’m hoping to simply be able to stay on my property. I’m a prepper and so are my friends, family and most of the people near by.

  39. Brad Smith
    July 12, 2012 at 3:26 pm

    RICK on July 12, 2012 at 2:53 pm

    Yes, I know the Gov is hiding UFO’s at area 51 and the Men In Black are telling all the demo experts to keep ther mouths shut.

    This is a classic bullshit answer to anything and everything. Straw man arguments are for kids. They don’t belong in adult conversation.

    The fact that you fall so far in regards to this discussion shows you have no true argument. Some conspiracies are true others are not. Many have been proven to be true others will be in the future. I am not even arguing one way or the other about the subject at hand. However, your response is a clear failure.

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      July 12, 2012 at 4:16 pm

      Thank you Brad.

  40. RICK
    July 12, 2012 at 4:31 pm

    To Brad Smith

    All I am asking for is having a demo- expert write a detailed estimate for the WTC7 to show that it can be done. The Gov showed there idea in writing. No straw man here.

    As you said some are proven to be true. A demo expert with the estimate would go a long way of proof.

    • methylamine
      July 12, 2012 at 4:51 pm

      Why should we have to do your research for you, RICK?

      We’ve done the hard work. More importantly, we’ve overcome our fears and embraced the truth. It’s horrible to realize you’re ruled by monsters who lie to you and kill you for their power and amusement.

      Now it’s up to you. You’ve been presented with an idea; it’s up to you whether to accept it or not.

      There are literally thousands of videos on YouTube describing in detail how the towers fell at near-free-fall speeds–an event impossible given the “pancake” theory. There are dozens of video interviews with demolition experts swearing all three, and especially Tower 7, were controlled demolition.

      The evidence–and proof, in the form of thermite dust–is so overwhelming you’d be a fool not to accept it having examined it. In contrast, the NIST study is so threadbare it looks like a freshman English major’s attempt at a physics paper.

      Here’s one site to start with:
      ae911truth.org

      Go to YouTube and find “Loose Change Final Edition”.

      And, yes, Europe’s top demolition expert comments on WTC 7’s collapse. He died in a car crash shortly after.

      Stop hiding your head in the sand RICK, you’re going to get your ass kicked sticking it up in the air like that–get with the program and educate yourself. Quit trying to cling to normality. You’ve been sold a falsehood. Acknowledge it.

      • RICK
        July 12, 2012 at 5:14 pm

        Meth,

        I have looked at 911truth and all those demo experts flapping there gums. I have not found a written detailed plan of demos the buildings.

        The demo experts just say it looks like that, which is different that being able to do it. I have yet to see one tell how he would do it.

        Clover

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          July 12, 2012 at 5:45 pm

          The burden of truth is on the initial claimant. The ragheads flew the aircraft into the building and the buildings burned and collapsed. Until convincing evidence is presented to prove otherwise, that’s what I will continue to believe.

          How many books and articles are there dealing with 9/11 conspiracy now? But the Kennedy assassination will probably continue to hold the record. As for me, I’m satisfied that a frustrated dickhead with an inexpensive firearm killed Kennedy all by himself. There are countless riflemen in America who could have equaled the feat . . . myself included. Hell, I could have killed the unfortunate man with a standard issue Garand.

          • BrentP
            July 12, 2012 at 5:58 pm

            We have no evidence that such people flew the aircraft into the buildings. We don’t know who flew them. Government told us that those people did, there’s no evidence of it.

          • methylamine
            July 12, 2012 at 7:32 pm

            In other words, Tinsley,

            La la la la la la! I am not listening! La la la la!

            And Kennedy? Oswald? With a bolt-action POS Carcano, 3 shots, 7 seconds?

            Have you ever actually fired a bolt-action rifle?

            You seem to be a victim of your own need for certitude…reality be damned.

          • July 12, 2012 at 7:44 pm

            Yeah, but the initial claimant is the government! It’s the government’s story that “ragheads flew the aircraft into the building and the buildings burned and collapsed.” The government is not exactly a trustworthy source – is it?

            I doubt we’ll ever know precisely what happened – but I know bullshit when I smell it.

            And this business about WT7 symmetrically free-falling into its own footprint as a result of debris falling on it and paper/office supply fires is bullshit.

        • July 12, 2012 at 5:59 pm

          Rick,

          You have a bad habit of resorting to insult in lieu of argument. It makes you look silly – not the people you’re mocking.

          The nuts of bolts of how it was done is conjecture – and a separate issue.

          What we are talking about here is that it was done. That WT7 was “dropped” by a controlled demolition; that the evidence for this is overwhelming – and that the “official story” is riddled with engineering, scientific and common sense problems.

          For example (and to repeat): We are told WTC 1 and 2 collapsed as a result of airplanes striking them at high speed, causing flame retardant coatings to be stripped off the structural steel trusses, which were then weakened by the subsequent jet fuel fire to the point that they lost their structural integrity and collapsed. That is the synopsis of the government’s story.

          Ok. There are numerous problems with that – but for now, for the sake of discussion, let’s accept the government’s story.

          WT7 was not hit by an airplane. There was no jet fuel/high temperature fire. So how, pray, did the fire-protected structural steel of WT7 weaken to the point that the entire building collapsed symmetrically onto its own footprint?

          The answer is there is no explanation – other than controlled demolition.

          Such an event – a symmetric collapse into its own footprint – has never occurred before in the history of steel-framed tall buildings, absent controlled demolition. Ever.

          Because it cannot happen.

          A building might fall over; sections of it might crumble. But the whole thing doesn’t just freefall, symmetrically, into a pile of dust without help.

        • methylamine
          July 12, 2012 at 7:34 pm

          The demolition expert describes how he would do it in the fucking video I linked to, RICK.

          Again, you show your unwillingness–nay, your resolute resistance–to educate yourself, preferring rather to steep in your own preconceptions and comfortable illusions.

    • BrentP
      July 12, 2012 at 5:55 pm

      Rick, the thing that amazes me about those who believe the government story on anything is how little evidence they require from the government people and how much they require from those who are not the government.

      If the government has support to their theory of one point, the “konspiracy kook” could have a thousand points worth of support and still be dismissed.

      Those who believe the government’s theory will just keep asking for more proof. If a demo expert or three states that the building was taken down by X,y, and Z and then they want a demo expert to quote the job. It’s just this ever increasing scale of demand. But there’s no point at which these people will re-evaluate their beliefs. There’s no finish line for a konspiracy kook. Just ever greater demands from those who believe the state.

      If it turns out it was demolition and there is a video of the charges being placed, the whole thing being set up and executed, most people will turn to the konspiracy kook and demand more or declare the video to be fake. Could take them in a time machine to have them watch it being done with their own eyes and it still wouldn’t be enough. There is no level of evidence strong enough to bring about reconsideration in the majority of americans. Sadly it also goes for some conspiracy folks who make it all that more difficult for the thoughtful konspiracy kooks to make a case between dealing with personal attacks and tin-foil-hat jokes.

      I don’t care to try to convince anyone of anything unless the exercise happens to amuse me or allows me to learn something. Because it’s simply impossible to do anything with the person who is always demanding more and dismisses everything put in front of him.

      • methylamine
        July 12, 2012 at 7:38 pm

        This is an excellent analysis, Brent. Thank you.

        It is SO frustrating; as you say, you could put them in a time machine and they’d invent an elaborate reason why that, too, was faked.

        The reason? Simple. It’s too painful to break the illusion; they will fight to the death to remain deluded and comfortable.

        Lazy, stupid, and happy.

        I fully understand that speech Morpheus gives Neo about people stuck in the Matrix; it’s dead-on.

      • Brad Smith
        July 12, 2012 at 9:41 pm

        Well said, Brent. Over the years I have argued with at least a thousand people regarding the myth that Clinton left the US with a surplus. I do it out of amusement, because even though it’s extremely easy to prove, people still refuse to believe it. It was a lie that was repeated often enough and by both the Left and Right so that it’s now ingrained in the minds of most Americans. If Slick Willy himself came and told them the truth they would call him a liar.

        • BrentP
          July 13, 2012 at 2:41 am

          Thanks, both of you.

          I too have dealt with the Clinton surplus myth. It doesn’t register. I usually state simply there was less deficit those years, but there was still deficit covered by SS monies.

          That said, people don’t understand what a budget is either. As most of here know a budget is a planning document. It doesn’t mean anything. Yet it’s always ‘budget shortfall’, ‘the children’, blah blah blah. The CAFR is everything. Do they read a CAFR? never. They don’t want to know. When the facts are put in front of them they ignore them.

          And then they hate us for presenting facts if even notice there was something presented. Which is beyond belief. They hate the people who tell them their house is on fire. Idiots. It’s one thing to be ignorant. It’s another not to learn.

          • Brad Smith
            July 13, 2012 at 2:50 am

            You’re welcome Brent. On top of that remind them that the government debt actually went up 1.6 trillion dollars under Clinton. They will always try and divide the budget deficit from government debt. That is BS and has nothing to do with the “surplus”. Only one year did he even balance the budget and like you said, that was an accounting trick by rolling over Social Security and pensions into the general fund and not counting the IOU’s as a debit. On top of that private debt was encouraged and skyrocketed. Not that Repugs have been better.

  41. harry p.
    July 12, 2012 at 4:43 pm

    one way to know if someone is a clover is to show them this video and and see how they react

    • July 12, 2012 at 5:46 pm

      Harry, I just pissed myself watching that!

      • harry p.
        July 12, 2012 at 6:44 pm

        haha, soon sunrises might be taxed, those things need to be “regulated”

        • Rob
          July 12, 2012 at 6:47 pm

          Of course they will be taxed for our own good…..gotta protect people from skin cancer….haha……some government stooge is probably working on a position paper on how to do this

  42. Tinsley Grey Sammons
    July 13, 2012 at 1:30 am

    Have you ever actually fired a bolt-action rifle?

    Sure have, the first being a .22 LR when I was about seven years old.

    I’ve owned several bolt action rifles and was what is called a Gun Nut. My favorite was my .222 with a 4x scope and my .243 was a close second. My 6.5mm Swedish Mauser was interesting but not something I’d use to try to set a record for accuracy. My Arisaka was trash and after test firing it a few times, I never used it thereafter.

    I no longer own rifles but years ago I was an expert rifleman and I loaded my own ammo.

    • methylamine
      July 13, 2012 at 1:39 am

      As I expected, Tinsley, you’re a rifleman.

      Then how can you buy the story that Oswald made 3 shots in 7 seconds with the craptacular Carcano bolt-action?

      Even with a very nice Browning .308, no way could I get off 3 aimed shots in that time.

      Did you see (also expert rifleman and ex-Seal) Jesse Ventura doing a trial at it? They set him up at the same height, with three stationary targets at the distances of the purported shooting…he couldn’t do it.

      • Brad Smith
        July 13, 2012 at 2:20 am

        Dear Meth, I shoot a 308 Remington 700 (bolt action) quite often. When deer were really overpopulated they issued farmer permits, 20 or 30 at a time. I could take down two in around 5 seconds. Not that I timed it, but it must have been close to that. One standing the next one running. I believe it’s possible, but unless he trained for years I think the likelihood is close to zero. We have all seen the guys that put on shows. But think about that. How many of them are around? I have seen my buddy Ted take down two quails with a single shot 12 gauge. Boom then boom. But again this was a shotgun he had since he was a kid and it was only two shots not three.

        To sum up I guess it would be possible, but he would have to have been one of the rare trick shot artists. I see no evidence that he spent years perfecting that skill.

        • methylamine
          July 13, 2012 at 2:27 am

          Exactly–and keep in mind, your Remington has a much nicer action than the Carcano. Plus, he had to compensate for the scope; it’s easier to reacquire through open sites than a scope.

          I haven’t bought that one since the first time I read about it.

          The only reason to force yourself to buy the gubmint’s version of these two fairy tales–JFK and 9/11–is to continue your peaceful residence ensconced in the Matrix.

          • Brad Smith
            July 13, 2012 at 2:57 am

            Right on, I think the scope is the biggest factor. Again take a look at trick shot artists. Do they use scopes?

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        July 13, 2012 at 3:29 am

        Then how can you buy the story that Oswald made 3 shots in 7 seconds with the craptacular Carcano bolt-action?

        *****

        What is the source of the story? Regardless, I’ll give you this round rather than waste a lot of time on it.

        • July 13, 2012 at 9:26 am

          Oswald may have made the shot(s). But my skepticism about his having acted alone is aroused by the bizarre and sinister connections swirling around this character. Look up, for instance, Oswald’s friendship with a fellow by the name of DeMohrenschildt. Oswald’s prior history, including his stint at the air base in Japan prior to his defection to the Soviet Union – and his subsequent return, wedded to the daughter of a KGB Major. And then there’s the all-too-convenient assassination of Oswald himself. Are you buying it that Jack Ruby “wanted to spare Mrs. Kennedy the trauma of a trial”? I’m not!

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            July 13, 2012 at 12:04 pm

            Speculation and evidence are not synonyms. In the absence of new evidence, the convoluted Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories will remain stalled.

            After fifty years, I doubt that anyone who might have hard evidence of a conspiracy is still living.

            As the number of persons who are in on a secret increases, the unlikelihood of maintaining secrecy eventually increases to the point of being impossible. The Manhattan Project certainly proved that.

          • July 13, 2012 at 12:06 pm

            Oh, agreed!

            But it stinks to high heaven. The “official story,” that is.

            Oh, and on the Manhattan Project: Thousands of people involved, so not really a fair comparison.

            A better comparison would the USS Liberty incident; still mostly unspoken of today.

            Or Operation Northwoods.

            Enough has come out about the JFK event to tell us there’s more to it than we were told.

            Which could also be said of the Manhattan Project, by the way. Ever read what Oppy said about the source of the uranium? Some know about this – but most don’t. Not because it’s a big secret. It’s just not discussed in the official narrative – and the official narrative often only tells us what those who control the narrative want us to know – or rather, to believe!

          • methylamine
            July 13, 2012 at 3:33 pm

            @Eric–YES! That one knocked my socks off…

            The source of most of the uranium was Deutschland, boys and girls.

      • tony2
        July 13, 2012 at 8:40 pm

        For what it’s worth:Jim Garrison’s book On The Trail Of The Assassins
        pages 98 & 99

        A great deal of confusion surrounded this second-rate Italian rifle because there was compelling evidence that it was not the weapon found in the assassin’s lair shortly after the assassination. Officer Seymour Weitzman, part of the Dallas police search team, later described the discovery of the rifle on the afternoon of November 22. He stated that it had been so well hidden under boxes of books that the officers stumbled over it many times before they found it. Officer Weitzman, who had an engineering degree and also operated a sporting goods store, was recognized as an authority on weapons. Consequently, Dallas Homicide Chief Will Fritz, who was on the scene, asked him the make of the rifle. Weitzman identified it as a 7.65 Mauser, a highly accurate German-made weapon. Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig was also there and later recalled the word “Mauser” inscribed in the metal of the gun. And Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone executed a sworn affidavit in which he described the rifle as a Mauser. As late as midnight of November 22, Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade told the media that the weapon found was a Mauser.
        There is, of course, a significant difference between a first-class Mauser and a cheap mail-order Mannlicher-Carcano. It should have been simple to know which weapon had been found. However, to complicate the issue, three empty cartridges from a Mannlicher-Carcano were found in the same room as the Mauser. They were near the easternmost sixth-floor window, close together and almost parallel to each other. Although this arrangement made them easy to find, it defied what any experienced user of rifles knows: that when a rifle is fired, the cartridge is flung violently away. A neat distribution pattern of cartridges like the one found on the sixth floor of the Depository is virtually impossible. It strongly suggested to me that the cartridges were never fired from the assassin’s lair but were planted near the window, presumably having been fired earlier elsewhere, so that bullet fragments found in the President’s limousine could be described as having come from the Carcano.
        more at: http://www.maebrussell.com/Garrison/On%20The%20Trail%20of%20the%20Assassins.html

  43. Tinsley Grey Sammons
    July 13, 2012 at 2:49 am

    Cui bono?

    The Kennedy assassination has never been very high on my list of things to worry about but I did recently see a convincing reexamination of the killing that supports Oswald as the lone gunman.

    For me, the joker in the deck has always been Jack Ruby. But anyway, going ’round and ’round about it is simply a waste of time.

    • July 13, 2012 at 9:49 am

      I’m interested in the JFK thing because of what it implies about power politics in this country; who actually runs the show – and what they are willing to do in the furtherance of their aims. That’s as relevant today as it was in 1963.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        July 13, 2012 at 12:21 pm

        Unprincipled swine will continue to run the show until a significant number of Citizens insist that the show be run according to the Principles underpinning the Unanimous Declaration. Sadly I don’t see that ever happening.

        From time to time Big Government will accede to a particular demand but as soon as the clamor subsides it’s back to criminal monkey business as usual.

  44. Tinsley Grey Sammons
    July 13, 2012 at 3:36 am

    Credibility and Katrina

    Meth, earlier in this thread you mentioned Katrina. What did Big Government do or fail to do that contravenes the Principles on which America lawfully stands?

    • methylamine
      July 13, 2012 at 3:57 am

      Among the dozens of violations of Common Law, they confiscated peaceful peoples’ guns–an unforgivable breach.

      But a useful exercise for the Elites; they needed to gauge two things, the willingness of the thug-class to take them, and the reaction of the people to the taking.

      As far as I know, we failed on both counts–though I did hear there were a few units who refused to confiscate guns, and I did see a feisty old gal clinging onto her wheel gun. Nevertheless, the heartless thugs grabbed it from her frail hands.

      I didn’t hear if any of the traitors were righteously shot. I think it came as a big surprise, and people weren’t prepared.

      If they try it on a mass scale, I’m betting at least 1% respond violently in self-defense…and then the game is on. I do not wish it though; it will be horrible.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        July 13, 2012 at 12:33 pm

        I lost my home and everything in it when Katrina struck St. Bernard Parish. I could not have asked my government and the volunteers to do more. The outpouring of assistance from both sources was something that Americans can be proud of.

        A blanket condemnation of government does not help the cause of Liberty and Justice for All. The actual bad and evil wrought by government is sufficient to stand on it’s own.

        • July 13, 2012 at 1:14 pm

          Dear Tinsley,

          Unfortunately a “blanket condemnation” is morally unavoidable according to any rational ethical code one cares to cite.

          Specifically because the resources that were doled out were first extracted from others at gunpoint. This makes anything that is done afterward tainted.

          Admittedly it’s not as bad as using the extracted wealth to kill either Americans or foreigners.

          But the fact that the resources were obtained by “The Government” by morally unacceptable means cannot and does not whitewash the initial injustice.

          Never forget, absent such coercion, the same resources would have remained in the private sector, where it could have and would have helped those in need, voluntarily.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            July 13, 2012 at 1:31 pm

            I cannot imagine the Private Sector handling the natural Katrina Disaster as well as it was handled by government controlled resources.

          • July 13, 2012 at 2:17 pm

            Dear Tinsley,

            You wrote:

            “I cannot imagine the Private Sector handling the natural Katrina Disaster as well as it was handled by government controlled resources.”

            Sorry, but the public sector CREATED the Katrina disaster.

            See:
            The State and the Flood, by Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr.
            http://mises.org/daily/1902

            An excerpt:

            Mother Nature can be cruel, but even at her worst, she is no match for government. It was the glorified public sector, the one we are always told is protecting us, that is responsible for this.

            It is the Army Corps of Engineers that has been responsible for the dwindling of the coastline that has required the levees to be constantly reinforced with higher walls.

  45. Tinsley Grey Sammons
    July 13, 2012 at 1:26 pm

    Google: shots fired at helicopter Katrina

  46. Tinsley Grey Sammons
    July 13, 2012 at 3:17 pm

    It is the Army Corps of Engineers that has been responsible for the dwindling of the coastline that has required the levees to be constantly reinforced with higher walls.

    So what? What has that to do with what had to be done during and following the storm. When I crossed the bridge that spans the Industrial Canal the water was lapping over the top of the levee. I spent the next fourteen hours driving at a crawl to the LSU Campus where my family having departed the previous day were waiting.

    In the years preceding Katrina I do not recall the private sector media publishing dire warnings about the inadequate levees.

    • July 13, 2012 at 3:34 pm

      Dear Tinsley,

      I guess you didn’t bother to read Lew Rockwell’s article?

      I quote:

      But who knew that a direct hit by a hurricane would cause them to break? Many people, it turns out. Ivor van Heerden of Louisiana State University, reports Newsday, “who has developed flooding models for New Orleans, was among those issuing dire predictions as Katrina approached, warnings that turned out to be grimly accurate. He predicted that floodwaters would overcome the levee system, fill the low-lying areas of the city and then remain trapped there well after the storm passed — creating a giant, stagnant pool contaminated with debris, sewage and other hazardous materials.”

      Newsday goes on: “Van Heerden and other experts put some of the blame on the Mississippi River levees themselves, because they channel silt directly into the Gulf of Mexico that otherwise would stabilize land along the riverside and slow the sinking of the coastline.”

      He is hardly some lone nut. National Geographic ran a large article on the topic last year that begins with a war-of-the-worlds scenario and reads precisely like this week’s news from New Orleans. It is the Army Corps of Engineers that has been responsible for the dwindling of the coastline that has required the levees to be constantly reinforced with higher walls. But one problem: no one bothered to do this since 1965. That’s only the beginning of the problems created by the Corps’ levee management, the history of which was documented by Mark Thornton following the last flood in 1999.

      Only the public sector can preside over a situation this precarious and display utter and complete inertia. What do these people have to lose? They are not real owners. There are no profits or losses at stake. They do not have to answer to risk-obsessed insurance companies who insist on premiums matching even the most remote contingencies. So long as it seems to work, they are glad to go about their business in the soporific style famous to all public sectors everywhere.

      • dom
        July 13, 2012 at 3:38 pm

        Do you have the link?

        • July 13, 2012 at 4:19 pm

          Dear dom,

          Yes. Lew Rockwell himself wrote it.

          See:
          The State and the Flood, by Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr.
          http://mises.org/daily/1902

          • Tor Munkov
            July 14, 2012 at 12:24 am

            The more horrors Americans endure, the more productive we become. We are needed only for our dreams, ambitions, and wild risk taking flights of fantasy.

            The new American dream will be only CGI and soothing HD virtual reality, not one to be physically inhabited and enjoyed.

            There are new tribes of builders of reality. 1.1 billion Chinese, 1.6 billion Muslims, 1 billion Indians. They too have science, technology, and discipline, and also willingness to sacrifice and expect less in return.

            Look at Jeddah, Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Chinese megacities. American cities are sad little adobe hut reservations where delusional ghosts and beggars wait to die.

            Osama Bin Laden is an heir of the Bin Laden Group, the largest construction firm in the world. He was hired to do a demo to speed up the rise of the new American era.

            Our fellow Americans are no longer leaders, but only dream catchers and vision questers. Too corrupted and hollowed out to do anything more than mill about and worship the spangled rotten totem poles and masonic teepees while new woundrous temples of the future are built somewhere else.

            Overcoming our conditioning to work for ourselves is our only hope.

            Humans are collateral for the National Debts
            http://youtu.be/brKJ2dd4AzE

          • July 14, 2012 at 1:17 am

            Dear Tor,

            I am a Baby Boomer. I grew up in the US and Canada during the 50s, when the US was at its economic and technological peak.

            I was thoroughly imbued with the premise — correct at the time — that America was the envy of the world.

            See:
            http://contestededen.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/billboard.png

            To me there was nothing ironic about the now infamous billboard which read, “World’s Highest Standard of Living. There’s no way like the American Way.”

            I never imagined that within my lifetime America would come to this.

            Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
            — Ronald Reagan

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        July 13, 2012 at 3:51 pm

        Should the Corps of Engineers be auctioned to the highest bidder? After all, lawsuits – so the story might go – could compensate the victims of the Corps’ oversights and failings.

        *****

        I followed the aftermath of Katrina closely and I am quite familiar with Van Heerden and what he had to say.

        Enough years have passed for my wife and I to put Katrina behind us. We seldom discuss it anymore.

        *****

        Afterthought: The money squandered on the unconstitutional Drug War could sure build and maintain a lot of levees. Unfortunately the American People wanted their Drug War and they sure as hell have it.

        • July 13, 2012 at 4:27 pm

          Dear Tinsley,

          I have no particular wish to argue with a hardline constitutionalist. I was one not too many years ago, just before I converted to free market anarchism.

          In fact, I’m affirming your hardline constitutionalism.

          None of the government blunders that led to the Katrina fiasco would have been possible had “The Government” adhered to Strict Construction.

          Anyway, I’m sure we both have bigger fish to fry.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            July 13, 2012 at 5:55 pm

            I’m convinced that it is best to fight a strategic war and try to take on the toughest battle first. Go after the Drug War and insist that the Principles underpinning the Unanimous Declaration be respected.

            By taking on the toughest first a precedent will be established that will make the repeal of other bad law much easier.

  47. Tor Munkov
    July 14, 2012 at 1:23 pm

    A state sponsored event in Brazil sure looks to be better than American celebrations. Imagine a parade without costumed praetorians, siege vehicles, flags, marching music, and slobbering patria-eroticism.

    Sao Paulo and Rio DJ might be thick with christ-clovers, but so far they don’t seem to be as africanized and weaponized into ravenous clover swarms as they are elsewhere.

    Rio DJ 2012 Carnaval Sambódromo
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQWQ7GizK3c&t=1m10s

  48. Tor Munkov
    July 15, 2012 at 3:32 pm

    State Nullification Resolutions of Virginia & Kentucky in 1798.
    By Thomas Jefferson and James Madison:

    “The several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but by compact, under the style and title of a Constitution and its amendments.

    Together they constitute a general government for special purposes only, Delegating to the general government certain definite powers, while reserving, each state to itself, the residuary mass of powers to their own self-government.

    Whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force. Each state is an integral party to this general compatct, and this general government was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself, since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers.

    In all cases of the general compact of the several states, the general government has no common authority of judgment, but that each state has an equal right to judge for itself, the mode and measure of redress of any infractions of the states sovereign rights and powers.”

    – Constitutional lawyer(like BHO) Alexander Hamilton’s response to these nullification resolutions was to further enlarge the Federalist army, and to begin a war and an invasion of the state of Virginia by the standing Federalist army.

    A standing army maintained in a time of piece against the provisions of the constitution.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kentucky_and_Virginia_Resolutions

  49. Tinsley Grey Sammons
    July 15, 2012 at 6:03 pm

    “I have no particular wish to argue with a hardline constitutionalist.”

    With the exception of the Bill of Rights I rarely base any argument on the Constitution. Since most of my arguments are philosophical I use the non-amendable Unanimous Declaration.

    The Question of Questions in my mind is: What can the State lawfully do to the Individual?

    “Find the enemy and shoot him down. All else is nonsense.” -Manfred von Ricthofen

    • July 15, 2012 at 6:15 pm

      “The Question of Questions in my mind is: What can the State lawfully do to the Individual?”

      My answer: Punish him for causing harm to others, or cause him to recompense those he harms for the harm he has caused.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        July 15, 2012 at 7:03 pm

        Makes sense to me.

        • July 15, 2012 at 11:40 pm

          If the actions of the state could actually be confined to this, I would never have become a free market anarchist.

          Unfortunately I have been forced to conclude that minarchist “limited government” never remains limited.

          Limited government is a camel whose nose is already in the tent. Limited government is a wedge whose thin edge is already in the log.

          Limited government always becomes unlimited government. Minarchism always becomes maxarchism. Tragically the history of the US of A is a real world empirical experiment that has borne that out.

          Once one concedes the “right” of the state to monopolize the use of force in a given geographical region, the game is already over. The war is already lost.

          That’s why although I approve of the direction in which Ron Paul or the Constitution Party are headed, I don’t actually believe it is ultimately a workable strategy.

          The initial concession of monopoly on the use of force within a given geographical region is a fatal mistake which inevitably leads to maxarchism/totalitarianism as the camel takes over the tent, and the wedge gets driven in all the way.

          • methylamine
            July 16, 2012 at 3:09 am

            Precisely, Bevin.

            It’s that initial concession, as small as a mustard seed, that grows into a tree that dominates the landscape.

            The individual must be the sovereign–anything else, and the machine is set in motion…and the boots marching.

            We’ll get there. In fact, we might make it on this round–perhaps not in our lifetimes, but the seeds of the nation-state’s destruction have been sown. Alternatives like voluntary ‘phyles and private security already exist in reality and imagination. As people total up the democidal death toll, they’ll come to realize almost no amount of private banditry can possibly compare.

            The real battle will be over money. When people get wise to the bankster’s game, the nation-state will fall, too–because governments ultimately serve the sociopathic banksters. Without their money, politician-sociopaths will return to regular gangsterism…and banksters to flim-flam cons.

          • July 16, 2012 at 3:58 am

            Dear methylamine,

            I agree.

            Mankind will eventually get there. Whether I myself live to see it or not is another matter.

            Speaking of trees, time for another Chinese aphorism:

            前人植樹,後人乘涼 pronounced “qian ren zhi shu, hou ren cheng liang”

            It means “Those who come first plant the trees. Those who come later, enjoy the shade.”

            If that’s how it has to be, that’s how it has to be.

            If we make genuine liberty possible, but never live to see it ourselves, so be it.

            Hopefully some of the trends you mentioned toward genuine liberty are also accelerating as we approach the watershed.

            The young Gen Y’ers who support Ron Paul could represent an approaching tidal wave.

  50. clover
    July 15, 2012 at 10:12 pm

    (This is Eric again.)

    Clover, oh Clover…

    If you’ll just tell us your real name and what you do for a living, you’ll be allowed to post again!

    We know how much you love us – how you can’t stay away from EPautos… so, how about it?

    It rubs the lotion on its skin….

  51. Tinsley Grey Sammons
    July 16, 2012 at 9:28 am

    “The real battle will be over money.”

    Concern for money dominates Internet discussions. After twenty years online I am convinced that most folks would sell their neighbors’ right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for a pittance.

  52. Mike in Spotsy
    August 3, 2012 at 3:54 pm

    Here’s one dude who is certainly not a clover:

    “A farmer angry over a recent arrest surprised police in Vermont on Thursday by driving his tractor over seven parked police cars before driving away.” His recent arrest was for marijuana possession and the ubiquitous resisting arrest. The pics in the article are priceless.

    Link to the whole article: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2182958/Farmer-takes-revenge-drug-arrest-driving-tractor-seven-police-cars.html

    • Brad Smith
      August 3, 2012 at 4:19 pm

      LOL, literally, Thanks Mike you made my day.

      Wow, holy crap! I laughed so hard my sided are aching. He is going to be in big trouble, but damn I hope it’s worth it for him. Talk about a story to tell your Grandchildren.

      Definitely not a clover.

      I loved the part where they said that they were inside their offices with the air conditioning on and had to be called on the phone to realize he was driving over their cars. Plus the part where it said they couldn’t pursue him. No kidding, really?

    • August 3, 2012 at 5:12 pm

      Hot damn! This made my day – no, my week!

      A true American hero. I’m going to see whether he has a legal defense fund set up – and send him a few bucks, if he does.

    • Olaf Koenders
      December 15, 2012 at 8:56 pm

      It was a massive tractor. It has four six-foot tandem wheels on the back. It was red..

      It’s only the red ones that really mean business, apparently.

      I love this guy, reminds me of the farmer that sprayed pig shit all over Number 10 Downing street in England some time ago. The Prime Minister’s front door – to those unacquainted.

      I don’t believe we have these “traffic schools” in Oz, but I would have been in sore need of some retribution – like removing number plates and peeling outta there after a few rubbery donuts. It’s piss-weak and I bet some of them do that, but hell. Take the frustration out on those that deserve it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *