You do not own your home. Mortgage or finance companies with an interest in your home, if any, do not own your home either. You RENT your home and your car from the government. You get to live in your house and drive your car only as long as you pay the rent in full, on time, plus any grace period (usually with high interest accrued) the government may allow.
You cannot and do not live in the "fair market value" of your home. You live in a building. Even if your house doubled in "value" today, you would still be living in the same house. The house would not increase in size, beauty or any other physical parameter. Only the rent would increase, nothing else.
Because you don't own your home, you cannot sell it. You may only transfer the right to live in it to another person who can pay the rent. Such a "buyer" must also wish to live in your unique home badly enough to give you "fair market value" for your limited rights.
All current property rights in Nebraska derive ultimately from the government. The government may deprive you of any or all of your property rights, with or without payment, as it sees fit.
I believe NO rights should derive from any government. In my thinking, my rights came to me with the gift of life. From God, if you will. I believe the framers of our United States Constitution thought this way as well. They wanted government to exist only to protect and nurture these God-given rights.
But, as sure as men are made out of meat, the Constitution has been subverted. Just as the love of Jesus burned men at the stake, the ideal is replaced by beastliness. What was meant to free us has, again, enslaved us.
What goes around, comes around. Sometimes it's a shit sandwich.
October 19, 2004
October 13, 2004
Terrorist Scenario of the Week
Terrorist Scenarios - Power Disruption during Election
The power outage near Duluth, Minnesota brings to mind the Peruvian terrs habit of 'turning out the lights' to show their presence. They may have been using tactics right out of WWII sabotage manuals. Some European terrs of the mao-fascist type (Red Army Faction) plotted similar things, back in the day. It isn't like knocking down power lines is a new idea. The maoists in Nepal still do it, even though it must be hard for most folks in Nepal to notice.
Bad Case: The Minnesota incident could have been a test.
The object would likely be to disrupt US processes by striking numerous strategic segments of our electric power grid simultaneously. Obvious targets would be centers of transportation and government. But the most attractive process presenting in the near future is the US election in November.
It would be easy to convince a few gangs of local simpaticos or wannabe jihadists that they would be helping the cause by loosening some bolts. Jihad without having to commit suicide or do anything more dangerous than vandalism. You can find such 'dedication' in the more extreme elements of the environmental movement, for example.
Compartmented, these local operatives would not need to know they were part of a larger strategy. Perhaps they would be more easily recruited if they thought the results of their efforts would be localized and arguably non-lethal.
Properly placed and timed, power grid attacks would bring the US electoral process to a halt. The terrs would hope for chaos to ensue. Martial law and civil unrest would be their dream; a writhing, headless snake their metaphor.
Worst Case: The Minnesota test is tied to Mr. Gertz's report of Chechen suiciders entering the US.
Tough, trained "already dead" Chechens might coordinate some sort of action with a power outage. We saw what these cold blooded terrs can do when they took the school in Russia. Their most strategic targets here would be crowded polling places. They could satisfy their thirst for blood and achieve martyrdom while further destabilizing our election. Maybe they have a nuke with them, but they wouldn't need one.
Add an uncertain election outcome to a bloody mass killing of innocents and you have terror. Add this flavor of terror to the already heated status of the current political scene and the terrorists might achieve a devastating blow to our country.
As with all my worst case ruminations, I hope it doesn't happen this way.
The power outage near Duluth, Minnesota brings to mind the Peruvian terrs habit of 'turning out the lights' to show their presence. They may have been using tactics right out of WWII sabotage manuals. Some European terrs of the mao-fascist type (Red Army Faction) plotted similar things, back in the day. It isn't like knocking down power lines is a new idea. The maoists in Nepal still do it, even though it must be hard for most folks in Nepal to notice.
Bad Case: The Minnesota incident could have been a test.
The object would likely be to disrupt US processes by striking numerous strategic segments of our electric power grid simultaneously. Obvious targets would be centers of transportation and government. But the most attractive process presenting in the near future is the US election in November.
It would be easy to convince a few gangs of local simpaticos or wannabe jihadists that they would be helping the cause by loosening some bolts. Jihad without having to commit suicide or do anything more dangerous than vandalism. You can find such 'dedication' in the more extreme elements of the environmental movement, for example.
Compartmented, these local operatives would not need to know they were part of a larger strategy. Perhaps they would be more easily recruited if they thought the results of their efforts would be localized and arguably non-lethal.
Properly placed and timed, power grid attacks would bring the US electoral process to a halt. The terrs would hope for chaos to ensue. Martial law and civil unrest would be their dream; a writhing, headless snake their metaphor.
Worst Case: The Minnesota test is tied to Mr. Gertz's report of Chechen suiciders entering the US.
Tough, trained "already dead" Chechens might coordinate some sort of action with a power outage. We saw what these cold blooded terrs can do when they took the school in Russia. Their most strategic targets here would be crowded polling places. They could satisfy their thirst for blood and achieve martyrdom while further destabilizing our election. Maybe they have a nuke with them, but they wouldn't need one.
Add an uncertain election outcome to a bloody mass killing of innocents and you have terror. Add this flavor of terror to the already heated status of the current political scene and the terrorists might achieve a devastating blow to our country.
As with all my worst case ruminations, I hope it doesn't happen this way.
October 11, 2004
Welcome to Democracy
Congratulations to all freedom loving Citizens of Afghanistan on their first generally and freely elected government ever. I have heard it said that it was their first general election in 5,000 years. The Athenians weren't even holding general elections 5,000 years ago. Why not give them credit for their first ever?
It seems they pulled off a pretty good election. Even the UN seems to think so. Their Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian affairs posts this nice account with this caveat:
[ This report does not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations]
Of course, the United Nations doesn't stand for democracy. Never has, and never will. More about my view of that ugly chancre on New York City are bound to surface, as I get the hang of blogging.
To Afghans everywhere, welcome to a great opportunity. So far, so good.
It seems they pulled off a pretty good election. Even the UN seems to think so. Their Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian affairs posts this nice account with this caveat:
[ This report does not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations]
Of course, the United Nations doesn't stand for democracy. Never has, and never will. More about my view of that ugly chancre on New York City are bound to surface, as I get the hang of blogging.
To Afghans everywhere, welcome to a great opportunity. So far, so good.
October 09, 2004
Dividend Life
John Edwards has been showing contempt for yet another group of Americans: the ones that 'live off of dividends'. While this may appear to be a subset of 'the wealthiest Americans' that Johns Edwards and Kerry both already despise, it isn't. Let's call them dividend sucks.
Not all of them live in the manner of the wealthy, with mansions in Italy and apartments on Park Avenue. Some of these folks live right in our middle class neighborhoods. Many of them are retired, but most are still contributing to our society. Other dividend sucks live in nursing homes and assisted living facilities.
It seems to me that, aside from the unavoidable unpleasantries of life, these dividend sucks have it pretty good. Could I get such a position? If I could live off of dividends, I'd have more time to enjoy life. Assuming, of course, it isn't a real job requiring actual work.
I'll post a follow-up as soon as I figure out what it takes to get me on the dividend gravy train.
Not all of them live in the manner of the wealthy, with mansions in Italy and apartments on Park Avenue. Some of these folks live right in our middle class neighborhoods. Many of them are retired, but most are still contributing to our society. Other dividend sucks live in nursing homes and assisted living facilities.
It seems to me that, aside from the unavoidable unpleasantries of life, these dividend sucks have it pretty good. Could I get such a position? If I could live off of dividends, I'd have more time to enjoy life. Assuming, of course, it isn't a real job requiring actual work.
I'll post a follow-up as soon as I figure out what it takes to get me on the dividend gravy train.
October 08, 2004
Blogging: Harder than it looks
This isn't going to be as easy as I thought it would be. Once I get used to the interface, I'll get started. Really.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
