Comments for Countdown To The End Of Our Sovereignty (Updated)

Countdown To The End Of Our Sovereignty (Updated)

2009-10-17T15:28:46Z

Just a teaser. The rest HERE,

Update - The unclean masses are lobbying hard to Madame Pants to recognize "Climate Refugees" Their sign reads: "Secretary of state, recognize climate refugees at COP15. COP15 is the aforementioned Treaty/Summit at Copenhagen.

BTW at 0:12, across the street, is Navy Hill. Though there is still a small US Navy office and Admiral Residency there, almost all of it is a State Department compound I used to visit it alot; as the State Department's Narcotic Affairs Section (NAS) is HQ's there. They do procure gobs of goodies I used to flog, on behalf of Latin American Counternarcotics Security Agencies. Lots of Boom-boom thingies that end-up in Colombia, stop there first. Ah good times.

Boq

Comment from Maggie on 2009-10-22

2009-10-22T13:10:45Z

Wow! They gave up electricity for 26 hours........I'm soooo impressed. I look at those earnest faces, with their straightened white teeth and think "Gee, I wonder how they will like life with no money for braces or Crest whitestrips or Starbuck's coffee or electricity for their PDA so they can follow their friends on Twitter?"

But maybe I'm just cranky b/c the US Navy has had me up early for two mornings in a row.

Comment from Boquisucio on 2009-10-21

2009-10-21T13:14:39Z

Having lived in Italy, I am well acquainted with the Gitano scourge befouling The Boot of Europe. But to me, they are a very minor nuisance.

Their Modus Operandi is as follows: Usually, packs of around twelve prepubescent kids roam around large congregating areas. Like a pack of hyenas, they target the weak and feeble in the crowd. One of the little tykes holds a newspaper or large piece of cardboard parallel to the floor and with a smile seeks to jam it up into your face. When your peripheral field of vision is shrouded by the piece of cardboard, the other kids pounce at once. Ripping your bags, ransacking your pockets, et caetera, and in a blink of an eye it is all over. You are left nekkid as a jaybird. They immediately, run and scurry around the back corner, where an adult gypsy collects the loot, and max-out your credit cards, in literally seconds. I'm not kidding - seconds. They efficiently do this by immediately relaying your credit card numbers to accomplices via mobile phone.

How do you avoid all this? Easy. Do not pay any attention to any of the kids in the swarm. They jib, jive and swirl on purpose in an attempt to distract you. Just place an icy cold stare on the kid with the newspaper. Be loud, and angry at her (it's usually a 11-year old girl). Feel yourself wanting to physically kill her, and make an ernest expresion of it. She WILL back-off, and move to other weaker quarry.

Comment from BillT on 2009-10-21

2009-10-21T12:54:11Z

Anyone and everyone who wanted to be here had legal right to be here.

Italy has a hellaproblem with purse-snatchers. Most of them *claim* to be Gypsies, and, since Gypsies are now defined by Italian Law as "Economic Refugees," all the perp has to do if a cop starts to chase him is stop, holler "Gitano" -- and saunter off. If you're fast, you can retrieve your wallet (or purse), but you can't muss the darlin' up in doing so.

One of the caribinieri in Milano told me that if you could introduce the perp's face to the nearest wall *before* he could say the magic word, you'd probably have a street named in your honor.

Comment from MCart on 2009-10-21

2009-10-21T05:12:39Z

No dogs. No firehoses. Not even that bulldozer that fixed the Rachel Corrie problem.

This protest sucked.

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2009-10-20

2009-10-20T13:20:42Z

That's why there's... *koff* spell-check, Boq. In the composing window, even...

Comment from Boq on 2009-10-20

2009-10-20T12:43:29Z

Tough Grammarian crowd here ;-)

Serves me well for having to post fast and on the fly. Not that my spick background helps either.

Comment from Argent on 2009-10-19

2009-10-20T04:44:29Z

He missed "accross" but probably couldn't get past the title.

Comment from Matt W on 2009-10-19

2009-10-20T03:01:03Z

Just a faint criticism... but it might help your case if you could spell the word 'sovereignty".

Comment from Grimmy on 2009-10-19

2009-10-20T01:59:44Z

BillT:

I think of them as Martians.
Green skin over red blood bags and minds as alien as hell.

Comment from BillT on 2009-10-19

2009-10-19T13:41:16Z

All the more reason to send the organization packing.

The UN is full of traffic lights -- they claim they're Green because they're too Yellow to admit they're Red.

Comment from Grimmy on 2009-10-19

2009-10-19T12:46:38Z

BillT:

That UN Agenda 21 was used as the "legal" motivation behind the efforts to establish a "migration corridor" through the US of A for the free and unfettered migration of wild life from Mexico to Canada.

The corridor was to start in the western foothills of the Sierra Nevada mountains and stretch east to about mid great plains. All humans, all signs of humanity, etc and so on were to be removed. Overflights by air craft were to be forbidden. The land reconstructed to its original natural state.

That UN agenda, along with others, was also used as the "international law" reasoning behind some of the louder attempts to make it a criminal offense to keep our own borders. Anyone and everyone who wanted to be here had legal right to be here.

This got real stupid during the Gray Davis admin here in California. BLM (Bureau of Land Management) went on a land grabbing spree, farmers were jailed for disturbing wild life habitat in their fields by plowing, etc and so on. And the illegal immigration problem reached flood proportions.

UN Agenda 21 was often cited by the .... persons... doing the damage and coming up with the crazy.

Comment from fdcol63 on 2009-10-19

2009-10-19T12:46:05Z

Hmmm .... Marxist-Socialists who are trying to use the Green Movement to destroy American capitalism.

Who woulda thunk it?

Comment from BillT on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T18:45:47Z

Sounds like some within the "international community" need to have Romany use their lawns for a crash pad for, oh, say, a month. And the beauty of it is that the Rom would find the idea both hilarious and appealing...

Comment from Grimmy on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T17:56:07Z

Many muches of unfettered sorryfulness for breaking faith on watching my tongue. No excuse for it.

On your economic/climate refugee question, you might start by digging around and reading up on UN Agenda 21 and other related UN documentation.

There has been a rather strong movement that's gone very under reported, within the "international community" that advocates the removal of all national boundaries in order to allow the free flow of humanity.

Comment from Grumpy on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T17:36:20Z

It is strange that John, the Armorer, should use the term, "grumpy". Well, I've been reading this thread. Yeah, I'm still an old "board certified rectal discomfort", with royalty status pending.

@BillT, You're right, it still takes 2/3 vote by the Senate for a treaty to take effect.

@John, You write, "No, they'll build the power plants (and wind farms to scar the landscape further) out here in the midwest, Bill - to power them folks to the east - and then hit *me* with a carbon tax surcharge for doing it. And not *them*." You make a good point. How do we resolve it? Whatya think about this? We'll take all of the dang fools from the east coast and ship them to the Castle. Then you've got the dang fools and their energy, all right together.

This sorta puts the 'Castle' in a different light. Is it 'Lemons' or 'Lemonade' or both? No matter what your answer is, there is a price. About my suggestion, seriously, The answer is this, I would not change your situation and it was only used as an illustration.

Comment from BillT on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T17:16:51Z

Doggone it, Grimmy, there ya go sugar-coating it again!

Okay, just watched the Update vid -- what is an "environmental migrant / climate refugee" and where are they coming from? So far, the only ones I've heard described as "climate refugees" are the Carteret Islanders -- and they've been *economic* refugees since 1990, when they destroyed their coral reefs and blasted a hole in their lagoon by fishing with dynamite -- which also caused seawater to seep into their fresh water aquifer.

Comment from Grimmy on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T16:52:42Z

Actually, it's being demanded that we make lemonade out of rotten fruit, unfit for human consumption, then pretend it's the nectar of the gods.

There is not one single aspect of any of this that is not MEANT to be destructive to our economy. That was the only purpose of the Kyoto idiocy, and that is the only purpose of this latest assault.

It's based on nothing, there's zero reality behind any of the "emergency" that's supposedly motivating all this retardation. It is %100, nothing more than a naked power grab by those who've long sought the destruction of the USA and, in addition, everything in "The West".

Scratch any "greeny" deeply enough and you get nothing but neo-marxist anti-capitalism goo under your finger nails.

And what the intellectually inbred sacks of dumbass in Europe refuse to comprehend, is that American capitalism, and American generosity, has been the only reason Europe has been able to afford all their socialism.

They're actively trying to kill the goose that laid their golden egg.

I do so hope that payback ends up as the hugest, most comprehensively destructive bitch to every stride the planet in vengeance.

Comment from BillT on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T16:31:00Z

The problem is not just that we're being given lemons -- we're also being told to make lemonade and then give it to someone else to drink.

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T15:24:19Z

No, they'll build the power plants (and wind farms to scar the landscape further) out here in the midwest, Bill - to power them folks to the east - and then hit *me* with a carbon tax surcharge for doing it. And not *them*.

I do love the cap and trade.

Eric - you're right in some ways, and wrong in another.

You're all about making lemonade out of the lemons, which I agree with.

You're too accepting of all the lemons, which is what we're grumpy about.

Comment from BillT on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T13:31:03Z

...but part of a smart business model to embrace "green".

Well, there are varying shades of "green" -- including many that result in using more oil in the production than would be saved over the lifetime of the product.

All those electric cars will require recharging -- for eight to twelve hours at a time -- and the additional electricity needed will have to be generated somehow. Good luck trying to build a new power plant anywhere in the Northeast or in California.

The toys with solar panels embedded in the roof will probably work fine in the Southwest, as long as the owners only drive while the sun is shining. One of the local townships back home spent an entire year's utilities budget for the admin buildings installing solar panels on the premise that they'd pay for themselves inside of two years and taxes would thereby be reduced.. It's been *three* years since they did it, and the additional upkeep and maintenance on the panels, added to the fact that solar cells have a drastically-reduced output on cloudy days, left the township administrator with the unpleasant task of announcing to the residents that the panels not only *didn't* pay for themselves in utilities savings, but their taxes were going up 8% to offset the cost of "going green."

After the *second* 8% tax increase, the largest employer in the township pulled up stakes for Virginia, taking 120 jobs with it.

Proving that the Universe enjoys irony, the only remaining manufacturer in town -- which employs 12 people -- makes *koff* solar panels...

Comment from Boquisucio on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T13:02:10Z

Boq pay the Seychelles Islands? and what do you call the hoards of topless Scandinavians that sun on their beaches. If that isn't "Ecological Justice", I don't know what is it.

Oh WolfW there's have to be a working draft of the treaty somewhere, just maybe not in the web. Maybe they are using the same strategy of obfuscation that our Congress has done to hide their health reform plan until the last moment.

Oh and yes, Argent, How do you say: "Corinthean Leather".

Comment from eric on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T12:06:24Z

i agree that it shouldn't be part of the the treaty circus, but part of a smart business model to embrace "green". however, now it's there sign it and use it to "rebrand" yourself as the cutting edge society you want everybody to think you are. as long as it doesn't remain rhetoric (mmmm, EU......) that could be pretty interesting. back to cars, Renault wants a complete line of fully electric cars on sale in 2012. not some distant year but, basically tomorrow. if the Chrysler's of this world want to stay on the sideline complaining loudly so be it. the rest of the world is moving forward. this isn't about treehuggers, but about seeing a competitive advantage.

Comment from Argent on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T10:27:46Z

Eric, making cars isn't going to remove a treaty.

Comment from eric on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T10:11:05Z

ps: a cautious optimistic view from the other side of the water. the eu just agreed to invest heavily in green energy, which is cool to start with and could also be a kick in the groin of the oil producing countries (which is even better). now i only need that Lotus to make my life complete.

Comment from eric on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T10:02:05Z

stop whining you pussies!!! get innovative and compete the hell out of everybody. if Lotus can build an electric sportscar, than so can you. not to mention the money you can make producing solar energy, which could make you independent from islamo-fascists (as you would probably call them here) as an interesting by-product.

Comment from BillT on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T09:09:45Z

It's a Boquisucism, which is a ryism with a Ricardo Montalban accent.

Comment from Argent on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T09:05:03Z

Is "Sovreignty" Americanisation or just bad spelling?

Comment from Argent on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T08:45:46Z

What's the bet my government's already signed up.

Comment from BillT on 2009-10-18

2009-10-18T06:49:10Z

Wanna bet Obie's Czars haven't even been *given* one?

Obie hisself couldn't even qualify for FOUO with his background and past associations.

Comment from Rod Thorsen on 2009-10-17

2009-10-18T04:18:55Z

Rereading my last post, I was reminded of the background check I just went through. I've had many in the past including full LE secure systems access for local, state, and federal as I changed positions. This was the first time that I've had to apply to keep my existing job (as did *everyone* I work with). Full resume', multiple fingerprints taken along each step, etc. Just the extent of it was beyond my past experience. It took six months, no joke. OPM had and has classified my currant position as "Non-sensitive".

Comment from Rod Thorsen on 2009-10-17

2009-10-18T03:48:38Z

"Be afraid, be very afraid"

-Wednesday Friday Addams

Seriously though, I take our system and the oath many here have taken to be comfortable, enough anyway, to wait until this plays itself out. This should not make me sound like a whoose, I do believe there are enough decent folks around (even among the congresscritters) that this won't happen.

However, given my California education (not the right word, but that's what they call it), I recall such things as "Democracy will seed it's own distruction", "Once the prolitariat realizes they can vote to take what others have earned...", etc, this is well worth watching if only to sort out who to vote out when the time comes.

Best possible outcome anyway.

Comment from wolfwalker on 2009-10-17

2009-10-18T03:24:02Z

Boq,
However, I haven't read The Copenhagen Treaty to know when will they consider it to be "in effect" Does the treaty triggers itself into life the moment that its signatories put ink into paper?
I ran a websearch looking for the actual text of the treaty and found ... nothing. There is no treaty yet. Only a draft that represents the wet dreams of all the watermelon NGOs that wrote it.

In any case, no treaty can be binding on the USA until it's ratified, whether the current White House resident signs it or not. That's black-letter law. President #42 signed the Kyoto Accord, but the Senate never ratified it and so it never went into effect here. Even if the NGOs' draft is accepted in toto at Copenhagen, there are still enough semi-rational people in the Senate to stop this abomination too.

I hope.

Comment from Cortillaen on 2009-10-17

2009-10-18T02:00:57Z

~~The Copenhagen Treaty~~ Anything the watermelons put forth is nothing more than a wealth-redistribution scheme...

Fixed that for ya. ;)

Still, given the "Czars" and disregard for protocol, law, and the Constitution demonstrated by the current administration, Boq's fear is justified. Obama forcing compliance with the treaty via executive order (regardless of legality) isn't exactly far-fetched.

Comment from BillT on 2009-10-17

2009-10-17T20:34:57Z

Does the treaty triggers itself into life the moment that its signatories put ink into paper?

Doesn't matter -- until that 2/3 vote ratifies it, it's just another collection of autographs, as far as we're concerned.

If the Congers does try to implement it de facto, there will be hell to pay. In a nutshell, it requires the developed countries of the world to pay reparations to the undeveloped countries of the world for the crime of being developed nations.

For example, Boq is the US and I am the Seychelles Islands. Boq must commute to his job, buy food in the local mart which is trucked in from outlying farms, and because he lives in a temperate zone, must heat his house in the winter. I, on the other hand, walk down to the beach and cast my net into the water for a few hours and snag a couple of fish, and I trade one for a cassava melon, then return to my house which doesn't require additional heating in the winter because I live near the Equator.

Under the provisions of the Copenhagen treaty, Boq would have to *pay* me to offset the "resources" he uses (fuel for his car, the fertilizer for the outlying farms, the cost of trucking the produce to market, the oil or gas or electricity he heats with in the wintertime) that I don't -- even though there's no way I would have any need of those particular resources to begin with, and he's already *paid* the suppliers for those resources, and those suppliers have already paid *their* suppliers for the raw materials.

The Copenhagen Treaty is nothing more than a wealth-redistribution scheme on a global scale.

Comment from Boquisucio on 2009-10-17

2009-10-17T19:13:24Z

Well, yes there's that quaint 18th Century document which "requires" a 2/3 approval by The Senate. However, I haven't read The Copenhagen Treaty to know when will they consider it to be "in effect" Does the treaty triggers itself into life the moment that its signatories put ink into paper?

I wouldn't put it past them to hamstring their power to govern by just having the heads of state sign it into "law". After all, their "law" supersedes all other national "laws".

Alternatively, I wouldn't put it past our government de facto ratify this treaty by acting in accordance to its mandates. Even if de jure, our Senate never ratifies this abomination.

Just some rambling worries.

Comment from BillT on 2009-10-17

2009-10-17T17:53:38Z

If you want to see more on the debate, go here -- and they're debating the issue on the other side of the pond, too.

The Brits and Aussies are of the opinion that we're the last bastion against what's obviously a "progressive" power grab. However, as Marvin has noted, the treaty must be ratified by a 2/3 vote in the Senate. With some idiots in both House and Senate either firmly in the tank for the AGW cultists or amenable to some quid-pro-quo negotiated in the cloakroom, we need to get vocal if it comes time to get vocal.

Comment from Marvin on 2009-10-17

2009-10-17T16:00:59Z

Treaties require a 2/3 vote in the Senate for ratification. Just because BO signs the treaty, does not make it binding. We must fight to prevent the Senate from ratifying this.