Quote of the Day – Tim Cook (2/17/2016)

While we believe the FBI’s intentions are good, it would be wrong for the government to force us to build a backdoor into our products. And ultimately, we fear that this demand would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect.

Tim Cook – A Message to Our Customers

February 16, 2016


[First, go read the whole thing; all of it. There are different things that can be used for quotes, but that final line says it all.

If you’re having trouble understanding why they wouldn’t help the government there’s a couple different things going on here. If you read their security document for iOS there is little that can actually be done. While no one on this side of the fence is supporting the actions of those asshats that shot up a Christmas party the most common argument I’ve seen has been appeal to emotion to catch those that supported them.

Yes, I want to catch them. Then break into their phone!!! Apple is aiding and abetting by not helping. No they’re not because there’s a lot more at stake than just one phone despite the claims by the government. Anything they build can be used against any other iPhone. Not only that, if it falls into the wrong hands it can be used for criminal enterprise.

Tim used the following line as well:

Criminals and bad actors will still encrypt, using tools that are readily available to them.

This is most definitely true. As pointed out to me by Ashley, if you replace the words and shift the subject this reads like letter from the President of the NRA.

I came to the following realization which cements just how important and how right this stance is. What the FBI wants fails the Jews in the Attic test. To think that this will only be used in this one case is naïve and without forethought.  There is no way you will keep a genie like this in the bottle. At some point it’s going to get out and it’s not going be pretty.

Say what you will about Apple, but at least they have the balls to stand up and not just play dead due to an “Appeal to Emotion.” -B ]

 

Assault Weapons Ban Comes to Washington

Rep. Jim Moeller (D-49, Vancouver) took steps to ban modern pistols, rifles and shotguns in Washington when he pre-filed HB 2354 for the 2016 Legislative Session on Tuesday.

Moeller would bar the manufacture, possess, purchase, sale or transfer of any pistol or rifle with ability to hold more than 10 rounds, shotguns with revolving cylinders and make possession of such or a long list of accessories a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison.

As Speaker Pro Tempore for the Washington House of Representatives and one of the leading Democrats running for the office of Lieutenant Governor is clearly a leader of and major force in the Washington Democratic Party. As such, voters must assume that this action reveals the true intentions of his party – imposing gun bans, seizures and entrapment upon law-abiding Washington gun owners.

If you’re from the 49th Legislative District, there is a rally that was already planned for this Friday. I suggest you arrive and pay your representative a visit. I also suggest strongly you start working on finding a replacement.

Quote of the Day – Chris Byrne (12/10/2015)

Our constitution could not be written today… and if by some miracle it were, it would never be ratified. It is too simple, and too radical.

It was radical then, it is still radical now. It was and is intentionally so. It created a nation, and a government, based on a principle that had never been tried before, and I don’t believe has been tried since.

Those who “misinterpret” it, do so intentionally, because they do not understand, or cannot accept, the notion of a government of strictly limited and enumerated powers, and a people of nearly unlimited, inherent, pre-existing, individual rights.

The notion that government cannot do everything they want it to, because they want it to, is entirely unacceptable to them. They cannot even comprehend it, never mind accept it.

And so, they dismiss the “inconvenient” language, as if it was meaningless, and twist it to fit whatever interpretation they find desirable.

They simply pretend the entire basis of the constitution, from which it solely derives its legitimacy and authority, does not exist at all.

That somehow, the “real” basis is some mishmash of communitarianism, authoritarianism, and majoritarianism, which can be altered and reinterpreted to suit the whims of “society”, as they see fit.

Chris ByrneFacebook Post

December 6th, 2015


[I have nothing else to add. -B]

 

An Interesting Jury

Things are bad and they’re only getting worse.  Many run their lives from an apathetic point of view.  If it doesn’t directly affect me it isn’t my problem.  There is a problem with that though, it does affect you, it affects everyone.   It is an erosion of your personal liberty whether you want to currently exercise that choice or not.

It is time to start standing up.  It is time to force your voice to be heard.  Neither party cares about liberty or freedom.  They care about money and power.  They have been slowly turning up the heat so they can steal more money and more, it’s time to jump out of the pot.

I remind you of this great document.  It reminds of of not just our rights but also our responsibilities in such matters.  Are you OK with standing in front of that jury?

Quote of the Day – Robert Steed (3/25/2013)

The Constitution did not guarantee public safety, it guaranteed liberty.  And sometimes what comes with liberty is tragedy, unfortunately.

Robert Steed
March 14th, 2013


[His whole speech was fantastic, but that quote was down right priceless.

DFS!  I must say he was also very well spoken.  Well done and said sir!  -B]

h/t Sebastian.

A Compare and Contrast Exercise…

Let’s compare and contrast the following two people, what they did, and the reactions by the American Media.

GonzalesVSHolder

For those who don’t recognize the pictures, on the left we have former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, on the right we have Attorney General Eric Holder.

The significant similarities necessary for this discussion:

  • Both are tied to the highest position within the Department of Justice.
  • Both committed questionable acts while in that position.
  • Both were disliked by large parts of the American people for their actions.
  • Both acted in a manner with the express intent of undermining and destroying enumerated rights.

Differences:

  • Eric Holder’s decisions resulted in the deaths of both American and Mexican civilians.
  • Eric Holder refused to process cases where the American public was intimidated from exercising their rights.
  • Alberto Gonzales was forced to resign while Holder continues to retain his position.
  • Eric Holder was found in contempt of congress.  Eric Holder has not been arrested despite the ability for congress to do so.
  • The Congressional “no-confidence” vote against Gonzales did not succeed.
  • Alberto Gonzales was appointed by President George Bush.
  • Eric Holder was appointed by President Barack Obama.

For those who may not remember the details.  Here is the quick rundown of the two big scandals under Holder.

The details you more likely need a reminder of is the incidents involving Alberto Gonzales

So while the comments and behavior of Gonzales was despicable and worthy of question, why has AG Holder been allowed to remain?  There is a man responsible for creating programs with the express purpose of illegally undermining a constitutional right.  Programs that resulted in the deaths of members of the public.  A man who has been found in contempt of congress, yet no one seems to have the balls to actually fire him.

Ultimately the biggest difference between these two is the men who were responsible for appointing them.  Because honestly that’s the only reason Eric Holder has been able to continue in his position.  Remember that the next time some tells you about how the media isn’t biased.

Irony, It is Strong With This

So I got an email from a friend this afternoon pointing me to a particular government document.  He told me to check out the new additions at the end.  We had both filled them out previously while at the NROTC Unit, and while I try to keep mine up to date in case it’s need for a future employment opportunity, the last time I looked at the form was in 2009 updating information after buying our house.

Well it has gone from 13 pages to 127 pages since the last I looked, but what is most interesting is the addition of Section 29.

 

That wasn’t too bad but I started laughing hysterically when I arrived at 29.5.

Tell me, how can one work for the DEA, FBI or god forbid the ATF and honestly answer that question with a “No”?  Doubly entertaining is this is a form geared towards protecting national security.  So the question of your association record is really this:

Have you EVER been a member of an organization that advocates or practices commission of acts of force or violence to discourage others from exercising their rights under the U.S. Constitution or any state of the United States with the specific intent to further such action? Any organization that is a part of, or under the direct guidance of the US Government is excepted.

Think about it, any law enforcement agency that has turned the other way when caught physically assaulting people lawfully exercising their rights is guilty of that violation.  Our government, more specifically people in its employ, has gone well beyond he limitations set out within the Constitution, yet they are exempted from being held accountable for their abuses.  Most entertaining though is the ATF and Operation Fast and Furious since it meets the definition provided by them in almost a textbook fashion.

What I find most entertaining is I have no doubt that should the day ever come I need to file this paper work I know this blog will be scavenged and the interviewer will use this commentary against me.  The DHS for example has classified me as a possible terrorist through numerous methods even though I have never associated with, thought about or attempted an act of terrorism.  Yet a real act of terrorism is merely PTSD and I’m the real threat.

Yeah that realization stopped any laughter and humor I was feeling from the irony.  It is becoming more and more obvious that the government is doing everything it can to further the wedge between itself and the people.  I need a drink.

How Fear, Not Fact, Informs the Gun Rights Debate

Wonderful video from Reason TV the truth behind the gun rights debate.

I find this a great addition to go along with this video I’ve used numerous times previously:

Then again, most of these people who fall into the irrational panic state don’t seem to understand the benefit of discussion occurring while you’re calm and rational.  Their coping mechanism for tragedy is to “Do Something,” even if that something actually causes more people to die they feel better because the did something.

I did see a video this weekend and I think I’m going to have to get together with some friends and script out a response.