Posted on 31st August 2014 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, ,

Violence broke between riot police and protesters in Stockholm’s Kungstradgarden, Saturday, as thousands gathered to rally against far-right Party of the Swedes’ (SVP) rally.




Posted on 12th June 2014 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, ,



Posted on 4th April 2014 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, ,

Just over a week ago I wrote a post called You Can’t Educate Feral Animals about Bartram High School in Southwest Philadelphia. This institution of higher learning spends $12,000 per year per “student” trying to teach feral animals who are the result of a total breakdown of the black community due to the welfare policies over the last 50 years. If you think I’m over the top referring to them as feral animals, watch this video. The School district and politicians promised changes after a faculty member was knocked unconscious by a 17 year old thug two weeks ago. Well guess what. The 17 year old criminal thug was roaming the hallways of Bartram High School this week. I wonder how the faculty feel about that. Maybe the solution will be for the staff and faculty to wear bullet proof vests. The answer from politicians and union officials will be to spend more taxpayer money. It won’t work. Children with no parents turn into feral dogs. The black community of Philadelphia is responsible. Whitey had nothing to do with this. Bartram High School is a holding pen for future inmates.

Violence persists at troubled Bartram High

Trouble persists at Bartram High.

A brawl erupted in the school cafeteria this week, with teenagers punching and stomping on one another and on school police. Students set off firecrackers inside the building. And the student who last month knocked a staffer unconscious was back in the halls of the Southwest Philadelphia school.

“It’s normal for Bartram,” said one teacher, insisting on anonymity. “It’s our new normal.”

Two weeks after “conflict resolution specialist” Alphonso Stevenson suffered a fractured skull and other injuries at the hands of a 17-year-old student, Philadelphia School District officials have sent a team to assess conditions inside the school, and added veteran troubleshooter Ozzie Wright as coprincipal. They have also reacted with dismay to what a spokesman called a “shocking” video of the cafeteria brawl.

Four additional Philadelphia and school police officers will be in place at the school by Monday, a district spokesman said. Police and school teams have assessed Bartram’s building conditions and staff deployment plan. A community

meeting is planned, and the district has reached out to city officials to get social-services help for students who need it.

“We want to show students that this is a place where you come in, you learn, and adults are here to help you, to take care of you,” district spokesman Fernando Gallard said.

But it’s going to be a long road, said science teacher Antoinette Calimag. Bartram has been a problem all school year, with more students, less staff, one principal removed less than two weeks into the school year, and rampant class-cutting, fights, smoking, and other student problems.

“You can’t just snap your fingers and say, ‘OK, it’s school time now,’ ” said Calimag, Bartram’s Philadelphia Federation of Teachers building representative. “We’re so deep into the school year. What if we’re just treading water until June?”

Staffers were shocked when they saw that the 17-year-old who assaulted Stephenson was back in the school this week, some said. The youth has been charged as a juvenile with aggravated assault, simple assault, and related offenses.

“He was cutting class, roaming the hallways,” said a teacher, who asked not to be identified for fear of retribution. “He spent two days in the building this week, and it seems the administration was not aware.”

Teachers said the student spent at least part of one day in classes, even discussing the Stephenson assault with a friend. That fits a pattern, teachers said – administrators have had a difficult time removing problem students all year.

Gallard said the student who assaulted Stephenson initially reported to Bartram for a required conference before his transfer to a disciplinary school but was turned away because he did not bring his parents.

When the teen returned with his parents, he was allowed to remain, but only for the meeting, and he will not be allowed back, Gallard said.

Told of the teachers’ accounts of the boy’s presence in the building over two days, Gallard said: “That’s not my understanding.”

The larger problem at the 1,100-student school, those inside said, is the continued culture of chaos and disregard for authority.

On Tuesday, “firecrackers were lit off in the building, on two separate floors,” Calimag said.

The lunchroom melee also happened Tuesday morning. As captured by a cellphone camera, with footage posted on social media, the fight appears serious – dozens gathered, with several students exchanging punches. A male school police officer attempts to separate the combatants as the room fills with screams.

In short order, a larger brawl erupts, mostly

between female students. A female police officer attempts to break up one skirmish, then others. At one point in the video, that officer appears to fall to the floor.

Gallard said the fight was coded by school officials as a disorderly conduct and fighting. Nine students were suspended, and only minor injuries – one girl suffered a bump on the head, another scratches – were recorded.

“I guess people didn’t think it was a big deal, because there was no blood, there were no serious injuries,” said another teacher, who also fears retribution.

Gallard called it a “shocking” video.

“There is no reaction from the students – they just continue fighting as if this is a normal way to behave. It’s shocking to see individuals behave this way, and to do it so brazenly in a school,” said Gallard, adding that the school police officers showed bravery by jumping into the brawl to try to break it up and protect students.

“It’s disturbing to see how helpless our staff feel,” the district spokesman said after viewing the video.

The fight affirms the need for the actions the district is taking, Gallard said.

More officers will help, he said, “but we have to go beyond police officers. We’ve got to figure out a way to get these young people to care for others.”

Teachers said that even with the attention given to Bartram after Stephenson’s injury and an Inquirer story detailing conditions inside the school, deep dysfunction persists.

“It’s unsettled,” Calimag said. “There’s just a sense of uneasiness.”

The administration has begun attempting to crack down on students who come late to school, and those who ditch class or use cellphones, but many students, accustomed to having wide latitude in the building, aren’t taking the adults seriously.

Thursday was a relatively calm day, staff said.

But even so, “there’s always groups of students in the halls,” a teacher said. “I constantly have to guard my door.”



Posted on 2nd September 2013 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , , , , , ,


How inconvenient for the liberal control freak douchebags.

If they are too dimwitted to understand the meaning of negative correlation, I’ll explain it for them. The more legally owned guns there are in a community, the LESS violent crime. Meanwhile, in the liberal shithole paradises of Chicago, Philly, Camden, New Orleans, Baltimore…… the strict gun laws have done their job.

… and finds… 

Indeed, “data on fire‐arms ownership by constabulary area in England,” like data from the United States, show “a negative correlation,”10 that is, “where firearms are most dense violent crime rates are lowest, and where guns are least dense violent crime rates are highest.”11 Many different data sets from various kinds of sources are summarized as follows by the leading text:

[T]here is no consistent significant positive association between gun ownership levels and violence rates: across (1) time within the United States, (2) U.S. cities, (3) counties within Illinois, (4) country‐sized areas like England, U.S. states, (5) regions of the United States, (6) nations, or (7) population subgroups . . . .12

Oh darn.

It’s not a very difficult read and, IMHO, well worth your time.

If you care about objectivity, that is.

Now let’s add in another ugly little fact — we’re now talking about Obama intending to initiate violence against a nation which may, if undertaken, in fact be aiding terrorist-affiliated rebels.

It’s time to ask these would-be-Mussolinis an uncomfortable question:

Since we have the facts cited in the above paper — that there is a negative correlation between civilian firearms ownership and crime — exactly what is the real reason these very same politicians want to restrict civilian firearms ownership?



Posted on 12th June 2012 by Administrator in Economy

, , , , , , , ,

I love how the powers that be in our Democratic run urban areas are blaming the warm Spring for the 50% increase in murders in their cities. Classic liberal response. It couldn’t be the policies they’ve inflicted on their residents for the last 40 years. How’s that War on Poverty working out in Chicago, Detroit and Philly? If you were thinking about moving to Chicago, think again.

If they are blaming the surge in murders on temperatures rising to 60 degrees in March, imagine what will happen when temperatures hit 100 degrees in August. It’s going to be a long hot summer in the cities.


Fractured gangs blamed for Chicago homicide surge

CHICAGO — There are many theories about what has caused a recent spike in Chicago’s homicide rate, including a splintering of established drug gangs, the warm winter and high unemployment in some neighborhoods that seem a world away from the city’s beaches, lush parks and skyscrapers.

The numbers clearly show there is a problem, with eight killed and at least 35 wounded in a spasm of gunfire last weekend.

The violence is nowhere near its historical peak of the early 1990s, when Chicago recorded roughly 900 homicides per year. But from Jan. 1 through late May there were 203 homicides, an increase of more than 50 percent over the 134 during the same period in 2011.

Mayor Rahm Emanuel has made combatting gangs a priority and has stood with Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy to unveil a plan of attack. Among the new police tactics is the deployment of dozens of specialized undercover officers to units on Chicago’s West and South sides and then saturating those neighborhood streets with uniformed officers.

In addition, Gov. Pat Quinn on Monday signed into law the Illinois Street Gang RICO Act, which aims to dismantle gangs by boosting penalties for crimes performed as part of a criminal enterprise.

In Englewood, a roughly 20-by-20-block South Side neighborhood, homicides jumped from 40 in 2010 to 60 last year, which is more than half of the total 2011 homicides for cities such as Cleveland, Milwaukee, Washington, D.C., Oakland, Calif., and Kansas City, Mo.

Though police are loath to attribute this winter’s unusually warm weather as a possible factor, because it smacks of excuse-making, there were far more people on the streets in January, February and March — including gang members — than during those months in 2011.

Just as important have been dramatic changes within the gangs themselves.

“In the past the gangs were very organized from the top down,” said Sgt. Matthew Little of the Chicago Police Department’s gang enforcement unit. As more gang leaders are arrested, convicted and sent to prison, the gangs they left behind have become “very splintered,” he said.

Young men on the city’s streets agree.

“There is no one to control this, so it has become haywire,” said Devon Tims, who identified himself as one of the Chicago Vice Lords, making him one of the city’s estimated 70,000 gang members.

In interviews, McCarthy said the “fracturing” of larger gangs into smaller ones has doubled the number of factions and conflicts. “These kids have guns and they end up using them,” he said.

McCarthy said the gangs are far more territorial and rigid than those that operated when he was a ranking commander in the New York City Police Department and the chief in Newark, N.J. And that means trouble when a gang member simply crosses the street into rival territory.

“If we see a car with three of (one gang’s) guys three blocks over there (on another gang’s turf), they are probably going to shoot someone,” said Leo Schmitz, a gang enforcement commander who was redeployed in January to command Englewood’s police district.

The demolition of the city’s infamous public housing complexes in recent years also played a role. While the high rises long were considered a massive failure that warehoused the city’s poorest families and became magnets for gangs, tearing them down caused a new set of problems by scattering gang members to other parts of the city.

Some of them eventually settled in the thousands of houses that were abandoned during the nation’s recent financial crisis. There the battle for supremacy started anew.

Residents and activists from the most violent neighborhoods have seen similar campaigns to combat gang violence over the years and were both hopeful and skeptical about the latest one.

Jean Carter-Hill, an activist from Englewood, said she thinks the increase in officers patrolling the streets is helping clean up the area but that the city needs to do more, such as helping youths with conflict resolution.

“Every time there is a conflict, these young people get a gun,” she said. “And everyone seems to know where a gun is.”

Thoughts on a Modern Revolution


Posted on 5th November 2011 by Sonic in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , , , , , , ,

Part I.  Why it won’t come easy…

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them 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.

–United States Declaration of Independence

There seems to be a division of thinking when it comes to the 1% vs everybody else.  Many people seem to think that their extreme advantage of resources, the power inherent in the existing structure, and the technology they have access to will ensure their continued dominance.  Others argue that because they are outnumbered 99 to 1 they can only maintain their control if the 99% remain compliant.  While I favor the latter view, questions remain: what percent need to resist in order for the existing power structure to be overthrown?   How does the average citizen overcome the massive advantages available to the existing authority?  Can this be accomplished with peaceful means, or will the conflict escalate into violence?  What does history teach us to expect in the resolution of this crisis?  If the existing structure is torn down, will it be replaced by something better or something worse?

In part 1 of this series, we will investigate the strength of the existing authority, and the inherent advantages that the authority holds over the average citizen who would consider resistance.  In part 2, we will look at the inherent strengths that the average citizen has in resisting the existing authority.  In part 3 we will look at some of the various methods and strategies that the resistance can pursue.  And in part 4 we will try to draw some conclusions about the path this crisis phase will take and what history teaches us to expect.

This is not authoritative commentary.  This is simply my observation and analysis of the challenges and opportunities that exist to the citizens that are contemplating resistance in an effort to restore the existing government to its constitutional origins or to another form entirely.  I welcome your commentary, perspective and wisdom in this study.

Let us look at the various ways in which the 1% are able to maintain their power.  First of all is momentum.  It is human nature to resist major changes.  Sure we like to change to the next new iPhone, but when it comes to major aspects of how we perceive our role in everyday life we ignore, deride, ridicule, or directly oppose both the change as well as those who are advocating it.  For that reason most of the major changes we have witnessed in our lifetimes are a result of tiny, seemingly insignificant changes that incrementally alter the way things are.  Freedom, taxation and legislation have all incrementally mutated from emancipated, transparent and accessible to incarcerated, opaque and ϋber statutory.


It takes a major shock to convince people that a change is worthy of the effort required to enact it.  Normalcy bias, fear, laziness, and ambivalence all fight to keep things the way they are.  Our overall wealth as a society and the extreme amount of “assistance” given over to what has become a large percentage of the population—the disabled, unemployed, and derelict—have insulated us by and large from hardships that have driven other populations around the world to protest, resistance, and violence.  Our poor are not starving; they are obese.  Our unemployed are not desperate; they are better off with their benefits than with a job.  More people are added to the rolls of the disabled every day by the expansion of the definition of disabled, and by the fact that in many cases they can receive more income while doing nothing productive (SNAP, medical, and direct payments) than they could earn with hard work.

Because of the distortion created and enforced by the various entitlement programs at the federal, state, and local levels, we have witnessed dramatic increases in the numbers of participants in these programs.  In turn we have seen the tax revenues that support these programs that are paid through the work of productive citizens drop as more and more  people become net recipients of government funds and fewer and fewer people are net contributors.  This trend is clearly unsustainable; however, each new person added to the dole is another person that would have to vote for change that would negatively impact their immediate circumstances.  History suggests that very few people will be willing to support actions that would hurt their personal short term circumstances in favor of society’s long term prosperity.  The consequence of this dynamic is that there will be no slow, transitional wind down of these programs.  Instead these programs and the numbers of people involved will continue to grow until the programs fail catastrophically.  For that reason, it is my assessment that the growing pool of beneficiaries will not be a significant part of any anti-establishment movement, protest, or revolution.

A contributing factor to the momentum of the establishment and the slow response of the average citizen is the lack of hardship and suffering he faces.  Very few people in the United States go hungry.  Very few people are denied medical care.  Very few people lack clean water, sleep without shelter, lack adequate clothing, have no access to education, can afford no entertainment, or have no access to sanitation.  We are by global comparison a very rich country, and even the poorest in this country live beyond the means of billions worldwide.  In short we all have quite a bit to lose, and that changes the riskiness of choosing to resist.

In my personal situation I have a wife and two children, I own a business that employs 14 people, I have property and investments (not a lot), I have 5 sisters, my mom and pop are living, and I have many close ties in my community.  If I choose to resist the government I put all of those people, all of my property, and all of my ties at risk.  I also put my life and health at risk.  I put my freedom at risk (such as it is).  In essence I put everything that is near and dear to me at risk, and that does (and should) enter into my decision to resist or to comply.

With our poorest tamed by the entitlements they would lose if they resist, the burden of resistance then falls upon a group of people with plenty to lose.  Their incentive is the awakening to the reality that not resisting may cost them all of the same things; however, the risk equation remains “if I resist I will risk all of my treasured people and possessions” vs. “if I resist I may risk all of my treasured people and possessions.”

Another significant factor in favor of maintaining control by the existing authority is force.  The establishment powers, whether behind the scenes (the bankers) or in full view (the politicians) have near complete capture of all the federal (the military, DHS, CIA, FBI, et al), the state (National Guard, SBI, State Troopers, et al) and local (sheriff, city police, et al) agencies.  While there is some question floating around the blogosphere about whether or not the members of those agencies will be willing to fire upon civilians history and recent events make it clear that at least the majority will comply with the orders they receive.  For the same reason that the average citizen is overwhelmed when thinking of how and when to resist authority, the front line soldier or officer is similarly daunted by thoughts of bucking the chain of command.  When you combine that with the very real threat of armed resistance, the possibility of significant violence cannot be ignored.

While any violence on the part of the agents of authority will likely escalate the overall level of resistance in the general population, it is certainly going to discourage any people who are caught up in the festival aspect of the resistance from continuing.  The real and present threat of violence and death is a great deterrent; it is not a coincidence that tyrannical governments across the globe and throughout history have made effective use of violence in putting down discontent.  While it will cement the resolve of the committed and work to increase the number of people who have suffered significant enough indignity and hardship to risk their lives, a large number of people will be too fearful to support the resistance and will in fact look to establish their own safety by actively helping the establishment root out the resistance.

Along with direct force there are force multipliers like air support, heavy weapons, command and control capabilities, control over the infrastructure, night vision and infrared tracking, satellite surveillance, the network of in place surveillance and traffic cameras, body armor, on-line intercepts of emails, phone taps, the ability to shut down transportation systems, forensic analysis, and training.  How does a single citizen cope with the myriad ways in which the governing authority can deploy massive resources and multiply their effectiveness?  When he realizes that he must join with others to pool resources and capabilities, how does he find or recruit his team without leaving a trace that will be detected by the government or co-opted to its benefit?  It is, to say the least, a daunting challenge.

Non-defense government (federal, state, and local) consumption and gross investment as percentage of GDP, 1929-2008

Anyone who has ever gone on an extended hike in the wilderness has come face to face with the importance and the challenge of logistics.  Like a rocket that uses 90% of the fuel to lift the fuel that lifts the rocket into orbit, a hiker must carry more food to offset the extra energy expended by carrying a heavy load of food onto the trail.  Furthermore, any tools or materials he needs must be carried along if they cannot be fabricated or acquired along the way, so if the hiker has any desire to do much more than walk (eg. take pictures, drink, sleep, cook, or bandage a cut), he has to carry the means to do so along with him.

For that reason the modern day resistance movement will begin as a largely local phenomenon.  People cannot afford to deploy themselves to faraway places and risk their source of income and/or support the additional expense.  There will necessarily need to be help in the form of food, medicine, shelter, and materials above and beyond what the average resister will be able to provide, and that lifeline of support is easily constrained or severed by the power in authority.

Conversely the government in all of its forms and agencies has nearly unlimited resources (at least in the short to medium term) in the form of cash, supplies, transportation, and secure storage to support its activities.  It rules the air and roads and sea and rails, and it can deploy immense amounts of resources in a short period of time if needed.  Furthermore there is no opportunity for any single citizen to limit the reach and ability of the government to deploy those resources.  It is simply the case of only being able to stop one grain of sand in a landslide.

The powers that be also have complete authority and control over all of the major channels of communication.  They can manipulate, halt, or utilize all TV, radio (broadcast), newspaper, internet, radio (point to point), telephone, snail mail and satellite communications at will.  They can monitor, intercept, jam, encrypt or decrypt nearly any message that a modern day citizen can compose.  That leaves the resister the option of sending messages that are very difficult to hide and protect, or sending messages that travel at very slow speeds by off the grid methods.

Hand in hand with the ability to communicate is the ability to coordinate.  Existing agencies have command and control structures in place that allow orders from leadership to be executed quickly and reliably.  Those agencies have extensive practice and established methods for preserving their chain of command and those in the chain are well versed in the execution of the orders they receive.  The command structure is redundant and well insulated from the agents in the field of operations, and is virtually immune to any action on the part of the citizen that has chosen to resist.

That citizen in turn is working with other autonomous people and groups (if he is working with anyone at all) who’s participation is completely voluntary.  They may agree to carry out the requests he makes, but they may only agree to part of the action.  They may decide to change the time table.  They may decide to back out without notice.  Or they may become otherwise engaged and be limited in the sense of accountability they feel and/or be limited in their ability to communicate their change in direction.  It is very easy to take out the leadership since the leadership is also likely to be the operator in the field.  There is little or no redundancy, and there is little or no practice in cooperative action.  Furthermore the more cooperative and effective the group becomes, the more likely they are to become a target of strategic priority by the forces of the powers in place.

The last major category of strength this analysis will address is financial.  Despite the overwhelming debt, the deficits, and the lack of solvency in the government at the federal, state, and local levels the fact remains that the financial powers can (and will) continue to create money to fund their activities.  There are many questions about whether or not this course of action is sustainable or effective; however, there is little doubt that it will continue.  The wealth of the United States is tremendous, and even though it is being steadily diluted by the devaluation of the dollar, there remains an enormous amount of wealth yet to dilute.  Consider that the total notional wealth of the United States is around $56T.  Even maintaining budget deficits that are funded by printing new dollars, it would take around 30 years to consume the wealth through the expansion of the currency.

Now I know that it is a good bit more complicated than that; however, the fact remains that there is massive wealth left that can be consumed.  Furthermore it is likely that the existing debt will be defaulted and wiped out.  While there are numerous disruptions inherent is such a scenario the government will be free of its encumbrances and will be able to continue to print new money (even if it is called something else or initially backed by other assets).  What this means is that for all practical purposes the government will remain unconstrained in its spending while the average citizen will be anything but.  More importantly, as the government creates more and more money, the wealth of the citizen will continue to decline further limiting him from saving or deploying his assets towards effective resistance even as the devaluation creates more and more people desperate enough to consider action.


An average citizen faces an enormous, frightening and disheartening challenge if he chooses to resist; however, that has always been true throughout history when the brave and often tragic souls of the past have decided that enough was enough.  No government in world history has lasted very long; most have failed in a much shorter span than the United States has lasted.  Neither success nor failure is baked in the cake.  In the next part, we will look at the inherent strengths that the average citizen has in resisting the existing authority.