William Thien

Archive for the ‘Revolutionary War’ Category

Though I see a need for the legislation, I am not the biggest fan of The Patriot Act.

What is very interesting to me is that identity theft spiked after authorization of The Patriot Act. You would think the opposite would have happened but that’s not the case.

I am not so sure there is anything nefarious happening at the governmental level. What could be happening is that in the transfer of all your personal information as it is compiled for the legislation the information is being skimmed somehow while in transit from perhaps the credit card company to the agency compiling your information.

In other words, is it possible that the legislation designed to make our country more secure is in fact making the individual inside the country more vulnerable to identity theft at the same time?

https://www.justice.gov/archive/ndic/pubs22/22972/index.htm

and then,

http://www.idtheftcenter.org/ITRC-Surveys-Studies/2014databreaches.html

Copyright © William Thien 2016

Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy and safe. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address. We will never sell your contact information to anyone.

 

 

Advertisements

One thing socialists and communists don’t want the public to know about socialism and communism is that the social programs they derive make things more expensive for those who are taxed to pay for the programs.

Let’s take rent assistance, for example. If you skim tax dollars off of the middle class (that’s where the money comes from) to redistribute it to pay for single women having children out-of-wedlock (nearly half of all babies born last year were born to single mothers), single mothers who need to stay home and take care of their babies, what is effectively happening is that an increase in the demand for rental housing is taking place and there is a corresponding supply of money, rent assistance dollars, to satisfy that demand. The socialists are using your money, tax dollars, to pay for that rent assistance. You are thinking, “Awe, isn’t that nice, I’m helping someone keep a roof over their heads.” But that’s only a small portion of it really, the good part.

The social programs put more money into the rental economy and thereby enable landowners to increase their rents. If all people don’t have enough money to pay the rent, landlords have to lower the rents. When demand is high, when money is available as in the form of rent assistance, prices are kept high, artificially high. The key word is “artificially” high. When demand is low, prices go down.

Now there is nothing wrong with landowners getting paid for renting their property, but social programs such as rent assistance are a double whammy to you and your dollar in that they totally undermine your very own housing dollar by working against it, driving the price of housing up for you and also taxing you for the dollars to do it! That’s what the socialists and communists don’t want you to know! They are forcing you to screw yourself right out of your very own place!

The same holds true for most major social programs and entitlements, Medicare, Medicaid, you name it. If you examine the cost of health care since the implementation of those two programs, what has happened? Recognize a pattern, yet?

Shhhhhh! Don’t tell anyone. They don’t want you to know, either. I’m not supposed to say anything, or else!, they say.

The media doesn’t tell you, do they? No, they want people sitting at home in front of the television or making more babies on the rug in front of it. If people are working, they can’t watch TV. Only those who ascribe to the socialist system can stay at home and watch TV all the time because they get the check, the assistance, and the food stamps. And many do. One in six Americans now receives food stamps, almost fifteen percent of the population. How many of them are working?

Corporate media actually likes the socialist system because it creates a large audience of viewers that they can market their products to in order to get the money from the food stamps and assistance checks. Is it big business? No, ladies and gentlemen, it’s huge!

How about food stamps? We’ve been talking about that lately. As I’ve described, when you throw a bunch of money in to any market, prices go up. It’s basic economic theory. If the supply remains constant and demand increases, prices go up. When you put $74 billion dollars into the market economy demand increases and so prices go up. And prices have gone up, haven’t they?

There were some questions sent to me asking about how such assistance programs drive up the prices of things and as you can see, not only do social programs drive up the price of things you buy, they use your money to do it. That’s what the socialists and communists in the government don’t want you to know.

Well, what’s in it for the socialists and communists in the government, you ask? A job, a job helping you screw yourself it appears, and judging from the size and scope of social programs in the US in comparison to the 1950’s, apparently they take great pleasure in seeing to it. Maybe Senator McCarthy from Wisconsin was right. Yes, I suppose he was.

Shhh! I shouldn’t be telling you all of this, any of it.

Copyright © William Thien 2014

Don’t forget to sign up to receive email updates and get the latest. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and enter your email address. It’s easy and safe.

In a public venue the other day I heard two teenagers discussing a text message to someone. I happened to overhear one of them say, “No way, dude. The NSA!” He whispered with raspy emphasis. Later in the week I overheard a conversation in a public place where an elderly lady said to a middle-aged man, “No, I don’t want that to happen. I don’t want the government thinking I’m a terrorist.” The elderly lady was clearly over seventy years old.

I had to laugh a bit. If teenagers and seventy year old ladies are concerned about being monitored by The NSA and being labeled terrorists, that may be the very definition of “a chilling effect,” a chilling effect in its purest form.

Copyright © William Thien 2013

Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy, safe, and free. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address.

I blogged recently about what I believe is happening with regard to The NSA’s program to surveil the telephone records of all Americans. I concluded that due to the success of the 9/11 attackers and that of The Boston Bombers, even though our intelligence analysts had advanced information on both events, the fact that both attacks were still successful indicated that the focus of the surveillance (collection of telephone records) by The NSA on all Americans may not be couched entirely in a desire to prevent further terrorist activity. Such flags as a heads up from a foreign intelligence agency (from Russia on The Boston Bombers) or the report about a pilot not wanting to learn how to land a jetliner (regarding the 9/11 attackers) only to fly the jetliner, such reports and information are the holy grail of the intelligence business. If someone looked the other way it was because they were told to do so. When you discover something like that while working in the intelligence business, it often merits a promotion. There are accolades and back slapping. And why not? Look what can be prevented with such knowledge? But more importantly in those cases, look what wasn’t.

Now, let me add that I have worked for The NSA (See my “About Page”) while on assignment from The US Army. In my experience, The NSA doesn’t simply just start collecting information on particular targets and the thought that they should start wiretapping or collecting information on all US Citizens on their own accord is absurd. These along with all of the other recent developments, The I.R.S. scandal, all have political origins, I am certain.

In fact my experience with such matters leads me to recall a situation where a number of us, all analysts, were asked if we should re-direct the focus of a multi-capability surveillance satellite over the country’s border to collect information on drug activity of a particular type. Of the ten or so of us sitting in the secure facility, all said we should not do so. With the technology we had at the command of what was basically a joystick, we could have easily done so, I must tell you. There were members of all US Armed forces present and members of several agencies as well. Not one person voted to turn the satellite in the direction of The United States. That tells you something about the very highest caliber of members of The US Armed Forces, then. This was in the early nineties. Instead, the information about the targets was given to the state police of said state and forwarded to domestic agencies.

That sentiment, that we should not surveil our own country due to the charter of The NSA may have changed since 9/11. But I doubt it. Why? The screening process to become an employee of The NSA or work in my capacity at the time in The US Army on assignment there at an NSA post is very thorough and involves numerous and lengthy questionnaires with cross-referenced questions, often a series of polygraph examinations with members of The Department of Defense visiting your neighbors, former employers, and going to schools you attended. The process frequently takes months, sometimes more than a year. My Top Secret SCSI Clearance took seven or eight months to complete. The older you are, the longer it takes because there is more footwork for the investigators to do.

Getting back to the point though, I believe that there is a political component to The NSA’s surveillance of all US Telephone records. I believe this because information obtained by said surveillance is transferred to local authorities. The federal government can’t be everywhere in a physical sense if it can in fact be everywhere in an electronic sense, which is what all of the databases, the telephone records, the credit card transaction records, the internet activity records, it is what all of the records allow, a sort of electronic omniscience. But since the federal government can’t be everywhere, they must utilize local resources to accomplish certain activities. Whoa! Where are you going with this?

The answer to the question that is forming in your minds is a definite, “yes.”

What is happening at a certain level is that the federal government is tasking local authorities with the responsibility to collect information on your physical activities if you make “the list” you could say.

But even more importantly, The Patriot Act, that legislation which authorized the expansion of wiretapping and such activities as you have now become aware of, also allows something much more insidious, the “sneak-and-peek” (entry) of your residence, with a warrant but unannounced (they do it when you are not there). Who knows when they will decide to tell you or how often they enter? In other words, someone deemed to be suitable to the task (may even be someone who is duly deputized due to a certain skill set such as a locksmith), someone deemed suitable is authorized to enter your dwelling in your absence and search it. But does it stop there? Do they sabotage your things during the search? Do they take things? You will never know unless you notice something yourself, because The Patriot Act authorizes such governmental intrusion.

The real problem in my estimation with such activity though is that anyone with a badge or any type of governmental authority can probably get away with doing what I’ve just described and you would never know and with no authority from the federal government. Your neighbors may even be aware, and you wouldn’t have a clue if they didn’t tell you. Things get bumped during such searches. Perhaps you noticed something was disturbed. Do your neighbors have a key to your apartment? What is happening here?! See what I’m talking about? I’ve blogged in the past about putting an end to The Patriot Act. Why? Not only does the Patriot Act undermine The Constitution (which may have been temporarily necessary, but that is unlikely), The Patriot Act also undermines the social well being of the country.

Just as importantly, The Patriot Act makes no real distinction between foreign and domestic terrorism and that is the catch (Read the link I’ve included from The ACLU further on).

Are you an outspoken conservative that wants to downsize government (maybe you went on the “possible terrorist” list)? 2nd Amendment Activist (possible terrorist)? Who knows how long the list is and who or what defines it? Did you recently buy some ammunition online? How about a firearm? Do you blog as I do? Do you like to read blogs like mine? Do you write to your elected officials with your suggestions (this is a crucial one because it immediately becomes a national security matter, almost certainly if you express any disgruntlement and dissatisfaction with their performance)? Isn’t everyone disgruntled about the performance of the government? Hold it, isn’t just about everyone disgruntled?

Lo and behold, suddenly we discover we are all under surveillance.

Enough said.

But don’t take my word for it. And I’m not the greatest fan of these people, but read this http://www.aclu.org/national-security/surveillance-under-usa-patriot-act

Note: the only other reason I can offer for the oversight which missed the obvious regarding The Boston Bombers is that now that the US Government has tasked intelligence agencies to monitor all of our activities, search old ladies and children at the airport, what have you, there is so much information coming in that the intelligence agencies are overwhelmed with a sort of white noise of information and unable to completely function or focus on certain threats. There is essentially information overload at the intelligence agencies. But to me the prior scenario seems more likely. Nevertheless, our intelligence agencies don’t just start spying (as our elected would have us believe), they don’t just start spying on us en masse without direction from our elected, Congress in particular. And this is why I’ve written to the effect that we should once again start profiling and leads to the title of that essay on profiling, Welcome to Post 9/11 America: The United States of Police States. An Argument for Profiling.

Copyright © William Thien 2013

Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy, safe, and free. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address.

When I examine the almost daily legislative encroachments states are now enacting, often with little or no debate, on the right to keep weapons as a result of the hysteria caused by recent mass shootings I am compelled to examine the Second Amendment once and again, “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

In the past all types of historians, legal scholars and pro’s and anti’s have attempted to examine the amendment to determine what the amendment says exactly. It’s pretty clear to me. The supreme court also ruled recently that it means Americans have the right to keep and bear arms. But once again the anti’s, those in particular from fringe segments of society, have come out of the woodwork after the recent mass shootings with all kinds of highly restrictive legislation with the hopes of “infringing” upon your right to keep and bear arms.

The phrase “keep and bear” from the amendment has been examined. Sounds pretty straight forward to me. “Keep” is a pretty obvious word and “bear” means to have it with you, perhaps at all times, something that only until recently many states have allowed even though the Second Amendment, part of the law of the land, has been around for 222 years!

“Well regulated militia” has been examined and that is just as clear.

But the word “infringed” hasn’t really been examined all that thoroughly as a component of the Second Amendment, at least to my knowledge. To me it means that perhaps even the fringes of weaponry are legal, the most modern, those which branch off from what is traditional, that which is experimental and leads to new technologies, that the very edges and types of ownership are legal, the weapons which may not be socially acceptable to somebody such as Senator Feinstein, for example, the “fringe” weapons, the ones which are perhaps the most effective, the most dangerous, the most deadly, those with which Americans may be able to secure most effectively their liberty, whether Senator Feinstein or anyone else does not like the idea, particularly as they raise our taxes. They just raised everyone’s taxes, by the way.

But that is just what the anti’s want to do, they want to “infringe” upon the types of ownership, they want to encroach, to trespass, to step on your rights. If you ask me, the very last word, “infringed,” of the amendment is one of if not the most crucial, particularly as those who wish to infringe upon ownership send their families to secure schools that are guarded all day or that they themselves have bodyguards, all paid for with our tax dollars. It’s OK for them to take away the right to protect ourselves, but far be it from them to go without protection when they feel they need it, armored cars, bulletproof glass, tax payer paid for intelligence, records of your credit card transactions, authority to examine your tax records, secret dealings, you name it.

The hypocrisy of the anti’s is in my opinion justification in and of itself for ownership.

If you ask me, all of the recently enacted legislation infringing upon your right to keep and bear arms, particularly at the state level, is just that “infringement,” but not just on your right to keep and bear arms, infringement upon the law of the land enacted by our founding fathers, all which is particularly concerning since the Federal Government recently purchased billions of rounds of ammunition for use right here in America. Oh yes, ladies and gentlemen, they will not be without theirs as they work to make sure you have none!

Another word to consider, “Overbearance.” Another, “Excessive.”

Copyright © William Thien 2013

Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy and safe. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address.

The recent mass shootings are tragic, there can be no question, but is it a surprise to any of you that all of the legislation proposed by members of The Democratic Party to restrict firearms in The United States involves substantial taxes upon the taxpayer, and I mean substantial taxes, sometimes hundreds of dollars!?

Copyright William Thien 2012

Over the next couple of weeks and perhaps months I plan to offer some observations about gun rights in The United States and what I believe is occurring as a result of recent shootings.

The recent mass shootings are tragic.

Capitalizing on that fact OBVIOUSLY certain members of The Democratic Party in coordination with a disingenuous media have created an environment of hysteria in order to begin another attempt to restrict gun ownership. But almost all if not all of the hysteria seems to be emanating from one party, The Democratic Party, and the media. I appreciate a number of Democrats so I began to ask the question, why?

Republicans have shown obvious concern over the recent shootings but they are not so quick to take away your rights to own guns. First, to me this indicates that the Republican Party is by nature less oppressive.

Furthermore, it occurs to me that on a number of levels The Democratic Party is not so interested in restricting guns to protect your welfare as they are in seeing that they are re-elected. Stay with me on this. The Democratic Party is anti-gun because Republicans are generally not so. The Democratic Party is anti-gun because they are afraid that with all of the taxes they create, with all of the social programs they implement at great expense to the taxpayer, eventually the other party, The Republican Party, the party that does not constantly attempt to restrict gun ownership, the one that is generally considered more conservative fiscally and less taxing when it comes to government programs and spending, or again The Republican Party, will be peopled by a population that favors gun ownership and peopled by a population that will eventually get sick of being taxed to death and revolt, and because they are peopled by a population that owns firearms, obviously the odds will be in favor of The Republicans and not The Democrats, on any battlefield that might evolve, and/or at the polls.

Copyright © William Thien 2012

Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy and safe. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address.


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Find by month

Find by date

December 2017
M T W T F S S
« Nov    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
Follow William Thien on WordPress.com
%d bloggers like this: