The Patriot's Flag

Today I am flying the Fort Moultrie Flag, it is the Patriot Flag I fly when there is discussion that risks Liberty and Freedom. Such discussion is taking place in the form of a notification made by Citibank on its statements to its customers throughout the country:

“Effective April 1, 2010, we reserve the right to require (7) days advance notice before permitting a withdrawal from all checking accounts. While we do not currently exercise this right and have not exercised it in the past, we are required by law to notify you of this change.”

Why would a bank notify their customers that they may withhold money if they believe it necessary? This is a security procedure to stop a “run” on the bank  Here is an excerpt from Page 22 of Citibank’s Client Manual:

Withdrawal Refusals

In some instances, we may refuse a request for a withdrawal or transfer from an account. The following list includes, but is not limited to, the most common reasons we might refuse such requests:

If we decide to require seven (7) days advance written notice …

From Washington;s Blog:

A top investment adviser, Harry Schultz – who was MarketWatch Peter Brimelow pick for financial newsletter of the Year in 2008 – is now claiming:

• Some U.S. embassies worldwide are being advised to purchase massive amounts of local currencies; enough to last them a year. Some embassies are being sent enormous amounts of U.S. cash to purchase currencies from those governments, quietly. But not pound sterling. Inside the State Dept., there is a sense of sadness and foreboding that ’something’ is about to happen … within 180 days, but could be 120-150 days.

Investment advisor and former Army Counterintelligence officer Bob Chapman is saying the same thing, reporting on the possibility of a so-called “bank holiday” planned for late August or early September. According to Chapman’s sources, U.S. embassies around the world are selling dollars and stockpiling money from respective countries where they operate

Four Sources on this subject:

1. TheFutureOfCapitalism: John Stossel’s blog
2. Business Insider: This blog “broke” the story on the subject.
3. PrisonPlanet: Blog post by Paul Joseph Watson
4. Washington’s Blog: American Embassies encouraged to stockpile local currencies

All four are recommended reading to understand the background and intent of Citibank’s warning to customers.

---

The Bottom Line

---

Does anybody else think something is coming down the tracks?  Is Citibank the “canary in the coal mine” … and has its song changed?  Hmmm, Would I still be paranoid if the train ran over me? My previous thoughts on “rumblings” here:

• Triggering the final Executive Order
• The Cloward Piven Trigger
• Hey, What’s that sound?

---

Recent Posts, References and Updates

1. 02.23.10 ZeroHedge.com Greeks Scramble to Pull 8 Billion Euros out of local banks (bank run!)

---

Ft Moultrie Flag - Liberty Risky Discussion

Today I am flying the Fort Moultrie flag. This is a Patriot Flag I fly when there is “liberty-risky” discussion going on. Today, President Obama proposed more nuclear power for the USA … but there’s a catch (as usual).

President Obama: “Those who have long advocated for nuclear power — including many Republicans — have to recognize that we will not achieve a big boost in nuclear capacity unless we also create a system of incentives to make clean energy profitable.”

Obama is “pledging” $8.3 BILLION, (only a down payment of a proposed $18.5 BILLION) to jump start this program. This is nothing but campaign pandering to the conservatives hoping they will boost his sagging polls. And once again, to “solve” America’s problems … he cranks up the government’s money printing presses spending money WE DO NOT HAVE!  (Has anybody noticed we are already in debt to the extent that we may not be able … EVER … to pay it back?).

The TRUTH is, this man has every intention of creating 2 new nuke power plants but NO intention of ever using them. He has every intention of spending BILLIONS of dollars that will go for his definition of “creating green jobs.”  In this case, he defines “green jobs” as union workers building “green” nuclear plants.  But there is a catch.  You can build all the nuke plants you want and contribute more billions to the unions (transferring the wealth) but the catch is …

Obama will spend $18 Billion to Build them…

… but he has no intention of ever TURNING THEM ON!

The problem is not building them, that’s the easy part. Getting congress and the regulatory agencies, controlled by the Democrats and Progressives, to TURN ON the nuclear plants once they are built is what makes this “pledge” a non-starter.  The regulators will never allow it, no “lefty” has ever approved of nuclear power … and this guy is so far left he’s almost invisible!  So Obama’s “good intentions” seem like a fig leaf back to the conservatives. It is, in fact, another Obama political trick.  Pledge BILLIONS we do not have for “green jobs” building 2 nuclear power plants he has NO INTENTION of “turning on.”

---

The Bottom Line

---

SHOW ME! Until I see a nuclear plant “turned on” in this country, I don’t want to see one TAX dollar spent on nuclear power.  If it is a good idea (and it is) and if it is potentially profitable (and it is), then the entrepreneurs will step up and fund it.  But why don’t they fund it, why aren’t they stepping up? Because nobody is going to “bet” on nuclear energy in the USA … the left won’t let it happen.  They haven’t let it happen for  40 years, why should they now?  So if the entrepreneurs won’t step up, then the government has to  … using the Executive Pen to sign away billions of dollars  Dollars people in their right minds and with their own money would never do! It is a bad bet!  This “pledge” has nothing to do with nuclear power, it is another “pledge” to unions to support them for giving their votes to Obama.  It is simple political payback!

He cannot have it both ways!

Department of Energy: “The Yucca Mountain program will be scaled back to those costs necessary to answer inquiries from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), while the administration devises a new strategy toward nuclear waste disposal.”

• Uh … he’s closing Yucca Mountain, but he’s going to build two more Nuclear Plants?  C’mon, this is news for the dumb masses not for thinking Americans. See how the “transparency” shows?

This $18 BILLION boondoggle is simply a cheap (scratch that, “EXPENSIVE”) political trick to make people feel good about contributing another $18 Billion to the unions with NO INTENTION and NO GUARANTEE of every actually turning on the plants. Remember all of Obama’s “statements” have expiration dates!  This president promised to be transparent. He’s now so transparent now we can see right through everything he is doing.  Its getting easier and easier to see the pattern. He has every intention of giving more printed money to the unions and absolutely no intention of “turning on” a nuclear power plant!

Face it, did you ever see a Progressive want to turn on a nuke?

Ahmadinejad will have a nuke plant running before we do!

---

Recent Posts, References and Updates

---

Ft Moultrie Flag - Liberty Risky Discussion

Today I am flying the Fort Moultrie Patriot Flag, a flag I fly when there is “Liberty Risky” discussion. The “Save-the-Children” do-gooders are at it again, this time with the Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act.  It has a “globally appealing” moniker … but as usual, look closely at something sounds so good, the center is rotten.  South Carolina is considering this bill and we need to, once again, call our S.C. representatives and get this one stopped.

This law has not passed in any state that has closely reviewed this act. The New Jersey Law Commission reviewed this act and issued a final report on Dec 2008. Their report is attached. Here is the conclusion of their report:

Commission Recommendations

The Commission has considered the UCAPA but does not recommend its adoption. The UCAPA does not provide authority beyond the current powers of New Jersey judges in custody matters. The Commission did not address deficiencies in the Uniform Law or possible modifications to sections 7, 8 and 9 of the Official Text to correct them, concluding that the UCAPA is not necessary in light of the broad powers of the New Jersey chancery courts.

Parents become potential abductors in any act where they would:

(3(F) obtained their child(rens) medical records – an act all good parents must do… or

(3)(F) obtained their child(rens) school records – an act all good parents must do… or

(3)(F) obtained their child(rens) birth certificate – an act all good parents must do… or

These acts are not illegal, are committed by all good parents, and in no conceivable way shape or form indicate that a parent is a ‘risk’ for abducting their children!

Do you really want to have a civil court label a custodial (or noncustodial) parent as a ‘potential abductor’ because they:

(3)(E) Booked travel reservations (aka ‘travel documents’ in this act) for their elderly parents for their 50th wedding anniversary?

(3)(E) Booked airline tickets (aka ‘travel documents’ in this act) for themselves to go to the mainland for a business trip?

Making travel reservations is not a criminal act, and except for a few special cases would not be indicative that the parent is a possible child abductor.

Please read these two ‘risk factors’ closely. Is this really what you want to do?

(6) Lacks strong familial, financial, emotional, or cultural ties to the State or the united States;

(7) Has strong familial, financial, emotional, or cultural ties to another state or country;

These two lines set up EIGHT independent criteria. These criteria are very poorly defined and in most cases do not show that a parent is a risk for abducting their child.

• How much money must a parent have to avoid being labeled a ‘potential felon’ under the ‘lacks strong financial connections to a state’?
• How much money invested in another state is too much money to be labeled a ‘potential felon’ because they have ‘strong financial connections to your state (or some other state)?
• Just what sort of ‘strong emotional connection’ must be demonstrated to the the state in question?
• Just what sort of ‘strong emotional connection’ must not be made with another state such as South Carolina?
• How many relatives living in another state such as Maine is enough to trigger the ‘strong family connections to another state?
• How many relatives must live in South Carolina to avoid having ‘lack of strong family connections’ to the state?

Legislation text: Please, READ THIS LAW CLOSELY. You can find the text of the act HERE. There is a reason that it has failed to pass in over 8 states.

Wikipedia has some excellent information on this including a good discussion and many external links. Worth the read to learn more about this legislation.  You can view the Wikipedia information HERE.

In South Carolina:

2007 S 486 was referred to the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on 3/1/07. It never progressed beyond the committee. 2009 S 383 reported favorably by the Judiciary on 3/11/2009; Passed by the Senate on 3/24/2009; and referred to the house committee on judiciary 3/25/2009. It did not pass the House committee.  I will keep updates coming in the “updates” area below.

---

The Bottom Line

---

I post this for “awareness” so the folks that read this blog will be informed about this potentially liberty/freedom-breaking legislation.  This is an excellent example of the creeping progressivism we are seeing in the country. As usual in a bill from the “do-gooders” … the legislation is well-intended. But the result attacks liberty and freedom. It would “help” in one or two media-hyped cases, but it would “hurt” millions of parents who would get caught in the legislative net.

---

Recent Posts, References and Updates

---

Ft Moultrie Flag - Liberty Risky Discussion

Today I am flying the Fort Moultrie Patriot Flag … I fly this flag when there is “Liberty-Risky Discussion” happening. And certainly President Obama’s State of the Union Speech tonight will qualify for that.  Since we are in the midst of it, perhaps it is time to begin to better understand the Progressive Movement. The information in this post is a list of references so you can study the subject.

• Note: I will continue to add to this post as more articles and resources are discovered. If you find another excellent resource, please contact me at ThePatriotsFlag@jdlinn.com or add it to the comments.  Thank you.

The Progressive Movement: A movement for reform that occurred roughly between 1900 and 1920. Progressives typically held that irresponsible actions by the rich were corrupting both public and private life. They called for measures such as trust busting, the regulation of railroads, provisions for the people to vote on laws themselves through referendum, the election of the Senate by the people and not by state legislatures, and a graduated income tax (one in which higher tax rates are applied to higher incomes). The Progressives were able to get much of their program passed into law. Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were associated with the movement.

Historical Trivia Question

Question: What Political Party did Theodore Roosevelt belong to?

Answer: Republican. however In 1912 he bolted the party and ran as a “Progressive” or “Bull Moose” candidate, but had reverted to the Republican Party by 1916.

The SEARCH AREA information below is designed to help you search for key words to more quickly get you to the information you may need.  I put historical, pro and con information into the search area so you can make up your own mind.  Some of the articles you can browse quickly, and some below are real books which would take a great deal more time.  Mousing over the link will give you information of what is contained in the link.  My views on Progressivism you can find below at The Bottom Line. More information will be added periodically. The information below is only a few of thousands that will give you the most information in the least amount of reading time.

---

SEARCH AREA (Warning: Some of this material could make you sick!)

---

• 19th Century Progressivism
• Wikipedia’s Coverage of Progressivism
• Glenn Beck Video – Cancer in America
• Wikipedia Progressivism in the US
• Progressive Education in the US
• Progressive Education In the School
• Progressive Era
• Progressive Philosophy of Notable People
• McClure’s Magazine – The Progressive Era (Outline)
• Progressive Era Reform (Regent’s)
• Progressive Era (G W Browne Yorktown Univ)
• Org of American Historians
• Handbook of Texas – Progressive Era
• Web Sources for Progressive Era
• Rutgers Egov Archive The Progressive Movement
• PBS.org The Progressive Era
• American History 102
• The Progressive Movement  A Non-Partisan Discussion (DeWitt 1915)
• The Progressive Movement Principals and Programs (Duncan 1914}
• Institute of American History (Good Conservation Links)
• Marginal Revolution: What is Progressivism
• What Progressives Believe
• National Progress Party and Infrastructure (pdf)

Recent (in the news) Posts

• Heritage Foundation: (Jan 2007) Progressives &Transformation of Amer. Politics
• Huffington Post: (Jan 2010) A New Progressive Era (Excellent Read)
• The Seminal: Jan 2010- Why the Progressive Movement needs to reclaim its “Far Left Radicals”
• Progressive.org The Progressive “Web Magazine”

---

The Bottom Line

---

Progressives: Rush calls them “liberals,” and Mark (Levin) calls them “Statists” …but the rest of the world calls them “Progressives.”  Whatever name you give them, if you read through the above materials, and if you are a Conservative, you will find them simply name them “dangerous” to the Founding Fathers concept of the United States of America.  You will find the downplay of God, you will find BIG BUSINESS is the enemy and you will find “conservation” … the beginnings of the foundation for the hoax of Global Warming. Throughout the materials above, you will discover the language being used today is the language they used “way back then” during the last attempt at progressivism. None of this is “new” … Hope and Change is only a resurrection of a dangerously failed ideology of the past. Unfortunately … people “fell for it” again.

The Progressive Process:

• It begins with the worthy cause. A need is identified by people sensitive enough recognize its existence. The need will touch on reality, will be based on a fear of what might/could happen if the need is not fixed, and people will step forward to embrace the crisis and work to solve the problem. Environmentalism,  poverty, the military and big business are the progressives’ usual targets … see any similarities today? (Same  old song, different era).

• It is identified as an opportunity. Because of the potential “universal nature” of the need, the Progressives infiltrate the ranks of well-meaning people who are proposing good and usurp the cause to their own end,. That end is invariably bigger and more centralized government or increased personal power.  The “perceived need” becomes a “glittering generality” logically … taking on the cloak of fiction posing as fact.

• Increasing the momentum of the cause.  The cause becomes “populist” … it becomes the darling of the masses and at the same time an even greater darling for the progressives. In our era, the main stream media becomes the megaphone and Hollywood the midway Barker. At this point progressive money, talent and effort added causing the need to be marketed to more people, thus increasing its strength. Truth and fact need not be validated, the “need” and “fear of failure” overcome the need for facts and validity is forgotten and left  far behind in the original history of the process. The original need becomes a dire, must-solve problem, ever spinning greater … a crisis is created. The Machiavellian tiger at the gate begins to roar.

• The Cause is Hijacked.  The original cause for good is hijacked by the progressives who will take control of the process. The progressive machinery within the process begins to prove itself and some begin to take notice. The “new and improved” direction of the cause no longer resembles the “original direction,.” The altered direction moves power to the progressives, sucking it from the good intentions of the original cause and need.

• It Grows or spins out of Control. Progressively, momentum is added to the cause, and like the proverbial snowball, picks up more strength, people and support. The Machiavellian “tiger at the gate” looms ever larger as the process continues.  But the tiger is paper,  and like the fear, was manufactured.  At some point, the altered purpose of the process is exposed and the process self-destructs.  The well-intended people whoo were duped by the process become angry and turn against it, recognizing it for what it is, originally a good idea that was hijacked for personal gain and power.

Modern Day Examples:

• Global Warming … the glaciers will melt, the sea will rise, we all will die. The entire world goes into a frenzy to “save the planet” not realizing that the people who took over the cause and are the greatest preachers of it have become the financial beneficiaries of it.  Al Gore is the perfect example.  And in the end, ClimateGate exposed the hoax, something built and sustained on lies for the good of people exchanging “carbon credits.”
• Hope and Change … The news media decried that George Bush was a financial and war-mongering disaster. And so Obama emerged as the Messiah to save the USA from destruction.  A man with no history or experience … which, as the legend grew, did not matter. So the frenzy grew without fact or truth and was fueled by “hope” and the “need for change”.  Blindly the USA put a Progressive into office … and our financial liability has tripled, the spending is totally out of control and government control is at the edge of becoming totalitarian. (It has taken over banks, GM, Chrysler and wants to control our Health Care!). But the people woke up, and Massachusetts broke the cycle … the progressives were exposed, and now will fail because of the peoples’ anger.
• Federal Income Tax … came from the 2nd Progressive Era.  This moved the money to the federal level where it could be controlled by less than 500 people (and not controlled by the states and local government). With the power of that money, those few people can use the money to bribe and intimidate moving toward even more government centralization.  Examples are the “Louisiana Purchase” (Senator Mary Landrieu’s vote on Health Care, and the “Nebraska Purchase” Senator Ben Nelson’s vote on Health Care. The Progress Process at some point becomes viable to the masses and when it is finally obvious, a revolt begins. In  the present example, the reversal in Massachusetts resulted.  (As a valid revolt to the misuse of the federal income tax,  the FairTax may not be far behind).
• Affordable Housing … starts off as a good-intended thought to help poor people. Then the Progressives decided the banks MUST loan dollars for housing to people who cannot afford to repay the loans. Eventually, the housing market crashes and the government must come in to “help” bail them out. and takes over control of many large banks. Scapegoats outside the system are blamed and more sub-prime loans are continually made … leading to the need for more government control of banks and the banking system. (Why didn’t Canada’s banks need a bailout?  Because they were not government-mandated to give out sub-prime loans!).
• Poison in the Tea? Watch the Tea Party Process carefully.  This is a fertile ground for the progressives. It is a good cause, and has momentum of its own. But it can be (and maybe already is being) infiltrated to divert its original intention.  See “Poison in the Tea?“.  The Tea Party people (like me) must be vigilant.

Summary: We do not have a Democrat President in the White House, we have a Progressive President.  Know this and understand the difference.  Democrats will begin to realize this is not the “party of their grandfathers” … it has been hijacked and has become something they no longer recognize. And as this happens, the poll ratings for this Progressive President and Congress will fall, people will become angry at being duped (Hope and Change?) and will revolt. The realization has started and Massachusetts was the first indication.The 2010 elections will be the end of this 3rd Progressive Era.  The more the “progressivism” of this President and Congress “shows” … the lower go the polls.  The latest from Rasmussen today (01.28.10) is to the right.

---

Recent Posts after this Post

1. Wikipedia: Congressional Progressive Caucus
2. FreeRepublic (JustPiper) Discussion on Progressive Caucus
3. WordPressBlog Uncommon Sense: What is a Prog? and why they should scare you Part I
4. FreeRepublic (JustPiper) Communist Goals … look at how these follow “Progressive” goals
5. Capital Research: Matthew Vadem, Sr Editor: Left puts Blueprint Online THE PDF File HERE

---

Ft Moultrie Flag - Liberty Risky Discussion

Today I am flying the Fort Moultrie flag.  I fly this flag when there is “liberty-risky” discussion happening.  The Democrats are trying to give CPR to the already declared dead HR 3200.  If there is any doubt in your mind about how destructive this bill can be to Liberty and Freedom, watch the video below and all doubts will be erased.

The video below was posted by OneNationUnder1God3in1 at YouTube. You will find it is an excellent summary of HR 3200 and if you care to follow along, you can download the text of HR 3200 to see the exact sections being discussed. (PDF LINK HERE). The video is about 10 minutes in length, I would suggest you set aside 10 minutes to watch it, but have a couple of aspirin (or something stronger) available for yourself when it is finished.

Disclaimer (sort of): The person who put this fine video together had to do a “translation” to get the information into a form that we could understand.  He is translating from “legalese” to “English”.  English is obviously the legislatures’ “second language.”  So it can be said that  perhaps he didn’t interpret the words correctly here and there … but I would disagree. Why would anyone have to “interpret” a law we will have to live under and in this case, one that affects our children and grandchildren’s financial futures?  If s/he “gets it wrong” then ANYONE … especially another legislator… can “get it wrong” and interpret the bill to his/her need. I feel he’s “got it right” …  (and our thanks for his/her work … a great deal of time spent for OUR good).

WARNING … the following video is approved for conservative audiences and it could make you SICK!

---

The Bottom Line

---

Socialists have no regard for life: History has proven that socialism, which is the stepping stone to Communism has no regard for human life. This form of government has never worked and has always ended in disaster.  The above video is what Socialism looks like when it gets into the inner workings of a free democratic republic.  For seniors it is a death sentence and a transfer of your retirement funds to  its “rightful owners” … (people who never worked for it like you did and now need it!) You can see the bill is not about “health care” that is the guise for “government control” over the people. For any conservative, the video clearly points out why we must continue our fight to rid this nation of this kind of thinking. It is beyond “conceptual” … these people are ACTUALLY DOING IT.

They must be stopped. Write your congressman, get on the blogs for comments, call the White House … MAKE YOUR VOICES HEARD … the alternative, as you could see by the above video, is not a future you or I would care to pass on to the next generation of  [hopefully] FREE Americans. For contact information you can go to the REFERENCES page for this blog and look under “Subject Reference Sites“. (Link)  Please take some action to make sure HR 3200 doesn’t come back to life … your freedom and liberty are in jeopardy.

---

More Recent Posts

1. 10thAmendmentCenter: Health Care Mandates Constitutional? Not even Close! 01.25.10
2. NewsMax Dick Morris, Pelosi and Reid Plot secret plan for Obamacare 01.25.10

---

Ft Moultrie Flag - Liberty Risky Discussion