Thursday, April 4, 2013
NC: Historical censorship should be a concern
Via Cousin John
VERBATIM
Gov. Pat McCrory is, from all accounts, a man dedicated to
helping North Carolina move ahead. However, on March 29, he made a
serious mistake.
At first glance, maybe ordering (through his Secretary of Cultural Resources) the removal of an historical exhibit of period flags from the historic old State Capitol might seem like a minor concern. After all, we’re not talking about the budget, roads or schools. But the removal of that exhibit of the historic Confederate battle flag because of political pressure from an individual, the Rev. William Barber, president of the North Carolina NAACP, who has never supported McCrory in anything and most likely never will, is both in error historically and politically.
The purpose of the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, and in particular its Historic Sites Division, in this exhibit, was to portray the exact way the old Capitol looked during the tragic War Between the States period (1861-1865), and to do so with balance in the context of our lived history. After all, the old Capitol is an historic site and serves as a museum; the legislature meets over in the newer Legislative Building, and only very rarely uses the 1840 Capitol building ceremonially.
Accordingly, historical flags of the period were hung upstairs in the House chamber of the historic State Capitol as a part of an exhibit (not in Gov. McCrory’s office downstairs at the far end of the building). Signage and docents were there to conduct tours and inform visitors about that painful period. As part of the sesquicentennial commemoration, the exhibit was scheduled to be there until the end of observances in 2015.
This, as Historic Sites director Keith Hardison explained, was entirely correct historically, since such flags did indeed hang in the old Capitol during that period. The object, very clearly, was to represent our history, all of our history, including some items and symbols that not everyone might approve of today and that might be painful to some.
As Hardison pointed out, the historian’s role is not to censure the past, but to portray and illustrate it as accurately as possible. On the contrary, the NAACP president apparently sees himself as the unelected arbiter of anything and everything in our state, including real and tangible portions of our collective history that he interprets as “offensive.” He complained loudly that the battle flag should not be displayed in the old Capitol, even though it was part of a strictly historical display and not displayed in any political or offensive manner. He insisted it had to go.
This is where the misguided action of the governor’s office makes this issue much more than the usual complaint by Barber. The caving-in to political pressure by the governor and his secretary is very troubling. From a simple political consideration, Gov. McCrory must know that there is absolutely no way that he can ever placate Barber politically.
But more disturbingly, this action, for all the misplaced good intentions that Gov. McCrory and his secretary may well have had, indicates that the highly contagious infection of “political correctness” and the willingness to censure our history if a pressure group shouts loud enough has reached the halls of power in Raleigh.
Applying a litmus test to whether a portion of our history can be displayed at a state historic site, even if that portion is essential to understanding our history, is the worst kind of censorship. Such action is not worthy of our governor, certainly not of a governor who wants to represent our state, its people, and all its history.
Thomas Smith is the Commander of the North Carolina Division of The Sons of Confederate Veterans.
At first glance, maybe ordering (through his Secretary of Cultural Resources) the removal of an historical exhibit of period flags from the historic old State Capitol might seem like a minor concern. After all, we’re not talking about the budget, roads or schools. But the removal of that exhibit of the historic Confederate battle flag because of political pressure from an individual, the Rev. William Barber, president of the North Carolina NAACP, who has never supported McCrory in anything and most likely never will, is both in error historically and politically.
The purpose of the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, and in particular its Historic Sites Division, in this exhibit, was to portray the exact way the old Capitol looked during the tragic War Between the States period (1861-1865), and to do so with balance in the context of our lived history. After all, the old Capitol is an historic site and serves as a museum; the legislature meets over in the newer Legislative Building, and only very rarely uses the 1840 Capitol building ceremonially.
Accordingly, historical flags of the period were hung upstairs in the House chamber of the historic State Capitol as a part of an exhibit (not in Gov. McCrory’s office downstairs at the far end of the building). Signage and docents were there to conduct tours and inform visitors about that painful period. As part of the sesquicentennial commemoration, the exhibit was scheduled to be there until the end of observances in 2015.
This, as Historic Sites director Keith Hardison explained, was entirely correct historically, since such flags did indeed hang in the old Capitol during that period. The object, very clearly, was to represent our history, all of our history, including some items and symbols that not everyone might approve of today and that might be painful to some.
As Hardison pointed out, the historian’s role is not to censure the past, but to portray and illustrate it as accurately as possible. On the contrary, the NAACP president apparently sees himself as the unelected arbiter of anything and everything in our state, including real and tangible portions of our collective history that he interprets as “offensive.” He complained loudly that the battle flag should not be displayed in the old Capitol, even though it was part of a strictly historical display and not displayed in any political or offensive manner. He insisted it had to go.
This is where the misguided action of the governor’s office makes this issue much more than the usual complaint by Barber. The caving-in to political pressure by the governor and his secretary is very troubling. From a simple political consideration, Gov. McCrory must know that there is absolutely no way that he can ever placate Barber politically.
But more disturbingly, this action, for all the misplaced good intentions that Gov. McCrory and his secretary may well have had, indicates that the highly contagious infection of “political correctness” and the willingness to censure our history if a pressure group shouts loud enough has reached the halls of power in Raleigh.
Applying a litmus test to whether a portion of our history can be displayed at a state historic site, even if that portion is essential to understanding our history, is the worst kind of censorship. Such action is not worthy of our governor, certainly not of a governor who wants to represent our state, its people, and all its history.
Thomas Smith is the Commander of the North Carolina Division of The Sons of Confederate Veterans.
We Need an Immigration Policy That Helps Americans, By Jeff Sessions
Via Mike
One of the most important concerns — and too little discussed — is
the economic impact. The last time Congress considered a comprehensive
immigration bill, unemployment was 4.5 percent. Today, it’s nearly 8
percent. Forty percent of those unemployed have been out of work for six
months or longer. The labor force participation rate is at a
thirty-year low. The unemployment rate for teenagers is 25.1 percent.
Wages are stagnant. Never before have more Americans been on food stamps
and other forms of welfare. Yet all we hear from those interests
pushing for a comprehensive immigration bill is that we have a labor
shortage and need to import more low-skill workers. An expanded
guest-worker program will not benefit unemployed American and legal
workers. We should be trying to help unemployed Americans find good
jobs, not importing cheap labor to take these jobs.
A well-planned welfare-to-work program — turning the welfare office into a job-placement center — is what is needed.
Immigration reform is a
complex issue that requires significant time and public engagement to be
handled responsibly and to produce legislation that will actually work.
We need to have open public hearings on every aspect of this proposed
reform — visa overstays, exit and entry systems, future flow, chain
migration, the public-charge rule, fiscal impacts, worksite security,
law-enforcement concerns, etc. For instance, the ICE officers’ union has
asked repeatedly to be given a chance to participate in White House
discussions and to speak with the Gang of Eight, but has been unable to
get a meeting — even as the special interests report almost daily on
their access and engagement.
A well-planned welfare-to-work program — turning the welfare office into a job-placement center — is what is needed.
More @ NRO
GOA Alert: No More "Mr. Nice Guy" It’s time for Congressmen to get off the pot
GOA has been issuing multiple alerts recently because of the imminent danger that is facing us - as the Senate will soon be taking up gun control legislation.
Much of the focus has been on the Senate. But if anyone thinks that the House – and specifically Speaker John Boehner – is our fail-safe to killing gun control in the Congress, they had better think again.
Speaking on Meet the Press on March 10, Speaker Boehner said that he has "made clear if the Senate acts on gun control legislation, the House will consider it."
Quite simply, that means that House Speaker John Boehner will allow the House to consider votes on gun control legislation.
Not only that, in an article entitled "House GOP Leaders: We can pass gun control, immigration, without Republican support," Breitbart.com reported that on issues like guns, Speaker Boehner was open to "taking rogue Republicans across the aisle to work with Democrats." The House leadership quickly backtracked from this position once the Breitbart article was published.
Regardless, this just underscores how we can't forget about the House, and how we need to keep the pressure on congressmen – especially the Republicans.
Sadly, at a time when the House leadership announces that they support universal gun registry legislation – only to quickly backtrack – we get nothing but excuses, excuses, excuses about why many GOP congressmen have not signed onto the Stockman-Broun letter.
Representatives Steve Stockman (R-TX) and Paul Broun (R-GA) are doing a bang-up job in the House. They are two of the most active leaders working to defeat gun control in Congress.
And to that end, the Stockman-Broun letter uses precedent to call upon Speaker Boehner to reject all gun control legislation unless it has the support of 117 Republicans. This is called the "Hastert Rule." And, if Boehner follows it, virtually no gun control can come to the floor of the House. Virtually none.
So far, more than 25 pro-gun Representatives have signed onto the Stockman-Broun letter - and they should be thanked. But there should be lots more.
It's very frustrating, however, when we have asked pro-gun Congressmen to sign onto the Stockman-Broun letter to tell Speaker Boehner NOT to bring up gun control, but we hear all kinds of excuses as to why they can't.
Here are the types of excuses that GOA is getting as to why congressmen won't sign onto the letter, and our answers to their lame excuses:
- EXCUSE #1: One office said it had signed other gun control letters.
ANSWER: There's no quota on your support for the Second Amendment. - EXCUSE #2: Another office said they were afraid of Boehner’s wrath.
ANSWER: You may want to consider your constituents’ wrath instead. - EXCUSE #3: A third office said that gun control was never coming to the House.
ANSWER: Are you going to do nothing until the anvil actually falls on your head? Boehner has publicly stated that Senate-passed gun control would be "considered" by the House. - EXCUSE #4: A fourth office said the congressman had promised to be bipartisan.
ANSWER: Obama's ruthless pursuit of his political goals, at the same time he mouthed words of "bipartisanship" is the reason why he controls the White House and you don't. - EXCUSE #5: A few offices have said they fear this letter is challenging Boehner's authority.
ANSWER: The Stockman-Broun letter does nothing of the sort. It simply asks the Speaker to follow a rule that was established by a former Republican Speaker of the House. No sanctions are stated or implied – it is only a request asking the Speaker to use the Hastert Rule to kill gun control.
ACTION: If your congressman has NOT cosigned the Stockman-Broun letter, then please contact him or her immediately. You may click here to send them a prewritten email. Demand that your Representative sign the letter invoking the Hastert Rule to kill gun control in the House.
Tan Son Nhut Airport, Saigon 1968
TSN and Bien Hoa were the busiest airports in the world. The ending may have been Tet that year.
Public Enemy #1 on Mississippi Gulf Coast
“Mother of Mercy…is this the end of Rico?” This famous line ended the classic gangster movie, Little Caesar, starring Edward G. Robinson. That line may have ended the movie, but it was the beginning of America’s fascination with gangsters. Hollywood peppered the public’s appetite with movies like Scarface, White Heat and The Public Enemy. Movies like these were based in gritty reality, using real events like the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre. They were also based on real people like Al Capone, Lucky Luciano and John Dillinger.
By the mid-30s, the violence surrounding gangsters and their illegal shenanigans was front page news. As the murderous violence increased, so did the public’s demand to stop it. To save the day, in blazed J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI with their “War on Crime.” That war led to the demise of the likes of “Baby Face” Nelson, “Machine Gun” Kelly, and Alvin “Creepy” Karpis. Of all the famous gangsters from the 20s and 30s, Karpis was the last Public Enemy #1 to be arrested, and also spent the longest time as a federal prisoner in Alcatraz, serving twenty-six years.
More @ Anthony Kalberg
Apple's iMessage encryption trips up feds' surveillance
Via Bill
An internal Drug Enforcement Administration document seen by CNET
discusses a February 2013 criminal investigation and warns that because
of the use of encryption, "it is impossible to intercept iMessages between two Apple devices" even with a court order approved by a federal judge.
The DEA's warning, marked "law enforcement sensitive," is the most detailed example to date of the technological obstacles -- FBI director Robert Mueller has called it the "Going Dark" problem -- that police face when attempting to conduct court-authorized surveillance on non-traditional forms of communication.
When Apple's iMessage was announced in mid-2011, Cupertino said it would use "secure end-to-end encryption." It quickly became the most popular encrypted chat program in history: Apple CEO Tim Cook said last fall that 300 billion messages have been sent so far, which are transmitted through the Internet rather than as more costly SMS messages carried by wireless providers.
A spokeswoman for the DEA declined to comment on iMessage and encryption. Apple also declined to comment.
How sweet it is!:)
Internal document from the Drug Enforcement Administration complains that messages sent with Apple's encrypted chat service are "impossible to intercept," even with a warrant.
Encryption used in Apple's iMessage chat service has stymied attempts by
federal drug enforcement agents to eavesdrop on suspects'
conversations, an internal government document reveals.
The DEA's warning, marked "law enforcement sensitive," is the most detailed example to date of the technological obstacles -- FBI director Robert Mueller has called it the "Going Dark" problem -- that police face when attempting to conduct court-authorized surveillance on non-traditional forms of communication.
When Apple's iMessage was announced in mid-2011, Cupertino said it would use "secure end-to-end encryption." It quickly became the most popular encrypted chat program in history: Apple CEO Tim Cook said last fall that 300 billion messages have been sent so far, which are transmitted through the Internet rather than as more costly SMS messages carried by wireless providers.
A spokeswoman for the DEA declined to comment on iMessage and encryption. Apple also declined to comment.
More @ Yahoo
Moving to the Country
Via Chuck
From the DVD of "A Night in Woodstock" featuring Chris Rival, guitar; Reed Butler, bass; and Billy MacGillivray, drums.
Obama Lies: Claims Fully Automatic Weapon Used At Sandy Hook
During a speech at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee
(DCCC) fundraiser on Wednesday Barack Obama openly lied, not that most
things coming out of his mouth aren’t lies, in order to push his
political agenda. He pushed for more gun control in the same place he made his now infamous “bitter clingers”
speech, and told a major whopper in declaring that the AR-15 alleged to
have been used by Adam Lanza in the Sandy Hook shootings was a fully
automatic weapon. The reality, of course, is that the AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle and a pair of handguns. Yes, it was clearly a lie, since the speech was written out before hand and viewed on his teleprompter.
“Now, over the next couple of months, we’ve got a couple of issues: gun control. (Applause.) I just came from Denver, where the issue of gun violence is something that has haunted families for way too long, and it is possible for us to create common-sense gun safety measures that respect the traditions of gun ownership in this country and hunters and sportsmen, but also make sure that we don’t have another 20 children in a classroom gunned down by a semiautomatic weapon — by a fully automatic weapon in that case, sadly.”
“Now, over the next couple of months, we’ve got a couple of issues: gun control. (Applause.) I just came from Denver, where the issue of gun violence is something that has haunted families for way too long, and it is possible for us to create common-sense gun safety measures that respect the traditions of gun ownership in this country and hunters and sportsmen, but also make sure that we don’t have another 20 children in a classroom gunned down by a semiautomatic weapon — by a fully automatic weapon in that case, sadly.”
More @ Freedom Outpost
Beretta Leaves Maryland Because of Stricter Gun Laws
Via Craig
Jeff Reh, member of the Board of Directors for Beretta USA, Corporate Secretary for Benelli USA, President of Stoeger Industries and general counsel for the Beretta family of companies
Established in 1526, Beretta holds the distinction of being the oldest active firearms manufacturer in the world. The U.S. factory is located in Accokeek, Maryland, and has been a staple of the local economy for years.
Beretta warned that stricter gun control laws would push the company outside of state lines, but that didn’t stop Maryland legislators. Jeffrey Reh, a spokesman for Beretta who also serves as the President of Stoeger Industries under Beretta, announced that the company would begrudgingly uproot and take its business elsewhere. He said, “We don’t want to do this, we’re not willing to do this, but obviously this legislation has caused us a serious level of concern within our company.”
He added that Beretta paid approximately $31 million in taxes, employs 400 people, and had invested $73 million in the business over the past several decades. Despite being such a prominent player in the local economy, Beretta was unable to prevent legislators from passing tighter gun control laws.
Ironically, Beretta manufactures some firearms that are now banned in Maryland.
Republican state Delegate Anthony J. O’Donnell lamented: “Losing [Beretta] would be a big disappointment. Maryland has a reputation for having a horrible business climate, and this would be one more nail in the coffin.”
Jeff Reh, member of the Board of Directors for Beretta USA, Corporate Secretary for Benelli USA, President of Stoeger Industries and general counsel for the Beretta family of companies
Established in 1526, Beretta holds the distinction of being the oldest active firearms manufacturer in the world. The U.S. factory is located in Accokeek, Maryland, and has been a staple of the local economy for years.
Beretta warned that stricter gun control laws would push the company outside of state lines, but that didn’t stop Maryland legislators. Jeffrey Reh, a spokesman for Beretta who also serves as the President of Stoeger Industries under Beretta, announced that the company would begrudgingly uproot and take its business elsewhere. He said, “We don’t want to do this, we’re not willing to do this, but obviously this legislation has caused us a serious level of concern within our company.”
He added that Beretta paid approximately $31 million in taxes, employs 400 people, and had invested $73 million in the business over the past several decades. Despite being such a prominent player in the local economy, Beretta was unable to prevent legislators from passing tighter gun control laws.
Ironically, Beretta manufactures some firearms that are now banned in Maryland.
Republican state Delegate Anthony J. O’Donnell lamented: “Losing [Beretta] would be a big disappointment. Maryland has a reputation for having a horrible business climate, and this would be one more nail in the coffin.”
More @ Opposing Views
Re-post: Average IQ of Countries+
The average IQ in the United States is usually set at 100.
Groups within the US score different average IQ's, such as 115 for
college grads or 85 for African-Americans. Similarly, average IQ varies
from country to country, shown in the 2002 book IQ and the Wealth of Nations (sets Britain at 100):
|
|---|
|
More @ SQ4MG
=======================
=======================
A Few Thoughts on IQ and the Wealth of Nations
A clear example of how a bad environment can hurt IQ
can be seen in the IQ scores for sub-Saharan African
countries. They average only around 70.
In contrast,
African-Americans average about 85. It appears unlikely
that African-Americans' white admixture can account for
most of this 15-point gap because they are only around
17%-18% white on average, according to the latest
genetic research.
(Thus African-Americans white genes
probably couldn't account for more than 3 points of the
gap between African-Americans and African-Africans.)
This suggests that the harshness of life in Africa might
be cutting ten points or more off African IQ scores.