Originally Posted by wtrg8

Well, show me your driver's license then? Special interests have taken that away from the states and have threatened to sue if we ask for papers.

Enough is Enough, the US know how much money I make, my routing number for my bank, know that I reside in Virginia and have a copy of my birth certificate because I needed a US Passport. I am not asking for anything I haven't provided myself. This something no one should be afraid of since as citizens we have already given up that right to not show papers...

H-m-m-m. In the Soviet Union, the "papers" you seem content to share were internal travel documents. Aren't you a bit too libertarian for that level of government oversight? I am.

Well, Roadbldr, I have found the definitive journalistic account from that time and I'm very curious as to what your reaction will be, but the pdf is much too big to load here. If interested please email me at KaiserD2@gmail.com.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

H-m-m-m. In the Soviet Union, the "papers" you seem content to share were internal travel documents. Aren't you a bit too libertarian for that level of government oversight? I am.

By not checking, you are granting the conspiracy theorists the ability to project their arguments in a logical manner that something else is behind this.The North American Union will not be a conspiracy, after all.

Arizona, Arizona. 20 years ago, I was a hotheaded young teenager, and that state voted not to acknowledge the King holiday. Now this. Completely unacceptable, and completely unsurprising considering the state's history.

Public Enemy said it best. "By the time I get to Arizona..." Or is that too Xer of me? I don't agree that those who are responsible for this law should be harmed. I just wish they'd realize how bad they look.

Originally Posted by wtrg8

If you walk into Canada without papers, wouldn't you be ask to return to where you came in the States? I think so after being detained to discover where you are from. Same thing, if a person walks onto your property, wouldn't you call the police you didn't give permission from them to on be it.

Um, I grew up in a Northern border city. Until 9/11, everyone on the U.S./Canada border regularly "walked into Canada without papers", or drove, or rode the bus or train. You were usually waved through checkpoints unless you looked suspicious or like an underage drinker. Supposedly we were to have our birth certificates on hand or a passport, but most of us just used our licenses. People worked on one side of the border, and lived on the other. We shopped there and they shopped here. It was wonderful.

Then 9/11 happened. The biggest effect up here was that the border closed for the first time that I remember. Canadians working over here had to crash on friends' couches for days. Not sure about Americans over there, but it was crazy.

After that, everything changed. We are no longer living on "the world's longest undefended border." The hassle at the border increased year by year, until now it's been at least 5 years since I've gone to a place that I might be able to see from my living room window this fall. Because of folks who did not enter through our border and concerns about the other border, we now have to have a PASSPORT to go across the bridge or tunnel, or in some cases, across the STREET. And we are not happy about it at all. There are "enhanced driver's licenses" but those can get you hassle these days too. It sucks because in many places, the Canadian side is a part of our metropolitan region.

Originally Posted by XerTeacher

Arizona, Arizona. 20 years ago, I was a hotheaded young teenager, and that state voted not to acknowledge the King holiday. Now this. Completely unacceptable, and completely unsurprising considering the state's history.

Public Enemy said it best. "By the time I get to Arizona..." Or is that too Xer of me? I don't agree that those who are responsible for this law should be harmed. I just wish they'd realize how bad they look.

I am not sure if the legislature knows what it has gotten itself into. This is very different from the MLK holiday. There weren't many black folks in Arizona--there are millions of Hispanics who are citizens and vote. They are already calling on the rest of us to boycott Arizona. Particularly if McCain were to lose the primary, this could cost them a Senate seat.

Originally Posted by XerTeacher

Um, I grew up in a Northern border city. Until 9/11, everyone on the U.S./Canada border regularly "walked into Canada without papers", or drove, or rode the bus or train. You were usually waved through checkpoints unless you looked suspicious or like an underage drinker. Supposedly we were to have our birth certificates on hand or a passport, but most of us just used our licenses. People worked on one side of the border, and lived on the other. We shopped there and they shopped here. It was wonderful.

Then 9/11 happened. The biggest effect up here was that the border closed for the first time that I remember. Canadians working over here had to crash on friends' couches for days. Not sure about Americans over there, but it was crazy.

After that, everything changed. We are no longer living on "the world's longest undefended border." The hassle at the border increased year by year, until now it's been at least 5 years since I've gone to a place that I might be able to see from my living room window this fall. Because of folks who did not enter through our border and concerns about the other border, we now have to have a PASSPORT to go across the bridge or tunnel, or in some cases, across the STREET. And we are not happy about it at all. There are "enhanced driver's licenses" but those can get you hassle these days too. It sucks because in many places, the Canadian side is a part of our metropolitan region.

I see your frustration. I do not want to tell the IRS that I have Health Care or not. But that right has been taken away from us as well. I do not like the fact that the IRS can deny me my tax refunds. Will you enjoy that hassle?

I have more respect of our neighbors when they do ask for our passports. It means they respect their borders and can still act neighborly at the same time.

Originally Posted by wtrg8

I see your frustration. I do not want to tell the IRS that I have Health Care or not. But that right has been taken away from us as well. I do not like the fact that the IRS can deny me my tax refunds. Will you enjoy that hassle?

I have more respect of our neighbors when they do ask for our passports. It means they respect their borders and can still act neighborly at the same time.

I don't understand. What does the IRS have to do with the way we've lived our lives on the US/Canadian border for the past 150 years?

Originally Posted by XerTeacher

Originally Posted by wtrg8

I see your frustration. I do not want to tell the IRS that I have Health Care or not. But that right has been taken away from us as well. I do not like the fact that the IRS can deny me my tax refunds. Will you enjoy that hassle?

I have more respect of our neighbors when they do ask for our passports. It means they respect their borders and can still act neighborly at the same time.

I don't understand. What does the IRS have to do with the way we've lived our lives on the US/Canadian border for the past 150 years?

He just wants to freeload on the healthcare system, rather than participating as a paying issuree, and can't see why that's not a "right".

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

He just wants to freeload on the healthcare system, rather than participating as a paying issuree, and can't see why that's not a "right".

Civility be damned when one ask for one's legal status or Health Care issuree papers per your arguments. I have both health insurance and my passport. No worries at all.

I don't like that Americans are asking for their liberties to be taken away in the name of... what? First the Patriot Act, and now a state is demanding that citizens carry around proof of citizenship and can be ordered to show it at any time. Tell me, why did we break away from Great Britain in the first place?

Many United States citizens of color who look "Latino" (what does that even MEAN?) have been in this nation far longer than those screaming bloody murder about the illegals. Many people in the American Southwest did NOT jump the border, the border jumped them a century and a half ago. Both sides of my family has been here since at least the 18th century, and we have NOTHING on the First Nations people of this continent who aren't even considered in this debate.

Originally Posted by XerTeacher

I don't like that Americans are asking for their liberties to be taken away in the name of... what? First the Patriot Act, and now a state is demanding that citizens carry around proof of citizenship and can be ordered to show it at any time. Tell me, why did we break away from Great Britain in the first place?

Many United States citizens of color who look "Latino" (what does that even MEAN?) have been in this nation far longer than those screaming bloody murder about the illegals. Many people in the American Southwest did NOT jump the border, the border jumped them a century and a half ago. Both sides of my family has been here since at least the 18th century, and we have NOTHING on the First Nations people of this continent who aren't even considered in this debate.

In a contest between fear and freedom, fear tends to win. It's sad, but most people tend to worry more about safety ... especially with the fear-mongers working hard to scare the bejesus out of them 24/7.

Benjamin Franklin nailed that dichotomy in his time, and it hasn't gotten any better since. If anything, it's worse.

Originally Posted by XerTeacher

I don't like that Americans are asking for their liberties to be taken away in the name of... what? First the Patriot Act, and now a state is demanding that citizens carry around proof of citizenship and can be ordered to show it at any time. Tell me, why did we break away from Great Britain in the first place?

Many United States citizens of color who look "Latino" (what does that even MEAN?) have been in this nation far longer than those screaming bloody murder about the illegals. Many people in the American Southwest did NOT jump the border, the border jumped them a century and a half ago. Both sides of my family has been here since at least the 18th century, and we have NOTHING on the First Nations people of this continent who aren't even considered in this debate.

With this logic, Do not ask me if I have Health Insurance or not since its none of the US Government damn business? Its a state's right to have that section repealed.

Originally Posted by wtrg8

With this logic, Do not ask me if I have Health Insurance or not since its none of the US Government damn business?

Having to declare this on a tax return is really not in the same ballpark as being pulled over by the cops, required to show your birth certificate, and being arrested and put in jail if you can't. Nobody's going to jail you for not having health insurance. There is some question of whether or not the no-health-insurance tax is constitutional, but comparing it to the new Arizona law is truly reaching.

Its a state's right to have that section repealed.

No, absolutely it is NOT a state's authority to do so. (And states don't even HAVE "rights.")

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

In a contest between fear and freedom, fear tends to win. It's sad, but most people tend to worry more about safety ... especially with the fear-mongers working hard to scare the bejesus out of them 24/7.

Unless they do the heroic thing, which is to confront the objects of their fears. Desperate as a 4T can get, people will find plenty of opportunities to display courage -- or cowardice. The ultimate cowardice is to become complicit with evil -- to cast the family dog to the crocodile in the hope that the crocodile will be sated.

I'd rather blow the crocodile out of the water with an AK-47 -- wouldn't you?

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

In a contest between fear and freedom, fear tends to win. It's sad, but most people tend to worry more about safety ... especially with the fear-mongers working hard to scare the bejesus out of them 24/7.

Benjamin Franklin nailed that dichotomy in his time, and it hasn't gotten any better since. If anything, it's worse.

yea, but the Progressives rose above that fear, clear headed, took it on, and not only formed a new nation but changed the world. A cycle later, the Progressive North could have said, F-it and let the South go along with their slaves - they didn't. A cycle later, well, "all we have to fear is fear itself."

We'll do it again, we just have to drag all the little scared shirtless whimpy baggers along with us. Most of them will be perpetually confused and cranky over it for the rest of their lives, but their children and grandchildren will deeply appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

I still believe 9/11 triggered the rest of it. Before 9/11, it did not seem prudent or worth it to risk the life of a single American soldier in order to fight militant Islam or prevent a genocide. The US use of military force was virtually handcuffed by popular opinion. The willingness to take action is the most basic values shift that one might associate with a 3T / 4T cusp. That, and the economic stresses of war led to the lack of preparedness for Katrina and the later economic collapse. It all came from there.

Thus, I see the first Bush 43 term as the 'On to Richmond' false regeneracy phase, as a military solution was sought without addressing core causes. With Katrina, the votes started clearly shifting and the 'business as usual' denial attitude became rarer. The economic collapse and Obama's election? I'd only use the phrase 'core 4T' at that point. No doubt about it from there, I would say.

But I suspect you are right. At this point, that discussion isn't going to be settled. We might have to wait until we recognize the 4T 1T cusp symptoms and measure back 20 years to settle things.

But regardless of where one puts the border, the spiral of violence generally starts well back in the 3T. It is hard to look at a long slowly increasing sequence of events and declare a definitive border. Still, the Sons of Liberty were active well before Lexington and Concord, and John Brown and the abolitionists had much to say and do well before Ft. Sumter. The truly important spirals of violence start long before the violence goes full scale military.

A spiral of violence that starts only with the decisive event that clearly marks core 4T is running late. Thus, a group that formed to protest the election of Abe Lincoln or to support the British military occupation of Boston would best be seen as an outgrowth of something that had been going on before. Yes, the last catalysts in a cascade will start some new movements and organizations, but in terms of putting a new philosophy or vision on the table, no, they will only refine and update something that has been building for quite some time.

Thus, I remain dubious timing wise. The primary dialectic is already there. The key issues and solutions are already on the table. The remaining surprise is in how far the solutions will have to be taken before the issue is considered solved sufficiently that one can transition into 1T 'no more argument we know how it is to be done now' mode. The 4T 1T cusp comes when the solutions applied are widely seen as having worked, and most folks are ready to stop fighting it and build what is needed for a full implementation.

We're clearly no where near there yet.

Bob, I know this is an old post, I'm playing catch up tho'...

This sounds like a good description of the tea parties? Were they around then?

Tone70

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

Lots to talk about here.

On 3T violence I just read Dennis Lehane's new novel, The Given Day, set in Boston,. his favorite city and mine, in 1918-19. It's a very violent story (climaxing at the time of the Boston police strike.) I never realized this but what happened during that strike was an outburst of anarchy comparable to the 2T riots in Watts, Newark and Detroit, or the 3T riot in South Central. Meanwhile there had been a number of major race riots around the country at the same time.

But now to the main event. Seeing things comparatively as I always do--the great advantage of having begun as a modern European historian--I have no doubt, frankly, that the raw material for a strong neo-Fascist movement is out there. What seems to be lacking,. however, is any real organization. Talk radio, however disgusting, may be a blessing--it's better to let our loonies get their rocks off listening to Rush than by putting on uniforms,. marching around the streets, and beating up gays, blacks and liberals. Perhaps too the Republican party did us a favor by co-opting these guys (just as the Democrats did with the KKK in the South earlier.) At least it keeps them within the system!

To answer one question--about the military--you can totally trust me on this one: I doubt there are a dozen officers in the whole US military above the rank of Captain who would consider anything seditious for a moment. We just don't have that tradition. Also the whole mid-grade to senior officer corps is now Gen X, virtually, and they're not the kind to organize that kind of thing, in my opinion.

So. . .even though my name has been falsely invoked in the last week to suggest that Americans need to arm against President Obama. . . I don't see it happening yet.

See my blog for today on bonuses, by the way.

I hope our citizen soldiers do in fact serve as a bulwark against tyranny I find it hard to imagine our soldiers rounding up Americans. But, to your second point, I believe this will be due to the independance of our X'er field and flag ranks. They are unlikely to organize "that kind of thing", unless given a very good reason. Ideological rhetoric, IMO, would be insufficient. Which is very fortunate, these same officers could, if they choose, topple our government. Strengths are often weaknesses.

Also, what about captain and below? Do they have reason to revolt? Won't they be promoted as the cycle turns?

Tone70

May or may not be totally relavent, but note the connection with the "Sovereign Citizens" crazies.

Alleged Lolo (Montana) 'house theft' may have been inspired by extremist websites

A California woman who allegedly moved into an unoccupied Lolo home earlier this month and claimed the digs as her own may have been influenced by websites promoting the extremist "sovereign citizens" movement.

Jackiya Dionea Ford, 37, allegedly moved into a Lolo home while it was for sale, then changed the locks and filed a fraudulent lawsuit against the home's builder and rightful owner, Bob Paffhausen.

Deputy Missoula County Attorney Dori Brownlow is prosecuting the case, and said numerous websites provide instructions on how to file such erroneous paperwork, which can clog up the court system if processed.

"There is lots of information online and I assume that's where it's all coming from as a central source," Brownlow said.

The filings include frivolous lawsuits and liens against public officials, and in some cases the documents effectively transfer the property rights on paper, creating a sticky legal mess that is difficult to sort out.

"It's very difficult to unrecord a document once it's been recorded, so we try to catch these things when they appear on the verge of legality," said Debbe Merseal, Missoula's chief deputy clerk and recorder.

Merseal said Ford's filings were so unusual that she sent the paperwork to the legal eagles in the Missoula County Attorney's Office for review. She said the woman tried to have several certified deeds and patent documents re-recorded, but refused to give a reason for the request.

"This definitely was an unusual document," Merseal said. "She described it as a ‘patent sandwich.' I don't believe we've ever seen anything like this."

At that point, Ford still hadn't been accused of committing a crime, though she was known to officials with the sheriff's department.

***

The woman first came onto the radar of local law enforcement when she became disorderly in the Missoula County Attorney's Office and had to be removed. She filed "bogus" lawsuits against several sheriff's deputies, said Lt. Rich Maricelli, and demanded settlements be paid in gold and silver.

"It's been an absolute nightmare," Maricelli said.

Then Ford filed suit against Paffhausen, the builder, who told authorities that the woman showed up to view his house as a prospective buyer. After their initial meeting, Ford delivered paperwork claiming ownership of the house and all the land in a 20-mile radius around it. She offered to drop the lawsuit if Paffhausen paid her $900,000 in pure silver and gold.

On April 14, as the builder worked with Brownlow to remedy the situation, he received a call from NorthWestern Energy saying someone had reported a natural gas leak at the house. Paffhausen went to the house, where he found the locks and garage door codes had been changed and the windows covered up with paper.

Various notices were also posted on the doors saying no one should enter the house without consent of the "authority of our Lord and Savior Yahushua," who had given the house to Ford as a believer.

Looking through an opening in the kitchen window, Paffhausen could see various personal belongings, including a rifle case leaning against the living room wall. Paffhausen called authorities, and as sheriff's deputies were inspecting the home Ford came speeding down the street and pulled into the driveway.

Ford told the deputies that she was a "sovereign citizen of the republic of America" and therefore officials had no authority over her. She said she owned the whole mountainside and that they were on private property.

At the time of her arrest, she had been living in the house about two weeks.

***

Ford's alleged intimidation tactics are consistent with the Sovereign Citizen Movement, whose adherents use "paper terrorism" as a form of harassment.

Paper terrorism involves the use of fraudulent legal documents and filings, as well as the misuse of legitimate documents and filings, in order to intimidate, harass and coerce public officials, law enforcement officers and private citizens, according to an FBI news release warning of the practice.

The allegations against Ford smack of the recent case of Brent Arthur Wilson, 53, who faces felony charges in Lake County for his alleged attempts to steal a $300,000 house in foreclosure.

Wilson allegedly broke into the home, changed the locks and filed a flurry of bizarre paperwork with the Lake County Clerk and Recorder's Office - including documents listing the property's location as "third planet from the sun" and references to the "Creator, Yahweh."

Ford was arrested on April 14 and her belongings removed from the home. She made an initial appearance in Justice Court on April 19, and her bail was set at $50,000.

She remains jailed, and will appear for arraignment Thursday morning in Missoula District Court. A young child who was in the car at the time of Ford's arrest is now in the care of Child Protective Services.

Originally Posted by MillieJim

Perhaps I'm being dismissive or misreading the situation, but...

Conservative talk radio hosts are the Eddie Haskells of American politics. They are the penultimate behind-your-back rebel. They'll stir up this ugly stuff among their listeners, and when one of said listeners takes their words to their logical conclusion (violence/terrorism), they will hem and haw and generally STFU while trying to deflect as much blame as possible. They are that bully kid who gets people into dangerous situations, but backs out when they realize what the consequences of their being in the situation are, leaving their followers to take the heat from authorities.

Hello Jim, I'm curious... I mean I'm Tony...

But I was wondering---a year has passed since you wrote this---do you feel this is still a valid analysis? If no, why not?

I ask because I don't follow the right very much.

Thanks.

Tone70

Originally Posted by Odin

Long, Hot Summer, anyone?

Yes it turned out it was...remember those f**king "townhalls"?

Originally Posted by Roadbldr '59

No I'd say the (bare) majority view here is that 9/11 probably started the 4T, with most of the rest believing it started either last year with the September stock market crash, or the year before with the subprime lending debacle/housing bubble slow-leak.

Only a handful of folks believe the Catalyst was Katrina in '05... though they do bring up some good points.

I don't have a concrete opinion as to the 4t start. I am still studying. But, at risk of repeating others observations, I offer this from "Generations", Pgs. 374-375

"Suppose authorities seriously suspected that a band of terrorists...had smuggled a nuclear bomb into New York City. How would America respond?... Boomer leaders in their sixties would neither hide nor ponder rumor; instead, they would exaggerate the threat...and tie it to a larger sense of global crisis. Unifying the nation as a community, these leaders would define the enemy broadly and demand it's total defeat-regardless of the human and economic sacrifices required."

S&H described this as happening in the 2020's over a rumor. It seems to have happened, in fact, after 9/11. Like I said, I am still studying. But does this not suggest an early and perhaps prolonged crisis? Or do I mis-understand, and this will shorten it? Neither?

I'm curious what people who have spent more then 3 weeks thinking about the saeculum have to say.

Thanks.

Tone70

Originally Posted by Skabungus

The religious right has been working long and hard to bring about the christian version of Jihad here in America.

Their madrassas have been training the army of god for action!!!!!

There message is rightous violence!

This film made my hackles stand up... I can't help imagining one of those poor kids setting fire to the stake I'm tied to...

Tone70

Originally Posted by The Rani

Sometimes you have to make your own chances.

Obama did try to curtail farm subsidies recently, but congress squashed it. So much for change.

The Obama administration seems to getting behind the local food movement lately. It's the first lady's thing, which I admit may be all PR.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

It's how people respond that indicates what era one is in. Think of the panic that Orson Welles' production of the radio play of H.G. Welles' War of the Worlds created in a country not in obvious danger of war. 1939 was 3T in America, and people who confused the radio play with a news broadcast acted as if they were in a 3T.

After Pearl Harbor, the government quickly regimented the economy, and people went into lockstep. People quickly accepted rationing and the sudden disappearance of luxury goods. They put up with a 35 mph speed limit.

9/11? Nothing of the kind happened. The president told us to go shopping -- which was the exact opposite of what FDR told people to do. No activity is more 3T than shopping at the mall for "retail therapy".

I'm afraid GWB also acted exactly like a boomer would be expected to act during a crisis, according to S&H. But, OTOH, no one listened so perhaps it is perceived otherwise, as was said elsewhere, and the lack of coordination makes it a 3T over-reaction on the part of GWB.