Syrian Protests Spread

As Syrian protests spread to now eighteen provinces, hundreds of thousands of Syrian's flocked to the streets after noon prayers on Friday. At least thiry-two were killed across the country, with hundreds more injured. The Damascus suburb of Doumas saw the worst of it. In the nine months of protests the United Nations estimates that over five thousand protestors have been killed by the Syrian government.
Currently Arab League observers are in Syria, but even members of their group have stated they do not think they will be successful in determining if Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is actually trying to find a peaceful solution. Syrian freedom activists say that the government has not tried at all.
Around the world, governments have verbally condemned the actions of al-Assad's government, but where is the outcry that met less death in Libya? By the time hundreds had died in Libya, the world was calling for Muammar Qaddafi to resign and leave the country, and when he didn't they used military force to aid the rebels in defeating him. Yet with Syria, the world seems content to ask President al-Assad to find a peaceful end to the protests.
What is the difference you might ask? Why does the world not step in as they did before and end this violence? How are Libya's people worth more than Syria's? Sadly it comes down to one simple answer, oil. Libya supplied and transported oil for the western world, especially Europe. Where as Syria, does not. Now if this was Kuwait action would've already been taken to ensure that there was no violence anywhere near the oil.
Syria is a true humanitarian crisis. Yet other than mentions does not seem to gather any sympathy from the world. Something more than saying "bad al-Assad" must be done. But what? Troops on the ground is not an answer. Nor are airstrikes really. But the world truly can not just sit back and watch as the Syrian people are brutalized and massacred by their government. The time has come for action that hurts the government, but not the people of Syria.
Will the world leaders of the United Nations, Arab League, European Union, Russia, China, and the United States have the guts to do it?

Advantages of Bringing In-N-Out to Denver

If you've ever been to Southern California, you've likely enjoyed an In-N-Out burger. Over the last decades, they've expanded into Arizona, Nevada, Utah, and Texas. You may have even traveled out of your way to hit one of the locations. I know I have added an hour or so to a trip for a burger and shake there.
Recently it was announced that Denver city councilman, Albus Brooks, is working with In-N-Out to bring them to Denver and other parts of Colorado. Some have come out against the idea complaining that we should stick to the local burger places and keep Colorado for Colorado. But the overwhelming majority support this idea in full. There really are many great benefits for Colorado to get In-N-Out to open stores in the state.
The most obvious of the benefits would be the great quality and taste of the restaurants. Yes it is fast food, but everything is fresh, never frozen. As the company's slogan says "Quality you can taste". The official menu is quite simple, but for those who desire there is a "secret" menu to be had.
Secondly, as those of us who live in Denver know, there really aren't that great of burgers to be had here. O some will argue for one place or another, but let's face it, if they really were that great everyone would know of them (If you're one of those, tell me where and I will gladly come try it). Truly our best hope has been another California chain, Fatburger, which has a couple locations in the metro. Other than that we really only have places like Red Robin and McDonald's to rely on for our burgers. So basically here we have a large city without great burgers. Anyone else see the demand for In-N-Out here? Remember the insane lines when Krispy Kreme opened at Park Meadows? In-N-Out would make that look like nothing.
The most important benefit of In-N-Out coming to Colorado would be the economics. They would create jobs, at their stores and distribution center. And good paying ones with benefits. This is not a company that gives minimum wage and that's it. They truly take care of their employees. And more importantly to the rest of the state, the fact that the company uses everything fresh means they would be buying their food supplies from local companies, who with the increased demand might be able to grow and expand themselves. Just one In-N-Out could literally mean hundreds of thousands more dollars being spent in state, each year. Imagine what a dozen or more locations could mean.
I truly can not think of an actual negative to In-N-Out expanding to Denver, the front range, and the rest of Colorado. There is nothing but win in such an arrangement.

The Strait of Hormuz

After the United States and European Union increased (as well as threatened even more) sanctions against Iran for it's continued work towards becoming a country with nuclear weapons, as well as other incidents (like the storming of the British embassy), Iran threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz. For those unaware the Strait is where a sixth or more of the world's oil travels through on it's way to western markets, fifteen million gallons every single day. Parviz Sarvari, a member of the Iranian parliament was quoted by Iranian media as saying “soon we will hold a military maneuver to the Strait of Hormuz. If the world wants to make the region insecure, we will make the world insecure." Clearly no misunderstanding there, or friendliness for that matter.
In various times in the past the United States has made it clear that such an action would be "an act of war". Has the Iranian government been pushed to the point of 1941 Japan? Where no more shall be taken from the westerners. Is war the only response left?
Many would not be upset by such. Since Iran has refused to back off it's attempts towards nuclear armament, more and more have called for some sort of military action to ensure Iran does not join the ranks of nuclear powers. Various mishaps, deaths, and explosions have led some to believe that it has already unofficially started.
Troubling is the near silence from Washington this time. In fact the main response has been from the US 5th Fleet, which is based in Bahrain, not far to the west. The 5th, clearly stated that any such action would not be tolerated and well within the means of the fleet to deal with.
This brings forth questioning of Washington's power and ability to control. Is the Obama administration afraid to back up our own policies and ensure that the world will not be held powerless by the terrorism of Iran's threats? And if that is so, are the leaders of the American military willing and prepared to strike out on their own to protect American and world interests?
Dangerous questions coming about in dangerous times.
Who will back down or stand up first? Iran, Obama, or the US military? Or will some one else take the center stage and ensure access to oil for the world? China has been wanting to show off it's new carrier and stealth fighter, maybe they'll be the ones to not only force Iran to back down, but also to one up Obama who has been maneuvering the United States into a cold war with them. Either all parties will back down or someone will emerge the winner. The answer to that could very likely decide the power balance of the world for the next few years if not longer.

The Latest From Mexico and The Drug War

Well at least we can see that the Mexican government is taking the drug war a little more seriously. As of today they disbanded the entire nine hundred person Veracruz-Boca Del Rio police force. No small measure there. Since they don't know who the corrupt cops are, they're getting rid of every single one of them and having the Mexican Navy take over law enforcement for the area. Former members of the police force can rejoin, after passing a series of loyalty tests. Would be interesting to find out what that involves.

The slashing attempt to curb corruption comes in answer to sixty-seven bodies being found in four sites, in the area, thought to be the scenes of a major battle between two of the largest drug gangs. This isn't the first area where Mexican armed forces or federal police have taken over, but the largest to this point.

Quite an interesting and bold statement by the Mexican government, it is inspiring to actually see a government making steps towards ending this major issue, which effects a good portion, if not all, of North America. And the question still remains will they ever be able to stem the flow?

The United States has been seen to do less and less under the Obama administration. That administration has definitely done nothing visible to increase help against the cartels. At least to public view, they seem to have stopped caring about that war, and even ignored drug gang's encroachment into US territory.

One thing is for sure, Mexico's job would be made easier if a certain person named Holder would not have been supplying the drug cartels with guns and ammunition. We can only hope that Holder and anyone else who was responsible for that be held accountable for not just crimes against the United States and Mexico, but literally war crimes against humanity.

For now though, good move Mexico! Proud to see someone working on the problem facing us all.

Passing of Kim Jong Il

At the age of 69, Kim Jong Il has died. The 'Dear Leader' of the Communist nation had ruled since 1994 when his father had died. Apparently he died on a train Saturday, with the North Korean government taking the time in between to strengthen it's grasp and avoid any riot or such. Kim Jong Il, leaves a greatly impoverished country, that has a military over one million strong.
His leadership caused former President George W. Bush to list North Korea as part of the 'axis of evil'. Definitely one of the worst dictators of this century, he will very unlikely be missed in the world.
At the news of his death South Korea went on high alert, whilst their government and that of Japan went into emergency meetings. His expected successor is his third son, Kimg Jong Un, of which little is really known. Un, was not even really seen until the last couple years as he was brought to the forefront and given the rank equivalent to that of a four star general. He is thought to have studied computer sciences. Much of the next while will depend on him, and how he takes the reins of power.
Will he lead the people in the footsteps of his father and grandfather? Will he attempt to lead them out of the darkness of communism towards a more free state? Will he aim for somewhere inbetween, more in the lines of China? Or will he even be the one to make the decisions?
Only time will tell, and the next few days in North Korea will be crucial in the telling.

Where's The Freedom?

The United States Senate has passed the "indefinite detention" bill, which had already cleared the House of Representatives. This bill allows for the US government to hold anyone, no matter their citizenry, indefinitely without trial. All the govenment has to do is accuse them, without proof, of being a terrorist.
That should really worry you!
Already some in the Obama administration have labeled the Tea Party movement as terrorists. The Occupy movement, has also been called such. Comparing them isn't really fair to either, as they stabd for completely different things and are on totally different levels of intelligence and organization, but they now could legally be grouped as one and the same.
The government now has the ability to lock away someone from either of those groups, or any other, forever without ever going to trial, just because they felt like it.
There is no longer the protection of an American citizen's right to a trial of their peers. There is no longer even a guaranteed tiral.
How easy for the government to label anyone who publically disagrees with it, or even annoys it in any way, as a terrorist just to get rid of the problem?
The guy who cut me off on the way home from work, definitely a jerk, but if I was in the government all I need to do is brand him terrorist and he's never heard from again. Now there's some road rage.
That was am extreme example, but it is something that is totally legal now that the bill has passed. All it takes is Obama's signature and it's official.
Where's the freedom, America? We're losing it, and now could realistically lose our freedom fighting for it. We are beyond trying to maintain our freedoms, now we have to fight to get them back. If the fight isn't brought to them soon, then eventually we'll have to sacrifice lives to get it back.

Welcome to America, Occupy

Remember when Occupy was just an annoying distraction? Ah the good ole days.
Now instead of just "peacefully" trashing parks, they've gone on a move to disrupt even more of the working American's lives. Today they moved into being "Occupy Walmart". Parks were one thing, but this is where millions of Americans work, let alone shop and take their kids.
Many people like to take shots at Walmart and "the people of Walmart", but the company is about as American as you can get. It believes in the free market system, the people who work for it, and giving back to the communities. O no one can deny that Sam Walton's kids are ridiculously well off. But Walmart and Sam's Club stores give back hundreds of thousands each to charities, medical foundations, and other community helpers in their areas.
And this is now the company that they've chosen to protest. Once again they've chosen to protest a lot of what makes America great, rather than the actual problems that sit in Washington.
But all that you my readers know, as you're intelligent Americans unlike the occupiers.
I really wanted to hit on some highlights of the attempt by Occupy to block a Walmart distribution center in Loveland, Colorado.
This was apparently organized by Occupy Denver, but led by a member of Occupy Oakland. You may remember Occupy Oakland as the ones who keep trying to shut down the port there, and cause other forms of general mayham like rape and murder. The arrests have definitely increased with 13 of 50 Occupiers taken into custody for blocking Walmart trucks from entering and leaving the center.
Out of today at Loveland, came my (at least so far in the movement) all time favourite quote from Occupy: "I'm out here for fairness for all people of this country," said Loveland resident Carla Massaro. "Corporations are not people. I have a sign on my car that says, 'I refuse to believe corporations are people until Texas executes one.'" Wait! Did Occupy just say they're pro death penalty?
But my definite all time favourite moment was that whilst the Loveland police sent out their SWAT, the Larimer County Sheriff sent the Posse. Was great seeing the Occupiers met by horses ridden by cowboys with long mustaches. Welcome to America!
Also very proud of the police who were there. Even one protestor that was arrested commented on how polite and nice the officers that arrested him were.

Who to Support in 2012?

All in all there are currently 23 candidates officially running for President of The United States of America. Some of them you'll never have heard of. And they're from all over the political center, with a few exceptions to the wings.
As things get close to the primaries, we face some crucial challenges. None of the three leading Republican candidates are really that conservative. Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are both only partially conservatives, whilst Ron Paul's answer to our problems is basically to burn everything down (part of which is turning our back on all our allies including Israel) and then see where we can get. Sadly there does not seem to be anyone who has enough backing to win and who is actually conservative and would move forward to help the country recover and improve. None are actually good choices, but they might at least be improvements over Barack Obama.
To add to it, possibly major players Mike Huckabee and Donald Trump have both threatened to run as third party, independent candidates. O, and the ever humble Ron Paul has as well.
Most if not all of the runners who continue on as third party candidates will take votes away from the Republican candidate.
Rumors of Hilary Clinton running against Obama are making the rounds again, but not likely to bear fruit this late in the game. She is the only one who could really take a chunk out of the Democrat votes.
So we're back to facing internal conservative battles as the truest threat in 2012.
As conservatives how do we choose between Romney, whose Romneycare was the basis for a lot of Obamacare; Gingrich, who is politically and morally ambiguous; and Paul, who whilst likely being the most honest politician ever is...well just scary?
Romney simply isn't conservative, he says things that are, but his growth of government control shows his true colours. And how much the main stream media protects him is disturbing as well.
Paul, well his idea of balancing things is to start at zero, which is totally a bad idea and about as destructive (if not as much (or maybe even more so)) as Obama's growing the government as quickly as possible. Starting at zero reeks of anarchy, rather than the Republic we are supposed to be.
Which leaves us with Gingrich. And that about says it, he's the lesser of the evils. Of the three leading Republican candidates he is most inline with conservatism. He is the least threatening to our freedoms and safety, and the most likely to actually get us on the road to recovery. In no way is he the "perfect candidate", but no one ever will be.
So of the three I choose Gingrich. But no matter what, in the end we must remember to Hang Together or Separately, our nation is at stake.

Winning a Cold War With China

As mentioned yesterday, Obama seems intent on beginning a cold war with China. Whether it be with statements that, "the United States is a Pacific power, and we are here to stay."; the deployment of extra troops to Australia; or the gifting of twenty-five F 16 fighters to Indonesia the Obama administration seems determined to build up US, allied, and "friendly" strength in a wall of power around China.

But can the US win a cold war with China in the same way it did with the Soviet Union, through pure military build up?  With the Soviet Russia, the American economy was truly the main force behind the conflict that the USSR just could not keep up with let alone match. But the Chinese economy does rival the US one. In fact many of the key components to US military weaponry are made in China, so an economic war would be disastrous for America.

The focus needs to shift then. Before the USA can even begin to contemplate battling China, they must first build up their own struggling economy. Products must be manufactured in the states, ending the dependence on foreign corporations. "Drill here, drill now" must be joined by "Private sector Jobs here, private sector jobs now" and "Build it here, build it now". If this was accomplished the United States' economy would be once again strengthened and could get back to being unrivaled in the world. Only then could America even hope to win this new conflict.

Except we live in the world of Obama's Hope and Change, where reality takes a back seat as we are driven at extreme recklessness across the bridge to nowhere. In Obama's world giving our military technology away is a good idea. In the Nobel peace prize winner's mind a few marines (why 250 not 300?) will stop the millions of Chinese, should they ever try to do something. In this President's head, we are still the un crippled United States of America that no one messes with, because we can not only take them on, but all their friends with them.

It's time to wake up and realize the situation. Reality does not go away if you just ignore it. As much as we do need to protect ourselves from increased Chinese influence we need to start doing that by rebuilding ourselves at home first. And to do that, we must elect a President who won't bow to other governments. A President who's allegiance is to the Flag of the United States of America and to The Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Only then can we worry about a cold war with China.

F16s to Indonesia

In case you missed it, we are now giving F-16s to Indonesia. Yes, not selling, but giving 25 of our fighters. To a quote unquote friendly nation. Yes, Indonesia is one of the more powerful nations in that part of the world, and strategically key due to its location, since we seem to be beginning a cold war with China. But, it is one of the most unstable governments in the area as well, constantly fighting rebels and separatists. The country is also a haven for terrorists, including Al Qaeda, who last I checked we were still at war with.
So lets repeat, we are gifting F 16s to an unstable government, who is only semi friendly, that harbours (or at least doesn't fight to get rid of) terrorist organizations that are currently at war with The United States of America. What could go wrong?
If we are serious about giving away military tech (that may be old for us, but is still beyond top of the line for most countries) how about we give it to a proven friend, that's stable, and helping us fight the war on terror? But that would be intelligent, and the administration again and again shows it is not that.
The only real possible benefit to this is the increased presence around China, but does any really thinking Indonesia would get involved if the situation actually went to war? No, they'll stay out of it, then back the winner.
At the very least we could've sold the jets to them, then we'd at least have gotten something out of it. We are facing a bad economy aren't we? O it wouldn't have solved it or anything, but when refurbishing the engines costs up to $30 million a plane, you know we could've made a few billion easy.
So President Obama and Secretary Clinton, what real benefit was there to handing over our technology to a place that will likely lose it all too quickly to our enemies? I'd love to hear about it or see it.
Lets face it, this at best another blunder by the administration, if not a complete failure. Hopefully our troops will never be shot at with these planes, but I'm sure the tech will lead to something new being shot at them.


Update: This article was picked up by Landmark Report.