Could the four American Deaths in Libya have been prevented?

It's looking more and more like the answer is "yes":

Revealed: inside story of US envoy's assassination

The killings of the US ambassador to Libya and three of his staff were likely to have been the result of a serious and continuing security breach, The Independent can reveal.

American officials believe the attack was planned, but Chris Stevens had been back in the country only a short while and the details of his visit to Benghazi, where he and his staff died, were meant to be confidential.

The US administration is now facing a crisis in Libya. Sensitive documents have gone missing from the consulate in Benghazi and the supposedly secret location of the "safe house" in the city, where the staff had retreated, came under sustained mortar attack. Other such refuges across the country are no longer deemed "safe".

Some of the missing papers from the consulate are said to list names of Libyans who are working with Americans, putting them potentially at risk from extremist groups, while some of the other documents are said to relate to oil contracts.

According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and "lockdown", under which movement is severely restricted.

Mr Stevens had been on a visit to Germany, Austria and Sweden and had just returned to Libya when the Benghazi trip took place with the US embassy's security staff deciding that the trip could be undertaken safely.

Eight Americans, some from the military, were wounded in the attack which claimed the lives of Mr Stevens, Sean Smith, an information officer, and two US Marines. All staff from Benghazi have now been moved to the capital, Tripoli, and those whose work is deemed to be non-essential may be flown out of Libya. [...]

Wouldn't the embassy's security staff have decided differently, had they been given the benefit of earlier mentioned intelligence information? Someone dropped the ball.

The UK's Daily Mail has some pretty dramatic photos of the continuing Middle East rioting.

     

A sneak preview of our own future?

The London Riots? Lets hope not, although there are many uncomfortable parallels. Is it just a mater of degree at this point? See what you think:

Thomas Sowell, Social Degeneration

Someone at long last has had the courage to tell the plain, honest truth about race.

After mobs of young blacks rampaged through Philadelphia committing violence -- as similar mobs have rampaged through Chicago, Denver, Milwaukee and other places -- Philadelphia's black mayor, Michael A. Nutter, ordered a police crackdown and lashed out at the whole lifestyle of those who did such things.

"Pull up your pants and buy a belt 'cause no one wants to see your underwear or the crack of your butt," he said. "If you walk into somebody's office with your hair uncombed and a pick in the back, and your shoes untied, and your pants half down, tattoos up and down your arms and on your neck, and you wonder why somebody won't hire you? They don't hire you 'cause you look like you're crazy," the mayor said. He added: "You have damaged your own race."

While this might seem like it is just plain common sense, what Mayor Nutter said undermines a whole vision of the world that has brought fame, fortune and power to race hustlers in politics, the media and academia.

[...]

In the United States, despite the higher poverty level among blacks than among whites, the poverty rate among black married couples has been in single digits since 1994. The disparities within the black community are huge, both in behavior and in outcomes.

Nevertheless, the dogma persists that differences between groups can only be due to the way others treat them or to differences in the way others perceive them in "stereotypes."

All around the country, people in politics and the media have been tip-toeing around the fact that violent attacks by blacks on whites in public places are racially motivated, even when the attackers themselves use anti-white invective and mock the victims they leave lying on the streets bleeding.

This is not something to ignore or excuse. It is something to be stopped. Mayor Michael Nutter of Philadelphia seems to be the first to openly recognize this.

This needs to be done for the sake of both black and white Americans -- and even for the sake of the hoodlums. They have set out on a path that leads only downward for themselves.

Thomas Sowell, Social Degeneration Part 2

Although much of the media have their antennae out to pick up anything that might be construed as racism against blacks, they resolutely ignore even the most blatant racism by blacks against others.

That includes a pattern of violent attacks on whites in public places in Chicago, Denver, New York, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Los Angeles and Kansas City, as well as blacks in schools beating up Asian classmates -- for years -- in New York and Philadelphia.

These attacks have been accompanied by explicitly racist statements by the attackers, so it is not a question of having to figure out what the motivation is. There has also been rioting and looting by these young hoodlums.

Yet blacks have no monopoly on these ugly and malicious episodes. Remarkably similar things are being done by lower-class whites in England. Anybody reading "Life at the Bottom" by Theodore Dalrymple will recognize the same barbaric and self-destructive patterns among people with the same attitudes, even though their skin color is different.

Anyone reading today's headline stories about young hoodlums turning the streets of London into scenes of shattered and burning chaos, complete with violence, will discover the down side of the brotherhood of man.

While the history and the races are different, what is the same in both countries are the social policies and social attitudes long promoted by the intelligentsia and welfare state politicians.

A recent study in England found 352,000 households in which nobody had ever worked. Moreover, two-thirds of the adults in those households said that they didn't want to work. As in America, such people feel both "entitled" and aggrieved.

In both countries, those who have achieved less have been taught by the educational system, by the media and by politicians on the left that they have a grievance against those who have achieved more. As in the United States, they feel a fierce sense of resentment against strangers who have done nothing to them, and lash out violently against those strangers.

During the riots, looting and violence in England, a young woman was quoted as saying that this showed "the rich" and the police that "we can do whatever we want." Among the things done during these riots was forcing apparently prosperous looking people to strip naked in the streets. [...]

Thomas Sowell, Social Degeneration: Part 3

[...] With all the damage that was done by these rioters, both to cities and to the whole fabric of British society, it is very unlikely that most of the people who were arrested will be sentenced to jail. Only 7 percent of people convicted of crime in England are actually put behind bars.

"Alternatives to incarceration" are in vogue among the politically correct elites in England, just as in the United States. But in Britain those elites have had much more clout for a much longer time. And they have done much more damage.

Nevertheless, our own politically correct elites are pointing us in the same direction. A headline in the New York Times shows the same politically correct mindset in the United States: "London Riots Put Spotlight on Troubled, Unemployed Youths in Britain." There is not a speck of evidence that the rioters and looters are troubled -- unless you engage in circular reasoning and say that they must have been troubled to do the things they did.

In reality, like other rioters on both sides of the Atlantic they are often exultant in their violence and happy to be returning home with stolen designer clothes and upscale electronic devices.

In both England and in the United States, whole generations have been fed a steady diet of grievances and resentment against society, and especially against others who are more prosperous than they are. They get this in their schools, on television, on campuses and in the movies. Nothing is their own fault. It is all "society's" fault. [...]

Read'em all. We are often told by the elites, that we need to learn from other countries how to do things better. Sowell ends up saying that in this case, perhaps we need to learn what NOT to do, to learn from their mistakes.
     

Is crime easy and risk-free in Great Britain?

So it might seem. This explains a lot:


Crime Is Easy

Maybe there is a simple explanation for the riots. In Great-Britain crime is easy and almost risk-free.

In his startling book ‘A Land fit for Criminals’ insider David Fraser demonstrates it with figures and facts.

Detection rate of crimes is 5 per cent. Of these cases only 2 per cent are processed in court. Only a mere 0.3 per cent of all crimes result in prison sentence. Offenders deem themselves untouchable. Fines are seldom paid. In 2002 it was reported that tens of millions of pounds in unpaid fines were written off.

Even persistent offenders with a long record of previous convictions and a complete lack of motivation to reform are granted probation and put back in the community.

The evidence shows that for them this means business as usual. The reconviction rate for all male offenders in 61 per cent; for offenders given community service 67 per cent.

‘Offenders are not corrupted by prison but by the unchallenged success of their criminality’, concludes Fraser, who served in the National Probation Service for twenty-six years, and was an analyst with the National Criminal Intelligence Service.

He blames the criminal justice system for putting consideration for the criminal first and the safety of the public second: ‘The bizarre fact is that all governments since the sixties have gone out of their way to introduce policies that have encouraged criminals to become more criminal. Numerous obstacles have been placed in the way of finding, arresting and convincing them.’ [...]

If you have read this far, then you've already read more than half the article. But read the rest, it's just as shocking.


Also see:  Can political correctness destroy a nation?
     

Related Links:

Political Correctness — The Revenge of Marxism

Did Tony Blair advance a "Culture of Lies"?

What is the Nature of Multiculturalism?

Our Culture, What’s Left Of It


About British gun laws:

England and Gun Control --- Moral Decline of an Empire

RESULTS ARE IN ON BRITISH GUN LAWS

Britain’s Gun-Control Folly
         

British Police Officer Blogs about the Riots

On the front line of the riots with the police

I have worked every night and every day this week. Since last Saturday, when I was on the streets of Tottenham in north London in the early hours as rioting and looting broke out, through to the early hours of yesterday morning. I have clocked up around 125 hours, too many of them being pelted by stones, petrol bombs and, in one case, in the chaos of it all, by a 4ft ornamental palm tree.

All that has sustained me has been a few hours of snatched sleep between shifts, plenty of tea, the occasional packet of Haribo sweets to provide a much-needed energy burst – and an unshakeable belief, shared with my fellow officers, that I have a responsibility for the safety of my colleagues, and for the decent, law-abiding majority of the community here in London where I live.

I am in my mid-30s and have been a police officer for 15 years, most recently in plain clothes, doing surveillance. I am also in the Territorial Army and have seen service in Iraq. So I thought I’d witnessed most things in the course of my career. I was on duty at the G20 demonstrations in London in 2009, for example. But nothing prepared me for what I experienced on the front line this week.

I last saw looting in Iraq, in the aftermath of the toppling of Saddam Hussein – but now, unimaginably, it was happening on the streets of London and other cities in the UK. On Monday night I was sent to Ealing, in the west of the capital, where I used to live. When I saw the wanton destruction of restaurants where I had eaten, or the barber’s shop where I would have my hair cut, the full horrific scale of what was happening hit home.

There have been so many things this week I thought I’d never see in London. Perhaps the most shocking sight was of children as young as 10 and 11 – small boys about 5ft tall – attacking police officers. I grew up in the countryside and was taught to respect the police. When, as a teenager, I was involved in a minor misdemeanour, the local bobby told me to apologise to the person I’d wronged, took me home and told my parents what I’d done. I never stepped out of line again. Sadly, there was no possibility of copying his tactics with the lawless children throwing stones at us this week.

It was a small child who shouted perhaps the strangest bit of abuse at me. [...]

Read the whole thing.

In countries like Egypt, Libya, Syria, Iran and others, the people are rebelling against REAL oppression; and they aren't burning down and looting their own neighborhoods, or attacking and killing their fellow citizens.

I've read far too much excuse making for the Brit rioters. Why are they doing it? Because they can. Crime is easy, and almost risk free. And why is that so? I suspect it has a lot to do with The mental illness masquerading as Marxism
     

Tottenham, and Riots and Geomagnetic Storms.

I've posted before about Geomagnetic storms/solar flares and riots. Coincidentally, the recent riots in Tottenham seem to coincide with this weekends solar weather:

BIG SUNSPOT GETS BIGGER; WEEKEND AURORAS; NIGHT-TIME SOLAR RADIO BURST

BIG SUNSPOT GETS BIGGER: Behemoth sunspot 1263 has almost doubled in size this weekend. A 28-hour movie from NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory shows the spot developing a tail that has added some 50,000 km of length to the active region. This development may increase the likelihood of a strong flare. Images: #1, #2, #3

WEEKEND AURORAS: A widespread display of auroras erupted late Friday, Aug. 5th, when a double-CME hit Earth's magnetic field and sparked a G4-category geomagnetic storm. "It was the most impressive display I've seen in years," reports Lance Taylor of Edmonton, Alberta. "From 10:00 PM on Friday to 3:00 AM on Saturday, the sky was pulsing from horizon to horizon in every direction." He took this picture during the most intense phase of the storm:



The show was not restricted to Canada. Northern Lights spilled across the border into the United States as far south as Utah, Colorado, and Nebraska. (Note: The faint red lights photographed in Nebraska are typical of low-latitude auroras during major geomagnetic storms.) Observers in Europe as far south as England, Germany and Poland also witnessed a fine display. Browse the gallery for more examples. [...]

Follow the link to the original article, which has many embedded links, and for information about the night-time solar radio burst, which has not happened since 1958.
     

100,000 march in Tehran to protest election fraud

Huge pro-reform rally defies crackdown threats

TEHRAN, Iran – More than 100,000 opponents of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad defied an Interior Ministry ban Monday and streamed into central Tehran to cheer their pro-reform leader in his first public appearance since elections that he alleges were marred by fraud.

[...]

The unrest also risked bringing splits among Iran's clerical elite, including some influential Shiite scholars raising concern about possible election irregularities and at least one member of the ruling theocracy, former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, openly critical of Ahmadinejad in the campaign.

[...]

Overnight, police and hard-line militia stormed the campus at the city's biggest university, ransacking dormitories and arresting dozens of students angry over what they say was mass election fraud.

The nighttime gathering of about 3,000 students at dormitories of Tehran University started with students chanting "Death to the dictator." But it quickly erupted into clashes as students threw rocks and Molotov cocktails at police, who fought back with tear gas and plastic bullets, a 25-year-old student who witnessed the fighting told The Associated Press. He would only give one name, Akbar, out of fears for his safety.

The students set a truck and other vehicles on fire and hurled stones and bricks at the police, he said. Hard-line militia volunteers loyal to the Revolutionary Guard stormed the dormitories, ransacking student rooms and smashing computers and furniture with axes and wooden sticks, Akbar said.

Before leaving around 4 a.m., the police took away memory cards and computer software material, Akbar said, adding that dozens of students were arrested.

[...]

After dark Sunday, Ahmadinejad opponents shouted their opposition from Tehran's rooftops. Cries of "Death to the dictator!" and "Allahu akbar!" — "God is great!" — echoed across the capital. The protest bore deep historic resonance — it was how the leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini asked Iran to unite against the Western-backed shah 30 years earlier. [...]

Attacks and brutal beatings of protesters continue. Foreign journalists who are there to cover the election are supposed to leave today. It's predicted the crackdown on protesters will worsen when the press is gone.

The government is promising an investigation of the voting process, claiming it will take 10 days. Most likely they are stalling for time. They made the same claim in 2005, that they would "investigate" voter fraud, in order to quiet protesters. The results of that investigation were never made public; it was just a ruse.

Will it happen like that again this time? If they can get away with it, probably yes, but it will cost them. The seething resentment and unrest will still be there, and it will have long term consequences if not addressed.


The ironic thing is, Moussavi, the main opposition leader, is a conservative. He's a former prime minister, not a radical outsider, but an insider; one of their own. Yet they feel he is a threat? What does that say about the rulers of Iran? Here is some commentary on the subject:

Commentary: Iran's hardliners are the real losers

(CNN) -- With an apparent political coup in Iran by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his supporters over the weekend, the ruling mullahs have dispensed with all democratic pretense and joined the ranks of traditional dictators in the Middle East.

The hardliners in Tehran, led by the Revolutionary Guards and ultra-conservatives, have won the first round against reformist conservatives but at an extravagant cost -- loss of public support.

[...]

Moussavi's warning to the mullahs that stealing the election would weaken the very foundation of their regime and ultimately bring about its collapse carries weight because he has been part of the political inner circle of the Islamic Republic, not an outsider.

Moussavi is a former prime minister admired for the way he managed the country's economy during the prolonged and bloody Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, a conflict which cost Iran over $500 billion.

He worked closely with Ali Khamenei, then Iran's president and today supreme leader, and clashed with him over political authority and powers. Moussavi is a member of Iran's Expediency Council, which mediates between the parliament and the non-elected Guardian Council led by Ayatollah Khamenei.

Initially, many reformists were skeptical about Moussavi's reform credentials and feared that he was too conservative for their taste.

Throughout the presidential campaign, Moussavi labored hard to portray his proposals on social policy and foreign affairs as an extension of the Islamic system in order to disarm conservative critics, even denying that he is a mainstream reformist candidate in the hope of winning the support of reformers and moderate conservatives.

Indeed, as the presidential campaign progressed, Moussavi won the backing not only of an important conservative segment of the electorate but also the formidable youth constituency. His charismatic wife, Zahra Rahnavard, electrified the female vote and won the hearts and minds of women voters who flooded their campaign rallies.

In the last two weeks, Moussavi's campaign gained momentum. There was increasing evidence that the tide was turning and that women and young voters would tip the balance of power his way, if they turned out to vote in large numbers.

[...]

But the disputed result shows that the ultraconservative mullahs are not only out of touch with a plurality of their citizens but also with reality. Their conduct reflects a deeper crisis of self-confidence and fear of the future.

Has the Islamic revolution run out of ideological steam?

If the mullahs fear Moussavi, a loyalist, they must be scared of their shadows and uncertain about their authority and power. That speaks volumes about where the Islamic Republic is and where it is heading.

The mullahs are swimming against the dominant current of Iranian society. In the next four years, Iran will likely be engulfed in social and political turmoil unless the electoral crisis is resolved in a transparent manner.

Moussavi is so conservative, that I've had doubts that electing him would even be a good thing for the West. After all, wouldn't he just be a "cover" for the same crazy Mullahs that support Amadinejad? Would he?

If there is a split or division among Iran's ruling elite, what could it mean?

This article is interesting, though the author, posting from within Iran, is anonymous for security reasons:

The street protests mount
A fresh report from the Iranian capital. The government uses machetes on the public, the public fights back.

[...] On buses and in taxes you hear voices saying, with resignation, "What's the point? They're all the same. Why fight it?" But then every night and even during the day clashes are occurring. This week will be critical. If the conflict can be sustained, if the pressure can be sustained ---Tehran is coming to a standstill -- then it is possible that the situation will enter a new phase.

Either way, have no doubt, the IRI, the Islamic Republic of Iran, is over. A leading cleric has already announced that we are no longer ruled by the Islamic "Republic" (jomhuri e Islami) but the Islamic government (hookoomat e Islami). Whether now or in a few months or years, the game is over.

I attended the Vali Asr demonstration of support for Dr. Ahmadinejad yesterday afternoon. The turnout was impressive, mostly families and obviously religious types (called "momen" in Farsi). Many asked that I take their pictures and the mood was festive, defiant. They were chanting, but it is critical to note that only some of the chants were against Mousavi. Almost all were directed against Rafsanjani. He is seen as the big threat. This election and its aftermath is turning out to be the climax of an outstanding feud between Rafsanjani and Ahmadinejad in alliance with the Supreme Leader, Khamanei. What will be interesting is to see what Rafsanjani does next. He is regularly described as the "power behind the power," the man with real pull in Iran. What will he do?

[...]

Finally, and this may be the most important piece of news, I personally heard "Marq bar Khamanei" (death or down with Supreme Leader Ali Khamanei) said quickly and once last night. Someone in the neighborhood reported that it was said more than once. If true, and I don't know if it is, this marks a significant turning point. Up until now the chants had been "Marq bar dictator," with dictator meaning Ahmadinejad. To chant against the Supreme Leader is an incredible taboo. In 1979, everyone wanted the Shah to fall, but no one believed that is was thinkable. Then, for some reason, it became so. The movement reached a moment of viability. While this did not guarantee the revolution's success, it was a necessary condition for events to move forward. Has the same happened now in Iran?

The 1979 Revolution, once in motion, took months to play out, but inside of it no knew what was exactly happening. They didn’t know long it would take, or whether there would be a successful conclusion. The same applies to the situation now.

Is there some sort of critical mass dynamic at work here, that is now coming to a head? Are big changes imminent? Time will tell.
     

The Young Iranian's are Fighting Back...

The students actually capture this policeman. Follow the links for many more dramatic photos and commentary. I got the photo's from here:

Its Time to Fight Back

This is Street Justice!

The above links are from the blog of an Iranian expatriate, Azarmehr. I will be checking his blog for updates, the link to the main page of his blog is here:

For a democratic secular Iran. For peace and prosperity in the Middle East.

I expect the Iranian Theocracy is going to crack down on this rebellion and try to squash it, the same way the Chinese crushed the Tiananmen Square rebellion.

I wouldn't feel too sorry for the captured policeman in the photos. Look at what the police goons did to students in June of 2007:

The can's this guy is being forced to suck on are used in toilets. His crime? Wearing Western style hair and clothes.

Note the Iranian News logo on the photos. The government wanted these photos to be seen in the local press, to intimidate the populace.



And remember the Iranian Police publicly bludgeoning women:







All of this, with high unemployment, a rampant illegal drug problem, a housing shortage, shortages of gas and essential goods, and the much talked about marriage crisis in Iran. Is it any wonder the current Iranian government has a rebellion on their hands? There is a large majority of youth in Iran (35% of the population) with no future prospects. No matter how hard the government cracks down, the demographics are working against them. Their economic problems are so severe they make our own look like nothing. They keep hanging more and more people just to silence the dissent.

I fear this is why they are working so hard to quickly acquire nuclear weapons; they have not the means to solve their internal problems and retain power, so they need nuclear weapons so they can acquire other resources from their neighbors, by force. (See "Iran's pressing needs and Iraq's vulnerability")

The great irony in all this is that the current Iranian Theocracy was swept to power in a student revolution. Now students are revolting against them. Will these students have any help from the West?


Related Links:

Ahmadinejad brushes off Iran election violence

The Power Behind Ahmadinejad's Disputed Win: Ayatullah Khamenei

Reformist Azeri Couple Challenge Iran's Amadinejad in Upcoming June Elections
     

What would a U.S. currency collapse look like?

Since the '70's, our government has steadily been printing more money:


This graph in a recent post by Pat (Inflation and our "funny money" supply) is startling in it's implications. Neither Republicans nor Democrats have done anything to stop the devaluing of our currency since the 1970's. In fact, they all have been printing even more money and devaluing it even further. When will it stop? Will it stop? And if it doesn't stop? Where will it lead us?



I've been reading a book called "PATRIOTS: surviving the coming collapse. It's a novel, in which a severe economic meltdown in the USA takes place. It was the description of the understated "crunch", the economic collapse when the dollar fails, that really gave me the creeps. What would the collapse of the American dollar actually look like?

The story starts with the US having 19 trillion dollars of debt, with interest on the national debt consuming 96% of government revenue. Most of it is "off budget", like the debts for the Iraq war, but it's still national debt. There is still interest to pay on it.

Ok, at this point you might say, "19 TRILLION DOLLARS of debt? No way, it could never happen." I would hope it wouldn't. But if you told me 10 years ago that we would even be talking about trillions of dollars of debt today, I would have said "No way, our government would never be that irresponsible". Yet, here we are. And our government has been taking debt "off budget", and borrowing from Peter to pay Paul. If they think it's ok to run debt up another 1 trillion, or 3 trillion... once you say it's alright to go down that road, then where does it stop? How much is too much?

In the story, European bankers start to express doubt that the US government can make the interest payments on it's growing debt, with serious results: foreign central banks and international monetary authorities began to dump their trillions of dollars in U.S. Treasuries. Foreign investors begin liquidating their U.S. paper assets.

The value of the dollar plummets. Businesses fail. Unemployment goes to 20% and higher. Ultimately it leads to a stock market collapse, and domestic runs on U.S. banks begin. Like in the Great Depression of the 1930's long lines of people form at the banks, wanting to withdraw all of their money. But unlike the 1930's, this time there is the promise of FDIC, "All deposits insured to $100,000." But the only way to let everyone withdraw their money, is to print even more money. This leads to hyper-inflation; the more money the government prints, the less it's worth. Think of Zimbabwe as a recent example.

In the novel, the government can't stop the inflation unless they stop printing money, but they can't stop printing more, because people are demanding their FDIC protected cash. With the resulting hyper inflation, soon a can of beans costs $150.00.

Now this is, to me, where the story really gets scary. I figured that if a 1930's type "depression" happened, it would be bad, but we would all somehow muddle through it, just as we had in the 1930's. But there are some significant differences between then and now.

In the 1930's, the government hadn't over-borrowed and raked up trillions of dollars in debt. In the 1930's, roughly half of American families lived on farms. They may have been made poor by the Depression, but they still had means to grow their own food and scrape by.

Nowadays, the population of the United States is much larger. The majority of U.S. citizens live in cities. Only 2% of the population lives on farms anymore. The majority of Americans must buy their food at stores. Think what would happen if they could no longer do that?

The story goes on to describe a situation where American cities are gripped with rioting and looting. The National Guard and the Army Reserve are called up to quell the rioting, but many of them don't report in, because they are staying home to protect their families.

Inner city areas are burned to the ground, and no one can stop it. Factories near cities close down "temporarily", but never open again. The Freeways that run through the cities become impassable, due to the riots, and due to fuel shortages, with people running out of gas and leaving their cars on the roads.

Most of the goods and fuel shipments in the US are transported on 18 wheel diesel trucks that use the interstate highway system. They all pass through cities. The cities become impassable, so the shipments of goods and fuel stop.

Trains pick up some of the slack, but not enough, and even they are vulnerable; mobs soon learn they can rip up the tracks to derail the trains, and loot them.

Without fuel shipments to power plants, the electrical grid begins to shut down. The few remaining factories that are operating are shut down by this, as well as the oil refineries that make our fuel. Even the refineries can't produce enough of their own electricity to keep operating, because they, like everyone else, always assumed they could count on the national power grid.

As the power grid shuts down from lack of fuel, so do the telephones, the internet, radio and TV stations. We are plunged back into the dark ages, literally. Our civil institutions and the rule of law break down completely.

THAT never happened in the 1930's.

You'll have to read the book for the complete picture the author paints. Now I grant you, the author is a survivalist. His reason for writing the novel was to use it as a vehicle to teach many of the survivalist strategies and related knowledge he has compiled, in the context of a story where such knowledge would be applied. Therefore, he has painted the bleakest picture possible, as a canvass for that story (See review in link below).

One can argue that a real crash might not be so... severe? I'm sure there are lots of variables, but the story Rawles tells is very compelling none the less. If nothing else, you have to wonder, WHERE is all this endless deficit spending leading us? The disaster described above is completely avoidable, but will we? It often seems like everyone in government is either oblivious to or unwilling to deal with the dangers of huge deficits and inflated currency.

I know that with a personal or a family budget, if you start having "off budget" debts, your finances will be headed for trouble. Government budgets are no different. We must all live within our means. The consequences of ignoring that could be too horrible.

As for this book, I have to read it in parts, and then give it a break. It's intense. I'm not really of a survivalist mind-set. I like to be an optimist, balanced with a boy-scout "be prepared" attitude. The book is full of all sorts of useful tid-bits of information, such as "how long can you store gasoline before it's no longer useful in an automobile?" (about two years, unless you add chemicals to extend it's life). But the story... argh. I don't want to go there, not even mentally.

But even worse would be to go there actually, in reality. That's why I made this post about it. Let's NOT go there.

Lest this all sounds too depressing, the author says on his website that each of us has to decide for ourselves how bad things could get, and what preparations we want to make. Fair enough.

I hesitated to make this post at all, lest it sound too grim. I'd like to just forget about it, but then I keep seeing headlines like this one today:

New Bank Bailout Could Cost $2 Trillion

Our national debt is already more than 10 trillion dollars. Where is it going to stop? It just makes me want to ring the warning bell. Forewarned is forearmed.

We should not go down this road. But if the nation does anyway, we had best keep our wits about us, try to steer for "damage control", and make preparations along the way as we think might be wise for our circumstances. And never give up hoping, praying, and affirming the best outcome.


Related Links:

Patriots: a customer review on Amazon

An Economic 9/11? A Depression? Trends...

The Federal Deficit and the American Dollar


UPDATE 07-08-10:

Has the slow portion of the collapse already begun? A case is made for it:

Has US Currency already "collapsed"?

Has our nations current financial policies accelerated the collapse process? We may see as soon as next year:

What happens when Tax Cuts Expire in 2011?

Is there anything that can be done about it? I'm not sure, but I think the November elections this year will be our last chance to vote in politicians who can deal with the reality of our present situation:

Our true national debt: $130,000,000,000,000.

November is probably our last chance to stop the runaway gravy train, before it derails.

     

What to expect from the new president of France

From John Fund at the Opinion Journal:
L'Adulte:
Can Sarkozy reform France?

Conservative Nikolas Sarkozy's comfortable victory over Socialist Ségolène Royal in France's presidential race may indicate that Europe's slowest-growing major economy is finally ready for some change.

[...]

By French standards Mr. Sarkozy is positively effusive about the need for the two countries to emphasize their points of agreement. "My dedication to our relationship with America if well known and has earned me substantial criticism in France," he said. "But let me tell you something, I'm not a coward. I embrace that friendship. I'm proud of the friendship . . . and I proclaim it proudly." He then went on to say that France's foreign policy had often suffered from an arrogant and insensitive approach, a clear reference to the haughty attitudes of retiring president Jacques Chirac and his prime minister, Dominique de Villepin.

But the clearest break that Mr. Sarkozy represents from leaders like Mr. Chirac is in his background. The son of a Hungarian immigrant, he has always been viewed as an outsider by French elites. He failed to attend the prestigious National School of Administration, where almost every leading figure in French politics, including purported populist Ségolène Royal, went.

It is difficult for Americans to appreciate just how removed from the French people the nation's bureaucratic elite is. Its arrogance is mind-boggling.

[...]

Mr. Sarkozy acknowledges he is now part of the elites of French society, but he pledges he will govern in a way that is beyond their interests. "If I'm elected," he told reporters before yesterday's balloting, "it won't be the press, the polls, the elites who chose me. It will have been the people." His clearest break with much of French elite opinion came last week when he made a dramatic speech about a "moral crisis" the nation entered in 1968, when the "moral and intellectual relativism" embodied by the 1968 student revolt that helped topple President Charles de Gaulle from power the next year. Today, many philosophers and media commentators routinely pay homage to "the élan of 1968" and lament that the revolutionary spirit of the time did not succeed in transforming bourgeois French society more than it did.

Mr. Sarkozy took on that '60s nostalgia. He labelled Ms. Royal and her supporters the descendants of the nihilists of 1968, and even appealed to France's "silent majority" to repudiate the false lessons of that period. He claimed that too many Royal backers continue to hesitate in reacting against riots by "thugs, troublemakers and fraudsters." He declared this Sunday's election would settle the "question of whether the heritage of May '68 should be perpetuated or if it should be liquidated once and for all." [...]

(bold emphasis mine) Amen to that! I don't expect miracles from this; France will still be France. But that doesn't mean the situation won't improve at all. Just as Angela Merkel of Germany has been an improvement over her predecessor, Sarkozy may well be an improvement over his. Lets hope so!

He certainly faces a lot of challenges. Already violent riots and arson have begun, as predicted (or threatened?) by socialist loser Segolene Royal. Many more photos of the riots can be found at the flickr.com link below:



Welcome to Sarkoland

Click on the link and look what Sarkozy will have to deal with.
The legacy of 1968. I don't envy him.