Sarah Sanders, Red Hen, & Social Engineering By The State

Authored by Kurt Nimmo via Another Day In The Empire blog,

This will be seriously politically incorrect.

The management at Red Hen, the Virginia restaurant that booted Trump press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, has all the right in the world to deny service to any person it does not want patronizing its business. 

It is illegal in many states to do this, especially based in skin color, religion, sexual orientation, disability, etc. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it so. 

Three jurisdictions forbid discrimination based on political affiliation – Washington DC, Seattle, and the Virgin Islands. 

According to the Law & Crime website, if “establishments in D.C. take a cue from [Red Hen], they could be held in violation of D.C. Code Section 2-1402.31, which bars discriminatory actions against people in whole or in part due to characteristics including race, religion, nationality, sex, age, and more, including political affiliation. Violations can result in punishments including court-ordered corrective action or monetary penalties.”

If you own a restaurant or any other “public accommodation” in DC, you cannot “discriminate” against people holding political opinions you disagree with. You are bound by law to serve Ku Klux Klan members and Antifa terrorists alike. 

It was Thomas Jefferson who said the only moral commercial transaction is one truly voluntary on the part of the buyer and the seller. 

The ideas of Thomas Jefferson – principal author of the Declaration of Independence – went out of fashion many years ago. According to the Identity politics crowd, his wisdom is the wisdom of a privileged white slave owner. 

The liberal social engineers busy at working destroying the Constitution believe the exercise of natural rights – the rights you are born with – permits racists, homophobes, and sexists to spread their poison throughout Hillary Clinton’s village. Natural rights are an excuse for privileged white heterosexual males to act deplorably. 

Now that the shoe is on the other foot – a “privileged white” was denied service for the crime of working for the president of the United States – it will be interesting to see what the response is. 

For these folks, application of the law is predicated on “diversity.” It revolves around “protected groups” of people designated by the state, people said to have been oppressed for centuries by evil white slave owners and Indian killers. 

According to the Identity crowd Trump is Hitler, a racist, a child abuser, a pervert who had sex with a porn star and soiled a bed Obama slept in. It is “justice”—as one tweeter put it—Sanders was denied service.  

The alt-right MAGA supporters want to punish the Red Hen for its behavior. MAGA tweets call for a boycott. This is certainly their right—unless the boycott target is Israel—but the effort is not likely to be effective. Democrats may respond by packing the restaurant every night with comrades from the rank and file of Nancy Pelosi and Chuckie Schumer’s Resistance. 

In a more sane and rational world, every property owner would have the freedom to exercise the natural born right to deny service or goods to any person for any reason. When government steps in and tells you what you can and can’t do with your property, you are reduced to the status of a landless serf at the mercy of the state. 

I’m afraid we’re at the point now where far too many Americans believe the state should be the final arbiter in personal matters. Decades of social engineering have resulted in a dumbed-down public, citizens that agree the state has the right to use violence against those who nonviolently resist its authority. 

US General Warns China Could Deploy Hypersonic Weapons On A “Large Scale”

The United States could lose its military technological superiority to China by late 2020s if it does not spend its $700 billion defense budget wisely, like more investments in artificial intelligence, electronic warfare, and hypersonic missiles, former deputy Defense Secretary Robert Work and Gen. Paul Selva, vice-chairman of the Joint Chief warned Thursday at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) conference on “Strategic Competition: Maintaining The Edge.”

“We should be prepared to be surprised in any conflict with China, not only because it has invested heavily in modernizing its armed forces but also how it has invested in next-generation military technology,” said former Deputy Secretary Work.

China “wants to be a first mover” in artificial intelligence, by incorporating machine learning algorithms into submarines, drones, hypersonics, and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV). “That will be how they will get ahead of the United States,” Work warned.

Both presenters harped on the idea that China has advanced its hypersonic program to a level where it could soon deploy on a large scale. Gen. Selva said that the Pentagon needs further investment in hypersonic research and development for an asymmetric advantage against China and Russia.

During the discussion at CNAS in Washington, D.C., Gen. Selva said China has yet to “mass deploy hypersonics or long-range [tactical] ballistic missiles,” however, “they are able now to deploy those capabilities at a large scale” if they decide to move in that direction, he added.

Gen. Selva then dropped a bombshell indicating the Pentagon is behind in the demonstration of hypersonic technologies, but he did mention that the Pentagon still holds an advantage when it comes to sensor and sensor-integration technologies.

“If we just sit back and don’t react we will lose our technological superiority” over China, Selva said.

In mid-April, Lockheed Martin announced that it had won a $928 million contract to develop a hypersonic missile for the U.S. Air Force to counter Chinese and Russian missile defense systems.

“What we’re really trying to do there is prototype using … [new rapid prototyping] authorities to see what we can advance, and what the art of the possible is to see how quickly we can get a capability out there,” Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch, military deputy to the assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisitions, technology, and logistics, told journalists during a June 21 meeting at the Pentagon.

Earlier this year, presenting the 2018 National Defense Strategy at the Johns Hopkins University, Secretary of Defense James Mattis warned about a world in which U.S. military is on the decline.

“Our competitive edge has eroded in every domain of warfare – air, land, sea, space, and cyberspace,” he said. “And it is continually eroding.”

“It’s very clear from our national defense strategy … that we intend to react” to what the Chinese are doing, Selva said. “If you accept that the Chinese are trying to offset our capability in the Western Pacific and that the Russians are trying to offset our capability in Europe, it’s incumbent upon us as strategists to react to that ambition.”

The Department of Defense must “analyze what your opponent is trying to do to you, make this a competition … and checkmate them or prevent them from getting so much of an advantage that they can prevent you from doing the things that are in your national interest,” Selva added.

The Pentagon is making a substantial investment via taxpayers to fund its research-and-development programs related to artificial intelligence, electronic warfare, and hypersonic missiles.

After the failed wars in the Middle East and trillions of dollars the Pentagon mysteriously lost, Washington is getting one last shot to remain relevant in the ever so changing world; otherwise, China could surpass America’s military technological superiority within the next decade.

Its quite evident that the Pentagon is willing to send this country even closer to bankruptcy by demanding $700 billion in its new budget, as it struggles to enforce its rule in the South China Sea.

“Given the size of our budget, if we don’t have the money to do this then we’re not paying attention,” Selva said.

“We have to put the money where it matters and that means allocating money to research and development in the technologies that are important to achieve asymmetric approaches to both China and Russia’s technology trends,” he concluded.

To sum up, this is it – the dying American empire gets one last shot to stay relevant in the world, as the clearly defined race against China to develop artificial intelligence, electronic warfare, and most importantly – hypersonic missiles. What comes next if Washington’s power slips in the Pacific? Well, you guessed it…War.

Ron Paul Rewind: The Constitution and Its Rejection By The US Government

Authored by Adam Dick via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

The United States Constitution was ratified 230 years ago this week as the foundational law of the US government, when on June 21, 1788 New Hampshire became the ninth state to ratify the document. In the year 2000, then-United States House of Representatives Member Ron Paul (R-TX) delivered a speech on the House floor titled “A Republic, If You Can Keep It” in which he discussed in detail his thoughts on the Constitution, the individual rights he viewed the document as seeking to protect, and the great extent to which the US government had expanded beyond and rejected constitutional limits.

Paul, who always would ask if legislation he was presented with in the House was authorized by the Constitution, early on in the speech explains:

Our constitutional republic, according to our Founders, should, above all else, protect the rights of the minority against the abuses of an authoritarian majority. They feared democracy as much as monarchy and demanded a weak executive, a restrained court, and a handicapped legislature.

Paul soon after in his speech notes:

The Constitution made it clear that the government was not to interfere with productive non-violent human energy. This is the key element that has permitted America’s great achievements. It was a great plan; we should all be thankful for the bravery and wisdom of those who established this nation and secured the Constitution for us. We have been the political and economic envy of the world. We have truly been blessed. The Founders often spoke of “divine providence” and that God willed us this great nation. It has been a grand experiment, but it is important that the fundamental moral premises that underpin this nation are understood and maintained. We as Members of Congress have that responsibility.

Yet, despite the effort of the Founders to ensure respect for liberty, government in America grew much over time, engaging in pervasive rights violations. In his speech, Paul provides many examples of such government action concerning matters from mass surveillance to a high tax system to US government involvement in education to the US monetary system to the increase in executive branch powers to the creation of an “armed national police state” to a policy of foreign interventionism including “global military activism.” In all these instances the US government exercises power to the detriment of liberty and in violation of constitutional limitations. Overall, Paul makes this stark assessment of the situation as of the year 2000:

Almost every daily activity we engage in is monitored or regulated by some government agency. If one attempts to just avoid government harassment, one finds himself in deep trouble with the law.

Paul notes in the speech a contest between people seeking liberty and people seeking power:

In every society there are always those waiting in the wings for an opportunity to show how brilliant they are, as they lust for power, convinced they know what’s best for everyone. But the defenders of liberty know that what is best for everyone is to be left alone, with a government limited to stopping aggressive behavior.

Unfortunately, in America the power seekers have won in many ways as government has expanded far beyond constitutional bounds. Indeed, Paul laments in his speech that the Constitution “no longer serves as the guide for the rule of law” and that “[i]n its place we have substituted the rule of man and the special interests.”

Yet, Paul in his 2000 speech, as in his comments since leaving the House and founding the Ron Paul Institute, is optimistic. He suggests toward the end of his speech that liberty proponents, though they “face tough odds,” can win and should work hard for victory. Says Paul:

The grand experiment in human liberty must not be abandoned. A renewed hope and understanding of liberty is what we need as we move into the 21st Century.

In his concluding sentences Paul expresses this aspiration:

Let’s hope and pray that our political focus will soon shift toward preserving liberty and individual responsibility and away from authoritarianism. The future of the American Republic depends on it. Let us not forget the American dream depends on keeping alive the spirit of liberty.

Watch Paul’s wide-ranging, thought-provoking speech (in eight parts) here:

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4:

Part 5:

Part 6:

Part 7:

Part 8:

Chinese Stocks Slump Into Bear Market As ‘Weaponized’ Yuan Continues To Tumble

China’s Shanghai Composite is down 22.8% from its late-January peak – officially entering its 4th bear market in 3 years – as Trade Wars (for now) are weighing heavier on China than US markets.

 

SHCOMP is down 45% from its highs in June 2015

 

Year-to-Date, the more tech heavy Shenzhen Composite is the worst performer…

 

And TATS (Tencent, Alibaba, Taiwan Semi, Samsung)are notably underperforming FANG (Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, Google) for now…

And while China has dramatically underperformed US markets this year, judging by the last two days, perhaps the global trade war contagion has finally washed ashore in America…

 

Meanwhile – USDJPY has erased all of its Navarro-bounce…

And offshore Yuan continues its tumble/devaluation…

‘Weaponized’ Yuan is now down over 5% from March highs…