Tuesday, June 28, 2016

NAMAZU ON BIAS IN THE "MAIN STREAM MEDIA"


HAVE YOU EVER NOTICED THAT OBAMA AND DEMOCRATS GENERALLY SEEM TO BE UNABLE TO DO WRONG WORTHY OF REPORTING IN THE MAIN STREAM MEDIA?


THE GREAT NAMAZU GIANT CATFISH FORMER DEMIGOD AND ANALYST FOR THE AAAB
Greetings Bipeds! 

  Have you ever been amazed by the scandals that you can readily read about in the "social media" that involve Obama, Hillary, and the Democrats generally and then wonder why you see little or nothing of this on the national net work news? If you bother to check all those detailed stories of the various nefarious doings of the dynamic and deadly Democrats you are no doubt surprised at how most prove are true.  Some of course are fabrications, or just propaganda, but clearly Obama and Hillary  are so totally indictable that it is amazing they are still free bipeds.  Well there is a reason why their hi jinks are so un-newsworthy.  They have friends in the "national main stream media". You my tax paying, long suffering biped friends do not. Here is a small sample of how it works, a few well known key relationships, that are well known if you are a media industry watcher. Most Americans are not, and have a misplaced trust in journalists assuming they are after the truth vice attempting to mold public opinion and eventually elections. Consider just these few commonly known examples of an apparent "interlocking directorate" of information slanted to elect Hillary, keep Obama in power till the coronation, and hide Democratic party member misbehavior:


ABC News executive producer Ian Cameron is married to Susan Rice, National Security Adviser.

CBS President David Rhodes is the brother of Ben Rhodes, Obama's Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications.

ABC News correspondent Claire Shipman is married to former Whitehouse Press Secretary Jay Carney.

ABC News and Univision reporter Matthew Jaffe is married to Katie Hogan, Obama's Deputy Press Secretary.

ABC President Ben Sherwood is the brother of Obama's Special Adviser Elizabeth Sherwood.

CNN President Virginia Moseley is married to former Hillary Clinton's Deputy Secretary Tom Nides.

 Believe me my much put upon biped friends this is just the tip of the ice burg.  The above list is just a small sample of the personal relationships involved. The corporate relationships are positively draconian. Consider:

Only six corporations own 1500 newspapers, 1100 magazines, 1500 TV stations, 9000 radio stations, and 2400 publishers. These corporations are GE, NBC, News Corp, Viacom, Time Warner, and CBS.I think most of you already know that not one of these organizations is politically neutral or conservative, all are liberal/progressive bastions. I won't bore you with the details but go look up their key executives and actual stock holders if you have any doubts about their leftist bias. For a while now I've been saying it in these pages "FREEDOM OF THE PRESS IN THE UNITED STATES NOW MEANS THAT HE WHO OWNS THE PRESS HAS THE FREEDOM". I predict that the effort to gain control of the "social media" of the Internet is already underway. Every day American bipeds find it difficult to find the truth. Things have really gotten out of hand. Do yourselves a favor, even if you have to hold your nose to do it...vote Trump because the people and organizations described above don't want you to. 

SEE ALSO: NAMAZU INTRODUCES CHARLES WADE

THE U.S.NAVY IS REVISING ENLISTED RATING STRUCTURE

                   
Photograph from the Naval Records Collection in the U.S. National Archives




 POLITICAL CORRECTNESS FORWARD: 

 Periodically the Navy and Coast Guard have to take a look at their enlisted specialty fields (called "ratings" in "Navspeak).  Occasionally changing technology eliminates the need for specific rates in their entirety. That's why you don't find sail makers among the active rates anymore. Sometimes technologies that started out needing very skilled operators evolve into more "user friendly" models that can easily be operated by watch standers whose higher identified ratings related skills are not in the operation of the older more difficult to operate technology. The older operator rating is then extinguished and the easier to use technology folded into the expected competencies of another rate or several ratings likely to have a use for the equipment. (See our previous post: A Brief List of Old, Obscure and Obsolete U.S. Navy Jobs).

 Today however we bring you news of a new U.S. Navy rate review, this time the driving force is political correctness. According to the Naval News Service "In order to be as inclusive as possible and reflect that all Navy occupations are open to men and women, Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus recently met with his leadership team to discuss the services enlisted rating titles review". One of the goals of this review, if not the driving force behind it is to make the rating titles more "gender inclusive". What a long way we have come since 1965 when the "honorman" of a Navy boot class was awarded a certificate announcing him to have proven himself a "True man of wars man". Really, heaven forbid that naval service might be perceived as a manly occupation. God knows that such an attitude might give an enemy pause for thought before attacking where a girly navy should engender no fear. Clearly this administration would never want to engender fear in an enemy. Enemies are just friends and contributors we haven't met yet. 

 The Navy will also create a second group of senior leadership to study how potential changes to rating titles may affect personnel policy issues. Heaven forbid that any sailor might be offended ......by anything...like maybe an order to do violence to an enemy? The really scary part is that the flag officers who have survived the Obozo purges are embracing this time and money wasting task and see it as an opportunity to "pour a foundation that will last for decades to come". We propose a name for that foundation "SSI" (Sissy Sailor Initiative) 



Monday, June 27, 2016

FINALLY SOME GOOD NEWS ABOUT CORAL REEFS


Image courtesy U.S. National Park Service

 Most news about The Planet's coral reefs for the last 70+ years has been alarming to say the least. Today we have some good news that may portend some later better news. All is not gloom and doom under the sea.  A new study  recently published in the journal NATURE surveyed about two thousand coral reefs and identified 35 reefs in apparent deep trouble and "15 bright spots" reefs doing about twice as well across a variety of measurements as "the norm". All 15 "bright spots" had human populations living near the reefs that depended at least in part economically on the fish life of the reef. What these populations had in common was a respect for the reef as an ecosystem, and cultures that attempted to regulate the reef related economic activity in such a way as to allow harvesting of reef products while preserving the reef's overall reproductive capability. Often the local fishermen themselves work as the enforcement officers for the reef rules whether they are "regulations" or traditional "taboos".

 Regardless of what the rules are called, or who enforces them or how, the common factors seem to always include provisions against physical damage of the coral. The regulated activities include; anchoring, dredging, and diving activities that may include harvesting of physical coral and sponges. These activities are not always prohibited in all portions of the "bright spot reefs", or at all times, but are regulated in diverse ways to the same effect; physical damage to the coral, pollution, and over fishing are prevented. Human impact and economic benefit are allowed, but the impact on the reproductive capacity and physical integrity of the reef is kept low.

According to the study's authors:

"Our results suggest that investments in strengthening fisheries governance, particularly aspects such as participation and property rights, could facilitate innovative conservation actions that help communities defy expectations of global reef degradation," 
Good news for coral reefs indeed. Read the Report





Wednesday, June 22, 2016

THE OBOZO RESPONSE TO ORLANDO

Book Cover Courtesy AMAZON .COM


The response by Obozo and the lame stream media to the mass murders by Islamic terrorist Omar Mateen in Orlando was predictable and adhered to the the now eight year old Islamic apologist pattern. Not once has the President or any of his minions been able to mouth the words,"Islamic terrorism"; seems we are still plagued by the deadly stalker that can not be named. Oh yes, Obozo did spread plenty of blame around pointing his skinny finger at the NRA, guns in general, the Republicans as always, and Donald Trump, the one office seeker unafraid to say the words out loud, "Islamic Terrorism". We shouldn't be surprised this is the pattern of the last eight years as the administration goes to any lengths to deflect any connection between Islam and terrorism, or even the inhumanity to man that daily occurs in Islamic states under the Sharia.
 Enough is enough, Orlando wasn't just another attack. Such attacks were called for by the Islamic State (ISIS) , the perpetrator claimed loyalty to ISIS, and and ISIS took credit in the aftermath. Like it or not, ISIS is a de facto state, occupying territory tenaciously contested by an alliance of powers and carrying out governance within those borders, which ISIS certainly defends better than the United States defends its southern border. ISIS holds territory in the Middle East and Africa and defends it against all comers. ISIS has more than 6 million people living in its new “caliphate”.  It has recruited more than 85,000 jihadists. Isis has revenues making between $2 million and $4 million every day from Its "taxes", shake downs, and illegal oil sales, and sales of sex slaves. Plain and simply.the  Orlando attack was an act of war. It was not ISIS first act of war upon the United States or within the United States. It was not another "lone wolf" event, rather it is an example of a new Muslim Jihadi strategy. Wake up America!  It is time to declare war on ISIS and all related Islamic Jihadi non governmental organizations (NGOs) . Giving OBOZO war powers will not result in any action as we already know by his own admission he "stands with the Muslims". But we have to be ready to enable use of the War powers  should a new President who is not Hillary or Bernie, Marxist fellow travelers with the Islamic State; make it into the White House.

 The continental United States is a theater of operations in this war and has been for some time. We can't continue to follow the International Law of Armed Conflict in the Middle East and typical U.S. law enforcement use of force policies inside the U.S.. We can't continue to define Islamic Terrorist attacks as "work place violence", "lone wolf attacks", etc. These must be treated as coordinated acts of unlawful combat and be responded to under the law of armed conflict, no Miranda warnings, defeat, not arrest of the enemy is the goal. Ambush of enemy individuals and forces upon reliable identification and without warning is permitted. People funding the enemy, are the enemy and should be arrested and tried for espionage ( if non citizens) or treason (if citizens). The army may be fully employed against the internal enemy within zones declared "military theaters" by the President. 

  Global jihadism, is the ideology of ISIS and its strategy for global conquest. ISIS and its fellow traveling NGOs and secretively cooperative nations are committed to killing and enslaving all Americans. Why do we continue to tolerate it? .......oh yea, OBOZO "stands with the Muslims...sorry I forgot. 



Thursday, June 16, 2016

CHINA IS PLANNING A MASSIVE DEEP SEA LAB

CHINA IS PLANNING THE DEEPEST SEA LAB EVER ATTEMPTED , A HUMAN HABITATION 10,000 FEET UNDER WATER


 While announced, this seabed mining and military project has no firm start date as yet.



NEEMO 12 crewmembers make their way to their undersea habitat during a training session for the NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) project. Photo: NASA

 Pictured above are NASA divers entering a long operating U.S. owned "sealab" off of the Florida keys located below decompression dive depths but still well within the zone of light penetration. The Chinese proposal is far more challenging to construct and operate. At 10,000 feet (roughly 3,000 meters) it will be in cold dark water and subjected to pressures beyond what most conventional submarines are designed for. Recent news releases from China indicate that the Chinese are speeding up their efforts to design and build their proposed deepest ever "sea lab". The project was described in China's five year economic plan released in March of 2016. The technological hurdles to over come are immense but not impossible. Specially built manned submersibles have visited such depths for decades, the engineering challenge is basically one of scale. How do you enlarge the small diving bell type self contained habitats of the manned submersibles designed to visit such depths for a matter of a few hours to contain living quarters and sustainability for months at a time? How do you design a submersible suitable for transferring "aquanauts" and supplies? How do you test such equipment before deploying it? These are all issue of scale that probably can be overcome given enough time, effort and money. The real question is why go to the trouble to live at these depths? 

 The Chinese probably see several reasons for attempting this mission improbable. First they wish to explore the possibilities of deep sea bed mining. The deep sea beds are known to contain gold, manganese, and other vital minerals.  However, a 10,000 foot depth is not typical of outer continental shelf depths, the one place where nations have clear rights to exploit sea bottom resources. China is likely to locate this lab in disputed waters in the South or East China Seas. They may use the "sea lab" to press their claim to international or disputed waters not available to them under the current provisions of the United Nations Convention On The Law Of The Sea. What would be even more scary would be an attempt to twist the existing international law on territorial acquisition. 

 In the case of islands and similar features the most effective argument for soverignity recognized today is "effective settlement". This is why some Antarctic claimants go to elaborate and expensive efforts to have children born aboard their existing Antarctic stations and to periodically hold elaborate cultural events aboard their stations and to maintain them over winter. When the Antarctic treaty extension expires, they are positioning themselves to claim some of the last unclaimed above water real estate on earth. By existing international law some things such as the "high seas", the deep sea beds, outer space at orbital level, and the planets of our solar system are all in the "commons" and not suitable for national claims of ownership. The Dragon however has always operated as if whatever its claws could touch was property of the Dragon. So pushing highly dubious territorial claims and reshaping international law away from the Western concept of the "commons" may be a second purpose for such a "sea lab".   

 Finally such a lab could have a variety of naval/military purposes both for experimentation and area monitoring and denial, particularly anti submarine warfare. Whatever reason or combination of reasons for China's interest in such an expensive, elaborate, and not obviously immediately profitable project they do seem determined. In the current five year plan. The project ranked number 2 among the top 100 science and technology development projects ion the plan. While the Dragon has a seemingly insatiable hunger for natural resources, we note that the design is meant to be portable, making the lab relocatable for any variety of missions including military missions. The proposed "sea lab" may well be a key stone project within China's planned anti submarine access project that they sometimes term "The Under Water Great Wall Project".

 It seems to us that in war, nations do attempt to disrupt their enemies submarine cable communications and submarine oil and gas distributions systems; but a highly expensive virtual fixed fort doesn't seem to be a reasonable replacement for simple submarine patrol systems. We are not sure what the military utility of such a deep sea lab would be, and we bet the Chinese aren't quite sure themselves. This has the look and feel of a soverignity assertion, political impression, status symbol. The Dragon hasn't published any cost data for the project. We guess its nearly as expensive as our Apollo program was, but going in, its pretty well assured that such a thing can be built and deployed. It's basically an underwater habitat just set in unusually deep water. This is a manipulation of existing technologies, not the invention of never before tried technologies. As difficult and expensive as it is, going to the bottom of the sea is not nearly as "iffy" as going to the moon and back was. Rest assured that if the Dragon spends the time and money it will milk the publicity as if they had reached  another planet. We see no reason for the US to get involved with a "race to the bottom of the sea". 






POWER VS PADDLE BOAT ACCIDENTS ARE ON THE RISE


 Photo: Texas Dept. Of Parks and Wildlife

 According to a report by the National State Boating Law Administrator's Association in 2014 over 21.7 million Americans took to the water by canoe, kayak, or paddle board representing an increase of over 3 million participants since 2010. Unfortunately the increase in participants has come with an increase in accidents including fatal accidents at a time when accidents among other boating activities are on the decrease. The most deadly incidents appear to be in the power boat/paddle boat collision category. According to a report by the U.S. Coast Guard, over the past decade the number of boaters killed aboard canoes or kayaks has grown by 71% rising from 78 fatalities in 2005 to 133 in 2014.

  Paddle boats don't come with electrical alternators or generators and so "running lights" are not associated with paddle and oar propelled vessels. But in fact the nautical rules of the road require "flare up lights" to be displayed by such craft "in time to avoid collision". Such a flare up light can be as simple as a battery powered flashlight waved in the direction of an approaching power boat. Why not carry a really good quality light,since your life may depend on it? There is usually plenty of room in a canoe or kayak for such a device. A couple of years ago new federal regulations required paddle boarders to carry lights and whistles on their person. How many are doing that? We think it is also important to note that it is the oar or paddle ( in some cases small sail boat, or peddle boat) propelled vessel that has the obligation to display that flare up light upon the approach of a powered vessel. The legal thought process here is that the oar, paddle, or small sail boat makes little noise and is otherwise unlighted and highly more likely to detect an on coming power boat than the power boat is likely to detect the paddle or oar propelled vessel.

 "Peddle Boats" Photo Fairfax Co. Govt

Peddle boats may present a special case as some may consider them "mechanically propelled vessels". Such a designation would require the display of red, green and white "running lights'. There are available on the market battery powered portable "running lights". We would still recommend the use of a "flare up light" on such boats even if displaying battery powered "running lights". These boats are very small, very slow, not very maneuverable and any running light system they can support is going to be relatively short range, displayed rather close to the water, and not nearly as visible as conventional "running lights" on conventional motor boats. None of this is meant as legal advice. Always conform to the latest applicable regulations, but nothing prevents you from going the regulations one better with the portable "flare up light" and extra caution as a look out. Never , however, display "extra lights" that might be confused with the red green and white "running lights".  


 We note that small sailboats like the ever popular sunfish have been sailing after dark for decades and have not been involved in any dramatic number of collisions with power boats. This is just our first hand observation, but we think this is because of an observable habit of many small sail boat operators. Many, if not most, savvy small boat sailors carry really good quality flash lights and periodically illuminate their sails regardless of whether or not they have detected any other vessels in their vicinity. Paddlers, peddlers, and rowers should follow the same practice and illuminate their hulls every few minutes in a like manner. Be sure to have fresh batteries before a night outing. If you are drift fishing or anchored in your small non motorized craft why not illuminate what you are doing as well as your position with a good Coleman lantern or its battery power equivalent. You will be less prone to injury, the light attracts fish, and prevents "allision" ( collision =involuntary contact between moving vessels/ allision = same between one moving vessel and a stationary vessel or other object). We're pretty sure than most of these involuntary contacts between powered and non powered vessels happen in reduced visibility , but not all. 

 While it is commonly thought that non powered vessels like sailboats usually have the right of way when meeting, or being overtaken by powered vessels , there are times when when the non powered vessel must give way.   For example just because you don't have a motor you are not allowed to interfere with the navigation of a powered vessel "constrained by its draft to a narrow channel". Not only are you not allowed to obstruct commercial shipping channels but the same can apply to a yacht harbor entrance. Your paddle craft may only require a few inches of water to remain afloat and maneuverable, but that cabin cruiser entering between the buoys and day marks may well be constrained to the marked channel. Even paddle boarders should take a course in the nautical rules to avoid collision.

 The weather you start out in may not be the weather that holds all day. This is why non powered vessels should carry breath activated "sound devices" (loud whistles), if there is no room for a compressed air horn. By regulation paddle boarders should have a whistle in the pocket of their required life jacket or hung around their necks precisely so that you can make your position known if you become enveloped in fog or a blinding rain squall.

 If you are reading this as a post , we suggest following up with a review of the paddle board regulations found in our Paddle and Oar Vessel Section or if you are reading this while in that section simply scroll down to the post on the paddle board regulations. For a short video introduction to the rules to avoid collision check out this YouTube video. Remember, your canoe, kayak, peddle boat, or even paddle board is legally a "vessel" not a toy. The waterways present enjoyable opportunities for recreation, but they are also arteries of commerce, transportation systems, and there are rules that apply to operating vessels, no matter how simple upon them. Failure to observe the rules can be fatal, and...no its not automatically the fault of the power vessel. Stay safe out there!

Monday, June 13, 2016

What Was really The Worst Shooting In American History?

THE GREAT NAMAZU ADDRESSES THE SHOOTINGS IN ORLANDO:

NAMAZU, GIANT JAPANESE CATFISH AND FORMER DEMIGOD, NOW MARITIME ANALYST FOR AAB

 Greetings Biped! 
   It grieves me to have to address you this Monday after the terrible attacks on the LBGT community in Orlando , but as usual the official American media and their darling Obama are trying to spin the incident to their political advantage. The myths are already being perpetrated. As you know I've been an observer of biped history for over 3,000 years so my memory is long, and I'm not easily drawn into the opinion manipulation that passes for journalism in America today.  My biped friends so constantly subjected to opinion manipulation please note the following:

1. When President Obama addressed the nation , despite the fact that he knew at the time that the perpetrator in the Orlando case was a Muslim and had pledged allegiance to ISIS he did not once use the term "Islamic Terrorism" in any of his public utterances. Its bad enough that the American public is under attack from "an non-uniformed enemy" but how can you ever expect to get the situation under control or defeat an enemy that can not be named. The media has used the term "Islamic" very sparingly throughout its coverage. 

2. The victims in this latest atrocity were all either members of the LGBT community or their guests at a festive night out. But no mention is ever made of Islam's clear admonition to its members to kill LBGT people, very little American media coverage ever addresses the almost daily executions by hanging , and being thrown from a height all over the Muslim world for the offense of being gay or transgender. But the media was quick to negatively criticize the Lt. Governor of Texas for tweeting a biblical quote days before the Orlando event, that doesn't even mention homosexuality, the quote addressed personal responsibility in general, but the media labeled it "hateful" and "insensitive". The American media has been utterly silent about Turkish (Islamic) media reports covering the incident with headlines like "50 PERVERTS SHOT IN BAR" . So by American media standards apparently tweeting a bible verse , any bible verse is hate speech, while an incendiary and completely hateful headline by an Islamic news paper is not worthy of mention, much less criticism. 

3. Notice the media attention on the fact that the Omar Mateen, the shooter obtained his weapons "legally". Despite the fact that he had appeared on a watch list and had been investigated by the FBI. Yet, thousands of American military veterans with training, and proven reliable characters are denied the right to purchase a "legal firearm" by administrators under the Obama administration. Any veteran with evidence of ever having a financial problems, or treatment for any mental issues is routinely denied his second amendment rights that he or she fought for. These vets carried guns to protect your freedom, and placed their lives at risk, but are routinely denied the right of effective self defense. Yet a Muslim who has repeatedly come to the attention of the FBI as a potential terrorist is allowed to purchase weapons and be gainfully employed in armed security. The media and the government want to use the incident to convince the American public to make it even more difficult for ordinary citizens to effectively defend themselves. Your friendly neighborhood giant catfish perceives not a problem with gun control laws, but an issue of selective enforcement. U.S. military veterans trained and predisposed to defend others are routinely denied their second amendment rights while points are stretched to assure Muslims can bear arms in the United States even though the murder of any of you who refuse to convert is a basic tenet of their so called religion.

4. Notice how the media and the White House continually call this the biggest gun death ( or mass shooting ) incident in American history.  Here is an inconvenient truth. In terms of unarmed civilians shot to death including men,women, and children this is not the largest incident. But this is the largest incident where the shooters weren't National Guard members or Pinkertons. As the 19th century was coming to a close and in the early parts of the 20th century Native Americans and labor movement members were shot to death in large casualty incidents across the nation for failure to conform to either government edicts or demands from major industrialists. The uppity but either unarmed or grossly under armed participants in peaceful protests by Native American and labor movements were put to death by Gattling gun wielded by either National Guardsmen operating under state orders , or the preferred henchmen of the era of capital, the Pinkerton National Detective Agency. At the Massacre of Wounded Knee , December 29, 1890 at least 150 unarmed men women, and children of the Sioux nation were killed by the U.S. Calvary, at least 50 more Native Americans were injured. However some historians believe the death count may have exceeded 300, and that the massacre was covered over as a "battle", The army give out over 13 Medals of Honor in the aftermath. Given the small numer of weapons collected, and the small number of Army casualties there could have been nothing so desperate in what the Army of the time characterized as a "fight" to warrant so much "gallentry". The judgement of history is in, Wounded Knee was a massacre. The Indian nations protest those medals to this day as part of the now exposed cover up. The government to this day has refused to acknowledge any wrong doing. Keep in mind at times Wounded Knee was and is within the Sioux Reservation.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wounded_Knee_Massacre. The labor movement knew the jack heel of government as well. The Ludlow Massacre on April 20, 1914 was an attack by the Colorado National Guard and Colorado Fuel & Iron Company camp guards on a tent colony of 1,200 striking coal miners and their families at Ludlow, Colorado, The casualty numbers are still disputed but no one can argue that miner's wives and children were shot to death. Our point is simple. The news concerning the Orlando Pulse Club Massacre has been slanted from the first moment to push public opinion away from seeing any connection with this murderous rampage and Islam, and to gain public support for ending all 2nd amendment rights to effective self defense. Disarming the innocent, never makes them safer . Gathering the innocent into "gun free zones" is giving the Islamic terrorist the equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel. 

American bipeds neither the American media nor your present government is believable, or any way has your best interests at heart. An agenda is being pushed, wake up!  

Wednesday, June 8, 2016

THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD IN AMERICA, A 10 PART COURSE

THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD IN AMERICA FULLY INTENDS TO OVERTHROW THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AND REPLACE IT WITH THE SHARIA.  


Haj Amin al Husseini and Adolf Hitler

 The Muslim Brotherhood existed outside of the United States for a very long time. During WWII it closely aligned with the Nazis and participated fully in the Holocaust.

SS Handschar Division

Basically, because the nations where the Muslim Brotherhood was organized and operating had been under one or another European colonial thumb prior to the war not much was made of their willing participation in the Holocaust. As the modern nations of the post war Middle East emerged the Brotherhood either flourished or was severely repressed depending on how they were seen in terms as rivals by the states they were found in. The Brotherhood is a terrorist organization, welcomed into the interior workings and power centers of the Obama administration. It is vital that every American know the truth about this organization in detail, quite literally your lives depend on it. Below are a couple of links to a 10 part video course on the history, intentions, connections, and recent actions of the Muslim Brotherhood in America. Don't try to take it all in one sitting. You'll need about ten hours to absorb it all. Perhaps watch one lesson per day, or binge watch over a week end.

 Regardless, make the effort and do it. It will shake you to your bones. Not every Muslim in America is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Indeed many Muslims came to America to get away from a system where "the church" was the state. But such Muslims avoid membership in things identified as :Islamic" and tend to focus on integration with the rest of society, resulting in no cultural counterweight to the movement of conquest led by the Muslim Brotherhood in America. If America is to avoid falling under the black flag of an Islamic Caliphate it will have to be Christians and Jews who mobilize against it. The left here is for it, seeing Islam as a sort of "communism with a god". The government as as demonstrated in the course is completely ineffective in standing up to this force.

 Watch this course, study it. Let this course inform your voting, business decisions, and conversations. Back "law fare" against the Islamic push for Islamic Privilege.  Exercise your second amendment right and train with your arms. Fight all attempts on your second amendment rights it is your last recourse if this situation can not be reversed.  Plain and simply, once the Brotherhood is in charge your choices are three. You must convert to Islam, or accept less than third class citizenship, taxed to your eyeballs, humiliated on the street, or be killed; and you may be killed at any point any way. Click on the links below to begin to see the light:
SS Handzar Division

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bs0xw5hPWVQ Parts 1-6


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUZeOHFgjsM  Parts 6-10

Tuesday, June 7, 2016

THREE FACTS COUNTER CLIMATE CHANGE


NEWSMAX REPORTS:

Three Facts Prove Climate Alarm Is a Scam

Photo: two polar bears with snow and sea. Photo: Library of Congress
 Here at the Namazu School of Climatology no one could call us "Climate Change Deniers". We have often asserted that "climates change,  that's what they do" and we have further asserted that "sometimes climates change suddenly and very drastically without any help from man, nor is man capable of controlling such changes as yet. " What has gotten us in trouble with the government and the politically correct crowd is that we keep asking for verifiable evidence that the climate is actually changing any faster or in any direction that is different from what is observable from the historical record and fossil evidence. While we see the usual changes in the 5 and 10 year weather cycles over the last 200 years , we simply don't see any real evidence of long term change from the direction or rate of measurable climate in the last two centuries. Something other than scientific fact seems to be driving the belief by government and others in a rapid, accelerating, on going, man caused "climate change". We think this linked article on NEWSMAX is one of the better explanations of the skeptics view point:
Below is our summary of the key points by Newsmax, we urge our readers to link over and read the entire article: Read More

1. No Recent Warming Despite Higher CO2
"During “modern times” the global climate has been warming in fits and starts since the last “little ice age” (not a true ice age) ended about 200 years ago. Yet apart from entirely natural 1998 and 2015 ocean El Nino spikes, satellite and weather balloon measurements show no statistically-significant global warming for nearly two decades."

2. Extreme Claims Proven Extremely Wrong
Contrary to prevalent fear-mongering, sea levels have been rising at a constant rate of barely 7 inches per century without any measured acceleration. Even the latest 2013 IPCC report states; “It is likely that GMSL [Global Mean Sea Level] rose between 1920 and 1950 at a rate comparable to that observed between 1993 and 2010.” Editor's note: Just one of numerous claims debunked in the linked article

3. Inconvenient Confessions From IPCC Authorities
Ottmar Edenhofer, lead author of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (2007), summed up the situation quite clearly. Speaking in 2010, he advised: “One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth.”
http://www.newsmax.com/LarryBell/climate-global-warming-ipcc/2016/05/31/id/731497/?ns_mail_uid=80607641&ns_mail_job=1670604_05312016&s=al&dkt_nbr=lrimmtej

Monday, June 6, 2016

Lesser-Known Lifeboat Celebrated at Coast Guard Station Chatham


American Admiralty Books Safety & Privacy Policies   EU VISITORS WARNING POSSIBLE COOKIES AHEAD

Coast Guard Station Chatham (U.S. Coast Guard photo)
Coast Guard Station Chatham (U.S. Coast Guard photo)

"CHATHAM — Sitting across from its movie star predecessor, a much used but less-heralded U.S. Coast Guard lifeboat was given its own 15 minutes of fame during a ceremony Friday at Coast Guard Station Chatham." READ THE FULL STORY 
 The Disney movie "FINEST HOURS"  featured the smaller and more famous CG rescue boat the CG 36500 used to rescue 32 crewmen from the stricken U.S. tanker PENDLETON in 1952 . ( MOVIE REVIEW AND LINKS TO BIOGRAPHY OF COXSWAIN BERNIE WEBBER.).  However the CG 44301 was the first 44-foot motor lifeboat purchased by the Coast Guard, commissioned in Chatham in 1963, and it was the last to go out of service about seven years ago. The CG 44301 had its own unique though less storied history. On May 9, 2016 Sam Mintz of the Cape Cod Times of Hyannis, Mass. told the story of the CG 44301. CAPE COD TIMES

MEET ANN CORCORAN, EXPERT ON REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PzT8vEvYPg

INTRODUCING ANN CORCORAN AND THE REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT WATCH: 

Photo: Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Slovenia

 Ann Corcoran is a reliable and fair minded observer and reporter on the on going Islamification of America. Her organization 'THE REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT WATCH " is producing some vital and truthful information on the process that Islamist fascist call the HIJRA. The Hijra is the religious obligation to spread Islam to the point of being the dominant global religion. Our mission here at American Admiralty Books is to focus on the maritime world, to produce an encyclopedic on line reference work to the entire collection of efforts, disciplines, and areas of endeavor that make up the maritime world.  Islamic generated troubles now account for over one third of U.S. aircraft carrier deployments and that is how we first became observers and reporters on the HIJRA. The European Union, U.S. Government, and "big media" are on a coordinated campaign to enforce the Islamic anti "blasphemy" laws of Islam on the rest of us. The concept of "blasphemy" under all forms of Islam is simply any form of communication that is any way critical of Islam. Penalties range from imprisonment, to whippings, and death, or any combination there of. Obviously neither the EU nor the U.S. are quite ready to impose the full penalties of Islam just yet. What they are trying to do is to deny access to any effective media by anyone who opposes the Islamification of America. The major TV and radio networks already carefully self censor their reports. A Muslim cuts the head off of a co worker in an American work place and sets about to see how many more he decapitate and the major media call it "work place violence" never "Islamic terrorism". Meanwhile in the social media we are already being warned that our tweets and posts may be censored by the dashboard and service providers if such are judged not complimentary to Islam. If we, American Admiralty Books are to survive to service our primary market of maritime and naval professionals and hobbyist we are forced to tone down our criticism of Islam. The Democratic governor of Louisiana has already demonetized our blog already. (See THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU ELECT DEMOCRATS

 At the moment we don't plan to pull from our blog archives previous posts that might be considered critical of Islam, or even just historically truthful posts. But we are forced to tone down our social media marketing of such posts. Increasingly we are afraid that posts such as this where we link you to experts in the field (termed "resistors" by the Feds) are about all we do to help spread the truth without becoming full time advocates for immigration reform and abandoning our services to our members. Obviously, our social media promotion of such information sources will be hopefully devoid of the more obvious "buzz words" the "internet PC police will be looking for. Below are some links to the very knowledgeable Ann Corcoran 



Here is Ann's 4.5minute introduction to the U.S. Islamic Resettlement Watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PzT8vEvYPg

Here is Ann on "Diversyfing the U.S." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gi5AeBW2MLw  about 58 minutes

Refugee Resettlement: Changing America One Town at a Time  https://www.youtube.com/watch?




Wednesday, June 1, 2016

THE WAR AGAINST FREE SPEECH AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT

THE GREAT NAMAZU, FORMER JAPANESE DEMIGOD AND NOW OUR LEADING POLITICAL ANALYST

GREETINGS BIPEDS!
 Just in case you've been living under a rock of late I thought I'd mention that your first and second amendment constitutional rights are under concerted attack mostly from your own government and from resident Muslim advocates of the imposition of Sharia law allowed in your country by your government, especially the Democratic party affiliates holding various offices from President of the United States to membership in both houses of Congress. Unfortunately, a number of for profit companies have been drinking from the Islamist "Kool Aid" and now want to suppress your free speech as well as take away any effective means you may have of defending yourself.  Important , often the most recognized, available vendors of certain types of internet access such as blog "dash boards, and various types of "social media" are starting to warn users of their services to tone down anti Islamic rhetoric. It is not politically correct to tell the truth about Islam and it violates the Sharia, the new de facto law of the land to say anything critical about Islam. We've examined the situation carefully and concluded that there is little legally we can do to assure our ability to tell you the truth about Islam over the Internet.  Short of using a small printing press and hand delivery of printed material the media moguls seem free to limit our speech through "their" media. Until some non Muslim or non left wing crazies purchase more of the media our only hope of getting out the truth is to fly below the radar. We may get less "preachy" in the future, but will try to quietly link you to truth containing sites as in this first attempt to keep the necessary information moving along. Below are a number of links to recent coverage of the combined Leftist / Muslim attacks on free speech:



http://www.nationalreview.com/article/429190/islam-twitter-and-free-speech


http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261550/democrats-castigate-anti-muslim-speech-proposed-deborah-weiss

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7176/criminalizing-free-speech

http://gatesofvienna.net/2015/12/hr-569-cairs-standard-operating-procedure/

THE SPRATLYS,OCCUPIERS AND OWNERS

South China Sea: Who Occupies, And Who Owns What in the Spratlys?

                           
Maps Courtesy CIA's WORLD FACT BOOK, SEE  WFB FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE SPRATLYS


                                                       


 China, a nation we generally refer to as "the Dragon" claims virtually the entire South and East China Seas as the nation's "territorial waters". Even if there were some history beyond the fertile imaginations of the Dragon's legal advocates, that idea is beyond any chance of international legal acceptance today. The whole concept violates the internationally recognized sovereign waters and exclusive economic zones of a number of states in the region. The concept is far outside the descriptions of "graduated soverignity" outlined in UNCLOS ( The United Nations Convention On The Law Of The SEA), a treaty to which China is signatory. If nothing else The Dragon's position on the the South and East China seas demonstrates that China is not yet ready to accept full membership in the community of nations, being unwilling to accept the communally accepted rules of well established, observed , and even codified international law when it is inconvenient to do so. Nothing says "thug state" like blatant violation of legal precepts that the thug state has signed off on, it kind of shouts "might makes right". 

For a great general backgrounder on sea dragons 

 In accepted modern international law soverignity is not recognized over sea areas beyond 12 miles from the adjacent coastal state's "base line" which, over simplifying, coincides roughly with that state's shore line. Areas inside the "12 mile limit" may be considered "territorial waters" or at sea, "The Territorial Sea". However, even that 12 mile zone of soverignity may be diminished by enumerated circumstances spelled out in the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS) . Where less than 12 miles of open sea separates nations, the allotted territorial sea is much smaller. The one instance where the usual 12 miles may be extended is in the case of a nation whose adjacent offshore area contains many islands that are part of the adjacent coastal state's sovereign territory. 

 In addition to actual territorial seas where the adjacent coastal state is completely sovereign virtually as if on land, coastal states may also hold extended particular rights out to about 200 miles from their "base line" which do not interfere with the rights of free innocent passage of the ships of all nations in "international waters". Such rights are generally described in the Outer Continental Shelf Treaty, and the UNCLOS concept of the "Exclusive Economic Zone". Under these precepts of international maritime law adjacent coastal states may be granted the exclusive rights to manage and extract "benthic fisheries", species which spend their lives in contact with the bottom such as flounder, and lobster. Such adjacent coastal states may have the exclusive right to mine minerals and establish structures or semi permanently moored vessels to exploit bottom resources subject to international requirements for the lighting and marking of obstructions to navigation. Once such special rights areas are established and recognized the naval and law enforcement vessels of the states with the special rights may exercise the right of close approach relative to foreign vessels transiting the special zones to assure that they are on innocent passage.  When a vessel is suspected of violating the special rights of the relevant coastal state their naval and law enforcement vessels may stop and board foreign vessels on the "high seas" within these special zones subject to having to pay damages if their stop for what might be termed "probable cause", doesn't prove an actual violation occurred. 

 China makes the utterly ridiculous claim that virtually all of the South and East China Seas are the territorial sea of China, almost to the beaches of the Philippines. Unfortunately most of China's legal arguments are based on doubtful history , and history itself is often irrelevant in such claims before modern international tribunals. Uninhabited islands like all modern territory no longer may be taken permanently by conquest. The strongest argument for soverignity over islands is "effective settlement", and in the case of the truly uninhabitable islands "effective administration". This is why the Dragon is busy building light houses, air fields, fishing support centers, and even encouraging tourism to parts of the Spratlys which are basically uninhabitable except at great expense and herculean effort. Though these islands are often as much as 800 miles from any part of the Chinese mainland, and sometimes within 24 miles or less of a neighbor state like Vietnam, the Chinese want them in order to extend their exclusive economic zone over the China Seas in order to gain exclusive or near exclusive rights to the oil and rich fisheries of the region. Their onslaught of high tech, high expense occupation is negatively impacted by some islands within the Spratlys that in fact have long been inhabited by nationals of Vietnam, the Philippines, and others. To learn more details about the international legal concepts of soverignity and the exclusive economic zones check out THE AMERICAN ADMIRALTY BUREAU'S GUIDE TO THE ENDURING PRINCIPALS OF MARITIME INTERNATIONAL LAW in our Authoritative Literature Section: Extension

 China and the other nations in contest with China over soverignity in the Spratly Islands all actually hold some manned "out posts" ( Vietnam objects to the classification of one of its' light houses as an "outpost", noting that it is civilian manned and unarmed. So far China has not answered the international court's summons on behalf of the Philippines to engage in a legal contest over certain areas claimed by the Philippines. However, the truth is, that if there is ever to be a peaceful legal settlement on the issue the first step is legally determining soverignity over the manned "outposts" by the various contesting states. This pretty much automatically means the Dragon doesn't get the whole region. So the Dragon being a thug state avoids litigation.  


Vietnam presently  occupies 21 "features" in the Spratly chain,  the most recent taken a few days after an exchange of gunfire and loss of Vietnamese sailors on March 14, 1988 with China at Johnson South Reef (near the more famous "Mischief Reef"often considered one region) . (Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy2ZrFphSmc) A full list of these features with their names and coordinates was publicized in the April 22, 1988 issue of Nhan Dan, an official Vietnamese government publication. The features are:

  1. Southwest Cay (Vietnamese: Song Tu Tay),
  2. South Reef (Da Nam),
  3. Petley Reef (Nui Thi or Da Thi),
  4. Sand Cay (Son Ca),
  5. Namyit Island (Nam Yet),
  6. Discovery Great Reef (Da Lon),
  7. Sin Cowe Island (Sinh Ton),
  8. Collins Reef (Co Lin),
  9. Lansdowne Reef (Len Dao),
  10. Sin Cowe East Island (Sinh Ton Dong),
  11. Ladd Reef (Da Lat),
  12. Spratly Island (Truong Sa or Truong Sa Lon),
  13. West Reef (Da Tay),
  14. Central Reef (Truong Sa Dong),
  15. East Reef (Da Dong),
  16. Pearson Reef (Phan Vinh),
  17. Allison Reef (Toc Tan),
  18. Cornwallis South Reef (Nui Le),
  19. Pigeon or Tennent Reef (Tien Nu),
  20. Barque Canada Reef (Thuyen Chai),
  21. Amboyna Cay (An Bang).
The Philippines presently holds the following 9 features in the Spratly Chain:

  1. Northeast Cay (Filipino: Parola),
  2. Thitu Island (Pag-asa),
  3. Loaita Cay (Panata),
  4. Loaita Island (Kota),
  5. West York Island (Likas),
  6. Flat Island (Patag),
  7. Nanshan Island (Lawak),
  8. Second Thomas Shoal (Ayungin),
  9. Commodore Reef (Rizal).
Taiwan holds only one feature in the Spratly Islands but it is the single largest land feature:
Itu Aba Island 

Malaysia
The number of Malaysian-held features in the Spratlys varies based on the definition of "occupation" as is somewhat the case with the Philippines. Let's stick for the time being with troop occupied featured of wich there are five listed below. Two others not listed are civilian occupied. 
  1. Swallow Reef (Malay: Layang-Layang), since 1983,
  2. Ardasier Reef (Ubi), since 1986,
  3. Mariveles Reef (Mantanani), since 1986,
  4. Erica Reef (Siput), since 1999,
  5. Investigator Shoal (Peninjau), since 1999.

Brunei
 Brunei occupies no above surface features but claims a submerged reef and two "oil blocks" oil lease areas administered by Brunei

CHINA:

 Only occupies six features but nearly all had to be constructed and continue to be maintained at great expense. Nearly all have no real previous history of Chinese occupation, or even human habitation.
  1. Subi Reef 
  2. Gaven Reef 
  3. Hughes Reef 
  4. Johnson South Reef 
  5. Fiery Cross Reef 
  6. Cuarteron Reef 
  7. Mischief Reef 
 So of the hundreds of tiny islands, exposed rocks, and occasionally exposed reefs about 43 are either occupied or regularly visited by nationals of 4 nations and a fifth nation claims "effective administration over two small submerged areas.  Title to these areas is the first real legal task that must be undertaken to redraw any of the UNCLOS exclusive economic zone lines. But the Dragon won't come to court and would rather build light houses where none are needed and bully its neighbors using its "coast guard" which is at least better than the simple expedient of shooting to death Vietnam's unarmed sailors as China did when seizing Mischief Reef in 1989.

For another, perhaps even more detailed look at this issue we suggest THE DIPLOMAT, an article by Alexander L. Vuving titled

South China Sea: Who Occupies What in the Spratlys?