Tuesday, April 3, 2012

Send Lawyers, Guns and Money

Somedays I miss that ol' 'War Monger', George W. Bush.  With him, you knew if you were "Fer him, or agin' him". 

Conversely, you knew if he were, "Fer you, or agin' you" too.

I find myself looking back with a fair bit of nostalgia to our 'Cowboy President'. 

He, at least, was what he purported to be...

Bob Dylan sang it best - The times they are a changin'...

From BusinessInsider.com

The Department Of Homeland Security Is Buying 450 Million New Bullets

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office is getting an "indefinite delivery" of an "indefinite quantity" of .40 caliber ammunition from defense contractor ATK.

U.S. agents will receive a maximum of 450 million rounds over five years, according to a press release on the deal.

The high performance HST bullets are designed for law enforcement and ATK says they offer "optimum penetration for terminal performance."

This refers to the the bullet's hollow-point tip that passes through barriers and expands for a bigger impact without the rest of the bullet getting warped out of shape: "this bullet holds its jacket in the toughest conditions."

We've also learned that the Department has an open bid for a stockpile of rifle ammo. Listed on the federal business opportunities network, they're looking for up to 175 million rounds of .223 caliber ammo to be exact. The .223 is almost exactly the same round used by NATO forces, the 5.56 x 45mm.

The deadline for earlier this month was extended because the right contractor just hadn't come along.

Looks like the Department of Homeland Security means business.

[Moos Note:  And Business, presumably, is...  Good.]

So, what's with all the ammo?  Somebody looking to start a war or something?

Hey, just for giggles, let's ask Candidate Obama!

Well, certainly Candidate Obama wasn't being 'literal', right?  He was most-likely misquoted and taken 'out of context'. 

Perhaps Rahm Emanuel can shed some light on this...

Anyone else notice that Lou Dobbs is no longer over at CNN?  I wonder why that is?  And who's the nice lady carrying his water for him?  I like her.  Is she gone too???

[Hint: Mr. Dobbs left CNN in November of 2009. Not sure about the female reporter's status as I have an allergy to Ted Turner's News channel. It's an 'audible allergy' to CNN - I begin shouting 'bad words' loudly whenever it's on. This makes my infrequent trips to Mickey D's for lunch particularly interesting. Store management has this bad boy Crazy Glue'd to CNN. Well, at least until somebody tossed a Shamrock Shake into that 40" bad boy. And no, I have no idea who would have done such a thing... I love Shamrock Shakes. I'm not going to waste mine on CNN. But thanks for going there for me.  What, you think I'm some kind of animal???]

But wait, there's more!!!

From ACLU.org, February 22, 2012:
On December 31, 2011, President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), codifying indefinite military detention without charge or trial into law for the first time in American history. The NDAA’s  dangerous detention provisions would authorize the president — and all future presidents — to order the military to pick up and indefinitely imprison people captured anywhere in the world, far from any battlefield.  

The breadth of the NDAA’s worldwide detention authority violates the Constitution and international law because it is not limited to people captured in an actual armed conflict, as required by the laws of war. Under the Bush administration, similar claims of worldwide detention authority were used to hold even a U.S. citizen captured on U.S. soil in military custody, and many in Congress assert that the NDAA should be used in the same way. 

The ACLU does not believe that the NDAA authorizes military detention of American citizens or anyone else in the United States. Any president’s claim of domestic military detention authority under the NDAA would be unconstitutional and illegal.

Although President Obama issued a signing statement saying he had “serious reservations” about the NDAA’s detention provisions, the statement only applies to how his administration would use them, and would not affect how the law is interpreted by subsequent administrations.

The provisions – which were negotiated by a small group of members of Congress, in secret, and without proper congressional review – are inconsistent with fundamental American values.

 I end this post the way I began it: 

Why does Homeland Security need 1.44 bullets for every American living in the nation?  

Why, it's for your own protection of course...

The question is, then, I guess, WHOM are they protecting you from?
  • Terrorists?
  • TEA Party folks?
  • Rogue Al Qaeda Cells?
  • Yourself?

I don't know. 

All I do know is that when the going gets weird - the Weird turn Pro.
In 2012 - we're all Pros - because it's ALL weird.

Post a Comment