October 29, 2014
As originally posted by Zbigniew Mazurak on October 28, 2014
Analysis: How many nuclear weapons does Russia have?
Although China has a much larger nuclear arsenal than the DOD and arms control advocates are prepared to admit, Russia remains the principal nuclear and geopolitical adversary of the US. It is therefore necessary to examine the size and composition of Moscow’s atomic arsenal and the Russian government’s plans for its future.
Like the US, Russia possesses a strategic triad of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), bombers, and ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) armed with submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs).
1) ICBMs: Russia currently possesses ICBMs: 58 SS-18 Satan (10 warheads per missile), 35 SS-19 Stilletto (6 warheads per missile), 171 SS-25 Sickle (single-warhead), 78 SS-27 Stalin (single-warhead), and 42 RS-24 Yars (4 warheads per missile) ICBMs, for a total of 384 ICBMs.
This works out to:
This enables Russia’s ICBMs to deliver a total of 1,207 warheads to the Continental US. Note that over time, as Russia continues to replace older, single-warhead SS-25 and SS-27 missiles with Yars and RS-26 Rubezh multiple-warhead missiles, the number of warheads it can deliver to, and will aim at, the US will only continue to grow.
2) Ballistic Missile Submarines (SSBNs) and their associated Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missiles (SLBMs): Russia currently possesses fourteen such submarines: 4 of the Delta III (Kalmar) class, 7 of the Delta IV (Delfin) class, 1 of the Project 941 Akula (Typhoon) class, and 2 of the newest Borei class.
Each of these submarines carries 16 SLBMs, except the Typhoon-class boat, which can carry 20 SLBMs but is usually used as a test platform (though it could be armed with SLBMs like a normal submarine if need be).
The fourteen SSBNs of the Russian Navy are:
Name……………………………………Class…………….Fleet…………Year of commissioning
K-129 Orenburg……………………..Delta III………..Northern……1981
K-433 St George the Victorious…Delta III………..Pacific………..1980
K-233 Podolsk………………………..Delta III……….Pacific…………1980
K-44 Ryazan…………………………..Delta III……….Pacific…………1982
K-51 Vyerkhoturye………………….Delta IV……….Northern……..1984
K-84 Yekaterinburg…………………Delta IV……….Northern……..1985
K-64 ……………………………………..Delta IV……….Northern……..1986
K-114 Tula………………………………Delta IV……….Northern……..1987
K-117 Bryansk…………………………Delta IV……….Northern……..1988
K-18 Kareliya………………………….Delta IV……….Northern………1989
K-407 Novomoskovsk……………..Delta IV……….Northern………1990
TK-208 Dmitriy Donskoi…………..Typhoon……..Northern……….1981
K-535 Yuriy Dolgorukiy……………Borei………….Northern………..2013
K-550 Alexander Nevskiy…………Borei…………..Pacific……………2013
K-551 Vladimir Monomakh……….Borei…………..Pacific…………..2014 (expected)
Included in the list is a fifteenth SSBN, the Vladimir Monomakh, which will be commissioned on December 10th, 2014.
The Delta IV class submarine K-64 is the only one in the Russian ballistic submarine fleet which doesn’t have a name. All other boats in the fleet are named after Russian cities, the Kareliya Peninsula, a saint (Saint George), or medieval Ruthenian/Russian princes.
Of the submarines listed, Orenburg, Ryazan, Yekaterinburg, and K-64 are currently in overhaul and (in the case of Yekaterinburg, which suffered a fire in 2013) repairs, which means they are not currently available for operational service.
Nonetheless, ten SSBNs are still available for duty at any given time – and Russian SSBNs can launch their missiles even when moored dockside.
Collectively, the thirteen SSBNs in service, other than the Dmitry Donskoi, can launch 16 SLBMs each; the Dmitry Donskoi can launch 20 such missiles. A single Russian Bulava SLBM can carry 10 warheads; the R-29RMU2 Liner missile can carry 12 warheads.
Assuming that all Russian SSBNs carry the Bulava, and not the Liner, the 13 non-Typhoon-class submarines could collectively launch 208 missiles, and with ten warheads per each missile, deliver 2,080 warheads to the CONUS. The Typhoon class boat, for its part, capable of launching 20 missiles, can deliver 200 additional warheads to the US.
Thus, assuming that all Russian SSBNs are armed with Bulava missiles, they can collectively deliver 2,280 warheads to the CONUS.
Even excluding those submarines that currently aren’t in operational service doesn’t reduce the Russian nuclear threat significantly. The 9 remaining Delta class submarines can collectively launch 144 missiles, and with 10 warheads sitting atop each missile, deliver 1,440 warheads to the CONUS – with the Typhoon-class boat delivering another 200.
So even with four submarines currently dockside in overhaul or repairs, the remaining submarines can still deliver 1,640 warheads to the Continental US if each submarine is armed with Bulava missiles – and even more if each submarine is armed with Liner missiles.
It is not clear how many warheads are actually currently deployed on Russian ballistic missile submarines – the New START “data” Russia gives the US State Department contains woefully understated figures and therefore is not credible. Russia undoubtely deploys many, many more warheads on its submarines than it acknowledges in New START “data exchanges.” Given that Russia has a long, proven history of violating arms limitation treaties, including most recently the INF treaty, no one should be surprised. In fact, had Russia’s most recent violations been disclosed before New START was ratified in December 2010, in the lame-duck session of the 111th Congress (the most liberal Congress in US history), the treaty would’ve never been passed.
Note that the Russian Navy has ordered over 100 Bulava and over 100 Liner SLBMs. This will be enough to fully equip each ballistic missile submarine of the Russian Navy and thus to replace the Sinyeva.
Finally, one must note that while the Russian Navy’s SSBNs conducted almost no patrols in the late 1990s and few in the 2000s, the situation is now different; these submarines go on patrol often, flush with funding from the government, primarily from oil and gas revenue.
3) Strategic Bomber Fleet (Dalnaya Aviatsiya – Long-Range Aviation)
This fleet consists of three aircraft types. The oldest is the Tu-95 Bear turboprop. While the oldest models were commissioned in 1956, the ones serving today were built later. Each can carry 6 nuclear-tipped cruise missiles and a freefall nuclear bomb. It was a Tu-95 bomb which, in 1961, detonated the Tsar Bomb – the most powerful nuclear warhead in history, with the explosive power of 50 megatons. Currently, the Russian Air Force operates 64 such aircraft which collectively can deliver 702 nuclear warheads right to the Continental US.
They are supplemented by 171 Tu-22M Backfire-C and 16 Tu-160 bomber. While the Tu-22M is often called a theater or continental bomber and was not included in START treaties as a strategic delivery system, it should have been, because its combat radius of 2,400 kms can be dramatically increased with in-flight refueling. That gives it capability to reach the CONUS from Russian bases in the Far East (such as Ukrainka AFB) if refueled in the air (which Russian Air Force does for its aircraft anyway when practicing nuclear strikes on the US, as Russia has repeatedly done in the last few years).
A single Tu-22M can carry 10 nuclear-tipped cruise missiles, including 4 on its wings and 6 in its internal weapons bay on a rotary launcher.
The Tu-160 bomber was commissioned in 1987 and can carry the most cruise missiles of any Russian bomber: 12. Thus, a fleet of just 16 Tu-160s can carry 184 nuclear-armed cruise missiles – and deliver them right to the CONUS. Russia is now building up its Tu-160 fleet with stockpiled components.
As for the Tu-95 fleet, it is estimated to be able to deliver between 384 and 702 nuclear weapons to the CONUS.
702 + 184 + 1710 = 2596. This is the number of nuclear warheads that the Russian bomber fleet could potentially deliver to the CONUS (with air refueling for the Tu-22Ms; however, the Russian Air Force does not have nearly enough tankers to provide aerial refueling for 171 Tu-22Ms; barely a few dozen could actually receive air refueling on their way to the US, relegating the Tu-22M to the role of a continental/theater bomber).
Even excluding the Tu-22M fleet, however, the Russian long-range bomber fleet can still deliver 886 nuclear warheads to the CONUS.
Russia’s next-generation bomber, the PAK DA (Prospektivnoy Aviatsionnyi Kompleks Dalnoy Aviatsii – Prospective Aircraft Complex of Long-range Aviation), is under development.
4) Tactical nuclear weapons and their carriers
Russia possesses thousands of tactical nuclear weapons. Just how many exactly it has is unclear. What is known is that they number in the thousands. A very conservative estimate by Hans Kristensen and Robert Norris puts the number at 2,000 tactical warheads deployed. Even the anti-nuclear, anti-American Ploughshares Fund estimates Russia’s total nuclear arsenal (strategic and tactical) at 8,000 warheads, the largest in the world (slightly larger than America’s, which consists of 7,300 warheads).
However, the exact number of tactical nuclear weapons Russia has remains unknown, due to the fact that Russia refuses to disclose this number, and the Obama administration is assisting in Russia’s nuclear opacity.
Russian tactical nuclear weapons can be carried by a wide range of delivery systems, including:
- Artillery pieces;
- Su-24, Su-25, Su-27/30/33/35 Flanker, and Su-34 Fullback tactical strike aircraft;
- Tu-22M continental bombers;
- Surface ships (in the form of nuclear depth charges and nuclear torpedoes);
- Submarines (in the form of nuclear depth charges, torpedoes, and cruise missiles, including the recently-deployed Kalibr missile – Russia’s 12 nuclear-powered attack submarines carry such weapons today, as do Russia’s 8 cruise missile submarines);
- Short-range missiles such as earlier Iskander (SS-26 Stone) variants; and
- Russia’s new, illegal, intermediate-range cruise and ballistic missiles such as the Iskander-M, Iskander-K, and R-500. Some of Russia’s Iskander missiles are reportedly deployed in the Kaliningradskaya Oblast north of Poland, from which they can threaten any target within a 500 km radius.
Russia has developed, tested, and deployed these missiles in blatant violation of the INF Treaty, which prohibits Moscow and Washington from even testing, let alone deploying, any ground-launched ballistic or cruise missiles with a range between 500 and 5500 kilometers, or even testing any ground-launched missiles inside that range. Therefore, the 2013 test of the Rubezh ICBM at a range of 2,000 km – i.e. within INF Treaty range – was also a clear violation of the treaty.
Although Russia’s blatant violations of the treaty have been known to the Obama administration since at least 2010, the administration nonetheless withheld that information from the Senate so as to win ratification of the one-sided New START treaty, which obligated only the US (not Russia) to cut its nuclear arsenal, while allowing Russia to build up its arsenal – which it has been doing ever since New START’s ratification.
While the US held a significant nuclear arsenal advantage over Russia at the time the treaty was signed, this is no longer true. The US now barely enjoys parity with Russia in strategic nuclear weapons.
Returning to the subject of tactical nuclear arms, these – except those carried by submarines, surface ships, and Tu-22M bombers – cannot be delivered to the US, but can be used against America’s allies in Europe and Asia. Russia has threatened to do so on numerous occassions, which is why US allies in Europe, particularly Poland and the Baltic states, have repeatedly stressed the need for the US nuclear umbrella and for the continued deployment of American tactical nuclear weapons in Europe.
Russia has always steadfastly refused to discuss any limits on its tactical nuclear weapons, knowing that it is absolutely not in its interest to throw away the significant advantage it has over the West in this field. Russia’s leaders, unlike those of the West, are not foolish enough to do so, and will not disarm Russia unilaterally – unlike the West’s leaders.
Finally, it should be noted that the Su-34 Fullback strike aircraft, like Tu-95 and Tu-160 intercontinental bombers, can launch the Kh-55 and Kh-102 nuclear-armed cruise missiles, which have a range between 2,500 and 3,000 kms.
Russia has regained nuclear parity with the US in all categories of strategic nuclear weapons, and holds a huge lead over the US and its allies in tactical nuclear weapons and their delivery systems.
Not only is this a huge threat in and of itself, but Russia has proven itself to be quite aggressive – and quite willing to use its nuclear weapons if it senses weakness on the West’s part. It reserves the right, in its nuclear doctrine, to use atomic weapons first even if the enemy doesn’t have nuclear weapons; it has threatened to use them against the US and its allies on at least 15 separate occassions since 2007; and its bombers have repeatedly practices nuclear strikes on the US and European nations (including neutral ones such as Sweden and Finland) since 2012.
Russia has made it clear it considers the US and NATO as enemies against whom its nuclear weapons are intended. In June 2012, after conducting simulated nuclear strikes on the US, the Russian Air Force was asked what it was doing in the Northwest, and replied it was “practicing attacking the enemy.” This September, while NATO leaders were gathered in Wales, Russian nuclear-armed bombers were again simulating strikes against the US – then practiced similar attacks against Britain.
Thus, Russia constitutes by far the gravest threat to US, allied, and world security, by virtue of its nuclear arsenal alone. Countering that threat should be, and appears to be emerging as, the DOD’s #1 priority. Comprehensive modernization of the US nuclear arsenal is the only way the Russian nuclear threat can be staved off and for decades to come.
Reposted with permission of the author by Reagangirl.com 10/29/14
October 28, 2014
The Dark Ages were also the Beer Ages. Life in the open sewers of Europe made it a little dangerous to drink from common water sources. Beer, having been distilled and containing anti-bacterial ethanol, was the preferred beverage. It didn’t enhance your functioning, but it didn’t kill you either.
An article in Mother Jones recently exposed the “dark, not-so-eco-friendly, energy-sucking, toxic side” of the agri-pot industry in the United States. But trust me, the earth-worshiping hippies will reject their Mother Gaia for the high any day.
As potheads from across the fruited plain congregate in Denver and the smaller burgs throughout Colorado, I can’t help but wonder, “what the hell happened to our culture?” A majority of Colorado voters opted to legalize pot in November of 2012, many swayed by the argument: “Well, why is alcohol legal and pot isn’t? Alcohol gets you high and trillions of people die each year in drunk driving crashes!”
The answer is pretty simple, but it’s also logical, so if you’re a champion of cannabis, you might want to step out of the room so your head doesn’t explode. Let’s take a stroll back in time…
The first bender probably took place beneath a fruit tree where early man overindulged on some rotting fruit, and felt happy. Early man’s early wife tried it too and found that it made her forget, for a time, about the insects living in her hair. Peach Schnapps was discovered.
Jump ahead to 5,000 B.C. and Pyramid Pale Ale. The Mesopotamians and Egyptians became more sophisticated in their quest for the best brew and they began to distill alcoholic drinks from grain and other starchy staples.
The Dark Ages were also the Beer Ages. Life in the open sewers of Europe made it a little dangerous to drink from common water sources. Beer, having been distilled and containing anti-bacterial ethanol, was the preferred beverage. It didn’t enhance your functioning, but it didn’t kill you either.
Alcohol has been around since humans first developed the concept of cause and effect. I consume this or that, it makes me feel happy, I want more, can you drive me to the liquor store? Humans have had tens of thousands of years to learn how to assimilate alcohol.
Human tradition, especially Western tradition, is the point juncture at which alcohol and pot diverge. Alcohol is found everywhere, and virtually every culture has a set of traditions which dictate its use. Even the Mormon Church, which prohibits the drinking of alcohol, finds value in its use as a cleansing agent and disinfectant. The green energy industry will even turn feed corn into booze and sell it to you at inflated prices to put in your gas tank. Because alcohol, with its many uses, is so a deeply rooted in Western culture, the culture itself has a developed a framework entrusting its management to the personal self-control of its users.
This implicit self-management of alcohol arrives through religion, social norms, and laws set forth to protect the public from those who abuse it, the most important of which is family tradition. This makes sense since families are the best agents of personal habit, but a variety of studies further prove that values taught early in life have great staying power. Adult patterns of alcohol use begin in homes of origin, so alcohol abuse is often an inherited trait. But if his parents applied strict limits and protocols pertaining to alcohol use, the adult drinker is more likely to have good self-regulation. If alcohol was prohibited by the family because of faith, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for example, or because of a simple desire to avoid its bad effects, the adult is likely to reflect those same values and abstain completely.
Teenagers will often stray from the patterns and rules of alcohol use set forth by their families before making a determination about what their life courses. It is a statistical fact that more often than not, that once in adulthood those errant teens will return to the standards with which he was raised. Families, not government, are the best regulators of alcohol consumption. The West inculcates family traditions which deal with booze at the most personal levels. Regardless of how government attempts to legislate alcohol, it is a permanent fixture in Western society and it best regulators are parents.
Pot is not the same as alcohol. American society has no norms for the open social use of pot and other drugs. Whereas alcohol has been with mankind for thousands of years, drugs have either destroyed the populations who used them, or they are so new to the mainstream that there exist no norms for their socially acceptable use. Across the Atlantic, permissive European drug laws have done more to harm culture and erode national identity on that continent than the prior centuries of alcohol consumption.
There are tribes scattered throughout the world, from the Amazon to Southern Africa, that use drugs for healing or religious rituals. They often employ ancient traditions that regulate the use of the drugs for specific uses in rituals and social exchanges. However, looking at these egalitarian cultures one has to wonder, “Would they be building hospitals and sports stadiums instead of scratching their subsistence out of the earth and living in mud huts if they weren’t burdened by superstitions and the hallucinogenic rituals that adorn them?”
If pot is legal, why not cocaine, meth, heroin, LSD, and all their ugly counterparts? Giving a legislative wink and nod to marijuana as a socially acceptable substance would increase abuse of other, harder substances, domestic violence, property crimes, and since Americans are reluctant to allow people to languish in the gutters of their broken lives, it would also, of necessity in a compassionate society, increase the size of government.
By Marjorie Haun 10/28/14
October 27, 2014
Mark Udall is married, in every sense, to the extreme environmental Left. His rejection of the Keystone XL project, which would increase America’s energy independence and bring thousands of jobs to states across the country, is indicative of how far he is willing to go to please extremist special interests, and at the same time, keep the peace at home.
Senator Mark Udall (D) Colorado, is known for his alliances with extreme environmental groups and his “I hate fossil fuel” policies, which often puts him at odds with Colorado’s businesses, local interests, and the national economy:
- Despite a recent study showing that fracking bans in the state of Colorado would have devastating effects on the state and local economies, Mark Udall refuses to disavow fracking ban initiatives.
- He voted against a non-binding resolution in 2013 supporting completion of the Keystone XL pipeline, despite polling which shows a large majority of Coloradans support it.
- Udall’s loyalties come into question recently when billionaire philanthropist Tom Steyer vowed to “back” lawmakers who continue to oppose the KeystoneXL pipeline.
- A proponent of “green” alternative energy, Udall has a record of pushing “climate change” legislation, and saying those in Colorado who have doubts about the science behind so-called manmade global warming have “their heads in the sand.”
- In 2004 Senator Udall himself received a 100% legislative rating from the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA), which is heavily involved in activities that increase Federal Government control over areas in and around national parks and promote their long-term goals of shutting off millions of acres to human activity and development.
One of the reasons Cory Gardner, the United States Congressman from Yuma, Colorado, is such a threat to Udall’s tenure in the Senate, is that Udall has a narrow, ideological focus on environmental issues, ignores the will of the people of his state and the country, and has voted with Obama nearly 100% of the time. Knowing what we know about Udall is unpleasant enough–but many people don’t know that he is married to Maggie Fox-Udall, an environmental lawyer and activist.
Maggie Fox-Udall has been the good wife to candidate Udall. While most political wives are seen in public supporting their men, acting the supporting role of help meet and honey, Maggie Fox-Udall, whose hubby is in a celebrity death match with Gardner, has been strangely silent–inexplicably invisible. Perhaps this is why:
- Maggie Fox-Udall is currently serving as President and CEO of the “Climate Reality Project”. The Climate Reality Project is “a non-profit organization leading a campaign to help citizens around the world discover the truth about the climate crisis and bring about global change.” In a “getboulder.com” magazine interview, Mrs. Udall compares educating “climate change” skeptics that the phenomenon is a reality with that of educating the people of South Africa that Apartheid was wrong.
- Maggie Fox is the past National President of “America Votes,” which “has built a permanent advocacy and campaign infrastructure that provides coordination, data and targeting services to progressive organizations; pursues electoral reforms that expand voting rights across the country; and advances progressive policies through state and local ballot initiatives. America Votes’ strong progressive infrastructure will support our coalition partners’ advocacy efforts and facilitate the coordination of voter outreach.”
- Maggie Fox is also a former Deputy Director of The Sierra Club, whose Rocky Mountain Chapter (RMC) advocates…
- Fracking bans
- Banning oil and gas extraction and waste disposal
- Political activities that drive energy development out of the State of Colorado
- Supports state and federal legislation increasing government control and decreasing local control over land and water rights, and threatening private property rights
- An ardent Leftist, Maggie Fox campaigned for Obama in 2008. In this clip she stumps for Joe Biden and introduces him with a plug for “a green energy revolution.”
The Maggie Fox-Udall resume’ is rife with examples of extremist leanings. But it should come as no surprise. Udall is known first as an environmentalist and obstructionist of western energy projects. He has tried for nearly 3 years to push national park status for the Colorado National Monument onto the folks of Western Colorado, a large majority of whom don’t want the change. But like all ideologues, Udall and Fox are relentless.
To hardcore Leftists like the Udalls, science takes a back seat to purpose. The ends justify any means, no matter how destructive. Public opinion is a hurdle to be overcome. And truth is what they want it to be.
Colorado is sick of bad science, destructive Democrat policies, and tin-eared politicians who, instead of We the People, serve their own agendas and extreme special interest groups. Mark Udall is quite literally married to the extreme environmental Left.
by Marjorie Haun 10/27/14
October 25, 2014
Most people, even Democrats, who run for public office have a sense of decorum. Democrats, for the most part, are skilled at knowing when to wear their “nice” faces in public. But every so often you find a liberal Democrat who ditched Public Image boot camp, and instead of tucking away less-than-statesmanlike impulses, just lets it all hang out to flap in the wind. Without further ado, meet the Democrat candidate for Colorado’s 7th Senate District, Mssss Claudette Konola. What follows are excerpts from the comment thread on Konola’s Youtube campaign ad.
My opening volley gets this response. It’s funny because Konola tells us her whole reason for running is the fact that poor leadership is hurting the state of Colorado. She is one of 3 people in Colorado who actually believe our economy is improving. What does she smoke? You’ll have to ask her.
Then we see the civil side of Konola and her cabal.
Konola then tries to walk away from her comments about Coloradans and the 2nd Amendment. Apparently she hates the people of Western Colorado AND Weld County.
Konola, perennially upset with the Grand Junction Chamber of Commerce because they have never endorsed her as a candidate, can’t recall calling them “political hacks” on the mentally unstable leftist ColoradoPols.com website.
In this statesmanwomanpersonlike diatribe, Konola clings to her “religious extremist” label for all people who think women are quite capable of taking care of their own contraceptives. Raise your hand if you want into Claudette Konola’s uterus or bedroom…silence.
As an added bonus, I shared the Colorado Observer’s observation Konola’s strangely shifting positions on the 2nd Amendment.
And then things got colorful; rainbow colorful. Konola could not remember calling Obama the first gay president and Hickenlooper the first gay governor in her Post Independent column. Her supporter, of course, labeled my quote a “typical right-wing distortion.” LOL
Then things get weird.
Yes friends, citizens of Western Colorado and Weld County, this is the creature running for state office. For more delightful cognitive dissonance from Claudette Konola, please search Coloradopols.com and the Post Independent. And vote…but don’t vote for Konola.
This message was approved by Ronald Reagan–because Konola and her supporters hate Ronald Reagan
Posted by Reagangirl.com 10/25/14
October 24, 2014
As published on Colorado Watchdogwire.com
THE COLORADO BLUEPRINT TODAY: STATE SENATE EDITION
Close inspection of a set of Democratic-supporting 527 groups—tax-exempt organizations created primarily to influence the selection of candidates to all levels of public office—and independent expenditure committees raises a number of questions about both the mechanics and the politics of the Colorado Democracy Alliance’s decade-old strategy.
The organizations in question first came to Watchdog Wire’s attention when they produced an ad critical of State Senate candidate Tim Neville for his stand on federal budget issues. The ad itself was produced by the Citizens’ Alliance For Accountable Leadership, and was featured on the You Tube channel of Colorado Voters’ Voice.
Those two organizations appear to be part of a group of teams devoted specifically to swing State Senate races, also including Mainstream Colorado, and the Colorado Voter Information Project.
Here’s how the money flows:
TRACER records show that Mainstream Colorado has contributed $100,000 to the Colorado Voter Information Project (CVIP), which has passed that along to Colorado Voters’ Voice (CVV). The national Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee has contributed $200,000 to CVIP, which has passed that along to CVV. This $300,000 constitutes CVV’s only funding for this cycle.
Read the rest of the article at Colorado Watchdogwire
Featured image from Shuttertstock
October 22, 2014
Thank you James O’Keefe and Project Veritas for obtaining this footage proving Colorado Democrats are complicit in vote fraud schemes for Mark Udall (D U.S. Senate), Joe Salazar (D Colorado State D31) and others. PLEASE SHARE!
Please donate to Project Veritas here
Posted by Reagangirl.com 10/22/14
October 22, 2014
The BLM, in concert with other agencies such as the National Park Service and Forest Service, plans to shut off roughly 1/10 of open American lands to human activity.
An internal document published by Department of the Interior titled “Treasured Landscapes”, was not meant to be released for public consumption. The House of Representatives Natural Resources Committee, however, obtained and published the 2009 draft in an effort to create public awareness of the shocking plan within the BLM and other government agencies to confiscate hundreds of millions of acres across the country through the creation of national monuments, national parks, wilderness areas and other protected zones.
The Introduction of this “discussion paper” details a 21st Century plan to “finalize appropriate conservation designations” of areas in the United States equivalent to the size of Wyoming and Colorado combined, overcoming “jurisdictional boundaries” (read state and private property rights) to create “a modern landscape-level management system…” In other words, the BLM, in concert with other agencies such as the National Park Service and Forest Service, plans to shut off roughly 1/10 of open American lands to human activity.
The “Treasured Landscapes” plan is being implemented by the current administration, as seen in a number of “Presidential declarations” which have, by executive order, created several new national monuments and protected areas without public comment or Congressional action. It gets worse. Read the entire text of the internal document here:
Friends of the Colorado National Monument has fought to keep a local treasure, a fixture of our daily lives, from undergoing a bureaucratic metamorphosis into a restrictive and risky national park. As plans of federal government agencies are revealed, it becomes clear that they view human beings as a problem to be solved, and not as citizens to be served. Please read and share this chilling document with everyone you know.
Posted with permission from Friends of the Colorado National Monument by Reagangirl.com 10/22/14
October 21, 2014
As first published in Colorado Watchdog Wire
Embattled National Parks Director Spends $38,320 to Filter Free Speech in Mesa County
Lisa Eckert, the embattled National Parks Director for the Colorado National Monument conducted ongoing “listening sessions” last week seeking public comment on her plan to prohibit certain vehicles from Monument Road, a public right-of-way which runs through the Colorado National Monument from the Grand Valley to the ranching community of Glade Park. Lisa Eckert admits that her plan to prohibit “hazardous material” hauls on Monument Road did not “land well,” but nevertheless appears to be pushing forward.
Following the announcement in June of her unilateral prohibition of essential vehicles from Monument Road, Eckert received significant blowback, including a reprimand from Mesa County’s regional newspaper. But despite unyielding public opposition to her plan, Eckert continues to spend thousands on expensive “facilitators” to moderate and report on her “listening sessions.”
According to a September 24th Grand Junction Daily Sentinel article by Gary Harmon, those hired to moderate Eckert’s series of listening sessions have cost American taxpayers well over $38,000. The article says:
A Boulder-based company, CDR Associates, [last spring] planned and conducted listening sessions and interviews in connection with the drafting of a visitor activity and commercial services plan and a final report. The Park Service paid CDR $26,876.
Karen Barbee of “Steadfast Communications,” received $11,444.80 for moderating the two October meetings. Barbee is a certified trainer with the Center for Non-violent Communication and lives in Glenwood Springs.
Barbee’s “non-violent communication” approach did not go over well at the October 7th meeting in Glade Park, where she attempted to lull the crowd by using “reflective” language and “emotional words,” often used in mediation and conflict resolution. Barbee told the crowd several times that their “anger” would prevent the meeting from being productive, which many Glade Park residents found insulting. Using her “non-violent communication” technique, Barbee restated the comments from audience members, submitting the restated versions to the written record of the meeting. Nancy Aldrich-Arellano, of Glade Park, protested Ms. Barbee’s subtle paraphrasing of comments saying, “That’s not what I said. Please don’t twist my words!”
Both Barbee and Eckert told the audience of their desire to “find solutions together.” The people of Glade Park, none of whom displayed support for Eckert, made it clear that there would be no agreement with her plan to prohibit vehicles such as propane trucks, cattle trucks, and hay haulers from Monument Road. Feeling like déjà vu all over again, the residents of Glade Park were understandably irate, since the October 7 meeting was round three in the Monument Road battle, and many felt that they were simply not being heard by Eckert and others from the National Park Service. David Wilkenson, a resident of Glade Park, wrote of Eckert’s facilitated listening sessions, “It look suspiciously like a disingenuous, wannabe-clever manipulation to achieve her goals.”
Resistance from those who live and work in Glade Park is not Eckert’s only hurdle to banning certain vehicles from Monument Road. In 1986 the matter was decided in the John R. Wilkenson v. U.S. Department of Interior, et al. decision handed down by the U.S. District Court. In that case the people of Glade Park joined forces with Mesa County to push back against restrictions and fees applied by the National Park Service regarding the use of Monument Road. It reads:
It is…Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed, that a public right-of-way exists in that portion of Rim Rock Drive extending from the East Entrance of the Colorado National Monument to the Glade Park Cut-Off, and across the Glade Park Cut-Off [*1281] connecting the DS road to Glade Park with the Monument Road to Highway 340, and the use of that road for the purpose of continuous travel through the Monument in a non-recreational use for which no entrance fee may lawfully be charged, and the defendants enjoined from charging any such fee or otherwise preventing such non-recreational use of the roadways.
Speculation mounted the following evening (October 8) that Eckert’s listening sessions constitute more spectacle than substance when another public meeting was held at Two Rivers Convention Center in Grand Junction. David Wilkenson, quoted previously, is the brother of John R. Wilkenson, the plaintiff in Wilkenson v. U.S. Department of the Interior. He stood quietly outside the doors of Two Rivers handing out flyers which cited and summarized the 1986 case that concluded Monument Road is a public right-of-way. Wilkenson says was approached by a representative from the National Park Service who asked for one of his flyers, then went back inside. A few moments later employees from Two Rivers Convention Center asked him to leave the premises.
Despite the fact that Wilkenson was contacted by a National Park Service representative before being thrown out by Two Rivers’ staff, Eckert, in a Grand Junction Daily Sentinel story dated October 10, claimed to have found out about the incident after the fact. Gary Harmon quotes her here:
“There was a question of contract and that question was asked to Two Rivers staff who I assumed handled (it) accordingly,” Eckert wrote [in an email]. “Since Mr. Wilkenson has never introduced himself to me, it’s unfortunate he didn’t choose to attend the public meeting and do so. I believe there was a lot of varied input and sharing.”
Eckert’s words infer that Mr. Wilkenson “didn’t choose to attend the public meeting,” when Wilkenson himself and a witnesses to the event, Sean Hunt of Grand Junction, reported to me that he was asked to leave.
I later interviewed David Wilkenson to discuss the 1986 case with him as well as his experience having been forced off the premises of Two Rivers Convention Center where Eckert was purportedly conducting a meeting for the public. He said of Eckert, who is originally from Madison, Wisconsin, that by using “facilitators” to paraphrase comments made by Mesa County citizens, and preventing an opposing voice from participating in a public meeting, she was “infringing on the First Amendment rights citizens.” Of the ongoing battle for Monument Road, which is a lifeline for the people of Glade Park, Wilkenson said, “It’s fundamental to the operation of the Colorado National Monument that the National Parks Director be in touch with the people of the region.” Whether or not Lisa Eckert gets more in touch with the will of the people of Mesa County has yet to be seen.
Reposted by Reagangirl.com 10/21/2014
From the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons
As originally published on the AAPS Online website 10/6/14
Protect Americans against Importation of Deadly Diseases Like Ebola, Says AAPS
- On August 8, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the Ebola epidemic to be a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC).The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has stated that a widespread outbreak in the U.S. is highly unlikely because of our sophisticated medical and public health infrastructure. However, the system is only as strong as its weakest link, and violation of basic precautions has already necessitated the monitoring of 100 contacts of one patient in Dallas who entered by air from Liberia.Basic public health principles dictate that epidemics need to be contained at the source. Even a “small outbreak” of Ebola would be extremely costly in lives and treasure.Hemorrhagic fever viruses such as Ebola have been widely discussed as a biological weapon. Deliberate introduction of such a weapon, whether in a warhead or a human vector, would be an act of war and a crime against humanity. Protection of our population is a matter of national security.
In addition to the Ebola threat, thousands of American children have been sickened, a few have died, and some have been paralyzed, probably permanently, because of enterovirus D-68. The CDC has been silent about the source of this epidemic. It is speculated that it could be from sending tens of thousands of children from an endemic region to American schools.
Since the primary role of the federal government is to protect the citizenry, AAPS calls for congressional hearings and consideration of legislation to:
Require persons entering the U.S. from West Africa or other areas reporting Ebola to undergo a 25-day period of quarantine;
Require that all illegal entrants undergo an adequate period of quarantine with screening to assure freedom from tuberculosis, infestation with scabies or lice or other ectoparasites, or other communicable diseases;
Protect whistleblowers who report potential public health threats;
Assure that timely and accurate information is reported to the public and medical facilities about the existence of threats and effective precautions.
The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is a national organization representing physicians in all specialties, founded in 1943 to preserve private medicine and the patient-physician relationship.
October 18, 2014
With a mortality rate of 70%, Ebola is an epidemic for which one cannot over-prepare. Should there be widespread outbreaks in the United States, the last resort to personal survival may be self-quarantine. The economic and political consequences of millions of citizens staying home for extended periods of time, eliminating unnecessary contact with others, would be devastating. But in the case of an Ebola outbreak in your community, to do otherwise may be deadly.
If Ebola should pass into history as a big scare that was properly contained, that’s great. The following preparations are beneficial in any form of emergency, from the loss of a job, to economic crash, to regional shortages.
Take an inventory of what you have, and supplement it so that you can be prepared to keep yourselves and your loved-ones safe should all external safeguards against an Ebola pandemic fail.
OBTAIN A 3-MONTH SUPPLY OF FOOD, FIRST AID SUPPLIES, MEDICINE, DRY GOODS, AND OTHER DAILY ESSENTIALS:
Medicine and Personal Hygiene: Obtain a 90-day supply of the following and store it securely away from moisture and heat.
- OTC Pain killers and anti-inflammatories (Tylenol, Advil, Aspirin)
- 90 days worth of prescription medications (many pharmacies offer discounts on a 90-day supply)
- Dietary supplements, especially essentials like calcium, vitamin C, etc.
- Feminine supplies, diapers, wipes, toilet paper, paper towels, tissues
- OTC Allergy medications, topical anti-allergy cremes, Epi-pen (with a prescription) if needed
- OTC Cold and flu medications
- Topical antibiotic ointment
- Epsom salts, rubbing alcohol, hydrogen peroxide, witch hazel, mineral oil, aloe vera gel
- Tooth paste, dental floss, soap, deodorant, razors, shampoo, lotion, etc.
- Liquid bleach
- Laundry and dish detergent, cleaning supplies, rags
- Garbage bags
- Other dry goods or pharmacy items that you expect to use a few times per year
Pantry supplies: Buy what you eat and involve your family in making your long-term storage choices. Obtain a 90-day supply of basic food and supplies for your pets. All of the following items have a shelf life of much longer than 90 days. Be sure to store them in a cool place with a stable temperature (garages are not good) away from light.
- Canned Meats
- Dried meats such as jerky, chipped beef, summer sausage, salami, pepperoni
- Velveeta or a similar shelf-stable cheese product
- Powdered cheese
- Wet canned vegetables, tomatoes, beans, condiments, and fruit
- Easy to prepare dry boxed meals and side dishes ( Macaroni and Cheese is great because it is comfort food.)
- Canned soups and stews
- Dried pasta and a variety of bottled or canned pasta sauces
- Instant potatoes
- Dried beans
- Dried fruit, raisins
- Boxed Jello and pudding desserts
- Boxed cake, muffin, dessert, and cookie mixes (treats and comfort foods have a lot of psychological value during times of stress)
- Boxed cereal, oatmeal, cream-of-wheat, cracked wheat, etc.
- Complete pancake mix, biscuit mix
- Flour, cornmeal, cornstarch, arrowroot
- Sugars, honey, molasses, corn syrup
- Powdered drinks, hot cocoa, fruit drinks, powdered milk, other preferences such as coffee or tea
- Evaporated milk and sweetened condensed milk
- Baby food and formula
- Peanut butter, Nutella, salted nuts
- Condiments, salt, pepper, herbs, spices, vegetable oil, olive oil, shortening, peanut butter, jams, jellies, syrups, ketchup, mustard, soy sauce, pickles, olives, capers, picante sauce, hot sauces, and other condiments that you use on a regular basis
- Packaged gravy mixes and bouillons
For your freezer: Properly wrapped meats and other foods will last in a freezer well over 90 days. The key to making your freezer an effective tool for home storage is to Store what you Eat, and Eat what you Store. If there is empty space in your freezer, fill the spaces with 3/4 full water bottles. Your freezer will be more efficient when it is filled with frozen items and, if your lose power for a time, the food will stay frozen longer, up to 72 hours if you leave the freezer door closed.
- Cured meats such as ham, sausages, bacon, etc.
- Frozen fruits and vegetables
- Prepared foods such as pizzas
- Butter, margarine, cream cheese, block cheese, shredded cheese
- Sealed packages of pork, beef or poultry
- Breads, bagels
- Candy bars
- Ice cream (don’t underestimate the value of comforting treats, especially if you have children)
- Bags of flour, biscuit or pancake mix (placing these items in the freezer greatly extends their shelf life and will fill up the empty space that may make your freezer less efficient)
- A basic first aid kit
- Several flashlights with batteries, tactical flashlights, emergency candles or lamps, fuel, matches or lighters
- If you have an outdoor grill, keep it well maintained and the fuel tank full
- Sternos, a hibachi or other simple cooking devices
- A battery powered or crank up radio S
- Short wave “HAM” radio and trained operator within your circle of friends or church group
- Obtain and store seeds properly
- Obtain basic gardening implements
- Become educated about gardening basics
- Teach your children how to work in a garden and enjoy the process of growing food
HAVE THE MEANS TO DEFEND YOUR HOME AND FOOD STORAGE:
Obtain firearms and learn how to use them. Know how to care for them, store them, and receive proper training so that you will be psychologically prepared to use them! Social chaos is often a life and death struggle and frightened, hungry people will try to get rid of you and take your stuff.
The only government we can depend upon are those layers of government closest to the individual: ourselves, family, church, neighborhood, community, and county. There will be great peace and safety in acting now to make your home a refuge from the storm.
Stay vigilant. Stay prayerful.
by Marjorie Haun 10/18/14