Radio Free Redoubt: 2022 Young Partisan OTP Contest

Radio Free Redoubt recently announced this year’s OTP contest:

YOUNG PARTISANS!  (17 AND YOUNGER) GET READY!

WIN AN OFFICIAL CHRISTMAS STORY COLLECTOR EDITION, 200-SHOT, LEVER-ACTION, REPEATER AIR RIFLE, WITH A COMPASS IN THE STOCK, AND THIS THING WHICH TELLS TIME, FROM THE DAISY MUSEUM!

INCLUDING CUSTOM RADIO FREE REDOUBT LASER ENGRAVING!

We are gearing up for the annual Young Partisan Red Ryder BB Gun Giveaway! (17 yrs old & under) Be sure to listen to the John Jacob Schmidt Show this coming Sunday evening, Dec, 11th, at 8pm Pacific (or the uploaded podcast the following morning) for your chance to enter the drawing!

PLUS, PRIZES FOR 2ND AND 3RD PLACE RUNNER UPS!

===============================================

INSTRUCTIONS:

  1. PRACTICE USING OTPs (instructions and resources linked below in this posting)
  2. Listen to the weekly RFR podcast live, Sunday evening, December 11th, or the RFR Podcast on Podbean uploaded on Monday.   Write down the numbers read by Lady Liberty during the show.
  3. Use the ‘STAR‘ One Time Pad to decrypt the numbers read by Lady Liberty in the radio show.
  4. Use the Conversion Chart (below) to convert the decrypted numbers into letters, revealing the secret message.
  5. The secret message that you will decode IS the password to open the 2022 OTP Christmas Red Ryder Contest Page.  Follow the instructions!  You’ll have SIX WHOLE DAYS to work on decrypting the secret message and getting your entry submitted.  Entries must be received by Saturday, December 17th, midnight (Pacific Time).
  6.  Tune in to the John Jacob Schmidt show (Sunday, December 18th) on Radio Free Redoubt to see if you’re one of the winners!

======================================================

THIS YEAR’S CHRISTMAS ONE TIME PAD (OTP) CONTEST INVOLVES LETTERS AND AT LEAST ONE SPECIAL CHARACTER.

(Scroll down in this posting for practice exercises and One Time Pad encryption resources.)

The 2022 One Time Pad, titled ‘STAR‘, is required to decrypt this year’s secret message.  Save it in a secret place!

Remember, you have to ADD to decode the message.

CONVERSION TABLE YOU WILL NEED FOR THIS YEAR’S CONTEST

Once you correctly add the secret message numbers to the STAR One Time Pad, you will have a set of numbers that you will then need to convert into a message that you can read.  You will need the Conversion Table below to convert those numbers to readable characters.

(the conversion table is always the same)

========================

PRACTICE!  PRACTICE!  PRACTICE!

===== GREAT PRACTICE RESOURCES BELOW =====

The resources below are for practice only, and are separate from the specific 2021 contest instructions at the top of this posting.

Besides the practice exercise below, here is a link to the excellent 2019 practice page, so you can learn how to decode One Time Pad (OTP) encrypted messages:  https://radiofreeredoubt.com/2019/11/21/2019-young-partisan-otp-contest-primer/

=====================================

Here’s another practice exercise that should help you to get ready!

NOTE:  Numbers will not be used in this year’s decoded message, but this practice exercise shows how numbers have been included in previous contests.

Up until this point we have converted letters into numbers and then converted the numbers back to letters using the one time pads and conversion tables. There are times when you will need to send or receive numbers also. Exact numbers are important parts of the message. Times, weights, telephone numbers need to be exact. You can’t guess what the sender probably meant when it comes to numbers. Our conversion table doesn’t even have numbers on it. How do we send numbers accurately?

Numbers are sent by repeating them three times. For example if you wanted to send “123” you would send your message as “111222333” If you were to receive a message of “111222333” you would know that it was meant to be “123”.

In order to prevent confusion and errors, number strings are preceded and ended with the “figure” character which is the number 90 on the conversion table. If you wanted to encode “123” you would use the following: “9011122233390” The “90” alerts you to the fact that numbers/figures are next and when you see the other “90” you know that the numbers/figures are ending.

Let’s practice a short message by using the below One Time Pad Census and the Conversion Table. You receive the following encoded message:

93786 00207 57770 04719 08239 92214

Remember that you add to decode and you don’t carry to the next place. (6+7=3 not 13)

Brushbeater Publishes The Guerrilla’s Guide to the Baofeng

NC Scout of Brushbeater has written The Guerrilla’s Guide to the Baofeng which is now available on Amazon. It’s an 8″x10″ paperback with 156 pages. If you are interested in the austere use of radio communications or you purchased an inexpensive Baofeng radio in order to be prepared and are wondering how to use it, then add this to your Christmas list.

The Guerrilla’s Guide To The Baofeng Radio is out and ready for purchase!

Amazon link: https://amzn.to/3FkwvUq

Its been a long time in the making, but the book is finally out. With chapters on communications planning, improvised antennas, operational considerations for sustainment, tactical and clandestine purposes, digital operations and yes, encryption, this book is an easy to follow how-to manual taking you from whatever your knowledge base may be and takes it to the next level.

From the blurb on Amazon:

The Guerrilla’s Guide To The Baofeng Radio is a handbook for those finding themselves in an austere environment, an underground resistance, or going into harm’s way with one of the most common pieces of communications equipment in the world. Going far beyond simple programming or what’s written from the Amateur Radio perspective, this manual goes in-depth on how to communicate, creating a communications plan, improvised wire antennas, digital operations and encryption in an easy to follow, step-by-step format based on combat proven methods. Whether you’ve just invested in a few of the inexpensive radios for an uncertain future or find yourself in rough corners of the world, this manual covers how to create communications where there otherwise would be none.

And the author info on Amazon:

NC Scout is the pseudonym of a former member of one of the US Army’s premier special reconnaissance units with two combat deployments to Iraq and one to Afghanistan. He runs Brushbeater Training and Consulting, which teaches courses on small unit tactics, communications and survival based on skills he learned while serving to prepare people for uncertain times ahead. He is the owner and senior editor of American Partisan, and can be found on his podcast, Radio Contra.

Christmas Potluck Meeting

The next meeting with be our Christmas potluck dinner meeting. It will be held on Thursday, Dec. 8th, at 6:00 pm in the Patriot Barn at 22202 N Hinzerling, Prosser.

For the potluck, we ask that people bring dishes according to last names beginning:

A-M dessert

N-Z salad or side dish

There will be some BBQ meat provided.

Short presentations include:

Matt S. covering/demoing “budget” night vision options. If you have your own night vision, you are encouraged to bring it for comparison and familiarization purposes.

Election recap and political climate.

Radio Free Redoubt: When Ham Radio is Banned and Non-Permissive Comms Environments Part-3

The following recording is from Radio Free Redoubt Episode 22-40 When Ham Radio is Banned and Non-Permissive Comms Environments Part-3.

  • Assessing Communications goals
  • HF Renaissance in the US Army (Review)
  • Introduction to NVIS for HF
  • Antennas and Learning Your Footprint  (are you meeting your goals?) 
    • WSPRNet
    • PSKReporter
    • VOACAP
  • ATAK/CIVTAK battle tracking/incident tracking
  • Polarization of antennas on VHF (vertical vs horizontal)

Assessing your communications goals.  What are you hoping to accomplish?:

In a WROL (Without Rule of Law) environment, what types of communications do you see yourself conducting, out of necessity?

Local:

  • Voice only, for quick coordination with others?  Digital/data mode capabilities for more in-depth intelligence and reports sharing?

Regional (up to 400 miles)

  • To an individual (family member or friends) just to stay in touch and check on their welfare, or supporting regional operations?
  • Welfare vs. Operational vs. Strategic communications
  • Voice vs. Digital modes

Continental (Intermediate to long range / 400 miles and  beyond):

  • To an individual (family member or friends) just to stay in touch and check on their welfare, or supporting regional operations?
  • Welfare vs. Operational vs. Strategic communications
  • Voice vs. Digital modes

Why will you be communicating? 

  • You and a family member (you and your brother), or multiple groups of family members or friends?
  • Mutual support, coordination and sharing of intel and coordination between multiple organizations?
  • Strategic communications supporting command and control for leadership to coordinate supplies.

Ask yourself, and answer these questions: 
– Who is it that I intent to communicate with?
– What is the purpose for our communicaitons?
– Why is this a permissive operating environment?

– Who is establishing the rule that I cannot communicate?
– Enforcement.  Who can stop me and what are their capabilities?  What type of threat do they impose?

  • Is it a local criminal or revolutionary element that’s forcing hams to work for them, or attempting to locate hams to take their equipment for their own use?
  • Is it low-intensity conflict, with skirmishes between rival factions with no RDF (radio direction finding) or jamming capabilities?
  • Is this a civil war, or an invasion, with portions of your country under enemy control?
  • Are you caught in hostile/occupied territory?
  • If you are in friendly territory, does your side have air superiority or air defenses?  Are you within, or outside of, artillery range (close to a border or forward edge of a battle line) ?
  • Is the threat/enemy force technologically advanced with RDF, jamming, or guided weapons capabilities?

All these things have to be factored in to your decision making and risk assessment processes.

Tenth Amendment Center: Patrick Henry’s Warning on “Implied Authority”

TJ Martinell at The Tenth Amendment Center writes about Patrick Henry’s insistence on certain amendments to the proposed Constitution of the United States before ratification in Patrick Henry’s Warning on “Implied Authority”. He argued that it must be explicitly stated that the Constitution did not provide any powers the federal government that were not explicitly stated in the Constitution, lest Congress construe that they did have the power.

Patrick Henry’s impassioned remarks during the final days of the Virginia Ratifying Convention were the culmination of week-long arguments between skeptics of the proposed Constitution and its supporters, such as James Madison.

In modern context, it is easy at first glance to find much of what Henry said to be, unfortunately, pro-slavery. In fact, many modern scholars focus completely on what they might call pro-slavery scare tactics.  But this surface understanding of his statements misses the bigger issue at stake for opponents of ratification – whether the new Constitution opened the door for a federal government to invent new authority and subvert state sovereignty.

The convention was closely divided on its support for the Constitution. Henry had hoped the state legislature convening would force the convention to adjourn. Instead, the legislature accommodated, allowing the convention to go on.

After the convention’s presiding officer George Wythe moved to ratify the Constitution, Henry leapt up in protest, adamantly insisting, as he had many times during the debates, that the document required amendments addressing numerous concerns. Chief among them was his fear that the Constitution gave the federal government “implied” powers not specifically stated.

Among other things, Henry demanded that its limited scope of power be specifically stated in the form of an amendment (bold emphasis added):

With respect to that part of the proposal which says that every power not granted remains with the people, it must be previous to adoption, or it will involve this country in inevitable destruction. To talk of it as a thing subsequent, not as one of your unalienable rights, is leaving it to the casual opinion of the Congress who shall take up the consideration of that matter. They will not reason with you about the effect of this Constitution. They will not take the opinion of this committee concerning its operation. They will construe it as they please.

He also reiterated his sentiment that the Articles of Confederation was an acceptable government and need not be changed:

We now act under a happy system, which says that a majority may alter the government when necessary. But by the paper proposed, a majority will forever endeavor in vain to alter it. Three fourths may. Is not this the most promising time for securing the necessary alteration? Will you go into that government, where it is a principle that a contemptible minority may prevent an alteration?

Further, there was no risk either to undermining what was already included in the Constitution or threatening full ratification by other states due to opposition (bold emphasis added);

It would be in vain for me to show that there is no danger to prevent our obtaining those amendment, if you are not convinced already. If the other states will not agree to them, it is not an inducement to union. The language of this paper is not dictatorial, but merely a proposition for amendments. The proposition of Virginia met with a favorable reception before. We proposed that convention which met at Annapolis. It was not called dictatorial. We proposed that at Philadelphia. Was Virginia thought dictatorial? But Virginia is now to lose her preminence. Those rights of equality to which the meanest individual in the community is entitled, are to bring us down infinitely below the Delaware people. Have we not a right to say, Hear our propositions!

The reason Henry devoted so much attention to the issue of “implied powers” is because it was the fundamental issue. If the federal government possessed implied powers, then it could (and would) interpret itself to have the authority to undermine or violate other rights. 

Henry’s contention was that the new Constitution did not adequately clarify this, contrary to what the Federalists said.

Henry and other opponents of ratification strongly believed that if the Constitution was adopted without amendments, the ramifications were many and varied. One Henry specifically mentioned was the question of slavery. Under the Articles of Confederation, it was left to the states to decide whether to retain or abolish slavery. However, Henry believed the Constitution would bestow this power to Congress via “implied powers.”

One way would be to call slaves to arms for national defense and offer them their freedom for their participation, as the British had offered American slaves during the War of Independence.

Henry said (bold emphasis added):

That power which is said to be intended for security and safety may be rendered detestable and oppressive. If they give power to the general government to provide for the general defence, the means must be commensurate to the end. All the means in the possession of the people must be given to the government which is intrusted with the public defence.

In this state there are two hundred and thirty-six thousand blacks, and there are many in several other states. But there are few or none in the Northern States; and yet, if the Northern States shall be of opinion that our slaves are numberless, they may call forth every national resource. May Congress not say, that every black man must fight? Did we not see a little of this last war? We were not so hard pushed as to make emancipation general; but acts of Assembly passed that every slave who would go to the army should be free.

Or, if northern states composed a majority in Congress they could simply vote to abolish slavery on the auspices of having the “implied authority,” Henry said. When others at the convention objected to this, he pointed out that the federal government would have the power of granting passports – something specifically prohibited in the Articles of Confederation – even though it doesn’t specifically grant that authority.

“They can exercise power by implication in one instance, as well as in another. Thus, by the gentleman’s own argument, they can exercise the power, though it be not delegated.”

It’s easy to argue that Henry was simply trying to preserve slavery. But his position requires nuance. We don’t have to defend Henry’s comments to place them in the context of the broader constitutional debate.

While saying slavery is “detested,” he added “is it practicable, by any human means, to liberate them without producing the most dreadful and ruinous consequences?”

As he viewed it, the institution of slavery was a Southern issue, and how it was dealt with affected Southerners. His fear was that the matter would be dealt with nationally by people far removed the situation and fundamentally unconcerned with the consequences.

“Every other property of the people of Virginia, is in jeopardy, and put in the hands of those who have no similarity of situation with us,” he said. “This is a local matter, and I can see no propriety in subjecting it to Congress.”

There are a couple of points to consider.

One is that Henry did not advocate for slavery, although he opposed abolition. The institution had been brought in more than a century prior, and by the time of Henry’s birth it had become an indispensable part of the region’s economy. There were also perceived problems with ending the institution that even southern abolitionists acknowledged. Henry referred to this as slavery’s “fatal effects.”

For Henry, it was really about local control. His view was that those directly impacted by slavery – the people in the Southern states – should decide how to deal with the institution. He didn’t want people who had no stake in the issue and little real knowledge of the situation in the southern states to make decisions on their behalf. 

Lastly, Henry had this attitude regarding every issue, not just slavery. If it was a local matter, it needed to be handled locally. The peculiarity of slavery’s presence in debates over freedom and individual rights doesn’t undermine Henry’s perspective.

We see this in Henry’s final statement during the convention, which drew such rancor that he was forced to sit down.

I see the awful immensity of the dangers with which it is pregnant. I see it. I feel it. I see beings of a higher order anxious concerning our decision. When I see beyond the horizon that bounds human eyes, and look at the final consummation of all human things, and see those intelligent beings which inhabit the ethereal mansions reviewing the political decisions and revolutions which, in the progress of time, will happen in America, and the consequent happiness or misery of mankind, I am led to believe that much of the account, on one side or the other, will depend on what we now decide. Our own happiness alone is not affected by the event. All nations are interested in the determination. We have it in our power to secure the happiness of one half of the human race. Its adoption may involve the misery of the other hemisphere.

Despite his intense rhetoric, James Madison shortly after got up to say he agreed with Henry on the amendments: he favored their inclusion and saw nothing in them that would undercut powers already included in the Constitution. 

The convention would ultimately ratify the Constitution, with the inclusion of recommended amendments that eventually lead to the creation of the Bill of Rights. 

Considering what transpired just years after, history has vindicated Henry’s worst fears over implied powers. 

To give one example, the federal government would soon debate what “necessary and proper” meant in the Constitution and whether that authorized Congress to charter a national bank. Even with the Tenth Amendment making it clear implied powers did not exist, the Supreme Court would aid the Federalists in effectively redefining words to circumnavigate constitutional limitations.  

The American Mind: Authoritarianism Without Authority

In Authoritarianism without Authority, Noelle Mering of the Ethics and Public Policy Center writes about the destruction of the concept of authority and how it leads to authoritarianism and the support for authoritarianism.

Any worthwhile postmortem of our COVID-19 response must account for two things: first, the scientistic fallacy that motivated the response itself. Second, the reasons why so many people fell in line en masse.

As Aaron Kheriaty explains, unlike the practice of science, the ideology of scientism “is the philosophical claim . . . that science is the only valid form of knowledge.” Scientism claims knowledge that cannot be supported by science itself. As Kheriaty illustrates, it is totalitarian in nature.

In the past few years, examples of scientism in action are legion. Its mantra is the oft-repeated imperative to just “follow the science!” In November of 2020, Anthony Fauci, the pope of scientism, complained that “science” had become politically divisive—as if debate and dissent are somehow antithetical to the scientific or political processes rather than inherent in both. Fauci reprimanded the public that in spite of their independent spirit, “now is the time to do what you’re told.”

Crafting broad public policy necessarily involves a whole host of various prudential and political judgments outside the realm of science. Ethical concerns must be weighed, and various goods ordered. Smuggling such prudential and political judgments under the cloak of science effectively condemns reasonable dissent as anti-science, as a heresy worthy of censorship and ridicule.

This should have alarmed us all. Freedom of thought and speech are fundamental to a truth-seeking society. Censorship and collective shaming are essential to the perpetuation of a fraud. Yet half the country shrugged, and more than half played along.

In his book, The Captive Mind, Polish poet and political dissident Czeslaw Milosz wrote of the various ways in which people come to accept totalitarian narratives. His own break from Communism he describes as attributable less to the reasoning of his mind than to the revolt of his stomach: “A man may persuade himself, by the most logical reasoning, that he will greatly benefit his health by swallowing live frogs; and, thus rationally convinced, he may swallow a first frog, then the second; but at the third his stomach will revolt. In the same way, the growing influence of the doctrine on my way of thinking came up against the resistance of my whole nature.”

The list of live frogs forced down our throats under the name of “The Science” is long. Liquor stores and strip clubs are essential for humanity, but churches are expendable, according to “The Science.” “The Science” also calculated that the entirely predictable catastrophe of school closures on kids’ emotional, physical, academic, and psychological health was worthwhile. Disagree and you’re a grandma killer.

For many, the third frog came in the summer of 2020, when cities across America exploded in protests and riots, masks barely on or entirely missing from protestors’ faces, bodies jostling together by the thousands for hours and days and weeks on end. Meanwhile, others watched their loved ones die over FaceTime, deprived of one of the most important and deeply human experiences in life. Was it “The Science” that allowed one, but not the other, sort of gathering?

Having recently lost my father, the idea that such a clearly politicized edict could have prevented us from being physically present with him stirs in me a combination of revulsion and rage. Holding his hand, kissing his forehead, cupping his face and looking into each other’s eyes when he could no longer form words—these are not matters of scientific measure.

How did every American’s stomach not revolt against this grotesque injustice?

Mental Lockdown

People grow compliant for many reasons. Certainly, there is a certain fear of public shame that always accompanies deviation from the norm. There is a deeply-rooted human hunger to belong, even if it is just to the tribalism of a political movement. With family life increasingly destabilized, that hunger is more acute than ever, rendering political tribalism more ferocious.

A more disheartening explanation is that contempt for others can be pleasurable and feels like a shortcut to actual virtue.

But perhaps the most fundamental reason is that a society shut off from the transcendent is bound to comply with a totalizing regime like scientism. Obedience is the inevitable result of a society long blinded to the terrible, wonderful mystery of the supernatural. Death is far too imbued with meaning and mystery to categorize, so we anesthetize ourselves to it. Avoidance becomes not just a matter of averting our eyes but an obsessive project of prolonging our lives. In this context, the calculations of scientism carry a satisfying force of moral clarity, while lacking any of the moral complexity that a truly human account requires. This is the ideological sleight of hand: we think our eyes are opened, when really our ability to think has simply been circumscribed within the narrow limits of scientism’s domain.

A truly human account grants the limits of science and so makes room to revere the hidden and higher things before which every knee must bend. Paradoxically, it is in that veneration of the things we can’t measure that we grow resistant to the dehumanizing demands of authoritarianism.

Authority vs. Authoritarianism

Over the past couple of years I’ve often heard people muse about how the “Question authority” generation of the 1960s became the compliant generation, imploring tech companies to silence anyone who, well . . . questioned authority.

But this behavior makes perfect sense if we understand that there is a chasm of difference between authority and authoritarianism, just as there is between science and scientism. The call to question authority, popularized by countercultural icon Timothy Leary, was not an effort to root out corruption in order to preserve proper authority. Rather, it was an injunction to undermine the understanding that there is any such thing as authority at all.

Authority, as the etymology indicates, is generative. Its absence leads to degeneracy. Cultural revolution is not a rejection of a particular as much as it is a rejection of a whole. It isn’t this old book we destroy but the reverence for old books generally. It is not that saint whose statue and memory is reviled; the concept of sanctity in its entirety is destroyed. Iconoclasm is not only directed at marble and bronze, paper and text, but at authority itself—most effectively through the role of fatherhood both human and divine.

And what will fill the void when we have broken down the statues, villainized the heroes, sneered at tradition, deconstructed father and mother, and divorced ourselves from our Author? It won’t be the freedom that comes from a fear of God but the perpetual fear of everything else.

The atheism of scientism is inextricably tied to the psychology of compliance. But as Milosz explains, the cure for this oppression is natural revulsion. At some point your body, your nature, your very being will feel disgusted at the thought of swallowing one more lie. Welcome that revulsion like a window in a dark room: it beckons us to things beyond this stultifying cage of ideology, to see anew what is here and now.

Economic Collapse Blog: Serious Shortages Of Amoxicillin, Augmentin, Tamiflu, Albuterol And Tylenol Have Erupted in US

In the article Very Serious Shortages Of Amoxicillin, Augmentin, Tamiflu, Albuterol And Tylenol Have Erupted All Over The United States Michael Snyder of The Economic Collapse blog brings together articles from several sources reporting on drug shortages in the US.

Hospitals are filling up all across America, and there are extremely alarming shortages of some of our most important medications.  Health authorities are warning that RSV, the flu and COVID are combining to create a “tripledemic”, and there are simply not enough medications to go around.  Personally, I am most concerned about RSV.  It is spreading like wildfire from coast to coast, and we are being told that very young children and the elderly are particularly vulnerable.  I wrote an entire article about the RSV outbreak earlier this month, and since that time things have gotten even worse.  Our medical system is being absolutely flooded with sick kids, and this has caused very serious shortages of amoxicillin, augmentin, tamiflu and albuterol…

America is facing a shortage of four key medications used for common illnesses in children as virus season comes back in full force.

Officials have declared a shortage of first-line antibiotics amoxicillin and Augmentin, which are used to treat bacterial infections. Tamiflu, the most common flu medication in the US, and albuterol, an inhaler for asthma and to open airways in the lungs, are also in short supply, according to the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists.

But we haven’t even gotten to the heart of flu season yet.

In fact, the beginning of winter is still about a month away.

So what will things look like by the time we get to the middle of January?

At this point, things are already so bad that we are also starting to see a very serious shortage of tylenol

A children’s Tylenol shortage currently affecting Canada has carried over into the United States, pharmacists in multiple American cities have warned.

The drug’s short supply, experts say, stems from a recent spike in pediatric sickness as seasonal bugs come back with a bang after being suppressed during COVID-related lockdowns.

This is nuts.

In all my years, I have never heard of a shortage of tylenol in the United States.

Unfortunately, we now have millions of people with compromised immune systems all over the country, and so RSV and the flu are hitting us extremely hard.

One doctor told CNN that “I’ve never seen anything like this”…

“In my 25 years of being a pediatrician, I’ve never seen anything like this,” pediatric infectious disease specialist Dr. Stacene Maroushek of Hennepin Healthcare in Minnesota told CNN. “I have seen families who just aren’t getting a break. They have one viral illness after another. And now there’s the secondary effect of ear infections and pneumonia that are prompting amoxicillin shortages.”

The reason for shortages is due to increased demand, especially with a surge in respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and flu cases. The combination of RSV, flu and COVID circulating has been called a “tripledemic.”

This is going to be one long winter for our medical system.

As I mentioned earlier, hospital beds are rapidly filling up all over the nation

These surges have filled children’s hospitals across these states. The Children’s Hospital of Alabama, the state’s largest pediatric hospital located in Birmingham – 91 per cent of beds are filled, according to official figures.

Vanderbilt University Medical Center, which includes the largest children’s hospital in Tennessee, is at 98 per cent capacity as of Tuesday.

And as I discussed in my article about RSV earlier this month, there are some hospitals that have already filled up all of their beds.

Of course most children that get sick don’t end up in the hospital.

Most of them just stay home and are cared for by their parents until they recover.

In October, more Americans missed work to take care of sick children than ever before

More than 100,000 Americans missed work last month – an all time high – because of child-care problems, many of which come down to sick children and sick daytime caregivers.

Sadly, we will almost certainly set another new all-time record this month.

It sure would be nice if the federal government would step in and help to ensure that everyone has enough medications to give to their children during this medical emergency.

But instead of doing that, the Biden administration has decided to give another 4.5 billion dollars to Ukraine…

The United States, through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and in coordination with the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Department of State, is providing an additional $4.5 billion in direct budgetary support to the Government of Ukraine. The funding, which will help alleviate the acute budget deficit caused by Putin’s brutal war of aggression, was made possible with generous bipartisan support from Congress. The Government of Ukraine will receive the funding in two tranches before the end of 2022.

In addition, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has just announced that the Ukrainians will be receiving another 400 million dollars in military aid…

Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced a new $400 million military aid package to Ukraine on Wednesday.

The package will include “additional arms, munitions, and air defense equipment from U.S. Department of Defense inventories,” Blinken said in a statement, which didn’t provide many specifics on the weapons heading to Ukraine. It is the 26th time the administration is using the presidential drawdown authority, which allows the United States to take from its stockpiles and provide those weapons to Ukraine.

Rather than giving so much money to the Ukrainians, why can’t we spend it on some antibiotics for our children?

It seems to me that our priorities are really messed up.

The RSV outbreak that we are witnessing right now is really serious.  If you have young children, you will want to closely monitor developments in your local area.

After a couple of really tough years, a lot of people had been hoping that we would experience a “return to normal” in 2022.

But as I keep warning my readers, we have now entered an era of great pestilences.

This year we have seen the bird flu kill tens of millions of our chickens and turkeys, a global monkeypox epidemic has spread all over the globe, and now RSV and the flu are ripping across the nation.

We really are living in unprecedented times, and the challenges that we are facing are only going to get even greater as the months roll along.

Radio Free Redoubt: When Ham Radio Is Banned and Non-Permissive Op Environments Part 2

The following podcast comes from Radio Free Redoubt.

AmRRON POLICY:  AmRRON OPERATIONS ARE LEGAL AND LAWFUL, and when using Amateur Radio bands, FCC rules apply.

We don’t use encryption over radio.  There’s no need to.  There’s no need to use tactical callsigns.  But we do practice with it using the internet and other platforms where it’s perfectly legal.

  • More on authentication
  • Authentication using  PGP key signatures for files
  • Tactical Callsigns (COMSEC/PERSEC/OPSEC); the alternative to using FCC callsigns when protecting your identity is necessary.
  • ‘Modding’ your radio (aka. Open banding, opening up, MARS modding, your radio to operate outside amateur radio bands)

AUTHENTICATION (TWO-WAY)

THE TEN-LETTER WORD AUTHENTICATION

The following is a visual of the one-way authentication example as used in the podcast:

Figure 1

THE DRYAD

The image below (Figure 2) is an example of a ‘Dryad’, found in military CEOIs, and was used for two-way authentication and enciphering numbers.  There is VERY little information available open source (on the internet) discussing or explaining most components of a CEOI.  However, American Partisan has a series of articles for the Raspberry Pi enthusiasts, for generating tactical callsigns, dryads, and more.  Today, authentication and encryption is loaded into modern military radios, and these soldier comms skills are (were) a dying art.  We’re bringing them back.

Figure 2

Instructions on using the dryad will not be covered here, but will be covered in the near future.

The following two links cover NCScout’s postings at AmericanPartisan… an excellent resource for modern patriots, including radio operators.

Note, it is a script for generating dryads, callsigns, etc. on a Raspberry Pi, for those of you savvy with using R-Pi.

R-PI OTP/DRYAD TRUE HARDWARE RNG HOW-TO

NEW STUFF FOR THE R-PI OTP/DRYAD – CEOI ADDITIONS, JEFFERSON THOMAS

Radio Free Redoubt: When Ham Radio Is Banned and Non-Permissive Op Environments

The following podcast comes from Radio Free Redoubt, covering non-permissive radio operations environments and ‘when ham radio is banned’.

The Non-permissive operating environments in segments 2 and 3, beginning at about the 19:00 minute mark.

Radio Free Redoubt Ep. 22-28 When Ham Radio Is Banned and Non-Permissive Op Environments

TACDA: Psychology of Civil Defense Webinar, Sat., Nov. 12

The American Civil Defense Association is holding an online webinar on the topic of Psychology of Civil Defense on Saturday, Nov. 12, 2022 at 5pm Pacific time. The meeting is scheduled to last 45 minutes with 15 minutes for questions.

Psychology of Civil Defense
Fear, panic, and sheer terror overwhelm the masses during and immediately after major disasters.

Our survival is dependent upon a change of attitude and the acknowledgment that we are at risk!

Topics of discussion:
▪ Assessing Your Risk
▪ A Change of Attitude
▪ Neighborhood Emergency Plan (for more information see below links):
▪ Psychological Preparation for Life in a Shelter
▪ Plan of Action in the Event of a Disaster

Neighborhood Emergency Preparedness Plan handout: Click HERE

Re
corded meeting from June 2022 Are We Ready? Neighborhood Emergency Preparedness: click HERE
***
HOPE TO SEE YOU THERE!

Saturday, November 12 2022 | 6:00 pm MST

TACDA is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

Topic: Psychology of Civil Defense (Ch. 1, TACDA Academy)
Time: Nov 12, 2022 06:00 PM Mountain Time (US and Canada)

Join Zoom Meeting
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89634802393?pwd=OHV1VmY2N1FhT0dPV3o4Zkp2VjVjdz09 Meeting ID: 896 3480 2393
Passcode: 855196

One tap m
obile
+17193594580,,89634802393#,,,,855196# US
+12532158782,,89634802393#,,,,
855196# US (Tacoma)

Dial by your location
+1 719 359 4580 US
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 408 638 0968 US (San Jose)
+1 669 444 9171 US
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 646 876 9923 US (New York)
+1 646 931 3860 US
+1 689 278 1000 US
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 309 205 3325 US
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 360 209 5623 US
+1 386 347 5053 US
+1 507 473 4847 US
+1 564 217 2000 US

Meeting ID: 896 3480 2393
Passcode: 855196
Find your local number: https://us06web.zoom.us/u/kbBbDkbwQH

AmmoLand: Gun Voters Could Deal A Punishing Blow on Election Day

Dave Workman at Ammoland.com writes about how Gun Voters Could Deal A Punishing Blow Driving Home the Win on Election Day 2022. Despite court victories re-affirming the individual right to keep and bear arms, oppression-minded politicians and organizations continue to press for the denial of people’s rights across the nation. Here in the northwest, Oregon’s Ballot Measure 114 is perhaps the most onerous gun control farce on the ballot.

The critical Nov. 8th 2022 midterm elections are only days away. As people continue talking about a “red wave” sweeping across the U.S. landscape to wash anti-gun Democrats from Congress and state legislatures, the “gun vote” could be the decisive factor in many of these races.

According to Fox News, “The discussion surrounding gun control in the United States is a core issue for some voters heading to the ballot box this November.”

The critical factor is whether gun owners—who often are guilty of lethargy and/or election season apathy—will turn out in adequate numbers to swing the vote. They did last year in Virginia, putting solid pro-gunners in statewide offices, but will they repeat that performance on a national scale?

Take a look at Massachusetts, where the Gun Owner’s Action League just released a report showing how homicides in the Bay State have increased 110 percent since the passage of the 198 Gun Control Act in that state. GOAL Executive Director Jim Wallace, in a telephone conversation with AmmoLand News, said the report speaks for itself:

“The Commonwealth’s decades old gun control scheme has been an unmitigated disaster.”

The law failed to reduce gun-related homicides. It failed to reduce accidental firearms fatalities, and it has done poorly in efforts to reduce gun-related suicides.

Call it the “October non-surprise” since gun control laws have also failed in other regions.

Out in Oregon, Fox News is reporting on Ballot Measure 114, an extremist initiative that would add Oregon to a list of states currently requiring a permit to purchase a firearm. [government permission slips]

According to Fox, “Oregon’s law would be the only one that mandates a live-fire safety class approved by the state police and administered by local law enforcement.”

The proverbial fly in the ointment is that nearly all police agencies do not have the facilities to provide the required training.

The story further notes, “The Oregon State Sheriff’s Association opposes Measure 114, citing the burden it would place on financially-strapped law enforcement agencies. Officials say it would delay law-abiding citizens from being able to purchase guns by months or even longer.”

Kevin Starrett, director of the Oregon Firearms Federation, told Fox News essentially the same thing he told AmmoLand News months ago: “The measure is designed to absolutely guarantee that people will not have the means to protect themselves and to dox anybody who attempts to comply with the permit process.”

In Georgia, it’s gun owners versus an avowed anti-gunner in Stacey Abrams, whom Fox News described as “one of the most significant advocates of gun control in a battleground election against Republican Incumbent Gov. Brian Kemp.”

The Fox report also pointed to Ohio, where anti-gun Democratic State Representative Tim Ryan is squaring off against Republican JD Vance.

It is against this backdrop that Friday’s attack on Paul Pelosi, husband of Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi—another perennial gun control proponent on Capitol Hill—was so shocking. Pelosi was brutally attacked in his own San Francisco home. He was seriously injured by a suspect who wielded a hammer, demonstrating that blaming guns and penalizing gun owners for violent crimes is a false flag.

Reacting to the attack, Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, said the nature of the attack “should preclude any effort by Speaker Pelosi’s Democrat colleagues to exploit this horrible incident for the purpose of advancing their extremist gun control agenda.

“This is the kind of violent crime against which average citizens, including Speaker Pelosi’s constituents, must be prepared to defend themselves on a daily basis in an environment where the far left has pushed ‘defund-the-police’ efforts and adopted policies which have allowed dangerous individuals to roam our streets and neighborhoods,” Gottlieb added.

In Gottlieb’s home state of Washington, there is also an energetic challenge of 30-year-incumbent Democrat Sen. Patty Murray—a dependable anti-gunner—by Republican Tiffany Smiley, a political newcomer who has been waging a remarkably effective campaign. A strong turnout of Evergreen State gun owners could provide a nasty surprise to Murray, who critics say has never represented their interests in Congress…(article continues)

For more on Oregon’s Ballot Measure 114 see this video from Colion Noir: