NO MORE BS: Highlights (?) of the first 100-Days

Theres moreOn this momentous day, marking 100-days of the fraudulent president, I thought it fitting to mark the occasion by reminding everyone of freedom grabbing runaway government promoted by President Biden.  As CNN so clearly stated, “To date, 10 of President Biden’s actions on immigration have been reversals of President Trump’s policies.”  Begging the question, do you feel safer in your home now, or this time four years ago?  I know my answer, and I am looking forward to your thoughts.

To date, President Biden has made 50-end runs around the US Constitutional process through executive orders.  For the record, you could take President Trump (38) or Obama (34), add them with President Bush II (13), and still not max out President Biden’s lead.  I have written about executive orders and why I detest this singular action made in a free Republic (if we can keep it) by any leading elected official, Mayor, Governor, or President.  The US Constitution does not need more beatings coming from leading executives, but less.  Much, much, less executive actions, executive orders, and singular people acting “for the good of all” without Congressional representation.  Why use CNN; because as the biggest cheerleaders for the fraudulent president, they have the clearest cheering squad.

Detective 2Examining closer the 50-executive orders issued by President Biden, we find the most egregious of these orders, raising the minimum wage of Federal Contract Workers from $10.95 to $15.00 by 2022 and eliminating the tipped minimum wage by 2024.  I am thoroughly unfamiliar with any federally contracted jobs that fall under the tipped minimum wage.  Thus, I can only presume the president is now arbitrarily setting the minimum wage for the country without congressional approval—leaving serious questions behind about the legality of this executive order.  Where is Congress in exerting its power and rights to set minimum wage?

A minimum wage is a serious issue; any time the wage goes up, jobs are lost.  A competent first-year economics major can trace that cause and effect line easily!  There are direct causal relationships between high school kids needing employment and not finding it due to the minimum wage laws.  This group of uneducated workers extends to many low-income families, minorities, and many others trying to find work as laborers and cannot find jobs.  Yet, as a political stunt, the president signs an executive order, betrays the US Constitution, upsets the separate but equal branches of government balance, and somehow this is a “nothing burger.”  I beg to differ, vociferously!

Detective 4Another interesting aspect of the president’s first 100-days is immigration.  The current president’s Trump Derangement Syndrome has him reversing 10 of President Trumps Executive Orders and writing two additional immigration-related orders.  The plasticization of modular language reveals the tyranny of ruling by executive order!  The terms “fair,” “equitable,” “just,” “proper,” etc., all point to the president’s desire to see America devalued by illegal immigrants.  Look at the rhetoric used by the president to “explain” why he has reversed, revoked, and wrecked the legal immigration process, and you will find that through Congressional inaction.  With Congresses’ refusal to exert its rights, the president can do anything he wants on immigration, and Congress’s leadership just cheers!

To the US House and US Senate, I must ask, where are you?  Did you take a taxpayer-paid vacation and stopped caring that you are a co-equal branch of the government?  Do you think the judicial branch will stop the president’s runaway government by executive fiat?  Do you believe that the American people stopped caring that the president is giving away America, one illegal alien at a time, and we would not notice?  Why are you not scrutinizing the executive branch and exerting your rights, standing up for your voice, and making sure you are playing a role in the governance of America?

PatriotismI have been insulted, denigrated, derided, and many other things for my stand that every president should have a contentious Congress!  I firmly believe that when a president has a contentious Congress, the will of America’s people is better respected, observed, and through the process of working together, real compromise occurs.  But, what do we see in the US House of Representatives; we see a Speaker who is also the majority leader and the minority leader abdicating their duties to their caucuses and the US House of Representatives.  We see members of the US House race-baiting, employing every card in the deck of identity politics deck and refusing even to acknowledge the other party.  But, the US Senate, if anything is worse, and the US Senate’s problems can be traced directly to the executive actions of Speaker Harry Reid (D) during President Obama’s tenure.

Millstone of Designed IncompetenceAmerica, we learned a lot about the “families” presenting themselves at the US Southern Border for entry into America.  We learned about child prostitution, children being “attached” to two strange adults and calling it a “family.”  We learned about a lot of schemes to feed the growing human trafficking problem in the United States.  Yet, the media continues to call the separation of “families” unfair, and the president has proved he learned nothing but smoke and mirrors.  At the same time, these children are raped, abused, disappeared, and destroyed, all through executive order instead of legislated demand!  Legitimate families should be kept together, but until documentation can be obtained, separating the families for the safety of the children should be paramount!  Sorting through the MS-13 plants is not uncaring; it protects America’s main streets from terrorists!  But, these immigration policies, designed by President Trump, are hated by the media; so, these policies have to go.  Thus, I ask again, do you feel safer in your home or not?

The Duty of AmericansI was never a President Trump (R) supporter; but, I did, and do, support anyone willing to try new ideas to make America safer.  I am not a supporter of holding children indefinitely in nice hotels when veterans are homeless and fully support an America FIRST agenda.  But, I also firmly believe that the churches and non-profit groups of America can organize to help in a humane way better than runaway government supported by executive fiat!

ApathyAmerica, we need legislation on immigration, NOT executive orders that change as frequently as the president!  I have maintained this stance, publicly, since President Reagan signed the first orders providing paths to citizenship for illegals.  The illegal immigration policies in America can be directly traced to President Roosevelt and WWII executive orders allowing foreign workers access to America’s jobs in agriculture.

Feel free to look this historical tidbit up, and ask yourself, are you safer in your homes and places of business with executive orders or legislation?  Are you feeling more secure in your finances with runaway executive actions or through the “Rule of Law?”  Do you prosper more under one “Rule of Law” or under identity politics where every single identity can request special treatment, special laws, and special rights?

Image - Eagle & FlagIf the fraudulent president has proved anything in his first 100-days, he has proved America is in trouble, DEEP Trouble, due to the executive orders, runs around the constitutional process, and the abdication of Congressional rule (legislative branch) at all levels of government.  Beyond a shadow of a doubt, this president has proved that bigger government is a millstone dragging this Republic down.  Finally, this president has proven you cannot “trust” the government and must watch it like a toddler running with a knife!  So, CNN, and all the other corporate media outlets, you cheer the fraudulent president; but don’t you dare try to claim this is a good thing for America!

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

NO MORE BS: Affirmative Action – A Discussion

Non Sequitur - ClassicI wonder if maybe affirmative action is not just dead but ready for the waste pits of history.  I was refused a schedule at a McDonald’s in a small Utah town after being hired and trained.  Why; because a local workforce specialist pointed out to the franchise owner they had no mentally challenged people in their workforce.  Thus, in a time of depression, where college-degreed people competed for entry-level jobs, I and ten others were “bumped” from the schedule to accommodate affirmative action.

Cohen (1996) affirmed federal hiring has a set of laws, with exceptions for every rule, to justify not hiring individuals.  I have personally witnessed this in Albuquerque, NM, for the better part of three years.  All while there are specific laws in Albuquerque to hire veterans first.  Law does nothing but provide excuses for manipulators to excuse their behaviors.

Literary FiendAt the V.A. Hospital, the Forestry Service, Social Security Offices, and so many more local, state, and federal government offices, the hiring managers refuse to hire veterans.  Using every trick, legal loophole, and multiple other hiring paths to keep “undesired people” from being hired.  “Undesired people” includes people with handicaps.  Even though through Schedule A hiring, Federal Policy claims they have top priority in government hiring and veterans, spouses, and dependents with specific federal benefits, minorities (including men, people of color of all shades, American Indians, etc.).  All the best jobs, positions, and perks are awarded through nepotism and the court of public opinion.  The hiring system is structured in such a way as to remain in legal compliance to affirmative action while denying those for whom the law was supposed to help.  Thus, affirmative action is a shield protecting lousy behavior instead of as a tool to improve workforce hiring.

Detective 3Harasztosi and Lindner (2015) discussed how the minimum wages cost jobs and excluded the neediest citizens from employment.  I contend that affirmative action has negatively impacted minorities, men and women, disabled people, etc., most significantly using the principles and logic of Harasztosi and Lindner (2015).  Rules demanding social behavior always most significantly and negatively impact those designed in the law to enjoy the most benefit.  It seems to me the following from John Adams applies, the U.S. Constitution “… was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”  Hence, the path forward is not more laws to avoid, but less.  The way forward is the societal education in morals as governed through a religious society; atheism is a religious society, and the belief structure fits well in the path ahead.

Historically, there are no legal, moral, or ethical reasons for affirmative action.  Affirmative action, and the diversity policies feeding the modern workplace adopted after affirmative action, barely have a legal foothold, let alone a justifiable reason for existence (Brazelton, 2016; Oppenheimer, 2016; Pierce, 2013; Young, 2001).  Human Resources is the capitalization of human capital to meet organizational needs.  When the capitalization of human abilities is appropriately affected, the effort becomes work, leading to finished products or services for sale to consumers. When not adequately modified, the capitalization of human skills turns into waste, loss, confusion, and the organization will eventually “fall an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle” (Bloom, & Kamm, 2014; Typographical Journal, 1892).

Detective 4Sykes (1995) defined affirmative action as “… [T]he set of public policies and initiatives designed to help eliminate past and present discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” As promising as this sounds, affirmative action remains the biggest farce crammed down the business community’s throats since the Federal Income Tax. By focusing, as this definition states on “eliminating discrimination past and present,” the entire country forgets the wise words from Master Oogway in Kung Fu Panda, “Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, today is a gift; that is why it is called the present.” By focusing on the past, we project the same problems of the past into the future, ruining both the present and the future.

No, affirmative action is not necessary, needed, or applicable; affirmative action, and the diversity programs replacing affirmative action, were never required, useful, or valuable enough to create from whole-cloth the legal precedent to justify affirmative action (Brazelton, 2016; Oppenheimer, 2016; Pierce, 2013; Young, 2001). No, the short answer, no, remains clear, Affirmative Action was not needed in 1964 and is still not needed today.  In 1964 when the Civil Rights Legislation was passed, the educational and experience gap between those working and not working caused pay problems, yet new professional opportunities naturally occurred as educational opportunities increased.  No affirmative action was needed.

Calvin & Hobbes - Ontological QuandryNow that Affirmative Action has pampered more than two generations, we have more women and minorities in the workplace with the same skills as white males, and the same problem exists in deferential hiring, differential treatment based upon race, gender, and other politically acceptable groups.  People who want to work, start early, work hard, and prepare for better jobs through education, experience, and single-minded determinedness. Those who do not wish to work create excuses, live off the government dole, and remain entrenched in ignorance, causing poverty, loss of self-esteem, ruined families, and a host of social problems that those who are working have to deal with and pay taxes to the government who started the problem in the first place. All the while, these same workers have to fight affirmative action and diversity policies for new jobs, promotions, pay increases, etc., including all the issues associated with a minimum wage and associated costs (Harasztosi, & Lindner, 2015; Hawkins & Sowell, 2011).

VirtueThese are my thoughts, and I welcome your comments on this topic.  A “Liberty FIRST Culture” allows for disagreements in opinions as a means to improving a situation.  I have listed my sources for the views shared.  I have listed my experience with affirmative action.  Feel free to disagree and comment accordingly.

References

Bloom, R., & Kamm, J. (2014). Human resources: Assets that should be capitalized. Compensation & Benefits Review, 46(4), 219-222. doi:10.1177/0886368714555453

Brazelton, S. (2016). A hollow hope? Social change, the U.S. supreme court, and affirmative action. The Journal of Race & Policy, 12(2), 84-95. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/docview/1940981339?accountid=134061

Cohen, C. (1996). Should federal affirmative action policies be continued?. Congressional Digest, 75, 181-181.

Harasztosi, P. & Lindner, A. (2015). Who pays for the minimum wage? UC Berkeley.

Hawkins, J., & Sowell, T. (2011). Right-wing news: Interview with Thomas Sowell. Retrieved from http://www.rightwingnews.com/interviews/sowell.php

Master, Oogway (Character). (2008). Kung Fu Panda [DVD].

Oppenheimer, D. B. (2016). The disappearance of voluntary affirmative action from the U.S. workplace. The Journal of Poverty and Social Justice, 24(1), 37-50. doi: http://dx.doi.org.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/10.1332/175982716X14538098991133

Pierce, J. L. (2013). White Racism, Social Class, and the Backlash Against Affirmative Action. Sociology Compass, 7(11), 914–926. https://doi-org.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/10.1111/soc4.12082

Sykes, M. (1995, August). The origins of affirmative action. Retrieved from http://www.now.org/nnt/08-95/affirmhs.html

Typographical Journal. (1892). Typographical Journal, Volume 4 [Google Play]. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=FydFAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA10-PA4&lpg=RA10-PA4&dq=%E2%80%9Cfall+an+unpitied+sacrifice+in+a+contemptible+struggle%E2%80%9D&source=bl&ots=DW3MDox1Xu&sig=vd-U9cqe7PVSqLbA27FIX5DgJOs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi4zp3I-ZTeAhXqwlQKHZfZC6QQ6AEwA3oECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=%E2%80%9Cfall%20an%20unpitied%20sacrifice%20in%20a%20contemptible%20struggle%E2%80%9D&f=false

Young, I. M. (2001). Equality of Whom? Social Groups and Judgments of Injustice. Journal of Political Philosophy, 9(1). Retrieved from https://search-ebscohost-com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=4335602&site=ehost-live&scope=site

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

LIC and the Labor Unions – Or Ideological Passion Drives Violence

Low Intensity Conflict or LIC is a misnomer; those who have become a victim of the barbarous cruelty of those practicing LIC find nothing “Low” about the experience.  The conflict is intense, the actions brutal, and the practitioners remain cunning adversaries using and employing willing dupes to hide the true depths of moral decay inherent in their societal destructions and depravations.  Many confuse LIC in trying to describe the actions of unbridled violence committed by ideologues under the banner of terrorism.  The US Military Joint Chiefs of Staff define LIC as:

A limited political-military struggle to achieve political, social, economic, or psychological objectives. It is often protracted and ranges from diplomatic, economic, and psychological pressures through terrorism and insurgency. Low-intensity conflict is generally confined to a geographic area and is often characterized by constraints on the weaponry, tactics, and levels of violence (Tinder 1990).”

Some will proclaim loudly, mostly due to affiliation with or money from labor unions, that LIC is only limited to those more commonly perceived as terrorists, i.e., car bombers, hijackers, and rioters, and that labor unions are not terrorists, but are organizations with the sole purpose of “Protecting the Workers.”  This article will prove the lie behind this fallacy and the charade will fall.  I contend, if labor unions were truly for the worker, their names would be changed to ‘Human Resources,’ dues would never be mandatory, and the personal and political power of independent organizations would come to replace the useless and power hungry monstrosity referred to as labor unions.LIC 2

As the definition demonstrates, LIC requires a “… Political-military struggle to achieve political, social, [and] or psychological objectives, ” along a “limited” front or axis.  Labor unions have always used the “Plight of the Worker” as their political and military casus belli.  As the basis for their actions, this excuse, the “Plight of the Worker,” also provides a limited but effective axis to justify their foul and loathsome acts of violence and degradation.  Throughout the history of the world, in every age, every society, in every single polity on the earth, children, women, men, all engaged in working conditions that were horrific, found themselves being exploited by power-hungry people, and/or were brutalized into serving others through war or other oppression.  These historical facts and political bents formed the modern labor pools the Industrial Revolution utilized to initiate the manufacturing of commodities.  By forming a collective, using violence to create news and through forced subscriptions, labor unions were born.  Upon forming an organized labor society, union members did three things: one, they changed working conditions in every organization employing people; two, they created the largest ‘Ponzi Scheme’ in history; three, they transformed politics into a beast which they can control by making a little news.  This took time, essentially from the late 1800’s to mid 1930’s.  The actions taken employed communistic literature, sympathetic rich people, and power mad activists to make a bad thing look good and appeal to the greater populace as respectable.  Taken one at a time, the following evidence is clear that the political-military struggle is all about power and not about employee health, wealth, or societal improvement.  Taken together, these three items showcase a dastardly design with the intended purpose of transforming a capitalistic society into a communistic community.

Changed Working Conditions

OSHA, MSHA, NLRB, Child Labor Laws, Education Mandates, and many other federal and state labor regulation boards were created through the insistence and political powers of labor unions.  This includes the most egregious law of them all, the Federal Minimum Wage Law.  By forcing the Federal Government to override state law, labor unions formed the first federal government overreach into the freedom power grab we face today.  Every single labor law, for good or ill, has been drafted, pushed, and violently fought through the actions of labor unions.  The very arguments swirling around the current president regarding class warfare, the individual mandate, and the freedom power grab have their beginnings in the labor union.  As stated, LIC must employ a three-pronged attack to justify the actions of those making violence, the fingers of the attack being political, social, and psychological.  For example, the injury of children working on looms was horrific and reprehensible and all societies now have child labor laws.  To pass child labor laws during the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, labor unions exploited children, who had been seriously injured, and those, who were young with mutilated bodies permanently deformed, by submitting their photos and stories to newspapers to begin the psychological war justifying the violence they created, such as destruction of private property, beating shop and business owners, and breaking laws with their organized crime efforts.  Enraged people then began the political and social war to change the laws.  But what laws did we get but forced federal governmental education of all children, and more power went from individuals and states into the federal coffers all in the name of “Protecting the Children.”  Parents were pushed aside, the needs of families thwarted, and child labor laws were deemed good for society as a whole.  The ‘Ripple Effect’ or the ‘Laws of Unintended Consequences’ meant that labor unions gained significant power, authority, and from these early gains, launched massive labor union growth, but not development.

Ponzi Scheme

Bernie Madoff has been given the title of running the largest ‘Ponzi Scheme’ in the world.  Yet, he is inconsequential compared with labor union organizations.  The Federal Security Exchange Commission FAQ’s on ‘Ponzi Schemes’ outline perfectly the points of this argument providing a wonderful base for the argument and can be found by clicking the link above.

Labor unions are organized as a ‘Ponzi Scheme’ with “Little or no legitimate earnings.”  Labor unions must finance themselves.  Labor unions do not produce a good or service for sale; so all monies generated originate from forced dues paid by members.  These members are people struggling to earn sufficient money through their employment.  Even when not working, many union members still have some dues mandated by the unions, which must be paid for membership to continue.  From the SEC definition alluded above we find this tidbit, “In many Ponzi schemes, the fraudsters focus on attracting new money to make promised payments to earlier-stage investors and to use for personal expenses, instead of engaging in any legitimate investment activity.”  Consider the incredible bill of goods sold to new union members about retirement benefits upon reaching the age of retirement.  Because the benefits of retirement are convincing, thousands of union members gladly pitch money into retirement; few of these union members will actually have a usable retirement fund.  The disparity rests in several factors, namely, fraud and theft of the pension, mandates and restrictions, and union leadership.  The number of pension managers getting caught raiding the pension accounts has grown and continues to grow leaving the pension bereft of funds and the retirees bereft of benefits paid for.  Union leadership receives big money as compensation for managing their unions.  For example, Andy Stern as head of the SEIU (2006) was earning $249,000 plus a lot of lucrative benefits while the majority of his union membership earned less than $30,000 a year.  Yet, every dollar Andy Stern “earned” came from the forced dues of his members.  Ponzi Scheme, the top and early investors get benefits and everybody else gets to pay for them.  The worst part of this entire scheme is that the Federal Government turns a blind eye to the scheme because of all the forced dues being pushed into political election campaigns.  If you doubt this, consider this tidbit:  SEIU, just SEIU, donated over $28 million to Obama’s election campaign in 2012.  This is not to single out any particular union, but considering all union donations, comparing leadership wages versus union worker wages and benefit packages is irreconcilable and practically impossible.

Transformed Politics

A major shift in politics took place in 1907; labor unions began making large inroads into the political arena.  While labor unions had been around in an on again/off again pattern since the early 1870’s, the American Federation of Labor under the capable leadership of Samuel Gompers began the most recognizable labor union model still in use today.  Coordinating strikes, creating coalitions, and banding under a single banner, many of the smaller less organized labor unions achieved political power.  While Samuel Gompers’s death and the ‘Roaring 1920’s helped reduce the power of organized labor, the Wagner Act brought organized labor into the federal government’s embrace in the middle of the ‘Great Depression;’ the labor union was reborn as a political powerhouse.  The Wagner Act is also called the National Labor Relations Act or NLRA.  This single piece of federal overreach came through the militant actions of the railroad union’s demand for, through force, violence, and political subjugation, many good and many bad items.  For example, the NLRA set forth what has become the standard 8-hour workday that some call “good,” and demanded an employer cannot interfere with the workers forming a union that many call “bad.”  By their unlawful actions, the NLRA stomped on states’ rights, removed individual rights, and set the stage for the current fiasco in Washington State where labor unions are forcing Boeing to transform their plant located in South Carolina, a ‘Right to Work’ state, into a forced union membership plant, transforming politics incredibly, innumerably, and ignominiously.

LICThe next part of the LIC requirement to prove the case of labor unions being terrorists comes directly from the definition of LIC.  “… Often protracted and ranges from diplomatic, economic, and psychological pressures through terrorism and insurgency.”  Any Google search on the terms ‘labor unions and violence’ will pull down millions of hits on the correlation between labor unions and their violent beginnings, violent actions, and current levels of violence towards non-union members, non-union political leaders, non-union lawyers, and other members of society who speak against union membership and the compulsory dues.  Political leaders, judges, and high-ranking members of society all turn a blind eye to the violence committed by unions.  This violence is always organized, sanctioned by the highest leaders in the union organization, and applauded by these same leaders.  A marvelous example is the ABC World News Article by Alan Farnham entitled, “How Nasty Can Union Violence Get and Still be Legal.”  Another case in point is the illegal imprisonment or borderline kidnapping of security guards by the Longshoreman Union and violent activities during a recent strike in Longview, Washington.  Since the SCOTUS ruling in 1973, many courts have turned the proverbial ‘blind-eye’ to violence performed by unions during strikes and also performed during protests not connected to strikes.  Like a spoiled child screaming in a grocery store when told ‘No,’ unions move quickly down the chain from diplomatic actions to violent revenge, when told ‘No’ again.  Terrorist activity and labor unions are inseparably connected.

Finally, we come to the most chilling part of the LIC definition and the terrorist connection to labor unions.  “… Low-intensity conflict is generally confined to a geographic area and is often characterized by constraints on the weaponry, tactics, and levels of violence.”  National borders formerly confined labor unions, but with the movement of labor unions being documented in the recent Egyptian struggle to replace Mubarak in power, we see geographic areas being violated.  The AFL-CIO is documented as having its hand in the recent spate of civil disobedience and unrest in the Middle East; this violence has left thousands dead, millions injured, and is employing levels of violence rarely seen outside of civil war.  Weapons, tactics, and levels of violence by the protestors and the government continue to escalate.  A mobster in Chicago from the movie “The Untouchables” is credited with this saying, “If they pull a knife, we pull a gun. They send one of our guys to the hospital; we send one of their guys to the morgue. THAT’S the Chicago way!”  This is also the labor union way of dealing with any and all obstacles to their agenda:  violence, more violence, and even more bloody violence.

It is important to always remember, labor unions are organized and sanctioned terrorists.  There is no difference between an ideologically driven person who straps on a semtex vest and explodes himself in a shopping area or airport and a labor union member.  No significant differences exist between these two ideologically driven individuals.  None!  Consider the recent violence in Michigan over the state moving from forced unionism to ‘Right to Work.’  The union’s disgruntlement turned violent, people lost resources, people were injured, private property damaged and destroyed, politicians threatened, “blood will be spilled,” and ideologically driven people become violent on demand.

Additional Links:

This article was compiled and presented on Michelle Malkin’s Blog, it has video’s and additional links to other sources:  http://michellemalkin.com/2011/09/05/happy-labor-day-top-10-union-thug-moments-of-the-year/

If the truth about LIC and Unions is not made clear above, this link has been certified and shows the case more clearly: http://www.unionfacts.com/crime-corruption/union-leader-fraud additionally links from this article span into election year activities and individual cases of fraud and corruption.

Finally, this article continues to deal with union violence and asks some good questions:  http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2011/08/22/why_do_we_accept_union_violence__99205.html

© 2012 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved

Reference

Tinder, A. J. L. (. (1990). Low intensity conflict. Informally published manuscript, Air War College – Air University, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama. Retrieved from http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA241060