Creating the Game Changer..
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
quare?
kweriy/kwohriy/..Lat.
wherefore..for what reason..on what account..
used in the latin form of several common law writs..
so quare..
now that it has been brought to your attention..
what are you going to do?.
Are You A Practicing Communist??
Many Americans pride themselves as being relentless anti~Communists..
A lot of people think of the communists as the bad guys and the cause of our troubles and that of the rest of the world's..
This bad guy must look really bad and we should spot him easily in a crowd. Let's examine what a communist really is..
Communism is a way of life that is contrary to most teaching of the Holy Bible and that of the common people, as our beloved country the 50 united States of America was founded to be..
In 1848, Karl Marx wrote the ten (10) planks of the Communist Manifesto..
It is the foundation of what communist ideology is all about. A true communist or communist country would be practicing all ten (10) planks..
Today, here in the 50 united States of America, we ARE practicing all ten (10) planks and we don't even realize that we are in reality communists..
We would rather call ourselves something else..
The 1st Plank..
THE ABOLITION OF PROPERTY AND LAND AND THE APPLICATION OF ALL RENT IN LAND TO PUBLIC PURPOSES.
As in the old law of Moses and in the first 150 years of the united States of America, when you owned land, you had absolute title to that land and no other party could lay claim on it whatsoever unless you sold the land or voluntarily let another party lay claim. But then, you had the right to get it back, even if it will take your grandchildren to claim it all back. Today, we only have what you might call a 99 year lease. The State can confiscate your land for non-payment of taxes or some supposed crime. The only reason the State can do this is that you don't really own your land. The State has controlling interest on your land and you are merely paying rent and this rent goes toward the public use such as paying toward the interest on the national debt.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2nd Plank..
A PROGRESSIVE, GRADUATED INCOME TAX.
Need this be explained? We all know that there is an income tax in the 50 united States of America and that the more you make, the higher your tax bracket, the more you are taxed. We did not have income tax until the 1940's. Through instruments of government such as the public fool (school) system and with the help corporate funding we have been convinced it applies to everyone even though it doesn't.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 3rd Plank..
THE ABOLITION OF ALL RIGHT OF INHERITANCE
In the old Law of Moses and the first 150 years of the united States of America, there was NO inheritance tax. In the Law of Moses, land was transferred to the eldest son absolutely. In the first 150 years of the united States of America, inheritance and/or your assigns was also absolute. There were no third parties involved. This started with the birth certificate and then getting a marriage license which makes the State the third party. When a spouse dies, the other spouse cannot claim the fruits of the marriage because of the third party, the State. Now, the state would in effect say "buy me out." Then the land would be forced to be sold just to pay the State, and almost always attorneys, who always want cash.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 4th Plank..
THE CONFISCATION OF ALL PROPERTY OF EMIGRANTS AND REBELS
Some people are beginning to find out about what is really going on. They are beginning to rebel against these communist and/or satanic practices and in the process, SWAT teams are sent against them. Businesses are padlocked; homes are liened; bank accounts seized; some are jailed without due process; and many are outright killed. What will it take to practice the Bible teaching and follow our original Republican Laws?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 5th Plank..
THE CENTRALIZATION OF CREDIT IN THE HANDS OF THE STATE BY MEANS OF A NATIONAL BANK WITH STATE CAPITAL AND AN EXCLUSIVE MONOPOLY
This brings us straight to the Federal Reserve Banks. The basis of the Federal Reserve Note is credit, which is the reason it lacks gold and silver backing. The government borrows these notes (they didn't borrow anything of value) to pass on to the people and you will notice how huge the federal debt is. All for the cost of printing these paper notes. In the Law of Moses and in the first 150 years of the united States of America, people used gold and silver coins which have intrinsic value. The Federal Reserve Bank has a monopoly on issuing currency today in violation of Article I, Section 10 of the United States Constitution for the 50 united States of America, "No State shall make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of Debts." This worthless paper currency is distributed through the local banks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 6th Plank..
THE CENTRALIZATION OF THE MEANS OF COMMUNICATION AND TRANSPORTATION IN THE HANDS OF THE STATE
This is accomplished by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) which controls, regulates and licenses all newspapers and magazines; radio and television stations, local or national distribution who are in a corporate or in a State created entity. Transportation is controlled by the various State Departments of Motor Vehicles and enforced by the various law enforcement agencies. Isn't it strange that we hired peace officers (to keep the peace), but somehow they became law enforcement officers?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 7th Plank..
THE EXTENSION OF FACTORIES AND THE INSTRUMENTS OF PRODUCTION OWNED BY THE STATE AND THE BRINGING INTO CULTIVATION WASTE LAND AND THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE SOIL GENERALLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH A COMMON PLAN
Factories are all controlled by the government by means of permits and licenses, and various other agencies like O.S.H.A., labor boards and others. Smaller businesses are really extensions of these factories because most are franchises. You cannot put up a business and start selling somebody else's product unless you first ask for and pay for this privilege. Even if you will buy and sell in bulk. Farms are told which crop to plant and are sometimes paid not to plant. Farms are controlled by various government agencies like Soil Conservation Districts, Bureau of Land Management and Desert Land Entry Act where government owned desert is leased out to farmers. And what about U.S. Wetlands?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 8th Plank..
EQUAL LIABILITY FOR ALL TO LABOR AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF INDUSTRIAL ARMIES, ESPECIALLY FOR AGRICULTURE
Equal liability is accomplished by means of the Social Security Number and most are members of an industrial army because you cannot get a job with a corporation unless you have a Social Security Number (slave number). You are part of the Social Security Army and being unemployed, the unemployment office will send you to work.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 9th Plank..
THE COMBINATION OF AGRICULTURE WITH MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES AND THE GRADUAL ABOLITION OF THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TOWN AND COUNTRY BY THE MORE EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION OVER THE COUNTRY.
Real wealth comes from the land and in 1920's, almost half the population owned their land outright. That has fallen steadily since then through farm foreclosures because these farmers are needed in the cities to work in factories. Equal distribution is not distributed evenly but rather distributed where you are needed. By the turn of the century, this country is expected to have but a few super corporate farms (like ConAgra?) instead of millions of family owned smaller farms, just like in Russia!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 10th Plank..
THE FREE EDUCATION OF ALL CHILDREN IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Do you need this explained? Even private and church schools need to have permits and licenses from the government and follow approved curriculum. This way our children can be indoctrinated with humanistic principles, and communistic ideology. Subtly but effectively.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One big difference between Russia and the 50 united States of America is that in Russia, people do not pretend to have private property, they don't call themselves free and homeowners like in the 50 united States of America..
Private property has been subjugated to the 10 Planks of the Communist Manifesto.
NOW, are you a practicing communist?
Be honest..
http://www.georgegordon.net/communist.htm
when a man lies..
he murders some part of the world..
~ Merlin ~
in the John Boorman film ~ Excalibur
IN THE U.K. ~ SCARED NEW WORLD..
New police powers imperil British liberties, privacy..
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=480010
Under the FEMA plan..
There is no contingency by which Constitutional power is restored..
FEMA..The Secret Government..
By Harry V. Martin with research assistance from David Caul
Copyright FreeAmerica and Harry V. Martin, 1995
Some people have referred to it as the "secret government" of the United States..
It is not an elected body, it does not involve itself in public disclosures, and it even has a quasi-secret budget in the billions of dollars..
This government organization has more power than the President of the United States or the Congress, it has the power to suspend laws, move entire populations, arrest and detain citizens without a warrant and hold them without trial, it can seize property, food supplies, transportation systems, and can suspend the Constitution..
Not only is it the most powerful entity in the United States, but it was not even created under Constitutional law by the Congress..
It was a product of a Presidential Executive Order..
No, it is not the U.S. military nor the Central Intelligence Agency, they are subject to Congress..
The organization is called FEMA, which stands for the Federal Emergency Management Agency..
Originally conceived in the Richard Nixon Administration, it was refined by President Jimmy Carter and given teeth in the Ronald Reagan and George Bush Administrations..
FEMA had one original concept when it was created, to assure the survivability of the United States government in the event of a nuclear attack on this nation..
It was also provided with the task of being a federal coordinating body during times of domestic disasters, such as earthquakes, floods and hurricanes..
Its awesome powers grow under the tutelage of people like Lt. Col. Oliver North and General Richard Secord, the architects on the Iran-Contra scandal and the looting of America's savings and loan institutions..
FEMA has even been given control of the State Defense Forces, a rag-tag, often considered neo-Nazi, civilian army that will substitute for the National Guard, if the Guard is called to duty overseas..
THE MOST POWERFUL ORGANIZATION IN THE UNITED STATES
Though it may be the most powerful organization in the United States, few people know it even exists..
But it has crept into our private lives..
Even mortgage papers contain FEMA's name in small print if the property in question is near a flood plain..
FEMA was deeply involved in the Los Angeles riots and the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake in the San Francisco Bay Area..
Some of the black helicopter traffic reported throughout the United States, but mainly in the West, California, Washington, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and Colorado, are flown by FEMA personnel..
FEMA has been given responsibility for many new disasters including urban forest fires, home heating emergencies, refugee situations, urban riots, and emergency planning for nuclear and toxic incidents..
In the West, it works in conjunction with the Sixth Army..
FEMA was created in a series of Executive Orders..
A Presidential Executive Order, whether Constitutional or not, becomes law simply by its publication in the Federal Registry..
Congress is by-passed..
Executive Order Number 12148 created the Federal Emergency Management Agency that is to interface with the Department of Defense for civil defense planning and funding..
An "emergency czar" was appointed..
FEMA has only spent about 6 percent of its budget on national emergencies, the bulk of their funding has been used for the construction of secret underground facilities to assure continuity of government in case of a major emergency, foreign or domestic..
Executive Order Number 12656 appointed the National Security Council as the principal body that should consider emergency powers..
This allows the government to increase domestic intelligence and surveillance of U.S. citizens and would restrict the freedom of movement within the United States and grant the government the right to isolate large groups of civilians..
The National Guard could be federalized to seal all borders and take control of U.S. air space and all ports of entry..
Here are just a few Executive Orders associated with FEMA that would suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights..
These Executive Orders have been on record for nearly 30 years and could be enacted by the stroke of a Presidential pen..
EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports..
EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media..
EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals..
EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 allows the government to take over all food resources and farms..
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision..
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 allows the government to take over all health, education and welfare functions..
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons..
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft..
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations..
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities..
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis..
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President..
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period..
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institution in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months..
The Federal Emergency Management Agency has broad powers in every aspect of the nation..
General Frank Salzedo, chief of FEMA's Civil Security Division stated in a 1983 conference that he saw FEMA's role as a "new frontier in the protection of individual and governmental leaders from assassination, and of civil and military installations from sabotage and/or attack, as well as prevention of dissident groups from gaining access to U.S. opinion, or a global audience in times of crisis."
FEMA's powers were consolidated by President Carter to incorporate..
the National Security Act of 1947, which allows for the strategic relocation of industries, services, government and other essential economic activities, and to rationalize the requirements for manpower, resources and production facilities..
the 1950 Defense Production Act, which gives the President sweeping powers over all aspects of the economy..
the Act of August 29, 1916, which authorizes the Secretary of the Army, in time of war, to take possession of any transportation system for transporting troops, material, or any other purpose related to the emergency.. and
the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which enables the President to seize the property of a foreign country or national..
These powers were transferred to FEMA in a sweeping consolidation in 1979..
HURRICANE ANDREW FOCUSED ATTENTION ON FEMA
FEMA's deceptive role really did not come to light with much of the public until Hurricane Andrew smashed into the U.S. mainland..
As Russell R. Dynes, director of the Disaster Research Center of the University of Delaware, wrote in The World and I..
"...The eye of the political storm hovered over the Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA became a convenient target for criticism."
Because FEMA was accused of dropping the ball in Florida, the media and Congress commenced to study this agency..
What came out of the critical look was that FEMA was spending 12 times more for "black operations" than for disaster relief..
It spent $1.3 billion building secret bunkers throughout the United States in anticipation of government disruption by foreign or domestic upheaval..
Yet fewer than 20 members of Congress , only members with top security clearance, know of the $1.3 billion expenditure by FEMA for non-natural disaster situations..
These few Congressional leaders state that FEMA has a "black curtain" around its operations..
FEMA has worked on National Security programs since 1979, and its predecessor, the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency, has secretly spent millions of dollars before being merged into FEMA by President Carter in 1979..
FEMA has developed 300 sophisticated mobile units that are capable of sustaining themselves for a month..
The vehicles are located in five areas of the United States. They have tremendous communication systems and each contains a generator that would provide power to 120 homes each, but..
Have never been used for disaster relief..
FEMA's enormous powers can be triggered easily..
In any form of domestic or foreign problem, perceived and not always actual, emergency powers can be enacted..
The President of the United States now has broader powers to declare martial law, which activates FEMA's extraordinary powers..
Martial law can be declared during time of increased tension overseas, economic problems within the United States, such as a depression, civil unrest, such as demonstrations or scenes like the Los Angeles riots, and in a drug crisis..
These Presidential powers have increased with successive Crime Bills, particularly the 1991 and 1993 Crime Bills, which increase the power to suspend the rights guaranteed under the Constitution and to seize property of those suspected of being drug dealers, to individuals who participate in a public protest or demonstration..
Under emergency plans already in existence, the power exists to suspend the Constitution and turn over the reigns of government to FEMA and appointing military commanders to run state and local governments..
FEMA then would have the right to order the detention of anyone whom there is reasonable ground to believe...will engage in, or probably conspire with others to engage in acts of espionage or sabotage..
The plan also authorized the establishment of concentration camps for detaining the accused, but no trial..
Three times since 1984, FEMA stood on the threshold of taking control of the nation..
Once under President Reagan in 1984, and twice under President Bush in 1990 and 1992. But under those three scenarios, there was not a sufficient crisis to warrant risking martial law..
Most experts on the subject of FEMA and Martial Law insisted that a crisis has to appear dangerous enough for the people of the United States before they would tolerate or accept complete government takeover..
The typical crisis needed would be threat of imminent nuclear war, rioting in several U.S. cites simultaneously, a series of national disasters that affect widespread danger to the populous, massive terrorist attacks, a depression in which tens of millions are unemployed and without financial resources, or a major environmental disaster..
THREE TIMES FEMA STOOD BY READY FOR EMERGENCY
In April 1984, President Reagan signed Presidential Director Number 54 that allowed FEMA to engage in a secret national "readiness exercise" under the code name of REX 84..
The exercise was to test FEMA's readiness to assume military authority in the event of a "State of Domestic National Emergency" concurrent with the launching of a direct United States military operation in Central America..
The plan called for the deputation of U.S. military and National Guard units so that they could legally be used for domestic law enforcement..
These units would be assigned to conduct sweeps and take into custody an estimated 400,000 undocumented Central American immigrants in the United States. The immigrants would be interned at 10 detention centers to be set up at military bases throughout the country..
REX 84 was so highly guarded that special metal security doors were placed on the fifth floor of the FEMA building in Washington, D.C. Even long-standing employees of the Civil Defense of the Federal Executive Department possessing the highest possible security clearances were not being allowed through the newly installed metal security doors..
Only personnel wearing a special red Christian cross or crucifix lapel pin were allowed into the premises. Lt. Col. North was responsible for drawing up the emergency plan, which U.S. Attorney General William French Smith opposed vehemently..
The plan called for the suspension of the Constitution, turning control of the government over to FEMA, appointment of military commanders to run state and local governments and the declaration of Martial Law..
The Presidential Executive Orders to support such a plan were already in place..
The plan also advocated the rounding up and transfer to "assembly centers or relocation camps" of a least 21 million American Negroes in the event of massive rioting or disorder, not unlike the rounding up of the Jews in Nazi Germany in the 1930s..
The second known time that FEMA stood by was in 1990 when Desert Storm was enacted..
Prior to President Bush's invasion of Iraq, FEMA began to draft new legislation to increase its already formidable powers..
One of the elements incorporated into the plan was to set up operations within any state or locality without the prior permission of local or state authorities..
Such prior permission has always been required in the past..
Much of the mechanism being set into place was in anticipation of the economic collapse of the Western World..
The war with Iraq may have been conceived as a ploy to boost the bankrupt economy, but it only pushed the West into deeper recession..
The third scenario for FEMA came with the Los Angeles riots after the Rodney King brutality verdict..
Had the rioting spread to other cities, FEMA would have been empowered to step in. As it was, major rioting only occurred in the Los Angeles area, thus preventing a pretext for a FEMA response..
On July 5, 1987, the Miami Herald published reports on FEMA's new goals..
The goal was to suspend the Constitution in the event of a national crisis, such as nuclear war, violent and widespread internal dissent, or national opposition to a U.S. military invasion abroad..
Lt. Col. North was the architect. National Security Directive Number 52 issued in August 1982, pertains to the "Use of National Guard Troops to Quell Disturbances."
The crux of the problem is..
That FEMA has the power to turn the United States into a police state in time of a real crisis or a manufactured crisis. Lt. Col. North virtually established the apparatus for dictatorship..
Only the criticism of the Attorney General prevented the plans from being adopted. But intelligence reports indicate that FEMA has a folder with 22 Executive Orders for the President to sign in case of an emergency..
It is believed those Executive Orders contain the framework of North's concepts, delayed by criticism but never truly abandoned..
The crisis, as the government now see it, is civil unrest..
For generations, the government was concerned with nuclear war, but the violent and disruptive demonstrations that surrounded the Vietnam War era prompted President Nixon to change the direction of emergency powers from war time to times of domestic unrest..
Diana Raynolds, program director of the Edward R. Murrow Center, summed up the dangers of FEMA today and the public reaction to Martial Law in a drug crisis..
"It was James Madison's worst nightmare that a righteous faction would someday be strong enough to sweep away the Constitutional restraints designed by the framers to prevent the tyranny of centralized power, excessive privilege, an arbitrary governmental authority over the individual..
These restraints, the balancing and checking of powers among branches and layers of government, and the civil guarantees, would be the first casualties in a drug-induced national security state with Reagan's Civil Emergency Preparedness unleashed..
Nevertheless, there would be those who would welcome NSC (National Security Council) into the drug fray, believing that increasing state police powers to emergency levels is the only way left to fight American's enemy within..
In the short run, a national security state would probably be a relief to those whose personal security and quality of life has been diminished by drugs or drug related crime..
And, as the general public watches the progression of institutional chaos and social decay, they too may be willing to pay the ultimate price..
One drug free America for 200 years of democracy."
The first targets in any FEMA emergency would be Hispanics and Blacks, the FEMA orders call for them to be rounded up and detained..
Tax protesters, demonstrators against government military intervention outside U.S. borders, and people who maintain weapons in their homes are also targets..
Operation Trojan Horse is a program designed to learn the identity of potential opponents to martial law..
The program lures potential protesters into public forums, conducted by a "hero" of the people who advocates survival training. The list of names gathered at such meetings and rallies are computerized and then targeted in case of an emergency..
The most shining example of America to the world has been its peaceful transition of government from one administration to another..
Despite crises of great magnitude, the United States has maintained its freedom and liberty..
This nation now stands on the threshold of rule by non-elected people asserting non-Constitutional powers..
Even Congress cannot review a Martial Law action until six months after it has been declared..
For the first time in American history, the reigns of government would not be transferred from one elected element to another, but the Constitution, itself, can be suspended..
The scenarios established to trigger FEMA into action are generally found in the society today, economic collapse, civil unrest, drug problems, terrorist attacks, and protests against American intervention in a foreign country..
All these premises exist, it could only be a matter of time in which one of these triggers the entire emergency necessary to bring FEMA into action, and then it may be too late..
Because..
Under the FEMA plan..
There is no contingency by which Constitutional power is restored..
SUPREME COURT OKs SECRET POLICE IN AMERICA..
Throw them in prison and let them rot, says high court..
Supreme Court Allows Secrecy for 9/11 Detainees..
Mon Jan 12, 1:54 PM ET Add Top Stories - Reuters to My Yahoo!
By James Vicini
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites) on Monday allowed the Bush administration to keep secret the names and other basic details about hundreds of foreigners detained after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
Without comment, the top court refused to hear an appeal by civil liberties and other groups challenging the secret arrests and detentions for violating the Freedom of Information Act and constitutional free-speech rights under the First Amendment.
The justices let stand a U.S. appeals court ruling that disclosing the names could harm national security and help "al Qaeda in plotting future terrorist attacks or intimidating witnesses in the present investigation."
Although the high court stayed out of the dispute about whether the government must release information about those detained, it has agreed to hear other cases arising from the administration's war on terror.
Those cases involve the president's power to detain American citizens captured abroad and declared "enemy combatants," and whether foreign nationals can use American courts to challenge their incarceration at the U.S. military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The appeals court said the government could keep secret the names of more than 700 individuals detained on immigration violations and those arrested as material witnesses in the investigation into the hijacked plane attacks that the United States blames on Osama bin Laden (news - web sites)'s al Qaeda network.
The appeals court said the government could also keep secret the dates and locations of the arrest, detention and release of all detainees, including those charged with federal crimes, and the names of the lawyers representing them.
Attorneys for the groups expressed disappointment that the Supreme Court rejected their appeal and will not consider whether the government acted properly.
SECRECY SAID TO COVER UP MISCONDUCT
"The Justice Department (news - web sites) is keeping the names secret to cover up its misconduct -- holding people incommunicado and without charges," said Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies, one of the groups that brought the lawsuit.
"The cover-up maintains the fiction that the government was going after terrorists when it instead was rounding up hundreds of innocent Arabs and Muslims," she said in a statement.
Steven Shapiro of the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites) said he still believes the secret arrest of more than 700 people violates basic due process rights. He said the government's own reports have documented mistreatment and arbitrary detentions.
"Such abuses are always more likely when the government is allowed to operate in secrecy," he said.
Attorneys for the groups said the appeals court erred in failing to recognize that the First Amendment prohibits secret arrests, except in the most compelling circumstances.
They said the appeals court gave unprecedented deference to government explanations that were "unpersuasive on their face, overly broad and without any support in the record."
A number of news media companies and groups supported the appeal.
The Justice Department, urging the high court to reject the appeal, said it was entitled to an exception that allows information to be withheld for law enforcement investigations.
Department lawyers said disclosure of the list of people interviewed and detained would provide terrorists with "a road map" of the investigation.
Disclosure also could "expose the identified individuals to harassment and intimidation and could destroy any ongoing intelligence value they might have," the lawyers said.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&ncid=578&e=1&u=/nm/20040112/ts_n...
US rental cars are spying on the drivers..
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/13/business/13gps.html
GOVERNMENT SECRECY HYPOCRISY..
US high court turns down prisoner secrecy case..
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/156369_scotus13.html
Here's a typical government secrecy abuse..
http://www.insidedenver.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_2572182,00.html
Are Internet flight bookings the next terror casualty?
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=4111770
Surviving the Soft Depression of the 21st Century..
One Madness Engenders the Next..
http://www.strike-the-root.com/4/smith/smith1.html
The price of flying will be the end of all personal privacy..
AMERICA'S COLOR CODED PASSENGERS..
http://www.reason.com/links/links011304.shtml
http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,61891,00.html
AMERICA'S COLOR CODED PASSENGERS..
The price of flying will be the end of all personal privacy..
http://www.reason.com/links/links011304.shtml
http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,61891,00.html
Who hath ears to hear, let him hear, Matthew 13:43
"Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves." Matthew 10:16
Put on the whole armour of God so you can take your stand against the devil's schemes. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the dark powers of this world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Ephesians 6:11-12
"Fear not therefore: for there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed; and nothing hid that shall not be made known. What I tell you in darkness, that speak ye in the light and what ye hear in the ear, that preach ye upon the housetops." Matthew 10:26-27
Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. Ephesians 5:11
Now the company of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things which he possessed was his own, but they had everything in common. Acts 4:32
When people are saying: "Peace and Safety" then a sudden destruction cometh upon them as upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. 1 Thessalonians 5:3
Bush and the Supreme Court..
Amputating the Bill of Rights..
By KURT NIMMO
The Sixth Amendment was lopped off the Constitution earlier this week.
AG Ashcroft can now have you arrested -- more accurately, abducted and detained -- and thrown in a military brig or sent to the Guantanamo concentration camp. Like military dictators in Chile or Guatemala, or the Gestapo in Nazi Germany, the Bushites don't have tell your family where you are, or even acknowledge your detention.
They can detain you for years, decades -- or until Bush's war on "terr'sim" is over -- that is to say forever.
All of this is now perfectly legal -- or so the Supreme Court ruled the other day when it refused to consider whether the government properly withheld names and other details of hundreds of people detained after 9/11. In other words, Bush may continue abducting people and throwing them in secret prisons without charge.
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense," states the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution.
Thanks to the Supreme Court there's now a big bloody hole in the Bill of Rights.
The First and Fourth Amendments are hanging precariously from the "living document" by threads. Give the Supreme Court time and they will hack those amendments away as well.
Recall Justice Sandra Day O'Connor predicting a few hours before the Supreme Court's 2001-2002 session that Americans are "likely to experience more restrictions on our personal freedom than has ever been the case in our country."
Bush will trump Abraham Lincoln when it comes down to stripping Americans of their civil liberties.
Lincoln had a habit of arresting people who disagreed with him during the Civil War. He threw them in military prison, sort of the way Jose Padilla was tossed in a military brig for the crime of searching the wrong thing on the internet ("dirty bomb") and visiting the wrong country (Pakistan).
"President [Lincoln] suspended the writ of habeas corpus and subjected all persons discouraging volunteer enlistments to martial law," writes author Jay Winik. "To enforce this decree, a network of provost marshals promptly imprisoned several hundred anti-war activists and draft resisters, including five newspaper editors, three judges, a number of doctors, lawyers, journalists and prominent civic leaders."
Maybe Dubya will one-up Lincoln and imprison several hundred thousand -- instead of several hundred -- antiwar activists and draft resisters. Of course, thanks to the Supreme Court, Bush will not be required to tell their families and lawyers where they are. Maybe a whole lot of them will be deported as well after Patriot II is rushed through Congress like its predecessor.
This will occur during Bush's second "term," actually his first term since he was appointed by the Supreme Court on the first go-round. Howard Dean, Wesley Clark, John Kerry, Al Sharpton, Dick Gephardt, Joe Lieberman -- none of these guys will make it to the White House, and even if one per chance does he will not do things a whole lot different than Junior. Remember, a "new Democrat" is basically "Republican Lite."
As for Dennis Kucinich and Carol Mosely Braun... well, they may end up with the aforementioned antiwar activists in the hoosegow. Lincoln jailed "prominent civic leaders," although none were members of Congress. Bush may best him yet. Anyway, sweating it out in prison sure beats following in the footsteps of Paul Wellstone.
Besides, AG Ashcroft had a point to make on December 6, 2001, when he admonished: "To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty ... your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity and ... give ammunition to America's enemies."
In other words, we're putting you on notice.
So Bill of Rights unfriendly is our New Caesar that he's going after the First Amendment, considered by many the foundation of the Constitution.
Bush's Secret Service march out ahead of Junior when he travels around the country. They get in touch with local cops and make sure those who disagree with the non-president are quarantined into "designated free speech zones" far away from the protest-adverse president and the media.
"Here's a place where the people can be, and we'd like to have any protesters put in a place that is able to be secured," the Secret Service told the Allegheny County Police Department when Bush visited the Pittsburgh area on Labor Day 2002. When Bush visited the St. Louis area on January 22, 2003, not only were protesters pushed far away from the president, but the media was prevented from talking with them.
In South Carolina, a protester was prosecuted by the Justice Department for possessing a sign -- "No War for Oil" -- in a crowd of people holding up pro-Bush signs. A policeman told the protester he was being arrested for the content of his sign. The protestor, Brett Bursey, was convicted of illegally protesting this month and fined $500. "He's no hero for First Amendment free speech rights,'' said the prosecutor after the verdict. "He's a criminal."
Most of us protesting last year against Bush's illegal invasion of Iraq are criminals, too. Bush called us a "focus group," but what he really meant to say is that he considers us criminals. Like Ashcroft said, if you disagree with Bush you aid terrorists. "You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror."
You see, the First Amendment pisses Bush off. His Christian soul has no tolerance for those who disagree with him.
After all, God talks to Dubya, he's a chosen instrument. He informed the ersatz Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas: "God told me to strike at al-Qaeda and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did."
Bush's Methodism works in mysterious ways, as did the Methodism of Rutherford B. Hayes, another president who lost the popular vote and yet won the White House after a contested dispute over balloting in Florida.
Lot's wife was reduced to a pillar of salt for disobeying God. One has to wonder if Bush beseeches his God, asking Him to turn disagreeable antiwar demonstrators into pillars of salt.
For now "free speech zones" will have to do.
Bush doesn't cotton to demonstrators. For instance, according to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union in 1999 (Texas United Education Fund, Inc. vs. Bush) when Bush was governor of Texas he had protesters arrested and thrown in the pokey on more than one occasion for criticizing environmental legislation that served his own interests. "The rules have changed," Bush averred when asked about his violations of the First Amendment and the freedom of speech and peaceful assembly.
Now he's changing the rules again -- and the highest court in the land refuses to take him to account for his deconstruction of the Bill of Rights.
Since Bush was coronated three years ago, he instructed Ashscroft to fiddle with the Freedom of Information Act; warned the media not to air tapes of Osama bin Laden; forced through the passage of Patriot I -- wiretaps, indefinite detention, warrantless searches -- and greased the skids for an even more draconian bill, Patriot II (it will not only allow secret arrests, but will strip citizenship from persons for their political associations); authorized snooping of attorney-client conversations; allowed the FBI to snoop on political groups not engaged in criminal activity (remember, the "rules have changed"); proffered Operation TIPS, or the Orwellian neighbor-spying-on-neighbor program; attempted to aggregate credit-card, travel, medical, school, and other records of everyone in the United States into the Total Information Awareness project (the brainchild of this supposedly abandoned exploit was former Iran-Contra criminal John Poindexter), and other laws, guidelines, and proposals designed to chip away at the Bill of Rights.
More recently, Bush and the Ministry of Homeland Security devised a plan to set up databases -- containing bank records, credit ratings, and medical records -- on every air passenger in the country. "We want these programs to be efficient to the extent it makes them more efficient to have them rolled together, we will be looking at that," said Nuala O'Connor Kelly, the chief "privacy officer" for the Ministry of Homeland Security (note the oxymoron). In other words, since most Americans fly at one time or another, John Poindexter's discredited program (see above) has come back in a different guise. You have to hand it to these Bushites for their dogged effort to convert America into a police and surveillance state.
Naturally, there will be lawsuits against all of this -- that is, while lawsuits are still permitted -- and in such cases the arch-conservative Supreme Court will likely come down on the side of their pothunter, the man they ushered into office, the man two of Antonin Scalia's sons worked for as lawyers and Clarence Thomas' wife helped out by collecting applications for people who wanted to work in the Bush administration. On May 11, 2003, while speaking before the Alaska Bar Association Convention, Scalia reflected on Bush's Patriot act and society in general. Surveillance and quashing dissent is necessary, Scalia explained, because society is becoming more violent and irresponsible. Moreover, US citizens tend to believe the Constitution affords them more rights than it actually does, said Scalia.
Or, as Scalia told an audience at John Carroll University in March of last year, during wartime "protections will be ratcheted right down to the constitutional minimum."
Because Dubya's war is indeterminate, a "ratcheted right down" Bill of Rights will certainly become the norm. In distant future, will Constitutional liberty be as foreign to the people of America as democracy was to the people of Russia after nearly three generations of totalitarianism?
It would seem Bush and Scalia think so.
Kurt Nimmo is a photographer and multimedia developer in Las Cruces, New Mexico. Visit his excellent no holds barred blog at www.kurtnimmo.com/blogger.html . Nimmo is a contributor to Cockburn and St. Clair's, The Politics of Anti-Semitism. A collection of his essays for CounterPunch, Another Day in the Empire, will soon be published by Dandelion Books.
http://www.counterpunch.org/nimmo01142004.html
this was posted as a response to phil's post 2033..
on the NOLIB board and was promptly deleted..
why would this be?
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2145051
phil..
a childs reality is inquisitive by nature..
the innocence by which information is gathered..
eliminates pretense..
what is an adult?
an adult is nothing more than a hardened child..
that has accepted what was taught them as gospel..
and therefore will be callous to anything..
which goes against the foundation of that formulated belief..
the question herein lies..
did the child seek answers or were they force fed by an agenda?
to form that perfect onion..
remember phil..
opinions are a dime a dozen..
just deal in the facts..
but one's ability to do so..
seems to have been compromised..
we are not in kansas anymore phil..
where would dorothy be had toto not pulled back the curtain of truth?
the blue or the red pill phil?
is this a choice you make for yourself?.
or
is it imposed upon you by socialistic pressure?.
this post was followed by this next one which was also deleted..
Life Without Principle..
by Henry David Thoreau
AT A LYCEUM, not long since, I felt that the lecturer had chosen a theme too foreign to himself, and so failed to interest me as much as he might have done. He described things not in or near to his heart, but toward his extremities and superficies. There was, in this sense, no truly central or centralizing thought in the lecture. I would have had him deal with his privatest experience, as the poet does. The greatest compliment that was ever paid me was when one asked me what I thought, and attended to my answer. I am surprised, as well as delighted, when this happens, it is such a rare use he would make of me, as if he were acquainted with the tool. Commonly, if men want anything of me, it is only to know how many acres I make of their land - since I am a surveyor - or, at most, what trivial news I have burdened myself with. They never will go to law for my meat; they prefer the shell. A man once came a considerable distance to ask me to lecture on Slavery; but on conversing with him, I found that he and his clique expected seven eighths of the lecture to be theirs, and only one eighth mine; so I declined. I take it for granted, when I am invited to lecture anywhere - for I have had a little experience in that business - that there is a desire to hear what I think on some subject, though I may be the greatest fool in the country - and not that I should say pleasant things merely, or such as the audience will assent to; and I resolve, accordingly, that I will give them a strong dose of myself. They have sent for me, and engaged to pay for me, and I am determined that they shall have me, though I bore them beyond all precedent.
So now I would say something similar to you, my readers. Since you are my readers, and I have not been much of a traveller, I will not talk about people a thousand miles off, but come as near home as I can. As the time is short, I will leave out all the flattery, and retain all the criticism.
Let us consider the way in which we spend our lives.
This world is a place of business. What an infinite bustle! I am awaked almost every night by the panting of the locomotive. It interrupts my dreams. There is no sabbath. It would be glorious to see mankind at leisure for once. It is nothing but work, work, work. I cannot easily buy a blank-book to write thoughts in; they are commonly ruled for dollars and cents. An Irishman, seeing me making a minute in the fields, took it for granted that I was calculating my wages. If a man was tossed out of a window when an infant, and so made a cripple for life, or seared out of his wits by the Indians, it is regretted chiefly because he was thus incapacitated for business! I think that there is nothing, not even crime, more opposed to poetry, to philosophy, ay, to life itself, than this incessant business.
There is a coarse and boisterous money-making fellow in the outskirts of our town, who is going to build a bank-wall under the hill along the edge of his meadow. The powers have put this into his head to keep him out of mischief, and he wishes me to spend three weeks digging there with him. The result will be that he will perhaps get some more money to board, and leave for his heirs to spend foolishly. If I do this, most will commend me as an industrious and hard-working man; but if I choose to devote myself to certain labors which yield more real profit, though but little money, they may be inclined to look on me as an idler. Nevertheless, as I do not need the police of meaningless labor to regulate me, and do not see anything absolutely praiseworthy in this fellow's undertaking any more than in many an enterprise of our own or foreign governments, however amusing it may be to him or them, I prefer to finish my education at a different school.
If a man walk in the woods for love of them half of each day, he is in danger of being regarded as a loafer; but if he spends his whole day as a speculator, shearing off those woods and making earth bald before her time, he is esteemed an industrious and enterprising citizen. As if a town had no interest in its forests but to cut them down!
Most men would feel insulted if it were proposed to employ them in throwing stones over a wall, and then in throwing them back, merely that they might earn their wages. But many are no more worthily employed now. For instance: just after sunrise, one summer morning, I noticed one of my neighbors walking beside his team, which was slowly drawing a heavy hewn stone swung under the axle, surrounded by an atmosphere of industry - his day's work begun - his brow commenced to sweat - a reproach to all sluggards and idlers - pausing abreast the shoulders of his oxen, and half turning round with a flourish of his merciful whip, while they gained their length on him. And I thought, Such is the labor which the American Congress exists to protect - honest, manly toil - honest as the day is long - that makes his bread taste sweet, and keeps society sweet - which all men respect and have consecrated; one of the sacred band, doing the needful but irksome drudgery. Indeed, I felt a slight reproach, because I observed this from a window, and was not abroad and stirring about a similar business. The day went by, and at evening I passed the yard of another neighbor, who keeps many servants, and spends much money foolishly, while he adds nothing to the common stock, and there I saw the stone of the morning lying beside a whimsical structure intended to adorn this Lord Timothy Dexter's premises, and the dignity forthwith departed from the teamster's labor, in my eyes. In my opinion, the sun was made to light worthier toil than this. I may add that his employer has since run off, in debt to a good part of the town, and, after passing through Chancery, has settled somewhere else, there to become once more a patron of the arts.
The ways by which you may get money almost without exception lead downward. To have done anything by which you earned money merely is to have been truly idle or worse. If the laborer gets no more than the wages which his employer pays him, he is cheated, he cheats himself. If you would get money as a writer or lecturer, you must be popular, which is to go down perpendicularly. Those services which the community will most readily pay for, it is most disagreeable to render. You are paid for being something less than a man. The State does not commonly reward a genius any more wisely. Even the poet laureate would rather not have to celebrate the accidents of royalty. He must be bribed with a pipe of wine; and perhaps another poet is called away from his muse to gauge that very pipe. As for my own business, even that kind of surveying which I could do with most satisfaction my employers do not want. They would prefer that I should do my work coarsely and not too well, ay, not well enough. When I observe that there are different ways of surveying, my employer commonly asks which will give him the most land, not which is most correct. I once invented a rule for measuring cord-wood, and tried to introduce it in Boston; but the measurer there told me that the sellers did not wish to have their wood measured correctly - that he was already too accurate for them, and therefore they commonly got their wood measured in Charlestown before crossing the bridge. The aim of the laborer should be, not to get his living, to get "a good job," but to perform well a certain work; and, even in a pecuniary sense, it would be economy for a town to pay its laborers so well that they would not feel that they were working for low ends, as for a livelihood merely, but for scientific, or even moral ends. Do not hire a man who does your work for money, but him who does it for love of it.
It is remarkable that there are few men so well employed, so much to their minds, but that a little money or fame would commonly buy them off from their present pursuit. I see advertisements for active young men, as if activity were the whole of a young man's capital. Yet I have been surprised when one has with confidence proposed to me, a grown man, to embark in some enterprise of his, as if I had absolutely nothing to do, my life having been a complete failure hitherto. What a doubtful compliment this to pay me! As if he had met me half-way across the ocean beating up against the wind, but bound nowhere, and proposed to me to go along with him! If I did, what do you think the underwriters would say? No, no! I am not without employment at this stage of the voyage. To tell the truth, I saw an advertisement for able-bodied seamen, when I was a boy, sauntering in my native port, and as soon as I came of age I embarked.
The community has no bribe that will tempt a wise man. You may raise money enough to tunnel a mountain, but you cannot raise money enough to hire a man who is minding his own business. An efficient and valuable man does what he can, whether the community pay him for it or not. The inefficient offer their inefficiency to the highest bidder, and are forever expecting to be put into office. One would suppose that they were rarely disappointed.
Perhaps I am more than usually jealous with respect to my freedom. I feel that my connection with and obligation to society are still very slight and transient. Those slight labors which afford me a livelihood, and by which it is allowed that I am to some extent serviceable to my contemporaries, are as yet commonly a pleasure to me, and I am not often reminded that they are a necessity. So far I am successful. But I foresee that if my wants should be much increased, the labor required to supply them would become a drudgery. If I should sell both my forenoons and afternoons to society, as most appear to do, I am sure that for me there would be nothing left worth living for. I trust that I shall never thus sell my birthright for a mess of pottage. I wish to suggest that a man may be very industrious, and yet not spend his time well. There is no more fatal blunderer than he who consumes the greater part of his life getting his living. All great enterprises are self-supporting. The poet, for instance, must sustain his body by his poetry, as a steam planing-mill feeds its boilers with the shavings it makes. You must get your living by loving. But as it is said of the merchants that ninety-seven in a hundred fail, so the life of men generally, tried by this standard, is a failure, and bankruptcy may be surely prophesied.
Merely to come into the world the heir of a fortune is not to be born, but to be still-born, rather. To be supported by the charity of friends, or a government pension - provided you continue to breathe - by whatever fine synonyms you describe these relations, is to go into the almshouse. On Sundays the poor debtor goes to church to take an account of stock, and finds, of course, that his outgoes have been greater than his income. In the Catholic Church, especially, they go into chancery, make a clean confession, give up all, and think to start again. Thus men will lie on their backs, talking about the fall of man, and never make an effort to get up.
As for the comparative demand which men make on life, it is an important difference between two, that the one is satisfied with a level success, that his marks can all be hit by point-blank shots, but the other, however low and unsuccessful his life may be, constantly elevates his aim, though at a very slight angle to the horizon. I should much rather be the last man - though, as the Orientals say, "Greatness doth not approach him who is forever looking down; and all those who are looking high are growing poor."
It is remarkable that there is little or nothing to be remembered written on the subject of getting a living; how to make getting a living not merely holiest and honorable, but altogether inviting and glorious; for if getting a living is not so, then living is not. One would think, from looking at literature, that this question had never disturbed a solitary individual's musings. Is it that men are too much disgusted with their experience to speak of it? The lesson of value which money teaches, which the Author of the Universe has taken so much pains to teach us, we are inclined to skip altogether. As for the means of living, it is wonderful how indifferent men of all classes are about it, even reformers, so called - whether they inherit, or earn, or steal it. I think that Society has done nothing for us in this respect, or at least has undone what she has done. Cold and hunger seem more friendly to my nature than those methods which men have adopted and advise to ward them off.
The title wise is, for the most part, falsely applied. How can one be a wise man, if he does not know any better how to live than other men? - if he is only more cunning and intellectually subtle? Does Wisdom work in a tread-mill? or does she teach how to succeed by her example? Is there any such thing as wisdom not applied to life? Is she merely the miller who grinds the finest logic? It is pertinent to ask if Plato got his living in a better way or more successfully than his contemporaries - or did he succumb to the difficulties of life like other men? Did he seem to prevail over some of them merely by indifference, or by assuming grand airs? or find it easier to live, because his aunt remembered him in her will? The ways in which most men get their living, that is, live, are mere makeshifts, and a shirking of the real business of life - chiefly because they do not know, but partly because they do not mean, any better.
The rush to California, for instance, and the attitude, not merely of merchants, but of philosophers and prophets, so called, in relation to it, reflect the greatest disgrace on mankind. That so many are ready to live by luck, and so get the means of commanding the labor of others less lucky, without contributing any value to society! And that is called enterprise! I know of no more startling development of the immorality of trade, and all the common modes of getting a living. The philosophy and poetry and religion of such a mankind are not worth the dust of a puffball. The hog that gets his living by rooting, stirring up the soil so, would be ashamed of such company. If I could command the wealth of all the worlds by lifting my finger, I would not pay such a price for it. Even Mahomet knew that God did not make this world in jest. It makes God to be a moneyed gentleman who scatters a handful of pennies in order to see mankind scramble for them. The world's raffle! A subsistence in the domains of Nature a thing to be raffled for! What a comment, what a satire, on our institutions! The conclusion will be, that mankind will hang itself upon a tree. And have all the precepts in all the Bibles taught men only this? and is the last and most admirable invention of the human race only an improved muck-rake? Is this the ground on which Orientals and Occidentals meet? Did God direct us so to get our living, digging where we never planted - and He would, perchance, reward us with lumps of gold?
God gave the righteous man a certificate entitling him to food and raiment, but the unrighteous man found a facsimile of the same in God's coffers, and appropriated it, and obtained food and raiment like the former. It is one of the most extensive systems of counterfeiting that the world has seen. I did not know that mankind was suffering for want of gold. I have seen a little of it. I know that it is very malleable, but not so malleable as wit. A grain of gold gild a great surface, but not so much as a grain of wisdom.
The gold-digger in the ravines of the mountains is as much a gambler as his fellow in the saloons of San Francisco. What difference does it make whether you shake dirt or shake dice? If you win, society is the loser. The gold-digger is the enemy of the honest laborer, whatever checks and compensations there may be. It is not enough to tell me that you worked hard to get your gold. So does the Devil work hard. The way of transgressors may be hard in many respects. The humblest observer who goes to the mines sees and says that gold-digging is of the character of a lottery; the gold thus obtained is not the same same thing with the wages of honest toil. But, practically, he forgets what he has seen, for he has seen only the fact, not the principle, and goes into trade there, that is, buys a ticket in what commonly proves another lottery, where the fact is not so obvious.
After reading Howitt's account of the Australian gold-diggings one evening, I had in my mind's eye, all night, the numerous valleys, with their streams, all cut up with foul pits, from ten to one hundred feet deep, and half a dozen feet across, as close as they can be dug, and partly filled with water - the locality to which men furiously rush to probe for their fortunes - uncertain where they shall break ground - not knowing but the gold is under their camp itself - sometimes digging one hundred and sixty feet before they strike the vein, or then missing it by a foot - turned into demons, and regardless of each others' rights, in their thirst for riches - whole valleys, for thirty miles, suddenly honeycombed by the pits of the miners, so that even hundreds are drowned in them - standing in water, and covered with mud and clay, they work night and day, dying of exposure and disease. Having read this, and partly forgotten it, I was thinking, accidentally, of my own unsatisfactory life, doing as others do; and with that vision of the diggings still before me, I asked myself why I might not be washing some gold daily, though it were only the finest particles - why I might not sink a shaft down to the gold within me, and work that mine. There is a Ballarat, a Bendigo for you - what though it were a sulky-gully? At any rate, I might pursue some path, however solitary and narrow and crooked, in which I could walk with love and reverence. Wherever a man separates from the multitude, and goes his own way in this mood, there indeed is a fork in the road, though ordinary travellers may see only a gap in the paling. His solitary path across lots will turn out the higher way of the two. Men rush to California and Australia as if the true gold were to be found in that direction; but that is to go to the very opposite extreme to where it lies. They go prospecting farther and farther away from the true lead, and are most unfortunate when they think themselves most successful. Is not our native soil auriferous? Does not a stream from the golden mountains flow through our native valley? and has not this for more than geologic ages been bringing down the shining particles and forming the nuggets for us? Yet, strange to tell, if a digger steal away, prospecting for this true gold, into the unexplored solitudes around us, there is no danger that any will dog his steps, and endeavor to supplant him. He may claim and undermine the whole valley even, both the cultivated and the uncultivated portions, his whole life long in peace, for no one will ever dispute his claim. They will not mind his cradles or his toms. He is not confined to a claim twelve feet square, as at Ballarat, but may mine anywhere, and wash the whole wide world in his tom.
Howitt says of the man who found the great nugget which weighed twenty-eight pounds, at the Bendigo diggings in Australia: "He soon began to drink; got a horse, and rode all about, generally at full gallop, and, when he met people, called out to inquire if they knew who he was, and then kindly informed them that he was 'the bloody wretch that had found the nugget.' At last he rode full speed against a tree, and nearly knocked his brains out." I think, however, there was no danger of that, for he had already knocked his brains out against the nugget. Howitt adds, "He is a hopelessly ruined man." But he is a type of the class. They are all fast men. Hear some of the names of the places where they dig: "Jackass Flat" - "Sheep's-Head Gully" - "Murderer's Bar," etc. Is there no satire in these names? Let them carry their ill-gotten wealth where they will, I am thinking it will still be "Jackass Flat," if not "Murderer's Bar," where they live.
The last resource of our energy has been the robbing of graveyards on the Isthmus of Darien, an enterprise which appears to be but in its infancy; for, according to late accounts, an act has passed its second reading in the legislature of New Granada, regulating this kind of mining; and a correspondent of the "Tribune" writes: "In the dry season, when the weather will permit of the country being properly prospected, no doubt other rich guacas [that is, graveyards] will be found." To emigrants he says: "do not come before December; take the Isthmus route in preference to the Boca del Toro one; bring no useless baggage, and do not cumber yourself with a tent; but a good pair of blankets will be necessary; a pick, shovel, and axe of good material will be almost all that is required": advice which might have been taken from the "Burker's Guide." And he concludes with this line in Italics and small capitals: "If you are doing well at home, STAY THERE," which may fairly be interpreted to mean, "If you are getting a good living by robbing graveyards at home, stay there."
But why go to California for a text? She is the child of New England, bred at her own school and church. It is remarkable that among all the preachers there are so few moral teachers. The prophets are employed in excusing the ways of men. Most reverend seniors, the illuminati of the age, tell me, with a gracious, reminiscent smile, betwixt an aspiration and a shudder, not to be too tender about these things - to lump all that, that is, make a lump of gold of it. The highest advice I have heard on these subjects was grovelling. The burden of it was - It is not worth your while to undertake to reform the world in this particular. Do not ask how your bread is buttered; it will make you sick, if you do - and the like. A man had better starve at once than lose his innocence in the process of getting his bread. If within the sophisticated man there is not an unsophisticated one, then he is but one of the devil's angels. As we grow old, we live more coarsely, we relax a little in our disciplines, and, to some extent, cease to obey our finest instincts. But we should be fastidious to the extreme of sanity, disregarding the gibes of those who are more unfortunate than ourselves.
In our science and philosophy, even, there is commonly no true and absolute account of things. The spirit of sect and bigotry has planted its hoof amid the stars. You have only to discuss the problem, whether the stars are inhabited or not, in order to discover it. Why must we daub the heavens as well as the earth? It was an unfortunate discovery that Dr. Kane was a Mason, and that Sir John Franklin was another. But it was a more cruel suggestion that possibly that was the reason why the former went in search of the latter. There is not a popular magazine in this country that would dare to print a child's thought on important subjects without comment. It must be submitted to the D.D.'s. I would it were the chickadee-dees.
You come from attending the funeral of mankind to attend to a natural phenomenon. A little thought is sexton to all the world. I hardly know an intellectual man, even, who is so broad and truly liberal that you can think aloud in his society. Most with whom you endeavor to talk soon come to a stand against some institution in which they appear to hold stock - that is, some particular, not universal, way of viewing things. They will continually thrust their own low roof, with its narrow skylight, between you and the sky, when it is the unobstructed heavens you would view. Get out of the way with your cobwebs; wash your windows, I say! In some lyceums they tell me that they have voted to exclude the subject of religion. But how do I know what their religion is, and when I am near to or far from it? I have walked into such an arena and done my best to make a clean breast of what religion I have experienced, and the audience never suspected what I was about. The lecture was as harmless as moonshine to them. Whereas, if I had read to them the biography of the greatest scamps in history, they might have thought that I had written the lives of the deacons of their church. Ordinarily, the inquiry is, Where did you come from? or, Where are you going? That was a more pertinent question which I overheard one of my auditors put to another one - "What does he lecture for?" It made me quake in my shoes. To speak impartially, the best men that I know are not serene, a world in themselves. For the most part, they dwell in forms, and flatter and study effect only more finely than the rest. We select granite for the underpinning of our houses and barns; we build fences of stone; but we do not ourselves rest on an underpinning of granitic truth, the lowest primitive rock. Our sills are rotten.
What stuff is the man made of who is not coexistent in our thought with the purest and subtilest truth? I often accuse my finest acquaintances of an immense frivolity; for, while there are manners and compliments we do not meet, we do not teach one another the lessons of honesty and sincerity that the brutes do, or of steadiness and solidity that the rocks do. The fault is commonly mutual, however; for we do not habitually demand any more of each other.
That excitement about Kossuth, consider how characteristic, but superficial, it was! - only another kind of politics or dancing. Men were making speeches to him all over the country, but each expressed only the thought, or the want of thought, of the multitude. No man stood on truth. They were merely banded together, as usual one leaning on another, and all together on nothing; as the Hindoos made the world rest on an elephant, the elephant on a tortoise, and the tortoise on a serpent, and had nothing to put under the serpent. For all fruit of that stir we have the Kossuth hat.
Just so hollow and ineffectual, for the most part, is our ordinary conversation. Surface meets surface. When our life ceases to be inward and private, conversation degenerates into mere gossip. We rarely meet a man who can tell us any news which he has not read in a newspaper, or been told by his neighbor; and, for the most part, the only difference between us and our fellow is that he has seen the newspaper, or been out to tea, and we have not. In proportion as our inward life fails, we go more constantly and desperately to the post-office. You may depend on it, that the poor fellow who walks away with the greatest number of letters, proud of his extensive correspondence, has not heard from himself this long while.
I do not know but it is too much to read one newspaper a week. I have tried it recently, and for so long it seems to me that I have not dwelt in my native region. The sun, the clouds, the snow, the trees say not so much to me. You cannot serve two masters. It requires more than a day's devotion to know and to possess the wealth of a day. We may well be ashamed to tell what things we have read or heard in our day. I did not know why my news should be so trivial - considering what one's dreams and expectations are, why the developments should be so paltry. The news we hear, for the most part, is not news to our genius. It is the stalest repetition. You are often tempted to ask why such stress is laid on a particular experience which you have had - that, after twenty-five years, you should meet Hobbins, Registrar of Deeds, again on the sidewalk. Have you not budged an inch, then? Such is the daily news. Its facts appear to float in the atmosphere, insignificant as the sporules of fungi, and impinge on some neglected thallus, or surface of our minds, which affords a basis for them, and hence a parasitic growth. We should wash ourselves clean of such news. Of what consequence, though our planet explode, if there is no character involved in the explosion? In health we have not the least curiosity about such events. We do not live for idle amusement. I would not run round a corner to see the world blow up.
All summer, and far into the autumn, perchance, you unconsciously went by the newspapers and the news, and now you find it was because the morning and the evening were full of news to you. Your walks were full of incidents. You attended, not to the affairs of Europe, but to your own affairs in Massachusetts fields. If you chance to live and move and have your being in that thin stratum in which the events that make the news transpire - thinner than the paper on which it is printed - then these things will fill the world for you; but if you soar above or dive below that plane, you cannot remember nor be reminded of them. Really to see the sun rise or go down every day, so to relate ourselves to a universal fact, would preserve us sane forever. Nations! What are nations? Tartars, and Huns, and Chinamen! Like insects, they swarm. The historian strives in vain to make them memorable. It is for want of a man that there are so many men. It is individuals that populate the world. Any man thinking may say with the Spirit of Lodin -
"I look down from my height on nations,
And they become ashes before me; -
Calm is my dwelling in the clouds;
Pleasant are the great fields of my rest."
Pray, let us live without being drawn by dogs, Esquimaux-fashion, tearing over hill and dale, and biting each other's ears. Not without a slight shudder at the danger, I often perceive how near I had come to admitting into my mind the details of some trivial affair - the news of the street; and I am astonished to observe how willing men are to lumber their minds with such rubbish - to permit idle rumors and incidents of the most insignificant kind to intrude on ground which should be sacred to thought. Shall the mind be a public arena, where the affairs of the street and the gossip of the tea-table chiefly are discussed? Or shall it be a quarter of heaven itself - an hypaethral temple, consecrated to the service of the gods? I find it so difficult to dispose of the few facts which to me are significant, that I hesitate to burden my attention with those which are insignificant, which only a divine mind could illustrate. Such is, for the most part, the news in newspapers and conversation. It is important to preserve the mind's chastity in this respect. Think of admitting the details of a single case of the criminal court into our thoughts, to stalk profanely through their very sanctum sanctorum for an hour, ay, for many hours! to make a very bar-room of the mind's inmost apartment, as if for so long the dust of the street had occupied us - the very street itself, with all its travel, its bustle, and filth, had passed through our thoughts' shrine!
Would it not be an intellectual and moral suicide? When I have been compelled to sit spectator and auditor in a court-room for some hours, and have seen my neighbors, who were not compelled, stealing in from time to time, and tiptoeing about with washed hands and faces, it has appeared to my mind's eye, that, when they took off their hats, their ears suddenly expanded into vast hoppers for sound, between which even their narrow heads were crowded. Like the vanes of windmills, they caught the broad but shallow stream of sound, which, after a few titillating gyrations in their coggy brains, passed out the other side. I wondered if, when they got home, they were as careful to wash their ears as before their hands and faces. It has seemed to me, at such a time, that the auditors and the witnesses, the jury and the counsel, the judge and the criminal at the bar - if I may presume him guilty before he is convicted - were all equally criminal, and a thunderbolt might be expected to descend and consume them all together.
By all kinds of traps and signboards, threatening the extreme penalty of the divine law, exclude such trespassers from the only ground which can be sacred to you. It is so hard to forget what it is worse than useless to remember! If I am to be a thoroughfare, I prefer that it be of the mountain brooks, the Parnassian streams, and not the town sewers. There is inspiration, that gossip which comes to the ear of the attentive mind from the courts of heaven. There is the profane and stale revelation of the bar-room and the police court. The same ear is fitted to receive both communications. Only the character of the hearer determines to which it shall be open, and to which closed. I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality. Our very intellect shall be macadamized, as it were - its foundation broken into fragments for the wheels of travel to roll over; and if you would know what will make the most durable pavement, surpassing rolled stones, spruce blocks, and asphaltum, you have only to look into some of our minds which have been subjected to this treatment so long.
If we have thus desecrated ourselves - as who has not? - the remedy will be by wariness and devotion to reconsecrate ourselves, and make once more a fane of the mind. We should treat our minds, that is, ourselves, as innocent and ingenuous children, whose guardians we are, and be careful what objects and what subjects we thrust on their attention. Read not the Times. Read the Eternities.
Conventionalities are at length as had as impurities. Even the facts of science may dust the mind by their dryness, unless they are in a sense effaced each morning, or rather rendered fertile by the dews of fresh and living truth. Knowledge does not come to us by details, but in flashes of light from heaven. Yes, every thought that passes through the mind helps to wear and tear it, and to deepen the ruts, which, as in the streets of Pompeii, evince how much it has been used. How many things there are concerning which we might well deliberate whether we had better know them - had better let their peddling-carts be driven, even at the slowest trot or walk, over that bride of glorious span by which we trust to pass at last from the farthest brink of time to the nearest shore of eternity! Have we no culture, no refinement - but skill only to live coarsely and serve the Devil? - to acquire a little worldly wealth, or fame, or liberty, and make a false show with it, as if we were all husk and shell, with no tender and living kernel to us? Shall our institutions be like those chestnut burs which contain abortive nuts, perfect only to prick the fingers? America is said to be the arena on which the battle of freedom is to be fought; but surely it cannot be freedom in a merely political sense that is meant. Even if we grant that the American has freed himself from a political tyrant, he is still the slave of an economical and moral tyrant. Now that the republic - the respublica - has been settled, it is time to look after the res-privata - the private state - to see, as the Roman senate charged its consuls, "ne quid res-PRIVATA detrimenti caperet," that the private state receive no detriment.
Do we call this the land of the free? What is it to be free from King George and continue the slaves of King Prejudice? What is it to be born free and not to live free? What is the value of any political freedom, but as a means to moral freedom? Is it a freedom to be slaves, or a freedom to be free, of which we boast? We are a nation of politicians, concerned about the outmost defences only of freedom. It is our children's children who may perchance be really free. We tax ourselves unjustly. There is a part of us which is not represented. It is taxation without representation. We quarter troops, we quarter fools and cattle of all sorts upon ourselves. We quarter our gross bodies on our poor souls, till the former eat up all the latter's substance.
With respect to a true culture and manhood, we are essentially provincial still, not metropolitan - mere Jonathans. We are provincial, because we do not find at home our standards; because we do not worship truth, but the reflection of truth; because we are warped and narrowed by an exclusive devotion to trade and commerce and manufactures and agriculture and the like, which are but means, and not the end.
So is the English Parliament provincial. Mere country bumpkins, they betray themselves, when any more important question arises for them to settle, the Irish question, for instance - the English question why did I not say? Their natures are subdued to what they work in. Their "good breeding" respects only secondary objects. The finest manners in the world are awkwardness and fatuity when contrasted with a finer intelligence. They appear but as the fashions of past days - mere courtliness, knee-buckles and small-clothes, out of date. It is the vice, but not the excellence of manners, that they are continually being deserted by the character; they are cast-off-clothes or shells, claiming the respect which belonged to the living creature. You are presented with the shells instead of the meat, and it is no excuse generally, that, in the case of some fishes, the shells are of more worth than the meat. The man who thrusts his manners upon me does as if he were to insist on introducing me to his cabinet of curiosities, when I wished to see himself. It was not in this sense that the poet Decker called Christ "the first true gentleman that ever breathed." I repeat that in this sense the most splendid court in Christendom is provincial, having authority to consult about Transalpine interests only, and not the affairs of Rome. A praetor or proconsul would suffice to settle the questions which absorb the attention of the English Parliament and the American Congress. Government and legislation! these I thought were respectable professions. We have heard of heaven-born Numas, Lycurguses, and Solons, in the history of the world, whose names at least may stand for ideal legislators; but think of legislating to regulate the breeding of slaves, or the exportation of tobacco! What have divine legislators to do with the exportation or the importation of tobacco? what humane ones with the breeding of slaves? Suppose you were to submit the question to any son of God - and has He no children in the Nineteenth Century? is it a family which is extinct? - in what condition would you get it again? What shall a State like Virginia say for itself at the last day, in which these have been the principal, the staple productions? What ground is there for patriotism in such a State? I derive my facts from statistical tables which the States themselves have published.
A commerce that whitens every sea in quest of nuts and raisins, and makes slaves of its sailors for this purpose! I saw, the other day, a vessel which had been wrecked, and many lives lost, and her cargo of rags, juniper berries, and bitter almonds were strewn along the shore. It seemed hardly worth the while to tempt the dangers of the sea between Leghorn and New York for the sake of a cargo of juniper berries and bitter almonds. America sending to the Old World for her bitters! Is not the sea-brine, is not shipwreck, bitter enough to make the cup of life go down here? Yet such, to a great extent, is our boasted commerce; and there are those who style themselves statesmen and philosophers who are so blind as to think that progress and civilization depend on precisely this kind of interchange and activity - the activity of flies about a molasses - hogshead. Very well, observes one, if men were oysters. And very well, answer I, if men were mosquitoes.
Lieutenant Herndon, whom our government sent to explore the Amazon, and, it is said, to extend the area of slavery, observed that there was wanting there "an industrious and active population, who know what the comforts of life are, and who have artificial wants to draw out the great resources of the country." But what are the "artificial wants" to be encouraged? Not the love of luxuries, like the tobacco and slaves of, I believe, his native Virginia, nor the ice and granite and other material wealth of our native New England; nor are "the great resources of a country" that fertility or barrenness of soil which produces these. The chief want, in every State that I have been into, was a high and earnest purpose in its inhabitants. This alone draws out "the great resources" of Nature, and at last taxes her beyond her resources; for man naturally dies out of her. When we want culture more than potatoes, and illumination more than sugar-plums, then the great resources of a world are taxed and drawn out, and the result, or staple production, is, not slaves, nor operatives, but men - those rare fruits called heroes, saints, poets, philosophers, and redeemers.
In short, as a snow-drift is formed where there is a lull in the wind, so, one would say, where there is a lull of truth, an institution springs up. But the truth blows right on over it, nevertheless, and at length blows it down.
What is called politics is comparatively something so superficial and inhuman, that practically I have never fairly recognized that it concerns me at all. The newspapers, I perceive, devote some of their columns specially to politics or government without charge; and this, one would say, is all that saves it; but as I love literature and to some extent the truth also, I never read those columns at any rate. I do not wish to blunt my sense of right so much. I have not got to answer for having read a single President's Message. A strange age of the world this, when empires, kingdoms, and republics come a-begging to a private man's door, and utter their complaints at his elbow! I cannot take up a newspaper but I find that some wretched government or other, hard pushed and on its last legs, is interceding with me, the reader, to vote for it - more importunate than an Italian beggar; and if I have a mind to look at its certificate, made, perchance, by some benevolent merchant's clerk, or the skipper that brought it over, for it cannot speak a word of English itself, I shall probably read of the eruption of some Vesuvius, or the overflowing of some Po, true or forged, which brought it into this condition. I do not hesitate, in such a case, to suggest work, or the almshouse; or why not keep its castle in silence, as I do commonly? The poor President, what with preserving his popularity and doing his duty, is completely bewildered. The newspapers are the ruling power. Any other government is reduced to a few marines at Fort Independence. If a man neglects to read the Daily Times, government will go down on its knees to him, for this is the only treason in these days.
Those things which now most engage the attention of men, as politics and the daily routine, are, it is true, vital functions of human society, but should be unconsciously performed, like the corresponding functions of the physical body. They are infrahuman, a kind of vegetation. I sometimes awake to a half-consciousness of them going on about me, as a man may become conscious of some of the processes of digestion in a morbid state, and so have the dyspepsia, as it is called. It is as if a thinker submitted himself to be rasped by the great gizzard of creation. Politics is, as it were, the gizzard of society, full of grit and gravel, and the two political parties are its two opposite halves - sometimes split into quarters, it may be, which grind on each other. Not only individuals, but states, have thus a confirmed dyspepsia, which expresses itself, you can imagine by what sort of eloquence. Thus our life is not altogether a forgetting, but also, alas! to a great extent, a remembering, of that which we should never have been conscious of, certainly not in our waking hours. Why should we not meet, not always as dyspeptics, to tell our had dreams, but sometimes as eupeptics, to congratulate each other on the ever-glorious morning? I do not make an exorbitant demand, surely.
THE END..
interesting..
http://www.fms.treas.gov/fr/index.html
so what are they?
trying to say..
the ultimate measure of a man..
is not where he stands in moments of comfort..
but
where he stands at times of challenge and controversy..
~ Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ~
don't repeat..
just delete..
~ vex ~
why are those in public office?.
not held accountable..
for that which..
if done by the people..
would be prosecuted to the nth degree..
the people should make him pay back..
or be responsible for..
the cost of his little lie..
thought this board..
was liberal free..
what is it that people?.
fear most..
One..have not..looks interesting though..as well as..
The Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline
by James Perloff
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0882791346/ref=sib_dp_pt/104-2575519-3947933#reader-link
my challenge to all with regard to what I post is exactly that..
just prove it wrong..
have not met with any intellectual challenges..just deleted posts..
most fear stepping outside the comfort of one's own world..
to learn that which goes against the grain..
of the very foundation of what one was taught..
the fear?
once this new information has been realistically processed..
the world one once knew..
will be gone forever..
ABATEMENT ~ MAN BEATS IRS..
by Kenny Adler
The following transcript details a defendant beating the I.R.S. in just about the shortest amount of time I've ever seen. This is a 1994 case in California, and I have tried to copy it perfectly from my copy of the court reporter's transcript. The case number is crossed out in the middle, as is this man's last name. I shall use a series of x's to show where words were crossed out, presumably by the defendant, before distribution. Please pay special attention to the capitalization of words throughout the document. They are as the clerk capitalized them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
HONORABLE JOHN G. DAVIES, JUDGE PRESIDING
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
Plaintiff(s) )
)
vs. ) NO. CV-94 xxxx -JGD
)
RANDY L. OxxxxxxxxxR )
____________Defendant(s)_ )
REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
Los Angeles, California - Monday, March 21, 1994
BEVERLY A. CASARES CSR# 8630
Official Court Reporter
312 North Spring Street, Room 440
Los Angeles, California 90012
(213) 617-2305
APPEARANCES:
FOR PLAINTIFF(S) GREGORY A. ROTH
312 N. Spring Street
Los Angeles, California 90012
(213) 894-2410
FOR DEFENDANT(S) RANDY L. OxxxxxxxxxR
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; MONDAY, MARCH 21, 1994; 1:30 P.M.
THE CLERK: Item number 6, case number CV-94xxxxx, United States of America versus Randy L. Oxxxxxxxxxr.
MR. ROTH: Good afternoon, your Honor, Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregory Roth appearing on behalf of the United States, and its agency the Internal Revenue Service.
THE COURT: Is there any opposition?
MR. OxxxxxxxxxR: For the record.
THE COURT: Yes.
Mr. OxxxxxxxxxR: My Christian name is Randy Lee and my family name is Oxxxxxxxxxr.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. OxxxxxxxxxR: That is spelled capital R, lower case, a-n-d-y, capital L, lower case e-e, capital O, lower case x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-r.
I have responded to this petition, because it was found on the door of the place where I take up housekeeping, and attempts to create a colorable persona under colorable law by the name of capital R-A-N-D-Y L period, O-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-R. The artifice being used here to deceive this Honorable Court must be abated as a Public Nuisance.
For the record Randy Lee and Jesus the Christ Advocate and Wonderful Counselor are using the Right of Visitation to exercise the Ministerial Powers to be heard on this matter.
I, Randy Lee am a native Californian and a Man on the Land in Los Angeles County, not a resident in the Federal Judicial District in the Central District of California.
My Colors and Authority is the California Bear Flag with the Gold star. My Law is My Family Bible. And my Status is shown by the Seal of the People.
I am who I say I am, not who the U.S. Attorney says I am. Further I sayeth not and I stand mute.
THE COURT: All right. Please take your things off of the podium and sit down at your table. Mr. Roth, do you have any response to this alleged case of mistaken identity.
MR. ROTH: Well, your Honor, Mr. Oxxxxxxxxxr seems to think that if you spell your name in upper and lower case, it relieves him of compliance.
THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Roth. Please call the next case clerk.
(Proceedings concluded.)
C E R T I F I C A T E
I hereby certify that the foregoing matter entitled UNITED STATES OF AMERICA versus RANDY L. OxxxxxxxxxR No. CV-94 xxxx -JGD is transcribed from the stenographic notes taken by me and is a true and accurate description of the same.
_____(signed)____________________. ____3/25/94________________.
BEVERLY A. CASARES CSR# 8630, Official Court Reporter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have been told that this defense has been used many times, with success each time.
Another dozen people did what he did under his direction over the next few months after his case, which was the first. None of these people have had anything further happen to them on these matters.
He also told me that his brother had a federal warrant out for his arrest. The federals attempted to serve it when he wasn't home. He took the arguments used in court and did an abatement on them, and later received proof that the warrant was withdrawn (I forget the actual word that Randy used, but it was somehow nullified).
Randy speculates that a name in ALL CAPS means a person subject to military jurisdiction, which fits in perfectly with what I've been saying over the past couple years.
I FOUND THE ANSWER! Here is a short section from 1 Corpus Juris on abatement. This will explain a lot of what happened in this case.
Definition, Nature, and Effect of Abatement
[1] A. DEFINITION. The abatement of an action at law is the overthrowing of the action caused by defendant's pleading some matter of fact tending to impeach the correctness of the writ or declaration. The abatement of a suit in equity is a mere suspension of all the proceedings therein for a want of proper parties before the court.
A plea in abatement is defined to be a plea that, without disputing the justice of the plaintiff's claim, objects to the place, mode, or time of asserting it, and requires that therefore, and pro hac vice, judgement be given for the defendant, leaving it open to renew the suit in another place or form, or at another time.
[2] B. EFFECT OF ABATEMENT - 1. At Law-a. Effect on Principal Suit. At law the abatement of a suit is a complete termination of that particular suit, so that it cannot be revived; but it does not determine or defeat plaintiff's cause of action or bar the issuance of a new suit.
[7] C. PLEAS IN ABATEMENT NOT FAVORED. Pleas in abatement, being dilatory pleas, are not favored either at common law, or under the codes and practices acts.
FOR THIS REASON, as will be shown in another place, pleas or answers in abatement must allege with the greatest certainty in every particular every fact necessary to their sufficiency. No presumptions of law or fact are allowed in their favor, but on the contrary every intendment must be taken against them. Furthermore matter in abatement must be pleaded at the earliest opportunity, and, if the facts are known, before a plea or answer in bar is interposed, and before a general imparlance or continuance.
So, this is why the Judge did what he did. The guy did not win per se, as the IRS could have corrected the defect in the "writ" and brought a new suit. This might not be a silver bullet, but it's not B.S. either.
Correspondence
Thanks for your input. I think I know how you feel about this "win." That it is correctable by the government. Simply don't use ALL CAPS next time, right?
That's where I think this issue is bigger. I think that the government CAN'T stop using ALL CAPS as a matter of martial law and/or commercial law. I have seen hints of this elsewhere, but nothing substantial.
Well, my wife suggested I take a look at the Lloyd Long [see Report: #16F: The Becraft Landmark Case] transcript, and sure enough, ALL CAPS. Interestingly enough in his answer and briefs his name is proper case.
The question which begs to be answered is WHY did his attorney not bring this up. HERE IS YOUR ANSWER.
Again, from 1 Corpus Juris:
II Objections to Jurisdiction
[17] A. Nature of Pleas to the Jurisdiction.
At common law pleas by which objection is taken to the jurisdiction of the court are not strictly pleas in abatement, but are in a class by themselves and are designated as pleas to the jurisdiction. They differ at common law from pleas in abatement in several respects, as, for example, in that they must be pleaded in person and not by attorney, and in that they must conclude, not with a prayer for judgement of the writ or declaration, or of the writ and declaration, and that the same be quashed, but whether the court will or ought to take further cognizance of the action or suit. They are, however, dilatory pleas, as distinguished from pleas to the merits, in that their effect is to defeat the present suit and not to deny or bar the cause of action, and therefore they are in modern practice treated for most purposes like other dilatory pleas as pleas in abatement, and are subject to most of the rules governing such pleas.
Shew... Looks like if you have an attorney, you are f#@ked. We knew this all along, but here it is in print.
By the way, I looked at a copy of my IMF [master file kept by the IRS on taxpayers]. You guessed it, ALL CAPS! This is getting too interesting.
Information on Abatement
For more information on Abatement, contact Randy Lee at c/o General Delivery, Canoga Park Post Office, Canoga, California; 818-347-7080; or Joe Allen at c/o General Delivery, Rosamond Post Office, Rosamond, California; 805-824-2971.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is an excerpt from an article by James Hazel titled The Abatement Process (See also James' article: Notes About Deceptive All Capitals Names):
In written form, the following example, to be delivered to the court clerk or judge, conforms with Randy Lee's successful petition, and with the requirements for abatements as enumerated in Corpus Juris Secundum and many, many cases which have treated the subject of abatement for misnomer.
[This is useful for instances where you have the opportunity, as in most cases, to reply in writing to a written demand/summons -- as it's much simpler than appearing in person, and most people prefer this option.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PETITION FOR ABATEMENT
TO: THE (FICTITIOUS NAME OF COURT, EXPRESSED IN ALL UPPERCASE LETTERS); ADDRESS OF COURT, INCLUDING ZIP CODE.
FROM: Petitioner John Doe (properly capitalized); Mail received: c/o (USPS address, including ZIP Code).
REGARDING: (Complaint, demand or accusation, [NO.____]), attached hereto and thereby incorporated as an integral part of this petition for abatement.
COMES NOW, John Doe, to petition this court to abate the above-referenced (accusation, complaint) on the following grounds:
The (accusation, complaint) against JOHN DOE, a fictitious name, was delivered into my hand on (date). As a prudent Man who fears that his ignoring of the instrument might well result in coercive procedures being used against him, I have chosen to approach this court with this petition that the court abate the instrument so it cannot in its present form, further restrain my liberties.
That the instrument was served on or delivered to me is evidence that this is a case of misnomer or mistaken identity. The instrument is against a fictitious name, "JOHN DOE." My given, Christian name is "John," with the initial letter capitalized as required by Rules of English Grammar for the writing of the names of natural persons. My patronymic, family name or surname is "Doe," with the initial letter capitalized. The (accusation, complaint) does not name me.
If the complainant or accuser has any claim or argument against me, it can bring a complaint or accusation against my real name. My objections herein will make it possible for the complainant or accuser to issue a better writ, which is the primary purpose of matters in abatement.
This is by content, grounds, intent and definition a petition in abatement, and not a plea in bar; and may not be construed as a motion for dismissal or for mere amendment of the instrument. It may be justly resolved only by abatement by the court.
When a petition for abatement is before a court, that court is charged with according to the defendant (petitioner) the benefit of the doubt. Also, courts should take cognizance of the law that provides: Where conditions for its issuance exist, abatement is a matter of right, not of discretion; The misnomer or misdescription of a party defendant is ground for abatement; and, Grounds for abatements are the same for equity and law cases.
FURTHER I SAYETH NOT, except to advise the court that in the absence of abatement of the instrument as a restraint against my liberty, I shall henceforth remain mute.
Dated this ____ day of the (First - Twelfth) month of the Nineteenth Hundred and Ninety Sixth year Anno Domini, in _____________ County, State of __________ (capitalize lawful name of State):
__________________________________
John Doe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Note: When a DEMAND is abated, it can theoretically be refiled; properly naming the accused person.
Most DEMANDS prosecuted in courts contain other fatal errors besides mistaken identify of the accused. By use of all uppercase letters in their entitlements or captions, and by erroneously capitalizing the terms "plaintiff' and "defendant," they fail to identify the parties, the venue, including the NAMES of lawful states and counties, and the NAME of a lawful court. It is advisable to avoid the shotgun technique of trying to "cure" all defects with one abatement petition, but is preferable to focus the first (and usually the last needed abatement petition, on the failure to accuse the coerced Man by his proper name. The present de facto courts have no lawful power to name natural persons, or otherwise exercise jurisdiction over them, except with their tacit (ignorant) consent. To date, I have heard of no abated accusation being refiled, properly naming the natural Man who objected to be held to answer to a demand against a fictitious person. But in the unlikely event that an accusation or demand is refiled using a proper name for the accused, a second petition for abatement would lie against failure to name the venue. Then, if necessary, a third for failure to name the court. And if still necessary, a fourth petition for failure to identify the "nature" of the parties (plaintiff and defendant).]
HOW BUREAUCRATS THINK..
Monthly Column by James Robertson, Dec. 1994
When you communicate a message, the perceptions you generate in your various audiences can vary immensely. Who your audiences are should be a prime consideration for you in what you communicate and how you communicate it.
When you communicate with other freedom-oriented individuals, you intend to convey certain meanings. Since such individuals "think the way you think" regarding many aspects of fundamental assumptions and analytical procedures, usually the framework in which you communicate is relatively easy for you to interact within. The topic of that particular conversation may be a complex one, but at least the basic orientations are no impediment to effective communication.
When you communicate with non-freedom-oriented, non-bureaucrats, you usually need to tailor both the content and delivery method to a sort of "average person audience." (Clearly this is an oversimplification, but the main thrust of this column is dealing with bureaucrats.)
When you communicate with a bureaucrat, you almost always need to adjust your message to a set of perceptions (those of the bureaucrat) radically different from your own. Applying the "Power Message Principle" (discussed in Report #10: How To Achieve and Increase Personal Power) requires carefully considering "how bureaucrats think," as discussed in my earlier columns.
One example: In a small city in Arizona for the last few years, I know of a person who has been fighting zoning ordinances for his residence/small business. He has plastered his home/business buildings with signs saying the city officials are "Nazis" and "storm troopers." This is something for which freedom-oriented individuals probably have a lot of sympathy.
You may understand several of the reasons for the man's comparison of the city bureaucrats to Nazis. One of them is probably the use of brute force inherent in the use of zoning ordinances and the enforcement thereof. Another reason for the comparison is probably that "Nazis used 'just following orders' and 'just doing my job' as excuses for unspeakable behavior." The comparison, of course, aptly applies to this example.
Consider, though, what the effects are on the various bureaucrats he must deal with.
Higher-level bureaucrats in the city probably figure they need to do whatever is needed to win in court or otherwise get compliance. They possibly understand the comparison (probably they don't); however, they don't really care what their involuntary "client" thinks. All they care about is that their rules are being obeyed.
Lower-level bureaucrats "on the street beat" almost certainly don't have any idea why the man is comparing them to Nazis. They probably figure he's nuts.
If the man wants to gather sympathy and maybe support from freedom-oriented individuals, the message content and delivery of plastering such words on his exterior walls probably has the intended effect.
If, however, the man wants to deal effectively with bureaucrats, the Nazi message content and delivery likely won't achieve any successful result. In fact, it's likely that it makes him LESS effective in dealing with the city bureaucrats (after all, most people probably would have a negative emotional reaction to being called Nazis!). The words and actions - which aren't necessary in this instance - might in fact make him a tempting target of the city bureaucrats, and other bureaucrats.
I have a lot of sympathy for this individual. I believe, however, he could deal with the situation in a more effective manner. His various options will be analyzed in next month's column.
PSYCHOLOGICAL TRAINING & NEEDS OF BUREAUCRATS..
Monthly Column by James Robertson, November 1994
"React Without Thinking" - To lower-level bureaucrats in physically dangerous jobs, you represent a particular threat if you don't immediately (meaning within approximately one and a half seconds or less) do what they order you to do. Partly this is due to their specific professional training, and partly this is due to the psychological characteristics of lower-level bureaucrats in general.
The specific professional training these types of bureaucrats undergo emphasizes to them that they must react instinctively - without thinking about it - to most situations in their job. Never mind that such behavior often promotes injury and death to some individuals whose actions aren't actually any threat to these bureaucrats. "Shoot first and ask questions later" seems to be the modus operandi (M.O.) of some of these types of bureaucrats. A lesser version of this mentality is "detain first, ask questions later." You have almost no time to form any meaningful response before their professional training kicks in and makes them act like automatons (i.e., no thinking; lack of conscious thought).
The typical psychological characteristics of this type of bureaucrat are similar to those characteristics discussed in my earlier columns. They typically have low self-esteem. Their job often involves genuine physical danger. Thus, already existing psychological cravings to "feel in control of every situation" are magnified so that they often feel they must physically dominate every situation. Like mobsters, they'll "make you an offer you can't refuse" by making you their "client" whether you want to or not. (This happens to be a very obvious type of physical coercion or force used against you in an immoral and unjustified way.)
Beware also of a particular mean streak in some of these types of bureaucrats when they "detain first and ask questions later." Many of them must derive some sort of psychological satisfaction from showing how big and bad they are by inflicting physical pain. In this regard, not much has changed over the centuries concerning some of the more primitive and savage manifestations of human behavior.
What can you do to protect yourself, when dealing with bureaucrats trained to act like goons? Regarding the answering of questions, you should formulate a strategy in advance. Even if you are not going to do anything more than politely refuse to answer the substantive (content) portions of any questions, you still need to give some answer within the requisite one-and-a-half seconds or you may fall victim to the "shoot-first-and-ask-questions-later" mentality or the "detain-first-and-ask-questions-later" mentality. It's highly advisable to very carefully plan for this in your life (requires strategic thinking).
If in a particular type of situation you plan to answer the content portion of most or all of the questions, you need to do so within the requisite one-and-a-half seconds. You may, in some situations, desire to "cooperate fully" with the bureaucrat in question (when it is to your advantage to do so). However, if you are not fast enough to do this (within one-and-a-half seconds), you may fall victim to the goon mentality before you even have a chance to act!
"Being (and Feeling) in Control of the Situation" - To lower-level bureaucrats in physically dangerous jobs, you represent a particular threat if as a result of dealing with you they feel "not in control of the situation." Partly this is due to their specific professional training, and partly this is due to the psychological characteristics of lower-level bureaucrats in general.
The specific professional training these types of bureaucrats undergo emphasizes to them that they must "be in control of every situation." This means that they are told that to do their jobs well they must do almost anything necessary to "be in control of the situation." Most people, I think, like to do their jobs well if possible. So they must "feel they are in control of you" to give meaning to their jobs and lives.
The typical psychological characteristics of this type of bureaucrat are similar to those characteristics discussed in my earlier columns. They typically have low self-esteem. Their job often involves genuine physical danger. Thus, already existing psychological cravings to "feel in control of every situation" are magnified so that they often feel they must physically dominate every situation.
This type of bureaucrat feels particularly threatened by the "breakdown of social order" now happening in many Western countries. Many of these lower-level bureaucrats probably don't think about it at this level of abstraction. But they certainly can tell there is increasingly less respect for their type of "authority" and order-giving during the interactions they have on their jobs with their involuntary "clients!"
They're "on edge" about this. Not being "in control of those we have authority to give orders to" strikes at the very core of their jobs and their reason for living. They resent it. They believe their purpose in life is to smash an iron fist in the face of anyone who they perceive is "infringing on their right to control you."
What can you do to protect yourself, when dealing with bureaucrats trained to act like goons? Regarding dealing with those who (erroneously) believe they have jurisdiction to control you, you do need to exercise prudent strategic planning.
The most important practical consideration also happens to be the best "general" or "overall" strategy: Most of the time, MAKE SURE THEY "FEEL" LIKE THEY ARE IN CONTROL OF THE SITUATION. Whether they are actually in control of the situation is of secondary importance to you. Their PERCEPTION of who is in control is your most important consideration.
As an example of an "operating strategy" within this "overall strategy" you may wish to: Consider always being polite to this type of bureaucrat. You may not want to, but you can vent whatever psychological frustrations you have to your friends at a later time. Right now, you are dealing with your enemy. Do what works! Let that bureaucrat feel "in control" of a polite (and respectful-acting) "client." Even if your strategy is to "not cave-in completely," you should still be polite about it. This type of bureaucrat (in particular) often interprets politeness as a sign of respect for their "authority." If they PERCEIVE you have respect for their "authority," they feel in control of the situation and you maximize your effectiveness in dealing with the situation.
Keep in mind also that you can "lose" (kowtow to the bureaucrat) in some particular single incidents, but still be winning against bureaucrats overall in your life as you strive to increase your freedom.
"Justifying (Not Apologizing for) Actions" - To lower-level bureaucrats in physically dangerous jobs, you represent a particular threat if as a result of dealing with you they feel you think their actions and words are unjustified. This is partly due to their specific professional training, and partly to the psychological characteristics of lower-level bureaucrats in general.
The specific professional training this type of bureaucrat undergoes emphasizes to them that they are "on a mission." "People not in our profession don't understand what we're up against." "We have to take back the streets!" "It's a war out there!" With the military model drilled into them in most of their professional training, it's not surprising they feel a moral imperative to approach their job with zeal and fervor and determination - gritting their teeth!
The typical psychological characteristics of this type of bureaucrat are similar to those characteristics discussed in my earlier columns. Their job often involves genuine physical danger. Most people, I think, like to feel that what they do in their jobs/professional lives serves a moral and useful purpose. Thus, it's predictable that this type of bureaucrat will respond with psychological fervor to the "we're on a mission! imperative" and feel absolutely justified in their actions and words. They feel indignation and anger against you if they PERCEIVE you are in any way calling these motives into question.
What can you do to protect yourself, when dealing with bureaucrats trained to self-righteously enforce their "mission" against you? Regarding dealing with these lower-level bureaucrats who believe they are on a "sacred mission," you should formulate a strategy. Probably the best "general" or "overall" strategy is to never let them think you question the morality or effectiveness of their "mission," unless it is to your advantage to do so.
As an example of an "operating strategy" within this "overall strategy" you may wish to: Consider being a very good listener. Let this bureaucrat do most of the talking. Appear considerate and (perhaps) sympathetic to the rigors of his job. "You guys must have rough going sometimes!" Appear earnest. You can save your true viewpoints for when your encounter with the enemy is done and you are among friends.
You may have to tolerate something of a lecture sometimes, but that's okay. As a conscious, thinking individual you realize some times are suitable for expressing your viewpoint, and other times are not. In a sense, this is an "extension of the Power-Message Principle". In a sense, your "lack of expressing a message" is in itself a message. It is a message of appearing considerate of your enemy. By doing this, you can avoid difficulties when the time isn't right. You can be effective in your viewpoints when the time is right.
DEMURRER Vs. TRAVERSE..
by J. Otis
Sometimes there is a difference between theory and procedure. Too many patriots have been "dead right" on legal theory, but have been hammered on legal procedure. The latter is where I think Eddie Kahn is on to something big.
[Editor: Mr. Eddie Kahn has written a book - No Enforcement Statutes / IRS Regulations Applicable for Individual Income Tax - essentially on how to use the "Billie-Murdock" approach to stop IRS agents dead in their tracks.]
What Eddie is doing is a classic example of demurrer. When you demur, you don't argue the facts. You argue law and procedure only. Eddie suggests that we don't bother getting into any arguments over whether or not we are "taxpayers." It doesn't matter! If the IRS has no legal authority to even ask our name, let alone levy our property, it doesn't matter whether or not we are "taxpayers." We can avoid that whole argument.
In the past, too many patriots have responded to an IRS summons as follows:
Patriot: "I'm not a taxpayer!"
IRS Agent: "Yes, you are!"
Patriot: "No, I'm not!"
IRS Agent: "Yes, you are!"
Patriot: "No, I'm not!"
IRS Agent: "Oh, yeah!? See that judge over there? We'll let him settle this fight!"
This is an example of a traverse. And that is how patriots earn a vacation in "Club-Fed!" Jack Smith (co-founder of The Right Way - l.a.w.) teaches the following principle: He who traverses - loses!
Eddie's response to the same demand is: "Look here, Mr. IRS Agent! The question is not whether I'm a 'taxpayer.' It's not whether or not I owe you a zillion dollars! The question is: do you have the authority to collect it?!" That is a very simple argument to make. This simplicity is, in my opinion, the reason why Eddie and Frank Kowalik [author of IRS Humbug] have stopped summonses and even criminal prosecutions dead in their tracks with this strategy.
Frederick Mann's Comments..
The IRS agent's major premise is that he has the authority to summons you, and to compel you to do certain things. If you accept that premise, you traverse and are at a major disadvantage. The IRS agent is in the position of plaintiff and you're in the position of defendant.
When you challenge the IRS agent's premise, you demur. You ask: "Show me the law that makes me liable for your tax" and/or "Show me your authority to demand anything of me." The roles are now switched. You're playing the role of plaintiff (attacker) and you've put the IRS agent in the role of defendant (defender). The IRS agent is dead in the water!
The Ant & The Grasshopper..
~ Hard Work & Government ~
** The Original Version ..
The ant works very hard in the withering heat all summer long,
building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The
grasshopper thinks he's a fool and laughs and dances and plays
the summer away. Come winter the ant is warm and well fed. The
grasshopper has no food or shelter so he dies out in the cold.
** The New Liberal Version ..
It starts out the same but when winter comes the shivering
grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the
ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are
cold and starving. CBS, NBC, and ABC show up and show pictures
of the shivering grasshopper next to film of the ant in his
comfortable home with a table filled with food.
America is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can it be, in a
country of such wealth that this poor grasshopper is allowed to
suffer so? Then a representative of the NAAGB (The National
Association of Green Bugs) shows up on Night Line and charges
the ant with "Green Bias" and makes the case that the grasshopper
is the victim of 30 million years of greenism. Kermit the
frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries
when he sings "It's Not Easy Being Green."
Bill and Hillary Clinton make a special guest appearance on the
CBS evening news and tell a concerned Dan Rather that they will
do everything they can for the grasshopper who has been denied
the prosperity he deserves by those who benefited unfairly
during the summer, or as Bill refers to it, the "Temperatures Of
The 80's".
Finally the EEOC drafts the "Economic Equity and Anti-Greenism
Act" RECTRO-ACTIVE to the beginning of the summer. The ant
is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green
bugs and having nothing left to pay his Retro-Active taxes,
his home is confiscated by the government.
The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last
bits of the ant's food while the government house he's
in... which just happens to be the ant's old house... crumbles
around him since he doesn't know how to maintain it. The ant has
disappeared in the snow. And on the TV, which the grasshopper
bought by selling most of the ant's food, Bill Clinton is
standing before a wildly applauding group of Democrats
announcing that a new era of "Fairness" has dawned in America.
---
. SLMR 2.0 #..jw . Humpty dumpty was pushed
Hard Work & Government ~ The Ant & The Grasshopper..
*** The Original Version ..
The ant works very hard in the withering heat all summer long,
building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The
grasshopper thinks he's a fool and laughs and dances and plays
the summer away. Come winter the ant is warm and well fed. The
grasshopper has no food or shelter so he dies out in the cold.
*** The New Liberal Version ..
It starts out the same but when winter comes the shivering
grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the
ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are
cold and starving. CBS, NBC, and ABC show up and show pictures
of the shivering grasshopper next to film of the ant in his
comfortable home with a table filled with food.
America is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can it be, in a
country of such wealth that this poor grasshopper is allowed to
suffer so? Then a representative of the NAAGB (The National
Association of Green Bugs) shows up on Night Line and charges
the ant with "Green Bias" and makes the case that the grasshopper
is the victim of 30 million years of greenism. Kermit the
frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries
when he sings "It's Not Easy Being Green."
Bill and Hillary Clinton make a special guest appearance on the
CBS evening news and tell a concerned Dan Rather that they will
do everything they can for the grasshopper who has been denied
the prosperity he deserves by those who benefited unfairly
during the summer, or as Bill refers to it, the "Temperatures Of
The 80's".
Finally the EEOC drafts the "Economic Equity and Anti-Greenism
Act" RECTRO-ACTIVE to the beginning of the summer. The ant
is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green
bugs and having nothing left to pay his Retro-Active taxes,
his home is confiscated by the government.
The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last
bits of the ant's food while the government house he's
in... which just happens to be the ant's old house... crumbles
around him since he doesn't know how to maintain it. The ant has
disappeared in the snow. And on the TV, which the grasshopper
bought by selling most of the ant's food, Bill Clinton is
standing before a wildly applauding group of Democrats
announcing that a new era of "Fairness" has dawned in America.
---
. SLMR 2.0 #..jw . Humpty dumpty was pushed
Nine Major Myths That People "Know for a Fact"..
1. We'd have a balanced budget if the rich would just pay
their fair share..
FACT: Recent figures showed 63,642 Americans made over $1 million
for the year. Even *doubling* their tax rate (to a highly unfair
79%) would add only enough money to feed the government monster
about ten days!
2. Global warming is destroying the planet..
FACT: Global warming doesn't exist. Satellite data now shows
worldwide temperatures *down* .23 degrees F. over the last 15
years! Previous high readings caused alarm, but proved to be
caused by such basic blunders as placing thermometers next to
airport runways and in other hot areas. But don't hold your
breath waiting for this to hit the evening news.
3. Republicans are reckless and mean-spirited. They simply
*can't* cut Government spending any further without slashing vital services..
FACT: Government spends more than $23,000 a year for every family in
the U.S.. Even corrected for inflation, that's *twice* the spending
level of 1960. Obviously, someone is trying to expand the meaning
of "vital".
4. The government should reign in greedy corporations and stop
them from gouging the American consumer..
FACT: Competition eliminates 95% of the potential gouging in this
country. Price jumps are largely caused by:
* the government, as manufacturers pass along the increased cost of
taxes (now a very high percentage of the cost of the average
item);
* government-caused inflation (which is actually over 7%, not the
official 3.3% you hear);
* and regulatory compliance and red tape (which in 1992 cost the
average family $8,300 to $17,100 a year).
EXTREME EXAMPLE: A child's $10 vaccination could profitably be given
for 50 cents. The other $9.50 is the pass-along cost of government
compliance!
5. A 1993 study in the New England Journal of Medicine found that
guns are dangerous for their owners and give "no protective benefit"
anyway..
FACT: It turns out that the study was not based on national
statistics at all, but sprang from a warped study of 388 households
where:
a. One-fourth had drug or alcohol problems.
b. Over half had a member with a rap sheet.
c. One-third had a previous record of domestic violence.
d. In all of them, homicides had taken place!
These 388 families are not exactly in the middle of America's bell
curve. The Journal disgraced itself, but the myth lives on.
6. The #1 villain of the century is Adolf Hitler..
FACT: Soviet and Chinese communists *both* killed over three times
as many victims as Hitler's 20,946,000 dead. But Hitler is always
singled out for villification by the left because the Nazis were
supposedly far right. To set the record straight, Hitler believed
in a centralized, powerful government, as do the Socialists.
Conservatives always believe in small, decentralized, restricted
governments.
7. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer..
FACT: This tired mantra is revived from time to time to complain
about economic conditions. Most recently, it was heard a lot in the
Reagan years. But according to the Fed, from 1983 to 1989, the net
wealth of American families grew like this:
Income Growth of Wealth
------ ----------------
$10,000-20,000 19.1%
$20,000-30,000 28.9%
$30,000-50,000 27.2%
$50,000+ 6.6%
Even the liberal Urban Institute has admitted that in the '80s,
"...on average, the rich get a little richer and the poor got much
richer".
8. Civilization is destroying the ozone shield..
FACT: Greenies keep warning us about a coming epidemic of skin
cancer caused by ozone depletion. But the "ozone hole" has been
wildly flunctuating up and down in size ever since it was discovered
in the '50s, and since 1974 the U.S. National Cancer Institute has
been racking the ultraviolent radiation on earth. They report it's
falling.
9. How come we can send a man to the moon, but we can't help the
three million homeless on our streets?
FACT: There are no 3,000,000 homeless. Back in 1980, a homeless
advocate named Mitch Snyder polled 100 agencies to get their
estimate of homeless people. The answers ranged from a high of 1%
in desperate areas down to a few hundredths of 1%. The higher
number suited his purposes, so in 1982 he started claiming that 1%
of us (2.2 million) lacked shelter, and that the number "could"
reach 3 million by 1983. The 3 million number was pounced upon and
quoted endlessly by advocacy groups until it attained the burnished
luster of gospel truth. But as Snyder himself later explained to a
Congressional committee, "These numbers are meaningless. We have
tried to satisfy your gnawing curiosity for a number because
Americans have to quantify everything in sight."
An identical process was followed by John Walsh after his son
vanished. His polls of missing-child groups yielded a total of
50,000 abducted kids per year -- and if you've ever seen a carton of
milk with a child's picture on it, you know the rest of the story.
Unfortunately for the alarmists' case, through, the federal National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children could only cite 471
definite kidnappings over a four-year span.
--
"'Free and unequal' is an oft-heard expression, suggesting that
freedom and equality are as inseparable as Siamese twins.
Actually, they are mutually antagonistic. The equality idea --
equal pay and so on -- rests on the antithesis of freedom: raw
coercion. It is just as impossible to be free when equality is
politically manipulated as it is impossible to be equal. Free and
unequal -- freedom and inequality -- are what go hand in hand. The
essence of individuality is uniqueness: inequality in skills,
talents, knowledge, aspirations. This is merely an acknowledgement
of a Universal Law." -- Leonard E. Read
US) Army Times: To Shoot or Not? A Vexing Issue..
The question given to the Marines was hypothetical..
Would you shoot at U.S. citizens who have disobeyed a federal
order to surrender banned firearms?
But Navy Lt. Cmdr. Ernest G. Cunningham found the answers seriously disturbing..
More than one~quarter, or 26 percent, of the 300 Marines Cunningham surveyed for his master's thesis said yes, they would shoot..
Sixty~one percent said they would not..
The rest had no opinion on the question, which ignited a firestorm when the survey, done in May 1994, leaked to the news media..
Had Lt. Cdr. Cunningham done his homework before running his
survey, he might have been spared those "seriously disturbing"
feelings..
Or perhaps not..
The reality is almost certainly worse than he found it to be..
But at least he might have been somewhat better~prepared..
In the early 1960s, the social psychologist Stanley Milgram at Yale
began a series of experiments designed to test how resistant
US citizens are to Authority and its demands. We've always prided
ourselves that the Holocaust could never have happened here because
ordinary americans would have resisted, unlike those weak,
over-subservient germans. The late sociologist Hannah Arendt was
severely criticised, at the time of Adolf Eichmann's trial, for her
characterisation of Eichmann as less an inhuman monster than
an unimaginative bureaucrat who was, indeed, "just following
orders". We desperately want to believe that only a monster could
do the things he did. But as Milgram determined experimentally,
Arendt was much more perceptive than her critics. Which is - or
should be - scary as hell to the rest of us.
Milgram's experiment was beautifully subtle: adult subjects were
recruited for a test of learning. The subjects represented the
full spectrum of education and occupation, and included both women
and men. Subjects were selected in pairs, and randomly chosen to be
either the learner or the proctor. The experimental conditions
required that increasing levels of electrical shock be given to
learners for failing to respond correctly, up to and including a
level labled "danger - severe shock".
In reality, the conditions were completely rigged such that the one
assigned the role of "proctor" was the only actual subject. The
"learner" and "experimenter" were confederates of Milgram's and no
actual shocks were ever given. The actual goal of the experiment
was to find out at what point the subjects' ethical resistance
would kick in and cause them to stop obeying the "experimenter".
In a related experiment - similar to Lt. Cdr. Cunningham's - , a
large group of people, including psychiatrists and psychologists,
heard the nominal experiment described (learning experiment,
randomly-chosen volunteer participants, shocks for failure) and
then were asked to estimate how far they themselves would be
willing to go in giving shocks. EVERY person was sure that they
would break off before reaching the "danger" level. They felt no
doubt about that. They were also asked to predict the responses of
other people, and again they predicted that only a pathological
few, one or two percent, would carry on through the whole range of
shocks.
The actual results were so disturbing that the experiment was
replicated with reduced contextual support until finally it was
conducted in a seedy storefront completely dissociated from any
academic setting or potential legitimacy.
The results didn't change.
TWO THIRDs of all subjects carried on through the whole range
of shocks. Even when the learner made increasingly-distressed
pleas for mercy and demanded to be released, 62% went on to
administer the maximum shock. And even when the proctor had to
force the learner's hand onto the shock plate, 30% were willing to
do that in order to give the maximum, dangerous shock.
There was no coercion. The lab-coated "experimenter" responded to
any expression of resistance with simple, dispassionate phrases
such as "the experiment requires you to continue", "you must go
on", and "you have no other choice".
For reasons i won't attempt to characterise, no government funding
could be obtained for a long time afterward for any experiment with
similar methodology. It was even, for awhile, regarded as
unacceptable merely to consider doing that kind of experiment.
So if we presume that there should be no difference between
civilian and military responses in a "free and democratic" society
such as ours purports to be, then Lt. Cdr. Cunningham's experiment
suggests that either (a) people are more self-aware today than a
generation ago, or (b) it has become more socially acceptable to be
unthinkingly obedient to authority.
Milgram concluded his 1974 book[1] (in which he described the whole
experimental series) with the observation: "The results...are
disturbing. They raise the possibility that human nature, or --
more specifically -- the kind of character produced in American
democratic society, cannot be counted on to insulate its citizens
from brutality and inhumane treatment at the direction of
malevolent authority. ***A substantial proportion of people do
what they are told to do, irrespective of the content of the act
and without limitations of conscience, so long as they perceive
that the command comes from a legitmate authority.***" [emphasis
added]
He ends by quoting Harold Laski on "The Dangers of Obedience":
"Our business...is to accept nothing which contradicts our basic
experience merely because it comes to us from tradition or
convention or authority. It may well be that we shall be wrong;
but our self-expression in thwarted at the root unless the
certainties we are asked to accept coincide with the certainties we
experience. That is why the condition of freedom in any state is
always a widespread and consistent skepticism of the canons upon
which power insists."
margaret
-------
[1] Milgram, S. Obedience to Authority: an Experimental View.
NY, 1975: Harper & Row Torch
Patterns ~ Media Brainwashing..
Hi all
This was originally posted 24 Oct 1996 to the UK Cybershooter list. While it
was specifically written to help members of the British shooting community
understand what was happening to them, I think it has broader relevance for us
all. My comments below...
________________________Begin Message________________________
Dear All.
I am not a shooter, but I live with one...No doubt my partner, Stuart, has
been helping out as much as he can.
However, I would like to give you a few pointers which may help in your pursuit
of personal choice and freedom which is currently under attack. I am
researching for my PhD, and part of that study involves culture, social and
communication studies. There are a few key concepts that you may find helpfull
which are in constant use within society and have been documented and
researched. Once you know how the patterns of social communication work, then
perhaps you may all be able to find some way of breaking the classic cycle (trap)
that society has currently placed you in...especially when it comes to the
'morality' issue.
1. Amplification of deviance.
The process whereby initial activity, labelled as deviant, is increased or
'amplified' as a result of social reaction which is largely co-ordinated and
articulated by the mass media. The concept has been developed particularily by
Wilkins (1964) who argued that under certain conditions when a society recieves a
simplified, stereotypical and often misleading information about groups and
activities labelled as deviant, it reacts in such a way as to produce more
deviance. Initial information generates a response, which in turn uncovers and
may promote even greater deviant activity. This underscores the role of the mass
media in providing information, particularly their provision of labels and
definitions of deviancy. Young (1981) suggests they are 'guardians of the
consensus'. a) An apparent 'crime wave' appears, orchestrated by mass media which
generates increased public concern. b) Public concern, expressed and represented
by mass media, pressure groups and political demands focuses the attention of the
police and control agencies on the deviant activity. c) This increase of
attention boosts arrest rates apparently uncovering greater or increasing
deviance. e) This accelerates the crime wave and further public sentiments and
concern (go back to (a))
This concept (cycle) offers a useful way both to think through and to analyse the
shootings sports within this concept, and break the pattern. You should
consider: Agenda setting.
Labelling.
Moral Panic.
The stereotypic shooting image.
2 Moral Panic:
An important concept which highlights the processes of interplay between forces
of social reaction and control, the mass media and certain forms of deviant
activity. The term has been introduced into the analysis of mass media and
their capacity to generate social concern by Cohen (1972) who describes the
process as one where 'A condition, episode, person or group of persons emerge to
become defined as a threat to societal values and interests.
a) The occurence and signification of an initial event, which attracts often
dramatic media coverage, and sets in motion often intensive media surveillance
and research routines. These are organised and aligned to identify any
subsequent events which may be coded as similar.
b) In the wake of intitial impact, media coverage starts to work from the event
in particular, to the wider social implications and issues that such an event is
defined as raising. Drawing particularly upon primary definers and 'accredited
witnesses'. who represent 'expert' and professional opinion, and possibly 'moral
intrepreneurs' who contend in defining the event as symptomatic of wider
breakdowns in moral and social fibre and fabfric, the media fuel public debate,
concern, outrage, and sensitivity. This may be further inflated and intensified
by media indentification of other events and occurences that have subsequently
taken place. These may under certain conditions, become defined and interpreted
as the progressive discovery that the problem or event in particular is in fact a
part of a widespread and correspondingly more menacing social problem. In this
way the intitial event becomes constructed as 'the tip of the iceberg', the first
'wave' or 'flood', an early 'blow' in a developing 'battle', and so on. This
spiralling public attention, and its replay through the media, notably in the
form of news, in itself may lend increased urgency and severity to:
c) Social control, excercised especially though not always exclusively in the
form of state responses to the 'problem' drastically and dramatically revealed.
the judicial, legislative and administrative responses and penalities will often
be articulated within the definitions and frameworks provided in preceeding
stages.
It would appear that shooters have been caught in both of these traps. The best
way to get out of these cycles is to either break the cycle or play your own
orchestrated cycle out to the media. I suggest that some-one spends a day in the
reference library looking up 'communication and media' studies in order to try
and find an experience in the past that was able to break the cycle. There is a
lot of very nasty social engineering going on here, and you are all the
scape-goats of a repressive and frightened government. The definitions I have
typed above are from a good source book called Key Concepts in Communication and
Cultural studies. (Routledge Tim O Sullivan ISBN 0-415-06173-3.) Unfortunately
you are also struck with another social engineering pattern within the new
'morality' issues currently raised...recognise the pattern???
I hope this hasn't been to ardouous to read, but what is happening here is a
classic case.. You must be clever, play them at their own game, and orchestrate a
positive, intelligent and well thought plan of flooding the mass media with an
'alternative cycle'.
_______________END FORWARDED MESSAGE_____________
I've had this note since it was written. We must understand the dynamics and
influences between our society and the media. I hope this note will make us each
aware that this is both a high art and a science. And that there are superb
practioners among us orchestrating campaigns against freedom and liberty.
"It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of
public opinion."
- Josef Goebbels, 1923
"What good fortune for governments that the people do not think."
- Adolf Hitler
"I'm going to cut my Political Attackers out of American Politics; They
are a Cancer!"
- William J. Clinton
"If you thought massive government propaganda was the special preserve
of communist countries, think again."
- William E. Simon, fmr Secretary of the Treasury
It's an old story. It has happened before. It will happen again. It can and
will happen to you, to me, to our families if we allow it to through our inaction
and ignorance. The state does not have to kill its enemies to silence them, it
needs only to make them irrelavent. They are first marginalized, then painted
as extremists and finally vilified and destroyed. We are all vulnerable. In
todays world, each of us is subject to being singled out for our views and
associations and then being attacked. Who ever we are, shooters, Libertarians,
Republicans, patriots, veterans, seniors, conservatives, self-employers, blacks,
WASPs, Mormons, Jews, or CPAs, we can be attacked and made irrelavent through
the methods touched on in this note. The methods are defined, the cycle
illustrated above is predictable and hauntingly familiar to us. Learn the
pattern. Learn how to counter with truth and reason. We see the pattern
everywhere we look. We see it used against those who support the right to keep
and bear arms, painted first as nuts, now as terrorists. If we do not all reply,
we will all be disarmed. We see it happening to the Internet. painted as a haven
for child molestors and perverts. If we do not reply, we will not be able to
post any truth there either. We see it against those who exercise their free
speech on the radio, painted as liars and freaks. If we do not reply, we will
return to the bland conformity of the evening news. We see it happening all
around us, do we take the time to understand, to reply, to fight back? We must
UNDERSTAND what is happening. Most people do not react. Too many that do react
do so with rhetoric and emotion, exactly the way that makes them even more
vulnerable. Valor and truth are insufficient unless allied with intellegence
and knowledge.
"All people, Jews or gentiles, who dare not defend themselves when they know
they are right, who submit to punishment not because of what they have done, but
because of who they are, are already dead by their own decision"
- Dr. Bruno Bettelheim, Psychologist & former prisoner at Dachau and Buchenwald.
ttfn
John
SHOTGUN NEWS
Vol. 50, Issue 33, 1996 -- 3rd issue of November
To the readers of Shotgun News:
...My columns concerning the "Drug War" in relation to gun control
have generated mountains of response from readers. The consensus is to
decriminalize drugs, let the chips fall where they may and obliterate the
drug dealer and crime in the process.
Mr. Populi's letter on the subject follows and we feel each and
every point he makes is well taken. We thank him for his permission to
publish this fine treatise on the subject and look forward to your input on
this timely debate.
Nancy Snell Swickard
Publisher
Ms. Nancy Snell Swickard -- Publisher
"Shotgun News"
P.O. Box 669, Hastings, Nebraska 68902
Dear Ms. Swickard,
I was very distressed to see the remark of one of your subscribers which
you quoted on page 8 of your October 1 issue. The support of the "Drug
War" by anyone who values the 2nd Amendment, and the rest of the Bill of
Rights, is the most dangerous error of thinking in the politics of the "gun
control" debate. This error is extremely widespread, although there have
been some recent signs that some Americans are seeing through the
propaganda of the Drug Warriors which affects all levels of our society.
Sadly, major players in the defense of the 2nd Amendment (like the NRA)
show no signs of awareness of the part played by the Drug War in our
present hysteria over violence. This is a serious error, because the
violence produced by the Drug War is one of the main reasons that a
majority of American citizens support gun control. Without the majority of
a citizenry frightened by endemic violence, Mr. Clinton and his allies in
the Congress would not enjoy the power they now posses to attack the Bill
of Rights.
To understand the effect of the Drug War, we must understand it for what it
is: the second Prohibition in America in this Century. I do not need to
remind anyone who knows our recent history what a disaster the first
Prohibition in America was. It is a classic example of the attempt to
control a vice -- drunkeness -- by police power. It made all use of
alcohol a case of abuse. It produced such an intense wave of violence that
it gave a name -- The Roaring Twenties -- to an entire decade. It lead to
the establishment of powerful criminal empires, to widespread corruption in
police and government, and to a surge of violence and gunfire all over the
land. And it produced a powerful attack on the Bill of Rights, including
the most successful campaign of gun control laws in America up to that
time. Before the first Prohibition criminalized the trade in alcohol,
liquor dealers were ordinary businessmen: after 1920 they were all violent
criminals fighting for their territories. We had gang wars, and drive-by
shootings and the use of machine guns by criminals. We now have the same
effects of the first Prohibition in the present Drug War, and Americans
appear to be sleepwalking through it with no apparent understanding of what
is happening. It is testimony to the truth of Santayana's famous remark
that those who do not know history are condemned to repeat it. We must
understand that this has all happened before, and for the same reasons.
It is essential that defenders of the 2nd Amendment understand the whole
Bill of Rights is under attack by the Drug War, and that assaults on the
2nd Amendment are a natural part of that trend. What is the main premiss
of a gun-control law? It is that guns are implements which are too
dangerous to entrust to the citizenry. What is the main premiss of Drug
Prohibition? It is that drugs are substances which are too dangerous to
entrust to the citizenry. Both lines of reasoning say that because a few
people abuse something, all Americans must be treated like children or
irresponsibles. All use is abuse. This is an extremely dangerous idea for
a government, and it leads inevitably to tyranny. It is a natural
consequence that such thinking will lead to attacks on the Bill of Rights,
because that is the chief defense in the constitution against abuses of
government power.
Since the beginning of the Drug War, no article of the Bill of Rights has
been spared from attack. There has been an enoromous increase in police
power in America, with a steady erosion of protections against unreasonable
search and seizure, violations of privacy, confiscation of property, and
freedom of speech. We have encouraged children to inform on their parents
and we tolerate urine tests as a condition of employment for anyone. All
who question the wisdom of Drug Prohibition are immediately attacked and
silenced. These are all violations of the Bill of Rights. Are we
surprised when the 2nd Amendment is attacked along with the others? We
understand that opponents of the 2nd Amendment exaggerate the dangers of
firearms and extrapolate the actions of deranged persons and criminals to
all guns owners. That is their method of propaganda. Do we also know that
Drug Warriors exaggerate the hazards of drug use -- "all use is abuse" -- in
the same way formerly done with alcohol, and extrapolate the condition of
addicts to all users of drugs? That is their method of propaganda. Most
Americans are convinced by both arguments, and both arguments depend on
the public's ignorance. That is why discussion and dissent is inhibited.
Most Americans are moving to the idea that drugs and guns are evil and
should be prohibited. Encouraging one way of thinking supports the other
because the logic of the arguments is the same.
Why not prohibit a dangerous evil? If every drinker is a potential
alcoholic, every drug-user a future addict, and every gun-owner a potential
killer, why not ban them all? There is no defense against this logic
except to challenge the lies that sit at the root of the arguments. Those
are the lies promoted by the prevailing propaganda in support of all
Prohibition. We cannot oppose one and support the other. To do so
undermines our efforts because all these movements walk on the same legs.
If we do not explain to people that the fusillade of gunfire in America,
the return of the drive-by shooting, and our bulging prisons, come from the
criminalizing of commerce in illegal drugs, we cannot expect them to listen
to a plea that we must tolerate some risk in defence of liberty.
Why should we tolerate, for the sake of liberty, the risk of a maniac
shooting a dozen people, when we cannot tolerate the risk that a drug-user
will become an addict? In fact, very few gun-owners are mass murderers and
a minority of drug users are addicts, but people are easily persuaded
otherwise and easily driven to hysteria by exaggerating dangers. What
addict would be a violent criminal if he could buy his drug from a pharmacy
for its real price instead of being driven to the inflated price of a
smuggler? How many cigarette smokers would become burglars or prostitutes
if their habits cost them $200 per day? How many criminal drug empires
could exist if addicts could buy a drug for its real cost? And without
Prohibition, what smuggler's territory would be worth a gang war? And why
isn't this obvious to all of us?
It is because both guns and drugs havve become fetishes to some people in
America. They blame guns and drugs for all the intractible ills of
society, and they never rest until they persuade the rest of us to share
their deranged view of the evil power in an inanimate object. They
succeed, mainly, by lies and deception. They succeed by inducing the
immediate experience of anxiety and horror by the mere mention of the
words: Guns! Drugs! Notice your reactions. Once that response is in
place, it is enough to make us accept any remedy they propose. An anxious
person is an easy mark. They even persuade us to diminsh the most precious
possession of Americans, the one marveled at by every visitor and cherished
by every immigrant, and the name of which is stamped on every coin we mint
-- Liberty. They say that liberty is just too dangerous or too expensive.
They say we will have to do with less of it for our own good. That is the
price they charge for their promise of our security.
Sincerely
Amicus Populi
* One of the "justifications" given by the ATF in the Waco
raid on the Branch Davidians... was that they had a
radical-underground-right-wing-fringe-gun-nut-magazine on the premises!
That turned out to be "Shotgun News." How very interesting.
* "These people, who do they think they are, saying that their government
has stamped out human freedom? We need to conduct a nation-wide search
for these right wing.... purveyors of hate." - Bill Clinton
Very Telling Quotes..
Times Change, But Collectivist Message Remains Constant..
We must organize all labor, no matter how dirty and arduous it may be, so
that every [citizen] may regard himself as part of that great army of free
labor.... The generation that is now fifteen years old must arrange all
their tasks of education in such a way that every day, and in every city,
the young people shall engage in the practical solution of the problems of
common labor, even of the smallest, most simple kind.
- Vladimir Lenin
Imagine an army of 100,000 young people restoring urban and rural
communities and giving their labor in exchange for education and
training.... [National Service] will harness the energy of our youth and
attack the problems of our time. It literally has the potential to
revolutionize the way young people all across America look at their country
and feel about themselves.
- Bill Clinton
[T]here is the great silent, continuous struggle; the struggle between the
State and the individual; between the State which demands and the
Individual who attempts to evade such demands. Because the individual, left
to himself, unless he be a saint or a hero, always refuses to pay taxes,
obey laws, or go to war.
- Benito Mussolini
I'm here because I want to redefine the meaning of citizenship in
America.... f you're asked in school, "What does it mean to be a good
citizen?" I want the answer to be, "Well, to be a good citizen, you have to
obey the law, you've got to go to work or be in school, you've got to pay
your taxes and - oh, yes, you have to serve...."
- Bill Clinton
All the people I know who are driving for a form of national service,
primarily want it to be compulsory. They realize that's a terrible problem
politically, so they're not willing to say it. It is endangerment of
freedom and the potential for indoctrination that skeptics do not like in
the national service concept. However benign the program, some think it
will not succeed on any meaningful scale unless it is compulsory.
- Martin Anderson, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution Boston Globe,
November 29, 1992
In his April 5 radio address outlining the goals of the summit, the
President endorsed compulsory volunteerism - and even called for extending
it to middle schools. In other words, the man who so famously avoided the
dangerous duty of fighting in Vietnam as a young man now proposes drafting
a new generation
of young people to perform a different set of difficult tasks.
- New York Post editorial, April 27, 1997
Fascism finds it necessary, at the outset, to take away from the ordinary
human being what he has been taught and has grown to cherish the most:
personal liberty. And it can be affirmed, without falling into
exaggeration, that a curtailment of personal liberty not only has proved to
be, but necessarily must be, a fundamental condition of the triumph of
Fascism.
- Mario Palmieri
The Philosophy of Fascism (1936)
[W]hen we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical
Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of
individual freedom to Americans, it was assumed that the Americans who had
that freedom would use it responsibly.... [However, now] there's a lot of
irresponsibility. And so a lot of people say there's too much freedom. When
personal freedom's being abused, you have to move to limit it.
- Bill Clinton
Before they have their own families, the young can make a unique
contribution to the family of America. In doing so, they can acquire the
habit of service, and get a deeper understanding of what it really means to
be a citizen. That is the main reason, perhaps, why we are here.
- Bill Clinton
Family - see Fascist State.
- Benito Mussolini's Fascist dictionary
We're here for the first President's Summit for America's Future - to
mobilize every community and challenge every citizen and to ask our young
people to become citizen-servants, too.
- Bill Clinton
According to Fascism, a true, a great spiritual life cannot take place
unless the State has risen to a position of pre-eminence in the world of
man. The curtailment of liberty thus becomes justified at once, with this
need of raising the State to its rightful position.
- Mario Palmieri
What they're trying to do is enslave our society by taking our children's
rights away. Young people who go through these [mandatory community
service] programs learn to submit, and later on they won't mind giving up a
few more of their rights when the government says it's necessary.
- Thomas Moralis (father of two students denied high school diplomas for
not complying with a mandatory service requirement)
When an opponent says, "I will not come over to your side," I calmly say,
"Your child belongs to us already.... What are you? You will pass on. Your
descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will
know nothing else but this new community."
- Adolf Hitler
We need a national-corporate commitment to public service to look after
[the elderly]. We aren't able to provide resources unless the young pay
something for their patrimony through public service.
- William F. Buckley Jr. in Mother Jones magazine
We will not recognize [American Fascism] as it rises. It will wear no black
shirts here. It will probably have no marching songs. It will rise out of a
congealing of a group of elements that exist here and that are the
essential components of Fascism....
It will be at first decorous, humane, glowing with homely American
sentiment. But a dictatorship cannot remain benevolent. To continue, it
must become ruthless. When this stage is reached we shall see that appeal
by radio, movies, and government-controlled newspapers to all the worst
instincts and emotions of our people. The rough, the violent, the lawless
men will come to the surface and into power. This is the terrifying
prospect as we move along our present course.
- John T. Flynn
Writing in the American Mercury, February 1941
Not much has changed, has it?
E X T R A C T
THE BANKER'S MANIFEST
Capital must protect itself in every way, through combination and through
legislation. Debts must be collected and loans and mortgages foreclosed as
soon as possible. When through a process of law the common people lose their
homes, they will be more tractable and more easily governed by the strong arm
of the law, applied by the central power of wealth, under control of leading
financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders. This
is well known among our principal men now engaged in forming an imperialism
of capital to govern the world. By dividing the people we can get them to
expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us
except as teachers of the common herd. Thus, by discreet action we can
secure for ourselves what has been generally planned and successfully
accomplished.
----------------------
The above was printed from the Banker's Manifest, for private circulation
among leading bankers only. "Civil Servants' Year Book (The Organizer)" Jan
1934 & "New American" Feb 1934
Enjoy.
the more you know..
the more you realise how much you don't know..
the less you know..
the more you think you know..
~ David T. Freeman ~
are you a patriot?
http://www.propagandamatrix.com/061103areyouapatriot.html
FEMA ~ The Secret Government..
By Harry V. Martin with research assistance from David Caul
Copyright FreeAmerica and Harry V. Martin, 1995
Some people have referred to it as the "secret government" of the United
States. It is not an elected body, it does not involve itself in public
disclosures, and it even has a quasi-secret budget in the billions of
dollars. This government organization has more power than the President of
the United States or the Congress, it has the power to suspend laws, move
entire populations, arrest and detain citizens without a warrant and hold
them without trial, it can seize property, food supplies, transportation
systems, and can suspend the Constitution.
Not only is it the most powerful entity in the United States, but it was not
even created under Constitutional law by the Congress. It was a product of a
Presidential Executive Order. No, it is not the U.S. military nor the
Central Intelligence Agency, they are subject to Congress. The organization
is called FEMA, which stands for the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Originally conceived in the Richard Nixon Administration, it was refined by
President Jimmy Carter and given teeth in the Ronald Reagan and George Bush
Administrations.
FEMA had one original concept when it was created, to assure the
survivability of the United States government in the event of a nuclear
attack on this nation. It was also provided with the task of being a federal
coordinating body during times of domestic disasters, such as earthquakes,
floods and hurricanes. Its awesome powers grow under the tutelage of people
like Lt. Col. Oliver North and General Richard Secord, the architects on the
Iran-Contra scandal and the looting of America's savings and loan
institutions. FEMA has even been given control of the State Defense Forces,
a rag-tag, often considered neo-Nazi, civilian army that will substitute for
the National Guard, if the Guard is called to duty overseas.
THE MOST POWERFUL ORGANIZATION IN THE UNITED STATES
Though it may be the most powerful organization in the United States, few
people know it even exists. But it has crept into our private lives. Even
mortgage papers contain FEMA's name in small print if the property in
question is near a flood plain. FEMA was deeply involved in the Los Angeles
riots and the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Some of the black helicopter traffic reported throughout the United States,
but mainly in the West, California, Washington, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas
and Colorado, are flown by FEMA personnel. FEMA has been given
responsibility for many new disasters including urban forest fires, home
heating emergencies, refugee situations, urban riots, and emergency planning
for nuclear and toxic incidents. In the West, it works in conjunction with
the Sixth Army.
FEMA was created in a series of Executive Orders. A Presidential Executive
Order, whether Constitutional or not, becomes law simply by its publication
in the Federal Registry. Congress is by-passed. Executive Order Number 12148
created the Federal Emergency Management Agency that is to interface with
the Department of Defense for civil defense planning and funding. An
"emergency czar" was appointed. FEMA has only spent about 6 percent of its
budget on national emergencies, the bulk of their funding has been used for
the construction of secret underground facilities to assure continuity of
government in case of a major emergency, foreign or domestic. Executive
Order Number 12656 appointed the National Security Council as the principal
body that should consider emergency powers. This allows the government to
increase domestic intelligence and surveillance of U.S. citizens and would
restrict the freedom of movement within the United States and grant the
government the right to isolate large groups of civilians. The National
Guard could be federalized to seal all borders and take control of U.S. air
space and all ports of entry.
Here are just a few Executive Orders associated with FEMA that would suspend
the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. These Executive Orders have been on
record for nearly 30 years and could be enacted by the stroke of a
Presidential pen:
* EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 allows the government to take over all modes of
transportation and control of highways and seaports.
* EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995 allows the government to seize and control the
communication media.
* EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 allows the government to take over all
electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.
* EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 allows the government to take over all food
resources and farms.
* EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into
work brigades under government supervision.
* EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 allows the government to take over all health,
education and welfare functions.
* EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a
national registration of all persons.
* EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows the government to take over all airports
and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.
* EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to
relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate
areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.
* EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 allows the government to take over railroads,
inland waterways and public storage facilities.
* EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of
Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders
into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic
or financial crisis.
* EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to
enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial
support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all
aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise
and assist the President.
* EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to
federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive
Orders issued over a fifteen year period.
* EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency
to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production
and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the
flow of money in U.S. financial institution in any undefined national
emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared
by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency has broad powers in every aspect of
the nation. General Frank Salzedo, chief of FEMA's Civil Security Division
stated in a 1983 conference that he saw FEMA's role as a "new frontier in
the protection of individual and governmental leaders from assassination,
and of civil and military installations from sabotage and/or attack, as well
as prevention of dissident groups from gaining access to U.S. opinion, or a
global audience in times of crisis."
FEMA's powers were consolidated by President Carter to incorporate:
* the National Security Act of 1947, which allows for the strategic
relocation of industries, services, government and other essential
economic activities, and to rationalize the requirements for manpower,
resources and production facilities;
* the 1950 Defense Production Act, which gives the President sweeping
powers over all aspects of the economy;
* the Act of August 29, 1916, which authorizes the Secretary of the
Army, in time of war, to take possession of any transportation system
for transporting troops, material, or any other purpose related to the
emergency; and
* the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which enables the
President to seize the property of a foreign country or national.
These powers were transferred to FEMA in a sweeping consolidation in 1979.
HURRICANE ANDREW FOCUSED ATTENTION ON FEMA
FEMA's deceptive role really did not come to light with much of the public
until Hurricane Andrew smashed into the U.S. mainland. As Russell R. Dynes,
director of the Disaster Research Center of the University of Delaware,
wrote in The World and I, "...The eye of the political storm hovered over
the Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA became a convenient target for
criticism." Because FEMA was accused of dropping the ball in Florida, the
media and Congress commenced to study this agency. What came out of the
critical look was that FEMA was spending 12 times more for "black
operations" than for disaster relief. It spent $1.3 billion building secret
bunkers throughout the United States in anticipation of government
disruption by foreign or domestic upheaval. Yet fewer than 20 members of
Congress , only members with top security clearance, know of the $1.3
billion expenditure by FEMA for non-natural disaster situations. These few
Congressional leaders state that FEMA has a "black curtain" around its
operations. FEMA has worked on National Security programs since 1979, and
its predecessor, the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency, has secretly
spent millions of dollars before being merged into FEMA by President Carter
in 1979.
FEMA has developed 300 sophisticated mobile units that are capable of
sustaining themselves for a month. The vehicles are located in five areas of
the United States. They have tremendous communication systems and each
contains a generator that would provide power to 120 homes each, but have
never been used for disaster relief.
FEMA's enormous powers can be triggered easily. In any form of domestic or
foreign problem, perceived and not always actual, emergency powers can be
enacted. The President of the United States now has broader powers to
declare martial law, which activates FEMA's extraordinary powers. Martial
law can be declared during time of increased tension overseas, economic
problems within the United States, such as a depression, civil unrest, such
as demonstrations or scenes like the Los Angeles riots, and in a drug
crisis. These Presidential powers have increased with successive Crime
Bills, particularly the 1991 and 1993 Crime Bills, which increase the power
to suspend the rights guaranteed under the Constitution and to seize
property of those suspected of being drug dealers, to individuals who
participate in a public protest or demonstration. Under emergency plans
already in existence, the power exists to suspend the Constitution and turn
over the reigns of government to FEMA and appointing military commanders to
run state and local governments. FEMA then would have the right to order the
detention of anyone whom there is reasonable ground to believe...will engage
in, or probably conspire with others to engage in acts of espionage or
sabotage. The plan also authorized the establishment of concentration camps
for detaining the accused, but no trial.
Three times since 1984, FEMA stood on the threshold of taking control of the
nation. Once under President Reagan in 1984, and twice under President Bush
in 1990 and 1992. But under those three scenarios, there was not a
sufficient crisis to warrant risking martial law. Most experts on the
subject of FEMA and Martial Law insisted that a crisis has to appear
dangerous enough for the people of the United States before they would
tolerate or accept complete government takeover. The typical crisis needed
would be threat of imminent nuclear war, rioting in several U.S. cites
simultaneously, a series of national disasters that affect widespread danger
to the populous, massive terrorist attacks, a depression in which tens of
millions are unemployed and without financial resources, or a major
environmental disaster.
THREE TIMES FEMA STOOD BY READY FOR EMERGENCY
In April 1984, President Reagan signed Presidential Director Number 54 that
allowed FEMA to engage in a secret national "readiness exercise" under the
code name of REX 84. The exercise was to test FEMA's readiness to assume
military authority in the event of a "State of Domestic National Emergency"
concurrent with the launching of a direct United States military operation
in Central America. The plan called for the deputation of U.S. military and
National Guard units so that they could legally be used for domestic law
enforcement. These units would be assigned to conduct sweeps and take into
custody an estimated 400,000 undocumented Central American immigrants in the
United States. The immigrants would be interned at 10 detention centers to
be set up at military bases throughout the country.
REX 84 was so highly guarded that special metal security doors were placed
on the fifth floor of the FEMA building in Washington, D.C. Even
long-standing employees of the Civil Defense of the Federal Executive
Department possessing the highest possible security clearances were not
being allowed through the newly installed metal security doors. Only
personnel wearing a special red Christian cross or crucifix lapel pin were
allowed into the premises. Lt. Col. North was responsible for drawing up the
emergency plan, which U.S. Attorney General William French Smith opposed
vehemently. The plan called for the suspension of the Constitution, turning
control of the government over to FEMA, appointment of military commanders
to run state and local governments and the declaration of Martial Law. The
Presidential Executive Orders to support such a plan were already in place.
The plan also advocated the rounding up and transfer to "assembly centers or
relocation camps" of a least 21 million American Negroes in the event of
massive rioting or disorder, not unlike the rounding up of the Jews in Nazi
Germany in the 1930s.
The second known time that FEMA stood by was in 1990 when Desert Storm was
enacted. Prior to President Bush's invasion of Iraq, FEMA began to draft new
legislation to increase its already formidable powers. One of the elements
incorporated into the plan was to set up operations within any state or
locality without the prior permission of local or state authorities. Such
prior permission has always been required in the past. Much of the mechanism
being set into place was in anticipation of the economic collapse of the
Western World. The war with Iraq may have been conceived as a ploy to boost
the bankrupt economy, but it only pushed the West into deeper recession.
The third scenario for FEMA came with the Los Angeles riots after the Rodney
King brutality verdict. Had the rioting spread to other cities, FEMA would
have been empowered to step in. As it was, major rioting only occurred in
the Los Angeles area, thus preventing a pretext for a FEMA response.
On July 5, 1987, the Miami Herald published reports on FEMA's new goals. The
goal was to suspend the Constitution in the event of a national crisis, such
as nuclear war, violent and widespread internal dissent, or national
opposition to a U.S. military invasion abroad. Lt. Col. North was the
architect. National Security Directive Number 52 issued in August 1982,
pertains to the "Use of National Guard Troops to Quell Disturbances."
The crux of the problem is that FEMA has the power to turn the United States
into a police state in time of a real crisis or a manufactured crisis. Lt.
Col. North virtually established the apparatus for dictatorship. Only the
criticism of the Attorney General prevented the plans from being adopted.
But intelligence reports indicate that FEMA has a folder with 22 Executive
Orders for the President to sign in case of an emergency. It is believed
those Executive Orders contain the framework of North's concepts, delayed by
criticism but never truly abandoned.
The crisis, as the government now see it, is civil unrest. For generations,
the government was concerned with nuclear war, but the violent and
disruptive demonstrations that surrounded the Vietnam War era prompted
President Nixon to change the direction of emergency powers from war time to
times of domestic unrest. Diana Raynolds, program director of the Edward R.
Murrow Center, summed up the dangers of FEMA today and the public reaction
to Martial Law in a drug crisis: "It was James Madison's worst nightmare
that a righteous faction would someday be strong enough to sweep away the
Constitutional restraints designed by the framers to prevent the tyranny of
centralized power, excessive privilege, an arbitrary governmental authority
over the individual. These restraints, the balancing and checking of powers
among branches and layers of government, and the civil guarantees, would be
the first casualties in a drug-induced national security state with Reagan's
Civil Emergency Preparedness unleashed. Nevertheless, there would be those
who would welcome NSC (National Security Council) into the drug fray,
believing that increasing state police powers to emergency levels is the
only way left to fight American's enemy within. In the short run, a national
security state would probably be a relief to those whose personal security
and quality of life has been diminished by drugs or drug related crime. And,
as the general public watches the progression of institutional chaos and
social decay, they too may be willing to pay the ultimate price, one drug
free America for 200 years of democracy."
The first targets in any FEMA emergency would be Hispanics and Blacks, the
FEMA orders call for them to be rounded up and detained. Tax protesters,
demonstrators against government military intervention outside U.S. borders,
and people who maintain weapons in their homes are also targets. Operation
Trojan Horse is a program designed to learn the identity of potential
opponents to martial law. The program lures potential protesters into public
forums, conducted by a "hero" of the people who advocates survival training.
The list of names gathered at such meetings and rallies are computerized and
then targeted in case of an emergency.
The most shining example of America to the world has been its peaceful
transition of government from one administration to another. Despite crises
of great magnitude, the United States has maintained its freedom and
liberty. This nation now stands on the threshold of rule by non-elected
people asserting non-Constitutional powers. Even Congress cannot review a
Martial Law action until six months after it has been declared. For the
first time in American history, the reigns of government would not be
transferred from one elected element to another, but the Constitution,
itself, can be suspended.
The scenarios established to trigger FEMA into action are generally found in
the society today, economic collapse, civil unrest, drug problems, terrorist
attacks, and protests against American intervention in a foreign country.
All these premises exist, it could only be a matter of time in which one of
these triggers the entire emergency necessary to bring FEMA into action, and
then it may be too late, because under the FEMA plan, there is no
contingency by which Constitutional power is restored.
Harry Martin's web site:
http://www.sonic.net/sentinel/
FEMA's:
http://www.fema.gov/
--
feustel@netcom.com
Dave Feustel N9MYI For PGP Public Key, finger feustel@netcom.com
Fort Wayne, IN Or else access http://www.mixi.net/~feustel/
219-483-1857
one thought this board was..
NOT FOR THE POLITICALLY SENSITIVE!!!
if one can only see..
one perspective..
how far?
can that one go..