FREEDOM OR ANARCHY,Campaign of Conscience.

Joseph F Barber | Create Your Badge
This blog does not promote, support, condone, encourage, advocate, nor in any way endorse any racist (or "racialist") ideologies, nor any armed and/or violent revolutionary, seditionist and/or terrorist activities. Any racial separatist or militant groups listed here are solely for reference and Opinions of multiple authors including Freedom or Anarchy Campaign of conscience.

To be GOVERNED

Not For Profit - For Global Justice and The Fight to End Violence & Hunger world wide - Since 1999
"Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people" - John Adams - Second President - 1797 - 1801

This is the callout,This is the call to the Patriots,To stand up for all the ones who’ve been thrown away,This is the call to the all citizens ,Stand up!
Stand up and protect those who can not protect themselves our veterans ,the homeless & the forgotten take back our world today


To protect our independence, We take no government funds
Become A Supporting member of humanity to help end hunger and violence in our country,You have a right to live. You have a right to be. You have these rights regardless of money, health, social status, or class. You have these rights, man, woman, or child. These rights can never be taken away from you, they can only be infringed. When someone violates your rights, remember, it is not your fault.,


DISCOVER THE WORLD

Facebook Badge

FREEDOM OR ANARCHY,Campaign of Conscience

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

The Free Thought Project,The Daily Sheeple & FREEDOM OR ANARCHY Campaign of Conscience are dedicated to holding those who claim authority over our lives accountable. “Each of us has a unique part to play in the healing of the world.”
“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.” - George Orwell, 1984

"Until the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior is finally and permanently discredited and abandoned, everywhere is war and until there are no longer first-class and second-class citizens of any nation, until the color of a man's skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes. And until the basic human rights are equally guaranteed to all without regard to race, there is war. And until that day, the dream of lasting peace, world citizenship, rule of international morality, will remain but a fleeting illusion to be pursued, but never attained... now everywhere is war." - - Haile Selassie I of Ethiopia - Popularized by Bob Marley in the song War

STEALING FROM THE CITIZENRY

The right to tell the Government to kiss my Ass Important Message for All Law Enforcers Freedom; what it is, and what it is not. Unadulterated freedom is an unattainable goal; that is what the founders of America knew and understood, which was their impetus behind the documents that established our great nation. They also knew that one of the primary driving forces in human nature is the unconscious desire to be truly free. This meant to them that mankind if totally left completely unrestricted would pursue all things in life without any awareness or acknowledgement of the consequences of his/her own actions leaving only the individual conscience if they had one as a control on behavior. This would not bode well in the development of a great society. Yet the founders of America chose to allow men/women as much liberty as could be, with minimum impact on the freedom or liberties of others

Saturday, April 30, 2016

The Absurdity Of Being A Citizen In The US Police State

Censored, Surveilled, Watch Listed and Jailed: The Absurdity of Being a Citizen in the American Police State


Seattle police officers wearing riot gear guard a Starbucks coffee shop during May Day demonstrations in Seattle



“You had to live—did live, from habit that became instinct—in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.”—George Orwell, 1984
In past ages, those who dared to speak out against tyranny—viewed as an act of treason—were blinded, castrated, disfigured, mutilated, rendered mute by having their tongues cut out of their heads, and ultimately crucified.
In the American police state, the price to be paid for speaking truth to power (also increasingly viewed as an act of treason) is surveillance, censorship, jail and ultimately death.
It’s a diabolically ingenious tactic for muzzling, disarming and ultimately eliminating one’s critics or potential adversaries.
However, where many Americans go wrong is in assuming that you have to be doing something illegal or challenging the government’s authority in order to be flagged as a suspicious character, labeled an enemy of the state and locked up like a dangerous criminal.
In fact, as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, all you really need to do is use certain trigger words, surf the internet, communicate using a cell phone, drive a car, stay at a hotel, purchase materials at a hardware store, take flying or boating lessons, appear suspicious, question government authority, or generally live in the United States.
With the help of automated eyes and ears, a growing arsenal of high-tech software, hardware and techniques, government propaganda urging Americans to turn into spies and snitches, as well as social media and behavior sensing software, government agents are spinning a sticky spider-web of threat assessments, behavioral sensing warnings, flagged “words,” and “suspicious” activity reports aimed at snaring potential enemies of the state.
It’s the American police state’s take on the dystopian terrors foreshadowed by George Orwell, Aldous Huxley and Phillip K. Dick all rolled up into one oppressive pre-crime and pre-thought crime package.
What’s more, the technocrats who run the surveillance state don’t even have to break a sweat while monitoring what you say, what you read, what you write, where you go, how much you spend, whom you support, and with whom you communicate. Computers now do the tedious work of trolling social media, the internet, text messages and phone calls for potentially anti-government remarks—all of which is carefully recorded, documented, and stored to be used against you someday at a time and place of the government’s choosing.
While this may sound like a riff on a bad joke, it’s a bad joke with “we the people” as the punchline. Yet it is no laughing matter that Americans are being jailed for growing orchids, feeding whales, collecting rainwater, and praying in their backyards. There is nothing humorous about Americans having their families terrorized by SWAT teams, their pets killed, their children shot, their homes trashed and their privacy shredded. And there’s really not much comic relief to be found when the citizenry is forced to pay their own government to jail, spy on, censor, terrorize and kill them.
The following activities are guaranteed to get you censored, surveilled, eventually placed on a government watch list, possibly detained and potentially killed.
Laugh at your own peril.
Use harmless trigger words like cloud, pork and pirates: The Department of Homeland Security has an expansive list of keywords and phrases it uses to monitor social networking sites and online media for signs of terrorist or other threats. While you’ll definitely send up an alert for using phrases such as dirty bomb, Jihad and Agro terror, you’re just as likely to get flagged for surveillance if you reference the terms SWAT, lockdown, police, cloud, food poisoning, pork, flu, Subway, smart, delays, cancelled, la familia, pirates, hurricane, forest fire, storm, flood, help, ice, snow, worm, warning or social media.
Use a cell phone: Simply by using a cell phone, you make yourself an easy target for government agents—working closely with corporations—who can listen in on your phone calls, read your text messages and emails, and track your movements based on the data transferred from, received by, and stored in your cell phone. Mention any of the so-called “trigger” words in a conversation or text message, and you’ll get flagged for sure.
Drive a car: Unless you’ve got an old junkyard heap without any of the gadgets and gizmos that are so attractive to today’s car buyers (GPS, satellite radio, electrical everything, smart systems, etc.), driving a car today is like wearing a homing device: you’ll be tracked from the moment you open that car door thanks to black box recorders and vehicle-to-vehicle communications systems that can monitor your speed, direction, location, the number of miles traveled, and even your seatbelt use. Once you add satellites, GPS devices, license plate readers, and real-time traffic cameras to the mix, there’s nowhere you can go on our nation’s highways and byways that you can’t be followed. By the time you add self-driving cars into the futuristic mix, equipped with computers that know where you want to go before you do, privacy and autonomy will be little more than distant mirages in your rearview mirror.
Attend a political rally: Enacted in the wake of 9/11, the Patriot Act redefined terrorism so broadly that many non-terrorist political activities such as protest marches, demonstrations and civil disobedience were considered potential terrorist acts, thereby rendering anyone desiring to engage in protected First Amendment expressive activities as suspects of the surveillance state.
Express yourself on social media: The FBI, CIA, NSA and other government agencies are investing in and relying oncorporate surveillance technologies that can mine constitutionally protected speech on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram in order to identify potential extremists and predict who might engage in future acts of anti-government behavior. A decorated Marine, 26-year-old Brandon Raub was targeted by the Secret Service because of his Facebook posts, interrogated by government agents about his views on government corruption, arrested with no warning, labeled mentally ill for subscribing to so-called “conspiratorial” views about the government, detained against his will in a psych ward for having “dangerous” opinions, and isolated from his family, friends and attorneys.
Serve in the militaryOperation Vigilant Eagle, the brainchild of the Dept. of Homeland Security, calls for surveillance of military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, characterizing them as extremists and potential domestic terrorist threats because they may be “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war.” Police agencies are also using Beware, an “early warning” computer system that tips them off to a potential suspect’s inclination to be a troublemaker and assigns individuals a color-coded threat score—green, yellow or red—based on a variety of factors including one’s criminal records, military background, medical history and social media surveillance.
Disagree with a law enforcement official: A growing number of government programs are aimed at identifying, monitoring and locking up anyone considered potentially “dangerous” or mentally ill (according to government standards, of course). For instance, a homeless man in New York City who reportedly had a history of violence but no signs of mental illness was forcibly detained in a psych ward for a week after arguing with shelter police. Despite the fact that doctors cited no medical reason to commit him, the man was locked up in accordance with a $22 million program that monitors mentally ill people considered “potentially” violent. According to the Associated Press, “A judge finally ordered his release, ruling that the man's commitment violated his civil rights and that bureaucrats had meddled in his medical treatment.”
Call in sick to work: In Virginia, a so-called police “welfare check” instigated by a 58-year-old man’s employer after he called in sick resulted in a two-hour, SWAT team-style raid on the man’s truck and a 72-hour mental health hold. During the standoff, a heavily armed police tactical team confronted Benjamin Burruss as he was leaving an area motel, surrounded his truck, deployed a “stinger” device behind the rear tires, launched a flash grenade, smashed the side window in order to drag him from the truck, handcuffed and searched him, and transported him to a local hospital for a psychiatric evaluation and mental health hold. All of this was done despite the fact that police acknowledged they had no legal basis nor probable cause for detaining Burruss, given that he had not threatened to harm anyone and was not mentally ill.
Limp or stutter: As a result of a nationwide push to certify a broad spectrum of government officials in mental health first-aid training (a 12-hour course comprised of PowerPoint presentations, videos, discussions, role playing and other interactive activities), more Americans are going to run the risk of being reported for having mental health issues by non-medical personnel. Mind you, once you get on such a government watch list—whether it’s a terrorist watch list, a mental health watch list, or a dissident watch list—there’s no clear-cut way to get off, whether or not you should actually be on there. For instance, one 37-year-old disabled man was arrested, diagnosed by police and an unlicensed mental health screener as having “mental health issues,” apparently because of his slurred speech and unsteady gait, and subsequently locked up for five days in a mental health facility against his will and with no access to family and friends. A subsequent hearing found that Gordon Goines, who suffers from a neurological condition similar to multiple sclerosis, has no mental illness and should not have been confined.
Appear confused or nervous, fidget, whistle or smell bad: According to the Transportation Security Administration’s 92-point secret behavior watch list for spotting terrorists, these are among some of the telling signs of suspicious behavior: fidgeting, whistling, bad body odor, yawning, clearing your throat, having a pale face from recently shaving your beard, covering your mouth with your hand when speaking and blinking your eyes fast. You can also be pulled aside for interrogation if you “have ‘unusual items,’ like almanacs and ‘numerous prepaid calling cards or cell phones.’” One critic of the program accurately referred to the program as a “license to harass.”
Allow yourself to be seen in public waving a toy gun or anything remotely resembling a gun, such as a water nozzle or a remote control or a walking cane, for instance: No longer is it unusual to hear about incidents in which police shoot unarmed individuals first and ask questions later. John Crawford was shot by police in an Ohio Wal-Mart for holding an air rifle sold in the store that he may have intended to buy. Thirteen-year-old Andy Lopez Cruz was shot 7 times in 10 seconds by a California police officer who mistook the boy’s toy gun for an assault rifle. Christopher Roupe, 17, was shot and killed after opening the door to a police officer. The officer, mistaking the Wii remote control in Roupe’s hand for a gun, shot him in the chest. Another police officer repeatedly shot 70-year-old Bobby Canipe during a traffic stop. The cop saw the man reaching for his cane and, believing the cane to be a rifle, opened fire.
Stare at a police officer: Miami-Dade police slammed the 14-year-old Tremaine McMillian to the ground, putting him in a chokehold and handcuffing him after he allegedly gave them “dehumanizing stares” and walked away from them, which the officers found unacceptable.
Appear to be pro-gun, pro-freedom or anti-government: You might be a domestic terrorist in the eyes of the FBI (and its network of snitches) if you: express libertarian philosophies (statements, bumper stickers); exhibit Second Amendment-oriented views (NRA or gun club membership); read survivalist literature, including apocalyptic fictional books; show signs of self-sufficiency (stockpiling food, ammo, hand tools, medical supplies); fear an economic collapse; buy gold and barter items; subscribe to religious views concerning the book of Revelation; voice fears about Big Brother or big government; expound about constitutional rights and civil liberties; or believe in a New World Order conspiracy. This is all part of a larger trend in American governance whereby dissent is criminalized and pathologized, and dissenters are censored, silenced or declared unfit for society. 
Attend a public school: Microcosms of the police state, America’s public schools contain almost every aspect of the militarized, intolerant, senseless, overcriminalized, legalistic, surveillance-riddled, totalitarian landscape that plagues those of us on the “outside.” From the moment a child enters one of the nation’s 98,000 public schools to the moment she graduates, she will be exposed to a steady diet of draconian zero tolerance policies that criminalize childish behavior, overreaching anti-bullying statutes that criminalize speech, school resource officers (police) tasked with disciplining and/or arresting so-called “disorderly” students, standardized testing that emphasizes rote answers over critical thinking, politically correct mindsets that teach young people to censor themselves and those around them, and extensive biometric and surveillance systems that, coupled with the rest, acclimate young people to a world in which they have no freedom of thought, speech or movement. Additionally, as part of the government’s so-called ongoing war on terror, the FBI—the nation’s de facto secret police force—is now recruiting students and teachers to spy on each other and report anyone who appears to have the potential to be “anti-government” or “extremist” as part of its “Don’t Be a Puppet” campaign.
Speak truth to power: Long before Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden were being castigated for blowing the whistle on the government’s war crimes and the National Security Agency’s abuse of its surveillance powers, it was activists such as Martin Luther King Jr. and John Lennon who were being singled out for daring to speak truth to power. These men and others like them had their phone calls monitored and data files collected on their activities and associations. For a little while, at least, they became enemy number one in the eyes of the U.S. government.
There’s always a price to pay for standing up to the powers-that-be.
Yet as this list shows, you don’t even have to be a dissident to get flagged by the government for surveillance, censorship and detention.
All you really need to be is a citizen of the American police state.

John W. Whitehead

Censored, Surveilled, Watch Listed and Jailed: The Absurdity of Being a Citizen in the American Police State


Seattle police officers wearing riot gear guard a Starbucks coffee shop during May Day demonstrations in Seattle



“You had to live—did live, from habit that became instinct—in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.”—George Orwell, 1984
In past ages, those who dared to speak out against tyranny—viewed as an act of treason—were blinded, castrated, disfigured, mutilated, rendered mute by having their tongues cut out of their heads, and ultimately crucified.
In the American police state, the price to be paid for speaking truth to power (also increasingly viewed as an act of treason) is surveillance, censorship, jail and ultimately death.
It’s a diabolically ingenious tactic for muzzling, disarming and ultimately eliminating one’s critics or potential adversaries.
However, where many Americans go wrong is in assuming that you have to be doing something illegal or challenging the government’s authority in order to be flagged as a suspicious character, labeled an enemy of the state and locked up like a dangerous criminal.
In fact, as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, all you really need to do is use certain trigger words, surf the internet, communicate using a cell phone, drive a car, stay at a hotel, purchase materials at a hardware store, take flying or boating lessons, appear suspicious, question government authority, or generally live in the United States.
With the help of automated eyes and ears, a growing arsenal of high-tech software, hardware and techniques, government propaganda urging Americans to turn into spies and snitches, as well as social media and behavior sensing software, government agents are spinning a sticky spider-web of threat assessments, behavioral sensing warnings, flagged “words,” and “suspicious” activity reports aimed at snaring potential enemies of the state.
It’s the American police state’s take on the dystopian terrors foreshadowed by George Orwell, Aldous Huxley and Phillip K. Dick all rolled up into one oppressive pre-crime and pre-thought crime package.
What’s more, the technocrats who run the surveillance state don’t even have to break a sweat while monitoring what you say, what you read, what you write, where you go, how much you spend, whom you support, and with whom you communicate. Computers now do the tedious work of trolling social media, the internet, text messages and phone calls for potentially anti-government remarks—all of which is carefully recorded, documented, and stored to be used against you someday at a time and place of the government’s choosing.
While this may sound like a riff on a bad joke, it’s a bad joke with “we the people” as the punchline. Yet it is no laughing matter that Americans are being jailed for growing orchids, feeding whales, collecting rainwater, and praying in their backyards. There is nothing humorous about Americans having their families terrorized by SWAT teams, their pets killed, their children shot, their homes trashed and their privacy shredded. And there’s really not much comic relief to be found when the citizenry is forced to pay their own government to jail, spy on, censor, terrorize and kill them.
The following activities are guaranteed to get you censored, surveilled, eventually placed on a government watch list, possibly detained and potentially killed.
Laugh at your own peril.
Use harmless trigger words like cloud, pork and pirates: The Department of Homeland Security has an expansive list of keywords and phrases it uses to monitor social networking sites and online media for signs of terrorist or other threats. While you’ll definitely send up an alert for using phrases such as dirty bomb, Jihad and Agro terror, you’re just as likely to get flagged for surveillance if you reference the terms SWAT, lockdown, police, cloud, food poisoning, pork, flu, Subway, smart, delays, cancelled, la familia, pirates, hurricane, forest fire, storm, flood, help, ice, snow, worm, warning or social media.
Use a cell phone: Simply by using a cell phone, you make yourself an easy target for government agents—working closely with corporations—who can listen in on your phone calls, read your text messages and emails, and track your movements based on the data transferred from, received by, and stored in your cell phone. Mention any of the so-called “trigger” words in a conversation or text message, and you’ll get flagged for sure.
Drive a car: Unless you’ve got an old junkyard heap without any of the gadgets and gizmos that are so attractive to today’s car buyers (GPS, satellite radio, electrical everything, smart systems, etc.), driving a car today is like wearing a homing device: you’ll be tracked from the moment you open that car door thanks to black box recorders and vehicle-to-vehicle communications systems that can monitor your speed, direction, location, the number of miles traveled, and even your seatbelt use. Once you add satellites, GPS devices, license plate readers, and real-time traffic cameras to the mix, there’s nowhere you can go on our nation’s highways and byways that you can’t be followed. By the time you add self-driving cars into the futuristic mix, equipped with computers that know where you want to go before you do, privacy and autonomy will be little more than distant mirages in your rearview mirror.
Attend a political rally: Enacted in the wake of 9/11, the Patriot Act redefined terrorism so broadly that many non-terrorist political activities such as protest marches, demonstrations and civil disobedience were considered potential terrorist acts, thereby rendering anyone desiring to engage in protected First Amendment expressive activities as suspects of the surveillance state.
Express yourself on social media: The FBI, CIA, NSA and other government agencies are investing in and relying oncorporate surveillance technologies that can mine constitutionally protected speech on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram in order to identify potential extremists and predict who might engage in future acts of anti-government behavior. A decorated Marine, 26-year-old Brandon Raub was targeted by the Secret Service because of his Facebook posts, interrogated by government agents about his views on government corruption, arrested with no warning, labeled mentally ill for subscribing to so-called “conspiratorial” views about the government, detained against his will in a psych ward for having “dangerous” opinions, and isolated from his family, friends and attorneys.
Serve in the militaryOperation Vigilant Eagle, the brainchild of the Dept. of Homeland Security, calls for surveillance of military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, characterizing them as extremists and potential domestic terrorist threats because they may be “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war.” Police agencies are also using Beware, an “early warning” computer system that tips them off to a potential suspect’s inclination to be a troublemaker and assigns individuals a color-coded threat score—green, yellow or red—based on a variety of factors including one’s criminal records, military background, medical history and social media surveillance.
Disagree with a law enforcement official: A growing number of government programs are aimed at identifying, monitoring and locking up anyone considered potentially “dangerous” or mentally ill (according to government standards, of course). For instance, a homeless man in New York City who reportedly had a history of violence but no signs of mental illness was forcibly detained in a psych ward for a week after arguing with shelter police. Despite the fact that doctors cited no medical reason to commit him, the man was locked up in accordance with a $22 million program that monitors mentally ill people considered “potentially” violent. According to the Associated Press, “A judge finally ordered his release, ruling that the man's commitment violated his civil rights and that bureaucrats had meddled in his medical treatment.”
Call in sick to work: In Virginia, a so-called police “welfare check” instigated by a 58-year-old man’s employer after he called in sick resulted in a two-hour, SWAT team-style raid on the man’s truck and a 72-hour mental health hold. During the standoff, a heavily armed police tactical team confronted Benjamin Burruss as he was leaving an area motel, surrounded his truck, deployed a “stinger” device behind the rear tires, launched a flash grenade, smashed the side window in order to drag him from the truck, handcuffed and searched him, and transported him to a local hospital for a psychiatric evaluation and mental health hold. All of this was done despite the fact that police acknowledged they had no legal basis nor probable cause for detaining Burruss, given that he had not threatened to harm anyone and was not mentally ill.
Limp or stutter: As a result of a nationwide push to certify a broad spectrum of government officials in mental health first-aid training (a 12-hour course comprised of PowerPoint presentations, videos, discussions, role playing and other interactive activities), more Americans are going to run the risk of being reported for having mental health issues by non-medical personnel. Mind you, once you get on such a government watch list—whether it’s a terrorist watch list, a mental health watch list, or a dissident watch list—there’s no clear-cut way to get off, whether or not you should actually be on there. For instance, one 37-year-old disabled man was arrested, diagnosed by police and an unlicensed mental health screener as having “mental health issues,” apparently because of his slurred speech and unsteady gait, and subsequently locked up for five days in a mental health facility against his will and with no access to family and friends. A subsequent hearing found that Gordon Goines, who suffers from a neurological condition similar to multiple sclerosis, has no mental illness and should not have been confined.
Appear confused or nervous, fidget, whistle or smell bad: According to the Transportation Security Administration’s 92-point secret behavior watch list for spotting terrorists, these are among some of the telling signs of suspicious behavior: fidgeting, whistling, bad body odor, yawning, clearing your throat, having a pale face from recently shaving your beard, covering your mouth with your hand when speaking and blinking your eyes fast. You can also be pulled aside for interrogation if you “have ‘unusual items,’ like almanacs and ‘numerous prepaid calling cards or cell phones.’” One critic of the program accurately referred to the program as a “license to harass.”
Allow yourself to be seen in public waving a toy gun or anything remotely resembling a gun, such as a water nozzle or a remote control or a walking cane, for instance: No longer is it unusual to hear about incidents in which police shoot unarmed individuals first and ask questions later. John Crawford was shot by police in an Ohio Wal-Mart for holding an air rifle sold in the store that he may have intended to buy. Thirteen-year-old Andy Lopez Cruz was shot 7 times in 10 seconds by a California police officer who mistook the boy’s toy gun for an assault rifle. Christopher Roupe, 17, was shot and killed after opening the door to a police officer. The officer, mistaking the Wii remote control in Roupe’s hand for a gun, shot him in the chest. Another police officer repeatedly shot 70-year-old Bobby Canipe during a traffic stop. The cop saw the man reaching for his cane and, believing the cane to be a rifle, opened fire.
Stare at a police officer: Miami-Dade police slammed the 14-year-old Tremaine McMillian to the ground, putting him in a chokehold and handcuffing him after he allegedly gave them “dehumanizing stares” and walked away from them, which the officers found unacceptable.
Appear to be pro-gun, pro-freedom or anti-government: You might be a domestic terrorist in the eyes of the FBI (and its network of snitches) if you: express libertarian philosophies (statements, bumper stickers); exhibit Second Amendment-oriented views (NRA or gun club membership); read survivalist literature, including apocalyptic fictional books; show signs of self-sufficiency (stockpiling food, ammo, hand tools, medical supplies); fear an economic collapse; buy gold and barter items; subscribe to religious views concerning the book of Revelation; voice fears about Big Brother or big government; expound about constitutional rights and civil liberties; or believe in a New World Order conspiracy. This is all part of a larger trend in American governance whereby dissent is criminalized and pathologized, and dissenters are censored, silenced or declared unfit for society. 
Attend a public school: Microcosms of the police state, America’s public schools contain almost every aspect of the militarized, intolerant, senseless, overcriminalized, legalistic, surveillance-riddled, totalitarian landscape that plagues those of us on the “outside.” From the moment a child enters one of the nation’s 98,000 public schools to the moment she graduates, she will be exposed to a steady diet of draconian zero tolerance policies that criminalize childish behavior, overreaching anti-bullying statutes that criminalize speech, school resource officers (police) tasked with disciplining and/or arresting so-called “disorderly” students, standardized testing that emphasizes rote answers over critical thinking, politically correct mindsets that teach young people to censor themselves and those around them, and extensive biometric and surveillance systems that, coupled with the rest, acclimate young people to a world in which they have no freedom of thought, speech or movement. Additionally, as part of the government’s so-called ongoing war on terror, the FBI—the nation’s de facto secret police force—is now recruiting students and teachers to spy on each other and report anyone who appears to have the potential to be “anti-government” or “extremist” as part of its “Don’t Be a Puppet” campaign.
Speak truth to power: Long before Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden were being castigated for blowing the whistle on the government’s war crimes and the National Security Agency’s abuse of its surveillance powers, it was activists such as Martin Luther King Jr. and John Lennon who were being singled out for daring to speak truth to power. These men and others like them had their phone calls monitored and data files collected on their activities and associations. For a little while, at least, they became enemy number one in the eyes of the U.S. government.
There’s always a price to pay for standing up to the powers-that-be.
Yet as this list shows, you don’t even have to be a dissident to get flagged by the government for surveillance, censorship and detention.
All you really need to be is a citizen of the American police state.

John W. Whitehead



People Increasingly See Themselves As Global Citizens


People Increasingly See Themselves As Global Citizens


Screen Shot 2016-04-29 at 11.54.49 AM
Above Photo: From bbc.com
People are increasingly identifying themselves as global rather than national citizens, according to a BBC World Service poll.
The trend is particularly marked in emerging economies, where people see themselves as outward looking and internationally minded.
However, in Germany fewer people say they feel like global citizens now, compared with 2001.
Pollsters GlobeScan questioned more than 20,000 people in 18 countries.
More than half of those asked (56%) in emerging economies saw themselves first and foremost as global citizens rather than national citizens.
In Nigeria (73%), China (71%), Peru (70%) and India (67%) the data is particularly marked.
By contrast, the trend in the industrialised nations seems to be heading in the opposite direction.
In these richer nations, the concept of global citizenship appears to have taken a serious hit after the financial crash of 2008. In Germany, for example, only 30% of respondents see themselves as global citizens.
Screen Shot 2016-04-29 at 11.50.46 AM
According to Lionel Bellier from GlobeScan, this is the lowest proportion seen in Germany since the poll began 15 years ago.
“It has to be seen in the context of a very charged environment, politically and emotionally, following Angela Merkel’s policy to open the doors to a million refugees last year.”
The poll suggests a degree of soul-searching in Germany about how open its doors should be in the future.
It says 54% of German respondents approved of welcoming Syrians to their country. In the UK, where the government has resolutely capped the number of Syrian refugees, the figure was much higher at 72%.
A significant proportion of Germans also sat on the fence when they were asked about issues to do with immigration and society.
Screen Shot 2016-04-29 at 11.48.29 AM
On the question of whether intermarriage was a welcome development, for example, 46% of German respondents were not sure how to respond or they tried to qualify their answers by saying it depended what the circumstances were.
This is in stark contrast to other European countries, such as France, where people were much more emphatically in favour of marriages between people from different racial or religious backgrounds.
These grey areas on the bar charts could suggest Germany is still grappling with whether it wants to welcome newcomers or not.
“There is a lot of uncertainty there,” says Mr Bellier.
“German respondents are showing a high level of indecisiveness when they are asked if they approve or disapprove of these developments and whether they accept the fact that their country is taking a lead on refugees.”
According to the data, there are some clear divides in attitudes within continents.
In Europe, it is Russia which has the strongest resistance to intermarriage, with 43% of Russians actively disapproving of marriages between different races and ethnic groups.
Compare that with Spain, where only 5% would be opposed to such matches. Spain also noticeably has the most respondents who see themselves as global citizens
Russia appears to have the strongest overall opposition to immigration. Only 11% of the Russians polled would approve of accepting refugees from Syria, for example.
On the other hand, Spain would be the most welcoming of all the countries polled when it comes to receiving refugees from the Syrian conflict. There, an eye-catching majority – 84% – believe they should take in more of those fleeing the five-year civil war.
Screen Shot 2016-04-29 at 11.49.37 AM
The figures suggest there is also an interesting divide emerging in North American attitudes to refugees. Of those Canadians asked, 77% said they would approve of accepting Syrians fleeing their home country. But in the United States that figure drops to 55%.
Indonesia has the weakest sense of national citizenship (4%). Instead, it seems Indonesians have a much stronger sense of localism, with over half of respondents seeing their immediate communities as the most important way of defining themselves.
In general, religion plays a much smaller part how people define themselves compared to nationality. The big exception to that rule is Pakistan, with 43% of Pakistanis appearing to identify themselves first and foremost by their religion – considerably higher than any other country.
The polling on religion also reminds us of one of the defining differences between old-world Europe and the United States. In the US, 15% of those asked would who define themselves first and foremost by religion. In European countries that figure is only 5%.

What is ‘global citizenship’ anyway?

One problem with polling attitudes on identity is that “global citizenship” is a difficult concept to define and the poll left it open to those taking part to interpret.
For some, it might be about the projection of economic clout across the world. To others, it might mean an altruistic impulse to tackle the world’s problems in a spirit of togetherness – whether that is climate change or inequality in the developing world.
Global citizenship might also be about ease of communication in an interconnected age and being able to have a voice on social media.
And for many, it will be about migration and mobility. We are, after all, witnessing the biggest movements of people since the World War Two.
This is not just driven by war and conflict. It is also because the world as a whole is becoming more prosperous and air travel is becoming more affordable to the rising middle classes.

People Increasingly See Themselves As Global Citizens


Screen Shot 2016-04-29 at 11.54.49 AM
Above Photo: From bbc.com
People are increasingly identifying themselves as global rather than national citizens, according to a BBC World Service poll.
The trend is particularly marked in emerging economies, where people see themselves as outward looking and internationally minded.
However, in Germany fewer people say they feel like global citizens now, compared with 2001.
Pollsters GlobeScan questioned more than 20,000 people in 18 countries.
More than half of those asked (56%) in emerging economies saw themselves first and foremost as global citizens rather than national citizens.
In Nigeria (73%), China (71%), Peru (70%) and India (67%) the data is particularly marked.
By contrast, the trend in the industrialised nations seems to be heading in the opposite direction.
In these richer nations, the concept of global citizenship appears to have taken a serious hit after the financial crash of 2008. In Germany, for example, only 30% of respondents see themselves as global citizens.
Screen Shot 2016-04-29 at 11.50.46 AM
According to Lionel Bellier from GlobeScan, this is the lowest proportion seen in Germany since the poll began 15 years ago.
“It has to be seen in the context of a very charged environment, politically and emotionally, following Angela Merkel’s policy to open the doors to a million refugees last year.”
The poll suggests a degree of soul-searching in Germany about how open its doors should be in the future.
It says 54% of German respondents approved of welcoming Syrians to their country. In the UK, where the government has resolutely capped the number of Syrian refugees, the figure was much higher at 72%.
A significant proportion of Germans also sat on the fence when they were asked about issues to do with immigration and society.
Screen Shot 2016-04-29 at 11.48.29 AM
On the question of whether intermarriage was a welcome development, for example, 46% of German respondents were not sure how to respond or they tried to qualify their answers by saying it depended what the circumstances were.
This is in stark contrast to other European countries, such as France, where people were much more emphatically in favour of marriages between people from different racial or religious backgrounds.
These grey areas on the bar charts could suggest Germany is still grappling with whether it wants to welcome newcomers or not.
“There is a lot of uncertainty there,” says Mr Bellier.
“German respondents are showing a high level of indecisiveness when they are asked if they approve or disapprove of these developments and whether they accept the fact that their country is taking a lead on refugees.”
According to the data, there are some clear divides in attitudes within continents.
In Europe, it is Russia which has the strongest resistance to intermarriage, with 43% of Russians actively disapproving of marriages between different races and ethnic groups.
Compare that with Spain, where only 5% would be opposed to such matches. Spain also noticeably has the most respondents who see themselves as global citizens
Russia appears to have the strongest overall opposition to immigration. Only 11% of the Russians polled would approve of accepting refugees from Syria, for example.
On the other hand, Spain would be the most welcoming of all the countries polled when it comes to receiving refugees from the Syrian conflict. There, an eye-catching majority – 84% – believe they should take in more of those fleeing the five-year civil war.
Screen Shot 2016-04-29 at 11.49.37 AM
The figures suggest there is also an interesting divide emerging in North American attitudes to refugees. Of those Canadians asked, 77% said they would approve of accepting Syrians fleeing their home country. But in the United States that figure drops to 55%.
Indonesia has the weakest sense of national citizenship (4%). Instead, it seems Indonesians have a much stronger sense of localism, with over half of respondents seeing their immediate communities as the most important way of defining themselves.
In general, religion plays a much smaller part how people define themselves compared to nationality. The big exception to that rule is Pakistan, with 43% of Pakistanis appearing to identify themselves first and foremost by their religion – considerably higher than any other country.
The polling on religion also reminds us of one of the defining differences between old-world Europe and the United States. In the US, 15% of those asked would who define themselves first and foremost by religion. In European countries that figure is only 5%.

What is ‘global citizenship’ anyway?

One problem with polling attitudes on identity is that “global citizenship” is a difficult concept to define and the poll left it open to those taking part to interpret.
For some, it might be about the projection of economic clout across the world. To others, it might mean an altruistic impulse to tackle the world’s problems in a spirit of togetherness – whether that is climate change or inequality in the developing world.
Global citizenship might also be about ease of communication in an interconnected age and being able to have a voice on social media.
And for many, it will be about migration and mobility. We are, after all, witnessing the biggest movements of people since the World War Two.
This is not just driven by war and conflict. It is also because the world as a whole is becoming more prosperous and air travel is becoming more affordable to the rising middle classes.


Elect Donald Trump, and You Elect the Problem

Elect Donald Trump, and You Elect the Problem

The majority of Americans are furious at the government because the government serves itself, not the people.

Politicians do the will of their big donors – the donor class – not what the voters want.  Unelected "civil servants" rule over the people by arbitrarily defining rules that conform to the liberal agenda – such as forcing nuns to support abortion.

Strangely, Trump supporters think the solution to this problem is to elect a member of the very donor class that has disenfranchised average Americans.

Trump trumpets his history of buying politicians to do what was good for Trump, not for the voters.  Similarly, Trump is unapologetic about using the full force of the government to subject a widow to five years of legal hell in order to stay in her own home.

The reality is that Trump is not the solution to the problem.  He is the problem.

Given that Trump has always used government to his own benefit, why should we think that he's suddenly going to change if he becomes president?

Is it because he's calling for a wall?  Given that he has stated recently that pretty much everyone who has snuck into America would be let back in through that wall, it's unclear what good it would do.  Further, we know from Trump's history that he has no problem with illegals and H-2B visa holders working on his projects, instead of Americans, because it saves him money.

Is it because he's so rich that he doesn't lust after even more?  Anyone who listens to Trump knows that Trump is never happy with what he's got.  Further, many members of the donor class have even more money than Trump, and they haven't stopped buying politicians for their own gain.

Is it because he likes and cares about us?  Well, he apparently liked his first two wives, but that didn't stop him from dumping them when it benefited Trump.  Should we honestly expect Trump to treat us better than he treated his own wives?

Is it because we think he can be trusted?  Well, the folks who lost their hard-earned wages because of his four bankruptcies, while he continued to live in luxury, trusted him, and it didn't work well for them.  It wasn't just the rich whom Trump ripped off; regular folks such as retirees and small contractors were left unpaid.

Is it because he's such a great businessman?  Well, four bankruptcies and his unwillingness to release his tax returns indicate that perhaps his self-created image of business wizardry is about as real as the quality of Trump University.  Trump started out with at least a $40,000,000 inheritance, and if he'd just invested that in stock market index funds, he'd be three times richer than he is now.  Other businessmen like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates have grown their fortunes much faster than the stock market.

Is it because he's supposedly pro-life?  Given that he's just said that the Republican Party should endorse abortion, it's unclear why anyone would think that Trump is really pro-life.  Whenever he speaks off the cuff, his pro-abortion bias is clear.  Whether it's praising Planned Parenthood or saying his sister, who thinks that partial-birth abortion is wonderful, would make a great Supreme Court justice, it's clear that the new Trump is like the old Trump: a pro-abort at heart.

Is it because he supports American values?  Well, he just said that men should be able to use women's bathrooms, and his position on so-called gay marriage is inconsistent.  It's useful to note too that Trump basically criticized North Carolina for standing up for women's rights because it cost the state business.  That might be construed to indicate that Trump's ethics are based more on the bottom line than on a deeply held system of moral beliefs.

To an impartial observer, it would seem clear that Trump is running for president not to be a voice for the average American – whom he has consistently exploited for his own personal gain – but simply to reduce the cost of business by cutting out the middleman: the politicians he currently has to buy.

Let's be clear: if the choice is between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, Trump is the better choice.  Clinton wants to destroy the American defined by the Constitution, while Trump is just out for himself and as such would do less damage to America.

But today, we have a much better choice than the donor-class Trump: Ted Cruz.

While Trump has desperately tried to portray Cruz as an establishment figure, that's simply a lie.  Cruz has been hated by the Republican establishment since he hit the national scene.  While Cruz was fighting the establishment in Washington, Trump was donating money to Hillary Clinton and praising her work as secretary of state.

It was Cruz who pushed the government shutdown so hated by the establishment but which resulted in the Republicans winning the Senate.

Trent Lott and Bob Dole – the establishment incarnate – prefer Trump to Cruz, as does Jimmy Carter.

Can anyone seriously think that Trump isn't a dedicated member of the establishment, given that Bill and Hillary Clinton attended his wedding?

If you want to overthrow the establishment in D.C., you need to vote for a real outsider, Ted Cruz, not for a man who boasts about stealing the government for his own benefit by buying politicians.


Tom Trinko,Joseph F Barber

Elect Donald Trump, and You Elect the Problem

The majority of Americans are furious at the government because the government serves itself, not the people.

Politicians do the will of their big donors – the donor class – not what the voters want.  Unelected "civil servants" rule over the people by arbitrarily defining rules that conform to the liberal agenda – such as forcing nuns to support abortion.

Strangely, Trump supporters think the solution to this problem is to elect a member of the very donor class that has disenfranchised average Americans.

Trump trumpets his history of buying politicians to do what was good for Trump, not for the voters.  Similarly, Trump is unapologetic about using the full force of the government to subject a widow to five years of legal hell in order to stay in her own home.

The reality is that Trump is not the solution to the problem.  He is the problem.

Given that Trump has always used government to his own benefit, why should we think that he's suddenly going to change if he becomes president?

Is it because he's calling for a wall?  Given that he has stated recently that pretty much everyone who has snuck into America would be let back in through that wall, it's unclear what good it would do.  Further, we know from Trump's history that he has no problem with illegals and H-2B visa holders working on his projects, instead of Americans, because it saves him money.

Is it because he's so rich that he doesn't lust after even more?  Anyone who listens to Trump knows that Trump is never happy with what he's got.  Further, many members of the donor class have even more money than Trump, and they haven't stopped buying politicians for their own gain.

Is it because he likes and cares about us?  Well, he apparently liked his first two wives, but that didn't stop him from dumping them when it benefited Trump.  Should we honestly expect Trump to treat us better than he treated his own wives?

Is it because we think he can be trusted?  Well, the folks who lost their hard-earned wages because of his four bankruptcies, while he continued to live in luxury, trusted him, and it didn't work well for them.  It wasn't just the rich whom Trump ripped off; regular folks such as retirees and small contractors were left unpaid.

Is it because he's such a great businessman?  Well, four bankruptcies and his unwillingness to release his tax returns indicate that perhaps his self-created image of business wizardry is about as real as the quality of Trump University.  Trump started out with at least a $40,000,000 inheritance, and if he'd just invested that in stock market index funds, he'd be three times richer than he is now.  Other businessmen like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates have grown their fortunes much faster than the stock market.

Is it because he's supposedly pro-life?  Given that he's just said that the Republican Party should endorse abortion, it's unclear why anyone would think that Trump is really pro-life.  Whenever he speaks off the cuff, his pro-abortion bias is clear.  Whether it's praising Planned Parenthood or saying his sister, who thinks that partial-birth abortion is wonderful, would make a great Supreme Court justice, it's clear that the new Trump is like the old Trump: a pro-abort at heart.

Is it because he supports American values?  Well, he just said that men should be able to use women's bathrooms, and his position on so-called gay marriage is inconsistent.  It's useful to note too that Trump basically criticized North Carolina for standing up for women's rights because it cost the state business.  That might be construed to indicate that Trump's ethics are based more on the bottom line than on a deeply held system of moral beliefs.

To an impartial observer, it would seem clear that Trump is running for president not to be a voice for the average American – whom he has consistently exploited for his own personal gain – but simply to reduce the cost of business by cutting out the middleman: the politicians he currently has to buy.

Let's be clear: if the choice is between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, Trump is the better choice.  Clinton wants to destroy the American defined by the Constitution, while Trump is just out for himself and as such would do less damage to America.

But today, we have a much better choice than the donor-class Trump: Ted Cruz.

While Trump has desperately tried to portray Cruz as an establishment figure, that's simply a lie.  Cruz has been hated by the Republican establishment since he hit the national scene.  While Cruz was fighting the establishment in Washington, Trump was donating money to Hillary Clinton and praising her work as secretary of state.

It was Cruz who pushed the government shutdown so hated by the establishment but which resulted in the Republicans winning the Senate.

Trent Lott and Bob Dole – the establishment incarnate – prefer Trump to Cruz, as does Jimmy Carter.

Can anyone seriously think that Trump isn't a dedicated member of the establishment, given that Bill and Hillary Clinton attended his wedding?

If you want to overthrow the establishment in D.C., you need to vote for a real outsider, Ted Cruz, not for a man who boasts about stealing the government for his own benefit by buying politicians.


Tom Trinko,Joseph F Barber

Chippie The Chipmunk

Chippie let go

Chippie The Chipmunk



My brother Ronnie and I were nothing alike. He was good; I was bad. Curious about everything, I got into trouble constantly, and received many a switching because of Ronnie’s snitching. Occasionally, though, events worked in my favor. Such was the case with his good buddy, Chippie the chipmunk.
Wild creatures interested Dad, and if he caught one, he’d bring it home for a few days before setting it free. Once he brought home a chipmunk and put it in a birdcage.
“Boys, what shall we name him?” I suggested Monk, but Dad preferred Ronnie’s choice: Chippie.
When Ronnie tried feeding Chippie a peanut, it bared razor-sharp incisors, expanded its cheek pouches, glared furiously with beady black eyes, and made threatening chirring sounds.
“Aw, come on, let’s be good buddies,” my brother coaxed, and again extended the peanut, which Chippie swiped at with needle-like claws.
The next day Ronnie removed the cage’s lid and dropped a peanut to Chippie, who gobbled it down. An idea popped into his head … a really bad idea.
“See! Chippie has accepted me as his good buddy. I’m going to ease my hand down and gently pick him up. Then I can hold and feed him at the same time.”
Blessed by Satan with a sadistic mind, I said, “Great idea — that will prove y’all really are good buddies.”
Ronnie slipped on one of Dad’s work gloves, and confident that the chipmunk couldn’t bite through the thick leather, eased the top off the cage and reached toward Chippie, who seemed unperturbed.
As my brother’s fingers closed gently around what he thought was his good buddy, Chippie opened his jaws so wide that it squeezed his eyes shut — and clamped down! Those incisors went straight through the leather and into Ronnie’s thumb.
When my screaming sibling tried to shake loose his attacker, Chippie bit even harder. Jumping up and down and flinging his arm around, he tried desperately to free his hand from the enraged animal.
Finally, satisfied that he had exacted as much pain as possible, Chippie let go. When he did, he and the glove went sailing across the room, knocked over one of Mama’s prized lamps, and thudded ominously into the wall.
Then I heard Dad’s boots clumping up the back steps. I looked at my squalling brother and thought … Oh boy! Your misery has just begun. Dad looked at the empty cage, shattered lamp, and deceased chipmunk, still attached to the glove.
“Which one of you did this?” he roared.
As he removed the dreaded belt, Ronnie begged, “Please don’t whip me, Dad. Look what Chippie did to my thumb!”
His pleas went unheeded, as Dad laid on the stripes. Then we heard Mama wail and saw her glaring at the ruined lamp. Her willow switch picked up where the belt left off.
By the time his punishment was over, Ronnie’s fate was about as bad as Chippie’s demise. Never again did he mention his good buddy, Chippie the chipmunk.

Chippie let go

Chippie The Chipmunk



My brother Ronnie and I were nothing alike. He was good; I was bad. Curious about everything, I got into trouble constantly, and received many a switching because of Ronnie’s snitching. Occasionally, though, events worked in my favor. Such was the case with his good buddy, Chippie the chipmunk.
Wild creatures interested Dad, and if he caught one, he’d bring it home for a few days before setting it free. Once he brought home a chipmunk and put it in a birdcage.
“Boys, what shall we name him?” I suggested Monk, but Dad preferred Ronnie’s choice: Chippie.
When Ronnie tried feeding Chippie a peanut, it bared razor-sharp incisors, expanded its cheek pouches, glared furiously with beady black eyes, and made threatening chirring sounds.
“Aw, come on, let’s be good buddies,” my brother coaxed, and again extended the peanut, which Chippie swiped at with needle-like claws.
The next day Ronnie removed the cage’s lid and dropped a peanut to Chippie, who gobbled it down. An idea popped into his head … a really bad idea.
“See! Chippie has accepted me as his good buddy. I’m going to ease my hand down and gently pick him up. Then I can hold and feed him at the same time.”
Blessed by Satan with a sadistic mind, I said, “Great idea — that will prove y’all really are good buddies.”
Ronnie slipped on one of Dad’s work gloves, and confident that the chipmunk couldn’t bite through the thick leather, eased the top off the cage and reached toward Chippie, who seemed unperturbed.
As my brother’s fingers closed gently around what he thought was his good buddy, Chippie opened his jaws so wide that it squeezed his eyes shut — and clamped down! Those incisors went straight through the leather and into Ronnie’s thumb.
When my screaming sibling tried to shake loose his attacker, Chippie bit even harder. Jumping up and down and flinging his arm around, he tried desperately to free his hand from the enraged animal.
Finally, satisfied that he had exacted as much pain as possible, Chippie let go. When he did, he and the glove went sailing across the room, knocked over one of Mama’s prized lamps, and thudded ominously into the wall.
Then I heard Dad’s boots clumping up the back steps. I looked at my squalling brother and thought … Oh boy! Your misery has just begun. Dad looked at the empty cage, shattered lamp, and deceased chipmunk, still attached to the glove.
“Which one of you did this?” he roared.
As he removed the dreaded belt, Ronnie begged, “Please don’t whip me, Dad. Look what Chippie did to my thumb!”
His pleas went unheeded, as Dad laid on the stripes. Then we heard Mama wail and saw her glaring at the ruined lamp. Her willow switch picked up where the belt left off.
By the time his punishment was over, Ronnie’s fate was about as bad as Chippie’s demise. Never again did he mention his good buddy, Chippie the chipmunk.


Stand and Deliver - Paul’s Message to Peter

A basic truism of economics is that if you subsidize something you get more of it and if you penalize something you get less

Stand and Deliver - Paul’s Message to Peter


What we learn before we turn eighteen becomes the common sense of our later life. Just as the vast majority of people after careful consideration of all the candidates and the issues end up voting for the same party as their parents so too most people can never break free of the paradigm impressed upon them as they grew up.
Many people repeat the time worn phrase, “Those who don’t learn from History are doomed to repeat it.” As a person who has read and studied History on a daily basis for more than fifty years, one of the major lessons I have learned is that the general public never learn from History, mainly because they don’t read or study it. Perhaps they were spoon-fed a few classes as they meandered through the American education factory but they never tried to do more than memorize enough to regurgitate at the proper time to move on. What was presented was based upon biased agenda of whoever picked the texts and prepared the lessons. The only way to get a broader view is to read and study.
Note how many people can give you statistics ad infinitum concerning their preferred sports team but are unable to tell you the most basic facts concerning American History such as why there were battles at Lexington and Concord, or what was the gun trade and how it impacted the History of colonial America. Americans are woefully ignorant of History; therefore they have no context for the History of the future which is current events. The news of the day is text floating in a vacuum. Remember a text without a context is a pretext. And all the many happenings of the day all become pretexts for the furtherance of the Progressive corporate state.
History forms the seedbed of the future. If we can’t connect yesterday with tomorrow the study of History today is a wasted journey into futility. We might as well read fiction as it is usually better written and more imaginative.
Here is a lesson from History: Socialism doesn’t work. Look at the most spectacular crash of an empire in our lives: the sudden Christmas present to the world of the unexpected evaporation of that great prison house of nations the USSR. Look at the rolling blackouts of Venezuela. Look at the pathetic pictures of a once prosperous Havana now a slum frozen in time. Socialism provides example after example, it just doesn’t work.

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy

Winston Churchill said, “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” Margret Thatcher told us that the problem with Socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money. Ronald Reagan said, “Socialism only works in two places: Heaven where they don’t need it and hell where they already have it.” The way I see it, once it becomes obvious that robbing Peter to pay Paul is the foundational policy of the State everyone will change their name to Paul.
A basic truism of economics is that if you subsidize something you get more of it and if you penalize something you get less. Using this as a lens, let us look at American society today.
We subsidize businesses that fail. Look at President Obama’s green energy boondoggles. Thirty-four companies that have received taxpayer money are showing us why we end up paying Six hundred dollars for a hammer. These white elephants have either gone bankrupt, they are laying off workers, or they are swirling around the bankruptcy drain.
The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies:
  1. Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
  2. SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
  3. Solyndra ($535 million)*
  4. Beacon Power ($43 million)*
  5. Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
  6. SunPower ($1.2 billion)
  7. First Solar ($1.46 billion)
  8. Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
  9. EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
  10. Amonix ($5.9 million)
  11. Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
  12. Abound Solar ($400 million)*
  13. A123 Systems ($279 million)*
  14. Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
  15. Johnson Controls ($299 million)
  16. Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
  17. ECOtality ($126.2 million)
  18. Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
  19. Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
  20. Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
  21. Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
  22. Range Fuels ($80 million)*
  23. Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
  24. Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
  25. Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
  26. GreenVolts ($500,000)
  27. Vestas ($50 million)
  28. LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
  29. Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
  30. Navistar ($39 million)
  31. Satcon ($3 million)*
  32. Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
  33. Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)
  34. *Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy. As listed in the Daily Signal.

We penalize success. Our corporate tax rate is the third highest in the world

We penalize success. Our corporate tax rate is the third highest in the world. Because of this many of our most successful corporations are seeking to relocate to other countries with lower tax rates in a practice known as Corporate Inversion. Some stock holders might call that due diligence. Our wanabe Big Brothers call it treason. Our Dear Leader followed his habit of ruling by decree and declared the procedure to be illegal. Afterwards he renewed calls on Congress to pass a law to prohibit the practice putting the cart before the horse constitutionally speaking. We can’t build a fence to keep intruders out, but we can build a legal fence to keep earners in to pay for the very system that is penalizing them for succeeding.
The evidence that Socialism doesn’t work is all around us. The cratered hulks of socialist failure abound. Yet in America today we are told that the majority of Millennials have given up on Capitalism and embrace Socialism. This shouldn’t be surprising. If you receive a trophy for showing up it should not be surprising if you expect a trophy for showing up.
And then we have the phenomenon of Bernie Sanders. An avowed Socialist who has never had a private sector job, never had a steady paycheck until he was in his forties when he was elected to public office, and was even thrown outof a Hippie commune because he refused to work.
Here is this ne’er–do–well who has never created a job, run anything productive, or even held a real job who wants to penalize everyone who works to support everyone who doesn’t, and millions of Americans say yes with their votes and their donations. If you need a visual for passing the tipping point Obama with his fundamental transformation of America, Hillary with her it’s-my-turn-I’m-a-woman-vote-for-me-entitlement attitude and Goldman Sachs paychecks isn’t enough just take a look at Red Bernie and his fellow travellers.
How did it ever come to this? We allowed our educational system to be captured by Progressives who indoctrinated generations of America hating, entitlement grabbing, special interest supporting citizens who have voted for getting more and more and more and willing to contribute less and less and less.
If socialism works, why don’t we just vote ourselves $100,000 a year, free medical, guaranteed retirement at 40, and a home in the Hamptons while we’re at it? Just charge it to Peter, if you can find him.
One final question might frame the discussion nicely, “Who is John Galt?”

A basic truism of economics is that if you subsidize something you get more of it and if you penalize something you get less

Stand and Deliver - Paul’s Message to Peter


What we learn before we turn eighteen becomes the common sense of our later life. Just as the vast majority of people after careful consideration of all the candidates and the issues end up voting for the same party as their parents so too most people can never break free of the paradigm impressed upon them as they grew up.
Many people repeat the time worn phrase, “Those who don’t learn from History are doomed to repeat it.” As a person who has read and studied History on a daily basis for more than fifty years, one of the major lessons I have learned is that the general public never learn from History, mainly because they don’t read or study it. Perhaps they were spoon-fed a few classes as they meandered through the American education factory but they never tried to do more than memorize enough to regurgitate at the proper time to move on. What was presented was based upon biased agenda of whoever picked the texts and prepared the lessons. The only way to get a broader view is to read and study.
Note how many people can give you statistics ad infinitum concerning their preferred sports team but are unable to tell you the most basic facts concerning American History such as why there were battles at Lexington and Concord, or what was the gun trade and how it impacted the History of colonial America. Americans are woefully ignorant of History; therefore they have no context for the History of the future which is current events. The news of the day is text floating in a vacuum. Remember a text without a context is a pretext. And all the many happenings of the day all become pretexts for the furtherance of the Progressive corporate state.
History forms the seedbed of the future. If we can’t connect yesterday with tomorrow the study of History today is a wasted journey into futility. We might as well read fiction as it is usually better written and more imaginative.
Here is a lesson from History: Socialism doesn’t work. Look at the most spectacular crash of an empire in our lives: the sudden Christmas present to the world of the unexpected evaporation of that great prison house of nations the USSR. Look at the rolling blackouts of Venezuela. Look at the pathetic pictures of a once prosperous Havana now a slum frozen in time. Socialism provides example after example, it just doesn’t work.

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy

Winston Churchill said, “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” Margret Thatcher told us that the problem with Socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money. Ronald Reagan said, “Socialism only works in two places: Heaven where they don’t need it and hell where they already have it.” The way I see it, once it becomes obvious that robbing Peter to pay Paul is the foundational policy of the State everyone will change their name to Paul.
A basic truism of economics is that if you subsidize something you get more of it and if you penalize something you get less. Using this as a lens, let us look at American society today.
We subsidize businesses that fail. Look at President Obama’s green energy boondoggles. Thirty-four companies that have received taxpayer money are showing us why we end up paying Six hundred dollars for a hammer. These white elephants have either gone bankrupt, they are laying off workers, or they are swirling around the bankruptcy drain.
The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies:
  1. Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
  2. SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
  3. Solyndra ($535 million)*
  4. Beacon Power ($43 million)*
  5. Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
  6. SunPower ($1.2 billion)
  7. First Solar ($1.46 billion)
  8. Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
  9. EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
  10. Amonix ($5.9 million)
  11. Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
  12. Abound Solar ($400 million)*
  13. A123 Systems ($279 million)*
  14. Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
  15. Johnson Controls ($299 million)
  16. Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
  17. ECOtality ($126.2 million)
  18. Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
  19. Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
  20. Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
  21. Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
  22. Range Fuels ($80 million)*
  23. Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
  24. Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
  25. Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
  26. GreenVolts ($500,000)
  27. Vestas ($50 million)
  28. LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
  29. Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
  30. Navistar ($39 million)
  31. Satcon ($3 million)*
  32. Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
  33. Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)
  34. *Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy. As listed in the Daily Signal.

We penalize success. Our corporate tax rate is the third highest in the world

We penalize success. Our corporate tax rate is the third highest in the world. Because of this many of our most successful corporations are seeking to relocate to other countries with lower tax rates in a practice known as Corporate Inversion. Some stock holders might call that due diligence. Our wanabe Big Brothers call it treason. Our Dear Leader followed his habit of ruling by decree and declared the procedure to be illegal. Afterwards he renewed calls on Congress to pass a law to prohibit the practice putting the cart before the horse constitutionally speaking. We can’t build a fence to keep intruders out, but we can build a legal fence to keep earners in to pay for the very system that is penalizing them for succeeding.
The evidence that Socialism doesn’t work is all around us. The cratered hulks of socialist failure abound. Yet in America today we are told that the majority of Millennials have given up on Capitalism and embrace Socialism. This shouldn’t be surprising. If you receive a trophy for showing up it should not be surprising if you expect a trophy for showing up.
And then we have the phenomenon of Bernie Sanders. An avowed Socialist who has never had a private sector job, never had a steady paycheck until he was in his forties when he was elected to public office, and was even thrown outof a Hippie commune because he refused to work.
Here is this ne’er–do–well who has never created a job, run anything productive, or even held a real job who wants to penalize everyone who works to support everyone who doesn’t, and millions of Americans say yes with their votes and their donations. If you need a visual for passing the tipping point Obama with his fundamental transformation of America, Hillary with her it’s-my-turn-I’m-a-woman-vote-for-me-entitlement attitude and Goldman Sachs paychecks isn’t enough just take a look at Red Bernie and his fellow travellers.
How did it ever come to this? We allowed our educational system to be captured by Progressives who indoctrinated generations of America hating, entitlement grabbing, special interest supporting citizens who have voted for getting more and more and more and willing to contribute less and less and less.
If socialism works, why don’t we just vote ourselves $100,000 a year, free medical, guaranteed retirement at 40, and a home in the Hamptons while we’re at it? Just charge it to Peter, if you can find him.
One final question might frame the discussion nicely, “Who is John Galt?”


War is Not ‘Good’ For the Economy

War is Not ‘Good’ For the Economy


In my last article, I said that some war criminals are equal than others. In case anyone still hasn’t gotten the message, have a look at this article. Evidently, the United States can attack a hospital, which is a textbook-perfect example of a war crime, and then basically get away with it. Again, they basically gave the perpetrators what amounts to a “fix its ticket” as “punishment”. I bet the reason was because the actual order for the attack originated high up in the Pentagon, from guys with heavy political connections beyond the usual shuck-n-jive they’ve got with so-called “civilian leadership”.
You know what? With all the rhetoric coming from various politicians these days, let’s all pause for a moment and give thanks that we live in the most hypocritical nation on Earth. Gee, what happened to “the greatest nation on Earth”, Jack?! That flew out the window right about the time the Pentagon odometer clicked over past 10,000 civilians killed for nothing and the morality warranty was voided. War is not healthy for children or other living things, the poster on the wall once said. Now it says war is good for the economy. Is that so?
Excuse me, but what happened to cars, stoves, bicycles, kitchen appliances, tools, and other durable products we once made here being good for the economy? I’m curious because once upon a time, you could buy an American-made product and it didn’t fall apart in your hands but you could pass it down to your grandkids. I’m at a loss to explain it. At what point did we come to think killing people was a far better way to make money than building them a stove to cook food? Did someone say, “Meh, I just can’t get into this whole farm tractor thing anymore. I’d rather build a robotic death machine that can be programmed to kill everyone that speaks Arabic!” Now, when a crime syndicate kills people for money (because it’s good for their economy), the government jails them. But the government can do this and not only get away with it, but they can pay a whole network of corporations to supply the weapons necessary to carry out those orders.
Speaking of which, there was an article in the paper the other day saying military robots programmed to kill are on the way. Excuse me, but they’re already here. We call them “drones”. Well, and also the “Pentagon brass”, but they’re allegedly semi-human. The jury is still out on that definition. Anyway, they’re trying to establish an “ethical base” and a “target identification” software program so the robots don’t run amok and kill people indiscriminatingly like the U.S. military already does. Or so these robots don’t attack civilian targets such as hospitals like the U.S. military already does. Hey, maybe we better hurry up that software program and turn it into a slideshow for the Pentagon. Of course, this protocol already exists. It’s one of the Ten Commandments: Thou shalt not kill. Oops.
Only the Pentagon would think we need to discover a morality behind appropriate methods to kill people using machines that can decide who to murder based off of a software program. Wow. Can anyone imagine what’ll happen when they get a computer virus? “Well, we regret the loss of innocent life at the Market Square Massacre, but it was a software glitch. But there’s good news! It’s covered under the warranty!” Pardon me while I puke. We’ve gone from building bicycles and stoves to death machines and robot soldiers.
Regardless of what the United States government says, killing other people is wrong. You can disagree with their governments without seeking to violently get rid of them by killing enough of their soldiers and civilians to make that possible. When other countries or terrorists do that to us, we sit here and whine and act shocked and sit there bawling like crybabies over it. Pardon me, but do unto others as you would have them do unto you. When you sit there and demand bombing raids on people that have not so much as let their cats crap in your flowerbeds, why then should you be at all surprised when the killing manifests here and not there as you so desired?
In case anyone forgot, these are human beings we’re killing. Civilians aren’t bulletproof or bombproof. Women, toddlers, infants, grandmothers—that’s who is blown to bloody shreds when you hear “We regret the loss of innocent life…” from the Pentagon. If you see a city park with kids playing on the swings and mothers wiping the mouths of babies, that’s who ends up dead when United States bombers make a little “mistake”. A mistake is when you forgot the mustard at a store and you’re having hot dogs for lunch. Not a bunch of dead kids and moms because you needed to demonstrate some political point none of them actually care about. What, you’re “saving” them? From what? Living longer?
There is an easy way to avoid having to “regret” the loss of innocent life. It’s called minding your own danged business and not killing them in the first place because you inserted yourself into another nation’s business. Excuse me, United States government, but who exactly gave you the right to decide who is or is not the “legitimate” ruler or government of another country? What gave you the right to bomb a flippin’ hospital and then blow it off like you backed into someone’s car at the mall? “Gosh, we’re sorry. But our insurance will cover it…” You guys are swell. I bet that brings great solace to those dead doctors and patients and their families.
War is not healthy for children or other living things. It’s not healthy for anyone else, either. Nor is it healthy for our economy because without it, we haven’t got those stoves and bikes to build instead of bombs and murderous robots we’ll call “weapons”. Watch the U.S. cities fight tooth and nail for the factory to build those robots because it’ll mean jobs to help their local “economy”. War is not good for the economy. It causes our economy to be enslaved to it like some horrific economic Mameluk. Right, war is good for the economy. That’ll bring solace to the man who lost his beloved wife in a U.S. bombing raid. Hey, you lost the love of your life, but you’re free now, right? Or the mother burying her kids, will she see the value of U.S. foreign policy objectives? I say again: These are human beings. They’re not “collateral damage” or whatever. They’re people that are the same as we are. And made in the image of God as we are.

War is Not ‘Good’ For the Economy


In my last article, I said that some war criminals are equal than others. In case anyone still hasn’t gotten the message, have a look at this article. Evidently, the United States can attack a hospital, which is a textbook-perfect example of a war crime, and then basically get away with it. Again, they basically gave the perpetrators what amounts to a “fix its ticket” as “punishment”. I bet the reason was because the actual order for the attack originated high up in the Pentagon, from guys with heavy political connections beyond the usual shuck-n-jive they’ve got with so-called “civilian leadership”.
You know what? With all the rhetoric coming from various politicians these days, let’s all pause for a moment and give thanks that we live in the most hypocritical nation on Earth. Gee, what happened to “the greatest nation on Earth”, Jack?! That flew out the window right about the time the Pentagon odometer clicked over past 10,000 civilians killed for nothing and the morality warranty was voided. War is not healthy for children or other living things, the poster on the wall once said. Now it says war is good for the economy. Is that so?
Excuse me, but what happened to cars, stoves, bicycles, kitchen appliances, tools, and other durable products we once made here being good for the economy? I’m curious because once upon a time, you could buy an American-made product and it didn’t fall apart in your hands but you could pass it down to your grandkids. I’m at a loss to explain it. At what point did we come to think killing people was a far better way to make money than building them a stove to cook food? Did someone say, “Meh, I just can’t get into this whole farm tractor thing anymore. I’d rather build a robotic death machine that can be programmed to kill everyone that speaks Arabic!” Now, when a crime syndicate kills people for money (because it’s good for their economy), the government jails them. But the government can do this and not only get away with it, but they can pay a whole network of corporations to supply the weapons necessary to carry out those orders.
Speaking of which, there was an article in the paper the other day saying military robots programmed to kill are on the way. Excuse me, but they’re already here. We call them “drones”. Well, and also the “Pentagon brass”, but they’re allegedly semi-human. The jury is still out on that definition. Anyway, they’re trying to establish an “ethical base” and a “target identification” software program so the robots don’t run amok and kill people indiscriminatingly like the U.S. military already does. Or so these robots don’t attack civilian targets such as hospitals like the U.S. military already does. Hey, maybe we better hurry up that software program and turn it into a slideshow for the Pentagon. Of course, this protocol already exists. It’s one of the Ten Commandments: Thou shalt not kill. Oops.
Only the Pentagon would think we need to discover a morality behind appropriate methods to kill people using machines that can decide who to murder based off of a software program. Wow. Can anyone imagine what’ll happen when they get a computer virus? “Well, we regret the loss of innocent life at the Market Square Massacre, but it was a software glitch. But there’s good news! It’s covered under the warranty!” Pardon me while I puke. We’ve gone from building bicycles and stoves to death machines and robot soldiers.
Regardless of what the United States government says, killing other people is wrong. You can disagree with their governments without seeking to violently get rid of them by killing enough of their soldiers and civilians to make that possible. When other countries or terrorists do that to us, we sit here and whine and act shocked and sit there bawling like crybabies over it. Pardon me, but do unto others as you would have them do unto you. When you sit there and demand bombing raids on people that have not so much as let their cats crap in your flowerbeds, why then should you be at all surprised when the killing manifests here and not there as you so desired?
In case anyone forgot, these are human beings we’re killing. Civilians aren’t bulletproof or bombproof. Women, toddlers, infants, grandmothers—that’s who is blown to bloody shreds when you hear “We regret the loss of innocent life…” from the Pentagon. If you see a city park with kids playing on the swings and mothers wiping the mouths of babies, that’s who ends up dead when United States bombers make a little “mistake”. A mistake is when you forgot the mustard at a store and you’re having hot dogs for lunch. Not a bunch of dead kids and moms because you needed to demonstrate some political point none of them actually care about. What, you’re “saving” them? From what? Living longer?
There is an easy way to avoid having to “regret” the loss of innocent life. It’s called minding your own danged business and not killing them in the first place because you inserted yourself into another nation’s business. Excuse me, United States government, but who exactly gave you the right to decide who is or is not the “legitimate” ruler or government of another country? What gave you the right to bomb a flippin’ hospital and then blow it off like you backed into someone’s car at the mall? “Gosh, we’re sorry. But our insurance will cover it…” You guys are swell. I bet that brings great solace to those dead doctors and patients and their families.
War is not healthy for children or other living things. It’s not healthy for anyone else, either. Nor is it healthy for our economy because without it, we haven’t got those stoves and bikes to build instead of bombs and murderous robots we’ll call “weapons”. Watch the U.S. cities fight tooth and nail for the factory to build those robots because it’ll mean jobs to help their local “economy”. War is not good for the economy. It causes our economy to be enslaved to it like some horrific economic Mameluk. Right, war is good for the economy. That’ll bring solace to the man who lost his beloved wife in a U.S. bombing raid. Hey, you lost the love of your life, but you’re free now, right? Or the mother burying her kids, will she see the value of U.S. foreign policy objectives? I say again: These are human beings. They’re not “collateral damage” or whatever. They’re people that are the same as we are. And made in the image of God as we are.