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.”

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

Sunday, April 30, 2017

I Am a Victim of Your Hateful Hate Crimes, You Hate-Criminals


I Am a Victim of Your Hateful Hate Crimes, You Hate-Criminals




As a person of absolutely no color who embodies an intersectional reality that includes my utter lack of genderfluidity and my unemployment-questioning, differently-veteraned, and non-pagan experiences, I am totally oppressed by progressivism’s hegemonic power structure. I am also the victim of a systemic system of hostile paradigms that denies my truth regarding my phallo-possessory identity.

My struggle is real, and my male-identifying genitalia will no longer be silent!

I bear a heavy burden in the form of my pasty, easily-sunburned skin. For too long, the fact that a previous Schlichter was booted out of Stuttgart in 1750 has meant that I have been subject to the hateful discourse of unabashed Fritzophobes. And that’s when society hasn’t stolen my Teutonic legacy outright. You are culturally appropriating my cold, emotionless people’s heritage every time you are punctual and efficient.

The same is true regarding my Scot ancestry. You shamelessly pillage the cultural treasures of the folk of the moors whenever you speak unintelligibly, or refuse to spend freely and without restraint. Enough of your condescending Braveheartism.

My kilt, my choice.

Even in my own home, I am oppressed. I live under a tyrannical framework of Cubano-supremacy. I am constantly reminded of my minority status as the only non-Latino in the family whenever I am prepared to leave on time while everyone else is still getting ready, whenever I am belittled for my love of mayonnaise, and whenever I am forbidden to dance in public.

“Intersectionality” means that I have lots of complaints about various stuff that I am, and I’m just getting started.

For instance, I am seen as enjobbed, in that I have a job and support my family. This hateful label marginalizes me and subjugates me to the stereotyped role of “provider” and “useful member of society.” It cruelly differentiates me from preferred progressive social actors, like “bums” and “welfare cheats.” The progressive paradigm is, after all, based upon compelling non-Democrat bodies to toil to generate tax revenue for the government to give to freeloaders.

My veteranness also makes me a target for othering. My soul roils from the conscious and unconscious prejudice poured upon me every time someone asks me if I was drafted, or if the Army is the one with Marines. Why don’t you just burn a hammer and sickle in front of my quarters, you monsters?

And no, I don’t have PTSD. I’m just really annoyed by you.

I am also victimized for my unpaganhood, and I am constantly pressured to conform and accept weird weather religions and the theological musings of internet hipsters who think the idea of Christian grace is some sort of supernatural point system where you get into heaven for accomplishing a set number of good deeds. I reject these attempts to subjugate me to the dominant discourse, just as I reject the liberal Jesusplaining that seeks to steal my savior and turn him into some sort of socialist hippie, a Bernie Sanders in a robe who thinks the only sin is generating too big of a carbon footprint.

And then there is the systemic hate for my rigidly male monosexual identification and my pronounced pro-chick agenda. Too often those of you who are genderfluid deny the identity of those of us who are gendersolid.

Finally, it is time to reject society’s paradigm of unphallused privilege. This bias results in interlocking systems of domination that produce the conditions under which oppressed peoples like me are forced to live, and usually manifests in me getting called whenever someone needs help lifting something heavy.

Those of us who wield a penis demand that you cease your dehumanizing unmale gaze and validate the manly values that stand firm against your anti-testicular hegemony.

We male-identifying men proudly shout out these radical truths:

Boys don’t cry, and it is lame to shed a tear in public, except on Memorial Day or when a dog dies.

Feelings are stupid, except for patriotism and a love of dogs.

Guns are awesome because they shoot solid lead freedom. Every man should have several guns. And several dogs, because a man with a cat is a woman.

Also, no man should ever listen to Maroon 5. Nor should anyone else. Including dogs.

We will no longer be man-junk marginalized. From this moment forth, my people’s pronouns are “he,” “him” and “if you touch my stuff, I’ll slug you.”

Your hate speech against us, which is defined as anything you say that we don’t like, must be banned, starting on campuses. As fellow social justice warriors have observed, “Free speech, a right many freedom movements have fought for, has recently become a tool appropriated by hegemonic institutions. It has not just empowered students from marginalized backgrounds to voice their qualms and criticize aspects of the institution, but it has given those who seek to perpetuate systems of domination a platform to project their bigotry.”

Right on! I mean, how could normalizing limitations on free speech ever backfire? You social justice warriors surely shouldn’t worry about this kind of thinking being expressed by people who don’t like you and who have a lot of guns.

Our initial non-negotiable demand is for a safe space for all German/Scot-Employed-Judeo/Christian-Veteran-Straight Males-Of Relatively Good Health on every college campus, as well as a Department of German/Scot-Judeo/Christian-Veteran-Straight Males-Of Relatively Good Health Studies to explore the issues regarding, and the terrible social stigma and prejudice faced by, us German/Scot-Judeo/Christian-Veteran-Straight Males-Of Relatively Good Health. We further demand a curriculum that teaches using unique German/Scot-Judeo/Christian-Veteran-Straight Males-Of Relatively Good Health pedagogic strategies, like “reading” and “studying.” It must also educate us about suppressed German/Scot-Judeo/Christian-Veteran-Straight Males-Of Relatively Good Health truths, like about how the Chinese stole the idea for the Great Wall from Deutschland’s autobahns, and how Steve McQueen is a million times cooler than Ryan Reynolds will ever be.

That is our intersectional reality; that is our cry for revolution. We refuse to allow the forces of social injustice to continue to deny our existence, and our suits, clean shaves, and combed hair shall be the transgressive body modifications that demonstrate our alienation from the dominant paradigm.

No longer will we allow our pallor to render us invisible!

No longer will we tolerate being left out of the acronym LGBTQ!

No longer will we be scrotum-shamed!




 Kurt Schlichter
The Burning Platform

Libertas aut Mors Semper Vigilans Fortis
Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of FREEDOM OR ANARCHY Campaign of Conscience



http://feeds.feedburner.com/FreedomOrAnarchycampaignOfConscience
https://www.razoo.com/user/f499yf
https://www.facebook.com/FREEDOMORANARCHYCampaignofConscience
https://twitter.com/toptradesmen
https://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
https://the-family-assistants-campaign.blogspot.com/
https://tradesmen.blogspot.com/
https://www.facebook.com/JosephBarberMastercarpenterBuilder/
https://www.facebook.com/lawfulrebelion/
https://plus.google.com/+JOSEPHBARBERforfreedom


I Am a Victim of Your Hateful Hate Crimes, You Hate-Criminals




As a person of absolutely no color who embodies an intersectional reality that includes my utter lack of genderfluidity and my unemployment-questioning, differently-veteraned, and non-pagan experiences, I am totally oppressed by progressivism’s hegemonic power structure. I am also the victim of a systemic system of hostile paradigms that denies my truth regarding my phallo-possessory identity.

My struggle is real, and my male-identifying genitalia will no longer be silent!

I bear a heavy burden in the form of my pasty, easily-sunburned skin. For too long, the fact that a previous Schlichter was booted out of Stuttgart in 1750 has meant that I have been subject to the hateful discourse of unabashed Fritzophobes. And that’s when society hasn’t stolen my Teutonic legacy outright. You are culturally appropriating my cold, emotionless people’s heritage every time you are punctual and efficient.

The same is true regarding my Scot ancestry. You shamelessly pillage the cultural treasures of the folk of the moors whenever you speak unintelligibly, or refuse to spend freely and without restraint. Enough of your condescending Braveheartism.

My kilt, my choice.

Even in my own home, I am oppressed. I live under a tyrannical framework of Cubano-supremacy. I am constantly reminded of my minority status as the only non-Latino in the family whenever I am prepared to leave on time while everyone else is still getting ready, whenever I am belittled for my love of mayonnaise, and whenever I am forbidden to dance in public.

“Intersectionality” means that I have lots of complaints about various stuff that I am, and I’m just getting started.

For instance, I am seen as enjobbed, in that I have a job and support my family. This hateful label marginalizes me and subjugates me to the stereotyped role of “provider” and “useful member of society.” It cruelly differentiates me from preferred progressive social actors, like “bums” and “welfare cheats.” The progressive paradigm is, after all, based upon compelling non-Democrat bodies to toil to generate tax revenue for the government to give to freeloaders.

My veteranness also makes me a target for othering. My soul roils from the conscious and unconscious prejudice poured upon me every time someone asks me if I was drafted, or if the Army is the one with Marines. Why don’t you just burn a hammer and sickle in front of my quarters, you monsters?

And no, I don’t have PTSD. I’m just really annoyed by you.

I am also victimized for my unpaganhood, and I am constantly pressured to conform and accept weird weather religions and the theological musings of internet hipsters who think the idea of Christian grace is some sort of supernatural point system where you get into heaven for accomplishing a set number of good deeds. I reject these attempts to subjugate me to the dominant discourse, just as I reject the liberal Jesusplaining that seeks to steal my savior and turn him into some sort of socialist hippie, a Bernie Sanders in a robe who thinks the only sin is generating too big of a carbon footprint.

And then there is the systemic hate for my rigidly male monosexual identification and my pronounced pro-chick agenda. Too often those of you who are genderfluid deny the identity of those of us who are gendersolid.

Finally, it is time to reject society’s paradigm of unphallused privilege. This bias results in interlocking systems of domination that produce the conditions under which oppressed peoples like me are forced to live, and usually manifests in me getting called whenever someone needs help lifting something heavy.

Those of us who wield a penis demand that you cease your dehumanizing unmale gaze and validate the manly values that stand firm against your anti-testicular hegemony.

We male-identifying men proudly shout out these radical truths:

Boys don’t cry, and it is lame to shed a tear in public, except on Memorial Day or when a dog dies.

Feelings are stupid, except for patriotism and a love of dogs.

Guns are awesome because they shoot solid lead freedom. Every man should have several guns. And several dogs, because a man with a cat is a woman.

Also, no man should ever listen to Maroon 5. Nor should anyone else. Including dogs.

We will no longer be man-junk marginalized. From this moment forth, my people’s pronouns are “he,” “him” and “if you touch my stuff, I’ll slug you.”

Your hate speech against us, which is defined as anything you say that we don’t like, must be banned, starting on campuses. As fellow social justice warriors have observed, “Free speech, a right many freedom movements have fought for, has recently become a tool appropriated by hegemonic institutions. It has not just empowered students from marginalized backgrounds to voice their qualms and criticize aspects of the institution, but it has given those who seek to perpetuate systems of domination a platform to project their bigotry.”

Right on! I mean, how could normalizing limitations on free speech ever backfire? You social justice warriors surely shouldn’t worry about this kind of thinking being expressed by people who don’t like you and who have a lot of guns.

Our initial non-negotiable demand is for a safe space for all German/Scot-Employed-Judeo/Christian-Veteran-Straight Males-Of Relatively Good Health on every college campus, as well as a Department of German/Scot-Judeo/Christian-Veteran-Straight Males-Of Relatively Good Health Studies to explore the issues regarding, and the terrible social stigma and prejudice faced by, us German/Scot-Judeo/Christian-Veteran-Straight Males-Of Relatively Good Health. We further demand a curriculum that teaches using unique German/Scot-Judeo/Christian-Veteran-Straight Males-Of Relatively Good Health pedagogic strategies, like “reading” and “studying.” It must also educate us about suppressed German/Scot-Judeo/Christian-Veteran-Straight Males-Of Relatively Good Health truths, like about how the Chinese stole the idea for the Great Wall from Deutschland’s autobahns, and how Steve McQueen is a million times cooler than Ryan Reynolds will ever be.

That is our intersectional reality; that is our cry for revolution. We refuse to allow the forces of social injustice to continue to deny our existence, and our suits, clean shaves, and combed hair shall be the transgressive body modifications that demonstrate our alienation from the dominant paradigm.

No longer will we allow our pallor to render us invisible!

No longer will we tolerate being left out of the acronym LGBTQ!

No longer will we be scrotum-shamed!




 Kurt Schlichter
The Burning Platform

Libertas aut Mors Semper Vigilans Fortis
Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of FREEDOM OR ANARCHY Campaign of Conscience



http://feeds.feedburner.com/FreedomOrAnarchycampaignOfConscience
https://www.razoo.com/user/f499yf
https://www.facebook.com/FREEDOMORANARCHYCampaignofConscience
https://twitter.com/toptradesmen
https://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
https://the-family-assistants-campaign.blogspot.com/
https://tradesmen.blogspot.com/
https://www.facebook.com/JosephBarberMastercarpenterBuilder/
https://www.facebook.com/lawfulrebelion/
https://plus.google.com/+JOSEPHBARBERforfreedom



The Place of Christianity in History A non-Christian view

The Place of Christianity in History: The Place of Christianity in History
A non-Christian view



In today’s irreligious and indeed anti-religious climate the fashion is to dismiss Christianity as crude superstition and to babble wisely about the separation of church and state. This is unfortunate, and stupid since Christianity was the heart and soul of as yet the greatest civilization the world has seen. Those who know nothing of it cannot understand the last two thousand years and how our world came to be.

Renegade Jews founded Christianity (most Jews soon wished they had not), as a sort of heresy that got out of control, lost all resemblance to Judaism,  and eventually stretched across Europe, Russia, North and South America, Australia, and the Byzantine Empire. In all of these, it shaped the culture, art, philosophy, literature, the very framework of mind. Much of this was superb and remains unsurpassed.

And what a magnificent thing it was! The traveler of today may have seen the gorgeous churches of Cuzco in the Peruvian Andes, Norman churches in Sicily, and Notre Dame, Salisbury, the wonderful cathedral of Barcelona, the Hagia Sophia, the ceremony of the Russian Orthodox. The artistry, the engineering needed to build many of them in times without structural steel are astonishing. Today in Mexico, in town after town one finds the churches on the central plaza, all different, many splendid, places of quiet and meditation. In any of these them, before Protestantism cast its drab cloak of half of the faith, a traveler could enter and understand everything he saw.
Barcelona Cathedral, built mostly in the 1300s. Things of this caliber are no longer built. 
The architecture was just the first syllable of a long paragraph. From Christendom came classical music, much of it explicitly Christian: The
Saint Matthew Passion, Handel’s Messiah, and the whole panoply of secular music in Christian forms. Jews came to the table late in recent centuries and for a while–it seems to be ending–were wildly disproportionate in their production in the arts and sciences but within the framework established by Christendom long before. Now the Koreans and Chinese begin to do the same. Muslims characteristically have done almost nothing.
The aesthetic element was pronounced, not just in music and architecture but in painting and literature and illuminated manuscripts, One may argue whether Defoe or Cervantes invented the novel, or France or America the airplane, but both came from Christendom. The genius of the faith appeared not only in sacred art but also in tolerance for, indeed encouragement of, works in other themes. For example, Cellini’s Perseus is hardly Christian but was greatly appreciated in the Italy of the 15oo’s. It would not have been in Damascus.
Perseus. If any other faith has produced the range and quality of Christendom’s art, I am unaware of it. The Italians no longer believed in the gods and myths of classical antiquity, but neither were they any longer threatened by them. 
The list could go on for volumes. After the Greeks and the dry spell that was Rome, mathematics was a Christian enterprise as were physics, chemistry, pretty much everything. Others would work within these fields. They didn’t originate them.
The other major religion of the Mideast, Islam, appeared in the Seventh Century and conquered vast territories, but quickly fell into intellectual sloth and has since produced almost nothing other than splendid carpets and some lovely mosques. This darkness was not of genetic origin. Many of the peoples conquered by Islam were advanced and impressive, as for example the Persians. Rather it is resulted from a deliberate revulsion against thought and inquiry. (The Closing of the Moslem Mind is good on this.) The alleged centuries of convivencia of the three religions in Spain, koom bah yah, and scintillating Islamic intellect are largely academic agitprop. (The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise deals well with this.)
Catholicism, in particular, has combined spiritual concerns with a strong intellectual bent. The Christian interest in questions of origin and destiny and man’s purpose produced profound thought from the Church Fathers to C. S. Lewis. Today consideration of such matters as death and meaning are held to be in bad taste. Insensible of the wonder and strangeness of existence, we watch Seinfeld reruns and congratulate ourselves on not paying attention to that, you know, like, religious stuff. We live under a sort or Disneyland Marxism and descend ever deeper into complacent ignorance.
Russian Orthodoxy. Whatever else it is, drab it isn’t.
And so I see attempts to dismiss Christianity as a mere add-on or style having nothing to do with the achievements of Christendom. This is historical illiteracy. Read any of the thinkers and authors from late Roman times on until recently and you find that they took their faith seriously, that it created their mental worlds. Augustine, Newton, Samuel Johnson, Sydney Smith more recently, and in the United States the Puritans, Quakers, and so on. Many of these were men of high intellect. Their casual dismissal by professors of sociology is in the nature of monkeys throwing books from a window.
The Renaissance in its entirely was an expression of Christendom. Whether you are a Christian–I am not–isn’t the point. And no, Christians were no more moral than anyone else. Popes catted around like any man does who has the chance. Yet the civilization produced wonders.
The evidence is strong that Protestantism, far less ornate than Catholicism, led to capitalism, which led to the modern West (whatever one thinks of this). See, for example,  The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.
In our material and not very thoughtful age the fashion is to point to the crimes committed by the church, to its venality, hypocrisy, and immorality. They existed. Christians behaved, and behave, as horribly as everybody else. But this is usual in human endeavor.  As a moral preceptor, Christianity was fraudulent. As a culture and civilization, it was of immense importance. One might note that the atheist dictators–Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot–hold the record for murderousness.
Then came in the Nineteenth Century the third great religion of Middle Eastern origin, or religion manque, Communism. Like Christianity directly, and Islam indirectly, it was a Jewish product. Never has so small a people had so great an influence on history.
Many wonder how a religion, Judaism, could bring about an avowedly atheist…what word do I want? Philosophy? The answer I think is that Judaism isn’t a religion but a matter of identity and ritual. At least, I don’t think I have ever met a Jew who believed in the six days of Genesis or that Lot’s wife became salt or that Jonah was swallowed by a great fish and reappeared, undigested. Christians and Muslims actually believe things, though many of the former resort to mental athletics to reconcile faith and science.
Anyway, communism killed its tens of millions and died, leaving a foul stench and little else.
Sagrada Familia, Barcelona, by the Catalan Anatoni Gauk√≠, died 1926.  Whether you regard it as lovely or merely eccentric, it is among the last architectural gasps of a once-flourishing faith.
The future? Christianity seems to be dying out. A resurgence is hard to imagine. It simply isn’t suited to the modern world. The Old Testament, in particular, is ugly and immoral and its magical events I suspect are too much for the modern mind.
Islam, being fanatical and primitive, will presumably survive for a while in its own lands. The mental night that is Islam can be seen in virtually everything, from schooling to commerce and is attributable to a religious hostility to modernity. From The Closing, mentioned above: “In comparison the number of patents registered in the twenty-year period from 1980 to 2000, the report shows Korea with 16328 and nine countries in the Middle East, including Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, with 370, with even many of these patents registered by foreigners.”
Judaism? Materialist in the philosophical sense and not requiring its adherents to believe things apparently impossible, it would seem better adapted to modernity. It imposes no restrictions on its adherents in science, culture, or commerce.
But Christendom was a hell of a show while it lasted.

Fred Reed

The Place of Christianity in History: The Place of Christianity in History
A non-Christian view



In today’s irreligious and indeed anti-religious climate the fashion is to dismiss Christianity as crude superstition and to babble wisely about the separation of church and state. This is unfortunate, and stupid since Christianity was the heart and soul of as yet the greatest civilization the world has seen. Those who know nothing of it cannot understand the last two thousand years and how our world came to be.

Renegade Jews founded Christianity (most Jews soon wished they had not), as a sort of heresy that got out of control, lost all resemblance to Judaism,  and eventually stretched across Europe, Russia, North and South America, Australia, and the Byzantine Empire. In all of these, it shaped the culture, art, philosophy, literature, the very framework of mind. Much of this was superb and remains unsurpassed.

And what a magnificent thing it was! The traveler of today may have seen the gorgeous churches of Cuzco in the Peruvian Andes, Norman churches in Sicily, and Notre Dame, Salisbury, the wonderful cathedral of Barcelona, the Hagia Sophia, the ceremony of the Russian Orthodox. The artistry, the engineering needed to build many of them in times without structural steel are astonishing. Today in Mexico, in town after town one finds the churches on the central plaza, all different, many splendid, places of quiet and meditation. In any of these them, before Protestantism cast its drab cloak of half of the faith, a traveler could enter and understand everything he saw.
Barcelona Cathedral, built mostly in the 1300s. Things of this caliber are no longer built. 
The architecture was just the first syllable of a long paragraph. From Christendom came classical music, much of it explicitly Christian: The
Saint Matthew Passion, Handel’s Messiah, and the whole panoply of secular music in Christian forms. Jews came to the table late in recent centuries and for a while–it seems to be ending–were wildly disproportionate in their production in the arts and sciences but within the framework established by Christendom long before. Now the Koreans and Chinese begin to do the same. Muslims characteristically have done almost nothing.
The aesthetic element was pronounced, not just in music and architecture but in painting and literature and illuminated manuscripts, One may argue whether Defoe or Cervantes invented the novel, or France or America the airplane, but both came from Christendom. The genius of the faith appeared not only in sacred art but also in tolerance for, indeed encouragement of, works in other themes. For example, Cellini’s Perseus is hardly Christian but was greatly appreciated in the Italy of the 15oo’s. It would not have been in Damascus.
Perseus. If any other faith has produced the range and quality of Christendom’s art, I am unaware of it. The Italians no longer believed in the gods and myths of classical antiquity, but neither were they any longer threatened by them. 
The list could go on for volumes. After the Greeks and the dry spell that was Rome, mathematics was a Christian enterprise as were physics, chemistry, pretty much everything. Others would work within these fields. They didn’t originate them.
The other major religion of the Mideast, Islam, appeared in the Seventh Century and conquered vast territories, but quickly fell into intellectual sloth and has since produced almost nothing other than splendid carpets and some lovely mosques. This darkness was not of genetic origin. Many of the peoples conquered by Islam were advanced and impressive, as for example the Persians. Rather it is resulted from a deliberate revulsion against thought and inquiry. (The Closing of the Moslem Mind is good on this.) The alleged centuries of convivencia of the three religions in Spain, koom bah yah, and scintillating Islamic intellect are largely academic agitprop. (The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise deals well with this.)
Catholicism, in particular, has combined spiritual concerns with a strong intellectual bent. The Christian interest in questions of origin and destiny and man’s purpose produced profound thought from the Church Fathers to C. S. Lewis. Today consideration of such matters as death and meaning are held to be in bad taste. Insensible of the wonder and strangeness of existence, we watch Seinfeld reruns and congratulate ourselves on not paying attention to that, you know, like, religious stuff. We live under a sort or Disneyland Marxism and descend ever deeper into complacent ignorance.
Russian Orthodoxy. Whatever else it is, drab it isn’t.
And so I see attempts to dismiss Christianity as a mere add-on or style having nothing to do with the achievements of Christendom. This is historical illiteracy. Read any of the thinkers and authors from late Roman times on until recently and you find that they took their faith seriously, that it created their mental worlds. Augustine, Newton, Samuel Johnson, Sydney Smith more recently, and in the United States the Puritans, Quakers, and so on. Many of these were men of high intellect. Their casual dismissal by professors of sociology is in the nature of monkeys throwing books from a window.
The Renaissance in its entirely was an expression of Christendom. Whether you are a Christian–I am not–isn’t the point. And no, Christians were no more moral than anyone else. Popes catted around like any man does who has the chance. Yet the civilization produced wonders.
The evidence is strong that Protestantism, far less ornate than Catholicism, led to capitalism, which led to the modern West (whatever one thinks of this). See, for example,  The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.
In our material and not very thoughtful age the fashion is to point to the crimes committed by the church, to its venality, hypocrisy, and immorality. They existed. Christians behaved, and behave, as horribly as everybody else. But this is usual in human endeavor.  As a moral preceptor, Christianity was fraudulent. As a culture and civilization, it was of immense importance. One might note that the atheist dictators–Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot–hold the record for murderousness.
Then came in the Nineteenth Century the third great religion of Middle Eastern origin, or religion manque, Communism. Like Christianity directly, and Islam indirectly, it was a Jewish product. Never has so small a people had so great an influence on history.
Many wonder how a religion, Judaism, could bring about an avowedly atheist…what word do I want? Philosophy? The answer I think is that Judaism isn’t a religion but a matter of identity and ritual. At least, I don’t think I have ever met a Jew who believed in the six days of Genesis or that Lot’s wife became salt or that Jonah was swallowed by a great fish and reappeared, undigested. Christians and Muslims actually believe things, though many of the former resort to mental athletics to reconcile faith and science.
Anyway, communism killed its tens of millions and died, leaving a foul stench and little else.
Sagrada Familia, Barcelona, by the Catalan Anatoni Gauk√≠, died 1926.  Whether you regard it as lovely or merely eccentric, it is among the last architectural gasps of a once-flourishing faith.
The future? Christianity seems to be dying out. A resurgence is hard to imagine. It simply isn’t suited to the modern world. The Old Testament, in particular, is ugly and immoral and its magical events I suspect are too much for the modern mind.
Islam, being fanatical and primitive, will presumably survive for a while in its own lands. The mental night that is Islam can be seen in virtually everything, from schooling to commerce and is attributable to a religious hostility to modernity. From The Closing, mentioned above: “In comparison the number of patents registered in the twenty-year period from 1980 to 2000, the report shows Korea with 16328 and nine countries in the Middle East, including Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, with 370, with even many of these patents registered by foreigners.”
Judaism? Materialist in the philosophical sense and not requiring its adherents to believe things apparently impossible, it would seem better adapted to modernity. It imposes no restrictions on its adherents in science, culture, or commerce.
But Christendom was a hell of a show while it lasted.

Fred Reed


Hickock45 Sets Off the Mossberg Shockwave

VIDEO: Hickock45 Sets Off the Mossberg Shockwave


Popular YouTube gunner Hickock45 got his hands on the Mossberg Shockwave and set it off!

VIDEO: Hickock45 Sets Off the Mossberg Shockwave


Popular YouTube gunner Hickock45 got his hands on the Mossberg Shockwave and set it off!



Washington Plans to Nuke Russia and China

Washington Plans to Nuke Russia and China


Not everyone likes to hear about the threat of nuclear war. Some find refuge in denial and say that nuclear war is impossible because it makes no sense. Unfortunately, humankind has a long record of doing things that make no sense.
In previous posts in recent years I have pointed out both written documents and changes in US war doctrine that indicate that Washington is preparing a preemptive nuclear attack on Russia and China. More recently, I have shown that Washington’s demonization of Russia and President Putin, the incessant lies about Russian deeds and intentions, and the refusal of Washington to cooperate with Russia on any issue have convinced the Russian government that Washington is preparing the Western populations for an attack on Russia. It is obvious that China has come to the same conclusion.
It is extremely dangerous to all of mankind for Washington to convince two nuclear powers that Washington is preparing a preemptive nuclear strike against them. It is impossible to imagine a more reckless and irresponsible act. Yet this is precisely what Washington has done.

Lt. Gen. Viktor Poznikhir, Deputy Head of Operations of the Russian General Staff has concluded that Washington in pursuit of global hegemony is implementing an anti-ballistic missile system that Washington believes can prevent a Russian nuclear response to a US pre-emptive attack. http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/04/us-forces-preparing-sudden-nuclear.html
Careful studies have convinced the Russians that Washington is investing in and arranging components that have no other function than to devastate Russia and cripple the country’s retaliatory capability. In short, Washington is preparing to launch a nuclear war. https://www.rt.com/news/386276-us-missile-shield-russia-strike/
As I explained previously, the theory behind this insane scheme is that after America’s preemptive strike Russia will be so devastated that Russia would not retaliate with any remaining forces out of fear that Washington would launch a second major strike. Washington also plans to use agents in place to assassinate as many members as possible of the Russian government, thus leaving the government in confusion without leadership.
Yes, the insane American/Israeli neoconservatives are this determined to exercise hegemony over the world.
Yes, Washington is sufficiently criminally insane to risk the destruction of life on earth based on the supposition that Washington’s offense will work perfectly and Russia and China’s capabilities will be so degraded that no retaliatory response will occur.
One might hope that the American and Western populations would be outraged that Washington is so power-crazed that Washington is subjecting all life to such risks. But there is no sign of an anti-war movement. The Western leftwing has degenerated into Identity Politics in which the only threat comes from white heterosexual males who are portrayed as misogynists, racists, and homophopes. The Western leftwing is no longer war-conscious. Indeed, the leftwing has become diverted into such silly irrelevancies as transgender rights to toilets of their choice. The impotence of the Western left is so overwhelming that the left might as well not exist.
Where then is the hope? Russia and China cannot simply sit there and await America’s preemptive nuclear strike.
Possibly Washington does not intend a preemptive strike, but only to convince Russia and China that Washington’s preparations give Washington so much predominance in a conflict that Russia and China will submit to Washington’s hegemony. But this interpretation of Washington’s intention implies no less risk. Why would Russia and China wait for Washington to complete its preparations for war, preparations that permit Washington to turn Russia and China into puppet states?
The US military/security complex has clearly prevailed over Trump’s intention to normalize relations between the US and Russia, and anti-Russian venom continues to pour out of NATO and Washington’s European vassal states. The majority of the American people seem to have accepted the propaganda that Russia is the number one threat to the United States. With propaganda controlling the explanation, Washington’s aggressive actions are explained as defense against a threat and not as a policy that will end life on earth.

The neoconservative claim of American exceptionalism is the identical claim made for Germans by Hitler. If Americans are indispensable, everyone else is dispensable and can be “bombed into the stone age” as one US government official put it, or nuked as Washington intends to do to Russia and China. The claim of American exceptionalism is not accepted by Russia and China. Therefore, the insane, crazed monsters who rule over the West in Washington are bringing life on earth to an end.
The chances are high that life on earth is approaching its end. The responsibility lies heavily on the American people, whose success, due to the mistakes of others, made Americans think that they are exceptional and privileged. Unaware of the inhumane threat to all life that is embodied in the neoconservative claim that Americans are exceptional and indispensable, the self-satisfied American public is unaware of the consequences of such hubris. Hubris is leading them, and the entire world, to slaughter in thermo-nuclear war.
And there are no protests. The idiot British, the idiot Germans, the idiot French, Italians, Canadians, Australians, Belgians, Greeks, Portuguese, Spanish, Japanese, rally behind the insanity that is Washington.
And so apparently do the American people, a population stupid beyond all belief.


Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts' latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the WestHow America Was Lost, and The Neoconservative Threat to World Order.




Libertas aut Mors Semper Vigilans Fortis
Paratus et Fidelis
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of FREEDOM OR ANARCHY Campaign of Conscience
 
Washington Plans to Nuke Russia and China


Not everyone likes to hear about the threat of nuclear war. Some find refuge in denial and say that nuclear war is impossible because it makes no sense. Unfortunately, humankind has a long record of doing things that make no sense.
In previous posts in recent years I have pointed out both written documents and changes in US war doctrine that indicate that Washington is preparing a preemptive nuclear attack on Russia and China. More recently, I have shown that Washington’s demonization of Russia and President Putin, the incessant lies about Russian deeds and intentions, and the refusal of Washington to cooperate with Russia on any issue have convinced the Russian government that Washington is preparing the Western populations for an attack on Russia. It is obvious that China has come to the same conclusion.
It is extremely dangerous to all of mankind for Washington to convince two nuclear powers that Washington is preparing a preemptive nuclear strike against them. It is impossible to imagine a more reckless and irresponsible act. Yet this is precisely what Washington has done.

Lt. Gen. Viktor Poznikhir, Deputy Head of Operations of the Russian General Staff has concluded that Washington in pursuit of global hegemony is implementing an anti-ballistic missile system that Washington believes can prevent a Russian nuclear response to a US pre-emptive attack. http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/04/us-forces-preparing-sudden-nuclear.html
Careful studies have convinced the Russians that Washington is investing in and arranging components that have no other function than to devastate Russia and cripple the country’s retaliatory capability. In short, Washington is preparing to launch a nuclear war. https://www.rt.com/news/386276-us-missile-shield-russia-strike/
As I explained previously, the theory behind this insane scheme is that after America’s preemptive strike Russia will be so devastated that Russia would not retaliate with any remaining forces out of fear that Washington would launch a second major strike. Washington also plans to use agents in place to assassinate as many members as possible of the Russian government, thus leaving the government in confusion without leadership.
Yes, the insane American/Israeli neoconservatives are this determined to exercise hegemony over the world.
Yes, Washington is sufficiently criminally insane to risk the destruction of life on earth based on the supposition that Washington’s offense will work perfectly and Russia and China’s capabilities will be so degraded that no retaliatory response will occur.
One might hope that the American and Western populations would be outraged that Washington is so power-crazed that Washington is subjecting all life to such risks. But there is no sign of an anti-war movement. The Western leftwing has degenerated into Identity Politics in which the only threat comes from white heterosexual males who are portrayed as misogynists, racists, and homophopes. The Western leftwing is no longer war-conscious. Indeed, the leftwing has become diverted into such silly irrelevancies as transgender rights to toilets of their choice. The impotence of the Western left is so overwhelming that the left might as well not exist.
Where then is the hope? Russia and China cannot simply sit there and await America’s preemptive nuclear strike.
Possibly Washington does not intend a preemptive strike, but only to convince Russia and China that Washington’s preparations give Washington so much predominance in a conflict that Russia and China will submit to Washington’s hegemony. But this interpretation of Washington’s intention implies no less risk. Why would Russia and China wait for Washington to complete its preparations for war, preparations that permit Washington to turn Russia and China into puppet states?
The US military/security complex has clearly prevailed over Trump’s intention to normalize relations between the US and Russia, and anti-Russian venom continues to pour out of NATO and Washington’s European vassal states. The majority of the American people seem to have accepted the propaganda that Russia is the number one threat to the United States. With propaganda controlling the explanation, Washington’s aggressive actions are explained as defense against a threat and not as a policy that will end life on earth.

The neoconservative claim of American exceptionalism is the identical claim made for Germans by Hitler. If Americans are indispensable, everyone else is dispensable and can be “bombed into the stone age” as one US government official put it, or nuked as Washington intends to do to Russia and China. The claim of American exceptionalism is not accepted by Russia and China. Therefore, the insane, crazed monsters who rule over the West in Washington are bringing life on earth to an end.
The chances are high that life on earth is approaching its end. The responsibility lies heavily on the American people, whose success, due to the mistakes of others, made Americans think that they are exceptional and privileged. Unaware of the inhumane threat to all life that is embodied in the neoconservative claim that Americans are exceptional and indispensable, the self-satisfied American public is unaware of the consequences of such hubris. Hubris is leading them, and the entire world, to slaughter in thermo-nuclear war.
And there are no protests. The idiot British, the idiot Germans, the idiot French, Italians, Canadians, Australians, Belgians, Greeks, Portuguese, Spanish, Japanese, rally behind the insanity that is Washington.
And so apparently do the American people, a population stupid beyond all belief.


Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts' latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the WestHow America Was Lost, and The Neoconservative Threat to World Order.




Libertas aut Mors Semper Vigilans Fortis
Paratus et Fidelis
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of FREEDOM OR ANARCHY Campaign of Conscience
 


Women Beware

Women Beware: Saudia Arabia Charged with Shaping Global Standards for Women's Equality

The Saudi regime is notorious for its abysmal treatment of women.

It’s hard to sink to a greater depth of hypocrisy than voting Saudi Arabia onto a UN Commission charged with promoting women’s equality and empowerment. And yet, on April 23rd, that is precisely what the UN Economic and Social Council did. Of the 54 countries on the Council, 47 of them agreed to add Saudi Arabia to a four-year term on the UN Commission on the Status of Women.

How did the US Ambassador to the UN and the democratic champions of Europe vote? The ballot was secret, and is it any wonder that the UN representatives refuse to reveal their votes? What is undeniable, however,  is that the Saudis could not have received 47 votes without support from the Western democracies. 
The Saudi regime is notorious for its abysmal treatment of women. Outside the home, women are forced to wear an abaya, a loose-fitting black cloak that conceals the shape of their bodies, and a hijab, or headscarf, to cover their hair. The fundamentalist dress code is enforced by zealous religious police who fine and beat women who dare to violate the code. Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world to ban women from driving, a practice that severely limits women’s independence and autonomy.
Saudi Arabia is unquestionably the most gender-segregated society in the world. The government enforces sex segregation in virtually all workplaces except hospitals, and fines businesses that fail to comply. In food outlets, including US chains such as McDonalds or KFC, all lines and eating areas are separated to keep unrelated men and women apart. The men’s section is usually the airy, front section, while the women and children are relegated to the back, shielded from public view. The majority of public buildings have separate entrances for men and women; some even ban women from entering.

The most oppressive aspect of life for Saudi women is the strict guardianship system. This system requires every female, from birth to death, to have a male guardian who controls her ability to travel, study, work, marry or even seek certain forms of medical attention.
Saudi women campaigning for women’s rights denounced the addition of Saudi Arabia to the UN Commission. “Allowing this oppressive regime to join a commission designed to empower women makes me feel personally violated and invisible and it is demoralizing for us as activists,” an anonymous Saudi woman seeking asylum in the United States told me. “It sends a message that for the international community, Saudi wealth and power are more important than women’s lives.”

Saudi Arabia is probably the worst country in the world to be put on a women’s commission shaping global standards on gender equality, not only because of its treatment of Saudi women but also because the regime uses its oil wealth to export misogyny abroad. Saudi Arabia spreads its reactionary version of Islam through the thousands of mosques and schools it builds overseas, as well as through the funding of extremist groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda affiliates. Wherever Saudi influence appears around the world, women lose rights and autonomy.
For Saudi Arabia, a top U.S. ally, a position on the Women’s Commission is a way to further whitewash its image and keep the organization from shining a spotlight on Saudi abuses. This was the same rationale for the regime to seek, and obtain, a seat on the UN Human Rights Council. While such positions may burnish the image of the Saudi regime, they tarnish the image of the UN itself, showing that money takes precedence over the principles of human rights and equality that the United Nations was created to uphold.
One can only imagine the suggestions the Saudi reps will come up with when addressing the UN Commission’s mission to assess the challenges to gender equality. It is doubtful they will ever suggest that the Saudi regime itself, and its support from Western allies, is a global obstacle that women must struggle to overcome. So it is up to women everywhere to call for the Saudis to be kicked off the Commission so that it can be a space truly dedicated to the empowerment of women.


Medea Benjamin (medea@globalexchange.org),is an American political activist, best known for co-founding Code Pink and, along with activist and author Kevin Danaher, the fair trade advocacy group Global Exchange. Medea is  author of a forthcoming book on Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of the Unjust.



Libertas aut Mors Semper Vigilans Fortis
Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of FREEDOM OR ANARCHY Campaign of Conscience


We shouldn't be so quick to get on our high horses! 

We need to remember that women in the Western "democracies" didn't have any standing as humans until the First World War, about the time that the West was planning to allow the Zionists to describe the Arabs in Palestine as "non-Jews". 
It was the US that got the Saudis into power in the Bedouin Arab Peninsular too.
I agree that the saudi regime is by far the most oppressive and disgusting, and to top it off gives a very bad name to the Prophetic teachings of the beloved Rasul. And although i agree with some of what Medea has said, I would like to ask her if she herself has been to the al-hijaz (i refuse to call it Saudi Arabia... for the Arabian continent is vast and they are not the rulers of it all). It is not that the segregation is confined to al-hijaz, but if you go to say Japan or Korea, they have train cars that are segregated. In Pakistan and India the same, in fact their restaurants and yes, some weddings and other gatherings are segregated. Why? Well because the men in these places can't keep their hands and other body parts to themselves. Having experienced this first hand, i can tell you for a fact that this happens and that it is a totally violating experience, where some men feel it is their right to be able to touch women. Not only are the hands on the move, the weight of the stare also is intolerable. I live in Singapore at the moment, and i get it all the time.... to the point i am vocal about it. This is the nature of some men, and it is the men who make the women feel unsafe. So yes, kick the bastards out of the UN... but then again, the UN is nothing but a tool anyway. 
Again, although i agree with much of what Medea has said, she is applying her own experience of living in a place where women's rights were fought for no more than 60 years ago and have not been fully implemented. Try visiting some these places and understanding why the reasons for segregation are in force. 7 times out of 10 it isn't what our 'liberal' minds think it is.


Women Beware: Saudia Arabia Charged with Shaping Global Standards for Women's Equality

The Saudi regime is notorious for its abysmal treatment of women.

It’s hard to sink to a greater depth of hypocrisy than voting Saudi Arabia onto a UN Commission charged with promoting women’s equality and empowerment. And yet, on April 23rd, that is precisely what the UN Economic and Social Council did. Of the 54 countries on the Council, 47 of them agreed to add Saudi Arabia to a four-year term on the UN Commission on the Status of Women.

How did the US Ambassador to the UN and the democratic champions of Europe vote? The ballot was secret, and is it any wonder that the UN representatives refuse to reveal their votes? What is undeniable, however,  is that the Saudis could not have received 47 votes without support from the Western democracies. 
The Saudi regime is notorious for its abysmal treatment of women. Outside the home, women are forced to wear an abaya, a loose-fitting black cloak that conceals the shape of their bodies, and a hijab, or headscarf, to cover their hair. The fundamentalist dress code is enforced by zealous religious police who fine and beat women who dare to violate the code. Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world to ban women from driving, a practice that severely limits women’s independence and autonomy.
Saudi Arabia is unquestionably the most gender-segregated society in the world. The government enforces sex segregation in virtually all workplaces except hospitals, and fines businesses that fail to comply. In food outlets, including US chains such as McDonalds or KFC, all lines and eating areas are separated to keep unrelated men and women apart. The men’s section is usually the airy, front section, while the women and children are relegated to the back, shielded from public view. The majority of public buildings have separate entrances for men and women; some even ban women from entering.

The most oppressive aspect of life for Saudi women is the strict guardianship system. This system requires every female, from birth to death, to have a male guardian who controls her ability to travel, study, work, marry or even seek certain forms of medical attention.
Saudi women campaigning for women’s rights denounced the addition of Saudi Arabia to the UN Commission. “Allowing this oppressive regime to join a commission designed to empower women makes me feel personally violated and invisible and it is demoralizing for us as activists,” an anonymous Saudi woman seeking asylum in the United States told me. “It sends a message that for the international community, Saudi wealth and power are more important than women’s lives.”

Saudi Arabia is probably the worst country in the world to be put on a women’s commission shaping global standards on gender equality, not only because of its treatment of Saudi women but also because the regime uses its oil wealth to export misogyny abroad. Saudi Arabia spreads its reactionary version of Islam through the thousands of mosques and schools it builds overseas, as well as through the funding of extremist groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda affiliates. Wherever Saudi influence appears around the world, women lose rights and autonomy.
For Saudi Arabia, a top U.S. ally, a position on the Women’s Commission is a way to further whitewash its image and keep the organization from shining a spotlight on Saudi abuses. This was the same rationale for the regime to seek, and obtain, a seat on the UN Human Rights Council. While such positions may burnish the image of the Saudi regime, they tarnish the image of the UN itself, showing that money takes precedence over the principles of human rights and equality that the United Nations was created to uphold.
One can only imagine the suggestions the Saudi reps will come up with when addressing the UN Commission’s mission to assess the challenges to gender equality. It is doubtful they will ever suggest that the Saudi regime itself, and its support from Western allies, is a global obstacle that women must struggle to overcome. So it is up to women everywhere to call for the Saudis to be kicked off the Commission so that it can be a space truly dedicated to the empowerment of women.


Medea Benjamin (medea@globalexchange.org),is an American political activist, best known for co-founding Code Pink and, along with activist and author Kevin Danaher, the fair trade advocacy group Global Exchange. Medea is  author of a forthcoming book on Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of the Unjust.



Libertas aut Mors Semper Vigilans Fortis
Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of FREEDOM OR ANARCHY Campaign of Conscience


We shouldn't be so quick to get on our high horses! 

We need to remember that women in the Western "democracies" didn't have any standing as humans until the First World War, about the time that the West was planning to allow the Zionists to describe the Arabs in Palestine as "non-Jews". 
It was the US that got the Saudis into power in the Bedouin Arab Peninsular too.
I agree that the saudi regime is by far the most oppressive and disgusting, and to top it off gives a very bad name to the Prophetic teachings of the beloved Rasul. And although i agree with some of what Medea has said, I would like to ask her if she herself has been to the al-hijaz (i refuse to call it Saudi Arabia... for the Arabian continent is vast and they are not the rulers of it all). It is not that the segregation is confined to al-hijaz, but if you go to say Japan or Korea, they have train cars that are segregated. In Pakistan and India the same, in fact their restaurants and yes, some weddings and other gatherings are segregated. Why? Well because the men in these places can't keep their hands and other body parts to themselves. Having experienced this first hand, i can tell you for a fact that this happens and that it is a totally violating experience, where some men feel it is their right to be able to touch women. Not only are the hands on the move, the weight of the stare also is intolerable. I live in Singapore at the moment, and i get it all the time.... to the point i am vocal about it. This is the nature of some men, and it is the men who make the women feel unsafe. So yes, kick the bastards out of the UN... but then again, the UN is nothing but a tool anyway. 
Again, although i agree with much of what Medea has said, she is applying her own experience of living in a place where women's rights were fought for no more than 60 years ago and have not been fully implemented. Try visiting some these places and understanding why the reasons for segregation are in force. 7 times out of 10 it isn't what our 'liberal' minds think it is.




Who’s deciding your future.

At the Threshold of War

 Who’s deciding your future.


At The Threshold Of War: “The Choice Is Not Up To Us Anymore… It Is Being Decided Upon At This Very Moment”

As reported Monday, April 25 on almost all mainstream and alternate news sites, Britain’s Defense Minister Michael Fallon has openly declared that his country will carry out a preemptive nuclear strike even if not attacked, as such:

“In the most extreme circumstances we have made it very clear that you can’t rule out the use of nuclear weapons as a first strike.”

Michael Fallon, BBC Today, 4-25-17

This is very serious and no longer simply rhetorical, as the Russians responded to the effect that the UK could be wiped off the face of the globe if they were to provoke the wrong party.  The U.S. now has a submarine in position in South Korea that is carrying Tomahawks armed with nuclear warheads and the American Naval armada continues to sail toward the region.  The North Koreans have been conducting artillery drills, as South Korea and Japan are preparing their citizens for war to break out.  The United States just test-launched an ICBM from California that splashed into the South Pacific.

In the U.S., President Trump has convened a meeting in the White House for all 100 U.S. senators as reported yesterday throughout the alternative media.  The mainstream media (MSM) is being notoriously silent about the whole matter, although it is plain to see the focal point of the meeting is North Korea, as announced by the White House.

Deflection has been rendered partially by the MSM by the endless barrage regarding the 9th Circuit Court trying to sabotage the Executive Order signed by the President to withhold federal funding from “sanctuary” cities trying to circumvent federal law and procedure with the illegal aliens.  The “First 100 Days” of the Trump Administration is the new catch-phrase the MSM is focusing upon, much as they did with the “47 million on food stamps” phrase that virtually stayed the same for more than 3 years.  Underreporting and obfuscation (if not outright lies) are the MSM’s way of keeping the public in the dark nationally and globally.

In the meantime, the Russians are beginning to redeploy ground troops to Syria.  It appears that the U.S. is going to be pushed into a war in one theater or another by the progressives masquerading as conservatives.  This brings to mind the ratiocination for the initiation of hostilities in either theater.  For North Korea, it is simple: The North Koreans are one of the three nations not involved in the global banking cartel.  In addition, a war will increase U.S. hegemony in the area regardless of what happens to South Korea or Japan in the aftermath.

Regarding Syria, the Obama administration started a proxy/indirect war with Russia over Syria, with Russia backing Bashar al-Assad and the United States its own “created boogeyman” of ISIS/ISIL.  Obama did not take Russia on directly, and Russia out-maneuvered him by suggesting he fight against his own creation…which he did…and then the Russians bombed the daylights out of them.  Russia then declared the bombing campaign to be over and did a “drawdown,” while still leaving enough of a force to deter Obama, who fizzled out in pusillanimous splendor.

Syria is still on the table, though, because we don’t have that pipeline running out of Qatar through Northwestern Syria to cut off Gazprom and the Russians from supplying Europe with natural gas.  In addition, the House of Saud wants Assad out of Syria, and in addition to this, the U.S. needs to take Syria if it wants (and it does want) to invade Iran.  The Russians bombing ISIS/ISIL prevented any more oil from being stolen from Northwest Syria and trucked across the border, where it was sold to Erdogan and his brother.

The Military Industrial Complex (MIC) and their paid-for congressmen and senators (such as McCain, Graham, Ryan, ad infinitum) are the ones who stand to benefit, either in stocks held or in kickbacks to either advance or snafu legislation or policy (depending on which benefits the firms).  They did it with Ukraine, as well, but the threat of directly confronting Russia was as good as an orchiotomy for Obama, and we have a stalemate between the U.S.-created Kiev government of Poroshenko and the separatists of the Eastern Ukrainian provinces.

The powers that be are intent on having a war, regardless of the consequences and effects on noncombatants.  A war would also be a way to prop up the administration’s flagging ratings.  Domestically we have not emerged from the “soft” police state and liberal “legislative” powers of the Courts to remake Constitutional law and circumvent Congress and the President through selective interpretation of anything and everything: These things are the true “legacy” of Obama.

Now, where from there?  We are at the threshold of another major war that could erupt in any of these areas.  The choice is not up to us anymore, and it is surely being decided upon at this very moment.

Reprinted with permission from SHTFplan.com.





By Jeremiah Johnson
SHTFplan.com
At the Threshold of War

 Who’s deciding your future.


At The Threshold Of War: “The Choice Is Not Up To Us Anymore… It Is Being Decided Upon At This Very Moment”

As reported Monday, April 25 on almost all mainstream and alternate news sites, Britain’s Defense Minister Michael Fallon has openly declared that his country will carry out a preemptive nuclear strike even if not attacked, as such:

“In the most extreme circumstances we have made it very clear that you can’t rule out the use of nuclear weapons as a first strike.”

Michael Fallon, BBC Today, 4-25-17

This is very serious and no longer simply rhetorical, as the Russians responded to the effect that the UK could be wiped off the face of the globe if they were to provoke the wrong party.  The U.S. now has a submarine in position in South Korea that is carrying Tomahawks armed with nuclear warheads and the American Naval armada continues to sail toward the region.  The North Koreans have been conducting artillery drills, as South Korea and Japan are preparing their citizens for war to break out.  The United States just test-launched an ICBM from California that splashed into the South Pacific.

In the U.S., President Trump has convened a meeting in the White House for all 100 U.S. senators as reported yesterday throughout the alternative media.  The mainstream media (MSM) is being notoriously silent about the whole matter, although it is plain to see the focal point of the meeting is North Korea, as announced by the White House.

Deflection has been rendered partially by the MSM by the endless barrage regarding the 9th Circuit Court trying to sabotage the Executive Order signed by the President to withhold federal funding from “sanctuary” cities trying to circumvent federal law and procedure with the illegal aliens.  The “First 100 Days” of the Trump Administration is the new catch-phrase the MSM is focusing upon, much as they did with the “47 million on food stamps” phrase that virtually stayed the same for more than 3 years.  Underreporting and obfuscation (if not outright lies) are the MSM’s way of keeping the public in the dark nationally and globally.

In the meantime, the Russians are beginning to redeploy ground troops to Syria.  It appears that the U.S. is going to be pushed into a war in one theater or another by the progressives masquerading as conservatives.  This brings to mind the ratiocination for the initiation of hostilities in either theater.  For North Korea, it is simple: The North Koreans are one of the three nations not involved in the global banking cartel.  In addition, a war will increase U.S. hegemony in the area regardless of what happens to South Korea or Japan in the aftermath.

Regarding Syria, the Obama administration started a proxy/indirect war with Russia over Syria, with Russia backing Bashar al-Assad and the United States its own “created boogeyman” of ISIS/ISIL.  Obama did not take Russia on directly, and Russia out-maneuvered him by suggesting he fight against his own creation…which he did…and then the Russians bombed the daylights out of them.  Russia then declared the bombing campaign to be over and did a “drawdown,” while still leaving enough of a force to deter Obama, who fizzled out in pusillanimous splendor.

Syria is still on the table, though, because we don’t have that pipeline running out of Qatar through Northwestern Syria to cut off Gazprom and the Russians from supplying Europe with natural gas.  In addition, the House of Saud wants Assad out of Syria, and in addition to this, the U.S. needs to take Syria if it wants (and it does want) to invade Iran.  The Russians bombing ISIS/ISIL prevented any more oil from being stolen from Northwest Syria and trucked across the border, where it was sold to Erdogan and his brother.

The Military Industrial Complex (MIC) and their paid-for congressmen and senators (such as McCain, Graham, Ryan, ad infinitum) are the ones who stand to benefit, either in stocks held or in kickbacks to either advance or snafu legislation or policy (depending on which benefits the firms).  They did it with Ukraine, as well, but the threat of directly confronting Russia was as good as an orchiotomy for Obama, and we have a stalemate between the U.S.-created Kiev government of Poroshenko and the separatists of the Eastern Ukrainian provinces.

The powers that be are intent on having a war, regardless of the consequences and effects on noncombatants.  A war would also be a way to prop up the administration’s flagging ratings.  Domestically we have not emerged from the “soft” police state and liberal “legislative” powers of the Courts to remake Constitutional law and circumvent Congress and the President through selective interpretation of anything and everything: These things are the true “legacy” of Obama.

Now, where from there?  We are at the threshold of another major war that could erupt in any of these areas.  The choice is not up to us anymore, and it is surely being decided upon at this very moment.

Reprinted with permission from SHTFplan.com.





By Jeremiah Johnson
SHTFplan.com


Saturday, April 29, 2017

WE SHOULD ALL BE LIKE THE HIPPIES IN THIS ONE WAY

WE SHOULD ALL BE LIKE THE HIPPIES IN THIS ONE WAY






The hippies are little understood these days. One particular version of them – the later, pot-smoking, political protestor – is what remains in popular culture. But the actual hippies, especially the early hippies, were a much different group. They were interesting and brave people: people very much worth remembering.

Who Were the Hippies?

The hippies were preceded by the Beat movement, a group of young people who rejected the conformity of the 1950s – a very “corporate” time. To get a feeling for their mentality, here is a quote from William S. Burroughs, one of their inspirations:

In the U.S., you have to be a deviant or die of boredom.

The Beats were, as one writer put it, “a whole bunch of people, of all different nationalities, who came to the conclusion that society sucked.”

The hippies, on the other hand, believed that they could make life better. And that was the great difference between the hippies and most other movements – the hippies acted. They changed their lives, painted their cars, and wore strange clothing. Rather than cowering at the thought of being different, they went out of their way to show their difference, and there’s something deeply transformative about that.

I’ll forgo a history of the movement and get right into the wisdom of the hippies. Let’s begin with the thoughts of two early hippies. First, some thoughts direct from the early days, care of Bob Stubbs:

We have a private revolution going on. A revolution of individuality and diversity that can only be private. Upon becoming a group movement, such a revolution ends up with imitators rather than participants.

Another, from Dr. Debra Jan Bibel:

Yes, it was sex, drugs, and rock & roll, but it was also spirituality and consciousness studies that eventually led to environmental/ecology movements, cognitive neuroscience, and psychoimmunology, as well as the increasing popularity of Buddhism in the United States and the development of world music appreciation…

Dr. Bibel is writing after the fact, of course, and you can see her disappointment with what the movement became. She continues:

The hippie wannabes spoiled the scene, did not understand the ideologies nor the proper use of entheogens. The popular image of hippies was of them, not the more thoughtful, experimental, and realized post-Beats, the pioneers who led the way.

As happens so often, the first people come for internal reasons and do the important work. Then others come along, wanting to lead the group and take credit for it as well.

From the early hippie habit of action came many of the better developments of the 1960s: new thoughts, new perspectives, the belief that they could live and thrive as individuals, not nameless insects in a giant hive.

But, more important than anything else, the early hippies discovered that they could activate their own will… that they could live their way, create the things they loved, and ignore the expectations of the state-tribe.

Once people reclaim their will, new, interesting and beneficial things tend to sprout up on every side.

The Thoughts They Sought Out

The hippies were very young, and even though they were generally intelligent kids, they knew that they lacked data and perspective, and so turned to older, experienced men.

Perhaps the best of these older teachers was Buckminster Fuller, a fascinating and good man. Here are some of his thoughts:

Politicians are always realistically maneuvering for the next election. They are obsolete as fundamental problem-solvers.

* * *

I seem to be a verb.

* * *

The end move in politics is always to pick up a gun.

* * *

You’ll see from this next one that Fuller makes up his own words. Bear in mind that he was a very serious engineer, so these odd word combinations were created carefully and are used with precision. You may have to read the passage slowly, but if you do, you’ll see that these are coherent thoughts.

The youth of humanity all around our planet are intuitively revolting from all sovereignties and political ideologies. The youth of Earth are moving intuitively toward an utterly classless, raceless, omnicooperative, omniworld humanity.

Children freed of the ignorantly founded educational traditions and exposed only to their spontaneously summoned, computer-stored and -distributed outflow of reliable-opinion-purged, experimentally verified data, shall indeed lead society to its happy egress from all misinformedly conceived, fearfully and legally imposed, and physically enforced customs of yesterday.

They can lead all humanity into omnisuccessful survival as well as entrance into an utterly new era of human experience in an as-yet and ever-will-be fundamentally mysterious Universe.

* * *

You can see that Fuller is deeply concerned with change in the world. Here are several more on that subject:

When I was born, humanity was 95 per cent illiterate. Since I’ve been born, the population has doubled and that total population is now 65 per cent literate. That’s a gain of 130-fold of the literacy. When humanity is primarily illiterate, it needs leaders to understand and get the information and deal with it. When we are at the point where the majority of humans themselves are literate, able to get the information, we’re in an entirely new relationship to Universe. We are at the point where the integrity of the individual counts and not what the political leadership or the religious leadership says to do.

* * *

We are powerfully imprisoned in these Dark Ages simply by the terms in which we have been conditioned to think.

* * *

Dear reader, traditional human power structures and their reign of darkness are about to be rendered obsolete.

* * *

Whether it is to be Utopia or Oblivion will be a touch-and-go relay race right up to the final moment… Humanity is in ‘final exam’ as to whether or not it qualifies for continuance in Universe.

* * *

I’ll close with a practical thought from Fuller. This is one that all of us should be taking seriously:

You never change anything by fighting the existing. To change something, build a new model and make the existing obsolete.

* * *

Regardless of how we wear our hair and our clothes, we should all, like the hippies, act to make life better. Now.

Peace.

Paul Rosenberg
FreemansPerspective.com

WE SHOULD ALL BE LIKE THE HIPPIES IN THIS ONE WAY






The hippies are little understood these days. One particular version of them – the later, pot-smoking, political protestor – is what remains in popular culture. But the actual hippies, especially the early hippies, were a much different group. They were interesting and brave people: people very much worth remembering.

Who Were the Hippies?

The hippies were preceded by the Beat movement, a group of young people who rejected the conformity of the 1950s – a very “corporate” time. To get a feeling for their mentality, here is a quote from William S. Burroughs, one of their inspirations:

In the U.S., you have to be a deviant or die of boredom.

The Beats were, as one writer put it, “a whole bunch of people, of all different nationalities, who came to the conclusion that society sucked.”

The hippies, on the other hand, believed that they could make life better. And that was the great difference between the hippies and most other movements – the hippies acted. They changed their lives, painted their cars, and wore strange clothing. Rather than cowering at the thought of being different, they went out of their way to show their difference, and there’s something deeply transformative about that.

I’ll forgo a history of the movement and get right into the wisdom of the hippies. Let’s begin with the thoughts of two early hippies. First, some thoughts direct from the early days, care of Bob Stubbs:

We have a private revolution going on. A revolution of individuality and diversity that can only be private. Upon becoming a group movement, such a revolution ends up with imitators rather than participants.

Another, from Dr. Debra Jan Bibel:

Yes, it was sex, drugs, and rock & roll, but it was also spirituality and consciousness studies that eventually led to environmental/ecology movements, cognitive neuroscience, and psychoimmunology, as well as the increasing popularity of Buddhism in the United States and the development of world music appreciation…

Dr. Bibel is writing after the fact, of course, and you can see her disappointment with what the movement became. She continues:

The hippie wannabes spoiled the scene, did not understand the ideologies nor the proper use of entheogens. The popular image of hippies was of them, not the more thoughtful, experimental, and realized post-Beats, the pioneers who led the way.

As happens so often, the first people come for internal reasons and do the important work. Then others come along, wanting to lead the group and take credit for it as well.

From the early hippie habit of action came many of the better developments of the 1960s: new thoughts, new perspectives, the belief that they could live and thrive as individuals, not nameless insects in a giant hive.

But, more important than anything else, the early hippies discovered that they could activate their own will… that they could live their way, create the things they loved, and ignore the expectations of the state-tribe.

Once people reclaim their will, new, interesting and beneficial things tend to sprout up on every side.

The Thoughts They Sought Out

The hippies were very young, and even though they were generally intelligent kids, they knew that they lacked data and perspective, and so turned to older, experienced men.

Perhaps the best of these older teachers was Buckminster Fuller, a fascinating and good man. Here are some of his thoughts:

Politicians are always realistically maneuvering for the next election. They are obsolete as fundamental problem-solvers.

* * *

I seem to be a verb.

* * *

The end move in politics is always to pick up a gun.

* * *

You’ll see from this next one that Fuller makes up his own words. Bear in mind that he was a very serious engineer, so these odd word combinations were created carefully and are used with precision. You may have to read the passage slowly, but if you do, you’ll see that these are coherent thoughts.

The youth of humanity all around our planet are intuitively revolting from all sovereignties and political ideologies. The youth of Earth are moving intuitively toward an utterly classless, raceless, omnicooperative, omniworld humanity.

Children freed of the ignorantly founded educational traditions and exposed only to their spontaneously summoned, computer-stored and -distributed outflow of reliable-opinion-purged, experimentally verified data, shall indeed lead society to its happy egress from all misinformedly conceived, fearfully and legally imposed, and physically enforced customs of yesterday.

They can lead all humanity into omnisuccessful survival as well as entrance into an utterly new era of human experience in an as-yet and ever-will-be fundamentally mysterious Universe.

* * *

You can see that Fuller is deeply concerned with change in the world. Here are several more on that subject:

When I was born, humanity was 95 per cent illiterate. Since I’ve been born, the population has doubled and that total population is now 65 per cent literate. That’s a gain of 130-fold of the literacy. When humanity is primarily illiterate, it needs leaders to understand and get the information and deal with it. When we are at the point where the majority of humans themselves are literate, able to get the information, we’re in an entirely new relationship to Universe. We are at the point where the integrity of the individual counts and not what the political leadership or the religious leadership says to do.

* * *

We are powerfully imprisoned in these Dark Ages simply by the terms in which we have been conditioned to think.

* * *

Dear reader, traditional human power structures and their reign of darkness are about to be rendered obsolete.

* * *

Whether it is to be Utopia or Oblivion will be a touch-and-go relay race right up to the final moment… Humanity is in ‘final exam’ as to whether or not it qualifies for continuance in Universe.

* * *

I’ll close with a practical thought from Fuller. This is one that all of us should be taking seriously:

You never change anything by fighting the existing. To change something, build a new model and make the existing obsolete.

* * *

Regardless of how we wear our hair and our clothes, we should all, like the hippies, act to make life better. Now.

Peace.

Paul Rosenberg
FreemansPerspective.com


HERBERTS SHOULDN’T WEAR TIE-DYE

HERBERTS SHOULDN’T WEAR TIE-DYE



The term “Herbert” referred to a stiff, rule-keeping bureaucrat.

Tie-dye was the clothing of hippies; it was made with bleach and strings.

Being old enough to remember how things were “back in the day,” I’m always half insulted to see very fine establishment types – people whose livelihoods rest on uncritical obedience – trying to align themselves with nonconformists they would have hurried away from back in that day.

Obedience was not cool back in the ’60s and ’70s. In fact, it was derided. Here’s a Beatles lyric that was sung as a condemnation:

Once upon a time there was a boy named Ted. And if his mother said, “Ted, be good,” he would.

Notwithstanding that I have a strong preference for well-behaved children, I think you get my point.

So when I saw some footage from the very presitigious Kennedy Center Honors, celebrating bluesman Buddy Guy, I recoiled. Here’s a still from it:



Here’s what went through my mind:

How would these suits and gowns have treated Buddy when he was working days as a janitor at Louisiana State University back in the 1950s? Or when he was performing in a lot of very unpretty clubs on the West Side of Chicago in the late ’50s?

Where were these very successful Herberts in the 1960s, when he was playing any juke joint he could to make ends meet? How many would have shown up at his club on Chicago’s East 43rd Street in the 1970s?

And how many of these people, I wondered (and you may too), would have sympathy for poor bluesmen if virtue signaling wasn’t involved?

Now, for just one more example, here’s another group of Herberts, at the same august event, honoring Led Zeppelin:



I’d love to see this group confronted with the boys of Led Zeppelin in, say, 1973. That would be a spectacle.

Worse than the 1950s

The 1950s are remembered as a time of abject conformity, and in some ways that was true. But today is actually worse. And the reason for it is simple:

Today’s conformity, every bit as bad as the 1950s, drapes itself in the garments of past radicals.

The tie-dyed, pot-smoking radicals of the 1960s are no longer any threat to the Herberts of the world. Mainly, they’ve been tamed and brought into the machine. But they did revolutionize the music scene, and by doing so, they taught advertisers how to abuse a youth culture. Because of that, images of past rebels became (and remain) commercially important.https://www.freemansperspective.com/hippies/

That’s why our modern Herberts turn out to honor people they might have jailed back in the day.

The proof of this is to be found in examining how these people have treated today’s radicals, people like Ross Ulbricht and Julian Assange. And the verdict is stark: They have mercilessly abused them.

But my point today is not condemnation, even if it is deserved. Rather, I’d simply like the Herberts to go back to things they’re good at.

Herberts are great at fitting in, presenting proper appearances, and keeping up with the Joneses. They should stick to their strengths and leave radicalism to people who know how to do it.

And so, here’s what I’d like to tell the Herberts:

If your mother never yelled at you for tie-dying clothes in her sink… if you weren’t asked to leave “proper occasions”… if you didn’t habitually look out for cops… you really shouldn’t make a show of celebrating radicals. It’s glaringly obvious you’re not like them. We may be polite about it, but we’re not fooled.

* * * * *


FREEMANSPERSPECTIVE 

HERBERTS SHOULDN’T WEAR TIE-DYE



The term “Herbert” referred to a stiff, rule-keeping bureaucrat.

Tie-dye was the clothing of hippies; it was made with bleach and strings.

Being old enough to remember how things were “back in the day,” I’m always half insulted to see very fine establishment types – people whose livelihoods rest on uncritical obedience – trying to align themselves with nonconformists they would have hurried away from back in that day.

Obedience was not cool back in the ’60s and ’70s. In fact, it was derided. Here’s a Beatles lyric that was sung as a condemnation:

Once upon a time there was a boy named Ted. And if his mother said, “Ted, be good,” he would.

Notwithstanding that I have a strong preference for well-behaved children, I think you get my point.

So when I saw some footage from the very presitigious Kennedy Center Honors, celebrating bluesman Buddy Guy, I recoiled. Here’s a still from it:



Here’s what went through my mind:

How would these suits and gowns have treated Buddy when he was working days as a janitor at Louisiana State University back in the 1950s? Or when he was performing in a lot of very unpretty clubs on the West Side of Chicago in the late ’50s?

Where were these very successful Herberts in the 1960s, when he was playing any juke joint he could to make ends meet? How many would have shown up at his club on Chicago’s East 43rd Street in the 1970s?

And how many of these people, I wondered (and you may too), would have sympathy for poor bluesmen if virtue signaling wasn’t involved?

Now, for just one more example, here’s another group of Herberts, at the same august event, honoring Led Zeppelin:



I’d love to see this group confronted with the boys of Led Zeppelin in, say, 1973. That would be a spectacle.

Worse than the 1950s

The 1950s are remembered as a time of abject conformity, and in some ways that was true. But today is actually worse. And the reason for it is simple:

Today’s conformity, every bit as bad as the 1950s, drapes itself in the garments of past radicals.

The tie-dyed, pot-smoking radicals of the 1960s are no longer any threat to the Herberts of the world. Mainly, they’ve been tamed and brought into the machine. But they did revolutionize the music scene, and by doing so, they taught advertisers how to abuse a youth culture. Because of that, images of past rebels became (and remain) commercially important.https://www.freemansperspective.com/hippies/

That’s why our modern Herberts turn out to honor people they might have jailed back in the day.

The proof of this is to be found in examining how these people have treated today’s radicals, people like Ross Ulbricht and Julian Assange. And the verdict is stark: They have mercilessly abused them.

But my point today is not condemnation, even if it is deserved. Rather, I’d simply like the Herberts to go back to things they’re good at.

Herberts are great at fitting in, presenting proper appearances, and keeping up with the Joneses. They should stick to their strengths and leave radicalism to people who know how to do it.

And so, here’s what I’d like to tell the Herberts:

If your mother never yelled at you for tie-dying clothes in her sink… if you weren’t asked to leave “proper occasions”… if you didn’t habitually look out for cops… you really shouldn’t make a show of celebrating radicals. It’s glaringly obvious you’re not like them. We may be polite about it, but we’re not fooled.

* * * * *


FREEMANSPERSPECTIVE 


Friday, April 28, 2017

Dismantling the 9th Circuit

All of these rulings by the court against Trump's executive orders are an overstepping of their judicial authorities. The judges are acting illegally.

Dismantling the 9th Circuit



In Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution the text states that Congress has the authority to “constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court.”

In Article III of the U.S. Constitution, when referring to the inferior federal courts, it states that it is Congress who may from “time to time ordain and establish.”

With the power of creation comes the power to dismantle.

The 9th Circuit of Appeals has been neglecting the rule of law.  What they do when they neglect to apply the law, and instead apply their opinions to the laws, is push the rule of man, rather than the rule of law.

The leftist activist judges have been ruling unconstitutionally based on their ideological beliefs, rather than applying the law to the cases they hear.  In response to their illegal rulings, of which the courts have no authority to enforce, President Trump said he is considering proposals that would split up the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Trump said, “There are many people that want to break up the 9th Circuit. It’s outrageous.  Everybody immediately runs to the 9th Circuit. And we have a big country. We have lots of other locations. But they immediately run to the 9th Circuit. Because they know that’s like, semi-automatic.”

First came the attacks against his travel ban, despite the fact that Article I, Section 9 gives Congress the authority to prohibit persons from migrating into the United States for any reason, and his executive order referenced those immigration laws he was delegating down to the executive branch agencies, the federal court system claimed he couldn’t because, in short, his travel ban was “mean.”


Trump can simply ignore the courts

Now, U.S. District Judge William Orrick has temporarily blocked Trump’s efforts to withhold funds from any municipality that refuses to cooperate with immigration enforcement officers.  According to Orrick, Trump had overstepped his authority when he directed the Justice Department to put immigration-related conditions on grants for so-called sanctuary cities that may not be directly related to law enforcement. The case, if appealed, would go before the 9th Circuit.

Fascinating.  I seem to remember the Democrats using the threat of withholding federal funding as a way of extorting the States a number of times in history. About a year ago congressional Democrats threatened North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory of taking away federal funding for the State’s education, transportation and health programs because of North Carolina’s law refusing to obey Obama’s demand regarding “gender neutral” bathrooms in schools.  The Obama White House announced that it wouldn’t pull federal funding once North Carolina responded that they would take the federal government to court.

As for the discretion of funding, and the idea that starving States of federal funding has to be associated with the issue in question, where in the Constitution does it even authorize the federal government to give the States funding in the first place?  Interior issues are none of the federal government’s business, as is the idea of funding those interior issues.

When it comes to the judicial branch’s lack of enforcement authorities, Trump can simply ignore the courts.  What are they going to do?  How would they enforce their rulings?

Regarding sanctuary cities, Article VI. of the United States Constitution, in the Supremacy Clause, it states that laws contrary to constitutional U.S. laws are unconstitutional, and the judges “shall be bound thereby.”


In short, the sanctuary status laws are illegal

In short, the sanctuary status laws are illegal.  The sanctuary cities have no legal leg to stand on, from the point of view of constitutionality.

That all said, dismantling the 9th Circuit Court is doable, but not by the executive branch.  If the judges need to be removed from their seats, and the court dismantled, the Congress would have to initiate the move with legislation.

In Article III’s Exceptions Clause, the Congress also has the authority to use legislation to make null and void unconstitutional rulings.  One wonders why they haven’t used that tool, instead.

If one reads the Constitution, and understands the history of the courts, we realize two things.  First, the judicial branch was originally supposed to be the weakest branch of the three, not the strongest.  Second, among Congress’s jobs is to be a check against the courts, the courts are not supposed to be a check against the President or the Congress.  The checks against the executive and legislative branches are supposed to be the States, and We the People.  In short, all of these rulings by the court against Trump’s executive orders are an overstepping of their judicial authorities.  The judges are acting illegally.




Douglas V. Gibbs of Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary, has been featured on “Hannity” and “Fox and Friends” on Fox News Channel, and other television shows and networks.  Doug is a Radio Host on KMET 1490-AM on Saturdays with his Constitution Radio program, as well as a longtime podcaster, conservative political activist, writer and commentator.  Doug can be reached at douglasvgibbs [at] yahoo.com or constitutionspeaker [at] yahoo.com.
All of these rulings by the court against Trump's executive orders are an overstepping of their judicial authorities. The judges are acting illegally.

Dismantling the 9th Circuit



In Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution the text states that Congress has the authority to “constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court.”

In Article III of the U.S. Constitution, when referring to the inferior federal courts, it states that it is Congress who may from “time to time ordain and establish.”

With the power of creation comes the power to dismantle.

The 9th Circuit of Appeals has been neglecting the rule of law.  What they do when they neglect to apply the law, and instead apply their opinions to the laws, is push the rule of man, rather than the rule of law.

The leftist activist judges have been ruling unconstitutionally based on their ideological beliefs, rather than applying the law to the cases they hear.  In response to their illegal rulings, of which the courts have no authority to enforce, President Trump said he is considering proposals that would split up the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Trump said, “There are many people that want to break up the 9th Circuit. It’s outrageous.  Everybody immediately runs to the 9th Circuit. And we have a big country. We have lots of other locations. But they immediately run to the 9th Circuit. Because they know that’s like, semi-automatic.”

First came the attacks against his travel ban, despite the fact that Article I, Section 9 gives Congress the authority to prohibit persons from migrating into the United States for any reason, and his executive order referenced those immigration laws he was delegating down to the executive branch agencies, the federal court system claimed he couldn’t because, in short, his travel ban was “mean.”


Trump can simply ignore the courts

Now, U.S. District Judge William Orrick has temporarily blocked Trump’s efforts to withhold funds from any municipality that refuses to cooperate with immigration enforcement officers.  According to Orrick, Trump had overstepped his authority when he directed the Justice Department to put immigration-related conditions on grants for so-called sanctuary cities that may not be directly related to law enforcement. The case, if appealed, would go before the 9th Circuit.

Fascinating.  I seem to remember the Democrats using the threat of withholding federal funding as a way of extorting the States a number of times in history. About a year ago congressional Democrats threatened North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory of taking away federal funding for the State’s education, transportation and health programs because of North Carolina’s law refusing to obey Obama’s demand regarding “gender neutral” bathrooms in schools.  The Obama White House announced that it wouldn’t pull federal funding once North Carolina responded that they would take the federal government to court.

As for the discretion of funding, and the idea that starving States of federal funding has to be associated with the issue in question, where in the Constitution does it even authorize the federal government to give the States funding in the first place?  Interior issues are none of the federal government’s business, as is the idea of funding those interior issues.

When it comes to the judicial branch’s lack of enforcement authorities, Trump can simply ignore the courts.  What are they going to do?  How would they enforce their rulings?

Regarding sanctuary cities, Article VI. of the United States Constitution, in the Supremacy Clause, it states that laws contrary to constitutional U.S. laws are unconstitutional, and the judges “shall be bound thereby.”


In short, the sanctuary status laws are illegal

In short, the sanctuary status laws are illegal.  The sanctuary cities have no legal leg to stand on, from the point of view of constitutionality.

That all said, dismantling the 9th Circuit Court is doable, but not by the executive branch.  If the judges need to be removed from their seats, and the court dismantled, the Congress would have to initiate the move with legislation.

In Article III’s Exceptions Clause, the Congress also has the authority to use legislation to make null and void unconstitutional rulings.  One wonders why they haven’t used that tool, instead.

If one reads the Constitution, and understands the history of the courts, we realize two things.  First, the judicial branch was originally supposed to be the weakest branch of the three, not the strongest.  Second, among Congress’s jobs is to be a check against the courts, the courts are not supposed to be a check against the President or the Congress.  The checks against the executive and legislative branches are supposed to be the States, and We the People.  In short, all of these rulings by the court against Trump’s executive orders are an overstepping of their judicial authorities.  The judges are acting illegally.




Douglas V. Gibbs of Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary, has been featured on “Hannity” and “Fox and Friends” on Fox News Channel, and other television shows and networks.  Doug is a Radio Host on KMET 1490-AM on Saturdays with his Constitution Radio program, as well as a longtime podcaster, conservative political activist, writer and commentator.  Doug can be reached at douglasvgibbs [at] yahoo.com or constitutionspeaker [at] yahoo.com.


Democrats introduce bill to ban pastors from ministering to homosexuals



Despite the way it's being reported . . .

Democrats introduce bill to ban pastors from ministering to homosexuals


This story is a good example of how politicians use phrasing to disguise what they’re really doing, and the media play along because they support the obfuscation agenda. In some cases it’s because the media really are that dumb and gullible, but the gullibility usually stems from their natural trust of Democrats - so it all comes back to the fact that they share the same agenda.

You’ve heard about something called “gay conversion therapy,” which sounds like some nonsense procedure in which a “therapist” of questionable credibility tries to work the gay out of someone. This is being offered up by Democrats as an example of medical fraud, and they have mounted an extraordinary effort to actually ban it on a nationwide basis. But quack therapists are not their real target, in spite of the way they and their media mouthpieces portray this:http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/senate-democrats-reintroduce-bill-ban-conversion-therapy-nationwide-n750871


The Therapeutic Fraud Prevention Act, filed by Senators Patty Murray of Washington and Corey Booker of New Jersey, constitutes a renewed effort from Congressional Democrats to ban conversion therapy after a Republican majority let the bill die without a hearing last year.

In a released statement, Sen. Murray cited fresh fears under the Trump administration as a reason for reintroducing the legislation.

“On this and so many other issues impacting the LGBTQ community, the Trump Administration has laid out a hateful, damaging agenda to undo hard-won progress, divide our communities, and hurt our friends, neighbors and family members just because of who they are or who they love,” Murray said.

“So-called ‘conversion therapy’ isn’t therapy at all,” Sen. Booker said in a statement. “It’s a tortuous, fraudulent practice that has been repeatedly condemned by medical professionals and has no place in our country.”

Leaving aside for the moment that there isn’t a single Trump Administration initiative that seeks to take away gay people’s rights - meaning the whole Trump-hates-gays hysteria is completely made up from nothing - there is no particular therapy that fits the description Democrats are offering here.

Over the years, there have been many different kinds of treatments - some clinical, some spiritual - designed to reverse tendencies toward homosexuality. Some were particularly crude and absurd, especially the infamous ice-pick lobotomy. You Masters of Sex fans might be interested to know that Masters and Johnson believed homosexuality was a type of disorder and they conducted research on how it might be treated. (Then again, most of you probably just watch the show for the boobs, so never mind . . .)

Because “conversion therapy” can’t be nailed down as one particular type of procedure you can criticize, the truth is that this isn’t about banning a fraudulent procedure at all. What the Democrats are trying to do is ban any attempt of any kind to address homosexuality as a problem needing a solution - no matter what it is or how it might works.

And if they were to be honest about this, which they never will, they would admit that their target is not “therapists” at all. It’s pastors.

It’s really just the Christian community that regards homosexuality as an issue needing to be addressed. Secular society, which cares nothing for the Word of God, couldn’t care less what 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Romans 1:26-27 and other similar passages have to say. As far as they’re concerned, if it makes you happy and no one’s getting hurt, who cares?

But Christians see it differently, because we understand that sexual sin carries spiritual consequences, and indeed has spiritual underpinnings. I explained this in exhaustive detail back in 2015, but for the purposes of this discussion let’s just say the Bible-believing Christian is concerned about the very real spiritual consequences of any sin against God, and that includes the practice of homosexuality.

The Democratic Party is the enemy of God
Because of this, the job of a pastor is lead his members to deliverance from every form of spiritual evil to the extent possible. Now some of you don’t believe in this stuff, but the reality is that demonic spirits can oppress a person and keep them in a state of sin. These spirits can be bound and cast out of a person when someone who understands deliverance takes authority over the spirit in the name of Jesus. A homosexual Christian who wants to repent and be delivered from this spirit can do so, but as with most deliverance issues, it helps to have the support and involvement of a pastor or some other minister who understands the spiritual issues involved.

What Democrats are trying to do here is make it illegal for a pastor to minister to a person who wants to be delivered from homosexuality. They may think “LGBTQ people are born perfect,” but a lot of people don’t see it that way - and that even includes some of those very LGBTQ people, who know they’re spiritually afflicted and want to be delivered.

GDP growth for Obama’s final year? A measly 1.6 percent

It’s important to understand here that Republicans are not trying to ban homosexuality or mandate that anyone take part in some sort of therapy. By refusing to countenance this stupid ban, what they will do is simply leave it up to freely acting people whether they want to seek help, while leaving it up to those who are able to help whether they would like to do so.

What would you think if you decided you had a problem in your life and you would like someone to help you with it, but politicians had passed a law decreeing that your problem is not a problem and no one is allowed to help you with it? That is what they are trying to do here. It’s pernicious, and there’s no question at all that the real target of this effort is pastors and ministers, not therapists.

The Democratic Party is the enemy of God.



Dan Calabrese --


Despite the way it's being reported . . .

Democrats introduce bill to ban pastors from ministering to homosexuals


This story is a good example of how politicians use phrasing to disguise what they’re really doing, and the media play along because they support the obfuscation agenda. In some cases it’s because the media really are that dumb and gullible, but the gullibility usually stems from their natural trust of Democrats - so it all comes back to the fact that they share the same agenda.

You’ve heard about something called “gay conversion therapy,” which sounds like some nonsense procedure in which a “therapist” of questionable credibility tries to work the gay out of someone. This is being offered up by Democrats as an example of medical fraud, and they have mounted an extraordinary effort to actually ban it on a nationwide basis. But quack therapists are not their real target, in spite of the way they and their media mouthpieces portray this:http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/senate-democrats-reintroduce-bill-ban-conversion-therapy-nationwide-n750871


The Therapeutic Fraud Prevention Act, filed by Senators Patty Murray of Washington and Corey Booker of New Jersey, constitutes a renewed effort from Congressional Democrats to ban conversion therapy after a Republican majority let the bill die without a hearing last year.

In a released statement, Sen. Murray cited fresh fears under the Trump administration as a reason for reintroducing the legislation.

“On this and so many other issues impacting the LGBTQ community, the Trump Administration has laid out a hateful, damaging agenda to undo hard-won progress, divide our communities, and hurt our friends, neighbors and family members just because of who they are or who they love,” Murray said.

“So-called ‘conversion therapy’ isn’t therapy at all,” Sen. Booker said in a statement. “It’s a tortuous, fraudulent practice that has been repeatedly condemned by medical professionals and has no place in our country.”

Leaving aside for the moment that there isn’t a single Trump Administration initiative that seeks to take away gay people’s rights - meaning the whole Trump-hates-gays hysteria is completely made up from nothing - there is no particular therapy that fits the description Democrats are offering here.

Over the years, there have been many different kinds of treatments - some clinical, some spiritual - designed to reverse tendencies toward homosexuality. Some were particularly crude and absurd, especially the infamous ice-pick lobotomy. You Masters of Sex fans might be interested to know that Masters and Johnson believed homosexuality was a type of disorder and they conducted research on how it might be treated. (Then again, most of you probably just watch the show for the boobs, so never mind . . .)

Because “conversion therapy” can’t be nailed down as one particular type of procedure you can criticize, the truth is that this isn’t about banning a fraudulent procedure at all. What the Democrats are trying to do is ban any attempt of any kind to address homosexuality as a problem needing a solution - no matter what it is or how it might works.

And if they were to be honest about this, which they never will, they would admit that their target is not “therapists” at all. It’s pastors.

It’s really just the Christian community that regards homosexuality as an issue needing to be addressed. Secular society, which cares nothing for the Word of God, couldn’t care less what 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Romans 1:26-27 and other similar passages have to say. As far as they’re concerned, if it makes you happy and no one’s getting hurt, who cares?

But Christians see it differently, because we understand that sexual sin carries spiritual consequences, and indeed has spiritual underpinnings. I explained this in exhaustive detail back in 2015, but for the purposes of this discussion let’s just say the Bible-believing Christian is concerned about the very real spiritual consequences of any sin against God, and that includes the practice of homosexuality.

The Democratic Party is the enemy of God
Because of this, the job of a pastor is lead his members to deliverance from every form of spiritual evil to the extent possible. Now some of you don’t believe in this stuff, but the reality is that demonic spirits can oppress a person and keep them in a state of sin. These spirits can be bound and cast out of a person when someone who understands deliverance takes authority over the spirit in the name of Jesus. A homosexual Christian who wants to repent and be delivered from this spirit can do so, but as with most deliverance issues, it helps to have the support and involvement of a pastor or some other minister who understands the spiritual issues involved.

What Democrats are trying to do here is make it illegal for a pastor to minister to a person who wants to be delivered from homosexuality. They may think “LGBTQ people are born perfect,” but a lot of people don’t see it that way - and that even includes some of those very LGBTQ people, who know they’re spiritually afflicted and want to be delivered.

GDP growth for Obama’s final year? A measly 1.6 percent

It’s important to understand here that Republicans are not trying to ban homosexuality or mandate that anyone take part in some sort of therapy. By refusing to countenance this stupid ban, what they will do is simply leave it up to freely acting people whether they want to seek help, while leaving it up to those who are able to help whether they would like to do so.

What would you think if you decided you had a problem in your life and you would like someone to help you with it, but politicians had passed a law decreeing that your problem is not a problem and no one is allowed to help you with it? That is what they are trying to do here. It’s pernicious, and there’s no question at all that the real target of this effort is pastors and ministers, not therapists.

The Democratic Party is the enemy of God.



Dan Calabrese --


The Iron Jaws of the Police State: Trump’s America Is a Constitution-Free Zone

The Iron Jaws of the Police State: Trump’s America Is a Constitution-Free Zone






“Policing is broken... It has evolved as a paramilitary, bureaucratic, organizational arrangement that distances police officers from the communities they’ve been sworn to protect and serve. When we have shooting after shooting after shooting that most people would define as at least questionable, it’s time to look, not just at a few bad apples, but the barrel. And I’m convinced that it is the barrel that is rotted.”— Norm Stamper, former Seattle police chief
Please.
Somebody give Attorney General Jeff Sessions a copy of the Constitution.
And while you’re at it, get a copy to President Trump, too.
In fact, you might want to share a copy with the nation’s police officers, as well.
I have my doubts that any of these individuals—all of whom swore to uphold and defend the Constitution—have ever read any of the nation’s founding documents.
Had they actually read and understood the Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights, there would be no militarized police, no mass surveillance, no police shootings of unarmed individuals, no SWAT team raids, no tasering of children, no asset forfeiture schemes or any of the other government-sanctioned abuses that get passed off as law and order these days.
We’ve got serious problems in this country, and they won’t be solved on the golf course, by wining and dining corporate CEOs, giving local police forces more military equipment, locking down the nation, or pretending that the only threats to our freedoms are posed by forces beyond our borders or by “anti-government” extremists hiding among us.
So far, Trump’s first 100 days in office have been no different from Obama’s last 100 days, at least when it comes to the government’s ongoing war on our freedoms.
Government corruption remains at an all-time high.
Police shootings and misconduct have continued unabated.
The nation’s endless wars continue to push us to the brink of financial ruin.
And “we the people” are still being treated as if we have no rights, are entitled to no protections, and exist solely for the purpose of sustaining the American police state with our hard-earned tax dollars.
Just take the policing crisis in this country, for instance.
Sessions—the chief lawyer for the government and the head of the Justice Department, which is entrusted with ensuring that the nation’s laws are faithfully carried out and holding government officials accountable to abiding by their oaths of office to “uphold and defend the Constitution”—doesn’t think we’ve got a policing problem in America.
In fact, Sessions thinks the police are doing a great job (apart from “the individual misdeeds of bad actors,” that is). 
For that matter, so does Trump.
Really, really great.
Indeed, Sessions thinks the nation’s police forces are doing such a great job that they should be rewarded with more military toys (weapons, gear, equipment) and less oversight by the Justice Department.
As for Trump, he believes “the dangerous anti-police atmosphere in America is wrong” and has vowed to “end it.”
Excuse me for a moment while I flush what remains of the Constitution down the toilet.
Clearly, Trump has not been briefed on the fact that it has never been safer to be a cop in America. According to Newsweek, “it’s safer to be a cop than it is to simply live in many U.S. cities... It’s safer to be a cop than it is to live in Baltimore. It’s safer to be a cop than it is to be a fisher, logger, pilot, roofer, miner, trucker or taxi driver. It’s safer to be a cop today than it’s been in years, decades, or even a century, by some measures.”
You know what’s dangerous?
Being a citizen of the American police state.
Treating cops as deserving of greater protections than their fellow citizens.
And training cops to think and act like they’re soldiers on a battlefield.

As journalist Daniel Bier warns, “If you tell cops over and over that they’re in a war, they’re under siege, they’re under attack, and that citizens are the enemy—instead of the people they’re supposed to protect—you’re going to create an atmosphere of fear, tension, and hostility that can only end badly, as it has for so many people.”
Frankly, if there’s a war taking place in this country, it’s a war on the American people.
After all, we’re the ones being shot at and tasered and tracked and beaten and intimidated and threatened and invaded and probed.
And what is the government doing to fix this policing crisis that threatens the safety of every man, woman and child in this country?
Not a damn thing.
Incredibly, according to a study by the American Medical Association, police-inflicted injuries send more than 50,000 Americans to hospital emergency rooms every year.
Yet as Slate warns, if you even dare to criticize a police officer let alone challenge the myth of the hero cop—a myth “used to legitimize brutality as necessary, justify policies that favor the police, and punish anyone who dares to question police tactics or oppose the unions’ agendas”— you will be roundly denounced “as disloyal, un-American, and dangerous.”
As reporter David Feige concludes, “We should appreciate the value and sacrifice of those who choose to serve and protect. But that appreciation should not constitute a get-out-of-jail-free card for the vast army of 800,000 people granted general arrest powers and increasingly armed with automatic weapons and armored vehicles.”
Vast army.
Equipped with deadly weapons.
Empowered with arrest powers.
Immune from accountability for wrongdoing.
What is this, Hitler’s America?
Have we strayed so far from our revolutionary roots that we no longer even recognize tyranny when it’s staring us in the face?
The fact that police are choosing to fatally resolve encounters with their fellow citizens by using their guns speaks volumes about what is wrong with policing in America today, where police officers are being dressed in the trappings of war, drilled in the deadly art of combat, and trained to look upon “every individual they interact with as an armed threat and every situation as a deadly force encounter in the making.”
Mind you, the federal government is the one responsible for turning our police into extensions of the military, having previously distributed billions of dollars’ worth of military equipment to local police agencies, including high-powered weapons, assault vehicles, drones, tactical gear, body armor, weapon scopes, infrared imaging systems and night-vision goggles—equipment intended for use on the battlefield—not to mention federal grants for militarized training and SWAT teams.
Thus, despite what Attorney General Sessions wants you to believe, the daily shootings, beatings and roadside strip searches (in some cases, rape) of American citizens by police are not isolated incidents.
Likewise, the events of recent years are not random occurrences: the invasive surveillance, the extremism reports, the civil unrest, the protests, the shootings, the bombings, the military exercises and active shooter drills, the color-coded alerts and threat assessments, the fusion centers, the transformation of local police into extensions of the military, the distribution of military equipment and weapons to local police forces, the government databases containing the names of dissidents and potential troublemakers.
Rather, these developments are all part of a concerted effort to destabilize the country, institute de facto martial law disguised as law and order, and shift us fully into the iron jaws of the police state.
So, no, the dramatic increase in police shootings are not accidents.
It wasn’t an “accident” that 26-year-old Andrew Lee Scott, who had committed no crime, was gunned down by police who knocked aggressively on the wrong door at 1:30 am, failed to identify themselves as police, and then repeatedly shot and killed Scott when he answered the door while holding a gun in self-defense. Police were investigating a speeding incident by engaging in a middle-of-the-night “knock and talk” in Scott’s apartment complex.
It wasn’t an “accident” when Levar Edward Jones was shot by a South Carolina police officer during a routine traffic stop over a seatbelt violation as he was in the process of reaching for his license and registration. The trooper justified his shooting of the unarmed man by insisting that Jones reached for his license “aggressively.”
It wasn’t an “accident” when Francisco Serna, a 73-year-old grandfather with early-stage dementia, was shot and killed by police for refusing to remove his hand from his pocket. Police were investigating an uncorroborated report that Serna had a gun, but it turned out he was holding a crucifix and made no aggressive movements before he was gunned down.
It wasn’t an “accident” when Nandi Cain, Jr., was thrown to the ground, choked and punched over a dozen times by a police officer after the officer stopped Cain for jaywalking.  Cain made no aggressive moves toward the officer, and had even removed his jacket to show the officer he had no weapon.
It wasn’t an “accident” when 65-year-old Thomas Smith, suffering from Parkinson’s Disease, called 911 because of a medical problem only to have his home raided by a SWAT team. Smith was thrown to the ground and placed in handcuffs because his condition prevented him from following police instructions.
It wasn’t an “accident” when John Wrana, a 95-year-old World War II veteran, died after being shot multiple times by a police officer with a Mossberg shotgun during a raid at Wrana’s room at an assisted living center. This, despite the fact that there were five police officers on the scene to subdue Wrana, who used a walker to get around and was “armed” with a shoehorn and not a knife, as police assumed.
It wasn’t an “accident” when a 10-year-old boy was subdued by two police officers using a taser because the child became unruly at the day care center he attended.
It wasn’t an “accident” when police in South Dakota routinely subjected persons, some as young as 3 years old, to catheterizations in order to forcibly obtain urine samples.
It wasn’t an “accident” when Charles Kinsey, a behavioral therapist, was shot by police as he was trying to help an autistic patient who had wandered away from his group home and was sitting in the middle of the road playing with a toy car. The officer who shot Kinsey was reportedly told that neither Kinsey nor the patient had a weapon.
It wasn’t an “accident” when Frank Arnal Baker was mauled by a police dog and kicked by an officer for not complying quickly enough with a police order. Baker, who had done nothing wrong, spent two weeks in the hospital with fractured ribs and collapsed lungs and needed skin grafts for the dog-bite injuries.
No, none of these incidents were accidents.
Nor are they isolated, anecdotal examples of a few bad actors, as Sessions insists.
Far from being isolated or anecdotal, police misconduct cases have become so prevalent as to jeopardize the integrity of all of the nation’s law enforcement agencies.
Unfortunately, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, this is what happens when you allow so-called “law and order” to matter more than justice: corruption flourishes, injustice reigns and tyranny takes hold.
Yet no matter what Trump and Session seem to believe, nowhere in the Constitution does it say that Americans must obey the government.
Despite the corruption of Congress and the complicity of the courts, nowhere does the Constitution require absolute subservience to the government’s dictates.
And despite what most police officers seem to believe, nowhere does the Constitution state that Americans must comply with a police order.
To suggest otherwise is authoritarianism.
This is also, as abolitionist Frederick Douglass noted, the definition of slavery: “I didn’t know I was a slave until I found out I couldn’t do the things I wanted.”
You want to know what it means to be a slave in the American police state?
It means being obedient, compliant and Sieg Heil!-ing every government agent armed with a weapon. If you believe otherwise, try standing up for your rights, being vocal about your freedoms, or just challenging a government dictate, and see how long you last before you’re staring down the barrel of a loaded government-issued gun.



 John W. Whitehead

The Iron Jaws of the Police State: Trump’s America Is a Constitution-Free Zone






“Policing is broken... It has evolved as a paramilitary, bureaucratic, organizational arrangement that distances police officers from the communities they’ve been sworn to protect and serve. When we have shooting after shooting after shooting that most people would define as at least questionable, it’s time to look, not just at a few bad apples, but the barrel. And I’m convinced that it is the barrel that is rotted.”— Norm Stamper, former Seattle police chief
Please.
Somebody give Attorney General Jeff Sessions a copy of the Constitution.
And while you’re at it, get a copy to President Trump, too.
In fact, you might want to share a copy with the nation’s police officers, as well.
I have my doubts that any of these individuals—all of whom swore to uphold and defend the Constitution—have ever read any of the nation’s founding documents.
Had they actually read and understood the Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights, there would be no militarized police, no mass surveillance, no police shootings of unarmed individuals, no SWAT team raids, no tasering of children, no asset forfeiture schemes or any of the other government-sanctioned abuses that get passed off as law and order these days.
We’ve got serious problems in this country, and they won’t be solved on the golf course, by wining and dining corporate CEOs, giving local police forces more military equipment, locking down the nation, or pretending that the only threats to our freedoms are posed by forces beyond our borders or by “anti-government” extremists hiding among us.
So far, Trump’s first 100 days in office have been no different from Obama’s last 100 days, at least when it comes to the government’s ongoing war on our freedoms.
Government corruption remains at an all-time high.
Police shootings and misconduct have continued unabated.
The nation’s endless wars continue to push us to the brink of financial ruin.
And “we the people” are still being treated as if we have no rights, are entitled to no protections, and exist solely for the purpose of sustaining the American police state with our hard-earned tax dollars.
Just take the policing crisis in this country, for instance.
Sessions—the chief lawyer for the government and the head of the Justice Department, which is entrusted with ensuring that the nation’s laws are faithfully carried out and holding government officials accountable to abiding by their oaths of office to “uphold and defend the Constitution”—doesn’t think we’ve got a policing problem in America.
In fact, Sessions thinks the police are doing a great job (apart from “the individual misdeeds of bad actors,” that is). 
For that matter, so does Trump.
Really, really great.
Indeed, Sessions thinks the nation’s police forces are doing such a great job that they should be rewarded with more military toys (weapons, gear, equipment) and less oversight by the Justice Department.
As for Trump, he believes “the dangerous anti-police atmosphere in America is wrong” and has vowed to “end it.”
Excuse me for a moment while I flush what remains of the Constitution down the toilet.
Clearly, Trump has not been briefed on the fact that it has never been safer to be a cop in America. According to Newsweek, “it’s safer to be a cop than it is to simply live in many U.S. cities... It’s safer to be a cop than it is to live in Baltimore. It’s safer to be a cop than it is to be a fisher, logger, pilot, roofer, miner, trucker or taxi driver. It’s safer to be a cop today than it’s been in years, decades, or even a century, by some measures.”
You know what’s dangerous?
Being a citizen of the American police state.
Treating cops as deserving of greater protections than their fellow citizens.
And training cops to think and act like they’re soldiers on a battlefield.

As journalist Daniel Bier warns, “If you tell cops over and over that they’re in a war, they’re under siege, they’re under attack, and that citizens are the enemy—instead of the people they’re supposed to protect—you’re going to create an atmosphere of fear, tension, and hostility that can only end badly, as it has for so many people.”
Frankly, if there’s a war taking place in this country, it’s a war on the American people.
After all, we’re the ones being shot at and tasered and tracked and beaten and intimidated and threatened and invaded and probed.
And what is the government doing to fix this policing crisis that threatens the safety of every man, woman and child in this country?
Not a damn thing.
Incredibly, according to a study by the American Medical Association, police-inflicted injuries send more than 50,000 Americans to hospital emergency rooms every year.
Yet as Slate warns, if you even dare to criticize a police officer let alone challenge the myth of the hero cop—a myth “used to legitimize brutality as necessary, justify policies that favor the police, and punish anyone who dares to question police tactics or oppose the unions’ agendas”— you will be roundly denounced “as disloyal, un-American, and dangerous.”
As reporter David Feige concludes, “We should appreciate the value and sacrifice of those who choose to serve and protect. But that appreciation should not constitute a get-out-of-jail-free card for the vast army of 800,000 people granted general arrest powers and increasingly armed with automatic weapons and armored vehicles.”
Vast army.
Equipped with deadly weapons.
Empowered with arrest powers.
Immune from accountability for wrongdoing.
What is this, Hitler’s America?
Have we strayed so far from our revolutionary roots that we no longer even recognize tyranny when it’s staring us in the face?
The fact that police are choosing to fatally resolve encounters with their fellow citizens by using their guns speaks volumes about what is wrong with policing in America today, where police officers are being dressed in the trappings of war, drilled in the deadly art of combat, and trained to look upon “every individual they interact with as an armed threat and every situation as a deadly force encounter in the making.”
Mind you, the federal government is the one responsible for turning our police into extensions of the military, having previously distributed billions of dollars’ worth of military equipment to local police agencies, including high-powered weapons, assault vehicles, drones, tactical gear, body armor, weapon scopes, infrared imaging systems and night-vision goggles—equipment intended for use on the battlefield—not to mention federal grants for militarized training and SWAT teams.
Thus, despite what Attorney General Sessions wants you to believe, the daily shootings, beatings and roadside strip searches (in some cases, rape) of American citizens by police are not isolated incidents.
Likewise, the events of recent years are not random occurrences: the invasive surveillance, the extremism reports, the civil unrest, the protests, the shootings, the bombings, the military exercises and active shooter drills, the color-coded alerts and threat assessments, the fusion centers, the transformation of local police into extensions of the military, the distribution of military equipment and weapons to local police forces, the government databases containing the names of dissidents and potential troublemakers.
Rather, these developments are all part of a concerted effort to destabilize the country, institute de facto martial law disguised as law and order, and shift us fully into the iron jaws of the police state.
So, no, the dramatic increase in police shootings are not accidents.
It wasn’t an “accident” that 26-year-old Andrew Lee Scott, who had committed no crime, was gunned down by police who knocked aggressively on the wrong door at 1:30 am, failed to identify themselves as police, and then repeatedly shot and killed Scott when he answered the door while holding a gun in self-defense. Police were investigating a speeding incident by engaging in a middle-of-the-night “knock and talk” in Scott’s apartment complex.
It wasn’t an “accident” when Levar Edward Jones was shot by a South Carolina police officer during a routine traffic stop over a seatbelt violation as he was in the process of reaching for his license and registration. The trooper justified his shooting of the unarmed man by insisting that Jones reached for his license “aggressively.”
It wasn’t an “accident” when Francisco Serna, a 73-year-old grandfather with early-stage dementia, was shot and killed by police for refusing to remove his hand from his pocket. Police were investigating an uncorroborated report that Serna had a gun, but it turned out he was holding a crucifix and made no aggressive movements before he was gunned down.
It wasn’t an “accident” when Nandi Cain, Jr., was thrown to the ground, choked and punched over a dozen times by a police officer after the officer stopped Cain for jaywalking.  Cain made no aggressive moves toward the officer, and had even removed his jacket to show the officer he had no weapon.
It wasn’t an “accident” when 65-year-old Thomas Smith, suffering from Parkinson’s Disease, called 911 because of a medical problem only to have his home raided by a SWAT team. Smith was thrown to the ground and placed in handcuffs because his condition prevented him from following police instructions.
It wasn’t an “accident” when John Wrana, a 95-year-old World War II veteran, died after being shot multiple times by a police officer with a Mossberg shotgun during a raid at Wrana’s room at an assisted living center. This, despite the fact that there were five police officers on the scene to subdue Wrana, who used a walker to get around and was “armed” with a shoehorn and not a knife, as police assumed.
It wasn’t an “accident” when a 10-year-old boy was subdued by two police officers using a taser because the child became unruly at the day care center he attended.
It wasn’t an “accident” when police in South Dakota routinely subjected persons, some as young as 3 years old, to catheterizations in order to forcibly obtain urine samples.
It wasn’t an “accident” when Charles Kinsey, a behavioral therapist, was shot by police as he was trying to help an autistic patient who had wandered away from his group home and was sitting in the middle of the road playing with a toy car. The officer who shot Kinsey was reportedly told that neither Kinsey nor the patient had a weapon.
It wasn’t an “accident” when Frank Arnal Baker was mauled by a police dog and kicked by an officer for not complying quickly enough with a police order. Baker, who had done nothing wrong, spent two weeks in the hospital with fractured ribs and collapsed lungs and needed skin grafts for the dog-bite injuries.
No, none of these incidents were accidents.
Nor are they isolated, anecdotal examples of a few bad actors, as Sessions insists.
Far from being isolated or anecdotal, police misconduct cases have become so prevalent as to jeopardize the integrity of all of the nation’s law enforcement agencies.
Unfortunately, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, this is what happens when you allow so-called “law and order” to matter more than justice: corruption flourishes, injustice reigns and tyranny takes hold.
Yet no matter what Trump and Session seem to believe, nowhere in the Constitution does it say that Americans must obey the government.
Despite the corruption of Congress and the complicity of the courts, nowhere does the Constitution require absolute subservience to the government’s dictates.
And despite what most police officers seem to believe, nowhere does the Constitution state that Americans must comply with a police order.
To suggest otherwise is authoritarianism.
This is also, as abolitionist Frederick Douglass noted, the definition of slavery: “I didn’t know I was a slave until I found out I couldn’t do the things I wanted.”
You want to know what it means to be a slave in the American police state?
It means being obedient, compliant and Sieg Heil!-ing every government agent armed with a weapon. If you believe otherwise, try standing up for your rights, being vocal about your freedoms, or just challenging a government dictate, and see how long you last before you’re staring down the barrel of a loaded government-issued gun.



 John W. Whitehead