Will You Be a Rebel, Revolutionary or a Slave?

A war against the American citizenry; America is a pressure cooker with no steam valve, and things are about to blow

The Bundy Paradigm: Will You Be a Rebel, Revolutionary or a Slave?

Author
By John W. Whitehead

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”—John F. Kennedy

Those tempted to write off the standoff at the Bundy Ranch as little more than a show of force by militia-minded citizens would do well to reconsider their easy dismissal of this brewing rebellion. This goes far beyond concerns about grazing rights or the tension between the state and the federal government.

Few conflicts are ever black and white, and the Bundy situation, with its abundance of gray areas, is no exception. Yet the question is not whether Cliven Bundy and his supporters are domestic terrorists, as Harry Reid claims, or patriots, or something in between. Nor is it a question of whether the Nevada rancher is illegally grazing his cattle on federal land or whether that land should rightfully belong to the government. Nor is it even a question of who’s winning the showdown— the government with its arsenal of SWAT teams, firepower and assault vehicles, or Bundy’s militia supporters with their assortment of weapons—because if such altercations end in bloodshed, everyone loses.

What we’re really faced with, and what we’ll see more of before long, is a growing dissatisfaction with the government and its heavy-handed tactics by people who are tired of being used and abused and are ready to say “enough is enough.” And it won’t matter what the issue is—whether it’s a rancher standing his ground over grazing rights, a minister jailed for holding a Bible study in his own home, or a community outraged over police shootings of unarmed citizens—these are the building blocks of a political powder keg. Now all that remains is a spark, and it need not be a very big one, to set the whole powder keg aflame.

As shown in the book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State,

there’s a subtext to this incident that must not be ignored, and it is simply this: America is a pressure cooker with no steam valve, and things are about to blow. This is what happens when a parasitical government muzzles the citizenry, fences them in, herds them, brands them, whips them into submission, forces them to ante up the sweat of their brows while giving them little in return, and then provides them with little to no outlet for voicing their discontent.

The government has been anticipating and preparing for such an uprising for years. For example, in 2008, a U.S. Army War College report warned that the military must be prepared for a “violent, strategic dislocation inside the United States,” which could be provoked by “unforeseen economic collapse,” “purposeful domestic resistance,” “pervasive public health emergencies” or “loss of functioning political and legal order”—all related to dissent and protests over America’s economic and political disarray. Consequently, predicted the report, the “widespread civil violence would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.”

One year later, in 2009, the Department of Homeland Security under President Obama issued its infamous reports on Rightwing and Leftwing “Extremism.” According to these reports, an extremist is defined as anyone who subscribes to a particular political viewpoint. Rightwing extremists, for example, are broadly defined in the report as individuals and groups “that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely.”

Despite “no specific information that domestic rightwing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence,” the DHS listed a number of scenarios that could arise as a result of so-called rightwing extremists playing on the public’s fears and discontent over various issues, including the economic downturn, real estate foreclosures and unemployment.http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/2014/01/fbi-admits-itsabout-manufacturing.html

Equally disconcerting, the reports use the words “terrorist” and “extremist” interchangeably. In other words, voicing what the government would consider to be extremist viewpoints is tantamount to being a terrorist. Under such a definition, I could very well be considered a terrorist. So too could John Lennon, Martin Luther King Jr., Roger Baldwin (founder of the ACLU), Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson 

and Samuel Adams—all of these men protested and passionately spoke out against government practices with which they disagreed and would be prime targets under this document.

The document also took pains to describe the political views of those who would qualify as being a rightwing extremist. For example, you are labeled a rightwing extremist if you voice concerns about a myriad of issues including: policy changes under President Obama; the economic downturn and home foreclosures; the loss of U.S. jobs in manufacturing and construction sectors; and social issues such as abortion, interracial crimes and immigration. DHS also issued a red-flag warning against anyone who promotes “conspiracy theories involving declarations of martial law, impending civil strife or racial conflict, suspension of the U.S. Constitution, and the creation of citizen detention camps.”

Fast forward five years, with all that has transpired, from the Occupy Protests and the targeting of military veterans to domestic surveillance, especially of activist-oriented groups and now, most recently, the Bundy Ranch showdown, and it would seem clear that the government has not veered one iota from its original playbook. Indeed, the government’s full-blown campaign of surveillance of Americans’ internet activity, phone calls, etc., makes complete sense in hindsight.

All that we have been subjected to in recent years—living under the shadow of NSA spying; motorists strip searched and anally probed on the side of the road; innocent Americans spied upon while going about their daily business in schools and stores; homeowners having their doors kicked in by militarized SWAT teams serving routine warrants—illustrates how the government deals with people it views as potential “extremists”: with heavy-handed tactics designed to intimidate the populace into submission and discourage anyone from stepping out of line or challenging the status quo.

It’s not just the Cliven Bundys of the world who are being dealt with in this manner. Don Miller, a 91-year-old antiques collector, recently had his Indiana home raided by the FBI, ostensibly because it might be in the nation’s best interest if the rare and valuable antiques and artifacts Miller had collected over the course of 80 years were cared for by the government. Such tactics carried out by anyone other than the government would be considered grand larceny, and yet the government gets a free pass.

In the same way, the government insists it can carry out all manner of surveillance on us—listen in on our phone calls, read our emails and text messages, track our movements, photograph our license plates, even enter our biometric information into DNA databases—but those who dare to return the favor, even a little, by filming potential police misconduct, get roughed up by the police, arrested, charged with violating various and sundry crimes.

When law enforcement officials—not just the police, but every agent of the government entrusted with enforcing laws, from the president on down—are allowed to discard the law when convenient, and the only ones having to obey the law are the citizenry and not the enforcers, then the law becomes only a tool to punish us, rather than binding and controlling the government, as it was intended.

philosopher Abraham Kaplan

This phenomenon is what philosopher Abraham Kaplan referred to as the law of the instrument, which essentially says that to a hammer, everything looks like a nail. In the scenario that has been playing out in recent years, we the citizenry have become the nails to be hammered by the government’s henchmen, a.k.a. its guns for hire, a.k.a. its standing army, a.k.a. the nation’s law enforcement agencies.

Indeed, there can no longer be any doubt that militarized police officers, the end product of the government—federal, local and state—and law enforcement agencies having merged, have become a “standing” or permanent army, composed of full-time professional soldiers who do not disband. Yet these permanent armies are exactly what those who drafted the U.S. Constitution feared as tools used by despotic governments to wage war against its citizens.

That is exactly what we are witnessing today: a war against the American citizenry. Is it any wonder then that Americans are starting to resist?

More and more, Americans are tired, frustrated, anxious, and worried about the state of their country. They are afraid of an increasingly violent and oppressive federal government, and they are worried about the economic insecurity which still grips the nation. And they’re growing increasingly sick of being treated like suspects and criminals. As former law professor John Baker, who has studied the growing problem of over criminalization, noted, “There is no one in the United States over the age of 18 who cannot be indicted for some federal crime. That is not an exaggeration.”

http://www.cbn.com/tv/2368574019001

To make matters worse, a recent scientific study by Princeton researchers confirms that the United States of America is not the democracy that is purports to be, but rather an oligarchy, in which “economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy.” As PolicyMic explains, “An oligarchy is a system where power is effectively wielded by a small number of individuals defined by their status called oligarchs. Members of the oligarchy are the rich, the well connected and the politically powerful, as well as particularly well placed individuals in institutions like banking and finance or the military… In other words, their statistics say your opinion literally does not matter.”http://www.rightoncrime.com/priority-issues/overcriminalization/

So if average Americans, having largely lost all of the conventional markers of influencing government, whether through elections, petition, or protest, have no way to impact their government, no way to be heard, no assurance that their concerns are truly being represented and their government is one “by the people, of the people, and for the people,” as opposed to being engineered expressly for the benefit of the wealthy elite, then where does that leave them?

To some, the choice is clear. As psychologist Erich Fromm recognized in his insightful book, On Disobedience: “If a man can only obey and not disobey, he is a slave; if he can only disobey and not obey, he is a rebel (not a revolutionary). He acts out of anger, disappointment, resentment, yet not in the name of a conviction or a principle.”

Unfortunately, the intrepid, revolutionary American spirit that stood up to the British, blazed paths to the western territories, and prevailed despite a civil war, multiple world wars, and various economic depressions have taken quite a beating in recent years. Nevertheless, the time is coming when each American will have to decide: will you be a slave, rebel or revolutionary?

Jews cannot allow Never Again to become an empty catchphrase or a universalized call for tolerance that fails to hold Islam accountable for its promotion of bigotry, violence and genocide
Never Again

Author
By Daniel Greenfield (Bio and Archives)  Tuesday, April 29, 2014
Comments at bottom of page | Print friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
1
Never again. To Jews it means a refusal to give genocidal bigots another go at them. To Obama, it means refusing to ever again have to listen to an Israeli leader explain why his country cannot commit territorial suicide in order to appease a gang of genocidal bigots.http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2011/06/narcissistic-rage-envy-and-bullying-at.html

When the Jews who fought among the crumbling walls of the Warsaw Ghetto finally made it to Israel, they came just in time to load up their guns and fight once again for their people’s survival. The survivors of one genocidal ideology bent on making someone pay for its sense of humiliation came just in time to fight off another version of the same thing.

After 2000 years of running, an indigenous minority that had been kicked around by emperors and caliphs finally made its stand around a handful of farming towns and in alleyways lined by the golden stone of Jerusalem. Men and women who only a few years earlier hid in their homes from Muslim pogroms, covering their children’s ears at the cries of “Ibtach Al Yahood”, “Kill the Jews”, took up arms.

They stood alongside the settlers who had drained the swamps, the refugees fleeing Muslim terror in Egypt and Syria and the remains of the original indigenous Jewish population which had survived the conquests of seven empires. They stood and fought for their lives against an ideology that said they had no right to be free because of their religion and the blood in their veins.

Like their Nazi allies, Muslim violence was driven by a need to reverse the humiliations of World War I which dismantled the Ottoman Empire and gave regional minorities like the Jews a chance at rebuilding their own independent countries. But going back to 1914 was only the beginning. Some wanted to go back to 1492 and the fall of Granada. Others in the Saudi desert were dreaming of a return to the 6th century. But what they all had in common was a refusal to tolerate an independent non-Muslim state in their midst.http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/auschwitz-blueprints/

And even though Allied troops were still within sight of the rubble, ruined tanks and barbed wire camps remaining behind from the last time that their countries had chosen to appease this sort of thing with a slice of Czechoslovakia, they still chose appeasement. Again.

President Wilson had idealistically envisioned turning over portions of the territories of the Ottoman Empire to peoples like the Jews and Armenians who had struggled for so long under Muslim dominion. But the European willingness to tolerate and appease Muslim violence nearly put an end to both dreams. Turkish armies swarmed over Armenia at the first opportunity and Arab armies did the same in Israel. The lesson was the same. If you wanted to be free to practice your religion, to live under your own laws, not those of the Koran which dictate the inferiority of minorities, you had to stand up and fight for it without counting on the support of the West.

Wilsonian idealism was no match for British empire building, and that was no match for Postmodern globalism. Both British and Globalist empire building desired stability at all costs.

President Wilson had wanted to give the peoples oppressed by Islam a chance to breathe the fresh air of freedom. But the British Empire turned over the largest part of Israel to a Saudi monarchy to rule over as the newly created nation of Jordan. Then the UN partitioned the remainder into a stump with indefensible borders in an attempt to appease the gathering Muslim armies. But the armies of Islam rejected even that partition and chose war instead. Now Barack Hussein Obama and a coterie of European leaders would like Israel to go back to those indefensible borders. Not because it will bring peace, but for the same reason that he retasked NASA from studying stars, to pander to the genocidal fragility of Muslim self-esteem.

The West has sold out Israel, the way that it once sold out Czechoslovakia, and with the same results. Muslims are no more satiated with the prospect of an ethnically cleansed Palestine, than Nazi Germany was with a Volksdeutsche Sudetenland. Their vision of a “Pure Arab-Muslim Palestine” inevitably swallows Israel, as it already does on their maps, and then aspires to join with a Pan-Islamic state stretching from Cairo to Damascus and beyond.http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/palmatoc1.html

Just as the Sudetenland was only the first bite out of Czechoslovakia, then Eastern Europe and then Europe… and then the world. So too Palestine is the first bite, followed by the overthrow of secular regimes in Egypt, Algeria and Turkey, the conquest of multi-religious African states, like Nigeria and Cote d’Ivoire, and then Drang Nach Osten, into Europe, and finally civil war in Thailand, India and China. This is what World War III looks like. And it is happening before our very eyes.

Never Again has become an empty phrase. Something that angry world leaders shout when the victims aren’t eager enough to appease the Third Reich or the Seventh Caliphate. Leaders who are committed to the false narrative that the violence in the Middle-East is caused by insufficient territorial concessions by the region’s only Non-Muslim minority to its Sunni Muslim majority, rather than the unwillingness of the Sunni Muslim majority to practice tolerance in their own countries, throughout the region or the world.

Jews cannot allow Never Again to become an empty catchphrase or a universalized call for tolerance that fails to hold Islam accountable for its promotion of bigotry, violence and genocide. While Jewish leaders occupy themselves with empty calls for interfaith brotherhood, Jewish farms and villages once again fall under siege. Farmers sleep with guns by their beds, children are taught to race to bomb shelters and Jewish store windows are smashed in the cities of Europe. Armies of soldiers, terrorists and diplomats gather once again to carve up Jerusalem. To ethnically cleanse half the city of Jews and turn it into a platform for terror.

This is what going back to 1948 means. It means going back to a religious civil war and a stump state with indefensible borders. This is the vision of international diplomats who hope that feeding a big enough piece of Israel to the crocodile will put it to sleep. It is also the vision of a leftist elite in Israel which wants to turn the Gush Dan region into a cramped tech-happy Singapore, and let Jerusalem and the farmlands fall into enemy hands, in the hope that they will be left alone to sip coffee in their cafes and launch their IPO’s in peace. But it is nothing more than the Warsaw Ghetto with an internet cafe. And even they are only a few years away from discovering that.

Shimon Peres’ vision of Tel Aviv as the Warsaw Ghetto with an internet cafe and a nanotech research lab, is colliding with the Muslim vision of the fall of Israel as the first of many victories over the Kufar, and the vision of world leaders of Israel dissolving away to make room for a Muslim Middle-East. Only one of those visions can survive or none of them. Either Israel falls to the first wave of a Jihad that will engulf the world, or it once again makes a stand.

The Europeans and Obama competing to offer Israel the best ‘alternative’ before the UN recognizes Palestine is nothing but empty theater. There is no compromise that will settle the issue. Nor can Israel ever convince the world compromisers of that. So long as the world community accepts the inevitability of Islamic dominance, then Israel will always be the goat. The sacrifice to appease the beast.

If Never Again means anything at all, it is a refusal to be the sacrifice, to be placed on the altar of appeasement for a Holocaust, a burnt offering, to the Muslim Moloch of insatiable rage and genocidal fanaticism.

Jews say, “Never Again” for the same reason that rape victims say, “No, Means No.” We have been there. We are not going to allow it to happen again. No matter what words are used to justify it. No matter how the perpetrators turn the world around so that they are right and we are wrong, so that their violence is just and our self-defense isn’t. No matter how many ways they find to blame us for their actions. World leaders may try to carve us up, but we will never consent to it. Not orally and not silently. We will resist.

We have said Never Again so many times that we have forgotten what the words mean. They have lost their edge. Worse, they have lost their purpose. It’s time to stop just saying , “Never Again”. It’s time to mean it.

Raising Up Compliant Children in the American Police State

If there is one glimmer of hope for this younger generation, it may be found in the unlikeliest of places: young adult literature

Raising Up Compliant Children in the American Police State

Author
By John W. Whitehead

“[The aim of public education is not] to fill the young of the species with knowledge and awaken their intelligence. . . . Nothing could be further from the truth. The aim . . . is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed and train a standardized citizenry, to put down dissent and originality. That is its aim in the United States…”—Henry Mencken, American Journalist (April 1924)

How do you persuade a nation of relatively freedom-loving individuals to march in lock step with a police state? You start by convincing them that they’re in danger, and only the government can protect them. Keep them keyed up with constant danger alerts, and the occasional terrorist incident, whether real or staged. Distract them with wall-to-wall news coverage about sinking ships, disappearing planes and pseudo-celebrities spouting racist diatribes. Use blockbuster movies, reality shows and violent video games to hype them up on military tactics, and then while they’re distracted and numb to all that is taking place around them, indoctrinate their young people to your way of thinking, relying primarily on the public schools and popular culture.

After all, public education the world over has always been the vehicle for statist propaganda of one sort or another, whether it’s religion, militarism, democracy or totalitarianism, and America is no exception. In fact, today’s public schools, far from being bastions of free speech, are merely microcosms of the world beyond the schoolhouse gates, and increasingly, it’s a world hostile to freedom.

As I show in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, within America’s public schools can be found almost every aspect of the American police state that plagues those of us on the “outside”: metal detectors, surveillance cameras, militarized police, drug-sniffing dogs, tasers, cyber-surveillance, random searches, the list goes on. Whether it takes the form of draconian zero tolerance policies, overreaching anti-bullying statutes, police officers charged with tasering and arresting so-called unruly children, standardized testing with its emphasis on rote answers, political correctness, or the extensive surveillance systems cropping up in schools all over the country, young people in America are first in line to be indoctrinated into compliant citizens of the new American police state.

Zero tolerance policies, which punish all offenses severely, no matter how minor, condition young people to steer clear of doing anything that might be considered out of line, whether it’s pointing their fingers like a gun, drawing on their desks, or chewing their gum too loudly. Although the Obama administration recently called on schools to rethink how they discipline and punish students who misbehave, their guidelines to help schools re-evaluate their disciplinary policies fail to address the source of the problem: the quasi-prison atmosphere of public schools.

Surveillance technologies, used by school officials, police, NSA agents, and corporate entities to track the everyday activities of students, accustom young people to life in an electronic concentration camp, with all of their movements monitored, their interactions assessed, and their activities recorded and archived. For example, the Department of Education (DOE) has created a system to track, archive and disseminate data on every single part of a child’s educational career with colleges and state agencies such as the Department of Labor and the offices of Technology and Children and Family Services. The system relies on a database called inBloom, which is funded by corporate magnates such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. DOE has also received $40 million from various state and federal agencies to help fund the program.

Metal detectors at school entrances and police patrolling school hallways acclimatize young people to being viewed as suspects. Funded in part by federal grants, school districts across the country have “paid local police agencies to provide armed ‘school resource officers’ for high schools, middle schools and sometimes even elementary schools.” As the New York Times reports, “Hundreds of additional districts, including those in Houston, Los Angeles and Philadelphia, have created police forces of their own, employing thousands of sworn officers.” The problem, of course, is that the very presence of these police officers in the schools results in greater numbers of students being arrested or charged with crimes for nonviolent, childish behavior. In Texas, for example, school police officers write more than 100,000 misdemeanor tickets a year, each ticket amounting to hundreds of dollars in court fines—a convenient financial windfall for the states. All too often, these incidents remain on students’ permanent records, impacting college and job applications.

Weapons of compliance, such as tasers which deliver electrical shocks lethal enough to kill, not only teach young people to fear the police, the face of our militarized government, but teach them that torture is an accepted means of controlling the population. It’s a problem that has grown exponentially as the schools have increasingly clamored for—and hired on—their own police forces. One high school student in Texas suffered severe brain damage and nearly died after being tasered. A 15-year-old disabled North Carolina student was tasered three times, resulting in punctured lungs. A New York student was similarly tasered for lying on the floor and crying.

Standardized testing and Common Core programs, which discourage students from thinking for themselves while rewarding them for regurgitating whatever the government, through its so-called educational standards, dictates they should be taught, will create a generation of test-takers capable of little else, molded and shaped by the federal government and its corporate allies into what it considers to be ideal citizens. Incredibly, despite the fact that the U.S. invests more money in public education (roughly $8,000 per child per year) than many other developed countries, we rank 27th in the world for school educational achievement.

Overt censorship, monitoring and political correctness, which manifest themselves in a variety of ways, from Internet filters on school computers to sexual harassment policies, habituate young people to a world in which nonconformist, divergent, politically incorrect ideas and speech are treated as unacceptable or dangerous. In such an environment, a science teacher criticizing evolution can get fired for insubordination, a 9-year-old boy remarking that his teacher is “cute” can be suspended for sexual harassment, students detected using their smart phones during class time can be reported for not paying attention in class, and those accused of engaging in “bullying, cyber-bullying, hate and shaming activities, depression, harm and self harm, self hate and suicide, crime, vandalism, substance abuse and truancy” on social media such as Twitter or Facebook, will have their posts and comments analyzed by an outside government contractor.

So far I’ve only mentioned what’s happening within the public schools. It doesn’t even begin to touch on extracurricular activities such as the Explorers program, which trains young people—“ages 14 to 21 who have a C average”—to be future agents of the police state. Explorers meet weekly, train for competitions and spend their weekends working on service projects. In one Border Patrol training exercise, teenagers as young as 14, suited up in military gear with lethal-looking airsoft guns, were “instructed on how to quiet an obstreperous lookout,” reports the New York Times. “Put him on his face and put a knee in his back,” a Border Patrol agent explained. “I guarantee that he’ll shut up.”

Then there’s the military’s use of video games and blockbuster movies to propagandize war and recruit young people. Thanks to a collaboration between the Department of Defense and the entertainment industry, the American taxpayer is paying for what amounts to a propaganda campaign aimed at entrenching the power of the military in American society. As author Nick Turse points out, “Today, almost everywhere you look, whether at the latest blockbuster on the big screen or what’s on much smaller screens in your own home - likely made by a defense contractor like Sony, Samsung, Panasonic or Toshiba – you’ll find the Pentagon or its corporate partners.”

What’s really unnerving, however, are the similarities between our own system of youth indoctrination and that of Nazi Germany, with its Hitler Youth programs and overt campaign of educational indoctrination. Now before I’m drowned out by howls of outrage, note that while I am not suggesting the United States is deliberately attempting to raise up a generation of Hitler Youth, our schools and society at large are teaching young people to march in lockstep with the all-powerful government—which may be just as dangerous in the end.

You don’t have to take my word for it. The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum provides some valuable insight into education in the Nazi state, which was responsible for winning “millions of German young people … over to Nazism in the classroom and through extracurricular activities.” The similarities are startling, ranging from the dismissal of teachers deemed to be “politically unreliable” to the introduction of classroom textbooks that taught students obedience to state authority and militarism. “Board games and toys for children served as another way to spread racial and political propaganda to German youth. Toys were also used as propaganda vehicles to indoctrinate children into militarism.” And then there was the Hitler Youth, a paramilitary youth group intended to train young people for future service in the armed forces and government.

Hitler himself recognized the value of indoctrinating young people. As he noted, “When an opponent declares, ‘I will not come over to your side, and you will not get me on your side,’ I calmly say, ‘Your child belongs to me already. A people lives forever. What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants however now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.’”

We’re certainly not doing ourselves or our young people any favors by allowing them to be indoctrinated into a police state mindset from early on, with no knowledge that they have any rights or any sense that they are the descendants of revolutionaries who stood up to tyrannical regimes.

If there is one glimmer of hope for this younger generation, it may be found in the unlikeliest of places: young adult literature, specifically dystopian literature, which is all the rage among young people today. Serial books such as Harry Potter, The Hunger Games, The Bone Season and The Giver all speak to a growing awareness among young people that the future awaiting them is far from secure, and that freedom ultimately rests in their ability to take on the powers-that-be.

the Rule of Law

The blatant and criminal disregard the feds have shown for the Constitution
The New York Times Discovers the Rule of Law

Leave it to The Gay Lady to be a day late and a few brain cells short. The New York Times recently published an article by some journalism-school retread about the Cliven Bundy situation, a piece containing all the usual talking points about how the “racist” rancher’s reasoning is really risible.

Rinse, wash and repeat. What interests me right now are not the facts of the case, however, but one particular line in the Times commentary.

The sentence is a quotation from ex-superintendent of the Lake Mead National Recreation Area Alan O’Neill, a line that the Times writer, a Mr. Adam Nagourney, obviously felt was so powerful and profound that it warranted closing his piece with. Here’s the passage containing the line:http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/us/politics/rancher-proudly-breaks-the-law-becoming-a-hero-in-the-west.html?hp&_r=0

“He [Bundy] calls himself a patriot, and says he loves America,” Mr. O’Neill said. “And yet he says he won’t follow any federal laws. You just can’t let this go by, or everybody is going to be like, ‘If Bundy can break the law, why can’t I?’”

Wow, an example of not following the law. Shocking! Unprecedented! A threat to the republic!

All I can say about Nagourney is that, for sure, one of us has taken the blue pill.http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/red_pill_and_blue_pill

Has it escaped the Times’ notice that the feds have been wanting in the enforcement of immigration law for decades and that Barack Obama has basically cast enforcement to the winds? Has the paper ever heard of sanctuary cities? Have its editors gotten the memo about rule by executive order and Obama’s suspension of ObamaCare provisions he finds politically inconvenient? Have they noticed that Uncle Scam has been violating the Constitution — the supreme law of the land — for nigh on 100 years and that Obama wipes his feet on it?

Gay Lady, I hereby re-christen thee The Blue Pill Times.

The BPT is certainly right in assuming that unanswered lawbreaking makes people conclude, “If ______ can break the law, why can’t I?” But it isn’t “Bundy” that fills in that blank.

In point of fact, the reason we had troves of people rallying to Bundy’s side is the same reason why we’re seeing state nullification movements pushing back against ObamaCare, federal gun-control law and other central-government measures:

The blatant and criminal disregard the feds have shown for the Constitution — the contract the American people have with one another — and the feds’ continual overstepping of their bounds and aggregation of power, have caused people to say, “If the feds can break the law, why can’t I?”

It has further made citizens realize that they have a right and a duty to oppose federal law. Why a right? Well, if a party subject to a contract consistently and obstinately violates the contract’s terms for the purposes of advantaging itself and undermining the other parties subject to the contract, are the latter still bound by the now broken agreement?

It is rendered null and void.

As for duty, to sit idly by while the feds violate the contract and trample rights makes one complicit in the crime, an accessory perhaps before, and certainly during and after, the fact.

This, mind you, is the main reason I side with Cliven Bundy. The particulars of the case are irrelevant because the feds long ago demonstrated their ill will and illegitimacy. As for The Blue Pill Times, it’s great it has discovered the value of the rule of law. Now all it need do is reveal what entity truly undermined it and the manifold ways in which it has been done. Of course, this would mean actually presenting, for the first time, “All the News That’s Fit to Print.”

The Environmental Apocalypse

Beneath the glossy surface of environmentalism is a vision of the American middle class learning to dig through bags of garbage, the detritus of their consumerism for which they must be punished

The Environmental Apocalypse

Early in the morning, while most are still sleeping, groups of elderly Chinese women spread out across city streets. They tear open trash bags, pick through the litter and sort out bottles and cans that come with a deposit. And then they bring them to the local supermarket to a machine that scans and evaluates each can, accepting and rejecting them one by one, and finally printing out a receipt.

The interaction between the elderly immigrant who speaks broken English or the homeless man who is barely holding it together… and the machine is a stark contrast between what the new smart clean green economy pretends to be and what it actually is.

The machine, like so much else that we design, is impressive, but its existence depends on someone digging through the trash with their hands for much less than minimum wage to extract a generally useless item.

The entire bottle economy, which has more than a passing resemblance to the trash sorting operations in the Third World carried out by despised and persecuted minorities, like the Zabbaleen in Egypt, is artificial. The United States is not so poor that it actually needs to recycle. It recycles not under the impulse of economic imperatives, but of government mandates.

The elderly Chinese women dig through the trash because politicians decided to impose a tax on us and an incentive for them in the form of a deposit. All those useless 1980s laws created a strange underground economy of marginalized people digging through the trash.

Every time politicians celebrate a recycling target met and show off some shiny new machine, hiding behind the curtain are the dirty weary people dragging through the streets at the crack of dawn, donning rubber gloves and tearing apart trash bags. They are the unglamorous low-tech reality of environmentalism.

These are the Green Jobs that aren’t much talked about. They pay below minimum wage and have no workplace safety regulations. They are the Third World reality behind the First World ecology tripe. It’s not that the people who plan and run the system don’t know about them. But they don’t like to talk about them because they come too close to revealing the unsavory truth about where environmentalism is really going.

Environmentalism, like every liberal notion, is sold to the masses as modern and progressive

Environmentalism, like every liberal notion, is sold to the masses as modern and progressive. It’s the exact opposite. It’s every bit as modern and progressive as those sacks of cans being hauled by hand through the streets to the machine.

Prince Charles, that avid idiot and environmentalist, visited a Mumbai slum a few years ago and said that it had some lessons to teach the West.

“When you enter what looks from the outside like an immense mound of plastic and rubbish, you immediately come upon an intricate network of streets with miniature shops, houses and workshops, each one made out of any material that comes to hand,” Prince Charles wrote in his book, Harmony.

The Prince of Wales is quite the author. In addition to Harmony: A New Way of Looking at Our World, he has written Shelter: Human Habitats from Around the World, The Prince’s Speech: On the Future of Food and The Illustrated Guide to Chickens: How to Choose Them, How to Keep Them.

One might be forgiven for assuming that the royal brain twitching behind those watery eyes is preparing for some sort of apocalypse. And it is. The apocalypse is environmentalism. Or from the point of view of the environmentalists, who spare some time from their public appearances and their mansions to pen tomes on the future of food and how to choose chickens, the apocalypse is prosperity.

People of that sort think that instead of getting the slum dwellers of Mumbai into apartments, we ought to be figuring out how to build shelters out of random garbage. Think of it as the recycling can solution as applied to your entire life.

“The people of Dharavi manage to separate all their waste at home and it gets recycled without any official collection facilities at all,” a marveling Charles, who probably never took out the trash once in his life, wrote. It’s easy to get people to recycle without any mandates or collection facilities at all. All it takes is grinding poverty so miserable that you either make the most of every last thing you can get your hands on or you die.

That is the sort of lifestyle that environmentalists think of as sustainable. Or as Hobbes put it, “In such condition, there is no place for Industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain; and consequently no Culture of the Earth… no commodious Building; no Instruments of moving, and removing such things as require much force; no Knowledge of the face of the Earth; no account of Time; no Arts; no Letters; no Society.” That is the natural state to which environmentalists would return us to.

More recently another deep thinker, Peter Buffett, Warren Buffett’s son, took to the editorial pages of the New York Times to denounce Third World philanthropy.

“Microlending and financial literacy—what is this really about?” Buffett asks. “People will certainly learn how to integrate into our system of debt and repayment with interest. People will rise above making $2 a day to enter our world of goods and services so they can buy more. But doesn’t all this just feed the beast?”

To the slum dwellers, the beast isn’t capitalism, it’s that gnawing feeling in your stomach when you haven’t eaten for a day. But Peter Buffett, who lives a life almost as privileged as Prince Charles, bemoans the idea of getting people to the point where they aren’t worried about where their next meal is coming from because it just turns them into capitalists and consumers. And before you know it, they’re buying big screen televisions and writing op-eds in the New York Times on the futility of philanthropy.

“There are people working hard at showing examples of other ways to live in a functioning society that truly creates greater prosperity for all (and I don’t mean more people getting to have more stuff),” Peter Buffett wrote, probably unaware that he was sniffing down the same trail that a thousand communes had gone. But the experimental farm is old hat. The new model is the Third World.

Instead of helping the Third World live like us, the perverse children of the rich dream of making us live like the Third World.

Those working hard to make our society function like Charlie’s favorite slum aren’t moving to their own collective farms. Instead they are transforming our society into the collective farm while pretending that their calculated destruction of our prosperity is smart and modern.

The Soviet Union pretended that its plans for the country were a modern step forward. In reality, the Commissars took the farmers back to feudalism and then turned much of the country into peasants, coping with harvest labor problems by forcing urban populations to come and pick the crops. And those were the good times. In the bad times, highways and other large projects were built through mass slave labor no different than the way that ancient Egypt built the pyramids.

Communist modernism was a Potemkin village, a cheap tacky curtain and behind it, the sweating slave and the stench of Babylon

Communist modernism was a Potemkin village, a cheap tacky curtain and behind it, the sweating slave and the stench of Babylon. The modernism of the progressive is the same facade covered in sociology textbooks, New York Times op-eds and teleprompter speeches. Behind it lie the ruins of Detroit, tribal violence in the slums of every major city and an economy in which there is no more room for the middle class except as clerks in the government bureaucracy. And it doesn’t end there.

The elderly Chinese woman picking through the trash in search of empty beer bottles isn’t the past. She’s the future. Recycling is big business because the government and its affiliated liberal elites decided it should be. It’s just one example of an artificial economy and it’s small stuff compared to the coming carbon crackdown in which every human activity will be monetized and taxed somewhere down the road according to its carbon footprint.

The ultimate dream of the sort of people who can’t sleep at night because they worry that children in India might be able to grow up making more than two dollars a day, is to take away our prosperity for our own good through the total regulation of every area of our lives under the pretext of an imminent environmental crisis.

The Global Warming hysteria is about absolute power over every man, woman and child on earth.

“I strongly believe that the West has much to learn from societies and places which, while sometimes poorer in material terms are infinitely richer in the ways in which they live and organize themselves as communities,” Prince Charles said.

It goes without saying that the Prince of Wales is not about to take personal advantage of these infinite spiritual riches of living in a house made of garbage, drinking contaminated water and dying before thirty. What he is saying is that while he personally is a little too attached to his lifestyle, he thinks that we as a society would be better off giving up on the materialism of living on more than two dollars a day and embracing the infinite social and spiritual riches that rich people imagine are accessible only to impoverished Third Worlders.

              Environmentalism is wealth redistribution on a global scale

Environmentalism is wealth redistribution on a global scale. The goal isn’t even to lift all boats, but to stop the tide of materialism from making too many people too comfortable.

The liberal billionaire who clamors about sustainability likes progress. What he dislikes is the middle class with its mass produced cars and homes, cheap restaurants full of fatty foods and television sets and daily deliveries of cardboard boxes full of stuff and shopping malls. He thinks, in all sincerity, that they would be happier and more spiritually fulfilled as peasants. It’s not an original idea.

The Industrial Revolution had hardly begun revolving when the ‘Back to Nature’ crowd began insisting that it was time to learn a more harmonious way of life by going back to the farm. Centuries later the only new idea that they have come up with is threatening an environmental apocalypse if the middle class doesn’t change its mass producing ways. Even its adoration of the Noble Savage is older than the American Revolution.

The modern environmentalism jettisons the idea of moving to a dilapidated farmhouse to spend time being bored while trying to make artisanal rocking chairs to sell to someone, It’s done its time searching for the noble savage within through drugs and degradation decades ago. Now it’s our turn to tap into the infinity of spiritual riches that comes from just barely getting by.

The sustainable logic of the slum that makes us better people by making us more miserable.

The Soviet idea of progress was feudalism dressed up in Socialist red. Environmentalism dresses up feudalism in Green. It seeks to reverse all the progress that we have made in the name of progress. Environmentalism is as sophisticated as a Soviet collective farm, as modern as the homeless people dragging bags of cans along on sticks to feed the machine and as smart as a slum made of trash.

Beneath all the empty chatter about social riches and sustainability is that need to impose progressive misery.

Beneath the glossy surface of environmentalism is a vision of the American middle class learning to dig through bags of garbage, the detritus of their consumerism for which they must be punished, to become better people.

Institutions don't fight racism, they create it

Institutions don't fight racism, they create it

It’s Hard to See Racism When You’re a Liberal




A few years ago, Newsweek’s glossy cover asked “Is Your Baby Racist?” The baby looking back at supermarket shoppers, airline passengers waiting for their flight and patients in the dental office had blue eyes.

The labeling of racists as white has itself become a racial stereotype. And it’s not an accidental stereotype.

Behind the left’s support for affirmative action is the belief that white racism is the only kind of racism that exists. Black racism they insist is really called “reverse racism” and is a myth made up by white people.

It’s not that the left believes that affirmative action isn’t racist. It’s that it believes that there is no such thing as racism against white people. Like the Knockout Game or white students who qualify on merit but can’t get into college because of racial diversity quotas; it’s an invalid category. A myth.

And if it’s a myth, then there’s nothing wrong with a little racial violence or a few racial preferences.

Our system isn’t immune to bouts of niche insanity. A sizable portion of Hollywood believes that their souls originated on another planet and that they will eventually gain superpowers. Much of Washington D.C. believes that money can be printed infinitely with infinite economic benefits. And the academic and non-profit establishment believes that anti-white racism doesn’t exist.

The left is delusional, but it isn’t completely insane. It doesn’t deny that black hate crimes can take place. It won’t even deny the occasional act of institutional discrimination. And that is where sanity parts ways with insanity because the left does not recognize racism except as a collective phenomenon.

Racism, to the left, exists systemically. It exists institutionally. It exists collectively, but not individually
The debate over affirmative action is about the collective and the individual.

“It cannot be entertained as a serious proposition that all individuals of the same race think alike,” Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the Schuette v. BAMN decision that permits a ban on racial affirmative action discrimination in Michigan. But that’s the exact premise that the left operates under. Or rather it doesn’t care whether members of a race think alike. It still chooses to address them as a group or not at all.

Racism, to the left, exists systemically. It exists institutionally. It exists collectively, but not individually.

All white people are racist. All black people are victims of racism. Any events to the contrary are exceptions to the rule. Racism can only exist one way between the majority and the minority.

Anything else is a mythical ‘reverse racism’.

Conservatives view people as individuals. Leftists view them as parts of a system. To a conservative, racism is something that happens between individuals. To a leftist, it’s the attribute of a system. Trying to convince a leftist that black racism exists or that affirmative action is racist is like trying to convince him that some of the cells in his body are plotting against him.

He doesn’t see individuals, he sees a system.

The debate over affirmative action is really the debate over whether we see people as individuals or cells

The debate over affirmative action is really the debate over whether we see people as individuals or cells, whether the white and black students who want to be seen as individuals will prevail, or whether the totalitarian left with its insistence on viewing them as differently colored marbles in a single system will continue to get its way.

Similarly in politics, conservatives reach out to people who agree with their policies, regardless of race, leading to less diverse, but more intellectually robust groups, while liberals form racial coalitions. Liberals accuse conservatives of racism because they assume that they are not a coalition of individuals, but a racial collective, just like them. The lack of individual conservative racism occasionally registers, but is not processed because only the system matters.

And yet racial healing hasn’t happened in America on a collective level. We haven’t been readjusted as a system. We have changed individually.

That is what the left, with its obsession with systems, cannot see and cannot cope with it. The Great Society failed miserably because we were a great society all along. We weren’t a great society because we were perfect, but because we were constantly striving to better ourselves as individuals.

And it is this trait which affirmative action and the left’s collectivist view undermines.

Systems don’t reject racism. Individuals do.

It is this fundamental truth that Newsweek’s obsession with baby racism and the indoctrination of white privilege are meant to combat. Their collective message is that individuals are products of the system, puppets of their biology, forever damned by an original sin of racism that so thoroughly pervades every part of their being and mental state that they can never escape it.

Not unless the system changes.

That was the left’s defeatist totalitarian response to class. The failure of its systems of economic management and the success of capitalism destroyed its credibility on class. The idea that the working class can never escape poverty under private enterprise has been buried as thoroughly as the statues of Marx and Lenin.

But instead of rethinking its paradigm, the left substituted a race for class. The working class could succeed under private enterprise , but only as long as it was white.

And that’s still wrong.

Race, like class, is not a systemic problem. It’s not a problem of the system, but of the individual. There is no single collective solution, only the solutions that individuals find for themselves. We are not a nation divided between black and white, or between the even more absurd formulation of the colorless whites and the ‘people of color’.

We are individuals. We always were.

Affirmative action denies that race is an individual experience. It denies that race is not the sum of the individual. It denies the suffering of those who are caught between the gears of the system because they are members of the ‘wrong race.’

It denies the individual. It denies his identity, his worth and his agency. It puts the system above the individual and takes away the rights of everyone, of all races, genders and assorted identities.

The left is obsessed with the ‘whiteness’ of the system. Its obsession is not only racist, but it replaces an open system in which people can change and are changing… with a closed system under which they cannot. This totalitarian aspect of the system has been hidden under a sham of empowerment and the rituals of victimization that reward those who play the race card over those who try to do their best.

The system doesn’t reward aspiration, it rewards only outrage. It is interested only in promoting the collective force that keeps its wheels turning, not the individual counter-clockwise rotation of dissent.

Institutions don’t fight racism, they create it

The white experience of black racism is illegitimate because it turns ‘against’ the system. And so it’s a conversation that has to be shut down and an experience that has to be delegitimized with accusations of white privilege. White privilege is an artifact of systemic thinking that does not recognize individuals. It’s an attack by the political immune system of an ideology that has absolutely no room for non-conforming experiences.

What will determine the outcome of the affirmative action debate and the larger debates over race and class is whether we approach them as individuals or as parts of a system. Americans resist being treated like interchangeable parts of a system, but the individual narratives that the left uses so effectively are cover for systemic approaches and systemic solutions.

The left has responded to institutionalized racism with institutionalized racism until it became the very racist institution that it was once fighting against. Institutions don’t fight racism, they create it. The most compelling argument against the left’s collective racial policies has always been the individual.

Organizations can create hate, but only individuals can replace it with love.

American Mafia

American Mafia

Senator Harry Reid rides to the rescue!

BLM Siege At Bunkerville - The Real Story

Author
By Steve Miller

AmericanMafia.com:http://www.americanmafia.com/Inside_Vegas/4-28-14_Inside_Vegas.html

Big profits are being threatened by animals grazing on prime real estate, but the real story has been lost in a haze of inciteful rhetoric
A rancher’s refusal to sell his land and stop his cattle from grazing nearby may have created a crisis in the real estate industry

BUNKERVILLE, NEVADA - Neil Kornze joined the Bureau of Land Management in 2011. He has been leading the BLM as Deputy Director for the past year.  Before his appointment, Kornze worked as a Senior Policy Advisor to U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

In 2013, following a five year recession, business in Mesquite, Nevada, five miles north of Bunkerville and 80 miles north of Las Vegas, began a miraculous recovery. Millions of dollars began to be invested in the area, and tired resort properties were lavishly refurbished. Retirement communities such as Sun City Mesquite sprung back to life and realtors began to again find buyers for expensive riverside or golf course frontage homes.

However, unbeknownst to the public, several miles down the Virgin River from the City of Mesquite, a lone hold out Mormon rancher named Cliven Bundy was about to throw a wrench in the works and bring anticipated development in the Riverside Road and Gold Butte area to a sudden stop because his cattle were “trespassing” on some of the most desirable real estate in Clark County.  He was to act alone because all his fellow ranchers had sold their spreads earlier.http://www.mesquitenv.gov/

Enter United States Senator Harry Reid.

On April 5, 2014, dozens of heavily armed federal agents arrived near Bundy’s Ranch and began seizure of his cattle that were illegally grazing on prime real estate presently controlled by the BLM. Federal agents also entered Bundy’s 160 acre ranch and later admitted to destroying water tanks, and killing six cows.http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/16/feds-accused-leaving-trail-wreckage-after-nevada-ranch-standoff/

http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/bundy-blm/blm-confirms-six-bundy-cattle-died-roundup

The BLM’s armed cattle seizure was undeniably an extreme and very expensive over reaction, when a lien could have been placed on the ranch until the court ordered grazing fees are paid. That’s why many believe there’s an underlying reason such a raid occurred, a reason the BLM does not want the public to know.


Undeveloped BLM grazing land near Bunkerville, April 2014

Developed former BLM land near Bunkerville, May 2013

As a former land developer, and later a member of the City of Las Vegas and Clark County land planning boards, I learned that the Director of the BLM has the authority to schedule auctions of public land. That’s how the land surrounding Las Vegas was bought cheap and developed. Too often, the choice of what land to auction, when, and the minimum acceptable bid has political overtones. If Neil Kornze decides to auction the land and water rights along the Virgin River or on Gold Butte overlooking the Bundy Ranch, I personally believe that investors close to the Reids will be first to know, and first in line to bid and purchase way under market value.

During 2013, Cliven Bundy unsuccessfully represented himself as a pro-se defendant in United States of America v. Bundy in the court of Federal Judge Lloyd D. George. Judge George ruled that Bundy owed the government hundreds of thousands in unpaid grazing fees. On August 9, 2013, Cliven Bundy acting as his own attorney appealed Judge George’s order to the Ninth Circuit Court. The Ninth Circuit dismissed Bundy’s appeal on January 30, 2014. Since then, Bundy has refused to abide by Judge George’s order claiming the federal government has no jurisdiction over Clark County land. (Lloyd George, a graduate of Brigham Young University, is a respected leader in the Southern Nevada Mormon community. The Lloyd D. George Federal Courthouse in Las Vegas, is named in his honor.)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lloyd_D._George_Federal_Courthouse#Las_Vegas

No Fly Zones

When the armed feds arrived on their land, the Bundy family sent out an SOS through social media.  Over a thousand ranchers and supporters arrived to support the family along with a number of militia members. Most arrived more than a day after armed BLM agents closed public roads and confronted the Bundy family, tazing several family members, all caught on cell phone cameras and uploaded to the Internet.

As the standoff and media coverage escalated, on Friday, April 11, the FAA suddenly established FAA NOTAM 4/1687 TFR Mesquite, Nevada, an unprecedented TFR (Temporary Flight Restriction). TFRs are most often used to prohibit civilian aircraft from flying near places where the President or Vice President are visiting. However, this TFR was specifically designed to prohibit all civilian flights including news helicopters from flying over a ranch during a cattle seizure. (Steve Miller is an ATP rated instructor pilot and former flight school owner.)http://www.stevemiller4lasvegas.com/BunkervilleTFR.jpg

First Amendment Areas

Then, also lacking precedent was the establishment of “First Amendment Areas” intended to corral media and protesters far from view of the cattle roundup. Cliven Bundy’s 37 year old son David was arrested for taking photos outside one of these areas. The presence of First Amendment Areas insulted members of the press, and they responded by converging on the Bundy Ranch in droves, many taking the Bundy’s side in the dispute..http://kutv.com/news/top-stories/stories/cattle-battle-update-ranchers-son-arrested-utah-ranchers-protest-federal-government-10501.shtml



On April 12, knowing the feds were outnumbered ten to one by Bundy supporters - many carrying weapons, and seeing reporters from around the world on site covering the breaking story, Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie asked the BLM to stand down.

After the federal agents retreated in a cloud of dust caused by spinning the wheels of their official vehicles, Bundy ordered his sons to open a temporary corral set up by the BLM, and release his cattle. Severely dehydrated in 90 degree heat, the cows headed directly to the Virgin River to drink while the Bundy family and hundreds of supporters celebrated by wading in the muddy water near the hydrating cattle.

After the BLM (temporarily) abandoned their effort, many thought the danger was over. However, Senator Reid appeared on national TV that evening and issued the warning “It’s not over!”
http://www.mynews4.com/news/story/Sen-Reid-on-Cattle-Battle-Its-not-over/nT5weKnqFkezV14I5GhESg.cspx

During the next week, the international media stood vigil at the entrance to the Bundy Ranch waiting for Reid’s threatened next move. Hundreds of armed militia members camped on the river’s edge nearby. During the lull, the media turned their interest to all things Bundy. That’s when the world got to know the Bundys, a church going pioneer family with fourteen grown children who are decedents of the first Mormon settlers in Nevada. The Bundys and their ancestors have operated the same ranch in the Bunkerville area for over 150 years - vividly contrasting the KKK, Timothy McVeigh, Ruby Ridge, Terry Nichols, or Branch Davidian comparisons made by pundits on MSNBC.

Inspired by the attention, the family patriarch Cliven Bundy unwisely used his fifteen minutes of fame to express several personal opinions that totally distracted from the crisis at hand.

Mr. Bundy’s ill-timed and distracting remarks included demanding local sheriffs seize guns from all federal agents, and his wondering out load if some “Negroes” who live in North Las Vegas would be “better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things? Or are they better off under government subsidy?” (Full transcript of his remarks.)http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/unedited-tape-bundy-emerges-sheds-light-racist-remarks

Bundy’s unsolicited comments totally distracted the media from more important subjects such as whether the No Fly Zone was intended to block news coverage of the actions of the federal agents? Or was a massive land grab by politically connected real estate developers in the works?http://www.stevemiller4lasvegas.com/BunkervilleTFR.jpg

One way or the other, establishing a No Fly Zone, and dispatching hundreds of federal agents with M16s and helicopters to rustle up a few hundred “trespassing” cattle took overwhelming political clout, the kind of clout only a U.S. Senate Majority Leader could muster!

It also cost taxpayers millions of dollars more than Bundy owes in grazing fees.

But, Bundy’s misplaced opinions about the plight of some North Las Vegas “Negroes” and his subsequent inarticulate apology took center stage and allowed those who opposed him to rally behind Reid who responded by calling Bundy a “hateful racist,”http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/24/harry-reid-cliven-bundy_n_5207150.html

 and calling Bundy’s supporters “domestic terrorists.http://www.reviewjournal.com/politics/reid-calls-bundy-supporters-domestic-terrorists

” Reid’s unqualified and hypocritical (see his statement below) “hateful racist” remark, and calling ordinary people “terrorists” carelessly fanned the flames in an already explosive situation, but not everyone agrees with Reid’s racist description of Bundy. Here are two qualified opposing views: Youtube.com;

Cliven Bundy’s poorly thought out remarks remind me of when Ross Perot withdrew his candidacy during the 1992 presidential election claiming he received threats by the Bush campaign to sabotage his daughter’s wedding.  It had nothing to do with Perot’s campaign, and totally distracted the media from his message. He also lost his base over it, and was never heard from again.

Bundy had the option to stay on subject and not be goaded into responding to questions about his personal views on subjects unrelated to the cattle seizure. Now he, like Perot, has lost much of his base, is being called names by Reid and his followers, and the real story of the BLM siege at Bunkerville may never be told.

Based on the distraction, I now envision master planned communities coming years sooner on land that was formerly grazed on by Bundy’s cattle.http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=K9lRTbUpOJo



  In the meantime, I hope the Bundy’s are paid for the infrastructure damaged by federal agents, and for the six cows agents killed and buried. Had he kept his opinions on unrelated subjects to himself, Bundy’s cattle might have been allowed to continue grazing on prime BLM real estate for some time - that’s if he paid his past due fees. Now I expect a BLM auction of that beautiful real estate and water rights within the next several years with help from Senator Reid, his former advisor Neil Kornze, and Reid’s lawyer sons Rory and Leif.http://www.lionelsawyer.com/index.cfm?page_id=5&page=attorney_profile&atid=49

http://www.lrrlaw.com/e-leif-reid/

There’s so much more to this story.  It’s clearly not about cows!  It’s about cheap BLM land with water rights, and about greedy developers. It’s well known that Reid’s sons represent Chinese investors. After all this aggravation, it’s hoped that only American citizens are successful in buying the cheap Bunkerville land if and when it’s auctioned.http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/31/us-usa-china-reid-solar-idUSBRE87U06D20120831

That said, guns should never have been brandished against citizens or government officials over real estate. If developers want to buy the now BLM land and water rights along the Virgin River or on Gold Butte bad enough, they should not use their stooges in D.C. to try to take it at gunpoint. If and when the BLM decides to auction it off, I hope they will get fair market value for the taxpayers, not discount it to favored bidders as the BLM is well known to do.

On March 26, Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie said, “No drop of human blood is worth spilling over any cow, in my opinion.”  And conversely, no drop of human blood is worth spilling over someone’s desire to buy beautiful BLM real estate at discount prices, either!http://www.reviewjournal.com/politics/slash-politics/backing-down-feds-have-made-bundy-situation-worse

Cliven Bundy’s careless remarks should never have become the main topic of this story any more than Senator Reid’s careless “Light skinned with no Negro dialect unless he wanted to have one” remark about Barack Obama that was underplayed during the 2008 Presidential campaign, or then-Delaware Senator Joseph Biden’s careless (Obama is the)http://www.nbcnews.com/id/34783136/ns/politics-capitol_hill/t/obama-reid-always-right-side-history/ “first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy” remark in 2007 that was never criticized by the same media commentators who are now attacking Bundy for making equally careless racial remarks. (All three apologized after learning they offended people.)http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-01-31-biden-2008_x.htm

A Senate Majority Leader and a Vice President were never called “hateful racist” for their remarks!  Why is a similar remark from a nobody rancher now making headlines? Maybe to distract from the real story - the BLM being used as a pawn in a land and water rights grab to benefit politically connected developers.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/24/harry-reid-cliven-bundy_n_5207150.html

For the time being, the real story of the BLM siege at Bunkerville is lost in a haze of inciteful rhetoric. It’s time to get back on point before the BLM returns to complete their ominous orders.

(Everybody’s a Racist!)

Everybody’s a Racist!: Welcome to the ‘Era of EAR’ where branding innocent citizens as racists is an unremovable BHO tattoo

Living in The ‘Era of EAR’

Author
By Judi McLeod

The Year 2014 is climaxing as the ‘Era of EAR’ (Everybody’s a Racist!)

EAR is here—and was here long before the New York Times came along to even the playing field for the gun-toting Bureau of Land Management (BLM) against rabble rouser Rancher Cliven Bundy.

Everybody’s a racist and that’s the way it will stay as long as President Barack Obama’s in office.  So long as everybody’s a racist, there will be no need for the administration to ever do the right thing.

If you reached the plateau of power and had such a convenient tool as robot- racist branding, wouldn’t you cling to that Marxist magic?

Qualifying as a racist has never been so easy.  You don’t have to sign up for membership as you do down at the local lending library, you just have to be against NSA spying, IRS intimidation; be pro-Constitution, pro-America or stubbornly anti-ObamaCare.

If you stand for liberty and freedom,  individual rights or anything else that made America what it was until January, 2009, you are an out and out racist.  The reverends Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson;  Oprah Winfrey, Hollywood stars, Obama czars or the New York Times will get you.  They will leave your opinions lifeless of passion to lie in your cold dead hands,  claiming you never had them in the first place.

Those who dare to raise a dissenting voice against Big Government are branded more painfully than any of Bundy’s cows.  Cows will get up and nosh the nearest blade of grass right after their branding.  Racists branded as such dare not struggle feebly to their God-given feet when they know the intention is to gag them for all time.

So how do you know whether you are earmarked by EAR?  Easy.  Only the lemmings of the Brave New World will never be branded racist.  Lemmings answer to the clarion call of “Free Stuff” and nevah, evah criticize the policies of the current White House regime.

It’s not only the big-talking BLM riding roughshod over hardworking ranchers with branding irons at the ready.  There are the aforementioned Sharpton, Jackson, Winfrey, the stars and czars.

There are too many ways to count when branding citizens as racists.  Church goers, other than those who bow with Al Gore to the religion known as Global Warming, are easily identifiable racists.

People who believe in the sanctity of life?  Same thing.

Anybody who owns a gun, thinks about owning a gun, spells the word gun, draws a gun, eats a sandwich in the shape of a gun or uses a finger as a gun is a blankety-blank racist.  And it’s no excuse if you’re only 5-years-old.

Carrying Old Glory, wearing a flag, saluting the flag or honouring a flag makes you a likely racist suffering from a bad case of patriotism.

The ‘Era of EAR’ will claim more victims than any strain of the flu.  By government rule or executive order, there will be no inoculation or antidote against it.Welcome to the ‘Era of EAR’ where branding innocent citizens as racists is an unremovable BHO tattoo.

People who believe in the sanctity of life

http://veteransproject.wix.com/the-veterans-project

Please forward this to as many of your contacts that you can and ask them to support this cause and to forward it to their contacts as well.

Thanks for your support