Saturday, March 30, 2013
Easter, Civil War, and Sovereignty
The topic is not pleasant, but the issue has become threateningly real. Most unfortunately, the prospect of a possible, coming civil war in the United States is no longer just a fictional scenario that remains safely locked away in the film canisters of Hollywood (See accompanying 10 minute video).
Although I pray that things may never reach such a level of insanity, we cannot just continue to live our lives in denial in relation to what is taking place within the federal government. Indeed, for quite some time -- and across a number of administrations -- various dimensions of the federal government of the United States have been making preparations to go to war against American citizens should the time arrive when committing federal forces and resources to that sort of path is considered necessary with respect to advancing the economic, financial, social, and political agenda of those who are in power.
The Patriot Act, The John Warner Defense Authorization Act, the Military Commissions Act, the National Defense Authorization Act, unprecedented, warrantless surveillance on all forms of domestic communication in the United States (one should familiarize oneself with what NSA whistleblowers William Binney and Thomas Drake have to say on this matter, not to mention Mark Klein's comments concerning AT&T's role in all of this), and a slew of Executive Orders (such as 10990, 10995, 10997, 10998, 10999, 11000, 11001, 11002, 11003, 11004, 11005, and 11921), together with the procurement of 1.5 billion rounds of hollow point ammunition by Homeland Security, as well as the purchase of enough body bags by DHS to house half the population of the United States, are all parts of the whole being alluded to above.
There also are treaties now in place between the United States and Canada which stipulate that if one of the two nations declares martial law, the armed forces of the other nation can be sent into (or will be permitted into) the country that has established martial law in order to assist the latter government in support of its oppression of citizens. Furthermore, the federal government has indicated that military personnel returning home from overseas may, because of their skill sets, constitute terrorist threats to the United States.
All the pieces are in place for the Office of the President to declare martial law at the drop of a hat. if this is done, the President would become a military dictator (remember he is Commander in Chief of the armed forces, though not of America citizens), having complete control (thanks to the aforementioned Executive Orders) of: all communications media (including the Internet); all modes of transportation (including highways, seaports, trains, buses, inland waterways, and air fields); all sources of energy, all food resources and farms; all forms of education; and all financial institutions. In addition, Executive Order 11921 empowers the Office of the President to declare a state of emergency that is not defined and which Congress cannot review for 6 months. Moreover, Executive Order 11000 permits the federal government to organize American citizens into work brigades that serve the pleasure of the federal government.
The accompanying 10 minute piece consists largely of an interview involving Dr. James Garrow, a Canadian citizen, who wrote the book: The Pink Pagoda: One Man's Quest to End Gendercide in China, and over the past 16 years, or so, has spent more than $25 million dollars in a successful effort to rescue approximately 40,000 Chinese baby girls from the almost certain fatal ramifications of China's one-child-per-couple policy. However, the interview does not explore the gendercide taking place in China but, instead, talks about the potential for a different kind of genocide which might be facing Americans.
Certain patriots high up in the command structure of the U.S. military have spoken with Dr. Garrow and urged him to come forward to give public expression to a set of events that is taking place between the military and certain facets of the federal government. More specifically, there is a litmus test that has been operating within military circles which is asking the following question: 'Would you fire on American citizens if they refused to give up their guns.'
This is not an idle issue. During Hurricane Katrina, homes were breached in Louisiana by military personnel, as well as by employees of military contractors such as Blackwater (which has gone through several name changes and is now known as Academe). The residents of those homes were threatened at gun point to hand over their weapons.
I am not a gun owner. In fact, I have never owned a gun ... although I went hunting a couple of times when a teenager using a .22 that belonged to my father.
Furthermore, I am not a fan of the gun lobby. For, despite whatever platitudes it mouths in conjunction with 2nd Amendment rights, it often ends up playing everyone against the middle in a self-serving policy intended to generate huge profits.
In addition, I am saddened by tragedies like those in Newtown, Conneticut, Aurora, Colorado, and the Arizona rampage which nearly cost Gabby Gifford her life while ending the lives of so-many other innocents. However, if tragedy and loss of life is the criterion for generating public policy, then, perhaps one should go after the medical profession for the nearly one million iatrogenic deaths which are caused every year through the recklessness, thoughtlessness, and negligence of hospital personnel ... in fact, al-Qaeda -- whatever its sins might be (I am sure those sins are legion) and despite its more than a decade of operations in one form or another -- has killed or injured only a small fraction of the people who have been killed, injured, and maimed through the medical/health professions in the United States every single year. Given such mayhem, it is a wonder that the professionals in that latter array of occupations have not been declared a terrorist group.
Or, let's consider all the people who are killed every year through automobile accidents (quite a few thousands of these are linked to drunk drivers). There are many times the number of people who are killed and injured through the misuse of the automobile as a weapon than are killed and injured through the misuse of guns. If tragedy and loss of life are the criteria for banning things, then, perhaps, we need to take a closer look at cars, their owners, and the people who manufacture, distribute, and sell alcohol.
Another inconvenient set of facts which is often hid in the debate over guns, is the role which pharmaceuticals (e.g., anti-depressants, anti-anxiety medications, mood stabilizers, attention deficit disorders, and a host of other arbitrary inventions in the medical cornucopia of profit-making) play in generating senseless deaths (both of others and via suicide) within, and beyond, the walls of schools and homes across America. Having taught all manner of courses in psychology for a number of years in both Canada and the United States, I am well acquainted with the evidence indicating that not only do prescribed psychoactive drugs not work as hyped, but, just as importantly, those drugs actually de-stabilize people's mental and emotional condition (for those who are interested, read: 'Medication Madness' by Peter Breggin, 'Our Daily Meds' by Melody Peterson, Side Effects by Alison Bass, and 'The Myth of the Chemical Cure' by Dr. Joanna Moncrieff), and, yet, hardly a word is mentioned about the role which pharmaceutical companies have been shown to play in conjunction with the perpetuation of violence in America.
When I taught criminology in Canada, I made certain that my students were aware of the following fact. Namely, there are far more deaths, injuries, and theft which take place as the result of corporate activity than is due to street crime considered collectively. Maybe, we should begin to think about banning corporations and classifying them as terrorist groups.
Guns were taken away from the people of the Soviet Union. Dictatorship ensued.
Guns have been taken away from people in Australia. Crime has skyrocketed.
Many Australians rue the day that they permitted their weapons to be confiscated by their government. One can shake one's head in the negative all one wants, but there is a negative correlation between crime rates and the presence of citizens who are armed -- that is, when citizens are armed, the rate of crime tends to be suppressed ... although there are always exceptions to this general tendency.
The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting wild game or target practice. It is the right of citizens to bear arms and, if necessary, to use those arms in defending themselves against whatever oppressive and tyrannical forces seek to take away the inherent right to sovereignty which people have ... a right that precedes, and, therefore, is not derived from, or granted by, governments, and in the light of the revelations being issued by Dr. James Garrow in the accompanying 10 minute interview, the American people will need their guns to protect themselves against a government which has established all of the legal mechanisms that are necessary to destroy democracy in America and take over the United States and make it a military dictatorship under the auspices of the Office of the President ... and if this is not what certain people at the federal level of government had in mind, they would have not rammed such legislation as: the Patriot Act, or the John Warner Defense Authorization Act, the Military Commissions Act, or the National Defense Authorization Act through Congress (and, unfortunately, very few people in Congress actually take the time to carefully read what they are voting on, and, therefore, are guilty of violating Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution).
Will some people use guns irresponsibly, arbitrarily, and criminally when interacting with other human beings? Unfortunately, the answer to this question is: "Yes."
However, people -- being human -- will also use cars, medical licensing, corporate power, and political office in various irresponsible, negligent, and criminal ways when interacting with other individuals as well. Tragedies due to the misuse of guns are many, but there are many more tragedies in American life which are due to the misuse of economic, political, financial, and corporate power than to the misuse of guns, and, therefore, before considering the issue of guns, one should deal with the other, more pressing, devastating and more problematic ramifications which ensue from the acts of criminality, insanity, and cruelty which are made possible through governments, corporations, banks, and educational institutions.
For those of you who are Christian, then, in addition to the issues surrounding the resurrection of Jesus (peace be upon him) on which you focus during this time of year, you might also want to reflect on a different kind of resurrection during, and following, this Easter holiday -- namely, the resurrection of sovereignty in the United States. Sovereignty is suffering, and the centurions are gambling on its robe beneath the shadow of sovereignty's ebbing light.