Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘history’ Category

This week President Barack Obama ordered the assassination of American citizen Anwar al-Awlaki. The Obama government has “linked” al-Awlaki to Ft. Hood gunman Nidal Malik Hasan and underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, and considers him an “imminent threat to national security”. Al-Awlaki is believed to be hiding in Yemen.

Pay attention here, people. A very important line has been crossed. Not even King George W. Bush ever ordered the assassination of an American citizen. Not even FDR, when putting thousands of Japanese-Americans in prison camps, publicly proclaimed that one of them be speedily executed without a trial. With this order, Barack Obama has chosen not only to violate the Ford/Carter/Reagan ban on political assassinations, but also the 5th and 6th amendments to the United States Constitution. In case you don’t recall those, I’ll post them here:

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

[The “time of war or public danger” argument won’t work here; the United States Congress has not declared war on any one, nor have they declared us to be in a time of public danger.]

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

We have crossed over into uncharted territory. From this point forward, American citizenship no longer protects said citizens from assassination by their own government. The Constitution has again been reduced to so much toilet paper, and all in the name of “keeping us safe”. Do you feel safer?

I don’t.

Read Full Post »

henryOn March 23, 1775, Patrick Henry stepped before the Virginia Convention of the House of Burgesses and delivered what is one of the most well known speeches in American History. Stooped under the weight of the Intolerable Acts, the Virginians were still unsure whether or not to enter into open rebellion against Great Britain. While no one in attendance that day wrote down Henry’s words, the speech was so burned into the memories of his fellow patriots that 36 years later William Wirt, Henry’s biographer, was able to accurately reconstruct the speech from their recollections. Wirt describes the listeners after Henry concluded:

“No murmur of applause was heard. The effect was too deep. After the trance of a moment, several members started from their seats. The cry, ‘to arms,’ seemed to quiver on every lip, and gleam from every eye!… That supernatural voice still sounded in their ears, and shivered along their arteries… They became impatient of speech – their souls were on fire for action.”

And so it was that the colony of Virginia sent troops to war with the British, and the American Revolution was joined. 27 days later, on April 19, the first shots were fired at Lexington and Concord. Seven long years of war followed until, on September 3, 1783, the Treaty of Paris formally freed the United States from Great Britain.

Patrick Henry went on to become the governor of Virginia from 1784 to 1786 and a fierce defender of state’s rights. He and fellow Antifederalists were instrumental in engineering the addition of the Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution.

It is conceivable that our nation would look very different today if Patrick Henry had not spoken the following words. This one small spark ingnited the inferno from which sprung the great American experiment. Unlike speeches from today’s politicians, whose endless and flowery words stand for very little and are soon forgotten, Henry’s speech was very brief, meant everything, and still endures. Happy Birthday Patrick Henry, from a grateful nation.

“No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.”

“Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.”

“I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free– if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending–if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained–we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!”

“They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable ­ and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.”

“It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace ­ but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

Listen to the speech here.

Watch a reenactment of the speech here.

For a modern, disturbing, and highly relevant interpretation of Patrick Henry’s speech, go here.

Read Full Post »

sleepyelephantThis is a call to all of my brothers and sisters who flock to the banner of the red, white, and blue elephant; who name yourselves for the original American form of government; who claim Thomas Jefferson and James Madison as your political forefathers. Many of you have been sleeping for the past 8 years, blissfully unaware that those of your ranks in public office were straying dangerously from the path of freedom. You barely stirred at your party’s adoption of massive government expansion, gross fiscal irresponsibility, and degradation of personal liberty. You sleepwalked through the election, hoping to squeak another carbon copy president into office who would let you doze away one more term. You may be sleeping even now, as a party of different name but similar intentions exercises its new found power. This is your wake up call. The time has come for you to embrace your true heritage and join the battle. The time has come for you to open your eyes.

Even now your party is lying to you. Your leader claims that you have “turned a corner” and can now begin your climb back to prominence, yet he stands firm on the same broken principles that led to your utter defeat. Your major spokesman talks the talk, but when it comes time to cast his vote, seems to forget all about walking the walk. Yet he is enthusiastically cheered by your party faithful. The people’s representative from the state of New York, one of your own, has introduced a plan to strip you of your most basic rights without due process of law, yet there is no outcry. There is barely a whimper.

Do you really think that you can rebuild the Grand Old Party with empty men of straw? Will you continue to elect those who give lip service to the Constitution, but true service to the purse? Do you truly believe that once you have allowed them to strip you of your right of self defense, they will allow you to keep your right to speak, your right to assemble, and your right to worship? Welcome to the truth: the party you cling to is no more. It has become the other half of the other side. There are no more D’s and R’s; they all stand for the same thing: the party of P. The party of power.

Republicans, your only path to restoration is the path of liberty. It is time for those who truly believe in freedom to break the chains of party loyalty. Don’t be afraid, this is familiar ground. It is the ground your party founders once walked. The republic of Jefferson and Madison is gone, buried long ago beneath reams of bad laws and good intentions. We must work together to clear away the rubble of America’s broken two party system and uncover the nation they left to us: a nation where every man is free to enjoy the fruit of his labor, the peace with his neighbor, and the blessings of his Creator. The fight will not be short or easy; the establishment is entrenched against us. But if we have the courage to abandon our labels and stand together, we can restore to a proud people what was once an honorable tradition. Wake up Republicans! Dust off your Constitution and join the cause. The Republic awaits.

Read Full Post »

homeland-securityFollowing the lead of the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC), the Department of Homeland Security has released a nationwide report entitled Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment. In this report the DHS claims that “small terrorist cells embracing violent rightwing extremist ideology are the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States.”

The DHS report closely mirrors the original MIAC report in its description of the militia terrorist movement, citing current trends like illegal immigration, conspiracy theories, and increased gun control as drivers of the movement. Authors of the DHS report also claim that the current economic downturn and the election of the first African-American president are contributing to the increased danger from right-wing extremists. As evidence of this “most dangerous domestic terrorist threat” the authors of the report cite the recent slaying of three Pittsburgh police officers by an insane gunman.

The DHS throws a new ingredient into the mix as well. Cited in the report are fears that Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans are being recruited by right-wing extremists. These veterans supposedly increase the militia’s legitimate military knowledge and deadliness.

I concede that there are some crazies out there who call themselves militias. I also concede that the law enforcement community would do well to learn a little about them so that they can be prepared for what dangers come their way. You could almost read through this report and come away saying, “What’s the big deal?” But if you look to the heart of the matter, that is, what the DHS considers “right wing extremism”, you should spot a glaring problem. The authors of the report are kind enough to provide us with this definition at the bottom of the second full page of text:

Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

Did you catch the middle part? The part I highlighted in red? If not, here it is again:

Rightwing extremism in the United States…[is] those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely.

If these “modern anti-federalists” are the rightwing extremists that the DHS considers “the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States”, then perhaps the following echoes from two of our rightwing extremist founding fathers will be instructive for them:

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite……The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. –James Madison

The several States composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for special purposes — delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force. –Thomas Jefferson

Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state. –Thomas Jefferson

We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties.
–James Madison

Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves are its only safe depositories.
–Thomas Jefferson

A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained in arms, is the best most natural defense of a free country. –James Madison

For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security. –Thomas Jefferson

I own that I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive. –Thomas Jefferson

The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted.
–James Madison

American patriots are not the enemy, despite the Obama government’s efforts to paint us as such. We only seek to peacefully defend the health of the republic and the welfare of its citizens; our ideals are fully grounded in the birth and history of our nation. But I guess there is some comfort we can draw from the obvious paranoia of the report:

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. –Thomas Jefferson

Read Full Post »

argentinaflagAs a follow up to yesterday’s post, here is a video of prominent Argentinian analyst and economist Adrian Salbuchi explaining how the current U.S. economy resembles the economy of Argentina in 2001 and how we are headed for a similar outcome.

Read Full Post »

argentinaIf you want to see a full blown economic collapse up close, look no further than Argentina in 2001. A quick Google search will turn up many detailed comparisons between Argentina’s economic situation then and the boondoggle in the United States now. If President Obama and the American Congress continue on their wild spending spree, many economists fear the U.S. will soon face severe hyperinflation, much like Argentina did.

The following excellent documentary shows the progression and extent of the Argentine crisis in 2001. Let us not be so arrogant as to believe that something similar can’t happen to us. Of course, unlike in Argentina, citizens of the United States are still allowed to own firearms. That means, if such an inflationary crisis arrives, there will be a lot more noise than banging pans in the streets.

If you prefer to watch the film in several shorter segments, here are the links for parts 1-12.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9
Part 10
Part 11
Part 12

Read Full Post »

changeMany believe that the most important and terrible casualty of the Bush years was the Bill of Rights. The Bush Administration, under the guise of protecting the American people from terrorists at home and abroad, dealt several serious blows the natural rights of U.S. citizens, mainly through legislation like the Patriot Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. These dastardly deeds were done in broad daylight and all the while we were reassured that they were for our own good. Many of us lost faith.

Enter the Agent of Change. Barack Obama has promised an open, honest, and transparent administration that will restore our faith in America. Thank goodness. Finally a man who will respect and preserve the natural rights of Americans the way the Founding Fathers intended. That sounds like a man you could teach your son to respect, maybe while he was participating in a valuable program like the Boy Scouts of America.

I’m sure Scoutmaster Todd Rausch was thinking something similar when he asked the Boy Scouts in Troop 100 to research the Bill of Rights and how it applies to their citizenship. One of the sources he recommended for their project was the White House website, www.whitehouse.gov. Imagine his surprise when his scouts informed him that the Bill of Rights posted on the official White House website didn’t seem to match the Bill of Rights they had found in other sources.

That’s right. Apparently in a bout of honest helpfulness, the Obama White House has paraphrased the Bill of Rights in the Constitution section of their website. Maybe they thought we were too illiterate and simple-minded to understand the original, or maybe something a little deeper is going on here. Because, you see, the new version is not just a paraphrase. Whoever wrote the pseudo-Bill of Rights for http://www.whitehouse.gov worked in enough subtle changes with the language to substantially alter the meaning of this important document.

Just as an example, let’s take the 2nd Amendment, which we all know Barack Obama does not support. Here is the original:

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

Here is the Obama version:

“The Second Amendment gives citizens the right to bear arms.”

Let’s start with the obvious. The Second Amendment does not give citizens the right to bear arms. The right to bear arms in self defense is a natural right. You get it by being a human being. Notice that the original 2nd Amendment assumes that citizens already have the right to bear arms and simply states that that right shall not be infringed. If you read the Obama version, you might be led to believe that the right to keep and bear arms hinges on the 2nd Amendment and can be taken away if the amendment is ever repealed. It does not and can not.

Secondly the Obama version blatantly omits the Founders’ reference to the necessity of a militia for the security of a free state. There is currently a lot of controversy about the “Modern Militia Movement” and its links to homegrown terrorism. The truth is that militias, in a historical sense, were made up of all able-bodied male citizens between the ages of 18 and 45 as mandated by the Militia Act of 1792. Without these citizen militias, the American Revolution would have been lost. The militias were not criminals or terrorists, nor were they the National Guard, which wasn’t established until 1903. The militias were an integral part of America’s military and they may prove to be so again. The Obama Bill of Rights chooses to ignore both their history and their very existence.

This is just one example of the seemingly innocent changes the White House has made to their version of the Bill of Rights. There are 9 more. Another obvious example is the 4th Amendment which states:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The Obama version reads:

“The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable search and seizure. The government may not conduct any searches without a warrant, and such warrants must be issued by a judge and based on probable cause.”

I’ll leave you to dissect the differences in this one yourself.

Todd Rausch has set up an online petition demanding that the Obama Administration change the mangled version of the Bill of Rights on their website back to the original. It is also possible to leave a comment at the White House website itself requesting this change. This issue may seem small and insignificant to some, but those who wish to preserve the liberty that our Founders intended for us should be aware of every subtle and “innocent” attempt to alter their immortal words. The Bill of Rights is not to be tampered with, especially in such a duplicitous manner. At least George W. Bush had the courtesy to trash our rights in broad daylight.

Read the Obama bill of rights here.

Read the real Bill of Rights here.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »