The Mongoose Trick

Swan Song

2008-10-15T11:49:00.000-07:00

So, we’ve all been required to invest in the stock market and banking industry, whether we like it or not and to the tune of $20,000 for each paycheck taxpayer. All of it, of course, is on account of the same thing as Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and a score more before them – national security. This isn’t unprecedented, of course; there was Chrysler Corporation, and, of course, the $100,000,000,000 we invested in the oil companies by way of “oil depletion allowances” and the odious. Put those with the hundreds of billions military industrial complex corporations are permitted to steal, and you have a good idea why a home that cost $20,000 dollars in 1960 costs $200,000 today.

The stock market is climbing; of course: where’s the risk when you know the government will hold someone up in order to assure that you don’t lose. Buy whatever you choose on even bad credit – the government will make your neighbor pay what you can’t.

And right and left wing extremists alike are telling themselves this isn’t a socialist country. How blind stupid can you get?!

The two presidential candidates are promising to cut taxes (every damned election since 1960, the same litany of lies regarding taxes, and people continue voting – incredible!) by printing more fiat money and spending more, and the morons who play the children’s monopoly game of politics go on . . . is there an echo in here?

Anyway, this is my swan song to the Internet and the discussion of it all there. I started my website and conversation with the public as part of a research project having to do with a proposed socio-economic thesis (for a PhD I now realize I need like I need a new hairstyle), an effort to learn how well the U.S. public thinks, and why that might be – the effects of Operation MOCKINGBIRD, in other words. The effort, which included nationwide travel, teaching in a Texas High School, and the Internet discourse and debate to which I had reference a minute ago, has had results I couldn’t have anticipated at the outset. Together with the federal swindle to which I had reference at the outset here, it has resulted in wife Rita’s and my own determination to begin preparation for what must now come soon, the swift decay and ruin of the nation.

Operation MOCKINGBIRD, the effort of the military industrial complex brainchild that was the CIA, has succeeded eminently, probably far beyond its most hopeful imaginings at the time of its creation. Conceived as the total takeover and control of the nation’s thought processes in the form of the news and information media, MOCKINGBIRD has reduced the U.S. public to a state so reminiscent of the “proles” in George Orwell’s prophetic book, “1984,” that almost no rational and original thought can be expected. An example is an electorate that believes contradictory nonsense like that being promulgated by today’s supposed (indeed, that anyone believes real an absurd charade like the current presidential campaign is evidence of intense behavioral conditioning and resulted dementia) political parties. It will demonstrate to future historians the fact of CIA and military industrial complex coup d’etat leaders’ MKULTRA mind and opinion control science success.

An electorate supporting with its finances and vote candidates like those we have today is like a rape victim cheering on her attacker. Your government, after all, has decided that you need to assure the success of the people who have daily been stealing you blind – corporate America, Wall Street, the bankers, and the nations financiers otherwise – and the government has gone to the bank (much the way IRS did when it decided to take all of my money), and it has taken from your account $20,000.

And many of the people who have been burglarized – people so blinded and behaviorally conditioned by the nation’s Fourth Estate and their MOCKINGBIRD propagandists that they are unaware of what has happened - are cheering the burglars.

In the last several years, almost all of it during the execrable George W. Bush Administration, the U.S. public has lost most of its Constitutional rights. All telephone, computer, and private discourse is subject to governmental invasion. Across the Land of the Free turned Land of the Fee, police break into homes without warrant, summarily murdering the people there. Unarmed citizens continually go down in a blizzard fusillade of bullets, or are shot down and electrocuted in public with a hideous device called a TASER (hardly anyone would find that surprising, in a nation whose congress and chief executive foment, condone, and practice torture). Law-abiding citizens are nevertheless stopped without reason on the nation’s highways, to be given a “warning ticket” for no other reason than “snooping” by the authorities.

Under the staggering burden of taxation, both by enactment, by printing press, deficit spending inflation, by staggering corporate theft, and by outright IRS thuggery, the wage-earning citizen has been reduced to Henry David Thoreau’s “quiet desperation.” The latter, together with federally-fomented ideological movements like feminism and homosexualism, has destroyed the basic social unit which is the family, with the further result that a critical portion of our children have become mindlessly ignorant savages, uncontrollable by teachers and school authorities and terrorizing the streets of our cities.

Even more signally meaningful where the nation’s youth are concerned, perhaps, are governmentally-inflicted social programs which provide for the inclusion among normal children in our schools of the mentally deficient (“challenged”), mentally deranged, and emotionally disturbed. A story in our local paper concerning an autistic child in a high school class is an example, and a microcosm of the nation and its swiftly deteriorating societal structures.

The common occurrence of acts of savage brutality like the immolation while living or savagely beating to death of the homeless and the aged, together with the further fact that large numbers of officials nevertheless work mindlessly to disarm prospective victims of such violence, are symptomatic of a society gone utterly insane.

And, of course, there is more – much, much more. Mathematical extrapolation of data having been published during my lifetime argues incontrovertibly that the North American continent will not be fit for human habitation by the dawn of the twenty-second century. The Mexican bandit – peasant villager, Magnificent Seven drama, that is despoiling reiver corporations like Uranium Resources and Exelon versus ranchers, townspeople, and local citizens currently being acted out in the area where I live is an example of the reasons the environment will kill anyone and anything foolish enough to attempt life here.

The history of nuclear energy and related research is utterly unmistakable, a trail of misery and destruction of fearsome proportions to those who will make the effort necessary to uncover it from where it has been hidden among the camouflage arrayed by the corporate powers in question and the media they own or control. While anyone with a Geiger counter or dosimeters and willing to do the necessary travel of, for instance, the state of Texas, will realize the extent of damage to the environment done by previous uranium mining – all of it despite cynically impassioned protestations to supposed state regulators concerning “clean-up” and other environmental protections – corporate influence in a nation already ruled by corporate influence of an apathetic and/or sheep-like populace will finally prevail. Those who persist in self-defense will be beaten into submission, either by legal mayhem or otherwise.

Were the continent's inhabitants to somehow save it from fatal contamination and corruption, continuing federal governmental policy having to do with deliberate support of illegal immigration - including hundreds of thousands of hardened criminals - from Mexico means inevitably and inexorably the conversion of the U.S. into a national parallel of that paragon of national virtue, Mexico. I need not recite evidence of what Mexico thunderously is, nor is it necessary to say again that a nation is what it is on account of its people. That, too, is self-evident.

The situation nationally, together with its parallel in the recent “bailout” of corporate Wall Street, of corporate predatory lenders (housing and otherwise), and of stock market corporations generally, tells a tactician like myself everything he needs to know. The Land of the Free has inexorably become the Land of the Fee, where money and political power derived from money – money created out of thin air by the very same corporate powers – rule. It’s time to begin fighting a tactical withdrawal and rearguard action.

I have begun converting our vehicles in order to make a large proportion of their fuel hydrogen (a process with which I have experience, having done the same in 1972 and again in 1981), and I am designing a system like that with which I once made a ten acre farm completely energy independent (anyone can do this: so much for protestations concerning the need to live next to a potential nuclear bomb and on land contaminated with the waste inevitably resulted from the same bomb and operations necessary to feed it).

To those with whom I have become favorably acquainted here on the Internet, I bid fond adios. To those with whom acquaintance has been not so favorable . . . well, you will probably respond with the same mindlessly knee-jerk and programmed diatribe, invective, and ad hominem lack of logic as usual. I thank you, however – you have taught me much of what I needed to know concerning the dim future of the nation for which I once loved enough to fight, kill, and be wounded.

Adios!

SITREP - Things for a Thoughtless Nation to Think About.

2008-10-04T13:00:00.000-07:00

The word comes that the sleaze of politicians on the Potomac has cravenly capitulated to Wall Street and all the lobbyists for big business, passing the seven hundred billion dollar ($700,000,000,000) legislative “bailout” package for them. This is as clearly unconstitutional as anything that has ever happened in the nation’s history, being a classic case of unlawful expenditure of tax monies. It is the biggest single swindle of the taxpayer since the swindle that was creation of the Federal Reserve itself.

This is more, even, than it appears to be where the fate of the nation is concerned, however. It remains to be seen how many citizens will call their lawyers in order to file a federal suit to stop this raid on their finances. Every citizen affected by this, the Congress latest attempt at destruction of his life, has the legal standing to bring suit. More, every citizen has the power and standing to file a pro se lawsuit in federal court, and at the cost of purchase of a couple of books from Nolo Press, http://www.nolo.com/index.cfm, he can learn how to file the necessary papers.

It’s interesting that while this swindle will cost every U.S. family in excess of twelve thousand dollars, tax money stolen and spent illegally, and while anyone, were their twelve thousand dollar car destroyed by someone in government would sue, few or none will sue concerning this “bailout” theft of his money. Neither are seven hundred billion dollars nationally, or twelve thousand dollars family-wise, the only costs of this. Statistical analysis (my own) based on other similar actions – financing of things like the “War on Terror,” for instance – reveals that the total cost of the “bailout” to the individual citizen will be upwards of thirty thousand dollars.

Federal Inflation, as I explained in recent essays here, costs the wage-earner far more than the amount the government borrows. Borrowed money not only means interest, you know, it means costs magnified many times as the “funny” money circulates through the economy.

Failure of the nations’ citizens to react with more than sheep-like bleating will tell historians everything they need to know about reasons for the decline and fall of the United States of America.

My own, pro se, lawsuit will be filed soon.

The ludicrous Palin-Biden “debate” – there goes the meaning and sense of another word – is, mercifully, history. Only one thing could be learned from that celebration of half (or quarter) truth, outright falsehood and political posturing, of course – the simple fact that of why we are a nation in decline.

Biden, the male on stage, was obliged by the logically weird rules of our society to say nothing that in any way attacked or might otherwise offend Palin, the female on stage. The same society that a couple of decades ago insisted that women were fit for combat, able to do anything a man could do there, and, moreover insists still that she is the equal of a man in all and every respect, demands here that a candidate running for vice-president or president treat a woman as though she might be seriously injured by a word – or facial expression.

Palin, of course, will “win” this “debate” if she somehow manages to characteristically glittering generality and non sequitur her way to the end of the tawdry affair without double-talking herself into tongue-tied lingual convulsions. Or wetting – “having issues” in - her panties.

Since boyhood, regarding that last, I have detested jargonized, C.O.I.A.K (clear only if already known), solecistic language. But I fear bias. In fact, I am absolutely terrified of biased thought and behavior. That’s because there are few human conditions more crippling, both of the individual and the group. There are no biases more pernicious vicious and destructive than the religious and ideological-political variety, a kind of bias that results in the group equivalent of muscular dystrophy in the individual. This political campaign, last night’s “debate” an archetypical example, has been the most thunderous example of the spastic fecklessness to which mindless ideological and political bias leads.

Everything that is said is suspect and useless as effective communication. There is simply no need to ask what anyone ideologically and/or politically involved will say: simply learn with which ideology or political party he is identified, and you know what he will say. For the media to ask any of its parroting pundits, for instance, who “won” the “debate” makes for a rhetorical question only. For a nation asking for useful explanations, for data and material by which to make decisions or gauge the depth of the trouble we’re obviously in, the “leaders” and “experts” provide pontificating, bloviating, and vapid generalities so broad as to be continental. Or galactic.

That’s when they’re not lying outright (of course, bias is a lie internalized; and a lie is bias publicized).

Even more infuriatingly frustrating is the now publicized – long since - fact that the language we speak has been so bowdlerized, sanitized, politically corrected, castrated, and otherwise mangled as to become damned near useless for meaningful communication. Add that fact of today’s discourse to conversation with a public now largely comprised of people whose attention span is too short to internalize more than one or two – and, mind you, very simple – sentences, and you have a recreation of the Biblical Tower of Babel.

Of them all – another Mersenne number, it seems – no solecistic and/or jargonized torture of the language has resulted in a much spastic paralysis of ideas as the execrable Malapropism “issues.” Here, the only relief is comic, like Katie Couric recently telling a nationwide audience of her “issues in bed.” Or the nitwit on CNN another day talking about male “sexual issues.” And, of course, if these paragons of the marginal intellect we choose for public office these days are “on” for an hour, the hyper-hackneyed term “issues” will be repeated until the audience develops a psychological facial tic at every re-iteration. More, women and old men will promise to “fight” for this and that, recalling interminably how he or she has “fought” for this and that interminably.

Aaaargh!

If any of these pontificating popinjays were given any problem – no, not “issue;” problem – in the real word, there would never be a solution. That’s even more the case should race, gender, religion, or the like be a factor. There are simply too many words one dare not utter, too many subjects that may not be discussed.

Joe Biden may not ask Sarah Palin if she believes any of the fundamentalist Christian things she says she believes!

Barak Obama, a candidate for president of the United States, refuses to prove with a verifiable birth certificate that he is a legal citizen of the United States! What is more, no one may ask him that question on television, in the land of the free press.

I may not say “nappy-headed hoe” (or whatever the hell the word was), I may not say that someone (was it Barak Obama, and did his running mate for the presidency say it?) is articulate, honest, and whatever the hell else it was, because if I do that I have insulted everyone like him, and I may not object to the guy who is burglarizing my house or camped on my patio if he is a Mexican because my complaint means I’m racist.

If I recognize that a male human has been designed by evolution to impregnate, care for, and defend a female human being because she is . . . well, female and intended by nature to be impregnated, I am a “sexist,” and I will probably lose my job and means of livelihood – to say nothing of risk my life. We can’t, in short discuss race, even if the problem is race. We can’t discuss gender, even if the problem is gender. We can’t discuss religion, even if the problem is religion.

We can’t solve certain problems because it is against the law or otherwise societally forbidden to discuss them. What does that tell you about certain of our problems? What does that tell you about the state of our nation and its government?

We are about to accept as a candidate for the highest office in the nation on the same basis and for the same reason that we have imprisoned literally hundreds, even thousands, of men for rape they didn’t commit – because we are forbidden to question her claims and statements.

Think about it.

"What Happened?!"

2008-10-01T14:03:00.000-07:00

Ed, a longtime friend, writes to say that what he thinks has happened to result in the latest “bailout” of a U.S. corporation is that when the U.S. demanded a “bailout” for the fat-cats in the money-changing industry – i.e., the bankers in one form or another - the Congress was ready to kiss ass as usual. Sixty thousand lobbyists in the Bordello on the Potomac aren’t there for a tour of our national monuments. Then, however, when the public outcry became threatening to their fat-cat jobs, the heroes of democracy suddenly got some “leadership” character. Ed thinks Wall Street has threatened to launch an attack on retirement funds, general investment media, and, I presume, entitlement programs in general. He warns that what follows will result further in Wall Street’s retaliation against mainstream U.S.A.

Ed was one of few people who agreed with me when I predicted years ago – almost a decade, in fact – what is happening today. I agree with him in this instance entirely. There will be, in other words, hell to pay.

Of course, none of it makes a bit of economic difference to me. I dropped out of the insane system that has produced this Lewis Carroll-ian dream more than two decades ago. I was never a “joiner,” and behaving like a jackass simply because a group of my kind was behaving like a jackass became anathema to me while I was still in high school.

‘’’But I don't want to go among mad people,’ Alice remarked.
"’Oh, you can't help that,’ said the Cat: ‘We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.’
"’How do you know I'm mad?’ said Alice.
"’You must be,’ said the Cat, ‘otherwise you wouldn't have come here.’”

I didn’t “come here” – which is to say I dropped out. I’m no goddamned idiot and you can’t make a slave of me – I’ll die fighting you (and take my share with me). With what’s about to come down very near now, there may be those who wonder what I did in order to have survived to be able to be watching this re-enactment of Alice’s journey down the rabbit hole.

Does anybody believe that if the Congress and the public refuses to give the bankers and financial swindlers of corporate America what they want legally, they won’t go right ahead and take it on the sly and illegally, anyway? Are you serious? You believe the fact of fifty thousand plus lobbyists in Washington, D.C. means the congressional watchmen you trust to watch the treasury are trustworthy? If you believe that, you are the principle reason we’re in this latest “screw the taxpayer” orgy.

You’re one of the morons who will vote in this next election, then bray that you’ve done your patriotic duty.

A lesson in economics – truth politicians spend most of their time suppressing – is in order. First, what we call a “dollar” – and pretend is money - is not money; it is a U.S. Government I.O.U. It is backed – i.e., given value – by the sweat, skill, and talent of the productive people of the United States. “Productive” people, in case you’ve never thought about it, are those who actually produce something real – that is, make it or make it from what is taken from the planet upon which we live.

All money, all “wealth,” is incontrovertibly derived from the planet Earth. Capitalism by definition is the turning of the earth and its resources into capital – money. Any medium of exchange, or unit thereof, is therefore representative of an amount of something derived from the earth.

The I.O.U. dollar is merely what is called by Harvard scholar types a “medium of exchange.” What does that mean? It means something that represents – represents; not is - a real thing of value, something, a commodity, derived from the planet. That, unfortunately or otherwise, includes a human being or his skill, knowledge, or ability to do what another can’t or won’t do.

Understanding economics is most easily done when the earth and all its peoples are represented by an island, one with only a few people on it. A microcosm, in other words. With time, the “money” inhabitants of the island have printed or minted becomes representative of nothing as the natural resources available on the island are used up. In the microcosmic example I used on a talk radio show from KOIA San Antonio decades ago, that of an island where the only resources were bananas growing there, the bananas have all been eaten or used otherwise. The trees have died (it won’t be too hard, in today’s ideological state, to imagine that the islanders have so polluted their island, and refused to do the hard work of cleaning up and/or caring for the trees).

The islander’s money now represents only the skill, knowledge, and labor of the inhabitants. For those unwilling or unable to work, the “medium of exchange” money is, in fact, simply a claim on the life and person of another islander. That’s all. If there are one thousand “dollars” on the island, and one hundred islanders, then each islander is worth ten dollars. Eventually, of course, the people on the island will be obliged to eat one another. And those who have succeeded in acquiring money – control and right to the life and person of another – will sell their fellow to be eaten. For money.

On the immense island that is the United States of America, under the infantile economic system that is corporate capitalism, a professional baseball player is worth literally tens of thousands of times what a soldier, or teacher is. Where the currency that is human beings is concerned, an adolescent female who cavorts semi-nude while singing doggerel verse is worth - valued at - many, many times what a doctorate-degreed musician is.

In the fall of 1956, as I was returning from a mission into Hungary during the revolution there, and having accomplished a feat of arms I knew few men on earth could duplicate, I stopped at a shop in LaGuardia Airport to buy a newspaper. The paper was still talking about the “heroics,” of Mickey Mantle, Yogi Berra, Bill (Moose) Skowron, and the Yankees pitching staff in the recent Baseball World Series. All of the Yankees would doubtlessly be making a lot of money next year, the paper said, and I recall calculating at the time that Mickey Mantle was being paid nearly twenty times what I was.

I sat staring at the ceiling for a long time, wondering what the future might be for a country with its priorities and perspectives having to do with money and personal worth – the product of its thought processes – so twisted that it would pay to play a children’s game twenty times what it would pay for risking of life and killing in combat. In the years that followed, as I watched the nation’s economic perspective grow more and more irrational, distorted and disproportionate, I became even more certain of the conclusion I drew then.

The conclusion? - just what has happened to result in this essay. There is, of course, a mathematical algorithm – for the reader who is a mathematician, a series – modeling what has been happening. Sometimes called “the Butterfly Effect,” the process is a chaotic one, meaning that a small and otherwise insignificant factor has staggeringly disproportionate results.

Let me digress – perhaps even further - for a moment. When I was a kid in high school, it occurred to me that there were two worlds. One was the world I lived in, where building things, producing, rearing, and husbanding real, weighty, ornery, resisting things was daily, perennial experience; and the second world was the world of language – rhetoric – wherein everything was a construct of mere words.

In the real world, every cause had an inevitable, often ineluctable consequence. Life was like my already then favorite sports, judo and wrestling. Make an error, you paid its prices. Nowhere to hide, no excuses, no escape. Most things were accomplished only with effort, sometimes great effort, and the rewards for effort were proportionate to the effort. Again, nowhere to hide, no excuses, no escape.

In the world or rhetoric, however, everything was entirely different. One could defeat the most skilled opponent simply with a turn of phrase, create a fight (the kind of “fight” politicians speak of daily) out of pure language, hide from his weaknesses behind a word blizzard smoke screen. One skilled with language could create anything he desired. I sometimes thought that the Apple in Eden was language, because with language man could rival even god – he could create.

Indeed, for those sufficiently astute, mere words are the medium of exchange representing reality – the planet. Like the U.S. dollar, they are a fiction, not a resource; they are a fiction, the ideated-only representation of a real thing. A person who accepts this ideated currency for anything he has produced with his labor, skill, or mind is a fool, accepting for something real and of the real world something that is an idea – a promise – alone.

In the world and virtual reality of language, that which was produced by the hands and mind of and individual is always worth the same kind of effort by and from another, no matter its effect in reality.

The value of a printed piece of paper is indeterminate and fickle as a nation who will pay a baseball player tens of thousands of times what it will pay one who teaches or guards his children.

It is as fickle as a nation who will arbitrarily and without study or any other kind of basis in fact simply decree that the value of a woman’s work is the same as that of a man, or that the value of work or product of an individual of one race is the same as that of an individual from any other race - or color, or creed, or clothing style – thusly depreciating in the same manner as the baseball player the teacher, soldier, or policeman the work, product, and person of everyone else.

It is as fickle and ripe for self-destruction as a nation that requires lending to certain people on the basis of their race, creed, or gender alone, thusly depreciating the value of credit in general – making it cost more and more - for everyone else.

It is as fickle as a nation that decrees in its educational establishment “no child left behind” – meaning that all children must stay behind.

It is as fickle as a society that will give its immature and unsophisticated children command of amounts of money sufficient to let them turn an otherwise pitiful clown masquerading as an artist or entertainer into a multi-millionaire, and let unscrupulous – corporate, of course – business prey upon the children’s immaturity.

Et cetera, ad infinitum – infinity now thunderously evident.

Of course, in addition to all of that feckless fickleness and in order to be able to steal at will from its productive citizenry, the government makes law that requires the productive citizen to exchange his blood, sweat, and tear, real-world product for a piece of paper represented by the baseball player’s product. The cold war warrior dueling with a handgun three AK-47 armed Soviet soldiers in Lövér Forest in western Hungary will be paid in currency valued in major part by a baseball player.

Money whose value has been inflated by the baseball player’s product and keeps the product of the farmer dirt cheap also keeps the public bewildered as to the value of anything. In a nation whose corporate government sings daily its “free market” litany, it is price-fixing at its most insidious, unseen, and vicious. The value – i.e., purchasing power – of “baseball player money” is being changed minute by minute as this or that profligate and asinine bargain or purchase takes place – that, in fact, while the productive person has no way to know what has happened or is happening to his money, his produce, or his value as a person.

The result today is that no one made available to the public by the news and information media, or by the government that controls them, can say what is happening or will happen. Joe Scarborough, host of this morning’s “Morning Joe” program, complains that no one, Congressman, Senator, President, Secretary of the Treasury, or political pundit is willing or able to say what has happened.

Of course not! How do you balance a checkbook on an account from which anyone can draw as much as he pleases and without recording the withdrawal, and the money being withdrawn has value which varies erratically from day to day?

Neither the average citizen nor the baseball player has any idea concerning how much President Bush’s war has cost him. The truth is, neither does anyone else, because there is no way to know! Even told, and an explanation given (the accuracy or utility of which, like the Heisenberg Principle, must be uncertain) he is unable to assess the effect of the theft until he can’t pay for things for which he once could pay and can’t borrow in order to pay for them, either. Eventually, however, everyone on the island that is our nation must borrow “money” – “money,” don’t forget, that has no certain value and whose repayment may, in fact, be impossible. The cost of everything on the island has been so inflated by the cost of things otherwise worthless, that all trade stops for re-negotiation of values and worth. What is true of the individual islander, of course, becomes eventually true for everybody on the island – or nation.

And that, Joe Scarborough – and John Q. Citizen – is what has happened.

To be continued (one solution) . . .

SITREP - Following the Historical Trail to a Disaster

2008-09-27T09:38:00.000-07:00

In my novel, “Jonatha’s Truth,” Fidel Castro observes, “The yanquis seem to have no trouble with socialism during a disaster, but once the socialism has dealt successfully with the trouble, they go back to letting the strong devour the weak.”

In the last several days, we have the Cuban leader’s fictional observation corroborated by events, and the mask ripped from the face of corporate U.S. capitalism. What could be more socialistic – more socialistic in the manner of the now defunct Soviet Union – than the “bailout” of corporate Wall Street and the Shylocks of American finance. The greatest capitalists of history want seven hundred billion dollars worth of socialism.

“Our entire economy is in danger,” says a sleaze on the Potomac lawmaker. Well, now – does that mean somebody will be punished? Sure. Does it mean that everyone’s business will be saved from the mess they made of it? Sure it does – when those proverbial pigs fly. Does it mean that all those CEO demigods of finance will be out in the street, living off the land – as I once was when Internal Revenue Service made me bankrupt (of course, the difference here was that everything I owned was seized, not frittered away on bad loans and investments)?

The history of this new form of socialism, of course, leaves a trail easier to follow than that a buffalo herd. It begins in the drugs-bewildered and mentally-deranged sixties with feminism demanding privileges including loans to people qualified for credit only by their gender. Concomitantly, the Kennedy-ian coinage of “affirmative action” reared its ugly and unconstitutional head. Loans for minorities – at first Afro-Americans, then virtually anybody – became a matter of law. The nation’s dream of equality began, in other words, morphing into the first signs of the utter contempt for law that is now national policy socially.

The first dominos had fallen, and by 1979, and the 1.5 billion dollar loan to Chrysler Corporation – fomented by and argued on largely using all the same conditions, reasoning, and – of course - rhetoric as today’s travesty on government and finance – the productive taxpayer found himself somehow a contributor to corporate welfare.

Of course, the bait on the hook then was jobs – “saving all those jobs.”

Those protesting this then state-of-the art rip-off said all the same things being said by victims of Congressional and White House lawlessness today. They were shouted down then by the media and its “analysts” just as the same media and analysts are forecasting impending doomsday and urging haste this time.

“Our entire economy is in danger.” Translation: if you don’t give us what we want, we will make it very hard on you. Where have we heard that one before? When do we ever hear anything else?

One of the current presidential candidates says it’s time to start asking some hard questions. “It’s time?!” Now it’s time?

I’ve got some questions – first, that is leadership? Friends of mine – Ed, Bill, Rita, and others - and I have been expecting this very thing to happen for years, amazed that it didn’t happen sooner. Maybe we should “lead?”

Even filing pro se legal action in the effort, I have been protesting matters like the proposed Wall Street Bailout and related congressional and presidential mis-behavior for literally decades, and the day before yesterday, I forwarded the following letter to the senators who represent Texas:

Senator, my wife and I are appalled and furiously angry concerning the proposed "bailout" of Wall Street and people who made loans they had only marginal chance of paying. This is, in every sense of the word, an outrage.

It would certainly have been nice when IRS destroyed my businesses and took steps to assure that I would never again be gainfully employed, had Congress "bailed" me out. Why should the executive fat cats on Wall Street not have to go to the streets and wildernesses for sustenance as I once did? Why are they better under the law than I?

Should we ever meet, don't expect me to shake your hand. No matter what you in the Congress may do to me next, I will always be better than that. To Ron Paul, perhaps the only member of congress with the intelligence and integrity to have been decrying not only this latest example of colossal corporate swindle but the asininely humanistic and feministic practices that led to it, I wrote only a thank you for the superb way he represents us.

My letter to Senators Kay Bailey Hutchinson and John Cornyn will, of course, not even be read (a few years ago, when I wrote to the Senator Phil Gramm to include tape recorded proof of extortion to commit rape by an IRS employee, I received a response thanking me for my interest in the Savings and Loan crisis). With nearly sixty thousand lobbyists possessed of fat check books provided by the very people who are now after seven hundred billion dollars owned by people those same lobbyists disenfranchise to listen to, our “representatives” in government have scant time to read what we write or listen to what we say.

More, the Wall Street bankers latest, and – since the maneuvering that led to formation of the Federal Reserve – biggest swindle is being perpetrated so swiftly that I won’t even have time to draw up a Flast v. Cohen lawsuit aimed at stopping it. I can, however, point out, that Flast v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83 (1968), was a United States Supreme Court case holding that a taxpayer has standing to sue the government to prevent an unconstitutional use of taxpayer funds.

If there was ever an example of an “unconstitutional use” of taxpayer funds, this is it.

But I have some more of the questions to which I referred a minute ago here: Why, for instance, is it that not one of the vaunted political pundits and analysts foisted upon the public by today’s media has mentioned Flast v. Cohen? Is the Fourth Estate, while babbling mindlessly and endlessly about what is euphemistically and obliquely being called a “bailout,” apparently totally ignorant of so obviously pertinent a Supreme Court ruling?

Why has no one (other, apparently, than one Robert Schultz of an organization called “We, the People” http://www.givemeliberty.org/revolution/) filed a legal action to stop this outrage of constitutional law?

It is all thunderously reminiscent of the way this same national media avoided like plague mention of Keyhole Satellite reconnaissance technology during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, and has steadfastly refused to breath a word concerning it even now. These giants of journalism didn’t know about satellite reconnaissance? They didn’t want to know what satellites perched over Iraq had reported, were reporting, and are reporting to the president? Keyhole satellites (guess why they’re called “keyhole”) capable of reading a motor vehicle license plate didn’t know there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? A decade of relentlessly flying over Iraq, snooping with the latest technological wizardry, didn’t know?

No one in the media thought to ask about inconsistencies and “smelled rats” like these?

More questions: If the journalists didn’t know about the Keyhole technology, why weren’t they informed by our representatives in congress? If there is so little communication between the media and members of congress, why should the public trust anything either of them say about purported financial conditions on Wall Street?

The questions, questions like these, go on and on and on. Specifically, why should the poor and middle class taxpayer “bail out” people who often pay no taxes whatever? Why, during all the years that IRS rampaged about the nation like the Frankenstein Monster, destroying individuals and small businesses alike, was the nation of Brobdingnagian corporations left unscathed, utterly sacrosanct?

The fact is that one purpose of incorporation is to insure that none of the people responsible for what has happened in any instance will actually lose a dime. The CEOs and other persons who are “incorporated,” in other words, have legally created a straw man who will assume responsibility and liability for whatever has occurred and been done. When the fat cat CEO has been caught in the swindling chicanery and conniving characteristic of his ilk, it is the straw man corporation that will answer and pay – nothing – while the CEO goes on his merry, rapacious, reiver way.

Successful in their appeal for seven hundred billion dollars, they will in all likelihood give themselves a congratulatory pay raise, and begin planning ways to steal as much of the new funding as possible.

How in the name of reason was a nation of people talked into committing a “hurry up and break you damned fool neck,” head-long rush like the invasion of Iraq? How did the already unconstitutional War Powers Act (purportedly intended, let’s remember, to forestall imminent danger to the nation) justify invasion, and why did no one in the media utter so much as a word of protest on that ground?

If the media was so untrustworthy regarding Iraq – what kind of moron believes supposed “troop surge” success means anything meaningful for progress in the Iraq war? – why should any reasonable person believe anything they say now? Why, moreover, should any source of information as abysmally erroneous and incompetent as the U.S. media has shown itself to be, be trusted about anything – much less seven hundred billions dollars?

Just having to do with Iraq alone, and ignoring hundreds of similar “stories,” have you ever looked at the media’s record of data, factual, and outcome error? – it is astonishing. These people “report” in a manner similar to the way one might expect a basketball team of the blind to play the game.

Why should a congress with the disingenuous, often criminal, and abysmal record where personal or group integrity is concerned of the U.S. congress be trusted with twenty dollars, much less seven hundred billion? Why should anyone pay taxes, when the persons charged with protection and defense of the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. public feel free to appropriate – create out of thin air – money the productive people of the nation will have to do without (and therefore, pay by means other than directly monetary)?

Why should anyone willingly support – with taxes or by any other means - those embezzling from his children and grandchildren, and condemning them to lives of virtual servitude to not only domestic enemies, but foreign ones?

Why should a citizen be required to pay for the ruin of his progeny’s lives? Why would any person of any kind of integrity expect that he do that?

Years, decades ago, I remember basketball great Bill Russell having noted that “Welfare for some little black kid isn’t your problem; welfare for the fat cat corporations is your problem.”

Amen, Bill Russell!

SITREP continued 9/22/08

2008-09-22T16:14:00.000-07:00

SEVEN HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS! In a nation that trumpets to the world its “free market,” its “entrepreneurs” have, like their role models the banditos in the movie “The Magnificent Seven,” ridden down from the mountain of Wall Street to raid the villagers.

Except there are no Magnificent Seven left in the land of feminism.

Still once more, I’m reminded of that quote from J.S. Mill: “A State which dwarfs its men, in order that they may be more docile instruments in its hands even for beneficial purposes -- will find that with small men no great thing can really be accomplished; and that the perfection of machinery to which it has sacrificed everything, will in the end avail it nothing, for want of the vital power which, in order that the machine might work more smoothly, it has preferred to banish.”

We’re in for it now, and I have mixed emotions. A couple of days ago, I added this to the home page of the Knight Errant website: “I want to see happen to the government and people of the United States what they caused to happen to me - simple justice. What happened to me made me come back far, far stronger than before, and I want that for my country, too. I'm going to enjoy watching you squirm, however. You deserve it (justice, again).”

That photo, incidentally, is the wound inflicted by a federal sniper shooting at me from ambush October 6, 1986. I thought that little dose of "land of the free" reality appropriate here.

It’s hard to feel sorry for a damned fool paying the price of his foolishness. In fact, it’s wrong. You do what you can to assure his folly isn’t fatal, but you know that for some, as a grandfather used to say, “The school of hard knocks is a damned poor place to learn, but a fool won’t learn in any other.” This fool will either learn from its pain, or it will die.

The odds provided by history indicated that the United States won’t die; they are actually, after all, a union of fifty nations whose loss of power over their own destinies was lost by way of perverted federalism (the “federal” government of today is the antithesis of the original theory of federalism) to a cabal of self-serving and therefore traitorous industrialists in the aftermath of two great wars. Avaricious and rapacious in a manner unprecedented in human history, the industrialists fat with the power provided by World War Two profits served what should have been notice to a nation made wise by the hardship of war, the notice that was their creation of an agency of government enable by law to spend without restraint even in the form of an accounting.

That, of course, was the CIA, in turn creator of a new war demanding continued spending, the “Cold War.” That no one, even today, seems to have realized what was occurring can only be attributed to another CIA operation, that of MOCKINGBIRD – co-option and eventual take-over and control of the nation’s thought processes otherwise known as the news and information media.

Included, of course, in the national hypnosis and resulting stupor was the federal operation that both gained control of education by politically-controlled financial means and infiltrated the school system at all levels. With foment of supposed movements like feminism, the takeover was completed and the nation effectively castrated. More and more, the Home of the Brave began to act for all the world like a female suffering premenstrual syndrome, a condition made no more apparent than by today’s Gracie Allen Checkbook economic practices.

Gracie Allen, some of us will recall, was the Vaudeville partner and wife of George Burns, and used to baffle her husband and delight audiences with her insistence that as long as her check book contained checks, her checking account must have money.

Neither can anything but feminism and effeminate humanism explain undeclared, cautious and restrained, “humane” wars like Korea, Vietnam, and “Desert Storm. “Now we have “Iraqi Freedom,” the ultimate demonstration of strategic and tactical military strategy degraded by emotion-governed female reasoning. Watching the U.S and its forces in Iraq is like watching a spastic wrestler, more likely to be defeated by his own inability to co-ordinate his limbs than by the strength and skill of his opponent.

And now, of course, this. Nearly eight thousand dollars for every individual taxpayer in the nation. That on top of an almost identically jaw-dropping figure for costs thus far of the war in Iraq. Both figures, of course, require multiplication by an operator taught by history concerning anything the federal government of the United States says. In instances like these, that multiplier is one, point three, meaning that the total cost of this latest swindle, together with the earlier one, will be 1.4 X 1012 times 1.3 ($1,400,000,000,000 times 1.3), which is: 1.82 X 1012 ($1,820,000,000,000) – One trillion, eight hundred twenty billion.

If there are, as IRS reports, 130,000,000 (one hundred, thirty million) individual taxpayers in the nation, that number representing this latest embezzlement and the cost of the Iraqi debacle means a cost for each taxpayer of fourteen thousand ($14,000), dollars. Anyone capable of accounting for a budget and faced with the costs of similar swindles like that being run presently by the oil company side of the industrial military complex corporate plutocracy, together with the staggering costs of illegal immigration being born by the consumer, and what it means for cost of living otherwise can see what is happening and an impossible future. In the same manner that robber corporations take control of a company, then gut it of finances and assets to cheat the company’s stockholders, the corporate interests who created the CIA and current federal government have gutted the United States of America and cheated its citizens.

But historians of the future will say that the U.S public has brought it all down upon themselves. I grew up among people who taught me that people who loaned money and the practice of borrowing money were inherently evil. The stock market was a swindle designed to bilk the wage-earner and productive person of his earned wealth.

In my entire life of seventy-two years, I purchased ONE thing on credit - my last car, that after IRS took everything I earned in my life and left me on the streets. Otherwise, I simply worked and saved until I could pay for it, and during my lifetime paid more than a million dollars in taxes - most of it spent on my mellow citizens who refused to do the same as I had done, or by pandering politicians in order to kill people elsewhere in the world.

It made me what I am today - angry, contemptuous of "our freedom," bullheaded, and nobody’s damned fool. There is a famous monologue speech in the movie Grapes of Wrath, and Bruce Springsteen paraphrased it like this:

Tom’s mother asks: “How will I know where you are? How will I know you’re okay?”

Tom said “Ma, wherever there’s a cop beatin’ a guy;

Wherever a hungry newborn baby cries;

Where there’s a fight ‘gainst the blood and hatred in the air;

Look for me Ma, I’ll be there.

Wherever there’s somebody fightin’ for a place to stand,

Or decent job or a helpin’ hand;

Wherever somebody’s strugglin’ to be free,

Look in their eyes, Ma, you’ll see me, you’ll see me.”

I never surrender - not ever, and when the nation that was the United States begins to break up, there will be many like me. Events like these of the past few years have a way of bringing to the fore leaders – real ones, rather than the bloviating, effeminate, and – to be fair to those whom age and the vicissitudes have deprived of their former strength and virility – surrogates we tolerate, even support now.

For that to happen, of course, those who will survive the maelstrom and follow will have to be forced to do so by their own cowardice, moral weakness, and fecklessness in the face of events. We are where we are because of addiction to ease and perceived security, and the decadence it has spawned and engendered. One trains to fight - as I have since life taught me during youth that to live means a fight - in order to live able to maintain respect for himself. Feminist humanism has substituted for physical, muscular and more testicular strength a new, “spiritual,” ideological, and virtual respect, one based entirely upon rhetoric and arguing that mere existence and identity is not only prideful, but deserving of respect.

So it is that the member of the most ridiculous, backward, vicious and barely civilized culture or nation may both imagine pride and demand from others respect. Even in the United States, equality under the law has come to mean equality in fact, a distortion of logic which has led to the absurdly chaotic state of national reasoning - as I said a minute ago, a nation behaving like a woman suffering PMS.

It won’t do. The nation will probably divide first along lines dictated by evolutionary forces, the same forces that have “strung the ladder of life” as history has recorded it. For anyone using probability to extrapolate the future, there is, after all, the scoreboard of upon which the past is written. Africa is Africa on account of Africans, Mexico as it is on account of Mexicans, Latin America on account of Latin Americans. Et cetera around the world. The nation that was the United States will, therefore, break up first along cultural and ethnic lines.

The fragmentation will be rancorous, of course. Washington, D.C. and its corporate plutocracy will not yield without a fight its wealth and power by purchased legislation and court rulings. More, neither nouveau riche plutocrat nor indolent welfare recipient “poor” – both of whom have availed themselves of federal political pandering to rob the productive laborer and artisan - will surrender their free lunch gladly.

On top of that, cultures both within the country and without represent fairly the macrocosm from which the individuals come. Both illegal immigrants from Mexico and their government believe and say publicly that they have a right to what has been earned by the “anglo” populations of the U.S. “Black Americans” – persons of African descent living in the U.S. – rail about discrimination, prejudice, limited opportunity, and even the slavery of their ancestors, while totally ignoring social theory, science and technology, medical advances, art and literature, and far, far more – all contributions made to mankind by white cultures, contributions from which these same black Americans draw enormous benefit.

Neither group or culture, Mexican or African, would willingly go back to whence they came, witness the fact that illegal aliens from Mexico fight with ever tool at their command to avoid going back to the nation and culture they now brazenly (and, in my own view, incomprehensibly) celebrate and vaunt from a secure distance afar.

History will not be able to ignore the irony of the racism being charged as a daily routine by Hispanic and Afro-American people, people who in their own behavior and in the behavior of the cultures from which they come demonstrate the factuality of the “prejudice” against which they rail. Actions, it is said, speak louder than words, and at the risk of repetitiveness, Mexico and Latin America are as they are because of their peoples. If white America believes it is ethnically and culturally superior, it may be because it hasn’t been permitted to ignore the weaknesses and failings of its “minority” detractors.

The most powerful impulse toward disintegration of the union once preserved by the Civil War will therefore be that of culture and race. It will be closely rivaled, however, by economic forces. One more – a “once more” repeated continually and with increasing tempo and effect since the World War Two (and before, actually, but nowhere to the degree seen now), we are seeing middle income white America being blatantly ripped off in order to satisfy and surfeit the rich and powerful who use and exploit the staggering number of aliens having come to the Land of the Free turned Land of the Fee since 1964.

Prior to that time, the United States was overwhelmingly composed of white people of European descent – eighty-nine percent in 1965, with the only minority being Afro-American citizens (ten percent). It is incontrovertibly fair to say that these people made the U.S. what it was then. With enactment of the Hart-Cellar, INS Act of 1965, national origin quotas were abolished; and, you should pardon the expression, the proverbial shit hit the fan. The influx of aliens both legal and illegal has paralleled the decline of the nation, to put my homely phrase another way.

The latest swindle being called a “bailout” is a scam so patently obvious as to be laughable under any other circumstances. More, this form of corporate financier bunco has been repeated again and again since its first success with formation of the Federal Reserve. The money lenders, using the formation of the fed and earlier “bailouts” like that of Chrysler Corporation and the Savings and Loans for precedent, make as many bad loans as they can – an orgy of purported largesse and all in the name of race relations, gender equality, political correctness, and the demagogue-ing like – knowing full well that the working-class, productive taxpayers of the nation will ultimately be required to pay off the bad mortgages.

The infuriatingly insulting character of it all is stupefying. Everybody, we are always told, is served and should be happy; every body has benefited. Millions of illegal aliens, millions of the uneducated and poor, millions of Afro-Americans, and others who could otherwise never have hoped to own a house, car, and more are being assured “the American Dream” (strange how that expression always makes me want to puke). And, of course, the lending institutions (which include insurance companies, by the way) have been made healthy again – the better to serve “America.” They made billions, in other words.

Just one segment of “America” is unhappy – those left holding the proverbial bag.

Perhaps, parenthetically, I should have said “unhappy or should be” – most of those left holding the bag for this the latest “bailout will be too stupid and/or ignorant to realize what has happened. Betrayed, bewildered - behaviorally conditioned and addled, that is - by decades of state-of-the-art corporate propagandist television and information media, many of the taxpayers being enslaved won’t know it until the inevitable result of it all comes down upon them like an avalanche. Wall Street and financier U.S.A has thrown a decades long, sumptuous and Brobdingnagian party, and white, middle class U.S.A. are the ones who will pay the bill.

But they, the Germanic, Nordic, and Celtic people, will realize eventually. Don’t forget, gentle reader, that I’ve already been through it all. When IRS and the federal government took everything from me in order to hand it over to the same people who will now to be recipient of the new “bailout” money, realization came like a lightning bolt. While my fellows today will need longer to convince themselves that they have been robbed and raped, the realization when it comes will come like that same lightning bolt. They’ll be livid – angry like I once was.

And they will, I think, do the same thing – drop out. After a certain number of repetitions of the same insult, you know, the individual – especially the Germanic individual – knows outrage. “Fool me once, shame on thee; fool me twice, shame on me.” The form of rape in question here is a degrading, and humiliating one. To play the game that is the so-called “American Dream,” toiling the majority of one’s life – only to have everything taken virtually at the stroke of a pen – is, once realization comes, infuriating.

Realizing further that their representation in government holds them in the contempt this latest bailout trumpets to the wide world, they will withdraw. First to go will be the states most heavily peopled by Germans, the Nordic, and Celtic people – the Midwestern and middle states, that is. It may be that states whose populations are nearly as German and still ingrained with the famed Protestant Work Ethic of the Northern Europeans - the ranching states of the Rockies Front Range, that is - will go with them, leaving the populous, welfare-sucking states of the coasts east and west and their economic black hole cities to fend for themselves.

The Little Red Hen will have made her last cakes.

Those who have for nearly three-quarters of a century been segregated from the free market and forced to take instead penny-ante subsidies and what the purchasing public for their produce, the farm and ranch people will stop producing for anyone but themselves. It must be singularly galling to see an industry that was built largely on their backs and has lived off them now given hugely preferential treatment denied them in the same circumstances.

What will happen to the perennially stiff-necked southern states is another matter, driven by different dynamics. This is too long already, and we’ll talk about the “solid South” next time.

Assuming, that is, there is time. Events of late have occurred so swiftly – it is important when staging robbery and similar crime to attack with swiftness – that I have trouble writing fast enough to stay abreast of events I predicted years, even decades, ago. Watch out for the health care and energy matters: what worked for the financiers and mortgage lenders this time will work for the health care insurers and the energy people – I refer to the supposed (when you know a Jesse James government will steal for you what you need to recoup any losses you may have, one can hardly call you entrepreneurial) entrepreneurs who will ostensibly develop new sources of energy.

To be continued . . .

SITREP - continued 9/19/08

2008-09-19T12:45:00.000-07:00

Continuing this SITREP from a senior citizen of seventy two years and ardent historian of sixty years, the nation is found in another economic crisis, that most noticeably having to do with recent bank bankruptcies like Lehman Brothers, an eighty-five billion dollar bailout of American International Group Insurance company (absurd on its surface – how does a government fifty-three trillions of dollars in debt bail anyone out – but more about that in a minute), and a collapsing stock market leaving everyone on Wall Street having those “issues” we hear about so much today – the issues being in their shorts.

Of course, the propagandist media shilling for the capitol’s criminal gang commonly known as congress, has begun its now patented and patent blizzard of bull issue, that in order to put the public even further in the dark than it already is, and prevent a run on banks and/or the end of investments in the archetypical capitalist swindle known as the stock market.

That’s easy, of further course, because the U.S. public knows next to nothing about economics or money, that due principally things like the fact that nowhere in the nation’s elementary or secondary education system can anyone learn anything about either subject. The only subject concerning which there is a similar prohibition is law. Nowhere in elementary or secondary education can a student learn anything about the law under which he must live. Think about that one.

Why, in a republic, would the government go to such lengths to assure the people are ignorant of the law?

Think about the economic issue – or rather, the lack of issue – where any information at all concerning money or the nation’s economy is concerned. The public is totally ignorant, meaning they must turn to journalists and news media pundits in order to learn what is happening. Some years ago, while touring the nation for the United States Judo Association, I indulged a penchant of mine, that of doing private surveys in order to learn the state of the nation and the public discourse. I have continued the practice here on the Internet. One of my surveys has to do with the public’s knowledge of fiscal matters, economics, and money.

I interviewed during my travels over a period of two years more than five hundred people, to learn that one person in five hundred could say how a dollar comes into being, and why. Ten people in five hundred knew what “national debt” means, and two people in five hundred person identified terms like “futures exchange,” “Bank of International Settlements” (which, by the way, has just ordered the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury to call in all bonds and debt paper issued overseas – an obvious effort to stop the U.S. from taking the rest of the world down the economic toilet with it), “hedge fund,” or the like. Neither did anyone know what the term “derivative” means, nor how derivatives affect money, credit, et cetera. Terms like “swaps,” “forward rate agreements,” “forward contracts,” “credit derivatives” and the like drew shrugs or blank states.

Neither did a single person know how to compute the interest on his car or home loan, or know how to ascertain that he was paying the interest he believed he was paying. Asked how one might compute the payment on a new car purchased while still making payments on his trade-in, people merely laughed as though I were talking about rocket science.

For anyone wondering how we’ve come to be in the economic mess we’re in – especially as respects sub-prime home mortgages – there is no need to look further. The U.S. public has about as much business doing credit business as a high school kid with a learners permit has in the Indianapolis Five Hundred. To expect the U.S. public to know what an eighty-five billion dollar bailout of AIG, or that of the savings and loan institutions some years ago, or of bankrupt creditors in today’s housing market, means is ludicrous – as ludicrous as it is to believe the same people know the merits of what the current presidential candidates are saying concerning any of the supposed political issues.

Had any of the people I interviewed while doing my surveys known anything whatever about money, had their elementary or secondary education taught them anything about money or economics, they would know first that since creation of the Federal Reserve – an act of hocus pocus not unlike the creation by fiat of currently circulating U.S. money – the dollar has lost ninety percent of more of its purchasing power. The dollar’s vanishing purchasing power accelerated when the Nixon Administration repudiated the Bretton-Woods Treaty, the agreement wherein the U.S. promised the world that we would back our money with gold.

“Never trust a capitalist,” says Johanna, the heroine of my novel, “everything is for sale.”

One result of the dollar becoming nothing more than a claim upon the nation’s productive people has been the ruination of anyone’s chances of secure retirement in old age. With the cancerous erosion of individual wealth savings, most of it due staggering inflation by government (things like welfare for the military industrial complex corporations, the latest bailouts, and the like), it is impossible to retire securely and social security has been made a cruel joke, an albatross around the taxpayer’s neck, a political whore bankrupting and bleeding an already scrofulous and tubercular economy to death.

A fiat U.S. dollar backed “by the full faith and credit of the United States” is in fact guaranteed and collateralized by nothing more than the labor, skill, and talent of the productive individual. “Productive” means producing something real - an artisan, a farmer, a rancher, a carpenter, or the like. Lawyers, as a U.S Supreme Court Justice recently observed, are not “productive.” Neither are teachers, policemen, soldiers, and their like. All money is collateralized – given value - by the planet, and what the planet provides. In short, and by inescapable syllogistic logic, fiat money is a form of slavery. It forces someone to work for someone else without compensation by anything of value. The productive get nothing but a dollar whose value is derived from their toil, and together with income taxation, fiat money is the principle tool of government desirous of keeping the poor in poverty and the middle class in constant peril of joining the indigent. Together with income taxation, fiat money is in fact, a principle tool of tyranny, a way to increase the power of government inexorably.

Look around – how else do you explain the Brobdingnagian size of the federal government or its Frankenstein Monster behavior?

That, I should remind us all, is the reason the founding fathers and their. constitution forbid income taxation, fiat money, and the creation of a central bank. Currency collateralized, for instance, by gold or silver is not only always worth something because gold and silver will never be worth nothing, it is a powerful tool by which to restrict the size of government and control it.

Let’s realize, just for one example of that among hundreds, that had our U.S. version of Hitler been obliged to spend something other than fiat money – money behind which there was a quantity of gold and/or silver – he could not have invaded Iraq.

And, parenthetically, persons smart enough to heed my recommendation at the time of the savings and loan crisis in 1990 to buy gold have nearly quadrupled their money. In the future, stalked by government irresponsibility like the Iraq war and other forms of massive welfare for the military industrial complex corporations - things like the S&L bailout, the AIG swindle, and all the rest - gold will reach thousands of dollars an ounce, as a matter of fact.

A couple of days ago, writing on one of the internet websites other than mine, I made the following observation: “Get ready to experience what I experienced more than two decades ago. One morning you will awake, to learn that you have no money. That’s NO money. None! Nada. Nichts. Zip. Bupkis. More, you will lose your house and your car will be repossessed. No bank or lending institution will talk to you (in my case, IRS had called concerning me, and made threats; besides, no one will lend money to someone beset by the government).

There will be no jobs (in my case, the government took effective steps to assure that I would never again be gainfully employed, steps including threat of retaliation against prospective employers).

People who have been indoctrinated in capitalist ideals – meaning that the poor are that way because the want to be or because they are too lazy to be otherwise – will despise you. Friends, probably including your wife (the U.S. female is a venal, material creature, you know), will desert you in droves.

And watch those street people (there’ll be millions more of them, of course, people like you and your neighbors): once their welfare checks have stop coming, and turning to government with street demonstrations and marches avails them of nothing, they’ll be hungry. Hungry bums can be really mean (almost as mean as the super rich industrialists and financiers who made them that way in the first place).

Do I digress? No, not actually – this is a situation report, after all, and that’s the situation. I know because I lived it.

In case, however, I’ve talked anybody into believing that by buying gold and silver he can avoid the loss of everything when the government announces that his money has been devalued to one tenth of its face value (anybody ever read about the Great Depression?), we need to know a few things: first, you may starve to death before being able to use gold or silver as money. The public, you see, is ignorant about such things – the government is very, and obviously, desirous of that, after all – and has no way to know how to transact business in what amounts to barter fashion. You can’t put gold in a coin machine, or buy gas in gold or silver. No one with whom you do business – the clerk at Wal-Mart, for instance – is the person with whom you are actually doing business, and he will have no way or no authority to accept your payment in gold or silver. Indoctrinated and addicted to paper money, too lazy to go through weighing, haggling over the value of the gold or silver, etc, they won’t do business in anything but dollars until having to take a wheelbarrow full of paper money to Wal-Mart becomes too onerous and far too time-consuming for checkout clerks to count it.

Then, too, there is the fact that the government has taken steps to assure that you use their money – and, of course keep them all-powerful. The fiat dollar is legal tender, and must be accepted in all but very few monetary transactions. First, if you have a dispute, contractual or otherwise with someone over a transaction done in gold, silver, or the like, any court you repair to for settlement will settle the matter in Federal Reserve paper. You’ll lose any way you look at it.

Next, people use U.S. currency for the same reason that a person discovering that he has a counterfeit bill either passes it on by buying something or he loses whatever the face amount of the bill is. If he takes it to the police, he loses it – gets nothing in return. If he takes it to the bank, the same thing happens. People use worthless U.S. fiat money because once “stuck” with it, the only alternative is to lose whatever it bought from them or its value, usually their hard work or something they’ve worked hard to in order to acquire. The few people who have enough understanding of economics save only money that says on its face that it is a silver certificate, gold and silver coins whose real value is many times their face value, or the like. Anyone who saves paper money – counterfeit or fiat Federal Reserve notes - is a fool saving something absolutely worthless.

Look up Gresham’s Law. Oh, and by the way again: while you’re thinking about using gold and silver in order to stay off the streets, look up the history of the Commodity Barter Association. These folks were an association of people who not only traded goods, but backed their U.S. fiat money with gold owned by the association (exactly as the founding fathers intended our nation’s economy to run, you may notice). You’ll be interested in what happened. Remember about fiat money and the power it gives government.

Finally, when you go to buy gold or silver, you will be required to pay a sales tax. Think about that one: do you have to pay a tax on the money you get when you cash your paycheck? How about when you break a twenty into two tens or four fives? When you change a dollar for four quarters? On top of all that, you will be required to pay a capital gains tax on the gold you purchase. The increasing value of gold means that the money you’ll use to pay the tax has decreased in value, but you have a capital gain.

Now do you understand the reasoning, for instance, that we’re in Iraq and staying there? How about the way our oil companies are making unprecedented profits, but the price of gas keeps going higher? Good – now you understand how losing money represents a gain in capital, and why a nation of people having been made poor by the rich keep voting the rich into office – so the rich can keep doing . . . oh, never mind!

It’s something right out of Lewis Carroll, and Alice in Wonderland. With a nation nine trillion dollars ($9,000,000,000,000 – I get a kick out of seeing the number) in debt, and a society fifty-three trillion ($53,000,000,000,000) dollars in debt, the nation (our “leaders”) proposes to borrow from the society another eighty-five billion ($85,000,000,000). To get us out of economic trouble.

“’But I don’t want to go among mad people,’ Alice remarked.
“’Oh, you can’t help that,’ said the Cat: ‘we’re all mad here. I’m mad. You’re mad.’
“’How do you know I’m mad?’ said Alice.
“’You must be,’ said the Cat, ‘or you wouldn’t be here.’”

Will somebody please put out that @#$%&! Cat?

Sitrep, September, 2008

2008-09-16T14:50:00.000-07:00

For the uninitiated, “sitrep” is a military communications abbreviation for “situation report.” This, then, is a situation report concerning the United States of America, as observed and reconnoitered during seventy-two years of living here, serving in its military, and having survived assault by its courts and government otherwise.

As I wrote this, news of the beginning of the economic disaster I first forecast nine years ago was announced by the nation’s news media. I have, as a matter of recorded fact, been able to make accurate predictions repeatedly concerning the nation – a fact I have further stated repeatedly over the last decade, both in my books and other writings and on the Internet. Not only does no one challenge me concerning this, by scores of people have written to acknowledge the accuracy of prognoses that began in 1972 with a public speech wherein I predicted unerringly events now unfolding and having unfolded of late.

It isn’t hard and there’s no Nostradamus-like mysticism about it. Anyone using a little logic and scientific method and observing events carefully and without bias (read that last again; it makes all the difference) could do as well. This is a society that can be read like a book – a psychology book.

As Friedrich Nietzsche observed, “Insanity in individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.”

It is also my private opinion that the rise and fall of nations is due the fact that they inevitably go insane. The United States of America will serve as an object example of that fact of history. It was none other than a President of the United States, John Adams, who observed that “Democracy never lasts long . . . it is always a suicide.”

The U.S. is now near that final drama.

To learn the science of prediction, one must first learn science. It is science, after all, that imposes upon any theory criteria which include that used to make accurate predictions. One begins in much the manner that a tracker following potential prey does: like Sherlock Holmes, he first observes small things. Here’s an example:

Yesterday, a friend sent me a video concerning “Skidboot,” a dog who before his demise in 2007 made more money - much more money - than his owner, one David Hartwig, a Texas cowboy who shoes horses – ie., works hard - for a living. “Skidboot,” as a matter of fact, was able to make more money than most semi-skilled laborers, policemen, teachers, or middle class people in general. The dog, you see, is perhaps the most intelligent of his kind, ever. He has as a result appeared on a number of high visibility televisions programs like the Oprah Winfrey show (that right there, incidentally, would tell you a great deal were you an analyst hoping to know the future of the nation). .

Let me say it again: a dog made more money than most United States citizens.

What does that tell you about what has happened to the Land of the Free turned Land of the Fee and its future? Let’s see if I can help. Among those people who make less than a dog are people most critical to the future of the U.S. In fact, just about – almost without exception - every person who will ultimately decide the survival of the country is paid less than was “Skidboot.” If that weren’t insane enough, most U.S. citizens today celebrate facts like this one, having somehow – “somehow” translated “massive information media and educational system propaganda” - been convinced that ability and hard work (the Horatio Alger Story, anyone?) can prevail over forces as capricious as those which raise a dog to prestige, power, and prerogative.

The economic system – it is more an urge or drive than a system; “system” implies thought or planning – known as capitalism regularly produces individuals like Skidboot, persons like Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, George W. Bush and their purportedly arch-capitalist like. People like these invariably would have you believe they “earn” their massive incomes; in fact, to dare think otherwise is anathema to their ideology and secular religion. These – in their minds – great ones asseverate that they are rich because they deserve to be rich, that on account of their surpassing intelligence, skill, talent, and beauty – or their great effort.

The “less fortunate” – none of their conservative capitalist like believe for one minute in good fortune where they are concerned – are so “less fortunate” because they are less skillful, less intelligent, and less valuable to society and nation. The wealthy are so simply because they are worth more.

Just like “Skidboot.”

The hunter who desires to follow the prey that is accurate anticipation and prediction of something like the latest economic mess – Lehman Brothers’ bankruptcy, for instance - must understand that an ideology like that of the rags to riches, Horatio Alger Myth, forms also a schema – a pattern, algorithm, or mathematical equation. Like a mathematical series, an ideological system that provides for a canine earning more than humans, a Sean Combs “rapper” more than a mathematician, and a football player more than a college president – just three examples of an absurd microcosm – also provides for ineluctable results.

I will digress long enough here to make in an elucidating manner a pointed prediction: now that corporate capitalism has done what it invariably does, capitalists both corporate and individual will do what they always do – go looking for as much socialism as they can find. The socialism, of course, will amount to little more than a disguise, camouflage to hide the colonialism that historically always precedes capitalism. Using their irresistible access – they will call in all their “markers” and IOUs – to congress and the bureaucracy, the “free market” captialists will obtain and use legislation to again colonialize the marketplace and return to exploitation of the public.

The “Skidboot” capitalists will use their corporate buddies in Washington, D.C. to recover what all that surpassing intelligence, skill, talent, and beauty have lost. The fruit of their Herculean labors, in other words.

One schooled in a logical Taylor and Maclaurin Series like Skidboot Capitalism expects – at the very least, is not surprised by - things like the rise of presidential candidates of the caliber of Barack Obama and John McCain. Anyone astutely familiar with political history since World War Two actually expected the vice-presidential nomination of a Sarah Palin (or the presidential candidacy of a Hillary Clinton). It’s Skidboot politics. It’s Skidboot economics. It’s Skidboot national security.

In Skidboot ideology, you see, the way to promotion and pay is, in fact, not excellence or competence; it is mediocrity and incompetence. In the effeminate world that has spawned the Skidboot ideology, the competent and ingenious are more than anything else a threat (when has feminism ever demanded competition on a wrestling mat, a level playing field, or any kind of fair contest – rather than competition in a court of rhetoric and emotion). Like the corporate executive or the military commander who is promoted once he has failed or the politician or political appointee who is protected once having been caught in graft, in illicit sexuality, malfeasance, or staggering mismanagement (if FEMA directors after Hurricane Katrina don’t come to mind, you’re too far gone to understand all this) a religion, ideology, or movement like that of feminism cannot be decried, much less denounced. Even though its miserable failings and effects are everywhere evident in a nation fairly disintegrating before our eyes, feminism has the politically almighty blessing of pitiable incompetence, of feminine failure (to demand more is, after all, “sexist”) and its therefore popular appeal (in a nation like this one, far more people identify with the “red neck” than with the rocket scientist).

In the Skidboot, feminist society, one rises to stardom, to wealth, position and power because he is a member of a minority, female (especially a well-built female), able to perform some wondrous feat like throw a ball through a hoop, make music, or the otherwise insignificant like. Have failed miserably in some large endeavor is also a major political asset in a society where all success is in some form political success.

Oh, and by all means, he must be a “team player.”

So here we are. Right where anyone able gather the data, construct the logical or mathematical model, and to do the necessary computation would expect:

The nation is fifty-three trillions of dollars in debt, a major portion of which is to a creditor in whose distrust and outright hatred we were for decades schooled and propagandized – “Red” (remember that term?) China. How insane is it to continue trumpeting that we won the cold war, while we are billions and billions and billions of dollars in debt to one cold war enemy, and being made to appear a feckless laughingstock to the rest of the world by another?!

I said “sitrep.” Well, here it is:

Our economic system, one dependent entirely upon being able to hornswoggle the ignorant into working for and spending fiat money whose only real value is the hope that people will continue to work for and spend it, is a beached whale; our cold war enemies either hold mortgages on our economy or enjoy watching us slowly destroyed by our addiction to what they possess and hold in massive proportions.

The World Bank for International Settlements has ordered the U.S. Federal Reserve and the Treasury Dept. to call in all foreign-issued bonds and debt paper. They are, in other words, trying to assure that the U.S. and its Skidboot “free market” economy doesn’t take the rest of the world down the tube with it. There will be those who remember that I predicted years ago that the rest of the world’s nations would one day realize that we are a cancer growing on the planet, a great black hole, that unless they stop us, will destroy them. It seems now that they may have “realized.”

Our educational system, long the prostitute exploited by a pimp government, has long since ceased to be capable of producing the kind of intellects that would almost certainly have invented alternative sources of energy; and our Skidboot form of capitalism continues to assure that obvious alternative energy technology will be smothered by legislation, or deprived of funding by legislation (having all one’s capital, capital for use in building alternative sources of energy, confiscated by taxation).

The corporate “free marketers” will make damned sure that no free market answer to high prices at the gasoline pump occurs, in other words.

While we are being bled white by corporate capitalist greed in the form of Shylock turned Gracie Allen lending practices together with the effeminate humanist’s insistence that everybody should buy whatever they feel like “owning,” the rich man the nation elected in order to protect the poor goes on with his own version of profligate borrowing and spending, the Iraq war.

Gracie Allen, parenthetically, was famed and now deceased comedian George Burns’ wife, and as part of their Vaudeville act used to say she believed that as long as her check book had checks, her account had money.

Have I mentioned my theory that the rise and fall of nations is due the fact that they go slowly insane? Yeah, I think I did.

Continuing our “sitrep,” and related to that last concerning our educational system, still another study reports that our male children are in dire straits. That’s both scholastically and psychologically. FUBAR is the most succinct way to put it, and no one who is, as I am, a teacher, has any doubt of it. That J.S. Mill quote that I use so often concerning a nation that dwarfs its men has proved to be true where its boys are concerned, too.

But, of course, as with everything demonstrating that the chickens of feminism have begun coming home to roost, feminist both female and merely effeminate have responded in exactly the manner one would expect – with blizzards of “it’s true because I say it is” recrimination. Maybe I should reiterate that quote, in case there remains anyone with enough intellect left to profit from looking around:

“A State which dwarfs its men, in order that they may be more docile instruments in its hands even for beneficial purposes -- will find that with small men no great thing can really be accomplished; and that the perfection of machinery to which it has sacrificed everything, will in the end avail it nothing, for want of the vital power which, in order that the machine might work more smoothly, it has preferred to banish.”

I trust the description is one too vivid to mistake, once you’ve had that “look around.”

And not that boys are alone. As I remarked recently – and as I remark frequently, anymore – men nowadays behave like the adolescent boys of my youth. “Wouldn’t make a pimple on a man’s ass,” as a grandfather was wont to say. You may be too young to recognize it – feminism reared its Medusa head four or five decades ago, and its FUBAR effect on the public consciousness was immediately apparent – but the Congress, degraded as it is by women – behaves these days like nothing so much as a sorority, an old ladies knitting circle, or kaffeeklatsch gossip society.

That same U.S. Congress spends like it has Gracie Allen’s comically infamous checkbook.

Next, in case you somehow have the idea that we might use our much-vaunted military to regain ascendency in the world, it is now clear that the nothing-costs-too-much war machine of our society can’t beat anybody. While that may have been clear to some after Korea (anybody know about that one? – it was 1950-ish, so you have to have read some history), it became thunderously clear in Vietnam when little men in black pajamas and armed mostly with small arms and B-40 rocket launchers fought our nothing-costs-too-much army to a standstill, then took over after we had our first look at bankruptcy by welfare for military industrial complex corporation.

In 1959, during a conversation with Major General Tom Van Natta, I made the observation that no nation in its right mind – or with any mind – would oppose in conventional manner our spend-more-than-the-other-guy and bury him in war machinery and soldiers’ bodies army. They would have to fight us, of course – capitalism is what it is and says it is – but they would wage guerrilla war and “death of a thousand cuts” wars of attrition. We, I said, would eventually spend ourselves to death. I remember, too, saying that our military was in such condition that were the local girls school to stage an insurrection, I doubted that we could put it down.

And now we have an Army whose combat commands are enormously degraded by women. And we’re back to fighting guys dressed in outlandish clothes, armed with AK-47s and B-40 rocket launchers. What was it – March, 2003, that we invaded Iraq? When was “mission accomplished” declared – May, 2003?

And, voila! Here we are living in one of my first – 1959, I remind you - prognostications.

Elsewhere in bedlam known as the Land of the Free Market – where nothing military is too costly – we have new intelligence satellites being built not because we need them for intelligence, but because the military industrial complex corporations keep up the pressure to build more. You’d expect that, inasmuch as that’s the same formula that has resulted in a military more costly by many times than the next ten militaries on earth.

And for all that Brobdingnagian spending, we are less safe from our enemies than ever before. While apparently distracted sorts like the FoxNews “personalities” I made mention of a minute ago continue to pontificate that another 9-11 attack hasn’t occurred (and illogically assuming, one must believe, that another must have been scheduled or intended), few persons with any knowledge of history can have any confidence in such reasoning. Our ports and borders remain open to anyone who wants to enter – as literally thousands are doing across our border with Mexico.

If someone is more desirous of delivering a nuclear bomb than kidnapping for ransom or the slave trade one of our women or kids, the missing on the wall at Wal-Mart won’t be due kidnapping or having run away, it’ll be because they were vaporized by a nuclear explosion, or killed by some bacteriological or chemical (or other) “terrorist” weapon.

Come to think of it, the “War on Drugs” yields just about the same results as the war in Iraq or Afghanistan. Or as did the war in Vietnam. Few palpable results except higher prices, higher taxes, more political posturing and promises, lots of death and misery, and no end in sight.

Good for the “free market,” of course.

To be continued . . .

The First Days of September Are an Anniversary for Me, Too

2008-09-07T10:52:00.000-07:00

Last night as we lay waiting for sleep, wife Rita suddenly asked if I missed the danger and excitement of the life I led before meeting her after September 11, 2001. It was strange that she asked when she did, because the first few days of September represent the anniversary of the time I first realized that my country and its government of the few, by the few, and for the few meant to destroy me.

It was, for instance, the first week of September, 1984, that cops In Nebraska stopped my car, threw everything in it (most of my clothes and belongings remaining after IRS took everything else) out on the road and into a roadside ditch, and knocked hell out of me under the pretense of “frisking.”

If financial ruin and interdiction of my chances of gainful employment, break-up of my marriages, and ruination of a son’s mental health weren’t enough, what would become relentlessly continual harassment by law enforcement everywhere should have done the trick. It didn’t, though. I had been by then, one should realize, schooled and indoctrinated in belief that the United States of America, Land of the Free, Home of the Brave, Nation of Laws could not do anything like this.

More, when I tried to tell them what was happening, all my fellow citizens schooled in the same manner said just that: “They can’t do that!” The U.S. Government doesn’t do things like what was happening to me, so it couldn’t be so. Yeah, I learned a lot during “the IRS wars,” and one thing I learned is that failure of us all to come to the aid of any one of us is totalitarian plutocracy’s best weapon. I learned that the nation of laws, “of the people, by the people, and for the people” – was a cynical lie.

I say “cynical” because I was hearing with my own ears the monster I was fighting say with his own words that the myth I believed and the vaunted system of law and government in which I believed were intended primarily to make by deception its victim more vulnerable, even helpless.

Do I miss the excitement? No, I said, of course not. I was asleep, I think, before I heard her rejoinder or question. The “IRS war” and what I learned have long been a foregone conclusion, not something that can keep me awake any longer.

In the morning, though, I thought about it some more. Having turned on the television as we always do the better to learn what new disaster might be impending, I could find nothing except the latest of the relentless propaganda being used to perpetuate the massive fraud that our nation’s government has become. That any of the politicians and either of their parties have the temerity to face the nation is astonishing enough. It is also terrifying - evidence as it is of the smug certainty the politicians and media have of their control over the public’s mind and opinions.

While their opposition’s electioneering is stupefying enough in its hackneyed repetition of tired nostrums more than half a century old, the cynical performance of the Republican Party is jaw-dropping. By doing more – much more - of what has brought the nation to near ruin, they tell the sleep-walking nation, they will make everything better.

The biggest wonder of it all, something even more stupefying than the shear chutzpah of it all, is that any of them can keep a straight face.

Meanwhile, the supposed debate between the parties’ partisans and their candidates resembles nothing so much as the bickering of children, a study in logical absurdity beggaring description to anything but behavioral scholars. The studied and memorized, relentlessly repeated lies are prevarications, inventions, and fabrications to which the national electorate listens every election year, a “made for television” performance designed by now state-of-the-art propagandists

“Tell a lie often enough . . .”

The unprecedentedly long electioneering and campaigning, of course, has been designed to restore the public’s flagging interest in what obviously isn’t real and doesn’t work. And the state-of-the-art Nazi Propaganda Minister Josef Goebbels created works. Everywhere, on the Internet and in public, one hears people parroting mindlessly the equally mindless slogans of their single interest or party. Few have any real understanding of the science, economics, or history behind the subject; more, they don’t care that they are ignorant. This is high school loyalty stuff – “I want my man or my team to win, regardless of anything else. I don’t care if I don’t know what’s going on.”

Even what would otherwise be thought of as the intelligentsia babble nonsense, once their behavioral and post-hypnotically suggested verbal button has been pushed. Say the name of a candidate, and listen to a man of woman with a masters or doctorate degree recite like an automaton.

The general public is worse. Recently, a participant cornered logically in an online debate pontificated that “Logic has no place in debate.” One can only wonder what he believes the purpose of debate is.

Obviously, it’s all useless for the purpose of democratic governance. Like an individual suffering from Alzheimer’s the nation designed to be ruled by its people can no longer do so, and are being put - have been put - in an institution, a virtual prison nursing home operated by the rich and powerful. What comes next for those who have evaded the brain-washing effect of media propaganda is the survival I’ve been talking about for weeks now here.

Do I miss the excitement of being hunted by my government? A provocative question. But, inasmuch as I will have to do it all again, soon – so will we all – it’s a useful question, too.

Rita, you see, is concerned because she once lived with a normal man, and among normal people. It’s obvious to her (and to many, it seems, from what I sometimes notice) that I’m not normal.

Normal men don’t do an inspection of the car before they get in; neither do normal men rig the car to tell them if someone has tampered with it. Normal men don’t practice defending themselves against sudden invasion of the house by SWAT teams, or arrange things there in such a manner as to impede the progress of those bursting in to race from room to room. Normal men don’t rig the place in such a way as to betray to them surreptitious entry. It’s not normal to live in a house that’s booby-trapped.

Normal men don’t kick a shoe under the bed in motel rooms and enter only after having pushed the door open from one side and peered through the crack next to the doorjamb. Neither do normal men check minutely bathroom, windows, and doors, then examine the room for surreptitious listening and video devices. Normal men don’t check the handgun they wear and clear clothing in order to facilitate a fast draw before opening the motel room’s door.

Normal men don’t watch their car’s rearview mirror like the proverbial hawk, and see every police car the minute it comes into view; neither do normal men scan the roofline of every building around wherever they walk and before they get out of the car upon arrival somewhere.

Normal men don’t position themselves inside restaurants and other places in such a way that anyone looking in from outside must enter in order to recognize them. Normal men don’t first assure of all the entrances and exits before sitting down.

Normal men don’t drive by every place they intend to visit, scanning nearby doorways, alleys or other places the like. Normal men don’t shy away from open spaces, and watch distant tree lines intently – making it all but impossible to converse with them - when walking

Normal men don’t note the position and occupancy of every car outside places into which they go before going in, nor do they survey and assess the potential ability of every man inside, recognizing each one who is concealing a handgun or other weapon.

Normal men don’t fear conversation on the telephone, refusing to make calls and likewise refusing to talk for more than a few minutes to only close friends (four), and often breaking off the conversation abruptly before even that much time. Neither are normal men made angry in Pavlovian fashion each time the phone rings.

Normal men don’t wear a loaded, cocked, and locked Model 1911 .45 pistol everywhere they go, and eschew places where wearing a weapon is prohibited. Normal men don’t work with a loaded, cocked, and locked pistol within reach, or sleep with the same pistol on the night table beside the bed. More, they don’t leap from the bed snatching up the weapon when some little sound breaks the silence.

Normal men don’t have hands that flash to intercept with crushing force the hands of others who happen to reach suddenly in their direction; neither do normal men practice daily to hit a target instantly with a handgun, and hold a handgun absolutely still when aiming. Normal seventy-two year old men don’t hit distant targets with rifle or handgun at ranges impossible for others.

Normal men don’t at seventy-two years of age continue to train like athletes one-third their age.

But I said, no, I didn’t miss the excitement. I liked the peace and quiet like one who has suddenly been relieved of pain enjoys the relief. Until recently, when a Texas State Trooper stopped us for no reason whatever, something bitterly reminiscent of as many as one hundred fifty such stops during the IRS-federal government war, I had come to enjoy driving again, a pleasure I had long since forgotten. I like living like a normal man; I liked it a whole lot.

I said that. I think I meant it. But a lot of things are broken – behaviorally, I mean. You don’t go hunted for twenty-three years without adapting. When you have been continually for twenty three years threatened by men wearing guns, you are taught to watch for men with guns. When those men have almost always worn the uniforms of law enforcement, you’re watchful, tense, around policeman and the places they frequent. When your dwelling places have been burglarized or broken into more than sixty-three times, you are taught to be very circumspect about your house and its security, and you sleep differently than other people. When your telephone has been bugged continually for twenty-three years, you are taught to hate talk on the phone, and answer it only by pre-arrangement with one or two people.

You don’t survive six hits by motor vehicles while a pedestrian or riding a bicycle, and you don’t have your car deliberately rammed by others without becoming leery of cars nearby. When you’ve been attacked repeatedly everywhere by would-be muggers, you have your head on a swivel like a fighter pilot over enemy territory, and you keep practicing to fight. Only the continuing practice and the confidence born of being able to do twenty pull-ups, a hundred push-ups, five hundred sit-ups makes, and bicycle or hike for days can calm you enough for you to be fit to live with. Being able to hit a quarter in a second at thirty feet with a big-bore pistol may be remarkable and a prideful thing, but the practice is also therapy. It makes you feel better.

I’m told it’s called “Post Traumatic Shock Syndrome.” Whatever. It’s there, and I deal with it. I’ve learned – years before the “IRS war” started – self-hypnosis, and Rita often urges me to use it. It always helps, considerably; in fact, I’ve become so proficient with hypno-therapy that I can stop pain with it.

But I still sleep with “Sweetheart,” my forty-five, and I am hyper-cautious and changed without it.

Oh, I have no doubt that I will one day conquer all the rest of the PTS, but there’s one thing that I know will never go away. I loved my country. I was often heard to say that the two most important things ever written were the Ten Commandments and the Declaration of Independence. They say the same thing, you know – that all men are “endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights.”

They say that we are to care about one another’s inalienable rights, and that the violation of any one of us is the violation of us all. They say that people who believe that and enshrine it in law are a kingdom, a nation, of God; and that such a kingdom cannot be defeated. To live in a nation like that, to know it and to practice it is tantamount to paradise.

You don’t lose something like that and not feel it, and when realization came that against an enemy like IRS no one, not even wife or family, would help, I knew the truth about me – and about the nation I love.

Nobody cared.

A Declaration of War

2008-08-30T17:11:00.000-07:00

On the Survivalist Pages of my www.judoknighterrant.com website, I have published my declaration of war against the corporate plutocracy now in power in the U.S. Rather than repeat it here, I suggest that you go there and read. You see, I have come to the considered conclusion that John McCain's fatuous announcement concerning his "running mate" signals yet another crumbling from the rock that was once the strongest governmental and economic system extant. In a couple of years a woman with two years experience as a governor might be the nation's chief executive; more, that is a very strong possibility - in a nation as bankrupt for intelligence and useful knowledge as this one, the greater majority of the distaff side of the electorate would vote for a woman - as one politician famously noted recently, Lindsay Lohan might be our next president - even though she were an idiot. And ninety percent of black citizens will vote for Barack Obama because he is black, if you need more of the same in order to see what I mean.

"Corporate America" and its Operation MOCKINGBIRD have succeeded, succeeded in so fracturing the electorate into groups competing for the most trivial, asinine, and impractical reasons imaginable that they may rule without question. The mile-marker at which I years ago decided that I would get off the train has come, in other words. There is only one place for an honorable man at a time like this and that is in a war (or, as Thoreau said, a prison). I propose to fight using effective tactics, however - the way I have always fought since the bullies of my youth made fighting necessary. I will attack the walls that hold the people of my country prisoner: the walls that are our economic system. The people are controlled because their money is controlled. All of the nation's great problems - health care, global warming (a cynical, "limited hangout" euphemism meaning corporate pollution), Iraq, and the rest are all matters made of plutocratic control of the nation's money. It's that simple!

As I said a minute ago on my Survivalist Page, a nation whose economic system is so chaotic that it will pay a basketball player more than it will pay all the teachers in an entire school district will not only pay almost anything for almost anything, it will pay for the reconstruction of another country before it will pay for maintenance of its own. Fill in your own examples of oxymoronic and moronic prices, and it will all fit in the same frame - an economy and money supply controlled by plutocratic corporate government. If that, incidentally and metaphorically, were exemplary of an individual mind, rather than that of a nation and national policy, it would be called a "fixation" - insanity.

So I will fight. I will make our cars here first highly efficient energy-wise - increase mileage by fifty percent - then completely independent of gasoline. I will publish all of it, including plans, and I will offer the service of assistance in making the systems and achieving my results. I will do the same with my home, the idea being to make a percentage of the public independent of both corporate oil and others the like. Only people who are financially independent are free of government and the incorporated rich who inevitably control government. That simple. Starved of the one thing government lives on, the one thing it lives for, it will fall - become manageable again by the people.

There is no other way! There is no other way, and that has a corollary. Anyone who is not willing to make himself independent, unwilling to throw off his monetary chains and fight by starving the ruling corporations of their power, anyone who is desirous of continued virtual enslavement by Operation MOCKINGBIRD government is, de facto, a traitor to a nation "conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal." These people have either no desire to be free or they have a new - I suggest feminist-humanist - definition of the word freedom. They have, too, a new, special, definition of democracy or republic.

That issue is one that merits brief comment. There are traditionally - the argument has raged for literally thousands of years - two views of freedom. One holds that the individual is free so long as he feels free. What that essentially means is that so long as he is unaware of any outside forces being exerted upon his life, he is free. If you recognize the female need for nurture and repair to the perceived security of the group, and that the security of the group constitutes freedom, you are a comrade of mine. If you recognize in that view the cancerous forces that have driven us to our present condition, you are a comrade of mine.

The other point of view - the reason for my use of the word "issue": ideological and governmental tampering with the meaning of words is a pointed example of the way one may be ruled without his being aware - is that one is free only when his actions are determined and decided by him and him alone. Actually, I am in both camps. My guerrilla Mongoose Tactic depends upon people willing to do what I will do - assist anyone who desires to be free in being so. Were everyone to do that - of his own, free will, because he wanted to - we could again control our own lives. WE are in the fix we are because in our decadent, selfish desire for surfeit and security, we have first relegated to government our responsibility for our own lives and our responsibility to our neighbor, then sat stupidly by while that government was taken over by the rich and their corporations, in order to do what the rich have always done, enslave and exploit their fellows. Presto, change-o, here we are - U.S.A., 2008.

The new Mongoose Trick, a new kind of guerrilla war, is therefore simple in concept: we reverse the process that led us toward ruin. We return the only real power there is in politics, money, to the people whence it came. WE take it away from the corporations by not giving it to them. WE stop saying "yes" to economic slavery.

For one as tough, as disciplined as me, it'll be easy. I've done it before. For others, it'll be hard - very, very hard. How hard? As hard - for an archetypical example everyone might understand - as letting up on the accelerator by which you push the power of the oil companies and your dependence upon them higher, and driving fifty-five miles an hour. As hard as turning off the engine while you wait for traffic lights to change. As hard as accelerating slowly once the light has changed and you have re-started the engine. Et cetera (that's "etc.," for the semi-literate and products of our corporately-ruled education system otherwise).

That's how hard. That - the almost total inability to control ourselves and our actions; all of it pandered to and engendered by corporate exploitation of our undisciplined desire for surfeit and security - is the one, great reason we're in the mess we've made for ourselves. Do you want "out?" Do you want to control you own life, your own destiny, again? Do you want government and the corporations who own it to march to your music and at the cadence you choose again.

Then, follow me!

Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape – the United States of America . . .

2008-06-05T16:15:00.000-07:00

On my own website, I have been offering instruction concerning survival, both urban and wilderness – that in response to request from people who know of my own survival of the U.S. Government and find themselves now concerned about their own survival. Thinks are that bad. What follows is the latest edition:

"Of old, warriors first made themselves invincible, then waited for their enemy's moment of vulnerability." --Sun Tzu

We begin today with an excerpt from a book by a great guerrilla warrior, Che Guevara: “Many will call me an adventurer - and that I am, only one of a different sort - one of those who risks his skin to prove his platitudes.” Che Guevara, you will recall (unless you are the typical "American" like the White House Press Secretary who didn't know recently what the Cuban Missile Crisis was and certainly wouldn't be expected to know of Guevara's murder in Bolivia. She may not even know who Che Guevara was.

There is another excerpt, this one from my own book, the foreword:

"The fact is, my story is really written for the young people of the future who will one day reap the whirlwind you, their parents and grandparents, have sown. The continent you will leave them is already despoiled and poisoned, and will soon be the source of widespread, continentally endemic sickness and disease. Their once proud nation, whose profligate greed has already made it despised and hated over most of the world, will have become a pariah among nations.

"In their parents’ and grandparents’ self-indulgent drive for ease and degenerate pleasure, “America’s” young people will have been spent relentlessly into irretrievable bankruptcy. More, and perhaps worst of all, “Americans’” cowardly demand for security without responsibility – provided by government hirelings, that is – will have made their nation a vast sheep pen, a totalitarian virtual prison.

"That, my fellow “Americans” will be the legacy you leave to your children, and, to quote Benjamin Franklin, 'they will piss on your graves.'

"I want our children and their children to know that I fought every step of the way, with every cell and fiber of my being, to prevent what their faithless nation, their parents and grandparents, are doing to them.

"This book is the story of that struggle, and it is written in the hope that my grave will be one they leave flowers on."

I don't, of course, mean to compare or equate myself in any way the man I was once sent to kill (that story is also in my book, incidentally). But it is a fact that Che once wrote to me personally, a short note when I had written to Fidel Castro to warn him about CIA assassination plans, to thank me for my "humanity." It is also a fact that Che once said, “If you tremble with indignation at every injustice, am not a comrade of Che Guevara.

The United States of America is a nation whose corporate government lives on injustice (can anyone observing what is occurring on the border with Mexico and with illegal aliens vis-a-vis our own citizens see anything but the truth of corporate capitalism?). Corporate Capitalism and its "Pinto Rule" are by definition an ideology devoted to injustice. "To capitalize" has for centuries - since the term first came into use - meant "to colonialize" - to seize by force or trick the land of another and its bounty, and to impose upon him rule. The planet Earth and everything on it or in it is being "capitalized" by the U.S. and its corporate masters.

What we are "capitalizing" now is the lives of our children and grandchildren - and their children and grandchildren. The United States and its corrupt and decadent people are colonializing their own progeny – nothing less. There is no doubt about that, moreover. One needs only to look around him. During my lifetime alone, anyone reasonably alert has watched corporate capitalism and those who worship at its "apres moi le deluge" - after me, the flood - altar despoil and ruin the continent. Not satisfied with our own continent, we infest the rest of the planet, colonializing (including more than seven hundred fifty military bases and fleets both surface and submarine in all the oceans and seas - all polluting and spoiling as only they can) and ruining everywhere.

Oh, yes - I can hear the knee-jerk reaction of those behaviorally conditioned to do so. Like FoxNews at every new revelation of malfeasance by the White House and its execrable occupant, there are those "patriots" who will begin bellowing their mindless mantra. They can save it. I have known my enemy for a very long time now. I have listened to him, matter of fact, in what he thought was his privacy (he, too, thinks the U.S. public are idiots, a laughingstock; he holds the people who call themselves "Americans" and their country in more contempt than even I do).

I also live in a dirty little town in South Texas, among the filthiest in which I have ever resided. It is like living in a landfill. The relentless wind here stirs up and blows a blizzard of flying paper and plastic, such that each morning on my daily walk, a distance of perhaps three hundred yards both ways, I pick up two or more plastic shopping bags full of trash. Living as I do a hundred fifty yards from a Wal-Mart (show me a bigger corporate capitalist), I rise nearly every morning to find Wal-Mart plastic shopping bags hanging in my trees, and my garden littered with Wal-Mart receipts discarded - thrown out the window - by passing motorists and their passengers. People leaving the Prosperity Bank down the street a few hundred feet daily throw scores of deposit slips and ATM receipts out the window. Each morning, the street's gutters are littered with beer cans and intact or broken beer bottles.

Neither is this behavior unique to Port Lavaca: In Kingsville where I resided before coming here two years ago, my morning walks in the apartment complex where I lived took me past dumpster after dumpster overflowing with - in fact buried in - garbage (I wrote an essay on this webpage concerning the matter and what it suggested for the future, matter of fact). Even when a dumpster a little over a hundred feet away was empty, the residents of Hawk's Landing would not deign to walk the little distance to dispose of their garbage in a sanitary manner. Upon opening the door to our apartment each Monday Morning, I was greeted with the stench of rotting garbage strewn across the parking lots by stray cats who had torn into the plastic garbage bags thrown carelessly outside, or piled atop, the dumpsters.

South Texas not only has the social character of nearby Mexico, it smells like it. Worse yet, and owing to the fact that the State of Texas and its legislatures and courts have long since sold out to Corporate America, the air stinks of and is poisoned by emissions from oil refineries, and area aquifers and streams have been made radioactive by unregulated (oh, like everywhere else in Corporate America, there are regulations; it's just that no one pays any attention to them - they're enacted only to make the public feel secure) uranium leach-mining. The soil, long saturated by arsenic used by corporate farming to defoliate cotton, is likewise poisonous.

Thus far, a scenario much reminiscent of my earlier efforts to stop criminal conduct and malfeasance by IRS and other federal bureaucracies, I have striven without success in so much as getting local newspapers and media to warn residents of the radioactive water. There is little doubt - provided that information dispensed by federal government agencies like OSHA and the Atomic Energy Commission are factual - that residents of Port Lavaca are being exposed daily, and perhaps lethally, to hazardous radiation (the fifty Roentgens being registered by dosimeters near faucets and shower heads monthly is a hell of a dose, should anyone remain in contact with the water for any time longer than a couple of minutes). It appears that I will have to print up handbills and distribute them, and/or post warning signs.

The situation here is a microcosm of the macrocosm that is the U.S. - and the world upon which the U.S. inflicted itself. Like Kingsville and Port Lavaca, the people of the U.S. refuse to restrain themselves. Driving gas-guzzler SUVs and huge pickups at ninety miles an hour on the highway (highway fatalities in the immediate area are a weekly occurrence and "descanso" memorials to the dead placed at accident scenes by Latino residents are everywhere) and at least ten miles an hour above the posted speed limit everywhere else, they throw garbage everywhere, polluting and spoiling the environment at will.

And that all the while bellowing their contempt for scientists expressing concerns that evidence of global warming is due human pollution of the atmosphere.

There is your enemy (as cartoonist Walt Kelly's Pogo said, "We have met the enemy and his is us!"). Know him or suffer the consequences (he doesn't care - even when those suffering are his own children [more and more of whom are being found discarded in dumpsters and the trash generally - or hadn't you noticed?]).

Know him if you will survive him, and learn to do what the rest of the nations and people of the planet are doing. For reasons I have already given here, you the private citizen - like the rest of the nations and peoples of the planet - can't fight him by conventional means. He has capitalized so much of what was yours and your forebears', colonialized so much of his fellow nations and peoples that he is invincible. Uh-uh. To survive him, to defeat him, you will have to learn the tactics and life of the guerrilla (a good start would be to read the books I have shown above here).

First, of course - and as I have already noted - today's urban guerrilla must make himself invisible, or un-findable. I should think the oppressor's relentless efforts to provide for identification and surveillance of every, single citizen (except illegal aliens who can easily be capitalized) - things like "social security" (whooo - sometimes the cynical hypocrisy of such things is stupefying!) numbers for every new-born - would make the capitalists' intentions thunderously obvious. So should legislation like the Patriot Act and its precursor, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and all the electronic eavesdropping it has loosed upon each and every household in the Land of the Free. Anyone remember George Orwell? The book "1984?"

"It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug into your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live - did live - from habit that became instinct, in the assumption that every wound you made was overheard, and except in darkness, every movement scrutinized"

That was 1984. This is 2008; every sound you make IS overheard, and darkness no longer prevents scrutiny (you do know about the seventies program called "Control Zones That See," don't you . . .?). Maybe you should read "1984," too.

Learning to defeat electronic and electricity-powered surveillance and security equipment, however, is almost ridiculously easy. As always, you have to do the study and practice required. Freedom, someone once said, isn't free. Study locks and security systems, then learn how to defeat them. Simply being able to pick locks is an invaluable skill, inasmuch as a large part of all security still depends upon simple "tumbler" locks. Video camera security is often rendered useless simply by the device of disguise or covering one's face and learning through practice to disguise one's movement and walk.

To elude the government's relentless harassment, I not only studied intensely the way of the ninja, I learned from Che Guevara. So skillful did I become at a tactic I came to refer to as "hide in plain sight" that on one occasion I baffled members of the U.S. National Judo Team I was then coaching. Appearing one night at Cowboy's, a dance club in Colorado Springs, the site of the National Judo Institute, I ate supper in the team's midst, observed goings and comings, and listened to conversation, all in such manner that the next day all agreed that I had not been there - until I related what they had discussed, what they had worn, what the had done, and more. I'm sure all of the team will still remember the incident.

My ability to penetrate the inner sanctums of government at all levels, to obtain documents, observe and listen, and leave proof of my having penetrated security came to infuriate - if also serve notice and teach respect - my enemy (I had a lot of fun, too). Unsure of what I had learned by my infiltration, protective of their positions and likewise unsure of the effect disclosure of my successes on their careers, I was able to use certain evidence again and again to escape federal and federally-instigated state harassment.

To learn "hide in plain sight" is training that requires years, more, having to do with understanding such things as peripheral vision, use of lighting conditions, and more the like, I'm not sure it can be successful learned without first-hand, personal instruction by one who has mastered it; but obtaining damning and therefore effective evidence against today's bureaucrat or politician (same thing, actually, and understanding how the political-bureaucratic hierarchy and social pecking order works is crucial) is a matter as simple as use of electronic equipment in the form of video cameras, tape (voice and sound activated) recorders, and listening devices like the parabolic and "shotgun" microphone. Here again, training and practice is crucial to success. I used friends, unwitting and otherwise (as I related in my book, I practiced technique with women friends, once recording surreptitiously the conversation of female college students who frequented poolside at my apartment complex's swimming pool). With acquired skill in "planting" listening devices and video cameras, I first graduated to the local police department, then the court house and city hall. Already then, I learned a great deal about the way government actually functions. It was a revelation that shook me to my core.

When making covert entry into a building (or anywhere, for that matter) be aware that surveillance cameras are everywhere these days. Be likewise aware at all times when planting “bugs” or video cameras, by whatever means. Be aware, too, that surveillance and monitoring equipment now has, all but invariably, its own, self-contained power supply (more about detecting surveillance and monitoring equipment).

I learned about courts, judges, and lawyers, too. That wasn't pretty, either. From my own experience - investigation including covert surveillance - at least forty percent of all courts are compromised by bribery or threat. While I was never put upon so successfully (a fact that in the land of government as corrupt as that of the U.S. speaks to my success with other defensive methods) that compromise of a judge was required, it is obvious to anyone who studies our legal system that it can be done, and is being done, successfully (the sudden - precipitously so - change of rulings in my F.O.I. case before the U.S. District Court of Colorado in 1988, the court ruling that the U.S. did not have to turn over records on the grounds of national security, is an example; in this case, of course, the decisive threat came from the U.S. Government).

Bribery and threat (threat is the only way for people of the limited means of most persons opposing government - as I've pointed out, they TAKE all your money by way of their opening gambit) are another example of things made practical only by careful and exhaustive study of the tactic and its subject and/or objective. I have done that, and used the tactic a number of times after having begun "Knight Errant," my effort to both assist persons in trouble with the criminal component of government and piss my enemy off while serving notice that I was still potentially lethal to the latter.

I described several instances of judicious (you should pardon the pun) use of threat and intimidation in my book, "Letters to Aaron, the Hal Luebbert Story, but another example had to do with the way certain persons from Arab countries are given carte blanche in this country. The woman in question had two children by her Arab husband before their divorce and his repatriation to his home state. Having learned that her ex-husband was back in town, she was certain he had come to take his children from her. After having overheard the story, then checked sufficiently to know that the woman was right, I decided to intervene covertly. Dueling with the U.S. Government wasn't enough adventure, I guess.

When I had located the Arab, I watched for a time and listened (the Arab spoke Arabic or Persian with the two men who accompanied him everywhere, but English with several others). There was no doubt: Ishmael (not his name, but the one I'll use for reference here) intended to seize his daughters at the first opportune time, take them to the local airport and the Gulfstream jet waiting there and leave the country. Safe passage had been arranged, he said (exactly what one should have expected, relations between the U.S. State Department and the nation in question being what they are).

Neither “Ishmael” nor his friends had ever seen me, and there was little or no chance they would have known that I had learned of their plot, or how. More, it wouldn't have made any difference if they had. As they dined the next evening at a hotel restaurant in Corpus Christi, I had a tape recorder and its recording delivered to their table by a waitress who, in turn, had been given it by another waiter. The latter had been told that I had seen one of the Arabs lose it outside. On the recorder was the following message (the voice, incidentally, was that of a young man picked at random from passersby at a shopping mall and paid twenty dollars to read a prepared script): "I know that you are here to kidnap your daughters - I gave their names - from your former wife." I said her name, too. "I represent a security group not known to anyone in this country or elsewhere; neither does your wife - I used her name again - know who we are. We have you under continuous observation. This is what you will do in order to continue alive. You will leave the United States as quickly as possible and having gone directly from this building to the airport. Any deviation from that route, any deviation in behavior, will result in your head being blown off by a high-powered rifle or by the silenced handgun being aimed at you right now. If when you have left the U.S. you return, the same thing will happen - no further contact and no questions asked. If you give me any reason whatever to believe that you intend to do anything but what I am demanding, I - it happens that I am the one watching you at the moment and it will be I who watches you until you leave for the airport - will kill you instantly, anyway. If you do not follow these instructions exactly - your fault, someone else's fault, nobody's fault - your head will be blown off. As I am sure you and your friends will realize once you have discussed it, there is no way for you to know whether this is real or not - except to experiment. If you do that, you will never know that you shouldn't have. Oh, and by the way, my company and I do this for fun, not pay. Frankly, I for one hope you decide to experiment."

The Arab's conversation when they had heard the recording was extremely excited, if soto voce. To the waitress' puzzlement, they did not order, preferring to have one drink, whiskey, then leave. The Gulfstream left Corpus Christi two hours later, never to return (I have my methods, there, too). I see my "client" - who has never had any idea of what happened - occasionally, by the way. She and her kids are doing very well more than a decade since the time in question, and she has remarried.

Obviously, there are several actions the Arabs could have taken in order to safely learn whether the recorder's message was truthful. They didn't, just as I was sure they wouldn't. KNOW YOUR ENEMY! The mass of men are much less than courageous, and this man's reasons for what he wanted to do were typical of his culture, his kind, and his gender. Arabs do not hold female children in high esteem, you know. In this case, however, I doubt that “Ishmael” would have done anything differently, even had his intended quarry been two horses - or something REALLY valuable.

Fighting to survive the U.S. Government, for its own citizens as for foreign nations and their citizens, is complicated, demanding, and exhausting - something akin to escaping from a prison like Alcatraz or Devil's Island. More demanding, perhaps, than even U.S. Air Force S.E.R.E - Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape - training. Not something for the sunshine soldier or the typically overfed and surfeited, Marie Antoinette "American."

You do, of course, also have a choice - slavery. I use this quote often - I recited it over and over during the years I fought the U.S. and its government by criminal - one from Winston Churchill: "If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves."

The only way to fight the corporate oligarchy that rules the United States is as a guerrilla seeking to inflict "the death of a thousand cuts," and recent history demonstrates it is the one war the U.S. is not good at (and, as a matter of fact, I predicted as early as 1956 that enemies of the U.S. would choose to use similar guerrilla tactics against her; one learns a great deal from the study of history alone, it would seem).

Okay, Now That the "American Dream" Has Come Down to a Question of Survival . . .

2008-05-23T08:42:00.000-07:00

Again responding to e-mail and other requests from persons aware of my more than twenty-three year struggle to survive the merciless machinations of the U.S. Government, this will begin a series of lessons in survival, both wilderness and urban. Soon, I will begin a webpage here, one specific to the subject. For today, however, we will begin with the tactical necessities where survival against an enemy like the U.S. Government itself are concerned, together with the likewise tactical understanding necessary to survive the results of government "policy" and practice.

First, the bedrock of any defense (or offense): Know your enemy. Like the ace fighter pilot, learn as the best possible early warning device to recognize an enemy. Study it. Most citizens of the super-sated, decadent United States exist in a perpetual state of "fat, dumb, and happy," gunfighter Colonel (now deceased) Jeff Cooper's "Condition White."

Next, learn again to learn. A large and decisive factor in the stupidity of the U.S. public is the individual's refusal to make any effort whatever toward learning. Few things worth learning, you know, can be learned in the now infamous "thirty days." Learn, too, to recognize a teacher. Propaganda - today's Operation MOCKINGBIRD media - is designed and wielded in order to behaviorally condition - not teach. And, to quote author Orson Scott Card, "There is no teacher but the enemy. No one but the enemy will ever tell you what the enemy is going to do. No one but the enemy will ever teach you how to destroy and conquer. Only the enemy shows you where you are weak. Only the enemy tells you where he is strong. And the rules of the game are what you can do to him and what you can stop him from doing to you. I am your enemy from now on. From now on, I am your teacher."

Inasmuch as the primary enemy here is the U.S. Government, the first line of that Orson Scott Card quote is pointed and profitable here, too: "I am your enemy, the first one you've ever had who was smarter than you." Here, just accept as fact that the enemy has resources beyond, even, what you can imagine. If recent and current history hasn't taught you that, it may be that any effort to learn survival is fruitless - you're too far gone to save. Look around, begin to let the enemy teach you.

For instance, as I type this the U.S. Congress is sneaking through legislation to give amnesty to the twenty million illegal aliens - also your enemy - already in the U.S. The legislation is included - i.e., deceitfully hidden - in legislation intended to provide more funding for the war in Iraq (which, in turn, is styled in such a manner as to make it appear the all the funds will go for support of our troops). That is your enemy. Learn from him.

Further as example, the U.S. Border with Mexico remains essentially wide open, in virtually the same state as it was on September 11, 2001. With only deliberately misplaced and misdesigned "fences" - "fences" whose only real purpose is to mislead the public - "fences" (what does it mean, to "fence?") standing in the way of the torrent of vicious and sociopath criminals (murder, rape, kidnapping, and illegal drug production and sales are major Mexican industries, with drug lords ruling large portions of the nation) pouring in from Mexico, those sworn to protect and defend us dither endlessly (you don't see the delaying tactic which will permit more millions of enslave-able amnesty-seekers to infiltrate?). More, increased coverage by the nation's news and information media concerning the paltry number of arrests of illegal immigrants and those who hire them (as yet, no arrests of those aiding and abetting the crime are being made) deliberately conveys the cynical message that an effort is being made, and something being done.

Think about that - learn from you enemy - it's how the people representing you in government actually view your welfare and safety (to say nothing of their oaths of office).

So, the border - a nineteen hundred and sixty-nine mile wide doorway - remains open; this while the Bush League Administration savages the U.S. Constitution and the civil rights of U.S. citizens in the name of national security. Cynical? Yeah. Deceitful? Yes, of course. Take a few days - skip a few days of hypnosis by that mind-warping mechanism in your living room (well, hell, actually they're everywhere), give up your golf game, your computer games, or whatever child's play diversion you do to in order to recreate (good word, and in its root meaning exactly what I'm recommending) for a couple of days and review U.S. History since World War Two. Compare the nation then and the nation now. Learn what happened, and why. Wake up, in other words.

Know your enemy!

How much more, parenthetically, do we need to know in order to decide that to vote in the forthcoming election is to aid and abet - lend credence to - the enemy destroying you and your country? THINK ABOUT IT! In almost every instance, voting for an incumbent in the U.S. Congress means voting to put a thieving, rapacious, even murdering, criminal back in office. To vote for any of the presidential candidates save Ron Paul is a vote for an individual already caught publicly in deliberate, bald-faced lying - lying for the purpose of deception and intended, therefore, to obtain under false pretenses - steal - the nation's highest office.

Incidentally, the two senators responsible for the latest attempt at amnesty for illegal aliens are Dianne Feinstein and Larry Craig (yeah, that guy) of Idaho. I have written each of my senators and representatives in the U.S. Congress, and just dispatched this letter to Dianne Feinstein: Senator, while I live in Texas and am not your constituent, I want you to know of wife Rita's and my disgust with your latest attempt to obtain amnesty - to aid and abet, in other words - for illegal aliens in the U.S. That you have in so doing chosen to hold hostage funding for our troops in Iraq is a thing so despicable that we are all but speechless. Were it not for the fact that you are a politician, it would be incredible.

"While those of us here near the border live warily amidst the flood of criminals pouring into the U.S. from Mexico (only a few weeks ago, I personally overheard - I speak Spanish - and thwarted a plan by two Mexicans to find a woman here in the U.S. and rape her), people like you do all you can to increase the tidal wave of crime and other anti-social and anti-U.S. behavior. Forced to live behind a nineteen hundred mile open door opposite the nation where murder, rape, kidnapping for ransom, and an illegal drug industry unequalled anywhere in the worlds are major industries, we have persons like you suborning and misprisioning the crime.

"I want you to know that neither I nor any of my friends will do business with or in California until the state rids itself of your duplicitous and pandering representation. I will today prepare a mailing to everyone with whom I associate or do business, asking - demanding, if necessary - that they cease association with California. I will also prepare to the same effect a page on my website. I am also forwarding a letter to Governor Swartzenegger.

"Do everyone in the U.S. a favor, impeach George W. Bush then resign!"

But I digress (I'm so damned disgusted, it probably has my head screwed up - I just can't come to grips anymore with the fact of what we have as a nation become). Suffice it to say that I consider that voting today in the U.S. and for candidates seeking federal office is nothing short of an act tantamount to treason, treason in the form of selling out the nation and the public. It is that bad.

And, of course, reason for beginning to take seriously survival and the advice of one already a twenty-three year veteran of survival, survival necessitated by government misdeeds, incompetence, malfeasance and corruption.

Continuing, note that speaking generally as I do here, there is nothing I say or will say that the reader does not not already have ample reason to believe. Anyone having lived two decades in the U.S. - certainly those having lived here as long as I have - will have heard, seen, and experienced enough to recognize the truth of what I say. In many instances, the truth will have come from the mouth of government itself - you can look it up.

The U.S. Government, your enemy (if not yet now, in the near future) - does not obey the law. Forget the idea that the law will save you from government (any government, in fact). Government may arrange for passage of legislation empowering it to destroy you - taxation, for instance - but wherever the law is intended to restrain or control government - the U.S. Constitution, for instance - the government will ignore the law, and do as it pleases. It will continue so doing until you are beaten into submission or destroyed. Like David facing Goliath, you will either learn how to evade and strike at the enemy's vulnerable places or be crushed. More, unless you learn in a manner that changes what you are - more about that in a minute - the best you can get is a draw.

The U.S. Government is deceptive and deceitful (it postures, for instance, as "the Nation of Laws" - that while continually making a mockery of the law and legality), an inveterate, neurotic, and psychotic liar. "Deception is a state of mind," a CIA official once observed, "and deception is the mind of the state." Learn, therefore, never to talk to any official of government without making a record of the conversation. During my twenty-three year war and all its skirmished with the IRS and other agencies of the federal government, a tape recording kept me out of jail dozens of times. Learn never to answer a question posed by an official, especially a federal official. Learn never write to an official of the U.S. Government without keeping a copy (I have cached all over the nation and Canada thermo-fax copies, tape and video recordings of such communication).

Expect, in other words, to be the object of the lie and lying whenever faced with any kind of official. The lie is not only the single most common tactic of officialdom, it is characteristic of all people desirous of rule, and of deciding what is best for persons other than themselves. A person who believes he knows what is good for everyone else cannot be trusted (think about it: he doesn't believe you know what is good for you - why should he bother with telling you the truth?). As Thomas Jefferson once observed, "An honest man can feel no pleasure in the exercise of power over his fellow citizens . . . Power is not alluring to pure minds and is not with them the primary principle of contest."

Jefferson also noted,"Whenever a man has cast a longing eye on offices, a rottenness begins in his conduct." Learn it!

In the U.S., the Chernobyl of capitalism, those who run for federal office do so for just two reasons - to acquire wealth or to protect wealth already acquired. Political power - the ability to exert force politically ("Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. -- George Washington) - is about money. Nothing more. Thomas Jefferson again: "Merchants have no country. The mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains." If you haven't seen our corporations fulfilling and proving that one of late, you just aren't paying attention.

Most officials of government - and that's at all levels - are miserable cowards, fearful terribly of actual physical force. That's also the reason they seek position - office - from which to wield the power of politics and law. Time and again, once I had learned when and where to use my judo to thwart official oppression, I saw the swaggering bully that officialdom inevitably becomes turn into a sniveling, craven crawler. One individual actually wept; another vomited.

More, the U.S. is now not only ruled by corporations who own everything including the federal government, the nation is being run as though it were a corporation. A corporation, don't forget, exists for one purpose: to make money. It has no conscience and no morality, and - on account of the Supreme Court's ruling in Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific Railroad - the corporation has all the rights once possessed by an individual citizen; all without meaningful responsibility. The world view of the corporation can be recognized easily in the infamous Ford Pinto matter of a few years ago, in which the corporation, knowing that its Pinto exploded and burned easily on account of a poorly designed and positioned fuel tank, decided on account of costs - being more than Ford believed lawsuits brought by those burned or by the families of those burned to death - to leave the rolling firebomb as it was.

The one or two hundred people Ford expected to be burned to death didn't matter as much as their profit. How many instances of that have we seen in the past few decades? Anyone remember the tobacco corporations - cigarette smoking? As I write this, I struggle with what to do about the fact that tap water here in Port Lavaca, Texas is highly radio-active. So far this month, the dosimeter at the kitchen sink shows a reading of forty Roentgens. The reading has been as high as one hundred, twenty Roentgens. For sometime, uranium leech-mining corporations have been feigning the effort to obtain legal permission to endanger (in leeching, chemicals are pumped into the aquifer in order to release uranium into the water, the now radioactive water then extracted to be pumped back once the uranium is recovered) the Gulf Coast aquifer. Obviously, illegal mining is ongoing, and having long since learned from the enemy and bought the dosimeters as soon as moving into the area and learned of leech mining elsewhere in Texas, I know it.

The Pinto Rule, remember? That people are drinking the water and bathing in it, with the obvious consequences, will doubtlessly be dealt with in the same manner. Uranium mining is a very profitable business. Learn from your enemy.

Learn also to relate what the lessons tell you about other matters concerning government and a nation run like a corporation. You expect something other than the Pinto Rule when it came time to weight the bodies of U.S. troops - to say nothing of the "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" of their families, and futures of U.S. citizens generally - against war profits for the military industrial complex? You really believe defense of a nation surrounded by huge oceans and continents, and made up of a citizenry armed to the teeth as is ours, really requires a military costing as much as the next fifteen biggest militaries combined? If you don't recognize Iraq - six hundred fifty thousand killed thus far and still counting, and lethally cancerous depleted uranium being strewn everywhere (just to assure that our presence in Iraq continues long after John McCain's "hundred years") - as another example of the Pinto Rule, you'll have no chance whatever when you are the monster that is corporate government's next meal.

"There is no teacher but the enemy." The teacher is teaching you, all right; but are you paying attention?

There should be no further need for recitation concerning the character of the enemy when it is the U.S. Government. Put yourself in the shoes of an Iraq1 citizen - whether for or against us. It makes no difference to a nation run like a corporation. If you want to learn the tactics of survival against the corporations that rule in the U.S., learn U.S. History since World War Two. That simple.

Once the survivalist has learned U.S. History - or become the living proof of the dictum that says he who won't learn history is condemned to re-live it - he must recognize the need for and learn to be alone. Only aloneness can teach you more than your enemy. That's because at first being alone is a fearsome thing, maddening for the majority of over-civilized "Americans." The fear, you see, being your enemy, teaches you. First, it teaches that loneliness is the great insulator, armor against everything. Disease, most of it, for instance, is transmitted from person to person.

So is oppression. "Democracy," Thomas Jefferson said, "is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” The Mormons at San Angelo, Texas, are learning that now. Are you paying attention? Alone, on the other hand, one obeys only law he has made himself. Alone, there is no one to fight. Alone, no one can steal from you. And alone, one is never bored (as Henry David Thoreau wrote in "Walden," "I have a great deal of company in my house, especially in the morning when nobody calls). In order for you to believe me, you'll have to live it. Loneliness will be your enemy, but it will teach you. It will teach you to survive.

In case you missed it, society and its government has taught you in such a way that you must die without it. It has taught you dependence.

Next time, more specific lessons in survival (I'm getting ready again - so should you).

You'll Fight, All Right - Because Like Me Once, You Won't Have a Choice.

2008-05-10T10:33:00.001-07:00

Each morning, I do a “dry-run” defense of our home against a misguided or malicious – it makes no difference, they kill you either way – S.W.A.T police raid. The place is “mined” – booby traps designed to disrupt the invaders’ otherwise practiced and machine-like assault – and readied as it is each night before bed time, as the cops pour down the lanes they’re forced into and fall prey to the devices they couldn’t possible anticipate and or avoid, I race through my own “play,” moving as planned, and killing methodically – one .45 ACP round to the upper lip of each man. It all takes about three and one-half seconds, and I’m striving for less. Even allowing for surprise, the shots require less than two seconds. I’m very good – I’ve been practicing, you see, for twenty-three years.

It was May 5, 1986 in the early morning hours when the IRS first invaded my house illegally; it was October 6, 1986 when I received my first bullet wounds from the United States. During the years that followed, the conspiracy of criminals that is my country’s government burglarized or otherwise invaded my homes and offices more (there were dozens of covert invasions before installed listening and recoding devices documented each burglary) than sixty times .

It’s a strange county, trumpeting relentlessly and endlessly as it does to the world its respect for the rights of the individual, its humanity, its peaceful intentions, and all the rest. On the other hand, it is a vicious killer, with a history of internecine savagery almost unprecedented in human history, a nation dedicated as none ever before to the design, production, building, and use of weapons, military vehicles, vessels, and aircraft. Today, it spends more on means to kill than the next fifteen largest industrialized nations together.

Behaving like a demented lunatic, it imprisons by many times more of its people than the next most cruel nation (upwards of two million, 760 for every 100,000), and keeps in poverty with its Brobdingnagian spending on weapons and making war forty million more. Reciting endlessly its devotion – leaders are sworn to protect and defend it – to its Constitution, it ruthlessly violates the human rights of more of its citizens in a single day than many countries do in a month – or in some instances, a year. Its government steals more money in a year than the entire fiscal budget of whole nations. As much as twenty percent of money derived from taxation of even the very poor is stolen by members of Congress and the bureaucracy.

In a nation proclaiming equality under the law, the rich pay no taxes or fines, through the legislative magic of incorporation handing both on to the wage-earning poor who have no alternative to buying their oppressors’ products and services. Talking peace relentlessly, it wages war continually, the costs for it all born by the poor, as are the costs in human life, injury and misery. The rich – especially those urging more war or standing idly by while the president sends thousands of their countrymen to die for the supposed freedom of foreign citizens – do not send their sons and daughter, or their loved ones, to die for “American honor.”

Neither do they have any more respect for their countrymen here at home. I have already made reference to the internecine savagery of the United States toward its own, but what is strange even for a nation ideologically, even religiously, devoted to the lie, is the fact that a recent spate of police brutality seems to be happening in a vacuum. Even with the perfectly understandable anger of the black community concerning the recent murder Sean Bell, the young bridegroom who died unarmed in a hailstorm of police gunfire, no one otherwise seems to relate the startling rise in savagery by the police with the similar primitive behavior being witnessed everywhere among the populace, especially its youth. It’s as though Ruby Ridge and the murder of a child and his mother by authorities, Waco, Texas and the immolation of seventy-six women and children, and dozens of hideous outrages the like never happened.

The list of Nazi-like summary death-dealing goes on and on, matter of fact. It has been going on for decades. On May 17, 1974, for instance, a house and surrounding in Los Angeles was set ablaze by explosives, and six people incinerated. On June 3, 1983, a man named Gordon Kaul – an individual whose story would serve to let me escape a similar fate – was barbecued in what has now become typical fashion during a siege of a farmhouse in Arkansas. In Philadelphia, May 14, 1985, the MOVE compound was blasted and burned in a fire that incinerated eleven people including six children, that when a state helicopter dropped a bomb on the place. It has gone on and on, with the national news and information media making far, far more of Chandra Levy-Natalee Holloway disappearances and Nancy Grace smut-peddler “news” than the appalling slaughter of the citizenry by those supposedly hired to protect it.

Still, muck-raking is the source of big business for the media, and weekly or so we are treated to a video of the “Serve and Protect” people in action like that a couple days ago, as many as fifteen cops kicking and beating the living hell out of three men who supposedly fired shots at someone or something. You never know, because the government never punishes any of its minions – the Fairfax County, VA cop who shot to death unarmed Dr. Salvatore Culosi as he stood defenseless in his driveway a little over a year ago was punished by a three week suspension - and its official account of what happened always makes one wonder if he was hallucinatory as he watched it. The de rigueur investigation never squares with the obvious.

That last reminds of Ken Trentadue, the Oklahoma man who on August 21, 1995 was tortured and beaten to death in a federal prison in Oklahoma City (for those with a strong stomach, the links below provide photos). To date, no one has received so much as a reprimand, and while the family of the brutalized man has three times won their lawsuit for civil damages, the government continues refusing to pay.

The government won’t pay, of course. To date, the United States has four times evaded facing me in court – where the power of subpoena could prove devastating for someone as well-informed of federal criminality as I. This isn’t the country FoxNews would have you believe it is.

In fact, the toll of U.S. citizens murdered by their government would amount to nothing less than a reign of terror – were anyone able to learn through the blizzard of Operation MOCKINGBIRD media “cooking,” spin-doctoring, and outright lying. The U.S. Bureau of Prisons told Trentadue’s family that he hanged himself, but upon inspection at the funeral, injuries over his entire body were discovered - the truth of it. Since the supposed invention of the SWAT team in 1967 (another government-by-corporation lie: actually, I wrote the first paper outlining the “Special Weapons and Tactics” concept ten years earlier, calling it exactly what Los Angeles Police would one day name it), there have been an average of forty thousand police raids on private homes yearly. Forty unarmed and innocent people have been shot to death, people like Dr. Salvatore Culosi, the optometrist I mentioned (Culosi’s crime? Betting on sports!)

Ken Trentadue’s crime, incidentally, was a supposed (and minor) parole violation. Of course, in George W. Bush’s “America,” the constitutionally convenient lie has become a legal process on a par with the arrest warrant. All that is necessary for the government to take a man’s freedom is the word of a malfeasant official. Thanks largely to the feminist revolution and its mindless machinations, the ages-old rule of unus testis; nullus testis – one witness, no witness – is dead as the proverbial doornail.

In fact, the “word of an official” may very well be supplanted by the bark of a dog.

So, survivalists urban, wilderness, and jurisprudential – I have, as a matter of fact, come to be known as a “guerrilla lawyer” - like me train continually and intensively. Early on in my war with the IRS – and war with the U.S. Government inevitably means confrontation with IRS – I realized that any or all of the lawless brutality of the United States we have been observing now for decades would inevitably be directed at me.

I was right. I was meant to be at some length the victim of a SWAT raid (and, as a matter of fact, actually thwarted one – the story being in my book “Letters to Aaron, the Hal Luebbert Story). The more than one hundred nine recorded times (in total, approximately a hundred twenty-five) I was stopped and harassed by police and constabulary on the nation’s streets and highways was supposed to result in one of the scores of beatings we have repeatedly witnessed by way of a video camera in the hands of a citizen (imagine, if you want to raise your “pucker factor” twenty points, the number of beatings that took place outside the view of video cameras).

Had the police succeeded in making a valid arrest, I would surely have been a Ken Trentadue (I would forego for more than a decade surgery for a double hernia inflicted when I was run down by a federal assassin in an eight-passenger van, fearful that unless I could arrange for monitors at the hospital, I would never survive anesthesia).

As it was, I was wounded by gunfire three times, suffered a broken wrist, broken ribs, and a severe facial laceration when rammed in my car by another vehicle. I escaped – outfought, then fled when he went to get a silenced pistol with which to end settle the issue – the Christmas Eve karate attack of a would-be federal killer, twice recovered from poisoning, and six times avoided or recovered from having been run down by cars while a pedestrian or riding my bicycle (use of a car finally proved to offer the government too many opportunities for the Amadou Diallo, Salvatore Culosi, Sean Bell Tactic). My vehicles were sabotaged several times with obviously murderous intent, and the RV where I lived for ten years was likewose frequently sabotaged, once obviously with arson in mind.

There’s more – this was a war that began in 1977 – but that, together with my long and intensive study of U.S. History, would suffice to confirm my understanding of my country. I’ve learned – I learned, and it’s let me be here today – the guerrilla tactics that will soon be required for survival in the Land of the Free become the Land of the Fee. I’ve learned to keep a voice recorder at hand at all times (never go out without it, and never answer the door without it). This is a nation whose officialdom lives by the lie, a fact no waking and sane person can fail to observe even daily. I do not – ever! – talk to a police or other official (friend, acquaintance or otherwise – the typical citizen of the U.S. will sell his soul in order to keep his job and/or income; public office makes it immensely worse).

Learn the tactics of deceit. The nation is run by them. Understand that to file a tax return is much like operating a motor vehicle on the nation’s streets and highways, an invitation to utter, ruinous disaster. The IRS can take everything you have, and without any kind of legal process whatever – in fact, any legal process will be entirely theirs, a mockery of legality. Traffic laws let the government stop you for any reason whatever, and to violate with impunity any and all civil and human rights protected by the U.S. Constitution (how many civil rights violations can you count in the latest police beating – and shooting unarmed men to death doesn’t violate their civil rights?). When you have been beaten, dispossessed, or raped – a favorite among the studs of the IRS, especially women who are illegal aliens and dare not retaliate against their abuser – the perpetrator will lie, and he will not be punished (something he knows, and which energizes him).

Believe me or your eyes and ears. The story of what happened to me – and what can happen to any citizen foolish enough or forced by circumstances to file a tax return - is included on my www.judoknighterrant.com website, in the legal complaint I filed with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas more than a year and a half ago.

In the several instances where my covertly recorded conversation with a cop or other officer of the law proved him to be a liar, not once was the offending criminal – falsifying a police report is a crime regardless of whether the perpetrator is a civilian or an officer of the law – prosecuted or otherwise punished.

And, by the way, with what we’ve seen with our own eyes of police behavior nationally, and with the government’s obvious attitude concerning law as it applies to them (the congressman with $100,000 in his freezer, sexual abuse of congressional aides, and scores of things the like – to say nothing of the cover-up of 9-11, the falsification of reasons for invasion of Iraq, and on and on and on), how many of the persons listed as missing in the U.S., especially women, is it reasonable to assume were victims of the police and officialdom otherwise?

If Ken Trentadue’s death was made known because of the fact of his having been in prison, how likely is it that the truth would have been known, had he been found on a deserted road somewhere?

As an example and on the other hand, the fact that I made monkeys several times of cops who stopped me far from civilization and possibly prying eyes or videos cameras without the incident ever being reported should tell you something. A number of times, I tore up a traffic ticket and flipped it into the air, certain because of the recording I had just made of the cop’s remarks that he would dare do nothing. Once, in a story I reported in my book “Letters,” I actually confronted two Wyoming Highway patrolmen, and man-handled one – all with impunity provided by the fact of my having recorded their misconduct during the “stop.”

In a parking lot in Raton, New Mexico, a few days before Christmas, I confronted three officers of the law, refusing to let them search my RV, and promising to kill in its defense. Obviously well aware of my reputation with judo and the .45 1911 pistol I wore in plain sight, aware that they were entirely in the wrong and being recorded, both video and voice, there was no search and no arrest. When I continued on my way to Colorado Springs, moreover there were no more “stops.” The story is also in the book, “Letters.”

When – with no reasonable alternative - I had begun my counter-attack against crime by government by infiltrating federal (and, in a couple of instances, state and local) offices in order to plant listening devices, I often left my card behind, a taunt. Of the dozens of times I did so, only twice did the official in question report (one famously, matter of fact) that he had been compromised. Of the several IRS female officials who provided me access to their files – among other things – not one confessed her (ahem - you should pardon the expression) infidelity. A government job – with all its power and perks - is something more feverishly-protected than anything you or I can imagine. Unless you think about it.

As Thomas Jefferson noted, "Whenever a man has cast a longing eye on offices, a rottenness begins in his conduct."

In the years after I started driving again in 2001 (shortly after 9-ll and after a six year hiatus), I planned every trip carefully, noting the address of each police station and sheriff’s office en route in order to be able to drive there slowly in the event of an attempted “stop” by a cop, highway patrolman, sheriff’s deputy or other law enforcement officer (a couple of times, even that didn’t work – a second and third car forced me off the road by blocking my way – and was obliged to resort to other means including the tape cellular phone, voice recorder and video camera were necessary).

When I had moved my RV to a RV and camper park in Corpus Christi, Texas, the first thing I did was learn the addresses of several local judges. As I related in the book “Letters,” the night I foiled a police attempt at provoking a lethal confrontation, I had among my plans for escape after the shoot-out a plan to reach the nearest judge’s residence. Nothing else would have stayed police vengeance for the killing of four (or five) cops. The confrontation with five police officers who surrounded my RV, incidentally, was all voice recorded.

The police were to retaliate a couple of days later with a phony traffic ticket written after another “stop” while I test-drove my just-repaired 80 VW Rabbit around the camper park (not, in other words, on the street or highway; and not, therefore illegal). When neither the court or the city attorney to whom the judge referred me would not look at the proof of insurance and vehicle registration that had been contained in the dashboard panel and glove box lying in my camper driveway some one hundred feet distant (the cop, a lieutenant named Vessey, would not let me go get it, preferring for some reason to write the bogus summons), and I appeared as ordered only to find no judge, no court, and no arresting officer, and a city attorney offering me a “deal” wherein I would pay a $400 fine, I told the lawyer to go to hell. Facing down two fat sheriff’s deputies summoned for the supposed purpose of intimidation, I left. Later, when the “official” notice that I had been found guilty and fined arrived by mail, I wrote across it something lewd and sent it back – together with copies of the damning insurance paper and motor vehicle registration, dates of issue high-lighted. There were no repercussions. I still have the tape recording of the “arrest.” Again, the entire series of events was voice recorded.

The United States is in rapid decay now because its citizenry submits docilely to the equivalent of being raped. It is being raped because it is too self-indulgent, too selfish, to react with outrage when one of its number is attacked and brutalized by government. It is being raped because it will not learn the law and use it as I have, because it simply pays instead of using all the devices available by which to fight and delay. It is being raped because a sufficient number of individual citizens will not withdraw from the economic system as I once did, to live off the land without money. The American public is also being raped because it will not slow down on the highways (as I also did, then in order to save my meager funds, driving forty-five miles an hour whenever and wherever I went), or turn off the engine at stop signs or other places where one normally lets the engine idle wastefully.

Pushing on the accelerator is demand, you know, and demand offers the corporations who own government an excuse and subterfuge by which to steal.

Americans are being swindled, beaten, and murdered by their government because they are too stupid, and too cowardly to make it stop. I am reminded of a couple of apropos quotes, one from a man named Martin Niemöller, the other Sir Winston Churchill (if you are the typical Kellie Pickler American, look him up). Niemöller, a pastor in Nazi Germany, said, “In Germany, they came first for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist; and then they came for the trade unionists, I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist; and then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew; and then . . . they came for me . . . and by that time there was no one left to speak up."

And Sir Winston said, “If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as a slave.

Corporate capitalism is what it says it is, and what you know it is. So is government by corporate capitalist. You are seeing it all around you, and every day. As I said in a video tape made for the American Lyceum many years ago, you’ll fight all right – like they did me, they won’t give you a choice.

"The U.S. doesn't torture;" you're joking – right?

2008-05-07T15:27:00.000-07:00

Something I said on one of the Internet sites concerning the despicable practice of “waterboarding” has evoked from the metrosexual male petty intellectual of the Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Duke of Plaza-Toro ilk a shit-storm of the pettifogging and fulminating invective typical of their “lead from the safety of the far rear” kind.

Okay. So let’s talk about torture. First, though, let me tell you how it was that I became expert on the subject. First, I was once trained to resist torture, that by the United States of America. Secondly, having completed basic training and waiting for advanced training in special operations, I was assigned to guard soldiers who had supposedly broken under Chinese torture and were to be subjected by their own country to torture in the form of courts martial. One, a guy named Chichester, had reportedly been “brain-washed” – that according to my superiors. Chichester himself didn’t really know what had happened to him, but he didn’t have a lot of hope in things like “truth, justice, and the American way.”

Interview with these hapless individuals made clear a depressing fact of national honor (that, presumably, of any nation and its government), the fact that once its enemy has had an opportunity to torture its soldier, the soldier’s country will probably torture him should he escape and be repatriated, that in order to learn what he might have told the enemy. All of the hapless soldier’s “interrogators,” of course, will have instituted the practice on the basis of what they know they would have done in the same straits. I had a lot of time to discuss it all with these guys, and I learned a great deal.

Having trained for a time to do covert operations against the Soviet Union or Communist China, having experienced a couple of the operational fiascos typical of almost everything this country does, I realized that I might one day stand in Chichester’s boots. As I went through Special Forces and covert operations training, I thought a great deal about the dilemma of a soldier taken prisoner. I also knew that I wouldn’t be wearing the uniform that my own side considered a ticket to treatment according to the rules of war. For insight in that regard, check the U.S. Government’s latest arguments on the topic concerning prisoners at Guantanamo Bayou. When I had had occasion during a mission to protect Soviet defectors against their country to discuss the USSR’s interrogation methods, I began training myself to resist, even preclude and neutralize “coercive interrogation” - torture. My efforts included an exhaustive study of torture.

What’s “torture?” Well, according to Webster’s, it’s “intense pain or suffering of body or mind; the infliction of such pain or suffering.” The word "torture" comes from the Latin verb torquere, "to twist." In Webster's New World Dictionary, the primary definition is: "The inflicting of severe pain to force information and confession, get revenge, etc." Even today, in the Twenty-first Century, all manner of vicious, “inhuman” – like the U.S. hypocrisy otherwise, I’ve always found that humorously ludicrous - cruelty is still commonplace, particularly in Mexico, Central and South America, Africa, the Middle East, and all nations inflicted with Islam (maiming and physical abuse are legal in Somalia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Sudan, and other countries that observe and obey sharia; the hands of thieves are chopped off, women convicted of adultery are often stoned to death; in Iraq, Saddam Hussein's police force burned stigma into the foreheads of thieves and deserters, and sliced off the tongues of those spoke out against the state). Governments around the world, including the United
States continue to employ rape and to terrorization of family members, including children, in order to extort confessions or information from those in captivity.

“Civilized” people everywhere readily condemn this sort of thing. Civilized “America” condemns these things – all the while their government does them. As I once wrote while still in high school, “the summation of history is that man proclaims the right, and does wrong.”

Then, however, there are “coercive methods” that some people argue, fall short of torture, things like sleep deprivation, exposure to heat or cold, the use of drugs to induce fear, confusion, or suggestibility, “abusive” (have you notice how important terminology is?) treatment such as forceful grasping, slapping, shoving, or violent shaking, forcing a prisoner to stand until collapse occurs, or forcing him to sit in painfully uncomfortable positions, and playing upon his fears for himself, his comrades, or his family. Although excruciating, this sort of thing generally leaves no evidence of injury – no wounds or scars, and – at least supposedly - does no permanent injury.

The famed Geneva Convention (it there were ever a better example of a resolution “more honored in the breach than the observance,” it’s not one known to this old soldier), incidentally, makes no distinction. The Geneva Convention bans any and all mistreatment of prisoners. Unless you are prepared to argue that simulated drowning is entertainment – therapy, perhaps - there is therefore no doubt whatever that “waterboarding” is a violation of the Geneva Convention (with his declaration of war and public admissions, therefore, the President of the U.S. is a war criminal).

That won’t do it for the Sean Hannity types, however. For them, torture is anything that isn’t “waterboarding.” Or whatever else we might do, or be doing. If the Home of the Brave is doing it, it isn’t torture, whatever - beating, breaking limbs or digits, inflicting bodily pain – whatever it is. Handy. To a wimp whose reality is all language, a guy who has never endured any kind of real world physical hardship – even the like of backache or blistered palms derived from hard manual labor – that’s truth. All that is required is a twist of terminology, or the coining of a new phrase.

In fact, the shear naiveté of persons like those who infest discussion on the Internet with their ill-informed opinion and vapid pronouncements is almost invariably traceable to the likewise vacuous commentary of purported pundits like O’Reilly and Hannity – to say nothing of their supposedly journalistic counterparts on the liberal side of their Operation MOCKINGBIRD reality.
“Americans” are monumentally ignorant of history, of course, but even one versed in very recent history knows that the simple and most salient fact concerning “waterboarding” torture is that it is highly unlikely that torture will obtain useful information. Nazi German science demonstrated long ago that there are no reliable ways to make people tell secrets. So did millions of dollars of U.S. taxpayer-funded Operation MKULTRA (and others the like) experiments. More, it is a fact that everyone in the intelligence community knows that. Where have all these pundits and “analysts” been all this time?

Face it, folks you don’t “waterboard” anyone because you want information having to do with intelligence – unless you are of the character of the Nazi Gestapo or its Einsatzgruppen.

Then, too, the fact is that U.S. soldiers have already been tried and convicted of torture for having inflicted “waterboarding” on captives. After the Spanish American War, the US Army used waterboarding – it was then called the “water cure” (remember that terminology is everything these effeminate days) or “Chinese water torture.” One Major Edwin Glenn was court martialed and sentenced to ten years hard labor for waterboarding a suspected Philippine insurgent.

Let’s take further as an example of torture – this time, the torture of words and language for propaganda purposes – the term “waterboarding” and the discussion thereof: Waterboarding, the Operation MOCKINGBIRD media has succeeded in convincing the public, is among the least severe of possible “coercive interrogation” – note the innocuous-sounding euphemism – methods. By the rhetorical device of loaded question (implying, in this instance, that a question exists), the media has created its own – and its master, the federal government’s – question and resulting doubt as to definition.

Tell yourself what your worst fears are. If the fear of drowning isn’t among them, you are the rare individual. In fact, the reason that, with torture by fire, torture using water has been throughout history the method of torture most frequently employed – and successful – has to do with both the fact of man’s certain familiarity with them and with their fearsomeness. All torture, after all is directed against the mind. Not the body. Oh, sure, you hurt him, but you hurt him in order to pressure his mind, to make him want to avoid the pain anticipated or being experienced.

Not death. There are many case histories of men threatened with, even assured, execution, men who nevertheless went to their deaths implacably – even smiling or laughing. Despite stories like one I heard again and again during my military career, stories like that of a Special Forces Trooper who said to make a man talk shoot his compatriot to his left, then the one to his right. “Then you can’t shut him up.” Try that with a zealot who thinks your shooting him will give him seventy-two virgins to deflower and paradise.

Uh-uh. Torture is about fear, especially fear of pain. Its ability to inflict fear has to do with what the victim is most fearful. In Orwell’s 1984, “Winston” feared rats; and the threat of being inundated by ravening rats broke his otherwise firm resolve.

Notwithstanding all that, there is the ancipital fact that the “waterboarding” being video-demonstrated almost daily by the media, the Internet, and almost all forms of electronic media is both the sort of thing used in military training like SERE (an acronym for “Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape”) and certainly not what is being done by U.S. to its captives; more, a mealy-mouthed media of the O’Reilly, Hannity, metrosexual male ilk have no real way to recognize the torture about which they pontificate almost nightly. That, folks, is a very telling scenario, one I’ll address in a moment.

At its logical peak of severity – what anyone not a fool or one stupefied by today’s MOCKINGBIRD media propaganda must realize - “waterboarding” is in fact drowning, then reviving the victim. It is not, contrary to the general opinion among those with whom I’ve been discussing the matter, the least severe of interrogation techniques. In fact, it is among the worst.

Ask anyone who has drowned, lost consciousness, and been revived by the lifesaving technique of empting the victim’s lungs of water and providing artificial respiration. Taken to its possible extreme (you expect something less of anyone so desirous of information that he is willing to inflict “coercive interrogation?), “waterboarding” is nothing less than – intended or otherwise - repetitive drowning and resuscitation. Get the timing wrong, fail in resuscitation, the interogee dies.

Oops!

To date, one hundred and twenty U.S. captives have died under U.S. “interrogation” (Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, chief of staff to General Colin Powell when he was US Secretary of State, said not long ago that he knew of more than seventy of what he termed "questionable” deaths among persons under US supervision as detainees, that being up to time he left office in 2002. That figure, he then added, “is now around ninety.” This, of course, is 2008.

Since the tenure of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld we have heard again and again of captured terrorist leaders has yielded "an awful lot of information" and had "made life an awful lot more difficult for an awful lot of folks." More, the media is striving mightily to make it appear that all these captured Islamic fanatics are talking their heads off. The sycophant media – most notably of course, FoxNews – has reported intelligence coup after coup like that of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who supposedly sang his head off under “waterboarding” interrogation.

Hmmmmmm. If that were the case, anyone thinking about it would think, U.S. interrogation has al-Qaeda in position to be plucked for its leaders like a tree its fruit. It just happens that Mohammed, for instance, didn’t know enough to let us capture Osama Bin Laden or his supposed second in command, Aiman Al-Zawaheri. Gee, I wonder how that happens.

I also note, by the way, that about as much of what we’re being told about this matter adds up as do all the other media stories and analyses thereof. If all the supposed intelligence victories over al-Qaeda are true, then a whole lot of fanatics eager to go to Allah are suddenly changing their minds and spilling the beans all over the place, or we’re torturing a hell of a lot of people.

With the credibility of the Bush Administration what it is on the record, moreover, there is no way to corroborate anything, including all the stories of U.S. interrogation successes. What we do know is that we are still in both Iraq and Afghanistan, we are still fighting an enemy of undiminished capacity to wage ware, we have not killed or captured either Osama Bin Laden or Aiman Al-Zawaheri, and U.S. propaganda has reached levels unprecedented in our history. The Bush League in Washington, D.C. is going to say al-Qaeda leaders are caving in under questioning whether they are or aren’t (in fact, even an honest administration would probably be well-advised to do that: men like Sheikh Mohammed, and the like are heroes in the Arab world, and word that they have been broken is enormously demoralizing).

As usual, we are being treated like mushrooms – kept in the dark and fed garbage. Neither I (I did interrogations professionally for twenty-three years) nor any of my friends who happen to be in the business of tactical and strategic military intelligence puts any stock in any of these tales of interrogation success. Professionals know better, and it all smells “made for television” and people who know no better than Hollywood. If a supposed top-level al-Qaeda leader like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed talked so much, why haven’t we seen any sign of the logical results? The fact, as I said, is that no one in any competent organization knows enough to make his capture devastating to his cause. It just isn’t done that way – except, of course, in Hollywood and FoxNews.

But since the U.S. admits torture, it’s pretty certain we’re doing it. Prisoners in U.S. custody in Afghanistan have died. As many as two dozen prisoners at Guantánamo Naval Station have attempted suicide (one prisoner survived after hanging himself but remains unconscious and is not expected to revive – on the other hand, that happens to victims of “waterboarding,” too . . .). And that’s only what we know about (too bad torture doesn’t work – we could get the truth from our government).

“Waterboarding” and the Bush League “War on Terror,” however, are providing enemies of the U.S. massive intelligence. The fact that our government must sees as necessary torture is very revealing. An old combative sportsman who trained in wrestling and judo for the purpose of training for actual war-fighting, I know as does any combative sportsman that an opponent who stoops to fouling his opponent betrays critical weakness. More, “waterboarding” is in character for this fiasco of fecklessness, demonstrating as it does our inability to defeat even an enemy we outnumber overwhelmingly both in numbers and weaponry. With arms and armament in such Brobdingnagian proportions as to beggar the imagination, costing seven to eight hundred billions of dollars yearly and costing since 1948 fifteen and a half trillion dollars, we cannot defeat a tiny force armed basically with small arms and improvised explosive devices.

Yeah, I know, a man of the cloth, Jeremiah Wright said something like that the other day nearly cause certain of us a stroke. The truth is a real bitch, isn’t it? Just so you know, there are on the public record fifty-two discovered and admitted instances since 1948 of U.S. experiments using unwitting citizens as Guinea Pigs. Remember that “virtual reality” I’m continually talking about?

And, you don’t believe a government willing to “waterboard” captives is one capable of using its citizenry for experiments like those to which the Reverend Wright had reference? REALLY?

Let me tell you what I know about torturers, the stuff I realized when I was sure I might one day be their victim. Assuming for a dizzy minute that you really think you can get useful information from torture, then why not always use torture? Why bother with any other means? Why stop at FoxNews’ “bomb somewhere” or the people who know where the bomb is? Why not the people who perhaps made the explosives, or saw them, or hauled them, or might have? How about people who might have heard or seen something concerning it all? How about people who may have contributed money to the people who made the explosives? Why stop at the torture victim himself? Why not torture his family, his relatives, their relatives, their neighbors?

If the end justifies the means, where would you draw the line representing restriction upon the means?

Twenty-three years ago today, May 6, 1985, I stood and watched agents of the United States of America burglarize my home. They had no warrant, didn’t even - ever - bother to claim probable cause for one. The agents of Internal Revenue Service weren’t, in fact, interested in my tax liability, in tax collection, or in anything remotely having to do with the U.S. Tax Code. The king-size garbage bags with which the hauled away my property (law books, family photos, and papers having to nothing to do with financial records) contained nothing of forensic use in court or in prosecution of an income tax or other criminal case. The Land of the Free and its nefarious agents were interested in cruelty, in demonstrating to a recalcitrant citizen the absolute power of their office and agency. They were engaged in intimidation, the infliction of fear, just as they were months later when on the evening of October 6, 1986, their rifleman shooting from ambush wounded me three times.

In the years that followed, the more than one hundred and nine traffic stops on the streets and highways of the nation,* six motor vehicle assaults, repeated attempts at mugging and murder, attempts at arson, vehicular sabotage, poisoning (twice), more than sixty burglaries like the one already described here, and more - including wounds inflicted by gunfire, the United States had no legitimate interest in internal revenue of tax collection (totally ruined by the government’s interdiction of credit, prevented by their efforts from return to business or even gainful employment, I had no income whatever).

No, the form of “waterboarding” – strangulation – the United States employed where I was the “captive” had nothing to do with intelligence or information. It had to do with inflicted terror.

It succeeded – at least where my family was concerned. First one wife, then – when I had recovered my business and remarried – another, deserted under the merciless pressure of the government in the form of postal and telephoned threats and lies. A teenage son was driven to three attempts at suicide. All of it was done with in order to inflict the maximum amount of fear. Torture, in other words.

How do I know about torture? I know about torture the same way I know about the United States Government the torturer, because for twenty-three years I, too, underwent torture by the United States.

*Apparently the U.S. Government hoped by means of falsified public record including police reports to incite an incident like the Amadou Diallo, Sal Culosi, or Sean Bell shootings. The leg wound here was inflicted by a federal sniper on October 6, 1986.

"Relative" - If It Happened in China, or Cuba . . ."

2008-05-04T10:54:00.000-07:00

Rambling last night and the day before through the bimbo-babble and metrosexual male posturing that is today’s television news, and doing my usual sweep of the various big-name Internet “blogs,” I may have gained useful insight into the nation’s malaise. Not from the “news,” mind you – that’s all structured by state-of-the-propaganda-art professionals in order to prevent any such understanding – but from the manner in which it is delivered, the people who deliver it, and the way it is structured.

Concerning that last, for instance, we have the New York Times revelation that the Department of Defense (read that “the military industrial complex”) ran an elaborate "psy-op" against the American people when it was selling the invasion of Iraq. The New York Times' David Barstow, we’re told, wrote front-page story on Sunday, a supposed report based upon “thousands of newly released Pentagon emails.”

“Like everything else Iraq-related,” one analyst wrote, “we learned that it is far worse than even the most cynical among us expected.”

Oh, my! As I wrote on the Huffington Post blogsite a minute ago, “Remarkable! The White House and the Pentagon in cahoots with the media to have generals and other army officers spread deception. WOW! The MOCKINGBIRD media has finally caught on to the MOCKINGBIRD media. Either that or they've been reading my Mongoose Trick Opinion Page (www.judoknighterrant.com) blog since the war started. Folks, it's another deception known in CIA tradecraft as a ‘limited hangout.’ You should look it up.”

The fact, of course, is that the White House propaganda machine has been throwing away parts for some time now. Remember Armstrong Williams, the guy who was paid something like a quarter of a million to pimp for the No Child Left Behind Act – legislation Williams had previously spoken out against? How about those stalwarts of media integrity Maggie Gallagher and Michael McManus? In case you’ve forgotten, those were the people’s watchdogs on the government who were being paid tens of thousands of dollars to pimp for the three hundred million dollar Bush “Healthy Marriage Initiative.” Then there was the saga of the false flag operation set up by the White House, a phony reporter planted in the White House Press Corp in order to let the President’s Press Secretary control news conferences.

Were it not for what it says about the integrity of the government and the media, the bungling and pratfalling incompetence of the Bush League and its administration would make it all low comedy.

And it goes on and on. On television the other night, the Lou Dobbs show, a politician blabbered that “American ingenuity will save the day” (by making gasoline of coal). That’s after the next morning all the networks reported still another survey demonstrating the cretin stupidity of the public (half of Americans didn’t read a single book last year, the report said). On the same show – or another; I wear out the remote dodging commercials, lose track in the process of where I was watching - media pundits discuss how “Americans” “relate” to Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John McCain.

You might as well ask how the nation’s glue-sniffing, pill-popping, pierced-like-a-pin-cushion, mentally-challenged drop-out teenager relates to the latest hip-hop sensation.

Either somebody’s not paying attention or it’s more deception and deceit. Television personalities – which is what they are; no one but a fool takes these characters for newsmen, journalists, or the expert analysts they pretend to be – talk so far over the heads of the Kellie Pickler public (that was the woman who didn’t know France was a country, thought Europe was, and that people in Budapest speak French) as to make themselves look just as stupid.

“Never try to teach a pig to sing,” Science Fiction writer Robert Heinlein once advised, “it wastes your time and it annoys the pig.”

Why the media doesn’t just bring out the strippers and have them wear initially a costume with “vote for . . .” sewn or stenciled on it is beyond me. Come to think of it, what we have is actually pretty close to that, isn’t it?

Whatever. And nevertheless, anyone truly desirous – and capable - of understanding and knowing the truth about the faux socialist state that is the United States need only to watch things the latest bailout of the rich by the rich at the expense of the poor – the subprime mortgage crisis. Anyone remember the Savings and Loan bailout of a few years back (strange, isn’t it, that little or no mention of that can be heard on the major media of late?)? The U.S. Savings and Loan crisis of the 1980s and 1990s was the reported – I stress that: this is the time of the MOCKINGBIRD media, let us not forget - failure of several savings and loan associations in the United States. More than a thousand savings and loan institutions – “S&Ls,” so called - failed in what one apparently honest economist called "the largest and costliest venture in public misfeasance, malfeasance and larceny of all time."

And what happened? Why, just what’s going to happen now, and the ultimate cost of the crisis was estimated to have cost the taxpayer – the vast majority of whom had no other interest whatever in the confidence scheme – paid through the teeth, to the tune of something (don’t forget the MOCKINGBIRD nature of the reporters) like a hundred thirty billion dollars.

That’s billion, with a “B” – not million, with an “M.”

And it worked like a charm once, why not run it by the suckers again.

Oops! --Bill O’Reilly is (again – it’s a recurring theme with him) talking indignantly about having to give half his “earnings” to the government in taxes. Maybe a better example of the surreal, virtual only, reality being created by the MOCKINGBIRD media has just been handed me. People like Bill O’Reilly earn the kind of money they get like a semi-literate in baggy shorts running up and down a hardwood floor and throwing a big ball through a hoop “earns” millions of dollars; or the way an equally mentally-challenged “rock star” with a voice range of one and a half octaves “earns” millions for howling piteously while going pelvic thrusts on a stage.

These people “earn” the way a poker player earns, and that’s while men and women serving the country in its uniform are paid comparatively small change to kill and maim or be killed and maimed EARN? Somehow, there’s been a change in definition.

Now – another channel, I think – New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson (the guy I’d for whom I’d have voted, incidentally) is saying, “We have a problem with race.”

Yes, governor, you’re damned right we have; and the “problem” is that we can’t talk about it. It’s a lot like sex.

Then there’s the dreary news from San Angelo, Texas.

First, though, isn’t it curious that no one seems to connect the San Angelo, Texas Church of Latter Day Saints raid by state authorities with what is provided for in the Bush League’s “Patriot Act?” The hideous affair began with what now appears to have been a totally unsubstantiated (just the word of government officials – people whose record for convenient lying beggars recitation) telephone complaint, then a paramilitary – as far as we yet know – raid that would have done credit to SS Colonel Otto Skorzeny. Like cattle, literally hundreds of women and children were herded into captivity.

Mind you, now – it was all to protect the children. That doesn’t remind you of the way we are “protecting” the people of Iraq? Maybe we need a new definition here, too.

But there it is: the government needs only to say someone called them on the phone (indubitably, the president would have said a voice came from out of a cloud), and you are legally the object of a full scale military operation. With a claim of terrorism and invoking of the War Powers Act, an individual citizen could be the target of anything up to and including a nuclear strike. That, you should take notice, includes a MOVE Compound, Randy Weaver Family at Ruby Ridge, Branch Davidians at Waco siege. It also includes an Amadou Diallo, Dr. Sal Culosi, or Sean Bell (the bridegroom killed by NYPD cops at his bachelor party?).

One “no knock” warrant, bought with official perjury, and you can be treated to some of that U.S. Government “shock and awe.”

Welcome to the new Land of the Free Nation of Laws. Think about it. And all they had to do was let a few Moslem nut cases highjack airliners and fly them into a building. The Kellie Pickler public handed over yours and my Constitutional rights like they were yesterday’s meatloaf. “George wouldn’t lie to us because he looked so cool in his flight suit on that aircraft carrier under that big 'mission accomplished' sign.”

It’s a lot like having your life and affairs controlled by the local school for the retarded.

It’s also like living in some kind of time-space, reality warp (for an object lesson, read some of the U.S. Tax Code; just pick anywhere at random – it’s all alike where this is concerned). In my question of the day segment here (click), for instance, I ask once again, when will Crystal Mangum be called to account for her false charges of rape against the Duke University Lacrosse Team? When, I also want to know, will the scores of women who made positive identifications that sent men to jail for rape be called to account? Why, more to the point, was the centuries-old doctrine of jurisprudence, “unus testis, nullus testis” – one witness, no witness – abandoned in the first place?

How could we possibly have come to be in so asinine a state?

Of course, we all know the answer to that one, and it is repeated again and again, and again and again, in the feminist literature of the past forty years. Ask the question I ask about Crystal Mangum on any of the feminists websites; the answers you get will tell you all you need to know in that regard.

And they are the reason for insanity - reality warped - like this:

“CARROLLTON, Texas — After spending nearly 27 years buried in the vast Texas prison system for a crime he did not commit, Charles Chatman's first weeks of freedom have been overwhelming . . .

“Chatman was exonerated last month by DNA testing while serving a 99-year sentence for sexual assault. His release Jan. 3 marked the 15th such exoneration in Dallas County during the past five years, the most of any county in the nation. Aside from New York and Illinois, Dallas County also has produced more exonerations than any state.

“As DNA technology and investigations identify a mounting number of wrongful convictions, the urgency to find others like Chatman is increasing. From Virginia to California, local prosecutors, law students and defense attorneys are combing through hundreds of thousands of old files in search of flawed convictions.

“Last week, two men were cleared of separate murder convictions in Mississippi after new DNA testing led authorities to another man now charged in both slayings. It was the first time post-conviction DNA testing had led to exoneration in Mississippi, one of eight states that does not have a law allowing for such testing. Lawyers with the Innocence Project pushed the state to move forward with the testing.

“Since 1989, there have been 213 post-conviction DNA exonerations in the USA. Of those, 149 came in the past seven years, according to the Innocence Project, the parent organization of a far-flung network that helps prisoners obtain DNA testing or other evidence that could prove their innocence.

Gee, that’s great, isn’t it? Uh-uh - not so great. Consider this:

In Virginia, officials are conducting a sweeping examination of more than 534,000 criminal case files, the largest such review in U.S. history. Three years and five exonerations after the effort began, authorities have identified 2,215 more cases they say are worthy of scrutiny.

That’s one state. I leave it to the reader to recognize that the truth is fifty times more hideous. How did it all happen? Well, let me first remind everyone who knows me that from 1976, when I first began getting into prosecutors’ cases for rape like a bear gets in a garbage can, I have written literally scores of letters concerning the outrageous state of our criminal justice system, specifically as it has to do with the crime of rape. For years – decades, in fact – I was as alone as a skunk at a picnic.

A couple of decades ago, when the hysterical feminist Marilyn French made the brilliantly scientific and rational asseveration, “All men are rapists, and that’s all they are,” I suggested whimsically that while she should be charged with inciting to riot, her obvious insanity made a legally impenetrable defense.

“They rape us with their eyes, their laws, and their codes,” that great apologist for females said (with apologists like that, who needs detractors?). French wasn’t alone. For two decades, one could hardly read a newspaper or watch television for a week without having slammed in his face the latest diatribe from the distaff wing of society. Remember these?

"All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman .... "You grow up with your father holding you down and covering your mouth so another man can make a horrible searing pain between your legs."

That was Catharine MacKinnon, a supposed scholar – that’s what the effeminate media called her – at the University of Michigan and Yale (and they call that “higher learning - how "high" do you suppose she was?).

It wasn’t a time of intellectual brilliance, that’s sure, but you would soon have to pretend that anything a woman said was somehow rational. Try to do that with this one:

"I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig"....."Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman." ...."for a woman, the home is the most dangerous place in the world!" .... "The traditional flowers of courtship are the traditional flowers of the grave, delivered to the victim before the kill. The cadaver is dressed up and made up and laid down and ritually violated and consecrated to an eternity of being used." .... "Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women's bodies."

That, of course – for those who paid attention to things other than Hollywood and television’s already vacuous entertainment was a feminist intellectual – an oxymoron, surely – named Andrea Dworkin. For a walk in the asylum of other-worldness, look her up on the World Wide Web (do it – it’ll explain do many of today’s “issues,” you’ll think you’re an historical scholar; people, after all, were forced legally to accept and believe this crap.

It went on, and on. Freed by men of the rigors imposed for aeons by Mother (ooh, I’ll be that one smarted) Nature, females had a field day at the expense of their liberators, and gossip became science – and law.

"To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he's a machine, a walking dildo." --Scum Manifesto, by one Valerie Solanas

"We are, as a sex, infinitely superior to men..." Elizabeth Cady Stanton, "One Woman, One Vote", Wheeler, p.58

"Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women's movement must concentrate on attacking this institution. Freedom for women cannot be won without the abolition of marriage." --Sheila Cronan, 1988 Houston National Organization for Women Conference for Women.

"We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage." –Robin Moran, Sisterhood Is Powerful

"Being a housewife is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of radical feminism is to change that." --Vivian Gornick, "The Daily Illini," April 25, 1981.

"In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them." --Dr. Mary Jo Bane, assistant professor of education at Wellesley College and associate director of the school's Center for Research on Woman.

"I believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which man structurally does not have, does not have it because he cannot have it. He's just incapable of it." (Former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan)

"Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release." (Germaine Greer) "Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience." (Catherine Comin, Vassar College. Assistant Dean of Students).

"The incest taboo can be destroyed only by destroying the nuclear family as the primary institution of the culture. The nuclear family is the school of values in a sexist, sexually repressed society... The alternative to the nuclear family at the moment is the extended family or the tribe. The growth of tribe is part of the process of destroying particularized roles and fixed erotic identity. As people develop fluid androgynous identity, they will also develop the forms of community appropriate to it. We cannot really imagine what those forms will be." (Shulamith Firestone - The Dialectics of Sex)

"The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the liberation of women. Therefore it is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men... All of history must be re-written in terms of oppression of women. We must go back to ancient female religions like witchcraft." ("The Declaration of Feminism," November 1971). "By the year 2000 we will, I hope, raise our children to believe in human potential, not God." (Gloria Steinhem, former editor of 'MS' magazine.)

“The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it." (Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, in "Women and the New Rage," p.67.)

"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." (Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor)

"The simple fact is that every woman must be willing to be identified as a lesbian to be fully feminist." (Sheila Cronan, National NOW Times, Jan.1988)

Consider that last one for a minute. It’s self-evident that National Organization for Women (if you think it’s any women but themselves they’re talking about, you haven’t been paying attention) wanted (wants?) to make lesbians as many women as possible. Inasmuch as the feminists here also seem to have had as a goal destruction of the family, the basic, sine qua non, unit of society and nation, it’s pretty clear that what was intended here was re-ordering – i.e., destruction - of the society and nation.

That’s treason, of course; but in the new, effeminate nation with its female rationality and rules, it’s how you say it that determines what it is.

It’s damned clear, too, however, that N.O.W. and militant feminists had little or no concern for seeking equal rights for women. They hated heterosexuality, they hated men, they hated society, and they hated the nation, but none of it had anything to do with equal rights for women. It isn’t about that now, either.

And it all relates. How will historians explain things like a deliberate campaign by government and the media it by way of Operation MOCKINGBIRD controls to deceive and confuse the public they supposedly serve? How will they assess a news and information media dedicated to disinformation rather than information and complicit in such a plot?

How will the future view a government, its media, and educational system that purposefully “dumbed down” the nation, cynically replacing journalists with “personalities,” and teachers with misogamistic, misandric, anti-social zealots like the “feminists” I quote here, and an educational system prostituted and co-opted by politics and politicians instead of teaching children?

How will they explain a society willing to pay athletes, entertainers (same thing, when you think of it), actors, and the like millions - while paying others upon whom their very lives depend – soldiers, for but one instance – comparative peanuts? If a basketball player or singer who entertains your kids is worth millions, what is a teacher worth?

What will history say of a nation founded, built, and brought to greatness by a certain – Germanic – culture, a nation ruled on the basis of a Constitution derived from that Germanic culture’s unique view of the individual, a nation that repudiated it all in favor of the kind of stupidity, misplaced (arrogant?) ethnic pride, twisted reasoning, logic, ethics, and ideological drivel such as that of feminism?

Yes, it all relates, all right. But a nation of people too stupid to recognize in the latest “housing crisis” the same old “Savings and Loan” swindle, who doesn’t in the raid at the San Angelo, Texas Mormon compound recognize the raid on the Randy Weaver family at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, or the murders of Amadou Diallo, Sal Culosi, and Sean Bell, and the attack on Iraq, will not recognize in the egocentric and maniacal ideology and behavior of the feminists I quote here the malaise destroying their country.

The United States, in short is dying of an excess of what once made it, the politization of everything critical to the cultural wisdom, the reason and science that, in turn, elevated it above all other nations. Everything – right and wrong, fact or falsehood, even personality itself, are now decided by rule of the majority, by politics. Everything must therefore be simplified to the level at which a nation of bubble-headed Kellie Picklers can understand it. Even sex – and, of course, rape - the most fundamentally known and understood of things, must now be described and recognized by politically decided means (I am reminded still again of the young woman whose rape charge sent four young men to prison; asked why men who knew they had committed rape would have willingly, even eagerly, provided their victim information with which to find them, she said, “Maybe they didn’t know it was rape . . . that’s up to the woman, isn’t it?”)

A great deal is now "up to the woman" - the fate of the nation included. And, as Santayana said, “Those who will not learn for history are condemned to relive it.”

District of Columbia v. Heller Will Tell Us a Whole Lot About Where We're Going

2008-04-24T08:26:00.000-07:00

The following quotations, may not be recognizable (when you’ve had a chance to read what follows, and to consider both the quotes and what I say here, I’ll identify the quotes as to author, but they are unmistakably apparent as principles practiced currently by the United States’ government. They are paraphrased (even, in certain instances, stated verbatim) ever day by today’s leaders and government. They are rife in the legal argument that is my subject here.

“All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach.” This one is not only oft-stated in the media, it is their privately published tactical doctrine, stated again and again in their inter-office and inter-agency communication.

“As soon as by one's own propaganda even a glimpse of right on the other side is admitted, the cause for doubting one's own right is laid.” You might recognize this at an utterance of George W. Bush. On the other hand you might think Carl Rove said it. Same difference – isn’t it?

“Demoralize … from within by surprise, terror, sabotage, assassination.” Fundamental with IRS, of course, but how far from this is “shock and awe?”

“How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think. No one watching television currently can fail to recognize this one (with so few these days able to read above the eighth grade level at which newspapers are written, it’s not likely the public would see it there), and the commercials-making industry has it for their general orders.

“I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Creator.” Not much doubt that everyone who watches the Tee and Vee will recognize in this one our fearless leader (fearless with everyone’s life but his own, that is). The only way to be sure of something like this, of course, is to talk regularly with god – like George says he does.

“It is not truth that matters, but victory.” Especially if only I get to say what “victory” means.

“The art of leadership . . . consists in consolidating the attention of the people against a single adversary and taking care that nothing will split up that attention.” Standard politics these days, of course. Its masters are the leaders of every modern pressure group, from the militant feminists to the scoundrel patriots. And don’t forget the people who yell “racist” at everyone who opposes them for any reason.

“The day of individual happiness has passed.” John McCain wasn’t first with this one, in other words. Even the author of this one didn’t promise “whatever it takes,” or pontificate that “those jobs are gone” (suck it up, folks). On second thought, however, the original author of this quote did say his country would either win or cease to exist. Pretty close, what?

“The doom of a nation can be averted only by a storm of flowing passion, but only those who are passionate themselves can arouse passion in others.” Yeah, I know that’s Barack Obama almost verbatim, but he wasn’t the author of the quote. Obama just seems to agree (says so many things so close) a whole lot with him.

“The great strength of the totalitarian state is that it forces those who fear it to imitate it. “ Pretty much the neo-conservative hymn, isn’t it? “Grab ‘em by the balls,” an old military associate of mine used to say, “their hearts and minds will follow.” Also the published dictum of the C.I.A. (Cuba? Fidel Castro? Chile? Salvador Allende? Need I go on?)

“The leader of genius must have the ability to make different opponents appear as if they belonged to one category.” “The leader of genius” – remember?

“The very first essential for success is a perpetually constant and regular employment of violence. “ This one, of course, I lived. Anyone who has dueled with the IRS will recognize the “M.O.” (modus operandi) here. Generally, though, this one is the objective and fair reading of U.S. history. Not many citizens of this country have lived their lives without having seen us make war on somebody; in fact, you could call it a précis of U.S. foreign policy.

“The victor will never be asked if he told the truth.” “Mission Accomplished,” anyone? George – not being a soldier, and never having been closer to a fight than leading cheers - just doesn’t happen to know what “victory” must “accomplish.”

Those are just a few of the scores of utterances one who pays as close attention as do I, and who has read and reads history as assiduously as I do, would recognize in the statements and practices of today’s “leaders.” I have another subject for today, one relative but worthy on its own merits of consideration. So interested am I as an historian, that I have just finished reading all of the sixty-six amicus curiae and two parties opposed in District of Columbia v. Heller, a civil rights case now before the U.S. Supreme Court. The matter, of course, has directly to do with the 2nd Amendment, and whether a citizen of Washington, D.C. has the right to defend his life and property.

“Directly,” I said. I, and the Supreme Court case itself, speak indirectly to a national crises even larger, even more lethal, to a nation conceived and dedicate as this one was. Heller – what a twist of fate that the name should have been that one – betrays both in the fact of its having come to pass and in the language of those who argue it the cancer that must eventually end the United States of America as the Land of the Free.

Anyone in a virtual prison who can yet insist that he is free only demonstrates to those outside both the character and the effectiveness of his imprisonment.

I speak, among other things, of the hideous idea which constitutes a common thread through all of the argument propounded by any of the attorneys - party or friend of the court; and at least in some degree, both pro and con - the insidiously evil idea that government is the origin, the grantor, of human rights.

District of Columbia v. Heller is in point of simple fact about the most basic “right” of them all, basic not only to human beings, but to all living things. That is the right of the organism to defend its life and thereby go on living. All living organisms are endowed by nature and nature’s god with means – means far too numerous to describe here - by which to individually defend their life. Only among Homo Sapiens – “Thinking Man” – however, can that right be called into question. Human beings - governments, in particular – alone presume to arrogate to themselves, either by means of greater strength in the form of muscle, size, weapons, or weight of numbers or by politics, economics, and law, the right to deprive one another of that most fundamental of rights.

Man alone, also, is capable of the thoroughly ignorant and demonstrably (the Prisoner’s dilemma, for one instance) illogical idea that depriving another of the right and ability to defend his life somehow enhances his own chances to go on living. Nowhere in any of the Heller argument is the point made better than in the amicus brief filed by GeorgiaCarry.org.

“The unfettered right to keep and bear arms was so commonly accepted,” the argument says, “that the Founders undoubtedly would find the instant case puzzling indeed. There was, however, a common exception:
“‘No negro or other slave within this province shall be permitted to carry any gun or any other offensive weapon from off their master’s land, without license from their said master, and if any negro or other slave shall presume to do so, he shall be liable to carried before a Justice of the Peace and be whipped, and his gun or other offensive weapon shall be forfeited to him that shall seize the same . . .’”

The GeorgiaCarry brief goes on to note that when President Andrew Johnson ordered General Ulysses S. Grant to disband and seize the arms of an independent militia comprised of black men, the New York Tribune of the time wrote that the proposed arms seizure. “. . . would be one of the most flagrant and despotic acts of usurpation . . . even Congress itself has no authority to infringe upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms . . . Nor can it without a violation of the Constitution, take away any man’s musket while he ‘keeps it’ for lawful purposes.”

Gun control, the brief observes, is the historic tool for enslavement. In fact, it is more than that: a person deprived of his right to defend his life is not only a slave, he is a human being reduced to natural status lower than that of an animal. There is no logical way to deny that, and salient by its absence from the entirety of the argument made by the District of Columbia is any such observation or mention.

Of course, logic has not been much used in U.S. law (in the words of Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, "The life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience."). More, it is not often appealed to in any of the argument by either party to Heller, nor by any of the amici curiae (those – “amici” is the plural - who filed amicus curiae – friend of the court – arguments). Not many things speak more pointedly to the execrable state of our legal system than that one fact, and historians of the future will certainly note what has been the increasing absence of logic and effective reasoning in our courts and public discourse generally. Neither will historians fail to cite the devastating effect of this one social and societal anomaly.

District of Columbia v. Heller is there a case in point. I spoke yesterday of public and governmental stupidity as lethal to our way of life; today I will demonstrate an instance of that in the form of a case before none other than the highest court – and, presumably - the repository of wisdom in the land.

To begin with, “Petitioners” (District of Columbia) in Heller argue, as do all proponents of 2nd Amendment repeal and effective disarming of the U.S. public, that such is in the interests of public safety. The argument can only be recognized as an example of what a grandfather once warned me was the fundamental judgment one must make about those with whom he might be obliged to associate – stupid or evil?

First, are these people stupid? Is the mayor of Washington, D.C. incapable of the logic necessary to recognize the effect of the city’s guns ban on the horrendous rate of violence and violent crime there? Is he incapable of recognizing what any rational person would expect of “gun free zones,” too stupid to do the simple mental experiments necessary to realize?” Is he unaware of what has happened, almost without exception, wherever people have been legally authorized to keep and bear arms? Is he unaware of the horrendous rate of violent crime in his own city (even neighborhood)?

I don’t think so; nobody is that stupid. Not one of the people arguing for “gun control” – note the equivocation; it means interdiction of gun ownership - would knowingly subject himself to the danger of or to actual rape, maiming, or murder. All of these same people, I daresay without exception, speak from certain safety the common man does not share. Pretty typical of mankind, isn’t it?

I note, in that regard and parenthetically, however, that hundreds of thousands, even millions, of women like those whose attorneys argue for the Coalition of Human Rights Groups are somehow willing to walk defenseless into the arms of rapist-murderer predators. “Nobody is that stupid?” Some, obviously, are; and when one observes another behaving in a manner inimical to the subject’s own best interests, he must of course logically and objectively consider shear stupidity as the reason. But, to continue with feminist dogma and women affected by it as an example, all women who go about alone and dressed in the most sexually provocative manner possible aren’t stupid. As with any other matter the like, there may be a variety of reasons; but one is similar to that demonstrated by “petitioners” in Heller. I refer to indoctrination. Propaganda.

“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.” In fact, each of the quotes that lead this essay is a factor contributing to the surreal arguments made by Washington, D.C. and its apparently benighted mayor in the Heller matter. These are all dictums of propaganda, and the propagandist, and for a primer on the art of the Big Lie propagandist, one need only go to the Heller amicus brief filed by “Professors of Criminal Justice.” The brief argues that “The D.C. Gun Law Is an Effective Mechanism for Reducing Handgun Violence,” and, “There Is a Proven Correlation between (sic) the Availability of Handguns and Incidents of Violence.” It gets worse. For instance, “The Effectiveness of the D.C. Gun Control Law Demonstrates Its Reasonableness” (!!! – what planet do these guys inhabit?).

One might reasonably argue here that that last one demonstrates the Ivory Tower, where ignorance is bliss, safety I construed here earlier; but, for cat’s sake, this is an argument before the U.S. Supreme Court!

Propaganda, from the Latin “propagare” – pay forward or spread – and the same word’s gerund meaning (more or less obviously) “spreading” - is a deliberately contrived communicaiton aimed at comprehensively influencing and thereby altering the opinions and behavior of large numbers of people. Effective propaganda is all but always truthful in some sense – sense, of course, always trivial or irrelevant to the subject.

The propagandist never fails to cite truth favorable to his purpose; he is careful to hide everything else. Briefs filed in Heller are redolent with the smell of propaganda, but nowhere moreso than with this tactic of the propagandist. There is hardly available – as well read as I happen to be, I honestly can’t think of one - a better study of propaganda than that propagated (another term related to propaganda) by most of the organizations filing amicus briefs in D.C. v. Heller. A study of their publications provide a veritable compendium of the propagandists art, and the propagandist ploy most characteristic of their publications is the emotional one – like the almost infinitismally small number of children killed accidentally by firearms.

This one is trotted out in the brief filed by “National Network to End Domestic Violence.” Et al. – there are so many feminist groups listed on the brief that in counting them I kept losing track – to say nothing of getting double vision. Listen to the argument (one wonders if these friends of the court get some kind of catharsis from this kind of drivel): “Domestic Violence is a serous crime that leaves millions of women and children nationwide scarred both physically and emotionally.” And, “Firearms exacerbate an already deadly crisis” (wouldn’t want to repair to the old loaded words fallacy, now would we?). Oh, yes – and: “The statue plainly survives Constitutional scrutiny.” Nothing like positive thinking, is there?

“The life of the law has not been logic.” Remember?

From my point of view, however, no argument among them all is as strangely bizarre, as thunderously contemptuous of both logic and history as that holding that men who lived in the Eighteen Century United States did not intend that individual citizens should own – “keep and bear” – firearms. In order to sincerely believe that, you must be totally ignorant of the time, or life then, and of the people then. Or you must have been somehow propagandized – Hollywood and its balderdash version of history, for instance.

This one, the primary argument of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, et alius (six more) characterizes and sets the tone for the entire anti-gun argument. It characterizes, too, liberalism, feminism, and politicized extremism in all its several U.S. forms – religion included. The one word that might further sum it all up is: “oblivious.” There is the real world and there is the world that is the figment of their Ivory Tower-derived imaginations. The Ivory Tower of humanist, feminist, and elitist liberalism demands that all of U.S. society behave in the same manner as today’s bubble-headed feminist. Society should find a way for the individual – and by extension, society – to defend oneself against criminal assault (the criminal element that every society in history has had), without violence - violence done by firearms, especially, that is.

Like the sweet young thing to whom I had reference a moment ago, they would have society proceed to outrageously tempt circumstance, demanding concomitantly that wiser society – men, in particular – find a way (one acceptable to her, of course) to assure that it gets away with its vacuous stupidity.

Heller also provides clear insight into what history will identify as the root cause of our national demise. I refer in this instance to the amicus brief filed by the American Bar Association (now, all of the “amici” – friends – of the court slanted their argument toward their particular interest in the matter, interest in themselves instructive to the logician or historian, but this one is a “doozie”). The lawyers for the bar association argue that we’ve always done it this way (proving that U.S. lawyers don’t know a hell of a lot of U.S. history; apparently, history hasn’t been Justice Holmes’ “life of the law,” either).

Now we have some insight into why our legal system is in the shape it is (like all the innocent men in jail, for instance).

One – no, two, actually - “Table of Contents” titles from the American Bar Association brief draws particular attention: The first is “The decision below undermines the rule of law by failing to provide special justifications for abandoning consistent and longstanding precedent upon which legislators, regulators, and the public (whoo, boy – now that is a stretch!) have relied.” That one is followed by this one: “The determination required by the decision below would compound the disruption of the regulatory system developed in reliance on judidicial precedent.”

Arguments not unlike that one are being made every day to keep imprisoned men proved innocent of rape charges by DNA tests.

A fair translation of both is, “The government has always done as it damned pleases without public control in any form, so it should be permitted to continue doing so in the future.” For insight into the hell of a mess we’re in, and how we got here, read the American Bar Association amicus brief in District of Columbia v. Heller.

For insight into where we are headed as a nation, however, read the entire case. It’s all there, a rhetorical blueprint for the virtual prison government by corporation intends for citizens of the Land of the Free.

The quotations with which I lead this essay, of course, are those of another gun control apologist and exponent, Adolf Hitler.

War, Recession, Kids Who Are Savages, Mexico in the U.S. - a "Bad Hair Day?"

2008-04-21T14:23:00.000-07:00

An e-mail received this morning reminds me of people I've encountered repeatedly since having begun studying the national discourse by way of subscription to dozens of Internet websites, publishing my own website, and by debate with the public. As subscribers here will know, I am simply flabbergasted, nonplussed to explain the all but impossible stupidity of the U.S. public. More, I am even more disconcerted at having learned that relatively few people in the Land of the free are significantly alarmed by it all. Neither are they concerned at the abysmal state of children mentally.

It all scares hell out of me, so much so that I am keeping my survival gear in a state of first-class readiness, training assiduously in the gym (for those interested, I hit twenty-two chin-ups last week), and practicing with firearms daily.

Parenthetically, and apropos of that last, this morning's paper reports that forty - that's forty - percent of teachers in Texas intend to leave teaching as soon as possible. Wife Rita, a teacher with forty-two years experience, is of the same mind. The reason? --parents and a nation who obviously care little about their children's minds or behavior. "No child left behind" may very well leave every child behind.

It may - it probably will - destroy the nation.

While the following may be apocryphal - I haven't "Snoped" it - I doubt it, I have heard similar, and for years, from not only the public everywhere (I'm reminded of the guy recently who when I made reference to the turn of the century, asked "When was that?" and the guy who said he isn't concerned about air pollution, global warming, and the like because mankind "will evolve to take care of it") but from officials at all levels of government. The public discourse, including the pontification of so-called pundits, analysts, and experts in the media, are full of this sort of non compos mentis utterance and assertion (try the global warming issue, for instance, the reasoning having to do with Iraq, the nation's economy, or any of the matter subject of the current political debates).

A report says that a Washington, DC airport ticket agent offers these examples of why our country is in its current state:

"1. I had a New Hampshire Congresswoman ask for an aisle seat on the airplane in order that her hair wouldn't get messed up by being near the window. (On an Airplane!)

"2. I got a call from a candidate's staffer, who wanted to go to Capetown. I started to explain the length of the flight and the passport information. Then she interrupted me with, 'I'm not trying to make you look stupid, but Capetown is in Massachusetts .' Without trying to make her look stupid, I calmly explained, 'Cape Cod is in Massachusetts ; Capetown is in Africa .' Her response? - click.

"3. A senior Vermont Congressman called, furious about a Florida package we did. I asked what was wrong with the vacation in Orlando. He said he was expecting an ocean-view room. I tried to explain that's not possible, since Orlando is in the middle of the state. He replied, 'Don't lie to me. I looked on the map and Florida is a very thin state!'

"4. I got a call from a lawmaker's wife who asked, 'Is it possible to see England from Canada ?' I said, 'No.' She said, 'But they look so close on the map.'

"5. An aide for a cabinet member once called and asked if he could rent a car in Dallas. When I pulled up the reservation, I noticed he had only a 1-hour layover in Dallas. When I asked him why he wanted to rent a car he said, 'I heard Dallas was a big airport, and we will need a car to drive between gates to save time.' (Aghhhh!!)

"6. An Illinois Congresswoman called last week. She needed to know how it was possible that her flight from Detroit left at 8:30 am and got to Chicago at 8:33 am. I explained that Michigan was an hour ahead of Illinois, but she couldn't understand the concept of time zones. Finally, I told her the plane went fast, and she bought that.

"7. A New York lawmaker called and asked, 'Do airlines put your physical description on your bag so they know whose luggage belongs to whom?' I said, 'No, why do you ask?' She replied, 'Well, when I checked in with the airline, they put a tag on my luggage that said 'FAT,' and I'm overweight. I think that's very rude!' After putting her on hold for a minute while I looked into it (I was laughing). I came back and explained the city code for Fresno, CA is ' FAT' - (Fresno Air Terminal), and the airline was just putting a destination tag on her luggage.

"8. A Senator's aide called to inquire about a trip package to Hawaii. After going over all the cost info, she asked, 'Would it be cheaper to fly to California, and then take the train to Hawaii ?'

"9. I just got off the phone with a freshman Congressman who asked, 'How do I know which plane to get on?' I asked him what exactly he meant, to which he replied, 'I was told my flight number is 823, but none of these planes have numbers on them.'

"10. A lady Senator called and said, 'I need to fly to Pepsi-Cola, Florida. Do I have to get on one of those little computer planes?' I asked if she meant fly to Pensacola, Florida on a commuter plane. She said, 'Yeah, whatever, smarty!'

"11. A senior Senator called and had a question about the documents he needed in order to fly to China . After a lengthy discussion about passports, I reminded him that he needed a visa. 'Oh, no I don't. I've been to China many times and never had to have one of those.' I double checked and sure enough, his stay required a visa. When I told him this he said, 'Look, I've been to China four times and every time they have accepted my American Express!'

"12. A New Mexico Congresswoman called to make reservations, 'I want to go from Chicago to Rhino, New York '. I was at a loss for words. Finally, I said, 'Are you sure that's the name of the town?' 'Yes, what flights do you have?' replied the lady. After some searching, I came back with, 'I'm sorry, ma'am, I've looked up every airport code in the country and can't find a Rhino anywhere.' The lady retorted, 'Oh, don't be silly! Everyone knows where it is. Check your map!' So I scoured a map of the state of New York and finally offered, 'You don't mean Buffalo, do you?' The reply? 'Whatever! I knew it was a big animal.'

"Now you know why the Government is in the shape that it's in!"

And as an aside here, I'll give you one guess concerning who the lady senator was (sixteen members of the U.S. Senate are women, and in the picture at the top here they are: Top row, Lincoln, Hutchison, Boxer, Clinton, Landrieu, Stabenow, Collins, Mikulski, Dole, Klobuchar, Murray; Bottom row: McCaskill, Feinstein, Cantwell, Murkowski, Snowe). There are seventy-four women in the comatose House of Representatives, three of them from Illinois, but only one from New Mexico. There is also only one congresswomen for New Hampshire. Ahem!

One might prepare his own list of examples where the stupidity of the U.S. Congress is concerned. For one recent instance, how bright would you have to be to know that you're going to be caught lying when you say something like Hillary Clinton's latest whopper, that concerning her having braved sniper fire? Or to expect people to find suspect (suspect, did I say - make that bald-faced, thunderously, obvious) her tale concerning how she learned to shoot?

How about John McCain's brilliant assessments of Iraq and U.S. occupation there. How do you "win" in Iraq?

And, of course, mentality of the public what it is, I dare not say anything about the other fellah, Obama. If I say anything positive about him, I've been negative about everyone else who's black; and I guess that means that should I say anything negative, I've paid everyone black a compliment - but I'm still a "racist" because I insulted a black guy. I'm too confused to talk about Barack Obama.

There are many root causes for how we came to be in the pickle we are, none better than abject stupidity both public and governmental. Invading Iraq was stupid, and the way we are proceeding there is stupid. The new - post WW-2, i.e. - U.S. way of conducting "limited," no victory war - war for "U.S. Interests" - is stupid (REALLY stupid). For a democratic nation like this one pretends to be to languish under the tax code we have is stupid. For the public to go on contributing to its own misery by continuing to drive at high speeds - consuming more gasoline, creating more demand, and raising prices - is stupid. To continue setting up shooting galleries - "gun free zones" - for the nation's psychotic nutcases is stupid (especially in a nation now dedicated to spawning, rearing, and otherwise providing for as many psychotic nutcases as possible). To leave the border between us and one of the most corrupt, rapacious and murderous societies and nations on earth - ever - is stupid. To protect people who are stupid - those who made loans to buy houses far beyond their fiscal means, for instance (and those who are up to their eyeballs in credit card or other debt, too) - from their own stupidity is stupid.

And to leave in office a president as obviously destructive of the Constitution he swore to protect and defend as this one is just, plain, STUPID!

Go down as you will the enervating list of our societal and national ailments today, you will not find one due to anything more than stupidity. When James. J. Kilpatrick, Steve Allen, Sidney Harris, and others the like first made note of what Allen termed the "dumbing down of America," they were reading the Biblical and proverbial handwriting on the wall for us. Jay Leno, Jeff Foxworthy, George Carlin, and the like make the nation laugh with people like the woman on Foxworthy's "Are You Smarter Than a Fifth-Grader" show - the adult female who thought Europe was a country, didn't know France was, and had never so much as heard of Budapest, the capitol of Hungary - but it isn't funny.

"Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader's" Kellie Pickler may run for Congress you know - lots of her sisters are already "serving."

IRS - Everything the Candid World Needs to Know About the U.S.

2008-04-18T11:02:00.000-07:00

Yesterday once more, citizens of the Land of the Free turned Land of the Fee were herded to be sheared like the sheep they so resemble. On each April the fifteenth, the corporate rich government of the United States Shylock exacts its “pound of flesh nearest the heart,” destroying for the vast majority of the public any chance of economic ascendancy they, themselves, enjoy.

Income taxation, after all, is nothing more than an elitist economic device by which to re-distribute wealth. No one conscious and thinking is unaware of that simple, obvious, and incontrovertible fact. In an economy where any segment thereof operating in the stead of plebiscite government can spend at will, to pretend that taxation is anything but a device by which to redistribute wealth is logically and reasonably absurd.

And “redistribute wealth” means exactly what has been happening since 1945, and the end of World War Two. That the Internal Revenue Service has succeeded in doing exactly that is so thunderously, so tornadically, so historically, right-in-your-face, and knock-you-on-your-plebian-ass obvious that nothing could better demonstrate the mindlessly oblivious state of the public here in the Land of the Free.

Inundated and immersed in behaviorist-conceived, state-of-the-art dispensed technology, a nation three hundred million strong has been behaviorally conditioned and indoctrinated until it believes both viscerally and mentally what is naturally and rationally absurd, and behaves in a manner ineluctably and decisively destructive to its fundamental doctrine of god-given rights and self determination. “Free” and “freedom-loving” people rush like stampeded cattle not only to hand over to the herdsmen the fruit of their lives, in so doing condemning their progeny to lives of even worse virtual slavery, but to empower their totalitarian corporate masters to savage and enslave the rest of the planet.

And it is all happening in plain sight of its victims, who somehow hypnotized like the snake’s prey stand in a kind of stupor to watch fascinated as death approaches. In plain sight!

No nation in history, after all, has extended its brutally acquisitive and colonialist hegemony over so much of the world. More, even were it not so globally, so cataclysmically, apparent, only economic muscle derived from taxing the incomes of a public as productive as this one, and in the Brobdingnagian proportions such taxation has been done, could otherwise explain such historically unprecedented power.

The supposed taxation system of the U.S. is literally, actually, and obviously absurd. That a nation which purports what this one does to include a satanic avatar of the government like IRS holds both the nation and its people up for world ignominy, contempt – and, yes - hatred. Yet, in a nation pretending to be a democracy, it persists. That it does is not only a contradiction of proportions impossible to go unnoticed to a populace in natural mental state, it is a contradiction that shouts to the wide world the cowardice of the “American” people.

The stupefying, suffocating hypocrisy of the U.S. public beggars description, but nowhere could there be a more appropriate example than in recent disclosures concerning yet another truth concerning the Land of the Free, the Nation of Laws, Protector of Individual Rights, and historic humanitarian, that of torture by our government. After decades of disclosures concerning IRS brutality and criminality, with “corporate America” infamous for its Love Canal, the Ford Pinto tactic, the Karen Silkwood Affair, the Tobacco Companies conspiracy, and many, many more the like; with the siege of Randy Weaver at Ruby Ridge, the immolation of the Branch Davidians at Waco, Texas, the fire-bombing of the Move Compound in Philadelphia, and literally dozens more the like, the U.S. public pretends that “water-boarding” is something new for the government by corporation ruling here.

Unbelievable!

The U.S. Tax Code is on its hideous Medusa face unconstitutional. Impossible to interpret uniformly – a fact demonstrated year after year, decade after decade, by courts, lawyers, tax consultants, and even the IRS itself – it is not legally enforceable, either as statue law or as a matter of contract, whether marine or otherwise. That courts, lawyers, tax consultants, congressmen, and senators know this – could not possible be unaware – yet permit to continue what has happened and has been happening in their full view puts once more the lie to everything the United States pretends to be.

The much-vaunted U.S. press and information media, too, has known for nearly a century. How many times have you heard them say what I have just said concerning the constitutionality of the federal tax system? CBS? NBC?, ABC? CNN? Fox News? The New York Times?

To expect that these same people, the sages and governors of the nation, will behave in any manner dissimilar toward other nations and peoples, or that they will demonstrate different behavior regarding any other issue so fundamental is plainly absurd.

For anyone who believes the government will stop illegal immigration and the staggering burden on the economy and legal system it represents, or believes that the government will protect its citizens from the torrent of vicious criminals pouring over the border with Mexico, let him look to Internal Revenue Service and its criminal depredations, and to the Congress that supposedly oversees it.

For anyone surprised at the impossible-to-believe (“the dog didn’t bark”) dereliction of duty represented by World Trade Center Attack, let him look to the oversight of courts, lawyers, tax consultants, and the congress regarding IRS. In the years 1985 to 1995, I personally forwarded to members of congress, to all of the major media, and to every possible source of assistance for the individual about to be destroyed (“the power to tax,” said Thomas Jefferson, “is the power to destroy”) evidence of rape, extortion to commit rape, embezzlement, wrongful appropriation of funds, and felony crime after crime – everything the vaunted media publishes about anyone and everyone else in the nation – and more.

Result? Nothing! Nada. Nichts. Zip. Bupkis (save it – a tape recording of a man boasting about the way he uses income tax liability to “get me some pussy” is impossible to interpret any way but the way it is).

For anyone surprised that the citizens of New Orleans continue to languish in the devastation of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, let him look to the congress, the courts, and the White House – and the public’s – oversight of Internal Revenue Service.

For anyone nonplussed and perplexed at the utterly asinine matter of Iraq, let him look to IRS, and the congress supposed to oversee it.

For anyone amazed and disgusted about “waterboarding” and the treatment of persons seized as terrorist s everywhere – look to cases like that of Kay Council of High Point, NC, 1988. Mrs. Council came home one night to find a note from her husband, Alex: ‘My dearest Kay - I have taken my life in order to provide capital for you. The IRS and its liens against our property have dried up all sources of credit for us. So I have made the only decision I can. It's purely a business decision. You will find my body on the lot on the north side of the house.’

There are more, hundred, thousands, of case histories like this one: “Jasper and Lucille Gates of Denver, CO received a letter from the IRS stating that they had overpaid their 1972 tax by $1,197. However, they never received a refund. Instead, in June 1974 they were notified, without explanation, that they owed $4,451. Soon another letter came, claiming the deficiency was $4,206. In October, the IRS claimed the Gates owed $13,700, in November it was $15,000. By October, 1975 the alleged deficiency had grown to $16,000 - all without explanation. Then, in August 1978, still without explanation or warning, the IRS seized the Gates bank accounts worth about $13,000 and their home worth about $100,000. They sold the home for $16,000. Mrs. Gates, in a wheel-chair, was evicted, the Gates' furniture and personal effects were thrown into the street. When the news media contacted the IRS, the U.S. Gestapo cited the Privacy Act, and refused comment.”

In my book, Letters to Aaron, the Hal Luebbert Story, I cited a number of examples (why were you never told – if Natalee Holloway, or Anna Nicole Smith and the like were news, why wasn’t Kay Council, or Mrs. Lucille Gates?). I told, too, about the young mother who was forced by an IRS agent to provide sex in order to prevent confiscation of her meager bank account and property.

If the U.S. Government, in the person of and empowered as is the Internal Revenue Service behaves like this toward Kay Council and Lucille Gates (and Hal von Luebbert), why would a rational – and, therefore, honorable – U.S. public expect them to behave more honorably concerning all these other matters?

The powerful mock the law. They mock the individual, whether singlely or en masse. A nation and public, however, that raises its grito concerning a judiciary, a congress and a president running amok, after having cravenly tolerated for decades the predatory outrages of the U.S. Tax Code and of Internal Revenue Service has no credibility; neither will it be heard.

The plain fact, using the archetypical rule of law that is the paradigm of the reasonable individual, is that no people having tolerated the U.S. Tax Code and the Internal Revenue Service has the moral strength or authority to protest anything else, much less any of today’s “issues.”

Feminism notwithstanding, the alleged victim who lives with and tolerates for decades her supposed oppressor, acceding to any and all of his demands, however outrageous, need not be surprised or indignant once she has cried “rape,” and everyone ignores her.

The rule of the reasonable person is based on atavistic and historical experience, not ethics, religion, or law.

"....preaches a doctrine he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots."

2008-04-15T12:43:00.000-07:00

"Demagogue: One who preaches a doctrine he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots." --H.L. Mencken.

Fascinated by human bias – particularly its behavioral causes and origins - I subscribe to as many as a dozen politically-oriented websites on either side of the Left-Right (or Right-Left) spectrum, some so biased that my choice of “left” or “right’ to go first in citing them here would label me as “conservative” or “liberal” there. Any agreement whatever with one of these points of view will result in labeling of the speaker by the opposite point of view as a member – almost invariably, an extremist member - of the opposition.

The fact, in that regard, is that I often agree with even extremists on some political issues. I sometimes agree with Media Matters, Truthout, Daily Kos, and others the like. I agree sometimes with Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, and Nancy Pelosi. I even agree on occasion with Ted Kennedy. Hell, I even agree with Al Franken now and again. The human condition what it is, some people get it right, even when they’re trying to get it wrong.

I sometimes agree with The American Conservative Union, NewsBusters, Accuracy in the Media, and their like. I sometimes agree with FoxNews, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter (agreement with the latter three always results in careful examination of my facts – to say nothing of my thought processes and mental condition). Like I said, no one can be wrong all the time – no one is that smart.

You see, the matter of bias has been a favorite subject – an avocation, even – since high school and my first investigations of news stories in the press (no television then, just the paper and the radio). My high school graduating class’ prophesy was that it would be I who tracked down the abominable snowman, a reference to my weekend and vacation expeditions – often hundred of miles by car - to check reports in the news. Interest in bias - and the truth, its victim – led me to what some consider an inordinate interest in logic, mathematics, statistics, and physics, subjects which proved almost always the best antidote for ideological prejudices and their fractious and factious spawn. A continual college student in classes taken in lieu of perhaps more pedestrian entertainment, I probably have more (a lot more, matter of fact) total classroom time in subjects related to logic, math, and physics than most PhD-holders in those subjects.

Bias, and its exposure for what it is, have always fascinated me. Why are human beings so uncomfortable with the truth? Why, as H.L. Mencken observed, does the public in the U.S. adulate the most obvious liars while detesting angrily, even violently, those who try to tell them the truth?*

I may have hit the nail on the head a few years ago, when I first observed in writing (I realized long ago, but this time I wrote it) that human beings seem to fear thinking, their own thoughts, more than anything else in the world. In an essay here (August 15, 2006), I wrote that people seem to consider thinking subversive and revolutionary. Thinking, I said, is always merciless to privilege, to established institutions, and to comfortable beliefs – everything, in other words, that the common man holds dearest. To society and government, thinking is anarchic and lawless, indifferent to authority and the “wisdom” of Man.

My answer then to my own “why?” question concerning thinking may explain bias, too. Bias must be about fear, the fear of thinking. Perhaps no latter-day (and, therefore, accessible) ideology better exemplifies the fear or thought than that of feminism. A recent article in the local paper is a case in point. “Rape Happens to Real People,” the article blazons, “police lieutenant (a woman) wants to show that victims are more than numbers.”

Typical of the genre, the essay must be searched assiduously and with care in order to find even a single example of objectivity. It is, in other words, archetypical of the word “bias;” but nothing therein is moreso than a high-lighted section entitled, “Common Myths About Sexual Assault.” Nothing here is original, all of it gleaned from similar publications (by typing whole phrases from the piece into an Internet search engine, matter of fact, one can arrive at each plagiarized quote).

The list of “myths,” in other words, is part of the mythology of militant feminism. Because the adherent wants to believe this stuff, they will not only refuse to think about it, they will tell you so emphatically.

The first of these supposed myths tells pedestrian minds like yours and mine that people believe rape victims “brought it on themselves by the way they acted/dressed/spoke.” The truth according to the article? “No means no. Always.”

The non sequitur is the writer’s, not mine. Sprinkled liberally throughout feminist thought and literature, the phrase, “No means no” seems to have become a militants’ slogan derived for the purpose of empowerment based upon woman’s societally-given sexual prerogative.

It’s such “feel good” stuff, I don’t suppose the author of “Myths” could resist using it.

In a manner similar to the way apologists for extremist Afro-American views never dare recognize by thought the incontrovertible fact that were it not for slavery, they in all probability would personally have been born and lived their lives in Africa, the feminists dare not think that were it not for male strength and the evolutionary political power derived from it, not only would rape never have been designated a crime, but the female would not have come to the historical place where she could acquire the political power by which she now successfully challenges natural male superiority.

“Common myths about rape” does not mention thought like that, either. At any rate, my response in a letter to the editor of the Victoria Advocate was:

“’Common myths about sexual assault,’ the article blazons. A rough count of the number of times that same slogan-phrase has been foisted upon the public since the rise of feminism would probably reach the tens of thousands, and the ‘common myths’ argument has itself become a myth.

“In discussing rape, or any feminist ‘issues,’ of course, one must immediately realize that feminist mythology is expressed in FemSpeak, that ‘true-because-I-say-it-is’ argot of the feverishly ideological and militant. All terms and expressions, in other words, have special, esoteric meaning.

“As a young woman whose rape charge sent four young men – one physically incapable of sex - to prison for forty years once told me several years after the conviction, ‘Maybe they didn’t know it was rape – that’s up to the woman, isn’t it?’ She didn’t say ‘No,’ it would appear.

“That, incidentally, was the same case in which a female juror later confided that in her mind any time a woman had sex with more than one man it had to be rape.

“The lady juror didn’t have to hear that ‘no,’ either, I guess.

“I happen you see, to have been a private detective who during the early seventies did a thoroughly detailed investigation of literally dozens of rape cases, investigation that included interview with the supposed victims several years after their ‘trauma.’ During one representative period, thirteen of fifteen rape cases I worked as an investigator for the defense were dropped or reduced to misdemeanor (“disorderly conduct”) severity, moreover.

“Here’s the truth, from one who took the trouble to do what was necessary to learn it objectively. First, half of the men in prison now for rape, were not guilty of what society commonly considers rape (another statistical evaluation made by myself personally in interviews with the public from coast to coast). The fact of DNA tests having freed more than a hundred men imprisoned on account of false rape charges is a stubborn fact, one reflecting powerfully on those “myths” the lady lieutenant cites (flaunts?) in the Advocate.

“Let’s have a look:

“’Myth #1’ (purported truth that how a woman acts, dresses, or speaks has nothing to do with rape): That’s not what men say. How many rapists has the lieutenant interviewed years after their conviction? How many men who were tempted to commit rape, but didn’t? The fact is that almost any male knows better than this old feminist “fact;” more, its self-serving, self-forgiving character – “that I was going ninety miles an hour with no brakes has nothing to do with my wreck” - is obvious.

Nothing irritates me more than this particular bit of feminist nonsense irrationality. Some years ago, I wrote about “Becky” an aerobics instructor in Denver who walked home from her classes still dressed in her scanty and form-fitting workout costume, though an area where a dozen rapes had then recently occurred. When the story broke that she had been raped, I wrote that one might also have expected that having learned of man-eating piranha in the local river, she would cover herself in blood before going swimming in the river to thrash about as energetically as possible. She could probably take great consolation from her feminist sisters insistence that her having been devoured was a crime of violence, not hunger.

“’Myth #2’ (purported truth that men are also victims of rape): Ahem! This one obviously requires some very special, FemSpeak interpretation. It will suffice perhaps to note that Viagra instructions caution that desire must be present for the product to be effective. Only in FemSpeak can armed robbery occur without arms.

Tell us, ladies - how many men, outside of prison, are raped?

“’Myth #3’ (purported truth that anyone can be a rape victim): This is called the ‘straw Man’ fallacy in logic (look it up). More, I’ve personally never heard this particular “myth.” It’s also true that anyone thinking could fill volumes with conditions under which a woman cannot be a victim of rape. I’ve never heard, for instance, of a woman having been raped while armed or in the charge of a bodyguard. Say for instance, ‘any woman wandering about alone at obviously – to one not demented by feminist ideology, that is - the wrong time and the wrong place, and I’ll agree.”

I note, parenthetically, that my clumsy “mouse” hand seems to have obliterated a paragraph, wherein I explained that the “straw man” in the “myth” argument supposes those who believe only beautiful women are raped. If anyone actually believes that, he’s even more biased than the authors of the Advocate article in question.

Notice that I didn’t mention stupidity, but it’s a possible reason – for both the straw man and the article’s author – too.

“’Myth #4’ (purported truth that 15 to 20 percent of rape victims don't know their assailant): ‘Ditto Myth #3.’ Does anyone wonder what the ‘truth’ cited in the article as related to this particular myth has to do with proving anything material to the question? And, what, pray tell, is a ‘dirty, old man’ (isn’t that all of us?).

“’Myth #5’ (that rapists succeed by means other than physical force): Yeah, like the young lady I mentioned above said, maybe the guy didn’t know it was rape – that’s up to women, isn’t it? Among the oldest principles of law, on the other hand, says ‘Unus testis, nullus testis’ – one witness, no witness.

“People lie when they have a reason – or hadn’t you noticed?

“’Myth #6’ (purported truth that wives and prostitutes - odious comparison, that - can be raped): Special FemSpeak interpretation again, what? Just – for all practical purposes - leaves the question of whether rape occurred up to the ‘victim,” doesn’t it? And, of course, ‘maybe he didn’t know it was rape’ – until I told him. And by what device of clairvoyance would society ever determine that rape of a prostitute means she simply wasn't paid?

“’Myth #7’ (that false accusations of rape are few [good grief - in what world does the author live?!]): I trust this means “most charges of sexual assault don’t take place,” etc. The “myth” as written here has a certain logic, one supposes, but I know of no instance in which a man raped a woman on account of her having charged him with rape.

“It happens, too, that I also happen to have first hand insight into this one. Of sixty-two insurance claims men I interviewed in 1977, forty-eight reported having been threatened with rape charges by women trying to make false insurance claims and extort insurance payments from the adjuster. Police records, as recognized in police department defensive regulations and practices, are replete with evidence of attempts by women to use false rape charges in order to gain advantage and evade arrest. The same is true of teachers and educational institutions. The fact, easily documented with research of public records, is that false rape charges have reached epidemic proportions (feminism, anyone?) in the U.S. It is also a fact that by using evidence documented by means of a tape recorder, I personally have been able to save myself from similar tactics four times - twice as a PI, and twice as a police officer (on two additional occasions, I was also able to stymie police ‘sting’ efforts intended to result in soliciting for prostitution charges). In several of the cases I worked successfully as a private investigator, women admitted having brought rape charges for the purpose of revenge (one, for instance, a student, charged with rape a teacher who had given her a failing grade), or to prevent traffic tickets.

“The fact is that nearly half of rape charges brought since the year 1975 have been false (police blotters across the country record the evidence in incontrovertible detail – for anyone interested and sincere enough to do the leg work necessary). As I said, false charges of rape have become an epidemic, one spawned almost entirely by feminism and the hysteria it engenders.”

Crystal Mangum, you know, has lots of company among persons who are able to bring false charges of felony crime without repercussion (gee, why do you suppose the lady lieutenant and the Advocate writer didn’t mention that singularly exemplary case?).

Now, it is unlikely in the extreme that the newspaper in question will print my letter. This is an “end justifies the means,” it feels good for feminists and it is therefore politically correct, subject, one where objective thinking is singularly taboo. The one fact mitigating the otherwise deleterious effect of journalism like this is the probably innocence of its perpetrators. Victims of the same ideology they espouse, the authors probably believe they are actually doing right. People defending mythology like that engendered by feminism, mythology like that blazoned in the “Rape Happens to Real People” article will say that lying for the purpose of rape prevention (how, by the way, does an article like “Myths” tend to prevent rape?) is a good thing. It isn’t.

It isn’t, and the trouble with fallacious reasoning like that, like most fallacious reasoning, is that it is cancerous, its own worst enemy; and, like bias, it inevitably finds itself “hoist on its own petard.” The lies and fallacious reasoning of the biased promoting their ideology are like erroneous numbers in a mathematical equation or column of numbers, seeming to proliferate as exponentially as viruses. They are suicidal.

Let me tell you what you’re thinking. It will make my point better here than anything else I’ve said (anybody remember Bill Cosby’s, “I told you that so I could tell you this”?). You’re thinking that I’m a misogynist, a guy who really does think women who are raped have brought their hurt upon themselves. You have just demonstrated objectively what I said at the outset here concerning those who are biased. No, I don’t dislike women, and - except as noted here - I don't believe women are to be blamed when they have been raped (I do know, on the other hand, that feminism is responsible for many – probably a majority – of women who by their credence in tripe like that dispensed by feminist extremists both put themselves in danger and/or rendered themselves defenseless against rapists).

“Rape Happens to Real People” is an example of something I detest, a statement that is illogical, or dishonest, or egregiously wrong otherwise, by someone with whom I identify and agree in principle. I, on the other hand, don’t care – certainly don’t want to see him silenced – when someone with whom I disagree says something erroneous or stupid. In fact, I exult in it. I have, for instance, often pointed out here that I seldom comment upon things coming from the liberal side of the political spectrum because people there seldom say anything with which I identify. More, I don’t care if what they say is wrong. I want them to keep talking, and as much as possible.

Yes, I know – thinking will do that to a person every time.

As wife Rita would tell you, I not only deplore the fact of scores of thousands of missing women, and the hideous statistics having to do with women and children raped in the U.S., I agonize over each new instance in the national press. I am literally furious with a male society that by its craven, boot-licking (high heels licking?), politically-correct cowardice in the face of militant feminism has condemned thousands of women and girls to the kind of oblivious stupidity that makes them walk right into the arms of their rapists.

I am equally disgusted with having to protect the women about whom I care particularly from feminist drivel like the authors of “Rape Happens to Real People” articles. I am damned sick and tired of having to worry while the several beautiful women in my charge as a husbanding man insist on account of utter nonsense like “Myth #1” to go out into the night alone and dressed in a manner they, themselves strive to make “attractive.” More, I have often had to be concerned about women I have never so much as spoken to, or am seeing for the very first time, concerned because of their circumstances and behavior at the moment. I wish I had kept count of the number of times I have waited, and obliged those with whom I happened to be to wait, while I watched to make sure a pretty and shapely, revealingly clad young woman makes it to her car late at night in the empty street or parking lot of a big city. Always, when the logical question comes to mind - how could she be so stupidly oblivious - the answer is always the same: feminism, and "Myth #1."

I guess I don’t believe “Myth #1.” I think, you see. Feminism, and the biased generally, ought to try it. Would that ever be an adventure!

*"The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth."

Petraeus; Abbott and Costello; "Who's on First" and a nation that doesn't "give a darn.

2008-04-08T13:35:00.000-07:00

This past Saturday, I went to a going-away get together for the friends of another young soldier being ordered to Iraq - Frankie. Now, I said to wife Rita, we have to start worrying again for still another friend being ordered to risk - and if fate so decrees, lose - his life. "For U.S. interests."

Not, mind you, in defense of his county, but "for U.S. interests."

A few days ago, as I noted on my "Question of the Day page here," I made reply to a solicitation to the public from Florida Congressman Robert Wexler for questions to ask the General commanding our troops in Iraq, General David Petraeus. I sent a list of questions by return e-mail (to see them, go to the Question Page).

Of course, the questions were obvious ones, as obvious as the historically unprecedented stupidity of invasion and the bumbling, bumbling, pratfalling conduct of the "war" (for everything related to the matter, new definitions seem necessary). The questions were as obvious, in fact, as what the general would say - regardless of the questions. In fact, I said months ago- right here - what he would say today. Need I remind you? Click here, go to the Mongoose Trick Archives for September 26, 2007.

To paraphrase by way of analysis what the soldier said (does anybody remember George Bernard Shaw's "I never expect a soldier to think" observation?) the way all the media pundits and "analysts" do, the general said that because things are going so well, we need to maintain our presence - "surge" included - in Iraq. If things were going badly, we would still want to maintain our presence there.

If the Iraq government and its forces were perfect, and doing everything perfectly, that would be a reason to stay, If they were doing miserably (pssst - the way they are), that is also a reason to stay.

And, the general said - here's a revelation for you - there's no way "right now" to judge when we can start "orderly withdrawal" great military minds like John McCain keep pontificating about.

General, let's see if I understand (some more of that "analysis" we get from the great minds of the media):

Since we don't know what's going on, there's no way to predict what will happen - that about it?

Since every time we included Iraqis in anything - political, military, what have you - a big percentage of them stay home, sabotage something, or go over to the other side, we're not sure when they will be able to begin running their country the way we want them to. That about it? General?

Since neither you nor we have any way to know how many "civilian military contractors" - CIA army, that is - are in Iraq or what they're doing, there's no way to assess their effect; or, in view of history, even their intentions. How do you command an army when you don't know exactly who they are (which puts you pretty much in the same condition as the public, doesn't it?).

Which brings me to how one assesses progress, costs, or status quo and the price of beans when you can't so much as define "winning" and "losing." I guess to define oh, so abstruse terms like that, you'd need also to define "interests." You know: those "U.S. Interests" we keep hearing about - as in "U.S. interests in the region." We're fighting to protect "U.S. interests" in Iraq. Dammit, what ARE our interests in Iraq? I mean, if I'm supposed to build a house, don't I have to know what it's supposed to look like when it's complete?

I watched the TV today, listened to the whole, damned posturing rigmarole of congressional hearings and the general's "testimony." I can't stomach these people, but it's the most - and the least - I could do for Frankie, I said to myself.

When can we leave (when have we won, when have our interests been served, when are we losing, when have we lost, etc., etc., etc.,)? No matter how the question was phrased, whatever its form, the answer was always the same: well, then we'll have to "make an assessment" (but you and I, of course, won't know when or what it is, and . . . oh, to hell with it!). When Senator Joe Biden - among others - asked how we know when conditions will be right for withdrawal of troops - some or all - I was reminded of another routine like this one. It was enacted by a couple of guys named Abbott and Costello, and it's become known as "WHO'S ON FIRST?".

"Costello: I throw the ball to who?

"Abbott: Naturally.

"Costello: Now you ask me.

Abbott: You throw the ball to Who?

"Costello: Naturally.

"Abbott: That's it.

"Costello: Same as you! Same as YOU!!! I throw the ball to who. Whoever it is drops the ball and the guy runs to second. Who picks up the ball and throws it to What. What throws it to I Don't Know. I Don't Know throws it back to Tomorrow, Triple play. Another guy gets up and hits a long fly ball to Because. Why? I don't know! He's on third and I don't give a darn!

"Abbott: What?

"Costello: I said I don't give a darn!

"Abbott: Oh, that's our shortstop.

"Costello screams."

Costello screams, and that's pretty much where the nation is. Me, too . . .

MOCKINGBIRD and Destruction of the Senses Essential to the Body Politic.

2008-04-01T14:13:00.000-07:00

The election fraud continues unabated, a made-for-television soap opera designed in the state of the art for propaganda. Of course, anyone still existing in a behaviorally unaltered state has only to compare the cynical charade with the blizzard of advertising that has come to be essentially all the broadcast media nowadays does.

But the vast percentage of the citizenry in the Land of the Free does not exist in an unaltered state, and that’s that. All people like my friends and I can do is make plans to abandon ship when the proverbial last minute comes. It won’t be long now.

Still, there has remained the problem of what to do about the kids and grandkids. It was with heavy heart, and after intense discussion with older friends – persons able to remember the time before Operation MOCKINGBIRD had hit its mind-controlling stride – that Rita and I have decided there is little chance to do anything about what their corporation-owned government has done to them and their future.

The kids – I speak, of course, of young, even middle-age, adults – simply cannot throw off their long since behaviorally-induced and habituated behavior. Like women watching a soap opera, they speak of the election campaign and its tawdry theater as though it were real.

I am reminded how a couple (three?) decades ago I stopped as was my custom for coffee at the 7-11 next door to my office. Attendants and patrons were talking excitedly about the news that “J.R.” had been shot. There was speculation concerning whether the victim’s wounds would be fatal, who the assailant had been, and more. The concern and emotion among the discussion’s parties was earnest and concerned, emotional - even worried.

Wrack my brain as I might, I could think of no one named J.R. Walking into my offices, I stopped at the front desk to inquire of Judy, my secretary – “Have you heard that someone named J.R. has been shot?” Of course, Judy said, everybody knew that - where had I been? Who the hell, I asked – annoyed now – was “J.R.”

It went on. J.R. owned such and such company, lived in Dallas, and was rich as Croesus. He had so many enemies there was no telling who had tried to kill him. J.R.

I’m an investigator by profession, so I know how to ask questions. How did Judy happen to know J.R.? I saw realization hit her pretty face. “Don’t you watch Dallas?” she asked. “Watch Dallas?” No, I said – no more than I watch, for instance Chicago, or Los Angeles, or . . .

“Hal,” Judy said, “it’s a TV show! Kind of like the daytime soap operas.”

Enough of that – you may have gotten the point. On the other hand, inundated and conditioned by what is certainly the most powerful mind and behavior control tool ever devised by the power-mad and avaricious mind of man – television – you may not.

There is, parenthetically, a relatively simple way to detect how far gone – or already lost – you might be. Consider this: If you really believe that the colossal, Brobdingnagian corporations who control virtually everything in the nation actually intend to let the public choose a president, you’re too far gone to help. If you really believe that from among candidates of the caliber – note, please, that I have mentioned nothing suggesting anything even remotely resembling leadership ability as a criteria; I speak merely of ability to survive in the real world – of John McCain, Barack Obama, or Hillary Clinton you can pick someone capable of the U.S. presidency, you probably believe in the Tooth Fairy, too.

You probably think the same corporate power structure that picked George W. Bush actually intended for him to control anything – himself, for instance. You might even think he does control something. Look around a bit. If you still think that, it’s probably too late for you. You still think it was Sue Ellen who shot J.R. (or was it?).

A long time ago – at least relative to the history of this benighted country, a man named Samuel Johnson made the famous observation that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Times have changed. The last refuge now is the world of virtual reality – the Operation MOCKINGBIRD media.

The First Amendment to the Constitution says that “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” The Founding Fathers, of course, had no idea that anything like Operation MOCKINGBIRD would occur, or that the fabulously, unimaginably powerful would manipulate the press until it was destroyed or destroyed itself.

People – especially those pundits who invariably, anymore, tell us what we just saw and heard - are often heard to say that the free press is democracy's first line of defense against corruption and tyranny. It’s more than that, actually – a lot more. In fact, the nation’s press is both in a manner of speaking and operative fact a critical part of what amounts to the nation’s thought processes. The nation’s mind – its people and the democratic process – are as healthy and functioning for the good of the body it controls, the body politic, as its news and information media.

The news and information media, as a famous old motion picture theater newsreel used to say, is the eyes and ears of the nation. It serves as the public’s senses, without which, like the individual, little or nothing can be known; and, just as the individual mind deprived of sensory input goes crazy, loses its memory, and dies, the democracy deprived or its news and information media does the same.

An old adage known to most fighters is that a man fights with his mind. An electorate fights – rules and controls – its government with its individual and collective mind. To defeat him totally and to subjugate an opponent, the fighter must control – even destroy - the opponent’s mind. The same can be said – it is the tactical doctrine of the CIA and the corporate powers that created it – of government and its collective adversary – the public. To rule totally – in a totalitarian fashion now being urged upon us and demanded by government in the U.S. – government must control minds.

Operation MOCKINGBIRD – control of the public mind - was, is, therefore, the cornerstone of the new “conservatism.”

There’s always a word, or expression, isn’t there? It is always, no matter how repressive the regime, no matter how many are starving and living in squalor, no matter how many are being imprisoned, maimed or killed, the “people” who rule. Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and the like are “conservative.”

They are also the voice of the media.

Oh, yes, there are others. Lots of them. The media may be – it is: lock, stock, and barrel – owned by the corporations (and only a few, at that) who own nearly everything else in the nation; it may have the character of all corporations – meaning it has only one purpose, profit – and it may be as averse to risk as any of its corporate masters. But journalists and reporters in our country strive every day, here and around the world, to do the work intended by their profession, their society, and their nation – to uncover and tell the truth.

They not only believe the truth will make their audience of the public free, they are willing to risk their lives in order to get the truth. In any given year, dozens, even scores, of journalists and persons engaged in finding and recording the truth are wounded and killed.

But no totalitarian-leaning government wants a free press, and government is despotic to the degree that it co-operates with a free press. That simple - the “fruit by which you shall know them.”

Were the media – the sensorium of a democratic nation – healthy, there would be nothing more necessary to say. The mind having felt its wounds, sensing its sickness, would take steps to recover. Ah, but here it is the mind itself that is sick. Confused and bewildered by deception, the mind knows neither its own state or that of its body. An Alzheimer’s patient, it is totally institutionalized, dependent upon its keepers for even the most basic life necessities.

Of course, the last thing the owners and operators of the institution that is the Land of the Free want is for the inmates – the euphemism here, further of course, would be patients – to recover from their dementia. Their corporate purpose, profit, after all, depends upon the “patients.”

So, were you still possessed of natural mentality, and a tactician, what would you – faced with a national media protected by the First Amendment – do? If I intended to take over a nation – the term for that in this case is “maximize profits” – I would first destroy the credibility of anyone who might blow the proverbial whistle. That is what – Operation MOCKINGBIRD – has done, and today, that is what the neo-conservative right wing is in the continuing process of assuring. So perniciously successful has the process been that however often a member of the U.S. Government is caught lying, cheating, or stealing, the effect is negligible, even advantageous. Depending upon his identification with one political faction or the other, he may use and sell drugs, prey upon children, accept bribes, or anything of corrupt character imaginable, and not only escape public opprobrium, but rise in political popularity.

All of it has been provided for and politically nurtured by the Operation MOCKINGBIRD and the media it controls. There is no disputing that historically – you have only to read the record of what has happened.

Destruction of the media as the sensory organ vital to the body politic has been on-going since the time of the industrial military complex coup d’etat in 1948. From the first suggestion that the news and information media was biased – the now accepted (repeat a lie often enough) "liberal media" – to today’s openly, blatantly apologists for scrapping of the U.S. Constitution (“fair and balance” Fox News, for instance), the media engages in Newspeak orchestration and outright falsehood intended to destroy the public’s contact with reality – create, that is, a national insanity not unlike that of nineteen thirties’ Germany.

Today, in fact, the once vaunted “free flow of information” exists only for those willing to assiduously pursue factual data concerning what is happening in the nation and world. While every state-of-the-art device is employed, none is a better, more easily discernible example of what has happened to than “national” news like the disappearance of a teenager from a small town in Alabama.

Of what national significance was Natalee Holloway? How would news and information services critical to the maintenance of a democracy equate her disappearance – receive equal stature, even precedence, over news the gravitas of a day in the Iraq war’s casualty count? Only with real effort, hours of research, phone calls, and the like every days is one able to learn concerning national events affecting his life and those of his family.

“Free flow of information,” indeed.

The fact is, the nation’s media has now become complicit in its own murder. I am reminded of Vladimir Lenin’s cynical promise that he would not only hang the capitalist U.S., it would lend him the money for purchase of the rope with which to do it. Stupidly arrogant – how does anyone who obviously can’t do simple, high school mathematics and statistics, erring again and again where anything mathematical is concerned, have the temerity to posture as “expert analysts?” Hyper-protective of their real interest, profit for the mega-corporations who own them, personally obsessed with individual and personal “perks” and career advancement, journalists and the media they crew have been as easily bought and sold by their corporate masters as their congressional counterparts have been prostituted by corporate lobbyists.

The success of CIA Operation MOCKINGBIRD not only turned the media into willing tools of the government and benighted the nation, it further crippled the media as a sensory device for the body politic, it destroyed the confidence of any citizen remaining unaffected by its behavior modification oriented propaganda. Behaving with its Newspeak “newscasts” exactly like those who swamp television broadcasting with acquisitive commercial messages, the media resembles nothing so much as P.T. Barnum, Elmer Gantry, and Sergeant Bilko – with Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh in their tawdry steads.

The supposedly liberal media is no better, and the continual bickering between the two likewise supposed opponents is nothing more than a cynical Mutt and Jeff routine (often, more like Abbott and Costello – who’s on first?) designed to keep the public distracted from real trouble like our colossally corrupt and incompetent government.

Our much-vaunted media has now taken on the collective character of a used car salesman no one mentally competent would trust. Neither can there be better proof of the public’s staggering scholastic stupidity and pratfalling political dystrophy than the fact that it continues to enrich these swindlers by their patronage.

With the nation’s sensory organs, the media, deadened, the government is now free to wield and govern by means of the Big Lie. How, or instance, could an alert, competent, and knowledgeable journalist – much less the media as a whole - have been taken in by the ridiculous pack of lies that led to invasion of Iraq? How could a media that had been sycophantly ballyhooing – this time in order to justify for the government colossal spending – the national defense capabilities of space-based spy technology, fail to so much as mention it during the weeks, months, and years of inspections in Iraq?! How could any journalist have failed to consider the thunderously obvious implications of U.S. discovery by nineteen sixties’ technology decades before of missiles in Cuba?

How did the media miss any of at least fifty more indications of White House – and government – lying?
Well, now! How did the public miss it? Not once in all the time of the run-up to the invasion of Iraq did any of the bloggers on the Internet mention the obvious. Neither has anyone but yours truly mentioned since that you can’t build missiles guided or ballistic in your garage; neither do you mix up chemical or biological weapons mass destruction in your bathtub.

The Bush Administration’s claims concerning “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq were as patently, obviously false as its incompetence having to do with the attack on the World Trade Center and its kid-caught-with-his-hand-in-the-cookie-jar excuses in the aftermath. They were as false – obviously to even a bright eighth grader – as the excuses made by the same administration in the aftermath (the continuing aftermath) of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the dithering and bloviating concerning the border with Mexico, and the Bush League’s utterly bald-faced lying concerning reasons for and the enactment of the Patriot Act and legislation the like.

Any journalist worth his salt could – as I could – go on and on. How about the spastic reasoning behind “No Child Left Behind?” How much intellect and reasoning power does it take to recognize as a corollary to “No Child Left Behind” “everybody waits until everybody catches up,” or “everybody is as educated as the stupidest – or laziest – among us”?

How did it all happen? I call your attention - and that of your short, oh, so, short memory - stories like that of “columnists” like the woman who was found to be writing propagandist pamphlets for the White House. Margaret Gallagher, in other words, is what is called a “CIA writer,” a practice instituted by Operation MOCKINGBIRD’s directors soon after creation of the taxpayer-funded program (anybody remember Lenin’s comment about the rope paid for by the people upon whom it would be used for a hanging?).

Then we have one Armstrong Williams. You remember him, don’t you? Supposedly a conservative Afro-American political commentator Williams was paid a quarter of a million dollars by the Department of Education to shill in writing and otherwise for the president's execrable “No Child Left Behind” boondoggle. Lenin again: the White House used our money to pay a guy to lie to us. Even worse, this guy would have done it all for nothing (check his Website).

Then, we have people hired and paid – your money, again – to pose as newsmen in order to serve up for the president or one federal agency wonk or the other the questions the government wants to answer.

And on, and on, and on – and still the public doesn’t get it. In the face of it all, with unadulterated truth from the press and electronic media as rare as hen’s teeth, and the presidential candidates just as truthful and real, the addled public believes we’re having an actual presidential election campaign, and that by participating we will actually affect our lives for the better.

How MOCKINGBIRD bewildered can you get? We'll see - oh, will we ever see!

http://www.armstrongwilliams.com/

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/27/politics/27columnist.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/10/fema-stages-fak.html

Surreal: The United States of America - Made for Television

2008-03-20T12:33:00.000-07:00

“For I have neither wit, nor words, nor worth; action, nor utterance, nor power of speech, to stir men’s blood; I only speak right on; I tell you that which you yourselves do know.” -Shakespeare (“Julius Caesar”)

The little guy, his hand held protectively by his pretty mother, walked up to where I was signing autographs at one of the hundreds of judo tournaments in which I competed in those days. Before mom could say anything, the little man blurted, “Are you Superman – can you fly?”

I winked at his smiling mom, and said (it’s been a long time ago; I was only reminded of it by my topic for today) something like, no, winning a judo tournament doesn’t mean you’re Superman. To fly, I needed an airplane, too.

But when I’d thought about it, I knew where the little guy was coming from. The martial arts movies, magazines, and related media were already then spewing such incredible nonsense that one assumed then that they did so knowing that no one really believed them. It was like the tabloids, Christ back on earth disguised as an alligator stuff, and those mindless soap operas. In his child’s mind, there was yet no way to tell the truth from fantasy. Little kids, you know, used to have parents, parents who knew the real world, that is, parents who helped with making such distinctions.

No more. Today, in the gossip coffee-klatsch that is our nation and its news and information media, people drive nails with a feather, break automobile leaf springs with a shuto (karate chop), and exploded chickens with ki (projected mental power) all the time. Kung-fu and karate fighters fight streetfights that are the equivalent in energy expended and calories burned of sprinting a twenty-six mile marathon. Utter nonsense, in other words. But that’s not all. In Hollywood, the U.S. Congress, and the Never-Neverland like, a Miss America candidate who weighs a hundred, ten pounds can street-fight three guys capable of playing in an NFL line and knock the snot out of them.

Women, of course, can do anything a man can do. It’s the law, besides.

Utter, as I said, nonsense.

And that’s just the beginning of it all. If it can be said, and made to hang together even in today’s pseudo-logic, it’s possible. No, it’s true. It’s reality. The sweeter it sounds, the more real it is. Politically correct, in other words. No matter how absurd to the reason, if it sounds good, it must be. Everyone’s opinion is as good as anyone else’s. No race is more intelligent than the others. No culture is more successful, and – therefore – to be respected than any other. No one – therefore again – should have to compete; to compete, after all, means someone must lose or fail, and we can’t have that – not if we’re all equal and alike. We must find a way to make all the kids in all our schools pass, and magna cum laude, at that or the result will be “hateful” (of course, we can always blame the tests, or the schools, or the teachers when the kids can’t read or do their sums).

Competition and tests are “discriminatory.”

In short, what was once known as common sense, that solid, everyday-experienced and lived contact with reality is as rare as the proverbial hen’s teeth. People who have never swung a hammer, used a spade or shovel, or mixed and poured cement tell us all about calluses. Worse, perhaps, they advise us on the value of buildings. We call them “appraisers.” Men whose closest experience with fighting is a spat with their wives - and now even more incredibly (formerly, that is), women - advise us on how and when to fight a war. And nobody sees any connection between that and the incredibly stupid way we’re fighting the war in Iraq, or the even stupider way we fell into the morass that it is in the first place.

I’ll tell you what, parenthetically, if I were a member of the Air Force Wing who woke up the other day to learn that their commanding officer was a woman, I’d refuse further service. AWOL – whatever it took. Ridiculous is ridiculous, and everyone who doesn’t know what’s ridiculous when he sees it is damned well not the guy I want flying my wing in a “furball” fight.

And it goes on, and on. It seems, these days, pointless to site common sense as an argument or reason for much of anything. This has become, largely the result of female and effeminate influence resulted from the rise of feminism, a nation ruled by emotions and emotional argument. As I said, the litmus test of everything nowadays is how it feels. As I returned home just now, for instance, a man being interviewed on National Public Radio was arguing that black people are entitled to say things white and other people aren’t. Emotional people, he implied, are entitled to argue using their best attributes (I guess he thinks black people are more emotional than others – and I will leave the obvious implication of that to the reader’s . . . oops – I was about to say “common sense”), so if they say things which would be hateful coming from a white, that’s okay.

Don Imus can’t say what he said, but Jeremiah Wright (the pastor of Barak Obama’s church) can.

And a few minutes later, one of those “analyst” pundits on the Tee and Vee says Wright is hateful, just plain hateful. He should be prevented from saying things like that, and his racist ranting is going to ruin Barak Obama’s run for the presidency.

Well enough. That’s as it should be. After all, hate speech is hate speech. Like Professor Ward Churchill a while ago, the Reverend Wright should lose his position, he should be banished and prevented from any more public speaking, drawn, quartered, and fed to the fishes. His family should be banished to a desert island. And all the customary, madder-than-a-wet-hen rest all those of us he has done such terrible hurt can dream up and devise.

What is even more crucial here is that we rail and rage against this sort of thing as much, as often, and as long as possible. I hope I have done my bit. Curses upon saying hateful things. I hate hate. I have gnashed my teeth, rent my garments, and uttered imprecations upon the miscreants who disturb the peace and quiet of anything.

I condemn and contemn the killing of wolves in Yellowstone and decry cock fighting . . .

Wait a minute – where was I? I may have gotten carried away.

What is far more interesting to me concerning the Reverend Jeremiah A. Wright, Professor Ward Churchill, and so many others like the, however, is that much or most of what they said happens to be true. Ah, yes, you say, but Wright is Afro-centrist (did I make that word up just now?). He is biased toward his race and his point of view, and if what he says is on the opposite side of the circle from the teachings of the Christianity he purports to espouse – well, his fellows in the hypocrite community are legion.

“Americans” – the fact that I often feel the need to remind the people of the United States that there are thirty-four other nations in the “Americas” is a facet of the words-only reality in which we now anguish fecklessly – share one characteristic bias more than any other people on the planet. Like their government, they hate the truth when it offends whatever falsehood they happen to cherish or worship. In the words of H.L. Mencken, "The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth."

H.L. Mencken (who passed away in 1956, years before the feminist revolution and the rhetoric-reality it demanded and spawned), you hadn’t seen anything yet.

But I have seldom seen that observation successfully gainsaid, and here we are again. Nothing is more hateful than the truth. The U.S. of America is a woman who asks her husband or boy friend how her new hair-do looks, or if she’s too fat for this dress, and now that the old bat looks like a cartoon caricature of a woman and is so fat that she requires a motorized cart to haul her overindulgent and corrupt carcass around, it is still hateful for him to recognize aloud the reality of her condition.

Today, Barak Obama goes to Philadelphia, and standing before a row of U.S.A. flags, delivers a large serving of common sense truth. Something the little kid four-year-old I mentioned at the outset would recognize at once. Mom, probably, wouldn’t – but he would. This is truth so thunderously obvious that sixty-four percent (my numbers, based on my own history-based accounting) will recognize it as such. The lunatic fringe, and those paid to appear in the lunatic fringe, will fulminate pro and con. Emotion, remember? Emotion! – Gotta remember the female audience, you know.

And about one-fiftieth of one percent will see it all for the bad, soap-opera, drive-a-nail-with-a-feather martial arts movie, pro wrestling, feminist rhetoric reality that it is.

Well, on second thought, you have a choice (assuming you have the commons sense remaining, that is). You can believe that the Reverend Wright is that stupid, that demented, or that careless, or you can believe he did it on purpose. You can believe that he cares so little for Barak Obama and his campaign for the presidency that he sought to be “divisive” (at a time like this), or you can believe he had another agenda.

Need I say “crazy of crazy like a fox?” Soap opera? Romance novel? Pro wrestling match? Hollywood-staged, made-for-television martial arts fight? Feminist rhetoric?

In this Never-Neverland production, the Dudley Do-Right hero – just when it appears that Snidely Whiplash has delivered the dastardly and fatal blow to Dudley’s plan to rescue the Nell Fenwick nation – has arrived with the antidote anecdote.

What a speech!

But meanwhile, as all this wondrously glamorous, excitingly emotive (there’s the magic ingredient, in case you’re still adrift with Winkin’, Blinkin’, and Nod), and even tear-jerking (or have we forgotten Hillary’s weepy, Joan of Arc frustrated performance of a few weeks ago), nail-biter is played for us, the reality outside goes on.

While we – those of us vapidly engrossed, and we, who still live in the real world and are fully aware that we have real reason to bite our nails – sit watching or enduring this soap opera, the planet’s fever goes unrestrainedly higher for wont of treatment. The misery and killing we have inflicted and are inflicting in Iraq mounts, while the infection resulted from the self-inflicted wound it represents – I speak figuratively of the seemingly uncontrollable costs there – races toward the heart of the nation’s economy. The border with Mexico remains so porous that hundreds of Mexican criminals, tons of illegal drugs, and all the rest of the execrable Mexican government’s flotsam and jetsam pour into our country. Gasoline for the car is nearing four dollars per, the price of groceries will soon drive most of us to cat food, and that “ain’t the half” of all our real troubles.

But we’re watching a “soap.” Oprah is interviewing the teary-eyed, three hundred pound walrus in chintz who can’t understand why her husband went to another woman. Mr. Clean is about to be bludgeoned with a ringside chair by the Evil Angel, and the Houston Rockets are on a winning streak. Then, too, someone found a Frosted Flake that looks like the outline of Illinois (the remarkable thing is that someone knows how the outline of Illinois looks?), and is selling it for $2,000 dollars.

Hell of a speech, all right! Hell of an election campaign, too. Too bad it has nothing to do with anything out here in the real world.

The Second Amendment and the Abstract, Surreal World of the LIberal & the Law Professor

2008-03-17T17:08:00.000-07:00

It was utterly fascinating, a display of bloviating balderdash unequalled even by some of our fearless leader’s latest twaddle (a man talking about maintaining tax cuts and finding ways to assure people who made loans far beyond their means at the same time he demands more funding by federal inflation of a twelve billion dollar a week war sounds like raving to anyone not in the same addled condition as the speaker). The following day, if that weren’t enough, a Democrat Party spokesman delivered a response to the president’s nonsense – more nonsense.

The democrats, too, will decrease taxes!

My god, people, it’s not only incredible that anyone in government would have the colossal, the Brobdingnagian, chutzpah to utter anything so obviously false, so thunderously shouted-down by history, it’s incredible that even a public as “Pearl Harbor – isn’t that a shampoo?” stupid as this one would so much as endure to such insulting, sewer gas, cynicism. The Democrats will cut taxes while they go on funding the indescribably asinine occupation of Iraq.

Folks, the war in Iraq is being “funded” by inflation. There is no money to pay for it. “Inflation” – among the most evilly cynical euphemism ever coined - is nothing more or less than a tax. When the menagerie of morons otherwise known as Congress “appropriates” (look the damned word up – it’ll do you good) money to fund George W. Bush’s perfidious boon-doggle, it is raising your taxes! When the government spends money it doesn’t have, and you have to make the I.O.U. good (lord – how many ways do I have to say it?) you are being taxed. Without representation! The federal debt – inflation – is already ten trillion dollars ($10,000,000,000,000)! With the cost of Iraq as planned by John (“Whatever It Takes”) McCain, that figure will reach a number in excess of all the money spent on this nation’s military from 1946 to the end of the Cold War (a little over fifteen trillion dollars).

There isn’t the slightest – not a scintilla of one – chance that the economy of the United States can support that (do the #$%&@*! Numbers!).

But yesterday’s “debate” (get another thing through your heads: we don’t have debates in the U.S. anymore – we have speeches with the opposing sides on the same stage or at the same table) staged by the Heritage Foundation was low theater, comic opera. The topic was that of the Washington, D.C. v. Heller and the Second Amendment matter. The three principals were all touted as experts.

Of course.

The “experts” all – pro and con the right of the individual to keep and bear arms - averred that the U.S. Constitution “grants” certain rights. As one who until not so long go could recite verbatim from start to finish, including all twenty-seven amendments, the U.S. Constitution, and has read as much of the history of the U.S. as any man or woman alive, I would, were I ever to become a contestant in one of these Abbott and Costello affairs, point out that the Constitution does not grant rights. The Constitution recognizes and guarantees certain of the individual’s rights. In fact, it guarantees all of them, whether enumerated in the Constitution or not. It says that the very purpose of government is to protect, defend, and guarantee those rights. It has no authority – it does not claim authority – to grant or limit (infringe, in this specific instance) the god-given rights of every human being.

"Can the liberties of a nation be secure, when we have removed the conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" --Thomas Jefferson

And here, last night as again and again of late, we have a panel of jackasses discussing rights “granted” by the Constitution.

That, moreover, it happens that the right in question is the most fundamental of all rights, the one right enjoyed by every living thing – the right to defend its life – is more significant than most will have the knowledge required for recognizing it. For the human being, to be deprived of the right to defend one’s life is to be a slave. There is no rational way to dispute that point.

But this coffee-klatch of “experts” seemed totally unaware. It was as though the subject was the monopoly-money object of a child’s board game, a sterile exercise in the hyper-theoretical having nothing to do with the real world and life therein. While I have long wondered at the convolute, twisted, and spastic reasoning of persons debating the meaning of the Second Amendment, the minimalist mental meanderings enunciated in yesterday’s “debate” by, for instance, one Mr. John Payton (who represents the NAACP as amicus curiae in the case) were, for instance, utter balderdash historically: the Second Amendment was aimed at perpetuating slavery (is everything whites do or have done aimed at abuse or belittlement of blacks?).

The argument of yet another of those Harvard Law Professor types – actually, this one is a law professor at Roger Williams University - one Carl Bogus (I’m not making that up; the bogus argument this time was, indeed, a bogus argument) was among the most obtuse, abstracted, and historically detached I’ve ever heard where the subject of gun ownership and the law so related is concerned. Basically – if anything that abstracted and nebulous can be considered to have basis – Bogus argued that the framers of the Constitution intended to “grant” – that word again - the right of the states to create militias.

Bogus also says that people who dislike having to continually defend their right to keep and bear arms have never really wanted the matter decided – it would give them nothing to bitch about, but that is just more of the same irrelevant and immaterial, non sequitur argument that has become de rigueur for the left wing where matters like this are concerned. The argument, of course, seeks by a variation on the logical fallacy known as begging the question to ignore a right existing long before the U.S. Constitution, or any constitution, and to establish a U.S. Constitution and government somehow empowered to grant human rights.

“Tell a lie often enough . . .”

But Bogus’ main assertion has to do with the “question” of the Second Amendment as a guarantee of an individual or collective right. Scholars, lawyers, and the courts, he argued, have long viewed the Second Amendment as “granting” only a collective right. Well, he’s right about that. As none other than Thomas Jefferson observed, government can only be counted on when it comes to usurpation. It always grows, never diminished.

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."

But how many times have we heard that “collective right” argument? About, I would guess, as many times as we have heard government swear it will lower taxes. What we haven’t heard – it’s likewise as rare as truth, integrity, and faithfulness in Washington, D.C. - is something I’ve always wondered about; more, it’s something that has always made me doubt the sincerity of all parties to the argument in question. Another of those “nobody is this stupid” cases.

First, let’s suppose that the “well-regulated-militia”-means-no-guns, just-militia folks are right. The Founding Fathers didn’t want the people to have their own guns. Suppose you’re a state governor in the last half of the eighteenth or nineteenth century about to “provide for the common defense” (or didn’t you happen to remember, Mr. Bogus – Roger Williams Law Professor, sir – that that’s what militias were all about; I notice you didn’t once mention that particular clause of the Constitution about which you are so expert).

You call up the militia. Good for you. Except these people don’t have any guns. Worse, most assuredly, they don’t know how to use a gun, either. They’ve never been permitted to own one, much less use one.

Assuming – as I trust I am entitled by the circumstances to do – that none of the liberal-minded, anti-gun folks (people like the Roger Williams Law Professor, that is – wouldn’t want to think he’s a hypocrite, now would we?) has every owned or used a gun, let me suggest an analogy more likely to elucidate for you.

Let’s assume you want to put up a building. You’re Amish, for instance, and you want to have a barn-raising. But none of the people you call to for help has any tools. It’s against the law. And, since the folks have never been permitted to own tools, they have never used tools. The crowd you’ve conscripted doesn’t know a hammer from a saw, a brace-and-bit from a flat iron or a rolling pin.

Ever watch a guy who’s never used a hammer try to drive a ten-penny spike? Swing a ten-pound hammer to drive a post? How about a planer to trim a door for fit? How about a plumb line or a carpenter’s square or a level?

Lots of luck with your barn, and your “well-regulated” work crew.

But here we are again. Here we are wandering and groping around in the nebulous, abstract, and vacuous world of those who get their reality from a book, a law library, a television set, or a computer. One thing those who live actually in the real world can always tell immediately is that people like Payton and Bogus do not live in that world. They’re invariably like our feckless leader the other day, holding forth on how he’d really like to have gotten into combat.

I pause to let that sink in.

You think I’m kidding? Have you forgotten that this is the same patrician fop who said he understood how the little people felt? Anyway, here’s the quote: "I must say, I'm a little envious. If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed. It must be exciting for you ... in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You're really making history, and thanks."

The son-in-law who sent me that observes that one Paul Riechhoff, an Afghanistan vet who authored the book “Chasing Ghosts,” was on the television show where that quote played. I’m told – it certainly doesn’t surprise me – that you could see the soldier’s disgust when he observed, “This is just the kind of thing people say who've never served in the military."

And it’s the kind of understanding of a Constitution written by men with their “lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor” on the line a hyper-civilized and pampered, petty intellectual pantywaist like Payton or Bogus would have. People like the lawyer and the professor live in a world made entirely of words – that abstract world I mentioned. To people like these, everything verbally possible is actually possible (remind anyone of Iraq?).

Try – if you have never in your life been in a really dangerous, even lethal, fight, don’t bother - to imagine men like the framers of the Constitution living without guns – or, for that matter, tools of any kind. With hostile savages known then as Indians everywhere, and with all manner of ravening wild animals also about everywhere, imagine any of the Founding Fathers or the men of the time being willing to surrender his weapons, leaving to another his personal safety and that of his family, and choosing to wait for a posse (or “militia”) to be formed.

Discussions – faux debates – like this one are ludicrous - “frivolous” in the coinage and jargon of the lawyer and his courts. To pretend an issue where the right of the individual to defend his life and that of his woman and children is concerned should be seen for what it is – an attempt at the most base, the most contemptuous, and rapacious of all human crimes. Slavery.

For an individual who may not defend himself has been reduced to a state lower than that of an animal – and no one doubts that animals have the right to defend themselves.

The Fantasy World of the U.S. - The Presidential Election, for Instance

2008-03-04T10:58:00.001-08:00

As I've remarked here repeatedly, it absolutely flabbergasts me that the people of the United States seem unable to see through a scam as thunderously, cataclysmically obvious as the latest presidential "election" campaign.

Now we have Rush Limbaugh, the Jubilation T. Cornpone of today's political pundits, urging his two clicks to the right of Attila the Hun followers to support Hillary Clinton! Apparently, Limbaugh and his fellow blowhards of talk radio are even more intent than usual upon making the orchestration of this tawdry spectacle that of a soap opera. Ann Coulter, Nancy Grace, and the like weren't enough, we now have - I had to repair quickly to the Internet to find an example of something I find so appallingly devoid of intellectual content that I've never seen one - "As the World Turns" as a model for politics.

The power of feminism to reduce the individual to doll-play is indeed wondrous.

Meanwhile, the nation - like the soap opera IT has become - goes on deteriorating while all the child-minds play house. While the crew and passengers of the ship of fools that is the nation indulge their infantile fantasies, posturing and cavorting through their make-believe roles, those of us who live in the workaday world that keeps one pressed hard against cold, hard, reality, together with those who are actually and personally (not researched and handed them by a propagandist production staff, that is) familiar with telltale history since nineteen forty-eight endeavor with increasing urgency to find something with promise for coping with it all.

On a ship like this one, people who are wise check to see where the life rafts are.

Today I live in a country where daily I either hear on the news or receive news from a friend like that concerning the maniacal murder of a family by a gang of teenage nutcases. Across the border with Mexico a few miles away, a torrent of hardened, murderous, Mexican criminals pours, and this mornings news includes that concerning the intent of prisons in the U.S. to begin releasing domestic - even more, in other words - criminals into the general populace. That's while rabid, invective-hurling "activists" like the woman who appeared last night to call efforts to curb illegal immigration "gestapo tactics" demand open borders. Lou Dobbs and those who want the border controlled are "racists."

Because, in other words, I want the burglars I've caught in my house removed and arrested, and because they happen to be Mexicans here illegally from Mexico, I am a racist. (Okay, I'm a racist. I still want them out of my house and arrested.)

If, as Bill Cosby used to say, that's not enough to shake up your spinal cord, the current election campaign promises either to elect a quasi-psycho nutcase who will continue not only U.S. occupation of Iraq, but U.S. efforts to dominate the world and bend it to our corporate will, or a quasi-psycho nutcase of the messianic variety intent upon not only bankrupting, but disarming me.

That's in a nation where the president - and by virtue of its utter failure to exert the balance of powers prerogative provided them by the U.S. Constitution (yes, that "old document") - and congress spend nine billion dollars a month on a war returning the nation absolutely nothing, a nation whose political pundits and public alike still profess to see no connection between the war and a deepening recession. That - just incidentally - is while two presidential candidate are promising "programs" that also promise expenditures of almost $800,000,000,000 (eight hundred billion) on social programs people like my wife and I will have to fund, and another promises (in a nation where killing is "abortion," trouble or difficulty is "issues," male is "chauvinist," and fifty more the solecistic like, why don't we say "promisers" instead of "politicians" or "candidates") to go on spending that nine billion a month for a hundred years.

And the cost of filling my car's ten gallon tank this morning was thirty bucks; it'll be forty by the end of the year. The cost of the groceries I buy every morning has increased by ten percent in just a few months, too - all of it thanks to the @#$%! incompetence and fiscal policies of this @#$%&! government!

Does anybody really think I will buy a god-damned house, or invest in anything? In a coast-to-coast and border-to-border economic looney bin like this one? They must be as crazy as the megalomaniacal menagerie that runs this country.

Of course, I've been expecting all this for a long time - twenty-two years, matter of fact. Everything that so pisses the rest of the world off about the United States happened to me 'way back then. I lived, for instance, a personal version of what happened to Cuba, one eerie in its parallel similarity. From economic sanctions and efforts to end my productive life, to libelous and slanderous falsification of records, and outright attempts a murder, I knew first hand the tactics of the plotters of the corporate coup d'etat under which the U.S. languishes.

Why is it so damned, incomprehensibly, hard to see that what the corporations who rule here want in Cuba is the same thing they want in everything they do, the same thing things they want everywhere else in the world, the same things they want from each of their own citizens? Why is the ages-old scenario of the Snidely Whiplash villain and the rich widow so hard to recognize when the principals are nations (one thirty times the size of the other)?

It, like these "As the World Turns" elections, is a thing so blatantly, so thunderously, apparent that the mind boggles at the likewise apparent failure of the nation's public to realize what has happened. Reading still another of the books written by an obviously disgruntled former employee of the government, that of one Michael Scheuer, I can only recall ruefully my own bewilderment at learning the truth about my country. The twenty-two years plus agent of the CIA, also the author of a book originally written under the sobriquet "Anonymous," first warned that we were losing the so-called war on terror. Agreeing with Congressman Ron Paul, a candidate, still, for president, Scheuer was quoted some time ago as having said, "I thought Mr. Paul captured it the other night exactly correctly. This war is dangerous to America because it's based, not on gender equality, as Mr. Giuliani suggested, or any other kind of freedom, but simply because of what we do in the Islamic World – because "we're over there," basically, as Mr. Paul said in the debate."

That's putting it mildly. Everyone seems to have forgotten what everyone raged about even earlier, Professor Ward Churchill's observation that, the "chickens had come home to roost" on 9-11. The public also seems to have missed the fact that the furor was raised most eminently and Operation MOCKINGBIRD-like by none other than FoxNews, who on September 7, 2007 accused Congressman Paul of "taking marching orders from Al Qaeda," and neither does the brain-dead public remember comedian George Carlin's similar observation, or FoxNews' phony outrage at his remarks. How convenient, that.

Not even those who first plotted Operation MOCKINGBIRD could have foreseen how completely deceived and taken in the U.S. public would be.

Michael Scheuer's premise is that we are losing the "war on terror." More, he warns in his latest book that we are headed toward a war with all of Islam (funny - I said that, in print, months before the the invasion of Iraq - where was Mr. Scheuer then?). He is incontrovertibly right. I disagree with Scheuer, Paul, and the others on one point, however; more, I am totally nonplussed to explain how people otherwise as intelligent can apparently have missed what is even more obvious than the status quo where the phony "war on terror" is concerned. I mean that we are "losing the war" on terrorism because the corporate rulers of the United States want exactly that.

Come on, people! Nobody is so stupid that they conduct wars like we have conducted them since 1945. NOBODY!

What kind of jackass general attacks any enemy while leaving his own rear un-secured? What kind of moron infuriates everyone in his neighborhood by all manner of trespass, trashing, insult, theft of property, arrogation of rights, and more, then leaves all of his own doors unlocked and open? What kind of Tinker-Toy tactician avoids destroying and killing his enemy, attacking him with a force so small that it assures continued resistance; what kind of soldier or army uses weaponry in a manner obviously intended to assure survival of the enemy and in numbers sufficient to do just that? What kind of fool proceeds as we have in Iraq?

This is exactly equivalent to the fighter pilot who attacks an apparent sitting duck target without a wingman and without "checking his six o'clock" - looking to see what's behind him.

You have to believe the people in control in our nation are that stupid, or you have to believe they have an ulterior motive. Now what might that be? Well, while you're "checking your six," I suggest you "check your Cuba," too. Check the methods by which we collect taxes and Internal Revenue Service. Check the history of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast since Hurricanes Katrina and Rita (the latest there is the story of the mobile homes - the poisonous mobile homes - provided by FEMA to survivors). See if you can imagine the people of Iraq being treated like that - publicly and without media cover-up, I mean (it would definitely not be okay for the world to know, should we begin treating the people of Iraq like we treat our own citizens).

You could also - as you could have when it happened all these years ago - check the history of how the "Nation of Laws" dealt with U.S. citizen Hal von Luebbert.

But, of course, you didn't. You like your news in soap opera, action adventure form. You like your truth in Hollywood, made-for-television, "special effects," form. If a Tomb Raider, G.I. Jane movie heroine can knock the snot out of candidates for World's Strongest Man, pro-football interior lineman types, and the Neanderthal Man like, why shouldn't they do the same in military-style combat? Why shouldn't Hillary be president (who cares if, when that phone rings at three in the morning, she has a good cry before she does anything?).

But if you really think you can stand a straight dose of the truth concerning how we've come to be in a situation as surreal, and as asinine at how we come to be in Iraq, check, for instance, the commentary by readers appended to martial arts movies on YouTube. Consider that ninety-five percent of the expert wannabe warriors there have never been in a real fight - organized, street, military, or otherwise - in their lives.

Amusing, huh? Next, consider what these authorities say, and what they would appear to be. Compare them with the Rush Limbaughs, the Bill O'Reilly', the Sean Hannitys, and the honor roll at the bottom of the page here, too. Note the bravado, the frequency of the insult equivalent to the middle finger salute from a passing car. While you're smiling, or laughing, stop to realize that these are at least to some degree representative of their gender, their society, and their nation. Now, for good measure, go back and review the history of our invasion of Iraq - see if you can still wonder how we came to be there, and why - having discovered that the wingman of the guy we flew obliviously up behind with intent to blow him out of the sky is perched right behind us at with his thumb poised over the firing button - that we're still there.

Next - oh, no; we are definitely not finished - consider how we have come to be ruled by women and by feminist "issues." How have we let our schools be taken over by the students (you really see no connection? - well, now there's another explanation for how that guy came to be perched on our "six" with his thumb poised over the firing button)? How did we come to accept anything as utterly, stupidly, schizoid - divorced from reality - as the Tomb Raider chick, G.I. Jane, and women in combat?

Maybe the same way we came to accept "Hillary for president?"

Finally (not really, but this is getting longer than I intended), how did we come to be so damned stupid, so gullibly so, as to believe this is a real election? Who, for instance, would have believed two - even three - years ago that the Republican Party could survive George W. Bush and his pratfalling blowhard warrior wannabe president (if you didn't find George's type there on YouTube, you're either one of the kind or you didn't bother to read the commentary). Well, see what you think now. Rush Limbaugh would otherwise - were this all real, that is - have a point. When the Democrat Party has made a total caricature, bad-guy-in-a-pro wrestling match ass of itself, the industrial military complex corporations and their Operation MOCKINGBIRD media will have accomplished another "impossible."

They will both have their man in the White House and the nation believing "the system works" - it was a real election. All the morons who are now clamoring and lining up to vote will go home to face soaring prices ("a hundred years" at nine billion a month - and if you think it will remain there for a hundred years, you really are "out of it"), a war with Islam - with, mind you, open borders (wouldn't want to be called "racist" now, would we?), and the growing probability of being murdered by the kids in the neighborhood on a lark (or, of course, your own kid being beaten to death or raped by his fellow savages). That's if the hundreds of rapists, murderers, white slavers, kidnappers, drug lords' servants, MS-13 marauders, and Typhoid Marys pouring over the border with Mexico don't get you first.

Aren't you tickled to know that we've become so enlightened that a woman can run for president? Good for you – you’re not a sexist (hand me the map, Rita – I think when the shit hits the fan, if we can get to the mountains, we’ll be able to get to Canada and British Columbia . . .).

The Fantasy World of the U.S. - Elections, for Instance.

2008-03-04T10:53:00.001-08:00

Dumber and Dumber - Campaign 2008

2008-02-27T11:20:00.000-08:00

Meeting persons I haven’t seen in a long while, I am often – almost invariably, in fact – reminded during the first few minutes of conversation of something I said or argued many years ago. My friends say they’ve more recently become ruefully aware that events now vindicate what I said. The continued existence and (devastating) effects of Operation MOCKINGBIRD is but one example.

I suppose that I should feel good about that. I suppose I do – sort of. You see, I can’t help wondering why my friends weren’t convinced then. I’m no prophet. All my predictions were based on sound logic having to do with history – an intensive study of human behavior - and events of the time. Anyone who expected the corporations who as the result of World War Two became rich beyond even the limits of imagination to simply find a product other than armaments and their accoutrements obviously was making it clear that he knew nothing of history. That's just for instance.

Hence, I suppose Santayana’s comment concerning such people. We are, indeed, condemned by our ignorance of history.

The list of subjects over which I am winning arguments begun as many as fifty years ago, is a long one, but – for the purposes of this example (I’m just too old to really give a damn about vindication or the like) – here are a few:

While still in high school, I had done mathematics and trials necessary to know that the one hundred, thirty grain rifle bullet in two seventy caliber was the best choice – performing best in all situations – for a military rifle, especially for snipers. Nevertheless, the fact that the calculus maximum of all the relevant data leaves no doubt had no effect on those arguing, for instance, for calibers like 30-06. After years of argument, the military of the United States has finally, fifty years later, decided the same thing. The Army’s new rifles will be in six point eight caliber - .270.

In 1956, when I wrote the first paper arguing that the U.S. should organize and develop Special Operations teams like today’s Delta, SEAL-6, and others, it proved damaging to my military carrier. When I reprised the idea in 1967 in a paper entitled “Hostage Situations – Special Weapons and Tactics, the college professor’s assistant who graded the paper wrote “lunacy” across the bottom. With SWAT and special operations teams now having been and continuing to be organized everywhere on the planet, my name somehow remains conspicuously absent in all the discussion. Gee, what a surprise!

In that first SWAT paper, I said that given a fifty caliber rifle, I could kill a hostage-taker at two thousand yards, and recommended that the U.S. Army develop a sniper rifle in that caliber. That drew hoots of derision, too. During the birthing years – literally, decades – of the Barrett Fifty and others the like . . . well, you know. It’s that kind of country.

When, in 1953, I told farmers back home that to do any kind of business with the government – the “soil bank” and government purchase and storage of crops was the issue, then - was to shoot oneself in the foot, I drew the same derision as I would get a few years later concerning rifle calibers, SWAT, and the like. When government had begun the wholesale bankrupting and handover to large corporations of most of the nation’s family farms (and if you can’t figure out why that should have been planned and brought to fruition, you really haven’t any idea of history), friends I spoke to then now remark that I was right.

Just as anyone who doesn’t realize that the cheap prices the U.S. has enjoyed since World War Two despite staggering taxation for the purpose of arms spending were paid for by farmers and ranchers, anyone who doesn’t understand that Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal and national recovery from the Great Depression was built on the backs of farmers and ranchers just hasn’t been paying attention; which is to say "has succumbed to Operation MOCKINGBIRD propaganda," that is.

Several of those I advised to avoid government as a business associate and refrain from ruinous borrowing, however (those who concomitantly refused lures to purchase massively expensive equipment and methods, for instance) would at the eventual time of eighteen percent interest rates credit me with saving their farms.

It goes on and on, and there are many, many people who will tell you that what I say here is true.

Which brings me to my subject for today, the sinking feeling I get each time I watch and listen to the current presidential campaign and news of it. My god – this is the best we can do? Now the Democrat Party candidates are bickering about choice of clothing! A few weeks ago, one got teary-eyed in an effort to get sympathy (I guess we’ve forgotten the old male wisecrack that crying by a woman during an argument is blackmail, huh?).

On the other side politically, the Republican Party’s leading candidate (how these people – I mean both parties – have the damned nerve to use those titles in this day and age is also beyond imagination) has the colossal daring to say that he doesn’t care if we’re in Iraq for a hundred years. With nearly eighty percent of the U.S. public vehemently opposed to the occupation and war in Iraq, what does that tell you? What does the fact that while an overwhelming portion of the public wants illegal immigration stopped, and the illegal immigrants forced to go home, John McCain has suddenly become sanctimonious – “they’re children of god” (John, the scores of thousands in iraq we’re maiming, killing, irradiating with depleted uranium, and a dozen witch’s brew things more, aren’t children of god, too?).

What does John McCain know that we don’t?

Just like John McCain and all the rest of his fellow “candidates” know perfectly well – and knew at the time and prior – that satellites over Iraq in the years before the invasion told the president there were no weapons of mass destruction there (a fact obviously known to Saddam Hussein and just as obviously the reason the Iraqi dictator acted as he did in the years prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom). John McCain and the rest of these actors in the current presidential charade know damned well why “news” like that is thunderously conspicuous by its absence from the supposedly all-knowing media.

They know, too, why it’s never once been mentioned in the halls of the U.S. Congress. And they know why it’s never mentioned in these “debates.” John McCain and his partners in crime, the U.S. Congress, know that a class of eighth-graders could successfully impeach George W. Bush.

John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, and all of these miserable frauds know why Internal Revenue Service with its appalling record remains in existence and above the law.

Of course, I could go on and on. I pay attention to history (that’s while you - assuming you're a typical member of the public - are watching sappy soap operas or the male minimalist equivalent, reading tabloid magazines, doting on boyish nonsense like the fraud of today’s professional sports or sucking up pornography with your computer, and fifty things more the like, that is).

But what John McCain and the rest know is that this election is a fraud, a made-for-television parody of politics. They know this is the equivalent of a pro wrestling championship, with the script written long in advance by agreement of the parties. They know that no matter which of them “wins” the championship belt, it will have utterly nothing to do with control of the nation, or anything they are promising.

That anyone who has lived in this country for the past fifty years can have any doubt about that is stupefying. Only the just-about-impossible-to-believe stupidity of the U.S. public can explain the fact that a charade like the election we’re seeing is being taken seriously. One might observe things like the fact that in a 2006 poll nearly half of persons eighteen to twenty-four years old don't think it is necessary or important to know where countries in the news are located. With the country more than four years at war – killing and being killed in the scores of thousands – only twenty three percent of people with college learning locate Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Israel on a map.

And, of course, that’s the tip of the iceberg. People I interviewed only a few years ago identified Pearl Harbor as a shampoo, for instance. More recently, at the time of the World Trade Center attack, when a television “anchor” (nice term, come to think of it, for people who are about as bright as the typical boat mooring) compared the terrorist strike with Pearl Harbor, folks having coffee at my hang-out of the time obviously had the Japanese attack confused with the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Anyway, a woman said, she knew it happened in Vietnam.

Remember the woman I mentioned recently, the one who thought Europe was a country, and had never heard of Hungary?

John McCain, Hillary, and the rest of these charlatans know the people of the U.S. are stupid enough to believe anything. They know that the people of the U.S. are interested only in their own, personal and solipsistic security and happiness. To hell with anything that doesn’t contribute directly – and immediately – to me and my ego. “Where ignorance is bliss,” wrote English poet Thomas Gray, “’tis folly to be wise.”

This, incontrovertibly, is a nation of people who - on account of effeminate humanism and the Operation MOCKINGBIRD plotters who spawned, reared, and exalted the neurosis feminism and its like - believe that "too much learning can be a dangerous thing" and "there is no such things as evidence or fact, just opinion” (sound familiar?). Science has become subordinated to popular opinion, with the result, for one instance of such among many, that few people see any reason that creationism shouldn’t be taught in our schools along with evolution.

A public too stupid to calculate a fifteen percent tip on the check at the restaurant or identify the outline the outline of their own country on a map insist upon trusting their opinion concerning science and physics like the origins of the universe.

Somehow, the “spin-doctors” of the MOCKINGBIRD media and educational system inveigled the public into preferring opinion and ideology to science, and turned into college-level learning minimalist nonsense and trivia things like "Women’s Studies," “Ebonics,” rock music, "pop culture," and more. Nothing was too ridiculous to be included in college-level learning. People graduated from college without having learned to read and write.

Not only have the people of the United States become abjectly, pitifully, ignorant of essential scientific, cultural, and legal matters, they don’t even realize that such things matter.

No matter which of life and existence’s vicissitudes befalls us, citizens of the U.S. believe, the nebulous “they” will do something.

McCain, Hillary, and the candidates - and those who actually rule in the U.S., too – know that our obsession with happiness has been carefully fed and nurtured for exactly that purpose. Operation MOCKINGBIRD, (together with the federally co-opted education system) spawned in the fifties, then reared in the sixties, ideologies like militant feminism and its humanistic sociological siblings. The obsession with hedonistic self-interest and the tenets of secular capitalism were easily wed, and their miscreant issue was an historically sudden extinction of the creative impulse, the “know-how” that once distinguished among all the peoples of the world the people of the United States.

The people once famed for their individual independence of thought, their mental toughness, and resourcefulness became in a few generations a nation of herd animals, whose idea of taking care of oneself has become knowing how to find help in the yellow pages.

That, of course, paralleled the degradation of the male, J.S. Mill’s “dwarfing of … men, in order that they may be more docile instruments in its hands….” But don’t let’s get me started on that issue. Suffice it to say that it was incontrovertibly part of the “dumbing down” of the nation that has brought us to the sorry state of affairs we see being paraded with breath-taking chutzpah and temerity today.

The Academy Awards given last night to Hollywood’s actors should have been awarded to the political candidates in this tawdry presidential campaign.

THIS IS IMPORTANT, people (god a-mighty - it occurs to me that I'm talking to people who consider news of Brittney Spears "important" )! This is not the Academy (of Motion Picture Arts) Awards. This is not about who is “most popular.” It’s not about who can shake her ass fastest while she shrieks lyrics to some who-will-remember-in-a-week “song.” It’s not about some child-man who scores a touchdown or a basket, then postures like a conquering hero of history as though he has done something earth-shaking. It’s not about some misfit moron reciting dip-shit doggerel rhythmically into a microphone. It’s not about any of scores more of “celebrities,” jocose jackasses – the clowns become presidential candidates included – who by virtue of some piddling skill happen to have been in the right place at the right time and were made famous.

The fact that the bell curve juxtaposed with today’s information technology multiplies by millions the individual's ability to prevail upon one of his fellows to listen or watch his performance means likewise the ability to repeat the five or ten dollar value of his performance millions of times does not change the five or ten dollar value of one’s ability or person.

This is about things as life-or-death important as global warming, environmental crises, or nuclear war.

I pause, to overcome the sickening realization that the majority of people who would otherwise control the most powerful military in human history – a military capable of destroying the planet scores of times – are more interested in knowing who it was who won the Academy Award. It’s worse than that: the people who would otherwise control a nation capable of producing and operating dozens of nuclear aircraft carriers, scores of nuclear submarines, and thousands of nuclear ICBMs – who can destroy civilization in a few hours – are as nonplussingly stupid as we have seen demonstrated of late.

They are so god-damned (and I use the term advisedly) stupid that they believe this is an election, an election to choose who will hold the highest office in the land, and the individual who will might decide to end civilization.

How stupid can you get? Check with Operation MOCKINGBIRD – they, after all, wrote the book.

SHOCKER!!!!!! Politics in the Effeminized U.S.A.

2008-02-24T15:07:00.000-08:00

Yesterday morning, I bet wife Rita that the tabloid headlines this week will say, McCAIN SHOCKER!”

John McCain, you see, is said to have had an affair with a lobbyist. Female that is. Too bad for the media, actually – an affair with a male lobbyist would have been oh, so much more “sexy.” Excuse, please, while I barf.

Before the rise of feminism, let us not forget (and we have – it’s the politically correct thing to do) tabloid garbage like that would never have become news. A few weeks ago, it happens, I harkened back hear to a New York Times column by Maureen Dowd entitled "Liberties; Cuddle Us, or Else!" In her essay, Dowd observed that women have taken over control of the two great male preserves here in the land of the free become the land of the fee, and – I quote the lady - "ruined them."

They’ve also taken over the language, and left it in state not unlike the mind and emotions of a woman suffering PMS. How else would you explain an MSN item today that purports to help women “get over (their) body issues.” I suppose, what with Katie Couric not long ago having advised her nationwide audience that she was “having issues in bed,” that’s good advise. On the other hand - like the time I watched a female friend in a fit of PMS triggered by something I seem to have said drive her new car through a fence and into a deep ravine - I’m just not sure.

I should think stoppage of “body issues” would not be good.

Like Dowd’s description of the Sydney Olympic Games, politics are being “redecorated . . . with silk and velvet and pink light bulbs. We have draped our leading warrior rituals in yards and yards of chintz. We have made them so mawkish, so hideously fluffy, so sentimental, kissy and fraught with personal travail, that these gladiatorial contests play more like those old Bette Davis/Joan Crawford weepies.

"This used to be guy season,” Dowd observed then concerning the Olympics. “Aggressive, muscular warfare focused on winning and losing, stats, handicapping, training, strategy and impenetrable debates on the modernization of the land-based leg of the nuclear triad. Now it's girl season, soaking in sentiment, soap opera, romantic walks along the lake, long, deep kisses on stage and guys making Cher-like hair and wardrobe changes. The pols and TV execs have decided that what women want is to be cuddled."

That concerned the Olympics, as I said. It now includes the campaign for the highest office in our” nation. A candidate “tears up” and wins a state primary. God – “she” – forbid that anyone should say anything rational, much less definitive or concrete, concerning matters like national health care and the like. With the candidate in question now having lost something like ten primaries in a row, only god can know what’s next. Pickles and ice cream? Let’s just make sure Hillary isn’t behind the wheel of a car, huh?

Now, what follows here is for guys older than fifty (the age of feminism was the silly sixties, if you recall). Males reared after that – the time of the “one parent family” that all the ladies knew “needed a man like a fish needs a bicycle” – wouldn’t understand. Boys reared by women, we’ve now “discovered” with all those wondrous psycho-babbling studies women so dote upon, tend to think and emote like women. Hence, I suppose anyone remotely rational might infer, the rise of the “metrosexual” male.

It’s girl season, all right. And the car that is the United States of America has been driven through the fence into a deep ravine.

Worse, there are no men left to haul it out and mend the fence. “Where have all the leaders gone?” Lee Iacocca’s recent book title asked. Well, Lee, they went to a day-school nursery, because mom – that’s “single parent family” mom – left them there. She left them there determined that they needed the association of mature males “like a fish needs a bicycle.” And, now – if I may continue to the dizzying heights of metaphoric altitude – the “chickens have come home to roost.”

No roosters, of course.

I have also quoted John Stuart Mill here often. I choose to do so again – a reminder, if you will. “A State which dwarfs its men,” the man once called the most intelligent alive said, “in order that they may be more docile instruments in its hands even for beneficial purposes -- will find that with small men no great thing can really be accomplished; and that the perfection of machinery to which it has sacrificed everything, will in the end avail it nothing, for want of the vital power which, in order that the machine might work more smoothly, it has preferred to banish.”

Mr. Mill, we are being so taught – umbriaggo!

And nowhere, never, do we hear even the slightest indication that feminism regrets its ingratitude for having been given by male muscle, male intellect, and male courage a world whose civilization, industrialization, science, and technology made women’s ascendancy possible in the first place. We hear not the slightest indication that feminism has had second thoughts about their heist of male authority and prerogatives; nor do we hear any hint of willingness to accept responsibility for the hideous mess they have made with that stolen authority and those arrogated prerogatives.

We hear no mea culpas, either, now that all the proverbial chickens hatched by feminists during the sixties have come home to roost. I refer to the execrable state of our youth – particularly boys, to a spastic educational system largely taken over by its pupils, to a society so castrated and permissive that it cannot control even its youth – to say nothing of its borders, or much of anything else - and to social malady after malady directly attributable to national dearth of cojones.

While a Congress and government degraded by females, metrosexuals - yes, even homosexuals - dithers and discusses endlessly and un-decisively, doing absolutely nothing actual, a torrent of criminals and crime pours over the border with Mexico, a tidal wave of cultural and national influence for a nation that is among the most vicious, rapacious, murderous, crime-ridden and corrupt on the planet (but you dare not say things like that because its “mean-spirited,” unkind, and – yes, of course – in the effeminate society, “politically incorrect”).

Buffaloed by the a swaggering, posturing, bullying loudmouth president, the House of Representatives effectively de-horned and castrated by the effeminizing presence of seventy-three women and led by a woman talks, talks, talks – and talks some more. In the U.S. Senate, the situation is much the same (sixteen women) – absent, of course, a Nancy Pelosi.

Anybody who doesn’t see the similarity between the fecklessness of the Congress where a president strutting like a rooster about to mount a hen is concerned and that of school systems incapable of dealing with bullying and disruptive students isn’t paying attention. A kid who disrupts, even wrecks the classroom, and terrorizes the teacher – even assaults him or her - gets for retribution a trip to the principal’s office and a lecture. Time after time.

The national record for children mothered while in high school has risen to three, and the record for children fathered by high school students, of course, no one knows. How’s that for Draconian?

All of that, course, has to do with students; teachers – where sexism takes on pre-menstrual rationality and character so bizarre no male not reared and educated by females alone has any hope whatever of comprehension - screwing students are in an entirely new realm of the politically correct.

In the nation’s judiciary, where the similarity between female behavior during natural hormone adjustments and that nation’s courts since the rise of feminism is impossible to miss, the situation is even worse. By the 1970’s, amid the tidal wave of cultural weirdness begun in the 1960s, the nation went cockamamie, nuts.

Of course, you had to have been there to fully appreciate the shear bubble-headed vapidity of it all.

Parenthetically, I cite for instance things like a young woman who availing herself of feminist-arrogated statutes that forbade defense questioning concerning such things as the accuser’s past sexual practices and mores, sent four young men to prison for forty years, then told me (two years later during an interview), “maybe they didn’t know it was rape – that’s up to the woman, isn’t it?”

You might also to have been male, male and raised by parents both female and male. Trusting that no one fails to recognize the chaotic state in which our nation is currently found jurisprudentially (not long ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that innocence was not necessarily a bar to execution), I submit the following for consideration – thought, even (no, not discussion; thought – the two things are not the same):

Today, women comprise something like twenty-six percent of the judges on state courts of last resort, nineteen percent federal district court, Twenty percent of federal appellate judges, and eleven percent of the U.S. Supreme Court. The American Bar Association says there has been a fifteen percent increase in the percentage of women attending law school, besides. A part of these will become judges. Even as lawyers, they will affect the cockamamie state of our judiciary.

The result? Well, of late we discover that we have been putting innocent men in the slammer – death row, even – for rape at one hell of a rate. As I write this, more than a hundred twenty guys have been released from prison – after having served as many as twenty-seven years – for rape the woman and feminists put there, but science and DNA said the victims – the real ones, not the accuser and other females desirous of “closure” - didn’t do.

Want to do some numbers (yeah, I know girls don’t do well with rational, “guy stuff,” like that, but what the hell)? Consider this: There are about ninety-two thousand, five hundred rapes reported each year. If we use the percentage of cases where DNA was decisive, there are at least twenty-three thousand women who have lied to put men in jail (FBI stats say that at least twenty-five percent - and as many as FORTY percent - of men convicted of rape aren't guilty).

Ah, well – what the hell?! If you can kill ten, even twenty babies without fear of the law, what’s a few innocent men sacrificed to the great feminist god Emotion by being locked in the slammer? A girl needs “closure,” you know . . .

Now, you may not “catch the drift” of things like this, but does anybody remember a chick named Marilyn French's, "All men are rapists, and that is all they are"? You don’t see the connection?

Really?

The legal system, folks, affects our lives even more than does the rest of government, and a legal system FUBAR has sociological implications elsewhere, you know.

Think about this (that’s even in the effeminized state in which – if you were born after the fifties – you are surely found): For centuries before women entered the practice of law, the United States had murder and incarceration rates lower than Canada, Denmark, France, and Portugal, and equivalent to Australia and Germany.

Paying attention? Good! Since women began entering the practice of law en masse in the 1960s in the US:

• Incarceration and illegitimacy rates have quintupled.
• Murder, male suicide, and divorce rates have doubled.
• Twenty thousand unconstitutional gun control laws have been implemented (and with what effect?).
• Every fundamental principle of the US Constitution, except quartering troops in our houses, has been violated.
• In the industrialized world, the US now has the distinction of having the highest incarceration rate, at the same time that it has one of the highest rates of violent crime, at the same time that it resolves a far fewer percent of crime.

Here’s another cute little bit of math: For each one percent increase in the percent of female judges there are sixty-one thousand additional men in prison; three hundred, ninety more murders each year, and two hundred seventy more unresolved murders each year.

That’s at the same time, on account of educational system and teacher’s politically mandated inability to establish discipline, our schools have become the chaotic menagerie they are. What a co-incidence!

And – ready? – there are one hundred thousand more female criminals who go unpunished each year (anybody still wondering why Crystal Mangum, who falsely – that’s criminally, people – accused the Duke University Lacrosse players of rape, hasn’t been prosecuted?)!

Of course, math – statistics and the like – give most effeminate “Americans” a headache, but if we are to believe feminists and the nation they now hold hostage by means of their relatively new political power – “political correctness,” again - akin to all these phony rape charges, men in the U.S. commit rape roughly seventeen hundred times more often than men in countries like Germany, Sweden, Norway, England, Spain, India, Japan, Italian, or France.

Do you REALLY think that's likely? The feminist does, and she says so

Then, where the effect of feminism more generally is concerned, there were things like passage of the infamous and infantile Title IX (that’s the nutcase nostrum that forbade “sex discrimination” in schools receiving federal aid. Worse in the way of PMS rationality was Roe v. Wade, wherein women not only received a power not even nations have without legal and judicial control – that of life or death – they realized their unique power to bend the law to their collective or individual will.

Kind of like the way a woman yelling “rape” can bring everything, not matter what, to a screeching halt, huh?

Of course, men had to consent to it all (take away all the “feminist issues” law, “political correctness,” and the civilization built mostly by white males, and mother nature would slam the feminist back into her natural place so fast it would make your head swim). Need I quote John Stuart Mill again? I’m reminded of a controversy that erupted a little while ago on an Internet Website, concerning the acceptability of men who cry(!!!) I don’t cry, I said, and I questioned whether anyone would want to face crisis on a ship or airliner full of crying men. We live now in a nation of men who fail at almost every conceivable challenge and task. In Vietnam (and several other places you haven’t been told about), our men, armed with every kind of gee-whiz, Buck Rogers, high tech, blow-it-all-to-hell-and-leave weapon known to man, could not defeat little men two-thirds their size and strength armed with B-40 rocket launchers and small arms like SKSes and AK-47s.

Notice, by the way, what while I didn’t utter there even a single syllable that wasn’t truth – and that I only dare do so because there is literally no way for anyone to deliver Don Imus-style, political correct retribution upon me (an example, incidentally, of what it really means to be free) – it is hugely the wrong thing to say today. Tell me that isn’t an example of a society gone effeminate.

And, oh, yeah, I know our troops didn’t lose even a single battle; but on account of “leadership” already gone to pantyhose character and principles, we didn’t win (hell, just like today, we didn’t even know what the hell “win” meant – what’s more female than that?). Unless you’re a woman or effeminate – the “metrosexual” male, again – “not winning” means you LOSE!

Now, in Iraq, we have another Vietnam, and for all the same idiotic reasons – none more salient than the thunderously obvious fact that a U.S. Congress riddled with pantyhose and pantywaist politicians can’t summon up the cojones and male decisiveness to be kill and destroy the opposition or leave. That we haven’t the resolution or moral fiber necessary to succeed is mirrored in the fact of an army similarly limited by female “soldiers” in its ranks.

When you don’t want to win bad enough to put your first team on the field, you shouldn’t be surprised when you can’t move the ball, and that has to do both with Vietnam, Iraq, and elsewhere of late, it has to do with the fact that deciding to stay or leave is essentially an old ladies’ knitting circle argument between a pussy-whipped U.S. Congress, and a limp-wrested pantywaist momma’s boy wimp president.

We can’t succeed or leave in Iraq because it isn’t politically correct to do so – we have to wait until we can be sure everyone has gotten his or her way, no one has been offended, and no one has been defeated - “women’s issues,” in other words.

Somebody ask Katie Couric if issues in Congress is anything like those "issues in bed” of hers, will you?

Seventy-one now, I have watched in abject astonishment and frustration as it all happened. For some reason it seems only upbringing by women can explain, men began to accept the kind of male criminality imagined by women (“All men are rapists, and that is all they are," remember?), a rap sheet of supposed outrages against women as long as his arm, most or all of it in the character of the rape charges that have put hundreds of innocent men in jail or to death. For reasons that will leave historians shaking their heads in wonder, the male “American” started accepting the emotion-drive, hormonally-warped ravings of the female.

When one hormonal female pontificated from the new sedia gestatoria of feminist prerogative, “Women have been largely man-made,” he sucked up the otherwise nugatory nonsense as though it ranked with the wisdom of Plato, Aristotle, Newton, Einstein, and hundreds more the dispassionately male like.

He forgot eternal truths, the acquisition and promulgation of which had been paid for almost entirely with strife and blood. The strife and blood of men. Males. For the approval of his female, men forgot legal doctrines like “testis unus, testis nullus” – one witness, no witness. They forgot the U.S. Constitution, and what it stands for – most singularly and defiantly where all of human history is concerned, the dignity and value of every human life. To appease and gain the approval of woman, came even to consent for torture and murder, not just of children, but – why do you find one so easily divorced from the other? – of anyone.

Handed the Biblical apple by Eve, he ate it.

“Abortion” and “waterboarding” come from the same roots, you know. For a Nazi, the death of a Jew was acceptable because the words surrogate in language for the people made it so. The male needed only a Fuehrer (in German, the feminine would be “Fuehrerin”), or a judge to tell him so (anybody ever read U.S. Supreme Court Justice Taney’s reasoning in the Dred Scoot case (I’ve included it below). To change the victim from a man like the Nazi German, or from a person to a “fetus” (a matter of age, after all), required only another expression, or word. The victim’s death was “die Endlosung” – the final solution. It could just as well have been “die Abtreibung” – the abortion.

In the erstwhile world of male reality, unlike that of the female, words only serve – they do not rule. Reverence – valuation – for life is like pregnancy. You either do or you don’t, you are or you aren’t.

The “one parent family,” “metrosexual” male forgot a lot of things. Emulating his parent mentor in the “one parent family” society, he took on the character of his female teachers. He became, in other words, mentally and spiritually soft, indecisive and effeminate. Right and wrong melded, into “relative.” He, and the matter of fact, no nonsense, nation his forefathers had built somehow decided to compromise it all, to “celebrate diversity.” Everybody was “okay.” No one should be permitted to fail – or even be challenged. As women took over the age-old preserves and prerogatives of the male, the nation once dependent upon him for its character went with him and morphed into something resembling Maureen Dowd’s “old Bette Davis-Joan Crawford weepies.”

“When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it …. And the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from he had been taken.”

An old story; but in the words of Santayana, “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” And that quote, which you should consider carefully, is here:

"It is difficult at this day to realize the state of public opinion in regard to that unfortunate race which prevailed in the civilized and enlightened portions of the world at the time of the Declaration of Independence, and when the Constitution of the United States was framed and adopted; but the public history of every European nation displays it in a manner too plain to be mistaken. They had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far unfit that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect."

On May 12, 1879, in the case styled United States ex rel. Standing Bear v. Crook, Judge Elmer S. Dundy ruled that "an Indian is a person" within the meaning of the habeas corpus act.

SHOCKER!!!!!! Politics in the Effeminized U.S.A.

2008-02-24T14:25:00.000-08:00

Yesterday morning, I bet wife Rita that the tabloid headlines this week will say, McCAIN SHOCKER!”

John McCain, you see, is said to have had an affair with a lobbyist. Female that is. Too bad for the media, actually – an affair with a male lobbyist would have been oh, so much more “sexy.” Excuse, please, while I barf.

Before the rise of feminism, let us not forget (and we have – it’s the politically correct thing to do) tabloid garbage like that would never have become news. A few weeks ago, it happens, I harkened back hear to a New York Times column by Maureen Dowd entitled "Liberties; Cuddle Us, or Else!" In her essay, Dowd observed that women have taken over control of the two great male preserves here in the land of the free become the land of the fee, and – I quote the lady - "ruined them."

They’ve also taken over the language, and left it in state not unlike the mind and emotions of a woman suffering PMS. How else would you explain an MSN item today that purports to help women “get over (their) body issues.” I suppose, what with Katie Couric not long ago having advised her nationwide audience that she was “having issues in bed,” that’s good advise. On the other hand - like the time I watched a female friend in a fit of PMS triggered by something I seem to have said drive her new car through a fence and into a deep ravine - I’m just not sure.

I should think stoppage of “body issues” would not be good.

Like Dowd’s description of the Sydney Olympic Games, politics are being “redecorated . . . with silk and velvet and pink light bulbs. We have draped our leading warrior rituals in yards and yards of chintz. We have made them so mawkish, so hideously fluffy, so sentimental, kissy and fraught with personal travail, that these gladiatorial contests play more like those old Bette Davis/Joan Crawford weepies.

"This used to be guy season,” Dowd observed then concerning the Olympics. “Aggressive, muscular warfare focused on winning and losing, stats, handicapping, training, strategy and impenetrable debates on the modernization of the land-based leg of the nuclear triad. Now it's girl season, soaking in sentiment, soap opera, romantic walks along the lake, long, deep kisses on stage and guys making Cher-like hair and wardrobe changes. The pols and TV execs have decided that what women want is to be cuddled."

That concerned the Olympics, as I said. It now includes the campaign for the highest office in our” nation. A candidate “tears up” and wins a state primary. God – “she” – forbid that anyone should say anything rational, much less definitive or concrete, concerning matters like national health care and the like. With the candidate in question now having lost something like ten primaries in a row, only god can know what’s next. Pickles and ice cream? Let’s just make sure Hillary isn’t behind the wheel of a car, huh?

Now, what follows here is for guys older than fifty (the age of feminism was the silly sixties, if you recall). Males reared after that – the time of the “one parent family” that all the ladies knew “needed a man like a fish needs a bicycle” – wouldn’t understand. Boys reared by women, we’ve now “discovered” with all those wondrous psycho-babbling studies women so dote upon, tend to think and emote like women. Hence, I suppose anyone remotely rational might infer, the rise of the “metrosexual” male.

It’s girl season, all right. And the car that is the United States of America has been driven through the fence into a deep ravine.

Worse, there are no men left to haul it out and mend the fence. “Where have all the leaders gone?” Lee Iacocca’s recent book title asked. Well, Lee, they went to a day-school nursery, because mom – that’s “single parent family” mom – left them there. She left them there determined that they needed the association of mature males “like a fish needs a bicycle.” And, now – if I may continue to the dizzying heights of metaphoric altitude – the “chickens have come home to roost.”

No roosters, of course.

I have also quoted John Stuart Mill here often. I choose to do so again – a reminder, if you will. “A State which dwarfs its men,” the man once called the most intelligent alive said, “in order that they may be more docile instruments in its hands even for beneficial purposes -- will find that with small men no great thing can really be accomplished; and that the perfection of machinery to which it has sacrificed everything, will in the end avail it nothing, for want of the vital power which, in order that the machine might work more smoothly, it has preferred to banish.”

Mr. Mill, we are being so taught – umbriaggo!

And nowhere, never, do we hear even the slightest indication that feminism regrets its ingratitude for having been given by male muscle, male intellect, and male courage a world whose civilization, industrialization, science, and technology made women’s ascendancy possible in the first place. We hear not the slightest indication that feminism has had second thoughts about their heist of male authority and prerogatives; nor do we hear any hint of willingness to accept responsibility for the hideous mess they have made with that stolen authority and those arrogated prerogatives.

We hear no mea culpas, either, now that all the proverbial chickens hatched by feminists during the sixties have come home to roost. I refer to the execrable state of our youth – particularly boys, to a spastic educational system largely taken over by its pupils, to a society so castrated and permissive that it cannot control even its youth – to say nothing of its borders, or much of anything else - and to social malady after malady directly attributable to national dearth of cojones.

While a Congress and government degraded by females, metrosexuals - yes, even homosexuals - dithers and discusses endlessly and un-decisively, doing absolutely nothing actual, a torrent of criminals and crime pours over the border with Mexico, a tidal wave of cultural and national influence for a nation that is among the most vicious, rapacious, murderous, crime-ridden and corrupt on the planet (but you dare not say things like that because its “mean-spirited,” unkind, and – yes, of course – in the effeminate society, “politically incorrect”).

Buffaloed by the a swaggering, posturing, bullying loudmouth president, the House of Representatives effectively de-horned and castrated by the effeminizing presence of seventy-three women and led by a woman talks, talks, talks – and talks some more. In the U.S. Senate, the situation is much the same (sixteen women) – absent, of course, a Nancy Pelosi.

Anybody who doesn’t see the similarity between the fecklessness of the Congress where a president strutting like a rooster about to mount a hen is concerned and that of school systems incapable of dealing with bullying and disruptive students isn’t paying attention. A kid who disrupts, even wrecks the classroom, and terrorizes the teacher – even assaults him or her - gets for retribution a trip to the principal’s office and a lecture. Time after time.

The national record for children mothered while in high school has risen to three, and the record for children fathered by high school students, of course, no one knows. How’s that for Draconian?

All of that, course, has to do with students; teachers – where sexism takes on pre-menstrual rationality and character so bizarre no male not reared and educated by females alone has any hope whatever of comprehension - screwing students are in an entirely new realm of the politically correct.

In the nation’s judiciary, where the similarity between female behavior during natural hormone adjustments and that nation’s courts since the rise of feminism is impossible to miss, the situation is even worse. By the 1970’s, amid the tidal wave of cultural weirdness begun in the 1960s, the nation went cockamamie, nuts.

Of course, you had to have been there to fully appreciate the shear bubble-headed vapidity of it all.

Parenthetically, I cite for instance things like a young woman who availing herself of feminist-arrogated statutes that forbade defense questioning concerning such things as the accuser’s past sexual practices and mores, sent four young men to prison for forty years, then told me (two years later during an interview), “maybe they didn’t know it was rape – that’s up to the woman, isn’t it?”

You might also to have been male, male and raised by parents both female and male. Trusting that no one fails to recognize the chaotic state in which our nation is currently found jurisprudentially (not long ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that innocence was not necessarily a bar to execution), I submit the following for consideration – thought, even (no, not discussion; thought – the two things are not the same):

Today, women comprise something like twenty-six percent of the judges on state courts of last resort, nineteen percent federal district court, Twenty percent of federal appellate judges, and eleven percent of the U.S. Supreme Court. The American Bar Association says there has been a fifteen percent increase in the percentage of women attending law school, besides. A part of these will become judges. Even as lawyers, they will affect the cockamamie state of our judiciary.

The result? Well, of late we discover that we have been putting innocent men in the slammer – death row, even – for rape at one hell of a rate. As I write this, more than a hundred twenty guys have been released from prison – after having served as many as twenty-seven years – for rape the woman and feminists put there, but science and DNA said the victims – the real ones, not the accuser and other females desirous of “closure” - didn’t do.

Want to do some numbers (yeah, I know girls don’t do well with rational, “guy stuff,” like that, but what the hell)? Consider this: There are about ninety-two thousand, five hundred rapes reported each year. If we use the percentage of cases where DNA was decisive, there are at least twenty-three thousand women who have lied to put men in jail (FBI stats say that at least twenty-five percent - and as many as FORTY percent - of men convicted of rape aren't guilty).

Ah, well – what the hell?! If you can kill ten, even twenty babies without fear of the law, what’s a few innocent men sacrificed to the great feminist god Emotion by being locked in the slammer? A girl needs “closure,” you know . . .

Now, you may not “catch the drift” of things like this, but does anybody remember a chick named Marilyn French's, "All men are rapists, and that is all they are"? You don’t see the connection?

Really?

The legal system, folks, affects our lives even more than does the rest of government, and a legal system FUBAR has sociological implications elsewhere, you know.

Think about this (that’s even in the effeminized state in which – if you were born after the fifties – you are surely found): For centuries before women entered the practice of law, the United States had murder and incarceration rates lower than Canada, Denmark, France, and Portugal, and equivalent to Australia and Germany.

Paying attention? Good! Since women began entering the practice of law en masse in the 1960s in the US:

• Incarceration and illegitimacy rates have quintupled.
• Murder, male suicide, and divorce rates have doubled.
• Twenty thousand unconstitutional gun control laws have been implemented (and with what effect?).
• Every fundamental principle of the US Constitution, except quartering troops in our houses, has been violated.
• In the industrialized world, the US now has the distinction of having the highest incarceration rate, at the same time that it has one of the highest rates of violent crime, at the same time that it resolves a far fewer percent of crime.

Here’s another cute little bit of math: For each one percent increase in the percent of female judges there are sixty-one thousand additional men in prison; three hundred, ninety more murders each year, and two hundred seventy more unresolved murders each year.

That’s at the same time, on account of educational system and teacher’s politically mandated inability to establish discipline, our schools have become the chaotic menagerie they are. What a co-incidence!

And – ready? – there are one hundred thousand more female criminals who go unpunished each year (anybody still wondering why Crystal Mangum, who falsely – that’s criminally, people – accused the Duke University Lacrosse players of rape, hasn’t been prosecuted?)!

Of course, math – statistics and the like – give most effeminate “Americans” a headache, but if we are to believe feminists and the nation they now hold hostage by means of their relatively new political power – “political correctness,” again - akin to all these phony rape charges, men in the U.S. commit rape roughly seventeen hundred times more often than men in countries like Germany, Sweden, Norway, England, Spain, India, Japan, Italian, or France.

Do you REALLY think that's likely? The feminist does, and she says so

Then, where the effect of feminism more generally is concerned, there were things like passage of the infamous and infantile Title IX (that’s the nutcase nostrum that forbade “sex discrimination” in schools receiving federal aid. Worse in the way of PMS rationality was Roe v. Wade, wherein women not only received a power not even nations have without legal and judicial control – that of life or death – they realized their unique power to bend the law to their collective or individual will.

Kind of like the way a woman yelling “rape” can bring everything, not matter what, to a screeching halt, huh?

Of course, men had to consent to it all (take away all the “feminist issues” law, “political correctness,” and the civilization built mostly by white males, and mother nature would slam the feminist back into her natural place so fast it would make your head swim). Need I quote John Stuart Mill again? I’m reminded of a controversy that erupted a little while ago on an Internet Website, concerning the acceptability of men who cry(!!!) I don’t cry, I said, and I questioned whether anyone would want to face crisis on a ship or airliner full of crying men. We live now in a nation of men who fail at almost every conceivable challenge and task. In Vietnam (and several other places you haven’t been told about), our men, armed with every kind of gee-whiz, Buck Rogers, high tech, blow-it-all-to-hell-and-leave weapon known to man, could not defeat little men two-thirds their size and strength armed with B-40 rocket launchers and small arms like SKSes and AK-47s.

Notice, by the way, what while I didn’t utter there even a single syllable that wasn’t truth – and that I only dare do so because there is literally no way for anyone to deliver Don Imus-style, political correct retribution upon me (an example, incidentally, of what it really means to be free) – it is hugely the wrong thing to say today. Tell me that isn’t an example of a society gone effeminate.

And, oh, yeah, I know our troops didn’t lose even a single battle; but on account of “leadership” already gone to pantyhose character and principles, we didn’t win (hell, just like today, we didn’t even know what the hell “win” meant – what’s more female than that?). Unless you’re a woman or effeminate – the “metrosexual” male, again – “not winning” means you LOSE!

Now, in Iraq, we have another Vietnam, and for all the same idiotic reasons – none more salient than the thunderously obvious fact that a U.S. Congress riddled with pantyhose and pantywaist politicians can’t summon up the cojones and male decisiveness to be kill and destroy the opposition or leave. That we haven’t the resolution or moral fiber necessary to succeed is mirrored in the fact of an army similarly limited by female “soldiers” in its ranks.

When you don’t want to win bad enough to put your first team on the field, you shouldn’t be surprised when you can’t move the ball, and that has to do both with Vietnam, Iraq, and elsewhere of late, it has to do with the fact that deciding to stay or leave is essentially an old ladies’ knitting circle argument between a pussy-whipped U.S. Congress, and a limp-wrested pantywaist momma’s boy wimp president.

History will inevitably conclude that when men uninfluenced by women in power fight wars, war is like Hobbes description of life were anarchy to prevail - “… nasty, brutal, and short.” Where women have the power to exert political power, wars are exercises in dithering indecisiveness – even more nasty, even more brutal, and long – very, very long. Men, in short, fight wars like they go shopping. So do women.

We can’t succeed or leave in Iraq because it isn’t politically correct to do so – we have to wait until we can be sure everyone has gotten his or her way, no one has been offended, and no one has been defeated - “women’s issues,” in other words.

Somebody ask Katie Couric if issues in Congress is anything like those "issues in bed” of hers, will you?

Seventy-one now, I have watched in abject astonishment and frustration as it all happened. For some reason it seems only upbringing by women can explain, men began to accept the kind of male criminality imagined by women (“All men are rapists, and that is all they are," remember?), a rap sheet of supposed outrages against women as long as his arm, most or all of it in the character of the rape charges that have put hundreds of innocent men in jail or to death. For reasons that will leave historians shaking their heads in wonder, the male “American” started accepting the emotion-drive, hormonally-warped ravings of the female.

When one hormonal female pontificated from the new sedia gestatoria of feminist prerogative, “Women have been largely man-made,” he sucked up the otherwise nugatory nonsense as though it ranked with the wisdom of Plato, Aristotle, Newton, Einstein, and hundreds more the dispassionately male like.

He forgot eternal truths, the acquisition and promulgation of which had been paid for almost entirely with strife and blood. The strife and blood of men. Males. For the approval of his female, men forgot legal doctrines like “testis unus, testis nullus” – one witness, no witness. They forgot the U.S. Constitution, and what it stands for – most singularly and defiantly where all of human history is concerned, the dignity and value of every human life. To appease and gain the approval of woman, came even to consent for torture and murder, not just of children, but – why do you find one so easily divorced from the other? – of anyone.

Handed the Biblical apple by Eve, he ate it.

“Abortion” and “waterboarding” come from the same roots, you know. For a Nazi, the death of a Jew was acceptable because the words surrogate in language for the people made it so. The male needed only a Fuehrer (in German, the feminine would be “Fuehrerin”), or a judge to tell him so (anybody ever read U.S. Supreme Court Justice Taney’s reasoning in the Dred Scoot case (I’ve included it below). To change the victim from a man like the Nazi German, or from a person to a “fetus” (a matter of age, after all), required only another expression, or word. The victim’s death was “die Endlosung” – the final solution. It could just as well have been “die Abtreibung” – the abortion.

In the erstwhile world of male reality, unlike that of the female, words only serve – they do not rule. Reverence – valuation – for life is like pregnancy. You either do or you don’t, you are or you aren’t.

The “one parent family,” “metrosexual” male forgot a lot of things. Emulating his parent mentor in the “one parent family” society, he took on the character of his female teachers. He became, in other words, mentally and spiritually soft, indecisive and effeminate. Right and wrong melded, into “relative.” He, and the matter of fact, no nonsense, nation his forefathers had built somehow decided to compromise it all, to “celebrate diversity.” Everybody was “okay.” No one should be permitted to fail – or even be challenged. As women took over the age-old preserves and prerogatives of the male, the nation once dependent upon him for its character went with him and morphed into something resembling Maureen Dowd’s “old Bette Davis-Joan Crawford weepies.”

“When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it …. And the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from he had been taken.”

An old story; but in the words of Santayana, “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” And that quote, which you should consider carefully, is here:

"It is difficult at this day to realize the state of public opinion in regard to that unfortunate race which prevailed in the civilized and enlightened portions of the world at the time of the Declaration of Independence, and when the Constitution of the United States was framed and adopted; but the public history of every European nation displays it in a manner too plain to be mistaken. They had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far unfit that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect."

On May 12, 1879, in the case styled United States ex rel. Standing Bear v. Crook, Judge Elmer S. Dundy ruled that "an Indian is a person" within the meaning of the habeas corpus act.

Fidel & Cuba - Yardstick by Which to Measure U.S. Character and Credibility

2008-02-21T11:31:00.001-08:00

The morning news yesterday says that Fidel Castro has resigned. The report brings back a lot of memories for me, among them the way I have long since learned to use U.S. relations with Cuba as a measure of my own benighted country’s character and credibility. The people of Cuba, Fidel Castro, and I, you see, have a great deal in common. Like that island nation, I have been the target of a favored U.S. weapon - that of blockade and siege; an effort to cause deprivation of basic life needs, even starvation.

I, too, like Fidel Castro, have escaped repeatedly U.S. Government attempts on my health and life.

I, too, have been for many years the victim of relentless U.S. Government vilification and lie. One blatant, evilly conceived and dedicated lie after another. Eternally the weapon most characteristic of a coward, the carefully-crafted and placed lie is still the most-favored tactic of the pusillanimous plutocrat, one still being wielded from the safety of wealth and privilege against members of the proletariat like Fidel Castro and myself. Does anyone remember President Bush’s mendacious report to the effect that Castro contributed to the global “problem” – the president’s choice of terms – by welcoming sex tourism? The U.S.’ embarrassment asseverated that the Cuban president did so in order “to bolster his failing economy.” You’ll no doubt remember, too, that the White House and its weirdo wannabe warrior found the idea in an undergraduate paper at Dartmouth University, then plagiarized it out of context.

Is THAT singularly typical of our son of privilege? How many people did this Little Lord Fauntleroy of the military industrial complex exploit, use, and abuse during his rise to the surface of the political cesspool and political power that is Washington, D.C. and the White House? This particular episode pretty much characterizes both the U.S. Government – the military industrial complex coup d’etat, that is - and its lying leadership since the 1950s.

The rise of the new King George, in fact, personifies in one man the rise of the military industrial complex corporate war on the common man, the middle class, and poor.

None of which, of course, is a real secret. Neither should it have been unexpected in a nation dedicated as this one is to the corporate capitalist ideal of exploitation and consumption of anything, everything, and anyone. The MOCKINGBIRD media simply spins the infotainment news in a behavioral manner sufficient to assure prevention of notice by its stupefied and stultified national audience. The propagandist device has the same effect as secrecy while being much more useful for political – and economic - purposes. It’s state of the insidious art, in other words.

A couple of days ago, the media promulgated another of its “hot and sexy” pieces, the tabloid, bilge-pump, FoxNews journalism demanded by the romance-novel reading, emotion-craving female and effeminized male segment of the public. That therein lies a microcosm of a nation that must cater to female issues and interests – no matter how maudlin and sentimental sappy the subject matter may be - is noteworthy, of course, but not my topic for the day. The story in question, that one Laura Todd’s life has been in turmoil as the result of federal tampering with her personal records, is one near and dear to my Patrick Henry heart.

The government, you see, deliberately and with that “malice aforethought” we so frequently hear about, tampered with public records having to do with me for more than twenty-three years. It’s one of their favorite “dirty tricks.” That, in case you don’t remember – or are like the typical U.S. citizen in that what you know of history wouldn’t make you blink if you got it in your eye - the Nixon era was the official term for criminal chicanery by the federal government, particularly the White House.

And, as Laura Todd explained to the CNN interviewer, it’s hell once you’ve been declared dead (you should pardon the expression). Mrs. Todd would also tell you what tampering with your record can do to all aspects of your life – your finances and ability to obtain credit, for instance. It’s crippling. But there’s a much more ominous face to the matter than just that, too. Falsification of police records, for instance, produces circumstances fraught with danger for the “subject” (among law enforcement personnel, a favorite – and telling one, when you think of it – reference to the citizen). It can, and often does, cost you your life.

While space constraints here prevent my telling just how much trouble it can cause, I will publish the story as I told it in my book “Letters to Aaron, the Hal Luebbert Story” on my Webpage www.judoknighterrant.com The following excerpt from “Letters” is a short one, and it explains well:

“The plain, demonstrable, fact is that the citizenry of the United States has no privacy. You are the most surveilled citizen, even creature, on the planet. Cross-referenced by the most exhaustive and swift accessing system known to man, all but everything about you is known to your invasive government, even your favorite entertainment, music, and food. That includes your government’s suspicions and inferences, together with rumors and fiction – gossip – authored by not only neighbors but people who don’t even know you. Credit reporting agencies, for instance.
“In fact, a great deal more than the truth has been made part of the “record.” The John Q. Citizen of the record is a caricature of the real thing, and when you are stopped by the ubiquitous traffic cop, all of the “record” is available to him. All that is necessary for an agency of government like IRS, for instance, to “reach out and touch” you is a notation in the “record.” With a false lien entered into the credit reporting “record,” the nation’s Gestapo both ruined my credit and prevented my gainful employment for years.
“Tough. Really hardball. But I knew the tactic was even more ominous than that. Consider that a notation in the “record,” true of false, may have turned the traffic cop who has just pulled you over and is approaching alongside your car into an avowed enemy. However well-intentioned, the “record” rules his opinions, such that he may view you with fear. Or, hate. All the record has to say is “suspected of,” and you are, in the mind of the cop, guilty and convicted. If the record says you are “dangerous,” you, in turn, are in great danger. He’ll shoot you for the least provocation.
“The fact is that since the advent of licenses to carry firearms, every confrontation between a law enforcement officer and a citizen is fraught with lethal potential. Coupled with the report that you are armed, almost any kind of additional information of negative effect turns a simple traffic stop into an armed confrontation.
“In my own situation, I was aware of this almost from the beginning. After Cedar Falls Patrolman, later Detective, Les Dempster pointed his sidearm at me for utterly no reason ostensible, I realized how vulnerable I had become and what might happen. I was never in doubt thereafter about the tactical purpose of IRS’ blatant tampering and falsification of the credit, public, and police record. Events rapidly confirmed my fears. In seventeen years, weapons were pointed at me by police eleven times. Coincidence, of course. One of those convenient mistakes.”

It is, I think, noteworthy that none of the surpassing geniuses of the media will mention any of this in their discussion of Laura Todd and her troubles. That, were you studied in propagandist tactics, might endanger one of the government’s favorite extra-legal devices for avenging or otherwise dealing with those it wishes to destroy. Were it not for federal Operation MOCKINGBIRD tactics, it might even have occurred to you. If you think the forty-odd citizens killed by SWAT raids on the wrong house, or the continual stories of unarmed citizens shot to death by panicky cops, are mere foul-ups by incompetence, you’ll want to think again about the stories of people like Laura Todd. You’d better read my story, too.

You might also read my novel, “Jonatha’s Truth,” a story based on actual events about the occurrence and aftermath of just such a thing.

So concerned was I concerning federal harassment by police proxy that I endeavored by way of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit to obtain my records. To no avail, of course. So concerned was a U.S. District Court about the effect of my having possession of the truth concerning federal crime and criminality that it raised income tax collection to the level of national security in denying to me my own, “public” records. As I also said in my book, Scelus semper timidus est – “crime is always fearful.”

A criminal is always recognizable as such on that account, too. Fearful of the exposition and the truth, he is invariably a relentless liar. And the nation ruled by corporate criminals was thunderously apparent this morning. Nowhere else in the world is the truth – it’s politically incorrect” - so widely feared and hated. Long ago, when in 1961 I had arrived in Cuba with the mission to assassinate Fidel Castro and – if possible, too – Ernesto “Che” Guevara, I first became aware of “politically correct” truth – the legislated lie, that is.

Since that time, the government of the Land of the Free turned Land of the Fee has made the truth about Cuba and Castro “politically incorrect.” No favorable or positive thing about Fidel Castro is acceptable. Even his early prowess as an athlete and baseball player must be pejorated – one “news” item this morning said that Castro “claimed to have tried out with the Washington Senators.”

Meanwhile U.S. President George W. Bush spoke from Africa about “real elections” in Cuba. The United States’ despot, the man who condones and wields criminal cadre like the Internal Revenue Service, said he hopes the Castro resignation “signals the beginning of a democratic transition.”

It’s breath-taking. How the despot who has trashed the Constitution of his own nation can say things like that with a straight face again demonstrates the bizarre, Newspeak character of our “politically correct” nation. More, how a nation, itself currently engaged in a Trojan Horse election process as thunderously specious as this one, can swallow such paltry propaganda is again the stuff about which future historians will shake their heads in bemused wonderment.

But we’ve had lots of practice. I made reference the other day to a new book delineating in some detail the way the Operation MOCKINGBIRD media has co-opted and controlled the nation’s supposedly free press. Two decades of personal research has shown me much in the same manner I once learned the truth about Fidel Castro and his revolution the strangely numb manner in which the MOCKINGBIRD media benighted U.S. citizen interfaces with reality. The stunned, stolid stupidity of the “American” in public is amazing – and not a little fearsome.

Last night, for instance, I was shown a clip of an adult woman being asked by a quiz host – “Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?” - what Hungary’s capitol city is. The woman – as I said, an adult – stated that she thought Europe is a nation. She had never heard of Hungary. She didn’t know that France is a nation.

Jeff Foxworthy, I’ve been asking “American” questions like that for decades. I can tell you that seventy-five percent of U.S. Citizens are so stupid that were any of them to become lost in any kind of wilderness, they would die in a week. These people read and believe the tabloids. They are entertained by today’s soap opera dramas, read romance novels the grist of which is an insult to the intellect of a child, and idolize television “personalities” like Nancy Grace, Kimberly Guilfoyle (Guileful?), and their vapid virago like.

And let’s not forget that 59,054,087 of them voted for George W. Bush, as monumentally obvious a fraud as there has ever been.

So Fidel is stepping down (odd, that – dictators step down?). I feel a loss, as I imagine the MOCKINGBIRD media must also. I will miss the yardstick for measuring U.S. Government pronouncements and behavior its relations with the Cuban leader have always provided. I imagine that Hugo Chavez has steeled himself to become the target for all the vilification and the like once reserved for Fidel. And, of course, one presumes that the media will have to look for another bugaboo whose “threat to peace in the hemisphere” persona can provide grist for their Jubilation T. Cornpone redneck, Man With a Hoe, audiences.

Fidel and I are both, perhaps, in our dotage. But I hope the old revolutionary lives long enough, and remains lucid enough, to see those who have sewn the whirlwind reap its harvest. If, as Lord Byron implied, nature has a “wild kind of justice,” he and I will see the nefarious behavior of those who rule the United States wreaked upon themselves. Disoriented by insidiously evil programs like Operation MOCKINGBIRD, those at the controls of the great airliner that is the once-great Land of the Free, Home of the Brave, Nation of Laws have flown it into a death spiral that won’t take long to reach its conclusion. And, in the words of everyone I could find all these years ago in Cuba, history will say:

Viva Fidel!

http://petersawyer.blogspot.com/