Monday, August 10, 2009


By Margaret Goodwin
August 2, 2009

If you wanted to come up with a plan to undermine the economy of the most prosperous and successful nation on earth, how would you go about it?

The first thing you'd have to do would be to debase the underlying value system that provides the foundation for prosperity. That is, the value system to which the founders of this nation, and many generations of immigrants who came here seeking opportunity, subscribed. The core of that value system is the belief that you do not deserve anything you have not earned.

The first step would be to condition the populace to believe that prosperity is bad, that anybody who makes more than a modest income must be evil (or at least dishonest), and that nobody really deserves to be rich, no matter how much they contribute to the economy or how many opportunities they create for others. The rich, by definition, are always a minority, since the term itself implies someone who has substantially greater wealth than the average person. All that's usually needed to turn the many against the few is a sense of grievance.

Fostering a sense of grievance can be accomplished by promoting the notion that everybody, by virtue of their very existence, is entitled to basic sustenance, such as healthcare, food, shelter, etc.

This attitude can be cultivated by establishing a system of bureaucracies (paid for almost entirely by the rich) that provide free handouts to everybody else, while nurturing a sense of perpetual resentment among the people receiving the handouts toward those who provide the wherewithal to satisfy their ever-increasing expectations.

The many are not generally aware that nearly 90% of the income taxes that sustain our government, and all the services "it" provides, are collected from the top 20% of income earners. And, if the many were aware of that, do you think they'd feel like saying "Thank you"? Not likely.

Because they've been conditioned to believe that the rich don't deserve their wealth, and that they, the beneficiaries of all those taxes paid by the rich, deserve that money more than the people who earned it. What did the beneficiaries do to deserve it? Nothing. But they exist, and therefore they're entitled to things they cannot afford, so the money should be taken from those who can afford it and redistributed to them.

Having undermined the cultural values that provide the basis for a prosperous economy, by fostering a culture of dependency on ever-expanding government services, you now have popular support for the next step, which is to penalize production. You do that by regulating industries to the point where the cost of doing business is too great to justify the returns, forcing businesses to either downsize, go bankrupt, or relocate offshore.

That increases unemployment, creating an even greater dependency on government services. At the same time, it reduces production so there's less wealth to tax, and less money coming into the system to support the ever-increasing demands.

At that point, you've got a self-perpetuating cycle, with ever-increasing demands on the system and ever-diminishing resources from which to draw to provide for them. To add fuel to the firestorm, you can use the increasing demands as an excuse to raise taxes on the remaining top producers even more, driving more employers out of business or offshore, creating an even larger non-productive class, and further accelerating the drain on the system...

But why stop there? At this point, the economy is so unstable, it can be toppled with ease. To finish it off in style, all that's required is to spend like a drunken sailor. Get the nation so far in debt to hostile foreign powers that they won't accept our IOUs any more. Print up fiat money and dilute our currency to the point that the whole world loses confidence in it and the G20 proposes a new international monetary standard. Then distract the citizens by holding contests in Congress to see who can spend money the fastest, and call it a "stimulus plan."

At that point, the death spiral reaches critical mass. That's were we are today. How did we get to this point? Well, it could just be a combination of entropy, ignorance, and well-intentioned idiots. Or it could be that there are those who actively seek to undermine our economy to bring our nation to its knees. For what purpose? That depends on who's pulling the strings. I concede that this begins to sound a little paranoid from someone who usually dismisses conspiracy theories.

On the other hand, it's hard to imagine that anyone, especially the leaders of our nation, are stupid enough not to realize they're doing the exact things required to accelerate the collapse of our already destabilized economy. And, if they're not stupid, then they must have a reason for what they're doing.

© 2009 Margaret Goodwin - All Rights Reserved

By Jon Christian Ryter
August 9, 2009

Wall Street Journal writer John Fund wrote an piece the other day noting that the "...White House is clearly worried about the opponents of its health care plan who are showing up at town-hall meetings with members of Congress. It took an extraordinary step of issuing a three-minute video rebuttal to a Drudge Report item that featured a 2007 clip of Barack Obama supporting the 'elimination' of private health insurance over time after a government plan is introduced. Later in the day, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs called the health care protesters a form of 'manufactured' anger. Democratic National Committee spokesman Brad Woodhouse went further and called them 'angry mobs of rabid rightwing extremists.'"

Let's face it. This is one time the media spinmeisters can't win the public relations debate. Why? Because those agitated rightwing extremists in "...limes and pinks and Brooks Brothers suits" who showed up at the health care town halls wearing Dockers and short sleeve sport shirts; or dresses, shorts and tank tops and flip-flops represent about 80% of the People of the United States. The protesters, in this instance, were not the minority voices of the voting public, they were the voting public. (And, the White House can't steal enough ACORN votes next year to overrule the will of the People who clearly intend to fire a bunch of Congressmen and Senators.) Let's hope they remember they are voting out the idiots who voted for the stimulus bills, and the idiots who nationalized the auto industry, and the idiots who voted for a socialist healthcare bill. Sadly, the arrogant fools on Capitol Hill who see themselves as demigods haven't yet disambiguated the message from the Tea Parites or the message from the healthcare town halls. Maybe it will translate better when the voters say, "You're fired!" Isn't that nice...everyone gets to play Donald Trump next November.

When the political issues are not so clearly defined, the politicians and their partners in the mainstream media can play the smoke and mirrors shell game and fool the weak-minded people that fiction is truth and truth is whatever they say it is. But, with the whole country vehemently opposed to the theft of the healthcare industry by greedy, corrupt politicians in bed with America's Marxists and healthcare lobbyists who come to dinner with pockets full of money, the American people are fed up.

Far left Californian Sen. Barbara Boxer, whose re-election campaign war chest will be filled by lobbyists who want to make sure their clients are sitting at the feast-laden universal healthcare table when the gratuities are doled out, told MSNBC Hardball host Chris Matthews that the media needed to "...take a look at what's going on here." Boxer apparently believes that the American people won't mind if their health care is doled out in dribbles while their children wait weeks or months to visit to the pediatrician when they get sick; or that the elderly won't object to being denied healthcare because old age is eventually terminal anyway.

Even though the Tea Party protests earlier this year were spontaneous, Boxer insisted that the healthcare protests were "...all planned. It's to hurt our president," she said, "and it's to change the Congress." For once a liberal may have actually got something right. The American people are boiling mad. They fully intend to change Congress in 2010. Boxer was right. For a liberal Senator, being right once in 18 years is better than average for the left. The American people intend to change Congress in 2010, and even more in 2012. The people of the United States do not intend to become the Soviet Union of the West. And, they do not intend to let Barack Obama become the Marxist dictator he sees when he looks in the mirror every morning.

The White House joined the fray once they saw that, universally, the American people were opposed to the government's single payer healthcare plan (that is now referred to simply as the "public option.") The White House and the far left House and Senate leadership—and the mainstream media—are using Obama's talking points "manufactured protest" to characterize the reaction of the American people from Florida to Washington State, and from Bangor, Maine to San Diego, California as being fabricated by the Republican Party and/or lobbyists for the healthcare industry who want to continue gouging policyholders with escalating insurance premiums and partially paid claims.

Gibbs, like Chris Matthews, referred to the healthcare protesters as the "Brooks Brother brigade," making it obvious where the talking points originated. When Sen. Arlen Specter [D-PA] together with Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, held a health care town hall in Philadelphia on August 3, they were booed by a bipartisan audience. One woman in the audience told Specter and Sebelius: "I look at this healthcare plan and I see nothing that is about health or care..." (the audience starts applauding.) "...What I see is a bureaucratic nightmare, Senator. Medicaid is broke. Medicare is broke. Social Security is broke. And you want us to believe that a government that can't even run a cash for clunkers program is going to run one-seventh of our US economy? No, sir! No.!" So, let me ask—now, does this sound like a woman who was paid by the healthcare industry as their shill? Or, that's she's a "rented" protester? No, sir! No! She's nobody's shill. She's an angry American. And, by God, before November, 2010, every liberal politician in America is going to know what an angry American looks like and sounds like...and just how much damage they can do to a worthless, graft-sucking politician!

Congressman Lloyd Doggett [D-TX] encountered the same reaction to the "public option" when he tried to sell government healthcare to his constituents. Congressman Frank Kratovil [D-MD] was hung in effigy by his constituents. Fourth term Congressman Tim Bishop [D-NY] was harassed so badly that he had to be escorted from the town hall site by the police.

The liberal website, Think Progress wrote a blog-post accusing the conservative advocacy groups, Americans For Prosperity and Freedom Works of organizing the "right wing harassment strategy, which they added was "..often marked by violence and absurdity." White House press secretary Gibbs suggested that protesters may have come via AFP's 13-state bus tour. Think Progress said that the DNC had a 10-page memo from a Connecticut activist that was evidence that there was a well-coordinated national campaign by the Republicans to protest healthcare. That, of course, is not true since, at the highest levels of politics, the money Mafia that fund both parties are in bed with each other.

And, finally, former Gore-Lieberman 2000 campaign manager Donna Brazile said that the Dockers' crowd that shows up on all of the videos (instead of the Brooks Brothers crowd that simply does not exist in any of the videos) were "rented" organizers. Brazile told the media that the town hall protests were the result of "...a well-organized group of lobbyists who are paying people to go out. They're renting organizers," she said adding, as if to -self confirm the validity of her statement, "The left has done it. Now, they're doing it. This little band of protesters are trying to stop [Congress] from doing [its] job. They know they can't win the debate, so they want to shut down the conversation." Asked by the media for proof, Brazile admitted she had none, adding, "I've seen this dance before." Of course she has. She's helped choreograph it in every Democratic political photo op for at least two decades where the boys in Washington needed interested spectators that simply didn't exist..

Almost every member of Congress has faced angry crowds in town hall settings when they attempted to convince their constituents that rationed healthcare for all Americans is not as bad as the Canadians make it sound.

In Tampa, Florida Congresswoman Kathy Castor [D-FL] and African American Florida State Representative Betty Reed held a health care town hall at the Children's Board of Hillsborough County. Eight hundred Tampa residents showed up, but only 200 were admitted. Many of them were members of SEIU who actually sponsored the town hall. The rest were senior citizens or those who were not carrying signs and placards opposing Obama's healthcare "reform." Four union goons sent to help the Congresswoman by frightening the opposition to silence by sheer brawn, attempted to exclude anyone opposed to universal healthcare from their meeting.

Halfway through Castor's unsuccessful attempt to convince her constituents that Obama's socialized medicine would be good for America, a fight broke out. One audience member said to Castor, "you won't let the people speak." Someone in the audience shouted, "Why won't you let the people speak?" Castor ignored those who disagreed with her, talking over them when they spoke. Union members pushed those with opposing views away from the doors, closing them. As the doors closed, someone inside the room said: "Tyranny!" Others shouted: "Read the bill! Read the bill!" Others began shouting, "Hold it outside! Hold it outside!" since 75% of those who came to voice their views were now locked out.

Many of those in the room were senior citizens. Most were typical middle class people, the type of person standing in front or behind you when you go to vote. The air suddenly turned ugly, like a violent, dark thunder storm where ground-strike lightning precedes the rain. A man shouted: "Bulls**t!" Others began chanting "You work for us!" and "Hear our voice!" It was at that point that the union goons began to push the protesters out of the room, closing the door. In the scuffle, one man in a short sleeve green shirt was accosted by three union thugs. His shirt was literally torn from his body. Tampa police, with orders to do so from Castor, locked the doors so the protesters could not enter. Castor took that opportunity to skip out of the building without fielding the questions of those to came to aire their grievances with their Congresswoman.

This is not how a Republic woks. This is how a communist state operates. The voters in the 11th Congressional District of Florida elected Castor in 2006 with 70% of the vote. They re-elected her in 2008 with 72%. With that vote, they surrendered their right to free speech in the 11th Congressional District. Hopefully the voters will correct that oversight in Nov., 2010.

Across the nation Democrats who had scheduled healthcare town halls to give their constituents the "good news" that they were going to get the public option (i.e., anal roto-rootering) that would theoretically allow them to keep what they have if they want to keep their private insurance plan, or switch to the government's universal healthcare plan, either staged "Congressman friendly" town halls by hand-picking the attendees from local labor unions friendly with the White House, or simply canceling them. The protests are genuine. They are not "Republican." They are nonpartisan. And, most of all, they didn't begin with Obama's healthcare reform program. Nor did they start with "cash for clunkers," which has angers millions of Americans. It began with the President George W. Bush's $700 billion bailout for banks when all that was needed to solve the financial crisis in 2008 was to change the Fed's "mark to market" rule that would free up local banks to loan money. It was that simple to solve. And, it still is. But the longer Obama tinkers with the economy, the harder the problem is going to be to fix. But, as history has proven over and over again, you can't fix the economy by robbing the taxpayers and recycling their money to the welfare crowd—whether those receiving the grand gratuities are poor or rich.

America's politicians should have paid attention when the first spontaneous Tea Parties were held across the country on April 15. And, if not then, on Memorial Day or on Independence Day because on July 4, the dye was cast. On Nov. 2, 2010, the non-partisan People intend to fire every Congressman and Senator who [a] personally failed to read the legislation they voted to enact, [b] voted for any of the stimulus bills, [c] voted to seize control of any car company or bank, or [d], voted to seize the American healthcare industry and convert the United States into a communist nation.

The Obama Administration is so desperate to steal control of your healthcare that the White House website issued this statement: "There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there...These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to"

The last leader that took used approach to limit free speech thorugh intimidation in the privacy of the homes of the citizens was Adolph Hitler. In a Republic, we have a right to free thought, free speech, and the right to discuss our ideas, our dislikes and our fears in the public square. And, government, according to the 1st Amendment of the Constituion is obligated to listen to our complaints—and properly address them. And, not by using Gestapo tactics designed to intimidate people into silence. The White House's attempt to stifle free speech is not only a violation of the Constitution, it's an impeachable offense.

By Joel Turtel

July 18, 2009

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive . . . . . those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – ;C. S. Lewis

President Obama said something at his White House healthcare event last week that should scare you out of your wits, especially if you are a senior citizen.

He suggested that one way to save health-care costs is not to spend on procedures that "evidence shows [are] not necessarily going to improve care" for the sick and the dying. "Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller," the President said.

This is socialist Obama-talk, and let me translate. Under Obama's plan, some impersonal bureaucrat, based solely on cost to the government health-care system, will now decide whether you or your sick father or mother, die. Do you need a heart operation or expensive cancer therapy to give you a chance for life? Under Obama's plan, a bureaucrat will "calculate" how much this care would cost the government.

The bureaucrat will then do a "cost/benefit" analysis, the "benefit" being extending your life or treating your cancer or heart disease. If you're too old, forget about it. The bureaucrat will have to follow rules laid down by his superiors in a big book of "rationing" rules.

If, for example, you're over 65 years old, the bureaucrat can tell you, "Sorry, extending your life by 10 years with this expensive heart operation is not "worth it" to the government health-care program or "other taxpayers." So we won't pay for your heart operation. Or, "you'll have to wait nine months on our heart-operations list, and we'll 'reconsider' your application at that time. The government only has so much money for health care, so we can't spend it on people over 65 years old. Sorry. Next in line, please." And you will DIE waiting on their heart-operation death lists.

Also, as health-care costs explode in a socialized-medicine paradise, bureaucrats will have to keep lowering the cut-off age for your CAT scan, heart operation or cancer care. First the cut-off age might be 68, then it will go to 65, then to 60, then to 55. The more health-care costs explode, the lower the cut-off age will go. Soon you will be caught in the net, with your LIFE at stake.

Think this is a frightening fantasy, that it "can't happen here?" Think again. In England and Canada, where they've had a socialized-medicine paradise for the last thirty years, that's exactly what happens, every day. In England and Canada, they have health-care rationing. Government bureaucrats decide who lives and who dies, who gets the expensive cancer care or heart operation, and who doesn't. Who gets the CAT scan or heart operation quickly, and who waits on the health-care "death lists" for nine months for that CAT can or heart operation.

Every day, sick people who the bureaucrats decide are not "worth" the money, DIE on the death-lists in England and Canada. That is your health-care future in America, if socialist Obama gets his "heath-care" plan approved. I hope this scares the hell out of you, because it scares me.

© 2009 Joel Turtel - All Rights Re

By Mary Starrett
July 31, 2009

If the socialized healthcare plan President Obama has been pushing, and Congress seems close to passing, is good enough for all of America, why isn’t it good enough for members of Congress?

Why is it the “vastly improved,” “cost-effective” healthcare “reform” package the left has been trying to pry open our clenched teeth to deliver for years is something we should all buy into while our elected officials in D.C. get an opt out from the get-go?

It’s simple. Congress’ Cadillac plan provides them easy access to their choice of doctors, the full array of diagnostic tests, prescription coverage, and all the bells and whistles our system of medical care offers. In short, with the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHB) they get all the benefits that a fully comprehensive health insurance plan provides. In fact, the FEHB offers “Federal employees, retirees and their survivors ... the widest selection of health plans in the country.”

Meanwhile, the liberals are salivating because they’re thinking they’re this close to passing the “Goodbye Grandpa” health plan they’ve been trying for years to force in an esophageal cramdown. Now they believe it will finally, finally happen.

But the lack of access, rationed, age-dependant bargain basement health insurance we’re being told is for our own good isn’t good enough for members of Congress.

That’s why Louisiana Congressman John Fleming is sponsoring a bill saying if the public health plan is so wonderful then members of Congress should sign up for the new plan they’re touting and forego their Cadillac plan.

H.R.615 says:

“... Members who vote in favor of the establishment of a public, federal government run health insurance option are urged to forgo their right to participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) and agree to enroll under that public option.

The Democrats’ current healthcare legislation provides for members of Congress to be exempt from the jalopy government-run health insurance plan we’d all be struggling to make work.

They must know something they think we don’t know about the reality versus the rhetoric surrounding the quality of care we’d all be forced, forced to utilize.

Maybe Congress has been reticent about opting out of their Cadillac plan because they know that, like any program or area the government gets involved in, (as this well-circulated diagram of how the plan would work shows, the quantity and quality of care could never equal what free market innovations can deliver.
Here’s a list of H.R. 615’s co-sponsors.

Are your Congressional representatives on the list? If not, call or email them and ask “Why isn’t the public health plan good enough for you, if you’re voting to make it good enough for me?”

House Republican Leader John Boehner’s Leader Alert urges Americans to push to:

“Require all Members of Congress to get their health insurance through the proposed government-run plan.” pointing out that “ Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV) offered an amendment in the Ways & Means Committee that would have required Members of Congress to enroll immediately in the government-run health plan that would be established under the Democratic bill. Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) offered an amendment to put his committee on the record in support of enrolling Members of Congress in the government-run plan as well. While the Wilson amendment was approved by voice vote in the Education & Labor Committee, the Heller amendment was killed in the Ways & Means Committee at the behest of Speaker Pelosi and Chairman Rangel.”

It’s time to push back and push back hard. Call and email Congress today, because unless Congress knows we mean business this healthcare debacle will wind up choking us while our elected officials continue to enjoy health insurance that goes down nice and easy.

© 2009 Mary Starrett - All Rights Reserved


Mary Starrett was the Constitution Party candidate for Oregon governor in November, 2006, a TV news anchor and talk show host for 25 years and a radio talk show host for 5 years.

Executive Director, Oregonians for Life, Board of Directors, Christian Family Adoptions.

She is currently the Communications Director for the Constitution Party. The Constitution Party is the fastest-growing minor political party ( and is made up of Americans who believe a return to constitutional government is imperative.


By Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.
July 20, 2009

“Now is the winter of our discontent made glorious summer by this son of York!” says the cunning Richard, Duke of Gloucester, of his brother, King Edward, in Shakespeare’s play, “Richard the Third”. That was then; this is now. And the coronation of the latest American “King”—or Duce, or Führer, or even (the piquant touch of blasphemy aside) “Messiah”, as may suit one’s taste in denominating exalted “leaders”—has not transformed America’s national winter into sunny days. Quite the contrary. The private economy is collapsing. The ostensible public debt is ballooning. The latter-day Ponzis who run their “debt-currency” and other “paper-wealth” confidence games and swindles through the Federal Reserve System, the Department of the Treasury, and the big Wall-Street financial houses are looting America on a scale and with a ferocity not witnessed anywhere in the world since Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan. And rogue officialdom in the General Government work day and night to replace “America the Beautiful” with a first-class fascistic national-security police state, before the economic house of cards tumbles down entirely.

All this would be bad enough by itself. What renders the tragedy truly intolerable is the veritable Greek Chorus of complainers from the ranks of self-styled patriots who bemoan the supposed irreversibility of events: “We are losing all of our rights! They are ready to impose martial law! They are going to put us into concentration camps! There is nothing we can do! They are too smart, too rich, and too powerful to be stopped!” These people ridicule the rest of America’s population as being composed of frightened and ignorant “sheeple”. But who, pray tell, is bleating most loudly about the inevitability of defeat?

True enough, things are going from bad to worse, and at an accelerating pace. Each day witnesses an expansion, intensification, centralization, and (most ominously) personalization of raw political power in the Disgrace of Columbia. Almost by the hour, the hydra of tyranny grows new heads, even without any of the old ones being cut off. So much for a description of the disease. Now, what is the prescription for the remedy?

Why should average Americans presume that their country is lost, and their freedoms and prosperity with it? Are average Americans not smart? Do they not, collectively at least, have as much knowledge and as many skills as—or far more, if the truth be told, than—their oppressors? Are average Americans not rich? Do they not exercise immediate physical control over most of the valuable property in this country? Could they not easily extend that control to all the rest of the property worth controlling? And, as the old saw has it, is not actual possession “nine-tenths of the law”? Are average Americans not powerful? Do not “we” outnumber “them” by orders of magnitude? And does not God favor “the big battalions”? Yes, yes, and once again yes! So the obviously correct course of action is for Americans to stop sniveling and whining about their impotence and vulnerability and instead to set about doing something decisive with the strengths they have. After all, God helps those who help themselves.

First and foremost, a little thinking is in order. Only “a little thinking”, because not that much is really necessary to solve this country’s fundamental problem. What is that problem? Ultimately it is a matter of law—or, more specifically described, of lawlessness. America is suffering the transmogrification of her legal system from the rule of law to the lawlessness of rulers. With the aid of puppet-politicians, media propagandists, and other front men, influential factions and special-interest groups are systematically seizing control of the apparatus of law so that they can use the law to break the law under color of the law—while treating everyone who justifiably opposes them as, if not actual lawbreakers, “extremists” only one short step removed from outlaws.

Where, though, is the law to protect the people? Why, where it has always been and remains today—in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Those are We the People’s laws. In the Declaration, We the People “assume[d] among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle[d] them”. Then they “ordain[ed] and establish[ed] th[e] Constitution for the United States of America”. And all public officials “shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support th[e] Constitution”.

But, the naysayers complain, “the Constitution has failed. It cannot prevent usurpation and tyranny. America needs a new constitution.” Easy enough to say. But the doing is another thing altogether. Who has the authority to prepare a new Constitution? What would it say? More to the point, what would it mean? How would it be adopted? And how would it be enforced, and by whom, if rogue public officials in the General Government and their satellites in various State governments refused to recognize it?

Besides, what real purpose would a new constitution serve? Anyone who takes the time actually to read the Constitution—and to peruse a few books of history so that he can understand its language as the Founding Fathers did—can come to know what the Constitution truly means. After all, the Constitution was written to be adopted and applied by farmers, yeomen, mechanics, merchants, and other common people—both in the late 1700s and thereafter throughout the ages. It contains no mysterious passages that can be deciphered only by graduates of Harvard, Yale, or other elitist law schools (which, by the way, none of the Framers attended), or by the black robes in the even smaller population of judges appointed to office because of their back-room political connections.

Moreover, anyone who studies the history of the modern “constitutional interpretation” for which those judges and graduates are responsible will soon realize what the Constitution does not mean and could not possibly mean. For decades, the legal gurus of the Bench, the Bar, and the law schools have inundated this country with tortuous and truly tortured theories of “the general Welfare”, “regulation of Commerce”, “implied powers”, “compelling governmental interests”, “judicial supremacy”, “the unitary executive”, and so on ad nauseum—all intended to infuse, increase, and intensify power in the General Government, at the expense of the States and especially of the people. What they failed to take into account, though, is that now Americans can see with the exactitude of personal experience how disastrously these crackpot notions have worked out in practice, and on that basis can foresee how much more harm they will undoubtedly cause—even unto this country’s utter destruction—if they are allowed to control the course of constitutional law any longer. As applied, these theories have engendered the exact opposite of what the Preamble to the Constitution catalogues as its purposes: namely, “to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”. Unless the Founding Fathers were veritable political idiots, they could never have written the Constitution so as even to suggest such aberrant theories of misconstruction. And unless contemporary Americans are worse than veritable political idiots, they will not suffer this travesty to continue at their own expense. Because, unlike the Founding Fathers who never lived with the horrific results that these perversions of the Constitution have visited upon this country, contemporary Americans now know that these theories were intended, not to “interpret” the Constitution, but to overthrow it—and to bury the common man’s liberty and prosperity in the rubble. This was never a matter simply of stupidity (although that, no doubt, played some part in it), but of calculated subversion.

Knowing what is wrong is not the same as supplying a remedy, however. Although patent to everyone with the eyes to see, the subversion continues apace. America’s enemies intend even to expand upon it, destroying what is left of the Constitution—and the Declaration of Independence along with it—by submerging this country in some hemispheric North American Union or global New World Order. But that in itself is highly instructive. For if America’s enemies are dead set on murdering the Constitution, common Americans should want that much more to preserve, protect, and enforce it. America’s enemies, after all, are no men’s fools. They know full well that if the Constitution is correctly construed and rigorously applied then they are finished. Which it why they have been undermining it for generations, and now want to eliminate it entirely, before too many Americans finally wake up and take action in their own and their country’s self-defense. Self-evidently, then, Americans need, not to give up on the Constitution, but instead to stand up for it—because that is what their enemies themselves admit, by their own actions, would be the most effective defense against them.

How can the Constitution, so twisted out of shape that it is barely recognizable, be straightened out and put to work for common Americans’ salvation and their enemies’ defeat? Not by amendments. Amendments are very difficult to enact. Worse yet, any new amendment will have to be “interpreted”—by the very same people, or at least the very same type of people, who are now misinterpreting the Constitution. So, self-evidently, the problem lies not in the document but in rogue public officials. We the People have allowed weasels to guard the chicken coop. As Cassius rightly chided Brutus in Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar”, “the fault * * * is not in our stars but in ourselves that we are underlings”. Now, We the People must muster the self-reliance and self-confidence to correct that error—because no one else is going to do it for them.

But where to begin? Of course, patriots must continue to oppose all of the horrendous legislation being proposed by their enemies. Mere opposition, though, even if successful in individual instances, will not suffice. For, as General MacArthur reminded America, “There is no substitute for victory!” And victory can hardly ever be won by defensive measures alone, particularly when the enemy already controls so much of this country. We the People must assume the offensive.

Yet a thoroughgoing reform cannot be accomplished all at once. Americans have to take back their Constitution, and with it their country, steadily and systematically, piece by piece. At the present moment, the most important powers that We the People need to reclaim for themselves are the Power of the Purse and the Power of Sword—not only because political philosophy has always treated these powers as the essence of sovereignty, but also and especially because America is now confronted by an accelerating economic collapse (to which the Power of the Purse must be addressed) and threatened by the imposition of a police state (against which the Power of the Sword must be applied).

Even such a partial reform cannot be effected everywhere at one fell swoop. Yet it must be done somewhere, to prove that it can be done anywhere. That “somewhere”, moreover, must offer the possibility of establishing a powerful political and economic base for further action. For We the People cannot be satisfied with nothing more than “political and economic survivalism”. Instead, they must establish a bridgehead from which to launch a political offensive that eventually will sweep across the entire country.

Fortunately, Americans can take advantage of the opportunities offered by the federal system: namely, that there are fifty States, each enjoying a large measure of sovereignty with the exercise of which rogue public officials in the General Government have no legal authority to interfere. Of course, in some States the odds against effecting any rational political and economic reforms are dauntingly high. In those States, both the “patricians” and the “plebeians” rightly deserve Marullus’s denunciation of the Roman mob in “Julius Caesar”: “You blocks, you stones, you worse than senseless things!” Nothing can be done with them. For the nonce, they must be left (as an old saw has it) like cheap sausages in a hot pan, to smoke and sputter in their own indigestible grease. But that is not the case in every State. In some States—in at least one State—it surely must be possible for We the People to regain control over their legislators. And even one State will be enough to start the ball rolling.

The basis steps in the strategy are straightforward:

1. Identify a State in which a sizeable segment of the population will support—yea, will demand—two measures:
(a) regaining the Power of the Purse through the introduction of an alternative-currency system based on silver and gold; and
(b) regaining the Power of the Sword through revitalization of “the Militia of the several States” in that State.

2. Draft comprehensive legislation for this purpose exactly as it needs to be enacted—thus embodying fully and precisely what We the People themselves demand, not some crumbs that legislators deign to throw to them.

3. Find patriotic, courageous, and sagacious legislators to introduce the bill and shepherd it through the legislative process.

4. Mobilize a mass of grass-roots activists, not only from that State but also from all over the country, to lobby for the legislation. Because the first State is the starting-point for reform throughout America, every patriot in every State has a vital interest in seeing the reform legislation enacted there.

5. If the bill does not pass, in the very next election remove from office as many as possible of those legislators who voted against it, replacing them with new legislators pledged to carry the reform to completion—legislators drawn from among We the People themselves, not from the ranks of professional politicians. The crucial, if not the only, issue in the election must be the candidates’ support for the reform legislation.

6. Return to step 3, and reiterate this process until the bill finally passes and is signed into law.

Once one or two States have enacted such legislation, others will follow because of the obvious economic and political advantages of doing so.

Then, with the Power of the Purse and the Power of the Sword firmly held in We the People’s hands, in jurisdictions with constitutional authority, other problems can be addressed, one after another, from a position of ever-increasing political, economic, and legal strength.

What is the alternative? This country’s enemies have been winning—and will continue to win—the political battles because they are organized, whereas We the People are not. The strategy advocated here will enable We the People, not simply to organize themselves, but also to organize around the two most important powers of sovereignty. Everything else—from Tea Parties, to resolutions invoking the Tenth Amendment, to calls to audit the Federal Reserve System, even to the demands of the 9/11 truth movement for a comprehensive investigation of that horrendous crime—amounts to mere political theater and wheel-spinning, because those endeavors, laudable as they are, have no teeth. They are not self-enforcing. In any country, those who actually wield the Power of the Purse and the Power of the Sword are the true sovereigns. Everyone else is a subject. For the Power of the Purse and the Power of the Sword are the fundamental enforcement-mechanisms for every form of government. If self-government is to exist in America, as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution require, then We the People—and only We the People themselves—must wield these powers. Not just “ought to”, but must.

One shrinks from adopting the apocalyptic tone of a Cassandra, that it is “now or never”. But, if not now, when?

By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
August 10, 2009

[Note: A brief CIA-Iran timeline: in 1953 the CIA helps overthrow the democratically elected leader Mossadegh and reinstates Pahlavi (the Shah) with the approval of Ayatollah Kashani. In the late 1970s, the Shah became convinced the CIA was behind calls for his removal from power. On January 16, 1979, the Shah and his wife left Iran, staying in several countries before David Rockefeller requested President Carter allow the Shah to enter a New York hospital for surgery on October 22, 1979 (the Shah left the U.S. on December 15, 1979).

The U.S. Embassy in Iran had been taken over briefly by Marxists on February 14, 1979 not long after the Shah left. U.S. Ambassador William Sullivan and 101 others were taken hostage but freed by forces loyal to Ayatollah Khomeini after a 3-1/2 hour gun battle. After the takeover ended, Ambassador Sullivan returned to the U.S. and later told Dr. Stan Monteith that he warned President Carter and National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski (ZB) that if they allowed the Shah to enter the U.S., our embassy in Iran would be taken over again. Why, then, did Carter and ZB admit the Shah, especially without additional military protection of the Embassy? ZB had a pan-Islamic crescent strategy to buffer Soviet expansion and he already lured them into Afghanistan to bog them down as the U.S. had been in Viet Nam. The Soviets had perhaps 24 divisions ready to move into Iran, and the U.S. needed an “incident” to show how rapidly we could deploy responding forces if necessary. The second Embassy takeover on November 4, 1979 with 60 American hostages (plus others) afforded an alleged rescue attempt which seemed designed to fail (e.g., how did they expect a large enough force to succeed to get into and out of the Embassy without incident?).

A “confidential” Foreign Report (April 30, 1980) gave details of what really happened April 24, 1980 just before the U.S. raid. A small part of this report revealed: “The Israelis were helping the Americans to jam the systems of two Soviet spyships that regularly cruise around Lebanon, Israel and Egypt.” The Egyptians jammed “Russian surveillance instruments operating out of Libya.” When the Soviets did spot American aircraft heading toward Iran, they informed the Iranians, who “did not send a single fighter aircraft up to intercept the American intruders.” Why not? Why would they if the whole affair was staged by the CIA and its Iranian agents?

The Shah was replaced by Ayatollah Khomeini (mentored by Ayatollah Kashani) on December 3, 1979 as the First Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran. And Iranian terrorist activity against the U.S. was planned shortly thereafter.

CIA Middle East operative Robert Baer in See No Evil said he looked at “an intelligence report from March 1982—a full thirteen months before the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, Lebanan—stating that Iran was in touch with a network capable of destroying the Embassy. A subsequent report even specified a date the operation should be carried out.” Ask yourself why the U.S. government didn’t stop this bombing it knew would occur!

Six months after the Embassy bombing on April 18, 1983, the U.S. Marine Barracks in Beirut was bombed on October 23, 1983 killing 220 Marines and 79 other U.S. servicemen. In 1988, the U.S. Navy’s Fleet Center in Naples, Italy also was bombed. Those responsible for the bombings reported to Iranian Prime Minister Mir-Hossein Mousavi.

In May 2007, President Bush issued an order for the CIA to destabilize the government of Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad, and in the Iranian election of 2009, who was portrayed positively by the U.S. as Ahmadinejad’s opponent? It was Mousavi, known as the “Butcher of Beirut”! Ask yourself why our government would do this.]

The Biblical reference to only a “few” being chosen or saved can be found in Matthew 7:14, 20:16, 22:14, and Luke 13:23. Most Christians don’t like to dwell on this, or they think they are one of the “few.” How can so many be deluded? It happens when they don’t recognize that they are in the time of “a [moral] falling away” (2 Thess. 2:3). They rationalize they are “basically good” people and that’s enough, not realizing that no matter how many good deeds one might do, if he or she supports the violent shedding of innocent blood by abortion, for example, then acceptance of Christ as Lord and Savior cannot be “complete” (something required for salvation).

The time of widespread “falling away” perhaps began in the 1960s when Bible-reading and school prayer ended in public schools, and was replaced by the religion of Secular Humanism and situation ethics. These gave rise to slogans such as “Don’t impose your morality on me,” which was followed by the unwillingness of a majority of people to overturn the Supreme Court’s 1973 decisions of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, allowing abortion almost on demand.

Secondly, Jesus is described in The Holy Bible as “the Truth,” and the “falling away” from this under Secular Humanism can be seen, for example, when a federal court in the 1980s ruled that public school students could be forced to read a series of (35) stories that had children lying or rebelling against their parents with no negative consequences. Confirming the acceptability of lying was Dr. Michael Lewis of the New Jersey Robert Wood Johnson Medical School on NBC’s “Today Show” (January 22, 1990) when he said: “Lying is an important part of social life, and children who are unable to do it are children who may have developmental problems.”

That lying was becoming generally more acceptable by this time can be seen by a December 5, 1989 USA Today poll indicating that only 56% said they teach honesty to their children. Since cheating is also being dishonest, relevant to this is the fact that a poll of students conducted for the Girl Scouts by a division of Louis Harris and Associates conducted September 14-October 30, 1989 found that 65% of high school students would cheat on an important exam. And isn’t it generally recognized that many people “fudge” (cheat) on their taxes?

Thirdly, even though The Holy Bible clearly indicates that fornicators “shall not inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9 and Galatians 5:19-21), a “falling away” from maintaining sexual abstinence outside of marriage has been quite evident. In the 1960s and 1970s, popular movies increasingly included fornication. And studies by the Centers for Disease Control showed, for example, that from 1982 to 1988 the percentage of 15-year-old girls having sex increased from 18% to 29%. Admired athletes began publicly to boast of their many sexual “conquests.” And a TV documentary “Against Her Will” about twenty years ago revealed that 35% of college males surveyed reported that they would commit rape if they knew they would not get caught.

Even a number of prominent members of the clergy have been exposed for their sexual immorality, and some of them as well as other TV evangelists have been millionaires, despite the admonition of Matthew 19:24 that “it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” Perhaps they should have listened to the popular song, “Would Jesus Wear A Rolex?”

Society was conditioned to accept sexual immorality. Characters such as Luke on “General Hospital,” Ross on “All My Children,” and John on “As The World Turns,” raped women and became heroes later on these TV soap operas.

About twenty years ago, cursing was also promoted, as in the first half hour of TV’s prime time “Jake and the Fat Man” (December 27, 1989), the stars cursed nine times. In twenty minutes of “Mancuso, FBI” (December 29, 1989), they cursed six times. And within one 15-minute period and another 10-minute period of “Kojak” (January 6, 1990), they cursed five times in each period.

Even authority figures such as the police were portrayed as having no problem with breaking the law. In one of the first episodes of the TV series “Hardball” in 1990, the two leading characters (police officers) don’t flip a coin to see who rides the bike, but rather they toss rocks at a streetlight, causing one of them to say, “Now we’re lawbreakers.” Earlier (Ladies Home Journal, July 1980), Dan Rather of CBS revealed that “as a reporter… I’ve tried everything…. I had someone at the Houston police station shoot me with heroin so I could do a story about it.”

© 2009 Dennis Cuddy - All Rights Reserved

By Greg Evensen

July 29, 2009

When police investigators begin amassing evidence at a crime scene, the bits and pieces of the puzzle begin to take shape. Usually, with several trained men and women working together to come up with an answer, the intent and actions of the perpetrator are almost always revealed.

Since my core training and experience over many years was as a state level enforcement officer, I have worked crime scenes that were large, complex and conflicting. With enough time, effort and resolve, we too, were able to bring the bad guys to account.

You certainly do not have to be a trained state trooper—or any other level police agent—to use common sense, logic and knowledge, to assess the crime scene that has become the socialist states of amerika.

I continue to be at a loss to explain how it is that so many tens of millions of amerikans simply do not see the utter destruction of their former republic by socialists, one worlders, deviates, liars and thieves. The men in black have been roving the country flashing their memory erasers around the clock. Let’s take a check on how things are really going.

Our nation’s police forces prior to the criminal thug Richard Nixon were centered on community policing. MOST of their time was spent on looking for, identifying, and monitoring criminals, and responding to unusual or dangerous events that were beyond the control of ordinary folks. We appreciated those officers and were proud to say, “he is OUR Cop!” We knew that we could talk to him, kid him, see him play adult softball, and sit across from him in church. We watched him shed tears when one of our kids didn’t make it home after a night of drinking and driving. We remembered him at Christmas, because he didn’t make much you know.

I said “him” because back then, there were no women in the ranks.

As government began its sickening expansion, policing became a meaner and nastier job. It was made that way by badge wearing thugs who didn’t hesitate to do whatever they were told by the S.A.C. (Special Agent in Charge) of the FBI, BATF(E), US Marshal’s Office right down to armed poultry inspectors—yes they have them and they are really tough on criminal chickens. The “us against them” mentality, and the “mission essential” attitude justified SWAT teams, “dynamic entries,” and later use of MACE, TASERS, FLASHBANG GRENADES and “routine” use of SUBMACHINE guns. All in the name of “taking down” the accused—no matter the charge. I abhor such police tactics and was an officer that served my own warrants, rarely with one other officer at the back door.

Now we have become eaves-dropping, roadblock setting, door crashing, face grinding, arm breaking, pursuit driven bastards that have sold their asses to the government masters hell bent on establishing the TRUE reincarnation of the dreaded SS. That is NO overstatement. Note: There are significant numbers of officers at all levels that simply detest the forced training at FEMA centers, the requirements to stop Patriots and others simply because they “look” dangerous, and are exercising free speech statements on their vehicles. By whose ultimate authority does this take place? By whose ultimate judgment is it that it is necessary to harass INNOCENT drivers and families? The public sees this Gestapo mentality as far more of a danger than any stickers they put on their vehicles? Where are all these “faithful” enforcers of the law when it comes to confronting the unlawful, unconstitutional, unjustifiable, and unmerciful rotten bunch of usurpers, communists, atheists, deviated, immoral scungebuckets that are walking the halls of Congress, the White House, and the Federal Courts? How is it that the “get ‘em at any cost” morons at Homeland Security have created an environment in amerika that is an unwarranted intrusion of power in 186 other nations?
And all of this is done in the name of safety and security. I guess that a majority of ignorant buffoons really do believe that Barack Sotero is the Messiah and he does hold the keys to socialist paradise in his hands.

So, once again, I implore those officers of the law who are in grave doubt about the legitimate authenticity of their superiors in any agency, to simply read the constitution, re-read their oath of office, seek out retired officers for guidance, and remember this very carefully—to brutalize citizens in the pursuit of order, is a guaranteed recipe for resistance. PLEASE do not pit yourselves (all 650,000 officers at all levels in the US) against a seething and angry populace who outnumber you 5000 to 1. Believe me; you want all of us working with you, not against you.

Have you been made aware of the massive roadblock plans to stop all travelers for a vaccine bracelet (stainless steel band with a micro-chip on board) that will force you to take the shot? Refuse it? You will be placed on a prison bus and taken to a quarantine camp. What will you do when your children are NOT allowed into school without the shot? What will you do when you are not allowed into the workplace without the vaccine paperwork? Buy groceries? Go to the bank? Shop anywhere?? Get on a plane, bus or train? Use the toilet in the mall? Nope. Police officers will become loathed, feared, despised and remembered for their “official” duties.

This nation is racing at interceptor speed toward a day of reckoning that has never been dreamed of. The lack of common sense, unusual brutality, and unintended consequences of the days of fall and winter will turn our overweight, undereducated, unchurched, and unprepared society into a wasteland of the abused and uncared for leftovers.

The recent training session in Crystal Falls gave people from all over the Midwest, an opportunity to taste independence, teamwork and hope. The singleness of purpose and deep caring for others who an half hour before were unknowns, proved to us all that freedom, honesty, personal skills based on common sense and preparation REALLY DO WORK!! We will never forget that time together. The caring folks who have asked me to come and speak to them about these same issues are precious examples of Americans who are willing to make the effort to have someone—ANYONE—help them see some daylight. We are beginning to make a difference, thanks to them.

The reason hundreds of others have sent for the DVD seminar, is because they could not get to a live seminar. They have seen the need, are sharing the information and are 100 to 1 grateful for it. One guy calling himself the “anti-rights American” told me precisely what he thought of me and others like me (implied). I cannot state it here. One other said it was useless to him since he was a Viet Nam veteran involved with MAC-SOG training and forward combat experience. I replied to him that many of the folks who were thrilled and let us know that, were not in his league. You decide, and no matter how I would like to be one of hundreds providing this service, I am one of a VERY few. I am told that no one else is willing to commit to a live audience or DVD, the things that I say.

That was certainly true of the issues covered at the in-field session held last week. It is time to lay down some plans that will get you through the galactic storm that is almost upon us. Do all you can. Do what you must. If you hesitate, you will become a quarantine camp victim or a casualty.

I have hundreds of police officers at all levels and military men placing their careers on the line with information that confirms every shred of the worst case scenario. You have been warned thousands of times, and yet you dismiss me and many others out of hand as nut-jobs, because we went out to the twig part of the branch to bring you information that freedom loving true remnant patriots must have.

I do not know entirely where amerika is in these perilous times in regard to the Holy Scriptures, but I will tell you this. We have welcomed the evil that has gripped this land and deserve whatever is retribution from God. I do cling to the hope that we will make some difference to others, if we will just not give in to the sweet assurances offered by the deceiver in charge of the nation and his winged monkeys on Capital Hill. The federal courts are basically the living room of hell for wrongfully accused citizens who have no other choice but to submit to the mouth of the lion.

“Look up, for your redemption draweth nigh,” is sufficient for the Believer. For the smug, anti-Christian militants, gay rights activists, brutality minded judges and others. Look straight ahead, for your moment of accountability before fed-up Americans is closer than you care to think.

To dear friend Alan Stang’s family, you are in Liz and my fervent prayers. A giant oak has fallen. We will deeply miss his strength and the comfort of his intellect, love of country, and courage very rarely equaled. Good-by friend, see you later! Please see to it that his family does not want for a thing.

[NOTE: Greg Evensen will be the main speaker at the all day seminar 9 to 5 in Medford, OR., on August 22, 2009 at the Medford Library. The event is sponsored by Bill Meyer from KMED Radio. The price for the all day event is only $25.00 per person.
1- Sent check to Bill Meyer at KMED radio, 3624 Avion Drive, Medford, OR., 97504
2- Via PayPal
3- Cash at the door is also acceptable.]

© 2009 Greg Evensen - All Rights Reserved

By Chuck Baldwin
August 11, 2009

The Internet is abuzz with news about the construction of internment camps all across America. Of course, "mainstream" media outlets refuse to touch the subject; or if they do, they pooh-pooh the story; they do what Glenn Beck recently did: try to debunk the story as fallacious and impugn people who speak of it as "conspiracy nuts." The fact that the Becks, Hannitys, Limbaughs, and O'Reillys of the media circus refuse to deal with the construction of large numbers of internment camps does not make them disappear, however.

For starters, all anyone need do to begin a serious investigation of the subject of internment camps is Google the phrase "FEMA Camps." There is more than enough evidence in that search engine alone to keep one busy with some in-depth private investigation of the subject for quite a while.

Another URL to check out is this one from the June 2009 Idaho Observer.

As people read my columns all across America, I have had numerous readers contact me, saying that they have personally witnessed the transportation of construction materials used for internment camps, have actually worked in and around them, or have personally seen such camps. These eyewitness testimonies have come from very credible people, including law enforcement and military personnel, as well as airline pilots and construction workers.

Just a few weeks ago, I was aboard a cross-country flight when the passenger I was sitting next to (a total stranger) asked me to take a look out the window. He asked, "Do those look like internment camps to you?" I was astonished that the man (1) would even know to notice such a potentiality, and (2) would be so bold as to ask such a question of a total stranger. I must say, I was extremely happy to make his acquaintance. And we had a very warm and invigorating discussion the rest of the trip.

We were flying over Colorado, over extreme wilderness terrain, and, yes, right in the middle of nowhere, the buildings and surrounding features that I saw sure looked like internment camps to me. Of course, flying at over 30,000 feet in the sky makes it difficult for any kind of detailed analysis to take place; that is for sure.

Then, a friend recently brought this URL to my attention.

This is an advertisement by the National Guard promoting the Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) of "Internment/Resettlement Specialist." Question: why does the National Guard need to recruit Internment/Resettlement Specialists? What do they know that we should know?

Furthermore, I have had military personnel tell me that many of the US military bases that have been recently "closed" are also being prepared as large-scale "holding areas."

Obviously, the question that begs to be asked is, "Who is the US government planning to intern and resettle?" And another question is, "How many people are they planning to intern that would require the massive number of camps that are apparently being constructed?"

Some suggest that these facilities are being prepared for large numbers of illegal immigrants. This seems extremely doubtful, however, considering the propensity of the federal government to (1) do next to nothing to seriously curtail the flood of illegal aliens into America, (2) do virtually nothing to apprehend illegals known to be in the US, and (3) do everything it can to facilitate the release of those illegals incarcerated by State and local authorities. To think that the federal government intends to place thousands of illegal aliens in internment camps borders on lunacy. If anything, the federal government (with either Democrats or Republicans in charge) has done everything it can to (1) entice illegals to come to America, and (2) provide every incentive for them to stay illegally in this country after having entered. I feel safe in saying that we can eliminate the possibility that these camps are being prepared for illegal aliens.

Others suggest that these internment camps are being constructed to accommodate "enemy combatants" from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Yet, the total number of these types of detainees is miniscule compared to the detention space being constructed. Can one really imagine the need to build facilities that could accommodate prisoners numbering in the tens of thousands to house a few hundred foreign troops? I don't think so.

Then, of course, there are those who continue to deny that these internment camps exist at all. But then, were there not thousands of Germans who denied the existence of concentration camps during World War II? These types of people would refuse to believe the sun came up in the east if the government spinmeisters told them it didn't.

That our federal government is building large numbers of "holding areas" or internment camps seems to be an established fact. The only questions that remain are "Why?" and "For whom?"

At this point, the imagination can take us anywhere, but it is not a little disconcerting when the same federal government that is building these internment camps begins categorizing Christians, conservatives, people who support the Second Amendment, people who oppose abortion and homosexual marriage, people who oppose the North American Union and the New World Order, people who oppose the United Nations and illegal immigration, and people who voted for Ron Paul or Chuck Baldwin as "extremists," or "potential dangerous militia members."

Anyone knows that before a government can begin persecuting and imprisoning large groups of people, they must first marginalize them. As someone said, "Just because you are paranoid does not mean they really aren't trying to get you."

In fact, an argument could be made that by today's politically correct definition, America's Founding Fathers would be categorized as "paranoid," "extremists," or "potential dangerous militia members." I would even go so far as to question the patriotism of anyone today that is not a little paranoid. This federal government has certainly earned whatever paranoia citizens feel.

Feelings of paranoia notwithstanding, why is the federal government constructing large numbers of internment camps, and who does the government plan on incarcerating in those camps? Those questions still need to be answered.

P.S. If you live within driving distance of Oklahoma City, or Tulsa, Oklahoma, I will be appearing at several events in this area this Thursday and Friday, August 13 and 14. I would love to meet any of my readers who could attend these meetings. For details, go here.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link.

© 2009 Chuck Baldwin - All Rights Reserved
Why is National Guard recruiting for 'internment' cops?
Ad campaign seeks workers at 'civilian resettlement facility'

Posted: August 07, 2009
11:45 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh

An ad campaign featured on a U.S. Army website seeking those who would be interested in being an "Internment/Resettlement" specialist is raising alarms across the country, generating concerns that there is some truth in those theories about domestic detention camps, a roundup of dissidents and a crackdown on "threatening" conservatives.

Are you an enemy of the state? Get the bumper sticker that lets everyone know you have no apologies for being right!

The ads, at the website as well as others including, cite the need for:

"Internment/Resettlement (I/R) Specialists in the Army are primarily responsible for day-to-day operations in a military confinement/correctional facility or detention/internment facility. I/R Specialists provide rehabilitative, health, welfare, and security to U.S. military prisoners within a confinement or correctional facility; conduct inspections; prepare written reports; and coordinate activities of prisoners/internees and staff personnel.
The campaign follows by only weeks a report from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security warning about "right-wing extremists" who could pose a danger to the country – including those who support third-party political candidates, oppose abortion and would prefer to have the U.S. immigration laws already on the books enforced.

The "extremism" report coincided with a report out of California that the Department of Defense was describing protesters as "low-level terrorists."

The new ad says successful candidates will "provide external security to … detention/internment facilities" and "provide counseling and guidance to individual prisoners within a rehabilitative program."

Officials at the state and federal National Guard levels told WND they were unaware of the program, although one officer speculated it could be intended for soldiers trained in the U.S. and dispatched overseas to "detention facilities." From the national level, WND was told, officials were unaware of any such "internment facilities" at which there could be jobs to be available.

At a website, a front page video describes the position thoroughly.

But one of the critics was a YouTube contributor who identifies himself as jafount and titled his video, "Want a job putting people into camps?"

Alarmed by the ads, he said it, the idea "just absolutely blew my mind."

Citing a promise that successful applicants would be trained in "search and restrain procedures," he said, "That's code for violating the 14th Amendment."

Likewise, he said, "use of firearms" is "code for depriving somebody of their life.'

"This is the real deal, I think," he said, citing, among others, the link.

"I saw something that didn't sit right with me. I posted it so other people can investigate," he said.

A commenter on the YouTube site pooh-poohed the whole suggestion.

"You have … put out a relatively benign fact, twisted it into something sinister, and then did a tinfoil-hat connection to give a false impression," the forum participant wrote.

The ads list as "advanced responsibilities" issues such as supervision and administration, responsibility for the "prisoner/internee" population, "custody/control for the operation of an Enemy Prisoner of War/Civilian Internee (EPW/CI) camp," and work on "custody/control for the operation of detention facility or the operation of a displaced civilian (CD) resettlement facility."

An editorial at raised some overall concerns:

Let's look at some of the evidence we have of the U.S. government's intentions to establish the infrastructure that could be used to house large numbers of political dissidents, so-called terrorists and other individuals the U.S. government wants locked up.

HR 645 the National Emergency Centers Establishment Act is a proposed bill in the U.S. House of Representatives that would authorize FEMA to build no less than six National Emergency Centers throughout the U.S. on closed or open military facilities. These facilities are to be designed to house large numbers of people. Why would emergency centers need to be built on closed or open military facilities unless there was a need to keep people from coming in and out of them?

KBR was granted a government contract a few years ago to build facilities to house illegal immigrants. Now with illegal immigration becoming less of a problem with the U.S. economy in the toilet, these facilities can now be used for other purposes.
"This is just another step in the U.S. government's long term plan to build the infrastructure that could be used to contain wide spread popular revolt. Combine this with the swine flu fear mongering and the potential for a mass swine flu vaccination operation and it is easy to see what might happen. Refuse to take their poisonous vaccine and you might risk being locked up as being a hazard to public safety. With the economy in the toilet and more and more people not trusting either political party or the corporate media, the 'powers that be' realize that they need to continue building their martial law apparatus. These Army National Guard job listings are just another piece to that puzzle proving what we already know is being built," the editorial claimed.

At the Examiner, a commentator wrote, "Correctional/internment facilities? I have to admit that the U.S. government is good at one thing: creating fluffy names for evil acts. During WW2, of course, the U.S. didn't have concentration camps, we had 'relocation centers' for hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese citizens."

The jobs also were listed at, and

WND reported when the DoD eventually withdrew a training manual question that linked protesters across the United States to terrorism.

That followed by only weeks a Department of Homeland Security report that described as "right-wing extremists" those who oppose abortion and support secure national borders.

Richard Thompson, president of the Thomas More Law Center, has told WND that as part of his organization's research for its lawsuit over the DHS "extremism" report, it has discovered additional information that it is withholding now but will include in a pending amended complaint.

Thompson said one of the things that sparked the organization's curiosity was a reference by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano in the original report to not only government resources but also non-governmental resources.

Thompson said the information he has "creates even more concern that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is unconstitutionally targeting Americans merely because of their conservative beliefs."

The earlier DHS report was "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment." WND has posted the report online for readers to see.

The report linked returning veterans with the possibility of terrorism, and when it was released it created such a furor for Napolitano she has given several explanations for it, including that she would have reworded the report and that it was issued by a rogue employee.

She later apologized to veterans for having linked them to terror.

But Thompson noted that the report also targeted as "potential terrorists" Americans who:

Oppose abortion

Oppose same-sex marriage

Oppose restrictions on firearms

Oppose lax immigration laws

Oppose the policies of President Obama regarding immigration, citizenship, and the expansion of social programs

Oppose continuation of free trade agreements

Are suspect of foreign regimes

Fear Communist regimes

Oppose a "one world" government

Bemoan the decline of U.S. stature in the world

Are upset with loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China and India, and more
Thompson told WND no apology has been offered to the members of any of those classes of citizens.

Thompson said the original "extremism" report was "the tip of the iceberg. … Conservative Americans should be very outraged."

The Thomas More Law Center filed its lawsuit against Napolitano and the DHS on behalf of nationally syndicated conservative radio talk show host Michael Savage, Gregg Cunningham of the pro-life organization Center for Bio-Ethical Reform Inc. and Iraqi War Marine veteran Kevin Murray.

It alleges the federal agency violated the First and Fifth Amendment constitutional rights of the three plaintiffs by targeting them for disfavored treatment and chilling their free speech, expressive association, and equal protection rights. The lawsuit further claims that DHS encouraged law enforcement officers throughout the nation to target and report citizens to federal officials as suspicious rightwing extremists and potential terrorists because of their political beliefs.