Click Here to Read the Press Release
Gee Guys? Rape and murder of the elderly isn't worthy of the death penalty? Reformative JUSTICE? Where was the justice for defenseless 88 year old Ruth Phillips?
I guess removing the Ten Commandments from site in public education removes any serious mind damage to those who don't see them-- and yours too?
Has TRI gone mad because those you are pandering to are not going to provide financial aid to your ill focused defense!
No doubt he deserves to be punished? And rate of recidivism on such people who are placed in peril by "reformative Justice?
DD
I have enjoyed reading many of John's opinions and have found myself agreeing with a vast majority
of them.
This is one that I find myself in opposition to. My reasons are the following.
One: For crimes of this nature, I am in favor of the death penalty.
Two: The heinousness of this crime cries out for this type of penalty.
Three: There are many in our society who have been subjected to abuse as children who
manage to live out their lives without committing acts of violence against others.
What if the jurors had been given a "complete picture", of the abuse, his attorneys claim Mr Jackson
was subjected to as a child, and the jury still found for the death penalty?
If one is opposed to the death penalty, for any crime, then those in opposition will always argue that
the guilty have not received a fair trial, or that there are mitigating circumstances to warrant undoing
a lawful verdict.
Sincerely,
Stephen
Monday, August 15, 2011
Monday, August 8, 2011
Is the Christian Right Getting Fooled Again?
Click Here to Read the Commentary
Aloha Mr. Rutherford!
This is yet ANOTHER article that makes me thankful I receive your newsletter! Mahalo!
I know you are a man of faith, and yet you choose not to blindly follow the "men" that profess "I am the way..." I respect your honesty.
I never quite know what to expect in my inbox, and that does intrigue me... Writings like this, documents and speeches from King, actions from J. Wallis, writings of John Deare, all move in the direction that Christ laid out for all to learn from... Too bad the riches of life enthrall so many...
Keep up the good work, Sir,
Malama Pono,
Mike
Thank you for posting this. I don't know how many Christians will read it much less heed your caution. I believeas a Christian who has a bit of Spiritual Discernment, that Rick Perry is a shrewd and consumate politician who will use every trick in the book, even if it means trying to decieve the people of God.
Bettye
You email is a good one but let me say this as a person whose family The Bowery Sullivans have been involved in politics since 1890---all Churches become somewhat political and at the turn of the century Irish Catholic priest asked the parishioners to vote for Tammany as it looked after the immigrant and Jewish district leaders and local politicians always worked the local temple.
We have had priests and ministers involved in the ant-war movement and run for elective office.
All of this without disgracing their cloth like Fr. Coughlin or Fr, Feeney.
I do believe that Rick Perry is treading on dangerous ground and is exciting people who call this country a Christian country. Very dangerous.
Tim
Was not Joseph raised to power? Moses? Joshua? Paul? Paul was a powerful person before his conversion. He used that power when he needed to, calling on his Roman citizenship etc. Maybe the reason Jesus was not more political was because he knew his ministry in the flesh was not going to last long. Many Christians believe their lack of involvement, years ago, is at least partly to blame for the mess we are in in America, today. Jesus must be lifted up in all areas of life, including politics.
I am a retired pastor living in an eastern Tennessee small community. We live among good people, yet they are not known for progressive thoughts and actions. Your articles (especially the one published on August 12: "Is the Christian Right getting fooled?") are very welcomed. Many thanks for your continued thoughts and reflections as you challenge us as a gadfly. Peace and Hope - William
Aloha Mr. Rutherford!
This is yet ANOTHER article that makes me thankful I receive your newsletter! Mahalo!
I know you are a man of faith, and yet you choose not to blindly follow the "men" that profess "I am the way..." I respect your honesty.
I never quite know what to expect in my inbox, and that does intrigue me... Writings like this, documents and speeches from King, actions from J. Wallis, writings of John Deare, all move in the direction that Christ laid out for all to learn from... Too bad the riches of life enthrall so many...
Keep up the good work, Sir,
Malama Pono,
Mike
Thank you for posting this. I don't know how many Christians will read it much less heed your caution. I believeas a Christian who has a bit of Spiritual Discernment, that Rick Perry is a shrewd and consumate politician who will use every trick in the book, even if it means trying to decieve the people of God.
Bettye
You email is a good one but let me say this as a person whose family The Bowery Sullivans have been involved in politics since 1890---all Churches become somewhat political and at the turn of the century Irish Catholic priest asked the parishioners to vote for Tammany as it looked after the immigrant and Jewish district leaders and local politicians always worked the local temple.
We have had priests and ministers involved in the ant-war movement and run for elective office.
All of this without disgracing their cloth like Fr. Coughlin or Fr, Feeney.
I do believe that Rick Perry is treading on dangerous ground and is exciting people who call this country a Christian country. Very dangerous.
Tim
Was not Joseph raised to power? Moses? Joshua? Paul? Paul was a powerful person before his conversion. He used that power when he needed to, calling on his Roman citizenship etc. Maybe the reason Jesus was not more political was because he knew his ministry in the flesh was not going to last long. Many Christians believe their lack of involvement, years ago, is at least partly to blame for the mess we are in in America, today. Jesus must be lifted up in all areas of life, including politics.
I am a retired pastor living in an eastern Tennessee small community. We live among good people, yet they are not known for progressive thoughts and actions. Your articles (especially the one published on August 12: "Is the Christian Right getting fooled?") are very welcomed. Many thanks for your continued thoughts and reflections as you challenge us as a gadfly. Peace and Hope - William
Television News: Are We Amusing Ourselves to Death?
Click Here to Read the Commentary
I totally enjoyed reading your two part editorial on the Media. We get it in a small town paper(The Pilot News). In my lifetime I've seen the media go from real reporting to the garbage they now spout as the news. In my own situation of being an Amateur Radio Operator, I've learned to look elsewhere for fact on shortwave, but even here you must have the salt shaker handy. It appears that the purpose of the whole thing is the dumbing down of the American Public so we will sit and be complacent little "subjects" with no mind of our own except what we are told by the talking heads of the networks. The edited stories of the news should start with "Once upon a time....".
I look forward to your further articles. They are read and discussed here in "flyover country".
Frank
Hi, Mr. Whitehead,
I am for freedom and agree with much of what you say. I agree with what you say about television "news" being little more than entertainment. But you also list Sean Hannity among some of these "entertainers" and I would like to ask you to reconsider. I also wonder why you have chosen to include him. Mr. Hannity speaks out for freedom, like you do. He delves into the issues and the lies of the mainstream media and shows how we are losing our freedoms. He informs us of what is really happening in America so that we can take a stand for what is right.
You include Mr. Hannity in your judgement of : Yet these talking heads are little more than Wizard of Oz-like front men for the powers-that-be, the mega corporations whose sphere of influence extends from the newsroom to the nexus of political power, Washington, DC.
Please do not attack and criticize people who are also fighting for our freedoms as you do, just because they may use a different medium then you do. Mr. Hannity is reaching people with the truth.
Again, I ask you to please reconsider attacking people who are fighting for truth and freedom in America.
Thank you,
Theresa
Your article which appeared in a local Wisconsin paper as "TV news gives a biased view of the world," was read with interest and appreciation. However, I believe that the article would be more accurate and pertinent if the following were eliminated or revised.
"In our media-dominated age, news personalities such as Bill O'Reilly, Chris Matthews, Sean Hannity, and Rachel Maddow, among others, dispense the news with power and certainty like preachers used to dispense religion and boast vast viewerships that hang on their every word." I have never felt these personalities were. "...dispensing the news." Rather, it is opinion, commentary, ideology, etc. Often their presentations are bracketed by opposing points of view. There is abundant evidence that the "NEWS" is biased. There is no need to created "straw men" to prove your points.
"Clearly, there can be little hope for objective reporting in an environment ..." A M E N ! "
Howard
Dear Staff,
Your institution espouses dedication to addressing serious issues ignored by the main stream media. What a joke. Where were you guys when Obama’s association with Bill Ayers, a know domestic terrorist, and Jeremiah Wright, a black liberation theology proponent, were being overlooked? Where were you when government influence on financial institutions forced them to provide home mortgages to people who could not afford them, thus creating an economic downturn with global ramifications? More recently, where is your expose on HR4646, a bill currently being snuck through Washington which puts a 1% tax on personal bank deposits?
Your president, John Whitehead, tells us the main stream media does not provide credible news. He indicates we need to go on the internet for the truth. He refers to Arianna Huffington as a vanguard in integrating news with social media. That reveals your true political slant, which is obviously based on a very socialistic agenda. Credible? What a joke!
Respectfully yours,
Joe
Dear Mr. Whitehead:
Thank you for your column on the news media lacking investigative reporting and news. I was talking Wednesday to a group of senior citizens about Montana's historical lack of investigative reporting due to Anaconda Copper and its electrical arm Montana Power owning the papers till out-of-state corporation bought the papers to sell ads, and TV news no long subject to a fairness doctrine. A gentleman in the audience said, see Whitehead's columns in the current Belgrade News. I looked, and there was your excellent column -- on the page facing my own guest opinion piece on social security law in Montana in 1923. I appreciate the work you are doing through your column and institute. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Anne
I totally enjoyed reading your two part editorial on the Media. We get it in a small town paper(The Pilot News). In my lifetime I've seen the media go from real reporting to the garbage they now spout as the news. In my own situation of being an Amateur Radio Operator, I've learned to look elsewhere for fact on shortwave, but even here you must have the salt shaker handy. It appears that the purpose of the whole thing is the dumbing down of the American Public so we will sit and be complacent little "subjects" with no mind of our own except what we are told by the talking heads of the networks. The edited stories of the news should start with "Once upon a time....".
I look forward to your further articles. They are read and discussed here in "flyover country".
Frank
Hi, Mr. Whitehead,
I am for freedom and agree with much of what you say. I agree with what you say about television "news" being little more than entertainment. But you also list Sean Hannity among some of these "entertainers" and I would like to ask you to reconsider. I also wonder why you have chosen to include him. Mr. Hannity speaks out for freedom, like you do. He delves into the issues and the lies of the mainstream media and shows how we are losing our freedoms. He informs us of what is really happening in America so that we can take a stand for what is right.
You include Mr. Hannity in your judgement of : Yet these talking heads are little more than Wizard of Oz-like front men for the powers-that-be, the mega corporations whose sphere of influence extends from the newsroom to the nexus of political power, Washington, DC.
Please do not attack and criticize people who are also fighting for our freedoms as you do, just because they may use a different medium then you do. Mr. Hannity is reaching people with the truth.
Again, I ask you to please reconsider attacking people who are fighting for truth and freedom in America.
Thank you,
Theresa
Your article which appeared in a local Wisconsin paper as "TV news gives a biased view of the world," was read with interest and appreciation. However, I believe that the article would be more accurate and pertinent if the following were eliminated or revised.
"In our media-dominated age, news personalities such as Bill O'Reilly, Chris Matthews, Sean Hannity, and Rachel Maddow, among others, dispense the news with power and certainty like preachers used to dispense religion and boast vast viewerships that hang on their every word." I have never felt these personalities were. "...dispensing the news." Rather, it is opinion, commentary, ideology, etc. Often their presentations are bracketed by opposing points of view. There is abundant evidence that the "NEWS" is biased. There is no need to created "straw men" to prove your points.
"Clearly, there can be little hope for objective reporting in an environment ..." A M E N ! "
Howard
Dear Staff,
Your institution espouses dedication to addressing serious issues ignored by the main stream media. What a joke. Where were you guys when Obama’s association with Bill Ayers, a know domestic terrorist, and Jeremiah Wright, a black liberation theology proponent, were being overlooked? Where were you when government influence on financial institutions forced them to provide home mortgages to people who could not afford them, thus creating an economic downturn with global ramifications? More recently, where is your expose on HR4646, a bill currently being snuck through Washington which puts a 1% tax on personal bank deposits?
Your president, John Whitehead, tells us the main stream media does not provide credible news. He indicates we need to go on the internet for the truth. He refers to Arianna Huffington as a vanguard in integrating news with social media. That reveals your true political slant, which is obviously based on a very socialistic agenda. Credible? What a joke!
Respectfully yours,
Joe
Dear Mr. Whitehead:
Thank you for your column on the news media lacking investigative reporting and news. I was talking Wednesday to a group of senior citizens about Montana's historical lack of investigative reporting due to Anaconda Copper and its electrical arm Montana Power owning the papers till out-of-state corporation bought the papers to sell ads, and TV news no long subject to a fairness doctrine. A gentleman in the audience said, see Whitehead's columns in the current Belgrade News. I looked, and there was your excellent column -- on the page facing my own guest opinion piece on social security law in Montana in 1923. I appreciate the work you are doing through your column and institute. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Anne
Monday, August 1, 2011
The Plight of Marco Sauceda and the Loss of Our Freedoms
Click Here to Read the Commentary
You article amazes me. Of all the examples to use about our civil liberties and you choose to write about an Honduran immigrant who speaks no english. The police were called there because a concerned neighbor saw a man kicking in a door. Even the most prudent of liberals like yourself should see that the police were obligated to respond and investigate. The police, probably speaking english....god forbid, instructed the man several times to show himself. He didn't. So the police handled it. A police invasion? Not at all, they were called, they responded and had a duty to investigate. Not the fault of the police that the man doesn't speak english. Poor poor Mr. Sauceda. If you want my sympathy you wont find it for an Honduran immigrant. You make it out like the cops were monsters. Like they were just driving along and picked out some illegal immigrant to mess with. The best part of your article is when you say, "When the police did finally get Sauceda out of the bathroom, they pepper-sprayed him, shot him with a pepper ball gun and wrestled him to the ground." WOW. The police probably did it for no reason. I'm sure the Honduran immigrant who speaks no english and has the mind of a child was totally cooperative. I'm sure the police probably just got done watching porn in their cars and decided to kick the crap out of a brown person. Very compelling human story.
You and other Liberal minded folk often speak of revolution, not in the war sense. But that each individual is responsible to guard our freedoms and not let the government take that away from us. News flash........most people are sheep. They are scared. They want to wake up, drink their coffee. Put the kids on the bus, go to work and not be bothered. I, like you desire change. But our children are raised to be politically correct and passive. Do you think our Founding Father's were passive??
No, i don't think they were. They believed they could make a difference, they could stand with other Patriots and fight off oppression and tyranny. That passion is gone. Most don't have the intestinal fortitude to fight. I served my country in the Marine's and have a deep love for this country, as you do. Today I serve the Commonwealth as a State Trooper, and have been one for nine years. I have a wife and 3 children. I do it because hopefully i can make a difference and ensure a brighter future for all of our families. But sometimes when i read your paranoid articles about the police and how they misuse their power, it makes me mad. I am not blind to police corruption. But most of us are good honest people. Who love this country. But it is a difficult job. Especially when people don't trust us.
I look forward to hearing from you. I know this was a little sarcastic but obviously we have different point of views. I respect your views and agree that our government may not always be on our side. But the police are pawns in a bigger struggle to take this country back. I desire a revolution. One that will change our government. But I, like most other Americans, have jobs, families and have bills to pay. So i guess it will just have to wait.
I will continue to read your articles.
Sincerely,
Matthew
Mr. Whitehead,
I read today your excellent column in the Richmond Times-Dispatch. Very well said. I have added you to my short list of modern-day American Patriots. At this point my list includes You, Deroy Murdock, A. Barton Hinkle, and the entire Richmond Times-Dispatch Op/Ed staff.
"The similarities to pre-Revolutionary America are startling." What is even more startling to me is the complacency of a people that call themselves free. You are right. This persistent creep of tyranny has been so slow that it has lulled us to sleep. So many of us have ceded our free will -- to the common good-- for so long, we no longer recognize tyranny. This theft of liberty, and autonomy, is exactly the same type of violation that ignited the American Revolution. Yet, today, we shrug it off as if it were nothing.
"Every successful revolution puts on in time the robes of the tyrant it has deposed." Barbara Tuchman
I eagerly await your next column. Godspeed my friend.
Sincerely,
Kevin
p.s. Please, if i might indulge you a bit further and quote Orwell. "Sometimes it is the duty of intelligent men to restate the obvious." Duty calls you sir. I humbly suggest that you get on with it.
"The U.S. Supreme Court effectively decimated the Fourth Amendment in an 8-1 ruling in Kentucky v. King by giving police more leeway to smash down doors of homes or apartments without a warrant when in search of illegal drugs which they suspect might be destroyed if the Fourth Amendment requirement of a warrant were followed."
This ruling is very disturbing. What is the point of having a 4th Amendment? how could 8 justices rule in favor of unlawful entry? What can we do to reverse this? I've lived in communist countries in my work, and it is normal for police to smash down doors whenever they like - and now the U.S. is no different.
Kurt
"In a very real sense, we truly are back to where we started in those pre-Revolutionary War days, seemingly having learned next to nothing from those early days of tyranny at the hands of the British crown." (The Plight of Marco Sauceda and the Loss of Our Freedoms)
Exactly. And it's been like that for decades, in my estimation. This is a major, major problem for Americans, even if few recognize it.
Not much difference in freedom from London, London Ontario, and Loudoun County.
Doug
Dear John
For some time it has seemed obvious to me that the goal of government was to criminalize the population. Once we have all been individually maligned, impugned or discredited we will distrust each other and view one another through a cloud of suspicion. This will allow the government, through legislation and a dependent, subservient police force to peel away the most egregious objectors to totalitarianism in the name of public safety. Even if we know that it is wrong, the pall of guilt cast upon everyone (aided by a complicit media) will paralyze us into inaction. As that begins to happen, Mr. Sauceda was just a "disposable" test case, I am going to miss you.
Sincerely,
Paul
USA is an evil torturing nation of it's own innocent citizens
And that is the damn truth.... 100% truth.
I am talking about many thousands of innocent Americans who have been put on a totally Unconstitutional 24/7/365 Patriot Act Sanctioned Organized Stalking Program-- where they not only surveil you, they vandalize your property, character assassinate you everywhere you go and in your home and hotels they bath you with painful directed energy weapon assaults. I have found numerous cops involved in this... retired cops, marines, former military and they have used these same type electronic torture weapons on my 78 year old mother when I stayed at her home in San Diego for a time after getting driven out of my home in Nashua, NH by extremely painful directed energy weapons. So don't tell me this is a good country.... we have an evil Government and through decades past the government is no better than the people who have been in charge. In the United States today--- across the entire nation, Americans charged with no crime, under investigation for no crime are having National Security Letters issued against them and mostly for vigilante- vendetta reasons that has nothing to do with terrorism. This can be kicked off by people in the government who are using the program that was most likely developed to deal with sleeper cell terrorists as a vendetta tool for gripes they cowardly cannot handle as a man or woman so they have their adversary in some non terrorist related issue put on this fucking program from hell. There is a shitload of people going through this. I am only one. And I am not putting up with i,t I can guarantee you that.
Once the Posse Comitatus Act was suspended in 2007 this kicked into high gear by war mongering self righteous evil bastards who think they are protecting America from terrorists when in reality they are torturing and harassing innocent Americans.
A bogus SAR report and the an NSL is issued... you have no day in court and then you are put on this goddamn program. God Bless Stasi America.
This Government is torturing thousands of their citizens.... You tell me that is a good government. There are a lot of websites that explain what is happening with this. This one I think is the most accurate. The website is by married couple with 3 children and they too have had to move around the country to try to get some relief. Which really doesn't work.
Sheriff Bill Gore in San Diego said " his name does not come up in my computer", after he ran my dob, ss#. drivers license number. And yet in San Diego I was hit with both government sponsored Patriot Act organized stalking 24/7/365 and painful directed energy weapons torture for hundreds of night and watched my 77 year old mother as she would be crying from the pain saying, " why did you bring this to my house." Captain Peter Segal of the Nashua, NH police Dept said " you are not under investigation for any crime." And my story is one of many thousands.. and growing Americans being put on this harassment, provocation, torturing 24/7/365 program.
So you look into this you moral high road truth seekers-- And let's see what the hell you do with the SPIN on this --- and then you will find out if what I am saying is the fucking truth or just stay Government Propaganda Specialists.
http://www.torturedinamerica.org/
Jeff
Just read this Op/Ed from August 1, 2011. Thanks for speaking up. I am really upset at the destruction of our personal liberties. The strip searching at the airports is one example. The government using imminent domain to steal people's property is another. The city of Raleigh sends letters to elderly in their 80s threatening a lawsuit if they don't sign over their property for less than 50% of the value the city assessed the property for tax purposes. They always time these letters to arrive right before a long vacation like Thanksgiving or Christmas to torture the recipient to the max. The reason for the imminent domain - to build a 50 foot wide bike path down the center of their property.
How's this: I'm driving down the Interstate. A driver in a one ton pickup truck who had been going 85 mpg earlier up the road is now blocking the highway, cruising at 55 (70 mph speed limit) is the left lane, neck and neck with another car in the right lane. I pull between the two lanes to try to see around the two vehicles. A state trooper pulls me over. First words out of his mouth: "Where are you going in such a hurry." Duh, I wasn't going anywhere, was I? So I answer "Nowhere." Answer seems obvious to me. I was going nowhere fast before he pulled me and nowhere at all sitting on the side of the road. So he gives me a ticket for following too closely. I'm wondering, what the hell does that mean? Where is his subjective data supporting that? I am 55 and have not had a traffic ticket in 39 years. Over the following days, I ask friends, including a coworker whose husband works with this state trooper, just what does that ticket mean. They are all amazed and say the only time they have ever heard someone getting a ticket for driving too closely is when they are involved in an accident. So I go to court, on my birthday, using up one of my valuable vacation days. About 80% of the people in traffic court are black. I am white. But I find it very suspicious that there is such an imbalance of blacks in the courtroom. I sit there all day. About 3 in the afternoon, the trooper comes in. He is frustrated to see that I came to court. There is a hurricane on the way. He tells me I can either come back another day (because the court will not have time to hear my case) or I can plead guilty to something about driving with improper equipment. So I can either lose another vacation day, or plead guilty to something I am not guilty of but which won't raise my insurance rates like following too closely will. What kind of choice is that? The other blacks I had been talking with over the day say to keep fighting because it is so bogus. But I decide I would rather pay the $100 court costs and keep my vacation day. It was so depressing and difficult to plead guilty when I was not guilty. I stood up there and cried. I looked at the clerk of court in disbelief and could hardly get the words out of my mouth. I was raised to tell the truth and here I was being forced to lie under oath. As I am standing there mute, looking at them, and the clerk is saying quietly, "plead guilty". It was such a violation. The one positive, now I understand why the jury found OJ innocent. I was treated better than alot of those blacks that were in the court. One man had driven over 100 miles to appear in court, and they were going to make him come back another day. My coworker whose husband is a state trooper with the man who cited me said he is known among his coworkers as an asshole. I wrote a letter of complaint to the state government. Nothing was done. This occurred in Halifax County NC. There is no justice in that county.
Here's another. We filed for our tax refund from the state of NC. They never sent it to us. We kept asking for two years. They sent a letter saying we owe them more money. Our attorney says to them, just deduct that from the refund you owe them. NC won't do that. My husband says he and the attorney will handle it. He still believes you can get justice from the government. In the end, the state of NC confiscated the money from my paycheck - over $2000. They still had three years of refund check they had not sent us. So I told the attorney I wanted to know why they took my money. I sat there in his office refusing to leave. He called the state of NC Revenue. Spent one hour getting bounced from person to person back to the original person to another person. They kept saying they had mailed the check but they could see it hadn't been cashed, but then they had mailed it again and so the check was in the mail. You and I both know there are lots of liars who say the check is in the mail when it isn't. But at least they finally put the three years of refund checks in the mail, because we got them within two weeks. I'm still out the fines and interest they had confiscated from me (the over $2000 stated above) and the attorney said they were wrong in their assertion that we owed more money. No one has told me just what the problem was. Another example of the poor tax code - in that same phone call, we clarified that we should not have to pay an additional $25 because the attorney had not signed on a line that the form said did not need to be signed. The government worker thought it still should have been signed but admitted that it was not required to be signed. So we won't get fined $25 and then get fined interest and penalties and get money confiscated etc.
And then they wonder why the TEA party is around.
Don't ask me for money. I just wanted to tell you my story. We are all slaves working to support "massa" government.
You article amazes me. Of all the examples to use about our civil liberties and you choose to write about an Honduran immigrant who speaks no english. The police were called there because a concerned neighbor saw a man kicking in a door. Even the most prudent of liberals like yourself should see that the police were obligated to respond and investigate. The police, probably speaking english....god forbid, instructed the man several times to show himself. He didn't. So the police handled it. A police invasion? Not at all, they were called, they responded and had a duty to investigate. Not the fault of the police that the man doesn't speak english. Poor poor Mr. Sauceda. If you want my sympathy you wont find it for an Honduran immigrant. You make it out like the cops were monsters. Like they were just driving along and picked out some illegal immigrant to mess with. The best part of your article is when you say, "When the police did finally get Sauceda out of the bathroom, they pepper-sprayed him, shot him with a pepper ball gun and wrestled him to the ground." WOW. The police probably did it for no reason. I'm sure the Honduran immigrant who speaks no english and has the mind of a child was totally cooperative. I'm sure the police probably just got done watching porn in their cars and decided to kick the crap out of a brown person. Very compelling human story.
You and other Liberal minded folk often speak of revolution, not in the war sense. But that each individual is responsible to guard our freedoms and not let the government take that away from us. News flash........most people are sheep. They are scared. They want to wake up, drink their coffee. Put the kids on the bus, go to work and not be bothered. I, like you desire change. But our children are raised to be politically correct and passive. Do you think our Founding Father's were passive??
No, i don't think they were. They believed they could make a difference, they could stand with other Patriots and fight off oppression and tyranny. That passion is gone. Most don't have the intestinal fortitude to fight. I served my country in the Marine's and have a deep love for this country, as you do. Today I serve the Commonwealth as a State Trooper, and have been one for nine years. I have a wife and 3 children. I do it because hopefully i can make a difference and ensure a brighter future for all of our families. But sometimes when i read your paranoid articles about the police and how they misuse their power, it makes me mad. I am not blind to police corruption. But most of us are good honest people. Who love this country. But it is a difficult job. Especially when people don't trust us.
I look forward to hearing from you. I know this was a little sarcastic but obviously we have different point of views. I respect your views and agree that our government may not always be on our side. But the police are pawns in a bigger struggle to take this country back. I desire a revolution. One that will change our government. But I, like most other Americans, have jobs, families and have bills to pay. So i guess it will just have to wait.
I will continue to read your articles.
Sincerely,
Matthew
Mr. Whitehead,
I read today your excellent column in the Richmond Times-Dispatch. Very well said. I have added you to my short list of modern-day American Patriots. At this point my list includes You, Deroy Murdock, A. Barton Hinkle, and the entire Richmond Times-Dispatch Op/Ed staff.
"The similarities to pre-Revolutionary America are startling." What is even more startling to me is the complacency of a people that call themselves free. You are right. This persistent creep of tyranny has been so slow that it has lulled us to sleep. So many of us have ceded our free will -- to the common good-- for so long, we no longer recognize tyranny. This theft of liberty, and autonomy, is exactly the same type of violation that ignited the American Revolution. Yet, today, we shrug it off as if it were nothing.
"Every successful revolution puts on in time the robes of the tyrant it has deposed." Barbara Tuchman
I eagerly await your next column. Godspeed my friend.
Sincerely,
Kevin
p.s. Please, if i might indulge you a bit further and quote Orwell. "Sometimes it is the duty of intelligent men to restate the obvious." Duty calls you sir. I humbly suggest that you get on with it.
"The U.S. Supreme Court effectively decimated the Fourth Amendment in an 8-1 ruling in Kentucky v. King by giving police more leeway to smash down doors of homes or apartments without a warrant when in search of illegal drugs which they suspect might be destroyed if the Fourth Amendment requirement of a warrant were followed."
This ruling is very disturbing. What is the point of having a 4th Amendment? how could 8 justices rule in favor of unlawful entry? What can we do to reverse this? I've lived in communist countries in my work, and it is normal for police to smash down doors whenever they like - and now the U.S. is no different.
Kurt
"In a very real sense, we truly are back to where we started in those pre-Revolutionary War days, seemingly having learned next to nothing from those early days of tyranny at the hands of the British crown." (The Plight of Marco Sauceda and the Loss of Our Freedoms)
Exactly. And it's been like that for decades, in my estimation. This is a major, major problem for Americans, even if few recognize it.
Not much difference in freedom from London, London Ontario, and Loudoun County.
Doug
Dear John
For some time it has seemed obvious to me that the goal of government was to criminalize the population. Once we have all been individually maligned, impugned or discredited we will distrust each other and view one another through a cloud of suspicion. This will allow the government, through legislation and a dependent, subservient police force to peel away the most egregious objectors to totalitarianism in the name of public safety. Even if we know that it is wrong, the pall of guilt cast upon everyone (aided by a complicit media) will paralyze us into inaction. As that begins to happen, Mr. Sauceda was just a "disposable" test case, I am going to miss you.
Sincerely,
Paul
USA is an evil torturing nation of it's own innocent citizens
And that is the damn truth.... 100% truth.
I am talking about many thousands of innocent Americans who have been put on a totally Unconstitutional 24/7/365 Patriot Act Sanctioned Organized Stalking Program-- where they not only surveil you, they vandalize your property, character assassinate you everywhere you go and in your home and hotels they bath you with painful directed energy weapon assaults. I have found numerous cops involved in this... retired cops, marines, former military and they have used these same type electronic torture weapons on my 78 year old mother when I stayed at her home in San Diego for a time after getting driven out of my home in Nashua, NH by extremely painful directed energy weapons. So don't tell me this is a good country.... we have an evil Government and through decades past the government is no better than the people who have been in charge. In the United States today--- across the entire nation, Americans charged with no crime, under investigation for no crime are having National Security Letters issued against them and mostly for vigilante- vendetta reasons that has nothing to do with terrorism. This can be kicked off by people in the government who are using the program that was most likely developed to deal with sleeper cell terrorists as a vendetta tool for gripes they cowardly cannot handle as a man or woman so they have their adversary in some non terrorist related issue put on this fucking program from hell. There is a shitload of people going through this. I am only one. And I am not putting up with i,t I can guarantee you that.
Once the Posse Comitatus Act was suspended in 2007 this kicked into high gear by war mongering self righteous evil bastards who think they are protecting America from terrorists when in reality they are torturing and harassing innocent Americans.
A bogus SAR report and the an NSL is issued... you have no day in court and then you are put on this goddamn program. God Bless Stasi America.
This Government is torturing thousands of their citizens.... You tell me that is a good government. There are a lot of websites that explain what is happening with this. This one I think is the most accurate. The website is by married couple with 3 children and they too have had to move around the country to try to get some relief. Which really doesn't work.
Sheriff Bill Gore in San Diego said " his name does not come up in my computer", after he ran my dob, ss#. drivers license number. And yet in San Diego I was hit with both government sponsored Patriot Act organized stalking 24/7/365 and painful directed energy weapons torture for hundreds of night and watched my 77 year old mother as she would be crying from the pain saying, " why did you bring this to my house." Captain Peter Segal of the Nashua, NH police Dept said " you are not under investigation for any crime." And my story is one of many thousands.. and growing Americans being put on this harassment, provocation, torturing 24/7/365 program.
So you look into this you moral high road truth seekers-- And let's see what the hell you do with the SPIN on this --- and then you will find out if what I am saying is the fucking truth or just stay Government Propaganda Specialists.
http://www.torturedinamerica.org/
Jeff
Just read this Op/Ed from August 1, 2011. Thanks for speaking up. I am really upset at the destruction of our personal liberties. The strip searching at the airports is one example. The government using imminent domain to steal people's property is another. The city of Raleigh sends letters to elderly in their 80s threatening a lawsuit if they don't sign over their property for less than 50% of the value the city assessed the property for tax purposes. They always time these letters to arrive right before a long vacation like Thanksgiving or Christmas to torture the recipient to the max. The reason for the imminent domain - to build a 50 foot wide bike path down the center of their property.
How's this: I'm driving down the Interstate. A driver in a one ton pickup truck who had been going 85 mpg earlier up the road is now blocking the highway, cruising at 55 (70 mph speed limit) is the left lane, neck and neck with another car in the right lane. I pull between the two lanes to try to see around the two vehicles. A state trooper pulls me over. First words out of his mouth: "Where are you going in such a hurry." Duh, I wasn't going anywhere, was I? So I answer "Nowhere." Answer seems obvious to me. I was going nowhere fast before he pulled me and nowhere at all sitting on the side of the road. So he gives me a ticket for following too closely. I'm wondering, what the hell does that mean? Where is his subjective data supporting that? I am 55 and have not had a traffic ticket in 39 years. Over the following days, I ask friends, including a coworker whose husband works with this state trooper, just what does that ticket mean. They are all amazed and say the only time they have ever heard someone getting a ticket for driving too closely is when they are involved in an accident. So I go to court, on my birthday, using up one of my valuable vacation days. About 80% of the people in traffic court are black. I am white. But I find it very suspicious that there is such an imbalance of blacks in the courtroom. I sit there all day. About 3 in the afternoon, the trooper comes in. He is frustrated to see that I came to court. There is a hurricane on the way. He tells me I can either come back another day (because the court will not have time to hear my case) or I can plead guilty to something about driving with improper equipment. So I can either lose another vacation day, or plead guilty to something I am not guilty of but which won't raise my insurance rates like following too closely will. What kind of choice is that? The other blacks I had been talking with over the day say to keep fighting because it is so bogus. But I decide I would rather pay the $100 court costs and keep my vacation day. It was so depressing and difficult to plead guilty when I was not guilty. I stood up there and cried. I looked at the clerk of court in disbelief and could hardly get the words out of my mouth. I was raised to tell the truth and here I was being forced to lie under oath. As I am standing there mute, looking at them, and the clerk is saying quietly, "plead guilty". It was such a violation. The one positive, now I understand why the jury found OJ innocent. I was treated better than alot of those blacks that were in the court. One man had driven over 100 miles to appear in court, and they were going to make him come back another day. My coworker whose husband is a state trooper with the man who cited me said he is known among his coworkers as an asshole. I wrote a letter of complaint to the state government. Nothing was done. This occurred in Halifax County NC. There is no justice in that county.
Here's another. We filed for our tax refund from the state of NC. They never sent it to us. We kept asking for two years. They sent a letter saying we owe them more money. Our attorney says to them, just deduct that from the refund you owe them. NC won't do that. My husband says he and the attorney will handle it. He still believes you can get justice from the government. In the end, the state of NC confiscated the money from my paycheck - over $2000. They still had three years of refund check they had not sent us. So I told the attorney I wanted to know why they took my money. I sat there in his office refusing to leave. He called the state of NC Revenue. Spent one hour getting bounced from person to person back to the original person to another person. They kept saying they had mailed the check but they could see it hadn't been cashed, but then they had mailed it again and so the check was in the mail. You and I both know there are lots of liars who say the check is in the mail when it isn't. But at least they finally put the three years of refund checks in the mail, because we got them within two weeks. I'm still out the fines and interest they had confiscated from me (the over $2000 stated above) and the attorney said they were wrong in their assertion that we owed more money. No one has told me just what the problem was. Another example of the poor tax code - in that same phone call, we clarified that we should not have to pay an additional $25 because the attorney had not signed on a line that the form said did not need to be signed. The government worker thought it still should have been signed but admitted that it was not required to be signed. So we won't get fined $25 and then get fined interest and penalties and get money confiscated etc.
And then they wonder why the TEA party is around.
Don't ask me for money. I just wanted to tell you my story. We are all slaves working to support "massa" government.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
VIPR Searches and the American Citizen: 'Dominate. Intimidate. Control.'
Click Here to Read the Commentary
Dear Mr. Whitehead,
I received a copy of your article, condensed via email, from 'Western Journalism' and 'World Net Daily.' After reading their short version, I found your full article. It 'says it all' ...if only people would read'n heed.
I often repost emails that I receive on to my blog and forward some of them to others, which I did for the condensed version email version of your article that I received from WJ/WND; however, after reading your complete article, I felt that by adding it on to my blog it would be futher disseminated and read by folks who visit my blog (not many, but everyone counts.)
First, let me say as that I was encouraged by your article in that it lets me and friends know that we are not alone in our view of the "state of America." Media pundits abound, but few have come close to expressing some of our concerns as well as you have done.
I'm retired from U.S. Customs in 1993 as a Special Agent (after 23 years.) I worked at New Orleans, St. Thomas, Jacksonville, Fl, HQ, the D.C. field office, at the Glynco National Training Center, and last here down in the Imperial Valley of California along the Mexican/American border in Internal Affairs until I retired. Having gotten lots of search warrants, made many arrests, seizures, fines, penalties at various duty stations, law enforcement and its application on the citizenry is 'old hat' so-to-speak.
As my police experience grew, I noticed a gradually change in federal law enforcement's expansion of "power" over 'ordinary citizens.'
Early on around 1970-1972, while stationed in New Orleans, some of us agents participated in a minor way, in testing the then new passenger 'walk through' metal detectors. I was becoming somewhat suspicious of what I now call, "unintended consequences" of the potential to eliminate, what until the early 70's what was normal for the times which was the ablility of a passenger with a picture ID to carry firearms on board an commercial aircraft. I presumed, rightly, that with the advent metal detectors, along with the then threat of Muslim terrrorists 'tail wagging the dog' results of their hijacking, that carrying a weapon on a flight was to be short lived. It was.
Back in the early 70's, before the days of 'sky marshalls', there was a (then) secret program of putting some of us Treasury agents (and a few FBI) on international flights to counter hijackers. I never quite understood the basis of our 'bottom line' authority, though it seemed a logical thing to do; however, the rules of engagement were telling. In order of priority from most important (1) to least important (4):
1. Don't screw the stewardesses.
2. Don't drink before (as I remember) 8 hours before a flight.
3. Don't fall asleep on the plane.
4. If you shoot, kill on the 1st shot.
Luckily, none of us that I flew with encountered a terrorist.
Later, in the mid-70's we were briefed on the then new, Currency and Transaction Reporting Act (COTR) which was supposedly written specifically to target the remnants of the 'La Cosa Nostra.' Some of us asked the U.S. Attorneys during training sessions on the new law as to whether we had to identify targets as being criminals or would the law applied generally to all citizens. Some hmm-hawwing later ...all citizens.
It wasn't long before anyone traveling in/out of the U.S. had to declare any money/negotiable instruments over $10,000. (Of course, we were to tell the citizens that IRS wasn't involved. (That too, went by the wayside later.)
Somewhere around the late 80's, we were briefed occasionally on changes about how we could develop probable cause to obtain search warrants in situations with in the past required us to clearly, without a search warrant, to stay off of a person's private property. The "new" training was about how we could intrude onto peoples personal property (curtilage), without warrant, to observe 'suspicious activity' in order to develop "probable cause" for search warrants. This was explained as even allowing us to cross on to personal property regardless of how it was physically protected, fenced...walled...etc., and to move right up to any opening (e.g. window with partly opened shade) and to even 'press our nose' on a window' and peer in to a home/building (after what in the past would have be considered 'violating curtilage') and if we observed 'suspicious activity' use that to develop from 'articulable circumstances' to 'suspcious cause' to 'reasonable cause' then on to 'probable cause', depending on the situation ...of course.
As I approached retirement, I began to question, especially being a border agent which gave me the authority (within the defined confines of a border area) to search to whatever extent I felt (being able to articulate my reasoning) to search of any item, vehicle, person, or dutyable object including mail crossing the border. It was when I first was transferred down along the Mexican border that I encountered my 1st "Border Patrol/INS Inland Checkpoint." Even as a federal agent, while traveling along a U.S. highway, being forced to stop and I and each passenger individually being forced to declare our citizenship or suffer the potential of a vehicle and body search was unnerving. I had not experienced outside the confines of an actual legally defined border area such unannounced, random, stop'n search situations. Except maybe 'drunk driver' road blocks which seemed intrusive enough.
Then, after 9.11 when the government wanted to create a 'computer database surveillance' system to monitor all databases in the U.S. for "anti-terrorist" purposes it didn't take long for me to realize that the government's appetite for monitoring and ultimately controlling all aspects of citizens' lives was at hand. Luckily, at least I think, that project was squashed; however now, as your article so clearly explains, Big Brother is upon us, face-to-face. From my experience in federal law enforcement, as a Customs Officer with more broad search authority (back then and within the narrowly defined confines of a border area) than any other law enforcement officer, I see not just a slow erosion of personal rights under the 4th Amendment, but all personal rights that were guaranteed under the Constitution are being systematically removed from the 'real world' experiences of all of us.
A friend, one of the people who reads my emails and blog, recently gave me a copy of a book entitled "Unintended Consequences." It is directed against the assault against the 2nd Amendment. I in no way condone the author's scenario to resolve the government's efforts to eliminate the 2nd Amendment; however, it did present an historical/modern view of how government power over citizens increases, how it increases exponentially and, as you point out, is almost impossible to remove once it is established.
I hope you will allow me to keep your article posted and also that you have some email means of allowing myself and friends to follow your writings.
I posted your article on my blog at: http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2011/07/warning-vipr-searches-and-american.html.
Please let me know if you want it changed in any way or removed.
Please excuse my rambling, but I have a few folks with whom I exchange messages and many of them I forward or post on my blog. Your article is important.
Given the current political climate in D.C. and that of some liberal states and federal court districts, times don't look good for us. Hopefully, a needed "change" will take place in November 2012.
Sincerely,
Robert
Dear Mr. Whitehead,
I received a copy of your article, condensed via email, from 'Western Journalism' and 'World Net Daily.' After reading their short version, I found your full article. It 'says it all' ...if only people would read'n heed.
I often repost emails that I receive on to my blog and forward some of them to others, which I did for the condensed version email version of your article that I received from WJ/WND; however, after reading your complete article, I felt that by adding it on to my blog it would be futher disseminated and read by folks who visit my blog (not many, but everyone counts.)
First, let me say as that I was encouraged by your article in that it lets me and friends know that we are not alone in our view of the "state of America." Media pundits abound, but few have come close to expressing some of our concerns as well as you have done.
I'm retired from U.S. Customs in 1993 as a Special Agent (after 23 years.) I worked at New Orleans, St. Thomas, Jacksonville, Fl, HQ, the D.C. field office, at the Glynco National Training Center, and last here down in the Imperial Valley of California along the Mexican/American border in Internal Affairs until I retired. Having gotten lots of search warrants, made many arrests, seizures, fines, penalties at various duty stations, law enforcement and its application on the citizenry is 'old hat' so-to-speak.
As my police experience grew, I noticed a gradually change in federal law enforcement's expansion of "power" over 'ordinary citizens.'
Early on around 1970-1972, while stationed in New Orleans, some of us agents participated in a minor way, in testing the then new passenger 'walk through' metal detectors. I was becoming somewhat suspicious of what I now call, "unintended consequences" of the potential to eliminate, what until the early 70's what was normal for the times which was the ablility of a passenger with a picture ID to carry firearms on board an commercial aircraft. I presumed, rightly, that with the advent metal detectors, along with the then threat of Muslim terrrorists 'tail wagging the dog' results of their hijacking, that carrying a weapon on a flight was to be short lived. It was.
Back in the early 70's, before the days of 'sky marshalls', there was a (then) secret program of putting some of us Treasury agents (and a few FBI) on international flights to counter hijackers. I never quite understood the basis of our 'bottom line' authority, though it seemed a logical thing to do; however, the rules of engagement were telling. In order of priority from most important (1) to least important (4):
1. Don't screw the stewardesses.
2. Don't drink before (as I remember) 8 hours before a flight.
3. Don't fall asleep on the plane.
4. If you shoot, kill on the 1st shot.
Luckily, none of us that I flew with encountered a terrorist.
Later, in the mid-70's we were briefed on the then new, Currency and Transaction Reporting Act (COTR) which was supposedly written specifically to target the remnants of the 'La Cosa Nostra.' Some of us asked the U.S. Attorneys during training sessions on the new law as to whether we had to identify targets as being criminals or would the law applied generally to all citizens. Some hmm-hawwing later ...all citizens.
It wasn't long before anyone traveling in/out of the U.S. had to declare any money/negotiable instruments over $10,000. (Of course, we were to tell the citizens that IRS wasn't involved. (That too, went by the wayside later.)
Somewhere around the late 80's, we were briefed occasionally on changes about how we could develop probable cause to obtain search warrants in situations with in the past required us to clearly, without a search warrant, to stay off of a person's private property. The "new" training was about how we could intrude onto peoples personal property (curtilage), without warrant, to observe 'suspicious activity' in order to develop "probable cause" for search warrants. This was explained as even allowing us to cross on to personal property regardless of how it was physically protected, fenced...walled...etc., and to move right up to any opening (e.g. window with partly opened shade) and to even 'press our nose' on a window' and peer in to a home/building (after what in the past would have be considered 'violating curtilage') and if we observed 'suspicious activity' use that to develop from 'articulable circumstances' to 'suspcious cause' to 'reasonable cause' then on to 'probable cause', depending on the situation ...of course.
As I approached retirement, I began to question, especially being a border agent which gave me the authority (within the defined confines of a border area) to search to whatever extent I felt (being able to articulate my reasoning) to search of any item, vehicle, person, or dutyable object including mail crossing the border. It was when I first was transferred down along the Mexican border that I encountered my 1st "Border Patrol/INS Inland Checkpoint." Even as a federal agent, while traveling along a U.S. highway, being forced to stop and I and each passenger individually being forced to declare our citizenship or suffer the potential of a vehicle and body search was unnerving. I had not experienced outside the confines of an actual legally defined border area such unannounced, random, stop'n search situations. Except maybe 'drunk driver' road blocks which seemed intrusive enough.
Then, after 9.11 when the government wanted to create a 'computer database surveillance' system to monitor all databases in the U.S. for "anti-terrorist" purposes it didn't take long for me to realize that the government's appetite for monitoring and ultimately controlling all aspects of citizens' lives was at hand. Luckily, at least I think, that project was squashed; however now, as your article so clearly explains, Big Brother is upon us, face-to-face. From my experience in federal law enforcement, as a Customs Officer with more broad search authority (back then and within the narrowly defined confines of a border area) than any other law enforcement officer, I see not just a slow erosion of personal rights under the 4th Amendment, but all personal rights that were guaranteed under the Constitution are being systematically removed from the 'real world' experiences of all of us.
A friend, one of the people who reads my emails and blog, recently gave me a copy of a book entitled "Unintended Consequences." It is directed against the assault against the 2nd Amendment. I in no way condone the author's scenario to resolve the government's efforts to eliminate the 2nd Amendment; however, it did present an historical/modern view of how government power over citizens increases, how it increases exponentially and, as you point out, is almost impossible to remove once it is established.
I hope you will allow me to keep your article posted and also that you have some email means of allowing myself and friends to follow your writings.
I posted your article on my blog at: http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2011/07/warning-vipr-searches-and-american.html.
Please let me know if you want it changed in any way or removed.
Please excuse my rambling, but I have a few folks with whom I exchange messages and many of them I forward or post on my blog. Your article is important.
Given the current political climate in D.C. and that of some liberal states and federal court districts, times don't look good for us. Hopefully, a needed "change" will take place in November 2012.
Sincerely,
Robert
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Acceding to Rutherford Institute’s Demands, Ohio Dept. of Education Removes Letter of Admonishment from John Freshwater Record
Click Here to Read the Press Release
Go, baby, go! When a skilled advocate rises to the defense of one who is battered about by the winds and the ways, it's a beautiful thing to see that person's waters calm and their boat level and their journey become a pleasure again. It's neat to see people realize they don't have to batter a Christian to respect the law, to see them learn they may be guilty of the things they so strongly teach children against.
Thanks for all that you do,
Bill
Go, baby, go! When a skilled advocate rises to the defense of one who is battered about by the winds and the ways, it's a beautiful thing to see that person's waters calm and their boat level and their journey become a pleasure again. It's neat to see people realize they don't have to batter a Christian to respect the law, to see them learn they may be guilty of the things they so strongly teach children against.
Thanks for all that you do,
Bill
Thursday, July 14, 2011
The Military Industrial Complex: The Enemy from Within
Click Here to Read the Commentary
John: (Should it be reverend?)
The problem with essays such as yours is not that they are inaccurate (they are quite accurate in fact) but that they are not read by the people who need to read them.
Military analysts and economists have been writing about these very same issues for quite a while and all corroborate exactly the same things that your recent essay proposes. In fact, this same type of writing has been accomplished on every issue facing the world currently... all to no avail.
This type of information reaches only a minor portion of the public because it is only that amount of people who are cognizant of the overall problems facing the United States as well as other nations.
The rest simply don't care or simply believe whatever the mass media presents them. Even if such information did in fact reach a wider portion of the public there would be little reaction since most of the public is indoctrinated from years of propaganda as to what should be believed.
Winslow Wheeler and Franklin Spinney (it may be Chuck Spinney, I always get the two confused) have written extensively on the US military and its ridiculous budgets and they have exposed far, far worse than your essay does... and yet no one I know has the faintest of ideas. For example, the F-22 Raptor, which had $4,000,000,000 allocated for future production has been scrapped in favor for more F-35s. The reason is that the F-22 is a completely hand-built aircraft making production expensive, slow, and resulting in fewer aircraft. The F-35 on the other hand is cheaper and is more easily produced for field implementation. Do you think the US saved any money by this decision?
Absolutely not! Lockeed simply added in an extra $4,000,000,000 to the F-35s after-production and maintenance costs. The F-35 is also not nearly as capable as the F-22 and like all stealth aircraft, vulnerable to long-wave radar and less capable of fending off projectile attacks on its skin.
Its not a bad idea to believe that an educated citizen will keep the government in line. And in simpler times has worked on occasion. However, with technology comes more stealthy ways to attack the way people think and that is the biggest threat to this planet's future. And the people in charge simply do not "think", they only do what is in their best interest.
As noted investigative journalist Arundhati Roy of India said just a short while ago, the idea that peaceful resistance can overcome such issues plaguing societies is long gone...
Steve
Dear Mr. Rutherford,
Thank you for your excellent article. There is no question that the military-industrial complex is a terrible drag on the country, and a deeply corrupting one.
At the same time, the public--including our politicians, from the top down--is operating under a very serious lack of knowledge regarding how our currency and banking system actually works.
One has to distinguish between federal debt and all other debt. The various states of the US, all private business and households, are users of the currency. They must "balance their books" to stay solvent.
The Federal government is the issuer of the currency. The currency acquires its legal status and practical reality owing to the fact that it alone is accepted as payment of taxes. This point is absolutely fundamental.
No currency, no credited accounts in the entire economy of the US would exist without it first having been spent into existence by the Federal government or its designated agens, such as its member banks. If this point isn't grasped, it is not possible to think accurately about our present economic system. It isn't a debatable point. It is simple fact.
The "debt" of the Federal government is the LIABILITY side of the ledger. Thus, when the government spends the money to buy goods and services in the private sector in order to accomplish its purposes, it creates a CREDIT in a given private sector account, which is an asset to the private sector and the gov't accounts for its position as a liability. In an ordinary household economy (and states and businesses) a liability represents a debt to pay which that agent needs to obtain dollars through income or borrowing to meet its obligations. But the federal government, being the monopoly issuer of the currency, literally creates what it owes with the stroke of a computer--as Ben Bernanke has acknowledge quite publically.
The problem here is that most humans are superstitious, and believe that money must be a "thing"; they must reify what is really a concept. Hence they confuse currency, which is termed nomical wealth, with what is termed real wealth--that is, real goods and services. If the country is incapable of producing anything of value, all the currency issued is worthless.
It goes without saying that the private debt in the US represents a very serious situation, and much of it is the result of the extraordinary corruption of the financial industry. See the articles of William K. Black at the "New Economic Perspectives" blog. See also the articles of Michael Hudson, often published at Counterpunch.
The Federal government, as the monopoly issuer of the currency--as distinct from the various states, which are users of the currency--does not need taxes to obtain the dollars to buy anything whatsoever. Federal--as distinct from state or local--taxes serve a quite different set of purposes in a fiat system, among them being removing purchasing power as a control on inflation, should the economy approach a condition of full employment (something we are very far from indeed). It can also serve various other political purposes, as should be evident.
The entire debate over the "debt ceiling" is essentially wrong-headed, as economists such as James Galbraith and Marshall Auerback, Michael Hudson, Warren Mosler, Randall Wray, Bill Mitchell, Scott Fulwiller, Cullen Roche, and others, have valiantly tried to explain. I earnestly recommend you read these authors.
The transfer of dollars to the banks represents a tremendous problem. Not because the gov't is "printing too much money" but because it represents a tremendous, dangerous, unjust concentration of wealth and power. And the same holds true regarding the Pentagon--with the added disadvantage of creating enmity abroad. These monies should have gone to create productive resources and renewal of infrastructure, all of which would have meant employment and therefore spending power, and therefore a means of rescuing our debt-burdened population.
The ridiculous theater of the "debt ceiling" does nothing more than to reduce the middle class to penury and debt peonage, and the various states are reduced to selling their public assets and utilities. This means the country falls into the hands of the vast corporate entities who wish to turn our country into a toll both-serf economy. This, incidentally, is exactly what is happening in Europe, since the various EC countries stupidly gave up their currency sovereignty in favor of the Euro, thereby rendering their status like those of the various states of the US.
We have a system that is perfectly capable of generating once again an enormous prosperity. But we are being savaged by a double parasite.
Best wishes,
Jim
Dear Mr. Whitehead:
I read with interest your article on the Future of Freedom Foundation’s website http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd1110f.asp .
And the situation is much, much worse than the military alone. The federal government now spends vastly more on entitlements and on subsidies to businesses (particularly the medical and insurance industries), universities, and a host of “social services” parasites, than it does on the military. Washington DC is an enormous feeding trough. It is not going to end well for individual liberty.
I urge you to read Professor Charlotte Twight’s book, “Dependent on DC the Rise of Federal Control Over the Lives of Ordinary Americans,” Palgrave/St. Martins Press, 2002. She is a Ph.D. economist and a lawyer. Nobel Laureate economist James Buchanan wrote a jacket-copy endorsement. http://www.amazon.com/Dependent-D-C-Federal-Ordinary-Americans/dp/1403961468/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1240863324&sr=1-1
Her book shows that the growth of government and the fostering of dependency has been systematic, deliberate, and bipartisan. She states that “growing federal power—driven by legislation, validated by Supreme Court decisions, and accelerated by presidential ambition—has eroded the rule of law in our nation, leaving almost no activity that the central government cannot at its discretion regulate, manipulate, or prohibit.” “A constitutional counterrevolution has occurred in America—one so profound that few today can imagine Americans free of dependence on government.”
Dependent on DC is the outgrowth of her doctoral dissertation which focused on the techniques government has systematically developed to expand the scope of government power even in the face of widespread public opposition.
You may be familiar with her 1975 book, “America’s Emerging Fascist Economy” (Arlington House Publisher) that received excellent reviews from National Review, Libertarian Review, Reason, and Human Events at that time. http://www.amazon.com/Americas-emerging-Fascist-economy-Charlotte/dp/0870003178
Dr. Twight referred to it as “capitalistic collectivism” and “participatory fascism,” the latter in reference to the insistence of those in power on demanding “participation” by the populace, --particularly by their opponents. Ayn Rand referred to this as demanding the “sanction of the victim.”
I think both of these books are highly relevant to what is happening to our nation. But of course, I am biased.
John: (Should it be reverend?)
The problem with essays such as yours is not that they are inaccurate (they are quite accurate in fact) but that they are not read by the people who need to read them.
Military analysts and economists have been writing about these very same issues for quite a while and all corroborate exactly the same things that your recent essay proposes. In fact, this same type of writing has been accomplished on every issue facing the world currently... all to no avail.
This type of information reaches only a minor portion of the public because it is only that amount of people who are cognizant of the overall problems facing the United States as well as other nations.
The rest simply don't care or simply believe whatever the mass media presents them. Even if such information did in fact reach a wider portion of the public there would be little reaction since most of the public is indoctrinated from years of propaganda as to what should be believed.
Winslow Wheeler and Franklin Spinney (it may be Chuck Spinney, I always get the two confused) have written extensively on the US military and its ridiculous budgets and they have exposed far, far worse than your essay does... and yet no one I know has the faintest of ideas. For example, the F-22 Raptor, which had $4,000,000,000 allocated for future production has been scrapped in favor for more F-35s. The reason is that the F-22 is a completely hand-built aircraft making production expensive, slow, and resulting in fewer aircraft. The F-35 on the other hand is cheaper and is more easily produced for field implementation. Do you think the US saved any money by this decision?
Absolutely not! Lockeed simply added in an extra $4,000,000,000 to the F-35s after-production and maintenance costs. The F-35 is also not nearly as capable as the F-22 and like all stealth aircraft, vulnerable to long-wave radar and less capable of fending off projectile attacks on its skin.
Its not a bad idea to believe that an educated citizen will keep the government in line. And in simpler times has worked on occasion. However, with technology comes more stealthy ways to attack the way people think and that is the biggest threat to this planet's future. And the people in charge simply do not "think", they only do what is in their best interest.
As noted investigative journalist Arundhati Roy of India said just a short while ago, the idea that peaceful resistance can overcome such issues plaguing societies is long gone...
Steve
Dear Mr. Rutherford,
Thank you for your excellent article. There is no question that the military-industrial complex is a terrible drag on the country, and a deeply corrupting one.
At the same time, the public--including our politicians, from the top down--is operating under a very serious lack of knowledge regarding how our currency and banking system actually works.
One has to distinguish between federal debt and all other debt. The various states of the US, all private business and households, are users of the currency. They must "balance their books" to stay solvent.
The Federal government is the issuer of the currency. The currency acquires its legal status and practical reality owing to the fact that it alone is accepted as payment of taxes. This point is absolutely fundamental.
No currency, no credited accounts in the entire economy of the US would exist without it first having been spent into existence by the Federal government or its designated agens, such as its member banks. If this point isn't grasped, it is not possible to think accurately about our present economic system. It isn't a debatable point. It is simple fact.
The "debt" of the Federal government is the LIABILITY side of the ledger. Thus, when the government spends the money to buy goods and services in the private sector in order to accomplish its purposes, it creates a CREDIT in a given private sector account, which is an asset to the private sector and the gov't accounts for its position as a liability. In an ordinary household economy (and states and businesses) a liability represents a debt to pay which that agent needs to obtain dollars through income or borrowing to meet its obligations. But the federal government, being the monopoly issuer of the currency, literally creates what it owes with the stroke of a computer--as Ben Bernanke has acknowledge quite publically.
The problem here is that most humans are superstitious, and believe that money must be a "thing"; they must reify what is really a concept. Hence they confuse currency, which is termed nomical wealth, with what is termed real wealth--that is, real goods and services. If the country is incapable of producing anything of value, all the currency issued is worthless.
It goes without saying that the private debt in the US represents a very serious situation, and much of it is the result of the extraordinary corruption of the financial industry. See the articles of William K. Black at the "New Economic Perspectives" blog. See also the articles of Michael Hudson, often published at Counterpunch.
The Federal government, as the monopoly issuer of the currency--as distinct from the various states, which are users of the currency--does not need taxes to obtain the dollars to buy anything whatsoever. Federal--as distinct from state or local--taxes serve a quite different set of purposes in a fiat system, among them being removing purchasing power as a control on inflation, should the economy approach a condition of full employment (something we are very far from indeed). It can also serve various other political purposes, as should be evident.
The entire debate over the "debt ceiling" is essentially wrong-headed, as economists such as James Galbraith and Marshall Auerback, Michael Hudson, Warren Mosler, Randall Wray, Bill Mitchell, Scott Fulwiller, Cullen Roche, and others, have valiantly tried to explain. I earnestly recommend you read these authors.
The transfer of dollars to the banks represents a tremendous problem. Not because the gov't is "printing too much money" but because it represents a tremendous, dangerous, unjust concentration of wealth and power. And the same holds true regarding the Pentagon--with the added disadvantage of creating enmity abroad. These monies should have gone to create productive resources and renewal of infrastructure, all of which would have meant employment and therefore spending power, and therefore a means of rescuing our debt-burdened population.
The ridiculous theater of the "debt ceiling" does nothing more than to reduce the middle class to penury and debt peonage, and the various states are reduced to selling their public assets and utilities. This means the country falls into the hands of the vast corporate entities who wish to turn our country into a toll both-serf economy. This, incidentally, is exactly what is happening in Europe, since the various EC countries stupidly gave up their currency sovereignty in favor of the Euro, thereby rendering their status like those of the various states of the US.
We have a system that is perfectly capable of generating once again an enormous prosperity. But we are being savaged by a double parasite.
Best wishes,
Jim
Dear Mr. Whitehead:
I read with interest your article on the Future of Freedom Foundation’s website http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd1110f.asp .
And the situation is much, much worse than the military alone. The federal government now spends vastly more on entitlements and on subsidies to businesses (particularly the medical and insurance industries), universities, and a host of “social services” parasites, than it does on the military. Washington DC is an enormous feeding trough. It is not going to end well for individual liberty.
I urge you to read Professor Charlotte Twight’s book, “Dependent on DC the Rise of Federal Control Over the Lives of Ordinary Americans,” Palgrave/St. Martins Press, 2002. She is a Ph.D. economist and a lawyer. Nobel Laureate economist James Buchanan wrote a jacket-copy endorsement. http://www.amazon.com/Dependent-D-C-Federal-Ordinary-Americans/dp/1403961468/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1240863324&sr=1-1
Her book shows that the growth of government and the fostering of dependency has been systematic, deliberate, and bipartisan. She states that “growing federal power—driven by legislation, validated by Supreme Court decisions, and accelerated by presidential ambition—has eroded the rule of law in our nation, leaving almost no activity that the central government cannot at its discretion regulate, manipulate, or prohibit.” “A constitutional counterrevolution has occurred in America—one so profound that few today can imagine Americans free of dependence on government.”
Dependent on DC is the outgrowth of her doctoral dissertation which focused on the techniques government has systematically developed to expand the scope of government power even in the face of widespread public opposition.
You may be familiar with her 1975 book, “America’s Emerging Fascist Economy” (Arlington House Publisher) that received excellent reviews from National Review, Libertarian Review, Reason, and Human Events at that time. http://www.amazon.com/Americas-emerging-Fascist-economy-Charlotte/dp/0870003178
Dr. Twight referred to it as “capitalistic collectivism” and “participatory fascism,” the latter in reference to the insistence of those in power on demanding “participation” by the populace, --particularly by their opponents. Ayn Rand referred to this as demanding the “sanction of the victim.”
I think both of these books are highly relevant to what is happening to our nation. But of course, I am biased.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)