The Ron Paul Error

Ron Paul

PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE Ron Paul has finally spoken to the issue which I have been waiting to hear him speak. While I am in absolute awe of his strict constitutionalism, and wish him the best of luck in turning this country back to its original path, I realize geo-political concerns are vastly different in this global supersonic nuclear age, and America's future cannot be resolved without recognizing this more complicated set of affairs. This is not the steam engine era. But with Prof. Paul's recent comments about Abraham Lincoln, the Civil War, the slavery issue, and now the Islamic problem, I know I cannot wholeheartedly support this man's candidacy, despite the vapors of wishful thinking of which I may occasionally succumb in a fit of inconvenient nostalgia for the patriotism I was taught in my fifth grade civics class and confirmed in the Boy Scouts of America, Troop 219. The argument that had America stuck to the constitution in the first place, the world and the States would be a very different place, has no worthwhile rebuttal. However, that hallowed place is not where we find ourselves today.

Paul repeats several tired misconceptions about the nature of contemporary Islamic agitation and jihad, blaming the West again despite evidence that this aggression is being accelerated all over the globe and into areas which have nothing to do with American bases, forces, pop culture, morality, or lack of it. It has everything to do with the prime directive of Mohammed to go forth when possible and dominate the earth, giving it over to Allah worship. Muslim leadership sees this time of global crisis amid their own oil wealth as Allah's sign to them to push jihad into all lands of the kaffir. It's that simple, folks.

Another fissure in Paul's flimsy "occupied holy land" construct is that rapidly after 9/11, the US completed a withdrawal from Saudi Arabi, yet today we learn that this terror spewing nation remains one of the major exporters of murderous Jihadis.

Fact: The United States leaves the "holy" trash heap of Saudi Arabia, and the Jihad impulse remains intact and even amplified.

Fact: Leave Gaza, and the bombs and exterminationist rhetoric only elevates, as exemplified here.

Fact: Exterminate Israel, and the work of the pious Muslims is not yet complete.

We are left with the realization that if one comprehends the true nature of expansionist triumphalist fascist Islam, one would must also understand instantly that such Islamic victories would only whet Muslim lust for more booty, more murder, and more territory for the imperialist nightmare of Islam.

An argument can and should be made that today there are more Muslims than ever supporting UBL and al-Qaeda, or offshoots of al-Qaeda. Rather than blaming our actions and our policies, (or our inactions for that matter) for this reality, as many Westerners (and ALL Muslims) do, it's much simpler to explain it as something intrinsic within the infinite hideousness of Islam. Murderous, expansionist, terroristic Jihad is a creed deeply entrenched within Islam. Hatred of non-Muslims is intrinsic. Lust for booty and war too. These, and many other evil and vile strands are in the very weft of Islam, inseparable from it.

These evils are the monster which bin Laden brilliantly awoke and vexed back to full consciousness after centuries of relative dormancy. It is ALL Islam...

As the Irish poet William Butler Yeats wrote around the turn of the previous century:

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

Joy To The World

prayer-jihadists
Just another day at the office...

Last week I had the joy of attending an art opening at Art Whino in Arlington. There I met a 19 year old female artist whose large works were exquisite in style and execution, sensuous and feminine, contemporary and dark. Her parents were artists. She had been painting her entire young life. After striking up a conversation, eventually the discussion stirred away from her work to my own as a painter. I mentioned the Islamic threat to the West as a topic of interest to me, and her response was cute, sassy, and pleasant to the ears of many, "Yes, I know, they think we are evil and we think they are evil. And so it goes."

Out of the mouth of babes? I think not.

Of course, we continue to hear from pacifist leftists, Islamochristians, Mainline Protestants, and other blind eye liberals, the same unbroken narrative of an "oppressed" people, a few Christians among them, persecuted by Zionist Israeli "occupiers." Since when were these a sovereign people living within defined borders? Lest we prove ignorant by our own standards of intelligence, we should recall that the Arabs rejected a two-state solution in 1917 (Balfour Declaration), in 1937 (Peel Commission Plan), in 1947 (U.N. Partition Plan), and in !967 (Israeli Peace Initiative). Hem and haw. Jack and Jill. This long winding road to an ever ephemeral peace plan isnothing but a protracted trick based on the Qu'ran that requires Muslims to fight the kaffir wherever he finds them. Period.

Are we to simply shed our relationship to the truth just to feel sorry for the collective lot of the these politically and religiously motivated Arabs and other Islamists around the globe who plot day and night, and blame Israel for its measures of self-preservation, and in a greater sense blame the West for its own stagnation? I think not.

Will All True Patriots Please Take A Seat In The Rear Of The Bus

surveillance-society_600

OKAY, I'M AS DISTURBED by this persistent Orwellian news flash culture where we find ourselves pushing back as both observer and the observed, as much as the next proud patriot. So let's take a closer look at this article from a Ron Paul supporter, not that there is anything wrong with being a Ron Paul supporter, although this past year I did run across more than a slugfest of rowdy Paulites that gave me pause.

However, cartoonist and "green" activist Mike Adams is worth consideration by anyone who feels that life on this planet can be improved one decision at a time. Let's begin our investigation...

The end of Free Speech in America has arrived at our doorstep. It's a new law called the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, and it is worded in a clever way that could allow the U.S. government to arrest and incarcerate any individual who speaks out against the Bush Administration, the war on Iraq, the Department of Homeland Security or any government agency (including the FDA). The law has already passed the House on a traitorous vote of 405 to 6, and it is now being considered in the Senate where a vote is imminent. All over the internet, intelligent people who care about freedom are speaking out against this extremely dangerous law. This bill is the beginning of the end of Free Speech in America. If it passes, all the information sources you know and trust could be shut down and their authors imprisoned.

The bill states:

‘...ideologically based violence’ means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual’s political, religious, or social beliefs...

Note that this means the "planned use of force to promote a political or social belief" would be considered an act of terrorism. This all hinges on the definition of "force," of course. Based on the loose use of logic in Washington these days, and the slippery interpretation of the meaning of words, "force" could mean:

  • A grassroots campaign to barrage Congress with faxes
  • A non-violent street protest
  • A letter-writing campaign that deluges the Senate with too much mail
  • A sit-in protest that blocks access to a business or organization
  • A grassroots e-mail campaign that overloads the e-mail servers of any government department or agency

The author, Mike Adams of NewsTarget continues on...

You get the idea. "Force" could be defined as practically anything. And since the "planned use of force" would be considered a criminal act of terrorism, anyone who simply thinks about a grassroots action campaign would be engaged in terrorist acts.

Well, maybe. No more Boston Tea Parties I suppose, even though I've heard Bill O'Reilly call for a new Tea Party several times over the past few years.

If you stopped someone on the street and handed them a Bible, for example, this could be considered an act of terrorism ("...use of force to promote the individual's religious beliefs...")

If you sent a barrage of angry letters to Washington about global warming and the destruction of the environment by the U.S. military, this could also be considered an act of terrorism ("...to promote the individual's political beliefs...")

If you believe in same-sex marriage and you wrote a letter threatning a sit-in protest in front of your state's capitol building, this could also be considered an act of terrorism, even if you never carried it out! ("...planned use of force to promote a social belief...")

This is all strong conjecture, but possible. With the Supreme Court going bonkers on issues like property rights and similar bad jokes against the people the past few decades, anything's possible.

Adams concludes that the United States is on the fast track to fascism, with Congress now working right alongside the current administration to criminalize any thoughts, words or speeches that disagree with current government policies regarding war, terrorism, domestic surveillance and civil liberties. Simply speaking out against the war on Iraq, he fears, could soon be labeled a crime. Merely thinking thoughts against the war on Iraq could be considered a criminal act. And while I agree that this doesn't bode well for the America we once knew, one wonders when the police will start rounding up Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, John Murtha, Sean Penn, Tim Robbins, and millions of other fine washables who vigorously oppose this war, for whatever reasons.

But we ARE at war, and from my own perspective, well-documented here on this blog and others found at The Scenewash Project, the enemy is already living and plotting here among us. While I cannot in the least fathom why these same leaders seem to show little interest in plugging these immigration holes to actually help keep our potential enemies out of this country, there is no validl argument against the fact that this enemy is already here, and at some point in time, we will fight this enemy on our own soil.

Professor Naomi Wolfe also fears this coming fascist state of America. In her lecture and new book, Naomi reveals the ten steps to fascism. She attempts to persuade us that the United States of America is pursuing all ten steps. Is her fear justified, or is she just another cheese-nibbling liberal defending the enemy as it chips away at our system which is predicated on the achievements of liberty they wish to overthrow and replace with sharia law, as has been stated here in America and abroad many times over by their own spokesmen.

That this S.1959 legislation, the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, represents one of the ten steps to achieve a fascist state is worth considering. Wolfe stipulates that this legislation is designed to squash all opposition to the State's ongoing march towards "blatant" fascism, where secret police and secret prisons dominate the law enforcement landscape, stripping U.S. citizens of all civil liberties and Constitutional protections.

Thoughtcrimes would, in the Mike Adams worldview, become a reality in the United States of America, and since Congress is pushing this through as quickly as possible so that each individual member of Congress can claim that he or she is "against terrorism" we as patriotic citizens should feel all the safer, because as well are made well aware, this administration and the Democratic Congress agree on very little. But, as Adams rightly points out, this bill doesn't merely target terrorism: It targets anyone who speaks or even thinks thoughts against the U.S. federal government. Here's his scenario:

With this bill, the U.S. government is officially labeling the People of the United States as criminals. It is drawing a line in the sand and stating that from now on, it's the Government vs. the People. If we don't stop this bill from becoming law, we are lost as a nation. There is no turning back from tyranny once the government turns its own citizens into criminals, enforcing only the thoughts, ideas, words and speeches that it approves or tolerates. Everything is at stake here!

Stopping this bill from becoming law is the single most important thing all Americans can do right now. If this becomes law, all free speech about health freedom, the crimes of the FDA, the crimes of the Bush Administration, America's role in global warming and any other topics could all be criminalized. YOU could be labeled a terrorist, kidnapped by government thugs, taken from your home, thrown in a secret prison, denied access to legal representation, denied due process and essentially "disappeared" into a system of such corruption and evil that it now begins to blatantly mirror Nazi Germany.

Think it couldn't happen here? It's happening right now! This is exactly how it happened in Nazi Germany. First, burn the Reichstag and blame it on the "enemy." Pass new police state laws. Disarm the people. Spread fear. Erect secret prisons and secret police. Call anyone who disagrees with you a "traitor." Control the mainstream media. Sound familiar? This is all happening right now in the United States of Amerika, and if we don't work to stop it, this nation will rapidly devolve into a fascist police state where no one is truly free.

We are but a few small steps away from it right now. All it would take is one dirty bomb in a major U.S. city. Bush would declare Martial Law and take over the National Guard. Troops on the streets. Anyone who writes a blog against the government would be arrested. Authors of "alternative" books would be kidnapped and have their books burned on the street. It could all happen at the stroke of a pen. The infrastructure for tyranny is in place right now, just waiting to be invoked.

There we have it, citizens. The ultimate in polarizing designer fear-mongering, as we are continuously bombarded with and held hostage by dystopian nightmares injected into our social being from both sides of the great divide.

Our best weapons: Non-violent protest and speaking the truth

How can we fight back against this onslaught of tyranny? We must use what remaining free speech freedoms we have right now to alert our fellow citizens to what's happening. We must rise up and tell the truth while urging our representatives in Washington to resist the temptation to vote for more "anti-terrorism" legislation that only works to enslave the American people.

We must use our phones, faxes, emails and blogs to rally our friends, family members and anyone who will listen to oppose these police state laws, and we must organize mass (peaceful) protests against this government that is attempting to marginalize the rights and freedoms of our People.

Okay, sounds good on the ears, and pulls at the patriotic heartstrings of those of us who recall with fondness the uplifting stories of America's humble beginnings. But now, let's fast forward:

We must not be lulled into a sense of false security by the purveyors of hatred and fear—the Sean Hannitys, Rush Limbaughs and Bill O'Reillys of the world. Instead, we must listen to the voices of freedom. In terms of the upcoming election for U.S. President, there is only one candidate that actually believes in freedom: Ron Paul. He needs your support to win.

All the other candidates are nothing more than tyrants of different political affiliations. Ron Paul is the only candidate who truly understands the fundamentals of freedom. That's why he's the only real choice for our next President. Can you imagine what Hillary Clinton would do with the police state powers that Bush has now created? That's the danger of all laws that centralize power in Washington: It's not necessarily what today's President will do with them, but what some future President will do with them.

That's why it's never good enough to say, "Well, we intend to only apply these laws to terrorists and not to U.S. citizens at home." That may be the intention right NOW, but virtually all such laws creep into areas of enforcement for which they were never intended. Just look at the application of RICO laws which were originally designed to fight organized crime operations but are now applied to virtually anyone (and yet they are never applied to Big Pharma, which operates almost exactly like organized crime!). All these anti-terrorism laws run the danger of expanding in enforcement to the point where they are applied against the People of this country. At first, it's only illegal for "terrorists" to think thought crimes, but before long, it's illegal for anyone to think those same thoughts. That when the domestic arrests of authors, journalists, bloggers and thought leaders will kick off, and the country will plunge itself into outright tyrannical fascism.

Again, we're on the track right now. This is happening, folks. You're LIVING through an amazing chapter of history right now. You're actually witnessing the downfall of a free nation and the rise of a superpower fascist state. You're actually part of it.

When it's all over, will you look back and realize you did nothing? Or will you now take a stand against tyranny and oppose these dangerous laws and lawmakers who threaten the Constitutional freedoms of you and your children?

Mike Adams has his theories down pat, and while I applaud his voice and share his concern, like most moral equivalency adherents usually found on the Left, he leaps to analogize the US with one of the worst regimes in history, and he never once considers the very real terrorist threat that our open borders and legal Saudi-influenced immigration policy encourages. And Ron Paul doesn't seem to be all that concerned either. Here's a rock, and there's a hard place. Don't look now, but I seem to be stuck somewhere in the middle.

Treason And Its Consequences

Fancy a strong argument against the tactics used by those who tout with positive spin the adage that WAR IS DECEIT simply because their warlord prophet told them so? Published on the stalwart beacon—Jihad Watch—by a fellow writing under the oddly familiar non de guerre Hyman Roth:

ihooper3
LEFT: Ibrihim Hooper, CAIR spokesman, often interviewed by Fox News Channel pundits

CAIR and other [noted] enemies undoubtedly would like to take some of the comments on this particular thread to falsely proclaim that Jihad Watch endorses random mayhem against all Muslims. Robert Spencer has mentioned that he is frequently on the defensive against this claim but addresses it this way: To paraphrase, Jihad Watch does not endorse the viewpoint expressed by each comment, but allows a wide range of viewpoints to be expressed. However, comments which explicitly advocate such things as genocide against any group, including Muslims, are considered beyond the pale and, subsequently, deleted by moderators as they are observed. Therefore, claiming that Jihad Watch endorses or supports such things as genocide or other lawlessness directed against any particular group is false.

That is a defensive position, but I would like to suggest to Robert to supplement the position so as to push forward a solution. Namely, when accused of promoting "hate" or "genocide" or whatever, after first referring to the standard disclaimer above, turn it around as follows:

"What my esteemed and honorable opponents may be referring to as being hateful rhetoric emanating from Jihad Watch is actually constructive and rational discourse regarding enforcement of the law. Treason is a capital offense. When anybody commits treason, Muslim or otherwise, they should be punished accordingly. This is compatible with rule of law and, in fact, rule of law cannot survive as an institution otherwise."

I have a personal example of why I believe that this position may help to improve the debate as well as open people's ears. When I was a good "progressive" college student in the late 80's in History 101 or something, the subject of the Kent State shootings came up. I told the professor and the class about fascism, Nixon, republicans, etc., like a good little hippie wannabee. Anyway, the professor remained calm and explained the situation the following way:

First, the Kent State shootings were not a result of a top down order to kill dissidents but a result of itchy trigger finger and loss of control on the part of police and provocation by students. Second, the leaders of the student movement were advocating violent revolution—whether or not they could conceivably pull it off is another matter. In just about every case of recorded history, anybody who advocates violent revolution, regardless of their likelihood of success, has been considered a fair target by the existing authorities. By all historical and even contemporary standards, Kent State protesters and much of the rest of the radical movement of the 60's got off lightly. A "good" regime cannot survive if it allows people to openly plan and implement its demise. So even if, hypothetically, in the unlikeliest possible instance that America was led by a "good" regime (irony), that regime would be within its rights and even duty-bound, to punish and perhaps even to kill people who were acting to destroy it.

That patient explanation from a History professor whose name I've forgotten provided a little dent in the PC armor which had at one time engulfed my feeble little mind.

Now that my feeble little mind is no longer engulfed within PC, I can proclaim that anybody who wants to destroy my country should be killed. If they aren't killed, then they get off lightly. And the process by which they should be brought to justice needs to be done via rule of law. I say this with no hatred in my heart—with no desire to break the law—but only with a desire to urge our authorities in the most strenuous possible fashion that it is their duty to enforce this mandate in the most efficient, fair, and humane way possible.

Robert, Hugh, and so on, please consider supplementing the "standard disclaimer" above with something so that it can be turned back against CAIR. Since CAIR is unspecific about which comments they consider hateful or genocidal, use that lack of specificity to define what they "actually" mean. What they actually must find offense from is rational discourse regarding the consequences of engaging in open war, treason, and sedition, against established, traditional, and legitimate authority. CAIR is a front group for people making war against the United States and our allies and, as such, wants to minimize the just consequences of this behavior, which include banishment, imprisonment, or death, depending on the particular circumstances.

By Any Means Necessary

usgarb
Sharia In Tennessee
FAST JIHAD IS JIHAD BY THE BOMB, by military means, aggressive and deliberate. Slow jihad is the active business of immigration, insinuation, agitation, and ultimate takeover of foreign lands by demographic means. This is no accident. War is deceit. By any means necessary. Qu'ranic tactics all. And most effective against nations who practice an open arms policy. History, unfortunately, is littered with the bloody extinctions of non-Islamic peoples exterminated by Islam hordes in its quest to fulfill the Qu'ranic dictates of Islamic world domination. And this is not the time to fall prey to the false analogies of cultural relativity. This slow jihad combined with al-Qaeda's fast jihad is a war strategy executed in real time in our time.

Simply put, Islam is the political engine for Arab imperialism cloaked in religious language. Ask the Buddhists and Hindus in south Asia. Ask the Christians and Jews in the Middle East. Ask the Armenians and Albanians in southern Europe. Ask the Christian and tribes in Africa and Indonesia and the Philippines. Ask the British and the French. Ask the Danes and the Dutch. Ask the Swedes. Ask the Germans.

Here is an article from Germany, a nation now only just beginning to wake from its slumber concerning its heavy increasingly problematic immigrant population, formerly embraced in the spirit of multiculturalism, but now feared as Islam begins its ascendency in a Europe betrayed by its own policy miscues. This is not fresh news to those who have been following the rise of Islam in Europe and elsewhere around the globe, and have studied its 1400 year history without the smoke and mirrors of political correctness obstructing this analysis, but it bears repeating.

‘Bezness’- a word derived from the English ‘business’, is used in many Islamic countries to describe the love affairs between naive Western women and Arab men, who made it their business to target Western, infidel women, merely to suck them dry.

The Muslim pretends to be in love until he has fleeced his victim of her money and/or made her pregnant, which helps him to become a permanent resident or citizen in Europe. Then begins the brutality in the marriage, but the women remain silent because of shame. These ‘Bezness-men’ usually lose all interest in wife and kids once they have become citizens and treat their wife and family like garbage.

Germany has a help line and an organization to help women who have been damaged by these very professional ‘bezness-men’. Those who seek help should contact: Homepage der Bezness-geschädigten Evelyne Kern

Women who have been cheated out of their savings and betrayed by Arab-fairytale merchants, ‘bezness-men’, should contact the above organization. The politicians and the media largely ignore these very serious crimes on these women constituents, who are deliberately and with malicious intend cheated out of everything they own and are traumatized, physically and psychologically damaged.

Political correctness is equally damaging and prevents the media from waging a campaign to further awareness. The victims are left to themselves. WDR and ZDF have managed to get the word out thanks to the organization of Evelyne Kern.

In the meantime there is also a data bank available where interested women can check if their lover is already blacklisted for his record of bezness-activities...

Chavez Buying Uranium For Iran

chavez
Hugo Chavez

CARACAS, Venezuela— The Washington Post is reporting today that a mysterious Venezuelan air force flight came under attack from vigilantes when it touched down last week at an airfield in northern Bolivia amid fears that the transport plane was delivering weapons. Suspicions were only deepened when officials confirmed that a Venezuelan banking official on board the flight had been carrying a briefcase stuffed with $160,000 in cash.

The airfield, at Riberalta, is located near a Bolivian uranium-mining area, adding to long-standing suspicions that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is trying to purchase uranium from his Latin American neighbor for transshipment to Iran. Riberalta is in Bolivia's northern and eastern lowlands, where local officials are resisting efforts by President Evo Morales to concentrate more power in his central government, which is dominated by highland Indians.

More than 400 changes to the constitution were approved by a special assembly dominated by Mr. Morales' ruling party during an all-night session ending Sunday morning.

Read it all.

C.S. Lewis On War And Humanity

Most of us here in the Mid-Atlantic states are feeling the cold whipping winds of winter roar in today, so to warms ourselves let's turn to an inspring piece of video homage to CS Lewis from a fellow named John-Michael, while I sit here in my easy chair unable to pull myself together enough to get to the studio to paint.