Category Archives: Sons of Liberty

Smash, Crackle, Pop In The Info War Trenches

Adapted from an article by Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
March 28, 2011

Pseudo-Intellectual Hit Piece Emblematic Of Crumbling Elitist Media

THE NEW YORK MAGAZINE'S JOE HAGAN has done his level best to ingratiate himself with leftist media elites by championing Cass ‘ban free speech’ Sunstein as part of a smear piece on Alex Jones that recycles the same tired old clichés in a bid to make deluded intellectuals feel more comfortable about sticking their heads in the sand while a malevolent global elite that Hagan is intent on proving doesn’t exist masterminds America’s downfall.

Ah yes, THAT Cass Sunstein, the most dangerous man in America according to Glenn Beck. Not that I don't suspect he's a really nasty unAmerican type, but unless Obama gets that second term, or oversees the explosion of a few American cities just before the November polls and martial law, Sunstein may not get to implement his pernicious plan to dismantle the First Amendment.

Scary stuff. Entitled, A Strange Man Is Following You, Hagan's article seeks to dismiss concerns about the Bilderberg Group, the Federal Reserve and the orchestrated economic collapse by characterizing Alex Jones as a paranoid crank who spouts paranoia for profit while inspiring mass shooters like Jared Loughner.

It's astounding to me that this lone wicked Loughner fellow continues to prowl the liberal mind, the able stooge for whatever ails the liberal forces, but then the Left is trying its best to ignore the fact that he was one of their own, as evidenced in his own fragmented writings.

According to Jones, Hagan spent the entire interview trying to get Alex to admit that he yearns and grovels for a show on Fox News. an important set up for Hagan’s final slap down when he quotes Fox News programming executive vice-president Bill Shine who states, “That’s not going to happen, so he should stick with trying to locate the black helicopters.”

In reality, Jones spent the whole discussion pointing out that Fox News is just the right-wing pillar of the crumbling corporate media, and that he had no interest in compromising his message merely to emulate the likes of Glenn Beck. But this answer didn’t jive with Hagan’s approach to the entire hit piece at the outset, which was structured around convincing the kind of pseudo-intellectuals who read New York Magazine that they should ignore Jones’ message because he represents little more than a ranting Glenn Beck wannabe.

By using sophomoric throwaway jibes and drive-by sound bites, Hagan attempts to reduce the exhaustively documented depopulation agenda down to paranoid drivel.

And he probably mocks Facebook as juvenile. True intelligence is that which recognizes patterns, complex patterns, patterns which reveal enough information for the plotting of accommodation or survival strategies. Language is mere wordsuck. Writers, mere moths to a flame. What us flutter in flight...

As we have exhaustively proven, the population reduction agenda is deeply rooted in the eugenics movement which began amongst the aristocracy in 19th century Britain and later manifested itself under the banner of Hitler’s Third Reich. As is documented in Alex Jones’ seminal film Endgame, Rockefeller’s father, John D. Rockefeller, exported eugenics to Germany from its origins in Britain by bankrolling the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute which later would form a central pillar in the Third Reich’s ideology of the Nazi super race.

After falling out of favor as a consequence of Hitler’s embrace of the pseudo-science, eugenics was then reborn in the United States in the 1950′s under the umbrella of “family planning”.

All this is documented in our article, The Population Reduction Agenda For Dummies.

We questioned establishment media spin which portrayed the attendees as kind-hearted and concerned philanthropists by pointing out that Ted Turner has publicly advocated shocking population reduction programs that would cull the human population by a staggering 95%. He has also called for a Communist-style one child policy to be mandated by governments in the west. In China, the one child policy is enforced by means of taxes on each subsequent child, allied to an intimidation program which includes secret police and “family planning” authorities kidnapping pregnant women from their homes and performing forced abortions.

Of course, Ted Terrific completely fails to follow his own rules on how everyone else should live their lives, having five children and owning no less than 2 million acres of land.

In the third world, Turner has contributed literally billions to population reduction, namely through United Nations programs, leading the way for the likes of Bill & Melinda Gates and Warren Buffet (Gates’ father has long been a leading board member of Planned Parenthood and a top eugenicist).

Well, BIG money DOES have its privileges. And they can prove it.

The understanding that the elite have been obsessed with population control and eugenics for hundreds of years is a matter of historical fact, but Hagan hastily dismisses the whole notion in his myopic pursuit to portray Jones as an eccentric opportunist.

These hacks cannot tolerate a free marketplace of ideas, so they have to try and strangle independent voices. It would be tragic if it were not so dangerous.

With the sands of the media landscape shifting as distrust in authorities plays itself out in terms of audience share, establishment entities are becoming increasingly frightened about the fact that they, as Hillary Clinton recently acknowledged, are “losing the information war,” and are increasingly lashing out at Jones in the form of hit pieces as they try and devise more sophisticated methods through which to silence the alternative press.

This is where Obama information czar Cass Sunstein comes into the equation. In his article, Hagan lauds Sunstein as the man with the plan to stop the likes of Jones from gaining any more media traction. Hagan seamlessly throws disturbed, skull-worshipping mass shooter Jared Loughner into the mix, implying that Sunstein’s efforts to stop the spread of conspiracy theories are commendable because they can prevent the Loughners of this world from being influenced by “information cascades on the Internet” that leave psychologically unstable people, “unable to distinguish fact from fiction.”

We heard about the skulls, but did he really worship them? The media does tend to whip out this "ghastly" cliche far too often to convince me that this particular bad guy's fascination with skulls was anything more than an aesthethic impulse. Does the skull and crossbones flag of the old European flag indicate that these sailors worshipped skull imagery? What about the youthful Steven Jobs, who hoisted the pirate flag above the Apple campus in the early days of the computer wars? No? Didn't think so. Let's face it, nearly all chippy writers fling arrows to make their point, no matter how frivolous the kill.

Hagan’s implication is thinly veiled—so-called “conspiracy theorists” like Alex Jones are creating legions of violent lunatics who will act out violently as a backlash against the paranoid world view with which Jones has brainwashed them, unless of course the likes of Sunstein are empowered to combat this growing threat.

What Hagan chooses not to mention is the fact that Sunstein also wrote of his desire to ban free speech, while advocating a myriad of deceptive, completely unethical and borderline illegal ‘cointelpro’ style methods with which to crush the alternative media.

On page 14 of Sunstein’s January 2008 white paper entitled “Conspiracy Theories,” the man who is now Obama’s head of information technology in the White House proposed that each of the following measures “will have a place under imaginable conditions” according to the strategy detailed in the essay.

1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing.
2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories.

One of the examples Sunstein gives of what would be banned under this new thought police regime is skepticism of man-made global warming, a belief shared by the majority of the American people.
Sunstein even characterizes as “false and dangerous” the idea that exposure to sunlight is healthy, despite the fact that top medical experts agree prolonged exposure to sunlight reduces the risk of developing certain cancers.

We soon begin to unravel the fact that Sunstein’s idea of a “conspiracy theory” is anything that disagrees with the establishment orthodoxy.

Along with a host of other clichés, Hagan’s article also makes generous use of the pejorative term, “conspiracy theory,” which has come to symbolize the disguise behind which control freaks like him and Sunstein hide their feverish contempt for the freedom to dissent against the myriad of real “conspiracy theories” cultivated and circulated by mainstream media such as:

a. weapons of mass destruction
b. humanitarian wars
c. troubled asset relief programs

The final goal, and one that Hagan evidently embraces, as Sunstein makes clear on page 20 of his paper, is outright government control of public discourse.

“We could imagine circumstances in which a conspiracy theory became so pervasive, and so dangerous, that censorship would be thinkable,” Sunstein writes. In Sunstein and Hagan’s world, disagreeing with the dogma of man-made global warming would be classed as heresy and subject to state censorship, a prospect far more alarming than anything that could be attributed to “conspiracy theorists”.

Hagan’s piece is symptomatic of the trend we are now seeing unfold in American media. With both the establishment left and the establishment right losing their audience to people like Alex Jones, both are busy trying to use Jones as a tool with which to demonize the other.

People like Hagan need to ingratiate themselves amongst the liberal media aristocracy by smearing independent voices that threaten that elite like Alex Jones because they know the peanut gallery is getting increasingly smaller, and it’s the same for those on the right.

While people on the right like Glenn Beck dream up vast conspiracies run by 9/11 truthers to discredit the establishment left, leftist groups like Media Matters simultaneously cite Jones’ advocacy of 9/11 to demonize Beck. Both the establishment left and the establishment right feed off each other, and without that parasitical relationship, they would both cease to exist.

In the meantime, people who just want the truth are tuning out, and like Hillary Clinton conceded, are turning off the likes of MSNBC and Fox News and flipping over to Russia Today, or God forbid— the Alex Jones Show.

Yes, the truth, the birth certificate, the college records, friendships fresh out of hiding, a believable paper trail, Islam unmasked, ah wouldn't that be nice...

Divine Guidance? President Of The Missing Links

THOUGH MANY AMERICANS believe this nation to have divine sanction, how many nations do not? Perhaps only communistic [regimes], though they appeal to a higher power, the divinity of the collective. All other nations believe that God blesses them. American exceptionalism is a contention that suffers from the [sad but forgivable] facts that we eradicated civilizations, labeling it euphemistically as a manifest destiny; built our wealth on enslavement; grew our territory through conquest; and now have the dubious honor of being among the leaders in the world of sanctioning the murder of our unborn. Though it is true there are liberties and rights that are well defined and enforced, and these stand in contrast to the blatant subjugation of other lands, it is still not the stuff of divine guidance.

—Ajax

Obama18
The President of the United States of America

And matters become even more convoluted when we consider the Obama presidency, or the presidency that wasn't. Word is number 44 sat out the Lincoln Inaugural Sesquicentennial Commemoration in the Capitol recently, instead preferring to pass his time on the golf course. Yet again, while the earth turns, burns, and churns into something it should not.

But why should anyone be surprised that Obama was absent at this event? He failed to attend the ceremony celebrating the end of the Cold War with the crash of the Berlin Wall, and accrued a bit of controversy for his simple arrogance. One suspects his disaffection for the event was caused by the possibility that someone else, in this case, former President Ronald Reagan might earn more glory this man insists belong to him, and him only. Instead he gave a vapid speech ignoring any credit to Reagan, absent at Arlington Cemetary.

He didn't shuttle off to France for the ceremony honoring our WWII dead. Lapel flag pins, absentee pledges, public and private sneers and snubs, phone-in decisions, empty words and dime store wisdom, all congealed into unsparing unworkable policies render all more clearly how nakedly Obama telegraphs his contempt for this land and its honored processes every time he misses one of these celebrations, while paying little to no immediate political penalty as the MSM continues to carry his water.

And now that a special ally is suffering under a major earthquake and tsunami, Obama again hits the links.

Obama's Maoist Marxism bleeds through constantly. His reported professorial statement that violent revolutions must 'unfold organically' without intervention in reference to Libya is a dead giveaway. Deploying the old Maoist term 'Sputnik moment' paints Obama in all his colors since this was the phrase applied to progressive accomplishments by local communes in Mao's Great Leap Forward in the late 50's.

This continued disconnect from the realities of American protocol is severely impertinent behavior for any chief officer of this nation, much less the commander-in-chief, and the sooner he is gone the better off the United States of America will be. Just say no thanks. Vote for somebody else in 2012.

The Ancient Roots Of Platonist Statism

"I see pieces of men marching, trying to take heaven by force;
I can see the unknown rider, I can see the pale white horse"

Bob Dylan

The fight in this country is not between left and right, but between liberty and tyranny. Big government Hamiltonian progressivism vs small-government Jeffersonian democratic-republicanism. It's nothing new. It's as old as the Nimrod vs Abrahamic styles of government.

Ron Jones, The Jones Family

popper
Karl Popper

To review the poisonous roots of Plato and his ideological state, read Karl Popper's two books on The Open Society and Its Enemies. Popper of course, is generally regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century, primarily for his rejection of the classical inductivist views on the scientific method, in favour of empirical falsification: A theory in the empirical sciences can never be proven, but it can be falsified, meaning that it can and should be scrutinized by decisive experiments. If the outcome of an experiment contradicts the theory, one should refrain from ad hoc manoeuvres that evade the contradiction merely by making it less falsifiable. However, he also made a great contribution to political discourse, just as well-recognized known for his vigorous defence of liberal democracy and the principles of social criticism that he came to believe made a flourishing "open society" possible, as he was for his scientific breakthrough.

I remember early fall 2000, sitting in a fast food joint eating my burger when I overheard two old men a table over chatting about the upcoming election. Neither were rock solid in their decision yet, although they seemed poised to split their vote between Bush and Gore. However, I heard one of them say that he didn't think he could vote for Bush because he didn't think that Americans should elect dynasties, pointing out the Kennedy family example with the presumption America would have been better off without that particular dynasty. "They begin to act like kings," he added.

I left amused and enlightened by their conversation but metaphorically pulled the lever for George Bush the younger that year, nevertheless. However, after doughnut holes, no child left behind, and nation-building of an inadequate kind, I'd absconded by the time the next presidential tally rolled around. Just don't go away thinking I voted for Kerry. That would have been stupid, and your part and mine. I did learn however that paying close attention to politics hardly earns one a better take on the candidates or the vitriolic process of governing than simply swinging for the fences from the plate of ideological reguritation, a hollow position re-enforced again upon me just seventeen months ago. Will political truth always remain so compromised I wonder...
Gabriel Thy

The 28 Principles Of Liberty

Battle Flag
As Goes The nation

LOOK NO FURTHER. These 28 fundamental beliefs instituted in the Constitution for the United States of America by the Founding Fathers which they said and we confirm must be understood and perpetuated by every person who desires peace, prosperity, and freedom.

Sarah Palin on Glenn Beck...

“Who’d have thought a history buff with a quirky sense of humor and a chalkboard could make for such riveting television?” Palin wrote. “Glenn’s like the high school government teacher so many wish they’d had, charting and connecting ideas with chalk-dusted fingers—kicking it old school—instead of becoming just another talking-heads show host.”

Editor's Note: Apparently 28 principals were too difficult to commit to memory. If the link above fails to return a page of principals, try this page of 7 Principals of the Constitution Party.

Unmasking The Monster

Here is a short, simple, straight to the point essay penned by Steve Bussey on ResistNET, a visibly patriotic website dedicated to stopping, then rolling back the move to abolish the US Constitution inch by inch, word for word, and with it the freedom and liberty that so many have fought to preserve and enjoy for well over 200 years.

This is a site I've only recently discovered, so I am still treading lightly, trying now to rustle too many leaves before I find myself somewhere I do not wish to be. But Mr. Bussey's article offers a clear idea of what is simmering beneath the surface tension that passes for political dissection discussion all across this great land of ours. Our nation's free citizenry and our elected leadership seem to have lost their way, and have been on this false path for several decades now.

I HAVE HEARD THE MODERN TEA PARTY MOVEMENT mischaracterized and slandered over the past several months, and seen yellow journalism about vocal protestors disrupting town hall meetings hosted by politicians. These and other crocodile tears are shed by journalists, politicians and pundits who are either too stupid to understand, or are intentionally trying to villainize the new conservative activism.

tyranny3307
Tyranny is a verb...

Some of the knocks I hear against the tea party movement are that they are racist because they didn’t protest during the Bush years, but only now when there is a black president; shut up and pay your taxes; or cries of hypocrisy because tea party protestors love big government in the form of military spending, interstate highways, or the Veteran’s Administration and oppose programs that would help the poor and downtrodden - all hogwash.

Discontent among conservatives and libertarians has been festering for several decades since George H.W. Bush succeeded President Reagan and began to walk back conservative advances. Contrary to popular belief, that is the primary reason he was a one term president.

The discontent swelled with the advent of the Clinton Administration and his largest tax increase in the history of the free world, as well as Hillary’s attempted take over of our health care industry. The Republican Revolution lead by Newt Gingrich, however, temporarily tamped down the discontent. Enter George W. Bush.

Conservatives and libertarians began to squirm in their seats with Bush’s unconstitutional federal intervention into our local schools with No Child Left Behind. The squirm turned into foot-tapping and nail biting with the Medicare prescription drug bill, and we stood and began shouting at our televisions with the expanded State Children’s Health Program and TARP—all unconstitutional expansions of federal tyranny over sovereign States and free enterprise. Enter President Obama.

They may name their movement "tea party" to invoke and evoke our Founding Fathers, but the movement is much more profound than just taxes. The movement is about freedom and liberty. It is about legalizing and respecting our Constitution once again.

President Obama has removed the mask from the monster once and for all and exposed the true Progressive agenda for America—a reshaped America based on a new foundation—his words, not mine, by taking over car companies, insurance and investment companies, Cap & Trade and a national health care plan. With his actions there can be no further debate concerning the direction Progressives in America, Democrats and Republicans, wish to take.

Why is there a modern tea party movement? Is it racist? There is a modern tea party movement because as Thomas Jefferson so eloquently wrote in the Declaration of Independence, “. . . all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable. . .”

It began before President Obama, but certainly with him and his programs, evil in the form of federal infringement upon our liberties, Progressive disrespect for our Constitution, American history, traditions and political philosophies, has become insufferable.

They may name their movement "tea party" to invoke and evoke our Founding Fathers, but the movement is much more profound than just taxes. The movement is about freedom and liberty. It is about legalizing and respecting our Constitution once again.

Yes, indeed, Mr. Bussey. We must also remember that both the 43rd president and the current Obama administration have led us—the American people—to believe that government first resides with the executive branch. Each administration also believe, the other two branches participate at the President's discretion. The problem this presents is that few constitutional scholars or free citizens agree with them, since the Constitution clearly states otherwise. Afterall, by 43rd and 44th's way of thinking, the law is just a 'guideline', and can be ignored when it gets in the way. We can think of too many dark scenarios of how this progression will eventually lead to a person to try to remain in power.

Is Democracy The Killer Of Liberty

Koran-ak47
Clinging To Guns and Bibles?
The following article by Amil Imani can be found at Islam Watch—Islam Under Scrutiny by Ex-Muslims. While I think Mr. Imani has written a superb essay on democracy and the threat it faces by Islam, I do have a problem which the language stated in the title. It is not democracy that is killing liberty, but democracy's enemies from within and without that is the quiet assassin of liberty. Imani's essay:

I repeat: Is democracy the killer of liberty? The dictionary defines democracy as the rule of the people. Even at its best, “democracy is the worst form of government except for all the rest,” according to Winston Churchill.

Is democracy a very bad form of government? Does it hold the threat of destroying humanity’s most precious right—liberty? Here are a few things to think about.

In the so-called democratic societies, a semblance of democracy hobbles along with fits and starts, always on the verge of complete subversion and collapse. For instance, the Western democracies are representative democracies where the ordinary citizens do not rule. A representative democracy is, in effect, a plutocracy where moneyed people and powerful interest groups rule.

The society’s rulers form a pyramid. At the base of the pyramid, we have the closest thing to democracy. The individual citizen has some sway on the locally elected officials such as the sheriff, the mayor, the city councilman, and the like. As we go up the pyramid, the voice of the individual citizen diminishes while the influence of money and power groups expands.

It is a fact that, without funds, one cannot even run for the city’s dogcatcher. At the very least, the aspiring candidate needs money for posters or some handbills to make himself known to the electorate and argue why they should elect him and not his opponent.

Resist the flourishing of mosques and Islamic schools. Mosques and Islamic schools are not for worshiping a loving God and for enlightening minds. They are incubators of Islamic bigotry and myopia.
Never mind the post of the city’s dogcatcher. How about seeking to be the mayor of New York City? Michael Bloomberg is presently running for election to his third term as the mayor of the city. This man is reportedly the 17th wealthiest person in the world. He spent $73 million of his own money on his first term campaign ad and apparently he is spending at least $18.5 million of his own funds again for a third mayoral term in 2009 campaign.

Is Bloomberg, one of the greatest mavens of business, a fool to spend that kind of money for a post that doesn’t pay even a fraction of what he is spending? No. He is not a fool. In fact, he is probably one of the best people running for a public office. That’s beside the point. The point is that it takes huge amounts of money to become a part of the pyramid. And not everyone is a Michael Bloomberg with a very deep pocket and the willingness to tap it.

Bottom line: If you aspire to become a part of the ruling pyramid, you require funds commensurate with the position you seek. Unless you are a Michael Bloomberg, you need others to pony up with the dough. And people don’t part with their money unless they get something for it in return. It is here that big money and interest groups come forward and deal-making takes place. In the process, the ordinary independent citizen is basically left out. The voter is presented with a choice between two equally purchased candidates or not voting at all. And you can see why so many people refuse to exercise their precious right of voting in elections.

Significant numbers of indigenous Europeans are either fleeing to other lands or are so hopeless regarding their way of life that they refrain from having children. Even in the United States and Canada, the bulging Muslim populations are more and more aggressively pressing for the adoption of Sharia law.
This is bad enough. But, there is more danger in the wings. Equal to the corruptive role of money is block-voting. A combination of money and block-voting is the certain death knell of liberty. In a democracy, when a large number of people, motivated by an ideology or a common goal, marry their wallets with their votes, then liberty can be subverted and eventually completely wiped out. And that’s exactly what Islam is doing in much of the world.

Reinvigorated Islam, flush with trillions of oil money, mostly from the pockets of the oblivious and uncaring “infidel” nations, is extinguishing the flames of liberty as it moves toward imposing the monolithic Islamic Sharia on lands near and far. The stone-age rule of Sharia is not limited to the ranks of the ever-swelling faithful, but encompasses all others.

The very word "Islam" is derived from the root word of “taslim,” which means submission, submission to the will and dictates of Allah as stipulated by Muhammad and elucidated by the medieval Islamic clerics.

Free people withstood the assaults of tyrannies such as fascism and communism and paid dearly in preserving liberty. Now, liberty is once again in mortal danger. This time, it’s from Islam. And democracy is indeed a great potential friend of the enemy.

Hold to account those politicians who sell themselves to the Islamists and promote Islam. These for-hire politicians will do anything they can to keep their position and benefit from the generous financial backing of the Islamists.
As I mentioned earlier, money and powerful interest groups play the critical role in a representative democracy. Islam has them both and is using them both. In the traditionally democratic societies such as those of Europe, Canada, and the United States, wave after wave of Muslim immigrants are forming powerful blocks of voters. With virtually unlimited funds, these immigrant communities are running deep roots in towns and cities of the host countries and influencing the staffing of the governance pyramid.

In a democracy, a politician’s first and foremost priority is to get elected. Once elected, his highest priority is to get reelected. The imperative of getting elected makes, per force, the politician a representative of the forces that bring and keep him in office.

Unfortunately, there are about one and a half billion people deeply entrenched in many democracies, including the United States, who are enemies of democracy and devotees of Ummahism—the Islamic theocracy, theocracy of the kind that rules in places such as Saudi Arabia—a Sunni version—and Iran—a Shi’a’ version. It is a fact that in Islamic societies liberty is dead. The individual is a vessel of the state and the state is the executor of the suffocating Sharia law.

Lest my warning be seen as the unwarranted rants of an alarmist, all one needs is to observe what is already happening in these newly Muslim-invaded lands. Sharia law is already in effect in many places in Europe. Significant numbers of indigenous Europeans are either fleeing to other lands or are so hopeless regarding their way of life that they refrain from having children. Even in the United States and Canada, the bulging Muslim populations are more and more aggressively pressing for the adoption of Sharia law.

Demographic changes in a democracy play a critical role in shaping the society. For example, only a couple of hundred thousand Muslims lived in the U.S. only two decades ago. By 2008, the number has swelled to seven to nine million. Once the numbers are wedded to the deep pockets of the Wahhabi and Shi’a paymaster, the fate of freedom is in serious jeopardy.

Democracy is the guardian of liberty. Imbedded in democracy are provisions that can make it implode from within. Democracy also has its own guardian: A resolutely vigilant, proactive and ethical citizenry.

What can be done? Is there a way of resisting and reversing the imminent coming Islamic assault on our most cherished right of liberty? Here are some suggestions.

  • Become an active worker of liberty, instead of a passive non-caring devil-may-care nihilists. Many Europeans are already paying the price of non-caring complacency as Islam is rapidly gaining greater and greater power and casting its suffocating pall on their lives.
  • Interact with Muslims in your locality and try to wean them away from Islam by pointing out how the Quran and the clergy are enslaving them in a defunct ideology of intolerance, backwardness and death.
  • Use the political process, while it is still responsive to the demands and wishes of freedom-loving people, by supporting laws that guard freedom and reject those that infringe on liberty.
  • Actively support political candidates who are deeply committed to the tenets of freedom.
  • Run for office, any office. Encourage your friends and other liberty advocates to pitch in and help in any way they can.

  • Hold to account those politicians who sell themselves to the Islamists and promote Islam. These for-hire politicians will do anything they can to keep their position and benefit from the generous financial backing of the Islamists.
  • Be an active educator by informing others about the creeping danger of Islamism. Islamism is seriously eroding the very foundation of liberty by a variety of means. Powerful moneyed Islamic organizations threaten anyone who dares to criticize Islam with ruinous lawsuits and even death.
  • Resist the flourishing of mosques and Islamic schools. Mosques and Islamic schools are not for worshiping a loving God and for enlightening minds. They are incubators of Islamic bigotry and myopia.
  • Contribute money, small or large amounts, to causes and individuals who are fighting to preserve liberty. As the old saying goes, freedom is not free.
  • In short, liberty is your most prized possession and democracy is the shield that protects it. Yet, this shield of democracy is vulnerable and needs to be repaired and strengthened on a regular basis. I am calling on you, the individual freedom-loving person, to play your part in the defense of freedom, not only for your own sake, but also for mine and all others who cherish this precious blessing of life.

    Amil Imani is an Iranian born, pro-democracy activist who resides in the United States of America. He is a poet, writer, literary translator, novelist and an essayist who has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran.

    Honoring Those Who Have Died

    american-billofrights
    American Bill Of Rights

    The first thing to know about World War II is that it was a big war, a war that lasted 2,174 days and claimed an average of 27,600 lives every day, or 1,150 an hour, or 19 a minute, or one death every three seconds. One, two, three, snap. One, two, three, snap.

    In an effort to get our arms around this greatest calamity in human history, let's examine 10 things every American ought to know about the role of the U.S. Army in WWII.

    The U.S. Army was a weakling when the European war began in earnest on Sept. 1, 1939, with the German invasion of Poland. The U.S. Army ranked 17th among armies in size and combat power, just behind Romania. It numbered 190,000 soldiers. It would grow to nearly 8.5 million by 1945.

    When mobilization began in 1940, the Army had only 14,000 professional officers. The senior ranks were dominated by political hacks of certifiable military incompetence. Not a single officer on duty in 1941 had commanded a unit as large as a division in World War I. The Army's cavalry chief assured Congress that four well-spaced horsemen could charge and destroy an enemy machine-gun nest without sustaining a scratch.

    The U.S. Army for a long time after we entered the war was not very good. Part of the WWII mythology is that all the brothers were valiant and all the sisters were virtuous. War is the most human of enterprises, and it reveals every human foible and frailty, as well as human virtues: cowardice and tomfoolery, as well as courage and sacrifice. The Greatest Generation appellation is nonsense.

    We are now engaged in another war with an enemy just as pernicious as Nazi Germany. We must again stand firm and undivided against our enemies and produce this victory over a totalitarian machine. But like in those early days of WWII, America begins from a weak position, a position that the Islamic enemy exploits with well-honed strategic genius.

    In the first couple years of American involvement the Army was burdened with clearly inferior equipment and commanders. Those first couple years of war required a sifting out, an evaluation at all levels within the Army of the competent from the incompetent, the physically fit from the unfit.

    It has sometimes been argued that in an even fight, when you matched one American battalion or regiment against a German battalion or regiment, the Germans tended to be superior, the better fighters. But who said anything about an even fight? Global war is a clash of systems. What matters is which system can generate the combat power needed to prevail, whether it's in the form of the 13,000 Allied warplanes available on D-day; the 10:1 American advantage in artillery ammunition often enjoyed against the Germans; or the ability to design, build and detonate an atomic bomb. What matters is which system can produce the men capable of organizing the shipping, the rail and truck transportation, the stupendous logistical demands of global war.

    Germany could not cross the English Channel, which is only 21 miles wide, to invade Britain. The United States projected power across the Atlantic, the Mediterranean and the Pacific and into Southeast Asia and the Indian subcontinent. Power-projection, adaptability, versatility, ingenuity, preponderance—these are salient characteristics of the U.S. Army in WWII.

    Read it all.

    This is an important essay penned by Rick Atkinson for the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. Every young American whose mind has been mismanaged with great liberal skill needs to understand a few facts about her own nation. Please take a few minutes of your post-modernist attention span, and give Atkinson's full essay a chance to sink into your slippery post-American sensibilities. Our brave young men and women who died in WWII as well as other conflicts in which the nation stood battle deserve your consideration. Let's not continue to confuse the cold harsh reality as demonstrated by Dick Cheney this week with the rose-colored wishful thinking of President Obama.

    We are now engaged in another war with an enemy just as pernicious as Nazi Germany. We must again stand firm and undivided against our enemies and produce this victory over a totalitarian machine. But like in those early days of WWII, America begins from a weak position, a position that the Islamic enemy exploits with well-honed strategic genius.

    America this time staggers from a system whose industrial base has been abandoned in favor of an argumentative human resource and legal infrastructure that has been allowed to deteriorate. This war is not about silly romantic notions of relative values or moral egotism. This is about defeating an enemy that that been quite outspoken on the one hand that it wants to conquer, enslave, or annihilate the sorry House of the West, while on the other hand sends in its oil-rich infiltrators with manipulating claims of being either stealth allies and trading partners of the West, as well as relentlessly demanding victims of Western hospitality at every twist and turn in playing the system of political correctness to its own dualistic endgame.

    Stand up. Be counted. Liberty must be defended, or it WILL be lost.