REPLACE LETHAL ECO-COLONIALISM - IN AFRICA

Good Neighbor Law contributing scientist, Dr. Willie Soon
and contributing writer Paul Driessen author:
Eco-Colonialism Degrades Africa

Sub-Saharan Africa remains one of Earth’s most impoverished regions. Over 90% of its people still lack electricity, running water, proper sanitation and decent housing. Malaria, malnutrition, tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS and intestinal diseases kill millions every year. Life expectancy is appalling, and falling.
And yet UN officials, European politicians, environmentalist groups and even African authorities insist that global warming is the gravest threat facing the continent. They claim there is no longer any debate over human-caused global warming – but ignore thousands of scientists who say human CO2 emissions are not the primary cause of climate changes, there is no evidence that future warming will be catastrophic, and computer models do not provide valid projections or “scenarios” for the future.
Warming alarmists use the “specter of climate change” to justify inhumane policies and shift the blame for problems that could be solved with the very technologies they oppose.
Past colonialism sought to develop mining, forestry and agriculture, and bring better government and healthcare practices to Africa. Eco-colonialism keeps Africans “traditional” and “indigenous,” by insisting that modern technologies are harmful and not “sustainable” in Africa.
Abundant, reliable, affordable electricity could power homes, offices, factories, schools and hospitals, create jobs, bring clean running water, and generate health and prosperity. But Rainforest Action Network and other pressure groups oppose coal and natural gas electricity generation on the grounds of climate change, and hydroelectric and nuclear power for other ideological reasons. They promote wind turbines and solar panels that provide electricity unreliably and in amounts too small to meet any but the most rudimentary needs.
Biotechnology could produce bumper crops that overcome droughts, floods, insects, viruses, and even global warming and cooling. But Greenpeace and Sierra Club oppose this precision hybrid-making technology, and instead promote land and labor-intensive subsistence farming.
DDT and insecticides could slash malaria rates that al Gore and other climate alarmists falsely claim are rising because of global warming. But Pesticide Action Network and other activists stridently oppose their use, and the European Parliament recently imposed new pesticide restrictions that will further restrict African access to life-saving chemicals.
Recent incidents dramatize how depraved and deadly global warming politics have become.
In Gambia, a UN-subsidized “national ministerial dialogue” promoted extremist views on “catastrophic climate change” and “sustainable development.” A Forestry and Environment department representative asserted that it would be “nearly impossible to adapt to … impacts such as the loss of the West Antarctic ice sheet … and [resultant] 5-15 meter sea level rise.”
There was no mention of the near-zero probability of such an event happening. Average annual temperatures in Antarctica hover around minus 50 Centigrade (-58 F), while average temperatures for the two-month summer in its Western Peninsula are four degrees above freezing.
Scary tales of runaway temperature spikes melting 200,000 cubic miles of peninsular ice might be expected from Al Gore and James Hansen. But when Gambian ministers engage in such unscrupulous propaganda, they further degrade the health and welfare of their people.
Cameroon hosted a “fact-finding” visit from seven senior British Members of Parliament, who declaimed that climate change is “a jinx that threatens humanity more than HIV/AIDS.” They were joined by Cameroon’s Minister of Forestry and Wildlife in urging that forests be managed to increase absorption of planetary carbon dioxide and “reduce global warming.”
Few climate actions, however, come close to the travesty being played out in nearby Chad. There the government has banned the manufacture, importation and use of charcoal – the sole source of fuel for 99% of Chadians.
“Cooking is a fundamental necessity for every household,” its Environment Minister pronounced. But “with climate change every citizen must protect his environment.”
The edict has sent women and children scavenging for dead branches, cow dung, grass and anything else that burns. “People cannot cook,” said human rights activist Merlin Totinon Nguebetan. “Women giving birth cannot even find a bit of charcoal to heat water for washing,” said another.
The government admitted it had failed to prepare the public for its sudden decree, but announced no change in plans – saying only that scarce propane might be an alternative for some. When citizens protested, they were violently dispersed by police.
“We will not give up,” a women’s group leader said. “Better to die swiftly than continue dying slowly.”
So this is where radical climate change alarmism has taken us. When the health of Planet Earth is at stake, human life means little – even if the “disasters” are nothing more than worst-case scenarios conjured up by computer models, headline writers, Hollywood, and professional doomsayers like Gore, Hansen and NOAA alarmist-in-chief Susan Solomon.
“Every time someone dies as a result of floods in Bangladesh, an airline executive should be dragged out of his office and drowned,” British arch-environmentalist George Monbiot lectured readers of The Guardian, in a typically hysteria-laced column.
One has to wonder if he would apply the same standard to eco-colonialist executives who continue to perpetuate poverty, disease, malnutrition and death in the name of preventing “global warming disasters” that fewer and fewer respectable scientists still believe are caused by human greenhouse gas emissions.
It’s time to address Africa’s real problems and replace lethal eco-colonialism with fact-based science and humane public policies.

STOP! READ THIS BEFORE YOU GET TANGLED IN CONSERVATION EASEMENTS!

By RIC FROST


In recent decades, Conservation Easements (CEs) and Purchased Development Rights (PDRs)have become a trendy way to acquire tax write-offs on private lands. Reasons as to why varies with each owner, but the common thread has been tax relief and to retain the land in agricultural production. Many of these landowners have placed portions, or all, of their private land holdings into a split estate situation without fully understanding the impacts to themselves, or their community. This is largely due to not asking enough questions, or the right questions.
To truly understand the problem: land trusts come on to landowners and communities with the claim that they are working to protect rural agriculture from development pressures.
Development is not the problem, as rural economic pressures come from:
Government Restrictions and Regulations,
Tax Exempt Non Government Organization Environmental Lawsuits,
Weather Fluctuations,
Market Fluctuations,
Operators Being Price Takers Without Control of the Market Pricing Structure (or the ability to pass on increased business costs, such as fuel expenses),
Subsidized Foreign Market Dumping Without Protection,
Influx of Wealthy Urbanites Competing for Control,
Estate Taxes and Compliance Costs.
These cumulative pressures force the economic demise of rural economies, and create
compromised-sellers ready for a quick economic fix, not willing sellers desiring to leave their cultural practices or heritage. So the question simply put is, do CEs protect agriculturalists from these real pressures as is claimed? Simply put, NO THEY DO NOT!
The secondary question to this is, if land trusts are concerned with protecting agriculture, then what have they done to alleviate these real pressures?
Splitting the title of private land has other consequences as well. Some comments on CE and PDR impacts by financial officers:
“Owners give up management and control of the land” : Jimmy Hall, PCA, NM
“Severely diminished loan value of land” : John Johnson, First Western Bank, SD
“CEs eliminate property loan value” : Dee Gidney, Texas Bank Ag Loans, TX
“Fragmentation of land title to deny future generations a full range of productive land use options” : David Guernsey, Alliance for America
Loan Value for Operational and Other Loans is Reduced up to 90 percent with an Easement
Interviews of land owners with CEs and PDRs have revealed some common misunderstandings held when they got involved. Some misconceptions are:
“Perpetual means 99 years.” False: perpetual is forever.
“I retain full title to the land.” False: title becomes split with easement holder.
“A CE (PDR) is the only way the land is managed to my intent.” False: the easement holder and future easement holder can change management practices at any time, including development!
Easement management loopholes also allow easement holders to sue the landowner and impose habitat restrictions.
“A CE (PDR) allows me to use the property as I always have.” False: you give up management control of all easement property, forever!
“Property with a CE (PDR) will sell easy.” False: a CE (PDR) may reduce the property
value, and affect the willingness of financial institutions to loan money on a split title.
Economic impacts may also be encountered as the result of CEs and PDRs.
Some of the impacts already experienced by landowners and communities have been:
Reduced management options on taxed lands of landowner and heirs
Restrictions on farm and ranch management practices
Restrictions on chemicals used
Restrictions on seed and plant types
Restrictions on farm and ranch management practices
Reduction of income due to restrictions
Reduction in management options with land and business value decline, forcing owner into a “willing seller” status (actually a compromised seller)
Imposition of Environmental Assessment (EA) and Environmental Impact Study (EIS)
expenses on land owner for restriction and management changes, especially if a Federal Nexus exists Legal and penalty expenses for CE and PDR violations (It’s built into the fine print)
Vulnerability from non-trust third party lawsuit - Litigation Exposure is in the Easement Act
Decreased, or eliminated, production, translating into negative economic impacts to
agriculture and related industries within community, county, and state
Recent reports indicate a majority of lands with CEs (PDRs) have not remained in agriculture, and are rendered to untaxed “open space” in the hands of the government, or owned by wealthy non-agriculturalists comfortable with “open space” restricted lands without production
Reduced Management Options on Taxed Lands of Landowner and Heirs
Reduction of Income due to Restrictions Reduction of Direct, Induced, and Indirect Economic Benefits to all Related Industries within Community, County and State Reduction of County Tax Base Forcing Tax Increases and Reduction of County Services on Other Property Owners in County to Make Up Loss (a disproportionate burden)
Impacts resulting from violations were studied by the Land Trust Alliance and published in the Winter 2000, Vol. 19 #1 issue of Exchange. It revealed that the landowner always pays legal and penalty expenses for violations, as this condition is built into CE and PDR language. Average cost per case is $35,000 with range of $5,000 to $100,000. Of 498 violations reported, 22 were litigated, only one landowner won in court, but was still made to pay land trust expenses (the $100,000 case).
Another ill-understood impact of CEs and PDRs is that if there are any federal permits or expenditures involved, this creates a Federal Nexus. The landowner must now undergo a Section 7 consultation process for existing and new species, restriction and proposed management changes. The owner with a CE or PDR must also pay for all related expenses for studies.
One question that is typically missed is who is behind the push to get private property into a CE or PDR. One effort where CEs and PDRs are the centerpiece, is known as the Wildlands Project, a plan developed by Michael Soule, Dave Foreman (founder of the Earth First! movement), and Dr. Reed Noss of Idaho. The base concept is that wilderness areas need connecting corridors (without human activity) for the creatures to roam freely and keep the gene pool healthy. The key to establishing these corridors is CEs and PDRs.
Dave Foreman, as quoted in Listening to the Land by Derrick Jensen (Sierra Club Books), considers conservation easements as the keys to the corridors. He had this to say about conservation easements:
If we identify a ranch … that’s between two wilderness reserves, and we feel it will be necessary as a corridor, we can say to the rancher, “We don’t want you to give up your ranch now, but let us put a conservation easement on it. Let’s work out the tax details so you can donate it in your will to this reserve system.”
It is highly recommended you research the design and implications of the Wildlands Project. It is a plan to render 50 percent of the United States land area as unoccupied, or affected by human activity. Several trusts such as the Nature Conservancy, involved with developing CEs and PDRs support and promote the Wildlands Project. A description of this plan and partial list of supporting organizations can be accessed at http://www.wildlandsprojectrevealed.org and
http://www.epi.freedom.org.
Questions landowners approached for CEs or PDRs should be asking themselves are:
What are CE (PDR) impacts to private landowners and communities?
Do the “benefits” offset the impacts? (Lost tax revenue and future earnings opportunities)
What are the other impacts and implications from imposing a CE (PDR) on private land?
(Federal Nexus and Section 7)
What is the long-range outcome from imposing a CE (PDR) on private landowners?
According to whom? (A tax-exempt organization?)
Would a limited liability company or incorporation better serve the landowner’s
tax needs, instead of a CE (PDR) that brings in tax-exempt third party and potential federal management?
Would it not be better to protect agriculture by:
Supporting reduced environmental restrictions on agricultural producers?
Stopping the dumping of foreign commodities on our markets by foreign subsidized products, at prices lower than what our producers’ cost of operation?
Making agriculture attractive as a viable business career and encouraging our youth to remain in agriculture as a productive and fulfilling life?
Questions State and County officials should be considering for CE regulation are:
License and Regulate Land Trust Agents
Regulation by State Real Estate Commission (they are acting as land brokers)
Bonding Requirement on Each CE Transaction Equivalent to Value of Encumbered Property Before Transaction Renegotiation Language Built into CE Contract that Allows Grantee to
Renegotiate Every 5 Years (North Dakota has 10 year limits - no perpetuity allowed!)
If Renegotiations Cannot be Accomplished to Satisfaction of Landowner, the CE Contract Becomes Null and Void
Land Trust pays back-taxes on land if this occurs, not landowner (don’t forget that if a CE is ended, under current law the landowner pays the IRS the back-taxes back to the time of the origin of the CE, not the trust)
Land Trust Pays Taxable Value of Severed Development Right to County to Prevent
Erosion of Tax Base as Community Infrastructure Demands Increase (check with county
appraiser for development right tax values)
No CE Shall be Valid and Enforceable Unless the Limitations or Obligations Created by the Easement are Clearly Presented in Writing on the Face of Any Document Creating the CE Including Information From the UCEA 1981 (Uniform Conservation Easement Act)
Water, Grazing, Farming and Mineral Rights Shall Not be Encumbered by Conditions or Restrictions Imposed or Agreed to in the CE Contract. Grantee (landowner) Retains Rights of Transfer on All Rights Not Expressly Identified in CE.
Local and State Legislation Expressly Prohibiting Transfer of CE to Other Parties Without Formal Written Consent of Landowner (a common practice of land trusts is to trade CEs without knowledge or consent of landowner)
Elimination of Third-party Enforcement Clause Language From CE Contracts - Must be State law! (Colorado apparently already has this law, and it has been upheld in one case)
Remember, restricting land through Conservation Easements in the name of “protecting agriculture” simply put, does not protect agriculture!

Editor's note: Mr. Ric Frost ranks amoungst the most knowledgeable individuals in the world, when it comes to Conservation Easements. We highly recommend you heed his every word. He wrote the preceeding on a blog in answer to the following by a Mary H.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Agrarian Insights Categories
Uncategorized
Transfer of Development Rights – A New Sub-Prime Threat
February 6, 2009, 11:51 am
Filed under: Uncategorized
After a year of worldwide economic turmoil caused by real estate and banking practices, it is puzzling that legislatures in Virginia and Washington would be considering initiating risky “market-based” speculative real estate programs called transfer of development rights – especially under the guise of natural resource preservation and smart growth. At a time when states are facing an over-supply of housing and plunging real estate values, it is folly to expect a positive outcome from these schemes.
These efforts would be creating the same market complexity seen in sub-prime mortgages – and the same challenges of regulation and oversight. While promoters of this approach tout a supposed lack of public cost – claiming “the market” pays for the conservation, oversight is much more complex than simple easement purchase programs, costing localities far more in employee-hours and administration.
In Virginia, this scheme would open the way for private equity interests to purchase and hold severed development rights as investments. If we look at the trouble that the bundling of mortgages for “investment” has caused the world of finance, think of the potential problems that localities would have in handling growth management with development rights floating out in this same investment world.
Would this create a situation where investors would oppose rezoning that would benefit a community but affect their investment portfolios? Would investors sue local governments over property rights when they do not even own land in these communities? Or is this just the latest manipulation of real estate values by private equity to accumulate wealth?
The transfer of development rights concept is a century old – established in Manhattan in the early 20th century to save urban park open space from development. It is a tool which is efficient at moving urban rights because they are relatively equal in value and application. It has worked effectively for a few very large deals between urban and rural areas – as in downtown Seattle’s 2,500 acre deal with timber interests and in Collier County, Florida, where a single transaction will protect 16,000 acres of the Everglades to create new metropolitan mixed use development.
It has not worked effectively in agricultural settings if the goal is to preserve the business of agriculture. Montgomery County, Maryland, is touted as the success story. But I would advise a bit of caution. American Farmland Trust reported in 2006, that “more than 60% of the land preserved through TDR easements in the United States is located in Montgomery County.[i]” This is not a model for success. It’s an anomaly.
If one simply measures acres put under conservation easements in Montgomery, it appears to have been wildly successful. But if one measures the decline in the local agricultural industry, it has been a disaster.
The University of Maryland[ii] examined the outcome of Montgomery’s program and found that it undermined the local agricultural industry. The economic analysis concluded that the county’s rate of farmland loss, reduction in the number of farming operations, and decline in market value of farm infrastructure all exceeded the state averages after the TDR program was enacted. Other indicators of agricultural industry health that lagged state figures included: farm size, operators as principal occupation, age of operators, the market value of agricultural products and harvested cropland.
At a time when state and local government is facing greatly diminished revenue, why would you burden it with increased costs for a sketchy, complicated experiment? You may hear from proponents about “success stories,” but many are simply where development interests have mined state and local conservation programs, like Forest Legacy, for funds to enable development at a cost to taxpayers.
There is no urgent need for these programs. In fact, the last thing we need is further manipulation of the real estate market. There are certainly many issues of higher public priority and lower cost that need the attention of the legislature.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[i] Montgomery County Department of Economic Development, Agricultural Services Division, “TDR Program Overview.”
[ii] University of Maryland. 2002. “An Analysis of the Transfer of Development Rights Program in Montgomery County, Maryland: A Report of the University of Maryland’s Spring 2001 Community Planning Studio,” University of Maryland, College Park, MD.

DO YOU CARE ABOUT THE "LITTLE PINK HOUSE?"

By JACK VENRICK

On February 12, 2009, The Evergreen Freedom Foundation presented: Those who are on the dark side taking our Land and our "Little Pink Houses" And Those who waking up to the truth they are SOVEREIGN & FREE
Exceptional luncheon this afternoon, hosted by Evergreen Freedom Foundation to a packed crowd. Susette Kelo was the star of the luncheon. She spent 10 years of her life fighting City of New London, Connecticut, New London Development Corporation, Pfizer Pharmaceutical, a President of Connecticut College and the governor of the State of Connecticut who literally bull dozed down her neighborhood for a project that never happen.
Investigative journalist Jeff Benedict who researched and wrote Ms. Kelo's story was also there and gave the heart wrenching history. The cover of Jeff's book is shown below. I encourage all to buy this true story and learn how big business, big academia and big government conspire to choke out individual freedoms and liberties for their own selfish pompous profit.
The Institute of Justice John Chambers also spoke and told their story of how they came into the battle to help defend Ms. Kelo.
After all this blood letting by big business and big government, 90 acres now stands empty and baron where Ms. Kelo's home and neighborhood once stood. The Governor of Connecticut went to prison and his Chief of Staff is out. The head of Pfizer was ousted. The President of Connecticut College was ousted. Lives were lost in the neighborhood because of the stress and damage caused in the neighborhood.
42 states have enacted laws against this sort of taking despite the Supreme Court 5-4insane decision but this is only Swiss cheese with holes.
Evergreen Freedom Foundation aired two additional property taking stories in Washington state by Sound Transit and the City of Sammamish.
Please help us stop these crimes against humanity and our property rights by supporting the rally below and the new property rights center starting by Evergreen Freedom Foundation www.effwa.org .
All of these takings come through illegitimate social and environmental culling programs such as Open Space, Public Benefit Rating System, Growth Management Act, CAO, SAO, Smart Growth and Sustaining Development and the United Nations.
All the founding laws of the land and the fundamental natural laws have been torn to sheds by the greedy green businesses & bureaucrats profiting from these "colonization" programs. All the taxes, usurious interest and diluted property titles are illegitimate takings of your basic rights. We have been deluded into sheep and herded like cattle to slaughter by the bench, bar, banks and brokers of big government.
We must wake up our neighbors and our community and expose this corruption by locking arms with our local and national property rights groups, freedom and legal foundations who are fighting to free us from the tyranny of taking private and public property.
Jack Venrick
Enumclaw, Washington
www.FreedomForAllSeasons.org

MORALITY

by JIM BEERS


Now President Obama says he wants to reduce abortions by nudging the argument "away from morality". Say what? If the "partisanship", "bickering", "dispute", "argument" (call it what you will) is not about the morality of taking a human life; what can it be about - cleanliness, doctor's training, parental v governmental control of children?
Suffice it to say that the pro-abortion folks have no moral qualms about abortion and they also refuse to recognize the precedent that abortion establishes vis a vis the elderly, the disabled, the terminally ill and all other citizenry ruled by a supreme government. A supreme government is one that does not recognize our rights as "unalienable" and "endowed by their (sic, our) Creator": such a government, as we have in Washington today, sees any rights as something they "endow" or deny as it suits their interests.
The Pro-Life folks have moral qualms about abortion in that they understand it to be the unjust taking (i.e. murder) of an innocent and helpless human life. They see abortion as granting government something to which it has no "right" that is the taking of human life that is of no danger to anyone; this perversion of the term "right" is clearly a precedent for such governments in the future to make similar determinations about the elderly and sick (National Medicine?) as well as the disabled, minorities, and 3rd World "natives" (Population Control, Minority Control, funding foreign abortions?).
Earth to President Obama, saying that you want to reduce abortions is unbelievable coming from someone that proclaims he would not want his daughter "punished with a baby". Furthermore, saying you want to shift the abortion argument from a moral one is like saying you want to shift relations with Russia from foreign relations. Babble all you will, our relations with Russia are and will remain "foreign" relations just as the debate about abortion will remain a "moral" argument.
To be blunt, the President's obtuse moral perceptions are not surprising. Like many Americans and Europeans of late, his "religious" record is one of attending a "club-like" assemblage of like-minded persons gathering on an regular basis to listen to a favored leader that makes everyone feel good. The President's, and many others today, sense of right and wrong, moral and immoral is somewhat relative and malleable as a result: hence the Anglican Bishop that left his family for a same sex "lover" speaking at the same ceremonies (Inauguration) as the anti-Prop 8 Pastor. Hence the doublespeak as the President protests his interest in decreasing abortions while he funds them internationally, appoints a plethora of pro-"aborters", plans to fund abortions nationally, and proclaims his willingness to sign a law enshrining Roe v Wade in federal statute.
So why is this relevant if abortion isn't on your radar? Because you are about to witness over the next two, at least, or four years an explosion of federal laws from this Congress and The White House that will advance the agendas of same-sex advocates, activist atheists, anti-marriage and anti-parental control activists, and pornography advocates. These supporters of the President and the Congressional leaders elections expect and will obtain rewards for their financial and public support for the election of these politicians. While the advancement of the foregoing agendas will cause considerable social disturbance, animal rights and environmental laws (banning horse slaughter, declaring the N. Rockies "Ecosystem" sacrosanct, Protecting Puppies, declaring more Wilderness, creating more Parks and Refuges, etc.) will serve as "soma"(see Ray Bradbury's, Farenheit 451 wherein the government TV "soothed" and "drugged" everyone) while paying those two groups for their support in electing the current Washington crew.
In all of these foregoing matters there is no right or wrong, no moral or immoral: there is only political expediency and the future hold on power and the expansion of personal power to consider. Take Pelosi, Biden, Kennedy, and Daschle (please): they proclaim their Catholicity as they run for office and then advocate abortion and then "advance" to lecturing the populace on the questionability of when life begins in direct opposition to Catholic teaching and Papal mandates. They even ignore the tepid protestations of their Bishops. Most important though is to comprehend why they have come to this point. The Catholic Bishops were joining these power "worthies" at fundraisers and social events for years while making no public mention of their abortion stances. The Bishops mostly mentioned "social justice" as a sort of backhanded way of letting Catholics vote for these sorts of politicians that supported abortion so these politicians now lecture Catholics, their Bishops and others about abortion. For centuries, the Catholic Church exercised excommunication on, among others like heretics, kings and publicly respected persons that sinned publicly and were unrepentant. This was not because they were known to have committed a serious sin but rather because they were thereby creating a "scandal" that might well lead others to sin (i.e. "if it is OK for the King to do it, can it be so bad or why can't I do it" etc.). Today the Catholic Bishops have created an enormous scandal by tolerating the continued proclamation of these public "Catholic" politicians as eligible to claim membership in a Church whose moral teachings they actively oppose. If one young girl gets an abortion because of this permitted scandal, there is a very wide swath of responsible persons that must answer. This relative morality is seeping into all aspects of American life.
The "relative" morality or lack of morality in American life may affect far more than any of us will recognize:
- As yet another young girl "disappears" from her home in Florida and the papers are full of children abused and women raped do we ever mention the role of pornography in all of these sex crimes?
- As a New Jersey Governor and Anglican Bishop leave wives and children for same-sex "lovers", do we dare protest the increasing encouragement of such behavior in our schools when children are developing their sexual identities? Do we dare to object to same-sex demonstrations for marriage and same-sex adoptions and parenting?
- Where is the outrage at providing US taxes to foreign abortion clinics: to American abortion clinics?
Could some of our negative image in Asia and Africa or South America be because:
- An African father discovers that his daughter has "received" an abortion from an American Abortion Clinic paid for by America?
- A Moslem mother discovers that her son has been watching an American same-sex pornography computer site and is now seeking same-sex liaisons?
- A South American wife discovers that American pornography has encouraged her husband to seek other women and to eventually leave her and their children?
- An Indian husband discovers that his wife wants to abandon him and their family because American feminists use American international radio stations and American sponsored conferences to demean motherhood and the role of homemaker?
- An African parishioner discovers that an American missionary priest has abused his son or run off with his wife?
If these things are not wrong because they are "immoral" there can ultimately be no objection to them. If the moral dimension can be dismissed as the President and his fellow politicians say: what hope is there of lasting opposition and reform to these things that are eating away at our very foundation? If such issues are "amoral" then what hope is there to maintain any of the rights in the Bill of Rights from guns for protection to religion to speech? If such rights, based on "Life. Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" do not come from our "Creator" as declared in The Declaration of Independence: where do we allow that they do come from? The answer can only be from those in power and to accept that will prove our undoing.
Take a lesson from the Catholic Bishops and have no doubt where "get-along" acquiescence gets you: it gets you in the position of supporting a growing immoral society. Likewise acquiescing in this moral posturing of the President and Congress gets us not only in the position of supporting that which we know is wrong, additionally we are pictured to the rest of the world as an "evil" society that will destroy their society and culture. What would we think if France was financially supporting abortions in America or Russian pornography was swamping America as sex crimes and same sex license increased all around us? What if Venezuelan radio stations were beamed into America and encouraged women to leave their families or discouraged young people from marrying before having children? What if Chinese pamphlets were spread all over America and declared human "overpopulation" and the need for laws about only one child and the need for more abortions and even forced abortions? What would you think of those countries and their culture?
The President and our political "leaders" should stick to the Constitution and the specific wording that authorizes their position and their proscribed authorities. They should leave morality to Churches and specifically to those Church leaders that have the knowledge and courage to declare what is moral and what is immoral. In my case our current political leadership and my current Catholic Church leadership leave a lot to be desired. As with much of the immorality of the day, Church and societal issues often parallel each other and reforms are ultimately the responsibility of each of us to make our nation, our communities, and our Churches the best they can be. The hope for reforms, like our very society, depends on moral agreement as Our Founding Fathers knew well. Dismissing the moral dimension of these issues only leads us deeper into the spiraling morass of decay and ultimately destruction. Jim Beers 12 February 2009

ALLIES OR JUDAS GOATS

by JIM BEERS

"World Net Daily"

"NEW YORK - As the Obama administration attempts to push through Congress a nearly $1 trillion deficit spending plan that is weighted heavily toward advancing typically Democratic-supported social welfare programs, a rebellion against the growing dominance of federal control is beginning to spread at the state level.
So far, eight states have introduced resolutions declaring state sovereignty under the Ninth and Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, including Arizona, Hawaii, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington.
Analysts expect that in addition, another 20 states may see similar measures introduced this year, including Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Nevada, Maine and Pennsylvania
Rollback federal authority
The various sovereignty measures moving through state legislatures are designed to reassert state authority through a rollback of federal authority under the powers enumerated in the Constitution, with the states assuming the governance of the non-enumerated powers, as required by the Tenth Amendment.
The state sovereignty measures, aimed largely at the perceived fiscal irresponsibility of Congress in the administrations of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, have gained momentum with the $1 trillion deficit-spending economic stimulus package the Obama administration is currently pushing through Congress.
Particularly disturbing to many state legislators are the increasing number of "unfunded mandates" that have proliferated in social welfare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, in which bills passed by Congress dictate policy to the states without providing funding.
In addition, the various state resolutions include discussion of a wide range of policy areas, including the regulation of firearms sales (Montana) and the demand to issue drivers licenses with technology to embed personal information under the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative and the Real ID Act (Michigan)."
On one hand I am tempted to cheer about 28 states passing or considering "resolutions declaring state sovereignty under the Ninth and Tenth Amendment to the Constitution". Twenty-eight states disturbed by "the increasing number of 'unfunded mandates'" and "the regulation of firearms sales (Montana) and the demand to issue drivers licenses with technology to embed personal information under the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative and the Real ID Act (Michigan)." This seems too good to be true;then again,what seems too good to be true usually is.
All of this bold affirmation of state's rights coincides with all but one or two Governors salivating at their recent Conference as they affirm the need for and worthiness of the "Stimulus" Bill being pushed by the Administration and the Congress. It coincides with the AWOL status and silence of state legislators and Governors as House Committee Chairman (and tax cheat) Rangel and Robert Reich discuss (in a Committee Hearing) how to keep state government "out of the process" as the $8-900 Billion "Stimulus" is formulated and then distributed (mustn't have anyone else interfere with the President and the Congressional leadership's prerogative of handing out what they took from other Americans). It coincides with state silence as the foregoing two crooks (Rangel and Reich) openly discussed how to keep "white" and "skilled" workers from getting any of the "Stimulus". It follows decades of states, with the occasional one or two dissenters that can never find other states to support them, bowing down to every theft of their authority by the federal interlopers in such areas as Endangered Species, Marine Mammals, federal land enclaves, federal land closures, federal land expansions, wolves, animal property rights, education, roadside plantings, energy development, catastrophic fires, cockamamie nonsense about "native ecosystems" and "invasive species", pet ownership, domestic animal disposition and use, etc., etc., etc. It is right on the heels of the absence of even a peep from state governments either publicly or to "their" federal cousins about recent confirmation of Administration appointees like the #2 guy in the Justice Department that was responsible for forcing pornography into public libraries where children would have access to it in the vast majority of Counties that were strongly opposed to it: or to the federal mandates to car manufacturers to only make small vehicles appropriate to visiting rural America but totally inappropriate to living and working in rural America.
I could go on here but in the throes of the federal con game going on today; this state's rights cry from state legislatures is one of three things:
1. It is incredibly naive. It is (at this point) like Neville Chamberlain relying on "diplomacy" to avoid the inevitable confrontation with Hitler.
2. It reflects a contempt for public understanding beyond belief. To be passing such resolutions as their Governors slobber all over federal politicians and bureaucrats for "their share" of the biggest possible "Stimulus" pie (Translation - "as much as they can get with or without 'strings'") and then expecting us to believe they are concerned about "state's rights" is insulting to say the least.
3. It is a classic example of chutzpah (the guy that murders his parents and then throws himself on the mercy of the court as an orphan). It is like President Obama saying he won't take away guns when his record is nothing if not one lifelong campaign of gun control in one of the worst 2nd Amendment abuse states in the nation or like the President saying he wants to "reduce" abortions as he funds foreign abortions, appoints a blizzard of pro-abortion advocates from Planned Parenthood and Emily's List, and as he advocates federal funded abortions nationally and enshrining Roe V Wade into federal statute. Do these politicians really think we are that stupid?
4. It is a feeble attempt to regain their "manhood". The states have "evolved" from bastions and defenders of freedom and individual rights to enablers of every anti-Constitutional movement that can buy enough federal politicians to pass legislation making their cause (environment, animal rights, forced urban living, controlled diets, family breakup, sexual license, atheism, etc.) superior to the individual and state's rights in our Constitution, our local communities, and our very traditions and culture. Is it possible that they really understand that the reason they are tough financial shape is this increasing reliance on federal money and that they are truly becoming irrelevant?
I want to believe it is #4 but then I listen to the Los Angeles Mayor talk about he and his federal Party cohorts in Washington are working together on sending the money straight to the cities so that the state government doesn't use it in rural areas since "most workers" (Translation: voters and interest groups that put the President and the Congressional "leadership" in office) live in urban areas. So just as the political crooks in Washington want the money to go their supporters and future reelections, so too do the Mayors want to control the money being printed in Washington and have it helicoptered directly to City Hall. This, ironically, in Governor "Terminator" Schwarzenegger"s state, the largest in the union and one of the first and strongest advocates of "Stimulus" funding as well as a state about to go broke from overspending and supporting all the same nuttiness that has been going on in Washington for decades. What goes around, comes around.
Call me cynical but when I begin to see more than resolutions maybe I will take heart. Small nations have always tried to negotiate with hostile large powers, historically to no avail. Consider the Easter European nations swallowed by Nazi and Communist aggressors prior to WWII, they too negotiated and proclaimed their independence while trying to accommodate an aggressor bent on conquering them "agreements and laws be damned". The federal government as currently construed is the greatest aggressor bent on absorbing state sovereignty and individual rights that ever existed. The states are being pushed aside like the "subcontractors" they have allowed themselves to become. Even their own cities are beginning to negotiate directly with federal usurpers about funding and harmonizing programs. Can you spell "s-u-p-e-r-f-l-u-o-u-s"?
The future for freedom and the future for rural America are bleak. Reforming this destructive trend begins with each of us. The next two years, between the radical politicians and bureaucrats now controlling our government and the laws they will write, are lost. We must focus on electing either Senators or Congressmen that will wrest control of at least one House of Congress from these radicals. You will note that I did not mention a Party. The "Democrat-Lite", "get-along" Republicans of recent elections have been no help and in some ways are even more dangerous to our freedoms and state governments by seductively and slowly doing the same as is going on in Washington today. We need politicians in control of either one or both Houses of Congress that will check the President's Socialist agenda and then work with State governments to restore the Individual Rights and State Authority that made this country great. Could "resolutions" be a first step? I don't know, but one can only hope.
PS. A "Judas Goat" is a goat staked out in a clearing to draw in a predator (wolf, coyote, leopard, cheetah, bear) where it can be killed. Like many hunting and fishing organizations, state legislatures are hotbeds of hidden agendas that would stun us to know of them. More often than we think, our hunting or fishing organizations really support things that are not in our best interests and often under these circumstances they will divert us by "standing up to" wolves or land closures while they do just the opposite behind our backs. The state legislatures might be doing the same thing: acting like they want to defend states rights while continuing to do whatever they can to obtain the "federal" money. It is possible that hunting and fishing organizations just like state legislatures "stake out the goat" with no intention of killing the predator that is ravaging the community; they merely want us to relax, go home and let them do whatever they want. Hence the title "Allies or Judas Goats?" by Jim Beers 10 February 2009

HR 45 - GUNS!

Are you ready for the House Bill titled 'HR 45, Blair Holt Licensing and Record Act of 2009'.? It will make it illegal to own a firearm unless it is registered with the database in Washington D.C. As a gun owner you will have to be finger printed, you will be required to provide your DL#, SS#, you must maintain a valid address at all times, submit to mental and physical health records being put on file, you will also be required to file any address changes and any ownership changes even if a private sale. Each update will cost $25 and if you fail to comply you will lose your right to own firearms. This bill and its language mirror almost completely one defeated last year in the House of Representatives by soon to be Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. Will we the citizenry be as lucky this time?
Pass this on to everyone who believes in strict Constitutionalism and remember that laws only apply to those who obey them. Criminals by definition and nature do not abide by laws. New laws and restrictions only apply to the law abiding citizen and are not written with the criminal in mind. With guns, it is not about having laws on the books to prosecute individuals, it is about taking guns away from the people so that no one has them in the first place. One last item to note, when assuming power and creating a facist state, Hitler was a proponent of strong gun laws because a disarmed populace was much easier to control than an armed one. The kings of old also outlawed weapons of any kind in any region that they conquered to quell the ability of the citizens to uprise against them.
The Founding Fathers of this nation understood all of the above and because of this they included the second amendment in the constitution.. In fact, they knew that at some point in every society's life span that the need for the population to arise came about. To this end they made the right to keep and bear arms against a tyrannical state an absolute right that could not be revoked. They did this because the first thing tyrants and despots do is to remove a population's right to defend themselves. When this is done, the tyrants have no problem with the destruction of society as we know it.
Send this on to all true patriots! Protect your Second Amendment!
I googled the bill-here's web link but it is not the Congerssional reserach site. B
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/text
The following is a summary of the bill as provided by the Congressional Research Service. If you read the whole bill, you'll find it will effectively preclude the ownership of ANY firearms by law-abiding people unless licensed by the Attorney General. How long do you think THAT would take??

Congressional Research Service Summary
The following summary was written by the Congressional Research Service, a well-respected nonpartisan arm of the Library of Congress. GovTrack did not write and has no control over these summaries.

1/6/2009--Introduced.

Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 - Amends the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to prohibit a person from possessing a firearm unless that person has been issued a firearm license under this Act or a state system certified under this Act and such license has not been invalidated or revoked. Prescribes license application, issuance, and renewal requirements.
Prohibits transferring or receiving a qualifying firearm unless the recipient presents a valid firearms license, the license is verified, and the dealer records a tracking authorization number. Prescribes firearms transfer reporting and record keeping requirements. Directs the Attorney General to establish and maintain a federal record of sale system.
Prohibits: (1) transferring a firearm to any person other than a licensee, unless the transfer is processed through a licensed dealer in accordance with national instant criminal background check system requirements, with exceptions; (2) a licensed manufacturer or dealer from failing to comply with reporting and record keeping requirements of this Act; (3) failing to report the loss or theft of the firearm to the Attorney General within 72 hours; (4) failing to report to the Attorney General an address change within 60 days; or (5) keeping a loaded firearm, or an unloaded firearm and ammunition for the firearm, knowingly or recklessly disregarding the risk that a child is capable of gaining access, if a child uses the firearm and causes death or serious bodily injury.
Prescribes criminal penalties for violations of firearms provisions covered by this Act.
Directs the Attorney General to: (1) establish and maintain a firearm injury information clearinghouse; (2) conduct continuing studies and investigations of firearm-related deaths and injuries; and (3) collect and maintain current production and sales figures of each licensed manufacturer.
Authorizes the Attorney General to certify state firearm licensing or record of sale systems.

WHOSE "TRUTH?"

By JIM BEERS

The raging "partisanship" and argument in Washington these days over the
proposed federal "Bailout" and "Stimulus" legislation and attendant government expenditures is a dramatic example of what is ailing this nation in recent years. No it is not politics or radical organizations or lazy citizenship, those things are symptoms of a deeper problem like the rash or soreness mistaken for the result of something you ate or did rather than the undiscovered cancer beginning to manifest itself. What is ailing this nation is abandonment of a common acceptance of who man is and what this nation is.
The emotionally charged debate over taking Trillions of dollars and dumping them into the economy isn't a Democrat/Republican thing and it isn't a vehicle for a panoply of hidden Socialist agendas, although both of these are true: it is basically an expression of opposed and strongly held opinions by large segments of the population about very basic things like:
- The role of government.
- The future of the nation.
These two things are based on very deeply held beliefs about:
1. The nature of Man, that is to say his relationship to the State and his innate worth as a creature created by God or merely just another animal, albeit a bright one, that is therefore as subject to government as a hog or swan.
2. In the case of the "Bailout/Stimulus" there is the additional belief that either government "intervention and power" are good and should be increased or that government "intervention and power" are counterproductive and dangerous and should be avoided.
It is the last of these two beliefs that I submit contain a lesson for all of us that applies to animal owners, animal users, meat eaters, ranchers, loggers, hunters, fishermen, trappers, rural residents, rural businessmen, and all of those that find the concerns I write about related to their own.
How do we argue for or against the stimulus? We try to mention "facts" that "experts" make available. For instance, one economist says that the last
eight years of tax cuts are responsible for the economic downturn while another says tax cuts are necessary to "stimulate" the economy. Another economist says that government spending is needed to "stimulate" business and "innovation" while another says that government spending depresses business and innovation. European (socialist) economists point to American debt and warrior foreign policy as "the" cause for their woes. Chinese (communist/socialist?) "leaders" consider changes in their economy based on their innate skepticism of capitalism and their hold on power as news photos of Chinese "Job Fairs" show mobs of people at a few booths and reinforce worldwide opinions that "more" government (in China) is needed everywhere.
The point is that each person or group involved in any such matters does two things:
1. They confront the crisis with their own justified preconceived beliefs and a common concern for preserving their best interest.
2. They begin with these perfectly natural biases to examine facts, assemble
proposals they believe in, and then advocate what they honestly believe to be best.
Internationally, we must understand what others are advocating, why they are advocating it, and what we must do in our own best interest as a nation (as does every other nation). Nationally, we are fortunate to live in a nation where for over two hundred years the Constitutional basis for our government has been to, simply put, protect the rights of each of us to "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness". This simple yet vital role provided something unlike any other place on earth:
- A tightly circumscribed government that would not grow to oppress individuals or groups as governments always have.
- A social environment where religious beliefs and immigrants of differing societies of origin could intermingle and live in peace.
- Guarantees of local community controls of day-to-day activities and the protection of all the basic rights enumerated or inferred in the Constitution for all citizens.
If we do not accept this American concept and defend this proven model then the wheels of society as we know it fall off and we crash. If we accept altering the circumscribed role of government or denying other citizens their rights or diminishing property rights or any of the other guarantees we have come to take for granted (to our great dismay): then the power of "our expert" and the "findings" of "our" scientist or economist or educator or fill-in-the-blank from dog whisperer to the guy on some wildlife program is "the scientific basis" for the changes we demand. Never mind the biases they bring to the table, their government grant or their interest in advancing their career or pay or tenure or power or whatever, their "findings" are "The Truth" if they are supported by "the central government"
today.
Think about Endangered Species "science". Think about fishery and marine mammal claims. Think about when Life is reputed to "begin" or not be "worthy". Think about animal "welfare claims about horses or gamefowl. Think about pets and cattle regulations. Think about parental rights and school curriculums. Consider global "warming" claims. Think about claims about polar bears and sea ice fifty years from now as a basis for draconian government growth and action.
None of this is meant to say that there are not worthy considerations in all
these matters. While dictatorships like Venezuela or Zimbabwe do not come up with such matters and hard economic times in freer nations tend to suppress such matters; I submit that the freer the nation and the more prosperous the nation (US/Europe, etc.) the more they make of such matters and the more they come to believe that their beliefs (because of their freedom?) are worthy of trumping all others. It is apparent that they either believe that there is no danger to their or others' rights by imposing themselves on their fellow citizens or that they intend to change the nation and our relationship to government. Environmental and animal rights, lifestyle, diet, "social issue", and expanded government advocates all are examples of those using "their" truth to change us. We need to somehow redirect these advocacies into the American Constitutional way of life and away from the dissolution of our society. If we can lower our unquestioning acceptance of what the latest "expert" or "scientist" demands and once again treat it as the advice it is and then accept or reject it in whole or in part in line with the freedoms we enjoy; we may be on the road to needed reforms.
Whether or not simply keeping the "findings' of "experts" in perspective in and of itself, without examining our common agreement with The Declaration of Independence assertion about our own status as people "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights", can help is another question. When we accept the notion that there may or may not be a God and that we may or may not be "special" "animals", we have jumped on the water slide that only takes us down into deep waters where we may enjoy the initial splash but then we face either getting out of it or drowning.
by Jim Beers 2/7/09

ONE MAN AWAKE

By Jack Venrick

I just uploaded this page on my site with key emails covering how we pulled out the State Department of Tyranny's "finger down our throat" attempt to shove in an unwanted Roundabout on a major SR169 and SE416th intersection. This is a half mile from where I live.
Senator Pam Roach was a major asset and tiger in the rural property owners tank to stop this. She had to ultimately go to the State governor of all things. This shows you how fanatical these green sustaining government wet dreams have become. They lay out the plans decades ahead and herd the community into the corrals and chutes leading to the cattle cars all bound for Sustaining "Death" a.k.a. "Development". That would be THEIR development and OUR death.
While the sovereign and free state Citizens are shut down from enjoying any of their property rights, the few privileges we grant a limited government, have mutated into a terminal cancer, turning our rural areas into little Stepford towns for the urban elite, e.g. bike trails, parks and roundabouts for fish and humans.
Please feel free to send me any news or suggestions to post, we are making history, one way or another. The awakening will occur through these experiences waking up one property owner at a time.
Forward and use as you see fit to others.
http://www.freedomforallseasons.org/Go%20Arounds%20For%20Humans%20&%20Fish.dwt.asp
Jack Venrick
Enumclaw, Washington

One Man Awake

One man awake, Awakens another,
The second awakens, His next door brother.
The three awake can rouse a town,
By turning the whole place upside down.
The many awake, Can raise such a fuss,
It finally awakens, The rest of us.
One man up, With dawn in his eyes
Surely then...Multiplies.

FOUR BROKERS OF APOCALYPSE NEED TO STARVE!!

By JACK VENRICK

The Four Brokers of the Apocalypse:
http://www.allposters.com/-sp/Four-Horsemen-of-the-Apocalypse-Posters_i1099834_.htm
The Four Brokers of the Apocalypse Should Be Starving To Death - Not The Natural Born Sovereign & Free Citizens
This perspective needs to be repeated over and over until we stop encouraging the continuance of an unnecessary
system of taxing ourselves to death thereby perpetuating an unecessary feudal & barbaric model.
Do not promote ANY FORM of taxes including "REFORM" upon the natural born, sovereign and free.
You may as well promote blood letting using leaches.
We do not want "reform", we want a complete end to this embezzlement
Forced & misapplied & "reformed" taxes of any form are destructive and unnecessary
Forced deceptive taxes are repugnant to & conflict with, the founding & fundamental laws of the land
Forced tax taking of private property including our wages are CRIMES NOT "taxes"
Tax "reform" is ONLY reformed embezzlement
"fair tax", VAT tax, "flat tax", consumption tax are misapplied indirect taxes directly on the people
The organizations promoting this tax taking "reformation" are lining their pockets with millions
by those who have swallowed "tax reform" hook, line and sinker.
"Americans for Fair Taxation" solicits donations using an ex Federal Reserve Board Governor name
That makes it pretty who is behind these cosmetic only reforms
Once again Americans bite the bait when they confuse a few choices to be their only choice
And worse yet, they are duped into thinking these few choices will be FREE CHOICE.
All taxes applied by force and deception are destructive and illegitimate.
These type of taxes are unnecessary, repressive and destructive as well as immoral
Basic contract law requires no coercion and no deception otherwise the contract is void
The myth of direct & indirect taxes applied upon the natural born is maligned
This is more Junk Finance propagated by the Four Brokers of Bankruptcy for their early retirement
AND YOUR EARLY DEATH
These are the Four Horseman of Death
The Bench,
The Bar,
The Bankers and
THEIR political Brokers,
i.e. their governments - Cities, counties, state and fed
TAX 101 (sorry to repeat this endlessly for those who know already)
1. Sales taxes are an indirect tax and must be uniform across the states and cannot be applied to the natural born as an add on till tax.
2. Direct taxes must be apportioned by population to the states.
How the several states pay is their business BUT
They cannot apply any taxes by force, coercion or deception to the natural born
Current property taxes, income taxes and sales taxes upon the natural born are unconstitutional
There are no constitutional direct taxes in the United States for good reason
Even the Federalist well knew the danger of direct taxes
and limited them to emergencies ONLY
1/4 to 2% MAX
and voluntary
This detail was intentionally left out of the Constitution
The Bill of Rights were to be the Supreme Law of Land Not the Constitution
The Bill of Rights were to be Articles NOT Amendments
The Constitution is in conflict with the Bill of Rights
You cannot tax God given rights of a natural born to own property and earn wages
A few good high courts have reaffirmed this in the past
Forced or deceptive taxes conflicts with the Bills of Rights AND the Laws of Nature
The Four Brokers of the Apocalypse have taken away the powers of Grand & Trial Juries
The Grand & Trial Juries have all the power to decide the law
The Four Brokers of the Apocalypse are to stand down to the will of the final Supreme Judges, the natural born.
The Four Brokers use tyranny to force unjust legal, financial, monetary & scientific fiction over the land
3. The ONLY constitutional sources of income for the government are:
uniform indirect taxes paid by the corporations and businesses
the lease and sale of government owned lands
customs import duties upon foreign countries and business trading in America
the federal printing press which do not have to pay interest to anyone.
THERE IS NO OTHER LEGITMATE SOURCES OF REVENUE FOR THE GOVERNMENT.
So called "Direct taxes" are not only immoral, they are highly destructive and need to be eliminated totally.
Even the Federalist could never get unanimous approval on this clause.
The direct tax clause is highly perverted the original intention of even the pro central Federalist
There was NO unanimous approval.
This is why the Federalist added the last Article 7 of the Constitution, i.e.
i.e. they could not get unanimous approval of the 13 states,
so they settled on 9 states as "sufficient" for ratification.
There are no constitutionally applied "direct taxes" existing today!
There have only been three times in history when the Four Brokers tried to stick this in
It never worked.
It is near impossible to apply.
There are precedence setting, repeated high court rulings, against
property taxes, income taxes and the taxing of any wages.
All sales taxes must be costed into the price of the goods or service by the merchants and then passed on IF the business sees fit when competing with other merchants.
Limited Constitutional Revenue Fences In The Government AND the sovereign states NOT the sovereign Citizens
This was the intension even of the pro big central government Federalist types.
The Anti Federalist were much more prophetic and correct.
Once you allow private property to be breeched, you have destroyed yourself
A central government does not protect the freedom of its people, it is a threat
Never give up your power to someone else to "protect" yourself
This is tantamount to giving up you side arm to a stranger to protect your family
The Four Brokers of the Apocalypse are bleeding American's to death.
Bailouts are ether on the same old fires of taking Americans.
We need to put The Four Brokers in a position whereby they have no choice but to starve themselves to death.
Thereby the people will be set free.
Free people and free markets create the wealth.
Government does not create anything BUT WARS, DEBT & PERPETUATION OF ITSELF
Government & Corporate Institutions are both by their nature predatory sharks
We cannot continue to blow up a balloon of debt with the illusion it will protect us.
This is an oxymoron.
Bailouts are the symptom of the problem NOT the cure.
The problem is the current system which has been created by and revolves around These Four Brokers of Death.
The solution is simple, though hard to believe for some
Get rid of all forms of forced direct and indirect taxes upon the natural born
Get rid of all interest charges upon the natural born
Interest and taxes are fictional creations by the Four Brokers for legal fiction entities ONLY
Financial fiction cannot be applied upon natural born state Citizens
Give the natural born allodial title to their property, i.e. the title of kings
Then set US free
Once people are secure from The Four Brokers of the Apocalypse
to own their homes, land and vehicles in allodial title without predatory takings
they are free to recreate themselves
"If there is righteousness in the heart
There will be beauty in the character;
If there is beauty in the character
There will be harmony in the home;
When there is harmony in the home
There will be order in the nation;
When there is order in the nation
There will be peace in the world."
-Sai Baba
Taxes and interest upon private property, create and perpetuate endless boom bust destruction upon our lives and the sanctity of our homes, land and property.
These two weasel words ("taxes & interest") were cleverly crafted masking the terminal nature of their venom.
Taxes and interest are equivalent to the profits of money changers as well as other deceptions, e.g. the monetizing of debt into a worthless currency,
evolution of legal fiction "progressive positivism", junk science fictions, e.g. "alternative energy", "man caused global warming", "man caused endangered species", etc.There is little to no need for interest as the money is freely printed at no cost Low to NO interest loans plus closing costs are economically viable
The sovereign states and their sovereign and free Citizens have been taken by stealth, deception and subversion while corporate media and the Four Brokers of the Apocalypse spin these superstitions into colored laws.
The federal government was intentionally restricted to a 10 square mile sand box around D.C.
The Four Brokers of the Apocalypse breeched this sand box long ago
by morphing the old concepts of a limited trade and a 5% import tax into
a global municipal corporation enjoined with national and global businesses.
They have amassed a virtual fortune beyond anyone's ability to visualize the scam.
There is no law requiring anyone to pay a so called "income" tax.
The high court has ruled on this several times so saying.
Income is profit or gain NOT wages.
Wages is your labor and is NOT profit or a gain
We live on the surface of a balloon intentionally over and under inflating.
This whip saw sends shock waves through the lives of Americans generation after generation
The Four Brokers of the Apocalypse intentionally continue this game for their profit and power Centuries of this "bull whipping" of the natural born and our private property ultimately uproot our lives and traditions.
Thereby, The Four Brokers of the Apocalypse more easily take anything they want, any time they want.
The great depression was orchestrated, as well as the Civil War, WWI and most of the wars.
The bailouts are the symptom NOT the solution
The solution is to overturn the money taking boards and tables creating these takings
The enormity of the takings against private property owners ....
Over the last 233 years, is unimaginable, indescribable, unbelievable and staggering.
"The founding lawyers regarded inferior courts as a vital link to the Supreme Court
for maintaining federal supremacy." The Constitution That Never Was.
The US Attorney Office as well as the US Attorney General office is not authorized by the Constitution
There is NO separation of power
The bench and the bar all work for the same boss
The Grand and Trial Juries meant to be the ultimate judicial check are strangled by judicial tyranny
The current tax system upon the natural born in American is feudal
People are killing themselves and their families because of the repressive nature of this apocalyptic system
Six families in California recently pulled the trigger on each other BECAUSE OF THE SYSTEM.
They are being pressured unjustly out of their homes
All because of the creation of phony myths of scarcity, of usurious interest diluted titles, promoted by the bench, bar, bankers & government brokers
whereby they your homes, land, vehicles, wages, family estate, etc.
The Four Brokers of the Apocalypse have destroyed everything we have fought and died for 92% of Americans do not even know it
There are no founding laws sanctioning any of these illegitimate takings of private property.
There are high court rulings via precedence cases against much of this
All being ignored by the lower bench, bar and banks & Brokers of CONgress
In addition to legal, financial & junk science fiction created hourly to legitimatize further embezzlement of our private property and traditional way of life.
The game board is rigged to wring out blood money to The Four Brokers of the Apocalypse
The apocalypse is created one tax crime at a time.
The taxing takes many forms, visible and invisible.
A recent federal court ruling in Washington State declared King County land restrictions an illegitimate tax
One of the speakers at the last GoodNeighborLaw Forum said it best, I thought.
We must nip these takings in the heel of the basic assumptions.
This is how ALL our private and public property are taken.
Every piece of "legislation" coming out of the several states in the corporate "united states" takes away from our free will and free choice, directly and indirectly generation after generation
The thief comes in the night when we are sleeping.
The solution is simple, turn on your lights and arm yourself with the hard truth.
Once you are able to see clearly who is taking your property
Sound the alarm throughout the land
"The Four Brokers of the Apocalypse are coming"
"The Bench are coming"
"The Bar are coming"
"The Bankers are coming"
"The Political Party Brokers are coming"
"The Tax Reform Brokers are coming"
Let the virtual Bell Towers signal the truth again
YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO
Jack Venrick 2/8/09

IRONY

By Jim Beers

i-ro-ny (I' re ni), n., 3. simulated ignorance in discussion (Socratic irony), 4. (in tragedy) the quality or effect of speeches understood by the audience but not grasped by the actors on the stage (tragic irony).
Let us begin with today's GW (global warming) update. Last night, 4 February 2009, the predicted low temperature in Jacksonville, Florida was 22 degrees: tonight the predicted low is 21 degrees.
Now I know, per the "experts", that GW isn't "warming" but the cause of "all variances of hot and cold and extremes of weather". I certainly would be the last to say, "Aha, if it is so cold in Florida; how can anyone say that the "globe" is "warming?" Rather I think we should consider the children of Florida. The young Floridian munchkins are bombarded with teachers, a President and Congress, television worthies, books, and assorted "guest speakers" preaching all manner of doomsday effects from GW if we don't shut down energy use, power development, livestock operations, and grant the central and even the much-needed "world government" complete control of our lives. If their parents are skeptical, they should be either converted by the children or ignored since that is like racism per one ex-Vice President. If they are not successful in this campaign, plant life will surely disappear along with animal species and there will be flooding of coastal
cities as exemplified by how drinks with melting ice cubes (overflow?); this last one probably strikes a chord with Jacksonville kids that play on beaches. What must these innocents think it was like years ago? Was Florida weather once like Minnesota before the evil capitalist white Europeans spoiled everything and "warmed" it up? If "they" (the "scientists and politicians) are going to cool down the "globe", what will summer on the beaches be like? If a "cooled" earth means lower ocean levels, where will the "beach" part of the desert between Jacksonville and the ocean be? How far will they have to go through sand dunes to reach it? Shouldn't a "cooler" Florida be less hospitable to the boa constrictors and piranhas and alligators and poisonous snakes that make Florida living perilous for children not under the "care" of the bureaucrats that hold them captive each day? This scenario might be considered an example of tragic irony.
Then we have yesterday's White House pronouncement that henceforth any (private?) enterprise taking any of the proffered Billions (one is reminded of the M-44 coyote getter, a scented ball that encourages a coyote to pull on it with his mouth thereby firing a poison cartridge into his mouth and killing him) may not pay any executives more than $500 thousand per year. "Hooray" we all say, "yeah if 'they are going to take 'our' money, they should dance to our tune"; the egalitarian fairness boggles the mind.
Then there were the news items accompanying this socialist dream mandate:
- The President's nominee to "Direct" the Central Intelligence Agency (a former Congressman and White House Chief of Staff) made $700 thousand last year giving "speeches" to whomever. As one who dabbles in that pursuit, I know how hard it would be to make such a sum! Be that as it may, why is it bad for an executive of a large (private??) enterprise to make whatever the enterprise will pay if they take the federal "dole" but it is of no moment when a retired and pensioned politician collects $700 thousand per annum for hobnobbing? If the companies go broke, unlike the Secretary of the Treasury job that can "only" be done by the incumbent so be it, however the (free?) enterprise system assures that they can replace the "over-paid executives" or else other companies will "out-compete" them and take their place with more efficient operations. This whole government takeover and precedent
seems to be an example of Socratic irony.
- Speaking of the CIA Director nominee, if as has been discovered he has received emoluments (money) from organizations and corporations that do business with federal intelligence agencies, wouldn't that disqualify him from holding such a powerful office that controls Billions of dollars of such business? I guess not if we accept this as an example of tragic irony.
- If the former (as of yesterday) nominee for the Secretary of Health and Human Services "position" that collected $5 Million plus a car and driver over the past two years (does that make him a "bad" person?) from medical and pharmaceutical firms, since he lost reelection (will miracles never cease?) as a US Senator can still be supported by the President and his former colleagues in the US Senate well, such business connections must be viewed as "advantageous" in spite of his "understandable mistake" of not paying $150 thousand or so ( without penalties) worth of taxes. Aside from this bit of cynicism there is the additional assertion by the President and his staff that this former HHS Secretary nominee was NOT a lobbyist since he did not "register" as a lobbyist. Maybe, like the other two tax cheat nominees one of who is now Secretary of the Treasury and the other one that
also withdrew yesterday, he didn't "realize" he had to register. The fact
that his wife that was a "registered" lobbyist, making more, no doubt, than the currently mandated "$500 thousand per annum for executives" while he was a US Senator and that so she remains today, should not indicate a person that we should expect would know about "registering" as a lobbyist. Therefore he was "what?" A "fixer?" A "front man?" A "behind-the-scenes-guy?" Such questions reflect a suspicion of Socratic irony in the matter.
- Then there is the Congresswoman nominated as Secretary of Labor. She likewise was "regulatory-requirements challenged". She never told anyone or much less "registered" as required by law (this must be a funny law that applies to Congressmen and not like other laws intended only for the rest of us) that she was a Treasurer for a Fabian Socialist Union organization while she was serving in Congress. She, like her tax-cheat cohorts simply made an "understandable mistake". Like all the others, she will not be prosecuted, fined, pay any penalties, or even be described as anything but smart and worthy of a child's role model. Tragic irony abounds here.
- As we talk about lobbyist spouses, registration requirements, and the integrity of government how can we ignore the newly appointed Secretary of State? Not only does her spouse collect millions of dollars per year from foreign governments for?? Not only are the records of past collections by this spouse, much like the list of the donors that contributed the record amounts of cash to the current President's campaign, unavailable to the public: this spouse has just held a one-hour meeting with the (Prime Minister/President/Dictator?) Putin of Russia as the Russians are muscling us out of the only and vital Afghanistan operations-support airbase in one
of their (former?) satellite states. Who allows such American citizen diplomacy? What was said? What real or implied authority does the husband of the Secretary of State or an ex-President exert? Why not just let Jimmy Carter "handle" North Korea and Israel while the current President and his "Cabinet" handle Argentina and Australia? This is classic Socratic irony.
Something that has long puzzled me was way in which British voters kicked out the Churchill government as soon as WWII was over. It had always seemed to me that he was an inspiring leader and had done a creditable job in very trying circumstances. A couple of nights ago, the reason for that abrupt governmental change became clear to me as I read Fabian Freeway by Rose L. Martin. That change, both the reasons for it and the results of it, is very important to understand in the USA today.
During and after WWI and through the 20's and 30's Europe was convulsed by radical movements and social turbulence. Communist savagery in Russia, Nazism in Germany, Socialism in Italy and all manner of revolutionaries in other European nations. During this period in England a mixture of every European revolutionary movement existed and amongst them was a flock of rich nobles and writers like Shaw and Wells et al that envisioned a Nirvana of social equality and universal welfare. During the late 1930's this group of "intellectual" activists began destroying the Liberal party to bring its' members into a Labour Party that they were redesigning with unions and an array of social and anti-colonial activists. Sound familiar regarding "smart people", "experts", and "scientists" since the 1960's in the US?
During WWII there was an agreement amongst British political parties to suspend political rivalries while fighting the war. Labour Party leaders secretly disregarded the agreement and worked up a program (actually a "study" and "proposal") of social welfare and security for all English citizens that they announced halfway through the war. Obtaining the support of the US Ambassador who was very sympathetic to socialism on the heels of the US Depression, British citizens from soldiers and sailors to factory workers and farmers tired of restrictions and hardships learned of the proposed "heaven-on-earth" that Labour would establish. Sound like a recent election?
When the war ended everyone was spent from fighting, rationing, and wartime mandates. The promised "Nirvana" was not only jumped at, it was embraced with all the fervor of honeymooners. Labour won a landslide victory and kept an iron grip on absolute power for six years. Although socialists blamed the war recovery at first, prices shot up, people did not seek work since the government "promised help", private housing g was discouraged and "public" housing was slow and generated ever-greater waiting lists, government nationalized almost half of the economy and businesses dwindled, government mandates and regulations and prosecutions proliferated steadily, things like a ration of one and a half eggs per person per week became common, and taxes went up and up as businesses went down and down. British working class tourists taking a ferry to Ireland received sympathy and
charity from Irish working class persons that felt sorry for their condition, especially for the children: an ironic turn-around if ever there was one. Britain was changed irreparably and shows the wounds to this day. President Bush, Iraq, Guantanamo, government takeover, economic downturn, asking for the "support" never given the previous guy, and promises of "heaven-on-earth" anyone?)
Does any of this sound familiar? Social turbulence? A populace tired of war? Radical claims and ideas? Economic "emergencies"? Central government control and intervention for every concern? Central government authority and planning for everything? Denigration of the former leadership? A promise of solutions to all problems if government can get and spend more? Government housing control? Government spending of unheard of amounts that can only be fed by more taxes? Disincentives for work as government "takes from the rich" thereby discouraging investment and "gives to the poor" thereby encouraging workers to only work when employers offer "enough"? Concomitant losses of rights as government authority encompasses all things? Elimination of culture and traditions? Charismatic leaders painting a future that is neither achievable nor respectful of human dignity?
Put this all together and in the context of the USA in 2009 and it adds up to irony of the highest order. We believe in and remind others to support corrupt leaders that lie to us and ignore the rules of civil order. We tell everyone that we "must want our leaders to succeed" (Bill O'Reilly et al) even though their goals are inimical to freedom and hostile to the principles and words of the US Constitution. Call me cynical but I anticipate an ironic tragedy, minus the irony based on the way things are heading. Jim Beers 5 February 2009

AN ENCOURAGING THOUGHT

By Jim Beers

This morning my parish priest mentioned a paradox worth pondering: "When it is easy to be a Christian, it is hard to be a Christian; when it is hard to be a Christian, it is easy to be a Christian". That wise observation about human nature has application for all of us facing a government that threatens our freedom, our culture, our traditions, and our Constitutional Republic. To paraphrase, "When there is no threat to your (property rights, guns, animal ownership, public lands, rural lifestyle, transportation, children's moral values, etc. - you fill in your own concerns), it is hard to remain vigilant about defending your rights; when your (as above) are threatened, it is easy to enunciate and defend those rights".
There is no doubt in my mind that at no other time in my 6+ decades of life were the threats to property, hunting, fishing, trapping, animal ownership, animal use, public lands, state government, local community autonomy, timber management, wildlife management, ranching, farming, outdoor recreation, transportation, pet ownership, children's environment, families, human dignity, and all of the Rights specifically enumerated in The Bill of Rights as threatened with destruction as they are today.
Eighty years of federal growth resulting from two Constitutional Amendments authorizing a federal income tax and the popular election of US Senators has fed a federal behemoth that has grown out of all proportion to the good of a Constitutional Republic.
Forty years of social turbulence and radical movements that have attached themselves to the federal "beanstalk" have given us animal "rights", "Wilderness" closure of public lands and unimaginable fires, "endangered species" confidence games that take property and impede economic development, sexual license of every imaginable stripe, replacement of parental authority with government authority, "environmental" laws that are 70 to 80 percent unnecessary yet give radical groups legal vetoes over human welfare, and incredible scams like global warming claims that threaten
government authority over every aspect of our lives and expose the ignorance of an increasingly ill-educated populace.
All of this terminates in the acceptance of more and more federal power for every aspect of our lives as best exemplified in the current "Bailout/Stimulus" fraud wherein Billions are appropriated overnight for "emergency" bailout of banks but then goes to other things. The current Trillion being rushed to authorization as an "emergency" to help the unemployed and to "stimulate" the economy will go to everything from Congressmen's favored institutions (extending federal controls and paying political debts) or to criminal enterprises like ACORN as well as to condoms
(eliminating children) and Billions and Billions for other Fabian-Socialist causes like dictating company salaries and business operations like what cars to build that are altogether like replacing the propellers on the engines of the American socialist movement bi-plane with jet engines. This "emergency" cover scheme has been an historic ruse for establishment of all manner of dictatorships and oligarchies that have come and gone throughout history. One need look no further today than Venezuela and Zimbabwe to observe the same scenario; elected governments that use "emergencies" and central government authority to cement themselves into "unreplaceable" dictatorships to the great distress of their citizenry and the national welfare.
It is a fact that The White House is now bursting with radicals that have and intend to achieve these Fabian-Socialist ends from gun control to "rights" for animals and the control of all property, businesses, and human activities by an "unchallegeable" federal government. The House of Representatives is controlled by a majority and by a "Speaker" that not only support these same goals and this White House; even more do they strive to accelerate and enlarge on these Fabian-Socialist goals before they might lose this sympathetic White House and an overwhelmingly sympathetic US Senate. What is true of the House of Representatives is identically true of the current US Senate. This "troika" amounts to one-party government and will almost certainly be able to soon place sympathetic Justices on the Supreme Court that will rule from their political sympathies and not from the Constitution to assure that the coming federal laws and treaties and regulations and bureaucratic actions are all affirmed. Add to this an overwhelmingly socialist-oriented federal workforce plus state governments, state agencies, and Universities that are all increasingly similarly oriented and increasingly dependent on the federal "dole" of "grants",
"cost-sharing", "partnerships", and now "stimulus" money with all the attendant "strings" and you have a very gloomy outlook to say the least.
Yet, there may be "hope". If it is true that being a good Christian is easiest when it is hardest: then today being a strong defender of rights should be easy in today's atmosphere. There is no doubt that the threats were never greater: the only question is how many of us will stand up for freedom in the face of these threats? Each of us has certain strengths and capitalizing on our strengths is where we are most effective. Community dialogues, talking to friends and acquaintances, writing, contacting those that might benefit from truth, coming together with like-minded people, and not buckling to intimidation are but a few of the things for each of us to consider. Our American freedoms are too precious to lose by cowardice; once
lost, their replacement is next to impossible. Not only our current families and communities, but also our descendants are depending on us.Jim Beers 4 February 2009

Vlad's Bad Gas Economically Asphyxiates, Silences and Chills Europeans, But They Continue to Tolerate It!,

Europe’s dependence on Russian natural gas is considerable. Countries in Central Europe, such as Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Germany and Austria, are extremely dependent on Russian natural gas imports, as is Turkey. Germany receives 43 percent of all the natural gas it consumes from Russia; Turkey receives 66 percent of its natural gas from Russia. At the moment, the Soviet infrastructure links the Russian Tyumen, Timan-Pechora and Ob Basin fields with European consumers, as well as the natural gas fields in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan.
To read about this in its entirety, please go to:
http://itssdjournalevolvingrussia.blogspot.com/2009/02/vlads-bad-gas-economically-asphyxiates.html

Letter From The Only Person Who Filed Suit Against Center For Biodiversity - and WON!

Jim Chilton was one of the guest speakers at the Good Neighbor Forum `07. He actually WON a suit against the Center for Biodiversity. To learn more, please go to www.GoodNeighborLaw.com

Jim Chilton, Chairman, Federal Lands Committee
Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association
Box 423, 17691 W. Chilton Ranch Road
Arivaca, Arizona 85601


To: Director, Judicial Watch, Inc.
Dear Mr. Fitton, January 13, 2009

It is time to declare victory. As you and I agreed at our meeting in 2005, citizens are subject to tyranny when a Federal Officer does not follow the laws, rules, regulations and handbooks of his or her Agency. When individual federal employees are allowed without consequence to impose their own personal environmental agendas through use of the federal regulatory process, we are no longer a nation of laws.
One of my goals as Federal Lands Chairman of the Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association was to get the United States Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Bureau of Land Management to issue new ethics guidelines regarding conflicts of interest for their employees. Thanks to Judicial Watch and our tenacious lawyer Dennis Parker, I am pleased to announce that the new ethics documents have been issued by these three agencies. Hopefully, this multi-year effort will give ranchers and other citizens a more effective way to challenge unethical behavior practiced by anti-ranching activists within these federal agencies.
Your team, led by Mr. Christopher J. Farrell, was instrumental in successfully identifying gross conflicts of interest and unethical behavior within the United States Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and Fish and Wildlife Service. I believe the identification of the abuses, together with a series of letters to Agency officials, caused the aforementioned Agencies to promulgate the attached Code of Ethics for each Agency. I sincerely hope the Obama Administration enforces the new Code of Ethics.
In closing, thank you again for your, your staff’s, Mr. Farrell’s and Judicial Watch’s diligent efforts to protect United States citizens. The American cattle and sheep ranchers of the West, along with the Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association and the National Public Lands Council, certainly appreciate your work.
Sincerely, Jim Chilton

THE ROAD AHEAD

By Jim Beers

First a GW Update - 2 February 2009, London: "Snow brings Britain to a screeching halt." "A fierce winter snowstorm crippled London's roads, subways, and buses and all but shut down many parts of Britain on Monday." "Britain's worst snowstorm in 18 years", "3,000 schools across England and Wales were closed". "The (British) Automobile Association said drivers would be flirting with hypothermia". "Three people were killed by the cold and torrential rains in Italy". "Airports were closed or beset by delays." "The Federation of Small Businesses predicted the storm would cost the (British) economy several billion dollars."
Conclusion. If you believe in Global Warming as:
1. A manmade phenomenon due to "too many people living their lives" and too much "carbon dioxide" being generated by human activities,

2. Something that can be affected by reducing carbon dioxide.

3. Something that only would create harmful effects and not merely change things in both positive and negative ways.

4. An excuse to sign the US into the UN/Kyoto Protocols aimed at giving the US government a mandate to "control" and regulate every imaginable human activity from farming and energy production to transportation and where and how you can live.
(FYI, I don't believe any of the above.) Ask yourself if you believe that Britain wouldn't benefit from a warmer winter? If Britain increased its' "carbon footprint" by things like burning more fossil fuel or feeding beans to livestock (thereby increasing the pharting of methane that is eventually oxidized in the atmosphere, producing carbon dioxide and water) would that moderate the climate and warm the British Isles? I submit that weather is primarily the result of activity on the surface of the sun and such things as oceanic hydraulics and the assumption that we can affect it significantly on a global or long-term scale is the height of human hubris. I am confounded by the naiveté (or is it purposeful disingenuousness?) of the promise of the new President of the United States to disadvantage us in World Trade by signing the Kyoto "TREATY" (thereby trumping, per Article VI, the Constitution of the US that make such "TREATIES" "the supreme Law of the Land") to establish an all-powerful central government control of American Society to "to stop global warming". This proposed "Law of the Land" authority for the central government of the US over something like carbon dioxide is akin to Soviet occupational authority over Eastern Europe in 1946 or Rome's authority over Israel in 73 AD after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem and the fall of Masada: that is to say absolute regarding everything. The fact that his newly appointed White House "Climate Czarina", Carol Browner, spent the last eight years actively incubating in Socialist International should alert all Americans to the magnitude of hidden agendas involved here that are NOT in our best interests.
Speaking of the new President, now beginning Week 3 of his Administration, the shape of the emerging White House staff should send chills down the spines of all Americans. Both because of the clear intent of this Administration to "run things" from a more powerful White House and the backgrounds of the appointees moving into these powerful position; an honest examination of the White House staff is of more than passing interest to all of us and not just political pundits. Keep in mind that I am ignoring the top Departmental appointees like the gun control/tax cheat pardon enabler that is now Attorney General or the tax cheat nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services (News alert! Daschle withdrew 2/3/09) that once led the fight against banning partial birth abortion or the tax cheat that is now Secretary of the Treasury. I am also ignoring the urban tax cheat US Representative that chairs the House Ways and Means Committee that writes tax legislation or the Chairman of the House Banking Committee that earmarks banks in his District in "Stimulus Legislation" and used to fix parking tickets on Capitol Hill for his
roommate that ran a male prostitution service out of his townhouse. They are both servants of and allies to The White House policies and programs planned for your future. While the ethical and historical records of these individuals are important, what I want to focus on is the emerging White House staff and the historical activism and agendas they represent. This as clear an indication that is available about what can be expected to from this dominant White House.
Regarding Gun Control it is sufficient to state that the new President and his Chief of Staff, former Chicago Congressman Rahm Emmanuel, have a long and unflinching record of gun control activism in Chicago, Illinois, and in the US Congress.
Regarding Animal "Rights", the newly appointed Director of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Cass Sunstein, is as extreme an animal "rights" radical as they come. Not only does he work to destroy the concept of animals as property, he opposes all manner of animal use from farming and hunting and fishing to eating animals or using their parts in any way. He is one of those that everyone smirks about when they hear about court cases or ads by PETA; don't smirk, he and they are deadly serious.
Regarding abortion, the government might just as well have paid the movers to move the Planned Parenthood and Emily's List head offices into the White House basement: abortion activists abound, to say the least.
- Melody Barnes, a former Planned Parenthood Board Member, left the very liberal Center for American Progress to be Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council.
-Ellen Moran, the Executive Director of Emily's List an abortion advocacy political action committee, will head the White House Communications Team.
-Jackie Norris, a former Planned Parenthood Board Member, will be the First lady's Chief of Staff.
- Although I promised to only mention White House staff, there is one other that begs for attention. NARAL's (the biggest feminist abortion lobby group) former Legal Director will be Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel.
These three things; gun control, animal "rights", and abortion are all I
(and your attention) have space for, but they are key to understanding what our future holds. You must take my word about the following. Over the past 15 years I have been up against the anti-natural resource management, anti-animal use, anti-property, anti-gun, anti-freedom, and anti-Constitutional groups. When you go to an Animal Rights Conference, not only are all the environmental extremist groups and animal rights radical groups represented, NARAL is actively engaged by loaning money and people to things like "The Great Ape Project" that is a succubus of the animal rights fringe to take a "great ape" into the "right" court at the "right" time to
get the "right" judge to affirm that Alfred the Ape or Ollie the Orangutan is entitled to "all the rights of any American citizen" (much like those terrorists at Guantanamo one must presume today). ALL of these groups support gun confiscation as a means to ally themselves with other socialist groups and as a means to eliminate hunting and animal control and rural lifestyles and the sort of free men envisioned by Our Founding Fathers.
So as they (the White House and their allies running Congress) attack a Constitutional Right, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms", specifically guaranteed in the Constitution and specifically protected as to "not be infringed": what chance do you think we have regarding "certain unalienable Rights" "endowed by their Creator" "among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" that are mentioned in The Declaration of Independence but are not held as binding in a court of US law? If you hunt, fish, farm, log, have a pet, ranch, trap, own guns, use guns, value your children's understanding of your moral sense, live in rural America, or want your descendants to enjoy the freedoms, culture, and traditions that made this country great: you are fooling yourself if you are not in fear of
what these new rulers intend for you and our nation. What they intend, believe me, you do not want.
Finally, if you have not been keeping abreast of the incremental creep of, for instance, animal ownership, management, and use; remember how we abandoned any management of whales (because they are what?) and then the management of seals (because they are what?) and then the management of sharks and wolves and cougars and grizzly bears: while today we point to "overfishing" and "dams" as causing fishery declines, and the deaths of campers and hunters and small children by predators as due to "improper behavior", and the disappearance of ranches and rural towns as due to "misuse of the land"? If you still doubt incremental creep, remember the Roe v. Wade cry of "only the first three months", then six, then nine, then partial birth abortion, and finally Princeton professors proposing "six months old" for those with a "poor quality of life" (like the cleft palate that my grandfather had as he raised his family and then me during WWII!)?
One final and current example of "creeping evil" is the confirmation process of the current Secretary of the Treasury and his cohort the Secretary of Health and Human Services nominee. When the Treasury guy (who now runs the IRS) was confirmed after being exposed for not paying $38 thousand in taxes from the two years before he was made to pay the same taxes for the following two years; and after he was given money by his employer to specifically pay those taxes; and paid them just as he was nominated for this post; and finally to not be charged penalties like you and me: a
standard was dropped and an ethical concept was abandoned. Enter the revelation that the Health and Human Services nominee, a former US Senator that made $5 Million in the two years after being defeated for reelection, failed to pay $138 thousand in taxes due years ago and that he was employed as a lobbyists for the medical industry, a major player in Health and Human Services as we all know. So when is tax evasion (cheating) an impediment to powerful government posts? If not at $38 thousand and then not at $138 thousand; if not at two years and not at four years: I can only assume it is like US Senator Webb's loaded handgun violation on Capitol Hill, that is to say "insufficient evidence" for powerful persons to be held accountable while not being an impediment for incarcerating those of us like the
starving citizens that Marie Antoinette once recommended should "eat cake".
Given the radical officials now in charge and the radical agendas they
represent; two years of incremental creep is a lifetime, four years is an eternity. The mix of radical agendas, majority rule, double standards, and the abandonment of ethics is as great a threat to our society today as it ever was for numberless other societies that disappeared into the sands of time.
God help us all, and God Bless America. Jim Beers 3 February 2009