End the War on Freedom

• Letter from Michele Kubby via Vin Suprynowicz - Steve Kubby is keeping up his fight against Placer County from Canada. Michelle is asking for donations to cover legal expenses. Go to www.kubby.com/00-contribute.html to contribute with a credit card.

  So folks, the reality is that everything they taught us about our rights in their government schools is a lie. The Democratic system of checks and balances, so nicely outlined on the black board, no longer exists. Even the people's right to throw out bad laws handed down by the legislature, has been officially outlawed by the California Supreme Court - (talk about alien ideas!).
  
  Welcome to the Drug War, where you are guilty until proven innocent. Anything you say, write, or think will be used against you in a court of law. Police can invade your home on a mere suspicion and conduct a fishing expedition in search of a crime. Police can peak through your windows, go through your garbage, and even listen through your walls. Before you know it, you'll be facing a jury where Libertarians and people who used marijuana or advocate its re-legalization are banned.
  
  The people in power have no respect for your rights. They make up laws and facts as they go along. Yet, Steve and I remain faithful to the Bill of Rights as an ideal that must be pursued against all obstacles and tyrants. It is the Bill of Rights, which protects our unalienable rights, which cannot be taken from us by any law or government. Steve has the unalienable right to his life. And he has the unalienable right to grow any God-given herb, and use them as he sees fit (same for mushrooms, cacti and any other vegetable matter).

• Letter from Warren Tilson - a novel way of looking at Pokemon:

  I have been using this show to teach my kids about the value and morality of being armed, responsible and standing up to evil. They already know the have the absolute right to fight back, now with the aid of this show they are being shown what a responsible, well armed society might look like.

• Letter from Brian Jennings - an advertisement for J.J. Johnson's Cracking the Liberty Bell. I read it quite a while back. I agree with Mr. Jennings. I could not put it down. Worth a few bucks and a few hours.
• Who Are We Trying to Educate? by Carl Bussjaeger - the nazis in Wheaton, IL, recently arrested a bicyclist for licensed concealed carry of a firearm. The arrest included a cavity search, rape by any other name... Mr. Busjaeger reminds us that we need to get gun-owners together and hold personally responsible the "people's" attorneys who do these kind of things. He is talking about lawsuits, not bullets, but I decided long ago that lawsuits are no longer useful. Only bullets will solve the problem. And it won't take many of them, nazis being the spineless cowards they are. At some point, enough people will get sick of it that every nazi will end up dead. Noone will plan it. Noone will take credit. It will happen via a million cells of one.
• Take Back Your Country: A Manifesto in Three parts by Chris Goodwin - the constitution is no longer honored by those in government. They pee on it regularly. It's time for this to change. Mr. Goodwin proposes Why, What, and How to effect the change. As a start, he wants to call a consitutional convention, as provided for in the constitution, to consider one simple amendment. I like the text he proposes. I'm definitely willing to propose it to my state senator and representative (New York doesn't have citizen initiatives). The existing second amendment means the same thing, but for some reason lots of people don't fully comprehend the phrase "shall not be infringed".

  I am proposing a grassroots effort, in the states that have the initiative process, to collect signatures on petitions to pass the following:

  "The legislative assembly of the State of (fill in the blank) is hereby directed to apply to the United States Congress to call a Constitutional Convention to consider the following Amendment to the United States Constitution:
  
  Amendment XXVIII -- The Right to Keep and Bear Arms
  
  Section 1. The right of the people, as individuals, to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
  
  Section 2. Congress and the several States are prohibited from regulating the keeping and bearing of arms by any means, including but not limited to, license, permit, tax, fee, or background check.
  
  All laws regulating the keeping and bearing of arms are null and void, and are immediately repealed and stricken from the body of United States law.
  
  Section 3. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms applies to all arms, regardless of make, model, appearance, caliber, magazine capacity, size, weight, cost, country of origin, or destructive radius of the arm, and to the people as individuals regardless of age, past criminal conviction, profession, need, location, organizational membership, or any other reason."

  When (not if) the petition is successful, the voters will vote. And when it passes, the state's legislature will apply to Congress to call a convention. And when 34 states in total call for a convention, one will happen.

  The proposed amendment is missing teeth. It needs something like:

  Section 4. Any person who has sworn to uphold this constitution and who supports in any way legislation or activity contrary to this amendment shall be brought to trial. On finding of guilt by a jury, such person shall be imprisoned for not less than five years.

• American Fascism by Keith Stehman Shugarts - Guess what? Amerika is no longer the cradle of liberty. It is a fascist state. But you knew that.

  Certainly there can be more written on this subject. There should be, and there will be, articles covering each point will be following in the coming weeks. The point of this initial article is simply to put to rest the idea that the United States is still the land of the free and to begin to think of "...instituting a new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness".

Ron Paul's Texas Straight Talk - Legislation Needed to End the IRS Threat to Religious Freedom - Dr. Paul speaks out in favor of new legislation that makes explicit the absence of any concept of "separation of church and state" in the constitution. The first amendment forbids the government from establishing a religion, e.g. the Church of England, but the constitution makes no restrictions on what privately founded religious institutions may preach.

While some well-known leftist preachers routinely advocate socialism from the pulpit, many conservative Christian and Jewish congregations cannot present their political beliefs without risking scrutiny from the tax collector. The "Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act" (HR 2357) will end this political favoritism and government interference with free speech. I'm pleased to report that the Act already has been sponsored by more that 50 members of Congress.

John Silveira at Backwoods Home Magazine - The coming American dictatorship Part V: How "emergency powers" and Executive Orders have turned America into a dictatorship in limbo - Dave Duffy, O.E. MacDougal, and Mr. Silveira talk about the state of the union. America has been in a legal state of emergency since FDR was president in the thirties. Current law allows the president to suspend the constitution and rule as a dictator during a state of emergency. That's what f.e.m.a. is about. Congress could end this by repealing the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917, but that's not likely unless we make it a campaign issue for them.

"But Roosevelt has always been credited with ending the Great Depression," I said.

"I know. You said that earlier today. But, as I pointed out, Roosevelt didn't end the Depression. He never served even one minute in office over anything but either a depressed economy or a wartime economy."

"So, what course of action did he take?" Dave asked.

"Upon taking office, Roosevelt decided to manage the entire economy. He closed the banks, made the personal possession of gold illegal, and began creating agencies to regulate all aspects of the economy. He acted without the consent of Congress and claimed his power stemmed from Wilson's Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917. This was the very same Act Wilson had created, before World War I, to seize German businesses."

"But you said that that act didn't pertain to the American people," Dave said.

"Roosevelt knew that. So, a few days after his inauguration, he convened Congress and, by a voice vote, the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917 was amended to his satisfaction and the offending provisions were revised."

"Meaning...? Dave asked expectantly.

"That now, in accordance with the Act, during any emergency declared by the President, the Trading with the Enemy Act could be invoked, that he could create policy without consulting Congress, and that foreign powers weren't the only people subject to the Act. American citizens were, too."

"... Furthermore, the Constitution has been null and void any time any President has declared emergency powers since March 9, 1933. That's almost 70 years if anyone is doing the math."

"Then Kennedy's Orders..." Dave began.

"...and those in the same vein that have been passed by other Presidents..." Mac interrupted.

"...would appear to be a real threat," Dave said. "Do you think they would ever really be used for anything other than our survival during an all-out war?"

"The answer to your question is that no one knows. But it was by allowing one man to aggrandize so much awesome power that the Germans gave themselves Hitler. At some future date we may be faced with the same kind of leader--and then again, we may not. We're not mandating a Hitler, but why a country that was founded on individual freedoms would want to clear the way for one is beyond me."

...

In future issues they will discuss how the government will eventually control the Internet, how the conversion of the military from a "citizen army" to a professional army is a danger to us all, and, though we don't like to admit it, why the United States is, in reality, now a fascist country.

Massad Ayoob at Backwood Homes Magazine - The rationale of the automatic rifle - Mr. Ayoob has been a police officer for 27 years, half his life. He reminds us of why the second amendment is important, why each man must be armed with the modern military weapons of the day.

When judges analyze a law's applicability, they go to the caselaw, to cases that are on point--relevant--that have already been decided by other jurisdictions. When you discuss the militia today on the planet earth, some of the strongest caselaw is embodied by the experience of Switzerland. The Swiss have been at peace longer than any other people on Earth, primarily because virtually every adult male (and any adult female who wants to join the effort) is a member of the militia and issued a real assault rifle.

The rifle the Swiss government issues to its citizens is a true machine gun. Picture a match-accurate M-16 rifle with a target grade trigger and a selector switch that goes from safe to semiautomatic to three-shot burst to full automatic, and you have the Sturmgewehr-90, which may be the most advanced assault rifle on earth. There's one in almost every Swiss home, yet mass murders in public are unknown in that country. The murder rate in Switzerland is a fraction of that in the lowest-crime states in the US, despite the ubiquitous presence of machine guns and ammunition.

When their time comes to leave the militia, aging members have the option of keeping their rifles. A great many do. The Swiss army, with only a few thousand full time career members, see the retired militia people who are still armed as one more resource that keeps their country safe from war.

Barely more than half a century ago, the Nazi war machine considered invading Switzerland. It was the sort of nightmare that would make a field marshal of an army of conquest wake up screaming in the middle of the night. Every home a sniper's nest? Mountain roads and bridges all mined, ready to be blown up and made impassable within 24 hours of an invasion? A populace unworried about embargo because every home had a year's supply of food, not to mention a significant supply of ammunition? And why had the German spies reported that every Swiss village had a 300-meter rifle range, busily used by the citizenry every weekend?

It was Invader Motel. "They check in, but they don't check out." Why did field marshals who could not dissuade Adolf Hitler from invading Russia in winter manage to convince him that there was no future in attacking tiny Switzerland? Because some things are so obvious that even raving madmen can understand them.

...

In 2003, the "Crime Law" that banned ownership of certain semiautomatic firearms and of magazines that held more than 10 cartridges will "sunset." There is time now to make it clear to elected representatives that such regulations should die a natural death, indeed, should be interred forever with a stake in their heart and a clove of garlic in their mouth so they don't rise up again to interfere with decent citizens of a free country.

...

Next issue, this essay continues with more "close-to-home" arguments for why private citizens should be allowed to own the type of arms in question.

Rich Lowry at National Review - Weed Whackers: The anti-marijuana forces, and why they're wrong - Makes a case for decriminalizing cannabis for all the wrong reasons. It's nearly harmless. So what. Even if it were 100% fatal, that would still be no reason to make it illegal.

But once all the misrepresentations and exaggerations are stripped away, the main pharmacological effect of marijuana is that it gets people high. Or as The Lancet puts it, "When used in a social setting, it may produce infectious laughter and talkativeness."

Ben Domenech at National Review - Legalize With Caution: Don't ignore the real effects of marijuana - an opposing viewpoint to Mr. Lowry's piece. Well, sort of. Mr. Domenech still believes cannabis should be decriminalized, but he believes that it is more harmful and more addictive than does Mr. Lowry. Again, as long as we're arguing about how harmful it is, people will come down on both sides of the solution. Change the argument to whether government may rightfully have any role whatsoever in protecting people from themselves, and it becomes much clearer. It may not. The war on some drugs must die. Completely. Now.

Richard Cowan at National Review - Legalize with Confidence: Don't ignore the real effects of prohibition - Mr. Cowan, the editor of Marijuana News, brings the argument back to reasonable ground. The war on some drugs is far more harmful than the effects of any of the drugs it claims to be fighting. "(I)t is the legal status of marijuana that makes it a gateway drug." Still, Mr. Cowan believes there should be a difference in the legal status of cannabis and so-called "hard" drugs. Not! Prohibition of cocaine, heroin, LSD, PCP, methamphetamine, ecstacy, etc. is also much more harmful than the substances themselves. Let nature take its course. People stupid enough to kill themselves belong out of the gene pool.

The war on some drugs has nothing to do with drugs. It is a war on freedom, a war on the Bill of Rights, a war on America's soul. End it.

Add comment Edit post Add post