Rev­o­lu­tion or Evo­lu­tion?

Trillions - - Table Of Contents - By Tim Lon­car­ich

Can the Amer­i­can gov­ern­ment be fixed?

When Bri­tain’s 13 Amer­i­can colonies de­cided to de­clare their in­de­pen­dence they thought­fully cre­ated one of the most im­por­tant doc­u­ments and ideals ever writ­ten:

When in the Course of hu­man events, it be­comes nec­es­sary for one peo­ple to dis­solve the po­lit­i­cal bands which have con­nected them with an­other, and to as­sume among the pow­ers of the earth, the separate and equal sta­tion to which the Laws of Na­ture and of Na­ture’s God en­ti­tle them, a de­cent re­spect to the opin­ions of mankind re­quires that they should de­clare the causes which im­pel them to the sep­a­ra­tion.

We hold these truths to be self-ev­i­dent, that all men are cre­ated equal, that they are en­dowed by their Cre­ator with cer­tain un­alien­able Rights, that among these are Life, Lib­erty and the pur­suit of Hap­pi­ness.--that to se­cure these rights, Gov­ern­ments are in­sti­tuted among Men, de­riv­ing their just pow­ers from the con­sent of the gov­erned, --That when­ever any Form of Gov­ern­ment be­comes de­struc­tive of these ends, it is the Right of the Peo­ple to al­ter or to abol­ish it, and to in­sti­tute 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. Pru­dence, in­deed, will dic­tate that Gov­ern­ments long es­tab­lished should not be changed for light and tran­sient causes; and ac­cord­ingly all ex­pe­ri­ence hath shewn, that mankind are more dis­posed to suf­fer, while evils are suf­fer­able, than to right them­selves by abol­ish­ing the forms to which they are ac­cus­tomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpa­tions, pur­su­ing in­vari­ably the same Ob­ject evinces a de­sign to re­duce them un­der ab­so­lute Despo­tism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Gov­ern­ment, and to pro­vide new Guards for their fu­ture se­cu­rity...

On July 4, 1776 the colonies for­mally de­clared their in­de­pen­dence and soon there­after be­came the United States of Amer­ica.

Bri­tain did not let the colonies go eas­ily and a war for in­de­pen­dence dragged on. With help from France and Spain, the Bri­tish were ul­ti­mately de­feated and in 1782 Bri­tain’s Par­lia­ment voted to end hos­til­i­ties. The war was of­fi­cially ended and Amer­i­can sovereignty rec­og­nized by Bri­tain with the Treaty of Paris in 1783.

The Con­sti­tu­tion of the United States came into force in 1789 and has been amended 27 times since. The most im­por­tant amend­ment is the Bill of Rights.

The United States Con­sti­tu­tion is the supreme law of the coun­try and any laws or ac­tions that vi­o­late it are in re­al­ity il­le­gal, even if the Supreme Court rules that it is not a vi­o­la­tion of the Con­sti­tu­tion.

While the United States is pre­sumed by most to be strictly a democ­racy, it was ac­tu­ally founded as a re­pub­lic, not a democ­racy. The Re­pub­lic form of gov­ern­ment was meant to em­body demo­cratic prin­ci­pals while pro­tect­ing in­di­vid­u­als from the mob rule than can re­sult in a strict democ­racy and un­in­formed or emo­tion­ally charged pop­u­lace. It was be­lieved that by dis­tribut­ing power into the leg­isla­tive, ju­di­cial and ex­ec­u­tive branches of the gov­ern­ment rea­son would pre­vail and the rights of mi­nori­ties would be bet­ter pro­tected.

James Madi­son said that in a pure democ­racy, “there is noth­ing to check the in­duce­ments to sac­ri­fice the weaker party or an ob­nox­ious in­di­vid­ual.”

The Re­pub­lic form of gov­ern­ment works fine un­til it is cor­rupted. Once thor­oughly cor­rupted it may be im­pos­si­ble to fix be­cause the peo­ple don’t have the power they would in a pure democ­racy.

Amer­i­cans have too long failed to use their power to cor­rect cor­rup­tion and it has now reached the point where the U.S. is no longer a re­pub­lic or a democ­racy but is in­stead an oli­garchy, or plu­toc­racy, with a pop­u­lace that is merely told that they live in a democ­racy. Un­for­tu­nately, some Amer­i­cans still be­lieve that they live in the great­est democ­racy on Earth and eagerly sup­port the ero­sion of their own rights by con­tin­u­ing to vote for cor­rupt politi­cians.

Fed­eral Gov­ern­ment Crim­i­nal­ity

Is the U.S. fed­eral gov­ern­ment in vi­o­la­tion of the Con­sti­tu­tion and thereby il­le­git­i­mate? Does it reg­u­larly vi­o­late in­ter­na­tional law? Has there been a “long train of abuses and usurpa­tions”? Most Amer­i­cans would an­swer the ques­tions as “yes”.

The ev­i­dence of the crim­i­nal­ity of the U.S. fed­eral gov­ern­ment is over­whelm­ing. Since the list of abuses would take hun­dreds or even thou­sands of pages, we will just high­light a few of the most se­ri­ous abuses.

As­sas­si­na­tion of Amer­i­can Cit­i­zens

Obama is the first U.S. Pres­i­dent to ad­mit to or­der­ing the mur­der of Amer­i­can cit­i­zens abroad. Pre­vi­ous ad­min­is­tra­tions have killed Amer­i­can cit­i­zens out­side of due process but only in se­cret or in the civil war.

The 7th amend­ment guar­an­tees Amer­i­can cit­i­zens the right to not “be de­prived of life, lib­erty, or prop­erty, with­out due process of law”. Due process does not mean the Pres­i­dent be­com­ing judge, jury and ex­e­cu­tioner. It means that ev­i­dence of wrong-do­ing is pre­sented to a court, charges are filed, a trial is held and the ac­cused judged by a jury of their peers.

Some peo­ple would ar­gue that Obama’s drone strikes are jus­ti­fied to save Amer­i­can lives from ter­ror­ism, yet most of the vic­tims of the drone strikes are ac­tu­ally women and chil­dren, or other in­no­cent peo­ple with no means to harm Amer­i­cans. One of the Amer­i­cans killed by an Obama or­dered drone strike was a 16 year old boy.

Obama’s mass mur­der of chil­dren, women and in­no­cent men, and his de­lib­er­ate bomb­ing of wed­dings and fu­ner­als only cre­ates in­tense ha­tred for the United States and en­sures that Amer­i­cans will in­creas­ingly be­come tar­gets of reprisals. The U.S. fed­eral gov­ern­ment also funds and arms ter­ror­ist groups and sup­ports coun­tries like Saudi Ara­bia, Turkey, Qatar, Pak­istan and Is­rael who fund and di­rect ter­ror­ism op­er­a­tions. So, any claims about pro­tect­ing Amer­i­can lives and com­bat­ing ter­ror­ism is a noth­ing more than a flat-out lie to jus­tify atroc­i­ties com­mit­ted to per­pet­u­ate con­flict and sup­port the mas­sive and im­mensely lu­cra­tive war in­dus­try. War has be­come Amer­ica’s largest in­dus­try.

Obama claims that his mur­der of Amer­i­cans is le­gal and points to a Jus­tice Dept. memo to jus­tify the crimes, but for a long time with­held the memo. Por­tions of the memo were even­tu­ally re­vealed but the key parts re­main se­cret. Re­gard­less of the jus­ti­fi­ca­tions, ex­tra­ju­di­cial killing of Amer­i­cans is a gross vi­o­la­tion of the U.S. Con­sti­tu­tion, and is il­le­gal un­der U.S. and in­ter­na­tional law as well.

Killing Amer­i­cans abroad and get­ting away with it will only make it eas­ier for the feds to jus­tify killing Amer­i­cans on U.S. soil by brand­ing them as ex­trem­ists or ter­ror­ists.

Ter­ror­ism is in­deed a global threat but the first step to stop­ping it is for the U.S. to stop cre­at­ing it and sup­port­ing it.

Im­po­si­tion of Con­sti­tu­tion-free Zones

The first Amend­ment states “Congress shall make no law re­spect­ing an es­tab­lish­ment of reli­gion, or pro­hibit­ing the free ex­er­cise thereof; or abridg­ing the free­dom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the peo­ple peace­ably to as­sem­ble, and to pe­ti­tion the Gov­ern­ment for a re­dress of griev­ances.” Yet, au­thor­i­ties fre­quently ban free speech and as­sem­bly en­tirely or al­low free­dom of speech only in spe­cial zones.

State and lo­cal po­lice reg­u­larly at­tack le­gal demon­stra­tors and even by­standers with tasers and pep­per-spray. They ar­rest peo­ple for ex­er­cis­ing their Con­sti­tu­tional rights. To add fur­ther in­sult to injury, the tax­pay­ers end up pay­ing the court set­tle­ments to the vic­tims of the abuse while those who or­dered the abuse and car­ried it out go un­pun­ished.

The fed­eral gov­ern­ment also re­stricts free speech by tar­get­ing jour­nal­ists and whis­tle-blow­ers with sur­veil­lance, ha­rass­ment, rigged tri­als and un­just im­pris­on­ment.

While the gov­ern­ment can in the­ory tem­po­rar­ily im­pose mar­tial law in ex­treme cir­cum­stances such as when the coun­try is un­der at­tack or an im­mense nat­u­ral dis­as­ter, it can­not le­git­i­mately sus­pend the Con­sti­tu­tion in whole or vi­o­late it as a stan­dard pol­icy.

Theft of Cit­i­zen’s Prop­erty

State and lo­cal po­lice and feds rou­tinely take cit­i­zen’s prop­erty with­out due process of law. This is a vi­o­la­tion of the Con­sti­tu­tion but was sup­posed to have been made le­gal some­how through anti-drug laws, even though the Sev­enth Amend­ment guar­an­tees Amer­i­can cit­i­zens the right to not “be de­prived of life, lib­erty, or prop­erty, with­out due process of law” and the Sixth Amend­ment pro­hibits un­rea­son­able searches and seizures.

In­no­cent peo­ple are rou­tinely stopped for no rea­son while driv­ing and any sig­nif­i­cant amount of cash they have is sim­ply taken by cops. Cops in some states are now even tak­ing funds from pre-paid debit cards. If some­one is driv­ing a ve­hi­cle that is es­pe­cially valu­able or strikes a cop’s in­ter­est, the ve­hi­cle is taken. The vic­tims must then sue to at­tempt to get their prop­erty back and of­ten the cases are dis­al­lowed or they are un­justly ruled against by cor­rupt judges.

In many cases, vic­tims are in­tim­i­dated into sign­ing road­side waivers dis­claim­ing own­er­ship of their prop­erty. The cops threaten their vic­tims with a felony con­vic­tion of be­ing in pos­ses­sion of drug pro­ceeds. Given the in­ces­tu­ous re­la­tion­ship be­tween cor­rupt cops, dis­trict at­tor­neys and judges, the threats must be taken se­ri­ously and re­lin­quish­ing one’s hard-earned prop­erty in ex­change for not spend­ing years or decades in a hell-hole prison is an easy choice for most peo­ple.

The cor­rupt city of Philadel­phia aimed higher than cars and cash and stole en­tire houses in their “seize and seal” pro­gram. They would seize a home and seal it, pre­vent­ing the own­ers from ac­cess­ing their home or prop­erty within. To get ac­cess to their homes, own­ers would have to agree to waive key le­gal de­fenses, in­clud­ing the right to trial. The city stole and sold nearly 1,200 homes and other real es­tate be­tween 2002 and 2012 and pock­eted the cash.

Theft by gov­ern­ment is now a multi-bil­lion dol­lar a year in­dus­try known as civil as­set for­fei­ture. Ac­cord­ing to the In­sti­tute for Jus­tice, the fed­eral Trea­sury and Jus­tice de­part­ments alone de­posited more than $5 bil­lion into their re­spec­tive as­set for­fei­ture funds in 2014. Add to this the state and lo­cal thefts by po­lice and you have a mas­sive crim­i­nal op­er­a­tion that greatly ex­ceeds the $3.5 bil­lion in losses from bur­glary by non-gov­ern­ment in­di­vid­u­als.

No-fly Lists

The se­cret No-fly List is a se­ri­ous vi­o­la­tion of the Con­sti­tu­tion be­cause it de­nies the right to due process. It im­pedes a per­son’s free move­ment and pun­ishes peo­ple who have com­mit­ted no crime. Most of those placed on the list pose no threat and the only rea­son they are put on the list is to pe­nal­ize them for ex­pos­ing gov­ern­ment cor­rup­tion, pro­mot­ing Con­sti­tu­tional rights, ques­tion­ing gov­ern­ment author­ity or sim­ply hav­ing a name that makes them an easy tar­get. The list even in­cludes dozens of in­fants.

At the same time, U.S. air­port se­cu­rity is a joke and any rea­son­ably in­tel­li­gent per­son who re­ally wants to, could eas­ily carry out a dev­as­tat­ing at­tack.

The id­i­otic re­quire­ment to re­move one’s shoes is noth­ing more than an ex­er­cise in con­trol and to con­di­tion pas­sen­gers to ac­cept greater vi­o­la­tion of their rights.

The peep-show scan­ners used at air­ports have failed to iden­tify a sin­gle ter­ror­ist. All of the lit­tle old ladies and chil­dren that have been groped and the peo­ple who have been hu­mil­i­ated has done noth­ing but cause fear, anger and com­pli­ance among trav­el­ers.

If a stranger out­side an air­port put their hands on a child’s pri­vates they would be ar­rested as a child mo­lester. If a boss felt up one of his em­ploy­ees he could be sued for sex­ual ha­rass­ment. But, some­how it is OK in an air­port and not only do we put up with it, we stand in long lines to have our rights vi­o­lated in a Con­sti­tu­tion-free zone.

Sur­veil­lance/stop and Frisk

I have been un­der vary­ing de­grees of gov­ern­ment sur­veil­lance since 1985 when I at­tempted to ex­pose il­le­gal drugs & weapons traf­fick­ing by the Rea­gan-bush ad­min­is­tra­tion un­der what came to be known as the Iran-con­tra Scan­dal. I had been spend­ing a lot of time in Cen­tral Amer­ica and had friends who looked to me to ex­pose the harm caused to their coun­tries.

At the time, I naively be­lieved that the U.S. Drug En­force­ment Agency (DEA) ac­tu­ally served the in­ter­ests of the Amer­i­can peo­ple. So, my friends gave me in­for­ma­tion and I passed it on to the DEA. That didn’t work out so well and I quickly be­came a tar­get for try­ing to do the right thing. I was ha­rassed and placed un­der sur­veil­lance not be­cause I had done any­thing wrong but be­cause I posed a threat to crim­i­nal el­e­ments within the gov­ern­ment.

So far I have been one of the for­tu­nate ones. Many other wit­nesses to the Rea­gan-bush crimes were mur­dered. At­tempts have been made on my life but in each case the at­tempts were some­how thwarted by in­ter­ven­tion from un­known sources. Need­less to say, I know some­thing about gov­ern­ment sur­veil­lance.

The Bill of Rights Sixth Amend­ment gives Amer­i­cans the right to be se­cure in their per­sons, houses, pa­pers, and ef­fects, against un­rea­son­able searches and seizures. Yet, Amer­i­cans are stopped and their per­sons, phones and ve­hi­cles are searched with­out prob­a­ble cause or a war­rant. The vic­tims are of­ten cho­sen by the color of their skin or the neigh­bor­hood they live in. Cops claim that their vi­o­la­tion of the Con­sti­tu­tion re­duces crime but in re­al­ity it doesn’t.

One’s house can be en­tered at any time by fed­eral, state or lo­cal law en­force­ment with­out your knowl­edge in a sneak and peak and items se­cretly taken or items left be­hind to frame you with.

The Na­tional Se­cu­rity Agency (NSA) has staff in­side re­gional mail han­dling fa­cil­i­ties who ex­am­ine the mail of any­one on their list. The au­to­mated mail sorters di­vert mail for se­lected peo­ple or ad­dresses into a spe­cial bin for NSA in­spec­tion.

The in­spec­tion also in­cludes pri­vate courier and ship­ping ser­vices. Many of my pack­ages sent by courier used to all be routed through an in­spec­tion fa­cil­ity in Washington state, even if the pack­age was com­ing from and go­ing to nowhere near Washington. Now there are many more in­spec­tion fa­cil­i­ties for UPS, Fedex and other ser­vices. I have had many pack­ages sent by overnight express take more than a week to be de­liv­ered be­cause their are di­verted for in­spec­tion.

A deep-black in­tel­li­gence agent told me that all elec­tronic com­mu­ni­ca­tions world­wide are recorded by the NSA and mon­i­tored by truly in­tel­li­gent Dna-based com­put­ers. The NSA’S im­mense bi­o­log­i­cal-elec­tronic mind doesn’t just mon­i­tor key-words or se­lected in­di­vid­u­als but uses a wide ar­ray of in­for­ma­tion about us to cre­ate in-depth pro­files on ev­ery per­son on Earth and as­signs and main­tains a threat level for each of us. How­ever, the threat level is not about the propen­sity for vi­o­lence or crim­i­nal be­hav­ior but the op­po­si­tion that one has to the sys­tem. The more aware and in­formed a per­son is, the higher their threat level and the more likely they will be se­lected for in­ter­ven­tion.

Highly in­tel­li­gent peo­ple have warned re­peat­edly of the dan­gers of ad­vanced ar­ti­fi­cial in­tel­li­gence (AI), yet our gov­ern­ment has cre­ated the most ad­vanced and mas­sive AI specif­i­cally to con­sider us as the en­emy.

Is it any won­der that James Cameron saw his Ter­mi­na­tor story in a vi­sion – of our fu­ture per­haps?

Pre­vi­ously, the NSA kept much of their in­for­ma­tion to them­selves and a few se­lect clients. The Snow­den Leaks were likely a CIA op­er­a­tion in­tended to re­place the Di­rec­tor of the NSA with one more friendly to the CIA and en­sure that the CIA started get­ting the full ben­e­fit of NSA in­tel­li­gence. Their op­er­a­tion seems to have worked.

I once caught the De­fense In­tel­li­gence Agency (DIA) us­ing a pop­u­lar anti-virus pro­gram to send them an in­dex of my com­puter hard-drive. I called the DIA and left a mes­sage ask­ing them to just talk to me if they had any ques­tions about my ac­tiv­i­ties. In­stead of talk­ing to me they broke into my house and trashed all my com­put­ers with a pow­er­ful elec­tro­mag­net.

It isn’t just the NSA that is watch­ing and lis­ten­ing. Lo­cal po­lice de­part­ments reg­u­larly lis­ten in on cell phone con­ver­sa­tions with­out war­rants.

Cell phones are used not just as war­rant­less track­ing de­vices but all calls are recorded and scanned for data of in­ter­est. If some­one is one of the tens of mil­lions of peo­ple around the world des­ig­nated for closer sur­veil­lance their phone is mod­i­fied to act as a burst trans­mit­ter and it se­cretly records all rel­e­vant sound. The data is com­pressed and up­loaded to satel­lite by burst trans­mis­sion at a power that greatly ex­ceeds ra­di­a­tion safety reg­u­la­tions.

You can check your wire­less elec­tronic de­vices to see if they have been gov­ern­ment hacked by us­ing a sim­ple mi­crowave me­ter to mon­i­tor the de­vice’s trans­mis­sions when turned off. If there are bursts of ac­tiv­ity at high power you can as­sume that all sound within range of the de­vice is be­ing con­tin­u­ally recorded and trans­mit­ted for anal­y­sis and pos­si­ble fu­ture use against you. How­ever, by the time you read this they may have switched to a less de­tectable method.

It is gen­er­ally safe to as­sume that ev­ery­thing you com­mu­ni­cate by any means could be recorded and an­a­lyzed in vi­o­la­tion of the U.S. Con­sti­tu­tion. It is the pol­icy of many gov­ern­ment agen­cies at dif­fer­ent lev­els to vi­o­late the Sixth Amend­ment.

One should be aware that many of those di­rectly tar­geted for death by drone were cho­sen merely be­cause they ex­pressed anger to­wards the U.S. gov­ern­ment by phone or text or ex­pressed anger near some­one with a com­pro­mised wire­less de­vice. Most were not cho­sen be­cause they ac­tu­ally had the means to harm Amer­i­can cit­i­zens.

Debtors Prisons

In­creas­ing num­bers of coun­ties and cities are jail­ing peo­ple who can’t af­ford to pay fines for sim­ple things like park­ing or traf­fic vi­o­la­tions. Many of the fines are for bo­gus charges.

Be­ing jailed for be­ing poor only wors­ens the per­son’s poverty and en­sures their rage against the sys­tem.

This is an­other gross vi­o­la­tion of the Con­sti­tu­tion.

Over­throw and Sub­ver­sion of For­eign Gov­ern­ments

While the U.S. Con­sti­tu­tion does not pro­hibit the fed­eral gov­ern­ment’s sup­pres­sion of democ­racy in other coun­tries and the over­throw of demo­crat­i­cally elected gov­ern­ments, it is a vi­o­la­tion of in­ter­na­tional law. It not only causes need­less suf­fer­ing and death in the coun­tries af­fected, it also harms Amer­i­cans by mak­ing the United States the most hated na­tion on Earth. It makes it more dif­fi­cult for Amer­i­can com­pa­nies to do busi­ness around the world. It en­sures that Amer­i­cans be­come a tar­get for reprisals and im­pov­er­ishes Amer­ica while em­pow­er­ing a vile crim­i­nal el­e­ment.

The United States over­threw Iraq’s demo­crat­i­cally elected gov­ern­ment in the 1950s to in­stall Sad­dam Hus­sein in power be­cause he would pro­vide Amer­i­can oil com­pa­nies with cheap or free ac­cess to Iraq’s oil. Amer­ica over­threw Iran’s demo­crat­i­cally elected sec­u­lar gov­ern­ment for the same rea­son. This de­stroyed the fu­ture of both coun­tries.

In Afghanistan, the U.S. cre­ated and funded the Mu­jahideen to fight the coun­try’s demo­cratic gov­ern­ment be­cause it was friendly with Rus­sia. This drew in the Rus­sians to help the Afghan gov­ern­ment. In do­ing so, the U.S. en­sured the emer­gence of the Tal­iban and its con­tin­ued rise to power and the rise of ji­hadism.

Ac­cord­ing to the pres­ti­gious Har­vard Uni­ver­sity’s Kennedy School of Gov­ern­ment, Amer­ica’s wars against the peo­ple of Iraq and Afghanistan will ul­ti­mately cost tax­pay­ers about $6 tril­lion, which is about $75,000 for ev­ery Amer­i­can house­hold.

$75k could con­vert a home to so­lar power and put a new Tesla model 3 elec­tric car in the drive­way, which could then cre­ate sav­ings of up to $10k a year in elec­tric­ity, gaso­line, oil changes and tune-ups. It could pay for a col­lege ed­u­ca­tion, or pay off a mort­gage.

The wasted $6 tril­lion could fix all of Amer­ica’s de­cayed in­fra­struc­ture and sup­ply plenty of well pay­ing jobs. It could pay for a na­tional health care sys­tem that ac­tu­ally works and doesn’t just en­rich the med­i­cal mafia and par­a­sitic in­sur­ance com­pa­nies.

In­stead, it has paid for the deaths of more than a mil­lion in­no­cent peo­ple, made some evil peo­ple very wealthy and pow­er­ful and trau­ma­tized an­other gen­er­a­tion of well-mean­ing Amer­i­can sol­diers. It has also cre­ated a grow­ing in­ter­na­tional ter­ror­ist force that can’t be stopped by force alone and won’t stop till it has its re­venge.

In Hon­duras, the U.S. backed a coup that re­moved the demo­crat­i­cally elected gov­ern­ment and put nar­coter­ror­ists in power. This has re­sulted in the deaths of count­less jour­nal­ists, en­vi­ron­men­tal­ists and democ­racy and jus­tice ac­tivists. It has fur­ther im­pov­er­ished the coun­try and robbed it of hope.

Why did the U.S. sup­press democ­racy in Hon­duras? Be­cause their Pres­i­dent wanted to raise min­i­mum wages and was friendly with Venezuela’s demo­crat­i­cally elected and pop­u­lar Pres­i­dent, Hugo Chavez.

When Washington says that it is “sup­port­ing democ­racy” it usu­ally means the op­po­site. In Gu­atemala and El Sal­vador, Amer­i­can democ­racy in the 1980s meant that the U.S. cre­ated and di­rected death squads that kid­napped, tor­tured and mur­dered more than 200,000 peo­ple. Most of those killed were the best and bright­est and most qual­i­fied to lead their coun­tries out of poverty and im­prove liv­ing con­di­tions while strength­en­ing democ­racy.

Once the death squad money stopped flow­ing, the CIA helped their killers be­come drug lords, who con­tinue to ter­ror­ize their coun­tries and con­tinue to flood the U.S. with drugs and drug gangs. Hon­duras and El Sal­vador are the mur­der cap­i­tals of the world, thanks to Amer­i­can democ­racy build­ing.

In most of Cen­tral Amer­ica, Amer­i­can for­eign pol­icy has con­demned the peo­ple to crime, de­spair and ex­treme poverty. Mil­lions of Cen­tral Amer­i­can refugees are try­ing to find some place they can sur­vive and these refugees will put in­creas­ing pres­sure on the U.S. econ­omy and in­fra­struc­ture.

Amer­ica’s death squad model of democ­racy is now be­ing used in Syria, Iraq and other coun­tries.

The United States has more than 660 mil­i­tary bases out­side the coun­try. It has so many bases that it doesn’t seem to ac­tu­ally know how many it has and is un­will­ing or un­able to pro­vide an ac­cu­rate ac­count­ing of them, just as it re­fuses to ac­count for $10 tril­lion in tax­pay­ers money that it is le­gally re­quired to ac­count for.

While there are a few ex­cep­tions, U.S. for­eign pol­icy does not re­sult in democ­racy, a safer world or hu­man progress. It usu­ally re­sults in death, poverty, cor­rup­tion and de­spair. Yet, in­stead of de­creas­ing its in­ter­fer­ence in the af­fairs of other na­tions, the U.S. is ex­pand­ing it and by do­ing so it is en­sur­ing its own demise.

Other na­tions will not tol­er­ate Amer­i­can bel­liger­ence and in­ter­fer­ence in their af­fairs for­ever.

Re­plac­ing the demo­crat­i­cally elected gov­ern­ment of Ukraine with ra­bidly anti-rus­sian neo-nazis and putting mis­siles on Rus­sia’s door-step in vi­o­la­tion of the 1987 In­ter­me­di­ate-range Nu­clear Forces Treaty, the Amer­i­can war in­dus­try is forc­ing Rus­sia to once again be­come our en­emy.

Rus­sia has re­cently made re­peated threats that it won’t con­tinue to tol­er­ate U.S.-NATO ag­gres­sion much longer and if pushed fur­ther will re­spond with all means pos­si­ble, in­clud­ing nu­clear weapons.

Do we re­ally want to start a nu­clear war to sup­port our war in­dus­try’s prof­its?

Can it be Fixed?

Amer­i­cans still have the right to vote and could the­o­ret­i­cally vote for peo­ple who are not cor­rupt and who could cre­ate pos­i­tive change. But most Amer­i­cans will con­tinue to vote for the can­di­dates main­stream me­dia (MSM) tells them to vote for and feel good about their choice. They don’t re­al­ize that there are can­di­dates that MSM doesn’t men­tion and if they did be­come aware of them they be­lieve that if the me­dia doesn’t pro­mote a can­di­date they aren’t wor­thy of a vote.

Per­haps only 10% of reg­is­tered Amer­i­can vot­ers have the ca­pac­ity to vote in­tel­li­gently. The good news is that over 40% of Amer­i­cans el­i­gi­ble to vote aren’t even reg­is­tered to vote. This means that if the 40%+ voted with the in­tel­li­gent vot­ers, some pos­i­tive change could be cre­ated, pro­vided that the elec­tronic vot­ing ma­chines didn’t flip their votes or the Elec­toral Col­lege didn’t be­tray the will of the peo­ple.

The prob­lem with a re­pub­lic or democ­racy is that it takes an in­formed and in­tel­li­gent pop­u­lace to make it work. If the pop­u­lace chooses to not be in­formed and makes poor choices in the vot­ing booth, the coun­try ends up with the kind of crim­i­nal regime that Amer­ica now suf­fers and prob­a­bly de­serves.

Rev­o­lu­tion of Evo­lu­tion?

Given the fact that the cur­rent U.S. gov­ern­ment is far worse than the Bri­tish gov­ern­ment that Amer­ica’s found­ing fa­ther’s de­clared in­de­pen­dence from, what would the found­ing fa­thers do if they were here now?

The method they chose in 1776 could sim­ply not work to­day. If a group of in­flu­en­tial peo­ple col­lec­tively an­nounced their in­de­pen­dence from the fed­eral or state gov­ern­ment they would ini­tially just be ig­nored and likely lost in the noise that over­whelms most peo­ple. If they took up arms they would be im­pris­oned as do­mes­tic ter­ror­ists or killed on site. Amer­ica’s prisons are full of po­lit­i­cal pris­on­ers who sought to cre­ate pos­i­tive change. Most of them have no hope of ever get­ting out be­cause they could in­spire others to seek change.

The U.S. has the ca­pac­ity to im­prison mil­lions of ad­di­tional peo­ple and has al­ready iden­ti­fied all of those that could pose a threat. Armed re­sis­tance to the world’s most pow­er­ful mil­i­tary force is sim­ply not a vi­able op­tion un­less ev­ery Amer­i­can stood up at the same time, and the won’t hap­pen.

Sur­veil­lance and in­fil­tra­tion of ev­ery pro­gres­sive on­line and off­line group means that one could not build a sup­port base over time. There is no po­ten­tial for a mass move­ment un­less it was al­most spon­ta­neous and mas­sive (vi­ral). Cre­at­ing a vi­ral po­lit­i­cal move­ment might be pos­si­ble but would be risky for all in­volved.

The re­al­ity is that most Amer­i­cans are so over­whelmed by me­dia and just try­ing to pay their bills that they don’t have the time or at­ten­tion span for change or the will­ing­ness to risk im­pris­on­ment to change some­thing that is maybe not yet so bad for them. The an­cient Ro­mans found that the masses could be con­trolled with bread and games. Not much has changed since the days of glad­i­a­tors. Now it is fast food, mass me­dia and car­toon­ish po­lit­i­cal can­di­dates.

Most of Amer­ica’s po­ten­tial young rev­o­lu­tion­ar­ies are eat­ing junk food, play­ing video games, tex­ting or up­dat­ing their Face­book page. They are cer­tainly not out hav­ing heated po­lit­i­cal dis­cus­sions in a dimly lit dive or loft apart­ment as they might have been in a preIn­ter­net age.

Many of those who are will­ing to stick their necks out are mis­guided and be­lieve that merely at­tend­ing demon­stra­tions is go­ing to some­how change things. They don’t re­al­ize that op­pos­ing what they don’t want isn’t go­ing to cre­ate what they do want.

Cer­tainly protest has its place and is nec­es­sary at times, but it will not rid gov­ern­ment of the so­ciopaths and psy­chopaths who do the bid­ding of crim­i­nal cor­po­ra­tions. It will not re­place a cor­rupt Supreme Court that con­tin­ues to vi­o­late the Con­sti­tu­tion and be­tray the peo­ple.

The pri­mary rea­son that the United States has been eroded is not just the con­spir­acy of evil men (and women), but the choices each of us make ev­ery day. The evil that in­fests the world serves the pur­pose of show­ing us what we don’t want and the con­se­quences of our ne­glect. It en­cour­ages us to cre­ate what we do want. We just have to play closer at­ten­tion to get the mes­sage and un­der­stand that when­ever any Form of Gov­ern­ment be­comes de­struc­tive..., it is the Right of the Peo­ple to al­ter or to abol­ish it, and to in­sti­tute new Gov­ern­ment.

The Way For­ward

It is time to clar­ify what we do want and make dif­fer­ent choices, and there are many good choices that we can make that will cre­ate pos­i­tive change.

In­stead of be­ing con­sumers of cor­po­rate me­dia that is de­signed to mis­lead and con­trol us, we can be­come the me­dia and spread our own in­formed mes­sages and sup­port other real me­dia. When you give CNN, MSNBC, Fox or other ‘net­work’ me­dia your at­ten­tion you are choos­ing to be lied to and let some­one else do your think­ing for you.

We can let ad­ver­tis­ers who sup­port bad me­dia know that we will boy­cott them if they con­tinue to sup­port dis­in­for­ma­tion me­dia and en­cour­age them to sup­port ben­e­fi­cial me­dia.

We can think for our­selves in­stead of let­ting others tell us how to think. We can share our thoughts with others, even when it goes against the mes­sages be­ing beamed out by mass me­dia.

We can in­sert our­selves into lo­cal gov­ern­ment and recruit other in­tel­li­gent and good peo­ple to dis­place those who don’t serve the needs of the peo­ple.

In­stead of buy­ing the prod­ucts of cor­po­ra­tions that try to con­trol our gov­ern­ment we can boy­cott them and let them know why.

We could even be as bold as Amer­ica’s found­ing fa­thers and cre­ate a new po­lit­i­cal sys­tem and put an end to the cor­po­rate con­trolled two-party sys­tem.

I have thought about the cre­ation of a new po­lit­i­cal party to end all po­lit­i­cal par­ties. It would be called the Sus­tain­able Pros­per­ity party and it would cre­ate sus­tain­able pros­per­ity by tak­ing our power back from crim­i­nal multi-na­tional cor­po­ra­tions, end all lob­by­ing and con­vert the cor­rupt war in­dus­try into a con­struc­tive force of good to mit­i­gate and adapt to cli­mate change (our great­est threat). It would en­gage the peo­ple in gov­ern­ment and give them the in­for­ma­tion they need to make wise choices. It would end all po­lit­i­cal par­ties and trans­form gov­ern­ment into a use­ful ser­vice, con­trolled by us, the peo­ple.

Elec­tronic me­dia negates the need for rep­re­sen­ta­tives. We can evolve be­yond the re­pub­lic po­lit­i­cal model, do away with the ex­ist­ing Congress, be­come a new Congress and make our own choices. In­stead of hav­ing cor­rupt­ible rep­re­sen­ta­tives make choices for us, we the peo­ple could con­sider both sides of an is­sue and make our own choices based on ac­cu­rate in­for­ma­tion and sound judge­ment. If we make a mis­take we can learn from it and cor­rect it.

It is true that few peo­ple have the time, at­ten­tion span or ca­pac­ity to un­der­stand com­plex is­sues and many would make bad choices, but that could change. In­stead of spend­ing hours a day zom­bied-out in front of mind-con­trol TV pro­grams we could par­tic­i­pate in a gov­ern­ment is­sues chan­nel and choose to ed­u­cate our­selves on the im­por­tant is­sues so that we could make good de­ci­sions.

At the same time that I have such fan­ci­ful thoughts, I ac­cept that try­ing to fix the mess that is the Amer­i­can gov­ern­ment may be im­pos­si­ble and that it may be delu­sional to think that it can be fixed. But I also re­al­ize that some of those who have made a real dif­fer­ence were some­what delu­sional, or maybe they just saw pos­si­bil­i­ties that others did not yet see.

Just be­cause the great Amer­i­can ex­per­i­ment in democ­racy is fail­ing now, it doesn’t mean that it can’t be fixed and suc­ceed. Fail­ure is what fu­els our evo­lu­tion and it is only by learn­ing from it that we can suc­ceed.

“Fail­ure pro­vides the op­por­tu­nity to be­gin again, more in­tel­li­gently.” ~ Henry Ford

“Ev­ery great cause is born from re­peated fail­ures and from im­per­fect achieve­ments.” ~ Maria Montes­sori

“I’ve missed more than 9,000 shots in my ca­reer. I’ve lost al­most 300 games. 26 times I’ve been trusted to take the game win­ning shot ... and missed. I’ve failed over and over and over again in my life. That is why I suc­ceed.” ~ Michael Jor­dan

“There is some­thing to be said for keep­ing at a thing, isn’t there?” ~ Frank Si­na­tra

I still have faith in the peo­ple to make sound choices when given an hon­est and forth­right play­ing field. The crim­i­nal el­e­ment is the mi­nor­ity and good peo­ple are the ma­jor­ity.

I be­lieve that it is time to wake up, step up and take back our coun­try! Who is with me?

Dec­la­ra­tion of In­de­pen­dence draft­ing com­mit­tee pre­sent­ing its work to the Congress. Paint­ing by John Trum­bull

Franklin, Adams, and Jef­fer­son work­ing on the Dec­la­ra­tion. Paint­ing by Jean Leon Gerome Fer­ris, 1900.

Sur­veil­lance drone over New York City. Photo: Ivan Cho­lakov / Shut­ter­

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.