Friday, December 08, 2006

....To Stifle Dissent

Troublesome little questions continually keep me awake as they ricochet about in the wide open spaces behind my eyes. To wit:

  • Why did the President start this "War on Terror" business with the audacious declaration that it will be a long war?
  • Why has there been no declaration of war?
  • Why was Osama bin Llama allowed to escape at Tora Bora?
  • Since Osama bin Llama is a Saudi, as were nearly all of the 9-11 highjackers, and since much of their financial support came from Saudi Arabia, why are we not at war with Saudi Arabia?
  • Why are we not at war with Iran, the home of the philosophical/religious system that supports the actions of these savages?
  • Why are most of the acts imposed within the US directed toward limiting the rights and freedom of American citizens?
  • Why are we waging the "war" in a politically correct manner, as not to offend the (as yet not fully identified) enemy, nor to cause him serious harm?
  • Why are we involved in Iraq, anyway?


The most likely theory that seems to fit is the following: we have managed to end the decades-long "Cold War" prematurely, in the eyes of many of the individuals who live at the unwilling expense of America's productive.

To support the status quo, it seems, those in the federal government require America to continually have an enemy 'pon which to focus, to keep our minds off what government is really doing, as it quietly dismantles the checks and balances erected to create freedom for us all. We, according to the parasite class, need a new enemy. One who will keep the state of fear at a high level for decades to come.

The "War on Terror" must have longivety. It can't be won too quickly.

The "War on Terror" has received a leg up from the "War on Drugs," in the process of neutering America's Constitution and its Bill of Rights, not to mention the concept of natural law. Each and every elected official who has voted for any facet of any bill authorizing or enhancing any part of either the "War on Drugs" or the hideously misnamed USA Patriot Act is guilty of violating his Oath of Office and ought to be thrown out of office and punished to the fullest extent of the law.

The "War on Terror" and the "Patriot Act" are designed to supress any and all kinds of dissention by Americans, by the simple process of accusing the dissident of terrorism. Note the oft-repeated admonition to not speak, even in jest, of bombing or any other kind of violence in the airport, in security lines and in the aircraft. Note also that any disagreement with airport or aircraft staff people can be treated as a felony.

"We will no longer tolerate any challenges against federal authority," is the message we've been given.

With every city, town and village of over 200 population receiving funding from the federal government to hire, equip and train police paramilitary thug squads (aka SWAT teams) who routinely break down the doors of individuals, for the most specious crime real or imagined, with or without proper warrants, who routinely terrorize and often kill individuals on the most skimpy of pretexts, how can we refer to the United States as anything but a police state?

We're fighting a "war on terror?" How about starting with disbanding these thug squads, whether they be labeled SWAT, DEA, BATF, IRS or any of the other alphabet soup of terrorists that scare the crap out of us far more than any half-a-world-away savage who couldn't even manufacture the filthy clothing that hangs shapelessly from his disease-riddled body.

In a time when government recognizes individuals' right to property only at its own convenience, when legal due process is a dim recollection of mainly elder students of the law and a few old libertarians who wistfully recall when the legal ideal was a nation of laws, not of men, many of us wonder how long Americans will continue in the role of a herd of sheep and will begin to insist 'pon enforcement of the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights--as written and envision by those wise revolutionaries who risked life, limb and fortune to begin this seemingly failing experiment.

They've killed Freedom! Those bastards!

Warm regards,

Col. Hogan
Stalag California

2 comments:

steveintx said...

I was filled with...WTF is he doing when he first announced going to Iraq? Even more amazed that the lawmakers, Reps and Dems followed almost in lockstep like the good little lemmings they are, not questioning this idiocy. 75%+ of congress voted for this, they could have stopped it.

I have kept pretty quiet about my thoughts, Justin has two friends over there and I wouldn't want anyone to think I don't support them or the American military. There are some that say that the best support we can give them is to bring them home. Would that we could! I would just as soon raze the area. What did the tribal leaders in Africa call it? Scorched Earth?

Geo Bush was, I considered at the time, the better candidate when I voted for him. Now I feel that along with Jimmy "the coward" Carter he will go down in history as one of the worst presidents of modern times.

Col. Hogan said...

9-11 happened in large part because the airline had made no provision for defending the aircraft from violence. To this date, airlines have done little to that effect.

Allowing Americans to exercise their 2nd amendment rights would've stopped the incident in its tracks. See Bieser's 'toon http://www.scottbieser.com/sept11.html for illustration.

The feds, to this point, have done nothing we could call effective to provide real security in airports nor on passenger aircraft: that isn't their aim. Their aim is to control travel in America.

While I support the individuals who enter the miltary to defend the country and to embark on rewarding careers, we have to recognize that they're being obscenely misused.