Vilify, Isolate, then Liquidate: The Regime Targets Cliven Bundy

by Will

Liberty Minute April 28 2014

Whatever his other faults, Cliven Bundy is not a racist – at least on the evidence of the carefully edited statement originally publicized by the New York Times.

In an impromptu speech to supporters on April 19, the embattled Nevada rancher described how the modern welfare state has undermined the black family, and expressed the hope that peaceful activism could reduce the size and invasiveness of government bureaucracy.

Like Dr. Walter Williams, a black economist and author, Bundy suggested that in some ways the welfare state has done more damage to the black family than slavery had done. Bundy also had sympathetic words for Mexicans, including illegal immigrants, whom he described as decent, hard-working, family-centered people.

Through the alchemy of ideologically inspired malice, the New York Times transmute those comments into the product of inveterate racism, creating a narrative that resulted in the immediate denunciation of Bundy by media and political figures who had supported him. The objective is to leave Bundy without public sympathy when the Feds finally deal with him.

This follows a familiar three-step process -- -developed by the Soviets, but employed by the Regime ruling us, as well --  for dealing with dissenters and non-conformists: First they are vilified, then isolated, then finally liquidated.

Let us take back the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free. 

The Society Our Rulers would Prefer

by Will

Liberty Minute April 25, 2014

 

Every failure of government to carry out its self-defined task of protecting the public results in the enhancement of the power of the officials and institutions responsible for that failure – and no accountability for their incompetence.

This phenomenon was on display during this year’s Boston Marathon, the first to take place since last year’s lethal bombing. While the government-aligned media fed the public a narrative of triumph and undaunted courage, the city of Boston was locked down. Helicopter gunships plied the skies over streets that had been shut down and clotted with armored troops carrying assault rifles. Train stations were shuttered; police at checkpoints across the city demanded identification and conducted warrantless searches and seizures.

One resident reports: “I was nearly arrested this morning heading into the office and had my briefcase searched – twice – within a distance of fifty feet.  Police don’t like it when you remind them of the necessity for probable cause or articulable individualized suspicion.”

This is how society looks when those who presume to rule us are given an excuse – and any excuse will do – to manage affairs as they would prefer to. This is why they are the least qualified, and least trustworthy, to provide for our security.

Let us take back the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free. 

The Feds Want Parents to be Terrorism Recruiters

by Will

Liberty Minute for April 24 2014

Parents have a duty to monitor the attitudes and enthusiasms of their children, and report them to law enforcement if they display symptoms of incipient extremism. This is the view of Lisa Monaco, Barack Obama’s Security and Counterterrorism adviser.

 In an address to Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, Monaco suggested that “sudden personality changes” in children, including a “confrontational” attitude, might betoken terrorist tendencies. Monaco lamented that “The government is rarely in a position to observe these early signals, so we need to do more to help communities understand the warning signs, and then work together to intervene before an incident can occur.”

 In the case of teenage Somali immigrant Mohamed Mohamoud, the father did exactly as Monaco recommended: He called the FBI when the 19-year-old began expressing militant attitudes. Rather than working to defuse the youngster’s militancy, the FBI abetted it, luring him into a scripted plot to bomb a Christmas ceremony in Portland.

In addition to being informants, the Feds want parents to act as terrorism recruiters, identifying troubled young people – usually boys – who can be fed into the FBI’s Homeland Security Theater apparatus.

Let us take back the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free. 

Defense of Property is Domestic Terrorism?

by Will

LibertyMinute April 23 2014

Defenders of the federal crackdown on Cliven Bundy’s ranch pretend that the theft of his cattle is both a legal and reasonable response to trespassing. From a constitutional perspective the Feds have no authority to claim that land, so the term “trespass” better describes Federal behavior on those grazing lands.

It’s worth recalling how the Feds have responded to cattle trespass on private land. In 2011, North Dakotafarmer Rodney Brossart seized cattle that had trespassed on his land and damaged his property. Under applicable range law, the owner of the cattle committed a class B misdemeanor, and Brossart was entitled to seize the animals as security until he had received redress.

However, the Nelson County Sheriff, Kelly Janke, refused to act according to the law. Instead, he dispatched deputies to Brossart’s home, where the farmer was assaulted, tasered, and abducted at gunpoint. The following day, the US Department of Homeland Security deployed two drones to overfly the Brossart property to aid a SWAT team sent to seize the farmer’s adult sons.

Brossart was acquitted of cattle theft, but found guilty of “terrorizing” law enforcement officers.

Whether inNevada or North Dakota, the Feds insist that defense of one’s property is a form of domestic terrorism.

Let us take back the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free.

Federal Rustling is Routine in Nevada

by Will

Liberty Minute April 22 2014

The family of Cliven Bundy achieved world-wide publicity when they and their supporters forced the BLM to relinquish several hundred head of cattle that had been confiscated after Bundy had refused to pay grazing fees to the federal government.

Bundy doesn’t object to paying fees, but he insists that the federal government has no constitutional authority to own those lands – and under a strict application of both the Constitution and Nevada’s statehood enabling act, Bundy is unassailably correct.

The seizure of the Bundy family’s cattle was not the first act of government-licensed rustling carried out by the BLM. In 2001, BLM hired contractors to steal the cattle of fellow Nevada ranchers Ben Colvin and Jack Vogt under very similar circumstances. The BLM and Forest Service likewise pilfered cows belonging to Wayne Hage. Last year, a federal judge ruled that those agencies had conducted a criminal conspiracy against Hage and recommended that their administrators face criminal prosecution.

In one of the most heartless cases of this kind, the BLM rustled livestock belonging to two elderly Shoshone sisters who were on land their ancestors had worked for centuries.

The Bundys were not the first to confront federally licensed cattle rustlers. They are, however, the first to fight back.

Let us take back the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free. 

"Combatant Children"

by Will

Liberty Minute April 21 2014

 

It is difficult, if not impossible, for the mind of man to conjure a more depraved expression than “Combatant children.” That obscenity is inscribed on a plaque found on a monument just north of Preston, Idaho, which serves as a memorial to the victims of the Bear River Massacre.

 

The plaque, which was written in 1922, claims that the US Army attack on a Shoshone village in January 1863 was justified to punish “Indians guilty of hostile attacks on emigrants and settlers,” and that it resulted in the death of up to 300 Indians, “including about 90 combatant women and children.”

 

No evidence was ever produced that the victims of the massacre included the Indians who had actually participated in raids against settlers. Those raids, furthermore, were carried out because the government had failed to deliver provisions that had been promised in exchange for access to land. Many of the Indians had been reduced to near-starvation by the time Col. PE Connor staged the pre-dawn assault on the village.

 

Most importantly, it is perverse beyond expression to describe children slaughtered in their own home as “combatants” – unless we assume that's how we should describe anybody who happens to die at the hands of US government employees.

 

Let us take back the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free.

How a Non-Accomplice Was Sent to Prison for Life

by Will

Liberty Minute April 18 2014

Ryan Holle never sold drugs, never stole anything, and certainly never killed anybody. He was asleep in his apartment when a friend to whom he had lent his car did all of those things. No evidence was ever provided that Holle – who had lent his car to the same friend on several previous occasions – knew what his friend had planned to do, let alone that he had any role in those crimes. Yet Holle was arrested and offered a plea bargain that would have resulted in a ten-year prison term.

Convinced that he had not committed a crime, Holle contested the charge in court. Acting with the vindictiveness that typifies his profession, the prosecutor charged him with first-degree murder  under Florida’s felony murder statute. A jury convicted him of that offense, and Holle was given a life sentence without the possibility of parole. He has served eleven years of that sentence.

Under the principle of collective guilt used to convict Holle, a citizen whose car is stolen and then used in a crime could be considered an accomplice. All that is necessary is a suitable case and a sufficiently depraved prosecutor.

Let us take back the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free.

 

Next Time a Cop Tazes an Innocent Person, Shoot Him

by Will

Liberty Minute April 17 2014

Arizona resident Jefferson Duncan was walking by an apartment complex in Phoenix when he and a friend named Jonathan Parker were approached by two off-duty police officers who had been hired as security guards. Despite the fact that it was early in the evening and neither Duncan nor Parker was suspected of a crime, the police – who were in uniform -- accosted them.

Parker ran, and Duncan would up in an altercation with one of the officers. The officer claimed that Parker seized control of his Taser and used it on him, leaving the officer briefly incapacitated. The officer claims that when he recovered he drew his firearm and shot Parker, killing him before he could use the Taser against him again.

Leaving aside for now the question of why off-duty police officers would be wearing uniforms while working as private security guards, this incident illustrates again that Tasers are not non-lethal weapons. That is, they are not regarded as such when private citizens use them, or threaten to use them, against police, who are allowed to respond with deadly force.

What this should mean is that when police make aggressive – and therefore unlawful – use of Tasers, citizens are legally entitled to use lethal force in self-defense.

Let us take back the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free.

 

Adding Words, Subtracting Rights

by Will

LibertyMinute April 16 2014

 Where the U.S. Constitution is concerned, rights can be subtracted through addition – in this case, by adding five words to the Second Amendment.

Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, a long-time opponent of the right to armed self-defense, insists that gun rights supporters misrepresent the clear intention of the Framers by saying that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own firearms. Stevens also insists that the same Framers somehow neglected to make that intention clear in the plain language of that amendment.

Thus he suggests that the phrase, “when serving in the Militia” should be added to the Second Amendment, which would then read: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.”

In this way, Stevens says, government would be able to enact measures “designed to minimize the slaughter caused by the prevalence of guns in private hands.” It would also create a state monopoly on firearms ownership that is the necessary precursor to mass slaughter carried out by government officials.

Not even a sophist as accomplished as Stevens can plausibly argue that the Framers intended to equip the government with the means to commit genocide. 

 

Let us take back the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free. 

Bullies Don't Accept Defeat Gracefully

by Will

LibertyMinute April 15 201

 

When the ATF attacked the Branch Davidians outsideWacoin February 1993, the expectation was a quick and painless victory over an eccentric religious sect and a public relations boost for the scandal-plagued agency. This is why the assault was code-named “Showtime.” Rather than allowing themselves to be slaughtered and dragged off in chains, however, the Davidians defended themselves, forcing the ATF to retreat. This led to an escalation by the FBI, which laid siege for 51 days before the final assault that left of scores of Davidians dead from fire, asphyxiation, and gunfire.

 

In 1973, a band of Sioux activists at Wounded Knee held off the FBI and theUSmilitary for 71 days, demanding redress of tribal corruption and investigation of unsolved murders. The planned assault was cancelled and the Feds were unable to convict the Indian activists of charges in court. But they eventually retaliated by carrying out a campaign of low-intensity warfare that left several innocent people dead.

 

Like any bully, the Regime inWashingtonchooses its battles carefully, generally avoiding fights with opponents capable of fighting back. But it will not accept defeat when clearly in the wrong. This is somethingNevadarancher Cliven Bundy and his supporters should remember.

 

Let us take back the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free.

<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 173 >>