Alex gives a speech at the Alamo Drafthouse cinema in Austin Texas before a showing of Endgame. Alex begins by relaying positive developments regarding the
Alex Jones On Solutions & Liberation In this speech filmed live following a showing of Endgame at the Alamo Drafthouse, Alex opens up by discussing the Bayer tainted blood scandal, before
Ron Paul Wins Nationwide Zogby Blind Poll Ron Paul Wins Nationwide Zogby Blind Poll Sizeable majority of Americans looking to vote for candidate who protects liberty, shrinks government, brings troops
AP - Prosecutors are accusing Rep. William J. Jefferson of Louisiana of soliciting bribes in two suspected schemes that are separate from the bribery charges he already faces, according to a published report.
Endgame Explodes Up Amazon Charts Endgame Explodes Up Amazon Charts Prison Planet Tuesday, November 13, 2007 After our push to vault Endgame up the Amazon rankings in order to expose the vital
AP - Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has a bull’s eye on his back at the beginning of what may be his toughest re-election campaign in years.
Clinton endorsed by SMART union (AP) AP - Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton on Saturday accepted the endorsement from a 230,000-member union and appeared at a rally with a young Hispanic lawmaker who promised her ground support in the early caucus state.
AFP - A senior UN official warned here Wednesday that the joint UN-African Union peacekeeping force may fail in its mission to protect civilians in strife-storn Darfur without the required air mobility and firepower.
AP - Residents in New Hampshire and Iowa have received phone calls raising questions about Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, his Mormon faith and the Vietnam War-era military deferments he received while serving as a missionary in France.
Political scientist Kees van der Pijl is Professor of International Relations at the University of Sussex, England. In his latest book Global rivalries, from the cold war to Iraq, he offers an intriguing analysis of international relations. He views as central the relationship between Anglo-American capitalism and the two powers themselves. Willem Bos, of the Dutch Socialist Party monthly De Tribune, interviewed him about the war in Iraq.
Kees van der Pijl: "Of course the war in Iraq is about oil. But we cannot understand the whole development if we don’t look at the relationship between the different parties involved, at the rivalry between on the one side the US and Great Britain and on the other countries such as France and Germany. This is, not coincidentally, the break between what I call the ‘core area’ - the English-speaking world, with its aggressive neoliberalism that wants to regulate everything via the market - and the more state-oriented countries, France and Germany being two examples. There have long been tensions over oil. When in the 1970s attempts were made to gain access to Arab oil by means of a Euro-Arab dialogue, the US reacted like someone who has been stung by a wasp."
Why has this rivalry come to a head over oil and over Iraq?
Kees van der Pijl: "In order to understand the background to this tension we need to look at the functioning of the international oil market. Oil is traded on the international market in dollars. These are deposited in London and from there spread around the world in the form of credit. In this way Britain and the US have their fingers on the buttons of the world oil trade, both in terms of the currency in which it is traded and via the investment structure. The other - European - countries need dollars in order to pay their energy bill. They can’t simply just lay their hands on these. European countries do ninety per cent of their trade within Europe and only ten per cent with parts of the world outside Europe, so dollars don’t come to them ‘automatically’ via trade. They have to be bought, and they’re dear. In this way Europe, via its energy bill, constantly helps to keep the dollar strong. Increasingly, as the price of oil increases, Europe tries to find other, cheaper ways to acquire oil. Every time that they do that it leads to major tension with the US and Great Britain. In essence that is what happened on the eve of the Iraq war."
Following the first Gulf War of 1990, the US and Britain had Iraq, by means of economic sanctions, in a stranglehold. These sanctions led to enormous impoverishment and disruption throughout the country. This was why the United Nations established the oil-for-food programme, through which food and medicine were sent to Iraq, but the regime’s control of their distribution resulted in the strengthening of Saddam Hussein’s position.
Kees van der Pijl:"The sanctions led to a huge disaster for the Iraqi population, while for Saddam they meant only that he had his hands more firmly on the reins. The US and Great Britain continued to support the continuation of the sanctions, but in general the view was that these measures against Iraq had had long enough. Anticipating the ending of sanctions a number of oil companies signed contracts with Saddam’s government to renew oil extraction - firms such as the French Total, Russian Lukol and corporations from China, India and Canada. They received contracts to exploit Iraqi oil fields operable as soon as the sanctions were lifted. The assessment of Saddam’s politics also played a role. It wasn’t, it’s true, clear whether Iraq still had weapons of mass destruction, but in general it was assumed that he no longer had the stomach for military adventures."
So the US and Great Britain saw themselves threatened with being sidelined.
Kees van der Pijl: "Exactly. It had become a tricky situation for them. The foreign competition threatened in time to make off with the Iraqi oil and along with that also to put the position of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait under pressure. After all, when as a result of the sanctions Iraqi oil production almost dried up, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait had taken that share of the market. The oil revenues of these countries were used in part to buy American weapons. If the sanctions against Iraq were to be lifted and Iraqi oil production to recommence, they would have to return a part of their market share. Saddam would certainly not be spending his oil revenues on American weapons, but would be going to his traditional suppliers, Russia and France."
The US therefore was thus threatened not only with the loss of control of a part of the oil from the Middle East, but this would also represent a blow to the American arms industry and to the United States’ military position in the region. In addition, the stability of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait would be put in jeopardy.
Kees van der Pijl: "This situation was also extremely disquieting for the Israel lobby in the US. It was feared that rising oil prices would bring about a change in attitude in relation to the Arab world - and that in the oil industry as well as in the arms industry sympathy for the Arab world would increase. The Arab countries were after all an increasingly important section of the market. Put all of these factors together, and understand also that Saddam had, as it were, ‘threatened’ to trade oil in euros, and you will see that there would have been a nervous reaction in London and Washington - Iraq returning to the oil market and the oil neither extracted nor traded by Anglo-American corporations but by companies from France, Russia, China and India. And all of this paid for in euros! This last factor represented a direct threat to the American economy and the position of the London markets. Because an oil-producing country that receives euros for its oil will not of course for preference spend its revenues in the US. Admittedly, none of these developments was complete. It was a matter of tendencies, of developments in a certain direction. But they explain, indeed, how at the end of the 1990s in the US and Britain the idea arose that the situation in Iraq and the Middle East was beginning to slip from their grasp. That was, moreover, not particularly strange, because France and Russia had long been the arms-suppliers and confidants of the Ba’athist r gime in Iraq, so for that matter they were simply returning to their former situation, but under, indeed, what were for the Americans extremely unfavourable circumstances."
The American and British attitude to Iraq can therefore, you argue, principally be explained by reference to the struggle to maintain control of the international oil, arms and currency markets?
Kees van der Pijl: "Yes, and over the whole situation in the Middle East. Of course there was also a political-ideological element which played a role in this. The initiative to present the scenario of a doomsday which must be averted came principally from a group of neoconservatives, who, with the coming to power of George Bush, found themselves in a strong position. The key figures in the neoconservative network had already long been active in politics and played a central central role in the so-called oil-arms-Israel conglomerate. The politics of this group were laid down in the Project for a New American Century, which took as its starting-point the idea that the United States must maintain a military ascendancy sufficient to enable it to impose its will on anyone and everyone in the world.
"That is one aspect: a political approach, an ideology, on which is based the idea that America must rule the world and recreate it according to its own interests. The other aspect that determined that there would be war is the oil situation. This was sketched out in May 2001 in a report from vice-president Cheney in which it was foreseen that the American dependence on foreign oil would rise from the then level of 52% to a level of 66% in 2020. In order to ensure that oil would come directly to the US by that time, foreign producers would have to up their production and from this enhanced production also ensure that more was supplied to the US. That would be difficult to reconcile with a situation in which Iraq was producing just for the European market. That whole picture was already clear long before September 11. It’s also clear that by then the scenario for an attack on Iraq was already in place. 9-11 gave the Bush administration the chance to carry out that scenario."
What plan did the American have at that time, then, for what would happen after the occupation of Iraq?
After the seizure of Baghdad Bush announced publicly that there would be a free trade treaty between a number of countries in the Middle East, and the US. In this way the US wanted to ensure the flow of the biggest possible slice of the region’s oil revenues. It was also the intention that there would be a peace treaty between the new Iraq, Jordan and Israel and that a pipeline would run from Iraq to the Israeli port of Haifa. This would guarantee Israel’s oil supply and put an end to the country’s isolation in the region. And all of this would completely ignore the Palestinians. Obviously this did not work out. The Americans were not welcomed as liberators, the world turned out not to be as pliable as the neoconservatives had thought. Now the situation in Iraq is desperate. Numerous attacks take place every day. Estimates put the number of people who have fled their homes at four million, the economic situation is catastrophic and the internal struggle is only increasing."
The interviewer goes on to ask Professor van der Pijl what people in their country, the Netherlands, can do about this, but his answer - though it draws attention to the particular relevance of the Netherlands as the home of the International Court - is relevant internationally, particularly perhaps to people, political parties and other organisations in developed countries.
"There is concern about a war without any legal justification. A legal complaint must be made. A party such as yours, such as the Socialist Party of the Netherlands, could play a role in this, if you look at international law and the position of The Hague as what is in fact the judicial capital of the world. America and Israel have not recognised the International Criminal Court (ICC), but the UK has, so Tony Blair could be proceeded against. It makes little sense to call for an enquiry into the Netherlands’ involvement in the war (which the SP and others have done - Ed.). I can tell you about that: we are the home port of Shell, we are scared, (the Dutchman) Jaap de Hoop Scheffer is paid for working for NATO (i.e., as Secretary General - Ed.) A child could understand these mechanisms. But why doesn’t the SP take the initiative in bringing a complaint against Blair? As a serious parliamentary party the SP could do that. I can give you the names of progressive experts in international law who could explain perfectly what steps would be necessary in order to lodge a complaint against Blair at the ICC."
International law?
"Yes. In my book I’ve devoted a chapter to the history of international law. In Nuremberg, at the trials of the leaders of the Nazi r gime and in Tokyo, where Japanese war criminals were tried, they proceeded from an idea that there were three sorts of crime. Crimes against the peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity. These crimes against the peace have since been completely forgotten. A crime against the peace is when you attack another country without provocation. For this, Nazis and Japanese were condemned and hanged. It is of the utmost importance that that element of international law is brought back into use. This could occur by means of a case against Blair. This would also be of importance to the SP. The growth of the SP<http://www.spectrezine.org/europe/spnl.htm> is of course an important phenomenon. I see it as a consequence of the mistakes, or if you prefer the treachery, of the (Dutch) Labour Party. But you can’t simply continue to build on this for ever. At a certain point the question will be posed - are we merely a left social democratic party or are we more than that? Are we truly going to try something different? A case against Blair could be an example of that."
See Also http://www.spectrezine.org/war/Wokusch20.htm _________________ The Mainstream Media is Nothing More than the Tyranny of a New Managerial Aristocracy chattering to Itself while the Planet dies.
AP - President Bush said Thursday the way the Senate reviews his picks for the federal bench has become so partisan and mean-spirited that qualified candidates decline because they don’t want to go through a confirmation hearing.
Given Gordon Brown’s recent speeches, in which he pushed the "Global Society" terminology idea I really shouldent have been surprised to see his lapdog Miliband foam at the mouth promoting an exapnded EU state.
Among other things, he stated the the EU "should be expanded to include Russia, Middle Eastern and North African countries."
Describing it as a "Model Power" it can "Persuade countries to play by the rules, and set global standards. In the way it dispenses its responsibilities around the world, it can be a role model that others follow."
This is nothing short of the begining of standisation leading to a world goverment.
A seldom quoted phrase of the "NWO" is ORDER OUT OF CHAOS.
Miliband stated enlargement was "our most powerful tool for extending stability.
It is not hard to imagine a manufactured finacial collapse or world conflict destroying the current landscape of the world, only for a new global governace to be presented to the people as the only solution.
Sadly, many, many I fear will fall for this nonsense.
I’m sure there are a substantial number of MEPs who are in agreement about false-flag operations. I don’t have the close contacts I had a decade ago with MEPs so I don’t know who these might be. But knowing the Greens’ suspicion of the State, in principle, it wouldn’t surprise me if some were in agreement that 911 was a false flag.
What all these anti-EU people seem to have in common is that they don’t have any coherent alternative. We live in a world ruled by ruthless capitalists hiding behind the tag of liberalism or neo-liberalism. Their idea of economics is to privatise everything and the devil take the hindmost.
What we see in this capitalist world are the developments of huge economic blocs. In North America we have NAFTA (USA, Canada and Mexico), in Europe we have the European Union, farther east we have the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) embracing Russia, China, Iran and I believe India (though the US is trying hard to decouple India from the SCO).
By the way, I would suggest it’s very likely that the current USUK/Sarkozy stance against Iran is motivated by (1) trying to stop and reverse its growth as a Middle Eastern and Asian power, and (2) to dislocate the SCO by so doing.
In Africa we have the African Union (which the US is trying to destroy through its NATO-for-Africa, AFRICOM, a dangerous move) and in South America we have the only thing that approaches a socialist economy, the Venezuelan-led MERCOSUR.
Australia is making deals with Japan and China with the latter playing an increasingly big role in the Australian economy.
That is, admittedly, a rule of thumb description but which indicates just how geopolitics is playing out across our Planet right now.
So, I return to the question: leaving aside the incredible economic dislocation that Britain’s leaving the EU would entail, leaving aside the question of a rising call for Scottish independence and the SNP’s commitment to a Scotland within the EU, just what kind of future do these Eurosceptics and Europhobes propose?
No good looking to the Commonwealth. We deserted that a long time ago. And anyone who looks at the economics of the old Empire out of which the Commonwealth arose in the 1950’s will see that it was basically built in favour of Britain and the white Commonwealth obtaining cheap materials at cheap labour costs from the Black Commonwealth. So any hope that Britain would be welcomed with open arms by the countries they screwed so harshly in imperialist times is guaranteed to be dashed.
A Free Trade Zone with Northern Europe? Maybe with Norway, the Faroes and Iceland but no one else.
So where else? We would be far too weak to carry on alone against all these protection zones. Oh, well there’s NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Association. Fascists like the now discredited Conrad Black and the yet-to-be-jailed Murdoch brothers would have liked us tied yet tighter in a Goetterdaemmerung Anglo-Saxon Alliance death-pact with Washington.
With the $US collapsing they might have big problems there anyway.
That would only leave Australia so clearly the acronym would have to be changed to include a North Atlantic and Pacific military/economic bloc based on the continued imperialist rape of Planet Earth.
So, given the outside possibility of allying ourselves with a race of benevolent extra-terrestrials from, say, the Pleiades (wouldn’t that be nice?) what options are left? Can we discuss this? _________________ The Mainstream Media is Nothing More than the Tyranny of a New Managerial Aristocracy chattering to Itself while the Planet dies.
As highlighted Iran DOES permit horrible conditions for minority groups, such as gays etc. No one should pretend Iran is the land of milk & honey.
The point is the powers that be often call to account these conditions as an excuse for "Regime Change" in Iran, while at the same time hosting a state banquet for Saudi royalty who promote similar conditions.
Therefore their justification falls flat & exposes their hypocracy.
Speaking Haifa’s Reali High School, Weizman said he considered homosexuality abnormal and a negative trait, like alcoholism.
Ezer Weizman - former President of Israel wrote:
I like it when a man wants to be a man and a woman wants to be a woman, I personally view homosexuality as something negative. The question is how to deal with this phenomena, this social anomaly."
Weizman added that the Bible proscribes homosexuality and sodomy. "I hope you are not in favor of sodomy," he told one pupil who had asked the president about his stand on sodomy.
Speaking at Haifa’s Reali High School, Weizman said he considered homosexuality abnormal and a negative trait, like alcoholism. The Israeli president "inflamed the haredi community and more extremist elements in Israel. It was an invitation to violence. Weizman, who said he would oppose any law allowing gay marriage, also called for a law governing "how to relate to homosexuality" in general.
"I am aware that homos suffer in society. I’m not pleased about that. But," he said, "there is too much fuss about this. It is exaggerated. It has turned homosexuality into something beautiful."
Israeli bomber seized before Jerusalem gay parade by Avida Landau Israeli police detained an Orthodox Jewish man carrying a homemade bomb in Jerusalem as thousands of Israelis marched in support of gay rights in defiance of religious protesters.
"Police stopped a 32-year-old religious Jew who was carrying a homemade explosive device," police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said of the arrest before the annual Gay Pride march began.
About 7,000 police officers had deployed inside and around Jerusalem to protect the marchers — about 2,000 of them by police estimates — after threats from religious Jews, who take exception to the event being held in a city they hold sacred.
One man evaded police to approach marchers yelling: "Filth! Get out of Jerusalem!." He was escorted away by police.
In 2005, an Orthodox Jew stabbed and wounded three marchers and fears of violence caused a march to be cancelled last year.
Reuters - Terrorist blacklists drawn up by the United Nations and the European Union violate basic human rights, a Swiss investigator working for Europe’s leading human rights forum has said.
AP - Officials in Shelby County, Tenn., complain they’ll have to spend millions to satisfy a federal judge’s “arbitrary” desegregation order. It’ll mean busing minority students up to an hour away and replacing hundreds of white teachers with black ones, they say.
AP - Early momentum has been the surefire way to win modern presidential primaries: Emerge as the front-runner in Iowa, New Hampshire or South Carolina, then steamroll through later states to become the nominee. Most of the Republican candidates are betting on this approach for 2008, but Rudy Giuliani is counting on something simpler: delegate math.
AP - A prominent doctor who treats displaced people in Darfur says the Sudanese government is risking the deaths of hundreds of thousands by forcing people out of the camps where they receive humanitarian aid.
Is This 20-Year CIA Vet Crazy For Saying 9/11 Is a Probable Inside Job? Debunkers not so quick to attack hugely respected intelligence & foreign policy expert
The Alex Jones Report November 5th, 2007 Alex Jones returns to the popular format of his studio-based weekly TV show filmed live in Austin, Texas, to present a rundown on the structure of the New
NFL Star Considered 9/11 a False Flag From Day One NFL Star Considered 9/11 a False Flag From Day One Super Bowl winner and former Dallas Cowboys ace Stepnoski goes further during radio interview Paul Joseph
Ron Paul On Course To Raise Millions In One Day Ron Paul On Course To Raise Millions In One Day November 5th “Money Bomb” explodes into action Steve Watson Infowars.net Monday, Nov 5, 2007 Presidential
The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed HR 1955, titled the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. It was passed with 404 votes in favor.
A close reading within an historical context keeping especially in mind the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and Presidential Executive Orders, pursuant to which the government has engaged in massive surveillance of its own citizens, as well as detentions, extraordinary renditions, assassinations, and torture leads me to the following conclusions:
This is a "Thought Crime" bill of the type so often discussed in an Orwellian context. It specifically targets the civilian population of the United States. It defines "Violent Radicalization" as promoting any belief system that the government considers to be extremist. "Homegrown Terrorism" and "Violent Radicalization" are defined as thought crimes. Since the bill does not provide a specific definition of extremist belief system, it will be whatever the government at any given time deems it to be.
A few extracts of the Bill are presented below to show you its tone or "flavor."
"(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term ..violent radicalization means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system to advance political, religious, or social change."
SECTION 899B. FINDINGS.
"(3) The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens."
"(6) The potential rise of self radicalized, unaffiliated terrorists domestically cannot be easily prevented through traditional Federal intelligence or law enforcement efforts, and requires the incorporation of State and local solutions."
Section 899D of the bill establishes a Center for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States. This will be an institution affiliated with the Department of Homeland Security. It will study and determine how to detain thought criminals.
THIS LEGISLATION ENDS THE POSSIBILITY OF A CULTURE OF REASON.
It is an attempt at legislative lobotomy of conscience. It aims to eviscerate ethical sensibilities of an entire culture.
Having usurped the power of war and peace, life and death, the Corporatocracy now bludgeons even the thought of speaking for conscience. This is State murder of the mind.
It is just too awesomely obscene for words. It exceeds not only the scope of my vocabulary, but my imagination as well.
The minions and hired agents of politicians are free to murder, rape and pillage on government hire using our money, but to imagine alternatives to them and the degraded, psychopathic political "leaders" who design and perpetrate these atrocities is legislated as a thought crime!
This is the legislated, politically promulgated end of man as a thinking, self-directed being. Surely this must be the outer limit of "positive law," that is, statutory laws passed by "Lawmakers."
It further entrenches the Power Elite as separate from and above their "subjects." It clearly demonstrates the paranoid delusions of the Establishment, pursuant to which it legislates a massive defense mechanism to protect itself from the populace that it subjugates.
I use these terms deliberately, because the so-called freedom of the vote has turned out to be a big con game. It is only the "freedom" to choose one set of thieves over the other. The blue suits or the red suits all of them manufactured suits of the corporations.
Following in the train of this legislation will doubtless be internal travel documents, neighborhood snoops and spies, rewards granted for turning in politically incorrect thought criminals, mass civilian detention centers in short, the whole totalitarian control mechanism that we associate with the SS, KGB and other code words of criminal regimes. There will be "re-programming / rehabilitation" centers to correct errant free thinkers.
Take note that the Department of Homeland Security already has more than 750,000 persons on its watch list. For a glimpse of past as prologue, read Solzhenitsyn.
Who Will Be Thought Police and Under What Standards?
Who will define radical thought, and by what standards? For example, how about the reported millions who believe that 9-11 was an inside job, citing a mass of evidence from eye witnesses, physicists, engineers, and recorded statements such as "We pulled it," essentially a confession by the building s owner of the planned demolition of Building 7?
Will the writings of John Perkins in Confessions of An Economic Hit Man and The Secret History of The American Empire be thought crimes? Will this very essay be a thought crime?
What about Operation Northwoods, pursuant to which the Joint Chiefs of the United States planned for innocent people to be shot on American streets, for boats carrying passengers to be sunk on the high seas, for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched within the country, and for other depraved acts conceived in the minds of government-hired psychopaths? Previously top-secret documents about this were released on 18 November 1997 and can be researched at www.wikipedia.org. Evidently, members of the Establishment will be permitted to engage in thought crime.
Soon enough, we will all be killing each other, and the statement of Mohandas Gandhi will be borne out: "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."
Will thinking about cleansing the national soul of our atrocities of Iraq, Guantanamo, Abu Gharib, the advanced plans underway to nuke Iran, the crimes of Blackwater murderers, the government s domestic coercion and violence be "Thought Crimes?"
Will it be thought crime to conceive of a domestic Truth and Reconciliation Commission pursuant to which high government officials are brought to book for crimes against humanity?
Will it be "radicalization" to think of alternatives to a government of, by, and for the Corporatocracy, which accumulates its vast wealth through the blood money of endless war?
What about imagination-consideration of a non-coercive society of free individuals acting in voluntary cooperation, what is commonly referred to as anarchy?
Will it be radical to conceive of preventing the Cheney-Bush cabal from launching WWIII and the incineration of earth through a false flag operation against Iran?
WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACTIONS OF OUR GOVERNMENT
BECAUSE WE PAY FOR IT
It has taken me too many years and too much income tax to come to the awful realization that these "public servants" are only hired mouthpieces and puppets of the Money Powers who operate behind the scenes to orchestrate war, to coordinate the Military Industrial Complex, the Homeland Security Complex, the NGO Help-The-Poor Complex, the "Third World Corporate Development" Complex. In short, the Exploitation Complex.
The roaring inside me is about the self-disgust at living by the whims of Nice Government Men and their intellectual and financial pimps men who, for just one example, can force starvation upon Indian farmers by their money printing press maneuvers to save their own hides from the overreach of blind greed. Men like those in Goldman Sachs who have the power to bail out their own companies and pay billions in bonuses while manipulating currencies such that basic food staples become priced out of reach of the rural Indian poor.
Let our excuse for the sorry state in which we find ourselves be not ignorance, for history is quite clear to those who would study. I quote founding father James Madison, "History records that money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible, to maintain their control over governments, by controlling money and its issuance." A more honest excuse would be our own greed and laziness. The quick buck. Buy now, pay later.
Statement of Conscientious Objection
HR 1955 as recently passed by the House of Representatives is in effect a Thought Crime Prevention Bill. This action simply stops my mind. It cannot be absorbed. This ultimate Police State freezes my imagination.
This newest version of draconian legislation on thought control is where Jeff Knaebel says enough is enough. Speaking truth to Power, I say, I am not your puppet. I declare my self-ownership. Come and get me if you wish. If you wish to own my body, you will have to imprison it. I am breaking the paper chains by which I have allowed you to enslave me.
Imagine with me for a moment (it may not yet be a thought crime). I say to Dick Cheney, "I refuse to obey. Come and get me, boss. Come alone I ll not run, and I am unarmed and harmless. Meet me in yonder open field." Standing in front of him, I remove my shirt, challenging him to do likewise. To prove his manhood equal, he follows along until we stand facing each other naked in the open field. I ask, "Now, what is your business with me?"
You see, it is all a mind game. The government is powerless before our non-cooperation. Of course, although an abstraction, it is a heavily armed abstraction. This argues for the right to bear arms and a well-armed citizenry in the American tradition. But if the mind behind the gun is cowardly and subdued, the gun is of no use. I suggest that nonviolent civil disobedience has proven to be a more effective method of regaining control of our lives. There would be significant loss of life, but much less than with an armed struggle.
Is murder an act that involves the human conscience? Can any other hear the voice of my inner conscience? Then, how can any such other claim the power to "represent" me in choosing to kill? How can such other "represent" me in determining which of my thoughts is criminal?
To say, or even to imply, that these people "represent" me cannot be described as an obscenity. It is an absurdity. Really, I should laugh. Instead it generates a roaring inside me the inner roar of a man who would be free.
THIS IS MY PLACE OF "LIVE FREE OR DIE."
One cannot deal with this except to speak out and be willing to put his life on the line. One must resist this legislation and this government, or else surrender his humanity and become a dead thing.
This is the place where the soles of my feet meet the path of Liberty. This is where Jeff Knaebel refuses to renew his "permission to live" identification documents pursuant to which Big Brother tracks him like an owned domestic animal. Any situation in which I am not free to leave means that my presence is by coercion or threat of coercion. If one cannot leave some "place" except by permission of the "owners" (passport), then he is a slave. To learn more about issues of expatriation and "man without a country," visit my website at www.statelessfreedom.org.
I was never the property even of my biological father, leave aside the absurdly stupid abstract concept of Nations bounded by arbitrary lines drawn on maps across which opposing armies of blood relations gun down the other.
My body is not the property of the U.S. Government. I will challenge the U.S. Government for ownership of my body, with my body itself. My mind will be forever free.
I did not ask for US citizenship, and I will not accept its rules even if forced upon me.
Any situation in which I am not free to leave means that my presence is by coercion or threat of coercion. If I cannot leave some "place" except by permission of the "owners" (passport), then I am a slave.
The US State does not own the land called America, and it does not own anybody who was born there or lives there.
No bureaucrat has the right to define who I am and the murder of which other person I may be forced to finance by his stamp upon some arbitrary piece of paper.
I belong to none, other than Almighty Creation.
I claim my freedom to respect the lives of others, as I would be respected. Freedom to do no harm, and to eschew violence. Freedom to express compassion in action. Freedom to support life. Freedom not to finance murder.
No other can hear the voice of my conscience, let alone "represent" it, or speak for it. My conscience will be muffled by no person and by no law. Nor will I ever knowingly aggress against another.
It Is Man s Duty To Love.
It now must be of the "tough love" variety. We must see clearly and face bravely the reality of what we continue to create for ourselves. We must take up tough ethical positions.
We have proved again and again, over spans of millennia, that any kind of violent revolution will only turn the wheel of violence another revolution, around and around.
If we will but cease to destroy, we may live. We cannot negotiate with melting glaciers. Perhaps we can negotiate with the storms of insatiable greed and desire raging within our own minds. Perhaps we can come out of our addiction to more, more and faster, faster.
The revolution we must undertake to save ourselves is a revolution within our own minds toward loving kindness, truth, and respect for life.
To those who would accept a legislated statutory slavery, I say may your shackles bind you without too much pain. May you go quietly into oblivion, and may you not burden me with the memory that you ever stood a watch with me on Spaceship Earth.
If you are interested in further exploration of personal statelessness, stop by and visit www.statelessfreedom.org.
November 5, 2007
Jeff Knaebel [send him mail] is an expatriate American domiciled in India since 1995. He formerly practiced as a registered professional engineer, having been trained at Cornell Univ. and the Colorado School of Mines. _________________ Explain again how sheeps bladders may be employed to prevent earthquakes!!
Former NFL Star Latest To Question 9/11 Official Story Ex-Dallas Cowboys lineman Stepnoski tells Indiana newspaper of doubts Paul Joseph Watson Prison Planet
AFP - Six years after the September 11 attacks and despite the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, the United States insists its war on terrorism justifies extreme forms of interrogation, including “waterboarding,” and rejects any talk of torture.
Ron Paul’s Presidential Odds Drastically Slashed Ron Paul’s Presidential Odds Drastically Slashed Britain’s biggest bookie has Texas Congressman 12/1 to win White House, down from 66/1 Paul Joseph Watson
Framing The Truth Movement As Terrorists Framing The Truth Movement As Terrorists Bellicose establishment hacks like O’Reilly and Beck pray for another attack so they can blame it on peaceful
Ron Paul On Course To Raise Millions In One Day Ron Paul On Course To Raise Millions In One Day November 5th “Money Bomb” explodes into action Steve Watson Infowars.net Monday, Nov 5, 2007 Presidential
