Craig Peterson Jr.'s Blog, page 10
October 19, 2020
Children in Cages Stain as the Election Draws Near
It was recently released that former Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his deputy, Rod Rosenstein, were leading the charge for President Trump’s “zero tolerance” separation policy of illegal immigrants. The last couple of years have been filled with hatred at the administration over images of children in confined cages and inhuman conditions. Although some may argue that the parents broke the law and should be prosecuted, a humane society should not overtly act in such a manner. All humans, whether citizens or not, should be treated with dignity and respect, and anything less than that is despicable.
Many immigrants and political refugees desire economic opportunities and asylum in the United States, and as a country, we should provide an easier method for them to achieve just that. Our current system is bogged down with bureaucracy and long wait times, and although there is much backlash (often from conservatives) due to the erroneous perception that immigrants steal Americans’ jobs and the idea that the immigrants will overwhelmingly vote for Democratic candidates, it is really in the best interest of everyone to allow people from different backgrounds and of varying skill sets to participate in the economic system. Regardless of one’s views on whether immigrants should have easy access to the country or be severely limited, as a society, we should agree that mistreatment of individuals seeking a better life should be condemned.
By the summer of 2018, approximately 2,342 children were separated from more than 2,200 adults, and by the time of the cessation of the policy, it is estimated that almost 3,000 families had been divided. Separating children from parents for a misdemeanor seems a bit harsh, and this is not something that a civilized nation should partake in. If that was not bad enough, Attorney General Sessions claimed that he wanted to use this policy as a deterrent to keep illegal immigration low. This type of intimidation from government officials is not acceptable.
The facilities utilized for holding the children have been compared to internment camps, and it appears that there was overcrowding, consumption of filthy water, poor-quality food provided, and lack of any real escape from the elements. Reminiscent of treatment of Native Americans and Japanese Americans, the United States government is now guilty of yet another form of concentration camps. This stain on the nation by the Trump administration is something that should not be easily forgotten, and it is up to Americans to put pressure on government officials in the future to prevent implementation of similar policies.
Many conservatives rightly argue that the “cages” used to separate children were initiated during the Obama administration, and for that, President Trump’s predecessor bears some of the blame. However, President Obama only held children in place for up to seventy-two hours before handing them over to the Department of Health and Human Services, and he did try to keep families together as much as possible. Still, President Obama’s record on human rights of migrant children was not great either, and President Trump’s record 2019 detainment of 69,550 children has been built upon by previous presidents. This does not excuse the Trump administration’s lack of concerns for human rights though.
As the 2020 presidential election draws near, the immigrant separation policy will prove to be a stain on his record. Although anti-Trumpers will try to claim racism and inhumanity due to these policies (and this is true), it should be noted that many policies implemented by the United States government, whether relating to torture and black sites, economic sanctions, overt and covert wars, drone strikes that lead to mass civilian casualties, militarization of police, and the drug war, have contributed to gross human rights violations throughout modern history. President Trump is not unique in his disregard for human life, but the reason that many believe to the contrary is because he is boisterous and vulgar in his approach. Actions speak louder than words, so we should be more concerned about detrimental actions than his racist Tweets (these are not acceptable either). As Americans, we need to be aware of and speak out about human rights violations regardless of which political party is in charge.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
Many immigrants and political refugees desire economic opportunities and asylum in the United States, and as a country, we should provide an easier method for them to achieve just that. Our current system is bogged down with bureaucracy and long wait times, and although there is much backlash (often from conservatives) due to the erroneous perception that immigrants steal Americans’ jobs and the idea that the immigrants will overwhelmingly vote for Democratic candidates, it is really in the best interest of everyone to allow people from different backgrounds and of varying skill sets to participate in the economic system. Regardless of one’s views on whether immigrants should have easy access to the country or be severely limited, as a society, we should agree that mistreatment of individuals seeking a better life should be condemned.
By the summer of 2018, approximately 2,342 children were separated from more than 2,200 adults, and by the time of the cessation of the policy, it is estimated that almost 3,000 families had been divided. Separating children from parents for a misdemeanor seems a bit harsh, and this is not something that a civilized nation should partake in. If that was not bad enough, Attorney General Sessions claimed that he wanted to use this policy as a deterrent to keep illegal immigration low. This type of intimidation from government officials is not acceptable.
The facilities utilized for holding the children have been compared to internment camps, and it appears that there was overcrowding, consumption of filthy water, poor-quality food provided, and lack of any real escape from the elements. Reminiscent of treatment of Native Americans and Japanese Americans, the United States government is now guilty of yet another form of concentration camps. This stain on the nation by the Trump administration is something that should not be easily forgotten, and it is up to Americans to put pressure on government officials in the future to prevent implementation of similar policies.
Many conservatives rightly argue that the “cages” used to separate children were initiated during the Obama administration, and for that, President Trump’s predecessor bears some of the blame. However, President Obama only held children in place for up to seventy-two hours before handing them over to the Department of Health and Human Services, and he did try to keep families together as much as possible. Still, President Obama’s record on human rights of migrant children was not great either, and President Trump’s record 2019 detainment of 69,550 children has been built upon by previous presidents. This does not excuse the Trump administration’s lack of concerns for human rights though.
As the 2020 presidential election draws near, the immigrant separation policy will prove to be a stain on his record. Although anti-Trumpers will try to claim racism and inhumanity due to these policies (and this is true), it should be noted that many policies implemented by the United States government, whether relating to torture and black sites, economic sanctions, overt and covert wars, drone strikes that lead to mass civilian casualties, militarization of police, and the drug war, have contributed to gross human rights violations throughout modern history. President Trump is not unique in his disregard for human life, but the reason that many believe to the contrary is because he is boisterous and vulgar in his approach. Actions speak louder than words, so we should be more concerned about detrimental actions than his racist Tweets (these are not acceptable either). As Americans, we need to be aware of and speak out about human rights violations regardless of which political party is in charge.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
October 6, 2020
Prepare for the Coming Authoritarian Winter
What will this coming winter bring in regards to a response to COVID-19? I think most people are expecting at least some form of restrictions. I mean, the next set of lockdowns have already begun in many parts of Europe (except in Sweden where the people have somehow been able to survive), and our overlords have been preparing us for what is to come. Masks are claimed to be the golden ticket that halts the virus in its tracks, but in reality, they will prove to be far less effective than what was sold to us, as witnessed by the cries for more lockdowns (lockdowns should not be necessary if masks really work to the extent that they claim). The increased restrictions that will be imposed on us this time around will likely be far more intrusive, enforced more strictly, and cause far more economic troubles, financial burdens, suicides, domestic abuse, and drug overdoses.
So, what can we expect this winter? Well, if this spring has been any indication, we can expect small businesses to be shut down, all gatherings and assemblies of any size to be banned, and increased enforcement of mask and social distancing mandates. How the restrictions are enforced may largely depend on which presidential candidate wins the election. Donald Trump has taken a hands-off approach, where the virus response was largely left to the states, while Joe Biden has displayed interest in a national lockdown and mask mandate. It appears that Biden and his nationalistic approach may win out (however, it is difficult to tell because Hilary Clinton was expected to win in 2016). Either way, our civil liberties are in jeopardy, but whether the tyranny comes from the states or the federal government remains to be seen.
Although there were a few minor victories in the courts with the striking down of some of the executive orders and constitutional violations (for example, in Pennsylvania and Michigan), governors still no doubt believe that they have the authority to suspend parts of the U.S. Constitution and their respective state constitutions due to an emergency. The United States’ Weimar Article 48 has been created out of thin air by power-hungry governors, and if we are not careful, more and more civil liberties will be suspended in the name of false security (notice that lockdowns statistically were not successful, but people felt safe because of them). I should not need to remind anybody of what occurred as a result of the Weimar Republic’s constitutional provision for suspension of rights during a crisis, yet, Americans do not learn from history and think that they are impervious to the cyclical events of the past.
The federal government or the states (or both) will ignore our natural rights, despite any court rulings, and Governor Andrew Cuomo and his band of merry governors (with the exception of South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem) have no respect for the institutions of a republican form of government or the rights of men and women in their states. They act on a whim, as if they have been given power by God himself to act as the ultimate authority on Earth. The First Amendment’s guarantee to the right of free assembly and association, the Second Amendment’s guarantee to the right of bearing arms (restricted through forced closures of gun shops), the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee to the right of privacy and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures (contact tracing and identification policies will be hatched next), the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee to the right of not having life, liberty, or property deprived without due process, and the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of republican government and contracts not being impaired are all threatened under these new future lockdowns.
Some argue that all of the restrictions and changes are just minor inconveniences that are of temporary nature, and by this time next year, we will resume life as normal. However, most sane people will understand that this will not be the case. A few months ago, the mainstream media was telling us to brace for more lockdowns, and even the possibility of being subjugated to shelter-in-place orders on and off for years, or at least until a vaccine was developed. This does not seem temporary.
We were then brought to the idea of a new normal, which is constantly being fed to us (even television commercials are full of this concept). A CNN report has suggested that we need to just embrace the idea that things will never go back to how they were and that we would be better off to accept this sooner rather than later. I am not sure how anyone can argue that changes to our lifestyle will be short-term.
The propaganda (things like “flatten the curve,” “social distance,” “mask up,” “new normal,” “New York tough,” and “in this together”) has been alive and well throughout this entire experiment on the suspension of rights, and these catchy phrases serve to condition us to accept whatever the government throws our way. The propaganda will grow stronger and more effective during the second wave of infections, as the government and media will attempt to scare us into submission with exaggerated data and emotional triggers.
Governments do not relinquish power willingly, and even if restrictions are loosened at various times, there is now precedent to lock down the states or the country for anything that the executive branch arbitrarily deems an emergency. Some are calling for future lockdowns to deal with climate change, and although the current political atmosphere does not support utilizing such tactics (lockdowns are currently thought to have a negligible effect on the climate), it should not surprise anyone if this changes soon (politicians will again argue that we are headed for impending doom, so draconian measures need to be implemented or everyone will die).
We are on a dangerous road this coming winter (if we do not kill ourselves first in civil conflict over the petty bickering by both parties in the election season), and if the people do not utilize civil disobedience tactics and oppose government restrictions (whether at the federal or state levels), the Bill of Rights will be lost in the chaos of 2020. We will be playing right into the authoritarian playbook (Americans are proving to be easily manipulated), and the experiment in liberty that our founding fathers established for us will come crashing into an explosion of fireworks. Our country and constitution are on the line here, and I fear that our country may be lost forever if we do nothing to stop it. Please stand with liberty and fight the coming tyranny!
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
So, what can we expect this winter? Well, if this spring has been any indication, we can expect small businesses to be shut down, all gatherings and assemblies of any size to be banned, and increased enforcement of mask and social distancing mandates. How the restrictions are enforced may largely depend on which presidential candidate wins the election. Donald Trump has taken a hands-off approach, where the virus response was largely left to the states, while Joe Biden has displayed interest in a national lockdown and mask mandate. It appears that Biden and his nationalistic approach may win out (however, it is difficult to tell because Hilary Clinton was expected to win in 2016). Either way, our civil liberties are in jeopardy, but whether the tyranny comes from the states or the federal government remains to be seen.
Although there were a few minor victories in the courts with the striking down of some of the executive orders and constitutional violations (for example, in Pennsylvania and Michigan), governors still no doubt believe that they have the authority to suspend parts of the U.S. Constitution and their respective state constitutions due to an emergency. The United States’ Weimar Article 48 has been created out of thin air by power-hungry governors, and if we are not careful, more and more civil liberties will be suspended in the name of false security (notice that lockdowns statistically were not successful, but people felt safe because of them). I should not need to remind anybody of what occurred as a result of the Weimar Republic’s constitutional provision for suspension of rights during a crisis, yet, Americans do not learn from history and think that they are impervious to the cyclical events of the past.
The federal government or the states (or both) will ignore our natural rights, despite any court rulings, and Governor Andrew Cuomo and his band of merry governors (with the exception of South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem) have no respect for the institutions of a republican form of government or the rights of men and women in their states. They act on a whim, as if they have been given power by God himself to act as the ultimate authority on Earth. The First Amendment’s guarantee to the right of free assembly and association, the Second Amendment’s guarantee to the right of bearing arms (restricted through forced closures of gun shops), the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee to the right of privacy and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures (contact tracing and identification policies will be hatched next), the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee to the right of not having life, liberty, or property deprived without due process, and the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of republican government and contracts not being impaired are all threatened under these new future lockdowns.
Some argue that all of the restrictions and changes are just minor inconveniences that are of temporary nature, and by this time next year, we will resume life as normal. However, most sane people will understand that this will not be the case. A few months ago, the mainstream media was telling us to brace for more lockdowns, and even the possibility of being subjugated to shelter-in-place orders on and off for years, or at least until a vaccine was developed. This does not seem temporary.
We were then brought to the idea of a new normal, which is constantly being fed to us (even television commercials are full of this concept). A CNN report has suggested that we need to just embrace the idea that things will never go back to how they were and that we would be better off to accept this sooner rather than later. I am not sure how anyone can argue that changes to our lifestyle will be short-term.
The propaganda (things like “flatten the curve,” “social distance,” “mask up,” “new normal,” “New York tough,” and “in this together”) has been alive and well throughout this entire experiment on the suspension of rights, and these catchy phrases serve to condition us to accept whatever the government throws our way. The propaganda will grow stronger and more effective during the second wave of infections, as the government and media will attempt to scare us into submission with exaggerated data and emotional triggers.
Governments do not relinquish power willingly, and even if restrictions are loosened at various times, there is now precedent to lock down the states or the country for anything that the executive branch arbitrarily deems an emergency. Some are calling for future lockdowns to deal with climate change, and although the current political atmosphere does not support utilizing such tactics (lockdowns are currently thought to have a negligible effect on the climate), it should not surprise anyone if this changes soon (politicians will again argue that we are headed for impending doom, so draconian measures need to be implemented or everyone will die).
We are on a dangerous road this coming winter (if we do not kill ourselves first in civil conflict over the petty bickering by both parties in the election season), and if the people do not utilize civil disobedience tactics and oppose government restrictions (whether at the federal or state levels), the Bill of Rights will be lost in the chaos of 2020. We will be playing right into the authoritarian playbook (Americans are proving to be easily manipulated), and the experiment in liberty that our founding fathers established for us will come crashing into an explosion of fireworks. Our country and constitution are on the line here, and I fear that our country may be lost forever if we do nothing to stop it. Please stand with liberty and fight the coming tyranny!
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
September 21, 2020
The Shrinking Threat from COVID-19
It is incredible that the majority of Americans still believe the official narrative on COVID-19, despite all of the recent information that has come out. Fearmongering by politicians and the mainstream media have contributed to an irrational fear of a virus that is currently estimated to have a 0.6% death rate. The major news headlines keep reading that things are getting worse as the number of cases and casualties have been on the decline (this pattern is likely to change, however, with winter on the way). Despite statistics showing that COVID-19 restrictions were unsuccessful, many Americans still have the audacity to claim that those who do not go along with the official narrative are unscientific fools. Blindly follow the experts that have been constantly wrong since the beginning is the mantra. Will Americans wake up before the next round of lockdowns and monarchical orders are issued?
The New York Times released an article stating that up to 90% of all people testing positive for COVID-19 may carry such a small amount of the virus that they are incapable of spreading the disease, and the CDC released a statement that 6% of all COVID-19 deaths were due to the virus alone (most of the casualties have had multiple underlying conditions). This is a big story because it shows that the virus is not nearly as deadly or contagious as originally thought, and it may prove that many of the lockdown restrictions were unnecessary. Yet, do not expect the government to admit its mistake, and it will continue to push the narrative that the virus is a plague that must be stopped at all costs.
The lockdowns were originally justified in order to prevent the overwhelming of the healthcare system, but then when it became apparent that this would not occur, the narrative changed to prevention of deaths. Once the number of deaths started declining, the media kept pounding in our heads the idea that the number of cases were increasing. In all of these cases, the government had to make a stretched case to the people in order to keep citizens in fear and justify continued restrictions. This all proves that the rationale behind the lockdowns was more about gaining and maintaining power and control over the populace than it was about actually containing the virus.
There have also been multiple cases of false reporting of COVID-19 deaths. Hospitals were incentivized to code medical cases under the new coronavirus (receiving $13,000 in Medicare payments per individual with a positive test result and $39,000 if the person went on a ventilator), and although some may argue that this was a money-saving policy that forced healthcare providers to stay within the $13,000 margin, it is likely that in most cases, profit was a motivation. We know that people were erroneously listed as COVID-19-positive. For example, a Tennessee woman who had been dead for months before she was alleged to have been tested for the virus received a letter stating that she was positive. Some physicians have stated that they felt pressured to list COVID-19 on the death certificates and diagnostic lists due to the financial incentives ($13,000 for COVID-19 patients, as opposed to $5,000 for pneumonia ones, for example). Medical fraud is being practiced nationwide, and it should be no surprise that the COVID-19 deaths are higher than they should be. Who would not want the extra cash? Why not continuously test the same patients over and over with unreliable tests until a positive reading is displayed? Why not bribe families to permit the hospitals to list deaths erroneously in order to assist with convincing the public that the virus is out of control?
Deaths per capita statistics for the disease showed that states or countries with less restrictive lockdowns or no lockdowns at all performed no worse than states or countries with strict lockdowns. In fact, Sweden, which did not impose a nationwide lockdown, has seen a rapid decline in COVID-19 cases along with the rest of the world, and in addition, the overall death rate from the disease is right on par with the United States (based on the average of all states). Therefore, the argument that the cases are declining in the United States (particularly this case is made by Governor Cuomo of New York) due to mass mask compliance breaks down when one considers the declining cases and overall death counts per capita in states and countries that did not have strict lockdowns (states such as South Dakota). There is no real evidence suggesting that lockdowns and wearing masks work, and it is more likely than not that the declining numbers are due to a cyclical pattern experienced by the whole world.
It appears that lockdowns prolonged the deaths, but they did not halt them. We destroyed our economy, let suicides and drug overdoses increase significantly, ignored other medical conditions to make room for COVID-19 patients, caused financial stress, anxiety, and paranoia for millions, and destroyed democracy in favor of monarchy all in the name of fighting an insignificant virus. It even appears that our political overlords are not taking their own advice on wearing masks and gathering in crowds (several politicians have been busted as of late not wearing masks or social distancing, and many politicians have praised the protests pertaining to social justice while condemning church services and small business gatherings).
Yet, people will still continue to blindly follow whatever narrative is pumped out. When we finally realize we have been played, it may be too late. Overt and emotional action is perceived as more effective than restrained and prudent action, and therefore, society prefers the former without weighing the consequences.
There is some good news though because a federal court ruled that many of Pennsylvania’s lockdown orders implemented during the crisis were unconstitutional and violated rights in an arbitrary manner that ran contrary to a free society. No doubt, governors will continue to push through as many restrictions as possible during the second wave of COVID-19 this winter and claim that judges striking down their orders are playing politics and ignoring the science. Ultimately, it will come down to the people utilizing civil disobedience tactics to challenge the growing tyranny.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
The New York Times released an article stating that up to 90% of all people testing positive for COVID-19 may carry such a small amount of the virus that they are incapable of spreading the disease, and the CDC released a statement that 6% of all COVID-19 deaths were due to the virus alone (most of the casualties have had multiple underlying conditions). This is a big story because it shows that the virus is not nearly as deadly or contagious as originally thought, and it may prove that many of the lockdown restrictions were unnecessary. Yet, do not expect the government to admit its mistake, and it will continue to push the narrative that the virus is a plague that must be stopped at all costs.
The lockdowns were originally justified in order to prevent the overwhelming of the healthcare system, but then when it became apparent that this would not occur, the narrative changed to prevention of deaths. Once the number of deaths started declining, the media kept pounding in our heads the idea that the number of cases were increasing. In all of these cases, the government had to make a stretched case to the people in order to keep citizens in fear and justify continued restrictions. This all proves that the rationale behind the lockdowns was more about gaining and maintaining power and control over the populace than it was about actually containing the virus.
There have also been multiple cases of false reporting of COVID-19 deaths. Hospitals were incentivized to code medical cases under the new coronavirus (receiving $13,000 in Medicare payments per individual with a positive test result and $39,000 if the person went on a ventilator), and although some may argue that this was a money-saving policy that forced healthcare providers to stay within the $13,000 margin, it is likely that in most cases, profit was a motivation. We know that people were erroneously listed as COVID-19-positive. For example, a Tennessee woman who had been dead for months before she was alleged to have been tested for the virus received a letter stating that she was positive. Some physicians have stated that they felt pressured to list COVID-19 on the death certificates and diagnostic lists due to the financial incentives ($13,000 for COVID-19 patients, as opposed to $5,000 for pneumonia ones, for example). Medical fraud is being practiced nationwide, and it should be no surprise that the COVID-19 deaths are higher than they should be. Who would not want the extra cash? Why not continuously test the same patients over and over with unreliable tests until a positive reading is displayed? Why not bribe families to permit the hospitals to list deaths erroneously in order to assist with convincing the public that the virus is out of control?
Deaths per capita statistics for the disease showed that states or countries with less restrictive lockdowns or no lockdowns at all performed no worse than states or countries with strict lockdowns. In fact, Sweden, which did not impose a nationwide lockdown, has seen a rapid decline in COVID-19 cases along with the rest of the world, and in addition, the overall death rate from the disease is right on par with the United States (based on the average of all states). Therefore, the argument that the cases are declining in the United States (particularly this case is made by Governor Cuomo of New York) due to mass mask compliance breaks down when one considers the declining cases and overall death counts per capita in states and countries that did not have strict lockdowns (states such as South Dakota). There is no real evidence suggesting that lockdowns and wearing masks work, and it is more likely than not that the declining numbers are due to a cyclical pattern experienced by the whole world.
It appears that lockdowns prolonged the deaths, but they did not halt them. We destroyed our economy, let suicides and drug overdoses increase significantly, ignored other medical conditions to make room for COVID-19 patients, caused financial stress, anxiety, and paranoia for millions, and destroyed democracy in favor of monarchy all in the name of fighting an insignificant virus. It even appears that our political overlords are not taking their own advice on wearing masks and gathering in crowds (several politicians have been busted as of late not wearing masks or social distancing, and many politicians have praised the protests pertaining to social justice while condemning church services and small business gatherings).
Yet, people will still continue to blindly follow whatever narrative is pumped out. When we finally realize we have been played, it may be too late. Overt and emotional action is perceived as more effective than restrained and prudent action, and therefore, society prefers the former without weighing the consequences.
There is some good news though because a federal court ruled that many of Pennsylvania’s lockdown orders implemented during the crisis were unconstitutional and violated rights in an arbitrary manner that ran contrary to a free society. No doubt, governors will continue to push through as many restrictions as possible during the second wave of COVID-19 this winter and claim that judges striking down their orders are playing politics and ignoring the science. Ultimately, it will come down to the people utilizing civil disobedience tactics to challenge the growing tyranny.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
August 27, 2020
The Lingering American Presence in Syria May Still Lead to Another War
A war is still going on in Syria (something many may have forgotten about with a not-so-deadly virus dying off in the United States and violent vigilante groups burning cities), and although this is not the number one item on most people’s minds, we have to consider that confrontation between the United States and Russia is still possible in the war-torn country. While some are touting President Trump’s peace deal between Israel and the United Arab Emirates (something that seems good on the surface, but that may lead to isolation of the Palestinians and the eventual recognition of Israeli-annexed lands in the West Bank) and are enraged over the UN Security Council’s rejection of the return of all previous sanctions on Iran, American patrols in Syria have been slightly less than peaceful.
Since a war with Iran would be unpopular at the moment and President Trump is slow on his rallying of nations in the Middle East to stand with Israel and confront Iran, the United States government needs to stir up the pot somehow. Why not cause trouble in Syria?
Earlier this month, American forces engaged in a skirmish at a checkpoint with pro-government forces in Syria. The United States knew that this checkpoint was operated by the Syrian military, but its military still proceeded to push through, which led to the convoy being attacked. A Syrian news source claims that an American helicopter (or two) then retaliated with an attack on the checkpoint, but regardless of which side’s account was correct, it was a reckless move on the part of the United States government.
This is hardly the first of its kind. Back in February 2018, after American advisors working with Syrian opposition forces came under fire by a few hundred Russian contractors, the United States Air Force launched airstrikes against pro-government forces, which resulted in the deaths of over one hundred of the Russians.
Recently, a Russian military vehicle rammed into an American armored vehicle, and although both sides proceeded to blame the other for instigating the childish incident (Russia said that the United States blocked their routine patrol from passage through the area and the United States said Russia performed an unsafe maneuver), the potential consequences of such irresponsible behavior are nothing to dismiss. Both countries are engaged in a proxy war with the other, and one misstep could send the two countries on the path towards war.
Why does the Trump administration want to risk a war with another superpower over a petty conflict involving warring parties in a country thousands of miles away from the United States? The stated goal for the American presence in Syria (that is, to defeat ISIS) is well past its expiration date, and the fact that the United States still retains a presence there shows that the mission was never really about ISIS. All along, it was about keeping the Assad regime at bay and ensuring that Russia was not able to have a dominating influence in the region. Hopefully, this does not escalate further, because if it does, we might be fighting a war with Russia over Syria and a war with China over COVID-19. With economic trouble and civil unrest developing in the United States, more foreign conflicts are not really something that this country can afford.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
Since a war with Iran would be unpopular at the moment and President Trump is slow on his rallying of nations in the Middle East to stand with Israel and confront Iran, the United States government needs to stir up the pot somehow. Why not cause trouble in Syria?
Earlier this month, American forces engaged in a skirmish at a checkpoint with pro-government forces in Syria. The United States knew that this checkpoint was operated by the Syrian military, but its military still proceeded to push through, which led to the convoy being attacked. A Syrian news source claims that an American helicopter (or two) then retaliated with an attack on the checkpoint, but regardless of which side’s account was correct, it was a reckless move on the part of the United States government.
This is hardly the first of its kind. Back in February 2018, after American advisors working with Syrian opposition forces came under fire by a few hundred Russian contractors, the United States Air Force launched airstrikes against pro-government forces, which resulted in the deaths of over one hundred of the Russians.
Recently, a Russian military vehicle rammed into an American armored vehicle, and although both sides proceeded to blame the other for instigating the childish incident (Russia said that the United States blocked their routine patrol from passage through the area and the United States said Russia performed an unsafe maneuver), the potential consequences of such irresponsible behavior are nothing to dismiss. Both countries are engaged in a proxy war with the other, and one misstep could send the two countries on the path towards war.
Why does the Trump administration want to risk a war with another superpower over a petty conflict involving warring parties in a country thousands of miles away from the United States? The stated goal for the American presence in Syria (that is, to defeat ISIS) is well past its expiration date, and the fact that the United States still retains a presence there shows that the mission was never really about ISIS. All along, it was about keeping the Assad regime at bay and ensuring that Russia was not able to have a dominating influence in the region. Hopefully, this does not escalate further, because if it does, we might be fighting a war with Russia over Syria and a war with China over COVID-19. With economic trouble and civil unrest developing in the United States, more foreign conflicts are not really something that this country can afford.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
July 31, 2020
Federal Tyranny in Portland
A storm has been brewing in Oregon as the Department of Homeland Security has clashed with Black Lives Matter protesters for several days. Conservatives have claimed that President Trump has the right to invoke the Insurrection Act in order to protect federal property and due to violence that has erupted, while liberals have been claiming that this is overreach of government power. So, which side is correct? It appears that both sides have a point to some degree due to the fact that there is an obligation of the federal government to protect property under its possession, however, there have been many constitutional and civil liberties violations that need to be addressed. The federal government has overstepped its authority and has created a tyrannical force that could be mimicked in other cities in the future.
With the extreme utilization of tear gas, rubber bullets, and flash grenades, it appears that federal troops in Portland have been performing more than just security duties over the Mark O. Hatfield Federal Courthouse. Groups like Don’t Shoot Portland and the Wall of Moms have been peacefully challenging the federal occupation of their city, and they have been met with disproportionate force (something you might expect to be exercised by the Israeli government against the Palestinians). Excessive force should not be condoned in the United States.
The federal response to these protests have violated the protestors’ First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights. The right to free speech and assembly have been violated because federal police were intimidating city residents and attempting to break up protests that were constitutionally protected, and the federal government has no right to discourage protesting. People have the right to protest, even right outside of federal property, and it only becomes a crime when trespassing or vandalism of the property occurs. All other forms of protest should be permitted. When people were being arrested far from the federal courthouse, it became clear that the deployment of federal troops was about more than just protection of federal property. Federal troops were deployed with the intent of halting free speech and assembly.
There were also reports of people having been seized and held by police with unmarked uniforms and vehicles, which was a violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures and being detained without due process. The Portland Police Bureau has been sued on the grounds of illegally collecting information on protesters, and the federal forces may have surveilled phone calls and text messages without warrants. Some protesters who were arrested were released on conditions that they could not reattend future protests. All of these actions further violated the First and Fourth Amendments.
As per the Tenth Amendment, the federal government is not allowed to perform basic law enforcement duties within state boundaries, and it is clear that Oregon and Portland officials did not request federal involvement. Therefore, any intervention by the federal government that did not pertain specifically to protecting the courthouse would be considered unconstitutional. The state and city governments were more than capable of protecting their citizens and preventing violence, and whether they chose to do so in a manner that the federal government did not like is irrelevant. Policing is a state power and not a federal one.
In the United States, there is no excuse for deploying federal troops for the purpose of quelling protests that are unfavorable to a president’s administration (not even the extraconstitutional border patrol enforcement within 100 miles of the border argument), and doing so is nothing less than tyranny. Although rioting, looting, property destruction, and other forms of violence should be condemned, and violent rioters have hijacked some of the peaceful protests, the federal government must protect all rights that are guaranteed by the Constitution, regardless of whether it agrees with how those individuals choose to exercise those rights. President Trump’s actions are not acceptable, and now there are potential plans underway to send federal troops to other cities across the country to police them and prevent violence. Could this become a common practice when a president does not agree with the message of certain protests? Will the president declare an emergency and utilize federal troops to further his own agenda? Will he use federal troops to stay in power past his term? People need to stand up against the police state before it becomes too late.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
With the extreme utilization of tear gas, rubber bullets, and flash grenades, it appears that federal troops in Portland have been performing more than just security duties over the Mark O. Hatfield Federal Courthouse. Groups like Don’t Shoot Portland and the Wall of Moms have been peacefully challenging the federal occupation of their city, and they have been met with disproportionate force (something you might expect to be exercised by the Israeli government against the Palestinians). Excessive force should not be condoned in the United States.
The federal response to these protests have violated the protestors’ First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights. The right to free speech and assembly have been violated because federal police were intimidating city residents and attempting to break up protests that were constitutionally protected, and the federal government has no right to discourage protesting. People have the right to protest, even right outside of federal property, and it only becomes a crime when trespassing or vandalism of the property occurs. All other forms of protest should be permitted. When people were being arrested far from the federal courthouse, it became clear that the deployment of federal troops was about more than just protection of federal property. Federal troops were deployed with the intent of halting free speech and assembly.
There were also reports of people having been seized and held by police with unmarked uniforms and vehicles, which was a violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures and being detained without due process. The Portland Police Bureau has been sued on the grounds of illegally collecting information on protesters, and the federal forces may have surveilled phone calls and text messages without warrants. Some protesters who were arrested were released on conditions that they could not reattend future protests. All of these actions further violated the First and Fourth Amendments.
As per the Tenth Amendment, the federal government is not allowed to perform basic law enforcement duties within state boundaries, and it is clear that Oregon and Portland officials did not request federal involvement. Therefore, any intervention by the federal government that did not pertain specifically to protecting the courthouse would be considered unconstitutional. The state and city governments were more than capable of protecting their citizens and preventing violence, and whether they chose to do so in a manner that the federal government did not like is irrelevant. Policing is a state power and not a federal one.
In the United States, there is no excuse for deploying federal troops for the purpose of quelling protests that are unfavorable to a president’s administration (not even the extraconstitutional border patrol enforcement within 100 miles of the border argument), and doing so is nothing less than tyranny. Although rioting, looting, property destruction, and other forms of violence should be condemned, and violent rioters have hijacked some of the peaceful protests, the federal government must protect all rights that are guaranteed by the Constitution, regardless of whether it agrees with how those individuals choose to exercise those rights. President Trump’s actions are not acceptable, and now there are potential plans underway to send federal troops to other cities across the country to police them and prevent violence. Could this become a common practice when a president does not agree with the message of certain protests? Will the president declare an emergency and utilize federal troops to further his own agenda? Will he use federal troops to stay in power past his term? People need to stand up against the police state before it becomes too late.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
July 4, 2020
Do We Deserve to Celebrate Independence Day This Year
Do we deserve to celebrate Independence Day this year? Out of fear and under the argument that rights can be suspended for the collective good, we have allowed the government to steal our “unalienable Rights” of “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” The Declaration of Independence further states, “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” With the COVID-19 crisis, the governors have taken it upon themselves to dictate our lives to us, and they are not securing our rights or acting by the consent of the governed. Have we regressed back to our pre-1776 colonial days?
How do some of the grievances listed in our Declaration compare with what is happening today? We the people have lost our representation in the state legislatures, which have decided to transfer their duties to monarchs and allow the paternal benevolence of authoritarianism to become the law of the land. Many “nonessential” judicial proceedings have been halted, which has paved the way for the executive branch to become the only active part of government. The governors have altered or created hundreds of laws on their own whim, and the acts of the executive branch legislating in our affairs amounts to nothing less than tyranny. The governors have destroyed countless lives through arbitrary enforcement of mandatory business closures and bans on gatherings and free association. Stay-at-home orders have amounted to nothing less than soft house arrest without trial by jury, and these measures have led directly to negative consequences, including drug overdoses, suicides, domestic and sexual abuse, and loss of jobs and increased poverty. At the same time as small businesses have been forced to close, many large corporations have been able to continue operating throughout the crisis, which has led to government-granted monopolies that have destroyed the livelihoods of small business owners. Our rights of free assembly, the practice of our religion in an unhindered manner, and the ability to not have our lives, businesses, churches, or property taken without due process have been violated.
In addition to our gross injuries caused by COVID-19 restrictions, our rights have been threatened through measures taken in our post-9-11 world. The federal government has maintained large standing armies throughout the world forming an empire that has been viewed as a threat by many countries, and as a result of forming new enemies, we are in danger of wars and perils that do not benefit us. We have been subject to unreasonable searches and seizures of our activities and records, and warrants without specific details have been issued through secret and unaccountable courts. The government’s spying on us in our homes or searching our online activities is comparable to the quartering of troops in our homes, as we are no longer safe in a place where we should have privacy from everyone outside of our household. We must be in fear of saying certain things online or in public because political incorrectness or ideas that may be construed as terrorist threats may ruin our lives or reputations or land us under investigation. The government has imposed excessive taxes on us without our consent by career politicians who have their own interests at heart and status quo arrangements that cannot be challenged. The government has brought federal issues to the local level and militarized the police, which has led to excessive force and deadly invasions of citizens’ homes.
These grievances are uncannily similar to what the American colonists were facing that led to a revolution. We as Americans like to take the American Revolution for granted, but in reality, the people advocating for restrictive measures under COVID-19 or 9-11 for the collective good would have been the loyalists to the British crown in 1776. The British government offered their American colonists the comforts of security, but it came with a cost: suspension of certain rights.
The Declaration states that when governments become tyrannical and have repeated abuses of power that restrict our rights, the people have the right to alter or abolish that government. Perhaps we should ponder on these things instead of celebrating the select freedoms that the government still allows us to retain.
How do some of the grievances listed in our Declaration compare with what is happening today? We the people have lost our representation in the state legislatures, which have decided to transfer their duties to monarchs and allow the paternal benevolence of authoritarianism to become the law of the land. Many “nonessential” judicial proceedings have been halted, which has paved the way for the executive branch to become the only active part of government. The governors have altered or created hundreds of laws on their own whim, and the acts of the executive branch legislating in our affairs amounts to nothing less than tyranny. The governors have destroyed countless lives through arbitrary enforcement of mandatory business closures and bans on gatherings and free association. Stay-at-home orders have amounted to nothing less than soft house arrest without trial by jury, and these measures have led directly to negative consequences, including drug overdoses, suicides, domestic and sexual abuse, and loss of jobs and increased poverty. At the same time as small businesses have been forced to close, many large corporations have been able to continue operating throughout the crisis, which has led to government-granted monopolies that have destroyed the livelihoods of small business owners. Our rights of free assembly, the practice of our religion in an unhindered manner, and the ability to not have our lives, businesses, churches, or property taken without due process have been violated.
In addition to our gross injuries caused by COVID-19 restrictions, our rights have been threatened through measures taken in our post-9-11 world. The federal government has maintained large standing armies throughout the world forming an empire that has been viewed as a threat by many countries, and as a result of forming new enemies, we are in danger of wars and perils that do not benefit us. We have been subject to unreasonable searches and seizures of our activities and records, and warrants without specific details have been issued through secret and unaccountable courts. The government’s spying on us in our homes or searching our online activities is comparable to the quartering of troops in our homes, as we are no longer safe in a place where we should have privacy from everyone outside of our household. We must be in fear of saying certain things online or in public because political incorrectness or ideas that may be construed as terrorist threats may ruin our lives or reputations or land us under investigation. The government has imposed excessive taxes on us without our consent by career politicians who have their own interests at heart and status quo arrangements that cannot be challenged. The government has brought federal issues to the local level and militarized the police, which has led to excessive force and deadly invasions of citizens’ homes.
These grievances are uncannily similar to what the American colonists were facing that led to a revolution. We as Americans like to take the American Revolution for granted, but in reality, the people advocating for restrictive measures under COVID-19 or 9-11 for the collective good would have been the loyalists to the British crown in 1776. The British government offered their American colonists the comforts of security, but it came with a cost: suspension of certain rights.
The Declaration states that when governments become tyrannical and have repeated abuses of power that restrict our rights, the people have the right to alter or abolish that government. Perhaps we should ponder on these things instead of celebrating the select freedoms that the government still allows us to retain.
June 29, 2020
Should We Celebrate Independence Day This Year?
As we recognize the 244th birthday of the United States of America, let us reflect on what freedom from government and independence mean in respect to the events that have plagued 2020. The country was founded on the principles of unalienable rights that include life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The Declaration of Independence further states that governments, with the consent of the governed, are instituted to secure these rights. Yet the state governments have abused their powers and become forces against that end. In the wake of COVID-19, what rights do we the people truly retain? Out of fear of a virus and penalties imposed for noncompliance of executive orders, we have sacrificed our liberties for a sense of security and safety that authoritarianism offers.
In the twenty-first century, we tend to think that our founding fathers just one day woke up and decided to form a country that would become a shining example of freedom and prosperity for the world, yet in reality, they were fighting for equal rights as British citizens. Independence was more of an afterthought and something that gradually gained momentum as the British continued to strip the colonists of their liberties. Today, it seems like we take these rights for granted, and we often fall for the seductive argument that we need to balance freedom and security. Afterall, our founding fathers would never have been able to foresee terrorism or pandemics, right? The government needs to be able to track and monitor us, suspend rights in an emergency, and enforce draconian measures to keep us safe from these threats. Without the paternal benevolence of government, we would be doomed, right?.
Even if one is not convinced that our founding fathers would have been aware of threats from diseases like small pox or terrorism from Barbary pirates or frontier raids, it is important to understand that they established principles that were to govern the people. Yet, there are very few principles of democratic/republican government left in the states. Governors have taken on the role of kings, and the legislatures have taken a back seat and allowed tyranny to take root. There are few checks and balances on the governors and few means to challenge the arbitrary orders. The people have only consented to dictatorial government through silence and compliance, but it is only because of fear that they bow to the governors.
The state governments and the media have conditioned people to believe the official narrative, and anyone who questions the authority that they have established is an outsider who is to be ignored or chastised. This fascist attitude has led to alterations of hundreds of state laws; stay-at-home orders that amount to house arrest; forced shutdowns of businesses without due process; hindrances of people to practice their religion through attendance of churches, mosques, and synagogues; prohibitions of peaceful assembly (with the exception of protests associated with the murder of George Floyd); the destruction of the economy (perhaps as a way to tear it down and rebuild it in a manner that pleases the governors, or perhaps as a way to ensure that President Trump does not win reelection); numerous deaths and injury from suicide, drug overdoses, and sexual abuse; the protection of large corporations at the expense of small businesses; and arrests and fines against people for not social distancing, opening up bars or restaurants, having church services, or not wearing coverings over their faces. These unacceptable actions have been cheered on by statists, collectivists, and progressives, and any negative consequences have been shrugged off as just collateral damage or minor inconveniences. It seems as if the emotional argument that these measures must be implemented or everyone will die has won out over rational thinking and sound policies that would protect the vulnerable but also keep the economy and people’s lives going.
Just as the British government dissolved the states’ legislatures, quartered troops in private residences and kept standing armies to enforce laws in times of peace, taxed the colonists without representation, prevented trial by jury, prohibited free trade with other regions of the world, and issued blank search warrants without specific details; the federal and state governments have resorted to similar tactics in the modern era. During the coronavirus crisis, the legislatures have essentially become obsolete because governors have taken it upon themselves to alter or create new laws in any way that they please. Edward Snowden revealed spying and searching of records without any real specific warrants, which is similar to keeping intelligence soldiers quartered in people’s lives. Some people have finally begun to realize the abuses committed by militarized police in the midst of the George Floyd and Breonna Taylor protests, including drug raids that result in death and destruction. These protests have resulted in curfews, shootings of rubber bullets against peaceful protesters, and excessive force. Governors are attempting to restrict our right to travel and associate freely through enforcement of executive orders, and businesses have been prevented from operating in a manner of their choosing, which prohibits free trade and the pursuit of happiness. In our rising fascist society, it is becoming unacceptable to speak freely without consequence in the age of political correctness. This sounds an awful lot like the British government attempting to restrict the actions of the American colonists.
The United States is no longer a free country, and by our silence, we have opted into an authoritarian and fascist system that deems our rights as something that are only granted if they do not counteract the orders of the state. We only have the illusion of freedom, and this is dangerous because it allows for the trading of rights for security with more confidence. The people will believe that these so-called temporary measures or slight decreases in freedom are necessary to live in a twenty-first century “civilized” society. Yet, the precedents set during the coronavirus crisis will ensure that our rights will be constantly seized by governments, and there will be no end to the theft.
Perhaps it would be unpopular to consider what Thomas Jefferson proposed if governments continue their abuses of power, but we must counter the attacks on liberty that we have been dealt in some way. We should start by reeducating ourselves in the history of the American Revolution and founders such as Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, John Adams, and Sam Adams and the sacrifices that they made long ago for this experiment of liberty. Perhaps we do not deserve to observe Independence Day this year since we have run to the open arms of government dependence. If we want keep our liberty and democracy, we must be willing to fight for it. If not, I fear we will regress into a tyranny that we may never be able to escape.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website. More importantly though, I urge you to contemplate how the government reactions to COVID-19 (and also the post 9-11 responses) have been detrimental to the liberty and happiness of the people. I cannot tell you how disappointed I am with the blind obedience to the state that the American people have displayed, and I really hope that people will begin to wake up and realize the error of their ways. Though I do not blame the people entirely because we have been conditioned by the fearmongering of the mainstream media and government officials, our window of opportunity to restore liberty is diminishing. We must demand that the government recognize our natural rights before it is too late. Please join the side of liberty!
In the twenty-first century, we tend to think that our founding fathers just one day woke up and decided to form a country that would become a shining example of freedom and prosperity for the world, yet in reality, they were fighting for equal rights as British citizens. Independence was more of an afterthought and something that gradually gained momentum as the British continued to strip the colonists of their liberties. Today, it seems like we take these rights for granted, and we often fall for the seductive argument that we need to balance freedom and security. Afterall, our founding fathers would never have been able to foresee terrorism or pandemics, right? The government needs to be able to track and monitor us, suspend rights in an emergency, and enforce draconian measures to keep us safe from these threats. Without the paternal benevolence of government, we would be doomed, right?.
Even if one is not convinced that our founding fathers would have been aware of threats from diseases like small pox or terrorism from Barbary pirates or frontier raids, it is important to understand that they established principles that were to govern the people. Yet, there are very few principles of democratic/republican government left in the states. Governors have taken on the role of kings, and the legislatures have taken a back seat and allowed tyranny to take root. There are few checks and balances on the governors and few means to challenge the arbitrary orders. The people have only consented to dictatorial government through silence and compliance, but it is only because of fear that they bow to the governors.
The state governments and the media have conditioned people to believe the official narrative, and anyone who questions the authority that they have established is an outsider who is to be ignored or chastised. This fascist attitude has led to alterations of hundreds of state laws; stay-at-home orders that amount to house arrest; forced shutdowns of businesses without due process; hindrances of people to practice their religion through attendance of churches, mosques, and synagogues; prohibitions of peaceful assembly (with the exception of protests associated with the murder of George Floyd); the destruction of the economy (perhaps as a way to tear it down and rebuild it in a manner that pleases the governors, or perhaps as a way to ensure that President Trump does not win reelection); numerous deaths and injury from suicide, drug overdoses, and sexual abuse; the protection of large corporations at the expense of small businesses; and arrests and fines against people for not social distancing, opening up bars or restaurants, having church services, or not wearing coverings over their faces. These unacceptable actions have been cheered on by statists, collectivists, and progressives, and any negative consequences have been shrugged off as just collateral damage or minor inconveniences. It seems as if the emotional argument that these measures must be implemented or everyone will die has won out over rational thinking and sound policies that would protect the vulnerable but also keep the economy and people’s lives going.
Just as the British government dissolved the states’ legislatures, quartered troops in private residences and kept standing armies to enforce laws in times of peace, taxed the colonists without representation, prevented trial by jury, prohibited free trade with other regions of the world, and issued blank search warrants without specific details; the federal and state governments have resorted to similar tactics in the modern era. During the coronavirus crisis, the legislatures have essentially become obsolete because governors have taken it upon themselves to alter or create new laws in any way that they please. Edward Snowden revealed spying and searching of records without any real specific warrants, which is similar to keeping intelligence soldiers quartered in people’s lives. Some people have finally begun to realize the abuses committed by militarized police in the midst of the George Floyd and Breonna Taylor protests, including drug raids that result in death and destruction. These protests have resulted in curfews, shootings of rubber bullets against peaceful protesters, and excessive force. Governors are attempting to restrict our right to travel and associate freely through enforcement of executive orders, and businesses have been prevented from operating in a manner of their choosing, which prohibits free trade and the pursuit of happiness. In our rising fascist society, it is becoming unacceptable to speak freely without consequence in the age of political correctness. This sounds an awful lot like the British government attempting to restrict the actions of the American colonists.
The United States is no longer a free country, and by our silence, we have opted into an authoritarian and fascist system that deems our rights as something that are only granted if they do not counteract the orders of the state. We only have the illusion of freedom, and this is dangerous because it allows for the trading of rights for security with more confidence. The people will believe that these so-called temporary measures or slight decreases in freedom are necessary to live in a twenty-first century “civilized” society. Yet, the precedents set during the coronavirus crisis will ensure that our rights will be constantly seized by governments, and there will be no end to the theft.
Perhaps it would be unpopular to consider what Thomas Jefferson proposed if governments continue their abuses of power, but we must counter the attacks on liberty that we have been dealt in some way. We should start by reeducating ourselves in the history of the American Revolution and founders such as Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, John Adams, and Sam Adams and the sacrifices that they made long ago for this experiment of liberty. Perhaps we do not deserve to observe Independence Day this year since we have run to the open arms of government dependence. If we want keep our liberty and democracy, we must be willing to fight for it. If not, I fear we will regress into a tyranny that we may never be able to escape.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website. More importantly though, I urge you to contemplate how the government reactions to COVID-19 (and also the post 9-11 responses) have been detrimental to the liberty and happiness of the people. I cannot tell you how disappointed I am with the blind obedience to the state that the American people have displayed, and I really hope that people will begin to wake up and realize the error of their ways. Though I do not blame the people entirely because we have been conditioned by the fearmongering of the mainstream media and government officials, our window of opportunity to restore liberty is diminishing. We must demand that the government recognize our natural rights before it is too late. Please join the side of liberty!
June 3, 2020
George Floyd Protests Have Led to a War Against the People
Just when we thought government overreach could not get any worse in the United States than what has been witnessed with the COVID-19 restrictions, protests and riots have broken out across the country in response to the superfluous force utilized against George Floyd. An officer in the Minneapolis Police Department brutally murdered a black man causing angry protesters to begin assembling nationwide to call for changes to the systemic racism that exists, particularly in regard to unfair treatment of blacks by law enforcement.
Many of the protests have been peaceful and seen police officers joining the events and symbolically kneeling in solidarity, but some have turned violent, which has led to looting, arson, and vandalism. The violence should be condemned because there is no right to destroy innocent people’s property, but the tactics employed by law enforcement to quell the protests have been unacceptable. The police have fired rubber bullets and tear gas and arrested peaceful protesters. Local governments have implemented curfews, and militarized police have terrorized communities.
These types of tactics have been supported by President Trump, who has acted more aggressively towards black protests than ones involving white supremacists. In order to get a photo op, he had police backed by the National Guard, which was called in from a few states, clear peaceful protesters out of the way with tear gas (though he claims otherwise) and batons. He then threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 to deploy the U.S. military to quell the “rebellion” if states and local governments would not properly utilize their National Guards to deal with the protests. He was attempting to federalize these local issues and turn the protests into a war.
This has become a war of sorts though. Police have attacked and arrested journalists, which prevents the right to a free press. Rubber bullets, which have been shown to seriously injure and even kill victims, have been shot at peaceful protesters and bystanders across many cities, and even some bystanders standing on their porch watching as fully armored police units strolled down the street were hit with paint projectiles from officers who ordered them to get into their house. In New York City, two police SUV’s drove into a crowd of protesters that would not disperse. In Atlanta, two students stuck in traffic produced by a protest were dragged out of their cars and had stun guns used against them. Police across many cities have resorted to excessive tactics, and they have engaged in war against the citizens of the United States.
State and local governments have also instituted curfews to prevent protests from continuing into the night and becoming violent. However, this restricts people’s rights to assemble and move freely, and it is unconstitutional. Rights do not just exist at certain times of the day, and then disappear at night.
In addition, police have restricted people’s freedom of speech and peaceful assembly. In South Carolina, peaceful demonstrators were kneeling and trying to engage in loving discussions with a SWAT team, but one black protester (the one who was doing the talking) was pulled away from the crowd and arrested for not obeying the orders of police to disperse. If people cannot peacefully protest or engage in freedom of speech, America is truly lost.
Amid authoritarian measures implemented across most states in response to the novel coronavirus, we are now witnessing brutality and further restrictions due to the George Floyd protests. Are the federal, state, and local governments preparing us for a police-state and martial law in the United States? It certainly seems so, especially when you consider the 1033 Program that has been transferring old military equipment from the federal government to local police departments for years. Police forces are now acting like small armies and terrorizing the people. Instead of serving the community, law enforcement has transformed into mini wings of the federal government to respond to national issues and started looking at most residents as potential criminals rather than members of the community. Not all police officers are bad, but there is a systemic problem that sometimes leads to officers making horrible decisions.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
Many of the protests have been peaceful and seen police officers joining the events and symbolically kneeling in solidarity, but some have turned violent, which has led to looting, arson, and vandalism. The violence should be condemned because there is no right to destroy innocent people’s property, but the tactics employed by law enforcement to quell the protests have been unacceptable. The police have fired rubber bullets and tear gas and arrested peaceful protesters. Local governments have implemented curfews, and militarized police have terrorized communities.
These types of tactics have been supported by President Trump, who has acted more aggressively towards black protests than ones involving white supremacists. In order to get a photo op, he had police backed by the National Guard, which was called in from a few states, clear peaceful protesters out of the way with tear gas (though he claims otherwise) and batons. He then threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 to deploy the U.S. military to quell the “rebellion” if states and local governments would not properly utilize their National Guards to deal with the protests. He was attempting to federalize these local issues and turn the protests into a war.
This has become a war of sorts though. Police have attacked and arrested journalists, which prevents the right to a free press. Rubber bullets, which have been shown to seriously injure and even kill victims, have been shot at peaceful protesters and bystanders across many cities, and even some bystanders standing on their porch watching as fully armored police units strolled down the street were hit with paint projectiles from officers who ordered them to get into their house. In New York City, two police SUV’s drove into a crowd of protesters that would not disperse. In Atlanta, two students stuck in traffic produced by a protest were dragged out of their cars and had stun guns used against them. Police across many cities have resorted to excessive tactics, and they have engaged in war against the citizens of the United States.
State and local governments have also instituted curfews to prevent protests from continuing into the night and becoming violent. However, this restricts people’s rights to assemble and move freely, and it is unconstitutional. Rights do not just exist at certain times of the day, and then disappear at night.
In addition, police have restricted people’s freedom of speech and peaceful assembly. In South Carolina, peaceful demonstrators were kneeling and trying to engage in loving discussions with a SWAT team, but one black protester (the one who was doing the talking) was pulled away from the crowd and arrested for not obeying the orders of police to disperse. If people cannot peacefully protest or engage in freedom of speech, America is truly lost.
Amid authoritarian measures implemented across most states in response to the novel coronavirus, we are now witnessing brutality and further restrictions due to the George Floyd protests. Are the federal, state, and local governments preparing us for a police-state and martial law in the United States? It certainly seems so, especially when you consider the 1033 Program that has been transferring old military equipment from the federal government to local police departments for years. Police forces are now acting like small armies and terrorizing the people. Instead of serving the community, law enforcement has transformed into mini wings of the federal government to respond to national issues and started looking at most residents as potential criminals rather than members of the community. Not all police officers are bad, but there is a systemic problem that sometimes leads to officers making horrible decisions.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
May 25, 2020
Government Overreach During Raids Such As That of Breonna Taylor
The shooting and killing of unarmed Breonna Taylor during a no-knock warrant drug raid by police in Kentucky has sparked outrage for both racism and excessive force, and the immediate charges filed against Kenneth Walker were appalling being that he was within his rights to use self-defense against government intruders who did not properly identify themselves. Since systemic racism exists and blacks are targeted disproportionately by police, it is easy to see why many have been horrified by the injustice that was witnessed. In addition, Kenneth Walker, who was a gunowner, was not defended by the supposed gun rights activist group the NRA, which should also be condemned. However, cases such as this that involve government overreach and home invasions, whether race-motivated or not, are more frequent than most people may realize.
In Cleveland, Tennessee, a man heard someone breaking into his house and grabbed his gun. DEA agents and a SWAT team armed with weapons, body armor, and grenades blazing had made their way to the end of his barrel, and the man was tackled to the ground for alleged murder. However, it was the wrong house, and a flash bang grenade had been released into the son’s bedroom, which caused temporary blindness and deafness. All of this happened because a mistake was made on the part of the DEA and the SWAT team.
More commonly, raids are conducted for the purpose of halting drug operations. In St. Paul, Minnesota, a drug raid by DEA agents was conducted, and all of the residents, including the children, were forced to the ground at gunpoint. All but one of the residents were handcuffed (the wife was forced from the bed to the ground almost naked, but she was not handcuffed). To make matters worse, the family dog was killed, and the handcuffed children were forced to sit next to the slain dog during the remainder of the raid. In addition, a handcuffed girl had a diabetic incident because she was not given access to her medication. In the end, it was determined that the house that was supposed to be raided was actually the next-door one, so the trauma that the family was forced to endure was again made by mistake.
In Eminem’s neck of the woods (Eight Mile in Detroit), a whole DEA, SWAT, and local law enforcement army with tanks and helicopters invaded an entire street looking for criminals related to drugs and prostitution. In one house in particular, men who were not easily identified as law enforcement (the badge numbers, names, and faces were intentionally hidden) barged in and threw a woman who had just had back surgery into a wall, and then they pinned her on the floor. Her mother who had just had knee replacements was thrown into a table before hitting the floor. Both women were innocent and never had warrants out for their arrest.
In Lebanon, Tennessee, a similar wrong-house event caused a man to be murdered and his wife to be handcuffed by two young and inexperienced officers. Unfortunately these events are all too common, and there are roughly 60,000 no-knock or quick-knock raids annually, most of which are for drugs. Between 2010 and 2016, there had been ninety-four deaths (eighty-one of them civilians) as a result of these types of raids. The so-called “War on Drugs,” has destroyed many lives of both the innocent and guilty and contributed to the mass incarceration in the United States. The ACLU has found that more than half of all SWAT raids were conducted against black or Latino people, and two-thirds of these were drug-related.
This intimidation and bullying by the federal government (and aided by state and local law enforcement) under the name of liberating the masses and keeping people safe from drugs have negatively impacted the country and should be ended. Plus, invasions that result in the wrong house violate the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Drugs are not the only inanimate objects that have been the subject of a federal (or state and local government) war, and no, this time, I am not talking about SARS-CoV-2 (the coronavirus that causes COVID-19), which has had the term “war” applied to the combating of it. Although guns have not been made illegal at this time (though gun rights have been watered down), there are many regulations against them that have led to prohibition-like raids and actions similar to those conducted against drugs. In National City, California, a firearms part store was raided by ATF agents in full tactical gear because it was selling gun parts for AR-15’s that were not made to ATF specifications. Despite the parts being legal for sale and purchase, they did not have serial numbers because they were made from a different type of material than other similar parts. The agents wanted a list of customers who had purchased the parts, and the parts and the customer list were taken by force with terrified customers inside. This excessive force should not be accepted in the United States.
The good news is that the Breonna Taylor and Kenneth Walker case has raised awareness of this type of oppression in the supposed free and constitution-respecting country of the United States. Senator Rand Paul has brought up the Fourth Amendment implications of no-knock warrants and how they are inappropriate and unreasonable. The Louisville Metro Police Department will now be required to have no-knock warrants sent to the chief of police or other designee before a judge can review it. Public scrutiny of the case has also led to the temporary suspension of Walker’s murder and assault charges against the police officer until an investigation can be completed.
These are steps in the right direction, but until public pressure gets stronger to have no-knock warrants removed, the drug war terminated, and excessive force utilized by federal, state, and local law enforcement ceased, these types of stories will continue to be reported across the country. As I have written in my book, The Global Bully, federal policies in regards to drugs, terrorism, and other things have trickled down to local issues causing government overreach against the people. In conjunction with the federal government’s militarization of state and local law enforcement and the growing concerns of martial law and other draconian measures (some of which have been exhibited by the coronavirus crisis), Americans should become suspicious of more power being placed in the hands of governments at all levels. Until people stand up to government overreach, tyranny will continue.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book and website website.
In Cleveland, Tennessee, a man heard someone breaking into his house and grabbed his gun. DEA agents and a SWAT team armed with weapons, body armor, and grenades blazing had made their way to the end of his barrel, and the man was tackled to the ground for alleged murder. However, it was the wrong house, and a flash bang grenade had been released into the son’s bedroom, which caused temporary blindness and deafness. All of this happened because a mistake was made on the part of the DEA and the SWAT team.
More commonly, raids are conducted for the purpose of halting drug operations. In St. Paul, Minnesota, a drug raid by DEA agents was conducted, and all of the residents, including the children, were forced to the ground at gunpoint. All but one of the residents were handcuffed (the wife was forced from the bed to the ground almost naked, but she was not handcuffed). To make matters worse, the family dog was killed, and the handcuffed children were forced to sit next to the slain dog during the remainder of the raid. In addition, a handcuffed girl had a diabetic incident because she was not given access to her medication. In the end, it was determined that the house that was supposed to be raided was actually the next-door one, so the trauma that the family was forced to endure was again made by mistake.
In Eminem’s neck of the woods (Eight Mile in Detroit), a whole DEA, SWAT, and local law enforcement army with tanks and helicopters invaded an entire street looking for criminals related to drugs and prostitution. In one house in particular, men who were not easily identified as law enforcement (the badge numbers, names, and faces were intentionally hidden) barged in and threw a woman who had just had back surgery into a wall, and then they pinned her on the floor. Her mother who had just had knee replacements was thrown into a table before hitting the floor. Both women were innocent and never had warrants out for their arrest.
In Lebanon, Tennessee, a similar wrong-house event caused a man to be murdered and his wife to be handcuffed by two young and inexperienced officers. Unfortunately these events are all too common, and there are roughly 60,000 no-knock or quick-knock raids annually, most of which are for drugs. Between 2010 and 2016, there had been ninety-four deaths (eighty-one of them civilians) as a result of these types of raids. The so-called “War on Drugs,” has destroyed many lives of both the innocent and guilty and contributed to the mass incarceration in the United States. The ACLU has found that more than half of all SWAT raids were conducted against black or Latino people, and two-thirds of these were drug-related.
This intimidation and bullying by the federal government (and aided by state and local law enforcement) under the name of liberating the masses and keeping people safe from drugs have negatively impacted the country and should be ended. Plus, invasions that result in the wrong house violate the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Drugs are not the only inanimate objects that have been the subject of a federal (or state and local government) war, and no, this time, I am not talking about SARS-CoV-2 (the coronavirus that causes COVID-19), which has had the term “war” applied to the combating of it. Although guns have not been made illegal at this time (though gun rights have been watered down), there are many regulations against them that have led to prohibition-like raids and actions similar to those conducted against drugs. In National City, California, a firearms part store was raided by ATF agents in full tactical gear because it was selling gun parts for AR-15’s that were not made to ATF specifications. Despite the parts being legal for sale and purchase, they did not have serial numbers because they were made from a different type of material than other similar parts. The agents wanted a list of customers who had purchased the parts, and the parts and the customer list were taken by force with terrified customers inside. This excessive force should not be accepted in the United States.
The good news is that the Breonna Taylor and Kenneth Walker case has raised awareness of this type of oppression in the supposed free and constitution-respecting country of the United States. Senator Rand Paul has brought up the Fourth Amendment implications of no-knock warrants and how they are inappropriate and unreasonable. The Louisville Metro Police Department will now be required to have no-knock warrants sent to the chief of police or other designee before a judge can review it. Public scrutiny of the case has also led to the temporary suspension of Walker’s murder and assault charges against the police officer until an investigation can be completed.
These are steps in the right direction, but until public pressure gets stronger to have no-knock warrants removed, the drug war terminated, and excessive force utilized by federal, state, and local law enforcement ceased, these types of stories will continue to be reported across the country. As I have written in my book, The Global Bully, federal policies in regards to drugs, terrorism, and other things have trickled down to local issues causing government overreach against the people. In conjunction with the federal government’s militarization of state and local law enforcement and the growing concerns of martial law and other draconian measures (some of which have been exhibited by the coronavirus crisis), Americans should become suspicious of more power being placed in the hands of governments at all levels. Until people stand up to government overreach, tyranny will continue.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book and website website.
May 18, 2020
The Federal Government Is Still Spying and Tracking Us
While the state governments continue to steal Americans’ rights in response to COVID-19, the federal government has its own rabbit to pull out of Uncle Sam’s hat. People have paid little attention to the surveillance state that has developed as a result of the 9-11 attacks, and even after Edward Snowden put the abuses right in front of their faces, they generally accepted spying and other measures as the status quo that does not really affect their lives.
Since this is the case, the government has little motivation to alter its course, and recently, the Senate went bold and struck down an amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that would have prevented law enforcement from searching web browser and internet search history without a warrant. Equally chilling, is the Trump administration’s new Transnational Organized Crime (TOC) watchlist that allows for tracking and monitoring without a warrant of Americans on the list. Apparently, the Fourth Amendment is just a suggestion in the twenty-first century.
The fact that the FBI or other government agencies can search people’s records without a warrant is bad enough, but thirty-seven senators from both parties decided to blatantly vote against Americans’ rights by shooting down the amendment introduced by Senators Ron Wyden and Steve Daines. Unreasonable searches and seizures became big in an era where the terrorists were lurking around every corner, and the government needed to spy on all Americans to stop a few of them. Now the government can continue to cry to secret FISA courts (ones that hardly ever turn down requests) when it wants its way with Americans’ online search details that are private and give descriptive insights into their personal lives. Although this is not a new measure or something that most Americans do not understand occurs, it is appalling that politicians take advantage of the people like this and that a few senators decided to not show up for an amendment that only required one more affirmative vote to pass.
President Trump’s new TOC list allows the monitoring of Americans who are suspected of being associated with transnational criminal organizations, but the list includes political groups that operate across national boundaries. Although the list sounds good on the surface because it takes aim at cartels, gangs, money laundering, computer hacking, and healthcare fraud, what is startling is that there does not need to be evidence that an American on the list is committing a crime for them to be warrantlessly surveilled. Some may say, “well, there must be a good reason why someone is on the list, and maybe those people should be monitored.”
The problem with this mentality, besides the Fourth and Fifth Amendment violations, is that a similar list, the Terrorist Screening Database, which has over a million people and many Americans included, has inaccurate and incomplete information. The government does not inform those on the list and provides inadequate means for redress if one does find out and would like to challenge it, and those on the list may be unable to exercise their right to travel or to not be unreasonably searched. The watchlist was challenged in court in 2019, and a federal judge ruled that this violates people’s rights of due process and threatens to place people who are not terrorists on the list erroneously. If President Trump’s TOC list models after the terrorist watchlist, there may be thousands of Americans who are not criminals being tracked or watched, and this is not something that our country should be proud of.
In general, Americans are becoming more and more willing to sacrifice liberties for a false sense of security, and nothing proves this point more than the current coronavirus crisis. Fear has caused people to accept authoritarian measures that nobody would have thought would be possible just one year ago. The big brother surveillance state may now cross over from terrorism to disease prevention with new calls for increased contact tracing. Will the federal and state governments soon track our every movements or gain access to our records in order to prevent us from spreading the disease? Edward Snowden suggests that this may lead to negative consequences and an “architecture of oppression”.
The good news though is that there was some success with an amendment introduced by Senators Patrick Leahy and Mike Lee that would limit FISA courts and allow for a civil liberties representative during the hearings to be able to access classified information and have more of a voice when a case may involve infringement on Americans’ rights. We will see what comes of this, and we may see the government attempting to find ways around this. However, it is a good start.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website website.
Since this is the case, the government has little motivation to alter its course, and recently, the Senate went bold and struck down an amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that would have prevented law enforcement from searching web browser and internet search history without a warrant. Equally chilling, is the Trump administration’s new Transnational Organized Crime (TOC) watchlist that allows for tracking and monitoring without a warrant of Americans on the list. Apparently, the Fourth Amendment is just a suggestion in the twenty-first century.
The fact that the FBI or other government agencies can search people’s records without a warrant is bad enough, but thirty-seven senators from both parties decided to blatantly vote against Americans’ rights by shooting down the amendment introduced by Senators Ron Wyden and Steve Daines. Unreasonable searches and seizures became big in an era where the terrorists were lurking around every corner, and the government needed to spy on all Americans to stop a few of them. Now the government can continue to cry to secret FISA courts (ones that hardly ever turn down requests) when it wants its way with Americans’ online search details that are private and give descriptive insights into their personal lives. Although this is not a new measure or something that most Americans do not understand occurs, it is appalling that politicians take advantage of the people like this and that a few senators decided to not show up for an amendment that only required one more affirmative vote to pass.
President Trump’s new TOC list allows the monitoring of Americans who are suspected of being associated with transnational criminal organizations, but the list includes political groups that operate across national boundaries. Although the list sounds good on the surface because it takes aim at cartels, gangs, money laundering, computer hacking, and healthcare fraud, what is startling is that there does not need to be evidence that an American on the list is committing a crime for them to be warrantlessly surveilled. Some may say, “well, there must be a good reason why someone is on the list, and maybe those people should be monitored.”
The problem with this mentality, besides the Fourth and Fifth Amendment violations, is that a similar list, the Terrorist Screening Database, which has over a million people and many Americans included, has inaccurate and incomplete information. The government does not inform those on the list and provides inadequate means for redress if one does find out and would like to challenge it, and those on the list may be unable to exercise their right to travel or to not be unreasonably searched. The watchlist was challenged in court in 2019, and a federal judge ruled that this violates people’s rights of due process and threatens to place people who are not terrorists on the list erroneously. If President Trump’s TOC list models after the terrorist watchlist, there may be thousands of Americans who are not criminals being tracked or watched, and this is not something that our country should be proud of.
In general, Americans are becoming more and more willing to sacrifice liberties for a false sense of security, and nothing proves this point more than the current coronavirus crisis. Fear has caused people to accept authoritarian measures that nobody would have thought would be possible just one year ago. The big brother surveillance state may now cross over from terrorism to disease prevention with new calls for increased contact tracing. Will the federal and state governments soon track our every movements or gain access to our records in order to prevent us from spreading the disease? Edward Snowden suggests that this may lead to negative consequences and an “architecture of oppression”.
The good news though is that there was some success with an amendment introduced by Senators Patrick Leahy and Mike Lee that would limit FISA courts and allow for a civil liberties representative during the hearings to be able to access classified information and have more of a voice when a case may involve infringement on Americans’ rights. We will see what comes of this, and we may see the government attempting to find ways around this. However, it is a good start.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website website.
