[118445] in Cypherpunks
None Dare Call It Fascism
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Robert Hettinga)
Tue Sep 28 09:31:37 1999
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <v04210114b416624842c6@[207.244.110.163]>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 09:07:10 -0400
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
From: Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Reply-To: Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>
Is Wassanaar a "treaty trap"?
See below.
Note that this was written pre-Monica, so I wonder if Bill still um,
lusts, for a SecGenship. Stranger things have happened to him,
though. And, of course, most of the Chinagate below is old/new news...
Cheers,
RAH
--- begin forwarded text
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 16:47:52 -0700
From: <Somebody>
To: <Buncha People> rah@shipwright.com
Subject: None Dare Call It Fascism
http://msstate.edu/org/cr/wheeler.html
>From <http://www.cgx.com>Conservative Generation X
For those of you won't don't know your 80s history, this is the man
who brought us the Reagan Doctrine. We owe Dr. Wheeler a great deal
of thanks.
None Dare Call It Fascism
Dr. Jack Wheeler
June 6, 1997
What I'm going to tell you is a true story. The German Foreign
Ministry in Bonn recently received a report from its Embassy in
Moscow on air safety in Russia. As an example, the report told of a
group of wayward Russian soldiers in Siberia that used a large
transport plane to steal some cattle. Airborne of the Siberian coast,
the cattle began moving about uncontrollably - so to avoid crashing,
the soldiers drove the cows out of the loading bay at the tail of the
airplane. One of the falling cows hit a Japanese fishing boat and
sank it. A Russian patrol boat rescued the fishermen but arrested
them because nobody believed their story. Later, Russian authorities
learned it was true. So help me, I'm not making this up; It actually
happened. And to think, the world was once afraid of the Red Army.
Perhaps you remember those days that seem so long ago. I became a
member of the Center for National Policy, at the invitation of Howard
Phillips and Woody Jenkins, in 1984. My first speech to CNP back then
was entitled "How to Collapse the Soviet Colonial Empire." We talked
about the freedom fighters in Nicaragua, Afghanistan, and other
Soviet colonies, about how we could develop a strategy to rid the
world of the Soviet Union, a strategy that was to become know as the
Reagan Doctrine. It seemed an impossible dream at the time for many.
But the cause of freedom fighters was embraced by the conservative
movement and the Reagan Doctrine became reality.
I remember one time at a CNP meeting in the mid-80s, 10-12 years ago,
when I was standing in the back of the main meeting room talking to
Paul Weyrich. It was a friendly talk until I said something that
caused Paul to snap his head around and look at me. Those of you who
have been the recipient of the Weyrich Look know what I am talking
about. I said to myself, "Uh-oh..." and prepared to get rhetorically
wasted. But instead, Paul broke into a quizzical smile and said, "You
really don't know, do you?" Well, I was still not sure if I had
escaped unscathed, so I cautiously asked, "Know what?" "You don't
know what you've done for the conservative movement, do you?" he
said. "You have given these people," pointing to the folks in the
room, "hope. Before, they thought it was no use, that the Soviets
were going to win, that we would never defeat them. But after you
told us about the freedom fighters, about the ways in which the
Soviets are weak an vulnerable, conservatives have hope, and now I
think that we are going to win and the Soviets are going to lose
because of it. You should know that, Jack."
While I have never forgotten what Paul told me back then, I've never
told him how much what he said meant to me. So let me say now
"thanks, Paul."
So here we are today with the Soviet Union off the map, Eastern
Europe joining NATO, America the world's only superpower - and we
never got to celebrate. We never got to have a party. Instead of
champagne, caviar, and a victory party, we got... Bill Clinton. What
a bummer. We, from the noble, heroic presidency of Ronald Reagan to
the sleaziest, most criminal presidency in American history. And
worse, all the sleaze and corruption doesn't seem to matter. Bill
Clinton could put a.44 magnum to the head of Mother Teresa and blow
her away on national television, and the media would say, "everybody
does it, the Republicans do this too, he didn't mean to do it, he
promises never to do it again." and that would be that. So no wonder
that conservatives once again think that things are hopeless, that
they are never going to win.
But it isn't hopeless. Let's face it: if we could take care of the
Soviet Union, we can take care of Bill Clinton and all he represents.
Boiling the Frog
How do we do this? First, we need to draw a clear picture of where
America is politically right now - and understand how it got there.
To learn how to regain our freedom, it is imperative to learn how we
lost it in the first place. Just how did America go from being the
freest land history had ever known to being run by amoral crooks?
Basically by what I call "boiling the frog."
If you place a frog in a pot of cool water -- an open pot, so that it
could jump out at any time -- and start to slowly heat the water up,
you can heat the water to boiling and kill the frog.
The trick is to make each incremental increase in water temperature
small enough to be below the frog's threshold of awareness. Do it
right and the frog will remain in the open pot of water and not
notice until it is all the way to boiling and it's too late: he is
dead. But should the temperature increases be too large or come too
quickly to exceed the frog's awareness threshold, he immediately
jumps out of the pot.
This is the process by which the Oligarchies of Washington have been
boiling our freedoms to death. But it is very important to understand
that this process has not been socialist, as so many conservatives
contend. The political direction of America over the last sever
decades has not been socialist - it has been fascist.
Fabian Fascism
As Ludwig von Mises observed, Fascism, Nazism, and Socialism are
varying versions of the same old conviction, summed up in the slogan
of the Nazis: "Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz"; (the public good ranks
above private profit.) All three assert that "profit-seeking business
harms the vital interests of the immerse majority, and that it is the
sacred duty of popular government to prevent the emergence of profits
by public control of production and distribution."<Note 1>1
What distinguishes Fascism and Nazism form Socialism in economic
theory is how they translate "public control" into reality.
For the socialist, it means outright nationalization -- government
ownership -- of private business. In a socialist state, the
government own and operates the airlines, railroads, banks, phone
companies, and any other business you can think of. Everyone is an
employee of the State. Until recently in Fidel Castro's Cuba, even
shoeshine boys worked for a government cooperative.
For the fascist<Note 2>2, public or government control is just that
-- control, not nationalized ownership, via complete bureaucratic
regulation of ostensibly private business. As an ardent admirer of
Marx, Mussolini created the term, Fascism<Note 3>3, for his brand of
authoritarian, patriotic Marxism.
As a social theory, fascism operates under the principle of "Might
Makes Right," the exercise of raw, naked governmental police power.
In America today, the increasingly rough shed violation of
constitutional rights by government agents in the name of "Protecting
the environment" or the "war on drugs" (just two of many current
rationales) is an indication of how we are proceeding in this
direction.
But fascism is also an economic theory, Intellectually, fascism is
far more dishonest than socialism, which at least has the courage to
assert legal ownership of the economy and thus assume legal
responsibility for its functioning. Fascism places responsibility for
the economy on business which is rendered Potemkinly private, a
Hollywood set facade of private ownership.
The result of both socialism and fascism is the same: the destruction
of economic freedom, replace the individual's choice of how to make a
peaceful, honest living with State edicts. Fascism accomplishes this,
however, more insidiously. Instead of being a straightforward
employee of the government, you and I are told our lives and
businesses are still private, while any attempt to act as such is
proscribed by some regulation -- until we are trapped and immobilized
in Washington's web.
We have become enmeshed in this web because it was spun around us so
slowly. If the welter of government controls that Washington has
enacted over the past sixty-six years (i.e., since the New Deal) had
been attempted in one fell swoop -- say, in one Congressional term of
two years instead of thirty- three terms -- the effort would, of
course, have failed.
Instead, it has been spun right before our eyes - yet so slowly,
strand by strand over many years, that we have barely noticed. We
could call this slow spinning of the fascist web "Fabian Fascism."
Advocacy of what became know as Fabian Socialism was in vogue in the
early part of the 20th Century, particularly among British
socialists, such as Sydney and Beatrice Webb and George Bernard Shaw.
They argued that socialism could best be achieved by not frightening
the horses, that is, not through immediate revolutionary action, but
in small, incremental steps.<Note 4>4
The gargantuan growth of governmental power in the United States over
the last sixty years has not been in a socialist direction, towards
nationalization and governmental ownership of industry. Clearly, it
has been in the direction of ever more bureaucratic, regulatory
control - that is, in a fascist direction. Since this growth has not
been sudden, but slowly accumulative, we can accurately and aptly
call the process Fabian Fascism.
Manufactured Crises
How did this happen? How did Americans relinquish so much
independence and allow the federal government to gain so much control
over their lives? Can we identify a mechanism or method by which
Fabian Fascism succeeds?
We should first observe that this process - the progressive loss of
personal freedom and growth of government - has not moved steadily in
a continuum, but in burst and jumps. Now observe that many people are
willing to trade freedom for security. When they feel threatened,
they will grant government or police emergency powers to remove the
threat. Then all the government has to do is somehow make the
temporary or emergency powers permanent.
Thus, it is in times of social crisis that governments can most
easily seize more power. The method of Fabian Fascism is the
utilization or creation of a crisis as a rationale to progressively
expand power.
The explosion of governmental growth in America and the development
of Fabian Fascism began with the crisis of the Great Depression and
the resultant passage of FDR's New Deal. Right on its heels came the
crisis of World War II and then the on-going and just-ended crisis of
the Cold War, allowing for fantastic increases in defense spending.
There crises were real, not imaginary. Advocates of bigger government
utilized them, but did not make them up. One of the fundamental
purposes of government, after all, is to protect its citizens from
such clear and present dangers as Nazi and Soviet imperial aggression.
But the preservation of freedom requires that the expansion of
governmental authority and financing necessary to deal with a crisis
be granted only on an emergency basis and must be dissolved when the
crisis is over. This is what the Washington Oligarchy always
struggles to avoid.
Nonetheless, after the initial advance of Fabian Fascism made
possible by the Depression and the New Deal, government growth was
held in check fairly well through the 1950s and early 60s. But after
defeating Barry Goldwater in 1964, Lyndon Johnson began an orgy of
eleuthericide that continues to this day.<Note 5>5
LBJ is the progenitor of Fabian Fascism, not FDR - for he realized
that crises were the path to power and if one was not at hand, you
had to create one. FDR did not create the Depression, he just took
advantage of it. LBJ had no real crisis at hand so he made one up:
Poverty.
Not the poverty didn't exist in America back then - in what society
in history hasn't it? But it wasn't by any stretch of a bleeding
heart's imagination some kind of societal crisis. Yet Johnson
masterfully whipped up a media frenzy over his manufactured crisis,
which he used to gain passage of his proposed "solution" - the most
massive expansion of government power since the New Deal, a
collection of government social programs called "The Great Society."
Notice that thirty years and hundreds of billions of taxpayer's
dollars later, we don't have any less poverty, but we have a lot less
freedom, because Johnson's programs have never gone away. This is
because the purpose of the Great Society had nothing to do with
poverty. There is a big difference between an excuse and a purpose.
"Curing poverty" was only the excuse for Great Society welfare
schemes; the purpose was to trick the American people into letting
the Washington Oligarchy expand its power.
This formula for the advance of Fabian Fascism has worked ever since.
After Johnson's Poverty Crisis and the War on Poverty came Nixon's
Drug Crisis and the War on Drugs; then Carter's Energy Crisis; then
the premier liberal crisis of modern times, the Environmental Crisis.
It was only thanks to Hillary Clinton's hubris that the latest
fashion in crisis mongering failed, the Clinton Health Care Crisis.
All of these manufactured crises offered one and only one type of
solution to the alleged crisis: vast government programs at
taxpayer's expense. None ever offered free market solutions, or were
used to expand individual freedom, rather than restrict it. All of
them either took a problem or set of problems, and hyperbolized it to
the moon until it became a self-made "crisis" - or created problems
out of thing air as an outright hoax, like "Global Warning." (Just
like "Global Freezing" scare of 15 years ago claiming man's
pollutants were participating the next Ice Age.<Note 6>6 )
The media merrily plays an enthusiastic accomplice in the scheme not
just because its members are mostly liberal, but because more
importantly, crises generate more readers, viewers and listeners.
This is why the principal product American media sells to its
customers is crises, not information.
Certainly there are problems in our society, often severe, regarding
poverty, drugs, the environment, et al. But the last thing these
situations need is massive government intervention, which just makes
them worse. They are not crises requiring emergency powers. They
require people freely motivated to solve them without government
coercion.
And that's the catch. If these problems were actually solved, all
these government programs and bureaucrats wouldn't be needed. Thus
the crises must be perpetual, never solved, always requiring another
program, another intervention and more taxpayers' money. For the game
is not to solve the problems but to use them to control people more
through regulations or subsidies (or both), making them dependent on
those writing and enforcing the regs and providing the handouts.
People who are depended on you are people who vote for you. The
result is a form of fascist rule imposed upon a citizenry not by a
dictator who seized power by force, but by freely elected leaders.
Democratic Fascism
We could call it Democratic Fascism whereby a people's freedom is not
taken away from them by dictatorial force, but is voluntarily
surrendered.
Just as a socialist government can be unelected dictatorship (like
Cuba) or a freely elected democracy (like Sweden), so can a fascist
government. Democratic fascism, or a fascist democracy is not more of
an oxymoron than democratic socialism or a socialist democracy.
Instead, it is the most accurate description of what America's
political system has become. By a patient Fabian strategy taking many
years, the American people have been persuaded, unwittingly and
almost unconsciously, to voluntarily chain themselves to their
colonial masters in Washington.
Americans have imposed the tyranny of Washington upon ourselves. No
longer innocently oppressed, America has become of nation of
belligerent beggars, demanding with insufferable arrogance an endless
cornucopia of government handouts, subsidies, and "entitlements."
Refusing to pay for them themselves, they demand that others pick up
the multi-trillion dollar tab - most especially and contemptibly,
their children and grandchildren.
This is, indeed, America's real drug crisis. Forget smack and crack.
By orders of magnitude, the most addictive and destructive drug in
America is welfare, government subsidies. Once people are shooting up
the dole into their veins, be they farmers on farm price supports,
artists on NEA grants, businessmen on protective tariffs and quotas,
fourth generation welfare moms, or well-to-do greedy geezers on
Medicare and Social Security, they're hooked far more than any heroin
addict. And any threat to cut off or even diminish their drug supply
makes them go berserk. So any attempt to really cut the federal
budget deficit, much less balance the budget, is completely hopeless
because so many millions of Americans want government goodies and
don't want to pay for them.
None Dare Call It Fascism
So - how do we, you and I, help America restore its freedom by
helping it to kick the fascist drug of the dole?
We must begin by breaking the great taboo, by using the forbidden
word - fascism - in every public forum at our disposal. The left has
always know that control of language was the key to political success
- just look at the "political correctness" movement as a clear
example. We must get the term of democratic fascism out into public
discourse, widely debate, and ultimate accepted as an apt description
of our current political system. That is requirement Number Uno.
Second, we must challenge the Brezhnev Doctrine of the Democratic
Part: that once any area of people's lives or businesses becomes
subject to bureaucratic control, it must stay that way; that any
elimination or reduction of government intrusion and control is
"turning back the clock" and is thus a return to immoral primitivism.
We must therefore abandon any strategy of containment, as we did in
the pre-Reagan Cold War. With Reagan, we changed the goal of
containment of the Soviets to rollback, and that's what we must do
now. But rollback to what? Rollback to constitutional government,
that's what. That's what our mantra should be, that's our goal,
that's what we say when asked what we want, what we demand from
America's constitutional government - literally acting outside the
law - and all we are asking is for a government that isn't an outlaw,
that obeys the founding laws of our country.
The Treaty Trap
The purpose of the Constitution is specify what the Federales are
permitted to do. That they are not supposed to do anything not
specifically authorized is made clear by the 10th Amendment. The
Constitution is a sort of Indian reservation for the Feds - and if
they ever escaped and started running amok, the courts were supposed
to be our cavalry, the round them up and herd them back where they
belong. But somehow, they got loose, and simply trashed the great
border of the Constitution, the 10th Amendment.
Just how did the Federal Government escape from the Constitutional
reservation? It happened during America's most disastrous presidency,
in which more freedoms were lost before or since - nope, not FDR's
but that of Woodrow Wilson. Not only did Wilson give us the IRS and
the Fed, and get us into the most idiotic war of the century, he
destroyed the 10th Amendment as well. He did it with treaties - and
it started with birds. In 1913, Wilson got Congress to pass a
Migratory Bird Act. When a fellow in Arkansas shot some geese out of
"season" the Feds busted him for breaking this new law. His lawyer
said Congress had no authority under the 10th Amendment to pass such
a law and the judge agreed; the fellow walked. So Wilson got a
Migratory Bird Act to implement the provisions of the treaty. So when
a hunter got busted for "illegally" shooting birds and his lawyer
used the unconstitutionality argument, this time the judge disagreed.
Since the Federal Government does have the clear Constitutional
authority to make treaties with foreign governments, the judge ruled
that federal legislation to implement a treaty's provisions was
constitutional; the fellow was found guilty. So since 1916, just
about every time Congress has made an end run around the 10th
Amendment, in the legislation's preamble it will say this is to
implement legislation for the Chemical Weapons Convention, the
scandalous treaty on chemical weapons, simply trashes the
Constitution. Under it, CWC authorities need no search warrant nor
show probable cause to an American judge to search a location
suspected of violating the treaty.
I call this the "Treaty Trap." And folks, unless we find a way out of
it, we'll never have constitutional government. But if the trap could
be sprung open, it wouldn't just mean the death of the Chemical
Weapons Convention, it would mean the as much as 90% or more of what
the Federal Government does could be declared unconstitutional. A
bright constitutional lawyer named Larry Becraft may have found an
escape hatch. He has compiled a history of case law where courts have
ruled that private domestic US citizens cannot sue one another for
violating the provisions of an international treaty - because
treaties only apply to governments and their citizens residing in
each other's country. On this basis, Becraft is preparing a challenge
to all implementing legislation that would be unconstitutional if it
weren't for some treaty. Further, he has also compiled a history of
Supreme Court rulings which clearly state that treaties cannot be
used to supersede or amend the constitution. Becraft, by the way,
along with a group of other investors including, I believe, CNP
member Larry Pratt, have just purchased Media By-Pass magazine. So
you'll be able to follow or learn how to assist their efforts in
Media By-Pass (1-812-477-8670).
Here's another road to constitutional government. John Shadegg of
Arizona has cleverly inserted into the House Rules that any proposed
bill has to specify just where in the Constitution such legislation
is authorized. He and Sam Brownback in the Senate want to see this
codified into law. We could encourage them to include in the
legislation a provision for granting "standing" to any citizen who
wishes to challenge the constitutionality of any given federal law or
regulation. The only way one can do so now is to be prosecuted for
criminally violating a law and face jail if the challenge fails.
Further, in granting such standing, Congress could require the courts
to consider the challenge de novo - that is, on the basis of the
Constitution's original intent only, and thus not to consider 200
years of bad precedents.
As Phyllis Schlafly points out, Congress has the constitutional
authority to specify how the Supreme Court is to interpret the
Constitution. Phyllis is currently embarked on a wonderful effort to
get Congress to use its Constitutional authority to restrict the
jurisdiction of federal judges, of federal courts in general. This is
infinitely preferable to efforts to get certain liberal federal
judges impeached, a real bad idea. Withdrawing jurisdiction from the
federal courts on such things as abortion or "same sex marriage" or
affirmative actions is an excellent path Congress can take to
constitutional government. I'd like to encourage you all to work with
Phyllis on this project.
We can all work on the local level as well, and more effectively that
on the national. One way is to become involved with the Sheriff
Education Program created by Juris Advocates, a legal activist group
one of whose founders is Wayne Paul, Congressman Ron Paul's brother.
The highest judicial office in your county, superior in power and
authority to any agent in the federal bureaucracy, is your local
Sheriff. IRS agents, for example, can do nothing to seize property or
conduct an arrest without the approval and assistance of local state
law enforcement officers. A Sheriff Education Program is available
from Juris Advocates ($125, 1-901-680-9901), enabling citizen and
business groups to educate and encourage their local law enforcement
to protect and defend their property and liberty from the EPA, ERA,
IRS, FDA, EEOC, OSHA and other fascist federal bureaucracies. Tip
O'Neill was right; all political power really is local.
As a matter of fact, those of you who would like to make money
fighting for freedom might consider buying a Juris Advocates
franchise. You can set up an office in your home town to protect your
neighbors and their businesses from IRS agents and other federal
predators.
The T-word
These are a few ways to get into the fight for constitutional
government, a fight which we all must join, for the consequences of
us giving up are severe. OK, folks, here it comes, and it's not going
to make you happy. Guess what Slick Willie wants to do with the rest
of his life? When he finishes his second term, he'll be 54 years old
- do you think he's going to shuffle off into the Arkansas sunset, or
build homes for the homeless like Jimmy Carter? Yeah, right. Have you
noticed the extent to which the Clintonistas have been
enthusiastically transferring our sovereignty to the United Nations
whenever they can get away with it - such as the "World Heritage"
sites over which the UN has jurisdiction? For any normal politician,
being President of the United States is the ultimate crowning
achievement. But for Slick, it's just a stepping stone to being
President of the World. Yes, Bill Clinton intends to be Secretary
General of the United Nations - and permanently.
Come on, you didn't really think that he was going to go away and
leave us alone after eight short years in the White House, did you?
Oh, no - he's just getting started with his life... and running
yours. The nightmare is going to continue indefinitely and
world-wide. There's one way to put a stop to this - and that's the
T-word.
A friend of mine's cousin from Germany visited him recently. When the
talk turned to politics in America, she informed him that people in
Germany were utterly mystified by something. "We understand that your
president is an amoral crook - but how unusual is that for a
politician?" she observed. "Yet everyday our newspapers are full of
stories like Clinton refusing to sell F-16 fighter jet technology to
Germany while selling it to China, and all the spy deals he's made
with Beijing. So everyone in Germany is asking now: why isn't your
President Clinton being tried for treason?"
Congressman Bob Barr (R-GA) has asked his fellow members of the
Subcommittee on the Constitution of the House Judiciary Committee to
draw up Articles of Impeachment against Mr. Clinton. A conservative
activist group just delivered 20,000 petitions to Barr's office
supporting his request. There is a web site,
http://www.impeachclinton.com, devoted to efforts to impeach both
Clinton and Gore. All of these cite numerous instances of
"obstruction of justice" and a legion of other examples of "Bribery,
High Crimes and Misdemeanors" for which the Constitution says are
grounds for impeachment. But so far, none of them accuse Mr. Clinton
of the ultimate cause for impeachment listed in Article II, Section 4
of the Constitution: Treason.
But it is not simply Bill Clinton who has committed treason against
his country. The leadership of the Democratic Party and the
Democratic National Committee (DNC) are his willing accomplices.
For 64 years, since 1930 with two short and irrelevant interruptions,
the Democrats ruled Congress as their private kingdom. Their
corruption was only matched by their arrogance. Losing their control
of Congress in 1994 drove them insane - so criminally insane they
were willing to do anything to get their power back: unequaled
demagoguery with the Mediscare campaign; massive vote-buying and
cheating to win numerous elections (such as Hernandez-Dornan in
California and Landrieu/Jenkins in Louisiana); and raising money with
wholesale disregard for campaign finance laws. But that's not all.
What they did to insure Slick's reelections and to try and regain
control of Congress was to sell classified military secrets to the
Chinese government in exchange for donations to the Democratic
National Committee. That, folks, is treason.
Clinton's bag man to the Chinese was, of course, John Huang, long
time employee of Mochtar Riady (both are from China)<Note 7>7. He
raised $5 million for the DNC, most of which the DNC has pledged to
return as it came from "illegal foreign sources." What the DNC is
desperate to hide, however, is that one of those sources was Chinese
military intelligence.
Huang's conduit was Wei Guioqiang, the Washington bureau chief of
Xinhua, the Chinese news agency. Wei was also the Chinese military
intelligence officer in Washington channeling money into DNC coffers.
In late march, Wei was summoned to Beijing on the pretext of
receiving an award. Instead, he got a bullet in the back of his head
from an officer of China's Ministry of State Security. Someone (John
Huang?) had tipped Beijing off that Wei was about to request asylum
in the U.S., and go public with what he had done to reelect Bill
Clinton. Dan Burton's investigators on the House Government Reform
and Oversight Committee are examining the connections between Huang
and Wei. Their findings may show that not only is the President
guilty of treason but the Democratic Party is as well.
So here's the in-your-face bottom line now: If Clinton continues to
get away with everything, if he survives his presidency intact and
unimpeached, he will become Secretary General of the United Nations,
he will convert the U.N. into something approaching a world
government, and he will shmooze his way into becoming the U.N.'s
permanent leader - just like his idol, FDR, became permanent
President until he died.
Now... are we going to let this happen? The answer is inside
ourselves. Are we going to bequeath to our children an outlaw
government or a constitutional government? Are we going to resign
ourselves to the fascist corruption of Bill Clinton and the
Washington Oligarchy or are we going to start kicking in doors on
Capitol Hill and demand impeachment proceedings? Are we going to let
conservatives who reach vast audiences like Limbaugh and Liddy
continue to slip deeper into mush, or are we going to relentlessly
push them to talk about democratic fascism and an outlaw government?
The goal is clear and direction is clear. The obstacles in the way
will remain there only if we do not remove them. With our insistence
and perseverance, we can enable the American people to unchain
themselves, bolt out of the boiling water, reclaim their liberty, and
transfigure their country into a land the Founding Fathers would
recognize and be proud of. This can be our legacy to America, if we
have the will to achieve it.
<#Note 1>
1. Ludwig Von Mises, Socialism (London: Jonathan Cape, 1969) pp.
578-9 <#Note 2>
2. Fascism and Nazism advocate a virtually identical economic
theory. What distinguishes them is the latter's racism and
imperialism (Lebensraum, living space, for the German race). <#Note 3>
3. From the phases, or bundle of rods that were the emblem of power
and authority in ancient Rome. <#Note 4>
4. The Fabian Society was founded in 1884, taking its name from the
Roman General Fabius Maximus, who fought Hannibal's army in small
debilitating skirmishes, rather than attempting one decisive battle.
<#Note 5>
5. OK, I coined this term. Eleuthera is the Greek word for freedom.
Thus, eleuthericide means killing freedom. <#Note 6>
6. Science, one of the most prestigious scientific journals in the
world, reported in 1992: "There has been no significant net CO2
released from the biosphere during the last 20 years." P.D. Quay, et
al, "Oceanic Uptake of Fossil Fuel CO2: Carbon13 Evidence," Science
(April 3, 1992, p. 74) This research was based on actual measurements
(the ratio of carbon isotopes in sea water). The apocalyptic
predictions of eco-fascists are based on computer models (GCMs:
General Circulation Models), which cannot reproduce the current
climate from current data, much less accurately predict future
climate. MIT climatologist Richard Lindzen observes: "The computer
climate models are a classic case of GIGO - garbage in, garbage out."
Cf. Ronald Bailey, Eco-Scam (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1993, p.
145) <#Note 7>
7. In 1984, Riady's Lippo Group and Stephens, Inc. (the Arkansas
investment bank that financed Clinton's gubernatorial campaigns)
bought the Hong Kong Chinese bank and installed Huang as
vice-president. Shortly after Clinton was inaugurated in January
1993, a 50% interest in the Hong Kong Chinese bank was sold to China
Resources, a Hong Kong company owned by Chinese Ministry of Foreign
Trade and Economic Cooperation and a front for the First Bureau of
Chinese Military intelligence. In June of 1993, Huang arranged a
private meeting with Commerce Secretary Ron Brown and Shen Jueren,
chairman of China Resources. In mid-1994, Huang left Riady's Lippo
Group to become Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce and
received a Top Secret security clearance with no FBI background
check. During the next 18 months, he received at least 109 classified
intelligence briefings. High level sources within Commerce say that
Brown was forced to hire Huang and give him the security clearance at
the Clintons' personal insistence. He then left Commerce in January
1996 to become a DNC chief fund-raiser.
--- end forwarded text
-----------------
Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah@ibuc.com>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
-- US Constitution, 11th Ammendment
