By Michael W. Howell Staff Writer and Senior Editor at Fighting the Tyranny
“The very word secrecy is repugnant in a free and open society, and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweigh the risks which are cited to justify it.
“Even today, there is a little threat of opposing a secret society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in ensuring the future of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it, and there is great danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment – that I do not intend to allow to permit to the extent that it is in my control. Continue reading “The Elite And Their Secret Societies”→
By Michael W. Howell
Staff Writer and Senior Editor at Fighting the Tyranny
You’re scratching your head wondering how this country got to where it is today, right? You just can’t fathom what led us here. You voted for the candidate that promised you everything you were looking for. You grew up patriotic. Your family is patriotic. You said the Pledge of Allegiance every morning in school and seemed to be surrounded by patriotic people, so what happened? Where and how did we deteriorate so fast and to such depths? Truth is we have been on this path for decades, no centuries. Yes, centuries. Don’t act like you haven’t heard this before. Continue reading “Welcome To The Truth”→
By Michael W. Howell
Staff Writer and Senior Editor at Fighting the Tyranny
Man is God, God is man. Where the line is, that separates God and man is in full effect to be erased and is coming at a hefty price. Mankind has always dreamed of controlling the weather to have a good harvest or to divert possible bad weather, but do we really understand how far we have gone? The better question is, do we collectively care enough to stop weather modification? What we have seen of late with the recent increase in earthquakes, has many scientists, activists, and even skeptics talking about Pandora’s box that seems to be on the edge of the opening. With programs like C.E.R.N., H.A.A.R.P., and the chemtrail program to corporations all vying for control of the world’s food source, all the way to the global depopulation program it is a convoluted ball of yarn that is slowly being unraveled for all to see.
With every day that passes conspiracy theorists are validated more and more. In fact, aren’t we to the point in verified information that we can completely throw that term out the window. Unless mainstream media says it the masses have a hard time believing it. And the general public doesn’t even know or care that the mainstream media is owned and/or controlled by the very same small group that is causing not only the division in this country (and worldwide), but spraying us like bugs. There, I said it and feel free to throw out any ad hominem attack towards me you wish.
The attention to chemtrails, geo-engineering, cloud seeding, whatever term you choose to use, has been picking up steam in the “real” media and that is social media sites, blogs, groups, and other places to get real news and information away from the discredited, disinformation pushing lamestream media. While the television is full of political ads, agenda-pushing globalism, and the latest far-fetched “tell me how to think” reports, one thing is for sure. We are wanting answers and we are looking elsewhere to get them.
So how do we tackle the issue of geoengineering? How can we get our voices heard? What can we do to stop the admitted program? Well, step one is, to be honest with ourselves and the information. Having an open and honest conversation about the problem needs to be step one. The evidence is overwhelming and the cognitive dissonance is even more overwhelming. Listen to the other side and find out exactly why they refuse to accept what is open for anyone to see. All you have to do is look up. It’s a bird. It’s a plane. It’s a chemtrail!
It is clear to any observer that our sky doesn’t resemble what it used to. It is being manipulated and controlled. We see it, the evidence proves it, and the program is even on record for anyone to research. And no, it is not a new program. It has been around for decades and has been expanded on heavily in recent years.
The United Nations along with even the Vatican and other global agencies have been pushing a carbon tax and on the verge of implementing their goals. While many of us know that this is just another transfer of wealth to the elite greedy globalist to pad their offshore accounts, there are some, many actually, that argue it is needed to save the planet from global warming. How did they come to this conclusion?
Until we address openly such programs as H.A.A.R.P. and all the information is laid out on the table in a real scientific manner we shouldn’t even be talking about taxing the American people through this fraudulent carbon tax. This data needs to be presented, researched, and debated before we can even come up with a game plan to combat the so-called “global warming” or “climate change” or whatever the new fad or flavor that we are calling it today. No plan can be achieved with missing or incomplete data. Only an agenda can be instituted.
The number of people getting sick from these chemtrails has been astronomical. No, that is not an exaggeration, but a cold hard fact. It even has been dubbed the “chemtrail flu” and “chemtrail cough.” There is no doubt the material that we are being sprayed with is harmful and not meant to be in our bodies in this manner. What is their answer? “Make sure you get your flu shot this year.” Wrong. Stop spraying us with toxic poisons and then telling us to go put more needless poisons in our bodies. You can find a great documentary on YouTube that covers the chemtrail program in detail titled “What In The World Are They Spraying” that has received international attention.
HAARP (High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program) is one of the programs at the center of all the controversy. Shrouded in secrecy and owned by the military or at the very least, managed by them, HAARP has come under scrutiny and been at the forefront of many debates.
Though denied by HAARP officials, some respected researchers allege that secret electromagnetic warfare capabilities of HAARP are designed to forward the US military’s stated goal of achieving full-spectrum dominance by the year 2020. While others go so far as to claim that HAARP can and has been used for weather modification, to cause earthquakes and tsunamis, to disrupt global communications systems, and more. And we have certainly seen a massive increase in both earthquakes and tsunamis of late.
According to the official HAARP website, “HAARP is a scientific endeavor aimed at studying the properties and behavior of the ionosphere, with particular emphasis on being able to understand and use it to enhance communications and surveillance systems for both civilian and defense purposes.” In a nutshell, weather weapon.
How HAARP works or its policies are held tight-lipped due to “National Security” concerns, however, we do have information on its inter-workings and projects. Many whistleblowers have come out against the agency (I use that term loosely) and much information can be easily found and readily available.
We do know how HAARP works and I am no expert in this field at all, but I even grasp the realization that this is not healthy, productive, or morally right when all things considered.
The short definition of HAARP can be summed up as: HAARP is a research program designed to analyze the ionosphere, a portion of the upper atmosphere that stretches from about 53 miles (85 kilometers) above the surface of the Earth to 370 miles (600 km) up. The program has been funded by the Air Force, the Navy, the University of Alaska and DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency).
Indeed these actions lead to weather modification that in return has led to much of the drastic changes we have seen. Especially of late. Tsunamis, earthquakes, winters lasting longer, even to crop damages that have Monsanto now entering the picture, coming as “saviors” to the problem with the admitted and controversial G.M.O. spraying of crops. That is another one of the big problems with the weather modification program. It opens the door for more control of landmass, private crops, and helps push Big Pharma products in the form of the cure for your cough or flu. A sickness that you wouldn’t have had not been for the spraying and modification.
Now I want to challenge you all. Log into your social media accounts and leave as a status, “I believe in chemtrails” and watch the uneducated comments and ad hominem attacks come. To remain clueless in this day of easily accessible information is the highest form of ignorance, but believe me, the attacks will come. Whistleblower after whistleblower has come forward to provide us with detail and information and still, it gets no serious consideration from the mainstream media.
Former National Security Administration (NSA) employee turned whistleblower, Ed Snowden, who we found out had high clearance with the administration has come out while seeking asylum in Russia and spoke out against chemtrails as well.
“The chemicals which are released by passenger airplanes have been covertly introduced as ‘additives,’ supposedly to improve efficiency. Only as the plane reaches cruising velocity does the heat and atmospheric pressure cause a chemical reaction that synthesizes the top-secret carbon-trapping molecule. This process is imperfect, and many of the by-products are incredibly dangerous even in trace quantities. The most dangerous thing is that although chemtrails are keeping the climate of the U.S. reasonably stable, citizens are bombarded every day with an invisible rain of carbon-laden molecules, and the effect on health is totally unknown.” – Ed Snowden
In fact, Ed Snowden is just a long list of people to speak out against the program. Even chemtrail pilots have spoken in detail about chemtrails. With so many participants themselves not knowing what they are involved in directly, it is hard to have an open debate about chemtrails. One thing is for sure though. Our skies are changing and fortunately so are many people’s minds in relation to the problem.
So what are the ingredients that they are spraying us with? Researchers, scientists, former participants, and others have named many of the ingredients in chemtrails and it is a smorgasbord of sickness leading to lasting health risk or even death.
The list of chemicals that have been identified is barium, nano aluminum-coated fiberglass [known as CHAFF], radioactive thorium, cadmium, chromium, nickel, desiccated blood, mold spores, yellow fungal mycotoxins, ethylene dibromide, and polymer fibers. It is no wonder we are seeing an increasing number of cases for the flu and that nagging cough many are complaining about. With these being present in the air we breathe it is really an obvious conclusion.
As a result of chemtrail chemicals we are seeing a drastic and sharp rise in many health cases that include dementia, flu cases, brain deterioration, and others. Chemical syndrome is a global pandemic with no end in sight or rather oversight from our elected officials.
We are no longer seeing our favorite animals in the skies or letting our imaginations run wild while observing the clouds like we did in our youth. Now, all we are seeing is snakes, ropes, and lines. Ask yourself if they were really contrails as those who like to debate the obvious claim, then why aren’t we seeing them daily when planes clearly fly the skies on a daily basis? Instead, we see them one day, off a couple days, and then again they fill the blue skies. And watch one as it does not evaporate away, but instead spreads into the sky as if it was placing a layer on the earth. Look at close up pictures of these planes that have been caught spraying. The chemicals are not coming from the engines, like contrails would, but rather a different part of the plane entirely.
I, myself, still have much to learn on the subject and will be doing follow-up articles on the matter, but the obvious can no longer be written off as conspiracy theorist material or just grocery store tabloid stories. These are real, the consequences are real, and the health risk to not only us but future generations are at stake. It is time to have healthy nutrition, strong immune system cause the fight against the destruction of humanity in the name of global warming or climate change will be a long fight. And I want to be healthy to help fight it the whole way through.
Just hours away from the fourth Republican debate and this time around could bring some candidates more attention than they really want. Donald Trump has been under the microscope every since he entered the race and controversy doesn’t seem to stop him or his campaign. With a care free and to the point answers, he has some shouting Trump 2016 and others cringing at that possibility. Ben Carson on the other hand, is at the opposite end of the spectrum. Low in tone, but high in the ratings, Dr. Carson has been under fire the past week for statements he has recently made pertaining to a “full scholarship” to West Point, his “almost stabbing issue”, several violent stints from his childhood, and a bizarre view into what he believes the reason for the pyramids are. It has his campaign in overdrive.
One thing is for sure Dr. Carson will have to face these questions tonight and he better hope his campaign has prepped him on all angles that not only the moderators, but his fellow Republican counterparts will come at him on. With a sleepy, almost none interested approach, he will have to be more calculated and direct in his response to the lingering questions. Now the official front runner in the campaign he will receive enough time to confront the questions. Let’s just hope he has the forcefulness to do just that.
Dr. Carson has been embroiled in controversy before and seems to have come out of it unscathed as the poll numbers seem to reflect. Ben Carson has made statements to gun ownership and vaccines that have turned off some, but not enough to seriously hurt his campaign and Presidential bid for 2016. Statements like “no one should be allowed to refuse mandatory vaccines” just shows, to me at least, that he refuses the science of vaccines and the choice of how someone chooses to govern their own body. While the subject and science has been out there, he is refusing even a debate or dialogue about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.
Another one of the hot topics in today’s times is gun control and gun ownership. Once again, he has made statements that have gone against the norm of a Constitutional Republic. Having at one time a good stance on gun ownership he has said that certain guns should not be allowed in certain cities. An example of this is urban vs. rural areas. Remember Dr. Carson, gun ownership is about protection and everyone, everywhere, has the right of self protection.
Trump is not without controversy, but he seems to have made it through the worst, so far, without to much of a blemish or lost of supporters. The real questions is how will the other candidates treat Dr. Carson with this new information coming out? Will they attack him? Defend him? Ignore him? I believe they will use this time to try to promote themselves while bringing him down. Will Jeb use this opportunity to climb in the polls? He and Marco Rubio have been going back and forth in campaign ads so maybe they will take a break from each other and focus their energy on Ben Carson or better yet, on their own goals and agenda.
Chris Christie who has been the loudest talker of them all, but not seeing it transpire in an increase in poll numbers didn’t make the cut to be on the main stage. When asked about this he said he didn’t give it to much thought and “would debate anyone, anywhere.” Well at least for tonight, it won’t be on the main stage.
What about the most liberty minded candidate of them all, Rand Paul? Though he and his campaign has stated many times that he is sticking around, his poll numbers aren’t reflecting that “revolution” feel his father brought the last couple elections. Is it because he is more Republican minded than Libertarian minded like Ron Paul was? Rand has filibustered, gone against the establishment on some issues like the N.S.A. spying program, but it hasn’t really inspired a new set of supporters. Can he change that tonight?
Carly Fiorina has had a decent showing thus far and has even won a debate here and there according to some polls. Relying on her past background as a C.E.O. in a time when unemployment is so high, she has many listening, and many rolling their eyes. She just hasn’t had that much needed breakthrough to elevate her enough to be a real contender. She will be given another chance tonight to bolster her numbers and get her views out there.
What it really comes down to is who can compete and defeat Hillary Clinton. With an expanding F.B.I. probe into her use of personal emails to conduct official business, and the potential of classified information, let’s hope they shed light on her and not going after each other. Politics is a dirty job and we are seeing it this time around. One thing is for sure. Grab the popcorn, put down the remote, and watch the monkeys, and tigers perform in the circus tonight.
The full text of the dreaded and mysterious TPP trade deal involving 12 countries and encompassing 40% of the world’s economy has officially been released. While little by little, part by part has trickled out like a slow leaky faucet, this is the first time the public has had the opportunity to read it in its entirety. Now the treaty is waiting ratification for the the interested countries. It covers the world’s labor, what has been said to be affordable medications, the environment, the safety of food and product safety, and much more corporate interest.
Ever since the leaky faucet has been dripping at a trickle pace, one of the questions many has had was how it would effect the internet among other issues. Many have said that the regulations are so strenuous that it would lead to internet censorship through heavy and broad copyright regulations. We defeated SOPA and CISPA and now we are facing much the same threat with the TPP treaty. To quote an article that I was reading earlier from truth out news it put it this way. “….. essentially what it does is it forces the United States’ broken copyright system on the rest of the world without expanding protections for freedom of speech and so-called ‘fair use,’ which are basically provisions that prevent copyright from being used to censor or take down legitimate content or criticism or political dissidence from the internet.”
Fair use is a statement that anyone with a social media account, YouTube account, and really anyone interested in sharing information is well aware of. Is this a way to suppress information the government, corporations, and those not “playing by the rules” are going to be using? That is a very real question and could lead to the ongoing attack on the first amendment and another way to calm fears of the corruption we are seeing today.
One of the fears, as far as the internet goes, it is will be used to prosecute and go after whistle blowers instead of protecting the acts of those that “see something, say something.” This is a multi fold problem that could even criminalize journalist using information they obtained from whistle blowers such as Ed Snowden and Bradley Manning. In these cases the information will be hidden and the truth can not be brought to light. That is against the grain of a Constitutional Republic which could be the very reason for this to be included in the TPP treaty. By including multiple countries it would extend the tyranny of the elite and bring prosecution to journalist seeking to expose the corruption.
Couple this aspect of the TPP with net neutrality and you could very easily take the internet out of the free people and have a genuine propaganda machine. Joesph Goebbels would of loved to of had this in his propaganda tool box. Complete and total control of not only the mainstream media but a deafening blow to alternative media as well. One swift blow, one swift silence to millions of voices.
This is really just one of the sickening parts of the TPP and I plan on talking about many other concerns once I have had time to digest and analyze the documents more. Just based on my initial research, some of my fears are now confirmed. Free speech is very important to a free society and we can not just turn that over to our elected politicians or more detrimental, a global agenda involving many nations.
Look for future articles about the TPP in the near future. If my research and the documents presented to us so far are this bad, then we really need to pick up our fight and make our voices not only known, but louder. Let your Senator and Representatives know how you feel. Something tells me they aren’t going to care, but this needs to be our first step.
Written by Michael Howell
Staff writer and Senior Editor at Fighting the Tyranny
We are under a massive attack on our rights. This isn’t a theory and it’s not fear mongering. Look around you and think about all the new laws and regulations that are coming at us on every front. Internet regulations, socialized healthcare, Freedom Act, and the Federal Common Core Curriculum to name just a few. What about the expansion of bureaucracies? The N.S.A., T.S.A., Department of Education, Department of Energy, and Department of Homeland Security, once again, just to name a few. How about the expansion of wars either directly or through proxy countries. Everyone can sense that the winds of change are blowing and blowing in a very dangerous direction. Every freedom that past generations have fought for and unfortunately have died for, is under attack. We are living in a pivotal time that will ultimately define how history will be written. Our actions will not only define this generation but how future generations lives will be lived. In freedom, with individual sovereignty. or under oppression and tyranny. That will be our decision to make and time is running out. Continue reading “Listen To Me Now, Not Later”→
Written by Michael W. Howell
Staff Writer and Senior Editor at Fighting the Tyranny
November 5, 2015
Operation Mockingbird. Sounds like an evil plot among birds, right? I can see a tree full of birds plotting against another group of birds calling their plan Operation Mockingbird. Well, this scenario isn’t that far-fetched just substitute birds for people, keep the plotting, and think of the tree full of birds as actually Washington D.C. and the other tree as the American people. Maybe before we continue with the silly analogies, we need to define what this operation really is and how it is manipulating what we see and hear.
Here is what many have officially defined as Operation Mockingbird. It is a government program that used C.I.A. personnel to infiltrate media organizations, and their objective is to control the way we hear the news, receive the story, and even react to the report. Their goal is to discredit alternative media and place the focus on the mainstream media, which they control, run, write for, and present. How did this deception get conceived, and is it still going on today?
Let’s define what it is, and then we will look at is this program still active today. What we do know for sure is that Operation Mockingbird was a secret program of the United States Central Intelligence Agency (C.I.A.) to manipulate the media as stated above. It got its roots in the early 1950s and was initially started by Cord Meyer and Allen W. Dulles. When Dulles became head of the C.I.A., the program was taken over by Frank Wisner. Their objective was to recruit well known and respected journalist into their system to tell the C.I.A.’s views through a “legitimate” news source. They are even attributed to some student and culture organizations, buying news and magazine businesses, and significant news outlets worldwide.
What would be their point in doing this? The answers here are numerous, so I will touch on a couple. One, and probably the main reason, is to control political opinions and help create the division among us. Why would the C.I.A. want division between us? To implement the Cloward and Piven strategy, but I will touch on that strategy in another article. For time’s sake, let’s just say they can’t carry out their global agenda with a united populace. They need us divided and dependent on them, their system, their goals as the answer. Think of it as them creating fictitious chaos so they can come in with the solution and appear to be the answer to all our problems.
Well, how do we know where to get our news from and who is the reliable source? This is a question I get asked many times. The answer is really multi-layered and needs to be addressed. It is evident and apparent that mainstream media is under the influence of this operation even to this day. So, that really leaves us as the news source. We have become dependent on mainstream media to tell us how to feel, or what to eat, and how to dress, or what’s popular in news stories across America daily. We have become misled to the point of confusion while being fed narrative after narrative. Just like if someone came into our home and took it over, it would be our responsibility to take back our house. This issue is no different. After all, they are coming into our home and taking over our thoughts, opinions, and way of life. Well, let’s take it back!
We can do this in many ways. With today’s social media, blogs like this one, and platforms to get our voice out there, this is easier than ever to report the accurate news. It is imperative in today’s time to not post satire articles. This is a massive issue for me and needs to stop. Sure those articles can be witty, funny, and, most times, so far-fetched that it can not only lose the person out there seeking the information but discredit us in general. We mustn’t become what we are fighting when the fight is about disinformation. There are many out there that may not be vocal in their battle, but they are relying on you for their news.
Use social media to inform the unaware and to open up dialogue. This will not only help the information get out there, but will also open up that dialogue we seek to those that may not fully understand what is really going on. Share articles you find informative, accurate, and trustworthy. Build a pipeline of blogs, social media sites, friends, family, that you see to be engaged and aware. Talk the points all the way through to the conclusion to not only get all the facts laid out but to understand the issues better yourself. In summary, learn the lesson then go out and be the teacher. The critical thing to remember is that you were not born awake, and neither was the person you are trying to reach. Meet them where they are at in their understanding. If they are health conscious, then don’t approach them about the Federal Reserve. It will be overwhelming and unproductive. Instead, let them know about G.M.O.’s and the harms of vaccines. Once again, meet them where they are at. Do not use this time to show off how much you know, but instead help them get to where you are in understanding the fact. Baby steps.
Why alternative media and not mainstream media. Well, let’s look at who owns and operates these mega-media sources. Before I go any further, I’m not saying completely turn off mainstream media, just be aware of the global agenda when listening to them and do your own research. Always do your own research. Even when it comes to alternative media.
Take Fox News, for example. They are the biggest and most watch news we have. Who owns them, and what is their relationship to the globalist, or elitist? News Corp, which is the parent company to Fox News, is actually owned by Rupert Murdoch with Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal holding 7% of the operation. When dealing with the global agenda, Saudi is one of the most violent countries even though we refer to them as an ally. They have a horrible domestic policy and, actually, to date, have more beheadings than what we see with ISIS. Saudi has also been implemented and tied to 9/11.
Whenever I engage in talks about Operation Mockingbird, one name comes up every time. Anderson Cooper with CNN. His name is one of the most closely tied to Operation Mockingbird that I have found. There are numerous YouTube videos out there showing him being confronted on this topic, and he always has the same reaction. Dismiss, deny, and belittle the person asking the question. Why? Ask me anything about my involvement in Operation Mockingbird, and I would sit there and talk to you as an innocent person accused of being a part of this would do. There are many, many more out there that I will touch on in another article.
Another way of knowing our media is fake is the content in which they report on. We know our money is printed out of thin air, not backed by anything, and then loaned out, with interest. Why is this not leading off every news cycle daily? Addressing the Federal Reserve, especially in today’s economy, would quickly get an audit, if not abolished completely when the American people really know what our monetary system is about. Ironically, but by design, the Federal Reserve, or The Fed, is controlling the news through financing the leading players and owners of the media.
How about undeclared wars? Why is this no leading the news cycle daily? We are a nation, in general, proud of our military and unite anytime we have to send our men and women overseas, so why not report on how these are illegal wars and not declared by Congress as the Constitution demands. Let’s not forget the troops swear an oath to the Constitution as well as the politicians sending them to war, so why are we not demanding they follow the document they swear to? Because many don’t even know what the Constitution says. That, too, is by design.
Look at the partisan platforms of the media outlets today. Depending on your political leanings is where and how you receive your news. If you are a Republican, you watch Fox News. Democrat, MSNBC, etc. Why and how did we allow this to happen? The media needs to be neutral. They need to tell us the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. When they take on a partisan stance, they are helping perpetuate the division and even protecting the very elements they are supposed to be calling out. It’s not by accident that corruption has hit an all-time high, and reporting on corruption has hit an all-time low. It’s because of Operation Mockingbird.
It is very evident and apparent that this C.I.A. program is not only still around, but thriving stronger than ever. We have the power to take it back, and we should take the moral authority to do just that. We are in dangerous times globally, and what gets reported needs to be the truth, regardless of who it offends. We can do this, and we can win. Only when we seek the truth and not partisan politics is when we will be free and informed. So get out there on your social media sites, blogs, radio shows, and activism activities and spread the truth. Spread it loud, spread it proudly, and spread it gently. We will win by being the change we want to see. Let’s start with posting facts, not satire. Learning the lessons and then going out and being the teacher. I am reminded this 5th of November that truth is what set people free in the now infamous movie V for Vendetta, not partisan politics.
I look forward to seeing you out there and learning from you all. Let’s be the peaceful end to Operation Mockingbird.
Written by: Michael W. Howell
Senior Writer and Editor for Fighting the Tyranny
At first glance, you wouldn’t think these two have anything in common. And you would be right to believe that mainly since they shouldn’t be grouped in together. However, the two are more closely linked than you would think. Well, that’s not a fair statement. The more accurate statement should read something like this, “Big Pharma and guns are linked when it comes to mass shootings.” There that’s the most precise way of tying the two together. What do I mean? Let’s look at several things.
What do the majority of mass shootings have in common other than they occur in gun-free zones? Well, we are finding that the gunmen are also on psychotropic medicine, which significantly influences their decision making. Am I blaming the drug industry alone? No, of course not, but they can not be overlooked as we see a mass increase in prescribed medicine to the public. We are in a time where Big Pharma and their influence is significant in power. Just look at the television on any given night and count the pharmaceutical commercials pushing their products in the disguise of a more full life, a more productive life. Now during that same commercial count, the number of side effects vs. the cause the drug is supposed to be treating. It’s mind-boggling the number of side effects of using the medicine vs. the symptoms that initially brought you to the need for the drug in the first place. In some cases, it’s almost worth it to have the symptom and not the side effects of the prescribed medication.
While I am not, and do not claim to be a doctor or even a novice when it comes to medicine, I can not ignore the damaging effects that are plaguing us today with prescribed medication. I always say, “If you go to your doctor and the first thing he doesn’t ask you is about your eating habits, then leave immediately cause that should be the first question of a health care physician.” It just seems like the first and only step nowadays is to check vitals, run some tests, and finally prescribe the remedy through a magic pill. Why not look into the root of the cause like what we put into our bodies? We have a very complicated immune system that is designed to flush and fight many attacks that invade our bodies, but like anything else, we need to take care of the immune system.
Now I am not against medicine at all. I see its benefits when prescribed and administered correctly. I just want the doctor and healthcare industry to be responsible for their patients, not Big Pharma. And unfortunately, the latter seems to be the norm. I could write a whole article on Big Pharma, but that is not the purpose of this article. I want to address the concerns I have of the gun confiscation that seems to be looming and all aspects of the “mass shooting” epidemic we seem to find ourselves in today.
So back to the issue…Big Pharma vs. guns. First, why do I feel like there is a gun confiscation looming around the corner? I see the United Nations, along with the democratic party looking at every chance to pass new laws, regulations, and sanctions on the right to bear arms. Republicans aren’t exempt. While they seem to be vocal, they are not really pushing the 2nd amendment like we need them to. It is a coordinated effort, and the talk on Capitol Hill seems to back up my suspensions. Can gun control really make us safe? No, it can not. It will only lead to more victims because criminals will never lay down their weapons regardless of what law(s) are passed. After all, isn’t there a law already making murder illegal? Of course, there is, and because they are criminals, they will not abide by it. So any kind of gun control is only going to disarm law-abiding citizens and make us a helpless victim to intruders of our family, home, and property.
How can we protect ourselves and still have a society that feels safe going to the mall? To school? Or even a movie? The evidence is overwhelming in support of a good guy with a gun stops or drastically reduces the impact a shooter makes. Isn’t that why we call the police when this sort of thing happens in the first place? Because we believe he is a good guy with a gun? So, it is elementary to dismiss the firearm as the problem when one takes agendas out of the way and looks at the evidence provided. One more point to make as far as guns being the problem. If arms were the problem, then no one would leave a rifle range alive, or even a gun show. However, the opposite, in fact. These shootings do not happen at rifle ranges or gun shows. They occur in gun-free zones. Where self-protection isn’t allowed.
How does Big Pharma fit into the equation? C.C.H.R. International wrote this in one of their articles – “At least 35 school shootings and/or school-related acts of violence have been committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs resulting in 169 wounded and 79 killed (in other school shootings, information about their drug use was never made public—neither confirming or refuting if they were under the influence of prescribed drugs). Another article written by Natural News states the following “Nearly every mass shooting incident in the last twenty years, and multiple other instances of suicide and isolated shootings all share one thing in common, and it’s not the weapons used. The overwhelming evidence points to the signal largest common factor in all of these incidents is the fact that all of the perpetrators were either actively taking powerful psychotropic drugs or had been at some point in the immediate past before they committed their crimes.”
There are tons more research and studies that all say the same thing in regards to the mental capacity of the individual on these drugs. Would making more gun-free zones help? Would stricter legislation regarding firearms change this? No, of course, it wouldn’t. Circling back to the point I made earlier, it would be treating a symptom and not the cause. When I really started looking into this connection, I was stunned that this wasn’t the first course of action taken before we talked about the tool (gun) that the individual used for their crimes.
Why isn’t the mainstream media reporting these facts at every chance? Remember those pharmaceutical ads I was referring to earlier? Well, they are also the sponsor of most, if not all, news channels, and as we know, they will not bite the hand that feeds them. Even at our expense. I do agree it is past time to stop burying our dead due to senseless violence, but disarming law-abiding citizens, or even heavily regulating the firearms industry will have no positive effect on the number of victims. Just ask the residents of New York, New Orleans, Detroit, Chicago, where gun laws are the strictest, but gun deaths are higher than the nation’s average.
In conclusion, we can minimize the deadly cost of gun violence by correctly diagnosing, prescribing, and following up with healthcare officials. I am not placing the blame on them solely, but the evidence supports the claim that we, as a society, are over medicated. Watch what we put into our bodies, and what comes out will be benefited. Watch who and how we trust our bodies to and take responsibility for our own health at a level we can control.
Here is a topic I have heard a lot, especially of late. And I must admit at first it was an easy question for me to answer; of course we do. But do we really need a President and if so, why? How come in a nation of 320 million Americans are we so focused on finding that one person to completely and blindly turn over our lives, so to speak, and entrust that one person will make the right decisions to “govern” us. Do we need to be governed? Is there really one person, along with their administration, that can make the right choices for our individual rights and liberties? No, there isn’t. The proof is in the pudding.
Let’s look at a declining past in order to really answer this question. I won’t take you on a long history lesson, but I must start at 1776. It was an exciting time, a self finding moment and even a time when people collectively would come together to find a way to have structure while maintaining individual rights and sovereignty. The Articles of Confederation was replaced with the Constitution and Bill of Rights and our founding fathers had a vision of self rights with limited government. Sounds great, right? What happened then? Why, when our country was founded on freedoms for all, are we seeing a decline in rights and liberties? This is where the article could get really long so for times sake I will just say the greed, self interest, and corporatism entered the free people unknowingly.
We are seeing attacks on the very freedoms and liberties that the founding fathers tried to tie down and secure. The 2nd amendment is being usurped by a foreign government, the United Nations, while my fellow citizens don’t even understand what the United Nations really is. It’s an all out blitzkrieg on the 4th amendment whether it is in the form of unconstitutional checkpoints on our roadways, or the acts performed at our airports by the T.S.A., or the N.S.A. spying program on innocent civilians. And of course, it is always in the name of security.
So, how does all this relate to the above question as far as do we need a President? Well the current President has taken away not only our individual sovereignty, but our nation’s sovereignty. That is crucial in the preservation of a Republic. This President can not take the blame alone though. This is a plan that is as old as the Constitution itself. And that plan is globalism. It has been openly called for and very aggressively fought to achieve. Here is where the citizens need to rise and take back their government. In a Republic it is our way of life we protect, not the politicians.
Self governing is at the heart of the question when one talks about Presidents and government. Albeit the smallest form of government is what is needed, but we are seeing an overreach of power with no consequences to the perpetrator. In fact, they are often protected, reelected, and continue the oppression that we use to define as treason. How have we lost our way in such a manner that treason is over looked and even protected and defended?
Could we really self govern ourselves in this day and age? In a time when our monetary system is fraudulent, our wars are undeclared and usually just a result of bad foreign policy that we have come to refer to as blowback. Or in this highly advanced technological age when cyber security is a daily threat. The answer is really quite simple. Yes, we could. The private sector out performs the government sector on every facet of life. Spending, protection, education, agriculture, business, financial, and many other ways that are essential to maintaining a Republic. So, how do we get to that point?
Before we get to that part let’s look at what the government really is. They collect taxes off of the working class in order to pay for programs that not only help the poor, but also programs such as social security. This makes the government the “middle man” in our lives. Often times at a gross over spending and poor oversight. Look at the roads situation. This a a hot topic to many. When I have had this conversation in the past I always get the “who will build the roads argument.” As many of you have as well. Let’s address that point. First off, the government doesn’t and have never built a road in the history of government. What they are suppose to do is get bids from the private sector and the winning bidder will be awarded the contract. Why do we need them to take our money illegally through taxes, sit on it for a while, just to award their friends of their investment partners the contract? We don’t need to. That is something that could and really should be done at the local level, state level if necessary.
This has nothing to do with the President thought. No it doesn’t, but it does show a big flaw in government in general. What point could I make to circle back to the main question in this article which is do we need a President. There are numerous points I could make to show this, but I will focus on one in particular. How about foreign policy? That is a big one as far as the way the world sees us and has gotten muddy regardless which party holds office. And to be frank, I do not see it changing in the future, only expanding its global reach. Take the past few elections for example. Let’s go back to 2008 when the country was tired of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. We were on the cusp of exhaustion and weary from burying our men and women. Many of us didn’t really understand why we were at war to begin with. After all, Iraq nor Afghanistan had anything to do with the events of 9/11. Then here comes this smooth talking, smart Senator, who belonged to the opposite party than the current President of the time, and he claimed to be against these wars. He even vowed to end these wars if elected. Long story short, the majority bought it and place him in the White House as the new Commander-in-Chief. Good times coming, right? Wrong. We didn’t get an end to the undeclared, unconstitutional wars we found ourselves in. In fact, we started more of these wars under his administration. Not only that, but the expansion of many programs through executive actions.
The N.S.A. was protected and expanded upon. The T.S.A. was now taking over security jobs in our airports that were once held by the private sector. The Patriot act was replaced by the Freedom Act. And our debt was out of hand through over spending and foreign aid. Not to mention the dreaded N.D.A.A. bill that was signed in 2012. So much has happened during this administration that it is hard to fit in this article so I will just stay on point.
Societies or communities that are self governed are generally doing better and thriving. Every thing from community funded schools to neighborhood watch groups seem to provide a better quality of life and reach their objective better, faster, and with greater results than government programs designed to accomplish the same. I guess at this point it would be better if I asked the question do we need government at all? At the end of the day we all need some form of structure. Minimal and effective, but structure nonetheless.
So, why can’t we provide these services ourselves and still maintain the Republic. We can and we should be taking it back. We need to hold these officials accountable who break their oath of protecting the Constitution. The only thing the government should provide is national defense and an honest monetary system. They have failed on both occasions.
The Federal Reserve is as crooked as a dog’s hind leg and is not open to an audit or even government oversight. And out national defense has become a cash cow for the military industrial complex and have hampered our trade relations with foreign nations. Not only have they failed at their only responsibilities, but face no consequences for doing so.
How would a self government society work and who would make the decisions? Well I do not have all the answers and will not pretend to, but this answer is really simple. We would. We would make the decisions based on our needs as a community, as free people, as a collective group of individual, sovereign citizens. Our foreign policy could be changed through trading and open dialogue. Our monetary system could be changed through trading, bartering, and using value back currency instead of printing money out of thin air, that is backed by nothing, then charged interest on. This is and should be unaccepted to all. It feeds banks at our expense and cuts out the middle class which is the backbone of the country. Entrepreneurial, innovation, creation, and small business is being wasted in this country as many are feeling hopeless do to regulations and over reach from the same people that swore an oath to protect them.
We are heading down a dangerous and slippery slope of world government that will dictate how we live our lives instead of being in charge of our own free will and decisions. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is our responsibility, but we will never truly achieve this until we hold those accountable for taking away our way of life. If not now, when? We have the authority, per Constitution, to change our government. Do we have the will power to change things? Do we have the passion? These are trying times and how we handle them will not only affect us, but those that come after us. Do the right thing and help restore the Republic.
By Michael W. Howell
Senior Writer and Senior Editor at Fighting the Tyranny
At what expense are we going to war on and I am not speaking monetarily, even though that needs to be addressed as well. What I am speaking of when I say the expense is the very thing that the soldiers are supposed to be protecting – the Constitution. How are wars brought about? How are they “approved?” The answer isn’t complicated or hard to understand. It all can be found in the Constitution.
We are told that wars are necessary at times to maintain our way of life from foreign governments and entities that may be a threat to the Republic. We have faced many of these challenges throughout the history of America and very likely will continue to be a target to those that seek to bring her down. So, why don’t we just end it now militarily and be done with it? That is very simple. If we bypass the Constitution then we become no better than those that attempt to destroy our way of life as those acts will very well be a loss of freedom and liberties. It will contribute to many things, but more specifically, a direct usurp of our way of life. And that’s the very thing that wars are meant to protect.
This is a very hot subject and has, and will continue to be talked about for years to come as the direct threats to us grow. So how do we combat this issue, maintain our rights and liberties, and keep the republic safe? This is where the focus needs to be channeled. This is at the very heart of not only keeping us safe but keeping our voice in foreign policy and being resolved to a higher moral ground. The consequences are too grave and the blowback is all too mighty.
Before we talk about the legality and constitutional way to go to war, let’s look at the last declared war. The last war that was brought before Congress for a declaration was World War 2. That means the Korean War, Vietnam War, Bosnia, Desert Storm War, Iraq and even Afghanistan Wars have all been undeclared and by any standard, one would have to come to the conclusion they have been illegal. That’s not an opinion, but one that is based solely on the Constitution.
How does a war become a legal act? What is the right way to go to war and to honor the Constitution? Many have debated this and have weighed in on this. It seems like the issue never gets resolved as the latest “threat” is always at the forefront of the conversation. If it is a real threat to the sovereignty of the Republic, then that should be more of a reason to bring it to the American people, using our representatives in Congress, to let our voice be known. Instead, we have seen a fast track to the process and go quickly into war.
Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution states “Congress shall have powers……to declare war.” Some have challenged this and said that there is no “formal declaration” needed for war. If this is true then we really have no power over our elected officials and give them the power, on their own will, to go to war at their choosing. This is a dangerous scenario and will surely lead to globalism, blowback, and finally, eventually, imperialism.
Such is the case in Doe Vs. Bush. The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled, “[T]he text of the October Resolution itself spells out the justification for a war and frames itself as an “authorization” of such war.” In effect saying an authorization suffices for declaration and what some may view as a formal Congressional “Declaration of War” was not required by the Constitution.” Let’s break this down as the terminology says it all.
Ask any contract attorney how important words are to a contract and they will reply with the wording is everything. One word that all attorneys look to remove from contracts or keep if it helps them is the word shall. That is a very heavy word and is absolute. Zero wiggle room as the saying goes. The word “may” has that wiggle room and can be challenged. A good example of this is when God handed Moses the Ten Commandments. God used that absolute word – shall. Had God used “may” or even another word along those lines then the commandments from God would and could have been challenged? Shall is absolute and definitive.
Our founding fathers knowing this could have used any word(s) to write the Constitution and when it came to the powers of Congress wanted to be very clear and precise on where they had authority. As well as what was left to the people. This is important for many reasons. One reason is to maintain checks and balance between the people and government, as well as recognizing that they, the government, worked for us, the people. The ruling of The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit used the word “may” and continues to be challenged against the Constitution.
Why all the fuss anyway, right? Well as stated above, if we leave the decision to invade or occupy another land solely on the decision of a few people in Congress, whether elected by us or not, then our voice is silenced. We are a Constitutional Republic and speak as one voice when deciding things such as wars and powers of our Congress. This is to prevent special interest, agendas, and globalism. It is because we have forgotten or just not cared that the global agenda has achieved at the rate it has. We have had the power all along. It is time, pass time to exercise it.
The military men and women of this great and mighty Republic take an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. A usurping of the Constitution for political, corporate, or personal gain is a threat to our Constitution and national security. It puts us in situations that as a sovereign nation we have no business being in and we never had a voice or opinion on the matter. It also puts our service men and women in harm’s way and pits them against the oath they took. Our first step in supporting the troops needs to be to make sure they are not put in a situation to break their oath. They may be our watchmen, but we need to make sure their actions are right and protected. We can all play a part in this.
Have we really been usurped and if so, what is the reason? Yes, we have. Over and over, too. The reason may very well be for political power, global agenda, central banks, or even for that nation’s resources, but make no mistake there is a reason they are avoiding your voice in going to war. Let’s protect the troops, the constitution, and our way of life for future generations. It is our duty and responsibility to make sure our elected officials not only hear our voice but honor their oath as well.
By Michael W. Howell
Senior Writer and Senior Editor at Fighting the Tyranny
This has to be the main question we ask ourselves if we are to come to terms with foreign wars and the ever-increasing globalism we are facing. With an out of hand Military Industrial Complex, horrible foreign policy, fictitious debt and monetary system, ever-growing police state, military operations pointed at civilians, and a myriad of other liberty taking actions, once again, we have to ask is our Constitution valid? After all, we are sending soldiers at a record number to “fight” for it so we need to answer this question now before we continue to support the agenda and goal of “democracy.”
Let’s look at the last word in that sentence before we go any farther. Democracy and what it means has been convoluted to mean many things and has been used to start and justify wars. So, what does it mean and are we a democracy? No, we are not. We are and were always formed as the Constitutional Republic. It is very important to know the difference. Our founding fathers knew the difference and it can be referenced in many of their writings and speeches.
Before I list quotes of the founding fathers’ thoughts on democracy vs. republic, let’s look at what the Constitution, itself, says about the two.
Article IV Section 4, of the Constitution “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a Republican Form of government and shall protect each of them against invasion”, the word Democracy is not mentioned in the Constitution at all.
We can now rest assured that the authors and founding fathers clearly wanted us to be a republic, not a democracy, as one cannot be both, as one cannot be socialist and fascist. Two separate forms of government. So, now let’s illustrate the point in more detail and look at direct quotes from those men that wrote the Constitution or had a hand in its conception.
“Hence it is that democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention: have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property: and in general have been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths…A republic, by which I mean a government in which a scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect and promises the cure for which we are seeking.” – James Madison, Federalist Papers No. 10 (1787)
“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!” – Ben Franklin
“A democracy is nothing more than a mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” – Thomas Jefferson
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes exhaust, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. “– John Adams
There are many other quotes you can look up on your own time as it pertains to the difference of Republic vs. Democracy, but I feel the clear platform can be established by now concerning their thoughts on the Republic.
Now let’s define the two. What is a Republic? What is a democracy? In the Constitutional Republic, such as America, the individuals’ rights are protected and cannot be voted or taken away. In a democracy, I believe Thomas Jefferson as stated above, has given us the best definition. To paraphrase him, it is simply when fifty – one percent rule over the remaining forty-nine percent. This is a slippery slope that was foreseen by the founders.
So, do we have any proof that the Constitution is invalid or has been usurped? Let’s take what President George Washington defined as the “liberty’s teeth”, the second amendment. Without this amendment, we would not be able to protect the remaining Constitution or Bill of Rights. It is very short and cannot be misinterpreted unless approached from an angle to reject it.
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
There are two key words in this amendment. First, being “shall” as it is absolute and infringed, which means taken away or even regulated. So, how has the second amendment being infringed you ask? Gun ownership is at an all-time high and rifle ranges seem to be busy nowadays so it must still be intact, right? Not so fast.
Look at cities like New Orleans, Chicago, New York City, and Detroit as an example. They have the strictest gun control laws and ironically, have the highest violent crime rate, but that’s a topic for another article. Some cities have instituted a magazine capacity ban. That is an infringement. Let’s look at the sanctions we have on Russian made AK-47’s. That is a political infringement on gun ownership. And lastly, let’s look at the United Nations Small Arms Treaty. Many things are wrong with this. One is that a foreign government, United Nations, is dictating rights on a sovereign Republic. That is a blatant infringement on gun rights. There are other violations of the 2nd Amendment but just these examples alone are direct infringements. Is the Constitution still valid?
Now let’s look at the 4th Amendment. “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Here we have that absolute word again – “shall.” Not a suggestion, but an absolute. Just as God used it in the Ten Commandments so that there is no other interpretation, the founders used it here as well and for the same reason. How is this being attacked you ask? We are seeing a gross amount of no-knock raids on homes and properties. Property illegally seized and often times even destroyed or never returned back to the owners. The fourth amendment clearly states the process in which warrants are to be issued and executed. Look at another example, checkpoints on roads. We have all seen them used in the name of safety. Drunk driving checkpoint, insurance checkpoints, etc. This is a clear violation of the fourth amendment as everyone has the right to be secure in their persons, papers, houses, and effects. It is unconstitutional to stop every single vehicle without probable cause. Here there is no probable cause and we are guaranteed to travel freely unless suspected of a crime. The proper, ethical, and even Constitutional way to go about these practices are being ignored. I ask you again, is the Constitution still valid?
Wars, we all hate them, but at times may be necessary in order to maintain freedoms and liberties. The constitution has defined the way a Republic goes to war. It is by a Declaration of War, through Congress, by our representatives, using our voice. When was the last declaration of war? World War 2. The rest have been on U.N. sanctions or have been under the name of conflicts. This is illegal and needs to be reigned in as the consequences are grave. Article 1, Section 8 defines it this way. “The Congress shall have the power to…..declare war. Notice that absolute word, shall, again? That means go to Congress and let the people voice their concerns and even approval, through their representatives. Not on United Nations sanctions or Presidential Executive Orders. I must ask you this again, is the Constitution still valid?
How about the 10th amendment? States rights were very key and instrumental in the establishment of the Republic as our founding fathers recognized all states do not live the same way and shouldn’t be governed the same way, or as in a blanket Federal law. States right’s is important in continuing a society free from government overreach. It secures the States govern themselves through the people of the States. Let’s look at the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage. Regardless what side of the fence you fall on you cannot deny that state rights were ignored and trampled on. First, look at how it came to be law of the land. The Supreme Court does not have the power, under the Constitution, to create laws, only rule on existing laws. In the case of gay marriage, they created, wrote, ruled, and executed the law. In return they created a blanket law for the Republic, bypassing the 10th amendment. This is getting to be a continuing theme; however, I have to ask. Is the Constitution still valid?
The last example I will use is so important to free people that the founders made it the first amendment and that is free speech. There have been famous quotes such as; “the first amendment wasn’t meant to discuss the weather, but controversial things” that sums up the importance of free speech. How can we continue to be a free society and prosper if thoughts are suppressed and our voices silenced? We can’t be. This is imperative to talking ideas and concerns all the way through to conclusion so that all sides and all options are brought forward.
Now with the expansion of the N.S.A. spying program to include metadata of innocent individuals, our free speech has been compromised. It has been proven, much to their own admission, that they collect metadata on all person’s phone calls, emails, and even social media post. This is not free speech. This can also be tied into the 4th amendment as it is an unwarranted collection of someone’s rights since no warrant was filed on the said individual, instead of collected on everyone as a whole. We are seeing a gross incline in political correctness which is silencing many thoughts and even keeping many from voicing their concerns out of fear of retaliation. This is a reminder of the Alien and Sedition Act that John Adams signed into law and then later felt obligated to repeal. We are starting to see things head that way again if we don’t act now. Any infringement on free speech is an infringement on all free speech. So in closing, I have to ask, is the Constitution valid?
Here is a question we have all asked ourselves. How come our foreign policy hasn’t changed regardless what party holds office or majority of congress? How come our reputation, globally, has taken a considerable hit? Why do countries not feel safe dealing with a republic like America? Why has the military industrial complex grown to irresponsible levels we see today? Why does a war or terrorism seem to last forever when we are the world’s superpower?
In spite of ideology or views, these are questions that must be addressed if we are to retain the rights and liberties our founding fathers established. How do we retain these liberties? How do we, in today’s times, fight for these liberties under the daily attack that we are under? One does not want to think of our leaders as being incompetent or agenda driven, but could that be the answer?
When I ponder these and many other questions I like to channel a speech made by someone who tried to warn us of these very questions. It was Dwight D. Eisenhower in his farewell address that pointed out the answer to this very question. Being a former General and then becoming President, Eisenhower gave a beautifully written and later spoken speech on the very issues we are asking today.
Sitting behind a desk, the oldest President handing the baton to the youngest President gave us inside information that many ignored or overlooked then as they are today. Without hesitation, and not once his voice shaking, he uttered a message of hope, integrity, and of warning.
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”
But could it really be that simple? Is the problem from the inside and not a true and realistic outside threat? He believed so. And I must say, 54 years later it appears he had a very clear and precise knowledge of the problem.
The very next administration would answer this question for us. Kennedy, coming off a very emotional and exciting victory would soon be put to the test. With the communist Soviets placing nuclear weapons just 90 miles off the coast of Florida, America faced a very real and possible threat. Go to war and very likely spark a nuclear war, or use negotiating tactics. These were the only two options the Kennedy Administration had. And to this very day, though much information has been released, I do not know if Americans really know just how close to nuclear war with Russia we were.
Able to divert the worst case scenario, Kennedy eased the minds of many while upsetting the elite. The victory would be short lived as he would be faced with a very new challenged. That threat was the Vietnam War. Go into Vietnam or use diplomatic tactics like he did with the Russians.
There are many that speculate Kennedy’s involvement and thoughts on Vietnam, but it is clear he was very aware of the military industrial complex and the power they wield. He had heated and insightful meeting with his staff regarding Americas involvement in such a war that was between the North and South Vietnamese. Often fights and arguments were heard and reported on between Kennedy and his cabinet.
On November 22, 1963 John F. Kennedy’s voice in the matter was silence and the push to not only continue, but expand the war, was implemented. Lyndon Johnson would take the oath of office and it would be clear from the offset that his buddies, the military industrial complex, would be given free reign and funding.
From that moment on it seemed like the agenda would only heighten in bad foreign policy. Whether the goal is liberation from a dictator or helping rebels fight the oppressors, it was without question that the only winners were the military industrial complex. While the funding increased, the liberties and freedoms of the people were slowly eroding.
Fast forward to modern times and that mentality is still in play. We are told that the enemy hates us for our freedoms, but we are seeing a massive decrease in personal liberties and freedoms. Not from the outside, but from our very own elected officials. And it is being sold to us all under the guise of retaining freedoms.
September the 11th would be a perfect example of this scenario. Once again we are told that Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban hated us for our freedoms, however, it wasn’t Bin Laden that took one freedom from us. From the devastating attacks that day we were handed policies such as the expansion of the N.S.A. spying program on innocent civilians, to the T.S.A. program in our airports.
How can this be? How can we win a war against those that hate us for our freedoms by turning over freedoms? How could we claim any victory or success, when our officials are taking away the very thing we are told they hate us and are attacking us over? One must conclude that the way of approaching this is neither logical nor effective.
Is it bad foreign policy or an agenda? Is it incompetence or dominance? And who is incompetent? Who’s agenda? And what about dominance? This is the very thing that we need to address in order to get the very answers we seek and are owed. After all, it is our service men and women that are risking it all and it is them that come out in the end, with the biggest lost.
At this time it may be important to quote Ben Franklin and see what our founding fathers had to say about freedom and the necessity to protect it.
“Those that sacrifice liberty for safety, deserve neither, liberty nor safety.” – Ben Franklin
It is very clear how Ben Franklin would have addressed the war on terrorism. He overwhelmingly believed no one, or no issue was above retaining God given rights, not taking them. After all, a republic is only free as long as we are able to have rights for all.
So, this brings us full circle. Is it bad foreign policy or an agenda? To answer this we have to ask ourselves who benefits and who profits? If we set aside our ideology and look at the root of the issue we find that not only is it the global bankers, but more directly the tax exempt, war perpetuating, military industrial complex. Just like Eisenhower warned us we have to address this growing threat to the nations sovereignty and even independence. We cannot and most importantly, should not send our men and women to die for anything less than retaining our rights.
Let’s look deeper into the problem. We now how over 700 bases in over 130 countries. On many of those bases we are the policing forces in that country. A very good, and confusing example of this is in Afghanistan where we have our soldiers guarding poppy fields which the Afghan people use for opium trade and commerce. Meanwhile we are fighting a drug war on American people. Look at how once the wars start we steal resources from the people of that land and say it is to fund the war. It’s theft and nothing less. Another freedom we lose through these wars is the fact that none of them are declared as instructed and demanded by our constitution.
Our soldiers take an oath to defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, but go to war with undeclared actions. That not only hurts them and puts them in a position to break their oath, but it takes the voice of the nation away from saying, through our representatives, if we want the war or not. It should, as instructed by the constitution, be brought forward to congress and voted on. Now we have wars based on United Nations sanction, which is a foreign government.
So I ask you again, bad foreign policy or an agenda? The answer lies within the military industrial complex and the politicians that protect them. This is a very serious question that until it is addressed will continue to mount more dead soldiers, more generational debt, and a continue trickle loss of individual sovereignty and freedoms. It’s up to us. The tyranny we accept today is the tyranny our grandchildren will live under tomorrow.
How are laws written? How does legislation become law? Who writes the laws that we end up being governed by? How do we get a voice in the making, passing, and the implementation of laws? Does the Supreme Court have the American’s interest in judging the laws? Should lobbyist be allowed in the process? These are serious questions that many Americans have and we will look into them closely and try to answer them together.
Let’s start with the birth, or writing of the law(s). How are they written and by whom? Have you noticed that when we look at laws in text form, they are never easy to read, understand, or even, most times, follow? Shouldn’t a law that governs so many be in basic and easy to understand wording? Why the confusion? Seems like we all need our own personal attorney walking around us just to understand laws. This can’t be by design, can it?
Well the answer to that is really obvious and shocking at the same time. Maybe, just maybe, they are written so that we get overwhelmed and lost in translation that we give up on understanding them out of our own frustration and confusion. Ask a friend, relative or co-worker to explain a law and the overwhelming majority can’t even give you anything but talking points at best.
Take for instance The Affordable Care Act, or what is commonly called Obamacare. Do you understand it? Can you explain it? The answer is overwhelmingly no. And why is that? Shouldn’t a law mandating healthcare for all, and enforcing it if you don’t comply through penalties, be easily understood and equally easy to follow? Instead we have such quotes as the famous one made by Nancy Pelosi. “We have to pass it in order to know what’s in it.”
Wrong Mrs. Pelosi. We need to know what’s in it in order to make an informative and calculated decision on whether we should pass it or not. Under any rational stance that would be common sense. Could it be that common sense doesn’t apply in Washington D.C.? I can’t buy that. After all, they are smart, Ivy League educated people in Washington. So what is the real issue then?
To answer this we have to look at many angles. Who wrote Obamacare? Who passed it? And is it fair to the American people? The issue of Americans and healthcare has been around for many years and was even a platform of the then First Lady, Hillary Clinton. So why now the sudden urge and illegal passing of the Healthcare Bill?
The reason the Government got involved in the healthcare business should be a red flag to start with. They are not authorized, permitted, or have any jurisdiction in altering, guiding, or controlling the free markets. With The Affordable Care Act, they do all these things. Then penalize those that don’t comply with a fee. That’s a dumbing down term they use to really mean tax. And that would be taxation without representation.
So, who wrote obamacare and is it constitutional? The finding in this question is astounding. Before I answer this I want to go back to the original question about who has the authority under the constitution to write laws, pass laws, judge laws, and finally execute laws. The government is broken down into three branches. Refer back to our junior high civics class and we will remember the three branches. The three branches create a check and balance and ultimately a separation of power that keeps the power in the people’s court. Those three branches are the legislative branch, judicial branch, and executive branch. With a breakdown of these three branches we can see how the founding fathers meant for us to be governed. The legislative writes the laws while the judicial branch judges the laws against the constitution leaving the executive branch to execute the constitutional laws. I will have more to say about that in a little later in this article.
So who makes up these three branches of government that was designed to protect us from the powers of a bloated government? The legislative branch is made up of our representatives that we elect to be our voice. It consists of two houses of Congress – the House of Representatives and the Senate. The Senate is made up of 100 members, two members from each state, while the House of Representatives is made up of 435 members. The number of representatives from each state depends on the number of population from each state. Their job, in terms of laws, is to represent the people of their states and to maintain little government and retain state rights and personal sovereignty.
The Judicial branch is where the rubber meets the road so to speak. Regardless what the legislative branch writes into law, it is the responsibility of the judicial branch to judge the laws against the constitution and determine if the law is in accordance with the law of the land – the Constitution. The Supreme Court is head of the judicial branch and is made up of nine members. Eight associate members and one Chief Justice. Unlike a criminal court, they rule on the constitutionality of the proposed law. A decision of the Supreme Court sets precedence, or interpretation of the law.
That leaves one branch left, the executive branch, which sole responsibility is to execute the laws that have been deemed constitution. The President is head of the executive branch and serves a four year term as elected by the public. The executive branch also includes the Vice President and members the 15 major departments of government.
Now that we have established the process and legality of laws, their judging or ruling, and how they are executed or upheld, let’s look at the example I have listed above – Obamacare. The Affordable Care Act originated in the Senate. That is an important fact to keep in mind as I will highlight later. But who authored the legislation? This is a scary fact and has virtually gone unnoticed and without report from the mainstream media or even the officials we elected to protect the constitution.
One man is said to have been responsible for writing 628 pages of the bill while in prison, nonetheless. His name is Robert Creamer. Creamer is a senior Democratic operative who defrauded banks in order to keep his Marxist/Communist community organization afloat by committing 16 counts of bank and tax fraud. Doesn’t sound like an elected official as declared by the Constitution to me? But that’s only 628 pages he has been tied to. What about the remaining pages? Where they written by members of the legislative branch?
We are now finding out that the Affordable Care Act was largely written and approved by a handful of large players in the healthcare industry, insurance companies, and drug companies. That is an example of just how powerful the lobbyist voice is in Washington and just how silenced our voices have become. This happens with many policies, I’m just using one example to illustrate the corruption pertaining to our laws.
So, when Nancy Pelosi made her moronic statement to the nation, could it be because she herself couldn’t understand the bill herself? In the words of Sarah Palin, “You betcha!” And I have to be inclined to believe because of a powerful plan to bring everyone under socialize healthcare, their goal was to secretly institute this policy and keep us unaware of the corruption regarding the policy and the drafting of it.
Remember earlier in this article when I stated the Supreme Court’s responsibility towards law? Here is where we should have repealed the Affordable Care Act based solely on the constitution and not ideology or interior motives. The Supreme Court ruled on June 28th, 2012 in a 5-4 vote ruling that the Affordable Care Act was indeed a tax. That should have nullified the bill based solely on the fact that taxes must originate in the House. Obamacare originated in the senate, therefore, should have been repealed and taken back to the House. Now there is little doubt that this was agenda driven to get pushed through and made the law of the land, but you have to ask yourself this. Why did your elected official not know this, or if they did, why we were not made aware of the process through our elected voice? This is a clear indictment of how the corporations, through their armies of lobbyist, not only usurped the Constitution, but states’ rights and individual sovereignty. Corporations indeed are controlling policies and running the government for their profit and gain.
Now I have just highlighted one issue, but there are many examples of this. Net neutrality being another example I will write about in the future. And once the TPP becomes more visible that will show more corporate invasion and loss of sovereignty. Big Pharma writes many policies and control the pharmaceutical industries as well. We have been, and will continue to be usurped until we act.
This is the very same thing my grandfather fought against in World War 2 and that being Fascism. Let’s protect their sacrifice and make it known we will not be usurped or controlled by lobbyist or corporations. The tyranny you accept today is the tyranny your children will live under tomorrow.