Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Insane Gay Agenda In California Schools.

WND Exclusive
Stripped bare: 'Gay' school
plot unveiled

'Infuse LGBTQ curriculum
into history,

social science, and literature classes'

Posted: December 11, 2007
9:05 p.m. Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2007

On the heels of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's signature
on S.B. 777, which opponents describe as a homosexual
indoctrination plan for education districts, a pro-
homosexual lobbying organization in California has
launched its campaign to infuse a "gay" influence into
public school curricula.

Gov. Schwarzenegger

The Gay Straight Alliance recently forwarded an e-mail
to its California chapters with information on how to
make sure homosexuality is taught in the state's schools
and warned that having students and parents simply
"tolerate" homosexuality is not enough.

"In many schools, learning about LGBTQ issues
takes the form of very necessary tolerance education
where students are educated about the importance of
not discriminating against each other," according to
GSA documents. "Tolerance education is an important
first step, but we need to push further.

"Infuse LGBTQ curriculum into history, social science,
and literature classes," is the organization's plan.

Karen England, a spokeswoman for Capital Resource
Institute who publicized the GSA campaign and is a
primary organizer behind the Save Our Kids plan to
put the issue before voters and ask them to reject it, said
this is exactly what she expected of those who wish to
promote the homosexual lifestyle.

"The homosexual lobby is active and ambitious. They
already have GSA units in many California schools
that will oversee the implementation of SB 777,
" England said. "As evidenced in the GSA e-mail, their
agenda is inclusion in school instruction and activities,
regardless of their public assertions of 'streamlining'
anti-discrimination policies in the law."

She said the GSA "guide" to be used tells students "that
insisting on LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender
and queer) history in school instruction 'helps to
create schools where students feel safer and
more supported.'"

"Utilizing the slogan 'Let's Set the Record Straight:
History Isn't', students are given several action steps
to take in accomplishing their 'curriculum campaign'
goal. These include monitoring classroom instruction
to see if LGBTQ individuals are discussed or 'made
invisible'; taking over class to present LGBTQ history
lessons and contacting textbook companies to
change curriculum," England noted.

She said no child should be subjected to discrimination,
"but incorporating discussions of an instruction about
controversial lifestyles in the classroom does not
accomplish this goal. Instead, it undermines parental
authority over children's moral upbringing."

The documentation promotes a classroom discussion
of Sylvia Rivera, a "Latina transwoman," and suggests,
"It's time to take action!"

"Are your teachers teaching about the historical
achievements of LGBTQ individuals? Are these issues
included in your textbooks?..." the organization
wrote. "Take over class! … Lead a discussion about
LGBTQ history or present a lesson of your own."

England said with the pending implementation of
S.B. 777, soon such messages will come not from
independent advocacy groups such as GSA, but
from the state's superintendent of Public Instruction,
Jack O'Connell.

"That will be the mandate if our referendum isn't
successful," she told WND. "It won't be just some San
Francisco school. It will be the San Francisco curriculum
and values forced on school districts in California."

She called the agenda "highly offensive" to most
Californians, in fact, "most Americans."

"Religious background or not, you don't want these
controversial issues discussed in a classroom," she said.

She said the Save Our Kids campaign is on track,
with more than enough petitions in circulation to
collect the signatures needed to present the plan
to voters.

But she said petition signature collectors now need
to be getting the pages of signatures back to the
campaign office to be processed and submitted
to the state.

She described the citizen response so far as incredible.

"We have people who are saying, 'Not with my kids, not
with my grandkids,'" she said. "Citizens who have never
done anything [politically] are setting up tables
outside of grocery stores."

The homosexual promotions suggested a "gay/lesbian
teacher as role model," promoted the life stories of
celebrity homosexuals, and suggests study of "The
Kinsey Report," which in 1948 explored "same-sex
sexual behavior."

It also advocates teaching "the truth
about historical figures."

"We will never know how he (Abraham Lincoln)
might identity his own sexual orientation if he were
alive today…" the group states. "It is good for young
people of all sexual orientations and gender identities
to know that some of the legends in their history books
were more complex than those books make them seem."

Brad Dacus, president of Pacific Justice Institute, said,
"It is within our reach to defeat SB 777 – the most blatant
attempt yet to mandate pro-homosexual and transgender
propaganda in schools. We urge all friends of liberty to
send CRFI their completed petitions as soon as possible."

WND previously has reported on an increasing number
of students leaving public schools because of the planned
agenda, and O'Connell has warned districts they'll lose
money if that happens.

A spokeswoman for a ministry called Considering
said she already has seen an
overwhelming increase in requests for information
about homeschooling.

As a result, spokeswoman Denise Kanter told WND
that her group is sending out 5,000 DVD packages to
churches around the state that include basic "how-to"
information to provide parents a direction to turn
when they choose to protect their children from
the new school agenda.

Another group's website, Discover Christian Schools,
has been getting almost 4,000 visits per day as parents
seek alternatives, co-founder Harold Naylor Jr. said.

The new law demands, "No teacher shall give instruction
nor shall any school district sponsor any activity that
promotes a discriminatory bias because of a characteristic
[including perceived gender.]"

"With the passing of SB 777, a Christian parent cannot, in
good conscience, send their child to a public school
where their child will be taught or coerced into a
lifestyle or belief system that is contrary to the faith
they hold dear," Kanter told WND.

In California, several parents told the Inland Valley
Press Enterprise they were pulling their children from
public school classrooms in protest of the law.

"We have rights, too. Enough is enough,"
Donna Myeres said.

Randy Thomasson, president of the Campaign for
Children and Families,
said there is reason for
alarm. He said the new law effectively requires
school instruction and school activities to portray
homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality to
the six million children in public schools in a
positive light.

He said he's gotten hundreds of contacts from
concerned parents, and is encouraging families to
leave the public school system entirely.

All of this has O'Connell alarmed.

In a notice to school superintendents, he said, "There
may be fiscal consequences to school districts
for funds lost due to student absences."

Meredith Turney, the legislative liaison for
Capitol Resource Institute, reacted to that
in a column.

"Mr. O'Connell, the bill's author Sen. Sheila
Kuehl and Gov. Schwarzenegger have all
maintained the party line that SB 777 merely
'streamlines' existing anti-discrimination
laws. However, these attempts to discredit
the public outcry against SB 777's policies are
disingenuous and misleading. In fact, SB 777 goes
far beyond implementing anti-discrimination
and harassment policies for public schools."

"The terms 'mom and dad' or 'husband and wife'
could promote discrimination against homosexuals
if a same-sex couple is not also featured," said Turney.

"Parents want the assurance that when their children
go to school they will learn the fundamentals of
reading, writing and arithmetic – not social
indoctrination regarding alternative sexual
lifestyles. Now that SB 777 is law, schools will
in fact become indoctrination centers for sexual
experimentation," she said.

As WND has reported, the non-profit Advocates
for Faith and Freedom
has filed a lawsuit
challenging a SB 777.

Robert Tyler, the general counsel, said the lawsuit
his organization has filed challenges the law on
the basis it is unconstitutionally vague and violates
the privacy of all students, teachers and other
people on school campuses.

Please also see -

"Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences"

"Back Fired," by William J. Federer, shows
how the faith that gave birth to
tolerance is
no longer tolerated!

Gun Control responsible for Sean Taylor's death.



By Larry Pratt
December 9, 2007

There are some lessons that we should learn
from the murder of the Washington Redskins
football star, Sean Taylor.

Taylor was gunned down in his Miami house.
It did not have to be.

Taylor, by submitting to a bad law, brought
a knife to a gun fight. To be precise, Taylor
was trying to defend himself, his fiancé and
their child with a machete. Why would he
have not had a gun?

Simple. Taylor had been disarmed by a
corrupt prosecutor and federal gun laws.

In 2005, Taylor and some friends pursued
some men they believed had shot up his all-
terrain vehicle. After it was all over, the crooks
were never sought, much less prosecuted by
the authorities, but Taylor was accused of
pummeling one of the suspects and possessing
a gun during the episode.

Taylor was charged by Miami-Dade
prosecutor, Michael Grieco, with three
aggravated assault charges and a misdemeanor
battery charge. Taylor faced 46 years in
jail. Grieco subsequently resigned when it
became apparent that the charges were not
brought from the pursuit of justice, but were
brought to promote Grieco's moonlighting
business as a nightclub disc jockey.

Oh, by the way, the "witnesses" in the case
have criminal records.

As a result of the plea deal that was worked
out -- the government had to save face once
it was clear that the justice system had been
prostituted by Grieco -- Taylor was unable to
own a gun. He was subject to 18 months of
probation (no jail time) which sounds like a good
deal after having faced potentially 46 years in
jail. As it turns out, that deal made him defenseless.

Even though his probation ended early, that did
not mean that Taylor could legally own a
gun. Indeed, even though the system was
working to expunge his record, he still might
not ever have been able to own a gun. Why?

Taylor was disarmed for life because he
pleaded guilty to a crime that could have
carried a jail sentence of over 365 days. That
put his name into NICS (or the National
Instant Criminal Background Check
System). Even if Taylor had lived long
enough to see his name expunged by local
authorities -- thus, removing the stigma
that comes with having a criminal
record -- his name would likely have
already been thrown into the federal
NICS system. As a matter of course, states
frequently fail to send expungements (from
the local authorities) to NICS, meaning that
Taylor would probably have been prevented
from buying a gun, expungement or no.

So Taylor's other option would have been to
appeal directly to the feds and have the FBI
clear his name under a federal statute known
as the McClure-Volkmer law. However, for over
a decade, this option has been put into limbo
by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who got
language inserted into the FBI budget
preventing them from spending any money
to relieve law-abiding citizens from unfair
gun bans.

In other words, Sean Taylor could have been
banned for life from buying a gun.

This is one of the reasons that Gun Owners of
America has opposed the Instant Background
Check from the very moment that the National
Rifle Association thought it up and began
promoting it back in the 1980s.

Gun control did not keep Taylor's
murderers from getting a gun. But it
sure kept Taylor disarmed -- and dead.

One good thing has emerged from this needless
tragedy. Teammate Chris Samuels has made
a potentially life-saving decision. Samuels told
Sports Illustrated: "I was always scared of guns
growing up. But this situation has told me I need
one. I'd rather be prepared than to be like Sean
was and not have a gun in his house when he
really needed it."

© 2007 Larry Pratt - All Rights Reserved

The day of reckoning Is approaching !

America's Day Of
Reckoning Is At Hand

By Paul Craig Roberts

Pat Buchanan is too patriotic to come right out
and say it, but the message of his new book,
Day of Reckoning, is that America, as we
have known her, is finished. Moreover,
Naomi Wolf agrees with him. These two
writers of different political persuasions
arrive at America's demise from
different directions.

Buchanan explains how hubris, ideology,
and greed have torn America apart. A
neoconservative cabal with an alien
agenda captured the Bush administration
and committed American blood, energy,
and money to aggression against Muslim
countries in the Middle East, while
permitting America's domestic borders
to be overrun by immigrants and
exporting the jobs that had made the
US an opportunity society. War and
offshoring have taken a savage
economic toll while open borders
and diversity have created social and
political division.

In her new book, End of America: Letter
of Warning to a Young Patriot, Wolf
explains America's demise in terms
of the erosion of freedoms. She writes
that the 10 classic steps that are used
to close open societies are currently
being taken in the US. Martial law
is only a declaration away.

The Bush administration responded to
September 11 by initiating military
aggression in the Middle East and by
using fear and the "war on terror" to
implement police state measures at
home with legislation, presidential
directives, and executive orders

Overnight the US became a tyranny
in which people could be arrested and
incarcerated on the basis of
unsubstantiated accusation. Both
US citizens and non-citizens were
denied habeas corpus, due process,
and access to attorneys and
courts. Congress gave
Bush legislation establishing
military tribunals, the procedures
of which permit people to be
condemned to death on the basis
of secret evidence, hearsay, and
confessions extracted by
torture. Nothing of the like has
ever been seen before in the US.

The cancer might have metastasized
if the Guantanamo detainees had
actually been the dangerous terrorists
and enemy combatants that the Bush
regime declared them to be. Had the
administration actually possessed
evidence against the detainees, the
Bush regime might have succeeded
in dispensing with the
Constitution. Conviction of the
detainees could have led to what
Wolf calls a "fascist
expansion." Following the exercise
of its new powers, the regime could
have broadened the definition of
terrorist to include the regime's
critics, thus pulling citizens in
general into tribunals devoid of
civil liberty protections.

It could still turn out this way in
the event of another 9/11 attack,
whether real or orchestrated. But
momentarily the drive toward
tyranny has been blunted, because
the vast majority of detainees turned
out to be hapless individuals sold
into American captivity by warlords
responding to the bounty the US
paid for "terrorists." Any unprotected
individual was vulnerable to being
captured by Afghan and Pakistani
warlords and sold as a
"terrorist." The Americans needed
to show results, and the Bush regime
needed "terrorists" in order to feed
the fear its propaganda had generated.

In Stalinist Russia or Nazi Germany, the
absence of evidence would not have
mattered as the judicial system
produced the results demanded by
the tyrants. However, the US
military had not been sufficiently
corrupted for the Bush regime's
Guantanamo agenda to
succeed. Honorable officers, such
as Lt. Col. Stephen Abraham, were
able to discern that the US
government had no information
on the detainees and used
interrogations in order to rubber
stamp the a priori determination
that a detainee was a terrorist or
enemy combatant. Military
officers made these revelations
known to real courts before the
tribunal process could establish itself.

CounterPunch writer Andy Worthington's
recently published book, The
Guantanamo Files: The Stories of
the 759 Detainees in America's
Illegal Prison, proves that the
regime's claim that it had hundreds
of dangerous terrorists at
Guantanamo was just another
Bush administration lie.

Currently, support for Bush,
Cheney, and the neoconservative
agenda is low. However, Congress,
the press, and elections have proven
to be feeble opponents of the Bush
regime's drive toward war and
tyranny. It remains to be seen
whether the regime has sufficient
credibility or audacity to initiate
war with Iran or a false flag attack
that would revive the fascist
expansion of which Naomi Wolf warns.

The Bush administration has been
a catastrophe. Its failures are
unprecedented. Energy prices
are at all time highs. The US is
deeply in debt and dependent on
foreign creditors. The dollar has
lost 60 per cent of its value against
other tradable currencies, and its
reserve currency status, the basis
of American power, is in doubt. The
US has lost millions of middle class
jobs which have been replaced
with low paid domestic service
jobs. Except for the very rich,
Americans have experienced
no gains in real income in the
21st century. As the ladders of
upward mobility are dismantled
and the middle class struggles and
fails, America is left with a few rich
and many poor. America's reputation
and credibility are damaged perhaps
beyond repair. Congress and the
press have enabled the executive
branch's disregard of the Constitution
and civil liberty. The US is mired
in two lost wars which are pushing
Lebanon and nuclear-armed Pakistan
into deepening political crises.

As Buchanan concludes, "Our day
of reckoning is at hand."

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant
Secretary of the Treasury in the
Reagan Administration. He is the
author of Supply-Side Revolution :

"Hate Crime" laws seek to end free speech.

National Prayer Network


By Harmony Grant
26 Nov 07

Demonstrators led by Al Sharpton recently marched on
to demand justice through federal use of
hate laws. Seeking justice from hate laws is like seeking
weight loss at McDonald's.

Sharpton said every noose-hanging should be
prosecuted. Would that include attention-getting
incidents like when a black student hung a noose
on her dorm room door in an attempt to get out
of university?

And if every word or symbol of racial or religious
hatred is to be prosecuted, when will lawyers file
briefs against those who cuss in Jesus' name or
call Christians' moral beliefs "homophobic?" Along
with blasphemous art like the crucifix hung in
urine, these words certainly seem like symbols
of “religious hatred” of Christianity.

But—as we’ve pointed out innumerable times—
hate laws aren’t an instrument of justice. They
are a political tool designed to privilege certain
social groups and silence others. They end up as
instruments of oppression for those in power,
eventually silencing the very groups who may have
once sought their protection!

Unfortunately, this is still not well understood. Students
in West Virginia also recently rallied. They said hate
crime laws "should have protected" Megan Williams,
victim of days' long horrific torture allegedly at the hands
of six white people. (Their logic is flawed. Shouldn't
existing laws against horrific torture have punished
Megan's attackers—regardless of her skin color?)

Hate crime laws are so complicated that the prosecutor
on the Williams case still hasn't filed these charges,
despite the marches and protests. That should tell
us something.

A number of Jewish skullcaps can be seen on the
news video from the West Virginia rally. Jewish
groups, particularly the Anti-Defamation League
of B'nai B'rith, have always led the charge toward
hate crime laws. ( Watch Rev. Ted Pike's Hate
Laws: Making Criminals of Christians
) Police
from 15 European nations just met in London to
be trained in hate crimes response by Paul
Goldenberg of the American Jewish Committee. The
seminar was organized by the ADL-led
Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe (OSCE).

Goldenberg said OSCE will launch a hate crimes
information-sharing network on Friday, Nov. 23.
It will “facilitate the exchange of information and
intelligence on hate symbols and organized hate
groups.” This will pave just another dangerous
curve in the highway toward international
censorship of organized Jewry’s critics.

In 2006, the AJC attacked Jewish anti-Zionists
in an essay by Alvin Rosenfield. The work was
widely criticized as a slanderous suppression of
healthy debate. Unfortunately, leftist academics
who resented the essay didn’t recognize the larger
threat. AJC—with the Anti-Defamation League of
B’nai B’rith and the rest of organized Jewry—seeks
to actually criminalize, not just slander, those who
criticize Zionism, Judaism, or other protected
groups. And they are gaining the power to do so.

This week, the US Department of Justice
released a fact sheet on 2007 hate crimes and
civil rights violations. The government says it
prosecuted a record number of civil rights
violations during this past fiscal year. The
FBI reported Monday
that hate crimes rose
8 percent in 2006.

The US government's fact sheet notes that it
received praise from the Anti-Defamation
League for prosecution of several crimes. Given
ADL's tawdry record of domestic spying and
anti-Christianity, this is astonishing. I first
read the comments about ADL praise in a
news story and figured that writer had
chosen to highlight it. But when I double-
checked the government website, there it
was! It speaks to the power of this
non-governmental Jewish advocacy
group, that their gold stars are listed in
an official government fact sheet.

Americans desperately need to understand
the ominous agenda of ADL and other leftist
Jewish organizations that seek to silence
legitimate speech—like moral criticism of
homosexuality or moral criticism of Israel —
through hate crime laws.

Instead, shortsighted leaders like Al Sharpton try
to earn popularity points by foolishly promising
they will provide greater justice.

Writing for the Chicago Tribune, black
columnist Clarence Page says the definition
of hate crime is too narrow! Page argues it
should include black-on-black violence. (Intraracial
violence--white on white and black on black--is
far more common than interracial.) Page
describes the brutal torture of a Haitian mother
and her son in Florida . Page asks, "Was that a
"hate" crime? It certainly wasn't about love."

Unfortunately, Page misses the whole
point. Instead of calling for crimes to be
treated equally--regardless of the skin color
or motives of the attackers or victims--he asks
for hate law preferences to be expanded still
further! He suggests all violence against women
--including "black-inflicted terrors"--should be
prosecuted as hate crimes. This is lunacy!

The muddled thinking doesn't stop this side of the
Atlantic . In Scotland , a lawmaker is trying to get
handicapped and homosexual people included
under existing hate crime laws against racially
or religiously motivated crimes. I recently
commented on British attempts to include
the elderly. Maybe someday we’ll come full
circle—back to equal protection for all.

There are two bright spots in a sky of
thunderheads. A Pennsylvania court ruled that
the legislature must toss out a 2002 amendment
that added "sexual orientation" to protected
status and also enhanced penalties to their
ADL-created state hate law. Conservative
Christians led by Michael Marcavage of Repent
America challenged this amendment after 11
evangelists were arrested under the
amendment for peacefully protesting at
a gay pride parade in Philadelphia three years ago.

On the federal level, the federal hate crimes
bill is in trouble. Conservative Republicans and
liberal Democrats threaten to defeat the arms
bill to which the hate crimes amendment is
attached. (See, We Can Still Kill the Hate Bill)
The Democrats don't want unrestrained
funding for the Iraq war. The Republicans
don't want the hate bill linked to the arms
bill. This is a very unexpected, encouraging
rift in Congress which all who love freedom
should do their best to widen. Although now
in recess, your Senators and House members
should receive this message, either in their
home offices or at the Capitol: "Please don't
vote for the National Defense Appropriations
Act, H.R. 1585 with the hate bill attached."

Let both conservatives and liberals in Congress
know the real aim of hate crime laws:

ending freedom.

U.S. government murders citizens at will.

Elian Gonzales' kidnapping by Janet Reno and her Nazis


Ruby Ridge, Idaho

Malibu, California

Detroit, Michigan


Dinuba, California

Santa Ana, California

Amadou Diallo

Michael Carpenter

John Perrin

Margaret Mitchell

Stanton Crew

Floyd Wayne Houston

Mario Paz

Ismael Mena

Troy James Davis

Cornel Young Jr

Patrick Dorismond

Mitchell L. Virgil Jr

Andrea Hall

Shannon L. Smith

Kevin Eugene Boyer

Ji Young Yoo

Alberto Sepulveda

John Adams

Anthony Dwain Lee

The Green Movement.

'Greens' movement may have darker agenda
2007 11 12

By Frank Malloy |

Some environmentalists, such
as Britain's
Prince Phillip, formerly
the president
of the World Wildlife
are showing us
the hidden hand behind the
eco-environmental movement.

When asked what he would be
were he to be reincarnated, he said
he would wish to return as "a
killer virus to lower human

population levels."

Unfortunately, as a
of population
control, he was
not kidding.

Mikhail Gorbachev, former Russian
founder of the Gorbachev
Foundation and head of
Cross International,claims the
environment crisis is the
cornerstone of
the new world order.

Consider oceanographer Jacques
Costeau's article in a United Nations
1991 UNESCO Courier, whereby he
called for the elimination of 350,000
people per day in order to
"stabilize world population."

Us against them- The American Police Mentality.

America In Crisis -
Increasing Police
By Ted Lang
Police brutality as a regular occurrence in
America was once limited to specific areas
in big cities. It was motivated by an "us-versus-
them" racist police mentality that was formerly
isolated to ghettos and included also organized
crime strongholds in such big cities as Chicago
and New York during the government-imposed
Prohibition back in the 1920s and 30s. The
"them" in the combative police mindset
during this time was comprised of a certain
race or a particular criminal class, and
focused mainly on organized mobsters
personified by bootleggers and gamblers
generally identified as elements of the
Italian Mafia. And in the mid-1800s, Irish
gangs in New York City were commonplace.
Back in the early part of the last century
and still in existence today, were the black
and Hispanic ghettos representative of the
cities of New York and Los Angeles. Even
without direct public approval, an underlying
public attitude existed that condoned
isolated incidents of "rubber hose" back
jail cell or stationhouse basement
mistreatment and torture of ghetto or
race specific individuals while in police
captivity. "They probably deserved it" was
in all likelihood the general attitude
characteristic of this laissez faire public
aloofness. And both the police and the
public are aware of the high rates of crime
in the impoverished ghettos of the big cities.
Organized criminals and gangsters, a
subculture of American society, could
easily be identified as not only antisocial,
but extremely dangerous as typified by the
rampant machine-gun shootings and gang
murders in public by the criminal gangs of
the 20s and 30s. Territorial gang wars as
well as machine-gun battles with "Eliott
partner=rssnyt&emc=rss Ness" Treasury
agents were all the result of the government's
ill-conceived Prohibition against alcoholic
beverage consumption. The battle lines
were drawn by law enforcement and
organized crime in the struggle to provide
the bootlegging demanded by the public
and banned by a meddlesome state. But
the then-illegal liquor trade made so by
the sanctimonious saints of yet another
soon-to-be more efficient criminal
subculture, American government, was
the product of our government's continuing
stupid and failed attempts to legislate
morality. The latter is an impossible feat
for the most immoral sector of any society.
Police brutality and murders in small
town rural areas were concentrated mostly
in the South, and were exemplified
primarily by police-permitted lynchings
and torture deaths directed towards black
Americans in those locales. The Civil Rights
movement of the 1960s also produced
among virtually all the police departments
of our nation, an increased police
intolerance for anti-racial demonstrations. The
murders of three
MurderOfCivil RgtsWorkers.html Civil
Rights Activists and the subsequent
cover-up of the crime in Mississippi in
1964 became the classic reference point
for Southern inhospitality on the part of
both a select minority of its citizenry [the
Klan] and police compounded by a
nebulous and undefined code of public approval.
In my high school years in the late 1950s, I
joined the police-sponsored Civil Defense
unit which met at the local police station
in Queens, New York. In addition to the
mandatory first aid training I received in
high school, the Civil Defense unit also
trained me in first aid thereby reinforcing
my life-saving and emergency medical
techniques. As part of the local precinct
of the NYPD, I mingled with the police
officers in the stationhouse.
The grumblings among the police officers
after televised news segments were aired
depicting police clashes with peaceful
marchers and demonstrators clearly
indicated more than a mere contempt
for both the Civil Rights movement and
the participating demonstrators on the
part on those officers of the NYPD. Members
of this very Northern and "Union"-oriented
police department became extremely
intolerant of these demonstrations in spite
of the fact that they were sanctioned by the
First Amendment and completely
peaceful. One of those televised news
vignettes showed the police and state
troopers assembled in a Southern town. The
newsreel recorded the police charge wherein
they literally tore into a column of African-
Americans and supportive whites that were
under the leadership of the late Reverend
Dr. Martin Luther King.
The police used attack dogs, swung their
billy clubs indiscriminately, and brutally
attacked women and even elderly
demonstrators, knocking them to the
ground and then continuously beating
them as their victims lay bleeding on the
ground. This wasn't crowd control; these
were acts of horrendous police brutality
and torture on public display. These
people had a right to demonstrate, were
not tying up traffic nor committing any
other type of criminal damage to the local
community. And they were marching
while prominently holding and displaying
the American flag. But they failed to obey
"police orders," even though those
"orders" were unconstitutional.
The site of that massive out-of-control
police rampage is still etched upon my
mind. It changed something inside
me. It planted a tiny seed of distrust for
both government and its police. It didn't,
at least at that time, extend my distrust
and disappointment to the uniforms of
the American military; I served my time
in the US Army. But, even that seed was
planted. Misguided volunteers for a
volunteer Army [or a Civil Defense unit]
controlled by expensively suited and
tie-wearing lunatics and genocidal
maniacs can still result in unwarranted,
unjust, and unconstitutional mass
murders and torture, even when
intending "to bring democracy" to a
people of another nation that never
asked for it and never did our nation
and its people any harm.
How did we "progress" from a "protect
and serve" mentality to one where every
American citizen is a criminal until the
citizen-victim proves otherwise under
taser torturing, physical beatings, and
outright life-threatening assault by
police? How did we go from an
"innocent until proven guilty" foundation
to the current government attitude
of guilty until proven innocent? The
police mindset has been transformed
into a new version of "us [the police]
versus them" [every citizen in America]!
The causes for this hatred by all levels
of police for America's citizens can be
attributed to four factors. The first
factor is technology. Police are now
able and capable of using monumental
technology against their new-found
enemy, the American people. Second,
police across America at all levels
have been unified by federal money,
benefits, equipment and reward-
producing initiatives provided by
Washington, DC. Third, the mindset
created by Cheney-Bush utilizing 9/11
and the success of Clinton's Waco
Massacre; everyone in America should
be, and WILL be, considered a terrorist,
or at least an "enemy combatant," until
convincingly proved to be
otherwise. Employing cruel and unusual
punishment is now the standard method
of proving innocence. Prohibitions
against these methods as documented
in that "goddamned piece of paper"
are no longer valid. And finally,
government's never-ending progressive
need for control, more control, and still
more control of its subjects. The "War
on Drugs" ["controlled" substances] and
gun "control" are typical. More and
more complicated and unintelligible
regulatory control mumbo-jumbo is
just what a dictatorship needs to make
sure every citizen does something
wrong so they can be arrested.
Let's look at these in turn. Technology
today is completely mind-boggling. Police
can employ infrared heat-sensitive
electronic scanners to focus on targeted
perpetrators inside brick and concrete
buildings. This technology is now available
to our military if not "our" police. Through
federal programs, it obviously can be made
available to police. And the government's
contempt and increasing violations of the
1878 Posse Comitatus Act will now enable
present advanced military technology to be
used against American citizens as well as
formerly legitimate, organized public
Video cameras for citizen control by police
are everywhere in America, and are being
expanded exponentially. Police now carry
fully automatic machine-guns as "standard
operating procedure" or SOP. Police dress
up in "SWAT" semi-military gear letting
America know that they are prepared to
shoot and kill with minimum
provocation. Razor wire barriers at
political conventions are also
SOP. Rubber bullets, audio weaponry,
disabling gases and smoke and other
"crowd control" disablers are also SOP.
Second, American police at all levels are
generously supported by the American
taxpayer via federal benefits delivered
to local, county and state police via
military surplus, and the required
acceptance of federal "initiatives"
such as the "War on Drugs" and the
"Global War on Terror," as well as
other federal initiatives. Police
departments at all levels in America
also become the recipients of federal
funding grants, special training, and
even the newest standard and surplus
military equipment. This federal
involvement with police departments
all across the country has progressed
to where it now unifies all American
police thereby creating yet another
dimension of a standing military force
so obnoxious to the Founding Fathers.
Third, the establishment of "terror groups"
did not start with either the 1993 World
Trade bombing or the destruction of
the World Trade complex on September 11,
2001. It actually started with the Waco
siege and massacre under the first Clinton
regime. The combined use of police, the
federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms [BATF], FBI, and the United
States military demonstrate clearly the
fear the Founders had in allowing the
federal government a standing army
and its horrific power to kill and
destroy. And although BATF and FBI
are "suit-and-tie" alphabet agencies, as
Waco demonstrated, they can and do act
in concert as a dangerous standing army.
The violation of the Posse Comitatus Act
was blatant, but as usual, since the
federal government can wield massive
killing power, and along with the
compliance of a virtually non-existent
American press, our killer government
experienced absolutely no modicum of
challenge from the media thereby
getting away totally with this most
egregious criminal outrage which in
effect supplants and makes irrelevant
the Boston Massacre and even the
American Revolution itself. Terrorism
is now used by American government to
control its own citizens. Justification for
such state paranoia was derived from
so-called anti-government terror groups
targeting America, whether real or imagined.
The Waco Massacre was totally
unnecessary. It perfectly demonstrates the
fourth factor. A simple mistake on a firearm
form, or a gun barrel that's an inch too
short, or the mere mention of the word
"gun," or a personal amount of a "controlled
substance," and uniformed police thugs
are now authorized the use of deadly
force. It is no longer necessary to prove
a crime has been committed, and a
crime is now defined by actions that are
really no crime at all because no fellow
citizen or citizens were injured. No
damage to any form of citizen or citizen
property need be proven. Waco was
planned and executed by Bill Clinton
and Janet Reno to terrify American
citizens and gun owners by demonstrating
the unlimited total power and authority
of government. Cheney-Bush are now
using this total power in Iraq and
Afghanistan to also kill, maim and
torture the unarmed and innocent
civilians of nations that did US no
harm. But what goes around will
eventually come around! Get ready
for yet another Waco or 9/11!
What is most horrifying for Americans
is the realization that there is only one
direction for ALL government: unchecked,
unlimited growth and never-ending
expansion of deadly force. And for
those individuals who were previously
totally incapable of understanding the
relationship of expanded government
and the resultant lessening of individual
freedoms, that relationship can now be
more easily understood. Whoever
offered that government "continually
grows" itself was telling it like it really
is. Look at the rate of government
expansionism! Look how increasingly
dangerous government at all levels
has become! Now ordinary traffic
pullovers and "confrontations" with
police as in just simply asking a police
officer for geographic directions when
lost can result in tasering, beating,
torture and even death.
As "We the People" are supposedly
"represented" by "two" political parties,
yet both with exactly the same agenda,
and Congressional representatives and
senators that completely ignore the will
of the people when it is publicly aired via
elections, it is obvious that the real power
and authority in America is not the people
but an unseen and unknown shadow
government empowered by the
international bankers seeking a
"New World Order." The avenue for
a reasonable, peaceful solution to this
increasing tyranny is growing
narrower and shorter.
How should we respond to the growing
threat of the state? Peaceably, of course!
But the rapidly increasing technological
power of the uniformed state guards
across America and their exponentially
growing violence against any and all
citizens, is working rapidly to prevent
any attempt at a peaceful
solution. Their total crushing of
individual freedom and citizen "wiggle
room" is threatening to destroy any
peaceful debate and corrective political
action. And as we become dangerously
closer to this non-solution, only one
course of action will be open: street
violence and revolution. All it will
take is another horrific outrage the
public finally realizes is government
perpetrated and violence may
erupt. And it appears that our
political class is both aware of
this as well as completely intent
on making it happen. The state is
powerfully equipped with dangerous
weapons of mass destruction; Waco
proves that our federal government
will use them against US!
The perpetrators of crime, formerly
identified as the "criminal element," are
ALWAYS prepared for violence. A
criminal does not commit rape, robbery,
assault and murder unless he intends
to succeed at his crime by employing
violence. Honest, decent, law-abiding
Americans just want to be left alone. They
are NOT prepared for violence, unless
they come to realize that no matter
how hard they try, violence cannot be
avoided. And when that realization
hits home, who is it that better deserves
the suffering produced from acts of
violence? Wouldn't that be the
unprovoked originator of the violence?
What happens if the American people
join together and determine that ALL
police and government authority is
"them?" Under police state slavery, we
will all be treated violently, and enslaved
and tortured. We will be sent to
forced-labor work camps [being built
by Cheney-Bush right now!] to enrich
the central bankers and their New
World Order. If we are to be killed
and tortured by heavily armed uniformed
government guards, we will suffer and
die anyway, so what real choice do we have?
Considering these scenarios, perhaps we
are fast approaching yet another time in
our republic's brief history when we
should again consider another:
"Live Free Or Die!"
c.2007 THEODORE E. LANG - All rights reserved
Ted Lang is a political analyst and freelance writer.