InhumanAcumen

America is lost, and we Americans lost it

2007-08-28T09:21:00.000-07:00

What does it take to have someone state the obvious, namely that America is lost. On this august occasion I hereby propose and nominate my recently departed kitty, "Commodore Fluffy" to the position of Head of State, inasmuch as in death she could do at least as well as the Smirking Chimp does, allegedly in life.

I AM sorry. I know you don't want to hear this; but it is true nonetheless. Gonzo's departure is in hopes of preventing more outrageous exposures, probably the least of which is the firing of I believe nine U.S. attorneys, all of whom have distinguished records, all of whom were doing the unthinkable and unforgivable---doing their job. This is the very same Gonzales who told congress that he couldn't remember anything relevant to his job, previous discussions, etc. etc. ad nausiam, and who declared, to a stunned Senators Lahey and Congressman Waxman and a naive America that Habeus Corpus is not fundamental to the Constitution of the United States of America. This insight is staggering both in its breath of defiance of history and logic, and in its depth of moral depravity.

The Washington Post, demonstrating once again that no ignominy is excessive, brushed off Gonzo's critics and described his "lackluster performance" or the like, adjuring that there was nothing noteworthy in the firing, and moreover--get this—that Clinton fired ninety some-odd attorneys, thereby--I suppose--trumping Chimp's record. (Sorry, but the combination of his name and "The President of the United States" sticks in my craw.) Clinton was the President and he never fired ninety federal attorneys; Gonzo is a political hack.

Not a month goes by but someone else flees the sinking ship, following in the tiny footsteps of their predecessors, the shipside rodents. The less-than-charismatic dancer, Carl Rove, also departed, not with a bang but with a whimper, hopefully to head off inquiry into his role in the Valerie Plame affair, together with his part in a host of other atrocities.

Up is Down, Left is Right, or in the understanding of Winston, slavery is freedom, lies are truth, and we all love Big Brother. We have the sadly comical sight of an ex-premier, Allawi, chipping in to improve the PR of the current puppet leader al Maliki. We have "The Surge," another spectacular and dazzling strategy that would leave George Patton speechless with wonder, proposed by that Denizen of Defence Strategy, a man with less than no military experience (draft-doging and quitting)--you guessed it--the Commander-in-Chef--of the backyard Texas Bar-B-Q, the Smirking Chimp, while at the same time Peter Pumpkin Eater, head of the Joint Chiefs, opining that perhaps we need to back off from Iraq (not leave, of course, just a teensy-weensy "reduction" in our commitment, giving as the excuse, that we just might need to bury their bodies in yet some other country. "Surge v. Reduction in force," sounds like a divorce case before an Administrative Law Judge. Perhaps we need a surge-protector. (I know, I know; but I just couldn't resist.)

The Vice (P)resident has developed a remarkable new branch of what used to be the solitary executive: the Office of Official Secrets, which is, according to him, impervious to any congressional inquiry.

All of which brings us to the real, true, and insufferable culprits--the Congress of the United States.

Human nature has been rightfully criticized when no one will go to the aid of a mugging victim, the passers-by gaping in silence and in inaction. How much more outrageous is the Congress, possessing all the power and (gasp!) responsibility, the very mandate which not only empowers but requires it to protect the Constitution by using its power of impeachment to rescue the country from precisely the situation that now exists. Its lowest point was the Speaker, Nancy Pellosi, having a clear mandate from the people, announcing that Impeachment was "off the table." Not one single representative has brought articles of impeachment to the floor. Not one.

What in God's name does it take? This state of affairs is the very prototype and poster child of impeachable offenses--high crimes and misdemeanors. If these leaders aren't culpable, who in Blazes would ever culpable?

The worst part of this all is that we have only ourselves to blame, and I don't mean this as a mantra, a theory. When Pat Tillman is murdered because he was to file for Conscientious Objector status, when parents do not object to their children participating in a war that anyone with the courage and capacity for original thought could see is totally unjustified, a sham, based upon a demonstrable lie--then sadly, tragically, they are to blame even more directly than the others whom I criticized above.

I'm sorry, but the truth hurts. During the Viet Nam War I was drafted to be a doctor in the military, presumably relatively out of harm's way; yet I knew that this atrocity of a war was to be a tragedy and a blight on our record as a super power and so I refused to serve, bearing the judicial wrath of the Fed. That was preferable to trying to explain to my children why I was part of that atrocity. And to those who are ready to pounce, forget it: I fought my way INto the military years later and served with distinction, receiving a Humanitarian Medal and a Naval Letter of Commendation from a Line Captain for my part in a rescue operation off the territorial waters of Viet Nam--with which country we have diplomatic relations, for no reason that I can see, but what do I know?

Wars typically have goals and circumstances that propel them to the forefront. What justification is there to this war? More to the point, what was the goal, the endpoint?

You say, "you can't pick your conflicts." To those who say this, I say, you're damn right you do; and you take the consequences. It's called "a code of morality." It is held by each individual, and he cannot offer up and sacrifice his responsibility for making this choice by some innane pretense to patriotism. That's what was said in Nazi Germany.

The purpose of the actions of these Unholy Minions of Satan was to destroy America. This is not poetry. We keep rationalizing away our leaders' actions as "ill chosen...poorly thought-out...reckless," etc. etc. It is nonesuch. It is exactly what it appears to be. Our leaders are most definitely not American citizens. They are Corporate Globalists, and all of their actions spring from that identification, and nothing they have done contradicts it.

The goal? To enslave the world population. In the warped minds of these elitists, this is the last challenge left. As any other addicts, these life forms, addicted to power, have nothing left, nothing to accomplish. Our greatest weakness, even greater than our unwillingness to think and to act, is our naïveté in thinking that no human could stoop to this level. And not unlike other addicts I have treated, they will do anything to get their fix.

It's just that simple.

All we have left is whatever residual self-esteem we can dreg up to use to fight to the bitter end, no matter what the cost, no matter what, live free or die. After all, we haven't accomplished a thing so far. This is a commitment--a sacrifice we owe to our children.

I'll tell you what is my greatest fear: the fear of dying before I have done this much.

"Your people are my people"

2007-03-27T22:28:00.000-07:00

(Originally written in Janury 2007:) Not twenty-four hours ago Hran Dink, the editor of the only Armenian newspaper in Turkey was assassinated on the street as he existed his office. Immediately thereafter large crowds of enraged citizens--presumably including numbers of Armenians--crowded downtown Istanbul. Dink had long been a visible crusader for acknowledgment of what has been known as the Armenian Holocaust. Despite numerous threats to his life, Dink courageously continued to write and to speak out.

This business of speaking out is risky business--again. We know this notion as an abstraction; but do we realize it as an institutionalized polemic in current society? Do we dare? Do we dare? (Shades of T.S. Elliot.)

I remember those glorious and stirring yet touching black and white films of the 40's,depicting the drama of WWII and of the fear and the consequences of speaking out against the irrepressible Wehrmacht. We winced when we saw the scenes depicting those courageous freedom-fighters who fought back, often publicly, risking and inevitably losing their lives. Even so, we hastily reassured ourselves that this would not happen again--or if it did, it wouldn't happen to us.

Apparently reality has not been subservient to art, for we have been treated to the identical spectre, both in Iraq and here in the United States. In Israel, for those interested parties, a mirror image parody of events occuring here has been occuring there, with events here possibly lagging somewhat behind, like the tape loop of a live interview.

How does it happen that people speak out and act out, at great risk to themselves, and on the basis of a moral principle, an abstraction, in contrast to more mundane and practical considerations? The Patriarchs initially did not rise to the occasion, but responded with reluctance--even incredulity--to The Call. Moses wore the Almighty's patience to a frazzle as he would not be convinced by one after another of miraculous demonstrations of the Almighty's power. Saul--later to be the Apostle Paul--did even worse to his brethren, until the scales dropped from his eyes. The Apostles were cruicified, without resistance, for their commitment. Rabbi Akiva in the first century, and at the age of 93 years, had his flesh flailed from his body, and in the process, gave an impassioned lecture on commitment to G-d, much to the incredulity of Jews and Romans alike. Joan of Arc responded to the alternative of giving up her commitment, "Light your fires!"

These--all--are the extreme examples of commitments which most likely had their roots and growth long before the event or events that defined them historically.

Ruth, in the book of her name, when asked by Boaz to be his wife and to leave all that she knew and loved behind, responds,

"Entreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God." (KJV)

it would appear that a deep and profound and intimate love, existing on a level and in a plane beyond words, allows--no, impells--those so stricken to offer their lives gladly, even joyously.

All of which brings us back to Hran Dink, who risked and then gave his life for his commitment to the Armenian people. Surely he was moved by a similar love for his people.

It seems we can have security at the sacrifice of principles, or principles without security. How would we respond to The Call? Will we respond with trembling out of fear, or out anticipation borne from commitment?

More to the point, do we really want to know?

Iraq? What you don't understand

2007-01-14T03:20:00.000-08:00

I see Olmert and the Israeli government as the absolute mirror image of Bush and the Neocons, particularly as they are working together. The major obstacles on the horizon are 1) peak oil, and 2) uncontrolled Islam.

What does trouble me is two things: What the Neocons plan or will accept and what unintended consequences might result.

It's clear to a blind man that the unintended consequences could be disastrous, as the Muslim nations become more and more emboldened. Obviously this could take all forms; and anyone who honestly believes they know the subtlety and sense of all of the Islamic combinations and permutations politically has got to be smoking confiscated herbs.

What troubles me more are the potential intended consequences--including that which many people regard as inconceivable purposefully; and I refer specifically to the destruction of Israel.

It would please the vast majority of powers if Israel were eradicated. This would please the Muslim world no end, and Saudi Arabia in particular, who could most benefit from such an occurrence, particularly as it would not only deflect attention from her but might even be envisioned as a way of allowing the Sunni world to gain predominance, and to do it quickly, before Iran actually is able to build a nuclear weapon. What most people don't realize is that a nuclear Iran is almost as much a threat to Saudi Arabia as it would be to Israel and others. The other problem concerning the Saudis is the Central Republics possibly re-aligning with Russia, or worse yet, with the evolving Central American countries.

Such a plan is also urged by the rapid advancement of China and the chilling possibility of rapprochement with Russia or at least her re-entry into the international arena.

In this scenario, Olmert and his ilk are doing this very work now and have been working on a parallel path in Israel as is Bush in the USA. The net result would be a free-flow of oil, with the Saudis and joint domination of Iraq by the Saudis and the Americans.

By "Americans" of course I mean the Neocon empire, which will be the North American Union, compromised of Mexico, USA and Canada, substituting the Amero for the dollar and therefore ditching the problem associated with the Federal Reserve generated worthless-backs.

The potential armed forces have largely been depleted and the continent will be controlled by Gulf State police. With Israel descimated, the remaining Jewish population will be easily manageable in the Diaspora as always been the case in the past. The potential existence of Israel as a moral, military and spiritual force will then gone, this time with no protector to resurrect the Jewish people.

Did I miss anything?

Let's hear it for the lemmings!

2007-01-11T19:02:00.000-08:00

Please, somebody--anybody--tell me what I'm missing here!

After today's portentious announcement that more troops were going to be sent to Iraq, we are treated to quotes from the troops themselves, ranging from cautious agreement, depending upon how the troops are used, to weary contempt, stating that the folks at home just don't know what is actually going on over there.

Okay. Enlighten us. I admit: I am totally nonplussed. I'm stymied. I don't have a clue; and I don't like to admit that out loud.

I cannot figure out for the life of me just what in hell the President of the United States is doing. "Surge?" Who writes his material? Is he a military person? Does he have divine insight to which the rest of us are not privy? He mulled this over for a week and then exited his sanctuary, not unlike the oracle at Delphi, and rendered his pronouncement to the enthralled multitude?

He fires the Generals (after all, only military commanders, not politicians,) who don't like the idea, and appoints some who--at least initially--won't object. Isn't he supposed to consult with military leaders so that he can make an informed decision--about policy, not about whose head is to roll?

If the mission is accomplished, then why are the pesky details so difficult to manage? What was our goal (or should be our goal) if the mission was subsequently misplaced?

Recent history shows us that leaders make decisions based upon one or more of the following considerations: 1) obvious motives, moral or otherwise, but clearly comprehensible, 2) devious motives, not obvious to most people but insiders 3) serious alterations in a leader's psyche, characteristic or unknown.

We can rule out "obvious motives." This leaves numbers two and three.

"Devious motives" seems a sure bet. Only question is--how many and what are they? Interestingly, "serious alterations" is unclear, as Bush may very well be operating under the direct instruction of Higher Powers, which, at least in part, seems inescapable.

There's another possibility. Call it "2a." It is a collective aberation of leaders, together with a nefarious motive. In the current situation I can conceive of a plan to hand a tidy profit to the military corporations, coupled with a desire to position us close to Russia's southwestern border, as well as proximate to Iran, coupled with a petulant contempt for the Moslem world, possibly even extending to the awareness that chaos looms and that those very leaders are ready to bail out and leave the field to whomever. Could they actually do that?

You betcha.

How to Control Americans—thought control mind control, disinformation and other naughty things-concl

2007-01-09T23:44:00.000-08:00

"The science of mind control has achieved the scale of a criminal subculture, and left a wide path of chaos and confusion that crosses all international boundaries. The carnage takes place under the noses of the public, obscured by cover stories and dead witnesses and the incredible naïveté of most news reporters." (Alex Constantine, Psychic Dictatorship in the U.S.A., 1995, Portland, OR, Feral House p.xl)

“Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which HaShem G-d had made.” (Genesis 3:1)

I had referred to the outlines of what happens in a controlled world in a previous article.

In my first article on this subject, I gave an overview and some of the salient documents on this subject. The available proof is vast. The problem lies in the conventional understanding of what constitutes “proof.”

Typically, those who wish to denigrate and to humiliate those who claim proof is available of extensive mind control activity in the US and in other areas of the world, attack the notion of “proof;” and because most of us have only a vague idea of what proof consists, I want to discuss some basic notions so that you will be better equipped to think about the subject in general and those detractors in particular. For those of you who are familiar with formal and material logic, I apologize in advance for simplifying.

A “proof” or an “evidence” of the truth of a statement is a specific instance of the thing being alleged. Thus the proof, for example, could be eyewitness testimony to some event. This is a good example, for even eyewitness testimony can be mistaken. So the more evidence for the existence or the claim of something, the stronger the case can be made for that claim. Generally speaking, the more witnesses that corroborate an event in its essentials, the more sure the proof is considered to be.

Please note, however, that human beings are not infallible, so the fact that people can make mistakes is not prima facie evidence that they have made a mistake. Besides, who trusts someone who has never made mistakes?

The most common examples we have of proof and of degrees of confidence can be seen in the different standards for “proof” in a court of law: For lesser offenses, “the preponderance of the evidence” may suffice. At the other extreme, as in capital cases, a conclusion “proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and to a certainty” is required. Seen from this perspective, “proof” can be seen to be like pieces in a jigsaw puzzle. The more pieces, correctly placed, the clearer and therefore the more convincing is the picture.

Life, however, does not accord us the luxury of such certainty, nor is it even necessary—in fact, such a demand can be downright ridiculous. Supposed you expected your son or daughter to be home by a certain time, and they do not appear. Do you shrug off your concerns because, strictly speaking, you don’t have “proof” of trouble? We intuitively know these things; but what is it actually that we know?

We know that something could happen, something dreadful; and that is sufficient enough a reason for us to be alarmed and then to act upon that alarm. But wait a moment. Aren’t we “assuming the worst?” And haven’t we all been admonished about making assumptions, or aren’t we jumping to conclusions? Indeed we are; and we had better jump. Were we were to walk, it may prove to be too late by the time we arrive at our conclusion so as to confirm or reject it.

The difference lies in the concept of purpose.. When we are dealing with matters of urgency and of survival, we do not have the luxury of such proof. If our purpose is our survival or that of our loved ones, we are obligated to make whatever assumptions we may know that might threaten our survival, and then proceed to search for proof to back these assumptions. If we do not find the proof, all well and good; however, it has hardly been a waste of time to do so.

If you cannot locate your toddler child, and you have a pool on your property, where is the first place you are going to rush to look? If it is inordinately quiet in the children’s room, don’t you dash in to reassure yourself everything is okay?

One of the reasons we do not or cannot make assumptions is that we do not have any prior experiences to forewarn us. It is for this reason we must educate ourselves to history and its lessons. It may seem far-fetched to us that history can be so vital to our survival today; but a good understanding of history will prove to us exactly the opposite.

One—if not the greatest—tragedy of today’s “educational system” is that young people have no sense of history. And as George Santayana so poignantly put it, “those who do not learn the lessons of history will have the misfortune of reliving them.” In the context of control of populations and of the deceptions used to accomplish this end, the best article to define this issue that I have seen to date is: Fake Terror—the Road to War and Dictatorship

To complicate matters further, much of what is happening to us, to our country, is kept hidden from us, so that it is difficult to garner suspicion, and it is easy for the Powers That Be to dismiss our concerns. Without knowledge of the technology that is actually in existence today in the Intelligence community and the military it is very difficult to conceive of what is actually happening.

I can tell you for an absolute fact that the technology exists today to scan your thoughts and actually to introduce, by the use of specific frequencies, certain ideas and emotions without the recipients being aware. Please do not take my word for this but do a search for “mind control” and comparable technologies, and you will not believe your eyes.

This has been formalized in a very chillingly objective fashion by the NSA, which has routine procedures for implanting such ideas—even without the exotic mind control technology that I mentioned earlier. NSA’s Subliminal Posthypnotic Scripts outlines exactly how this is done.

Here’s a chilling verbatim quote from the NSA training manual:

“7.Stage 3 (Extreme Process): _1.This method is very severe and usually results in a two to five year program._Because of the severity of the suffering, the subject is usually permanently_impaired for integration into normal mainstream life and is essentially_institutionalized” (”The NSA and Mind Control—Part 3.”

There are numerous technologies available. Two of the most intrusive are: HRIC and EDOM:

HRIC stands for “Hypnotic Radio Intra-cerebral Control” and accomplishes just that. You can find a detailed description of the technology in: Project Open Mind Part 2.

The Psychologist, Martin Cannon, wrote a seminal work on the subject of governmental mind control passed off as “alien abductions,” and presents a very plausible hypothesis for explaining them without reference to aliens, in The Controllers—a New Hypothesis of Alien Abductions.

If you need a hard-nosed investigative reporter to show you the depth and magnitude of governmental activity over many years, I recommend Sherman Skolnick’s page: Sherman Skolnick Reports. This man single-handedly brought down the corrupt Illinois judicial system. Tragically, Sherman passed away in May of last year.

Finally, the field of scalar physics gives us another vista of a Soviet threat, not hitherto imagined. Here is video that is guaranteed to alleviate any residual tranquility you may possess regarding the future.

In summary, with history showing the precedents, and with a glimpse of current technology, it is incumbent upon us all to “assume” the worst and to seek out the evidence or it so that we can—and our children can—do something about our future and that of generations—hopefully—to follow.
-------------------------------
“Ha-shem” literally “The Name” in Hebrew. Observant Jews regard even the word “G-d” to be so sacred that it cannot be uttered; and the word “Ha Shem” is used in its place.

I can think of no better place to start to learn than H.W.B. Joseph’s “Introduction to Logic,” published by Oxford University Press originally.
The power of these technologies, taken together, is beyond reasonable doubt.
The Nazification of America

Reflections on the Death Penalty

2007-01-03T02:02:00.000-08:00

Most recently, California has placed a moratorium on the death penalty. A recent execution in California by legal injection took almost thirty minutes to be completed. Claims that this method causes excruciating pain and the inability to cry out have been quite well refuted from a medical point of view by the high court which turned down a recent appeal by a death row prisoner.

There were documented large areas on each forearm of the condemned where the intravenous fluids had infiltrated under the skin. Little notice and less comment resulted from this observation, which was pregnant with meaning: It was clear evidence that both IV sites had infiltrated, thus causing considerable pain and dramatic alteration of the expected effects on consciousness. The fact that the second IV site was also infiltrated has a serious implication: that the extravasation was obvious with the first IV, and as a consequence the second was started. It is reasonable to assume that the second site was also observed to be infiltrated, but that it was decided that nothing was to be done.

The gruesome and inescapable conclusions are, therefore, that the first site infiltration provoked a decision to start the second. Subsequently, the second botched IV was simply allowed to continue, with the intent that the condemned would eventually die--hopfully--without further embarrassment to the medical and custodial staff.

It is a common practice in execution by firing squad for one shooter to have a blank rather than a live round. The intention is never denied--so that each shooter can entertain the hope that he did not fire the fatal shot.

This latter practice speaks volumes: We show hommage to capital punishment by volunteering to be an assassin--as long as it is accompanied by the statistical self-delusion that we really may not have been one, in effect.

Why don't we insist that all shooters have bullets, so that there is no question that justice was done, and that each and every man with a gun is committed to the role of implimenting justice? Why didn't the medical team jump on the opportunity to re-start the IV to ensure that the law was either to be carried out, to the letter--or not at all?

There is impassioned demonstration by a gathered crowd at each execution held by those who oppose capital punishment; yet you rarely see comparable demonstrations routinely by those who favor it. Virtually no one feels comfortable with the notion of capital punishment.

Even so, we have a sense of justice, however uneasy we may feel. Moreover, we feel we owe it to the families of the deceased, particularly when we hear them tell us that the execution has brought them some measure of closure, some deference to the notion of a society that shows its caring for the innocent by the execution of those who would take a life.

We watch eagerly and feel better for a moment when we see testimonies by aggrieved relatives that they are a little or a lot more a peace. We rarely see quoted statements by the families that the death by execution accomplishes nothing whatever, or more rarely, that they are opposed to it.

At the same time, we pale when we receive word that, not only are there dozens of men on death row who have be exonerated once DNA evidence had been made available, but also that numerous men and women have been executed for crimes, it later is shown, they simply did not commit.

It was a courageous Governor Ryan of Illinois who on January 31, 2000 paroled 156 men on death row when several of such cases came to light. It therefore came as no surprise when In 2001, amidst growing charges of favoritism and in particular granting, he resigned. Over the previous year, facts came to light regarding influence-peddling, etc., resulting in an indictment and conviction on 18 counts.

Whatever culpability Ryan had, he was one among the ranks of comparable criminals in Illinois government who did exactly the same and worse. In view of the known politics of Illinois, together with the demonstrable lack of financial gain to Gov. Ryan, and the courage to take a profoundly moral stand, It is a reasonable inference that he paid the price for his integrity.

However conflicted we personally may be--or should be--about the death penalty, there are far more powerful and dark forces that have no intention to see it end.

Ryan literally saved 156 men and was punished. Saddam Hussein was executed for allegedly ordering the death of 145 people. Bush is directly responsible for the death of 3003, so far.

There's an irony here. I'm not sure what it is exactly.

The Sea-tac Airport Flap

2006-12-16T20:11:00.000-08:00

This past week, there was considerable editorial comment here and in Israel on the outpouring of virulent and anti-Semitic hate mail pouring into newspapers as a result of the "Christmas Tree Incident" at the airport. What is clear from the comments is that as a result of some complaint, presumably from representative members of the Jewish community, the Christmas Tree was taken down. An Israeli editorial mentions that there was no specific request for this to be done, but rather a request that a Hannukah menorah be placed side-by-side with the tree. Curiously, it neglects to mention that the Christmas Tree was removed.

In his editorial in a Seattle paper, Robert Jacobs, the regional direcor of the ADL does say the following:

"The Port of Seattle commissioners who agreed to pull the trees from the airport were misguided. The darker elements in our community who blamed this action on "the Jews" were more than misguided"

To whose influence, pray tell, is the community supposedly expected to direct its condemnation? The Buddists?

I quite agree that unbridled anti-Semitism is not a measured response; and the Commissioners decision was another example of odious Political Correctness, which, characteristically, is democratic and even-handed in antagonizing everybody. And there are many Jews--me among them--that would have been quite content to see a Christmas Tree at the airport.

In these troubled times, the unqualified love and good-will that is clearly reflected in the idea of Christmas and of the Christmas tree in particular is so poignantly clear and is so desperately needed that it is nothing less than unkind bordering on cruel and insensitive to oppose it.

There are enough cases of legitimate anti-Semitism to preoccupy these do-gooder organizations. The Jewish community does not have to compete in the Good-Will department

"It Can't Happen Here"

2006-12-02T02:57:00.000-08:00

In the 1935 book by Upton Sinclair the possibility of a dictatorship in America is entertained--and I use the term in it's generic sense.

This past day, a student at the library of UCLA was repeatedly tortured with a taser, while a security guard repeatedly said, "stand up!" You have to see this to believe it: click here.

What is important to note is the relative self-righteousness and high-handed nature of the guard. It's terribly important, because this is exactly the way in which such activity started in Germany. Thanks to the "Patriot Act," that hypocrisy of euphemism, we have such disgusting activities as this encouraged.

The law enforcement agencies have blended in indistinguishably from those in totalitarian countries; whereas our uniqueness has been in perceiving a right to dissent, one which actually regards such as patriotism, in its truest sense, not the sense in which Dubya declares.

As this kind of behavior increases under government sanction, will our citizenry recall the generic courage, a natural and normal capacity, nutured and grown out of our Declaration of Independence and that sincere and mature although youthful state of mind that was and is the very finest of the attributes of us Americans? Will the response be truly a call to arms in every and any sense of the term, as it was truly meant to be?

Thomas Jefferson once said that every so often a revolution would be needed to keep us free. Now this is a truly remarkable statement, coming, as it does, from one of the founders of our form of government. He was not advocating revolution for revolution's sake. He was speaking of a healthy counterbalance to those forces inherent in human nature, those tendancies which have been understood since time began.

He was showing us a new idea, a new way to ride the horse of the tempestuous human soul: to go along with the ebb and flow of human behavior, seen against the backdrop of the freedom to petition for acceptance of new ideas, whatever they might be; and in a manner parallel to that of its economic counterpart, the free market, to allow, literally, human nature to express itself so long as human rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness was held sacrosanct.

Now, for the first time in our age, we have the challange of the Old Nature and the New Vision in conflict, once again. Will we win the War Against the People?

There is a story in which Ralph Walso Emerson visited Henry David Thoreau in jail:

"What are you doing in there?" queried Emerson.

"No David. What are you doing out there?" was the response.

I don't know if we will win it; but I can say with resignation to the fact: Whether before, during, after, or as a consequence, I hope to die finding out.

Kramer is forgiven!

2006-11-21T18:28:00.000-08:00

The hell he is!

Now that I've got your attention....

What is so mind-boggling about that tirade of neurotic explosive prattle is that he had enough presence of mind to consider the response of the heckler and to have what could be called racist reparte: "Because you wouldn't shut up...." And this is a reason, he would have us believe. At that point the tirade accelerates. There's no inner censor, no recognition. And he wasn't overcome with rage; he demonstrated contempt--because it was inconvenient to have to deal with a heckler. Imagine--a performer sending a heckler a bill for heckling. That's like sending the Orioles a bill for losing.

And to make the perfect come-back, people of color said, quietly, "That's totally uncalled for." Had they lived down to the stereotype they would have burned the place down and ran out with the stereo equipment. Want to hear something worse? On the TV screen in this bar at the Holiday Inn a moving marque spells out, "Is he forgiven?"

There is nothing to forgive. You don't forgive an ocelot for not being a snail, and you don't criticize a guppy for not doing calculus.

This is not an issue of forgiveness. This is an issue of identification. As a physician, from watching him I have reason to believe that he may have some form of explosive disorder, probably either a seizure focus, or personality disorder, possible ADHD, possibly alcohol. (Now--where have I seen that recently?)

As a physician, I quickly noted these labels pass my consciousness. But I'm also and more fundamentally--a person, And as a licenced certified person with the State of California, I have diagnosed him as a disgusting bigot. Human garbage.

That's my diagnosis. Forget about the bill.

--Moshe Posner
moss david posner
david.posner@comcast.net

Gaul beyong Chutzpah

2006-11-19T02:36:00.000-08:00

The very thought of the President of the United States, a country which allegedly fought a war for Peace Freedom and The American Way--in Viet Nam--not, mind you--receiving the Premier of Viet Nam in the White House, but going to Hanoi, is an irony that at best is fathomless. If the mountain will not come to Mohammed, then he will be obliged to go to the mountain.

We fought a war against a tiny country in Southeast Asia. We don't say, "we lost." Oh no. That is too harsh, too gauche, and all too direct. Yuen Tsu, in "The Art of War," says that the true victor is the one who can impose his will upon the enemy and can reach an objective which is moral or which rights a wrong.

Okay, we didn't lose. My military friends sternly correct me, saying that we won every battle. I guess that means we won the war.

Call it what you will. We left, under their terms, and which ultimately was their objective. There are no rules of Goren, Culbertsen or Hoyle. They achieved their objective; we didn't: They drove the invader out of their country. Possibly the fact tht we didn't have an objective might be closer to the truth.

We don't like to talk much about the Viet Nam War. We don't even want to think about it. That's why the Viet Nam Vets were never received, we treated like dogs and worse, Like the Queen's idiot cousin in the back room. Yet at the same time, you don't hear even a whisper, let alone a whimper. The President of the United States' visit to Viet Nam goes virtually unnoticed.

That's because no matter on which side of the issue you come up, it is an embarassement to us all. So why did Bush do it? We know he's not needed here; but why on earth would he even run the risk for such a fractious idea? The reason given is gibberish, and worse: He wants their support for the war in Iraq.

That's like asking the family of a rape-murder victim to contribute to NAMBLA. (North American Man-Boy Association, and I kid you not, Surrah!)

Who better than Bush, for whom no humiliation is too severe, no treachery too intense, no act beyond the pale of morality--to go to Viet Nam without blinking? Yes--but Why?

Because we desperately need Viet Nam and other Asian nations to continue to buy U.S. Treasury securities to abort a crash of the US dollar, which is complettely worthless, as any decent economist--and in particular, Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winner and free market capitalist would tell you. They already bailed us out about two months ago, an event which went virtually unnoticed--or at least unreported by the country's sculpatory press and wire services, for whom no shame is too great, nor cowardice, excessive.

For those of us who have been fortunate (?) enough to have lived through the Viet Nam yeaars, this is our private joke, or our private tragedy--or both.

Europe Died at Auschwitz

2006-11-13T17:51:00.000-08:00

I saw this article of Nov. 8, 2005. It has been widely published since it appeared:

Europe died at Auschwitz

November 8th, 2005
Written by a Christian Spanish journalist
Sebastian Villar Rodriguez

I was strolling along Cours Raval (Barcelona ) when I suddenly realized that Europe died at Auschwitz :

We assassinated six million Jews to import in return twenty million Muslims.

We burned at Auschwitz culture, intelligence and ability to create.

We burned a people of the world, people that proclaim itself “God Chosen” because it is this same people that gave humanity emblematic figures capable of changing the face of history (Christ, Marx, Einstein, Freud) people that is at the root of essentials towards progress and well being.

We have to admit that Europe , by relaxing its borders, and under the doubtful pretext of tolerance by bending to a fictitious cultural relativism, has consequently opened its doors to twenty millions Muslims mostly analphabetical and fanatic.

We can find them, at best, in locations like Cours Raval mentioned earlier. Those Muslims who prepare, at worst, attacks like those of Manhattan or Madrid. Such Muslims are cramped in apartments provided to them by official Social Services.

Therefore, we exchanged Culture for Fanatism, Ability to create for Will to destroy, Intelligence for Superstition. We have exchanged the Jewish instinct of transcendence which, even in the worst imaginable conditions, have always aimed at a better world of peace, for a pulse or urge of suicide.

We exchanged the pride to live for the fanatic obsession of death: our death and that of our children.

What a mistake we have committed!

A Plague on Both Your Houses!

2006-11-09T00:51:00.000-08:00

I am hurt.
A plague o' both your houses! I am sped.
Is he gone, and hath nothing?
--Mercutio (Romeo and Juliette)

A change of dominant party will change absolutely nothing with respect to the underlying problem confronting our nation. If the underlying problem is not solved, nothing will be solved and we will surely perish as a nation.

Neither party intends to take bold moves to extricate us from Iraq. This is because Congress cannot accomplish this. Even if a substantial number of senators could be influenced to demand a withdrawal, they would be overridden by vested interests who would theaten them with lack of support or worse. Otherwise, another catastrophe would be created by our Shadow Government, and we would be the worse for it.

Everything in this country--absolutely everything--is controlled. You have only to start a new idea or movement and to see what happens to prove this point to yourselves.

Congress is controlled. Ayn Rand said it best when she said, "The purpose of the Democratic Party was to smuggle us into welfare statism; the purpose of the Republican Party was to retard that process." The powers that be (PTB) have only to withdraw the party that does the dirty work so that the other party can take the blame. Subsequently, the Republican Party will be able to continue to advance the agenda of the PTB--which is nothing more nor less than those corporate interests whose influence can be seen all around us. This is why Bush gave no support to Republican swing districts by witholding announcement of Rumsfeld's demise as SecDef: with a barely dominant Senate and a House that is Democratic, the Democrats will lose credibility and the Republicans will probably win in 2008 or definitely win in 2012. By that time, federal law will be ammended, and Arnold Schwartznegger will be the first President of a truly Nazi state, supported by the very people who put Hitler into power--the Bush family. Any good backgammon player knows that it is better to have control (of the doubling cube) by midgame. (Ask someone who plays backgammon.)

All press is controlled. Every news source is controlled by three major companies. Recent action by the FCC Chairman Michael Powell, the corrupt son of Gen Colin Powell has indicated that he will curtail free public access, which has been one the mainstays of our system. In a similar fashion, the internet will be controlled by allowing carriers to charge differing rates and to refuse to carry content additionally. Last year, Bush renegged on a prior promise to share control of the existing internet mainframes with Europe.

Outspoken people are controlled by becoming the victims of trumped-up or created charges and then imprisoned with draconian sentences for interminable periods of time. In a short period of time the internet will be controlled; and this will be followed by a Dark Age which will make the previous ones look like dalliances.

The problem is made much worse by the facts that 1) the educational system is controlled and dumbed-down, 2) all private property is subject to taxation and confiscation for the purpose of increasing tax revenues, 3) voting is controlled by computer software manipulation, 4) the legal profession is notoriously corrupt at worst and impotent at best, 5) corporate dominance keeps people in constant flux both psychologically and physically, by making continued demands and by effecting constant change in housing locations, thus discouraging any stable grass-roots movement from springing up.

There are only two ways that we can do anything to survive the current state affairs: grassroots campaigning for Jail4judges and comparable efforts, and home schooling.

The Jail4judges initiative was defeated in South Dakota as a result of intense campaigning by the legal profession. It was passed off as a cheap and quick way for disgruntled parties to law suits to attack the judicial profession. Of course this was nonsense. Judges are beholden to the identical standards as any other profession, except for the fact that they aren't: The initiative properly called for a special Grand Jury for judicial complaints, thus giving the identical due process rights to judges. Currently there is no way to hold judges accountable. As the matter now stands they have virtually unlimited power and are legally entitled to police themselves with no attendant higher authority with control. The only system that compares to this is the Correctional systems of the country, organizations which have virtual unimpeaded control and absolutely no direct oversight. The results are the same--injustice, performed legally and with no exposure.

The rise of Nazi Germany started in an identical fashion as events are proceeding in our country. Initially, the German judges upheld blatantly unconstitutional legislation. Later, they passed unconscionable judgements on innocent people. This is occurring in our country right now, and this will worsen unquestionably as a consequence of the "Patriot Act" so-called and the "Military Tribunals Commission." For ominous parallels, read "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," by William Shirer.

The other, nuclear area of change is one that is the most definitive and ultimately the only enduring one, but it requires time and sustained committment: home schooling.

An enlightened public and one capable of critical thinking is the most powerful and effective antidote to--and innoculation against--totalitarianism. This can only be accomplished if education is taken out of the hands of the State. When home schooling is attacked, we may not see a civilization comparable to our own for a long, long time. In such a case, we--you and I--will not see it; but I pray that our children will.

(with apologies to Franz Kafka)

2006-11-05T02:57:00.000-08:00

This evening it was announced that Saddam Hussein has been sentenced to death "for Crimes against Humanity." The conviction was predicated upon demonstrable proof of his role in the killing of some 148 people in a small town of Dujail some thirty-five miles north of Baghdad.

One hundred and forty-eight people--a "Crime against Humanity?"

This either elevates the event of the killing of 148 people to a crime "against humanity," or it demeans the very meaning of the term from its original intention.

Make no mistake: In no way does that statement diminish the horror and tragedy of the deaths of 148 innocents. At the same time, by putting this into the framework of a crime against the human race, it rather diminishes the true meaning and intent of such a crime. In fact, it is almost a hasty stamp--a seal of disapproval--added to a clumsily orchestrated trial, which, inclusive of the deaths of assorted attorneys, and the concurrent deaths of at least ten times than number of Iraqis during these august proceedings, was, as everyone knows (except perhaps for some of the Shiite Iraqis) as artificial and as a contrived and cynical display as that of the character of Joseph K in "The Trial," a work of that name by Franz Kafka.

In the surreal plot of Kafka's book, the accused is never quite told what crime it is of which he is found guilty; yet during the disjointed development of the plot-line, the main character is seen to initiate some acts which border on the criminal, thus compounding the confusion, as was the case with Saddam Hussein.

In the all-too-real plot line of the conflict raging in Iraq, where the enemy is similarly ill-defined as an "insurgent" and during which atrocity it has been objectively determined that some 650,000 Iraqis have died, and not of natural causes (in relation to which the deaths of a paltry number of "insurgents" would negligibly diminish this tally) as well as well over a million Iraqi children died over a ten year period prior, and at least a dozen or a lot more Iraqi civilians died as a direct result of premeditated American soldiers' executions--and where this grand total was equally as directly orchestrated by our American leader, exactly who is morally allowed to indict whom, pray tell?

Perhaps it was best stated by one of my familial ancestors:

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Kerry's gaffe--or moment of greatness?

2006-11-02T02:20:00.000-08:00

(October 27, 2006 Army recruits express their motivation during a platoon competition at an obstacle course at Fort Benning, Ga. This photo appeared on www.army.mil.)

"You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq."

To me, everything surrounding Kerry's statement makes no sense; except for the statement itself.

When I read it, it made perfect sense. When I heard him say it, it made perfect sense. The only two things I don't understand are, first, everyone's reaction to it; and second, his apology for saying it.

Are we all brain-dead? We all know that education is the key to success; and the poor guys who don't make the effort, or who don't have the ability, why they go into the military for want of any other alternative, and then they get stuck in Iraq.

Does anyone seriously doubt this? Isn't the truth of this brought home by the innane ads for each service of the military? "Ya did som'p'n ya never did before: ya called me sir and ya shook m'hand." Or being told of the breathtaking vistas of knowledge and fulfilled dreams and of heightened dramatic scenes that will inevitably unfold upon joining with others of a similar bent.

Wow. Wish I could be like dat.

During a moment of sincere musing to himself out loud, a politician with the right motives and a humane sense said an honest and decent thing. Yet the public, acting with the same mentality displayed at the Salem Witch Trials, recoils in horror. Simultaneous with public gasping and staunch defenses of the honor, integrity, and spiritual virginity of our military, we see the spectre of Senator John Kerry, with the aplomb of Frank Driven of LAPD, rendering the "stream of conscience" inarticulate by infusing the objective "us" somewhere, and then declaring triumphantly that the whole shebang was really a criticism of the current occupant of the White House.

Consistant to the end, Senator Kerry blows an opportunity to say what everyone desperately needed to hear our loud--that this accursed war is just that, and that it becomes the habitat of the modern equivalent of the Foreign Legion, or that of the reluctant Soldier of Fortune, who, lacking in the necessary skills to make a future for himself, finds himself in that unholy morass--which perhaps initially to be a noble cause, now, in the throes of almost three thousand dead American youth and over 650,000 Iraqis--and which now appears as and for what it is--a shame, a blight upon our name, and I will say it--a dishonor to the concept of any morality in military action.

Perhaps the worst tragedy of all is the fact that our youth, having been dis-educated in our schools and therefore lacking in the skills of critical judgment, and substituting obedience in place of independent thought and moral judgment--now become the heirs to Macbeth, and to the tragedy which was his and his alone, precisely because now the public will turn their nose up and their head away from the debaucle, as they did in Viet Nam, and shun the returning ghoulish proof of its perfidy.

May our dreams be our perpetual curse.

Gaza Desiderata

2006-11-01T21:37:00.000-08:00

"The community of peace organizations in Israel has gathered together in a coordinated, major campaign calling on the Israeli government and on the international community to end the siege on Gaza and to embark upon negotiations with the elected Palestinian leadership."

This is a quote from "The Scoop" from New Zealand, a country which, according to my maps, is some sizable distance from the Middle East, and which has a singular paucity of outstanding authorities on that area.

It must be my recalcitrant nature, but I am at a loss to explain--or so far, to have anyone to explain to me--exactly what is the atrocity that is allegedly taking place in Gaza: If there is a shred of validity to the claim regarding the conditions in Gaza, it is that those conditions have worsened since the Israeli government has stopped sending tax revenues to the Hamas government in Gaza.

Are you savoring each word I just wrote? Is the immediate implication of this not apparent? The simple and mind-boggling fact remains that the Israeli government has, for the past half a century, and despite four wars aimed at Israel's extinction, been sending tax revenues to a place whose leaders and some of its populous have unceasingly called for the destruction of Israel and whose schools and institutions--even their maps--call for the destruction of Israel, and, it goes without saying, refuse even to accept Israel's right to exist. Arabs in Israel are Israeli citizens and entitled to all the rights and privileges thereunto appertaining.

Can we pause briefly over the wording here--denying a nation or an individual's "right to exist?" Are you understanding what this means?

One would think that the Arab countries, whose resources are unimaginably vast, could throw a few shekels the way of Palestine. One would think that the Jordanian government, which, in virtue of its Royal Guard, virtually extinguished the (only) uprising against Jordan, fifty years ago. By some strange coincidence, the Palestinians never tried that again.

One would think these things, but one would be wrong. There is a saying in the area that the Israelis are no one's first choice for control of the Palestinians, but the Israelis are everyone's second choice.

Imagine, if you will, how our citizens feel about the continued invasion of our country across our southern border. And rhetoric imitates life in the arrogance of the Mexican president complaining bitterly about the fence which is supposed to be built (without funding) to protect that border. (Perhaps that's why we have heard less recently in the way of criticism of the Israeli border fence?) To add irony to tragedy, we now have discovered tunnels built under our southern border for the purpose of smuggling people and God-knows-what across our border.

But God does know what has been smuggled through tunnels across the border from Gaza--munitions, arms, bombs and whatnot. This is Israel's thanks for evacuating Gaza, dragging her own citizens out, followed by the wholesale destruction of the vinyards and greenhouses that could have supported the Gazan population, after which missle and rocket launchers were moved up to the border, from which more rockets have been launched.

And all of this passion for Jerusalem.... Jerusalem was never mentioned in Palestinian or Arabic writings until 1948 when--voila!--Israel was declared a country. There is no mention in the Koran or anywhere else, for that matter. A lot of things aren't mentioned in the Koran: the word "love" for example.

Over 95% of original Palestine is in Jordan, yet no one finds that of particular interest. Here's another statement of no particular interest: 80% of Jordan--is--Palestine, belongs to the people calling themselves Palestinians. "Transjordan" was carved out of Palestininan land; and except for a loosely-strewn series of Hashemite kingdoms in the north and south of Jordan, the rest is--Palestine.

Go to U-tube or Google video and look up the propaganda films shown to the Palestinian children. If that doesn't make the rest of your hair fall out, nothing will.

I have yet to see one report of even isolated, let alone documented systematic attempts to attack the Palestinians from Israel. Each and every operation in Gaza has been in direct response to hostilities launched against Israel. (We won't even speak of the continued rocket attacks from Lebanon, about which the UN forces do nothing, as per usual.)

Ehud Olmert is the best friend Gaza and Lebanon ever had. Perhaps we can effect a new kind of swap: Olmert for Elad Galit. Seems like a fair exchange.

Jerusalem if I fail thee

2006-11-01T19:39:00.000-08:00

Is anyone else scratching their heads over the Israeli government's behavior; or am I the only one?

Olmert could not have done a better job in sabotaging Israel's safety and security had he been for sale--which brings up the question, doesn't it?

Dismantling settlements, imprisoning dissidents, and more recently, initiating a half-baked retaliatory attack on Hizbullah, while at the same time delaying a definitive offensive for 72 hours, thus ensuring that Hizbullah will have adequate time to identify Israel's offensive positions and target her tanks by means of capturing her wire communiques--did I overlook something?

Why are we surprised? More to the point, why are the Israelis surprised? Olmert is the poor reflection--the crack-in-the-mirror reflection of The Smirking Chimp, whose Vice Presidential handler has directed our once-proud nation into penury and ignonimity--his wan corpulenscenceness, a scowling and growling example of a once-proud and toothless attack dog, a pupeteer, behind the scene, whose very silence gives testamony to the truth of these metaphors. After all, the best ventroloquist can only use one voice at a time.

We are offered the grim alternatives of the Republican innate and repetitious warning of dire consequences in their absence (true enough, taken literally,) with histrionic and strident elulations from the likes of Bill O'Reilley and Rush Limbaugh, who dishonor themselves more than usual with their most recent utterances--all--on the one hand, and the grimly defiant and purposeless attempts at we-told-you-so by the Democrats, whose answer to any problem is to rob some defenseless segment of our population for undeserved and unpaid services of one sort or another, be they medical, or whatever--on the other hand. Wow. Wotta choice.

You have only to revisit William Shirer's "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" to see the parallels. Parallels? Did I say parallels? Same cast of characters, one or two generations removed--both in the forms of the Bush spectre, now the young ne'er-do-well, as the spawn of the arch-criminal Prescott Bush, who together with Fritz Thuyssen put Adolph Hitler into power; and then when it was convenient, allowed him to be removed.

Yet the grimmest irony was yet to come:

After and during World War II, all European countries, as well as United States military leaders, robbed the Jews of their lands and of their possessions, jewelry and gold. All postwar attempts to achieve some justice were to no avail. It was this desperate and clear perception of what had to be done that led to the formation of the State of Israel--all of which, I hasten to add--bought, part and parcel, from the Ottoman Sultan, (who later attempted to renege on the deal.)

Israel was born out of a religious destiny and sealed by the formation of a homeland for the Jews. What has happened ever since is heartbreaking: Generations of Israeli politicians, in order to appease the United States, upon whom she is desperately dependent for aid, arms and loans, have given away precious land for broken promises of peace from the Arab league; and the Arab population within her borders will out-breed the predominantly Jewish population.

The grim reality of the need for total possession and of the severe consequences if this is not recognized is excellently layed-out by:

How ironic--that Israel is faced with a moral dilemma, generated by her own humanity, and despite her own historical experience! How far greater an irony is it that the religious base and justification for her existence is, in effect, outlawed as a governing principle in her own country, whereas humanist moral-philosophic concerns may very well become the cause of her own undoing.

2006-11-01T18:14:00.000-08:00

North Korean Nuclear Testing:

Someone please explain to me the fuss over North Korean's testing of nuclear weapons. I don't see North Korea as a substantial source of "hegemony" (to borrow the term from the Chinese) nor do I see them overtly threatening anyone.

It appears as if we become absolutely hysterical whenever anyone shows the slightest tendancy towards technological supersuccession that might have the potential to do bad things--like, for example, the United States.

Our country has, since the fall of the Berlin Wall, rather than to take a place of a benevolent leader and to lead by example and help other nations and give them a leg up, we have allowed the most necrophiliac of interests, mostly corporate, simply rape, pillage, and otherwise act as the outlaws that they are. We have not hesitated to indulge in oppressive policies, kill innocents in a variey of countries who have done nothing to us, and in the case of Iraq, wherein there is absolutely no reason for being there--let alone, remaining there--systematically depriving than country of the ability to survive by blatantly putting an embargo on all good to that place, over a ten-year period, and having the chutzpah to call the action that which it is--an Oil for Food program.

Our greatest crime is, simultaneously, our best defense--ignorance. Our citizenry has done nothing; and what have we come to? A spiritual degenerate infesting the White House, together with his unholy minions, a legislature comprised of the same quality individuals, in which setting graft and corruption are the coin of the realm, wherein no legislation is possible unless there is a price paid to those in power.

These are admittedly sweeping generalizations, but they apply, are true, and undeniable.

Now we have come to the point where our leaders have taken off the gloves. We have the Smirking Chimp in The White House, a "Patriot" Act, which is the height of temerity in name, and a "Military Commissions Act" clearly hiding its contents behind a facade of self-importance, which, taken together, literally eviscerate our Constitution. This of course was helped along by the injection into our country of people who have nothing but contempt for our country, its language and its traditions, and have not the slightest interest in citizenship. This fact, coupled with a dumbed-down educational system which teaches absolutely nothing about critical thinking and demands no performance before handing out rubber stamped papers attesting to some academic achievement or another, all taken together guarantees the rapid demise of our sacred institutions.

This past week it has been revealed that Bush & Co. have purchased literally dozens of thousands of acres of land in Paraguay, and even now is negotiating with the Paraguayan government certain guarantees against any extradition attempts against any of their family and close associates.

This coming election, there will be some changing of hands, and absolutely nothing will be done. This is readily apparent for the simple fact that absolutly no would-be leader has set the revocation of any of these accursed Acts as defined above as his or her highest priority.

We are now seeing a trickle of people leaving our country for Europe and Australia and Canada. It will become a flow, and then a torrent--until the governmental oppression puts a stop to it.

When that happens, God help us all. No one else will.