The ancient rights of man have slowly slipped away from us and continue to be eroded at a rapid clip. The article below demonstrates a potential very real threat to our 4th Amendment rights.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
First, some years ago we gave up the right to be free from unconstitutional searches of our cars and persons in the public arena if police officers felt threatened. And of course more recently we have given up the right to almost everything at airports and other public venues, all for the sake of security. Now it seems some court has determined that if police officers feel threatened they may search a citizen’s home without due process or a warrant. Amazing how fast tyranny just rides in under the radar.
I guess I have been wrong all of my life. I always thought that the police were there to protect and serve. Just like soldiers going off to war face the possibility of death being a police officer is dangerous. We would not accept a policy of allowing our soldiers to shoot first and ask questions later in contingency and operations other than war situations. We are willing to take some American casualties in those circumstances in order to do what is right. After all soldiers know that their jobs are dangerous and accept the risks. Why would we accept allowing police officers the ability to violate the Constitution just so that THEY feel safe. Don’t they realize that their job is supposed to be dangerous?
It seems a far better thing to have brave men an women working as police officers that are willing to accept the risks of the job and realize that occasionally some of them will die rather than to compromise the Constitution. Just who are these folks there to protect and serve? Laws and concepts like the court decision below lead me to believe that it is not the citizen.
So if a police officer feels threatened this court believes that the police have the right to search my home. I am a peace loving man but I tell you that one of the few things that will ever cause me to be a threat to anyone is for someone I have not invited to enter my home.
Thank God that we law-abiding citizens still have remnants of the Second Amendment in place to thwart any goose-steeping Nazis that come knocking uninvited. As for my friends Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson and I, we understand full well the adage that a man’s home ought to be his castle.
Recedite, plebes! Gero rem imperialem
El Cid
______________________________________________________
Court Opens Door To Searches Without Warrants
POSTED: 3:55 pm CST March 26, 2004
NEW ORLEANS -- It's a groundbreaking court decision that legal experts say will affect everyone: Police officers in Louisiana no longer need a search or arrest warrant to conduct a brief search of your home or business.
Leaders in law enforcement say it will provide safety to officers, but others argue it's a privilege that could be abused.
The decision was made by the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. Two dissenting judges called it the "road to Hell."
The ruiling stems from a lawsuit filed in Denham Springs in 2000.
New Orleans Police Department spokesman Capt. Marlon Defillo said the new power will go into effect immediately and won't be abused.
"We have to have a legitimate problem to be there in the first place, and if we don't, we can't conduct the search," Defillo said.
But former U.S. Attorney Julian Murray has big problems with the ruling.
"I think it goes way too far," Murray said, noting that the searches can be performed if an officer fears for his safety -- a subjective condition.
Defillo said he doesn't envision any problems in New Orleans, but if there are, they will be handled.
"There are checks and balances to make sure the criminal justce system works in an effective manor," Defillo said.
Copyright 2004 by TheNewOrleansChannel.com. All rights reserved
Thoughts, ponderings and ramblings on politics, culture, society, religion, science and such.
Rantings from the defenders of resonable free thought.
Disclaimer- Everything here is an opinion, theory or philosophy. This is a celebration of the 1st Amendment and our God given right to think and speak. Some opinions may be harsh.
3.28.2004
3.24.2004
Why They Hate Us-Part II
Many Muslims term the United States as the Great Satan. Americans puff up at this claim. Our Friends in South Korea view us disdainfully, Americans look at them as ungrateful. Mexicans consider the US to be a belligerent bully that has invaded and robbed Mexico of her lands. A dozen other countries can make similar claims to US militaristic aggression.
My topic here is US cultural aggression in foreign lands. Most of us, if we were raised by parents that taught us right and wrong, find occasional if not persistent repulsion in the items that emerge from our televisions. Over the last twenty to thirty years we have been bombarded by ever increasing encroachments on common decency and values. To a large degree we have become immune to the content and may not fully realize just how decadent our society has become.
Consider this
Our Society
· Protects the murder of unborn children
· Flaunts homosexual behavior and lifestyles
· Has abandoned the sanctity of marriage
· Produces some of the worst child molesters in the world
· Produces and consumes pornography of various levels far in excess of the rest of the world
· Worships thugs, gagsters, punks and drug addicts that we call celebrities and sports stars
· Produces corporate executives, government leaders and even presidents that live by no apparent moral code
· Encourages greed
· Discourages selflessness
· Shuns the divine principles of our founding
The world receives MTV, HBO and all manner of other media produced right here. Their perception of us is based largely on what they see. Many have never met true Americans. They judge us by those that we idolize.
Would you fear a neighbor that had no apparent moral base and just happened to be much bigger and stronger than you? If that neighbor also had a demonstrated propensity to kick in the door of the houses of his other neighbors to “set things right” you would certainly fear him. If he also continually flaunted his immorality in front of you, attempted to take economic advantage of you at every turn and continually told you how to live your life you would grow to hate him.
Why does the so much of the World hate us? We are that neighbor. The “civilized” world, specifically Europe, tolerates us more because in many ways they are as decadent as we. In nations where people are closer to their God and less able to offer reasons for the US to leave them alone there is little toleration and much hate.
The United States has embarked on a path that will lead to its’ destruction. The War on Terror should have begun years ago by changing the reasons that people hate us. It is too late to become a good neighbor now. The War’s in Afghanistan and Iraq will not solve anything. Capturing a few leaders will not make the problem go away. Men that believe in their principles will follow them. That is really the problem with principles and conviction, you just cannot kill it.
The US lacks the advantage of actually having any principles in this current incarnation of imperial globetrotting. With all of the industrial, economic and military might that the US has this one fact will ultimately cause defeat. Just as the Roman and British armies seldom tasted defeat on the battlefield during the heyday of their empires the US too will remain supreme tactically. Strategically and over time however, this is a war that cannot be won.
People argue that the “terrorist” that struck the World Trade Centers demonstrated a distinct lack of principles and acted as murderers. War is a sad endeavor. I wished intently that the event of Sep. 11th had not of occurred. However, when faced with numerical and technically superior enemies one is forced to use asymmetric tactics. The methods used on the World Trade Center were brutal but effective and one of the few options available to those that wished to strike the US. It could be argued that their methods were no less terroristic that a US bomber flying at 20,000 feet dropping bombs on individuals that have no idea they are being targeted, or cruise missiles being fired from hundreds of miles away. The definition of terror is really in the mind of the receiver.
The rest of the world hates Yankee imperialism, secularism, commercialism and immorality. I for one cannot fault them for standing on their principles. The US must now fight this War and we as citizens are forced to support it because there is really no way out. We cannot simply stop and come home because nothing has fundamentally changed. The reasons for hatred still exist.
In the final analysis future historians will dissect the causes of the demise of the US Empire just as all historians do with all empires. The economic strain caused by making enemies of the world because we were bad neighbors will undoubtedly be the prime cause they settle on.
My topic here is US cultural aggression in foreign lands. Most of us, if we were raised by parents that taught us right and wrong, find occasional if not persistent repulsion in the items that emerge from our televisions. Over the last twenty to thirty years we have been bombarded by ever increasing encroachments on common decency and values. To a large degree we have become immune to the content and may not fully realize just how decadent our society has become.
Consider this
Our Society
· Protects the murder of unborn children
· Flaunts homosexual behavior and lifestyles
· Has abandoned the sanctity of marriage
· Produces some of the worst child molesters in the world
· Produces and consumes pornography of various levels far in excess of the rest of the world
· Worships thugs, gagsters, punks and drug addicts that we call celebrities and sports stars
· Produces corporate executives, government leaders and even presidents that live by no apparent moral code
· Encourages greed
· Discourages selflessness
· Shuns the divine principles of our founding
The world receives MTV, HBO and all manner of other media produced right here. Their perception of us is based largely on what they see. Many have never met true Americans. They judge us by those that we idolize.
Would you fear a neighbor that had no apparent moral base and just happened to be much bigger and stronger than you? If that neighbor also had a demonstrated propensity to kick in the door of the houses of his other neighbors to “set things right” you would certainly fear him. If he also continually flaunted his immorality in front of you, attempted to take economic advantage of you at every turn and continually told you how to live your life you would grow to hate him.
Why does the so much of the World hate us? We are that neighbor. The “civilized” world, specifically Europe, tolerates us more because in many ways they are as decadent as we. In nations where people are closer to their God and less able to offer reasons for the US to leave them alone there is little toleration and much hate.
The United States has embarked on a path that will lead to its’ destruction. The War on Terror should have begun years ago by changing the reasons that people hate us. It is too late to become a good neighbor now. The War’s in Afghanistan and Iraq will not solve anything. Capturing a few leaders will not make the problem go away. Men that believe in their principles will follow them. That is really the problem with principles and conviction, you just cannot kill it.
The US lacks the advantage of actually having any principles in this current incarnation of imperial globetrotting. With all of the industrial, economic and military might that the US has this one fact will ultimately cause defeat. Just as the Roman and British armies seldom tasted defeat on the battlefield during the heyday of their empires the US too will remain supreme tactically. Strategically and over time however, this is a war that cannot be won.
People argue that the “terrorist” that struck the World Trade Centers demonstrated a distinct lack of principles and acted as murderers. War is a sad endeavor. I wished intently that the event of Sep. 11th had not of occurred. However, when faced with numerical and technically superior enemies one is forced to use asymmetric tactics. The methods used on the World Trade Center were brutal but effective and one of the few options available to those that wished to strike the US. It could be argued that their methods were no less terroristic that a US bomber flying at 20,000 feet dropping bombs on individuals that have no idea they are being targeted, or cruise missiles being fired from hundreds of miles away. The definition of terror is really in the mind of the receiver.
The rest of the world hates Yankee imperialism, secularism, commercialism and immorality. I for one cannot fault them for standing on their principles. The US must now fight this War and we as citizens are forced to support it because there is really no way out. We cannot simply stop and come home because nothing has fundamentally changed. The reasons for hatred still exist.
In the final analysis future historians will dissect the causes of the demise of the US Empire just as all historians do with all empires. The economic strain caused by making enemies of the world because we were bad neighbors will undoubtedly be the prime cause they settle on.
Slavery NOT The Cause of The War Between the States
Below is an interesting articulation of the fallacy of the Yankee Imperialist’ argument that the War Between The States was fought over slavery.
Like all the Economic Wars the Imperialist Yankees have waged this war was cloaked in terms of a moral crusade. The War, the way it was waged and the revision of history to justify it are the most immoral acts imaginable.
The rightful culture of millions of Southern blacks has been robbed by the lies told by the historians of the victorious. Thousands of black men stood shoulder to shoulder with their White Southern countrymen and fought and died defending their homes. This is a fact that will not today be discussed, for to do so would undermine the federal governments legitimacy with those it wishes to incorporate in its’ insidious welfare state.
So you don’t believe that thousands of blacks freely served and fought to defend their country? You do not believe that the Southern Army was the first fully integrated Army, with blacks and whites serving in the same units, bearing the same load and fighting a common enemy? Then you are a product of the Yankee education system. Read Fremantle’s Diary or go to the library and search old Southern pension files. Take a look at several of the southern state soldiers monuments that depict black and white soldiers side by side. You do not believe because you are not informed.
Slavery was an evil and despicable institution, particularly from our 21st century viewpoint. Slavery was not started on the North American continent by Southerners, most Southerners never owned slaves and Southerners did not profit the most from the slave trade or slave labor. Yankee merchants profited from the trade and from the follow-on trade produced by its' labor.
Free Blacks in the North were treated generally far worse than free blacks in the South. Free blacks in the South owned property, some even owned slaves. The social register of the antebellum Charleston Mercury contains marriage and other tidbits of social information about free black families. This was unheard of in the North. Economically slavery was proving unviable all around the world, including the South. Most estimates predict that left alone the system of slavery would have ended by 1900.
And what of the South where slavery ended in a natural death? It is reasonable to assume that without the foreign occupation that accompanied Reconstruction Free Blacks in a post slavery South would have enjoyed the same status as Free Blacks in the antebellum South. Without the foreign meddlers and economic depression caused by the War the adjustment from slave to sharecropper to skilled laborer would have been a much smoother transition. If the economic base that was destroyed by the War remained intake there would have existed an ample job market. This would have avoided the circumstance of a century of poverty for Southern Blacks and the necessity for the Federal Welfare State. Jim Crow laws, a reaction to Yankee meddling, would never have existed.
It is a tough thing to admit or accept for most folks. The fact is that The War was never about freeing slaves; it was about the North’s desire to retain economic control of a tremendous resource.
Who really lost in this immoral and illegal war? Southern People, black and white.
__________________________________________
Slavery as the Cause of the War Between the States
by Dr. Donald Livingston
Of all the myths taught to our children about the War Between the States none is more corrupt (and corrupting) than the claim that the war was “about slavery”-- that the South seceded to protect slavery and the North invaded to abolish it. Slavery was a national enormity and not merely a southern problem. It was not the South but New England that, in the seventeenth century, opened the slave trade with Africa and grew rich selling slaves throughout the western hemisphere. The seed money for the industrial revolution came from the slave trade and from financing and shipping southern exports, largely produced by slave labor. By 1860 nearly three fourths of American exports were from the South. Hardly anyone at this time, North or South, was prepared to integrate into society an African population of 3.5 million, many of whom were only two generations from tribal existence. Northern manumission laws were designed to rid themselves of their African population. These laws freed not adults but children, born after a certain date and upon reaching adulthood. Owners were free to sell their slaves in the meantime. By 1860 less than one per cent of Massachusetts was black. Many northerners thought that blacks would eventually die off as most of the Indians had.
Lincoln’s state of Illinois prohibited the entrance of any free blacks unless a bond of $1000 each could be raised. The constitutions of Oregon and Indiana prohibited absolutely the entrance of any free blacks and nullified any contracts made with them. No political party of any significance in the North had proposed emancipation. Lincoln proposed sending free blacks abroad. The abolitionists, a tiny and despised minority, did urge emancipation, but their solution was peaceful secession of the North from the South as the best way of ending slavery. By 1861 the South had accomplished this goa1 for them. But worse, Congress, with Lincoln’s approval, passed an amendment to the Constitution making it impossible for the central government ever to interfere with slavery in the states where it was legal. The amendment would have been ratified by the states had the South stayed in the Union. Slavery could not possibly have been better protected than it was by the northern-dominated Congress of 1861.
With the exception of Haiti, slavery was peacefully abolished everywhere in the west by the 1880s. And it would have disappeared from the South by then had it been allowed to secede as the abolitionists had urged. The Confederate Constitution prohibited the slave trade and allowed for the entrance of non-slave holding states. The Confederate cabinet agreed to abolish slavery five years after the cessation of hostilities in exchange for British and French recognition. Robert E. Lee believed in gradual emancipation and freed the slaves he had inherited through marriage. He and other Confederate leaders argued early on to arm blacks as the first step in emancipation and integration. Slavery, like any other institution, had evolved over time. Theologians were urging reforms, and in the border states the institution was evolving into an apprenticeship system. Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas had voted to remain in the Union. They reversed themselves only after Lincoln illegally raised troops from the North to coerce the seceding states back into the Union.
It has been said that Southerners, in their defense of secession, have not confronted the evils of slavery. We have long since confronted them. What has not been confronted (and what our nationalist historians guarantee will perhaps never be confronted) is the evil of launching a war that left 1,500,000 killed, missing, and wounded merely to consolidate a northeastern industrial empire. Lincoln was not able to win the war without finally directing it against the civilian population. This shocked Europeans, as it broke the code of civilized warfare that had been in place since the early eighteenth century. In violating the Geneva Convention the Lincoln administration became the first of the modem war criminals. To dignify this unexpected ourbreak of barbarism as being “about slavery” is the deep lie in the soul of the American liberal. Indeed it has almost become a part of American self-identity. Until it is honestly faced Americans will remain in a condition of spiritual and political adolescence.
Like all the Economic Wars the Imperialist Yankees have waged this war was cloaked in terms of a moral crusade. The War, the way it was waged and the revision of history to justify it are the most immoral acts imaginable.
The rightful culture of millions of Southern blacks has been robbed by the lies told by the historians of the victorious. Thousands of black men stood shoulder to shoulder with their White Southern countrymen and fought and died defending their homes. This is a fact that will not today be discussed, for to do so would undermine the federal governments legitimacy with those it wishes to incorporate in its’ insidious welfare state.
So you don’t believe that thousands of blacks freely served and fought to defend their country? You do not believe that the Southern Army was the first fully integrated Army, with blacks and whites serving in the same units, bearing the same load and fighting a common enemy? Then you are a product of the Yankee education system. Read Fremantle’s Diary or go to the library and search old Southern pension files. Take a look at several of the southern state soldiers monuments that depict black and white soldiers side by side. You do not believe because you are not informed.
Slavery was an evil and despicable institution, particularly from our 21st century viewpoint. Slavery was not started on the North American continent by Southerners, most Southerners never owned slaves and Southerners did not profit the most from the slave trade or slave labor. Yankee merchants profited from the trade and from the follow-on trade produced by its' labor.
Free Blacks in the North were treated generally far worse than free blacks in the South. Free blacks in the South owned property, some even owned slaves. The social register of the antebellum Charleston Mercury contains marriage and other tidbits of social information about free black families. This was unheard of in the North. Economically slavery was proving unviable all around the world, including the South. Most estimates predict that left alone the system of slavery would have ended by 1900.
And what of the South where slavery ended in a natural death? It is reasonable to assume that without the foreign occupation that accompanied Reconstruction Free Blacks in a post slavery South would have enjoyed the same status as Free Blacks in the antebellum South. Without the foreign meddlers and economic depression caused by the War the adjustment from slave to sharecropper to skilled laborer would have been a much smoother transition. If the economic base that was destroyed by the War remained intake there would have existed an ample job market. This would have avoided the circumstance of a century of poverty for Southern Blacks and the necessity for the Federal Welfare State. Jim Crow laws, a reaction to Yankee meddling, would never have existed.
It is a tough thing to admit or accept for most folks. The fact is that The War was never about freeing slaves; it was about the North’s desire to retain economic control of a tremendous resource.
Who really lost in this immoral and illegal war? Southern People, black and white.
__________________________________________
Slavery as the Cause of the War Between the States
by Dr. Donald Livingston
Of all the myths taught to our children about the War Between the States none is more corrupt (and corrupting) than the claim that the war was “about slavery”-- that the South seceded to protect slavery and the North invaded to abolish it. Slavery was a national enormity and not merely a southern problem. It was not the South but New England that, in the seventeenth century, opened the slave trade with Africa and grew rich selling slaves throughout the western hemisphere. The seed money for the industrial revolution came from the slave trade and from financing and shipping southern exports, largely produced by slave labor. By 1860 nearly three fourths of American exports were from the South. Hardly anyone at this time, North or South, was prepared to integrate into society an African population of 3.5 million, many of whom were only two generations from tribal existence. Northern manumission laws were designed to rid themselves of their African population. These laws freed not adults but children, born after a certain date and upon reaching adulthood. Owners were free to sell their slaves in the meantime. By 1860 less than one per cent of Massachusetts was black. Many northerners thought that blacks would eventually die off as most of the Indians had.
Lincoln’s state of Illinois prohibited the entrance of any free blacks unless a bond of $1000 each could be raised. The constitutions of Oregon and Indiana prohibited absolutely the entrance of any free blacks and nullified any contracts made with them. No political party of any significance in the North had proposed emancipation. Lincoln proposed sending free blacks abroad. The abolitionists, a tiny and despised minority, did urge emancipation, but their solution was peaceful secession of the North from the South as the best way of ending slavery. By 1861 the South had accomplished this goa1 for them. But worse, Congress, with Lincoln’s approval, passed an amendment to the Constitution making it impossible for the central government ever to interfere with slavery in the states where it was legal. The amendment would have been ratified by the states had the South stayed in the Union. Slavery could not possibly have been better protected than it was by the northern-dominated Congress of 1861.
With the exception of Haiti, slavery was peacefully abolished everywhere in the west by the 1880s. And it would have disappeared from the South by then had it been allowed to secede as the abolitionists had urged. The Confederate Constitution prohibited the slave trade and allowed for the entrance of non-slave holding states. The Confederate cabinet agreed to abolish slavery five years after the cessation of hostilities in exchange for British and French recognition. Robert E. Lee believed in gradual emancipation and freed the slaves he had inherited through marriage. He and other Confederate leaders argued early on to arm blacks as the first step in emancipation and integration. Slavery, like any other institution, had evolved over time. Theologians were urging reforms, and in the border states the institution was evolving into an apprenticeship system. Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas had voted to remain in the Union. They reversed themselves only after Lincoln illegally raised troops from the North to coerce the seceding states back into the Union.
It has been said that Southerners, in their defense of secession, have not confronted the evils of slavery. We have long since confronted them. What has not been confronted (and what our nationalist historians guarantee will perhaps never be confronted) is the evil of launching a war that left 1,500,000 killed, missing, and wounded merely to consolidate a northeastern industrial empire. Lincoln was not able to win the war without finally directing it against the civilian population. This shocked Europeans, as it broke the code of civilized warfare that had been in place since the early eighteenth century. In violating the Geneva Convention the Lincoln administration became the first of the modem war criminals. To dignify this unexpected ourbreak of barbarism as being “about slavery” is the deep lie in the soul of the American liberal. Indeed it has almost become a part of American self-identity. Until it is honestly faced Americans will remain in a condition of spiritual and political adolescence.
Cultural War Crimes
Once upon a time on the North American Continent there existed two cultural nations and several sovereign states. The various states conceived to form a more perfect union by covenant and convention and thus was formed the United States. Reference to the union in the pre 1861 period included the lower case the and sometimes a lower case united states to reflect that the whole was only comprised of the many and various States. Sovereignty remained with the States, granted by the consent of the people.
There remained however two separate cultural nations.
The North was the cultural product of England and puritan ideologies. Commercialism, mercantilism and commerce dominated the cultural development of the Northern Culture. Puritanism developed and transformed over time from a reliance on the divine to reliance on the human. Secularism combined with commercialism was the recipe for the commercially driven Imperialism to follow.
The South drew a great deal of its’ original cultural influence from the Scots and later a proportionally large Irish influence. Celtic, Christian and agrarian would best describe the cultural influence of the South. A cultural history of “feeling the tyrant’s boot” in Scotland and Ireland combined with a simple belief in Man’s individual relationship with God made the culture of the South individualistic and unconcerned with expanding and trampling the rights of others in far away lands.
John C. Calhoun first articulately expressed the problem of concurrent majorities existing under one government. The cultural divide could not be sustained in a system where 51% of the voters got everything they wanted and 49% were left disenfranchised.
Just like a club that members freely join of their own accord, members ought to be allowed to leave. In 1861 when it became apparent that the system could no longer support two separate cultures the Southern States exercise their legitimate right as sovereign States to leave the club. There was no Constitutional Crisis, in fact the system worked fine, no bloodshed was required.
The Imperial Northern Yankees would not and did not accept this amicable and logical solution. Instead they visited war upon the Southern People and Nation. It was an economic war later clothed in the aura of a religious crusade to abolish slavery. The Yankee Imperialist has a despicable habit of cloaking their economic wars in terms of “noble crusades”. I will discuss the fallacy of the Northern Slavery claim in latter writings.
Since the occupation of the South in 1865 the list of crimes against all of mankind have piled up. The United States post 1865 began an imperial empire. Those subjected to be trapped within its’ borders have been subjected to an ever-growing federal tyranny that taxes, legislates and dictates almost every aspect of a mans’ life. As I have discussed previously those outside the US borders are no safer and are increasingly faced with the Sophie’s Choice of cooperate or die.
The list below does not speak at all about other internal victims of Yankee Imperialism: Native Americans forced from their lan and lied to in treaties, Blacks bought and sold by Yankee merchants, Hawaiians duped out of their independence, Mexicans forced from their lands etc. I will deal with those crimes in later rants.
A brief list of Internal Crimes against the Southern People
· Promoted the murder of 45 million – (Abortion is a travesty worse than the Holocaust in the sheer numbers killed).
· Scoured and raked the country to roust God out of every heart and hiding place, out of every schoolroom and football game and school board meeting
· Set children against mother and father, wife against husband, woman against man, race against race
· Legitimized every form of fornication and foulness
· Driven the farmer off the land and the smallholder out of his property and made our people renters & strangers in their own land
· Traversed the globe with armies and fleets, bombing cities and nations and imposing upon them the imperial will or death
· Eroded the rights of Man defined so clearly in Bill of Rights
· Suspended Habeas Corpus (1861, 1862 and apparently and subtly in 2002)
· Created a welfare state
· Taxed the people beyond reasonability
· Legislated every aspect of human existence
· Denied cultural identity to a significant portion of the population
There remained however two separate cultural nations.
The North was the cultural product of England and puritan ideologies. Commercialism, mercantilism and commerce dominated the cultural development of the Northern Culture. Puritanism developed and transformed over time from a reliance on the divine to reliance on the human. Secularism combined with commercialism was the recipe for the commercially driven Imperialism to follow.
The South drew a great deal of its’ original cultural influence from the Scots and later a proportionally large Irish influence. Celtic, Christian and agrarian would best describe the cultural influence of the South. A cultural history of “feeling the tyrant’s boot” in Scotland and Ireland combined with a simple belief in Man’s individual relationship with God made the culture of the South individualistic and unconcerned with expanding and trampling the rights of others in far away lands.
John C. Calhoun first articulately expressed the problem of concurrent majorities existing under one government. The cultural divide could not be sustained in a system where 51% of the voters got everything they wanted and 49% were left disenfranchised.
Just like a club that members freely join of their own accord, members ought to be allowed to leave. In 1861 when it became apparent that the system could no longer support two separate cultures the Southern States exercise their legitimate right as sovereign States to leave the club. There was no Constitutional Crisis, in fact the system worked fine, no bloodshed was required.
The Imperial Northern Yankees would not and did not accept this amicable and logical solution. Instead they visited war upon the Southern People and Nation. It was an economic war later clothed in the aura of a religious crusade to abolish slavery. The Yankee Imperialist has a despicable habit of cloaking their economic wars in terms of “noble crusades”. I will discuss the fallacy of the Northern Slavery claim in latter writings.
Since the occupation of the South in 1865 the list of crimes against all of mankind have piled up. The United States post 1865 began an imperial empire. Those subjected to be trapped within its’ borders have been subjected to an ever-growing federal tyranny that taxes, legislates and dictates almost every aspect of a mans’ life. As I have discussed previously those outside the US borders are no safer and are increasingly faced with the Sophie’s Choice of cooperate or die.
The list below does not speak at all about other internal victims of Yankee Imperialism: Native Americans forced from their lan and lied to in treaties, Blacks bought and sold by Yankee merchants, Hawaiians duped out of their independence, Mexicans forced from their lands etc. I will deal with those crimes in later rants.
A brief list of Internal Crimes against the Southern People
· Promoted the murder of 45 million – (Abortion is a travesty worse than the Holocaust in the sheer numbers killed).
· Scoured and raked the country to roust God out of every heart and hiding place, out of every schoolroom and football game and school board meeting
· Set children against mother and father, wife against husband, woman against man, race against race
· Legitimized every form of fornication and foulness
· Driven the farmer off the land and the smallholder out of his property and made our people renters & strangers in their own land
· Traversed the globe with armies and fleets, bombing cities and nations and imposing upon them the imperial will or death
· Eroded the rights of Man defined so clearly in Bill of Rights
· Suspended Habeas Corpus (1861, 1862 and apparently and subtly in 2002)
· Created a welfare state
· Taxed the people beyond reasonability
· Legislated every aspect of human existence
· Denied cultural identity to a significant portion of the population
Latin American Interventions by Yankee Imperialist
Here is a sample of Yankee Imperialism visited on just one continent. The same has occurred all over the world in one form or another…and continues apace now.
Why does the World hate the US and wish to blow up the symbols of Yankee Mercantilism? A history of meddling, invading and interference is just one reason why.
___________________________________
History of U.S. intervention in Latin America and the Caribbean
1823: The Monroe Doctrine declares Latin America to be in the United States "sphere of influence."
1846: The U.S. provokes war with Mexico and acquires half of its territory, including Texas and California.
1855: U.S. adventurer William Walker invades Nicaragua with a private army, declares himself president, and rules for 2 years.
1898: The U.S. declares war on Spain and as a result annexes Guam, Puerto Rico, the Philippines and Hawaii.
1901 : With the Platt Amendment, the U.S. declares its unilateral right to intervene in Cuban affairs.
1903: The U.S. encourages Panama's independence from Colombia in order to acquire the Panama Canal rights.
1905: The Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine declares the U.S. to be the policeman of the Caribbean; the Dominican Republic is placed under a customs receivership.
1912 : U.S. Marines invade Nicaragua and occupy the country almost continuously until 1933.
1914: Mexican refusal to salute the U.S. flag provokes the shelling of Veracruz by a U.S. battleship and the seizure of parts of the city by U.S. Marines.
1933: U.S. Marines finally leave Nicaragua, but are replaced by a well-trained and well-armed National Guard under the control of Anastasio Somoza.
1954: The CIA engineers the overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Guatemala; 30 years of military dictatorship, repression, and violence follow.
1961 : The U.S. attempts to overthrow the revolutionary Cuban government at the Bay of Pigs.
1965: Johnson sends 22,000 troops to the Dominican Republic to combat the constitutional forces trying to regain power.
1973: The CIA helps overthrow the democratic government of Allende in Chile in favor of a bloody dictatorship.
1981: The Reagan Administration begins the contra war against Nicaraguan civilians.
1983: The U.S. invades Grenada to overthrow a popular government.
1989: The U.S. invades Panama to arrest accused drug dealer Manual Noriega.
1990 : The U.S. intervenes in the Nicaraguan election process through covert and overt means.
Why does the World hate the US and wish to blow up the symbols of Yankee Mercantilism? A history of meddling, invading and interference is just one reason why.
___________________________________
History of U.S. intervention in Latin America and the Caribbean
1823: The Monroe Doctrine declares Latin America to be in the United States "sphere of influence."
1846: The U.S. provokes war with Mexico and acquires half of its territory, including Texas and California.
1855: U.S. adventurer William Walker invades Nicaragua with a private army, declares himself president, and rules for 2 years.
1898: The U.S. declares war on Spain and as a result annexes Guam, Puerto Rico, the Philippines and Hawaii.
1901 : With the Platt Amendment, the U.S. declares its unilateral right to intervene in Cuban affairs.
1903: The U.S. encourages Panama's independence from Colombia in order to acquire the Panama Canal rights.
1905: The Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine declares the U.S. to be the policeman of the Caribbean; the Dominican Republic is placed under a customs receivership.
1912 : U.S. Marines invade Nicaragua and occupy the country almost continuously until 1933.
1914: Mexican refusal to salute the U.S. flag provokes the shelling of Veracruz by a U.S. battleship and the seizure of parts of the city by U.S. Marines.
1933: U.S. Marines finally leave Nicaragua, but are replaced by a well-trained and well-armed National Guard under the control of Anastasio Somoza.
1954: The CIA engineers the overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Guatemala; 30 years of military dictatorship, repression, and violence follow.
1961 : The U.S. attempts to overthrow the revolutionary Cuban government at the Bay of Pigs.
1965: Johnson sends 22,000 troops to the Dominican Republic to combat the constitutional forces trying to regain power.
1973: The CIA helps overthrow the democratic government of Allende in Chile in favor of a bloody dictatorship.
1981: The Reagan Administration begins the contra war against Nicaraguan civilians.
1983: The U.S. invades Grenada to overthrow a popular government.
1989: The U.S. invades Panama to arrest accused drug dealer Manual Noriega.
1990 : The U.S. intervenes in the Nicaraguan election process through covert and overt means.
"Imperialism of Decadence", 1913-or better yet Yankee Imperialism in the early 20th Century
History indeed repeats itself. The Imperialism of the Yankee Merchant/Industrialist machine has grown steadily since 1861. First it conquered the sovereign states of Southern America. Next a war with Spain was “invented”. And as we see in this period piece the Imperialist pursued a series of interventions in Latin America.
Almost 100 years later we may have forgotten the tyrannical boot stomping of early Yankee Imperialism. The various conquest have always been justified in one way or another (to remove a tyrant, free a people etc. etc.) This benign cover has worked well for internal distribution. Most Citizens of the United States long ago sold their soul to the corporate mindset and culture that supports and feed upon Yankee Imperialism.
We have long forgotten the true Rights of Man or the Noble charter that originally formed this land. Our Constitution; that divinely inspired great human endeavor; ceased to exist in 1861. The nation that won the War Between the States was not the representative of the republican principles set forth by the Forefathers of the True America. The Imperialistic power that usurped and supplanted the former government has proven itself time and time again to be a thorn in the side of human freedom and self-determination.
The gentleman that wrote the piece below makes the mistake of grouping all US citizens together as US Imperialist. It is an easy enough mistake. He missed the fact that many that live within the borders of the US are themselves victims of Yankee aggression.
One may wonder why so many people around the world hate the United States. It should be no mystery to anyone that knows history. The piece below, written in 1913 by a man that experienced the heel of the US Imperialistic boot first hand might well represent many of the voices that hat the US still.
_________________________________________________
Francisco Garcia Calderón:
"Imperialism of Decadence", 1913
Calderón was a Peruvian diplomat and writer. Here he criticizes U.S. policy, as well as US businesses, for exploiting Latin Americans. He also warns of the dangers of cultural imperialism.
Interventions have become more frequent with the expansion of frontiers. The United States have recently intervened in the territory of Acre, there to found a republic of rubber gatherers; at Panama, there to develop a province and construct a canal; in Cuba, under cover of the Platt Amendment, to maintain order in the interior; in Santo Domingo, to support the civilising revolution and overthrow the tyrants; in Venezuela, and in Central America, to enforce upon these nations, torn by intestine disorders, the political and financial tutelage of the imperial democracy. In Guatemala and Honduras the loans concluded with the monarchs of North American finance have reduced the people to a new slavery. Supervision of the customs and the dispatch of pacificatory squadrons to defend the interests of the Anglo-Saxon have enforced peace and tranquility: such are the means employed. The New York American announces that Mr. Pierpont Morgan proposes to encompass the finances of Latin America by a vast network of Yankee banks. Chicago merchants and Wall Street financiers created the Meat Trust in the Argentine. The United States offer millions for the purpose of converting into Yankee loans the moneys raised in London during the last century by the Latin American States; they wish to obtain a monopoly of credit. It has even been announced, although the news hardly appears probable, that a North American syndicate wished to buy enormous belts of land in Guatemala, where the English tongue is the obligatory language. The fortification of the Panama Canal, and the possible acquisition of the Galapagos Island in the Pacific, are fresh manifestations of imperialistic progress....
Warnings, advice, distrust, invasion of capital, plans of financial hegemony all these justify the anxiety of the southern peoples.... Neither irony nor grace nor scepticism, gifts of the old civilizations, can make way against the plebeian brutality, the excessive optimism, the violent individualism of the [North American] people.
All these things contribute to the triumph of mediocrity; the multitude of primary schools, the vices of utilitarianism, the cult of the average citizen, the transatlantic M. Homais, and the tyranny of opinion noted by Tocqueville; and in this vulgarity, which is devoid of traditions and has no leading aristocracy, a return to the primitive type of the redskin, which has already been noted by close observers, is threatening the proud democracy. From the excessive tension of wills, from the elementary state of culture, from the perpetual unrest of life, from the harshness of the industrial struggle, anarchy and violence will be born in the future. In a hundred years men will seek in vain for the "American soul," the "genius of America," elsewhere than in the undisciplined force or the violence which ignores moral laws....
Essential points of difference separate the two Americas. Differences of language and therefore of spirit; the difference between Spanish Catholicism and multiform Protestantism of the Anglo-Saxons; between the Yankee individualism and the omnipotence of the State natural to the nations of the South. In their origin, as in their race, we find fundamental antagonism; the evolution of the North is slow and obedient to the lessons of time , to the influences of custom; the history of the southern peoples is full of revolutions, rich with dreams of an unattainable perfection.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source:
From Francisco Garcia Calderón: Latin America: Its Rise and Progress (London: T. F. Unwin, 1913), pp.392-393.
Almost 100 years later we may have forgotten the tyrannical boot stomping of early Yankee Imperialism. The various conquest have always been justified in one way or another (to remove a tyrant, free a people etc. etc.) This benign cover has worked well for internal distribution. Most Citizens of the United States long ago sold their soul to the corporate mindset and culture that supports and feed upon Yankee Imperialism.
We have long forgotten the true Rights of Man or the Noble charter that originally formed this land. Our Constitution; that divinely inspired great human endeavor; ceased to exist in 1861. The nation that won the War Between the States was not the representative of the republican principles set forth by the Forefathers of the True America. The Imperialistic power that usurped and supplanted the former government has proven itself time and time again to be a thorn in the side of human freedom and self-determination.
The gentleman that wrote the piece below makes the mistake of grouping all US citizens together as US Imperialist. It is an easy enough mistake. He missed the fact that many that live within the borders of the US are themselves victims of Yankee aggression.
One may wonder why so many people around the world hate the United States. It should be no mystery to anyone that knows history. The piece below, written in 1913 by a man that experienced the heel of the US Imperialistic boot first hand might well represent many of the voices that hat the US still.
_________________________________________________
Francisco Garcia Calderón:
"Imperialism of Decadence", 1913
Calderón was a Peruvian diplomat and writer. Here he criticizes U.S. policy, as well as US businesses, for exploiting Latin Americans. He also warns of the dangers of cultural imperialism.
Interventions have become more frequent with the expansion of frontiers. The United States have recently intervened in the territory of Acre, there to found a republic of rubber gatherers; at Panama, there to develop a province and construct a canal; in Cuba, under cover of the Platt Amendment, to maintain order in the interior; in Santo Domingo, to support the civilising revolution and overthrow the tyrants; in Venezuela, and in Central America, to enforce upon these nations, torn by intestine disorders, the political and financial tutelage of the imperial democracy. In Guatemala and Honduras the loans concluded with the monarchs of North American finance have reduced the people to a new slavery. Supervision of the customs and the dispatch of pacificatory squadrons to defend the interests of the Anglo-Saxon have enforced peace and tranquility: such are the means employed. The New York American announces that Mr. Pierpont Morgan proposes to encompass the finances of Latin America by a vast network of Yankee banks. Chicago merchants and Wall Street financiers created the Meat Trust in the Argentine. The United States offer millions for the purpose of converting into Yankee loans the moneys raised in London during the last century by the Latin American States; they wish to obtain a monopoly of credit. It has even been announced, although the news hardly appears probable, that a North American syndicate wished to buy enormous belts of land in Guatemala, where the English tongue is the obligatory language. The fortification of the Panama Canal, and the possible acquisition of the Galapagos Island in the Pacific, are fresh manifestations of imperialistic progress....
Warnings, advice, distrust, invasion of capital, plans of financial hegemony all these justify the anxiety of the southern peoples.... Neither irony nor grace nor scepticism, gifts of the old civilizations, can make way against the plebeian brutality, the excessive optimism, the violent individualism of the [North American] people.
All these things contribute to the triumph of mediocrity; the multitude of primary schools, the vices of utilitarianism, the cult of the average citizen, the transatlantic M. Homais, and the tyranny of opinion noted by Tocqueville; and in this vulgarity, which is devoid of traditions and has no leading aristocracy, a return to the primitive type of the redskin, which has already been noted by close observers, is threatening the proud democracy. From the excessive tension of wills, from the elementary state of culture, from the perpetual unrest of life, from the harshness of the industrial struggle, anarchy and violence will be born in the future. In a hundred years men will seek in vain for the "American soul," the "genius of America," elsewhere than in the undisciplined force or the violence which ignores moral laws....
Essential points of difference separate the two Americas. Differences of language and therefore of spirit; the difference between Spanish Catholicism and multiform Protestantism of the Anglo-Saxons; between the Yankee individualism and the omnipotence of the State natural to the nations of the South. In their origin, as in their race, we find fundamental antagonism; the evolution of the North is slow and obedient to the lessons of time , to the influences of custom; the history of the southern peoples is full of revolutions, rich with dreams of an unattainable perfection.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source:
From Francisco Garcia Calderón: Latin America: Its Rise and Progress (London: T. F. Unwin, 1913), pp.392-393.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)