MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Constitution’

« Previous Entries

The Joys of Diversity and Multicullturalism Have Come Home to Roost – PaulCraigRoberts.org

Posted by M. C. on June 16, 2020

Perhaps you don’t think Americans are stupid,  but Democrats certainly think they are. The Democrats think voters are going to blame Trump, not the Democrats who are encouraging more looting and burning, and that voters will elect the Democrats, who have stood down in the face of massive looting and property destruction, to run the country.  If voters elect Democrats, it will prove the Democrats are correct that Americans are stupid.

Consider the female Democrat that the smart, white, high-tech people in Seattle elected as their mayor.  She enabled peaceful protests to burn down businesses.

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2020/06/15/the-joys-of-diversity-and-multicullturalism-have-come-home-to-roost/

Paul Craig Roberts

Hi Dumbshit American.  Have you had enough of diversity and multiculturalism?  If not, vote a Democrat president, and the second wave of peaceful protests will loot and burn down your homes and neighborhoods.  Be sure you understand that diversity means no more white statues and white history, because they are racist.  Multiculturalism means no more white civilization, which is racist. You may have to give up your language as well, because English is racist.

I have been telling you for years that you are living The Camp of the Saints.  Having failed to become aware, you have no idea what is happening. When it finally dawns on you, it will be too late.

The anti-white, white presstitute national media have not told you what is going on. The official line is that a few peaceful protests have been marred by white supremacists sneaking in among the peaceful protesters and causing violence in order to discredit blacks.  Some of the more deranged white liberals say that the burning and looting in cities and states run by Democrats is Trump’s plot to discredit Democrats as the party that will not protect property, thereby assuring Trump’s reelecton.  The terrorist threat scare doesn’t work any more, so the white liberals claim that Trump has replaced it with the black scare.  The Democrat mayor of Minneapolis is really a Trump Agent and allowed 500 Minneapolis businesses to be destroyed in order to ensure Trump’s election.  If you don’t believe it, just ask a white liberal.  https://www.startribune.com/twin-cities-rebuilding-begins-with-donations-pressure-on-government/571075592/

Perhaps you don’t think Americans are stupid,  but Democrats certainly think they are. The Democrats think voters are going to blame Trump, not the Democrats who are encouraging more looting and burning, and that voters will elect the Democrats, who have stood down in the face of massive looting and property destruction, to run the country.  If voters elect Democrats, it will prove the Democrats are correct that Americans are stupid.

Consider the female Democrat that the smart, white, high-tech people in Seattle elected as their mayor.  She enabled peaceful protests to burn down businesses.  Some of the peaceful protesters have set up a foreign country within Seattle’s city limits called the Capital Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ), which is already receiving foreign aid from the citizens of Seattle courtesy of the mayor.  Can World Bank and IMF loans and a seat at the UN be far behind?

So far Seattle’s foreign aid has not been enough. One of the rulers in the Autonomous Zone has told the white citizens of the new country that they have to give their non-white counterparts money or face retribution. “White people, I see you. I see every one of you, and I remember your faces. You find an African American person and you give them $10. Do It!”  If white people find giving up their money difficult, the Leader said, how “are you going to give up power and land and capital?”  https://www.theblaze.com/news/leader-in-seattles-chaz-demands-white-occupiers-fork-over-money-to-black-counterparts?utm_source=theblaze-dailyAM&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily-Newsletter__AM%202020-06-14&utm_term=TheBlaze%20Daily%20AM%20-%20last%20270%20days

Change is so rapid that not even the Leader can keep up and mistakenly calls an African CHAZ  citizen an African American.

The black female police chief in Seattle, Carmen Best, said that “rapes, robberies, and all sorts of violent acts have been occurring in CHAZ  (the new country inside Seattle) that we’re not able to get to.” https://www.theblaze.com/news/seattle-police-chief-violence-chaz  The Seattle Democrat mayor, Jenny Durkan, says it is all just “a summer of love,” and nothing is going on but “free speech and self-expression.”  Be sure you get that, White America.  Looting, burning, rape, and extorting money are just free speech and self-expression, so don’t dare protest when free speech and self-expression come to your neighborhoods.

Before the embers went cold Atlanta is alight again. On Saturday June 13  peaceful protesters burned down a Wendy’s. A black man who resisted arrest, disarmed a police officer of his or her Taser and aimed it at police was shot in front of Wendy’s.  Obviously, it was Wendy’s fault, and Wendy’s paid by being burned down. http://www.stationgossip.com/2020/06/rioting-protesters-torch-atlanta-wendys.html

Atlanta’s white female police chief was so devastated, not, of course by the fate of Wendy’s, but by the non-sympathetic response of police to a man aiming a weapon at them, that she was despondent and resigned, leaving the black protesters without a white uncle Tom to cover for them. http://www.stationgossip.com/2020/06/rioting-protesters-torch-atlanta-wendys.html  Racist of her, don’t you think?

In Chicago the black female Democrat mayor confronted by one of the city’s Democrat aldermen concerned that the looting was approaching neighborhoods told him he was full of shit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VrLvJBxAKw

Efforts are underway to get peaceful protests going in Ashville, Portland, and Chattanooga. Having wrecked large cities like Minneapolis, New York, Chicago, and Atlanta, smaller cities are being targeted.

The Tennessee governor, Bill Lee, made it clear that there will be no toleration of violent protests or autonomous zones in Tennessee. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jemimamcevoy/2020/06/12/tennessee-governor-warns-protesters-against-creating-nashville-autonomous-zone/#27f7ec9b6c19  As the US is in an advanced stage of collapse, exactly like France in The Camp of the Saints, don’t be surprised if Pentagon Chief Mark Epsy and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mark Milley take a page from The Camp of the Saints and send the US Air Force to bomb the Tennessee State Police and National Guard who demonstrate white racism by protecting Tennessee’s cities.

To comprehend the collapse of white confidence consider the number of top US military leaders who have declared President Trump, not looters and rioters, to be the real menace. Espy and Milley have already undercut President Trump’s effort to protect life and property by falsely alleging that it would be unconstitutional to use the US military to stop America’s cities from burning.  These two enemies of white Americans and their property are joined by former Pentagon chief James Mattis, former Special Operations Commander William McRaven, former Joint Chiefs Chairman and Secretary of State Colin Powell, former commander of US forces in Afghanistan John Allen, former commander of the US Southern Command Barry McCaffrey, former Joint Chiefs Chairman Mike Mullen.  These top military commanders have called for Trump’s removal from office. https://justthenews.com/government/security/retired-generals-who-denounced-trump-could-be-recalled-active-duty-and

McRaven said that President Trump was working to destroy America.

Powell said that Trump lies all the time—an example of the pot calling the kettle black—and is a menace who has drifted away from the US Constitution.

Allen says the Constitution is under threat from the President of the United States.

McCaffrey denounced Trump as a threat to national security.

Mattis said that Trump made a mockery of the Constitution.

Let’s see now.  It was George W. Bush who made a mockery of the Constitution when he asserted the power to detain Americans indefinitely without due process of law.  It was Obama who asserted—and exercised—the right to execute American citizens on suspicion alone without due process of law.  It was Congress which repearedly renews the unconstitutional PATRIOT Act which pisses all over the US Constitution and destroys the constitutional protection of privacy.

The big shot generals all lived through these horors without opening their mouths.  But OhMyGod the racist Trump is going to frustrate blacks by protecting private property!  He has to go.

This is precisely how France collapses in Jean Raspail’s famous novel The Camp of the Saints. In the United States we are living the novel, as is most likely all of Europe.

Good will between races and genders has been destroyed by Identity Politics, and without good will there is only violence. The age of violence is upon us.  Our leaders have no awareness and encourage the violence.   A thug with a long criminal record who was resisting arrest died either from illegal substances he was consuming or from Israeli training of Minnesota police, but it has been declared by the White Establishment to be Murder by Racism, with the consequence that American businesses are looted and famous cities are burned in what the white liberals say is “just retribution.”

The 21st century is the century that White Civilization will vanish along with its monuments and history books.  You can read your certain future by reading  The Camp of the Saints.

Be seeing you

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Do Conservatives Really Believe Than Unconstitutional Law Is No Law? – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on June 2, 2020

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/06/laurence-m-vance/do-conservatives-really-believe-that-an-unconstitutional-law-is-no-law/

By

I see that all manner of conservatives are saying in response to the draconian lockdowns across the country that an unconstitutional law is no law. They are praising district attorneys, sheriffs, and local police for saying that they won’t enforce the decrees of state governors. Some conservatives are advocating rebellion and civil disobedience. Their focus, of course, is mainly on states with Democratic governors. But it is typical of conservatives not to criticize Republicans too much.

But do conservatives really believe that an unconstitutional law is no law? Do they really believe that district attorneys, sheriffs, and local police should not enforce unconstitutional laws?

Of course they don’t.

Now, I am glad to see that conservatives are actually talking about civil liberties. But the greatest violation of civil liberties, private property, individual liberty, personal freedom, and free enterprise is the federal government’s war on drugs.

Under federal law—

Possession of marijuana is punishable by up to one year in jail and a minimum fine of $1,000 for a first conviction. For a second conviction, the penalties increase to a 15-day mandatory minimum sentence with a maximum of two years in prison and a fine of up to $2,500. Subsequent convictions carry a 90-day mandatory minimum sentence and a maximum of up to three years in prison and a fine of up to $5,000.

And that is just possession.

Manufacture or distribution carries tougher penalties. The sale of paraphernalia is punishable by up to three years in prison. And “the sentence of death can be carried out on a defendant who has been found guilty of manufacturing, importing or distributing a controlled substance if the act was committed as part of a continuing criminal enterprise.”

And that is just marijuana.

Woe unto the American who possesses, manufactures, or distributes cocaine, heroin, meth, or fentanyl.

Drug laws are certainly unconstitutional laws.

Does the Constitution authorize the national government to regulate, criminalize, or prohibit the manufacture, sale, or use of any drug?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to intrude itself into the personal eating, drinking, or smoking habits of Americans?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to restrict or monitor any harmful or mood-altering substances that any American wants to consume?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to have a drug war?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to concern itself with the nature and quantity of any substance Americans inhale or otherwise take into their body?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government regulate, monitor, or restrict the consumption, medical, or recreational habits of Americans?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to have an Office of National Drug Control Policy?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to have a Drug Enforcement Administration?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to have a drug czar?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government a Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to have a Controlled Substances Act?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to have a Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to have a National Survey on Drug Use and Health?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to have a Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to have any federal crimes other than treason, piracy, and counterfeiting?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to have a National Drug Control Strategy?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to institute drug prohibition without a constitutional amendment?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to have a Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to wage war on a plant?

Does the Constitution authorize the federal government to ban anything?

Of course it doesn’t.

Since an unconstitutional law is no law, shouldn’t conservatives be opposed root and branch to the federal government’s war on drugs instead of being its biggest supporters?

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Do We Need The State? – Doug Casey’s International Man

Posted by M. C. on May 21, 2020

Editor’s Note: Sociopaths are drawn to the government. They seek power and control over others through coercion, taxation and more.

Muslims, Christians, and Jews lived together peaceably in Palestine, Lebanon, and North Africa for centuries until the situation became politicized after World War I. Until then, an individual’s background and beliefs were just personal attributes, not a casus belli. Government was at its most benign, an ineffectual nuisance that concerned itself mostly with extorting taxes. People were busy with that most harmless of activities: making money.

https://internationalman.com/articles/do-we-need-the-state/

by Doug Casey

Rousseau was perhaps the first to popularize the fiction now taught in civics classes about how government was created. It holds that men sat down together and rationally thought out the concept of government as a solution to problems that confronted them. The government of the United States was, however, the first to be formed in any way remotely like Rousseau’s ideal. Even then, it had far from universal support from the three million colonials whom it claimed to represent. The U.S. government, after all, grew out of an illegal conspiracy to overthrow and replace the existing government.

There’s no question that the result was, by an order of magnitude, the best blueprint for a government that had yet been conceived. Most of America’s Founding Fathers believed the main purpose of government was to protect its subjects from the initiation of violence from any source; government itself prominently included. That made the U.S. government almost unique in history. And it was that concept – not natural resources, the ethnic composition of American immigrants, or luck – that turned America into the paragon it became.

The origin of government itself, however, was nothing like Rousseau’s fable or the origin of the United States Constitution. The most realistic scenario for the origin of government is a roving group of bandits deciding that life would be easier if they settled down in a particular locale, and simply taxing the residents for a fixed percentage (rather like “protection money”) instead of periodically sweeping through and carrying off all they could get away with. It’s no accident that the ruling classes everywhere have martial backgrounds. Royalty are really nothing more than successful marauders who have buried the origins of their wealth in romance.

Romanticizing government, making it seem like Camelot, populated by brave knights and benevolent kings, painting it as noble and ennobling, helps people to accept its jurisdiction. But, like most things, government is shaped by its origins. Author Rick Maybury may have said it best in Whatever Happened to Justice?,

“A castle was not so much a plush palace as the headquarters for a concentration camp. These camps, called feudal kingdoms, were established by conquering barbarians who’d enslaved the local people. When you see one, ask to see not just the stately halls and bedrooms, but the dungeons and torture chambers.

“A castle was a hangout for silk-clad gangsters who were stealing from helpless workers. The king was the ‘lord’ who had control of the blackjack; he claimed a special ‘divine right’ to use force on the innocent.

“Fantasies about handsome princes and beautiful princesses are dangerous; they whitewash the truth. They give children the impression political power is wonderful stuff.”

Is The State Necessary?

The violent and corrupt nature of government is widely acknowledged by almost everyone. That’s been true since time immemorial, as have political satire and grousing about politicians. Yet almost everyone turns a blind eye; most not only put up with it, but actively support the charade. That’s because, although many may believe government to be an evil, they believe it is a necessary evil (the larger question of whether anything that is evil is necessary, or whether anything that is necessary can be evil, is worth discussing, but this isn’t the forum).

What (arguably) makes government necessary is the need for protection from other, even more dangerous, governments. I believe a case can be made that modern technology obviates this function.

One of the most perversely misleading myths about government is that it promotes order within its own bailiwick, keeps groups from constantly warring with each other, and somehow creates togetherness and harmony. In fact, that’s the exact opposite of the truth. There’s no cosmic imperative for different people to rise up against one another…unless they’re organized into political groups. The Middle East, now the world’s most fertile breeding ground for hatred, provides an excellent example.

Muslims, Christians, and Jews lived together peaceably in Palestine, Lebanon, and North Africa for centuries until the situation became politicized after World War I. Until then, an individual’s background and beliefs were just personal attributes, not a casus belli. Government was at its most benign, an ineffectual nuisance that concerned itself mostly with extorting taxes. People were busy with that most harmless of activities: making money.

But politics do not deal with people as individuals. It scoops them up into parties and nations. And some group inevitably winds up using the power of the state (however “innocently” or “justly” at first) to impose its values and wishes on others with predictably destructive results. What would otherwise be an interesting kaleidoscope of humanity then sorts itself out according to the lowest common denominator peculiar to the time and place.

Sometimes that means along religious lines, as with the Muslims and Hindus in India or the Catholics and Protestants in Ireland; or ethnic lines, like the Kurds and Iraqis in the Middle East or Tamils and Sinhalese in Sri Lanka; sometimes it’s mostly racial, as whites and East Indians found throughout Africa in the 1970s or Asians in California in the 1870s. Sometimes it’s purely a matter of politics, as Argentines, Guatemalans, Salvadorans, and other Latins discovered more recently. Sometimes it amounts to no more than personal beliefs, as the McCarthy era in the 1950s and the Salem trials in the 1690s proved.

Throughout history government has served as a vehicle for the organization of hatred and oppression, benefitting no one except those who are ambitious and ruthless enough to gain control of it. That’s not to say government hasn’t, then and now, performed useful functions. But the useful things it does could and would be done far better by the market.

Editor’s Note: Sociopaths are drawn to the government. They seek power and control over others through coercion, taxation and more.

Unfortunately, there’s little any individual can practically do to change the course of these trends in motion.

The best you can and should do is to stay informed so that you can protect yourself in the best way possible, and even profit from the situation.

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

What If the Government Has It Wrong? – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on May 21, 2020

What if the COVID-19 virus has run its course and run into natural immunities? What if many folks have had symptom-free episodes with many viruses and are now immune from them? What if the government refuses to understand this because it undermines the government’s power to control us?

What if — as Thomas Jefferson said — the blood of patriots should be spilled on the tree of revolution at least once in every generation? What if we nullify the government that has nullified our rights?

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/05/andrew-p-napolitano/what-if-the-government-has-it-wrong/

By

What if the government has it wrong — on the medicine and the law?

What if face masks can’t stop the COVID-19 virus? What if quarantining the healthy makes no medical sense? What if staying at home for months reduces immunity?

What if more people have been infected with the virus in their homes than outside them?

What if there are as many credible scientists and physicians who disagree with the government as those who agree with it? What if the government chooses to listen only to scientists and physicians who would tell it what it wanted to hear? What if the government silences scientists and physicians, and even fires one, who attempt to tell it what it didn’t want to hear?

What if the government wants to stoke fear in the populace because mass fear produces mass compliance? What if individual fear reduces individual immunity?

What if a healthy immunity gets stronger when challenged? What if a pampered immunity gets weaker when challenged? What if we all pass germs and viruses — that we don’t even know we have — on to others all the time, but their immune systems repel what we pass on to them?

What if the COVID-19 virus has run its course and run into natural immunities? What if many folks have had symptom-free episodes with many viruses and are now immune from them? What if the government refuses to understand this because it undermines the government’s power to control us?

What if government orders to nursing homes and assisted living facilities to accept the sick and contagious are insane? What if the same government that micromanages nursing homes and assisted living facilities knows that they are not hospitals and are not equipped to cure the sick or contain contagion?

What if the government makes health care decisions not on the basis of medicine or human nature but statistics? What if reliance on the government’s statistics has made many folks sick?

What if we’d all be healthier and happier if we make our own choices with our own physicians rather than the government making choices for us? What if it is un-American for the government to tell you how to care for yourself? What if it is equally un-American for you to follow the government when it intrudes into your personal choices?

What if the Supreme Court has ruled many times that your health care decisions are private, personal and to be made between you and your physician? What if the Supreme Court has also ruled many times that your private health care decisions are none of the government’s business?

What if we never elected a government to keep us free from all viruses, but we did elect it to keep us free from all tyrants? What if the government — which can’t deliver the mail, fill potholes, stop robocalls, or spend within its income — is the last entity on earth into whose hands we would voluntarily repose our health for safekeeping? What if the government won’t admit that its understanding of science is colored by politics?

What if the government has misunderstood its mandate? What if the government thinks it can do its job by keeping us safe but unfree? What if — according to the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence — government’s first duty is to safeguard our rights? What if there is no legal basis for the government to keep us at home or to close our businesses?

What if the government gave itself the power to interfere with our personal choices? What if that self-imposed power violates the basic constitutional principle that the government derives its powers from the consent of the governed? What if no one consented to a government that interferes with our personal choices? What if our personal choices to take personal chances have never needed a government permission slip?

What if the Constitution was written to restrain the government? What if all in government — local, state and federal — have taken an oath to uphold and comply with the Constitution?

What if the government decrees that liquor sales are essential but clothing sales are not? What if the government decrees that abortions are essential but orthopedic surgery is not? What if the government decrees that music stores are essential but the free exercise of religion is not?

What if these decisions about what is essential and inessential are for individuals — and not for the government — to make?

What if to the barber or short-order cook or retail sales person a barbershop and a luncheonette and a clothing store are essential? What if to those who love God, the free exercise of religion is essential?

What if the government makes essential whatever serves its friends, enhances its wealth, maintains its stability and removes obstacles to its exercise of power? What if the Constitution — with its protections of our rights to make free choices — is an intentional obstacle to governmental power?

What if America’s founders and the Constitution’s framers chose liberty over safety? What if the government doesn’t like that choice? What if the government only nominally endorses it?

What if — when the pandemic is over — the government remains tyrannical? What if — when the pandemic is over — folks sue the government for its destruction of life, liberty and property only to learn that the government gave itself immunity from such lawsuits? What if — when the pandemic is over — the government refuses to acknowledge its end?

What if — as Thomas Jefferson said — the blood of patriots should be spilled on the tree of revolution at least once in every generation? What if we nullify the government that has nullified our rights?

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

NJ Gov. Murphy: ‘I Wasn’t Thinking of the Bill of Rights’ When Issuing Stay-at-Home Order, Did Consult with Lawyers

Posted by M. C. on April 16, 2020

New Jersey Governor Phil Murphyon the Constitution

“That’s above my pay grade…

If New Jersey was dumb enough to elect him to begin with I doubt this will harm re-election.

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/04/15/nj-gov-murphy-i-wasnt-thinking-of-the-bill-of-rights-when-issuing-stay-at-home-order-did-consult-with-lawyers/

Ian Hanchett

…The discussion then turned back to the restrictions on religious services. Host Tucker Carlson asked, “By what authority did you nullify the Bill of Rights in issuing this order? How do you have the power to do that?”

Murphy responded, “That’s above my pay grade, Tucker. So, I wasn’t thinking of the Bill of Rights when we did this.” Murphy continued that he looked at science and data on social distancing…

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Death in Slow Motion – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on April 16, 2020

Now, we have become a nation of sheep. We have elected officials with constitutionally assigned duties — and constitutionally imposed limitations — who have assumed to themselves dictatorial powers and have falsely claimed that they can interfere with our personal choices. Who are the governors to decide which human activities are essential? Abortion is essential but Mass is not? No constitution gave them that power.

Closing churches meets no constitutional standard. There is no question that fighting a pandemic is a compelling state interest, yet there are far less restrictive ways to address it than preventing worship.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/04/andrew-p-napolitano/death-in-slow-motion/

By

During the past month, as Americans have been terrified of the coronavirus, another demon has been lurking ready to pounce. It is a demon of our own creation. It is the now amply manifested inability of elected officials to resist the temptation of totalitarianism. And it is slowly bringing about the death of personal liberty in our once free society.

It is one thing for public officials to use a bully pulpit to educate and even intimidate the populace into a prudent awareness of basic sanitary behaviors — even those which go against our nature — to impede the spread of the virus. It is quite another to contend that their suggestions and intimidations and guidelines somehow have the force of the law behind them.

They don’t. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Death in Slow Motion – LewRockwell

Resistance Building To Coronavirus ‘House Arrest’ Orders…It’s About Time!

Posted by M. C. on April 9, 2020

http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2020/april/07/resistance-building-to-coronavirus-house-arrest-ordersits-about-time/

Written by Daniel McAdams
Tuesday April 7, 2020
Across the country, from political leaders, to small business owners, to parents who just want to take their children to the park, resistance is growing to the authoritarians who have effectively suspended the Constitution and placed most of the country under house arrest. Lawsuits are also challenging unlawful “stay at home” orders. What if all the hysteria-driven orders have actually made the virus outbreak even worse? More scientists are coming forward to argue for the “Sweden model” of moderation rather than lockdown. Watch today’s Liberty Report:

Copyright © 2020 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
Be seeing you

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : End the Shutdown; It’s Time for Resurrection!

Posted by M. C. on April 7, 2020

On March 24th, the CDC issued an alert stating that doctors should classify “probable COVID-19” or “likely COVID-19” as Covid-19 deaths. Perhaps that explains the seeming drop-off of pneumonia deaths this year and the simultaneous spike in Covid-19 deaths as some researchers have reported.

The BBC reported last week that, “At present in the US, any death of a Covid-19 patient, no matter what the physician believes to be the direct cause, is counted for public reporting as a Covid-19 death.”

Does that sound like a scientifically sound way of determining how deadly Covid-19 really is?

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2020/april/06/end-the-shutdown-it-s-time-for-resurrection/

Written by Ron Paul

For many millions of Christians, Easter is a time to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Others may celebrate the arrival of spring and the promise of new life. Whatever one’s beliefs, after several weeks of mandatory “stay at home” orders and the complete shutdown of the US economy over the coronavirus, this self-destructive hysteria must end and we must reclaim the freedom and liberty that has provided us so much opportunity as Americans.

To do that we should first understand that much of the hysteria is being generated by a mainstream media that has long prioritized sensationalism over investigating and reporting the truth. Government bureaucrats are also exaggerating the threat of this virus and appear to be enjoying the power and control that fearful people are willingly handing over to them. One “coronavirus” bureaucrat even told us that we can no longer go to the grocery store! So we should just starve?

It is certainly possible to believe that this virus can be dangerous while at the same time pointing out that radical steps are being taken in our society – stay-at-home orders, introduction of de facto martial law, etc. – with very little knowledge of just how deadly is this disease.

On March 24th, the CDC issued an alert stating that doctors should classify “probable COVID-19” or “likely COVID-19” as Covid-19 deaths. Perhaps that explains the seeming drop-off of pneumonia deaths this year and the simultaneous spike in Covid-19 deaths as some researchers have reported.

The BBC reported last week that, “At present in the US, any death of a Covid-19 patient, no matter what the physician believes to be the direct cause, is counted for public reporting as a Covid-19 death.”

Does that sound like a scientifically sound way of determining how deadly Covid-19 really is?

What is most dangerous is that although this virus will eventually disappear, the assault on our civil liberties is not likely to be reversed. From this point on, whenever local officials, county officials, state governors, or federal bureaucrats decide there is sufficient reason to suspend the Constitution they will not hesitate to do so. Anyone who challenges the suspension of the Constitution “for our own good” will be labeled “unpatriotic” and perhaps even reported to the authorities. We have already seen hotlines springing up across the country for Americans to report other Americans who dare venture outside to enjoy the sun and build up their vitamin D protection against the coronavirus.

The government is justified in cancelling the Constitution, we are told, because we are in an emergency situation caused by the Covid-19 virus. But do people forget that the Constitution itself was written and adopted while we were in an “emergency situation”?

Did the framers of the Constitution fail to add an 11th Amendment to the Bill of Rights saying, “oh by the way, none of this counts if we get sick”? Of course not! Those who wrote our Constitution understood that these rights are not granted by the government, but rather by our Creator. Thus it was never a question as to when or under what conditions they could be suspended: the government had no authority to suspend them at all because it did not grant them in the first place.

Our country is far less at risk from the coronavirus than it is from the thousands of small and large authoritarians who have suddenly flexed their muscles across the country. President Trump would do well to end this ridiculous shutdown so that Americans can get on with their lives and get back to work.

Americans should remember the tyrants who locked them down next time they go to the ballot box. Let’s demand an end to the shutdown so we can resurrect our economy, our lives, and our liberties!
Copyright © 2020 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.

 

Be seeing you

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Rutherford Institute :: Suspending the Constitution: Police State Uses Crises to Expand Its Lockdown Powers | By John W. Whitehead |

Posted by M. C. on March 26, 2020

The America metamorphosing before our eyes is almost unrecognizable from the country I grew up in, and that’s not just tragic—it’s downright terrifying.

This is how freedom dies.

We erect our own prison walls, and as our rights dwindle away, we forge our own chains of servitude to the police state.

https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commentary/suspending_the_constitution_police_state_uses_crises_to_expand_its_lockdown_powers

By John W. Whitehead

“That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary. There wasn’t even any rioting in the streets. People stayed home at night, watching television, looking for some direction. There wasn’t even an enemy you could put your finger on.”― Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid’s Tale

You can always count on the government to take advantage of a crisis, legitimate or manufactured.

This coronavirus pandemic is no exception.

Not only are the federal and state governments unraveling the constitutional fabric of the nation with lockdown mandates that are sending the economy into a tailspin and wreaking havoc with our liberties, but they are also rendering the citizenry fully dependent on the government for financial handouts, medical intervention, protection and sustenance.

Unless we find some way to rein in the government’s power grabs, the fall-out will be epic.

Everything I have warned about for years—government overreach, invasive surveillance, martial law, abuse of powers, militarized police, weaponized technology used to track and control the citizenry, and so on—has coalesced into this present moment.

The government’s shameless exploitation of past national emergencies for its own nefarious purposes pales in comparison to what is presently unfolding.

It’s downright Machiavellian.

Deploying the same strategy it used with 9/11 to acquire greater powers under the USA Patriot Act, the police state—a.k.a. the shadow government, a.k.a. the Deep State—has been anticipating this moment for years, quietly assembling a wish list of lockdown powers that could be trotted out and approved at a moment’s notice.

It should surprise no one, then, that the Trump Administration has asked Congress to allow it to suspend parts of the Constitution whenever it deems it necessary during this coronavirus pandemic and “other” emergencies.

It’s that “other” emergencies part that should particularly give you pause, if not spur you to immediate action (by action, I mean a loud and vocal, apolitical, nonpartisan outcry and sustained, apolitical, nonpartisan resistance).

In fact, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has been quietly trotting out and testing a long laundry list of terrifying powers that override the Constitution.

We’re talking about lockdown powers (at both the federal and state level): the ability to suspend the Constitution, indefinitely detain American citizens, bypass the courts, quarantine whole communities or segments of the population, override the First Amendment by outlawing religious gatherings and assemblies of more than a few people, shut down entire industries and manipulate the economy, muzzle dissidents, “stop and seize any plane, train or automobile to stymie the spread of contagious disease,” reshape financial markets, create a digital currency (and thus further restrict the use of cash), determine who should live or die…

You’re getting the picture now, right?

These are powers the police state would desperately like to make permanent.

Specifically, the DOJ wants to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without trial. The DOJ also wants to be able to pause court proceedings and suspend the statute of limitations on criminal and civil cases.

Both signify a clear violation of every right espoused in the Constitution, including habeas corpus.

Habeas corpus, a fundamental tenet of English common law that guards against arbitrary and lawless state action, does not appear anywhere in the Bill of Rights. Its importance was such that it was enshrined in the Constitution itself. And it is of such magnitude that all other rights, including those in the Bill of Rights, are dependent upon it. Without habeas corpus, the significance of all other rights crumbles.

The right of habeas corpus was important to the Framers of the Constitution because they knew from personal experience what it was like to be labeled enemy combatants, imprisoned indefinitely and not given the opportunity to appear before a neutral judge. Believing that such arbitrary imprisonment is “in all ages, the favorite and most formidable instrument of tyranny,” the Founders were all the more determined to protect Americans from such government abuses.

Translated as “you should have the body,” habeas corpus is a legal action, or writ, by which those imprisoned unlawfully can seek relief from their imprisonment. Derived from English common law, habeas corpus first appeared in the Magna Carta of 1215 and is the oldest human right in the history of English-speaking civilization. The doctrine of habeas corpus stems from the requirement that a government must either charge a person or let him go free.

While serving as President, Thomas Jefferson addressed the essential necessity of habeas corpus. In his first inaugural address on March 4, 1801, Jefferson said, “I know, indeed, that some honest men fear that a republican government cannot be strong; that this government is not strong enough.” But, said Jefferson, our nation was “the world’s best hope” and, because of our strong commitment to democracy, “the strongest government on earth.” Jefferson said that the sum of this basic belief was found in the “freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus; and trial by juries impartially selected. These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us, and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation.”

Throughout the twentieth century, the importance of the right of habeas corpus has repeatedly been confirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. Yet 200-plus years after America’s founders risked their lives to secure their freedoms, we find ourselves right back where we started, with a government determined to strip us of every vestige of our freedoms.

The DOJ’s latest request to Congress is merely a signal that the police state is ready to step out of the shadows, with the current national emergency being a convenient cover for their dastardly deeds.

Bear in mind, however, that these powers the Trump Administration, acting on orders from the police state, are officially asking Congress to recognize and authorize barely scratch the surface of the far-reaching powers the government has already unilaterally claimed for itself.

Unofficially, the police state has been riding roughshod over the rule of law for years now without any pretense of being reined in or restricted in its power grabs by Congress, the courts or the citizenry.

As David C. Unger, observes in The Emergency State: America’s Pursuit of Absolute Security at All Costs:

“For seven decades we have been yielding our most basic liberties to a secretive, unaccountable emergency state – a vast but increasingly misdirected complex of national security institutions, reflexes, and beliefs that so define our present world that we forget that there was ever a different America. … Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness have given way to permanent crisis management: to policing the planet and fighting preventative wars of ideological containment, usually on terrain chosen by, and favorable to, our enemies. Limited government and constitutional accountability have been shouldered aside by the kind of imperial presidency our constitutional system was explicitly designed to prevent.”

This rise of an “emergency state” that justifies all manner of government tyranny in the so-called name of national security is all happening according to schedule. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Coronavirus vs. Constitution: What can government stop you from doing in a pandemic?

Posted by M. C. on March 13, 2020

Apparently pretty much anything it wants.

Precedents are set.

People are trained to obey…or else.

Laws do not go away. Income tax, social security, tax withholding are a few that come to mind.

https://www.sacbee.com/news/nation-world/national/article241106636.html

By Hayley Fowler

Public closures, a ban on gatherings, quarantine notices and orders for isolation have become increasingly common as the coronavirus continues to spread across the United States.

Officials in Washington state and San Francisco are limiting the number of people allowed to attend public gatherings. The governor of California joined them on Thursday in urging the cancellation of all events with more than 250 people in attendance.

The governor of Kentucky, a Bible belt state, has asked churches and other religious institutions to temporarily cancel services.

But if it seems these actions are infringing on individual freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, think again.

“You don’t have a right to assemble against the backdrop of known public health risk,” James G. Hodge told McClatchy News.

Hodge is the director of the Center for Public Health Law and Policy at Arizona State University, an affiliate of the Network for Public Health Law. As the number of COVID-19 cases climbs, he said, the types of “aggressive measures” taking place in some parts of the country will be used elsewhere.

As of Thursday, more than a dozen states from California to North Carolina have declared a state of emergency to try and stop the spread of the coronavirus.

Hodge said those declarations help shape how public health officials can respond at the state and local level, enabling them to act fast while instituting forms of social distancing — “which is one of the only tools we have available to us” during a public health crisis like the coronavirus pandemic, he said.

Officials typically have to go through legal processes to close an establishment or shut down public gatherings, Hodge said. But under a state of emergency, everything is expedited.

“It’s not that we don’t have time for First Amendment interests, it’s that we must act fast,” he said. “What was opened today can be closed tomorrow.”

Getting the courts involved

That doesn’t mean communities in the U.S. will see the kind of large-scale lock-downs happening in Italy and China, Hodge added.

But there are circumstances under which a voluntary recommendation can become involuntary.

A man in Missouri left quarantine to attend a father-daughter dance at a nearby hotel, McClatchy reported, prompting county health officials to warn “he must remain in his home or they will issue a formal quarantine that will require him and the rest of his family to stay in their home by the force of law.”

When someone opts to evade such recommendations, Hodge said, public health authorities can seek a court order mandating their compliance.

“Some of those basic liberties are going to be truncated for a brief period,” he said. “Most Americans understand the need for that.”

But these types of public closures and requests for self-quarantine aren’t without good reason — it’s “flattening the curve,” Vox reported.

If officials don’t stop the rapid spread of coronavirus, or at least slow it down, epidemiologists have said the health care system could be “overwhelmed by a sudden explosion of illness that requires more people to be hospitalized than it can handle,” according to Vox.

Our #FlattenTheCurve graphic is now up on @Wikipedia with proper attribution & a CC-BY-SA licence. Please share far & wide and translate it into any language you can! Details in the thread below. #Covid_19 #COVID2019 #COVID19 #coronavirus Thanks to @XTOTL & @TheSpinoffTV pic.twitter.com/BQop7yWu1Q

— Dr Siouxsie Wiles (@SiouxsieW) March 10, 2020

Least intrusive means

Still, these measures aren’t undertaken without due process.

“The government does have sweeping powers to combat communicable disease but there are limits,” said Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst at the American Civil Liberties Union.

Stanley told McClatchy News officials have a set of guidelines to follow when it comes to making these decisions — it has to be overwhelmingly in the public interest, rooted in rational, scientific ends and done by the least intrusive means possible. There must also be a mechanism to challenge it.

Officials can’t, for example, use COVID-19 as an excuse or pretext “to achieve illegitimate ends” like shutting down a protest or discriminating against certain groups, he said.

Hodge said these types of measures aren’t designed to be punitive, they’re protective — and they don’t “trip any constitutional safeguards when done right.”

He pointed to a case from the 1980s in West Virginia where a man who officials suspected had tuberculosis was involuntarily confined in quarantine. The man argued he was denied due process when the trial court delayed appointing him an attorney, and judges agreed.

That, Hodge said, is an example of what not to do in a public health emergency.

“There really are definitive checklists of things you have to show to utilize quarantine and isolation powers at the level we’re going to see,” he told McClatchy.

‘Not guesswork’

But he said state and local health authorities know that — “this is not guesswork.”

The coronavirus hasn’t caught the public health system off guard so much as prompted them to operate on a much larger scale than usual, Hodge said.

“It gets a lot easier when Americans act on their own volition and self-quarantine pursuant to public health directives,” he said. “Most Americans will respond that way.”

The CDC has guidelines on legal authorities governing isolation and quarantine as well as the types of laws and regulations that come into play during a pandemic.

Be seeing you

I Make No Predictions, But Evil Takeover Is Imminent!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

« Previous Entries