MarkMcCoy.com Consummate Seditionist and Bombastic Iconoclast

An email tete'-a-tete' between myself and some family members.

2008-06-20T20:01:00.001-05:00

An email tete'-a-tete' between myself and some family members.

I received an email that began as a forward from someone else regarding Barak Obama emaciating the military and turning America into a third-rate nation. My reply to that email and the devolving, or evolving, rhetoric which ensued between myself and a few family members ended up escalating to phone calls, hysteria, and attempted shaming. Who those family members are shall remain for only them to know, but I can assure you that despite the abundant information I have posted regarding my philosophy and opinions, it is obvious nobody took the time to understand my position, but rather to spout rhetoric, hyperbole, and emotion. So it begins.....

----- Original Message -----

See url below.

c-

You all HAVE to see this! God help us all if this idiot gets elected.

~Geoff

Please send this to everyone you know TODAY as it will be pulled off the air soon. Here Obama reveals his true intentions to make the US a third rate nation - vulnerable to attack by every rogue nation on the earth.

This is an uninterrupted 51-second video of Obama speaking; he's telling us exactly what he will do to the military...watch it before this too is removed off the web site.

Pass it on...the USA needs a Wake-up call.

http://www.macsmind.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/obama-plans-to-disarm-america

This is absolutely shocking & reprehensible. He plans to unilaterally disarm our nation.The question is... for what? And more specifically, for whom ?!!!!!!!!

MY REPLY

First, America is already a third-rate nation as evidenced by our academic ineptitude compared to other nations, our being the world’s largest importer of consumer goods, and our largely illiterate middle class. We are just a more polished turd.

Second, America has done much to create, fund, arm, and inspire many of the rogue nations that now, allegedly “threaten” us.

Third, America is one of the largest arms dealers in the world who spreads the potential threat around to justify our “alleged” need for a stronger, more imperialistic military.

Fourth, the military has already exceeded its Constitutional purpose and is essentially a mercenary force used in the pursuit of subduing the labor, resources, and economies of other nations at the behest of salivating corporate benefactors who exist by way of incestuous relations with that (not yours, mine, or anybody’s but their own) government, called the United States.

The present political doctrine under which this government now operates implies all humanity is vile, corrupt, and violent; so it is by way of the God-given mandate of an artificial entity called government acting under the tacit, ignorant direction of the voluntarily enslaved inhabitants thereof to kill everybody who does not parrot the same fallacious reasoning.

I agree with one of the responders on the YouTube site who thinks Obama won’t live through his term. IF, there is not another “terrorist” attack that causes martial law to be imposed, thereby suspending all Constitutional government, including elections, then Obama will be elected president with Vice-Hillary. He will be assassinated some time thereafter, which will result in the closest thing to civil war or more aptly class/race war, compounded with unaffordable gas prices (courtesy Bush-driven third-world instability), soaring food prices and shortages (courtesy the worthless federal script called “Dollars” and our anti-humanitarian, oppressive, brutal, and weapons-dealing misanthropic brethren, China, no longer supporting our debt by buying worthless T-bills for corporate favoritism). Look then for the beloved military to trample posse comitatus and assume the role of your new keepers. Soon thereafter, the NAFTA umbilical highway giving birth to the malformed commercial body consisting of Mexico, U.S., and Canada, will pump commercial blood through the paved veins traversing formerly sovereign states and essentially dissolve America into a giant hemispherical-commercial behemoth.

Look for the total devaluation of the funny-money currency called Federal Reserve Notes and the new fiat savior for all your materialistic needs, the Amero, to be introduced as a move towards a one world government takes one small step for man, and one giant leap for corporate-kind.

Ask yourselves this, for those of the armchair Christian persuasion, who would Jesus nuke?

Since I am not a United States Citizen, don’t vote, am not a member of a political body, am not complicit in lending my energy, labor, or consent to violence, ignorance, or fear (long-hand for government) then I will sit on the sidelines and watch the dissolution of another failed fallacy and contrivance of man and his ongoing pursuit to control, enslave, and rule over his fellow-man.

My hands and conscience are clean. Since people are averse to reason and instead opt for the fat, dumb, happy, hedonistic life purchased with the sweat of others, and who believe that man can make the life their Creator has provided anything other than it is, sometimes hard, sometimes frightening, sometimes ugly, but at all times theirs, then let them suffer under the hand of man to whom they’ve made themselves beholden.

I apologize, not for the rant, but for the length (I could have been more concise), but as long as people look to institutions that foment lies, violence, and fear, they will get what they deserve; viz., lied to, beaten, and frightened.

I apparently do not believe in God, for God has no flag, no army, has no political opposition, requires me not to surrender any of my rights or liberties in order to protect me, demands no allegiance, and fears no other aggressing god coming to harm me. What I believe in, I do not know, because if this is a nation of God-fearing, righteous, moral people then they sure have a way of resorting to immoral and unrighteous actions for securing their liberties, viz., persisting to vote for men who will kill as their proxy. My conscience won’t allow it.

BTW, this is not an attack or commentary on anybody’s beliefs or character, in particular, but rather a retrospective commentary on where I have come from and now find myself; especially when confronted with messages containing alarmist messages about preserving an institution designed to kill without question and an industry designed to facilitate the means and wherewithal to do it more efficiently and impersonally.

Every war should be fought with spoons and only by the political leaders of those warring nations. Let them invest themselves in wrenching the life from their enemy while the people live their lives peaceably and prosperously. Good riddance!

REPLY FROM FAMILY MEMBER NUMBER 1

Thanks for that happy pick-me-up, Miss Sunshine! When our enemies do away with their weapons and arm up with spoons, then and only then will I be in favor of disarming (but only after we stockpile a poop-load of forks) Peace out.

REPLY FROM FAMILY MEMBER NUMBER 2

“Peace-out”…what kind of leftist talk is that? John McCain would disown you!

MY REPLY

How do you define a “enemy”? Is it an individual who wishes to harm or kill you? Your nation abounds with such beings. Is it another body of people who seek to harm or kill you? Again, look to your legislatures, police, prison systems (notwithstanding contrived justifications as “breaking the law”, of which there is no such transgression absent a articulable and obvious threat to individual life or property). Or, are enemies actually other governments that take exception with our government for the crimes it has perpetrated abroad for its own purposes? I have yet to hear of a war fought by nations of peoples against other nations of peoples where government was not involved. My enemies are within arm’s reach; not living in some far off land seething over our pop-driven, corporate-branded, politically-infested, techno-violent-prurient culture. I think many count themselves lucky to not be so superficial. How do you reconcile fearing what you define as an “enemy” when your government courts, fraternizes, incites, and copulates with? So, again I ask, define this “enemy”.

REPLY FROM FAMILY MEMBER NUMBER 1

En-e-my – noun – 1. Crazy towel heads who fly planes into our buildings and the countries who harbor and support said crazy towel heads. 2. Rosie O’Donnell

MY REPLY

Crazy towel-heads were Saudi. Some of the alleged “towel-heads” who flew planes so expertly into someone’s buildings are still alive (they were not YOUR buildings). Crazy towel-head Bin Laden had no direct involvement with the Sept. 11 attacks (Google FBI making such statement). Rosie O’Donnel is a CIA operative. Enemy = U.S.A. – U.S.A. – U.S.A……

Abolish the U.S. government and see what happens. I would rather be honestly invaded by enemies without than to be sold into subjugation by the enemies within. The worst thing that can happen is you will die. Just refuse to follow the orders of a taser-packin’ so-called “officer” and you’ll meet the same fate, but it will be within departmental policy so you have no reason to complain.

Remember, we are free………….so long as we obey.

REPLY FROM FAMILY MEMBER NUMBER 3

I'm no war monger. But if wars were never fought, we wouldn't have western civilization as you know it. You wouldn't be living in a free country (I know you don't think America is one, but try living in North Korea), and you wouldn't have the luxury of going for your bike rides (you'd likely be too malnourished to do so), and probably wouldn't have the computer you're using, which came about from the entrepreneurial spirit born of a free market, capitalistic society.

Wars were fought in biblical times, and God was often credited with helping one nation conquer another. Obama wants to sit down for a tea talk with a nut that denies the Holocaust and wants to wipe Isreal off the face of the globe. But why should that surprise anyone? He's good buddies with a couple that bombed our pentagon and sent pipe bombs to police stations.

I ask this question seriously... if America is the rotten, corrupt, imperialistic behemoth you feel it is, why don't you move to a "better" country void of all the evils we possess? Not that I want you to leave, but the question begs to be asked, based on how you feel.

MY REPLY

First, you can’t say with certainty that what we have can be attributable to the capricious taking of life, both guilty and innocent, if one is to accept the flawed reasoning that man is capable of making such determinations. What other people define as free does not necessarily comport with what I determine freedom to be for me. I am not bound to accept what other people define or determine to be acceptable or preferable. Political relativism does not make a free country out of that which someone else perceives as a threat to liberty. Bike rides, corpulence, and materialism does not define a free nation, or a free man. Those things cannot also be proven to derive from a free-market or capitalistic society since there is abundant evidence that shows we have a “relatively free market” and “quasi-capitalistic” society. If something is relatively or quasi then it is not absolutely, which means there is control being exercised by arbitrary power not of the society itself.

Wars have been initiated by religion, government, and other contrivances used by men to control other men. Just because anecdotal hearsay claims to derive justification for exercising violence over others as coming from God, doesn’t make it so. Don’t impugn Obama for choosing to engage in a dialogue over arbitrary violence. This “nut” may deny the holocaust, but other nuts in this government deny the true reasons for many of the military pursuits that have died the rivers and land red with blood (Gulf of Tonkin, sinking of the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Project Northwoods, Korean War, Gulf War….etc…). So what if someone wants to wipe Israel off the face of the globe. When did we conscript our children to fight for Israel. Maybe Israel has its own sins to account for.

There is no conclusive proof (notwithstanding fabricated and convenient proof by way of government controlled propaganda outlets) that this “nut” had anything to do with THEIR pentagon or police stations.

My feelings about “America” being, or more aptly representing a rotten, corrupt, imperialistic, behemoth causes no harm, nor has any impact upon anybody unless they allow them to. America is a fantasy and construct. It does not exist. It is what those who acknowledge it say it is. I have a right to live anywhere on this planet I choose and to criticize anything I see fit. I don’t live in America. Others may attempt to bind me to that notion, but their reality is not necessarily mine. America is a bastardization of corrupt political power and pervasive ignorance. America will soon be an amalgamation of political/corporate entities comprised of Mexico and Canada. There is nothing you can do about that. Is America an amorphous abstraction subject to the manipulative hands of usurpers who define it for all to be forced to swallow? I do not agree or accept what others define America to be. It is tired, lazy, ignorant, violent, corrupt, and greedy. I choose to not be a part of that reality. Amazingly enough, even after I remove myself from that fantasy, I still persist by the grace of my Creator.

I will live where I choose by whatever rules I deem fit for my happiness and security. Being amongst evil does nothing to me. I have already moved out of “this country” since a country is all make believe anyway. I am perfectly capable of living my life without submitting myself to the evil ways of other men who don’t serve to protect me in anyway not already provided by myself (don’t deviate to arguments about paved roads, water, sewer….etc.; not the sole domain of governments or “countries”). I have discovered too many lies, deaths, and injustices that originate with the power of government. It is something I can just accept as being a requisite for a moral or happy life. Life, men, and this world being what it is; I am perfectly capable and ready to act according to the dictates of my conscience and suffer whatever earthly consequences may attach. Since all men have free-will, and are accountable for their actions in this temporary life, I refuse to act negligently or under the direction of others who have no investment in my spirituality; and will therefore act accordingly and disavow all which is incongruent with my understanding and reason.

There is no spoon.

REPLY FROM FAMILY MEMBER NUMBER 3

"There is no conclusive proof (notwithstanding fabricated and convenient proof by way of government controlled propaganda outlets) that this “nut” had anything to do with THEIR pentagon or police stations" .....

The "nut", being William Ayers, a member of the Weather Underground, and a friend of Barack Hussein Obama's, ADMITTED to bombing a New York police stations, the Capitol Building, and the Pentagon. Barack Obama launched his Illinois senate campaign at his house. 'Government controlled propaganda' has nothing to do with it. Tell me who your friends are....

And stop with the "I don't live in America" philosophical stuff. The point I was making about "why not leave?" is just that -- if this place is so corrupt, evil, etc., why choose to live here? It must be because it is better than anyplace else in the world. No intelligent, rational person would choose to live in a horrible place when they had a world of other options. You wax ad nauseum about every possible thing you perceive to be wrong with America. There must be more things you like about it than you dislike, or else you wouldn't be here. That's all I'm saying.

By the way, name for me one country, just one, that has done as much to help other countries in need, as this one. Just do so without listing a litany of all the wrongs you think we've done. I dare you. Name one country that has given more time, blood and money than America, to help other countries. I won't hold my breath....

MY REPLY

Regardless, I have seen pictures of Donald Rumsfeld with Saddam Hussein as well. How is Obama any different? That proves nothing other than those serving this government cannot be trusted.

Why should I dispense with the “philosophical stuff” as you put it? Am I required to buy into everyone else’s perpetual hearsay? The point I was making is that there is no place that is evil, it is evil people in those places. I can live anywhere and not be affected by anyone else’s actions, unless directly acted upon me; and even then those only affect my body. I live here for convenience and out of custom and habit. It is a choice. There are things about this land that I love. There are things about people that I love and hate. Intellectual laziness and moral apathy are amongst the things I hate. Philosophy is a critical search for the truth. If you listen to other people without critical inspection or discovery then you never find the truth. Why should people just accept something because it is better than an alternative when it could be better; or more precisely said, the people could be better. Countries don’t help other countries. People help other people. You are saying that criminals who live in America and rape, kill, and pay taxes are just as deserving a pat on the back because the taxes paid go to help other countries, therefore bestowing them with some of the philanthropic credit. If not, then how can anybody who does not directly contribute to the betterment of the human condition claim their superior morality merely by way of their residing on the land called a place that has other people acting in its name with the resources of its people?

Show me how a country can do anything when it is not an animate thing, but merely a name for a political society of individuals who have differing opinions, beliefs, philosophies, and morals. It is insane to assign human attributes to an artificial entity. If people have it within their power to charge government to do for them then the people have the power to do it themselves. I can name probably a dozen countries that have not contributed to so many deaths as the United States. I can name over a hundred that have not used nuclear weapons against civilian populations. I can name over a hundred that has a lower percentage of its population incarcerated for non-violent offenses. It is more honest to address the inequities and injustices than to keep repeating pleasant platitudes in denial. Why the tenacious clinging to something not of your doing? Why fervently defend something that grabs the glory and goodness resulting from the actions of people, and use it as a justification for its own power? Why choose to serve a man-made fiction that causes much harm, and some good, but would be best if abolished and left to the whim of society? God can’t, or won’t, stop poverty, killing, or inequality so what makes people think government is the answer to society’s problems? It is up to each individual to reason and understand for themselves. As long as people adopt government as their conscience and artificial reason we will continue to live, and suffer, accordingly.

REPLY FROM FAMILY MEMBER NUMBER 3

Exactly, it is the people of a country that is either good or bad. And people are the government. It is our government that has more often gone to the defense and aid of other countries' people, often times without any benefit whatsoever, and often to our own human and economical detriment.

>"I can name over a hundred (countries) that have not used nuclear weapons against civilian populations" <... What ?! Heck, name more than 10 countries that even HAVE nuclear weapons capabilities. That's like me saying I can name a hundred countries that chose not to put a man on the moon. We used them to end a war and save hundreds of thousands of lives. Do you seriously think that would be the basis for Iran or Iraq?

How is Obama different from Rumsfeld? Well, for starters, Saddam Hussein had not bombed our own government at the time, and then said he wish he had done more.

You defend your continual habitation of America on grounds of convenience, custom, and habit, but those are weak excuses for continuing to dwell in a land whose people, through their government, as you would say, support evil acts, and are too stupid to elect the libertarian party to head the executive branch of government, as you would like to see done. What I suspect by your actions, or inaction, is that you ultimately see more redeemable qualities in our country than bad. If not, your high sense of morality and ideals would compel you to forsake convenience and habit in exchange for a country whose people do not elect corrupt people to act on their behalf. I think the answer is that you deep down know, just like the thousands who try to gain access to America every year, that there is not a better place in the world to live. If this were not the case, you would not betray your ideals and stay here.

MY REPLY

“Exactly, it is the people of a country that is either good or bad.” - - No. It is people. Period. There is no difference between a moral American and a moral Frenchman. If you were blindfolded and transported to another country where the surroundings resembled where you live in America and you were told that outside aggressors were coming to invade your country you would probably, hopefully, fight to defend it. In doing so you would believe you were defending your home in America, but were in reality in a rural part of communist China. You would then be fighting for a plot of soil you, in your mind, believed to be your beloved America, but was in reality the soil of a communist nation. Countries are fictions. There is nothing more just or moral about this part of the northern hemisphere than any place else on the globe.

“And people are the government.” - - No. People are not the government. Government is a fiction. People create it. People cannot create people. The government is a role which is populated by actors appointed by a largely ignorant consenting governed. How can a living thing become a fictitious inanimate entity? Government can be abolished and created with the stroke of a pen. Try doing that with flesh and blood. The government is supposed to be “of the people”, meaning deriving from the will of the free inhabitants thereof, but it is not the people. When the actors who execute their roles in government retire to their abodes they cease to be those actors and become people again. A mayor is not a mayor when he is at his fireside. A president is not a president when he is with family. Only when serving in the role defined are they those actors.

“It is our government that has more often gone to the defense and aid of other countries' people, often times without any benefit whatsoever, and often to our own human and economical detriment.” - - Whose government? Surely not yours or mine. What makes it yours? Did you draft the documents that breathe life into it? Did you negotiate the treaties with other nations that become the law of the land? Did you personally elect those who sit in legislative control over your life and everybody else’s? Just because you are allowed to mosey to the polling place and punch a card or touch a screen does not make this government accountable to you or anybody else. Try removing those in government who pass legislation that contradicts your conscience. Try withholding your money (FRN’s) from a government that gives it to other governments that engage in atrocities. Try exercising your prerogative to reign in an out of control servant and you will quickly see just how accountable your government is. That statement is another platitude parroted by the ignorant to quell their insecurities about being kept in a gilded cage.

“What ?! Heck, name more than 10 countries that even HAVE nuclear weapons capabilities. That's like me saying I can name a hundred countries that chose not to put a man on the moon. We used them to end a war and save hundreds of thousands of lives. Do you seriously think that would be the basis for Iran or Iraq?” - - Numerical semantics notwithstanding, we are the only nuclear power who used that weapon on civilians to end a war we helped instigate. If the ends justify the means then we are justified in nuking any nation that the government deems a threat. More political paranoia and delusion.

“How is Obama different from Rumsfeld? Well, for starters, Saddam Hussein had not bombed our own government at the time, and then said he wish he had done more.” - - No. Saddam gassed his own people with weapons provided by the United States with the knowing that he was going to use them on the Kurds. It was done under the pretense that he would use them on Iran, which whom he was warring, but his ire turned to the Kurds as well, and our government said that as long as he didn’t use them on domestic populations it was alright. However, he didn’t deem the Kurds to be part of his domestic population.

“You defend your continual habitation of America on grounds of convenience, custom, and habit, but those are weak excuses for continuing to dwell in a land whose people, through their government, as you would say, support evil acts, and are too stupid to elect the libertarian party to head the executive branch of government, as you would like to see done.” - - My reasons for doing anything are my reasons and not subject to outside interpretation. Where I dwell, and amongst whom I dwell, are of no consequence to my actions, conscience, or morals. I don’t hold people out to be stupid for not voting libertarian, but I do hold people out as ignorant for continuing to vote; believing that government and politics is the answer to any of society’s problems.

“What I suspect by your actions, or inaction, is that you ultimately see more redeemable qualities in our country than bad.” - - No. I see opportunities with like-minded people, of which there is an abundance, and a land where I will live under my own terms and use what my Creator has provided; damn any man or entity who tries to compel my obedience or allegiance in contradiction to my free will.

“If not, your high sense of morality and ideals would compel you to forsake convenience and habit in exchange for a country whose people do not elect corrupt people to act on their behalf.” - - Maybe your sense of morality and ideals would compel such actions, but I don’t believe anyone has been imbued with the authority or insight to gauge my actions as predicated by an erroneous interpretation of my ideals. I have as much a right to live where I choose as any man. I have as much a right to identify, address, and communicate my feelings about what I perceive the world to be as experienced through the filter of my reason and understanding. I do not encumber myself with the failings and inequities of others who choose not to invest themselves in the consequences of their lives. Entrusting other men with decisions of life and death that require your tacit or overt consent to facilitate is not a patriotic or moral act. It is an abdication of responsibility that assigns as much culpability upon the governed as it does the despot.

“I think the answer is that you deep down know, just like the thousands who try to gain access to America every year, that there is not a better place in the world to live. If this were not the case, you would not betray your ideals and stay here.” - - There are plenty of places in the world that are better to live, depending on how you critique and differentiate what is better for whom. If you mean politically, then you can’t speak for me. There are realities which preclude me from uprooting my life and abandoning my responsibilities in favor of a geographic Xanadu. It is my relationships with people and financial considerations which induce me to remain here. Should the benefits become outweighed by the negative I can assure you I would leave in a heartbeat. It is also my prerogative to live my life on my terms; even in defiance of those who may seek to compel my obedience and allegiance, and reach out to others who can recognize the collective abandonment of individual responsibility and the trend towards collectivism, imperialism, corporatism, and institutionalized tyranny. Deep down I know what I have come to learn, not what I have been provided. My ideals compel me to be defiant, disobedient, and moral, contrary to the whim and pressure of the man-made malignancy called government. I do not favor, respect, obey, worship, or respect man-made institutions.

REPLY FROM FAMILY MEMBER NUMBER 3

I think at this point we're both merely restating what we've already said for the most part. So let's agree to disagree. Good duel. In closing, let me just say, you must have graduated at the top of your class at the Sanford Brown Speed-typing University.

MY REPLY

Alrighty then. I don’t expect to change your mind. I have changed my own mind over the years through philosophical inquiries concerning my life, past, present, and future. You do make some valid points, or rather touch on some valid concerns, but you have to seriously ask yourself, how much of your reasoning derives from within as opposed to being a reflection of the reality you have been presented with by others? Once you abandon everything you think you believe or have been taught and adopt truth as you come to understand and critically experience if for yourself, your perspective, like mine, may change. The world is not what it is. Nature is what it is. The world is what mankind makes it and people can lend themselves to acting upon fear and ignorance or upon knowledge and peace. If death is the worst thing we face then we’ll all be there someday. Why spend the divine capital of life on the Ponzi schemes put before you by usurpers, tyrants, fear mongerers, and despots?

Anyway, truce!

REPLY FROM FAMILY FRIEND

Wow..! you guy's have alot of time on your hands to try to persuade one another.. In the end of it all...is one going to agree with the other??? hmmmm!! entertaining it is...however, I do enjoy the rhetoric......please keep up the good work....I have to know "who gets the last word"???

Please don't be mad at me, after all....I'm sure others think the same. Not trying to instigate what-so-ever...you both have good things to say...I do evjoy the read...

Your FRIEND Mike

MY REPLY

Hey Mike, thanks for the input. Gary and I have called a truce, or at least détente’. Apparently, there were some on the CC list who had much to say, just not the fortitude to say it to those for whom it was intended. So, in order to spare some the pain of having to endure a debate, we have decided to cease with rhetorical hostilities, for the time-being. I actually raised the ire of some who took exception with my challenge to belief systems based on country, politics, religion….etc. Of course, the knee-jerk response from such people is “If you don’t love this country then why don’t you leave?” I have yet to find a way to emotionally attach myself to a un-natural thing called a country. I don’t know if I am supposed to love the grass, dirt, buildings, air, people, politicians….. It is very unclear to me. If it means that I am supposed to conform my mind to accept the constructs, realities, fantasies, and superstitions of others then I am afraid that is not possible.

You have to ask yourself, at what point do you find yourself in this country, and when does a love for it attach? Is it after the first date; during heavy petting, or after intercourse (where the govt. has its way with you)? I believe it is when other people create that reality and conscript your mind in adopting it; lest one be ostracized by their ignorant peers. Do you think Helen Keller believed herself to be in America, or just a woman trying to interpret a natural world with the senses provided her by her Creator? I posit this; that there is much we have come to believe, not by experience or investigation, but by hearsay and custom. Children are among the most intellectually honest creatures because they can directly challenge commands for obedience by asking, “why?” Many people cannot reason, even to themselves, “why” we do what we do, believe what we believe, obey what we are commanded….etc. I don’t want to face my mortality having to reconcile why I lived and acted under the direction and demands of others, and not under the dictates of my own conscience which my Creator has provided.

Think about it. Take it easy home boy.

REPLY FROM FAMILY MEMBER NUMBER 4

WHEN A SOLDIER COMES HOME.....

When a soldier comes home, he finds it hard to listen to his son whine about being bored.

...to keep a straight face when people complain about potholes.

...to be tolerant of people who complain about the hassle of getting ready for work.

....to be understanding when a co-worker complains about a bad night's sleep.

.....to be silent when people pray to God for a new car.

....to control his panic when his wife tells him he needs to drive slower.

....to be compassionate when a businessman expresses a fear of flying.

.....to keep from laughing when anxious parents say

they're afraid to send their kids off to summer camp.

.....to keep from ridiculing someone who complains about hot weather.

.....to control his frustration when a colleague gripes about his coffee being cold.

.....to remain calm when his daughter complains about having to walk the dog.

....to be civil to people who complain about their jobs.

....to just walk away when someone says they only get two weeks of vacation a year.

.... to be forgiving when someone says how hard it is to have a new baby in the house.

The only thing harder than being a Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine....

…is loving one.

MY REPLY

When a man realizes he has made a terrible mistake…..

He will scour the internet for a friendly country to provide him political asylum when he decides to stop killing for other men.

The magnitude of his destruction will resonate in his conscience, calling himself a “destroyer”.

He will deny the insanity of his surroundings and pretend that the world he has conscripted himself to is “acceptable”.

He will appear outwardly at peace, while seeing the faces and smelling the scorched flesh of his victims in his sleep.

He will pray to his God for the strength to do all those things he knows God would not allow him to do.

He will view the world through the spectrums provided by instruments of death, and in doing so view all of humanity as a threat to his power.

He will even fail to recognize the consequences of his actions when they strike his own companions.

He will don the costumes of his earthly creator, adopt its reasoning, assimilate into its culture, and act upon its command like a mass-produced automaton.

He will, with arrogance and threats, present himself before the vanquished inhabitants and assert his mechanized and amoral superiority.

He will feign compassion, contrive empathy, and project concern for others, not all, but will never realize such emotions, honestly evoked, have been suppressed and erased from his psyche.

Will stand vigilant over stark, desolate, and ruined lands without a modicum of understanding or comprehension, but merely because he was so ordered.

Will battle, with futility, his assailing conscience and rue the day when he will be held to account for his actions.

Will deny his own reason, and instead use levity to desensitize himself to the horrors he embraces.

Will forsake his own to be able to serve other men.

Will stand surrounded with the trappings of insanity, mired in denial, and turn his anger for himself against others.

May ultimately substitute a piece of cloth, pomp, and glory for his earthly presence so that his loved ones can seek protection, guidance, and joy from insulting, inanimate objects.

REPLY FROM FAMILY MEMBER NUMBER 3

Mark, how can you purport to know how these brave soldiers will be judged?

"He will feign compassion, contrive empathy, and project concern for others"... ?? You know for a fact the soldiers do this? So all these guys are "phoneys"?..

Regardless of whether or not you believe we should be there, or whether you think what we're doing there is moral or legal, our men in women in uniform overthrew a brutal dictator who butchered, gassed, raped, and cut the tongues out of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, sometimes feeding them through wood chippers, and buried them in mass graves. Our troops have now built schools, infrastructure, and hospitals. They're not over there targeting innocent civilians as Saddam did. They're going after terrorists and insurgents who would like to see the Baathist government restored, which was responsible for all the aforementioned atrocities. Based on a humanitarian level alone, I think God will more likely judge our troops very mercifully, and look upon them with favor. They're looking after our brothers and sisters, as God commanded us to do.

MY REPLY

If people want to engage in assigning human attributes to an institution, the military, and to a make-believe role designed to OBEY other men without question, soldiers, then I will make such judgments upon those artificial contrivances. However, if a human being does some good, regardless of what type of costume they are wearing or what they may call themselves, then I will interpret that within the realm of human deeds. No, soldiers will not be judged, people will be judged. God did not create soldiers. Governments create soldiers. And like slaves, some both voluntarily and involuntarily, are bound to serve earthly masters until the time they come to understand they are not serving their Creator. The taking of lives, regardless of the number of smiles, hugs, and joy, is not justified. Who is anyone to decide that the lives not taken are any more viable than the lives lost?

I made my statements based on conversations I have had with people in the military who regret and are ashamed of what they’ve done. I can justify killing anyone if I can find a few to say, “But he is a swell guy”? And despite what governments do their people, remember, our government has much blood on its hands for being a willing accomplice in much of the horror and the atrocities. Men who follow other men are not absolved of the consequences for their actions because it was their “job” or “duty”. And like many who are now turning to suicide, drugs, alcohol, and other behavioral forms of self-punishment, some are coming to wrestle with the significance of their moral abdication to evil, power-hungry men.

REPLY FROM FAMILY MEMBER NUMBER 4

Mark,
I've spent the last hour being pissed off at you, and then I got to thinking that I am in fact the one I need to be pissed off at. I should not have thought for one minute that you would be sensitive to anyone's experience but your own. I basically opened Dan and thousands of other people who, believed in the principles of this country, that allow you the right to express your opinions. The insults and degradation, that you have seen fit to impose on a group of people, who sacrificed, and provided you with the privilege to express your views. I am also extremely sorry for providing you with a forum, to express your opinions to friends and family who also will be upset.
I am sorry I have passed on the e-mail that started this, I will in fact make sure that your e-mail address is deleted from my contacts, and hope you will do the same with mine and Dan's.
I am sorry that I chose to include your Mom and Dad in this, I would hope they would not share your opinion, but if they do there are people who died so that they could. I did not want to hurt their feelings.
One last thing you have really got to get over the idea that God needs you as a mouth piece, their are people who do a much better job of spreading His word.

MY REPLY

I did not avoid you. I was in a meeting when the phone rang. I also felt it best not to exacerbate the situation and put myself in a position of engaging in an emotionally charged debate, or argument, where things that were not meant were said. I owe apologies to nobody, because I insulted nobody. If I express an opinion about an institution that does nothing to another human being, unless they consider themselves a product of that institution, then they make themselves the object of my commentary. This government, the military, or any other thing has given me nothing. Everything I have comes from my Creator. I owe nothing to anybody. I choose to not serve anybody. I did not target Dan, or anybody else, with my comments. I am not responsible for the way Dan feels in response to my opinions. I am under no obligation to curb my tongue because someone might be offended. I am not ashamed of my opinions because I believe I have the interests of humanity, peace, and justice at heart. There are alternatives to what people choose to construct their particular realities. I find nothing noble or honorable in following other men, despite what one’s intentions may be. If people are that righteous and just then they would take the initiative upon themselves to stand defiant against tyranny.

Nobody has died for me. Nobody has died for my rights. Nobody has died for my freedom. They have died for other men who told them they were dying for these things, but nothing they have done has resulted in a free world or country. Sure, Dan may have pulled his buddies out of a bombed building in a foreign land, but why should people accept an armed military presence in their land? We were the outsiders. It is not a justification, it is a possible explanation. If I stand in the middle of the highway in hopes of trying to stop speeding because my friends were killed in a traffic accident caused by speeders and I am killed by a bus, it is the bus which is at fault or me for putting myself in that situation? My Creator has provided me with everything and I refuse to submit to any notion that I owe anybody anything.

I also do not purport to be a mouthpiece for God. Other people adorn themselves with righteousness, morality, and justice, claiming such is the mandate of God, but the things they do under those pretenses is a result of men following other men as opposed to their conscience. I merely point out the lunacy of serving two masters; one, a fallible, conniving, power-hungry, controlling, manipulative creature, man; and one a divine purveyor of conscience, reason, nature, and justice, God. There is no logical justification for engaging in acts commanded by the one, and justified by the other. People, not institutions, governments, or associations, are responsible for their own morality and spirituality. Once one becomes a member of anything else they surrender a piece of their morality and conscience in favor of adopting a collective consciousness that has been manipulated for the purposes of control and conformity.

I don’t get upset when you wave the flag, impugn my reasoning, favor idolatry (worshiping man-made institutions), or send me your opinion in email. I used to be in such a place, and after abolishing virtually everything I was taught or told to believe or accept, and questioned everything on its merits, I realized I did not need to believe in such things to live my life in a way that makes me ultimately accountable and responsible for my actions. I have looked inside and found many unpleasant things that have been tossed onto the trash heap. I have contemplated the time where I will be drawing my last breath and will not suffer anguish or regret in having to reconcile my having transgressed upon others by adopting the will of people who could not provide me with one more heartbeat with which to beg for mercy. I will live, and die, on my own terms, at my own peril, and under the restrictions and liberties provided me by way of my birth and through my Creator, to whom I am solely and ultimately accountable. Nothing else in this world can move me or compel me in any way not of my own volition. I am in a different place than you, and many, and I will not apologize or be humbled for having not intentionally caused harm to anyone, or for speaking a message that fosters peace, reason, and conscience.

I love you. I would prefer you to understand me, but that is not a requisite.

REPLY FROM FAMILY MEMBER NUMBER 4

GrandioseIndividuals with grandiose delusional disorder have an over-inflated sense of self-worth. Their delusions center on their own importance, such as believing that they have done or created something of extreme value or have a "special mission.
REPLY FROM FAMILY MEMBER NUMBER 4

What are Delusions of Grandeur?

In the vernacular, the term usually describes people who are disliked dictators of countries, prominent businessmen, or celebrities, since they are often prone to being selfish and egotistical. However, this sort of popular attention downplays the seriousness of an actual medical diagnosis where symptoms are common in mentally ill persons.
Also generally known as megalomania, delusions of grandeur is a term familiar to psychological discourse. They are known as the manifestations of a psychopathological condition in which a person has delusional fantasies of power, wealth, and omnipotence, thus the term delusions of grandeur. Individuals may also bear an obsession with grandiose or extravagant things or actions. Despite evidence to the contrary, they may still be convinced of these false impressions.
In clinical terms, delusions of grandeur are real delusional symptoms, which are irrational and inappropriate beliefs. Often found in patients with varying degrees of either dementia, psychotic or depressive disorders, they firmly possess unrealistic beliefs that may eventually harm them physically, mentally, or emotionally.
Drug intoxication and drug addiction may also contribute to episodes of delusions of grandeur, especially when subject to the influence of marijuana or speed. This is dangerous because users who are high may believe they have powers that will enable them to perform dangerous feats that any normal human being would not succeed in doing, like flying off tall buildings or stopping an oncoming train with one hand. Delusions of grandeur could actually result in serious injuries or even death.
Like other clinical terms such as "anti-social" or "mentally retarded," the term "delusions of grandeur" is often used non-technically and incorrectly. While this behavior may downplay the negative social connotations of the phrase, it may mask situations in which actual delusions of grandeur bear an actual psychopathological threat to a person's health.

REPLY FROM FAMILY MEMBER NUMBER 5

pat, sometimes people forget to read the bible and learn what war is all about. it is a spiritual warfare that tears humanity apart. the ugliest war ever fought was on the cross! as you know the Good Guy won. because God is a Holy God and can not even look at anything that is unholy. God only brings goodness to things even things the prince of darkness does to destroy us. because of evil we have illness, wars, murders, rapes, children killing children and slave trade of young girls for the lusty deranged pleasure seeker. Christ died for all of us sinners, including mark , so that we can go to the perfect place when we go home to heaven, see you there one day, love and blessimgs carole

SUMMARY

Finally, after deciding to pursue pointless arguments with people who do not listen, I decided to let it go. I received a phone call one evening from the husband of one of the family members who had served in the military and was supposedly in Beirut when the Marine barracks were bombed. He said he had to pull his buddies bodies from the rubble; which I touched on in one of the emails. He asked to be removed from my email list, which he was not on, but merely a recipient by way of my replying to all. I said no problem to that request, and he went on to say that he respected my right to say what I want (gee, thanks) and that he fought to give me the privileges I enjoy. What! I could tell he had been drinking and I thought it best not to provoke an obvious emotionally charged issue, so I let it go. As I have said, nobody; soldier, police, politician,.... gives me ANY rights. I was born with all my rights. Again, it was a dead end to argue with such emotion and the rest is history.

"Don't Talk to the Police" by Professor James Duane

2008-06-14T21:41:00.004-05:00

Good stuff from a law professor, as well as a follow-up confirmation from a police officer. Basically, keep your mouth shut. The truth is irrelevant. The facts are subjective. Your liberty is up for grabs. Bottom-line, you cannot trust the police so why waste your breath?

Follow-up by George Bruch - from the horses mouth.

Illinois Gun Laws Pamphlet. Marxist Malapropisms, or How to Beat a Concealed Carry Rap.

2008-05-20T22:34:00.002-05:00

Control! The govt. oozes lies and misleading propaganda to make you believe they control you. I saw a link to the Illinois Gun Laws pamphlet, and decided to take a look at the usual pap disseminated by "Common questions and answers" publications. Let's take a look at this:

First. we are directed to CRIMINAL OFFENSES
(720 ILCS 5/) Criminal Code of 1961.
We must look to the definitions section to understand what, and whom, we are seeking to regulate or punish:

(720 ILCS 5/Art. 2 heading)
ARTICLE 2. GENERAL DEFINITIONS

(720 ILCS 5/2‑0.5) (was 720 ILCS 5/2‑.5)
Sec. 2‑0.5. For the purposes of this Code, the words and phrases described in this Article have the meanings designated in this Article, except when a particular context clearly requires a different meaning.
(Source: Laws 1961, p. 1983.)

(720 ILCS 5/2‑7.1)
Sec. 2‑7.1. "Firearm" and "firearm ammunition". "Firearm" and "firearm ammunition" have the meanings ascribed to them in Section 1.1 of the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act.
(Source: P.A. 91‑544, eff. 1‑1‑00.)

The Firearm Owners Identification Act is limited in scope, and falls within the authority of the "Police Power" of the State. I discuss police power in one of my previous posts, but keep in mind that it is NOT constitutionally derived power, but rather assumed power for the state to regulate for the health, safety, welfare, and morals of the citizens as such may pertain to "commercial activities". For instance, looking at the FOID act, we see that all of the objects of the regulation pertain to the commercial acts of selling or buying firearms. Look at the wording carefully. I'll emphasize with CAPS:

(430 ILCS 65/1) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑1)
Sec. 1. It is hereby declared as a matter of legislative determination that in order to promote and protect the health, safety and welfare of the public, it is necessary and in the public interest to provide a system of identifying persons who are not qualified to acquire or possess firearms, firearm ammunition, stun guns, and tasers within the State of Illinois by the establishment of a system of Firearm Owner's Identification Cards, thereby establishing a practical and workable system by which law enforcement authorities will be afforded an opportunity to identify those persons who are prohibited by Section 24‑3.1 of the "Criminal Code of 1961", as amended, from acquiring or possessing firearms and firearm ammunition and who are prohibited by this Act from acquiring stun guns and tasers.
(Source: P.A. 94‑6, eff. 1‑1‑06.) --- ALL THIS DOES IS PROVIDE FOR A SYSTEM FOR IDENTIFYING, BUT DOES MAKE IMPOSE ANY REQUIREMENT FOR LICENSING OR REGISTERING.
So, who are they addressing?
"Federally licensed firearm dealer" means a person who is licensed as a federal firearms dealer under Section 923 of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968 (18 U.S.C. 923). COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY

"Gun show" includes the entire premises provided for an

event or function, including parking areas for the event or function, that is sponsored to facilitate the purchase, sale, transfer, or exchange of firearms as described in this Section. COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY

"Gun show vendor" means a person who exhibits, sells,

offers for sale, transfers, or exchanges any firearms at a gun show, regardless of whether the person arranges with a gun show promoter for a fixed location from which to exhibit, sell, offer for sale, transfer, or exchange any firearm. AGAIN, COMMECIAL ACTIVITY

The FOID Act does not identify or define OFFENSES commited pursuant to the act, aside from a petty offense.

So, it is clear that the FOID card is a Commercial Firearms License for use within the State of Illinois, and does not apply to private Citizens who possess their own firearms for personal use and protection. Moving on to the criminal statute.

(720 ILCS 5/1‑2) (from Ch. 38, par. 1‑2)
Sec. 1‑2. General purposes. The provisions of this Code shall be construed in accordance with the general purposes hereof, to:
(a) Forbid and prevent the commission of offenses; THE FOID ACT DOES NOT LIST ANY OFFENSES OTHER THAN A PETTY OFFENSE, WHICH IS NOT CRIMINAL IN NATURE AND INAPPLICABALE TO THIS STATUTE.
(b) Define adequately the act and mental state which constitute each offense, and limit the condemnation of conduct as criminal when it is without fault;
(c) Prescribe penalties which are proportionate to the seriousness of offenses and which permit recognition of differences in rehabilitation possibilities among individual offenders;
(d) Prevent arbitrary or oppressive treatment of persons accused or convicted of offenses.
(Source: Laws 1961, p. 1983.)

(720 ILCS 5/1‑3) (from Ch. 38, par. 1‑3)
Sec. 1‑3. Applicability of common law. No conduct constitutes an offense unless it is described as an offense in this Code or in another statute of this State. However, this provision does not affect the power of a court to punish for contempt or to employ any sanction authorized by law for the enforcement of an order or civil judgment.
(Source: P.A. 79‑1360.) AGAIN, THE FOID ACT DOES NOT DEFINE ANY OFFENSES, AND THE COMMON LAW DOES NOT APPLY DUE TO THE LACK THEREOF.

Looking further to the definitions of (720 ILCS 5/Art. 2 heading)
ARTICLE 2. GENERAL DEFINITIONS

(720 ILCS 5/2‑4) (from Ch. 38, par. 2‑4)
Sec. 2‑4. "Conduct".
"Conduct" means an act or a series of acts, and the accompanying mental state.
(Source: Laws 1961, p. 1983.) SO YOU HAD A CONCEALED WEAPON. WHAT WAS YOUR MENTAL STATE AT THE TIME? TO COMMIT A CRIME, OR EXERCISE A CONSTITUTIONAL, GOD-GIVEN RIGHT? EXERCISING A RIGHT IS NOT A STATE OF MIND CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME.

(720 ILCS 5/2‑15) (from Ch. 38, par. 2‑15)
Sec. 2‑15. "Person".
"Person" means an individual, public or private corporation, government, partnership, or unincorporated association.
(Source: Laws 1961, p. 1983.) THIS SHOULD BE INTERESTING. ARE YOU A PERSON? GENERALLY THE WORD INDIVIDUAL WOULD MEAN A REAL PERSON, OR PEOPLE, BUT USED WITH THE OTHER WORDS GIVES IT THE MEANING OF BEING AN ARTIFICIAL ENTITY, SUCH AS A CORPORATION OR OTHER GOVERNMENT-CREATED ENTITY. PERSON DOES NOT ALWAYS MEAN PEOPLE.

So, what constitutes a "crime"?

(720 ILCS 5/4‑2) (from Ch. 38, par. 4‑2)
Sec. 4‑2. Possession as voluntary act.
Possession is a voluntary act if the offender knowingly procured or received the thing possessed, or was aware of his control thereof for a sufficient time to have been able to terminate his possession.
(Source: Laws 1961, p. 1983.)

(720 ILCS 5/4‑3) (from Ch. 38, par. 4‑3)
Sec. 4‑3. Mental state. THIS MUST BE PROVEN IN COURT!!!
(a) A person is not guilty of an offense, other than an offense which involves absolute liability, unless, with respect to each element described by the statute defining the offense, he acts while having one of the mental states described in Sections 4‑‑4 through 4‑‑7.
(b) If the statute defining an offense prescribed a particular mental state with respect to the offense as a whole, without distinguishing among the elements thereof, the prescribed mental state applies to each such element. If the statute does not prescribe a particular mental state applicable to an element of an offense (other than an offense which involves absolute liability), any mental state defined in Sections 4‑‑4, 4‑‑5 or 4‑‑6 is applicable. WE WILL LOOK AT THESE SECTIONS.
(c) Knowledge that certain conduct constitutes an offense, or knowledge of the existence, meaning, or application of the statute defining an offense, is not an element of the offense unless the statute clearly defines it as such.
(Source: Laws 1961, p. 1983.)

(720 ILCS 5/4‑4) (from Ch. 38, par. 4‑4)
Sec. 4‑4. Intent. NOPE, INTENT IS NOT MENTIONED IN THE OFFENSE SECTION.
A person intends, or acts intentionally or with intent, to accomplish a result or engage in conduct described by the statute defining the offense, when his conscious objective or purpose is to accomplish that result or engage in that conduct.
(Source: Laws 1961, p. 1983.) OKAY, SO YOU INTEND TO CARRY A CONCEALED WEAPPON UNDER THE EXERCISE OF YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT.

(720 ILCS 5/4‑5) (from Ch. 38, par. 4‑5)
Sec. 4‑5. Knowledge. THE CRIMINAL ACT STATES "KNOWINGLY". LET'S LOOK AT "KNOWINGLY".
A person knows, or acts knowingly or with knowledge of:
(a) The nature or attendant circumstances of his conduct, described by the statute defining the offense, when he is consciously aware that his conduct is of such nature or that such circumstances exist. Knowledge of a material fact includes awareness of the substantial probability that such fact exists.
(b) The result of his conduct, described by the statute defining the offense, when he is consciously aware that such result is practically certain to be caused by his conduct.
Conduct performed knowingly or with knowledge is performed wilfully, within the meaning of a statute using the latter term, unless the statute clearly requires another meaning.
(Source: Laws 1961, p. 1983.)

(720 ILCS 5/4‑ (from Ch. 38, par. 4‑
Sec. 4‑8. Ignorance or mistake. (a) A person's ignorance or mistake as to a matter of either fact or law, except as provided in Section 4‑3(c) above, is a defense if it negatives the existence of the mental state which the statute prescribes with respect to an element of the offense.
(b) A person's reasonable belief that his conduct does not constitute an offense is a defense if:
(1) The offense is defined by an administrative regulation or order which is not known to him and has not been published or otherwise made reasonably available to him, and he could not have acquired such knowledge by the exercise of due diligence pursuant to facts known to him; or
(2) He acts in reliance upon a statute which later is determined to be invalid; or
(3) He acts in reliance upon an order or opinion of an Illinois Appellate or Supreme Court, or a United States appellate court later overruled or reversed;
(4) He acts in reliance upon an official interpretation of the statute, regulation or order defining the offense, made by a public officer or agency legally authorized to interpret such statute.
(c) Although a person's ignorance or mistake of fact or law, or reasonable belief, described in this Section 4‑‑8 is a defense to the offense charged, he may be convicted of an included offense of which he would be guilty if the fact or law were as he believed it to be.
(d) A defense based upon this Section 4‑‑8 is an affirmative defense.
(Source: Laws 1961, p. 1983.)
IGNORANCE OR MISTAKE IS AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, BASED ON THE ABOVE CONDITIONS. HOWEVER, BELIEF THAT THE CONSTITUTION ALLOWS FOR THE CARRYING OR POSSESSING OF A FIREARM, EXCEPT WHERE THE POLICE POWER, WHICH APPLIES TO COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY RELATING TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE AND MORALS, APPLIES.

I would go into more detail, but this would make for a very lengthy post. All I can say is, read the law. All of the law. Definitions and intent as well. The law does not provide penalties for open carry, only concealed carry, and then under specific circumstances. I think a weapons charge under this statute, based on open carry, is able to be beaten, with the proper attorney who actually looks at the law and challenges the system based on what the law says, and uses proper case law and precedent, avoiding any mention of United States citizenship or alluding to having engaged in a commercial activity. Once you possess the FOID card, and then violate the statute, you are nailed because possessing the FOID card is the nexus that lends the presumption that you are, in fact, requred to have one and therefore engaged in a commercial activity. Once you place yourself under the autority of the police power, your constitutional rights are gone, and the U.S. citizenship priviledges apply, which do not include the second amendment. If anyone is interested in learning how U.S. citizenship means waiving your second amendment rights just let me know and I'll show you a PowerPoint presentation detailing this fact. You can also look up 14th Amendment and Incorporation Doctrine. The Incorporation Doctrine says that courts do not consider all of the Bill of Rights to be "fundamental rights", and have not considered the second amendment to be a right of U.S. citizenship.
Is anyone ready to take up arms yet? It's about time!

State Sponsored Terrorism, Kidnapping, and Child Abuse

2008-05-20T21:58:00.005-05:00

Like a master of illusion, the bureaucratic jack-booted do-gooders in Texas have commandeered the media, your reason, and some 416 children under the pretense that they are saving the more nubile young ladies from the ravishing clutches of perverted older men. To justify this assault upon a private culture that considers itself outside the pestilential creature that is government, words such as “statutory rape, polygamy, and cult” have been capriciously tossed about. Television shows have sought the counsel of experts in human behavior, linguistics, and body language to impugn the outward appearance, mannerisms, inflections, and thoughts of the women. The only indictment borne from the witch hunt is they don’t appear “normal”; hardly a justification for invading a private society on unfound accusations and terrorizing children and parents.

Despite the personal feelings of any of you, or of an assemblage of criminals, otherwise known as a legislature, it is not within the purview of the state to inspect, question, assess, or approve the behavior of private people or their cultures. I am not defending the act of having sex with 14 year old girls, as the unfounded accusations assert, but then again I have not had sex with girls of such age. However, if it had not been for “underage” girls having had sex in the past I can assure you all that humanity would not have progressed to this day. Yet, one has to ask themselves what is the issue which makes that act objectionable? Is it our perception that a dirty-old-man is gratifying himself at the expense of an unknowing and exploited child? Is it that such a precious treasure should not be exposed to such a vile and immoral act as sex? Is it possibly because the government has not given its approval to such unconscionable behavior, such as it has with legalized murder through warfare, capital punishment, rendition, torture…. etc.? If government lowered the legal age of consent to 14 years there is nothing you or your indignant self-righteousness could do about it. It would be “legal”.

When an “older man” has relations with a “young girl”, where is the state? The state does not prevent the act from taking place despite the law which rests on the books. Yet, where are the parents when the state violates young women? We have government mandated vaccinations which expose children to things more immediate and injurious by way of the compounds in the vaccine than the possible harm arising from contracting the illness to begin with. I comment on one sadistic jurist named C. Phillip Nichols from Prince George’s County, Maryland. My commentary can be found on my blog at http://markmccoy.com/blogspot. It is not hard to find. The Justice Department visits regularly. Malfeasant Nichols threatened parents with jail time if they failed to inoculate their children, despite the parent’s objections to introducing pathogens and agents to their children’s bloodstream. Nichols’ behavior smacks of bio-terrorism and disregard for liberty and parental autonomy. Likewise, the gumma which are confiscating children in Texas are on par with Nichols, sans bio-terrorism. Who is there to save children and parents from the abuse of government?

Why does the state not raid the homes of parents who allow or assist in their children joining the military to be used for imperialistic or corporate aggression? Are parents who place their children before the canon’s mouth for glory and political mischief any less culpable for the resulting harm than those who permit a young woman to take an older husband? How many of these allegedly “abused” girls have died as a result of their “illicit” union compared to the number of children sent to their deaths by the contrived and fallacious wars created by government?

Look at it like this. If sex with children was a priority for government then they would have raided the Catholic Church and the priests possessing priapic adolescent proclivities. If the state were concerned with polygamy it would look at itself and the “spousal” relationships it keeps with despots, tyrants, and dictators abroad. As a matter of fact, worse than polygamy is bigamy wherein one has many marriages. Every licensed marriage is a three-party contract between the two parties and the state. Talk about a slut, to use a vulgar colloquialism. If government gave a damn about morality it would immediately crawl into a hole and proceed to pull kitty litter over itself in order to spare us the stench. If people really cared about liberty, tolerance, privacy, and justice they would train their sights on usurpers and tyrants who deem to act on behalf of the consenting governed.

I do not believe it is within the purview of anyone to judge any people, culture, society, or behavior when their reason has been corrupted and replaced with the arbitrary and violent conscience of absolute power. If we are about ridding the world of evil then let’s start where evil is readily identified, known, and abundant; in the halls and offices of people serving that presumed master, government.

Analysis of the Barak Obama Speech on Race

2008-05-10T19:58:00.002-05:00

Obama, my nigga’!

I respect your feigned attempt at illustrating the racial divide that has been eating away at this country’s cultural psyche and that which is now culminating with the triangulation of hate, nationalism, and racism fed by the fuel of “illegal immigration” tossed capriciously upon the smoldering heap of racial discord. You may believe you are quelling the acrimony, but you sir, have possibly exacerbated it. You were speaking to a largely ignorant populace, but the undertone of a rallying cry for elitists permeates your message.

Considering you position, it is understood that politicians feed upon the insecurities and ignorance of others they callously call their constituents. Politicians have become the new plantation owners and we, those you call “citizens of the United States”, are the slaves. Beginning with the acceptance of slavery in the Constitution, notwithstanding the irreconcilable dichotomy with the Declaration that says “all men are created equal”, implying that slaves were not men; through the un-Civil war for commerce not slavery; the passage of the “Reconstruction Amendments to the United States Constitution”; through the black codes of the south; the struggle for equality, civil disobedience, and the Civil Rights Act… At every turn government has successfully circumvented black’s attempts at asserting their unalienable rights and claiming their sovereignty. Instead, they have been sold a Bill of Rights, through the Incorporation Doctrine, and afforded to be duly processed under the law.

Why, sir, do you serve up platitudes such as, “…to deliver slaves from bondage, or provide men and women of every color and creed their full rights and obligations as citizens of the United States.”? Why do you not refer to the common Creator of all men instead of the watered-down prescriptive servitude of U.S. citizenship? Is it because those U.S. citizens are the subjects over who you seek to be elected their keeper? I essayed this trap of involuntary servitude on my blog where I addressed the profundity called “Martin Luther King Day”.

Mr. Obama, we, the “kept inhabitants” of the United States are the niggas of the 21’st century. We have been goaded, tricked, deceived, dumbed-down, frightened, fattened, and exploited to turning to that sonofaUncleSam for our sustenance and security. We almost have true equality inasmuch as the middle-class and lower-class are virtually homogenous and the ruling elite, of which politicians, lawyers, and corporations occupy the marble thrones. Niggers belong to the antebellum and pre-civil rights world, where the segue to niggas has now embraced both white, black, male, and female through surreptitious legislation, police state implementation, and the dissolution of our republic into one large federal enclave occupied by resident vassals.

Even though I hail from the “whitey” camp of U.S. niggas, I wholeheartedly agree with Reverend Wright's rhetoric. The man has nailed it. I sense his indignance, outrage, frustration, and honesty. America is not the land of God. It is not the land of justice. It is not the land of freedom. It is a lie, a bastion of hypocrisy, a stronghold of ignorance, and a source of world instability and strife. And it is because people have surrendered their reason, conscience and morals in favor of being fattened for slaughter by earthly masters. The people refuse to, or at least cannot hear the truth, because their ears are full of sand and their heads full of public school indoctrination. Whites, as well as blacks, are culpable for the disastrous ending to the great American experiment. Whites first subjugated blacks, and then offered them government privileges instead of acknowledging their rights as free people under one Creator. The so-called black leaders then formed an alliance with government in exchange for power and positions of influence over the not-quite-free rabble. Instead of expressing righteous indignation and claiming their right to self-determination they became the dispensers of handouts and benefits. As long as they kept the masses placated, government would extend to them latitude and discretion in arbitrating their obedience.

Until people, black, white, Hispanic, and other refuse to lend their consent to other men in hopes of being governed into prosperity and happiness; until they stop surrendering their children to murderers for militaristic pursuits and glory; until they stop toiling for their master’s benefit instead of their own; until they stop the hypocrisy and lying, they will continue to suffer by their own hands, chained and calloused, controlled and owned by tyrants and despots. Mr. Obama, you may believe you adroitly avoided calling a spade a spade, but you inadvertently called us all your nigga’s.

Fat, dumb, and happy in Amerika.

2008-05-10T19:54:00.000-05:00

Let’s not mince words. The “Great American Democratic Experiment” has failed. “In what way?” you ask, shifting your gaze from your wide-screen plasma ejaculating NASCAR, football, and “So You Think You Can Dance” to address your tattooed, belligerent, corporate-branded, entitlement-minded children. You look about your overpriced, oversized, over-mortgaged home and entertain escaping in your fuel-hungry, overpriced vehicle. You inventory your legal plastic tender and contemplate the looming interest rate that will soon engulf more of your overtaxed income that serves to further bloat the swollen bellies of voracious malfeasants, traitors, terrorists, thieves, murderers, and vermin posing as legislators and law-makers lying greased and prone for their corporate sodomites.

The American Experiment that began with our founding traitors, terrorists, and landed-white-males standing on a Declaration of Independence and finally settling for a Constitution that embraced slavery, protected the privileged, and favored the mercantile, has accomplished exactly what it intended; that is, to feed the multitude a steady diet of propaganda, compensate them with fiat currency, commercially satiate their prurient desires, fatten them from the trough of government benefits, exact their allegiance, commandeer their children, and superficially educate them in preparation for corporate conscription.

The only involvement the so-called “We the People” have had in this experiment is to serve as lab rats for government to expose to war, deceit, division, and illusory wealth. And as sure as the carcinogenic fare was placed in front of their noses the rats consumed all their bellies could hold. What hath this experiment wrought for a so-called free people? It has produced evidentiary testament that speaks to blissful ignorance, voluntary servitude, moral abdication, spiritual prostitution, and cultural degradation. It is virtually impossible to live, work, eat, trade, associate, reproduce, or travel without the licenses, permits, or regulations of government sapping your common sense and free-will.

It would serve most of you well to forget these words and absorb the messages emblazoned onto your psyche by the corporate media, courtesy of your keepers. So-called “cults” who promote polygamy or “underage sex” are impugned, attacked, and their children confiscated; yet, parents proudly decorate their sons and daughters in the military regalia of an imperialistic despotism and allow them to be marched into foreign lands to die as glorious corporate mercenaries in not-quite-so-conquered foreign lands whose indigenous peoples exhibit more courage, temerity, and resolve than our morally exsanguinated and conscience bereft conquerors could ever hope for. Police routinely electrocute, shoot, or beat people, yet nary an indignant word is uttered by the masses because it was claimed to have been done “within established policy”. It is deemed unpatriotic to not tithe what the government commands. Never before has a society so immersed in technology, opportunity, and apparent capability been rendered so “fat, dumb, and happy” by relinquishing all that is theirs into the hands of arbitrary, corrupt, co-opted, and self-serving oligarchs.

As long as the din of platitudes flows past the Botox lips of the catatonic consumers inhabiting Gomorrah, Inc. by the incessant stream of National Anthems, Pledges of Allegiance, Oaths of Office, and Star Spangled Banners then the truth will lie as it has for eons; consistently and obviously etched upon the redacted words of history, ignored or re-written by those with power to perpetually subjugate those without.

King for a day.

2008-01-27T13:20:00.000-06:00

I intended to write on this topic sooner, but wanted to see how Martin Luther King, Jr. was remembered over “his” holiday. For one day a year, we take time to recognize, acknowledge, honor, dismiss, forget, and deny a man that was murdered for standing up for what he believed. Decades after the dust has settled from King’s “rabble rousing”, we have relative equality, since people do not prosper under liberty, but ignorantly suffer under sophistic rights. Moreover, in a consummate act of patronization, we recognize a government holiday named after one of its victims. We give one day to recognize a struggle that took a lifetime, and a life.

King was not the first to posit civil disobedience. Mahatma Gandhi and Henry David Thoreau were both progenitors of that doctrine. After each generation of peaceful strides, government responded with more legal and institutionalized tyranny and oppression. Of course, King is lauded for making great strides in achieving racial, political, and societal equality, but is it that blacks are elevated to the same level as whites; or were whites lowered to the same level as blacks? If you have two glasses; one filled to the brim with rights, and the other half-filled with rights, and you wish to make them equal in volume, you don't necessarily need fill the lowest one, but may instead opt to empty the fullest one. This is the equality King achieved; or more accurately, the equality the government created.

I am not here to disparage King's work, his message, or the man himself. I greatly admire and respect what he stood for and accomplished. I've heard people refer to King as a failure for black people still not having true racial equality. I believe King was a success, as evidenced by his untimely murder. If there is failure to be assigned, then let it rest on the heads of all who have settled for the watered-down, diluted, manufactured, prescribed, defined, and regulated "privileges and benefits" the government dispenses to placate the otherwise restless rabble so as to keep them fat, dumb, and happy. We have failed. We have failed to protect that which we possess, individual sovereignty. We failed to remain vigilant over encroaching power. We have submitted to servitude, and self-delusion.

What did King accomplish, exactly? He stood defiant against institutionalized legal power. He stood defiant against the state. He was assaulted, stabbed, beaten, reviled, hated, and ultimately murdered. King did not die for what he believed. He died because he was shot. Let it be said that he was murdered for what he believed. He did not wish to die. If someone had said to him, "Dr. King, believing such things will cause your life to flee your body." I presume he would have given it a second thought, and then probably proceed nevertheless. However, his beliefs affected his opponents to such a degree that they moved to permanently silence him. His message was infectious and dangerous. What kind of world would this be if ALL men were treated as equals? Where would government get its power to soothe the pain of injustice it creates? What if all we had to do to defeat tyranny is to simply disobey?

Where King and I part ways is where he advocated passive civil disobedience. I fall more along the lines of the Black Panthers or Malcolm X. I agree with taking a passive, disobedient stand against tyranny, but I find when government or authority fails to honor that peaceful overture and instead compel allegiance, obedience, or action; then righteous, violent self-defense is warranted, by any means necessary. As Malcolm X said, "It is criminal to teach a man not to defend himself." I understand why King took the tact he did. His foe is was, and still is, impressive, ruthless, violent, and pervasive. Violence turns many away from what would otherwise be a just battle. Yet, when one comes upon a battle and sees only carnage, if is hard to identify with the struggle when the reason for the bloodbath unknown to the observer. King needed to win minds more so than kill tyrants.

The government's response to "uppity black-folk" was the Civil Rights act of 1966. What were the "equal rights" Uncle Sam so generously gave to his subjects? If you look to Title 42 United States Code, Chapter 21, Subchapter I, Section 1981, it will tell you that "Equal Rights" include, in part, "… full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other." Where, in that legislation, do the words “rights” or “liberties” appear? Moreover, in order to achieve this equality, without acknowledging Creator-derived unalienable rights belong to blacks as well as whites, the government created the subordinate "white citizen" class and elevated, or laterally moved, the blacks to that subjugated group.

Instead of blacks being acknowledged to have unalienable rights, like the Declaration of Independence states belong to “all men”, prescriptive and diluted privileges were created, called "Civil Rights”, and offered to the People in exchange for their unalienable rights, and their allegiance. Government slyly created a slave class and tricked the blacks into staying right where they were, along with the ignorant and newly-subjugated "white folks". Honestly, I don't know why blacks wanted the same rights as whites. Blacks had to be forced into subjection, and whites hurriedly marched headlong into it.

After all the strife, struggle, battles, and deaths ,we have a legal pacifier shoved into the gaping mouths of the infantile masses. Subjects gladly trade what their Creator bestowed for what government creates. The government did not set a day aside to honor Dr. King's accomplishments and promote his message. The message they wish to convey is, if you exhibit audacity, arrogance, fearlessness, righteousness, and independence, then you too will suffer beatings, oppression, insult, and most likely death. This is what we are to remember on this government-made holiday. It is the reminder that Dr. King stood for something more important than life. He did not willingly succumb. For his petulance he was killed, and it would serve us well to not follow in his footsteps, and instead, accept the scraps off master's table and obey.

So, we have Martin Luther King for a day, and servitude for the rest. Pay obligatory homage to fallen heroes, but don't dare emulate them or suffer like-fate. Ignore what you possess by right of your birth. The government claims to be able to provide for your comfort and security. Surely you don't believe your Creator blessed you with anything comparable to the power of that malignancy called government. I urge you all to exhibit audacity and independence. Step outside your comfort zone. Venture off of the plantation. When "master" comes-a-stalking to get you back in line turn that passive disobedience into righteous self-defense. Why be King for a day when you can rule yourself for life?

Mark McCoy

Judge C. Philip Nichols, Jr. Expresses His Death Wish.

2007-11-18T00:19:00.000-06:00

His Malfeasance, the Marquis de Sade Nichols

Parents face jail for not vaccinating their kids
Maryland officials frustrated by lack of compliance with immunization policy

You can protest, complain, petition, whine, and plead; but this malfeasing, low-life, sadistic, despotic, abusive, repulsive juristic manifestation should be receiving a snug-hemp-hug about his 6th cervical vertebrae while suspended 3 feet off the ground. Why would these parents bow to judicial terrorism and submit their children to the needle when they have determined that the best interests of their children's health is not served in such a manner? I would have assembled a congregation of like-minded parents to march into that courthouse and submit Nichols to repeated muzzle flashes.

I'm particularly outraged at his arrogance when the story reported, "The judge noted the unhappy looks of some of the kids in line waiting for vaccinations.
“It’s cute. It looks like their parents are dragging them to church,” Nichols said." How would you like to be dragged into a secluded wooded area, sir? How "cute" would that be? How would you address the children who suffer adverse reactions to the state-mandated-poisoning? Are those children deemed acceptable losses for the sake of the greater good? Do you and the state determine which lives are more worthy? Are you so pompous, socialistic, vile, cold, and removed to compel parents to place their children's health and lives in peril; or suffer under the despotic demands of your megalomaniacal edict? Any violence directed towards you could be deemed to be in self-defense.

Sadly, this is the mentality of many sitting judges today. They feel compelled to adjudicate, not just the so-called law, but our private lives as well. The only proper response to this type of tyranny is violent response. Make no mistake. Such men are willing and resolved to using the full force of the state in compelling compliance, regardless of what the individual may feel is proper for themselves or their children. The problem is, the children have been commandeered by the state and parents relegated to the position of trustees for the safe-keeping of the state's "prpoerty". When men such as Nichols begin disappearing from the comfy confines of their secure residences in the dead of night under the tutelage of righteously indignant individuals then maybe they will understand the fear they attempt to impart upon the ignorant masses.

Mr. Nichols, you are vile, you are a brigand, you are repulsive, and you have not yet assailed a principled and fearless parent who has no qualms about introducing you to the true authority. The best thing for you is to hide behind your bench, issue your terrorist letters to the ignorant and compliant, and inject the children with poison. A harsher fate awaits you. Prepare yourself. The tyranny you wield in this life will not protect you from the ultimate higher authority.I pray that you push the right person too far with your threats. I pray that the lesson you fail to learn in this world will be made painfully aware to you in the next. How dare you. How dare you. How dare you.

For reference purposes, should anyone wish to directly engage this loathsome sadist directly, here is his pedigree:

Circuit Court for Prince George's County, MD
Associate Judge, 1992 to present
District Court for Prince George's County, MD Associate Judge, 1985 to 1992
Orphan's Court for Prince George's County, MD Associate Judge, 1977 to 1985
Chief Judge, 1982 to 1985
Military Experience Acting Officer in charge of U.S. Sending State Office At the U.S. Embassy, Rome, Italy, 2000
Tour of reserve duty in Rota, Spain during Operation Desert Storm, 1991
Served aboard the USS Kidd (DDG-993) in 1984
Captain, U.S. Naval Reserve
Military Judge, 1991 to 1995
Appellate Military Judge, U.S. Navy-Marine Corps
Court of Criminal Appeals, October 1996 to 1993
Law School JD, University of Baltimore School of Law 1973
Undergraduate AB, Georgetown University, 1969
Memberships/Acknowledgements President, Prince George's County Bar Ass. 1989 to 1990
Dean, Traffic School, 1994
Chairman, Board of Directors of Laurel Regional Hospital 1996 to 1998
President, Rotary Club of Laurel, 1980 - 1981
Fellow, Maryland Bar Foundation
Honorary Life Member of the Laurel Volunteer Fire Dept.
Outstanding Rotary Club President in Maryland and the District of Columbia, 1981
First Maryland judge to attend the University of Kansas Law and Organizational Economics Program
Member, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
National Advisory Committee on Child Support Guidelines, 1995 to 1996
Chairman, National Judicial Advisory Committee to the U.S. Office of Child Support Enforcement, 1996 to 2000
Chairman, Planning Committee for the First National Symposium on Children, Courts and the Federal Child Support Enforcement System, Denver, CO 1998
Personal Information Born and raised in Prince George's County, Maryland Attended public and parochial schools in Laurel, Maryland and La Salle Military Academy.

In defense of the "N" word.

2007-11-08T12:16:00.000-06:00

First, I make no apologies for what I say. I have thought it through, weighed the consequences, and acted accordingly. I believe that I will probably be assailed by the ignorant, superficial, and juvenile; but it is up to them to become informed. It is not up to me to pander to the ignorant.

I am no fan of the word nigger. I have used the word in the past. I have never called a black-person, African-American, person-of-color, negro,....or any of the other "persons" classified and renamed in feigned attempts at political correctness. As a matter of fact, I've never called anybody a nigger. I've used the word in conversation, in reference to, anecdotally.... but never in directly addressing another human being. When I did use it, I was speaking out of ignorance. The society in which I grew up afforded me many opportunities to be intimately familiar with many sorts of bigots, racists, and other ignorant persuasions.

Do I apologize for my ignorance and use of the word nigger? No. Of course not. I will apologize for a deliberate act, but not one that arises from not knowing. How did I come by my ignorance? Growing up in the 60's and 70's I was afforded access to much of the civil rights unrest. I heard the word nigger used often when referring to unruly and audacious blacks. "How dare those niggers!" was the objection I recall. The unfortunate thing is, many of those people are still with us; possessing the same point of view and harboring hate and disdain for blacks.

There is a huge inequity in that blacks are given a pass at using the word nigger. If the word is so offensive then it is color-blind and not just offensive to blacks. What if the word became a slur against, what is commonly referred to as "white-trash"? If white-trash were referred to as niggers then would the word lose it's status as a racial slur? I hear blacks refer to each other as "nigger", "nigga" and "my nigga". I guess it's possible that some blacks would be offended at being called nigger even if done so by another black, but I don't think the same level of outrage and indignation is reached when within the same race.

The puzzling thing is that black people don't mind being treated like niggers by the government. Following the Civil War and the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States black people were drawn into federal subjection and then bestowed with "civil rights". Civil rights are created by government, regulated by government, and can be taken away by government. I have never heard anyone in government acknowledge that, not only blacks but all people have natural, unalienable rights that originate with their Creator and are outside the purview of government. Yet, the so-called "civil rights leaders" keep leading the black people by the nose ring in the pursuit of their "civil rights', and thereby deceiving them into neglecting their natural, unalienable rights. If there is such a thing as a nigger, and I'm referring to the immoral, disingenuous, fraudulent, dishonest, unscrupulous, and vile actions of a person who would rather choose, and lead others to, servitude and subjection, then I'd say that many of the civil rights leaders fit that bill. This is not to vilify those who are pursuing civil rights without knowing the true nature of civil rights and believe them to be striving for all rights.

If someone is going to be offended by the word nigger then they should be equally offended at being treated like one. Nigger is a term of disdain and hate that probably fomented after the Civil War and spread with the black people's assertion and struggle towards freedom, as opposed to settling for the watered down civil rights. I am not, however, going to ignore the existence of the word because of some self-imposed over-sensitivity. The word is not ugly, it is not hateful and it is not derogatory. It is a word. It is the intent, emotion, context, and inflection applied when using the word that makes it what it is to some people. If nigger is so terrible, then is not the words murder, rape, and hate equally as abhorrent? If we are to look at what a word means, nigger being an ignorant utterance towards black people, then aforesaid words, meaning much more horrible things than just a slur, should be banned as well.

My black friends, of whom I have many, will understand this diatribe. Opportunistic whites will use this to deflect their shortcomings towards my character in hopes of minimizing their failings. Disingenuous blacks will seize my words to further perpetuate more hate and divisiveness. If you are a hateful, narrow-minded bigot then that is your misery. If you are a sanctimonious opportunist looking for a whine factor then that is your problem. For the rational and reasonable who recognize the world, and people, for what they are and refuse to be identified by the hateful, ignorant words of others, then I say welcome! Remember the word "nigger" for what it is. A symptom, a disease, a defect, and identifier of hate and ignorance. We can't hide from the ugliness in the world, but we can realize it for what it is and choose not to partake in its dehumanizing effects.

The Writing is On the Wall

2007-10-05T11:43:00.000-05:00

I just came across this and wanted to post it sans my thoughts. I believe it speaks for itself witout too much of my commentary. All I can say is arm yourselves. The naysayers will live as wards of the state and ready to turn in any dissenters they may discover in exchange for benefits until the pen closes on the sheep while they graze unaware and fat.

This type of policical chicanery takes guts in a state with conceal carry.

2007-10-01T19:52:00.001-05:00

Apparently, in Texas, it is commonplace for members of the legislature to cast votes on bills for other legislators who happen to be absent for whatever reason. It is against the rules, as promulgated by the legislature, but it is up to themselves to enforce and apply penalties for violations. Can you think of a more rigged game than this?

I'm not sure, but a reasonable person could more accurately than not assume that this practice is not confined to the hallowed halls of the Texas Legislature. How many laws could be considered null and void due to such malfeasing chicanery? How many people are incarcerated for violating laws which owe their origination to the prolific voting fingers of a select few of aspiring targets? This rises to the level of fraud, and a fraud can never be remedied, since it exists from its inception and is forever a nullity.

Seeing as how I live in Illinois, I cannot offer any relief for the Texas Citizenry, but I can extend an admonition to the legislative body of Illinois. I will push for, through a constitutional amendment for Illinois, that any law which has the preponderance of having more than one vote per person will be immediately repealed and void. Any evidence attesting to a legislator behaving in such a fashion will be punishable by immediate removal from office, forever all benefits and privileges, inability to ever run for public office in Illinois, and, depending on the type of legislation tampered with, imprisonment for up to 10 years.

This type of activity is a direct and blatant violation of the public trust and an indelible fraud upon the People. It is outrageous, abhorrent, and deserving of the fullest penalties prescribed by law.

People intimidated by government must be funny to Stan Schaeffer

2007-04-10T19:57:00.000-05:00

It happened at an April 9, 2007 Collinsville, Illinois City Council meeting. Mayor, Stan Schaeffer, was taking input from "residents". This is the part of the meeting where the City entertains comments and concerns from those in the community. I had spoken a number of times in the past, mainly challenging the City's authority to implement a business license ordinance and other things. At this particular meeting I was in possession of a campaign flyer paid for by "The Committee to Elect Stan Schaeffer". This flyer is similar to possibly thousands that were direct-mailed to potential voters.

The purpose of my having this flyer was the conspicuous display of Mr. Schaeffer's City office phone number and his City provided cell phone. These services are paid through tax dollars, which makes them the property of the Citizens. Mr. Schaeffer was advertising tax payer funded resources in his bid for re-election, thereby using the money of those who may have been aggrieved or in opposition to Mr. Schaeffer's bid for re-election. I spoke not only for myself, but for other Citizens who express their displeasure with the City's progress, or lack thereof, but who are afraid of reprisal from the City, Mr. Schaeffer and other assembled councilpersons included.

In my address, I made reference to my speaking in agency for those apprehensive voices. I did not say that these persons are afraid of Mr. Schaeffer directly or personally, but intimidated by the potential abuse of the City's resources, i.e., police, code enforcement,...etc, as can be illustrated historically and anecdotally. People have made it known to me their personal experiences that, taken in the context of a Citizen speaking out about government abuse or waste, there was a corresponding negative consequence timed conspicuously close to the dissent of the Citizen.

When I addressed the Council I made it clear that this faction of the population was also being represented in my address. Mr. Schaeffer is seen to clearly snicker and cover his mouth upon my mention of those who fear retribution for their dissent. I became very angry upon seeing this disrespectful act by Mr. Schaeffer, but managed to maintain my composure and complete my address. Mr. Schaeffer also attempted to limit my address to the arbitrary limit of 4 minutes, as set by ordinance, and I refused to relinquish the floor until after I had finished my thought. A minor display of professional petulance ensued and the matter defused after a short while.

In my address I used the word "cabal" in referencing the Mayor and his campaign-supporting constituency. He makes a point to define the word for the assemblage and the future viewing public, I presume because having possibly been educated in a Collinsville Public School they may not possess the lexical aptitude to understand a polysyllabic word like "cabal". I chose that word very carefully because I believe that Mr. Schaeffer's bid for re-election is just that, a cabal. The people are the authority, and government is the reaction to our action of forming a government for the security of our rights and property. Mr. Schaeffer and his cabal of special interests, developers, and privileged status are, through attempting to keep Mr. Schaeffer in office, conspiring to subvert the People's will and reduce them to peonage by having their property taxed, confiscated, or developed against their will. Yes, Mr. Schaeffer...it is a cabal.

I may update this later, but I wanted to get the video out for those who wish to witness a callous display for the justified, albeit unnecessary, apprehension of other Citizens to publicly confront what they believe to be oppressive, unresponsive government. More to come.....