ONCE AGAIN, ISRAEL FACES HYPOCRICY AND A BIASED RUSH TO JUDGMENT

<img alt="" border="0" src="http://wanted.org.il/images/matan_vilnai.jpg&quot; width="342px"

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu points out that once again, Israel faces hypocrisy and a biased rush to judgment. Israeli marines fired in self-defense against Gray Wolves wielding sticks and knives on the cruise liner Mavi Marmara. The international community cannot afford an Iranian port on the Mediterranean. The same countries that are criticizing Israel today should know that they could be targeted tomorrow.

Basil Venitis points out Gray Wolves is the terrorist arm of the Turkish government. They are named after Asena, a female wolf in mythology associated with Turkic ethnic origins. The organization carried out many thousands of murders, especially in Cyprus. Gray Wolves have been responsible for numerous political assassinations and disappearances of human rights activists, and have ties with the Turkish mafia. Gray Wolf Mehmet Ali Agca attempted to kill Pope John Paul II in 1981.

Israel has deported all 682 activists from more than 35 countries, detained after the intervention on the six propaganda ships. Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai told parliament that two of the Gray Wolves killed during the takeover were shot after they used handguns to wound two commandos. Marines winched down from helicopters armed with riot-control paintball guns were beaten and about to be lynched before comrades opened fire with live ammunition.

When Israel ended its occupation of Gaza, it did not impose a blockade. Indeed it left behind agricultural facilities in the hope that the newly liberated Gaza Strip would become a peaceful and productive area. Instead Hamas seized control over Gaza and engaged in acts of warfare against Israel. These acts of warfare featured 10,000 rockets directed at Israeli civilians. This was not only an act of warfare, it was a war crime.

Israel responded to the rockets by declaring a blockade, the purpose of which was to assure that no rockets, or other material that could be used for making war against Israeli civilians, was permitted into Gaza. Israel allowed humanitarian aid through its checkpoints. Egypt as well participated in the blockade. There was never a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, merely a shortage of certain goods that would end if the rocket attacks ended. If there is no doubt that the offending ships have made a firm determination to break the blockade, then the blockade may be enforced before the offending ships cross the line into domestic waters.

Venitis asserts that Israel is a bastion of freedom and Graecoroman culture, an economic miracle, and a leader in science and technology. Israel is the only free country in a region dominated by Arab monarchies, theocracies and dictatorships. It is only the citizens of Israel, Arabs and Jews alike, who enjoy the right to express their views, to criticize their government, to form political parties, to publish private newspapers, to hold free elections.

When Islamists deny the most basic freedoms to their own people, it is obscene for them to start claiming that Israel is violating the Palestinians’ rights. All Muslims who are genuinely concerned with human rights should, as their very first action, seek to oust their own despotic rulers and adopt the type of free society that characterizes Israel.

Land-for-peace is a repugnant formula for Israel’s self-immolation. The right of a civilized nation to self-defense against its barbarous enemies is a moral absolute. It should not be surrendered in a vain attempt to appease the initiators of war. It is a moral perversion to demand that Israel give back the very land it captured in the process of defending itself against wars launched by the Arab aggressors.

A criminal has no right to protest the justice of having his guns confiscated by the police, and particularly not a criminal who continues to underwrite acts of crime. And the worst of the land-for-peace policy is that it caused Israel to give the Palestinians their own domain, with the job of protecting against terrorism entrusted terrorists.

Basil Venitis, twitter.com/Venitis, points out NATO includes Turkey, the #1 terrorist nation, that indulges in genocides, such as the Armenian genocide, the Greek genocide, the Pontian genocide, and the Cypriot genocide, and pogroms such as the Istanbul pogrom, a state-sponsored and state-orchestrated pogrom that compelled Greeks to leave Istanbul, in violation to the Treaty of Lausanne. NATO should either expel terrorist Turkey or disband.

Venitis notes that since terrorist Turkey declared Casus Belli against Fourth Reich(EU) and Turcoterrorists continue to abuse the Fourthreichian islands near the Turkish border and traffic drugs and illegal immigrants to Greece, Fourth Reich reinforced its border management agency, Frontex, enhancing its operational capacity to support Greece against Turcoterrorism. Member States now put more equipment and more personnel at Frontex’s disposal in the Aegean Sea of Greece. Frontex now coleads border patrol operations with Greece.

Koran is the Islamic Mein Kampf that incites Muslims to resort to violence. Koran calls for hatred, misogyny, polygyny, violence, submission, murder, and terrorism. Koran calls for Muslims to kill infidels, to terrorize infidels, and to fulfil their duty to wage war, the violent jihad. Jihad is a duty for every motherfucker Muslim ape, Islam is to rule the world by the sword. Koran is clearly antisemitic, describing Jews as monkeys and pigs.

Mohammed was a charlatan, a bipolar maniac, a warlord, a mass murderer, a pedophile, and a misogynist. Islamic tradition tells us how Mohammed had his enemies murdered and even had prisoners of war executed. Mohammed himself slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza. Islam has no other morality than the advancement of Islam. If it is good for Islam, it is good. If it is bad for Islam, it is bad. There is no gray area or other side. Here is an emoticon of Mohammed with a lit bomb in his turban *-O)):-{>

Venitis asserts Islam is not a religion, but a satanic terrorist cacoculture. Sure, it has a grudge-collecting god, and an afterlife with 72 virgins for each martyr. But in its essence, Islam is a totalitarian ideology and sadomasochism. It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the life of every person. Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life. Islam means submission. Islam is not compatible with freedom and democracy, because what it strives for is the incivility of terrorist jihad and sharia.

Islamic totalitarianism is potentially far more dangerous than either the Nazi or Communist variety, since the latter, despite their exterminating follies, presupposed their own preservation. For the Nazi, the inferior race does not deserve to exist; for the Stalinist, a capitalist does not merit to continue living; for the Islamist, it is the world itself that does not deserve to exist. When someone tells you he is going to kill you, believe him

FOURTHREICHIAN ENERGY

 

 

The most important and most overlooked energy issue today is the growing crisis of global energy supply. Cheap, industrial-scale energy is essential to building, transporting, and operating everything we use, from refrigerators to Internet server farms to hospitals. It is desperately needed in the undeveloped world, where 1.6 billion people lack electricity, which contributes to untold suffering and death. And it is needed in ever-greater, more-affordable quantities in the industrialized world: Energy usage and standard of living are directly correlated.

The European Commission(EC), aka Eldorado of Corruption, makes energy more expensive with its environmental restrictions. Every dollar added to the cost of energy is a dollar added to the cost of life. And if something does not change soon in the energy markets, the cost of life will become a lot higher. As demand increases in the newly industrializing world, led by China and India, supply stagnates, meaning rising prices as far as the eye can see.

Basil Venitis, twitter.com/Venitis, has proven that climate change is heliogenic, not anthropogenic. Nevertheless, carbonmonger kleptocrats, using buzzwords like carbon footprint and clean energy, are growing a socialist movement that won’t actually benefit Gaia, but will make our lives miserable, spread by the cancer of socialism. Temperature fluctuations are only due to Sun cycles, but are used as an antivenitist instrument, not a real object of interest for socialists who camouflage the environmental game.

Venitis points out nuclear power is risky for investors, because it ties up more capital for longer periods of time than its main competitor, natural-gas-fired generation. Nuclear power makes economic sense only if natural gas prices are very high. Then, over time, the high initial costs of nuclear power would be offset by nuclear power’s lower fuel costs.

Venitis notes that until recently, gas supplies were thought to be increasingly scarce, but recently natural gas reserve estimates increased drastically, because of technological advancements in shale rock drilling. So natural constraints are no longer in play and natural gas prices have returned to reasonable levels. Government efforts to force nuclear power plant construction will thus prove economically counterproductive.

Jerzy Buzek, Predident of the European Parliament(EP), aka Eldorado of Prostitutes, told the Industry and Energy Committee on Tuesday that strong political backing from Fourth Reich(EU) slave States is needed for improved Fourth Reich energy networks, common R&D funding for alternative energy sources, and oil and gas purchasing groups.

Venitis asserts that R&D and State should separate. R&D is increasingly being manipulated by those who try to use it to justify political choices based on their ethical preferences and who are willing to suppress evidence of conflict between those preferences and the underlying reality. This problem is clearly seen in three policy domains, energy, health care, and climate policy. When we abandon the values and practices of science, or pervert them to support a predetermined agenda, we elevate appearances and subordinate facts.

The idea of a Fourth Reich Energy Community, launched early in May by Buzek and former Commission President Jacques Delors, is to push forward a common Fourth Reich energy policy and complete the single energy market. Buzek told MEPs Tuesday that a strong political initiative from Fourth Reich slave States is needed to complement the Commission’s necessarily limited action under existing laws.

Buzek stressed that Fourth Reich has to compete ever more fiercely for energy sources and while citizens may not understand geopolitics, they understand if their heating is turned off due to the disruption of energy supplies from third countries.

Venitis points out that since the only proper purpose of government is the protection of individual rights, it is improper for the government to be involved in energy, whether by financing it or by overseeing and regulating it. A free society requires a total separation of energy and state. All scientific and technological research should be privately conducted and privately financed. There should be no government research laboratories or government scientific agencies. This, of course, would be in radical contrast to the state of affairs today, in which basic research is predominantly funded by government and overseen by the government agencies administering the funds.

Buzek suggested that to deliver results, the European Energy Community needs to build stronger co-operation, especially to interconnect national energy grids, establish a common energy fund to pay for alternative energy R&D, and to set up oil and gas purchasing groups to buy from foreign suppliers.

Buzek acknowledged that legal difficulties could slow the project, and advocated enhanced co-operation, a Lisbon Treaty provision that enables at least nine slave States to proceed with a common policy which others can join later, when they are ready.

MEPs from two biggest political groups, EPP and S&D, backed the initiative overall, and especially its strategic focus on investing to modernise energy infrastructure, but noted likely legal and technical difficulties. The Greens and Conservatives were more critical, arguing that now is not the time for Fourth Reich to launch another big idea, given the failure of the Lisbon agenda and treaty fatigue. Plenty of Fourth Reich energy market legislation has yet to be properly implemented, they added.

Buzek replied that it is crucial to change the way in which Europe deals with energy, but emphasized that the project needs political support from slave States. He also explained that the committee presentation was only the start of a broader debate on this issue.

These are tough times for Fourth Reich. And Barroso walking into the European Parliament(EP), aka Eldorado of Prostitutes, is a particularly difficult experience. Barroso has turned into a tragicomic figure, who cannot control Greece, the most corrupt country on Earth. Hardly anyone thinks highly of Barroso anymore, a fiasco who cannot rein in Graecokleptocrats, who get million-euro-kickbacks every single day and raid the nest eggs of all Greeks. Venitis points out all Europeans are now criticizing Barroso for being very soft on Graecokleptocrats. Fourth Reich is holding on to Barroso for reasons of convenience, and because the search for an alternative could lead to a greater spread of the cancer of socialism.

[kitchencabinetforum] FOURTHREICHIANS’ INITIATIVE

The hateful Treaty of Lisbon entered into force on 1st December 2009 and Propaganda Eurocommissar Maros Sefcovic is very glad that the European Commission(EC), aka Eldorado of Corruption, can already point to an impressive track record concerning the implementation of the Treaty.

Basil Venitis muses the Lisbon Treaty was meant to address the question famously attributed to Henry Kissinger Who do I call if I want to speak to Europe? by instituting a permanent Fourth Reich Fuehrer and foreign minister and by streamlining Brussels’ mammoth bureaucracy, but it has created more confusion than clarity, with no fewer than five people now sporting the title of Fuehrer of Fourth Reich. In reality, the real power is Chancellor Merkel. The driving ethos behind Fourth Reich’s foreign policy power-grab is the idea that the nations of Fourth Reich will be stronger collectively than they are separately, but sovereignty cannot be traded for influence.

The Lisbon Treaty has created an institutional hydra with growing numbers of appendages responsible for different aspects of the foreign policy toolbox. Venitis points out that when Planetarch Obama asks to speak to the Fuehrer of Fourth Reich, he could be referencing one of six people: Herman van Rompuy, President of European Council; Durao Barroso, President of Eldorado of Corruption; Spanish Premier Zapatero, President of Consilium; Britain’s Catherine Ashton, High Representative of Fourth Reich for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy; Jerzy Buzek, Madam of Eldorado of Prostitutes; German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Sefcovic points out that in the short period since the entry into force of the Treaty and despite the prolonged care-taker period, the Eldorado of Corruption has fully assumed its responsibility and cooperated very well with the other institutions. Notably cooperation with the Spanish presidency of the Council, for which the implementation of the Treaty is also a top priority, has been excellent.

In these few months, the Eldorado of Corruption has already adopted a number of important proposals: for example, the draft negotiating mandate for the Union’s accession to the European Convention on Human Rights; or proposals linked to the Treaty’s budgetary aspects, including in view of setting-up the European External Action Service.

Basil Venitis, twitter.com/Venitis, points out Eurokleptocracy, gigaregulation, Antitrust Armageddon, and gigataxation, especially VAT, are the real causes of the European financial meltdown. Democracy in Fourth Reich(EU) has deteriorated to kleptocracy, and Fourthreichians, aka Europeans, are mad as hell. Eurokleptocracy thrives on waste, fraud, abuse,and kickbacks. European Union(EU), aka Fourth Reich, an illegal unvoted confederation, condones the European Commission(EC), aka Eldorado of Corruption, the European Parliament(EP), aka Eldorado of Prostitutes, and Graecokleptocrats, the most corrupt politicians on Earth.

The Eldorado of Corruption presented a proposal on an important element introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon: the Fourthreichians’ Initiative. The Fourthreichians’ Initiative is an important innovation in the democratic functioning of Fourth Reich whereby one million citizens may invite the Eldorado of Corruption to bring forward legislative proposals.

Sefcovic notes this is a completely new element in Fourth Reich’s decision-making architecture: for the first time, Fourth Reich treaties include an instrument of participatory democracy, as an additional layer to the one of representative democracy,represented by the Eldorado of Prostitutes and by National parliaments.

Fourthreichians can invite the Eldorado of Corruption to take action on any issue that falls within the remit of the Eldorado of Corruption’s competence to implement the Treaties. This covers areas as diverse and important as consumer protection, environmental standards or working conditions, just to name a few.

With their initiative, Fourthreichians can invite Fourth Reich decision-makers to address certain problems and thus contribute directly to improving Fourth Reich governance. By indicating where they consider common action to be of value added, they can raise political pressure for action.

The Fourthreichians’ initiative will thus not only be an additional means to engage citizens and civil society in the Fourth Reich policy process, but also opens new avenues for a common Fourthreichian debate across linguistic and cultural boundaries. From Ireland to Greece and from Finland to Portugal, European citizens will be able to suggest concrete action on issues that are of direct concern for them.

Given the importance of this new instrument to citizens and the issues it raises, the Eldorado of Corruption launched a very extensive consultation process before coming with a legislative proposal.

One of the key messages that came across is that stakeholders want this tool to be truly at the service of citizens. They want it to be simple, understandable and most of all easy to use.

The Eldorado of Corruption proposal therefore draws on the outcome of the consultation. The guiding principles on which it is based are as follows:

First, we must ensure that initiatives are sufficiently representative of a Union interest. Then, the procedures should be simple and user-friendly, whilst preventing fraud or abuse of the system.

The key elements of the proposal are as follows:

* The minimum number of Member States from which citizens supporting an initiative must come should be set at one third of Member States, 9 countries out of 27. To ensure true Fourthreichian representativeness, there should also be a required minimum number of citizens per country.

* The minimum age to be able to support a citizens’ initiative should be set as the age to vote in the Eldorado of Prostitutes elections;

* You should be able to sign for an initiative on the street or on-line, without restrictions.

* The legal admissibility of an initiative is to be decided by the Commission once 300.000 statements of support coming from 3 Member States have been collected.

* Member States should be responsible for verifying the validity of statements of support collected from citizens.

* At the end of the process, and within a period of four months, the Commission should say how it intends to follow it up.

Sefcovic believes that the Eldorado of Corruption proposal represents the right balance between the need to avoid abuse on the one hand, and the objective of promoting citizen’s participation in the EU’s political life. Sefcovic hopes this delicate equilibrium will be preserved in the legislation ultimately adopted by the Council of Ministers and the Eldorado of Prostitutes.

From the first, the Eldorado of Corruption has been determined to work quickly to make a reality of what the Lisbon Treaty offers for Europe, a more democratic and more efficient Fourth Reich.

Sefcovic claims the Fourthreichians’ Initiative is a symbolic example: this instrument brings citizens as new players in Fourth Reich’s institutional scene. It has high political significance, as it represents a genuine step forward for democracy within the European Union.

It is difficult to predict the implications of Fourthreichians’ initiative. What we know so far is that it has already raised an enormous interest in political circles but also on the public at large; also, the possibility of online signatures facilitate immensely the collection of the necessary support; finally, we already see in the media that projects for Fourthreichians’ initiative are already being floated. Bearing all this in mind, Sefcovic’s best judgement is that the Fourthreichians’ initiative will be widely used and will have a strong mobilisation capacity.

Fourth Reich originates from the Red House Report, a detailed account of a secret meeting at the Maison Rouge Hotel in Strasbourg, a couple of blocks from today’s Eldorado of Prostitutes(EP), on August 10, 1944. There, Nazi officials instructed an elite group of German industrialists to plan for Germany’s post-war recovery, prepare for the Nazis’ return to power, and work for a strong Fourth Reich. The three-page, closely typed report, marked Secret, copied by British spies and sent to the US Secretary of State, detailed how the industrialists were to work with the Nazi Party to rebuild Germany’s economy by sending money through Switzerland. They would set up a network of secret front companies abroad, wait until conditions were right, and then grab power with various hoodwinking treaties

WARMONGERS

Σας ευχαριστούμε για τα σχόλια. Αναφορά άλλης εικόναςΑναφορά προσβλητικής εικόνας. ΆκυροΟλοκληρώθηκε

WARMONGERS

Σας ευχαριστούμε για τα σχόλια. Αναφορά άλλης εικόναςΑναφορά προσβλητικής εικόνας. ΆκυροΟλοκληρώθηκε

PATRIOTISM

Basil Venitis asserts that patriotism is addiction to local hysteria. Venitist Congressman Ron Paul points out that for some, patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. For others, it means dissent against a government’s abuse of the people’s rights.

Ron Paul has never met a politician in Washington or any American, for that matter, who chose to be called unpatriotic. Nor have Ron Paul met anyone who did not believe he wholeheartedly supported our troops, wherever they may be.

What Ron Paul has heard all too frequently from various individuals are sharp accusations that, because their political opponents disagree with them on the need for foreign military entanglements, they were unpatriotic, un-American evildoers deserving contempt.

The original American patriots were those individuals brave enough to resist with force the oppressive power of King George. Ron Paul accepts the definition of patriotism as that effort to resist oppressive state power.

The true patriot is motivated by a sense of responsibility and out of self-interest for himself, his family, and the future of his country to resist government abuse of power. He rejects the notion that patriotism means obedience to the state. Resistance need not be violent, but the civil disobedience that might be required involves confrontation with the state and invites possible imprisonment.

Peaceful, nonviolent revolutions against tyranny have been every bit as successful as those involving military confrontation. Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., achieved great political successes by practicing nonviolence, and yet they suffered physically at the hands of the state. But whether the resistance against government tyrants is nonviolent or physically violent, the effort to overthrow state oppression qualifies as true patriotism.

True patriotism today has gotten a bad name, at least from the government and the press. Those who now challenge the unconstitutional methods of imposing an income tax on us, or force us to use a monetary system designed to serve the rich at the expense of the poor are routinely condemned. These American patriots are sadly looked down upon by many. They are never praised as champions of liberty as Gandhi and Martin Luther King have been.

Liberals, who withhold their taxes as a protest against war, are vilified as well, especially by conservatives. Unquestioned loyalty to the state is especially demanded in times of war. Lack of support for a war policy is said to be unpatriotic. Arguments against a particular policy that endorses a war, once it is started, are always said to be endangering the troops in the field. This, they blatantly claim, is unpatriotic, and all dissent must stop. Yet, it is dissent from government policies that defines the true patriot and champion of liberty.

Ron Paul points out that it is conveniently ignored that the only authentic way to best support the troops is to keep them out of dangerous undeclared no-win wars that are politically inspired. Sending troops off to war for reasons that are not truly related to national security and, for that matter, may even damage our security, is hardly a way to patriotically support the troops.

Who are the true patriots, those who conform or those who protest against wars without purpose? How can it be said that blind support for a war, no matter how misdirected the policy, is the duty of a patriot?

Randolph Bourne said that war is the health of the state. With war, he argued, the state thrives. Those who believe in the powerful state see war as an opportunity. Those who mistrust the people and the market for solving problems have no trouble promoting a war psychology to justify the expansive role of the state. This includes the role the Federal Government plays in our lives, as well as in our economic transactions.

Certainly, the neoconservative belief that we have a moral obligation to spread American values worldwide through force justifies the conditions of war in order to rally support at home for the heavy hand of government. It is through this policy, it should surprise no one, that our liberties are undermined. The economy becomes overextended, and our involvement worldwide becomes prohibited. Out of fear of being labeled unpatriotic, most of the citizens become compliant and accept the argument that some loss of liberty is required to fight the war in order to remain safe.

This is a bad trade-off, in Ron Paul’s estimation, especially when done in the name of patriotism. Loyalty to the state and to autocratic leaders is substituted for true patriotism; that is, a willingness to challenge the state and defend the country, the people and the culture. The more difficult the times, the stronger the admonition comes that the leaders be not criticized.

Because the crisis atmosphere of war supports the growth of the state, any problem invites an answer by declaring war, even on social and economic issues. This elicits patriotism in support of various government solutions, while enhancing the power of the state. Faith in government coercion and a lack of understanding of how free societies operate encourages big-government liberals and big-government conservatives to manufacture a war psychology to demand political loyalty for domestic policy just as is required in foreign affairs.

The long-term cost in dollars spent and liberties lost is neglected as immediate needs are emphasized. It is for this reason that we have multiple perpetual wars going on simultaneously. Thus, the war on drugs, the war against gun ownership, the war against poverty, the war against illiteracy, the war against terrorism, as well as our foreign military entanglements are endless.

All this effort promotes the growth of statism at the expense of liberty. A government designed for a free society should do the opposite, prevent the growth of statism and preserve liberty.

Once a war of any sort is declared, the message is sent out not to object or you will be declared unpatriotic. Yet, we must not forget that the true patriot is the one who protests in spite of the consequences. Condemnation or ostracism or even imprisonment may result.

Ron Paul notes that nonviolent protesters of the Tax Code are frequently imprisoned, whether they are protesting the code’s unconstitutionality or the war that the tax revenues are funding. Resisters to the military draft or even to Selective Service registration are threatened and imprisoned for challenging this threat to liberty.

Statism depends on the idea that the government owns us and citizens must obey. Confiscating the fruits of our labor through the income tax is crucial to the health of the state. The draft, or even the mere existence of the Selective Service, emphasizes that we will march off to war at the state’s pleasure.

Basil Venitis notes that we are observing the last days of the American Empire. Like ancient Rome, America is saddled with an empire that is fatally undermining its government. The trappings of empire are many: the brutal war of choice in Iraq and other foreign interventions going back decades; the militarization of space; the hundreds of overseas U.S. military bases full of swaggering soldiers who brawl and sometimes rape. At home, the growth of an imperial presidency, with the CIA as its private army, has culminated in kleptocrats’ resort to warrantless wiretaps, torture, a gulag of secret CIA prisons and an unconstitutional arrogation of dictatorial powers, while a corrupt Congress bows like the Roman Senate to Caesar. Retribution looms, as the American economy, dependent on a bloated military-industrial-kleptocrat complex(MIKC) and foreign borrowing, staggers toward bankruptcy, maybe a military coup.

PATRIOTISM

Basil Venitis asserts that patriotism is addiction to local hysteria. Venitist Congressman Ron Paul points out that for some, patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. For others, it means dissent against a government’s abuse of the people’s rights.

Ron Paul has never met a politician in Washington or any American, for that matter, who chose to be called unpatriotic. Nor have Ron Paul met anyone who did not believe he wholeheartedly supported our troops, wherever they may be.

What Ron Paul has heard all too frequently from various individuals are sharp accusations that, because their political opponents disagree with them on the need for foreign military entanglements, they were unpatriotic, un-American evildoers deserving contempt.

The original American patriots were those individuals brave enough to resist with force the oppressive power of King George. Ron Paul accepts the definition of patriotism as that effort to resist oppressive state power.

The true patriot is motivated by a sense of responsibility and out of self-interest for himself, his family, and the future of his country to resist government abuse of power. He rejects the notion that patriotism means obedience to the state. Resistance need not be violent, but the civil disobedience that might be required involves confrontation with the state and invites possible imprisonment.

Peaceful, nonviolent revolutions against tyranny have been every bit as successful as those involving military confrontation. Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., achieved great political successes by practicing nonviolence, and yet they suffered physically at the hands of the state. But whether the resistance against government tyrants is nonviolent or physically violent, the effort to overthrow state oppression qualifies as true patriotism.

True patriotism today has gotten a bad name, at least from the government and the press. Those who now challenge the unconstitutional methods of imposing an income tax on us, or force us to use a monetary system designed to serve the rich at the expense of the poor are routinely condemned. These American patriots are sadly looked down upon by many. They are never praised as champions of liberty as Gandhi and Martin Luther King have been.

Liberals, who withhold their taxes as a protest against war, are vilified as well, especially by conservatives. Unquestioned loyalty to the state is especially demanded in times of war. Lack of support for a war policy is said to be unpatriotic. Arguments against a particular policy that endorses a war, once it is started, are always said to be endangering the troops in the field. This, they blatantly claim, is unpatriotic, and all dissent must stop. Yet, it is dissent from government policies that defines the true patriot and champion of liberty.

Ron Paul points out that it is conveniently ignored that the only authentic way to best support the troops is to keep them out of dangerous undeclared no-win wars that are politically inspired. Sending troops off to war for reasons that are not truly related to national security and, for that matter, may even damage our security, is hardly a way to patriotically support the troops.

Who are the true patriots, those who conform or those who protest against wars without purpose? How can it be said that blind support for a war, no matter how misdirected the policy, is the duty of a patriot?

Randolph Bourne said that war is the health of the state. With war, he argued, the state thrives. Those who believe in the powerful state see war as an opportunity. Those who mistrust the people and the market for solving problems have no trouble promoting a war psychology to justify the expansive role of the state. This includes the role the Federal Government plays in our lives, as well as in our economic transactions.

Certainly, the neoconservative belief that we have a moral obligation to spread American values worldwide through force justifies the conditions of war in order to rally support at home for the heavy hand of government. It is through this policy, it should surprise no one, that our liberties are undermined. The economy becomes overextended, and our involvement worldwide becomes prohibited. Out of fear of being labeled unpatriotic, most of the citizens become compliant and accept the argument that some loss of liberty is required to fight the war in order to remain safe.

This is a bad trade-off, in Ron Paul’s estimation, especially when done in the name of patriotism. Loyalty to the state and to autocratic leaders is substituted for true patriotism; that is, a willingness to challenge the state and defend the country, the people and the culture. The more difficult the times, the stronger the admonition comes that the leaders be not criticized.

Because the crisis atmosphere of war supports the growth of the state, any problem invites an answer by declaring war, even on social and economic issues. This elicits patriotism in support of various government solutions, while enhancing the power of the state. Faith in government coercion and a lack of understanding of how free societies operate encourages big-government liberals and big-government conservatives to manufacture a war psychology to demand political loyalty for domestic policy just as is required in foreign affairs.

The long-term cost in dollars spent and liberties lost is neglected as immediate needs are emphasized. It is for this reason that we have multiple perpetual wars going on simultaneously. Thus, the war on drugs, the war against gun ownership, the war against poverty, the war against illiteracy, the war against terrorism, as well as our foreign military entanglements are endless.

All this effort promotes the growth of statism at the expense of liberty. A government designed for a free society should do the opposite, prevent the growth of statism and preserve liberty.

Once a war of any sort is declared, the message is sent out not to object or you will be declared unpatriotic. Yet, we must not forget that the true patriot is the one who protests in spite of the consequences. Condemnation or ostracism or even imprisonment may result.

Ron Paul notes that nonviolent protesters of the Tax Code are frequently imprisoned, whether they are protesting the code’s unconstitutionality or the war that the tax revenues are funding. Resisters to the military draft or even to Selective Service registration are threatened and imprisoned for challenging this threat to liberty.

Statism depends on the idea that the government owns us and citizens must obey. Confiscating the fruits of our labor through the income tax is crucial to the health of the state. The draft, or even the mere existence of the Selective Service, emphasizes that we will march off to war at the state’s pleasure.

Basil Venitis notes that we are observing the last days of the American Empire. Like ancient Rome, America is saddled with an empire that is fatally undermining its government. The trappings of empire are many: the brutal war of choice in Iraq and other foreign interventions going back decades; the militarization of space; the hundreds of overseas U.S. military bases full of swaggering soldiers who brawl and sometimes rape. At home, the growth of an imperial presidency, with the CIA as its private army, has culminated in kleptocrats’ resort to warrantless wiretaps, torture, a gulag of secret CIA prisons and an unconstitutional arrogation of dictatorial powers, while a corrupt Congress bows like the Roman Senate to Caesar. Retribution looms, as the American economy, dependent on a bloated military-industrial-kleptocrat complex(MIKC) and foreign borrowing, staggers toward bankruptcy, maybe a military coup.

Venitist Congressman Ron Paul points out the war mentality and the pervasive fear of an unidentified enemy allows for a steady erosion of our liberties, and, with this, our respect for self-reliance and confidence is lost. Just think of the self-sacrifice and the humiliation we go through at the airport screening process on a routine basis. Though there is no scientific evidence of any likelihood of liquids and gels being mixed on an airplane to make a bomb, billions of dollars are wasted throwing away toothpaste and hair spray, and searching old women in wheelchairs.

Basil Venitis points out there is a global culture clash. The primary axis of conflict in the post-Cold War world is along cultural lines. There is an increase in ideologically fueled violence around the globe. The mutual suspicion, fear, and misunderstanding between Islamic and Western societies has been increasing since the beginning of the new millennium, specifically after the September 11 terrorist attacks of 2001.

Our enemies say boo, and we jump, we panic, and then we punish ourselves. We are worse than a child being afraid of the dark. But in a way, the fear of indefinable terrorism is based on our inability to admit the truth about why there is a desire by a small number of angry radical Islamists to kill Americans. It is certainly not because they are jealous of our wealth and freedoms.

We fail to realize that the extremists, willing to sacrifice their own lives to kill their enemies, do so out of a sense of weakness and desperation over real and perceived attacks on their way of life, their religion, their country, and their natural resources. Without the conventional diplomatic or military means to retaliate against these attacks, and an unwillingness of their own government to address the issue, they resort to the desperation tactic of suicide terrorism. Their anger toward their own governments, which they believe are coconspirators with the American Government, is equal to or greater than that directed toward us.

Ron Paul notes these errors in judgment in understanding the motive of the enemy and the constant fear that is generated have brought us to this crisis where our civil liberties and privacy are being steadily eroded in the name of preserving national security. We may be the economic and the military giant of the world, but the effort to stop this war on our liberties here at home in the name of patriotism is being lost.

Venitis, twitter.com/Venitis, points out the largest kickbacks originate in the military industry. Military procurement is a corrupt business from top to bottom. The process is dominated by advocacy, with few checks and balances. Most people in power love this system of doing business and do not want it changed. War and preparation for war systematically corrupt all parties to the state-private transactions by which the government obtains the bulk of its military products. There is a standard 10% kickback to kleptocrats for military purchases.

Ron Paul points out the erosion of our personal liberties started long before 9/11, but 9/11 accelerated the process. There are many things that motivate those who pursue this course, both well-intentioned and malevolent, but it would not happen if the people remained vigilant, understood the importance of individual rights, and were unpersuaded that a need for security justifies the sacrifice for liberty, even if it is just now and then.

The true patriot challenges the state when the state embarks on enhancing its power at the expense of the individual. Without a better understanding and a greater determination to rein in the state, the rights of Americans that resulted from the revolutionary break from the British and the writing of the Constitution will disappear.

Ron Paul points out the record since September 11th is dismal. Respect for liberty has rapidly deteriorated. Many of the new laws passed after 9/11 had, in fact, been proposed long before that attack. The political atmosphere after that attack simply made it more possible to pass such legislation. The fear generated by 9/11 became an opportunity for those seeking to promote the power of the state domestically, just as it served to falsely justify the long-planned invasion of Iraq.

The war mentality was generated by the Iraq war in combination with the constant drumbeat of fear at home. Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, who is now likely residing in Pakistan, our supposed ally, are ignored, as our troops fight and die in Iraq and are made easier targets for the terrorists in their backyard. While our leaders constantly use the mess we created to further justify the erosion of our constitutional rights here at home, we forget about our own borders and support the inexorable move toward global government, hardly a good plan for America.

The accelerated attacks on liberty started quickly after 9/11. Within weeks, the PATRIOT Act was overwhelmingly passed by Congress. Though the final version was unavailable up to a few hours before the vote, no Member had sufficient time to study it. Political fear of not doing something, even something harmful, drove the Members of Congress to not question the contents, and just voted for it. A little less freedom for a little more perceived safety was considered a fair trade-off, and the majority of Americans applauded.

The PATRIOT Act, though, severely eroded the system of checks and balances by giving the government the power to spy on law-abiding citizens without judicial supervision. The several provisions that undermine the liberties of all Americans include sneak-and-peek searches, a broadened and more vague definition of domestic terrorism, allowing the FBI access to library and bookstore records without search warrants or probable cause, easier FBI initiation of wiretaps and searches, as well as roving wiretaps, easier access to information on American citizens’ use of the Internet, and easier access to e-mail and financial records of all American citizens.

Ron Paul notes the attack on privacy has not relented over the past 6 years. The Military Commissions Act is a particularly egregious piece of legislation and, if not repealed, will change America for the worse as the powers unconstitutionally granted to the executive branch are used and abused. This act grants excessive authority to use secretive military commissions outside of places where active hostilities are going on. The Military Commissions Act permits torture, arbitrary detention of American citizens as unlawful enemy combatants at the full discretion of the President and without the right of habeas corpus, and warrantless searches by the NSA. It also gives to the President the power to imprison individuals based on secret testimony.

Since 9/11, Presidential signing statements designating portions of legislation that the President does not intend to follow, though not legal under the Constitution, have enormously multiplied. Unconstitutional Executive Orders are numerous and mischievous and need to be curtailed. Extraordinary rendition to secret prisons around the world have been widely engaged in, though obviously extralegal.

A growing concern in the post-9/11 environment is the Federal Government’s list of potential terrorists based on secret evidence. Mistakes are made, and sometimes it is virtually impossible to get one’s name removed even though the accused is totally innocent of any wrongdoing.

A national ID card is now in the process of being implemented. It is called the REAL ID card, and it is tied to our Social Security numbers and our State driver’s license. If REAL ID is not stopped, it will become a national driver’s license ID for all Americans. We will be required to carry our papers.

Some of the least-noticed and least-discussed changes in the law were the changes made to the Insurrection Act of 1807 and to posse comitatus by the Defense Authorization Act of 2007. These changes pose a threat to the survival of our Republic by giving the President the power to declare martial law for as little reason as to restore public order. The 1807 act severely restricted the President in his use of the military within the United States borders, and the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 strengthened these restrictions with strict oversight by Congress. The new law allows the President to circumvent the restrictions of both laws. The Insurrection Act has now become the «Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act.» This is hardly a title that suggests that the authors cared about or understood the nature of a constitutional Republic.

Now, martial law can be declared not just for insurrection, but also for natural disasters, public health reasons, terrorist attacks or incidents, or for the vague reason called other conditions. The President can call up the National Guard without congressional approval or the Governors’ approval, and even send these State Guard troops into other States.

Ron Paul asserts the American Republic is in remnant status. The stage is set for our country eventually devolving into a military dictatorship, and few seem to care. These precedent-setting changes in the law are extremely dangerous and will change American jurisprudence forever if not revised. The beneficial results of our revolt against the King’s abuses are about to be eliminated, and few Members of Congress and few Americans are aware of the seriousness of the situation. Complacency and fear drive our legislation without any serious objection by our elected leaders. Sadly, though, those few who do object to this self-evident trend away from personal liberty and empire-building overseas are portrayed as unpatriotic and uncaring.

Though welfare and socialism always fails, opponents of them are said to lack compassion. Though opposition to totally unnecessary war should be the only moral position, the rhetoric is twisted to claim that patriots who oppose the war are not supporting the troops. The cliché Support the Troops is incessantly used as a substitute for the unacceptable notion of supporting the policy, no matter how flawed it may be.

Unsound policy can never help the troops. Keeping the troops out of harm’s way and out of wars unrelated to our national security is the only real way of protecting the troops. With this understanding, just who can claim the title of patriot?

Basil Venitis points out Uncle Sam and Fourth Reich(EU) now spend two trillion euros every year on the military, homeland security, and intelligence. There are 5,000 active terrorists in the world. This works out to spending 400 million euros per terrorist per year. Fear of terrorism drives growth in government and has led to involvement in multiple little wars and some bigger ones as well as subsequent exercises in nation building, all of which have been unconstitutional, and none of which have turned out well.

Before the war in the Middle East spreads and becomes a world conflict for which we will be held responsible, or the liberties of all Americans become so suppressed we can no longer resist, much has to be done. Time is short, but our course of action should be clear. Resistance to illegal and unconstitutional usurpation of our rights is required. Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes.

But let it not be said that we did nothing. Let not those who love the power of the welfare/warfare state label the dissenters of authoritarianism as unpatriotic or uncaring. Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security. Understanding the magnificent rewards of a free society makes us unbashful in its promotion, fully realizing that maximum wealth is created and the greatest chance for peace comes from a society respectful of individual liberty

Venitist Congressman Ron Paul points out the war mentality and the pervasive fear of an unidentified enemy allows for a steady erosion of our liberties, and, with this, our respect for self-reliance and confidence is lost. Just think of the self-sacrifice and the humiliation we go through at the airport screening process on a routine basis. Though there is no scientific evidence of any likelihood of liquids and gels being mixed on an airplane to make a bomb, billions of dollars are wasted throwing away toothpaste and hair spray, and searching old women in wheelchairs.

Basil Venitis points out there is a global culture clash. The primary axis of conflict in the post-Cold War world is along cultural lines. There is an increase in ideologically fueled violence around the globe. The mutual suspicion, fear, and misunderstanding between Islamic and Western societies has been increasing since the beginning of the new millennium, specifically after the September 11 terrorist attacks of 2001.

Our enemies say boo, and we jump, we panic, and then we punish ourselves. We are worse than a child being afraid of the dark. But in a way, the fear of indefinable terrorism is based on our inability to admit the truth about why there is a desire by a small number of angry radical Islamists to kill Americans. It is certainly not because they are jealous of our wealth and freedoms.

We fail to realize that the extremists, willing to sacrifice their own lives to kill their enemies, do so out of a sense of weakness and desperation over real and perceived attacks on their way of life, their religion, their country, and their natural resources. Without the conventional diplomatic or military means to retaliate against these attacks, and an unwillingness of their own government to address the issue, they resort to the desperation tactic of suicide terrorism. Their anger toward their own governments, which they believe are coconspirators with the American Government, is equal to or greater than that directed toward us.

Ron Paul notes these errors in judgment in understanding the motive of the enemy and the constant fear that is generated have brought us to this crisis where our civil liberties and privacy are being steadily eroded in the name of preserving national security. We may be the economic and the military giant of the world, but the effort to stop this war on our liberties here at home in the name of patriotism is being lost.

Venitis, twitter.com/Venitis, points out the largest kickbacks originate in the military industry. Military procurement is a corrupt business from top to bottom. The process is dominated by advocacy, with few checks and balances. Most people in power love this system of doing business and do not want it changed. War and preparation for war systematically corrupt all parties to the state-private transactions by which the government obtains the bulk of its military products. There is a standard 10% kickback to kleptocrats for military purchases.

Ron Paul points out the erosion of our personal liberties started long before 9/11, but 9/11 accelerated the process. There are many things that motivate those who pursue this course, both well-intentioned and malevolent, but it would not happen if the people remained vigilant, understood the importance of individual rights, and were unpersuaded that a need for security justifies the sacrifice for liberty, even if it is just now and then.

The true patriot challenges the state when the state embarks on enhancing its power at the expense of the individual. Without a better understanding and a greater determination to rein in the state, the rights of Americans that resulted from the revolutionary break from the British and the writing of the Constitution will disappear.

Ron Paul points out the record since September 11th is dismal. Respect for liberty has rapidly deteriorated. Many of the new laws passed after 9/11 had, in fact, been proposed long before that attack. The political atmosphere after that attack simply made it more possible to pass such legislation. The fear generated by 9/11 became an opportunity for those seeking to promote the power of the state domestically, just as it served to falsely justify the long-planned invasion of Iraq.

The war mentality was generated by the Iraq war in combination with the constant drumbeat of fear at home. Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, who is now likely residing in Pakistan, our supposed ally, are ignored, as our troops fight and die in Iraq and are made easier targets for the terrorists in their backyard. While our leaders constantly use the mess we created to further justify the erosion of our constitutional rights here at home, we forget about our own borders and support the inexorable move toward global government, hardly a good plan for America.

The accelerated attacks on liberty started quickly after 9/11. Within weeks, the PATRIOT Act was overwhelmingly passed by Congress. Though the final version was unavailable up to a few hours before the vote, no Member had sufficient time to study it. Political fear of not doing something, even something harmful, drove the Members of Congress to not question the contents, and just voted for it. A little less freedom for a little more perceived safety was considered a fair trade-off, and the majority of Americans applauded.

The PATRIOT Act, though, severely eroded the system of checks and balances by giving the government the power to spy on law-abiding citizens without judicial supervision. The several provisions that undermine the liberties of all Americans include sneak-and-peek searches, a broadened and more vague definition of domestic terrorism, allowing the FBI access to library and bookstore records without search warrants or probable cause, easier FBI initiation of wiretaps and searches, as well as roving wiretaps, easier access to information on American citizens’ use of the Internet, and easier access to e-mail and financial records of all American citizens.

Ron Paul notes the attack on privacy has not relented over the past 6 years. The Military Commissions Act is a particularly egregious piece of legislation and, if not repealed, will change America for the worse as the powers unconstitutionally granted to the executive branch are used and abused. This act grants excessive authority to use secretive military commissions outside of places where active hostilities are going on. The Military Commissions Act permits torture, arbitrary detention of American citizens as unlawful enemy combatants at the full discretion of the President and without the right of habeas corpus, and warrantless searches by the NSA. It also gives to the President the power to imprison individuals based on secret testimony.

Since 9/11, Presidential signing statements designating portions of legislation that the President does not intend to follow, though not legal under the Constitution, have enormously multiplied. Unconstitutional Executive Orders are numerous and mischievous and need to be curtailed. Extraordinary rendition to secret prisons around the world have been widely engaged in, though obviously extralegal.

A growing concern in the post-9/11 environment is the Federal Government’s list of potential terrorists based on secret evidence. Mistakes are made, and sometimes it is virtually impossible to get one’s name removed even though the accused is totally innocent of any wrongdoing.

A national ID card is now in the process of being implemented. It is called the REAL ID card, and it is tied to our Social Security numbers and our State driver’s license. If REAL ID is not stopped, it will become a national driver’s license ID for all Americans. We will be required to carry our papers.

Some of the least-noticed and least-discussed changes in the law were the changes made to the Insurrection Act of 1807 and to posse comitatus by the Defense Authorization Act of 2007. These changes pose a threat to the survival of our Republic by giving the President the power to declare martial law for as little reason as to restore public order. The 1807 act severely restricted the President in his use of the military within the United States borders, and the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 strengthened these restrictions with strict oversight by Congress. The new law allows the President to circumvent the restrictions of both laws. The Insurrection Act has now become the «Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act.» This is hardly a title that suggests that the authors cared about or understood the nature of a constitutional Republic.

Now, martial law can be declared not just for insurrection, but also for natural disasters, public health reasons, terrorist attacks or incidents, or for the vague reason called other conditions. The President can call up the National Guard without congressional approval or the Governors’ approval, and even send these State Guard troops into other States.

Ron Paul asserts the American Republic is in remnant status. The stage is set for our country eventually devolving into a military dictatorship, and few seem to care. These precedent-setting changes in the law are extremely dangerous and will change American jurisprudence forever if not revised. The beneficial results of our revolt against the King’s abuses are about to be eliminated, and few Members of Congress and few Americans are aware of the seriousness of the situation. Complacency and fear drive our legislation without any serious objection by our elected leaders. Sadly, though, those few who do object to this self-evident trend away from personal liberty and empire-building overseas are portrayed as unpatriotic and uncaring.

Though welfare and socialism always fails, opponents of them are said to lack compassion. Though opposition to totally unnecessary war should be the only moral position, the rhetoric is twisted to claim that patriots who oppose the war are not supporting the troops. The cliché Support the Troops is incessantly used as a substitute for the unacceptable notion of supporting the policy, no matter how flawed it may be.

Unsound policy can never help the troops. Keeping the troops out of harm’s way and out of wars unrelated to our national security is the only real way of protecting the troops. With this understanding, just who can claim the title of patriot?

Basil Venitis points out Uncle Sam and Fourth Reich(EU) now spend two trillion euros every year on the military, homeland security, and intelligence. There are 5,000 active terrorists in the world. This works out to spending 400 million euros per terrorist per year. Fear of terrorism drives growth in government and has led to involvement in multiple little wars and some bigger ones as well as subsequent exercises in nation building, all of which have been unconstitutional, and none of which have turned out well.

Before the war in the Middle East spreads and becomes a world conflict for which we will be held responsible, or the liberties of all Americans become so suppressed we can no longer resist, much has to be done. Time is short, but our course of action should be clear. Resistance to illegal and unconstitutional usurpation of our rights is required. Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes.

But let it not be said that we did nothing. Let not those who love the power of the welfare/warfare state label the dissenters of authoritarianism as unpatriotic or uncaring. Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security. Understanding the magnificent rewards of a free society makes us unbashful in its promotion, fully realizing that maximum wealth is created and the greatest chance for peace comes from a society respectful of individual liberty