Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Big Brother

Whether or not we live in a 'brave new world' is open to debate. Alternatively, there is little doubt we live in a new world. We are visited with 'new-speak' regularly and as recently as Sunday thanks Messrs Gibbs, Axlerod and Hernandez. Some gadgets or tools, however, from this high-tech age must be refined and ultimately used to: a) pre-empt terrorists from ever getting to the US, much less allowing them room or time to carry out a mission; and b) index and track illegal aliens, with the ultimate goal of either converting them to tax-paying citizens (whilst going through legal channels and starting at the back of the line) or providing them immediate deportation.

"Our representatives in the WH & Congress bear little resemblance......." (how true).

Disenfranchisement is the ultimate dilemma American citizens are experiencing. My family and I are recent transplants from Illinois. In 1960, my backdoor neighbor won the U.S. 20th Congressional District seat, from my hometown of Pittsfield. Paul Findley stayed in Washington for 11 terms and never once failed to vote himself a pay raise, COL increase or boost his health and pension benefits. My disillusionment with Washington and government started then and has matured since, with an unending supply of new data. The current administration's platform is incomprehensible and I have stated same to our friends, Perriello, Warner & Webb. I have, as other Virginians and citizens around our country, asked them to recognize that it is us, the citizens, who are the sovereign entity and that they heed our requests. Pleas for representation fall upon deaf ears, frustrations flourish and the once bright light of the American Dream fades into the eerie luminescence of an Alaskan winter evening.

There has been one major change in politics since Mr. Findley's days in Washington. Arrogance. While Paul took care of himself relentlessly, he still had the best interests of his constituency at heart. Now we see daily reminders of how tending to ones own self-interest has morphed into disdain, nimiety and hubris; citizens and constituents be damned. Have the extremists from the late 60's, Alinsky, Ayers, Cloward-Piven, Hoffman, et-al resurfaced to haunt us? Perhaps they've added to the 'white noise' but the beltway mindset is not party specific. It comes from both sides and the middle without a care or a moments thought. "We are here! We are entitled! You will listen! We will explain later!" I, for one, am sick of their attitudes and actions and am encouraged by Scott Brown's, "It is not Ted Kennedy's seat", comment. Campaign rhetoric? A fresh wind blown into Washington by the people? Time will tell, but I'm not going to stop looking over my shoulder.

You wrote we've lost the sense of how to hold Washington accountable. I must admit that the voting booth, while legal and overtly conservative, seems an excruciatingly slow and painful process. On the other hand, if we exercise our "Right" to alter or abolish the government in its present form and attempt to form a new one, (even while invoking the ghosts of Washington, Jefferson & Henry), we will be shot in the street like dogs. That may just be, however, the impetus necessary to wrest our Country back from the brink.

Great article Sunday. Thank you. Thomas B.

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Where is My Country?

The Country that I grew up in, and the Constitution that I came to love, is gone. The question now is, can we the people, get it back? Or is a jackboot on my face inevitable. One way or another, I will not live to see it. Thank you for your insight. -- S. Sullivan

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Obama and the Global Police: More Friendly Fascism?

Read the Commentary Watch the Video

One of the ways in which I try to operate within a factual arena is by finding trusted sources, both left, right and center, for information collection and aggregation. After reading some of your commentaries and other writings, I thought I could add you to my list. And then came EO #13524, dated December 16, 2009, and you lost me.

There are 70+ International Organizations in the US that operate under the International Organizations Immunities Act including  the International Atomic Energy Agency, the International Monetary Fund, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International Pacific Halibut Commission and Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission. When Pres. Reagan included Interpol in 1983, Interpol did not have an office in the US and thus did not have any employees or offices where the exceptions could be applied. They were simply holding their annual meeting here that year. Interpol, in fact, did not have an office or permanent employees on US soil until 2004, when it moved into the United Nations Bldg in New York City with five staff members. (Do I need to note that the UN Bldg in NYC and the DOJ in DC look nothing alike?)

Perhaps because they were envious of the Tuna Commission, Interpol applied to have the exceptions removed in 2004. The application then took up residence in the State Dept before gaining approval, but by that time, George Bush was out of time, and so it rolled over to Pres. Obama's administration. Also, if interested, you should please note that there are major differences between the International Organizations Immunities Act and the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.

Last but not least on this subject, your descriptions of Interpol's activities and duties seem to be pretty creative interpretations of its actual roles and duties in the 188 countries. I'm not sure why you feel the need to add to the fear mongering and hate promoting claims that are already out in the blogosphere by the thousands, including some of the comments on this blog. But sometimes I like to set the record straight and today you are one of my lucky recipients. Good luck to you, sir, in your life. We stand at opposite ends on most things, but it never hurts to wish for the best (and truth!) for others as we would wish them for ourselves. -- Sincerely, Carole L .  




A thoroughly enjoyable essay, and the contents of which I have been recently made aware of. However, the only flaw is the continuous misuse of the term "fascism" to describe the growing possibility of a US police state.  Authors of all stripes are continuously misusing this dogma when applying it to ongoing legal issues that involve the degeneration of US liberties and freedoms. It appears to be the in-term when describing such processes.

Fascism does not necessarily mean a police state.  In fact, its true terminology is "corporatism", which defines a state in which both government and business are heavily entwined in a symbiotic relationship.

Given this definition, the United States has already reached the first major departure from a democratic republic since the US began this path at the end of World War II.  That is what Truman began with his NSC-68 memo, though he did not intend the results that eventually ensued.

Authors should drop the term "fascism" and its subsequent misuse for the more appropriate term, "totalitarianism", which better reflects the ongoing deterioration of civil liberties to the growing agendas of police state tactics and endeavors. -- With all respect, Steve N.




My 1994 Geo Prizm, still trusty after 196,000 miles, sports a bumper sticker with precisely that "VISUALIZE WORLD POLICE" message.  Nevertheless, I've long believed the one-world fears harbored by some right-wingers and Constitutionalists misplaced.  For all intents and purposes, the Federal Government of the United States rules the world; U.S. elites merely exploit the United Nations and its various agencies to provide the occasional fig leaf of "international community" legitimacy to their imperialist designs. Or so I thought until I read your article.  I'd heard of Interpol before but I'd just assumed it was a paper tiger against the backdrop of FBI-BATF-DEA abuses.  Now I know better. -- Thanks, Tony  P. 




I appreciated your essay at http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/whitehead7.1.1.html but I feel it missed talking about the legitimacy of executive orders, and in this case, what recourse we have to stopping this EO.  This is only one of many power grabs by the executive branch — a process which had accelerated so much under Bush2, and we can see clearly that the ultimate goal is global "governance". -- Kyle D.




This problem has been brewing for a long time.  Congress, you remember them, long ago should have slapped down the executive and ended executive orders.  As I recall, executive orders were originally intended as administrative aides or ways to more effectively move papers around.  Instead of ending EOs, the congress has stood by for"signing statements".  This begs the question, what the hell do we have
a congress for?

As per Obama, the real rulers of this country (and if one doesn't believe there are real rulers of this country, and it's not the politicians, then they surely believe in the Easter Bunny) understood that Obama would be given much more time to implement their plan than Hillary would have been given.  That is why the MSM has a hands off approach to Obama.

We have just experienced the greatest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the elites in the history of the world, and the stupid people are still chanting "hope" and "change".  The rest have been relegated to conspiracy theorists (read the latest from Cass Sunstein).

I wish you well in your fight for the constitutional protections that are the birthright of every American.  However, I believe the battle has long ago been lost.  As long as the judges (political lawyers, the worst of the cartel/monopoly of the legal racket) can deny juries their right to judge the law as well as the facts at issue, the American legal system is a cruel joke!  Call me old fashioned, but the rights of juries goes back to the Magna Carta in 1215, and is the single greatest protection that people have against their government.  Until we can exercise that right in all civil and criminal courts in America, American justice (sic) doesn't exist. --Bob G.

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Obama and the Global Police: More Friendly Fascism?

Read the Commentary Watch the Video

Do you truly believe that the DOJ is restricted at all by the Constitution and Bill of Rights?

The legal system has set out rules for violating 'inalienable rights' of the people. The most significant of which is immunity for those within that community; law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, and law makers. There is no such power granted within the Constitution for this powerful shield. If you refer to Article 1, Section 6 that was set out to prevent unwarranted arrests, and for the benefit of free speech, but never from prosecution for unlawful acts such as the violation of the oath of office.

I suggest that we have been going down this road for some time, but it is true fear that are waking up some people to the obvious. — Nicholas T.




Dear John,
I think having an honest crime fighting organisation like Interpol acting autonomously in the US would not be such a bad move, considering the endemic crime and corruption in your fascist police state. I would be far more worried that this change would give a malevolent outfit like Mossad more freedom to perpetrate their dirty deeds with impunity - although 911 shows they don't really need any more freedom than they already have to spread terror in the USA. So, under the on-going regime of 'Apple Pie' fascism - as Gore Vidal calls it - I guess America will just continue to get its priorities and morality upside down - sadly, for the whole world. -- David H.




mr. whitehead, calling obonzo a skillful and savvy politician is a travesty. he is a lying, evil snake more reminiscent of the evil in the garden of eden than anything human. please stop being complimentary to him on any level as his agenda is one of evil, control, destruction of america, anti-freedom, anti-liberty and anti-constitutionalism. there is nothing about him for which to be laudatory. i know i am not alone in this knowledge. your continuation of this policy will cause me to disregard the rest of your writings.

i'm pushing a campaign to call obimbo and his ilk anti-freedom, anti-liberty, anti-constitutionalists to identify them for what they are. in my opinion calling them socialists or communists or fascists or nazis, which they are all that, doesn't resonate enough with the average american. but calling them anti-constitutional makes them sound exactly like what they are, anti-american. it is specific and definitive enough to make it stick. it is also distinctly american. will you support me in this and help it go viral? and i'd like to have everyone wear white shirts on thursdays to show support for the constitution. thank you, -- Dave




Mr. Whitehead:

With interest I read this article, and it is true that most Americans are what I call "zombified", a state reached by many after long years of Pavlovization. Zombi Serfs Media has done its job.

However, Americans like yourself defending freedom, I fear, have been entirely too provincial, to our collective hurt. This I say because as a husband to a wonderful wife from Honduras, I have witnessed this neglect. The international news agencies lied to the entire world, mostly through the torture of semantics and filtering of relevant background for articles, that it amounts to criminal negligence. Hondurans now know that CNN, AP, and the other international suspects are not news agencies, but psychological warfare instruments for oppressive forces everywhere.

You should consider why Obama pushed so hard to keep a Communist usurper dictator in power and overthrow the friendly nation of Honduras. Honduras is a brave example of The Mouse That Roared, the Little Country That Could, and can provide a tremendous morale booster to those who battle tyranny. Roberto Micheletti has been enthusiastically named "National Hero", awarded plaque and all, for his very principled defense of their representative Republic against all the death threats and noises from abroad.

The real story is that Manuel Zelaya was the coup leader, who early in 2009 began his overthrew of his own constitution:
#1.he was ruling by decree,
#2.refused to obey or enforce laws passed by their Congress,
#3.refused to submit a budget and instead collecting and spending taxes
by personal whim and dictate,
#4.organized a blatantly illegal "referendum" --votes pre-counted in
computers discovered the day after his exile-- that would provide
disinformation cover to obliterate the republican government and hold
fraudulent "elections" to put in place his own lackeys,
#5.exposed his own fraud when he replaced the "non-binding" language in
his decree for said referendum on June 26, 2009, with language that he
planned to use to dissolve Congress on June 28, 2009 with mob violence
(and then blatantly lied to the United Nations about it),
#5.tried to dissolve Congress by cutting off their funding,
#6.tried to dissolve the Courts by cutting off their funding,
#7.in an especially ironic twist tried to dissolve the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (Commission) by cutting off their funds,
#8.recruited a hostile foreign power in his overthrow of his own government by getting his illegal "ballots" printed and imported from Venezuela,
#9.robbed money from the Central Bank using willing subordinates and false documents to the tune of some 50 million lempiras (approximately $2.5 million US,
#10.robbed the budget money from the poor when he diverted untold billions to his ambitions to perpetuate himself in power as a vassal king for the nascent NWO ruling classes,

...and many other crimes against the people of Honduras, multiplied by his continued treasonous activities after June 28, 2009. --Alan

It's The Beatles' World (We Just Live In It)

Read the Commentary Watch the Video

I just finished reading the above captioned column and wanted to take a few moments to respond and add some thoughts. The points you made are all very true and the analysis was excellent, in my opinion! The Ed Sullivan Show was "the only game in town" for a lot of us back in those days.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Beatles were the "right group, in the right place, at the right time" and that they influenced and will continue to influence many generations. The ONLY portion of your column that I disagree with is your statement, that is included in the last paragraph.---"something that will never happen again."

This statement totally ignores the role of music and song as a social force for change and inspiration in our U.S. history.....just a few instances come to mind: (1) the songs of the black Americans as they endured what they did. (2) the music that was spawned by World War I, (3) the role of music during the times leading up to World War II......songs like "My Sister and I", "The White Cliffs of Dover", "Don't Sit Under The Apple Tree", to name just a few, had a tremendous effect on people of all ages who lived in that era.

And who can ever forget the story that was told through, "Rosie, The Riveter" and the effect that women leaving the traditional woman setting to help with the World War II defense effort....that too, was a defining moment. Radio was king, queen and royal family when I was growing up and listening to the Hit Parade was a must for us all! —George S.




I did not like the beetles then and I still don`t. I graduated H.S. in 1964. --David T.

Wednesday, January 06, 2010

It's The Beatles' World (We Just Live In It)

Read the Commentary Watch the Video

Dear John: It's been quite a while since I last wrote you, so this time I will make my comments short if not so sweet. As a professional musician who looked askance at this 'happening', with its usual throng of screaming females capturing headlines everywhere, I naively thought, "Well, this can't last" -- and I waited in vain for the revolution to cease. Would that it had!

I cannot share your enthusiasm for this anti-Christ group (their words, not mine) who succeeded most likely through Demonic assistance in transforming my lovely life into today's need to wear ear-plugs everywhere I go just to attempt to keep an inner peace and sanity. If you truly can approve of the results of this invasion, well then I must question your sanity, alas. We have descended into chaos on almost every level, most especially the young, as they experience relentless, pounding cacophony which is now foisted on all of America's citizens (and non, of course!) whose only escape, should they realize the necessity!, is to stay in their own controlled environment as often as possible. I know you know what I mean!

It is a noble undertaking, The Rutherford Institute, but as its founder and mentor you would be more credible were you to severely criticize the ugly results of this 'musical' group I know you so admire. At your age, you should be able to see and dissect what our 'culture' has become from the top down, sparing your inner emotions/memories of past exhilaration at this new and mesmerizing phenomenon and therefore calling for a return to sanity ESPECIALLY IN OUR CULTURE, before we continue our dastardly descent into overall chaos which has long been the goal of the enemies of God. I shall keep you in my prayers - J. E.

Rutherford Institute Joins With Virginia Groups To Urge Governor To Restore Voting Rights Of Virginians With Felony Convictions

Read the Press Release

i totally disagree with this position. considering how high the recidivism rate is it's readily apparent most felons go right back to their criminal ways upon release. and many felons are released on parole so they haven't fully paid their debt to society. and considering how many judges sentence leniently time served is not relevant to having paid their debt either to the victim or society. if you want to allow felons to get their voting rights back which some should be allowed to do, then i believe they must show having paid restitution to the victim and the state for their incarceration and that they have not engaged in criminal activity for a period of at least 5 years. if you're going to indiscriminately restore voting rights to felons we might just as well give them to illegal aliens and terrorist detainees. 2 things i hope you wouldn't agree with.

i'm pushing a campaign to call obimbo and his ilk anti-freedom, anti-liberty, anti-constitutionalists to identify them for what they are. in my opinion calling them socialists or communists or fascists or nazis, which they are all that, doesn't resonate enough with the average american. but calling them anti-constitutional makes them sound exactly like what they are, anti-american. it is specific and definitive enough to make it stick. it is also distinctly american. will you support me in this and help it go viral? and i'd like to have everyone wear white shirts on thursdays to show support for the constitution. -- Dave

Tuesday, January 05, 2010

What Can Americans Expect in the Next Two Years?

Watch the Video

Your statement that Bush was trying to turn this country to Globalization is incorrect. President Bush tried and was very successful in keeping American safe. He did that. For 7 years. You said the peace prize went to Obama because he was also a globalization president, this IS true. But Bush was not try to globalize this world. The clown we have in the white house now is very dangerous for this country and he is proving this evey day. Saying cops are stupid; on the Christmas flight, he said the system worked, IT DID NOT WORK. Then he said it didn't work and tried to blame Bush for it. We Americans are very tough people and we will survive this excuse for a President, but this guy is a slick salesman and I, like millions of others do not trust this liar. --Ed H ., Lynnwood,WA

Monday, January 04, 2010

Christmas Without Carol

Read the Commentary

Dear Mr. Whitehead, I read your editorial in the Marion Star (Marion, OH) tonight—catching up on papers we missed since our Christmas vacation and subsequent trip to Pasadena for the Rose Bowl (go Bucks!). I was very touched and felt compelled to write and let you know how sorry I am for the loss of your wife. After reading “Christmas without Carol”, I looked up the Rutherford Institute to learn more about your work and organization. How very refreshing to know there is an organization that supports Christianity and the Constitution in the same breath! I hope you and your family had a wonderful Christmas in spite of your very painful loss. My husband and I have been married for 41 years, and I cannot imagine life without him. May your goals and organization prosper in the new decade. I believe we never really get “over” the loss of a loved one—but we do get “through” it. Life changes with every beat.—Carol H .