By Chris Giles

 

“Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” These words are taken from the Declaration of Independence. The American colonists living under the rule of the English King, George III, after years of unfair treatment and tyrannical malfeasance began to rebel against the monarchy. The people had endured enough and decided to fight back. The signing of the Declaration of Independence was the culmination of their disapproval of the despotism of the crown. The overmatched colonists eventually prevailed against the far better equipped forces of the monarchy and achieved their freedom and independence. 

In the last 235 years, those freedoms have slowly been chipped away at and lost by a systematic process of false-flag attacks and fear mongering by the government. The attacks of 9/11 are probably the biggest example of this process. Whether you believe in the theory that the government knew ahead of time about the plot and allowed it to happen or that they planned it from start to finish, the end result is the same. The PATRIOT Act. The USA PATRIOT Act, which stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism, legalizes activities such as indefinite detentions of immigrants; searches through which law enforcement officers search a home or business without the owner’s or the occupant’s permission or knowledge;  the expanded use of National Security Letters, which allows the FBI to search telephone, e-mail, and financial records without a court order;  and the expanded access of law enforcement agencies to business records, including library and financial records.

According to the official story, the attacks of 9/11 were perpetrated by 19 Muslim terrorists bent on the destruction of America. These terrorists were part of or at least supported by Al Qaeda. The Bush administration immediately declared war on Al Qaeda and invaded Afghanistan, the supposed training ground and safe haven for Al Qaeda terrorists. Most of us could get behind this war because of the direct link to Al Qaeda and the attacks. However, when the Bush Administration decided to go after Saddam Hussein in Iraq for purportedly having weapons of mass destruction, there was some skepticism from the American people. Previous indications were that Saddam no longer had WMDs and he had destroyed his weapons stockpile after the Persian Gulf War in 1991. Just before Saddam’s hanging in 2006, he admitted to FBI investigators that he only boasted about having WMDs in order to appear more powerful to his middle eastern neighbors, namely Iran. Nevertheless, the Bush Administration went forward with their war plans based on supposed clear evidence that Saddam had WMDs and needed to be disarmed for the safety of the entire world. Almost 7 years later, no significant WMDs have ever been found in Iraq, billions upon billions of dollars have been spent, thousands of American servicemen have been killed or maimed and there is no real end in sight. Over 9 years since the war in Afghanistan began, there has been no significant progress made and recently a troop surge was ordered to keep the Taliban from regaining a strong foothold in the country. 

These two wars and the billions spent to keep them going have only served to dig the US into a deeper hole of debt. You may recall that the Clinton Administration turned over to Bush a budget surplus. Every year of the Bush Administration, there was a budget shortfall arguably because of the war spending that has yet to show any benefit to the average American. 

Then there was the Wall Street bailout plan of 2008. The program was supposed to set aside $700 billion to help financial institutions with “toxic assets” known as derivatives. These derivatives are financial instruments that basically bet that the price of real estate in this country would continue to rise. When reality came crashing down on these institutions that had garnered tremendous profits initially, many of the biggest banks in the country were critically injured. The term “too big to fail” was coined to convince people that if we did not give them billions of our tax dollars, then the failure of these institutions would cause a total economic collapse. Most Americans did not buy into the plan expressed their wishes not to bailout these companies. Thousands of calls flooded the offices of Senators and Representatives alike asking them to vote down the measure. Against the desires of the majority of Americans, the “Bankster Bailout” was eventually passed. To add insult to injury, one company, AIG, used their bailout funds to dole out millions in bonuses to executives. After public outcry, Sen. Chris Dodd changed his earlier position and admitted that he had been involved with writing the legislation that paved the way for these AIG bonuses and that he had been approached by Treasury Department officials to do so.

Forward to 2009 and the new administration of President Barack Obama. One of the first things Obama does as president is sign into law a $787 billion stimulus package. In the wake of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, lawmakers decide that we need to spend our way to recovery. Millions of Americans are left confused by this logic. To this point, the majority of stimulus money has yet to be spent though reports are that we are in the midst of economic recovery. However, the unemployment rate remains around 10% and does not look to significantly improve this year. Economists have described this phenomenon as a “jobless recovery” if there is such a thing. 

Obama’s next big initiative was Health Care Reform legislation. After several months of debate, the entirely Democrat-written behind closed doors bill passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 220-215 despite protests by thousands of Americans on the steps of the Capital in the days leading up to the vote. The Senate passed its own version of health care reform on Christmas Eve only after virtually bribing several senators including Mary Landrieu of LA and Ben Nelson of Nebraska with “sweetheart” deals for their states. Though polls indicate that most people want some kind of health care reform, they do not support the bills that have come out of Congress thus far. Some polls say up to 60% of respondents are against the health care reform as it stands today. Yet, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi proclaims, “Let’s remove all doubt, we will have healthcare one way or another.” These bills are packed with earmarks that have nothing to do with health care and will inevitably lead to a rationing of care as the system will be flooded with up to 30 million people who do not currently have health insurance. The biggest blow to freedom in this bill is that everyone will now be mandated to buy health care. Never before in American history has anyone been forced to buy something or else face a stiff fine.

I have outlined several examples of how the government proceeds with its own agenda despite the objections of millions of those for whom the government is supposed to work. There are many other issues that I did not even discuss including the continuation of the Federal Reserve System as the Central Bank for the US; the escalation of the War on Terror to include Pakistan; Cap and Trade legislation and the efforts to control carbon dioxide output; and the expansion of the use of Czars to circumvent congressional approval. The current administration has shown its arrogance and complete unwillingness to listen to the wishes of the masses and has suffered several embarrassing election defeats in recent months at the hands of Republicans. However, Republicans are just as much to blame for the situation that the nation is currently in. Most people think in any public office election there are only two choices, Republican or Democrat. A vote against one party is still a vote for the other party. I believe the Presidential election of 2008 was won by Barack Obama in just this fashion. Many people did not necessarily want to vote for Barack Obama but they wanted to vote against another Republican administration. The fact is that both parties are bought and paid for by special interests. A viable third party or even fourth party in major elections would change these either/or scenarios and force candidates to work harder for their votes. However, in our current system, it is extremely difficult for third parties to gain financial support in the form of public funding for elections. And so, unless new parties get unprecedented support for the next few years, we will continue to be caught up in the left/right paradigm that is our current system. The current system, having proven itself to not work for the average American, must be changed. The problem is that the current system likes itself the way it is and does not want to be changed. Therefore, a clash between the status quo and the people is bound to occur. Whether this conflict will be fought with votes or with guns remains to be seen but, either way, the destiny of this country is in the hands of the people. How will you choose to fight?