Communist United States
Alan StangEtherzoneFriday July 27, 2007
At a Republican National Convention many years ago, I visited in the Indiana delegation with U.S. Senator Bill Jenner. Bill told me a story I suspect may be apocryphal, but it packs quite a wallop.
In Germany, said Bill, during the 1930s, when that country was forbidden to rearm, a young man worked in a baby carriage factory. His wife was pregnant, so he conceived the idea of stealing a part from each factory division. When he had all the parts, he would assemble them and have a baby carriage.
So, every couple of days, he stole a part. When he had all the parts at home, he assembled them. What he wound up with was not a baby carriage, but a machine gun – which recalls the fact that in the beginning Hitler built his war machine with subterfuge. By the time the world became aware of it, it was too late.
Today, here in the United States, all the elements of totalitarian dictatorship that, because of modern technology would leave Hitler, and Stalin, etc., breathless with envy, have been meticulously installed, from the Patriot Act, which the congressmen who voted on it were not allowed to read, to Patriot II, the existence of which the White House denied, through the emasculation of the Posse Comitatus Act that forbade the domestic use of our military, to the act that cancels habeas corpus.
Most Americans don’t realize that the United States is a Communist country. What? The United States a Communist country? Stang, are you out of your mind? We’ve been fighting Communism from the beginning. We fought wars against Communism in Korea and Vietnam. We tried to invade Cuba. We confronted the Soviet Union. How can you say we’re a Communist country?
Yes, we fought Communism for years. Most Americans still naively assume that means we fought to win. Why else would you fight? No! We didn’t win, because our policy was not to win; it was to fight, to keep fighting endlessly while we drained ourselves of treasure, money and human.
We created the Soviet Union, which never did collapse. We created Red China. We created Communist Cuba. It is not at all an exaggeration to say that were it not for the United States, Communism would never have been anything more than a minor historical footnote, long since disappeared. For an explanation of all this, see my extensive archives.
How would you decide whether a country is Communist? Why not go to the expert? Would you take the word of Karl Marx? In the Manifesto of the Communist Party, Marx set forth a list of ten steps to Communism. Marx said a country that takes those ten steps is Communist.
So, how many of those ten steps have we taken in the United States? Until last week, we had taken nine. For instance, the federal government has long since taken control, both direct and indirect, of the land. The federal government has installed a graduated income tax. The federal government has taken control of the nation’s money and credit. The federal government controls the nation’s education. All these things are planks in the Communist program.
The only thing Washington has not adopted is the fourth plank: “confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.” There are a couple of additional, unnumbered steps. One is the abolition of the family, which phony feminism in tandem with organized sodomy has gone a long way toward accomplishing. The other is public ownership of women, which will be adopted after the next major crisis, maybe the attack on Iran, when martial law is imposed and women are drafted as well as men. My money says that by now we are corrupt enough to let it happen.
And on July 17th el presidente Jorge W. Boosh adopted Plank Four. From now on, if you are found to be “undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq and to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people,” or if you are discovered to “pose a significant risk of committing” an act of violence that could threaten “the peace or stability of Iraq,” the federal government can “block” your property. The determination would be made by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretaries of State and Defense.
So, what does this mean? What does it mean to “undermine efforts?” What does it mean not just to commit an act of violence, but to “pose a significant risk of committing” one? However broad and sloppy it is, doesn’t this language obviously refer to violent Islamic terrorists? Shouldn’t we give our own government the benefit of the doubt?
Remember that until the Socialist Herbert Hoover Administration, immediately reinforced by the Socialist Franklin Roosevelt Administration, Americans did not give government the benefit of the doubt. They were intensely suspicious of government, an attitude bequeathed to us by the Founding Fathers in the separation of powers, until Republican Hoover and then Democrat FDR turned the federal government into troughs and beguiled the pigs to slop.
I would give the benefit of the doubt to Tom Jefferson or to Andy Jackson or to Grover Cleveland. I don’t give it to a President who says he is fighting terrorism, but who refuses to protect our borders from terrorists, a President who imprisons our Border Patrol but rewards drug smugglers and coyotes, a President who is trying to dissolve our country in a world government, a President who says he is fighting terrorism in Iraq, but whose Rules of Engagement prevent our military from winning, give the crucial edge in combat to the enemy and put our finest officers on trial.
What does it mean to “undermine efforts?” Could it mean to criticize severely? If an American sincerely opposes spending our money to effect the economic reconstruction of Iraq, would “undermine efforts” to do that include organizing and working to prevent it? If the Secretary of the Treasury decides that is what you are doing, he apparently can seize your property.
Indeed, remember, the language of the new presidential Executive Order says nothing about undermining the American war effort. It says nothing about interfering with the military. The new offense consists of “undermining” the administration’s foreign economic policy. If you do that, you become, in the terminology of the Communist Manifesto, a “rebel” whose property the government can legally seize.
So, if we now have taken, or are about to take, without exception, every single one of the Communist Manifesto’s steps to Communism, wouldn’t that make us a Communist country? Yes, we fought the Communist countries we founded. So what? Dion O’Bannion fought Al Capone. Did that make him any less a gangster?
Four star general Tommy Franks, our former commander in Iraq, says the President will impose martial law and abolish the Constitution after the next “terrorist attack.” Some victims of astigmatism tell us there is nothing to worry about because, after all, we don’t have martial law today. In fact, a couple of weeks have passed since Boosh issued the new Executive Order and nobody’s property has been seized. No one has been called a “rebel.” The elaborate, totalitarian powers the government has written into the law have not been invoked, so there is “nothing to fear.”
Yes, maybe that is true. But there was “nothing to fear” from Hitler until he put everything in place. Remember the Enabling Act? There was “nothing to fear” from Stalin until he consolidated power. There was “nothing to fear” from Mao until Washington had forced President Chiang to flee. There was “nothing to fear” from Castro until he arrived in Havana and was installed by the United States.
Everything to do what they did and then some is now in place here.
The Boosh EO typically uses Iraq as the phony justification for imposing still more controls in the United States. But remember, as in Vietnam, we could win the war in Iraq any time we like. Here again is but one classic tactic that would guarantee almost immediate victory, from the archives of the prestigious Stang Institute of Modern Warfare.
Cover the country with propaganda leaflets clearly and calmly explaining that every round we fire – be it from a personal weapon, chopper or artillery – will henceforth be soaked in pig guts, that every Mohammedan terrorist we kill will routinely be buried with a hog and that his children will be raised on pork chops. At the very least, this tactic would separate the Muslims and the Reds.
And guess what? This tactic would not undermine efforts to reconstruct the Iraqi economy! If you spread word about it, there is no danger you could lose your property.
Alan StangEtherzoneFriday July 27, 2007
At a Republican National Convention many years ago, I visited in the Indiana delegation with U.S. Senator Bill Jenner. Bill told me a story I suspect may be apocryphal, but it packs quite a wallop.
In Germany, said Bill, during the 1930s, when that country was forbidden to rearm, a young man worked in a baby carriage factory. His wife was pregnant, so he conceived the idea of stealing a part from each factory division. When he had all the parts, he would assemble them and have a baby carriage.
So, every couple of days, he stole a part. When he had all the parts at home, he assembled them. What he wound up with was not a baby carriage, but a machine gun – which recalls the fact that in the beginning Hitler built his war machine with subterfuge. By the time the world became aware of it, it was too late.
Today, here in the United States, all the elements of totalitarian dictatorship that, because of modern technology would leave Hitler, and Stalin, etc., breathless with envy, have been meticulously installed, from the Patriot Act, which the congressmen who voted on it were not allowed to read, to Patriot II, the existence of which the White House denied, through the emasculation of the Posse Comitatus Act that forbade the domestic use of our military, to the act that cancels habeas corpus.
Most Americans don’t realize that the United States is a Communist country. What? The United States a Communist country? Stang, are you out of your mind? We’ve been fighting Communism from the beginning. We fought wars against Communism in Korea and Vietnam. We tried to invade Cuba. We confronted the Soviet Union. How can you say we’re a Communist country?
Yes, we fought Communism for years. Most Americans still naively assume that means we fought to win. Why else would you fight? No! We didn’t win, because our policy was not to win; it was to fight, to keep fighting endlessly while we drained ourselves of treasure, money and human.
We created the Soviet Union, which never did collapse. We created Red China. We created Communist Cuba. It is not at all an exaggeration to say that were it not for the United States, Communism would never have been anything more than a minor historical footnote, long since disappeared. For an explanation of all this, see my extensive archives.
How would you decide whether a country is Communist? Why not go to the expert? Would you take the word of Karl Marx? In the Manifesto of the Communist Party, Marx set forth a list of ten steps to Communism. Marx said a country that takes those ten steps is Communist.
So, how many of those ten steps have we taken in the United States? Until last week, we had taken nine. For instance, the federal government has long since taken control, both direct and indirect, of the land. The federal government has installed a graduated income tax. The federal government has taken control of the nation’s money and credit. The federal government controls the nation’s education. All these things are planks in the Communist program.
The only thing Washington has not adopted is the fourth plank: “confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.” There are a couple of additional, unnumbered steps. One is the abolition of the family, which phony feminism in tandem with organized sodomy has gone a long way toward accomplishing. The other is public ownership of women, which will be adopted after the next major crisis, maybe the attack on Iran, when martial law is imposed and women are drafted as well as men. My money says that by now we are corrupt enough to let it happen.
And on July 17th el presidente Jorge W. Boosh adopted Plank Four. From now on, if you are found to be “undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq and to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people,” or if you are discovered to “pose a significant risk of committing” an act of violence that could threaten “the peace or stability of Iraq,” the federal government can “block” your property. The determination would be made by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretaries of State and Defense.
So, what does this mean? What does it mean to “undermine efforts?” What does it mean not just to commit an act of violence, but to “pose a significant risk of committing” one? However broad and sloppy it is, doesn’t this language obviously refer to violent Islamic terrorists? Shouldn’t we give our own government the benefit of the doubt?
Remember that until the Socialist Herbert Hoover Administration, immediately reinforced by the Socialist Franklin Roosevelt Administration, Americans did not give government the benefit of the doubt. They were intensely suspicious of government, an attitude bequeathed to us by the Founding Fathers in the separation of powers, until Republican Hoover and then Democrat FDR turned the federal government into troughs and beguiled the pigs to slop.
I would give the benefit of the doubt to Tom Jefferson or to Andy Jackson or to Grover Cleveland. I don’t give it to a President who says he is fighting terrorism, but who refuses to protect our borders from terrorists, a President who imprisons our Border Patrol but rewards drug smugglers and coyotes, a President who is trying to dissolve our country in a world government, a President who says he is fighting terrorism in Iraq, but whose Rules of Engagement prevent our military from winning, give the crucial edge in combat to the enemy and put our finest officers on trial.
What does it mean to “undermine efforts?” Could it mean to criticize severely? If an American sincerely opposes spending our money to effect the economic reconstruction of Iraq, would “undermine efforts” to do that include organizing and working to prevent it? If the Secretary of the Treasury decides that is what you are doing, he apparently can seize your property.
Indeed, remember, the language of the new presidential Executive Order says nothing about undermining the American war effort. It says nothing about interfering with the military. The new offense consists of “undermining” the administration’s foreign economic policy. If you do that, you become, in the terminology of the Communist Manifesto, a “rebel” whose property the government can legally seize.
So, if we now have taken, or are about to take, without exception, every single one of the Communist Manifesto’s steps to Communism, wouldn’t that make us a Communist country? Yes, we fought the Communist countries we founded. So what? Dion O’Bannion fought Al Capone. Did that make him any less a gangster?
Four star general Tommy Franks, our former commander in Iraq, says the President will impose martial law and abolish the Constitution after the next “terrorist attack.” Some victims of astigmatism tell us there is nothing to worry about because, after all, we don’t have martial law today. In fact, a couple of weeks have passed since Boosh issued the new Executive Order and nobody’s property has been seized. No one has been called a “rebel.” The elaborate, totalitarian powers the government has written into the law have not been invoked, so there is “nothing to fear.”
Yes, maybe that is true. But there was “nothing to fear” from Hitler until he put everything in place. Remember the Enabling Act? There was “nothing to fear” from Stalin until he consolidated power. There was “nothing to fear” from Mao until Washington had forced President Chiang to flee. There was “nothing to fear” from Castro until he arrived in Havana and was installed by the United States.
Everything to do what they did and then some is now in place here.
The Boosh EO typically uses Iraq as the phony justification for imposing still more controls in the United States. But remember, as in Vietnam, we could win the war in Iraq any time we like. Here again is but one classic tactic that would guarantee almost immediate victory, from the archives of the prestigious Stang Institute of Modern Warfare.
Cover the country with propaganda leaflets clearly and calmly explaining that every round we fire – be it from a personal weapon, chopper or artillery – will henceforth be soaked in pig guts, that every Mohammedan terrorist we kill will routinely be buried with a hog and that his children will be raised on pork chops. At the very least, this tactic would separate the Muslims and the Reds.
And guess what? This tactic would not undermine efforts to reconstruct the Iraqi economy! If you spread word about it, there is no danger you could lose your property.
No comments:
Post a Comment