In the News

The following are my reactions to a variety of news stories I've recently read on-line. Any quotations below are not cited as to source, but did appear in the original news stories.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

ONE:

Why do I keep having this recurring nightmare about our own Pentagon being responsible for the F-35's plans eventually ending up in enemy hands because of "hacking?" If that were to happen (perish the thought), we'd have to then come up with yet another generation of fighters. Using the same contractor because by then Lockheed will have learned its lesson. Oh, one more thing: This whole idea of stealth aircraft overlooks one method of detection: From space-based sensors that can detect these planes as they slice through (and disturb) the earth's magnetic field. Busted!

TWO:

"[La-Sissie]...realizes that Egyptians can go to Tahrir Square tomorrow if his administration is seen as not being as efficient as promised...” No problem. He'll kill as many of his countrymen as he needs to to stay in power. His tanks will give a new meaning to the term “exploding population.” Hey, fewer people means fewer mouths to feed, and will also keep profits high for the generals. No, I do not like this man at all.

THREE:

The United States... protested against the detention of the reporters." And yet, our aid to La-Sissie will continue uninterrupted since, as Obama refuses to declare, Morsi's ouster was not a coup.

FOUR:

Obama's embarrassed that his move against Assad failed. When the insurgency first erupted, it was cued by the CIA which had nurtured sleeper cells in Syria for at least 10 years. Obama thought the time was right and that Assad would be overthrown by popular revolt, after his army turned against him. Well, that didn't happen. We goofed in our calculation. As it turned out, Assad was right when he blamed foreign influence for the move against him.

FIVE:

"Every moment we don't separate from the Palestinians is a clear threat to the existence of Israel as a Jewish state." Well, there's an even greater threat - that of Jews converting to Buddhism after they come to realize how bogus Judaism is. The US has no business recognizing a state for its religion, since that has a chilling effect on the right of anyone to convert.

SIX:

"Jews are entitled to have a state of their own." If the voting majority of Israel were to convert from Judaism to (say) Buddhism, no one would be talking about a Jewish state any more, except of course those "left behind" who didn't convert. Not my problem.

SEVEN:

Abraham Lincoln preserved the Union – that's about it. However, he did so by exacting (at least) three terrible prices. First, he single-handedly voided the principle, as stated in the Declaration of Independence, upon which the USA was created – that is, one people (in this case, the Southerns) had a right to severe the political bands which connect them to another people (in this case, the Northerners).

Second, he demonstrated that the second amendment's protection against the overreach of federal power was a fiction at best. If the South, with an army of its own, couldn't fight off the feds, how on earth can modern day 2nd amendmentists hope to ever do that.

Third, Lincoln showed that not all men are created equal when it comes to military conscription. If you had $300 in your pocket (that is, if you were rich), you could buy your way out of the army. But if you were an immigrant just arriving in NYC, you were sworn in as a citizen – and then immediately sworn into the army.

EIGHT:

“...the Court declared that the power to classify and conscript manpower for military service was 'beyond question.''' That “power” is nowhere listed in the Constitution. Although Congress has the power to raise armies, like all other rights and powers, this one is not absolute. For instance, in the name of “raising armies,” does Congress have the right to seize wealth indiscriminately and without compensation in order to pay for this?

The Court has also ruled that it is our “duty” to serve in the military, although the word “duty” is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution – except as a form of tax. [The Court is very good at making up stuff when it can't find a good argument – sad but true.]

Then there's the text of the Amendment itself. Why was it “necessary” to include “except as punishment?” Did anyone think the 13th would be used to empty our jails? And why were these words deemed important: “shall have been duly convicted?” [The word “duh” comes to mind.] Maybe the 13th should have read:

“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime or in the form of conscripted military service, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”

The Oath of Enlistment makes it clear that all conscriptees should be protected by this Amendment. You're being told to swear an oath, the meaning of which you can't possibly know. How many know the regulations and the UCMJ before enlistment? Then of course there's the “So help me God” part. If you don't say those words, then you can't be inducted – problem solved!

NINE:

After the 14th was passed, this country lost the right to call itself the United States of America, because its first sentence took away the right of the states to define citizenship within its borders: “All persons...are citizens...of the State wherein they reside.” If a sovereign political entity can no longer define by what criteria its citizenship is defined, that power passing to another entity, it has lost its sovereignty. Even under our federal system, the states were recognized as having an appreciable degree of sovereignty. But the 14th was the first of many steps designed to eliminate that status.

If you don't believe state sovereignty had become a target, then ask yourself why the former states of the Confederacy couldn't rejoin the union unless their state Constitutions were rewritten and approved by Congress.

Section 2 of the 14th amuses me where it says, “But when the right to vote...is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age...” It should have said, “...being at least twenty-one years of age...” It amazes me how Congress so often fails so miserably to get it right. What a bunch of idiots!

TEN:

It never mattered how rich our presidents were or had become. What mattered was the Prime Directive: "If they don't toe the line of the real Powers-that-Be, there will be a bullet in the brain as their reward." And they all know this.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steven Searle, former candidate for USA President (in 2008 & 2012)

Founder of The Independent Contractors' Party

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com