Early Novemeber 2009 updates

Historians have found out that the Nazis and Communists are ideological bedfellows. Benito Mussolini is a dictator of fascist Italy. He was an ally of Nazi Germany in WWII. Mussolini was once a Marxist. Marxism view capitalism as bad, they are mostly atheistic, and they believe the state should control of all the means of production in order to be fair to the masses (but it doesn't work effectively). Mussolini was once a Communist. In fact, he organized Red Week to fight against the capitalist world in a violent revolution. He was released from prison for protesting the “imperialist” Italian war in Libya, at which one veteran socialist said: “From today you, Benito, are not only the representative of Romagna Socialists, but the Duce of all revolutionary Socialists in Italy!” After WWI begn, Mussolini worked to get Italy to join Britain and France. He did that. After WWI, Benito became a fascist. Fascist Italy influenced Hitler and the development of Nazi Germany. By 1943, Italy surrended to the Allied Powers and Mussolini ran into Northern Italy (as a Italian Socialist Republic). The constitution of this odd polity was written by Nicola Bombacci, a communist and a friend of Lenin. In February 1944, the Socialist Republic issued a “Legislative Decree for the Socialization of Enterprises” that provided that all enterprises with capital of over one million lire or employing more than a hundred persons would be run by a committee composed of an equal number of management and workers. That communist. In 1944, Mussolini praised Stalin and wanted the Soviet Union to dominate Europe. So, Mussolini was Communist early in his political career and around the time of his death. Nazis and Bolsheviks are twins since each want to have authoritarian control over citizens' lives, forms of extreme collectively, and an oppressive big government. Max Eastman later wrote in a subsequent book, Reflections on the Failure of Socialism (1955): “Stalin’s totalitarian police state is not an approximation to, of something like, or in some respects comparable with Hitler’s. It is the same thing, only more ruthless, more cold-blooded, more astute, more extreme in its economic policies, more explicitly committed to world conquest, they hated Judeo-Christian views, racism is common among Nazis and Bolsheviks (The Soviets killed Tartars, Germans, Ukranians, etc.), and more dangerous to democracy and civilized morals.”


Our rights are threaten all of the time. Barack Obama continues the Bush administration policy regarding Posse Comitatus. Over a year ago, the U.S. Army announed that the 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Bridage Combat Team was being placed under the direct control of the US Army Northern Command (or NORTHCOM). The military said it was being indefinitely reassigned as an “on-call federal response force” for emergencies of all sorts, natural and man-made, including terrorist attacks, within NORTHCOM's area of responsibility — the United States, Mexico, and Canada." This was unprecenteded, because this was the first time that a regular unit of the Army was under the command of NORTHCOM. The force is expected to be about 20,000 by 2011. This massive force will all be trained and equipped to “subdue unruly or dangerous individuals” and “help with civil unrest and crowd control.” As usual, these directives are vague and could be applied to any number of scenarios. Furthermore, the critical question to be asked in light of such an arrangement is who will decide who is unruly or dangerous? Whoever is appointed the arbiter of such things will of necessity be feared as he will have 20,000 troops on alert and ready to quell these civil disturbances. It's unconstitutional to use American military forces as in law enforcement modes. This is a violtion of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. This Act was in response to federal troops abusing citizens' right in the South. President Barack Obama is continuing this anti-Posse Comitatus agenda by allowing the military to participate in undefined emergency situations in the borders of America. NORTHCOM is withholding information about this force. It releases information clumsily and slowly on this issue. NORTHCOM is trying to coordinate various exercise in many states. They want more power in training in more states as well. There are more than 19 federal agencies and 17 states that participated in one or more of the seven "Homeland Security" exercises that NORTHCOM conducted since 2005. The GAO or the Government Accountability Office desires states to give up their administration of forces and agencies (in management plus command) to NORTHCOM. This proposal is a violation of federalism and the Tenth Amendment (which promotes state sovereignity). The army's role in government is limited. It shouldn't be expanded to promote NORTHCOM. Heroically, there are local police officers who feel threatened by being placed on a short leash placed by the President in the hand of the U.S. Army. Former NYPD detective and U.S. Marine intelligence officer, Sid Frances has called upon the state houses and Governors to assert their constitutionally guaranteed sovereignty and outright refuse to place their state forces under the command of federal officers. “I cannot understand why the federal government is so intent on using such military force within our borders. It reminds me of the Branch Dividian massacre in Waco, Texas, when the feds used that deadly physical force based on false information.” The seperation of the military and police is needed in our society not the merging of the 2 into one unitary entity.


Some believe that the Climate Change Treaty is a precursor to global government. Dr. Jerome Corsi wrote an article for WorldNetDaily. He wrote that a former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher believes that the real purpose of the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen is to use global warming hype as a pretext to lay the foundation for an one world government. This meeting will last from December 7 to 18. Lord Christopher Monckton told a Minnesota Free Market Institute audience in Bethel University at St. Paul that the President will sign a climate bill. The EU will rubber stamp it according to Monckton as well. Corsi quotes Monckton as also saying, "I read that treaty and what it says is this: that a world government is going to be created. The word 'government' actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity."The Climate Change document doesn't talk about a vote or elected official at all. The document is about a framework that can lead into a world government. The climate proposal wants the West to fund the Third World in huge levels. They want at least 0.7% of the GDP of developed parties to fund governments and community organizations. People should help the Third World, but not under the guise of fake man-made global warming hoax at all. The document uses a world boyd to handle funding nations in climate change. This document doesn't allow Congress to look at its real components (ike punishing countries with non-compliance with the documents' demands on nations). America does have a right to show its independence and not allow its sovereignity to be submerged into global bodies. Man-made global warming has been refuted with record low temperatures in 2009, the natural forces in the Universe plus the Sun having the superior influence on climate change, the polar bear population growing, the Arctic Ice in the North Pole increasing in size, and other facts.


Brian Rohrbough wrote about how an NBC show shows both sides of the abortion debate. Typically, TV shows would demonize totally the pro-life position. One quote from a show exposes rape as not a legitimate reason for abortion. The quote is that: "...You got it backwards, man. The horrible thing is the rape, not the bringing of a life into the world." "Law and Order" lasted for over 2 decades. Brian believes that one episode shows a pro-life perspective on abortion in a positive light. The episode was entitled "Diginity." It was about a vigilante murdering a later term abortionist at church. The writers loosley based the script on the deceased Wichita abortionist George Tiller. It aired first on October 23, 2009. A "Law & Order" character, Assistant District Attorney (ADA) Connie Rubirosa says, "I grew up thinking Roe v. Wade was gospel. … But [now] I don't know where my privacy ends and another being's dignity begins." And Executive ADA Michael Cutter was quoting real-world surveys when he said, "The tide has turned. Most Americans are pro-life now." Personhood ideas of the unborn have made into primetime television. Although, newspaper audiences are going down. The Internet news sites are increasing rapidly. Brian supports the Denver-based American Right to Life group that wants personhood laws in order to re-criminalize abortion (and influence the culture). Abortion being criminalize would be a great day in America indeed. Brian made the point that cats and dogs have more rights than the unborn. The reason is that if you kill a dog or cat you will be sent to jail (and you should), yet if you kill an unborn child intentionally then you won't recieve jail time in most instances. Other examples of personhood influencing the episode include a detective rejecting abortion after rape, a reference to fetuses in the womb as "persons" and even the pro-choice mom who, against her doctor's advice, did not abort her premature baby and found out in the hours they had together that her child "wasn't a monster, like the doctors warned me." Another pro-choice character argues abortion for rape, which is the unholy high ground of the entire abortion position, a shibboleth that must be slain. In response, Detective Kevin Bernard, played by Anthony Anderson, says, "You got it backwards, man. The horrible thing is the rape, not the bringing of a life into the world. That unwanted child could change the world. Cure cancer, be president." Brian wrote that George W. Bush opposed the personhood movement in South Dakota's plan to ban abortion. The personhood movement is growing in Colorado. So, the pro-life movement is growing stronger day by day. Although, we have a long way to go to have real change in America.

Sigmund Freud is a controversial figure. Freud expressed pessimism and hope in "Why War?" from 1932. He exchanged letters with Albert Einstein for publication. In answering Einstein on “Right and Might,” Freud pointed out “that right is the might of the community. It is still violence, ready to be directed against any individual who resists it; it works by the same methods and follows the same purposes.” Is there no difference then? One difference, Freud held: “What prevails is no longer the violence of an individual but that of a community.” In other words, Sigmund Freud believes that peace can only be established in the world if the powerful central government would rule society and make wars impossible. This is similar to the League of Nations and the United Nations that still exists, but wars are common. Nationalism is against a world government construct. Freud didn't believed in a higher law or a right which power must be subservient to. To him, there are only human instincts. He didn't want to embrace ehtical judgments of good and evil in trying to find tranquility in the world. The one-world order he hoped for was an order built on violence, and reason itself was no more than a biological aspect of man, a thin veneer over a vast unconscious. Freud had written at length on the nature of dreams as an infallible index to the unconscious forces in man. So, Sigmund Freud wanted to build an Utopia which he believed could be achieved by human reason. Freud was a known person who influence psychology.

By Timothy