Do You Hear what I Hear?
By WJ Anthony
Have you heard the warnings? What warnings? you ask.
Our generation of humanity, at least in USA, is accustomed to warnings, especially today. It is in your neighborhood, on the TV and radio. Sirens of police and fire fighters, cameras watching what we do at every stoplight, police at every city high school, airport surveillance with open hand touch or body scan radiation of passengers… except for the Wall Street “theftsters” of taxes or investments who cover the losses of scam by bankers who loaned money for sub-prime mortgages to people they knew couldn’t repay the inflated value of mortgages… or crooks… who play with phony derivatives scams… or politicians… who run for public office to get payoffs and broads for serving the crimes of lobbies. Things don’t look good in America.
What happened to this land of the free and home of the brave? We thought we were wholesome people, families who were neighborly and concerned for the wellbeing of our country. We went to church, paid our taxes, supported the local schools, and took family summer vacations to wholesome parks or lakes. We didn’t litter the streets or highways. We went to school and respected out teachers, learned the skills of our trade or industry, worked for our living, and respected the honesty of our bosses. We paid our bills, and saved for the future, trusted our government, expected truth and justice, and lived with our spouse and loved our family.
Yet, since we were children, war and more wars were in our life, year after year killing and dying with never ending fear of threat and Armageddon hanging over our lives. Why… a thousand US military based in nations throughout the world?
Why… could businesses in the US, be funded by US banks to close their US operations, lay off their US workers, build new facilities in foreign countries, pay their foreign workers a fraction of US wages to learn and produce the same products or services as their former US workers, and be permitted to ship and sell the foreign-made products or services back to the US consumer market, without needing to pay any import tariff?
Why did our presidents lie? They lied about the causes of the Spanish American War; the War with Mexico; and World War One.
Franklin Roosevelt lied that Sunday morning, when he told us the Pearl Harbor attack was a surprise.
Truman lied about US involvement in the “police action,” known as the Korean War.
Lyndon Johnson looked us in the eye on TV and told the lie, that a North Vietnamese boat attacked our US ship in international waters; so he could take us head long into the shameful unjustifiable war against Vietnam at enormous cost in lives and treasure.
The first Bush president told ambassador April Glaspie to lie to Saddam Hussein about his dispute with Kuwait.
The young Bush president lied when he claimed that 19 Afghan Arabs hijacked four US airliners on 9/11 and crashed two of them into the World Trade Center towers, one into the Pentagon, and crashed a fourth plane in Pennsylvania and then had Cheney, Rumsfeld and Powell lie to television viewers and claim that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, which he intended to use in a biochemical attack against helpless Israel?
Both Bushes and Bill Clinton invaded and launched illegal and deadly wars that killed over 2 billion innocent Iraq and Afghan men, women and children.
Did we agree with the slaughter of millions of people by the Bushes and Clinton?
The antiwar protestor, Bill Clinton, when he was president, chose to carve his name in the blood of the innocent. He ordered the illegal bombing of the people of Serbia for over 70 days without the consent of American people.
Did we agree with Bill Clinton on his War crime?
Do these lies justify war crimes? Did the lies enable crooks to achieve world power? Did the lies acquire wealth for certain decision makers?
Did the lies cause the depression and problems that Americans now face?
To understand policies of American government and the role of war in its operation, go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations
More than three hundred specific wars took place outside of the continental US (some might be called military operations) since the birth of this nation. Not included are the hundreds of wars and military operations against native people on their homeland.
That Wikipedia archive listed above, tells how mercantile-based companies, with the permission of Spanish, Dutch, and British kings, invaded the North America homeland of native peoples to steal the lands and resources and kill hundreds of thousands of native peoples in their homeland, which we now call “The United States of America.”
You may ask, “Why bring this up now; this is information of long ago? What does that have to do with what we now face in the US?”
The US, or America, as we like to call it, is a result of a policy of British kings, who hoped to build a British Empire, based on their money, which would rule the world.
The gunboat diplomacy of Great Britain and the wars of the United States were never based on genuine justice. Nowadays, we hear opinions that claim the US was built as a pillar of freedom, human rights, democracy, courage and honesty. We cannot excuse our war with Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan. The world knows the controlled demolitions crime of 9/11 was an inside job, to deceive the American people and Congress into allowing George W Bush to order the invasion and war in Afghanistan and Iraq, as the “Project for a New American Century.”
“We know this!” you might exclaim. War is big business in America. War creates a huge market for the tools of war. Our war markets surpass all peacetime markets. After World War 2, American people were anxious to buy the new products of peace – automatic clothes washers, dishwashers, refrigerators, freezers, television sets, automobiles, boats, etc. When a consumer market of refrigerators, has been satisfied, sales to consumers drop to a small fraction of what they were previously. Unless the manufacturers are able to produce and sell other products, they go out of business.
After the war, the need and market for war munitions was expected to decline; the people greeted the vision of a world without war. The weapon industries lobbied Congress, the presidents and taxpayers to believe in the cold war. It was a way to resume the war business. Manufacturers know that war is the greatest profit making opportunity of all markets, because its products are continually used up or destroyed. War always needs more of everything it can use.
War loves money. It requires money – lots of money. Since war is always an ‘emergency’ there are no excuses to reduce the supply of ‘vital’ war materials and the borrowed money that is required to purchase all the supplies and structures and employees and troops that should or can be used in war. And since war is an emergency, the production and delivery of the armaments and processes of war need to be done as quickly as possible, which requires an arrangement to manufacture and deliver war on a ‘cost plus’ basis; the government interprets the ‘plus’ to mean ‘regardless of the cost’ or ‘whatever it costs under the sun’.
Which brings us to consider all the money involved in those US wars and military operations, first against the native peoples and then all the hundreds of other specific wars or military operations against peoples outside the continental US. All the money that was borrowed to purchase the tools of war and equip “our men (and now women) in uniform” (so they could kill the enemy in one way or other or die as heroes), was spent as loans from bank corporations with the agreement by government that US taxpayers, for generations afterward, would repay the loans with interest after the end of the war. Banking has probably been the biggest profiteer in wars, by the loans that they float to government and war industries and by their ownership of corporate investments in the war industries. If there is no war, they have to start one.
Americans are told that our wars were fought to keep us free? Did Woodrow Wilson or someone say, “We fought the World War to make the world safe for democracy.” Really? Should this tell us something?
What do the words of the Declaration of Independence mean in its second paragraph?
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That 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.”
The Declaration was created over a decade before the US Constitution. There are two great and essential differences between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
1. The Declaration says all people are endowed with “certain inalienable Rights” from their Creator, which means no president, Congress, or church or brotherhood has the authority to remove those rights from a person.
2. The purpose of Government is to secure that birthright for each of us. In effect, the Declaration declared the inalienable Rights to be a birthright.
How did the Creator intend that birthright to be achieved? The Declaration specifically listed three rights. What does Life include and what does Liberty include? We might be surprised by the answers.
The Declaration said those three rights were among other rights. What might be the other rights?
The right to not be deliberately aborted once a person is conceived and starts to become one of us?
One of the birthrights was the right to pursue Happiness. What does Happiness include?
Happiness requires an appropriate standard of living that includes appropriate goods and services. Infants, children, adults and senior aged people have certain needs that are necessary to be satisfied and able to be happy.
When the Declaration described the inalienable Rights, it said not a word about money, such as money earning more money, or spending money. The Declaration inferred the need for goods and services, when it mentioned that we have the right to pursue Happiness.
Might a Birthright-based government foster many improvements in a person’s satisfaction of Liberty? Would it be wise for the Birthright government to respect the right of a mature, dissenting contender, who rejects the premises and functions of the Birthright government and its society? Could a provision be incorporated in the plan of a Birthright society and its government, to arrange a significant opportunity for dissidents with such contentions?
America has vast areas of natural challenge, such as unproductive badlands, deserts, or frontiers that are undeveloped but could offer significant resources if they were developed. Contenders could be offered government help, to develop a pilot project that might express the process and conditions that a contender would approve. If a contender was offered an area of challenge for a pilot project, and the contender was able to demonstrate that his or her vision was feasible to coherently satisfy happiness for its users, then continued assistance could be appropriately offered to the contender by the Birthright government. The value of offering such a provision is that, a better idea might emerge from the pilot project, which could be successfully adopted by the established system of government.
The ‘pursuit’ of ‘Happiness’, may require transportation, safety, healthcare, tools, communication, special services and provisions. That would especially be true for handicapped or ill people. Education would help each person to develop and use their freedom of discovery to select a role in life, by which they can pursue the happiness of fulfillment.
Besides the things mentioned above, ‘Happiness’ probably requires appropriate means to participate with other people and opportunities to express personal understandings.
In the present money-based Government, based on the Constitution, the goods and services, which people need, are purchased by money, if they have money. The Government coins money and determines its value. The government obtains money by taxing the people it governs and uses that money to sustain the services of people who the government employs and to purchase the facilities that those officers of government use to perform their vested powers.
The Constitution does not assign to the Government the duty to organize the political or economic facilities to produce and distribute goods and services to satisfy the inalienable Rights of its citizens. The Constitution mentions nothing about inalienable Rights.
The original proposed text of the Constitution said nothing about people having any rights or how they obtained their rights. The Convention, which created the Constitution, would have failed to pass the original proposed text of the Constitution, without including the ten proposed amendments. Those ten amendments became what are known as the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights does not contain any words that suggest or state where people get their rights.
The Constitution in Article 1, Sections 2, 7, 9 mentions money, and Section 8 declares the powers of Congress to create and handle money. The judgment and administrative functions of government listed in the Constitution and its Articles and Amendments demonstrate that the new Government of the United States was not intended to secure the inalienable Rights of all of the people that it would govern.
Why didn’t the Constitution state that the purpose of Government was to secure the inalienable Rights of people it governs? The second paragraph of the Declaration was widely known throughout America during the Revolutionary War and after the war.
Does War violate the inalienable Rights of each human being to live and be free to pursue Happiness?
If the purpose of Government is to secure the inalienable Rights of each person, would those Rights preclude the US Government from waging war?
Do our inalienable Rights require our Government to secure peace and beneficial relations among our people and help the people in other governments to live and be free to pursue happiness?
Would the inalienable Rights have required the wealthy slave owning men of the American colonies to recognize and accept the inalienable Rights of their own wives and daughters, their slaves, and the native people?
If a new Government of The United States would organize the production and distribution of goods and services to secure the birthrights of its citizens to live and be free to pursue their Happiness, would any Americans be unemployed and loaded with debt and foreclosed mortgages?
Would Americans consent to change their Government, so that it would be able to secure their inalienable Right to pursue Happiness?
If the powers of American Government were organized to provide each person with food, clothing, the necessities of life, a home for shelter, and appropriate opportunities to participate in the pursuit of happiness, would you like to live, as a citizen, in that America?
* If you have read the foregoing text, we invite you to respond to the following question and then copy and paste the question and your response and email it to: firstname.lastname@example.org After we tally the responses, we will publish the results on this blog. Thank you for visiting.
Should the United States reorganize its powers of Government with the authority and responsibility to secure the inalienable Rights of each person, and to organize the production and distribution of goods and services, so as to provide each citizen with appropriate food, clothing, the necessities of life, a home for shelter, and appropriate opportunities to participate in their pursuit of happiness?
YES _______ NO_______