“Just Say No” to the “War on Drugs” : It is Time to Take a “Zero-Tolerance” Perspective on the Military-Industrial Complex’s Perpetual War on U.S. Tax Payers Who Self-Medicate With Cannabis


I’m glad I do research on medicines on the internet before I take them, got some “cold medicine” over the counter yesterday (here in the Philippines while on vacation) that has at least one drug ingredient that has been banned in many countries in the last decade for causing strokes, and psychotic episodes.  I guess the big American and European drug companies are trying to dump the banned drug where ever they can now (third-world developing Nations), since they probably have tons of the stuff stock-piled somewhere they can’t sell in the U.S., the U.K., Canada, and India anymore.  On the plus side, if I want to take the risk, I can experience euphoria, increased heart rate, and some other side-effects similar to those one might experience if they were abusing meth!  Banned in the states, still given in some countries by vets to stop dog incontinence, but I can legally take it over the counter here in the Philippines for my cold and flu symptoms.  God bless the big pharmaceutical companies for ensuring “high-quality safe products” get into the hands of those desperate for a cure regardless of the price/consequences!  Get a cold, take an over the counter tablet, have a stroke or psychotic break-down!  That is medical progress people! 

No wonder those same giant Pharmaceutical companies need so many lobbyists on Capitol Hill to try to keep the Federal Schedule I ban on cannabis!  Just think of how many different dangerous drugs (with even more dangerous side-effects) they would have to discontinue and dump on third-world markets if other states like Colorado, Washington, and the 18 other U.S. states that have already made medical-marijuana legal were joined by even more states (and countries like Uruguay).  Congress and other Western nations might actually be forced by the will of the people to finally repeal the Draconian “War on [the tax payers who use] Drugs” Federal drug laws, and a common-sense approach (both Domestically and Internationally) that didn’t demonize or incarcerate a substantial segment of the World’s population could finally be realized yet again! 

Just think of how much money the American tax-payer could save on “just saying no” and refusing to support or continue to allow their tax dollars to be used to combat so-called “narco-terrorism” alone!  Think about all the budget changes that would have to be made to reduce the funding of all the authoritarian government agencies currently waging war on the civil liberties of the American people!  Think of all the profits that would be lost by the big pharmaceutical companies (and their lobbyists and shareholders) in the short run, while they were forced to purchase all the mom & pop “dispenseries” in the long-run to keep a monopoly on the market! 

I wonder how much money they are going to lose in Colorado alone after January 1st, when all the old folks there start smoking grass again, instead of taking sleeping pills, depression pills, pills to get an erection, pills to calm their nerves, pills to… well you get the drift right?  Heck, imagine how much money the alcohol industry could stand to lose, or Hollywood in anti-drug propaganda films bought and paid for by your tax dollars, or private prisons, or rehabilitation centers, or bail bondsmen, towing companies, defense lawyers!  Not including the plastics manufactures (i.e. big oil), the timber industry, etc.  

I guess I can see why the Federal government still has it ranked as a Schedule I drug (supposedly more dangerous than cocaine or meth), because to so many in the military-industrial complex, it is very dangerous, dangerous to their bottom-line!  For so long cannabis has also been public enemy number one because outlawing it was an effective way to stigmatize and politically handicap minority groups and counter-cultural political activists.  But it is nice to see many citizens of states across America are now waking up to the reality that the War on Drugs has been a costly failure paid for by American tax payers to often incarcerate, punish, and ruin the reputations of their own family members, and other patriotic Americans. 

So yes, cannabis is still a Schedule I drug in America, but I can still buy the ingredients for Meth over the counter whenever and almost wherever I wish.  Now does that make any sense?  I know one thing for sure, I won’t be taking the crap the local pharmacy is “peddling” for the “man” to treat my cold!  I would rather not have a stroke or psychotic episode trying to get rid of my sinus problems thank you very much!  Luckily however, I don’t get sick often, because I choose to take an ancient herbal remedy that reduces stress and boosts one’s immunity naturally.  And in just a few more days, it will be available over the counter without a prescription in Colorado.  Now that is what real progress and reform looks like!  If you don’t believe me, wait until you hear about how much tax revenue the state is generating for it’s economic recovery, and how much money it is saving by not incarcerating some of it’s more productive, conscientious, and “civil” citizens.         


Egypt’s Military Topples Muslim Brotherhood Ruling Party Then Labels Them Terrorists: Should We Be Worried This Could Happen in America?


Are the Muslim Brotherhood democratically-elected Patriots of the “Arab Spring,” or dangerous terrorists bent on creating political turmoil and unrest?  To answer this question accurately, one must first be aware of the political issues surrounding the question.  The current Egyptian “interim government” backed by the Egyptian military came to power after the military toppled Egypt’s democratically elected pro-Islamic President.  For those who might not know, the mass democratic movement known as the “Arab Spring” elevated Mohamed Morsi to power, for him only later to be removed from office by an Egyptian military that had been heavily funded ($1.3 billion) by the United States.  The U.S. denies involvement, as if you can deny 1.3 billion reasons to be involved, and has even gone so far as to revoke $260 million of Egypt’s military aid, suspended shipment of 14 F-16s and some tanks, but refused to go so far as cutting all financial assistance in the future.  Realistically speaking, that political possibility is highly unlikely, since in all honesty, those behind the curtain of secrecy in American foreign policy (and many in front of it) would like to keep the Egyptian military on the pay-roll despite appearances.  Why?  It is convenient to have American trained, supplied, and financially funded military units actively toppling any Islamic group like the Muslim Brotherhood when Middle Eastern countries (or any country for that matter) engage in “Arab Spring”-like revolutions that topple dictators and vote into power real political reform candidates that threaten the established pro-Western political, economic, and religious dominance in the Middle East. 

Two plus two equal four, and President Morsi was arrested, the Muslim Brotherhood were violently and systematically toppled from political power, outlawed, and now they have been declared a “terrorist organization.”  In other words, anyone who once voted for Mohamed Morsi for President after the Arab Spring in Egypt could now be suspected as a terrorist!  So the Egyptian military backed government (subsidized by U.S. taxpayers) that made this pronouncement, and who will likely continue to use the military for enforcement of it’s dire objectives could silence all future Democratic elections in Egypt.  This result would be counter to the stated objectives of American foreign policy to ensure free and fair elections be held as soon as possible to reinstall a new (presumably more palatable) elected President.  However, this repressive strategy may reawaken the Arab Spring in Egypt, and the state sanctioned terrorism against supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood will likely spark further unrest, and perhaps even a civil war similar to the one now occurring in Syria.  Perhaps the recent bombing coinciding with the military backed government’s announcement suggests the same “game-plan” has already been implemented. 

Also, if Egypt’s “Arab Spring,” and the people’s overthrow of Hosni Mubarak only led to a military counter-coup, to create a pro-Western puppet government bent on suppressing the Democratic process and making potential criminals out of a majority of the country for voting for the previous Islamic ruling party, then such a disturbing political tactic will likely cause horrendous ripple-effects that will subvert the democratic process in Nations that have elections around the world.  In other words, this type of blanket retroactive criminalization of political parties and voting may yet threaten the very concept of Democracy as we know it in the future!  Using American taxpayer funds to train and supply a military that thwarts the Democratic process, is the worst sort of “election engineering” any conspiracy theorist could ever imagine.  But if such a theory were accurate, then covert political collusion between America’s military-industrial complex, and Egypt’s pro-Western military forces amounts to an unjust subversion of the political process in Egypt simply because an anti-Western political party rose to power democratically.  Worse still, by criminalizing all those who support the Muslim Brotherhood, a majority of Egyptians who voted (the last time they were allowed to vote for President) may now be labeled supporters of terrorism by the state/military, beat up, rounded up, shot at, perhaps incarcerated (like the teenage girls recently arrested and given extensive sentences only to have them revoked, and then be released), or worse, even killed!  Reminds me of how the hippies, Vietnam War protesters, “tree-huggers,” “freedom riders,” and other Civil Rights advocates were treated in 1960s America.  So is this really what an Egyptian version of a state-sanctioned counter-revolutionary response really looks like?

“What difference does it make in my life?  I don’t live anywhere near Egypt!” one might ask or exclaim, but imagine if America’s CIA (or some other covert organization affiliated with our country’s military-industrial complex) actually is involved in the toppling of President Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood.   If so, then this tactic would fit the modus operandi of decades of C.I.A. operations in Latin America, South East Asia, and the Middle East to topple pro-Communist or pro-Islamic leaders when the democratic process in targeted countries elevated anti-Western leaders to power with a majority of their people’s blessings.  Cut to the present, if America’s government, or branches of America’s government, whether approved, or without Congressional approval, have been engaging in these types of covert activities globally in direct violation of international law for decades, then what is to stop “them” from doing the same thing in America if “they” do not like a potential election outcome?  Who is to say “they” have not already been actively involved in subverting the Democratic process in America for decades!  In fact, perhaps we already know who was behind the assassinations of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, and Martin Luther King (to name but a few), but we don’t want to admit it to ourselves.  For if we allowed ourselves to follow that train of thought to it’s logical conclusion, then for most of us it would mean we would have to admit we had been living in a country made of lies all of our lives! 

Furthermore, if an entire political party can be labeled as a “terrorist organization,” and all of it’s voters, “supporters of terrorism,” then all bets are off in the game we call “representative government.”  If a “hostile take-over” method of subverting democracy is allowed to thrive globally as a legitimate political tactic for any country’s military, then the trend will foster a political reality that makes it far too dangerous for the average voter to participate in the democratic process anywhere anymore.  Forget apathy, or low trust in government, if the U.N. (or the people of the U.S.) allow this disturbing political trend to proliferate, all the “free people” of the world considering whether or not to vote in any given election in the future will have to assume they might someday be retroactively labeled as “terrorist sympathizers” by any “interim government” that rises to power by American subsidized military groups determined to thwart by force their peaceful and legitimate votes.  Civility is to be replaced by hostility, Democracy by Dictatorship, paid for by American taxpayers no less, whether they know it or not.  So ask yourself, can we afford to stand by any longer waiting to be labeled as “terrorist sympathizers” ourselves simply for voting against, or speaking out against those who are the true enemies of our Constitutional and International Laws?  Or shall we rise-up together, and stop allowing our representatives to use our tax dollars to fund the Egyptian military?  If you are an American tax payer, ask yourself, why should we continue to aid Egypt’s military in a war on terrorism that turns the majority party of any country into a country of terrorists!  Why did a majority of Congress refuse to support Rand Paul’s efforts to cut all funding to Egypt once the so-called “popular uprising” backed by the military toppled Morsi’s government?  As American taxpayers, do we really want to  support those who covertly subvert “free and fair” elections, rather than tolerate and try to use diplomacy over force and manipulation against legitimately elected leaders they happen to dislike?  I am a pacifist, so I don’t wish to call anyone to arms, but I ask those using arms against peaceful supporters of reform in Egypt now, and in America in the past, how can you expect us to believe in Democracy, or that a “fair election” will ever be allowed to occur on this planet ever again, if you pass laws that turn relatively moderate voters into fundamentalist Islamic terrorist sympathizers or peace-loving teenagers into narco-terrorist sympathizers?  With that same logic, every American Patriot who founded this country, or fought against the British “Red Coats” was a terrorist, and everyone that gave quarter to the “minute men” and George Washington’s Continental Army were terrorist sympathizers!  Don’t believe everything that is reported on the news, political events can be so easily manipulated by those controlling the airwaves.  In our modern era, people can be labeled as terrorists, and bombs can be set off in unison to punctuate such absurd assertions, but that does not always mean that two plus two equals “terrorists.”

Could A&E’s Suspension of “Duck Dynasty” Star Phil Robertson, For His Biblically-Inspired “Free Speech,” Be The Final “Spark” That “Ignites” Civil Discord Between A Hopelessly Divided America?


So unless your living in a cave, or under a rock, you should know Phil Robertson was recently suspended indefinitely from the popular show “Duck Dynasty” (an A&E / Walt Disney production) for potentially offensive comments he recently made against the Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, Transgender (LGBT) community.  How did such a super-star fall from grace with A&E while helping to obtain their best ratings yet?  Well, in a recent interview, when asked his opinion about homosexuality, he had the audacity to quote scripture, and compare it to bestiality!  Since he uttered his controversial if not Biblical opinion, the fall-out of his indefinite suspension from the show has been a domino-effect of out-rage by the religious right, and supporters of the First Amendment.   Now for those who may have forgotten, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution “prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.” (Wikipedia).  Furthermore, regardless of which side of the cultural-rift you find yourself on, it is pretty much universally accepted that “freedom of speech” means having the right to say what you think, regardless of whether you offend others or not. 

In other words, the First Amendment is supposed to protect our freedom of speech by ensuring no law will be passed neither Federally, nor at the State level, to limit us from speaking our minds in public (with some important limitations -like you can’t yell “fire!” in a crowded movie theater – and “hate speech” has it’s limits as well).  Nevertheless, all this freedom leads to some unusual paradoxes, like even though the Civil Rights Movement has altered America forever by ending segregation, the KKK still has the right to make racist speeches in public.  But ironically, the same freedom of speech also ensures the LGBT community gets the right to promote and advocate for their “alternative” lifestyle in public, regardless of what a majority of Conservative Americans may think of their lifestyle.  Likewise, even Muslims have the right to promote their Islamic perspectives in public despite the 9/11 terrorist attack (supposedly orchestrated by Islamic fundamentalists), albeit at their own peril, due to the pervasive and rampant Islamaphobia spreading like wild-fire across the Nation.  Ultimately, however, the exercise of such freedom (without fear of governmental retribution) is what “tolerance” is all about!  But we all should know freedom of speech does have its limits, and no one should allow oneself to be naive enough to think that just because one may think one is protected from Federal or State interference in exercising one’s freedoms, that does not mean if one is irresponsible with one’s own freedom, severe consequences won’t soon follow from other sources.

For example, a network like A&E (or Walt Disney) is a corporate entity trying to make a profit, and has the right to decide who and what they put on their TV station to ensure the maximum amount of advertising revenue.  So once they discover something about a contracted actors/actresses character or mentality (revealed by that person’s decision to exercise their 1st amendment rights off-set in a non-scripted magazine interview), we shouldn’t be surprised if the network then uses that new public information to make adjustments or new decisions about current or future programming and employment on their privately owned network!

Remember Howard Cosell’s “little monkey” comment, that caused his radio sports broadcasting career to prematurely end, or how about Paula Dean’s “fall from grace” more recently for admitting she used the “n” word in public. The same fate will surely befall current and future Christians who make negative comments about the LGBT community on Liberal Hollywood TV studio lots.  Conversely, the more reality TV shows with Southern or “Bible-Belt” participants they produce in Hollywood, the more they should expect to hear controversial intolerant statements like Phil Robertson’s.  So, if Hollywood producers don’t want to hear such homophobic statements, and if studios don’t want have to have to deal with the financial fall-out of suspending actors or actresses who make such statements (after they have already inadvertently participated in the propagation of such statements by making their actors famous), then they shouldn’t be making TV shows with “back-woods,” “red-neck” Christian cast members.  I use those last two terms in quotes with the greatest of respect, since I grew-up a “back-woods, red-neck” myself.

On the other hand, if Phil Robertson wants to keep making money off A&E, Walmart, and the “Duck Dynasty” franchise, he should recognize he is a famous public figure now, and his every word will be scrutinized.  So he should be prepared to “speak no evil” against the LGBT or African-American communities, or he should be readily prepared to face the back-lash of exercising his freedom of speech in an industry that has been notoriously liberal since it’s inception.  In the long-run however, it is clear A&E’s & Walt Disney’s Hollywood corporate offices misjudged their demographic audience totally, and are going to likely lose their shirts on this one!  Or perhaps they are more concerned with the principle of the matter, rather than ratings; is that even possible!  Can cable networks and Hollywood studios have a moral compass, and a more enlightened compassion than Christians?  Can they actually see beyond profit and greed, to recognize the humanity and love that can occur between two consenting adults of the same sex?  Should they?  Who are the real “sinners” here?

These philosophical and spiritual questions are not easily answered, but one thing is clear, freedom of speech is a political freedom (that limits what the Federal or State governments can do to limit speech by law), it does not prevent a privately owned or even publically owned corporation from hiring, firing, or laying off someone who is being offensive, or potentially harassing to another group based on their sexual orientation), and it certainly is not a free-pass to offend on TV.  There is no “right to stay on TV” (or continue to make movies) once you’ve spoken your mind, and if you don’t believe me, just go ask Mel Gibson!

Don’t get me wrong, I believe 100% in the 1st Amendment, but a cable TV network is not the Federal Government, and is not required to follow the same rules as the Federal government.  Even with the Supreme Court’s use of the Interstate Commerce Clause to extend the 14th Amendment’s rights and protections to African-Americans in the Southern States (to end segregation), the States being bound by the Bill of Rights does not mean all corporations have to let everyone say what they wish, and then keep them on the payroll.  

However, everyone out there offended by A&E’s treatment of Phil Robertson has every right to exercise their own freedom of speech, and engage in a boycott of the show. And if you are a Christian, and you support Phil Robertson, perhaps you should, maybe it will cause more Christian programming to be made in the future in Hollywood. But conversely, A&E has every right to hire and fire whomever they wish for whatever reason, as long as they are following the letter of the law, and not discriminating against anyone.

However, I think where it gets a little heated and potentially legally problematic for A&E and Walt Disney, is whether or not a case can be made that they discriminated against Phil Robertson due to his actual “religious beliefs,” rather than suspended him for intolerant “hate speech.” I guess the Federal courts will have to decide that one if the “Duck Dynasty” -a.k.a. Robertson family sues A&E/Walt Disney for wrongful indefinite suspension, and for a Title VII discrimination violation.  But before that, they would likely need to file a religious discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).  Unfortunately, that Federal agency is so back-logged, that it could take years for the issue to be resolved, unless the notoriety of the case gets it bumped to the front of the line.  Either way, by the time it reaches the courts, A&E will have lost most of their Christian “Duck Dynasty” watchers, unless of course their viewers still enjoy shows like “Hoarders” or “Intervention.”

Either way, it is clear the government has been using Hollywood to make their propaganda for almost as long as the movie industry has been in existence.  So it should not be surprising if the “tool” of the Government’s propaganda and mind-control machine for the last 75 years or so would also choose to limit the “controversial” messages being disseminated to the public by popular actors via their networks (whether commanded to do so by the Government or not).  I just find it ironic, and a bit surprising that Walt Disney (the largest share-holder in A&E) would be the company to come to the defense of the LGBT community against someone who calls himself a Christian. They used to be so main-stream, and family oriented, being a cartoon movie studio.  But now that they are trying to avoid lawsuits, and wish to “cover their asses” legally, they have become so bold as to suspend an actor for intolerant “hate speech” that violates the civil rights of the LGBT community by demeaning their members.

However, since Mr. Disney died, the corporate Disney is a different animal, and the whole idea of what is “main-stream,” and “family-oriented” has also changed a lot in America in the last 40 years – at least in some parts of the country. Therefore, it will be interesting to see how many Americans are offended by A&E’s decision to suspend Phil Robertson, and how many are actually offended by his biases and beliefs.  Regardless of how that public opinion poll pans out, this is the exact type of mess that makes me understand why Christians don’t think Hollywood supports them and their beliefs, because they don’t.  Hollywood supports the Federal government’s agenda (at least on the surface), because they pay better, and because they don’t want to get sued by the ACLU, the Justice Department, or the LGBT community.

How could Mr. Robertson have thought exercising his freedom of speech rights would not have had an impact on his future career on the show, with the network, or in Hollywood in general?  Perhaps he wasn’t thinking about the potential ramifications of speaking his mind, or perhaps he wasn’t so worried about continuing to be rich and famous in the first place.  Perhaps instead, he had a sincere desire to express his Biblical beliefs about something he deems as evil and a sin.  Also, maybe he didn’t expect the outrage and backlash he received.  Either way,  I’m sure if he realized his mouth would end-up writing a “check A&E wouldn’t cash,” he would have recognized a “trap for headlines”  when he saw one, and perhaps he would have remembered with great freedoms and rights, come great responsibilities (including, but not limited to, knowing when to keep your big mouth shut, if you want to keep making the big bucks).  After all, does anyone on that show, or who is protesting A&E’s decision to suspend Phil Robertson recall what state Hollywood is in!  San Francisco, California (just North of Hollywood) is the capital of the LGBT community, and Hollywood and the acting profession have embraced the LGBT community with open-arms perhaps longer than most other industries combined.  So WTF is everyone thinking? 

Jesus Christ! Please, don’t tell me some back-woods, red-neck’s comments about homosexuality on “Duck Dynasty,” and his suspension from that popular TV show is going to be the great “spark” that “ignites” this woefully culturally divided nation on “fire!” As Rodney King so eloquently put it, “Why can’t we all just get along?  Likewise, Abraham Lincoln got it right when he said, “United we stand, divided we fall.”  Look around you, this is definitely not the best time for those on the political Left or the religious Right of our Nation to be on the verge of beating one another to a bloody pulp over how people choose to love each other in the privacy of their own homes.  But these controversies are a sign of the times, for our unlimited government would rather see us at each others’ throats, rather than wrapping our fingers around the necks of those who really deserve it the most – the wealthy, and “all-powerful” ruling elite.  After all, in truth, they could probably care less one way or the other what most Christians think about the LGBT community (or vice versa), because they would rather pit both groups against each other in the hopes of ensuring the two don’t notice the lack of jobs, dwindling economic opportunities, and crumbling infrastructure we all must overcome in the future regardless of our sexual orientation or religious beliefs.

Phil Robertson is a very rich man himself, and now, even if he never makes a show again, he will likely always be famous or infamous depending on which side of the cultural divide you align yourself.  If he were a scantly-clad Miley Cyrus swinging from a wrecking ball, we would likely just collectively shake our heads and chalk-up his bold if not naive remarks to youthful inhibitions.   But he’s not Ms. Cyrus, he’s an old man, preaching to his choir, and thus, he may have known exactly what he was doing.  I just hope his homophobic remarks, A&E’s indefinite suspension of him from the show, and the Conservative American public’s likely “boycott” of A&E (and perhaps even Disney) satiates the lust for “blood” out there in America.  Otherwise, Mr. Robertson may have just ridden in on his own wrecking ball, and the “new America” the Religious Right views as condemned, deprived, and immoral is the very “structure” he and his cohorts truly wish to demolish and build anew!

Maybe America’s Constitutional “Checks & Balances” Aren’t Moot Yet!

Judge: NSA spying ‘almost Orwellian,’ likely unconstitutional

In the Yahoo News link attached to this blog, a Federal District judge for the District of Columbia ruled in a recent opinion against at least one facet of the NSA’s spy program, called it “Orwellian” in scope, and suggested the war on terror could last forever!  Nice to know their might be hope that enough of us being outraged at the NSA’s unconstitutional acts and our government’s potential perpetual war on terror, might actually make a difference and create an impetus for reform, but how long do you think it will take for this ruling and court case to reach the Supreme Court’s docket? And how many other secret “dark” programs do you suspect “our government” has that we fund with our tax dollars that violate the Constitution on a regular basis? If the domestic and international policies of our government over the last two Presidential administrations have shown us anything, government transparency is necessary now more than ever! “The light of day” needs to pierce the veil of secrecy, before we all find ourselves locked or hiding in a “cave,”(whether a real cave, or one made of our own ignorance, apathy, or blind-patriotism) cowering in the dark, afraid of our own government. 
Don’t get me wrong, 9/11 was horrendous, and Muslim terrorists and extremists do exist, but that doesn’t mean we should stand by and quietly watch our government dismantle the last vestiges and freedoms of our Constitutional-Republic before our very eyes so we might be more safe, but less free. It is never acceptable for our government to suspend the Constitution, or any of the Bill of Rights in the name of national security.  Thus, this is one America citizen that is glad to see the American Federal Court system finally ruling against the NSA and their blanket-universal wide-spread violations of the 4th Amendment in an Orwellian fashion.  Please read more on the latest news on the subject from Yahoo news to discover further details.

In the counci…

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

Dwight D. Eisenhower

Dwight DavidIkeEisenhower (pronounced /ˈzənhaʊər/, EYE-zən-how-ər; October 14, 1890 – March 28, 1969) was the 34th President of the United States from 1953 until 1961. He was a five-star general in the United States Army during World War II and served as Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in Europe; he had responsibility for planning and supervising the invasion of North Africa in Operation Torch in 1942–43 and the successful invasion of France and Germany in 1944–45 from the Western Front. In 1951, he became the first supreme commander of NATO.[2]

Eisenhower was of Pennsylvania Dutch ancestry and was raised in a large family in Kansas by parents with a strong religious background. He attended and graduated from West Point and later married and had two sons. After World War II, Eisenhower served as Army Chief of Staff under President Harry S. Truman then assumed the post of President at Columbia University.[3]

Eisenhower entered the 1952 presidential race as a Republican to counter the non-interventionism of Senator Robert A. Taft and to crusade against “Communism, Korea and corruption”. He won by a landslide, defeating Democrat Adlai Stevenson and ending two decades of the New Deal Coalition. In the first year of his presidency, Eisenhower deposed the leader of Iran in the 1953 Iranian coup d’état and used nuclear threats to conclude the Korean War with China. His New Look policy of nuclear deterrence gave priority to inexpensive nuclear weapons while reducing the funding for conventional military forces; the goal was to keep pressure on the Soviet Union and reduce federal deficits. In 1954, Eisenhower first articulated the domino theory in his description of the threat presented by the spread of communism. The Congress agreed to his request in 1955 for the Formosa Resolution, which enabled him to prevent Chinese communist aggression against Chinese nationalists and established the U.S. policy of defending Taiwan. When the Soviets launched Sputnik in 1957, he had to play catch-up in the space race. Eisenhower forced Israel, the UK, and France to end their invasion of Egypt during the Suez Crisis of 1956. In 1958, he sent 15,000 U.S. troops to Lebanon to prevent the pro-Western government from falling to a Nasser-inspired revolution. Near the end of his term, his efforts to set up a summit meeting with the Soviets collapsed because of the U-2 incident.[4] In his 1961 farewell address to the nation, Eisenhower expressed his concerns about future dangers of massive military spending, especially deficit spending, and coined the term “military–industrial complex“.

On the domestic front, he covertly opposed Joseph McCarthy and contributed to the end of McCarthyism by openly invoking the modern expanded version of executive privilege. He otherwise left most political activity to his Vice President, Richard Nixon. He was a moderate conservative who continued New Deal agencies and expanded Social Security.

Among his enduring innovations, he launched the Interstate Highway System; the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which led to the internet, among many invaluable outputs; the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), driving peaceful discovery in space; the establishment of strong science education via the National Defense Education Act; and encouraging peaceful use of nuclear power via amendments to the Atomic Energy Act.[5]

In social policy, he sent federal troops to Little Rock, Arkansas, for the first time since Reconstruction to enforce federal court orders to desegregate public schools. He also signed civil rights legislation in 1957 and 1960 to protect the right to vote. He implemented desegregation of the armed forces in two years and made five appointments to the Supreme Court. He was the first term-limited president in accordance with the 22nd Amendment. Eisenhower’s two terms were peaceful ones for the most part and saw considerable economic prosperity except for a sharp recession in 1958–59. Eisenhower is often ranked highly among the U.S. presidents. (Wiki).

“The right to a…

“The right to agree with others is not a problem in any society; it is the right to disagree that is crucial.” –Ayn Rand.

Ayn Rand (/ˈn ˈrænd/;[1] born Alisa Zinov’yevna Rosenbaum; February 2 [O.S. January 20] 1905 – March 6, 1982) was an American novelist, philosopher,[2] playwright, and screenwriter. She is known for her two best-selling novels, The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, and for developing a philosophical system she called Objectivism. Born and educated in Russia, Rand moved to the United States in 1926. She had a play produced on Broadway in 1935–1936. After two early novels that were initially unsuccessful in America, she achieved fame with her 1943 novel, The Fountainhead.


In 1957, she published her best-known work, the novel Atlas Shrugged. Afterward, she turned to non-fiction to promote her philosophy, publishing her own magazines and releasing several collections of essays until her death in 1982. Rand advocated reason as the only means of acquiring knowledge and rejected faith and religion. She supported rational and ethical egoism, and rejected ethical altruism. In politics, she condemned the initiation of force as immoral[3] and opposed collectivism and statism as well as anarchism, instead supporting a minarchist limited government and laissez-faire capitalism, which she believed to be the only social system that protected individual rights. In art, Rand promoted romantic realism. She was sharply critical of most philosophers and philosophical traditions known to her, except for some Aristotelians and classical liberals.[4]

Literary critics received Rand’s fiction with mixed reviews,[5] and academia generally ignored or rejected her philosophy. The Objectivist movement attempts to spread her ideas, both to the public and in academic settings.[6] She has been a significant influence among libertarians and American conservatives (Wiki)

The War on Peace: Military-Industrial Complex Killing the Working Class At Full Capacity

America has been at war for most of it’s existence, for over 200 years in total in fact!  Think about that for a moment… Now, according to John Locke, (a political philosopher our American forefathers heavily relied upon to develop the Constitution) the reason why government was formed was to create a “social contract” between the governed to literally “govern” our behaviors and actions so as to reduce the conflict resulting from or arising out of the anarchy found within “a state of nature” if without government.  But with that said, if America has been at war most of it’s existence, then our “social contract” is not functioning properly.  Why?  Our capitalist economy has used it’s influence and wealth to corrupt politicians and the military into making unethical decisions counter-intuitive to the goals and aspirations of America’s citizens.  They have adopted political warfare as a major and successful tool for gaining and growing wealth, and use our own money, servitude, and blood for their own selfish objectives.  This realization, coupled with the Edward Snowden revelations about NSA surveillance of domestic (and international citizens) without probable cause (in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment), should help bring to light and perhaps even revitalize the concerns of former five star General Dwight D. Eisenhower (our 34th President of the U.S.).   In his Farewell speech, he gave the American public this final warning:

“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” Read more at (http://www.brainyquote.com/).

Thus, it is my contention that Eisenhower’s dire warnings of “the disastrous rise of misplaced power” has already occurred, and I believe the NSA is just one tentacle of the “monster” of “misplaced power” and “unwarranted influence” that has been exposed from the dark depths of our own military-industrialized “Leviathan” (see Thomas Hobbes).   So now more than ever, it is time to expose the truth as Snowden has, and shine sufficient light on the real problems, so perhaps more citizens can grasp the truth, organize, and be moved into political action by it.  In other words the goal of this article is to inspire others to engage in political activism, to battle against our Federal government’s continued expansion, increased influence over every aspect of our lives, and negation of the Constitutional safe-guards that has historically served to protect our liberties.  Progress on meaningful political, economic, and perhaps even military reforms need to happen now both domestically and internationally to counter the threat of fascist imperial government, organized standing armies, and multinational corporate interests colluding in morally bankrupt schemes to further their own selfish interests at the detriment of those who they were supposed to be representing, defending, or providing excellent products and customer service (instead of inferior products at the cheapest price, and dangerous working conditions).

I’m sticking my neck out for speaking on such political issues in a public forum being monitored by the very beast I speak of, but such are the lessons of the “Allegory of the Cave” expounded upon by Socrates more than 2000 years ago, and documented within Plato’s “The Republic.” If it comes to that, perhaps they will allow me the courtesy of Hemlock as well, rather than a bullet in the back of the head.  But I digress… onward, and upward!

For anyone who may not know, if you look at the research, it states the following: “the Military–industrial complex, or military–industrial–congressional complex,[1] is a concept commonly used to refer to policy and monetary relationships between legislators, national armed forces, and the military industrial base that supports them. These relationships include political contributions, political approval for military spending, lobbying to support bureaucracies, and oversight of the industry. It is a type of iron triangle. The term is most often used in reference to the system behind the military of the United States, where it gained popularity after its use in the farewell address of President Dwight D. Eisenhower on January 17, 1961,[2] though the term is applicable to any country with a similarly developed infrastructure.[3][4]

The term is sometimes used more broadly to include the entire network of contracts and flows of money and resources among individuals as well as corporations and institutions of the defense contractors, The Pentagon, the Congress and executive branch. This sector is intrinsically prone to principal–agent problem, moral hazard, and rent seeking. Cases of political corruption have also surfaced with regularity. A parallel system is that of the Military–industrial–media complex, along with the more distant Politico-media complex and Prison–industrial complex.

A similar thesis was originally expressed by Daniel Guérin, in his 1936 book Fascism and Big Business, about the fascist government support to heavy industry. It can be defined as, “an informal and changing coalition of groups with vested psychological, moral, and material interests in the continuous development and maintenance of high levels of weaponry, in preservation of colonial markets and in military-strategic conceptions of internal affairs.”[5] An exhibit of the trend was made in Franz Leopold Neumann’s book Behemoth: The Structure and Practice of National Socialism in 1942, a study of how Nazism came into a position of power in a democratic state.” (Wiki).

This research adequately helps to better explain why the “war pigs” need fresh new sacrifices of America’s youth every generation to keep their “war machine” well lubricated. The blood of America’s youth, has been sacrificed at the alter of patriotism much too often! For far too long, often for very questionable motives, Americans have been asked (or have been compelled) to go to war so their unworthy “leader’s” drunk on political mandates, corruption and greed could/can grow fat off the “spoils of war” made from their ultimate sacrifices. They have built an Empire on those sacrifices, bigger than anything the Aztecs or the Maya could have ever conceived.

IT ALL WENT TERRIBLY WRONG WHEN RELIGION FAILED US, AND THEY TRIED TO MAKE GOVERNMENT OUR GOD!  Government is not our God, nor should it ever be, it is far too inefficient to ever be deemed holy.  But fascism, socialism, communism, and democracies run by tyrants attempt to get their citizens to become servants of their belief systems just as sure as any religion does.

Don’t support the military-industrial complex’s agenda, don’t be a lamb led to the slaughter, compelled to do so out of a false sense of obligation, patriotism, or duty to a Nation led by murderers.  They come into your communities, your schools, and into your homes, and recruit you and use terrorism (or the threat of terrorism) repeatedly displayed over various mass-media sources as an effective propaganda tool to stir-up your emotions, cloud your minds, and mislead you so as to gain your financial, political or voluntary support for a false cause you may even be required to give your life for, (or the life of a son or daughter). If you don’t believe me, ask yourself, just how many American wars over the last 100 years were absolutely unavoidable?  Could “calmer heads” in power using diplomacy have prevented any of the conflicts that readily come to mind if profit was not the primary cause of war in America?

In at least one of my previous professions I had to hold my tongue regarding my own political opinions on this subject, but I am under no obligation to do so in this venue.   Thus, I can say without hesitation that I am against war, unless it is for defensive purposes after America has been attacked on it’s home front.  So if I have offended anyone who is or has a family member actively serving in the Armed Forces, or who has made the ultimate sacrifice for their country (and my ability to exercise my First Amendment rights now) by defending our country from foreign aggressors, then I wish to apologize to you or them, and thank you and them for your and their service.  My only wish is that they had wiser, more ethical, and less covert leaders, who truly valued a soldier’s potential, and who avoided needlessly sacrificing soldiers for profits.  All American citizens have too much value and potential to be sacrificed for increasing the profit margins of a select few.

If we had listened to President Eisenhower’s dire warnings, and had made concrete political efforts to stymie skyrocketing deficit spending when times were good, and to thwart political-military-industrial collusion whenever it arose, we could have better ensured our “inalienable rights” would not have been stolen from us (supposedly for our own good) by our own government during a moment of crisis.  But ever since a growing, educated, and affluent middle-class started questioning authority, and attempting to alter the status-quo power structure, the war against citizens who use drugs arose from the ashes of Prohibition, then 9/11 turned the war machine further in-ward.

Whether 9-11 was real, or a staged “false flag” operation to create an unjustified “rally around the flag” effect for pushing through the passage of the unconstitutional Patriot Act, a preemptive war with Iraq, secret prisons with enhanced interrogation techniques, NSA monitoring of all citizens foreign and domestic, a war in Afghanistan, drone strikes, etc.  we may never know for sure.  But one thing is certain, ever since that highly televised event, our government has been using taxpayer money to  spy on American citizens, and to combat those who would sacrifice everything to restore America to her former glory. ”  I guess some might call them, the Occupy Wall Street crowd, Hippies, Beatniks, Bohemians, Environmentalists, strict constructionists, Libertarians, the Reform Party, the Tea Party, or just true American Patriots.  We run the political spectrum, divided in many ways by specific political differences, but united in our desire to fight against the two parties that have been co-opted by the military industrial complex to thwart our civil liberties and inalienable rights, supposedly for the express purpose of combating domestic and international threats they themselves generated with their lack of governmental restraint!

Whatever political group you affiliate yourself with, if you believe in America, and believe in the traditional American values of “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, and a citizen-constrained limited Federal government, then join us in taking back our country from those immoral few who would readily violate our Constitution, bankrupt our country, manufacture war, destroy the middle class, and tread on our most sacred of civil liberties, to consolidate their power, maximize their war profits, and further diversify their global investment portfolios.