Author: Roger Mitchell

The Wages of Sin is Death–Official or Not

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

In the last few weeks, there have been three high-profile instances of deliberate murder in which those killed had no warning that they were going to die. Life was good, until all at once it was over.

  1. Eleven crew members of a small Venezuelan boat in the Caribbean which was destroyed by a Hellfire missile.
  2. A 23 year old woman, Iryna Zarutska,1 stabbed in the neck repeatedly by a man behind her while riding home from work in Charlotte, NC.
  3. Charlie Kirk, shot in the neck while speaking at a rally at a Utah university.

Other than the fact that they were completely unexpected, do these murders have anything in common? It could be argued, I suppose, that the boat’s crew members were “known to the State of US” to be violent gang members running drugs, therefore the takeout was justified. It could be argued that Charlie Kirk brought it on himself by opposing the “woke”, progressive, liberal agenda and being extremely vocal about his beliefs. It could be argued that Iryna’s murder was caused by decades of insane policies of refusing to treat criminal cases harshly without any serious consequence for the perps.

Yet, during his first term in office, Donald Trump gave the order to assassinate an Iranian general2, Qasem Solemani, while he was traveling to a peace conference in Iraq, done without warning solely because it was possible. While Barack Obama was president, numerous persons were simply killed via drone strikes3 because they happened to get on the wrong list, including an American citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki, and his 16 year old son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki. How many innocent people have been killed because of the aggressive wars waged by the American State and society? It is safe to assume that they number in the tens of millions and probably most of them were not aware that they were in imminent danger until it was upon them.

We have a problem and it is not going to be easily solved nor overcome. America, the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave, has always been a practitioner of violence, often deadly. We still are, and there does not seem to be any groundswell of movement on the part of the grassroots population to bring the official killings to an end. Instead, if the Venezuelan State sank one of the US Navy ships in the area, citing defense, this country as a cohesive unit would issue a full-throated roar for vengeance and destruction, regardless of who started the whole mess or whether it was legal or right. We love our violent Hollywood movies and PlayStation video games in which we can vicariously “live” the victorious life. Or die trying, except that we get to come back another day and fight again.

“Kill them all. Let God sort them out.”

Why are we shocked when something like Charlie Kirk’s assassination or Iryna Zarutska’s cold-blooded murder occur, but pooh-pooh any notion that the killers were only following the examples set by their own government? Why is murder excused, even lauded and honored, when it is practiced by a government for political purposes, but individual murders cannot be tolerated, even though they might be done for political purposes? Why do we tolerate “black on black” murders which constitute the largest part of the killings in the US and try to justify “black on white” murders as, well, “correcting racial imbalances”? Why do we treat “white on black” murders as worse than any other, especially if a police officer is the one doing the killing?

Why? Why? Why? These are the hard questions we need to honestly explore and try to answer in order to make some sense of the situation, and the first place to start is with ourselves, in our own innermost being, the one which drives and defines everything we are. Am I a supporter of government led and sponsored wars and extra-judicial “executions”? Do I think it is right for my government to declare war on other countries without cause? Would I join the military and kill some person I never knew simply because someone else told me to? Do I hate my neighbor and wish evil on him? And on, and on, and on…

We are at this point in history because, as a nation and a people, we have either explicitly abandoned the moral imperatives of God or made light of them, ignoring them when convenient, and/or trying to substitute our own man-made rules which seem right and just to us. Today, and increasingly so in a rapidly disintegrating future, we are (and will) reap the consequences of our actions and behaviors. The only way out is to seek forgiveness for our own sins and change the way we think, which will change the way we act. This is called repentance…and it works. It is the only thing which will work. Everything else is nothing more than a Band-Aid® slapped over a blood-gushing wound.

More to come…and it ain’t looking good. Murder is murder is murder, and it’s past time to recognize this fact. Time to raise our sights to a higher plane, one where the injunction, “Thou shalt not kill” still holds true.

  1. Notice that Wikipedia does its dead-level best (no pun intended) to mask the fact that the killer was a black male who had 14 convictions on his record and was still walking the streets. ↩︎
  2. To justify this action and call it “lawful”, read this. I do not agree with the conclusion. https://www.jagreporter.af.mil/Post/Article-View-Post/Article/2539536/the-killing-of-qassem-soleimani/ ↩︎
  3. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/holder-weve-droned-4-americans-3-by-accident-oops/ ↩︎

Jeffrey Epstein or Beating Up on Venezuela

Roger Mitchell3 Comments

Donald Trump, America’s peace-loving, peace-making president, is acting presidential again. No, he has not got the war in Ukraine settled after almost nine months of overtures, empty threats, and broken promises, one of which was that he would stop it in twenty-four hours as soon as he took office. Nor has he reined in the Insane Beast of the Middle East, Bibi Netanyahu and the Israeli State, on their wild, murderous rampage through Gaza. Neither has he stopped threatening Iran over its refusal to bow down and worship “the god that be”, that is, the puppet-masters and heavyweight policy-makers of the Western realm.

Instead, probably with the blessings and direction of his controllers (whoever they might be), he has virtually, unilaterally, declared war on Venezuela, a small, oil-rich country on the northern coast of South America. In fact, on Tuesday, September 2, following Trump’s direct order, a boat was fired upon by the US Navy off the coast of Venezuela in international waters, killing eleven crew members. This was done without warning, without any attempt to stop the vessel, any effort to arrest the crew and bring them to a court in the US where they could be tried and convicted of their crimes against humanity and receive “justice”. Note the quotation marks.

All on Trump’s say-so. Yes, very presidential, if I may say so myself. In this, at least, he was consistent with his own words, “I’m the president. I can do whatever I want.” Well, now he’s a murderer…on several counts, as are the men and women who colluded with him and those who actually pulled the triggers. Now, in response to Venezuela’s response in which two of its warplanes buzzed a US destroyer, Trump has just issued another threat. “Don’t do that anymore or I will shoot you down.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/trump-warns-any-venezuelan-plane-threatening-us-ships-will-be-shot-down

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/trump-deploys-f-35s-puerto-rico-airfield-after-pair-venezuelan-jets-buzz-us-warship

Supposedly, the boat which was fired upon was running drugs from Venezuela to…somewhere, and those drugs were guaranteed to find their way onto the streets of Miami, Baltimore, and Philadelphia, or points between and further afield. Supposedly, the drug runners were members of the “notorious” gang known as Tren de Aragua, vicious rapists and killers all, whose only goal was to degrade and destroy the fine, upstanding citizens of the above-named communities and points between and further afield. Yes, it is certain that, if Trump had not acted “presidentially”, the streets of America would have been thrown into chaos, confusion, degradation, and death, but today the people who live there can sleep peacefully at night, knowing that a heavily-armed SWAT team is not going to smash their front door in and shoot up the place, because there are no drugs inside. What a relief!

Yeah, we have to fight them over there, so that we don’t have to fight them over here.

OK, let’s cut to the chase here. This is America, the land of the free and the home of the brave. The land of innate human rights backed up by the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights. All of us know this and we repeat it monotonously and mindlessly whenever the government, represented by the president (currently Trump), overrides The Supreme Law of the Land and tramples and abuses the citizenry. But, but, but…that’s not constitutional. That’s not allowed. That’s illegal. OK, tell that to your Congressperson or Senator the next time you see them…if you ever get a chance to see them, which isn’t likely unless they’re in your district stumping for re-election, at which time they will tell you anything to get you off their back AND get your vote in the upcoming election.

  1. Donald Trump, representing the US government, declared the crew members “criminal” and not worthy of life.
  2. Donald Trump, taking matters into his own hands, ordered them killed without recourse to any of the legalities which Make America Great.
  3. The boat was destroyed in international waters, on the high seas. This makes Trump a pirate, a modern-day one, to be sure, but absolutely no different in principle than other pirates throughout the ages.
  4. Trump has, in effect, declared war on Venezuela and its people, some of whom probably are vicious rapists, killers, and drug-runners. However, the highly-revered and worshipped Constitution insists that Congress must declare war and the president is bound by it. Despite this impediment, none of America’s wars since WW2 have been lawfully declared, they just somehow happened, usually because the president and his henchmen decided that they could do anything they wanted…and did, to the detriment of an enormous number of people world-wide, including Americans. Oh, and BTW, Congress which should have stepped in and stopped it, did nothing at all.

If Trump sends the troops and gunboats into Venezuela to “arrest and neutralize” the drug-runners, especially the top dog, Nicholas Maduro, it is likely to immediately resemble the situation in Viet Nam during the “war” (undeclared) there. Venezuela is an ideal spot for a protracted guerilla war with rough, mountainous terrain, steaming rain forests, huge rivers, and a poverty-stricken population which might conclude they have nothing to lose except their lives in the battle against an invading hegemonic power. Even though the US would quickly gain air superiority and maintain control of the coast with its warships, the place is not suited for tank warfare nor would it be easily overrun by large armies, which the US cannot afford to lose.

The best that Trump, representing the government, could hope for is that the Maduro regime (don’t you love that word, always used against our enemies, never our friends) would be destabilized and run out of town (or, better yet, into a maximum security prison in El Salvador), giving the US the opportunity to install a puppet government to its own liking, a proxy which would act as it was told to and would speedily sign over Venezuela’s vast mineral rights (oil) to ExxonMobil, Shell, and the like.

It would be wise, however, to remember that Venezuela’s neighboring country, Colombia, suffered from a decades-long struggle which pitted a weak, centralized government against dedicated opposing guerillas, until they finally were able to come to an agreement and end the fighting. Would Venezuela be any different? Would ExxonMobil or Shell care? Would The Powers That Be who have unleashed Trump and sicced him onto a “crappy little country” which is only fit to be picked up and thrown against a wall? Would Trump himself care?

What is really going on? I can think of three things without ever breaking a sweat.

  1. Trump and the West have lost the war (excuse me, Special Military Operation) in Ukraine. The Russians have won it. There is no stopping it without submitting to Vlad Putin’s demands, all of which have been known publicly for years.
  2. The war in Gaza (excuse me, Special Military Operation) is going badly for Israel and its constantly attentive, muscular, sycophantic groupie, the US State. Every day that Israel beats up, shoots down, tortures, rapes, and starves innocent people, mainly women and children, is another day in which world opinion increasingly turns against it. Like Ukraine, the war is lost but it cannot be admitted and will not be quit nor surrendered until the bitter end.
  3. Jeffrey Epstein. Ahhhhh! You thought I would never get there, didn’t you? It’s OK, you can exhale now. Yep, good ole Jeff is reaching out from beyond the grave (if he is actually dead which is not certain for sure) and causing havoc, panic, and consternation among the power-brokers who think that they had control of the narrative on this sordid affair. Do you believe that there is no list? Do you believe that Donald Trump is on that list? Do you believe that Ghislaine Maxwell is telling the truth? Do you believe that all the young girls who were supposedly seduced and manipulated willingly cooperated and that there were absolutely no victims among them? Do you believe that Thomas Massie is going to give up on his efforts to expose ALL the records held by the government?

What is more probable is that Trump and the cronies around, beneath, and over him are scared to death, terrified of being exposed, and doing what they do best to distract the public by creating a diversion, the best diversion, the one most guaranteed to turn the attention of the public away from the issue–war. A war which will accomplish its purpose, meant to take the heat off the current crisis which is threatening severe consequences on people who have acted with impunity for decades, believing like Trump, that they can do whatever they want.

Psalms 2 tells what happens when kings, rulers, and nations get too big for their britches. It’s not a good place to be.

A Mealy-mouthed Admission of Guilt

Roger Mitchell2 Comments

According to an article in Zero Hedge, the state of Florida is taking steps to remove all the imposed mandates concerning the Covid so-called “vaccines”. Yes, that’s right, all of them. To which I can only say, “It’s about time. They never should have ordered them in the first place.” But, credit where credit is due, and this is a positive development.

That being said, I am not pleased with Florida’s Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo’s philosophical argument in his announcement as he fudges what the real issue is.

“Who am I, as a government, or anyone else, or who am I as a man standing here now to tell you what you should put in your body? Who am I to tell you what your child should put in their body?

“I don’t have that right. Your body is a gift from God. What you put into your body is because of your relationship with your Body and your God.”

Ladapo manages in just a few short sentences to shift the argument from one of imposed mandates by a power-grabbing, totalitarian wanna-be State to one more to the liking of “libertarians” everywhere, namely, the sovereignty an individual has over his or her own body. Indeed, who is Ladapo (or anyone else, for that matter) to tell anyone at all how they SHALL treat themselves? Isn’t the base principle of libertarianism the concept that everyone can decide for themselves how they live? With respect to this, he is saying nothing new and, really, nothing at all.

The point that he avoids, however, is not one of individual, sovereign choice but the fact that injecting the shots has not been voluntary, but forced on people by the very same government which Ladapo is a part of. If he was entirely truthful, his words would have looked like this: “Who am I, as a government,…to tell you what you WILL put into your body?” No, no, even that is not correct. Let’s try again. “Who am I, as a government,…to tell you what someone else WILL put into your body, completely overriding any objection you might have?” Furthermore, “Who am I to tell you what your child WILL have injected into their body, against their (and your) will and consent?”

This has nothing to do with bodily autonomy or personal freedom and everything with understanding that the anti-Covid tide is running strong against TPTB and the scam which was foisted on the world. In some areas, it still has life but the monstrous beast which destroyed liberty over the course of a few years can be seen struggling and thrashing about, trying to maintain its viability. Ladapo recognizes the trend and is trying to get ahead of the curve by throwing out a bone, but I am willing to bet that if the Establishment had won the battle, we would never hear anything like this…from anyone. Instead, the only thing which would have been voiced is the injunction to–“Get Your Booster!”, and the giddy, gleeful (or not) pronouncements by the Bought and Paid For “news media” that Donald “Cap’n Warp Speed” Trump has won again.

I’m glad to see the state of Florida taking the lead on this issue but, please, please don’t muddy the waters. Either individual people are secure in their own rights or the State can tell them what they will do. There are no other alternatives. There is no other option.

Eugenics, Elitism, and the Law

Roger Mitchell2 Comments

“The first one to plead his cause seems right, until his neighbor comes and examines him.” — Proverbs 18: 17

“From there He arose and went to the region of Tyre and Sidon. And he entered a house and wanted no one to know it, but He could not be hidden. For a woman whose young daughter had an unclean spirit heard about Him, and she came and fell at His feet. The woman was a Greek, a Syro-Phoenician by birth, and she kept asking Him to cast the demon out of her daughter. But Jesus said to her, “Let the children be filled first, for it is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs.” And she answered and said to Him, “Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs under the table eat from the children’s crumbs.” Then He said to her, “For this saying go your way; the demon has gone out of your daughter.” And when she had come to her house, she found the demon gone out, and her daughter lying on the bed.” — Mark 7: 24-30, NKJV

At first glance, these two pieces of scripture seem to have nothing in common, but I have found a connection. Oddly enough, it comes from two separate articles on The Unz Review, the first making a case for the practice of eugenics and the second ripping his argument into shreds. Reading through the first article (7600 words, half-marathon, but I finished), one might be tempted to think that there is a sound argument for the practice, but reading through the second (27, 800 words, I skipped a lot and didn’t get through to the end before I quit), it is quite apparent that there are a lot of flaws in the first, all of which need to be resolved and the Commenters Which Follow happily did (and still are doing) their part to achieve that.

There are a lot of things which play into this debate and discussion, but ultimately the lesson learned is that eugenicists favor some method of “selection” to cull those they disapprove of. The reason for the disapproval nor the method employed are not critical to the debate, all that matters is that there are “elites” who decide and “sub-standards” who bear the judgment of the decision. This attitude brings to mind the saying that “The strong do what they will and the weak suffer what they must.”

Throughout human history, the world has experienced this tension repeatedly. This is not something new. Everywhere, in all times, some class of people has been termed “deficient” and “not quite human”, and due to that designation, suitable for “subjugation and/or removal”. Consider the history of the United States alone:

  1. Native Americans
  2. Black slaves
  3. Irish and Italian immigrants
  4. Chinese
  5. White trash
  6. Mentally incompetent
  7. Physically flawed
  8. And many more.

Applying this topic to the second scripture quoted, it is evident that the mindset was prevalent and accepted during the time of Jesus. The Jews knew that they were “superior” over all others and the others who lived under their dominance knew it as well. How else can you explain these words? “…it is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs.” The Gentiles were treated like dogs, little dogs, fit only to be cursed and kicked out of the way, unless, of course, they could be used to fill the coffers and wallets of the self-recognized “upper” class, which included not only the highest echelons of Jewish society, but also the lowest of the low. Remember Peter and the vision he had in which God told him not to call anything “unclean” which God had cleansed? Yes, even poverty-stricken, ignorant fishermen were prone to look down their snobbish noses at anyone they deemed “inferior” and draw in the hems of their robes to avoid touching them.

Thank God that after twenty centuries, we’re beyond that. Except that we’re not. The issue still swirls and the temptation still exists to consider a specific class as better than all others and it is nearly certain that the “favored ones” are represented by those who do the defining. Curiously enough, the definition always matches the person and personality of the definer, but then again, it really isn’t so curious. After all, we do have tendencies to inflate and lift ourselves above the status of others around us, don’t we?

Or am I the only one who has ever done that?

The Concept of Justice in an Unjust World

Roger Mitchell7 Comments

I subscribe to Doug Casey’s communique and regularly receive articles which I always read intently, sometimes more than once, and from which I usually learn something, even if nothing more than to buttress and bolster my own viewpoint. The most recent one did just that, commenting on the system in American society which we call “justice”, and proposing a logical, well-reasoned solution to the problem. I have reprinted it here in verbatim and added nothing. If you want to see the original, click on the link below. For the record, I am in complete agreement with Casey’s argument.

Doug Casey on the Failures of the Justice System and a Viable Solution

justic1e.jpg

International Man: What is the role of a justice system in a society, and what should the State have to do with it?

Doug Casey: In my view, what really holds a society together isn’t the laws enacted by legislatures or dictators, but peer pressure, social opprobrium, and moral approbation. In general, society is pretty self-regulating. It’s why people pay their bills at restaurants even though there’s not a cop at the door. Criminals are the exception, not the rule—although, it must be said, they naturally gravitate towards the government.

When somebody commits a crime, there’s a trial to determine what harm has been done, who should be compensated, and so forth. Courts determine these things. But I would argue that the state is not a necessary part of any of this. Society, like markets, tends to be self-ordering.

With a minimal “night watchman” sort of state like that described by Ayn Rand, the proper role of government is simply to defend you from force and fraud. This implies an army to defend you from force external to your society, a police force to defend you from force within your society, and a court system to allow the adjudication of disputes without resorting to force.

I could live in a society like that—it would be a vast improvement over what we have now. A proper court system, with either arbitrators or judges and juries system, would be part of it. But I’d go on to argue that juries and courts should be privatized.

International Man: What would a privatized justice system look like? Would it have juries?

Doug Casey: There might be either arbitrators, or juries, or both. The jury should be composed of independent thinkers who aren’t easily swayed by rhetoric or pressured by groupthink. Today, however, they’re just random people who aren’t clever enough to avoid jury duty.

In theory, juries can counter the tremendous power of judges. Judges today are either elected or appointed. If elected, they have to campaign like any other politician and are subject to the same perverse incentives any other politician is. If they are appointed, it can be even worse. Appointees are often just collecting political favors. While they’re allegedly more independent, in many ways, they’re even less accountable.

In theory, a jury is a good counterbalance to the power of the judge. You need some way to weigh the facts and decide who’s in the right. But the way juries work in the US today is far from optimal. It used to be that a jury could easily overturn any law. The process was called jury nullification, and it was an effective way for the common people to keep legislators under control. Today, however, it’s really a dead letter.

Today’s juries amount to a form of involuntary servitude. You get your notice for jury duty, and you either have to serve, whether you want to or not or come up with excuses the state will deign to accept. Most productive people feel that they have more urgent priorities in their lives than helping decide court cases that can go on for months. So the type of people who end up serving on juries these days generally have nothing better to do or for whom the trivial fee they pay is good money. Hardly the kind of person who should decide weighty matters, perhaps even life and death.

In addition, many trials center on highly technical concepts, and forms of evidence, that people rounded up from the highways and byways are simply unqualified to interpret.

Worse, there’s the jury selection process called voir dire. The notion is to give the attorneys of both sides the opportunity to remove a few individuals from the jury who might be biased against their case, thus ensuring a more unbiased jury. But in practice, it’s an interrogation process by which lawyers try to ensure they get a jury that will believe whatever they tell them. This usually means that anyone exhibiting the least bit of independent thinking or is prone to value justice over law enforcement will get removed and never serve on a jury.

The result is that the quality of juries today is several standard deviations below what it should be. Any intelligent person has opinions, and in this day of the Internet, almost any person’s opinions are easy to find out. No matter which way your opinions line up, one side or the other isn’t going to like them in any case, so you won’t make it past voir dire. Both the prosecution and defense like to see malleable jurors with easily influenced minds. As a result, the typical juror has no opinions other than those on the weather, sports, and American Idol. People who think in concepts are weeded out as troublemakers.

This process makes a shambles of the concept of a “jury of your peers.”The type of people they rope into jury duty wouldn’t likely be the peers of anyone now reading this. If I were facing a trial, I’d much rather be tried by twelve people randomly selected out of a phone book than by the type of people who get selected for jury duty.

If we’re to have juries, they ought to be truly juries of our peers—people who can understand you and the facts pertaining to your case. But we’re far from an ideal system. It’s worse than arbitrary; given that most of those employed by the justice system work for the state, and that it’s the state vs. an individual in so many cases, there’s a huge inherent bias on top of the whole problem with today’s stacked juries.

International Man: What is an ideal justice system in your perspective?

Doug Casey: It would be a more equitable system if judges and jurors were professionals who had to compete with each other on the basis of their proven records of intelligence, fairness, speed, and low cost. The victim and the accused would mutually agree on the judge and jury or arbitrators.

Separating justice and state would help eliminate the state’s ability to prosecute phony, made-up crimes, especially crimes with no victims. There needs to be an actual victim to press charges if the state can’t be party to a case. That alone would eliminate the wasted resources and trashed lives resulting from the US’s various wars against victimless crimes. No one could be criminally prosecuted for having unorthodox sexual preferences, using unpopular drugs, drinking on Sunday, or smoking in a private establishment. Or for evading taxes. It might surprise Americans to know that tax evasion is a civil, not a criminal, matter in most countries.

Most legal actions focus on matters of tort and breach of contract. It’s important to keep the laws simple and few, so ignorance of the law is impossible. Ideally, just two great laws:

1. Do all that you say you’re going to do.

2. Don’t aggress against other people or their property.

The point is that justice has to do with righting actual wrongs that have been done to people, not enforcing laws and exacting arbitrary punishments. Today justice means enforcing the will of politicians and bureaucrats. A proper system of justice would focus on making the victim whole, not arbitrarily punishing the aggressor.

With privatized justice, someone would accuse another, both sides would choose an arbitrator (professional or otherwise), and those two arbitrators would agree on a third to make sure there were no tied votes. They would look at all the facts—not just the arbitrary subset of facts allowed by legal precedent and state machinations. That decision would not be about punishing anyone but about making the harmed party whole again.

The key concepts are justice and restitution, not punishment. Punishment, if you actually think about it, rarely serves any useful purpose; it just gives vent to base and reactive emotions. It may set a “good example” to deter future miscreants, but it definitely sets a bad example for society as a whole by institutionalizing and justifying cruelty.

International Man: Is there any hope for the current justice system?

Doug Casey: The whole system is highly politicized, which is only natural for something run by the state. Unfortunately, as the country increasingly looks to government as a solution—your only choice being to choose between so-called “right” and “left” politics. That’s going to make the current legal system even more dysfunctional in every way I can think of.

International Man: What are the implications of this for investors and businesses?

Doug Casey: I see people being convicted under ridiculous applications of the securities laws, tax laws, and more. The only area where things are becoming more rational and freer is the area of drug laws. It’s becoming clear to even the dimmest legislators and jurists that they’re as stupid and destructive as were those against alcohol during Prohibition.

In fact, almost all the administrative laws of the myriad of three- and four-letter agencies—ATF, FTC, EPA, SEC, FDA, etc., etc.—create bogus and even nonsensical “crimes.” Even if you aren’t convicted, if you’re targeted, it can cost you hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in legal fees, plus time, lost business, and damaged reputation. The system has become rapacious and Kafkaesque. And as the state grabs more and more power with each passing crisis, the risk of attention from state operatives increases, even for innocent and honest­ people. The trend is accelerating in a negative direction. If history is any guide, things will get worse until we reach a genuine crisis. That’s bad news for anyone with any wealth, especially if they have unpopular political views.

That has very serious implications. Not just for people in business and investors, but society itself. This is one reason I’m so bearish on the prospects of the current world order; not only are there decades-long distortions in the economy that have to be liquidated, but the whole legal system is rotten to the core. It needs to be scrapped—someone needs to push the reset button and restore justice as its guiding principle—and that, too, is a distortion that can’t be corrected easily or painlessly.

Unfortunately, it seems as if it’s the very worst people who have their fingers on “The Great Reset” button.

The Smell of Blood Money

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

Whoohoo! Happy days are here again.

Europe To Spend $100BN It Doesn’t Have, To Buy Weapons America Doesn’t Have, To Arm Soldiers Ukraine Now Lacks

This is the headline of an article on ZeroHedge which attempts to explain what happened in Washington yesterday between Donald Trump and the seven dwarves of Europe1 in their discussion of the situation in Ukraine.

Here’s what Trump had to say after the meeting.

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
I had a very good meeting with distinguished guests, President
Volodymyr Zelenskyy, of Ukraine, President Emmanuel Macron,
of France, President Alexander Stubb, of Finland, Prime Minister
Giorgia Meloni, of Italy, Prime Minister Keir Starmer, of the United
Kingdom, Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany,
Friedrich Merz, President of the European Commission, Ursula
von der Leyen, and Secretary General of NATO, Mark Rutte, in
the White House, which ended in a further meeting in the Oval
Office. During the meeting we discussed Security Guarantees for
Ukraine, which Guarantees would be provided by the various
European Countries, with a coordination with the United States
of America. Everyone is very happy about the possibility of
PEACE for Russia/Ukraine. At the conclusion of the meetings, I
called President Putin, and began the arrangements for a
meeting, at a location to be determined, between President Putin
and President Zelenskyy. After that meeting takes place, we will
have a Trilat, which would be the two Presidents, plus myself.
Again, this was a very good, early step for a War that has been
going on for almost four years. Vice President JD Vance,
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Special Envoy Steve
Witkoff, are coordinating with Russia and Ukraine. Thank you for
your attention to this matter!

Yes, he should be happy and quite proud of himself because, just a few minutes later he said this in response to a question from a reporter.

“We’re not giving anything. We’re selling weapons,”

Spoken like a true hero and peacemaker, a very compassionate, loving way to make the stakeholders of the military-industrial complex (MIC) extremely happy. And richer than ever. Yes, the sale of weapons is really what counts in this matter. BLM! Bottom Lines Matter! The war in Ukraine can eventually be brought to an end–someday–AFTER we have milked this cash cow for as much as we can get out of it. Did it ever cross his mind that while he’s raking in the dough along with his cronies (partners-in-crime) that average, everyday people in Ukraine are being mercilessly slaughtered?

The fact of the matter is that Donald (Colonel Bombast) Trump could end the war in Ukraine in one day, just as he promised he would while on the campaign trail. All he would have to do is to declare that the US would no longer write any more checks to Ukraine, it would no longer allow US weapons to be transferred to Ukraine (whether they were given or paid for), it would no longer use its intelligence “services” to coordinate and work with Ukraine, it would immediately drop the sanctions imposed on Russia, and demand that the EU follow in lockstep with his directive.

Boom! End of war. But he won’t do that. We all heard that, right? “We’re not giving anything. We’re selling weapons.”

Ain’t it grand?

  1. Starmer (UK), Macron (France), Merz (Germany), Meloni (Italy), Stubb (Finland), Rutte (NATO), and the smallest of them all, Ukraine’s own, Vlad Zelenskiy, plus the fairy godmother, Ursula von der Leyen, the head honcho of the European Commission, who can’t resist the temptation to keep the war going at any cost. ↩︎

Five Years On: Covid, Clergy, and Culpability

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

“…five years after the most significant assault on the human race by its governments since the invention of democracy, only a handful of clerics have emerged to state clearly that, far from being any kind of ‘subtle seduction’, this assault was evil and disgusting.” — https://johnwaters.substack.com/p/diary-of-a-dissenter-the-week-from-aaa

John Waters was commenting on the Catholic Church’s response to the various Harry Potter books and films when he threw this curveball, but it fits. Of course, he was referring to the COVID (pandemic, plandemic, panic, debacle, fiasco, coup, etc., take your pick), but the fact of the matter is that his statement is absolutely accurate. Let me ask you. How many members of the Christian cloth, the clergy, (whether Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox doesn’t matter) have you heard recently (or at any time at all) call out the Covid scheme for what it really was–an overt assault on the rights and freedoms of individuals world-wide? Really now, I’ll bet you can count them on the fingers of one hand without using any of them twice. Can you? Give it a try. If I am wrong, let me know by leaving a comment and include links which back up your assertion. I’ll check them out.

Early on in the COVID years (late February 2020), I saw that this was a scam and began encouraging people to resist it. One of the ways I did this was to state that churches everywhere ought to tell the State where to get off and to get out.

Corona, churches, and Easter

This exhortation produced nothing, nothing at all, as the local churches I am familiar with did nothing of the kind but, instead, fell all over themselves to parrot and obey the Party Line because…Romans 13. Well, that last is pure conjecture, but I have no doubt that it had something to do with the attitude of obsequiousness, in addition to which they were scared to death, fearful, terrified, that they and everyone around them would get sick and die unless the State was exalted and worshipped as the only entity which could stave off the (allegedly) approaching existential disaster. God, er, I mean, Government forbid that anything like this should happen. Or, it might have had something to do with an obscure, archaic, generally benign, seldom mentioned tax law called 501(c)(3), which is rarely, if ever, used to restrict anyone’s free speech.

Pardon, my sarcasm is showing! I apologize profusely to anyone who might bristle at the heretical thought that the concept of money is one of the most prominent things which pastors, preachers, and church officials think about. How could I have been so stupid???

An Easter Message for Our Time

Can you think of even a single church leader who has stood firm in his denunciation of the State for their mendacious, brutal oppression of the citizenry during the COVID era? How many can you name who were willing to go on record in defense of human rights and liberty at the risk of their own health, wealth, and well-being? Try this for starters, Artur Pawlowski, who did not hesitate to call a spade a spade. Or, better known, Chuck Baldwin, who absolutely refused to shut down his large church in Kalispell, MT and is constantly speaking out about the abuses of Statist societies.

OK, there’s two. You only have to come up with three more.

Am I being too hard on the preachers? OK, then, let’s spread the responsibility around. It is fairly certain that the church leaders were only saying what their constituents wanted to hear, you know, the itching ears syndrome. After all, when Covid arrived on the scene, everyone was scared s*itless [spitless] and everyone was looking for someone, anyone, to assure them that all was well and, lo and behold, there was the State, which openly proclaimed the narrative: “Do as you are told and all will be well with you. Otherwise, you will die a horrible, agonizing death and if you don’t, someone’s grandmother in Omaha or East Berlin will. You don’t want that on your conscience now, do you?” This is not a great amount different than the admonitions we heard as young children at table. “Eat your food. There are starving children in Africa.” That didn’t make any sense to me then, and still doesn’t.

With respect to that, the parishioners were as complicit and compliant as the clergy and, five years on, it doesn’t seem to have improved substantially, if at all. Churches today are still filled with people (pew-sitters) who want to have their feelings tickled, to go home emotionally satisfied, to congregate again after the service at the local restaurant and extol the “lift” they got from the morning’s “worship”, which was AWESOME!, and for which they willingly deposited their tithe (Es ist Pflicht!)1 in the “offering” tray as it was passed around. Is it any wonder at all that pastors and priests do not rock the boat, do not call their followers to a higher level, do not call out evil for what it is?

Is it any wonder that today churches have no power to speak power into the lives of those who are enmeshed in the grip of evil?

In a thought-provoking post on his Substack, Joshua Stylman wrote this gem.

“Now, the mirage is gone. What was once promised can no longer be afforded. The institutions that upheld the illusion are spent. They extract, but no longer inspire. They preach equity while enforcing dependence. They sell empowerment while removing agency.”

“And still, they insist the dream is alive.”

Stylman was not writing about churches. Instead he was focused on the real problem of homeownership in America among the younger generations, most of whom will never own a home due to financial circumstances–price and interest rates, for instance. Nevertheless, it is not difficult to extrapolate his assertion onto Christian churches today. Unfortunately, much of the “dream” which has been promised relentlessly over the years and decades has been the assurance that Jesus would return soon, real soon, and “rapture” His followers out of here, to never experience any more evil or hardship again. Yeah, beam me up, Scotty! What is even more unfortunate is that those who swallowed this crap whole-heartedly refused, by and large, to affect the society around them in a positive manner, believing that anything they did would be minimal, would have little to no effect, and would probably be destroyed in the Tribulation.

“Everyone knows the world is getting worse and worse, so, why should I waste my time, energy, and wealth in a vain attempt to alter its course for the better? “

Except for voting Republican and conservative in the next election, especially if one of the names on the ballot is Donald John (Captain Warp Speed, Colonel Bombast) Trump.

Es ist Pflicht! That is required.

  1. Es ist Pflicht! A German phrase which basically means “duty, obligation, responsibility, etc.” My thanks to C.J. Hopkins for the education. ↩︎

Can Moral Obligations be Mandated by Law?

Roger Mitchell1 Comment

I’m going to give Donald Trump a little respite and breather in this post and address something more philosophical and germane to human nature.

I hardly ever watch Fox News and if by some chance I do, it is for never more than a moment or two before I quit, usually out of disgust by whatever clap the commentator is waxing eloquent about. Self-determined and proclaimed moralism is not just a religion of the Left, the so-called conservative Right is also shot through with it.

Nevertheless, a few days ago, I sat down with my wife and watched a segment of news, Laura Ingraham’s interview with Holly (last name unknown), as she was recovering from a severe beating she had endured at the hands of an out-of-control mob in Cincinnati, Ohio. The resultant bruises from the blows she had received were still quite visible, although it appeared that she was well on the road to physical healing.

Holly exuded an air of calmness and patience, and I did not notice any display of anger or rage on her part, which might have been justifiable considering everything she had been through. In fact, she openly expressed an interest, not in revenge and punishment, but reconciliation and understanding to ensure that nothing like this would ever happen to another person. This is an admirable stance. I respect her for it and I said something to that effect to my wife when the segment was over.

“I like her. She is already famous and this will benefit her immensely. The black mob and the Cincinnati officials have not done themselves any good, but Holly will become an important, highly sought-after person, perhaps running for political office or accepting an offer to become a TV news personality of her own.”

Or something like that. As I said, it was a few days ago and my memory is not what it used to be.

There was, however, something that Holly said which I disagree with and it has to do with the moral responsibility of the onlookers, many of whom were actively taking videos, but did not call 911 or the legal authorities to intervene to bring the melee to an end. In essence, she said that this practice ought to be illegal and these people punished according to law. Philosophically, I think she is wrong and, on this, I am going to invoke Walter Block, he of “Defending the Undefendable” fame (infamy?) While it is certain that the inactions of the many people who watched Holly take a “beatdown” were reprehensible and morally despicable, they should not be considered criminal and punishable.

“Every crime is a sin, but not every sin is a crime.”

I have my own differences of opinion with Walter Block, among them his favorable treatment of abortion on demand and his shrill, unwavering support of the nation of Israel, despite the undeniable fact that the ones who suffer the most (unborn babies, already born babies in Gaza) are destroyed outright by people who are more powerful than they are. In these, I find his position on libertarianism and the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP) inconsistent and untenable, and I have written numerous times about his position on abortion. See here and here for examples.1 Still, I find his arguments about people who are repugnant and despicable to be compelling and I cannot, to be consistent with my own philosophy, find any good reason to overturn it, at least, legally. There are moral arguments to be made here, but they ought to be presented to those who are the “active sinners” and not against Block, et alia, who only defend their right to live in such a way.

As it relates to Holly and the mob, numerous questions arise.

  1. Did certain people refuse or neglect to call 911?
  2. Was this refusal/inaction morally reprehensible, thoughtless, and/or selfish?
  3. Should people be punished because they are morally reprehensible, thoughtless, and selfish?
  4. If so, what charges should be brought against them? What should be the prescribed punishment? Would these be based on principles of reason and truth or pure emotion, public will, and political pandering?
  5. Could prosecution under the law ever be considered as running afoul of a person’s religious beliefs, i.e., that everything is pre-ordained and to interfere is going against God’s will, therefore, personally detrimental? Does civil “responsibility” ever trump spiritual submission to one’s higher power? If so, what would it look like and where are the limits, if any?
  6. Etc., etc., etc…..ad infinitum.

More importantly, this argument falls into the philosophical arena known as “positive” law, which basically seeks to make people good by virtue of legislation. I am strongly opposed to the notion as I understand that only God can make people good and that only through the personal acceptance of Jesus Christ and the life-altering influence of the Holy Spirit. Confession of sin, repentance, and change for the better cannot be legislated nor made mandatory, ordered, and enforced, it must be voluntary and freely sought. The first sentence in the description of positive law in Wikipedia (yes, I am citing Wikipedia) describes it quite well and flows with my own version.

“Positive laws (Latin: ius positum) are human-made laws that oblige or specify an action.” — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_law

In our relevant case, Holly would like to see a government mandated ordinance which obliges and specifies an action, such action being that people who see someone being beaten would be compelled by law to make an attempt to correct the situation in some way. Whether this means getting physically involved as Holly did or simply dialing 911 and alerting the officials while maintaining a safe distance really does not matter. The important thing to remember is that action MUST be taken under threat of punishment, i.e., “You will DO good, dammit, whether you want to or not. It is The Law. Doing nothing is not allowed. After all, your brother’s (sister’s) life, health, and well-being are at stake.”2

With all due respect to Holly and the millions of like-minded people around the world, whether to become involved or not is a moral issue, one to be decided solely within the conscience of an individual who knows what is right and what is wrong. It is not, ought not be, a legal issue with sanctions imposed for lack of activity in the event of a traumatic event. To attempt to make it a legal matter would only open up a subjectively interpreted can of worms and do nothing at all to change human behavior.3 “Love your neighbor as you love yourself…” is the operative phrase here which carries the thought of personal self-sacrifice on behalf of your neighbor, even at the risk of your own life and Holly’s action showed this explicitly. However, this is not the same as loving your neighbor under compulsion because you are afraid of the trouble that a disinterested third party might inflict on you if you don’t. The two are worlds apart.

What is really astounding to me are the vast numbers of people (finger-pointing is not necessary, you know them) who are willing to castigate and condemn the bystanders in Cincinnati, yet who do or say absolutely nothing to stop the aggressive actions of the Israeli State against the impoverished, helpless population of Gaza. Where is the outcry from those who think that ‘There outta be a law’? Why do we laud and support Holly in her drive to make human inaction illegal, yet criminalize human action (anti-semitic speech, BDS, street protests, etc.) when it infringes on our own pet issues? The only answer I can come up with is that people are, generally speaking, driven by emotion, but recoil at the thought of applying consistency of thought and action, i.e., reason and repentance, to their own daily lives. The fact that the current situation in Gaza is shot through with religious overtones does nothing to alleviate the situation and, in my opinion, actually makes it more difficult to resolve through rational discourse. “God said it. I believe it. That settles it.”

Only it doesn’t. The beatdowns continue, and will, until morally upright people from all walks of life stop expecting someone else to solve these problems via brute force and become actively involved in them personally, abandoning the idea that man-made laws can overcome and correct the evil-ridden apathy which afflicts human nature.

  1. BC (Before Covid), I was writing essays and articles on abortion, an issue about which I have strongly held beliefs. For instance, I would have no problem at all with prosecuting the “doctors and nurses” who perform them, charging them with first-degree murder and punishing them severely if convicted. I am ambivalent about bringing such charges against women who abort for various reasons which are too numerous and complex to mention here. You can access the postings here. When Covid hit, I made the decision to focus on that as I believed it was the greater and more pressing threat to our lives and liberties. Now that Covid is receding into the rearview mirror (not necessarily over), I may again pick up the thread to preserve innocent, unborn human life. ↩︎
  2. This brings to mind the tragic case of Kitty Genovese, a young woman who was stabbed numerous times and raped as she lay dying in New York City in 1964. At the time, the New York Times claimed that 37 people had witnessed the incident from their apartment windows but did nothing to stop it with the exception of one man who shouted, “Leave that girl alone!”, but did not go to her aid. The Times assertion has since been debunked and it is not known how many (few) people actually witnessed the crime, but the story stuck and still resonates today. The incident resembles what is known as the Bystander Effect and was a strong impetus to the development of the 911 system we have today. ↩︎
  3. Given the prevalence of mobile smart phones today, it would be possible for a zealous prosecutor to geo-locate every single phone which was in the vicinity at the time, identify who owned the phone, and charge them with the crime of “not calling 911 in an emergency”. Untold numbers of people could have their lives turned upside down and wrecked under such a scenario, especially if the prosecutor was prone to using these instances as stepping-stones to higher office, which many are prone to do. ↩︎

Colonel Bombast: “He Shouldn’t Have Said That.”

Roger Mitchell4 Comments

“AND I’M GOING TO SLAP HIM SILLY BECAUSE HE DID!”

On Friday, August 1, Donald Trump stated that he had ordered two US nuclear submarines to be “repositioned in the appropriate areas” as a response to a statement made by Dimitry Medvedev, one of Vlad Putin’s close advisors and a former president of the Russian state.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-nuclear-submarines-repositioned-medvedev-f8e9b870fa107f6b6209e7a22f8ada43

This is high-stakes theater at its most hilarious, or it would be if it wasn’t also extremely dangerous for the entire world.

So, really what did Medvedev say and why did Trump feel the need to respond so forcefully, not only with his rhetoric but also with the action described above?

“Trump’s playing the ultimatum game with Russia: 50 days or 10… He should remember 2 things: 1. Russia isn’t Israel or even Iran. 2. Each new ultimatum is a threat and a step towards war,” –Dimitry Medvedev

To which, of course Trump couldn’t resist answering.


“…tell Medvedev, the failed former President of Russia, who thinks he’s still President, to watch his words. He’s entering very dangerous territory!” — Donald Trump

All this culminated with his announcement that he had ordered the subs into position. What a joke! What a farce! What a circus! The comedy of this exceeds even that of the recent 12-day “war” with Iran which ended with the US strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities and Iran’s subsequent strike on al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar, all of which were given advance notice so as to not let the situation escalate out of hand. Blow for show, in other words, akin to the ridiculous “sport” known as professional wrestling.

The only problem is that we might all be blown to smithereens if something goes horribly wrong.

  1. Trump ordered two nuclear subs into the “appropriate area”, just in case. Well, just in case, what exactly?
  2. Are these subs nuclear-powered or nuclear-armed? This is a big difference and highly crucial. Nuclear-powered subs with conventional weapons are not the same as nuclear-armed subs which can take out an entire country with one salvo.
  3. Did the Pentagon actually send these subs to their new coordinates or was this “order” simply ignored because wiser heads decided not to follow it and only played along with the game, stroking Trump’s ego so he could feel like he’s really in control?
  4. Has Russia responded to Trump’s “repositioning” by doing some of their own? Did they already have subs in position somewhere off the eastern seaboard of the Atlantic Ocean, say, 500 miles east of New Jersey, ready at a moment’s notice to take out Washington, D.C., New York City, Philadelphia, and Boston? Is this a legitimate possibility?

Trump, for all the good he has done in educating the average American about the dangers of being subservient to the Deep State, sounds like he has taken his own words to heart, believing that all he has to do is issue ultimatums, threats, and veiled insinuations at which everyone else, including his own closest enemies, will repent of their sins with fear and trembling. “B’God, those pesky Russians, especially Medvedev, had better shut their potty mouths and start listening to me. Or else!”

The major problem with this is that he has offered up so much bullshit in the past that he has no credibility left on the world stage when he speaks. Remember that he promised to end the Ukraine War in twenty-four hours once he had gained the Oval Office? Yeah, well, things aren’t quite as simple as they appeared when he was playing to throngs of adoring audiences on the campaign trail.

Trump, in my opinion, is increasingly seen as someone who can be ignored and sidelined. He is not consistent, does not act diplomatically, refuses to hold to his word even when it hurts, bluffs constantly, and does not hesitate to change course politically if he thinks it will benefit him. Compared to this, Vladimir Putin comes across as reasonable, calm, logical, unmoving, and steadfast.

But, then, what should I expect? After all, I did compare Trump to a wrecking ball, appointed only to destroy what already is to clear the way for what will be. With all due respect to that, I am not disappointed. It is happening. In real time. And we get to watch it unfold.

Hang on to your life. Trump isn’t going to.

Face it, MAGA! The Man lied to You.

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

And you still act like a groupie?

I am really confused. Why did Donald Trump spend so much time and energy on the campaign trail talking about releasing the Epstein files and then refusing to actually do it when he had the power to make it happen? Kash Patel and Dan Bongino are both small potatoes and it’s obvious that someone or something scared them s*itless. But Trump? He’s as big as they come and should have seen the way the wind was blowing, yet continued on with his endless, mindlessly bloviating promises to his supporters who ate them up like red meat thrown to a mad, ravenous pack of wild dogs. Something doesn’t add up, in my opinion. I don’t know what. Two things come to mind, though:

  1. Trump was completely clueless when he was on the trail and no one bothered to set him straight even though it was plainly evident he was going to triumph “bigly” over Kamala Harris and sweep into Washington with a huge, cohesive mandate to clean house, only to find out later, after the fact, that he couldn’t say anything at all, could not expose any of the putrid rotting stench emanating from the scandal, or,
  2. He understood all along what was going on and simply misled his followers (true believers, all), telling them what they wanted to hear, a.k.a., itching ears syndrome, knowing full-well that he would abandon them as soon as he could and do it in such a fashion that there would be no question about walking it back.

I find it difficult to believe the first option. If he didn’t know, he should have. Trump has been in bed, so to speak, with the muckety-muck, high-powered, extremely wealthy, movers and shakers all his life. He had the overt backing of Miriam Adelson, an ardent Zionist, to the tune of $100 million tossed into his campaign budget. He was closeted with numerous other Zionist proponents and made his intentions toward Israel plain, earning himself the derogatory nickname, “Zion Don”. To say that none of these well-connected persons, among many others, had an inkling about Epstein’s (alleged) connections to Mossad and did not caution him to tone down the rhetoric is unlikely. Either they knew and kept quiet or they were also clueless.

Given my opinion of government and political leaders, it is easier for me to assume, without proof, mind you, that he blatantly flat-out lied to gain votes and backing. Part of the game, you know. Anything goes. The end justifies the means. After all, the man does not have a reputation for honesty or honest dealing and has shown his utter contempt for anyone who dared to show even a smidgeon of resistance over his actions. Thomas Massie, for instance, the embodiment of America First, whom Trump has declared persona non grata over their differences on a budget bill. Or the millions of MAGA men and women he casually jettisoned when the notice on Epstein was given because they became upset at the news. Or the hundreds of J6’ers and their families that he let twist in the wind because it was convenient when he could have laid down the law and turned them loose forthwith.

No, I have no problem at all saying that Trump deliberately lied to “his” people, the very ones whom he rode into the White House for the second time, or maybe the third, depending on who you ask. The only thing that adds a jarring, discordant note to my theory is that he appeared to be visibly agitated and angry (watch Marco Rubio’s eyes speak volumes while he says nothing at all) at the hearing which broke the news that Epstein had no client list, that there was no evidence of pedophilia, no blackmail, and that there would be no more investigations on the subject. “It is finished”, thundered the verdict, sealing the box closed forever, much as the Romans hoped to do when they rolled a massive stone over the tomb where Jesus’ body was laid after his crucifixion. (Note: see here for more similarities between Jesus Christ and Jeffrey Epstein)

Why was Trump so angry? Why did he lash out at the reporter who dared to ask him a simple question about the files? If he was complicit with the scheme all along AND if he was an accomplished liar as I have asserted, it would seem logical that he would have simply blown this all off with a practiced air of aplomb and sangfroid. He most definitely was not as “cool as a cucumber” under the pressure. I cannot decide if his moral conscience was bubbling up to the surface and struggling to be let out or if he was truly livid at the fact that his word was being questioned and that the issue refused to die. Probably the second. If his name was Greta Thunberg, his response would have been “How dare you?”

If he didn’t know, he was incompetent. If he did know, he was complicit. Either way, he deserves to be turned out of office and relegated to the “dustbin of history”. Officially, this would happen after the 2026 elections IF the Democrats manage to scrape together a majority of Congress, but this is not certain because it appears they are actively trying to collectively commit suicide and destroy the party. Constitutionally, it could happen IF J.D. Vance were to depose him with the strong support of Trump’s cabinet via the 25th Amendment, Section IV, which we were introduced to during the waning days of the Biden Administration. It does look, at least to my untrained eye, like he has visibly changed and grown old in the last few months and his speech and actions increasingly seem to be schizophrenic and erratic.

Regardless, public trust in the federal government has been broken, probably irrevocably, and Epstein’s List may loom large in the history books as the straw that broke the camel’s back. I tend to agree with Charles Hugh Smith who seems to think so.

“Perhaps when we look back on the Epstein Affair, we’ll understand that it broke the back of Americans’ faith in their political and law enforcement institutions. A great many Americans are not party loyalists; they voted for Donald Trump as the independent “outsider” who vowed to clean house, an independent who used one of the parties as a convenient platform.”

“If even an “outsider” is incapable of cleaning house, then it’s hopeless, and if the two parties have failed us, then where do we turn? That is both an open question, and a taboo, for the corporate media is already churning out narrative control about the 2028 election being a “contest” (heh) between flimsy cardboard cutouts of failed ideological covers for systemic corruption.”

“America’s elites aren’t above the law; there is no law. But don’t say it out loud; it’s an unbreakable taboo.”

No, don’t say anything out loud. Just sweep it under the rug and hope that no one notices.

Face it, MAGA. You’ve been lied to. And you took it.

Jesus, Jeffrey, and Existential Paranoia

Roger Mitchell3 Comments

I have read that one of the reasons why Jeffrey Epstein’s (non-existent) list of wealthy, powerful men and women will not be released is that it would cause so much turmoil and chaos that the entire Western system of government could collapse. Under such a scenario, the Pullers-of-Strings who now control the corridors of power would be exposed to public ridicule, scorn, and hatred on such a level that they would be deposed and someone else would take their place, thus upending the entire apple cart.

God forbid! We can’t have that! This is America, after all, the land of the fraudulent and the home of the buffoons.

Well, bring it on. I’m down with that.

“It is preferable that one man should die than that the whole nation should perish.” — John 11:50

Two thousand years ago, the high priest Caiaphas used this argument to persuade his fellow priests and Pharisees that it would be better for the Jewish nation if Jesus Christ were to die, thus creating the rationale which they immediately pursued with single-minded zeal.

“Then from that day on, they plotted to put Him to death.” — John 11:53

In this sense, Jeffrey Epstein and Jesus Christ are alike and Donald Trump is acting like Caiaphas, trying his dead-level best to quell an uprising which might very well cause the overturning of the nation, the death of the current power regime. If only Epstein would just die and be dead and go away forever, everything would be MAGA for all eternity. In Donald’s view, that is. The rest of us might beg to differ.

The only problem is that Epstein, although being dead (?) for more than five years, simply won’t stay that way and his “resurrected presence” haunts The Powers That Be (whoever they might be, Trump is only a puppet on a string) to this day. Jesus was dead for three days and His resurrection and Presence have created consternation, worry, and fear among rulers and tyrants ever since.

The truth cannot be buried forever. Sooner or later, it will be brought to life and the agents of death have no power to stop that from happening. In fact, the more they try to suppress it, the more pressure is brought to bear on the issue. Eventually, all will be known. No telling how long it will take, but Jeffrey Epstein will “out” and the world will finally know what is actual and real about his “little black book”, whose names are written therein, and what their deeds amounted to. My guess is that once Epstein’s List has been made fully public, JFK, the USS Liberty incident, and 9/11 will follow soon after.

Like that of Jesus’ day, the world paradigm is changing. Trump, like Caiaphas, is fighting a losing battle.

There are a lot of “conspiracy theories” wandering around about Epstein’s cadre of associates, all of whom plausibly deny that they had sex with any of his girls, many of whom were under the legal age of consent. Take your pick. I’m not going to regurgitate them more than I already have (see the opening paragraph above). What I am going to mention is that someone, arguably more powerful than Trump, got to him and his staff in some “yuuge” way, enough so that they lied through their rattling, clattering, clacking teeth about the issue. Just watching their body language and the way they reacted to comments or questions was enough to convince me. The real question is “whodunit”? I don’t think it was a coincidence that Trump did a 180 turn as soon as he walked Bibi Netanyahu out the door of the Oval Office and kissed him goodbye. There are no coincidences in politics. Draw your own conclusions from that.

While there are no coincidences in politics, there certainly is irony, and what I find deliciously ironic is that history, which doesn’t repeat itself, appears to be rhyming. The Jewish leaders of Jesus’ day were the ones who openly schemed to have Him crucified, believing that He wouldn’t be able to “stir up” more trouble if he were dead and buried. Wouldn’t it be sweet if their modern-day compadres (those who will not be named, use your imagination to determine who I mean) were the ones to stifle and suffocate Epstein to death (even though he’s (allegedly) already dead), in the vain attempt to keep him (or at least his List) from creating extreme difficulty, hardship, pain, and suffering for them and their untold, unlimited riches and power.

The more I think about this, the more excited I get.

“Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries that are coming upon you! Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver are corroded, and their corrosion will be a witness against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have heaped up treasure in the last days. Indeed the wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, cry out; and reached the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. — James 5: 1-4

“The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and against His anointed, saying, “Let us break Their bonds in pieces and cast away Their cords from us.” He who sits in the heavens shall laugh; the Lord shall hold them in derision. Then He shall speak to them in His wrath and distress them in His deep displeasure.” — Psalm 2: 2-5

I would not want to be in their shoes. Nothing would be worth that.

Epstein Revisited: Random Thoughts on the Debacle

Roger Mitchell1 Comment

“Some men’s sins are clearly evident, preceding them to judgment, but those of some men follow later.” –1 Timothy 5:24

Jeffrey Epstein is gone, so it is said, and he has been preceded by widespread judgment about his evident sins. There are those whose sins have not yet been made evident, but their time is coming. Those sins may be covered up and secreted away for a time, but sooner or later, the evidence will be brought into the light. They cannot be hidden forever.

How do these people sleep at night? With everything that is going on in the current Epstein saga, it would seem that they must be frantic, wondering how and when their own “sins” are going to be exposed for the whole world to see. This explains why there is so much time, effort, and expense being implemented to keep the whole affair under very tight wraps.

Donald Trump and his administration have lit a fire which will not be easily extinguished. My opinion is that it will not be, but will burn and burn until the whole landscape is scorched and blackened. Blatantly and deliberately lying about everything to do with this does nothing except add more fuel to the fire. Refusing to allow “transparency” to do its work does nothing except make people more curious and generates what might be called a feeding frenzy. Call it the Streisand Effect.

“The Streisand Effect, also known as the Barbra Streisand Syndrome, refers to the phenomenon where attempts to suppress, hide, or censor information result in increased public attention and dissemination of that information. The term originated from an incident in 2003 when Barbra Streisand sued photographer Kenneth Adelman and Pictopia.com for publishing an aerial photograph of her Malibu home, which inadvertently drew far more attention to the image than it would have otherwise received.”

“The effect is often attributed to psychological reactance, where people become more motivated to seek out information that is deliberately hidden or restricted. This phenomenon has been observed in various contexts, including legal battles, online censorship, and corporate attempts to manage public perception. For example, when companies or individuals try to remove content from the internet, it often leads to the content becoming more widely shared and discussed.”

“Other notable examples include the case of Sci-Hub, where the founder’s efforts to make academic papers freely available led to increased attention and support for the platform despite legal challenges. Similarly, attempts by organizations like the Church of Scientology to censor information about Tom Cruise resulted in greater public interest and dissemination of the content.”

“The Streisand Effect highlights the challenges of controlling information in the digital age, where the act of suppression can often amplify the very information it seeks to conceal.” — from a Brave AI search

No amount of frantic shoveling is going to bury this monster. Trump and his team would be better off if they just simply told the truth and let the chips fall where they would. The chances of this happening, of course, are slim to none, as these people, their associates, acquaintances, and handlers have no knowledge about the timeless wisdom which encourages people to,

“Confess your sins to one another…so that you may be healed.” — James 5:16

Who is the big winner in all this? Not Trump, Bondi, Bongino, nor Patel. They are tarnished forever. However, there is one person who appears (at least to me) likely to benefit greatly from this debacle and the visible rending of the MAGA movement: Thomas Massie. Remember how Trump vowed to “primary” Massie because of his resistance to the “Big, Beautiful Bill”? If Massie plays this right, he can parlay the anger, antipathy, and feeling of betrayal against Trump into another landslide victory. All he has to do is keep the incident openly in front of his constituents and encourage the “backsliders” to join with him. Between now and the 2026 primary, this will (should) play a “yuuuge” part in Massie’s campaign.

It was only a year ago that Kamala Harris was attacked from all sides because she did not call out Joe Biden’s obvious (evident) mental deterioration and take action to remove him from the office. How long will it be before J.D. Vance is roasted for the same “sin”, because it is clearly evident that Trump is rapidly losing it. He cannot maintain a coherent narrative or program, constantly changes his story or policy for no good reason, and appears to be increasingly schizophrenic. Trump is becoming completely unhinged and Vance, for the good of the country and the world, will have to step in, sooner or later, and guide him off the stage–calmly and quietly if possible, but forcefully if necessary.

If the Democrats regain control of Congress in 2026, impeachment proceedings against Trump will almost certainly follow and the likelihood that he will be run out of office increases dramatically. Vance, by acting pre-emptively could eliminate this possibility and set himself up in good shape for a 2028 presidential run. I have no doubt, politics being politics1, that he has considered this.

In spite of all this, many people will continue on with their worship and adulation of Trump, believing fervently that he is The Answer to all the problems which face themselves and America. What will it take to bring them to a point where they are able to see the light, to wash the mud out of their eyes, to confess their sins of idolatry? I do not know, but I suspect it will not be pleasant nor wealth-generating.

These are interesting times. May you prosper and succeed even as you live in them.

  1. I describe politics as the practice of getting what you want by manipulating other people and is always at their expense, to their detriment, which is an adaptation of this quote by Frederic Bastiat–“Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavours to live at the expense of everybody else.” — https://poorrogersalmanac.com/2024/10/19/the-practice-of-politics-continued/ See also here. ↩︎

Officially Confirmed: Epstein Did(n’t) Kill Himself

Roger Mitchell7 Comments

“Never believe anything (in politics) until it has been officially denied.”

By this time, you probably are aware that an “official” statement has been made concerning Jeffrey Epstein, the front-man of the criminal blackmailing scheme which (allegedly) video-taped numerous high and mighty men of “elite” status engaging in sex acts with (allegedly) under-age girls. According to this memo, Epstein did not traffic any under-age (or over-age, for that matter) girls or women. He did not blackmail anyone. There are no lists of clients who availed themselves of his “services”.

Officially, Epstein has been exonerated from all charges, rumors, insinuations, and any type of misinformation and disinformation which anyone might care to promote and expound on. Officially, he has been declared a saint and all efforts to sully his name will be squelched. Officially, that is. Actually, I’m quite surprised that they didn’t deny the existence of the “Lolita Express” which Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, and Prince Andrew, among others, including Trump, did not ride on.

Most importantly, according to this report, he really did kill himself, contrary to the headline of this article. Committed suicide. By himself. With assistance from no one. This, despite all the circumstantial evidence which shows that there is a three-day dead cat in the woodpile somewhere which stinks to high heaven. Video cameras which didn’t work in a high-security prison. Video which is clipped and cropped mysteriously at exactly the moment in question. Guards who fell asleep and did not check on him every 30 minutes in flagrant violation of the rules. Cellmates which were transferred to another location the day previous to the incident. Broken bones in his neck which are more representative of strangulation by force rather than voluntary suicide by hanging.

Nothing to see here, move on.

Donald Trump, AG Pam Bondi, FBI director Kash Patel and his right-hand man Dan Bongino have all come out and courageously verified what everyone knows deep down to be the truth, i.e., that THERE IS NOTHING TRUE AT ALL about the rumors and speculation surrounding Epstein and his girl Friday, Ghislaine Maxwell, who is actually serving a twenty year sentence for, get this, trafficking under-age girls for sex with powerful men who were on the list which doesn’t exist. No, there is nothing true about all this.

Now, that last sentence is absolutely true. The whole thing is a farce, a lie, a cover-up. It ranks at least as high as the JFK assassination in Dallas on November 22, 1963, in which Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman and one of his bullets changed course abruptly in four different directions. The major difference between these two instances is that there are still many people who swear by the Warren Commission report about Kennedy, while today virtually no one believes the line about Epstein, even if they do parrot the “official” narrative and carry water for those who pull their strings.

There is one other similarity between JFK and Epstein. The case is closed. Closed. Officially closed. There will be no more investigation, no more fact-finding ventures, no more questioning, no more publicity, no more “conspiracy theorizing”. The administration of Donald Trump and Co. has issued its last report and there will be no release of any files pertaining to the matter. In due time, it will all be forgotten.

Except that it won’t be. There is simply too much about this that doesn’t pass the smell test. Anyone with a sense of reason, common sense, and a nose for the truth can discern that we have been lied to…again, this time with vehemence, bigly, as Trump would say. Just a few days ago, Trump aggressively reacted to a journalist who asked him a question about the sordid mess. Bondi testified to a “list of clients” which was on her desk in February waiting for her attention, but somehow it vanished within three months. Patel and Bongino went into office vowing to overhaul the FBI and cleanse it of corruption, but changed their tune as soon as they were installed.

And the beat goes on.

The one good thing to come out of this is that people who once would have believed whatever they were told by the authorities can now see the brazen lie for what it is. A brazen lie. We know that they are lying. They know that we know they are lying. We know that they know that we know they are lying. The beat goes on. However, with each passing day, as more and more people express their skepticism and disbelief, it becomes more difficult for those in power to maintain the farce. We have been lied to so much, so many times, about so many things that no one believes them anymore. My father had a story about a man he knew who had the reputation of a liar. If he came by and said, “Good morning”, you would go to bed, thinking it was night. This is where we are at today.

Remember Aesop’s Fable about the boy who cried, “Wolf!” and the beating he got when the townspeople finally got tired of his shenanigans? Why should we expect anything different to happen here?

Government and its attendant institutions have lost the trust of the American citizenry. Blind faith in the system has been shattered and will never be restored. Donald Trump has shot his bolt…and missed. From here on out, he will be increasingly irrelevant until he disappears like Pam Bondi’s “client list”.

“I have seen the wicked in great power, and spreading himself like a native green tree. Yet he passed away, and behold he was no more; indeed, I sought him, but he could not be found.” — Psalm 37: 35-36

Try as much as I can, I am unable to call to mind anyone at present who does not spread himself more than Donald Trump. When it comes to calling attention to himself, he has no equal. In his world, there is only One and He knows it. Reminds me of Nebuchadnezzar, who was also compared to a tree and was cut down to size. See Daniel 4 for the story.

Iran: The Difficulty of the Battle

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

This is a topographic map of Iran, the quintessential existential threat to America due to its placement next to numerous US military bases.

A little information is in order. Iran is 2.4 times the size of the state of Texas. It is almost the size of Alaska, the largest state in America, and has a terrain which matches. The greatest difference between Iran and Alaska is the climate, where Iran is generally warm while Alaska is cool/cold. Or maybe it is the population–Iran has about 92 million people, while Alaska can’t even break the 1 million mark.

Without ever getting into the geo-political ponderings about “regime change” in Iran, I simply cannot imagine the success of a ground-based assault on this country by anyone, including the world’s hegemon and its lapdog, Israel. Or is it the other way around? The logistics alone would (should) generate hysterical fits for generals and planning staffs. Let’s forget about budgets, air superiority, military size, economies, etc., for the moment and concentrate on what it would take to put boots on the ground here in a successful invasion and overthrow of the current government. Remember Iraq? Iraq, a much smaller country with a tabletop flat landscape, was a cakewalk compared to what Iran would be. Boots on the ground simply will not work and the DOD knows it. You might be able to completely control the airspace so your warplanes can fly with impunity, but if you do not have control of the local neighborhoods beneath the rooftops and awnings, you have nothing.

The West has nothing. And it will break its teeth if it decides to make this a matter of actual muscle.

No Going Back. The Rubicon is Behind Us

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

That didn’t take long.

On June 19, I posted an opinion that Donald Trump would not attack Iran and listed several reasons why I considered it possible, even likely. Less than three days later, my reputation as a geo-political forecaster lay in wreckage, much like the Fordow nuclear station in Iran after it was (allegedly) hit by numerous bunker-busters delivered by Trump’s B2 “stealth” bombers. My mistake, it seems, was supposing that Trump would act rationally and reasonably because America (meaning he) had too much to lose. Wishful thinking on my part. I threw the dice and wound up snake-eyes.

“In gambling, snake eyes is the outcome of rolling the dice in a game and getting only one pip on each die. The pair of pips resembles a pair of eyes, which is appended to the term ‘snake’ because of the long-standing association of this word with treachery and betrayal.” — https://gambiter.com/dice/Snake_eyes.html

Treachery and betrayal. After a few days of reading commentary from various sources, it appears to be quite certain that the DT1 has been quite adept at playing this kind of game over the last few weeks. First, after the Israeli attack on Iran which killed many top nuclear scientists and military leaders, came his admission that he knew about it beforehand, yet gave out that negotiations were still on track so as to deceive the Iranians into remaining complacent and letting their guard down. Second (this is where I made my bet), was when he proclaimed that he would make his decision known to the world within two weeks, giving the impression that he was allowing things to cool down, while all the time planning to send in the B-2 bombers and missiles.

Sucker punches! The whole thing reeks to high heaven of treachery and betrayal, and the one thing that Trump has just demonstrated to the entire world is that he is not capable of honest, above-board dealing. From now on, his word will be distrusted, as will that of those underlings who are close to him. With respect to this, America has lost its credibility and trust, even among its own “allies”, although without doubt, they (especially Great Britain) will follow his lead, doubling down on one disastrous move after another until the entire West is out of chips and retired from the game.

Constitutionally speaking2, Trump does not have the authority to declare war or to attack another country on his own initiative and say-so. Congress holds the constitutional responsibility to declare war, but has abdicated in every conflict since WW2 ended, beginning with the Korean War. There are noises, at least little grunts, being made about taking that back, including a war powers resolution introduced into the House by Thomas Massie, R-KY, and Ro Khanna, D-CA, but this is not likely to gain any traction and Trump will probably carry on virtually unimpeded. Impeachment for his “crimes” may occur if he loses and will not even be mentioned if he wins. However, the odds for impeachment rise dramatically if the Democrats retake control of the House in 2026.

The one sure and certain way that Congress could put a dent into the military ventures abroad would be to simply draw the purse strings tight, denying the administration (DOD, MIC, etc.) the necessary funds to support such endeavors. If representatives and senators exercised fiscal sanity and rectitude, they would just say “No”, and all this would come to an end.

Will this happen any time soon? Will pigs fly tomorrow? To ask these questions is to answer them as virtually every Congress critter is in the pay and thrall of the MIC or AIPAC, very likely both. Where is Jeanette Rankin when you need her? She was, after all, the only Congress(person) to vote against becoming involved in both WW1 and WW2, actually casting the only “No” vote in 1941 after the attack on Pearl Harbor, which ended her political career. Talk about sticking to principles regardless of cost!

BTW, Trump is far from the first president to “unofficially” sidestep the Constitutional restraints because they were too restrictive and confining. He certainly won’t be the last.

In 1953, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, a participant in aptly named Operation Keelhaul, had this to say in his Chance for Peace speech.

“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.”

Sometimes, at least twice a day, even a broken clock tells the right time and in this, Eisenhower spoke the unvarnished truth. Every dollar spent on war and war armaments is a dollar NOT spent on feeding and clothing those who are hungry and naked. Every dollar spent to visit destruction and death on others is not a dollar spent to alleviate the misery and heartache of the human condition. This is not to say that we should stop the funding the “Warfare State” in favor of the “Welfare State”, but simply a recognition that lavishly slathering the militaristic sections of society with obscene amounts of “grease” is not conducive to building up and maintaining the American Dream.

Unfortunately, there are too many people in these United States who profit mightily from the carnage. There are too many who may not profit financially but thrive in the smug belief that they, as part of the American Empire, are elevated above those who are debased. There are too many who simply believe that Donald (Cap’n Warp Speed)3 Trump is the new Messiah and can do no wrong.

America MUST be saved! MOVE OVER, JESUS, AND MAKE WAY FOR THE DONALD!!

In the end, though, Trump will only be with us a little while longer. When he is gone, who will take his place, or perhaps more importantly, what will be our condition when he vacates? Of one thing I am certain, it will not be pretty, gentle, nor compassionate. We should be prepared for THE REAL DEAL to be visited on us in all its brutal, tyrannical, vicious, and murderous ways because, as the Word tells us,

“Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” — Luke 6:38

Candidly speaking, America has “given” death and destruction to many, many others throughout its history and become, so to speak, drunk with its power to the point of reckless arrogance. Is there any reason to believe that our “generosity” will not be measured back to us in spades?

Jesus Christ does not share His throne or His Glory. With anyone. Donald Trump, kiss the Son while you still can. You might spare America an enormous amount of grief.

  1. DT is also an abbreviation of the term ‘delirium tremens‘, which refers to the symptoms suffered by an alcoholic subjected to abrupt withdrawal after a bout of heavy drinking. I tend to think that Donald Trump is only the first manifestation. ↩︎
  2. I am of the Lysander Spooner persuasion. I have never signed nor agreed to the stipulations of the Constitution, therefore, as a contractual obligation, I am not subject to it. Ted Weiland has a different take on it. You can read his viewpoint here. ↩︎
  3. I use this term because many people are aware of it and make the connection to Trump’s work to force the Covid-19 farce and fiasco on the world. Personally, I prefer to call him Colonel Bombast, which is a reference to the clownish power-mad character, Baron Bomburst, in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. If you can imagine Trump with a full moustache, the two would even resemble each other. ↩︎

Will He or Not? Trying to Outguess Trump!

Roger Mitchell5 Comments

OK, I’m going out on a limb here and might saw the doggone thing off standing on it. Or I might be right and seen as a prophet.

Donald (Cap’n Warp Speed) Trump is NOT going to join with Israel and attack Iran. My guess, for what it’s worth, is that he has looked at this situation logically and decided it’s not worth what it might cost. After all, he is an astute businessman who can read the signs as well as anyone. Better than me, I expect, at least he’s far richer and more powerful.

  1. Congress is moving rapidly (amazing, I know, but miracles do happen) to block Trump from unilaterally sending the troops (planes, bombs, missiles) in. After all, it is the constitutional responsibility of Congress to declare war, even though it has been woefully absent from the subject since the start of the Korean War. About time they put on their man pants and did what they are supposed to.
  2. Polls consistently show that an enormous amount of Americans, 75% or more, disapprove of getting involved in another “forever war”, which is what this one will become unless Iran is beaten thoroughly and quickly, which isn’t likely to happen. No, the tide of public opinion is against escalation.
  3. MAGA, Trump’s baby, will split and polarize if, IF, he jumps into the fray. Remember his promise when he was on the campaign trail? “I am the peace president.” “I will not start any new wars.” “I will end the war between Ukraine and Russia in one day.” Etc., etc., etc. Ad infinitum, ad nauseum, as Gary North would say. A very large percentage of those who supported him and voted for him took him at his word that America’s wars were going to end and that the country would benefit because of it. Yeah, right, that lasted just a few months until he started bombing Yemen and pushing the “Big, Beautiful Bill” which would give the Pentagon $1 trillion next year to spend on creating turmoil and mayhem. Er, I mean, defense of the American Dream.
  4. Trump is limited in his options:
    • Go for the gusto. Hit Iran hard with everything he has at his disposal. What happens if that doesn’t work?
    • Hit Iran with a limited strike, say, a “bunker buster” bomb or two dropped in the Fordo nuclear site. What happens if the plane, say a B-2, is somehow shot down and never reaches its target?
    • What happens if Iran unleashes a salvo of missiles against American military bases in Iraq, Jordan, Syria, and Kuwait, among others? What happens if Iran simply closes down the Strait of Hormuz, which it can easily do, and causes the world price of oil to skyrocket to unprecedented, astronomical levels?
    • What happens if Iran sends a missile against any one of the American aircraft carriers now congregating in the region? If one of these goes to the bottom, it will mean at least 5, 000 servicemen (women) (persons) lost and will immediately create a call to “nuke” Teheran, a densely populated city with at least 20 million people at risk. What happens to the image of America in world opinion if something like that happens? Not good, I am sure.

There is more. I have barely scratched the surface of the possibilities. Nevertheless, as a rational person and somehow (against the odds) of believing that Trump can act rationally, I have to believe that he will pull in his reins and slow this “steed” to a trot. My guess is that he will allow Israel and Iran to trade blows with each other, then bring up the idea of “negotiations” again. Of course, I do not have a great deal of confidence in his negotiations, which are, as follow:

“Let’s negotiate. You cannot have a nuclear weapon. Period. Ever. End of negotiation. You have sixty days to agree with this and obey. Otherwise, all hell will break out against you.”

Maybe I should reconsider my position.

Victimization: Running Out of Steam

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

I like to think of myself as caring and compassionate, especially toward those who are beaten down and needy through no fault of their own. I have no problem with slipping a Benjamin into the hand of an elderly widow or young mother who I am certain is not able to pay her electric bill. Yet, there are some things which simply cause me to rebel, to resist. One of these is the claim by some that they are eternal victims and that everyone must excuse their behavior because…

Well, you know.

Blacks in America are pretty good at this. They (or their ancestors, or perhaps only some) were made slaves by white people centuries ago and, due to that unfortunate tidbit of history, ought to have everything handed to them on a silver or gold platter today. Never mind that the ones who enslaved them (or their ancestors, or perhaps only some of them) were probably also black. Never mind that the term, Slav, which classifies a middle-European race, likely sprang from the fact that white people from that region were probably also “slaves”. Never mind that the black ancestors who were enslaved have long been dead, as have been their “masters”, and that there is no connection between myself and a black man in San Francisco or Atlanta as a result of that specific situation. Everyone knows they are victims and must be compensated.

Enough of that! Let’s get to the real meat here.

Earlier today, I watched a short “news” brief by ABC on the retaliation by Iran because of the Israeli strikes on that country on June 13. Friday the 13th. Exactly sixty-one days after President Donald (Cap’n Warp Speed) Trump had told the Iranians they had sixty days to conform and comply with his nuclear “negotiations”. If they didn’t, well, at least he warned them of the terror and suffering that was to come.

Anyway, ABC had a reporter on the ground in Bet Yam, a community which had received numerous missile strikes from the Iranians. (Where the heck is Iron Dome when you need it?) One of the complaints was that children, at least two, had been killed. Let’s be real clear about this, at least two Israeli children had been killed from the missile strikes and, for that, we ought to be outraged. Yet, there was not a word about the thousands of Palestinian children who have been coldly slaughtered in the name of “security” and “Greater Israel”, even though it is (and can be) completely documented. Nothing said at all about the Iranian children who died as a result of Israel’s aggressive action.

No! NO, NO, NO! Our children are dying!! Ours, not theirs. We ought to be the ones who are sympathized with, pitied, and something must be done about it!!!

Pat Benatar had something to sing about this. “I’m going to harden my heart…”

Truth is, I have trouble with ginning up any sympathy for the Israeli claim, because I know that the Israeli State is killing, has killed, an untold number of Palestinian or Iranian children. I can have pity for them, but…that’s about as far as it goes. The problem is that they have been claiming to be “victims of circumstance” for as long as I can remember, at least since the “oppression” in Egypt during the time of Moses, some 3500 years ago. How long does one have to be a victim before it becomes embedded into the DNA and bloodline?

Remember Pinnochio? The fox and the cat?

Is this wrong? Do I have a bad attitude? Am I in need of a readjustment in some camp somewhere?

I can, and do, feel sadness at the violent deaths of two Israeli children, but I also recognize and understand that this is payment received for the evil, violent, murderous behavior exhibited, pursued, and acted upon, by decades of Israeli leadership and society, which knew (know) only one thing: violence for the sake of power is to be pursued to the ultimate end, which is death. All that matters is that we win, no matter how much it costs, nor how many others have to die so that we can achieve our goal, our end. If some of those who die are our own, well…collateral damage.

“Give, and it will be given to you: good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over will be put into your bosom. For with the same measure that you use, it will be measured back to you.” — Jesus Christ, as recorded in Luke 6:38.

Elon Musk: Honest Outrage or Play-acting?

Roger Mitchell3 Comments

Perhaps I was too hard on Elon Musk. Perhaps. Time will tell. But, he’s a big boy and can handle a little bit of honest opinion, truthful or not.

Nevertheless, I still think my criticism has validity and this article bears that out. Musk is a businessman who tried to operate in Washington under business-like protocols and was screwed as a result. It bears repeating–government is not a business nor can it be run like a business. I do give him credit for discovering that, however, and hope that he will continue to entertain the notion and allow it to guide his future. His outrage at the Republican version of out-of-control government spending appears to be, seems to be, heartfelt and sincere. Unlike his erstwhile boss, Donald Trump, who simply cannot resist owning it.

“Passing THE ONE, BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL is a Historic Opportunity to turn our Country around,” Trump posted on social media. He urged senators Monday “to work as fast as they can to get this Bill to MY DESK before the Fourth of JULY.”

There is nothing ambiguous about this bill. It will raise federal spending by a huge amount, increases the deficit, and raises the so-called “debt ceiling” (a misnomer which means nothing since it is ignored continually). Granted that there are some concessions (No Tax on Tips, for instance), but the fact remains that the entire spectacle is a smoke-and-mirrors show, orchestrated entirely by the Republican Party and Donald Trump, which will do absolutely nothing to slow down or stop America’s headlong plunge into the bottomless pit of bankruptcy and fiscal destruction.

Yeah, but…! Yeah, but…!

“And the beat goes on. The beat goes on.” — Sonny and Cher

In my opinion, Donald Trump is like the character, Baron Bomburst, in the movie “Chitty Chitty Bang Bang”, except that I think the moniker, Colonel Bombast, would be more appropriate. It will take an enormous amount of positive change on his part to persuade me otherwise. Elon Musk, though, may have made a breakthrough with me and should he run for President in 2028 (if there is an election), I might decide to get on board.

But, no, probably not. I’m in the process of cleaning myself up and, regardless how you might portray it, politics is dirty.

Here Doggy, Dogge, DOGE!

Roger Mitchell3 Comments

Aaaaaaand, he’s gone! Elon Musk has left the Trump Administration and is no longer heading up the DOGE (doggy) branch of government. Apparently, after identifying a few billion dollars of waste that could be cut from the federal budget, Musk decided it was easier to call it quits than to continue butting heads with The Beast which is Washington, D.C.

What a dog! Mangy, flea-bitten cur is more like it. [Editor’s note, just to clarify: This does not refer to Musk in person but to the program he headed, as if government efficiency could ever be achieved, even by the most ardent and capable practitioners. Efficient government ought to scare everyone. See the quote below by King George the First.]

Whatever happened to the $2 trillion goal in cuts which was bandied about? Gone, gone, gone. Ain’t gonna happen. Never had a chance. This lofty, unrealistic reach was in the same ballpark as Trump’s claim that he would end the Russia-Ukraine war in one day after he became President. How much do you hear about that now?

The problem, as I see it, is that Musk, Trump, and others of that ilk are businessmen. They make deals. They shake hands. They exchange money for services. All done in a, more or less, voluntary fashion by mutual agreement. More or less, with a good, healthy dollop of “help” from the taxpayer. But what they do not understand is that government does not operate according to business principles. Government is not a business and it cannot be run like a business. Or, as George Washington so aptly put it centuries ago,

“Government is not reason; it is not eloquence. It is force. And force, like fire, is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.”

Now, Musk might be reasonable but I don’t think he is eloquent. He is certainly sharp about the workings of money. Trump doesn’t even make any pretense about being reasonable but also understands money. And he talks a lot. Of course, verbosity of speech doesn’t necessarily equate to eloquence, but that’s a small thing. The point is that, in trying to impose their business tactics and ideals on the government, both have failed. Failed to the point that Congress just simply shrugs its collective shoulder and says, “So?”, then pushes through a “Big, Beautiful Bill” which hands over $1 trillion to an already obese Military-Industrial Complex (MIC). Thankfully, this still has to be passed by the Senate before Trump can sign off on it, so there is still a remote possibility that it might not be brought to life. Miracles do happen.

Government is force. There is no reforming it to make it more reasonable, palatable, nor consumer-friendly. Businesses and consumers buy and sell voluntarily, making transactions on a daily basis because they are willing to give up what they have in favor of what someone else offers. Government doesn’t care about any of this, rather, if it wants what someone else has, it simply takes it. Or tries to, and only grows larger and more aggressive with the passage of time. Over time, as more and more people buy into the concept of “organized theft and redistribution”, the system becomes corrupt from the top to the bottom and eventually collapses and disappears, making way for something different to build out of the rubble.

Musk is out, presumably hitching a ride to Mars on your tax dollars. Trump is a wrecking ball destroying what has been built up over the last hundred years or so. Neither of them give a damn about us. Which brings me to another point–where are Montana’s Congress critters on this matter, this question about spending the country into glorious, indisputable, beautiful bankruptcy and destruction? Daines? Sheehy? Zinke? Downing? Not a word. Not a peep. Nothing but silence, or have they too joined the chorus?

“So?”

It wouldn’t be surprising if they did. After all, who can think of a better way to personally benefit than to ride this broken-down bronc until it buries its nose into the arena floor?

Buying into the Lie. Eve did. And We Do.

Roger Mitchell1 Comment

“In the beginning was the Word…” — John 1:1

Or, maybe this.

“In the beginning were WORDS!”  People will “jump off bridges” on account of a few discouraging words. Doesn’t that disprove the old saying, “Sticks and stones can break my bones, but WORDS will never hurt me?” Words are seeds; watch them grow into beautiful flowers,…or deadly poisons. The thing is; once these lies are disseminated, people cop a position and refuse to ever admit they were fooled.” — https://www.lewrockwell.com/2025/05/capt-randall/polls-haha/ [Edited slightly]

Holy cow! Isn’t that the truth? People will not, absolutely will not, admit that they were fooled. Fooled on everything. Fooled on everything they have ever believed to be true. Fooled because they bought into a lie. Fooled because they really thought they had all the answers and that their own “word”, independently arrived at, had more value than The Word.

Fooled like Eve, who took the first off ramp from the clear truth as soon as it was offered to her. “Has God said…?” “Yes, but…” So typical.

But. It is always that word. But. It asserts that there is a conflict between what has already been spoken and the subjectively recognized version of “reality”. We disparage Eve for what she did (and Adam for being a weak man who gave into his woman), yet we refuse to confess that we would have done the same if we had been there. We still do, although we try our best to forget (or conveniently do not remember) those instances when we gave into the same impulse.

But…

Why is it so hard for people to admit they have been wrong? To admit that they don’t know everything? To admit that they are complete fools for buying into The Lie? Is it not because we are like Eve, who only wanted to assert her own word over the Word which had been given to her? Eve’s decision, like that of all independently minded persons everywhere, had consequences which have reverberated down through the history of humanity, to the detriment of all humanity…forever.

Why is it so hard for me to admit that I have been wrong? Is it not because I want to decide for myself what is true? What is right? What is best? Why should I (and all those who follow me) be punished because I only wanted to improve my situation? Because I simply could not tolerate that there was a Chain of Command to which I was accountable?

Because I can not admit that I am nothing at all?

Fooled! Oh, yes, I have to admit that I have been fooled, that I have bought into the lie, that I “thought more highly of myself than I ought to.” (Romans 12:3) That I really believed I was something and that everyone and everything should pay attention to me. Me. Me. Me. Isn’t that what it’s all about anyway?

This has to change.

Finally, after nearly sixty-seven years of life, I am starting to realize that I have been fooling myself and I only have a few more years, perhaps less, to correct my course. There is no word except the Word, and this can be condensed and understood in just a few words: “Love your neighbor as you love yourself.”

So simple. So freeing. So difficult. So difficult. So difficult, yet I am determined to walk that path.

Fear is a liar. Lose the fear.

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

Read this first.

https://thedailyeconomy.org/article/its-always-about-fear/

Yes, it’s always about fear. I concur with that sentiment. People who are afraid do not make any attempt to be free or self-governing. Instead, they are constantly clamoring for someone, someone, anyone, to come and save them from themselves and their self-imposed misery.

Why? Is it not because they have too much to lose? Too much of what? Possessions, self-esteem, pride, inability to admit failure, etc.?

Funny, we think in terms of a lifetime which is entered into without our permission, consent, and initiative, and is ended (mostly) in the same manner, yet is over in (almost always) less than 100 years, a mere blink in the timeline of human history. In that 100 years (almost always less), we learn to think that all that matters is how much we can gain while here and never once consider how much we might lose in eternity, once we have departed this ‘mortal coil’. Which we are going to do, regardless of how much we believe Elon Musk.

Oh, yes! I don’t dare speak out against injustice because… I don’t dare resist oppression because… I don’t dare live a life of personal sovereignty because… And we give up what is rightfully ours, that is, the freedom to live our own lives according to our own personal beliefs and desires, because…

Because… because…because we are afraid. There is no other reason. We are afraid to lose what we think is ours, either by right or by acquisition. Yet, we fail to realize that nothing in this life is guaranteed to us, except for one thing: we are going to die. No exemptions. No “Get Out of Jail Free” cards. Instead, we buy into the idea that “He who dies with the most toys wins”, which is an an exquisitely fabricated slogan for selfishness, narcissism, and disregard for the future.

What else is there? Why do we hesitate to call out the lies in our own lives? Why do you resist the “temptation” to resist the tide of evil which is increasingly swelling upon our shores? Is this all there is and should I be concerned about what might happen to my grandchildren because I failed to stand up against the evil? Because I refused to stand up for what is right? After all, what does this cost me? Do you realize how much this cost me?

Well, do you???

Tell that to the One Who said this:

“For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it.” — Matthew 16:25

Let’s face it. Squarely. In your face. We are afraid. We want to save our own life. We do not have any other answer and that is all we know. We are victims and we live like it.

Or, as Linda Ronstadt so perfectly put it, “Poor, poor pitiful me.”

My advice: Get over it.

Freedom and fear have nothing in common. Where fear reigns, freedom does not exist. Fear is a liar. Live not by lies. Lose the fear.

Sin, Crime, and Complicity

Roger Mitchell2 Comments

This is nothing more than a flash of inspiration experienced just the other day. Take it for what it’s worth.

Jesus said that if a man looks at a woman lustfully, then it is the same as if he had engaged in adultery with her. Think about her in a sexual manner and it is equivalent to bedding her physically. In other words, your thoughts define you as much as your actions.

Pretty stark, and I am absolutely guilty of the commission of this particular sin.

Now, let’s expand that to the conflict in Gaza, in which the Israeli State is attempting to completely destroy the Palestinian people who lived there. No holds barred. Kill them all. Let God sort them out. There are only three choices here for those not caught up in the actual “blood and guts” scene:

  1. Recognize that the way Israel is acting is wrong and must be brought to an end.
  2. Recognize that the way Israel is acting is right and support policies that push the effort forward.
  3. Do nothing. Have no opinion. Don’t even think about it.

Many people world-wide, more and more every day, adhere to #1, as I do. Pressure is building which is going to force an end to the slaughter and mayhem. God speed the day! And, there are many who simply cannot be bothered to consider what is happening because they are too caught up in their own world to care about anyone else. And, there are those who cheer and applaud what is being done without any regard to the wanton loss of life and the destruction of the Gazan population.

Unfortunately, many of this last set are Americans who call themselves Christian, yet perceive the events as biblical prophesy unfolding in history. God said it. I believe it. That settles it. As if there was no room for contemplation and admission of error. I know what I think and nothing is going to change my mind. Don’t even bother to try.

Returning to my opening statement, let me paraphrase the admonition from Jesus in this way.

If, if, you have a desire and a passion to see the Palestinians killed, tortured, raped, maimed, crippled, starved, and displaced by the Israeli State, then, for you, it is the same as if you had personally pulled the trigger, dropped the bomb, activated the flame-thrower, stopped the food trucks, destroyed the water-purification facilities, wrecked the hospitals, and forced the inhabitants into the desert with nothing more than the clothes on their backs and what they could carry. If, if, you support the most current “genocide” out of a belief, then you have committed the crimes listed and probably more.

After all, thinking about the act is the same as doing it, in God’s eyes. At least that is how I read it.

Now, if I am right about this, then there are millions upon millions of American Christians, some of them close to me, who are absolutely guilty of the same things which Israel and its chief benefactor and enabler, the United States, are doing. Yes, if this is the way you think, then you are complicit in these horrors and will be convicted, sooner or later, in some way or other, of the charge laid against you.

“But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” — Matthew 5:28

Straight from the lips of the Master. Without ambiguity or equivocation. Take it for what it’s worth.

The Death of Due Process: Mahmoud Khalil

Roger Mitchell1 Comment

What in the world? This is America, after all, The Land of the Free and the Home of Constitutionally Protected Freedoms as delineated in the first ten amendments, commonly known as the Bill of Rights.

Chances are pretty good that if you were to ask any average American about Mahmoud Khalil, he or she would respond with one word. “Who?” If this person derived their politics from the right side of the ledger who vigorously supports Donald Trump, then the odds go up that, on learning about the status of Mahmoud Khalil, the answer would immediately come back with double the quantity of words and heightened intensity. “Good riddance!” In this, they will echo the words of Kristi Noem, who could not let a good opportunity go to waste.

A week ago, I posted an article in which I explored the issue of Tren de Aragua, a notorious, violent, criminal gang from Venezuela which operates internationally (including the United States), and was designated by Donald Trump as a Foreign Terrorist Organization via an Executive Order on his very first day in office, second term. Since then, the administration has been active in rounding up and deporting alleged gang members back to Venezuela or shipping them off to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador, whichever is easier, more effective, and less costly.

Let’s get one thing perfectly clear right now. I do not support the importation and keeping of violent criminals into this country. Undoubtedly, there are people here who ought to be removed from American society–violently, if necessary. Nevertheless, there are rules to follow in the process, the foremost among them being the 5th Amendment to the Constitution:

“No person shall be…deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” .

Now, of course, this brings up the question of whether or not the government is operating according to the 5th Amendment. I cannot say. I don’t know. If it is, well and good. If not, then we have a problem which will only get worse as social, economic, and political circumstances worsen and degrade. In order to maintain the trust of the American people, it is incumbent on the administration to make sure it works within the law whether it advances the political agenda or not.

Which brings us to Mahmoud Khalil. Born in Syria of Palestinian origin and a citizen of Algeria, legally admitted to the US with Green Card and permanent resident status, Columbia University student, married to an American woman, soon to be a father. He was arrested in the lobby of his apartment complex in New York City, on March 08, then shipped without notice to Jena, LA, where he was held incommunicado without notice to his attorney or pregnant wife. He was the first person arrested after Trump had promised to crack down on university student protests over the conflict in Gaza.

Obviously, Khalil had broken some law or committed a crime, right? After all, if you haven’t done anything wrong, you have nothing to be afraid of. Right? Why else would the government go after him if he was innocent? As it turns out, he had been involved in the protests at Columbia, acting as an intermediary between the university and the main body of participants. He had been open and cooperative with the university and the media and refused to mask his face, becoming widely known to the public and giving the administration a clear target to aim at in the battle against “anti-semitism”, a term no one can define well but which is politically useful. Sort of like “freedom-fighters” and “democracy”.

Marco Rubio, the current Secretary of State has alleged that Khalil engaged in “antisemitic protests and disruptive activities, which fosters a hostile environment for Jewish students in the United States”, but he produced no evidence to this effect and did not accuse Khalil of committing any crime whatsoever. In a court case before Jamee Conans, an immigration judge in Louisiana, Rubio brought out an arcane law as precedent to prove that he could legally deport Khalil, whether he was guilty of any wrong-doing or not. CNN described it this way.

“The administration previously said it based its deportation order for Khalil on an obscure provision from the Immigration and Nationality Act – which provides broad authority to the Secretary of State to revoke a person’s immigration status if their “activities in the United States would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences” to the country.”

““For cases in which the basis for this determination is the alien’s past, current, or expected beliefs, statements, or associations that are otherwise lawful, the Secretary of State must personally determine that the alien’s presence or activities would compromise a compelling U.S. foreign policy interest,” the memo from the secretary reads.”

OK, let’s get this straight. Marco Rubio has applied an obscure regulation from 1952 to justify his action against Khalil, who has not had any criminal charges filed against him. According to the memo seen above, Khalil’s “past, current, or expected beliefs, statements, or associations that are otherwise lawful” are sufficient to require his deportation. His beliefs? His words? The company he keeps? Not only in the past and currently, but also those to happen at some time in the future?

What is this if not a full-throated assault on free speech in America, a guaranteed right covered by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution? If any Secretary of State (there are many, they change all the time) can determine arbitrarily that a person is a “threat to national security” at any time and for any reason, and use the overwhelming power of the federal government against them, does this not rip the guts out of the 1st Amendment? Since the powers-that-be today will not be those in charge tomorrow, how can anyone be certain that what he says or believes today will not be held against him tomorrow when the politics have shifted? The fact is that he cannot and this type of action by Rubio and Trump will only have a chilling effect on what is said and done in this country.

The 5th Amendment is toast. The 1st Amendment is almost gone. With those out of the way, who can guarantee that the 2nd Amendment, the so-called Right to bear Arms, will not be targeted next? When the Goon Squad breaks down your front door to confiscate your guns, what authority can you appeal to for deliverance, especially if you have refused to stand up for those who were taken out and beaten in the War against Free Speech, Beliefs, and Friendships?

Where is Martin Niemoeller when you need him?

The Trump administration has been given the green light to deport Khalil by Jamee Comans, an immigration law judge in Louisiana, who justified her ruling based on Rubio’s statement. Khalil’s lawyers have until April 23 to appeal the decision and it is quite possible that this case will be heard all the way to the Supreme Court.

An ironic twist to this saga is that the Leftists who were so keen to cancel, censor, and silence their critics a few years ago are now howling loudly on behalf of Mahmoud Khalil, while the Rightists who complained loudly and bitterly about being told to sit down and shut up are now advocating that Khalil be treated in exactly the same way. Or worse.

Fairness, integrity, and consistency. I guess it all depends on which version of justice you subscribe to. Go figure.

Weep, Our Beloved Country

Roger Mitchell5 Comments

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2025/03/no_author/international-law-is-now-suspended-if-not-eliminated/

“A law cannot exist if there are individuals or organizations that fall within its scope but which stand “above the law” — can’t be prosecuted no matter how flagrantly they violate it. EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW IS THE FOUNDATION-STONE OF LAW, and if any exceptions can be allowed, those are ONLY the ones that are stated IN the law as being NOT within its scope — and, thus, the fundamental principle of law is that a law exists ONLY if all individuals or organizations that fall within its scope are subject to investigation and prosecution if they violate it. Otherwise, it’s NOT a “law.” To call it a law is false. The United States Government and its colonies such as Israel can’t be prosecuted for violating international law no matter how flagrantly they violate it. Consequently, international law no longer exists. What DOES exist, then? The traditional ethic does: Might makes right.”

Might makes right. More than anything else, this philosophy is the one which most people subscribe to and practice, regardless of what they privately espouse. It is the order of modern American politics which stands for holding to a particular model of government until power is seized, at which point all the “true” points are discarded in favor of raw power. Because we can, and the foot-soldiers in the trenches cheer and applaud everything which the top command is doing, whether it adheres to the principles espoused or not. Because the “war” must be won. By fair means or foul, and it doesn’t matter who gets hurt in the process. War is painful, after all, and the Dastardly Democrats or the Rascally Republicans must be beaten down, never to rise again, in order to usher in the Golden Age of Utopia for All Humanity. Er, I mean, all persons because it’s forbidden to create a label which includes the letters written as “…man…” Mankind, humanity, humankind, human beings, human rights, etc. All gone. All outlawed. All discarded. Because…discrimination, you know, which simply is nothing more than making a choice between different options and possibilities. There ought to be a law.

But seriously, folks.

I don’t follow Eric Zuesse. I do read his articles from time to time and I am never disappointed, even though I may disagree with him vehemently. In this case, I think he is spot on and his argument can be applied directly to what is happening today in American jurisprudence. Namely, the idea that the Executive Branch of federal government can do anything it wishes and no one will complain. Because…they can. Might makes right, indeed!

A law is not a law IF the people who administer the Law are above the Law and are not held accountable by the Law IF they transgress the Law. Can it be put more plainly than that? In other words, if Donald Trump, and Co., decide to move in a certain direction regardless of the Law, who is going to hold him (them) accountable? After all, they are the Power and, as everyone knows, Might makes Right.

Right? Of course, right.

OK, enough of beating around the bush. Let’s bring this in for a landing.

We hear all the time from “Conservatives” that we must “return” (as if we ever left it) to The Constitution (the highest law which cannot be transcended), yet the Constitution declares these rights (of the individual) to be inviolate. Meaning that they cannot be superseded by any law, whether Congressional, Judicial, or Executive, or regardless as to whether they are popular, conservatively speaking.

  1. The 5th Amendment to the Constitution. “No person shall be…deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” .

Pretty plain, right? Cut and dried, right? No person, right? Unless, of course, this applies to an “illegal immigrant” who also happens to be a member of a “terrorist” gang (designated by the Executive Branch, i.e., the President) as a threat to the “national interest”. In that case, those who are guilty (whether they are charged or not is irrelevant) of this “crime” (violation of law) are subject to immediate deportation to their country of origin OR removal to a prison system run by the El Salvadoran government, which we pay buku bucks for, generously provided by the US taxpayer.

This does not appear to be any different than the “war” waged on La Cosa Nostra, i.e., Mafia, which has been ongoing for decades and does not appear to have an end point. Except that the action against Tren de Aragua has the support and vociferous backing of half the population of the US, which Donald Trump is counting on to allow him to completely circumvent the 5th Amendment to the Constitution, which all his supporters depend on to keep the country safe from the depredations of a tyrannical government. We MUST get back to the Constitution, right? Except when it is convenient to discard it, of course.

Whatever happened to “Innocent, until Proven Guilty”? Does this mean anything, anymore?

I admit that Tren de Aragua probably is criminal. It is probably based on force, violent in nature, to achieve its ends, i.e., the compliance of those it seeks to subjugate. That being said, is there any realistic, theoretical, philosophical, difference between this one specific gang and others which are larger and have much more power, e.g., the United States of America, which can be said to impose its power and influence around the world? As far as I can see, the only difference is one of size and scope.

I could applaud the current administration for its stance and actions, except for one niggling reminder. First, they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out because I wasn’t a socialist. Yes, I said nothing when those in power came for Tren de Aragua because I was not a member of the group and, besides, I liked what Trump & Co. was doing. Never mind that the end of this is that when they came for me, there was no one left to speak up for me.

Should we be concerned? Absolutely, yes, we should, but not necessarily in the manner so prevalent in conservative circles today. If the government can arrest and punish anyone at all based solely on an accusation, then who is safe? Am I safe? Are you? How do you know?

“By their works, you shall know them.”

What is most interesting about the article by Eric Zuesse is that he mentions the Peasant’s Revolt of 1525, which resulted in the deaths of perhaps as many as 100, 000 common, ordinary, everyday, persons who simply wanted an end to the abuses perpetrated on them by those more powerful, and which can be summarized as follows:

“Laws should be made more equitable so that all are equal before it and no one gets harsher or more lenient treatment for the same crime.” — https://www.worldhistory.org/Twelve_Articles/

Imagine that! The Law applied equally and without discrimination! No one, not even Donald Trump, Elon Musk, nor Chuck Schumer above it!

We have a long way to go.

COVID: A Modern-day Hydra

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

COVID is over. At least, I thought it was over. In fact, I wrote an article and posted it here on August 15, 2021, in which I said that the tide of the war had turned and, from that point on, the battle was going to become increasingly desperate for those who were determined to ram the fraud down our throats and inject all of us with their favorite deadly toxin, while trying to shut our mouths with their stupid, silly dust mask mandates. At that time, I called it a “gut feeling” and I still think I was right.

Well, yes, but Adolf Hitler didn’t blow his brains out until the Soviet Army was only five hundred yards away from his bunker and closing fast. And COVID is like that, refusing to die peacefully, still wreaking havoc wherever it can, hanging on until the bitter end, i.e. until there is no more money to be made from it and no more foolish idiots to gull. The fact is that a lot of people still wear their stupid, silly dust masks, believing beyond credulity in the efficacy of a piece of fabric to keep them safe. Chain stores like Walgreen’s and RiteAid are still pushing the Pfizer and Moderna shots, often coupling them with more traditional “flu” shots to draw in customers. Not quite like “Buy one, get one at half price!”, but close enough.

Speaking of the mRNA shots (I will not call them vaccines), I became aware the other day (hat tip, Mr. B) of a bill, H.B 371, introduced into the Montana State House which would ban, literally outlaw, the use of mRNA injections for human “consumption” within the state. You can read the text here. It was just shot down by a sizable majority, with all the Democrats and a large percentage of the Republicans voting to kill it.

https://projects.montanafreepress.org/capitol-tracker-2025/bills/hb-371/

https://bills.legmt.gov/#/laws/bill/2/LC1463?open_tab=status

If I was a swearing man, I’d ask “What the *&^%?” is the matter with these people? Are they not aware that the mRNA shots have probably killed more people than the virus itself, which was probably engineered in a Wuhan, China lab with the strong financial support of certain people in the US government? All paid for with your tax dollars and inflation, no less. Nice, neat, and tidy, wasn’t it? Well, maybe Elon Musk can sort it out. Maybe Anthony Fauci will go to jail, but I’m not holding my breath.

What is going on with the legislators in Helena, anyway? Why would they vote to turn down a ban on something which is strongly suspected (speaking graciously) of being a deliberate, orchestrated killing protocol unleashed on a trusting public? Why indeed, and I can only think of one answer: someone got to them and convinced them that it was in their best interest to bury this bill. Possibly, human nature being what it is, the convincing might have involved the transfer of a substantial number of Benjamins. Bribes, in other words, but then, I’m only speculating. Maybe promises were made to donate to the next campaign season, which every politician looks forward to. At any rate, looking out for the best interests of their constituents must have been the last thing on their minds.

Do you live in Montana? Do you want to see an end to this bullshit? Then I encourage you to find out which way your local representative voted and contact them with either a note of thanks for voting “Yes” or a fiery, blistering condemnation of their action if they voted “No”.

Click here, then scroll down to 2nd Reading, Show Full Vote Breakdown.

After all, this is your government, right? Didn’t you just participate in an election which sent these people to Helena as your “representatives”? If they are your representatives, then they are supposed to work for you, not an international corporation which enriches itself by keeping you sick. Or worse, making you dead.

Yes, yes, I know. Pure, blatant populist rabble-rousing, isn’t it? Well, maybe that’s what it takes to get you moving. If the shoe fits, wear it.

Orange-haired Wrecking Machine

Roger Mitchell5 Comments

It has been barely a month since Donald Trump took office as President and already monumental changes have occurred. As Vladimir Lenin famously said, “There are decades when nothing happens and there are weeks when decades happen.” Trump appears to have learned the lesson well from his first term during which he was drubbed from every direction and, with the assistance and support of his staff, is aggressively making his mark on America and the world. Whether it will be “great” or not remains to be seen. If Trump succeeds in dismantling and rearranging the federal government, a long overdue event, it will bode well for the future of this country—in the long run. The short run is a different story. Getting from our current situation to “Happy days are here again” is not going to be a pleasant journey, even if you are a starry-eyed supporter of everything which he is accomplishing.

America, the Hegemon, has run its course. After 1-1/4 centuries of empire-building (marking the Spanish-American war as the beginning), it is obvious to clear-minded thinkers that there is nothing left except to change course and operate in a different manner. We cannot bully our way anymore as in the past. Threats only have an effect on small insignificant countries like Colombia, which caved recently on the issue of repatriation of immigrants to the US. Large, near-peer nations (Russia, China, e.g.) are charting their own destiny and have the power to make it happen, with or without the “blessing” of Washington.

Closer to home, financial collapse and ruin are on the horizon. After decades of constant inflation from 1971 onward (Nixon’s decoupling from the gold standard) and unfathomably massive deficits (call them by their real name–unpayable debts), the economy is on extremely shaky ground and will probably experience a severe recession in the near future, almost certainly within the next four years. It is conceivable that this will be worse than the Great Depression of the 1930’s, and it is not necessary to resort to “conspiracy theories” to understand that. The dollar is strong vis-a-vis all other currencies only because they are even weaker, not through any real value of its own. The current run-up in the price of gold is a telling indicator. The day is long gone when all problems could be solved by throwing money at them.

What does this mean for us? Put as simply as I can, it’s going to hurt. Bigly. There are going to be serious consequences for America’s actions and many of them will be personally disruptive and destructive. Lifestyle changes are going to become the order of the day and many of these will come about because there is no other choice. Adapt or die. Simply expecting that the State or society will allow us to remain as we were is a foolish exercise in complacent irresponsibility. Those who cling to the past will almost certainly perish. At the very least, they will become irrelevant.

For too long, we have believed in the State to protect us from every conceivable danger and inconvenience. Today, that false god is bankrupt and toppling. The motto, “full faith and credit of the US government”, is no longer valid and does not apply. It is like a decrepit, derelict building which has long outlived its original purpose and must be destroyed to make way for the future.

Donald Trump, like any good wrecking ball, is loud, disruptive, and causing a lot of damage to the existing structure. However, wrecking balls are good for only one purpose–deconstruction. Trump is not going to “save” America, but he may clear the way for others to come behind him and start the rebuilding process all over again. Time will tell.

Leather gloves, hard hats, steel-toed boots, dust masks, and safety goggles are the order of the day.

Romans 13: The View from Here

Roger Mitchell5 Comments

In the Holy Bible, there are no scriptures which create more dissension, disagreement, and controversy than Revelation and Romans 13. These two stand head and shoulders over everything else in the ability to get believers, students, and pontificators riled up against those who read from a different viewpoint. It is debatable which of these two holds the top spot. We are not concerned with that here.

I have been engaged in a discussion with a friend of mine who does not see eye to eye with me on the function (or necessity) of government and when she challenged me about the meaning of Romans 13:4, I decided to reply by means of this article. This is not meant to be the last word on the subject, but is intended to spark conversation about it, including opposing perspectives, so that all of us can advance closer to the truth of the matter. At the top of this page is a Comment button, which you can click if you want to join the discussion and put in your own two cent’s worth. If you think your insight on this subject is worth promoting, now is your chance.

What is Romans 13, anyway? This is the question which must be answered before any significance can be attached to its message and meaning. “Context, context, context” is the continual refrain from those who attempt to understand this, yet so many forget all that in considering this passage by lifting it out from the rest of the book.

Written originally by the Apostle Paul, there were no chapters and no verses. It was simply one long letter from him to the Roman Christians and they were expected to consider the whole without trying to separate it into various parts. The chapter and verse organization was added centuries later to facilitate the finding of a specific section of Scripture and, unfortunately, has created chaos in many circles, this being one of them. Nothing in it can be distinctly separated from the whole to stand alone as its own separate doctrine. Unfortunately, many Christians tend to forget this and elevate certain sections, e.g., Chapter 13, above all else. This is a major error and ought to be repented of.

Enough of that. Let’s dig into it.

“Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God, therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgement on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.” (Romans 13:1-4, NKJV)

What a mouthful!

“Let every soul be subject to the …” This is where the problems begin. If you go to your web browser and type in the search term “Romans 13:1”, it will return this link, https://biblehub.com/romans/13-1.htm, which will give an extensive list of translations, all of which name this as “governing authorities”, “higher powers”, “those above you”, those who have authority”, etc., except two, which read as follows:

GOD’S WORD® Translation
Every person should obey the government in power. No government would exist if it hadn’t been established by God. The governments which exist have been put in place by God.

Good News Translation
Everyone must obey state authorities, because no authority exists without God’s permission, and the existing authorities have been put there by God…

Imagine that! Adolf Hitler or Joseph Stalin is the government in power. What are you going to do?

Out of the many translations I saw, only these two translate the “higher power who has authority over him” as “government”, and the Good News Translation goes so far as to name this “state authority”. The reality, however, is that there are multiple authorities over persons starting with parents and progressing from there. Many spring to mind: the husband/wife relationship, church authority, employer/employee, civil governments, creditor/debtor, coach/athlete, headmaster/student, etc., and some you can probably think of which are not listed here. There is absolutely no justification for twisting this particular passage to mean that the ONLY authority is that of the State, unless you are advocating for the supremacy of the State and its total authority over you and everyone else.

Disclaimer: I am not a scholar. Greek is Greek to me, as is Hebrew. I have never studied them and do not claim to speak as an expert nor even with some knowledge of the languages and words. That being said, I recommend you read this clear, well-written article in which the author DOES dig into the meanings of the Greek words used and explains how they relate to the topic in question.

We simply cannot assume that Romans 13:1 refers to state (civil) government exclusively. Like the so-called “balance of power” implied by the Constitution of the United States, authority must also be spread out among many competing “authorities”, and there is no one single man-centered authority which controls all others, no “One Ring to rule them all.” Instead, the “authorities”, each of which has their own place within society, is meant to enhance and advance the rights and well-being of their subordinates, not to rule over them. Good parents raise their children in order to turn them loose on the world in the hopes that they will be able to function as competent adults in their own right. ALL authorities should operate in the same manner.

Authority is meant to complement. It is designed to bring out the best in persons. It is not supposed to be a system of control, of rule. All the “governing authorities” mentioned in Romans 13:1 are meant to operate for the good of those who are in the subordinate role, to bring them to a higher position and perhaps even so they can act as authority figures themselves.

And all of that (barely scratching the surface) in v.1, but my sparring partner’s concern was with v. 4.

“For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.”

It seems evident that this verse is addressing civil government or at least a system of legal justice against criminal behavior and I do not have a problem with that. If you read RMB’s article linked to above, you would already have this understanding, as no other “authority” exercises the power of the sword legitimately in the way the civil authority does. Without a clear sense of justice, however, the sword can and does represent naked power and the ability to force others to conform to a “rule of law”, in which whatever the government decides and enacts becomes law, whether it is beneficial or harmful to the society under it. Simply passing a law does not create justice and expecting that everyone become obedient to the law passed BECAUSE it is the law is ludicrous on its face. Should Christians (or anyone else, for that matter) rat out their neighbors to the ruling “authorities” because the law proclaimed that all Jews must wear a yellow star sewed onto their clothing? To ask the question is to answer it. Obviously, there must be a way to allow for government and law, but also a means of resistance to it should it become demanding, overbearing, and evil.

The main problem I have is the tendency within Christian circles to simply submit, conform to, and obey the law as proclaimed by the modern State, as if it were God Himself. Remember COVID and the “suggestion” that churches cancel Easter service in 2020? After all, Romans 13 teaches us that we are to subject ourselves to it, doesn’t it? How did the world move forward without the application of the modern State to rule over us, dictating every little “jot and tittle” to us, and expecting that we would observe every facet of that?

In other words, without government, we are lost. In a society and culture where power over others has become the goal and government has become God, this is the logical end of such a belief.

What then are we to make of this? What is the relevance of Romans 13 to us today? How are we meant to respond to its message? What does it really mean? Perhaps this is a good time to bring in some other voices and opinions, not necessarily expert, but certainly authoritative in their own right.

As I see it, government authority is to be one authority among others. It is not meant to be The Authority over all other authorities. Certainly, government is not meant to be the State as we know it today. If there is a compelling political authority in the United States, it would have to be the Constitution, which all civil government, including the federal government as personified in the president, Donald J. Trump, is sworn to uphold and defend. Politicians raise their right hand, place their left hand on the Bible (except DJT), and swear to this, right? Yet, how much of what we see today is subject to the Constitution and how much would have to change to bring our situation back to alignment with it? This is not to say that the Constitution is The Authority, as it should be clear that even the Constitution is subordinate to a “higher power”, which is the Word of God. In other words, there are layers and layers of authority and none of them, except the Word of God, reigns supreme over all the others.

Authority is an inescapable concept. There is authority. It is not a question of authority vs. no authority, but rather a question of whose authority, which authority. I understand this and do not dispute it. Where I draw the line is that real authority cannot be gained by the use of force and power. It cannot be legislated. It cannot be imposed by an outside force, but must rather be recognized and accepted by all concerned. Real authority is based on a system of trust, with the subordinate party believing that the authority over him has his best interests at heart. Such is not the case in the State/citizen relationship today. We cannot trust that the State, which seeks to gain all power and control, will do right by us. In fact, we know this to be true because we go through the gyrations of “free and fair elections” every election cycle in order to correct our situation, believing that if only we can install the right man or woman into office, justice will have been achieved and we will be set free from all the fears that plague us. Nothing could be further from the truth. True authority does not appear by virtue of the ballot box.

Does any of this mean that Romans 13:4 is irrelevant to today’s society or that we can simply ignore it? Hardly, as there will always be a need for someone, some authority, to exercise judgment and justice on wrongdoing and criminal behavior. We may be individual persons living out our own lives as we see fit, but we are also part of the community surrounding us and it is within that community that we must live in cooperation with the other members. At some time or another, there will arise a situation where the community must come together to “execute wrath on him who practices evil”. How is this to be done? What defines evil? Who does the defining? There are only two answers: an organic approach fostered from within the community itself OR a “solution” imposed from above and outside the community. Either the answer comes from within us as we understand the truth or it will be forced on us by others who have the power to compel our obedience and subjection.

“He (the civil authority) is God’s minister to you for good.” Keep that in mind as you explore all the ways in which the modern State government does NOT minister to us for good. The dilemma here is that the modern way of thinking is to legislate, pass a law which will solve the problem, but which creates more problems, all of which need to be corrected by passing even more laws. In this, today’s government is similar to the pharmaceutical response to poor health and disease: pop a pill, and if that creates side effects, take another drug to counter that. There is never any effort made to find the root of the problem, only to address the symptoms, which is then pawned off as a cure, and which results in the patient (citizen, society) getting sicker and weaker all the time. There is no money to be made in keeping people healthy and there is no benefit, at least for the State, to making society responsible for itself.

Oppression Shall Cease: O Holy Night

Roger Mitchell5 Comments

December 25, 2024. Christmas Day.

“Truly He taught us to love one another, His law is love and His gospel is peace. Chains shall He break for the slave is our brother and in His Name, all oppression shall cease…” — from the Christmas hymn, “O, Holy Night”

ALL oppression shall cease. It follows logically that, wherever oppression exists, His Name has not yet become the guide for life. Wherever people are oppressed, the Name of Christ has not become the Law which is followed and obeyed in everyday life. This applies to both the individual and the collective (corporate, according to Karl Ludwig von Haller), because it is certain that both the individual and the collective can be (and are) oppressive.

All OPPRESSION shall cease. Oppression implies control because it is impossible to oppress someone, anyone, unless control is established over them. It follows that the less control we have over others, the less possibility there is to oppress them. If the statement that all oppression shall cease is true, then it must mean that all control over others must also come to an end. Of course, there are qualifiers: parents exercise control over their children, but only to the point where their children are able to function as responsible individuals in their own right. Once that point is reached, control must be relinquished and the child must become liable for his own actions.

All oppression SHALL cease. This implies that the cessation of oppression in all aspects of life is future-oriented and will not occur completely nor immediately in the present. This should give us hope that the future will be better than the present or the past. There are issues we have to work through to gain the end of oppression–both individually and collectively. Christians, especially, ought to understand this since we are taught that holiness is gained progressively as we surrender and submit our lives to the Kingship and Authority of Jesus, the Christ. If the Law of Christ is not oppressive and brings peace, then, as His disciples, we gradually and progressively learn to become non-oppressive towards ourselves and others as well. We learn, over time and through experience, to love our neighbors as we love ourselves, minimizing and eventually eliminating the effect of oppression on them and that expression is a personal choice made by us, as individuals, under and with the power and authority of the Holy Spirit working in and through us. We have no excuses for not going down down this road.

All oppression shall CEASE. Come to an end. Be eliminated. Can this really happen in time and on Earth? Do we, as sinful persons, need to have a Messiah descend from Heaven to impose this upon us OR do we have the capability to make this fulfilled now? Again, Christians ought to know the answer to this question. Yes, we do, and it is by the grace and power of the Holy Spirit that we are able to achieve this goal. We can refuse to oppress others. We can love them as we love ourselves. We can serve them without expecting anything back from them. All cessation of oppression begins with the individual and expand outward into the collective (corporate), bringing to life the lesson taught by Jesus in the parable of the yeast mixed into the bread dough.

Ultimately, this is an expression of faith. The Kingdom of Jesus, the Christ, is triumphant over oppression now and will be triumphant over oppression in the future, up to the point where oppression is no longer existent. It is a long-term goal, something to be anticipated, something to work for. It is not to be given automatically. It is not a “participation trophy”. It will not be reached by imposition, only by surrender to the Word, which speaks the Gospel of Peace into our lives on a daily basis. It will not be attained by a submission to law or obedience to legislation, regardless of the source. It can only be gained by recognizing, in the present, that I am a sinner, prone to oppressing others for my own sake, and abandoning and overcoming that tendency within myself, so that all may benefit.

The obliteration of oppression does not begin with political action. It is not derived from the top down, rather, it begins at the very bottom of the pile–the soul of the individual, who recognizes that his life does not reconcile with the Law of Love and the Gospel of Peace, and begins to change his ways so as to become compliant with them. Society is a collection (collective, corporation) of individuals, and if the individual changes his ways, the society will change–for better or for worse.

Coming of the Light: The Next Four Years

Roger Mitchell3 Comments

Today, December 21, 2024, is the winter solstice, the shortest day of the year. In my latitude, that means daylight arrives only a few minutes before 8:00 a.m. and darkness falls shortly after 5:00 p.m., for a total of about nine hours of light sufficient that I don’t need to rely on artificial illumination. From here on out, for the next six months, the daylight spans will become increasingly longer, until June 21, 2025, when the cycle will reverse.

Also looking forward, not necessarily toward more light, on January 20, 2025, just 30 days from now, Donald Trump will be sworn in as the next President of the United States. This will make many people absolutely giddy with delight and euphoria as they expect that he (and his cohorts) will transform the current System of Governance into one in which justice is reached at last, (at least for those on our side), governments actually protect their citizens from harm of all kinds, money is once more made valuable, wars are fought and won decisively against “our” adversaries, and everyone’s life becomes more free and prosperous as long as they are not drug dealers, illegal immigrants, anti-Semites, Democrats, and progressive Utopian zealots who do not know the difference between a boy and a girl.

Ah, yes. Good times, good times!

I watch what is happening today and I don’t know if I should laugh or cry, because it is evident to me that the American Empire is thrashing about in its death throes and the next four years under Trump will not resurrect it to vigorous life again. It was bad under Biden, it will not improve under Trump. In all likelihood, more people will be worse off then than they are now and, what is just as likely is that most of them will remain clueless as to why this happened. For many of them, the ignorance will be deliberate. As Bionic Mosquito (see here or here), one of my correspondents, commented recently,

“People don’t want to open the door on one false belief because they are afraid (or maybe know) that once one false belief falls, their entire worldview will crumble. It scares most people to consider that their house is built on sand. So they defend, no matter the evidence.”

Yes, once the foundations of a system crumble, the entire worldview changes. Those who believe the notion that The State, The System, is the natural order of things and that everything will be lost without it will do anything and everything to avoid coming to the conclusion that they have believed in a veritable fountain of lies. Instead, they will cling desperately to the sinking ship, dancing upon its increasingly steep decks, refusing to jump into the icy cold water of political, social, and economic reality, or the lifeboat that is personally responsible life. True believers will go down with the ship and, in the US, there are millions of them. The nostrum that Trump will make the bad things go away is delusional, but it is one which will be held tightly and, when it fails, will be explained away in the manner of all excuses which are adamantly opposed to the truth–“If only we had tried harder…”

Be careful what you wish for. You might get it.

Politics, Contradiction, and Lies

Roger Mitchell6 Comments

“In every other science one saw at least a more or less adequate degree of congruence between theory and practice, reason and experience; only in politics was there an eternal contradiction between the dominant doctrines and the state of the world. It is this very contradiction that true science seeks to avoid, by adjusting the theory to the nature of things, while false science seeks to save itself by torturing facts in order to force-fit them into accredited systems.” —Karl Ludwig von Haller, Restoration of Political Science, Preliminary Discourse. (Emphasis mine)

Remember Covid? Writing in 1816, Haller presciently and accurately described the method by which false science was used to impose the narrative on an unsuspecting population. It cannot be emphasized enough that the lies, social manipulation, division, ostracization, and emotional distress caused by irrational fear were all driven by a false science designed for only one purpose: control over the many by a few for a pre-designed agenda. It cannot be denied that the perpetrators of the Covid scam tortured the facts so as to force-fit them into their desired system of total control over all–worldwide.

And money. Boatloads of money. More money than they could ever need or spend. All gained at the expense of the average, common, everyday Joe.

Four years on, there are still those who are clinging tightly to this “false science”, who will not relinquish their hold on it–either because they hope to gain from it by perpetuating it, or because they are afraid to admit they were gulled and bought into it. I see the latter occasionally, on sidewalks, in shops, at events, who have their face masks firmly in place, advertising to the world that they are still gripped by the notion, the false science, that a thin, porous piece of cloth will actually keep them from contracting a virus.

(I am tempted at times to walk up to them and ask them if they are trying to keep their chin warm, but I don’t. It might be like poking a stick into a hornet’s nest. Better left alone. Besides, I am aware of the sage advice in Proverbs 26:4 which tells me not to answer a fool according to his folly. Or as The Message puts it, “Don’t respond to the stupidity of a fool; you’ll only look foolish yourself.”)

Nevertheless, Haller’s point is that in every science based on observation and adjustment, facts count and when theory is not consistent with the facts, then the theory must be adjusted. It is only in the “science” of politics that this does not hold, instead the facts themselves are twisted to fit the theory. It does not matter what the theory is, who promotes it, nor its end purpose, the promoters and adherents of the theory are not at all reticent nor ashamed to push their own version of the “science” to achieve their goal, which is, of course, getting what they want at the expense of everyone else. Anthony Fauci even alluded to himself as “The Science” and baldly asserted that to disagree with him was an assault on science.

The unfortunate reality in all this is that the vast majority of people, across the full spectrum of society, believe that the only way to make things “work”, according to their own preferred belief system, is to engage in politics, twisting and distorting the facts to make themselves look better and their antagonists look worse. What is really sad is the fact, undistorted and wholly reliable, that people fail to learn from their past mistakes, especially in politics. They will swallow virtually any lie so long as it appears to come from an authority which proclaims to have the ability to “save” them from risk, catastrophe, and danger, and in their acceptance of the lie, they attempt to work the world over to bring it to life, to add it into the pantheon of truth.

People never learn, but then someone like von Haller pops up and sheds a little bit of light on the subject.

There is hope.