The Federal Reserve is a threat to economic stability alongside the IRS. Only the Fed does more economic damage to individuals finances than the IRS & other regulatory agencies combined. The U.S. dollar is devalued thanks to this central bank with no oversight from Congress. A militant patriot is more likely to hold the Fed accountable than government.
This here is about a 21 year old Bangledeshi national who packed a van full of fake explosives set by an undercover informant. Nafis intended to bomb the Federal Reserve! Should sound money proponents such as Ron Paul be proud of people like Nafis for effort in fighting the Federal Reserve militantly in order to prevent more havoc on the economy or is there much good at stake here?
Nafis's motive was to undermine America & bring it to Islamic domination. What if a classical liberal(libertarian) plotted the same kind of attack with the only targets being the building itself & the Fed employees, including the chairman? What if Ben Bernanke were deposed & the FED was destroyed permenently through terrorist-like means?
I don't feel that destroying the FED would advance Islamic Supremacy but as Thomas Jefferson would say that the blood of the employees & chairmen would grow the tree of liberty forward.
If the Federal Reserve buildings in Washington D.C. & New York were to be destroyed, then it would send an extremely powerful message that as Thomas Jefferson would also say "When the people fear the government there is tyranny. When the government fears the people there is liberty." It would send an even more powerful & strong message if the employees & leaders responsible for inflating the economy through counterfeiting force were destroyed in the destruction of the buildings they were inside.
However there is speculation that gold reserves are being held at FED buildings, making it a bad idea to bomb the building for fears of destroying the gold supplies.
Nafis intended to target Obama & the New York Stock Exchange but the latter does not deserve to be attacked.
The 9/11 attack on the WTC was absolutely sick & the radical muslim extremists should go to hell! Our country is being violated by our own government & I feel any terrorist like attack on tyrannical government facilities & against tyrannical public officials while avoiding non-belligerant deaths is patriotic & revives the spirit of '76. Trying non-violent civil disobedience is encouraged when effective.
It seems the easiest way to destroy government buildings is to strike it with an aircraft. This was the case with tax resistence hero Joe Stack who struck an IRS building in occupied Austin, Texas on February 17-18, 2010, killing one IRS employee. Joe Stack was a hero who sacrificed his life in a brazen attempt to send a powerful message to the federal government to stop terrorizing defiant political opponents trying to fight unconstitutional tax laws. Sadly, it wasn't strong enough & the attack could have been stronger had a truck full of 30 ton explosives successfully detonated towards the IRS building, causing it's nearly complete destruction! That would have really got as many headlines as the Oklahoma City bombing back in '95.
However there must be measures taken to prevent as many non-belligerent deaths/injuries as possible & that's why targeting the federal building in Oklahoma City back in 1995 was a bad idea considering possibly knowing about the daycare center inside which was responsible for the many deaths of young children.
Bombing government buildings of agencies responsible for destroying freedom is justified since liberty is a birthright & people have the right to fight back through whatever means necessary. It's not stealing if it's already yours so why should we allow failed election after failed election to stop us?
Note: This is only to express views & not to advocate any form of violence
Monday, October 22, 2012
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Liberal Democracy vs. Elective Dictatorship
There's a major difference between Liberal Democracy & Elective Dictatorships.
A Liberal Democracy secures individual liberty & holds those in office accountable regardless of elections.
An Elective Dictatorship on the other hand despite having non-one party elections the office holders act like dictators with no regard for economic & individual freedom. This creates an illusion that elections appear to exist but are exploited to the fullest extent without blowing cover. What I mean is election laws protect establishment parties against all others either through major party laws, winner take all with no majority run off elections, or both. In elective dictatorships, the elected dictators will claim they have a license to pursue totalitarian policies based on elections, even if they only won a plurality.
People think that simpling changing the dictators will bring change but that is false. No elected official should have a license to pursue a barrage of economy crippling & totalitarian policies in between elections, even if we can simply vote them out of office. It's frightningly possible for a country to go from a prosperous economy from one election & lose prosperity with lower standards of living within six years.
Government must have consent under liberal democracies & if elected officials act like dictators, what about the individuals who didn't vote for them? Should people suffer lower standards of living & prison like standards of living through no fault of their own simply because elected officials became dictators. All it takes is for a few senators/congressmen to propose laws that will affect the entire country for worse, creating an infamous regime. The president does worse by exercising dictatorial executive power & Obama has done just that. What if elected officials are term limited, won't run for re-elections, or will simply be re-elected de facto by default like a king?
Another issue here is does the elected official have a vested interest in enacting bad policies? Are special interest groups contributing to their campaign in return for favors? Congress is just way too professional & that creates unaccountable public officials who make elected politics a career. This makes voting to reform government hardly ever work or not work at all since these newly elected congressmen become wooed by party hierarchy & luxurious salaries/benefits. Looking for benevolence is acknowledging & accepting elective dictatorship but falsely hoping for change from within.
What are our outside options? Civil disobedience is direct action at breaking fiat laws. Fiat means what the state says it means such as fiat currency, where government determines the value of the currency.
I like to point attention towards paramilitary approaches such as fighting back against government agencies with firearms & explosives. Law enforcement agencies use paramilitary force in some cases which gives just cause to fight back using the same methods. Law enforcement agencies & armies are too dangerous to be taken on without the use of firearms. Law enforcement & armies have advanced weaponry & vehicles to crush opposition. Acting along leaves no power but creating a united paramilitary organization based loosely off of Al-Qaeda will give the regime a real scare.
Armed insurrection may seem frightning to some but what's even more frightning is being close to a highly centralized state like North Korea which has an awful human rights record. Education could be hijacked by the federal government as students will be as controlled as North Korean subjects.
This can be avoided by staunchly defending gun rights & condoning violence against gun confiscators & gun control activists. What's more frightning? Having bureaucrats control your life or militant freedom fighters engaging in guerilla warfare against the Fasco-Communist regime?
Elections to change government hardly work but militant action & civil disobedience does. I do favor non-violent tactics when they actually work while favoring as less of violence as possible. Don't be fooled into believing that if there was one single global state & arms control, we would have a more peaceful society. What we will have under world government of disarmed subjects is a totalitarian communist state where violence is legitimatized by the regimes actions against it's subjects.
What is the best way to prevent it from happening? Paramilitary approaches are necessary & a duty to defeat tyrannical government when non-violence fails. The United Nations is a far-left organization which secretly advocates a world government & has fought secretly for leftist & marxist interests. What if a giant object such as an airplane were to crash into the U.N. Headquarters in New York City? Should it be condoned & praised? Seeing the collapse of any tyrannical government's building or their activists is something for freedom fighters to be proud of. The American Revolution was all about fighting the British Crown through militant action, especially after the invasion of Concorde & Lexington on April 19, 1775 by British troops.
If people have no right to shoot law enforcement officers & armed force members destroying liberty, life, & property, then our society has failed to be a free society. Don't allow government to decide what liberty is. You know what individual means & know right from wrong & defend these truths at all costs.
A Liberal Democracy secures individual liberty & holds those in office accountable regardless of elections.
An Elective Dictatorship on the other hand despite having non-one party elections the office holders act like dictators with no regard for economic & individual freedom. This creates an illusion that elections appear to exist but are exploited to the fullest extent without blowing cover. What I mean is election laws protect establishment parties against all others either through major party laws, winner take all with no majority run off elections, or both. In elective dictatorships, the elected dictators will claim they have a license to pursue totalitarian policies based on elections, even if they only won a plurality.
People think that simpling changing the dictators will bring change but that is false. No elected official should have a license to pursue a barrage of economy crippling & totalitarian policies in between elections, even if we can simply vote them out of office. It's frightningly possible for a country to go from a prosperous economy from one election & lose prosperity with lower standards of living within six years.
Government must have consent under liberal democracies & if elected officials act like dictators, what about the individuals who didn't vote for them? Should people suffer lower standards of living & prison like standards of living through no fault of their own simply because elected officials became dictators. All it takes is for a few senators/congressmen to propose laws that will affect the entire country for worse, creating an infamous regime. The president does worse by exercising dictatorial executive power & Obama has done just that. What if elected officials are term limited, won't run for re-elections, or will simply be re-elected de facto by default like a king?
Another issue here is does the elected official have a vested interest in enacting bad policies? Are special interest groups contributing to their campaign in return for favors? Congress is just way too professional & that creates unaccountable public officials who make elected politics a career. This makes voting to reform government hardly ever work or not work at all since these newly elected congressmen become wooed by party hierarchy & luxurious salaries/benefits. Looking for benevolence is acknowledging & accepting elective dictatorship but falsely hoping for change from within.
What are our outside options? Civil disobedience is direct action at breaking fiat laws. Fiat means what the state says it means such as fiat currency, where government determines the value of the currency.
I like to point attention towards paramilitary approaches such as fighting back against government agencies with firearms & explosives. Law enforcement agencies use paramilitary force in some cases which gives just cause to fight back using the same methods. Law enforcement agencies & armies are too dangerous to be taken on without the use of firearms. Law enforcement & armies have advanced weaponry & vehicles to crush opposition. Acting along leaves no power but creating a united paramilitary organization based loosely off of Al-Qaeda will give the regime a real scare.
Armed insurrection may seem frightning to some but what's even more frightning is being close to a highly centralized state like North Korea which has an awful human rights record. Education could be hijacked by the federal government as students will be as controlled as North Korean subjects.
This can be avoided by staunchly defending gun rights & condoning violence against gun confiscators & gun control activists. What's more frightning? Having bureaucrats control your life or militant freedom fighters engaging in guerilla warfare against the Fasco-Communist regime?
Elections to change government hardly work but militant action & civil disobedience does. I do favor non-violent tactics when they actually work while favoring as less of violence as possible. Don't be fooled into believing that if there was one single global state & arms control, we would have a more peaceful society. What we will have under world government of disarmed subjects is a totalitarian communist state where violence is legitimatized by the regimes actions against it's subjects.
What is the best way to prevent it from happening? Paramilitary approaches are necessary & a duty to defeat tyrannical government when non-violence fails. The United Nations is a far-left organization which secretly advocates a world government & has fought secretly for leftist & marxist interests. What if a giant object such as an airplane were to crash into the U.N. Headquarters in New York City? Should it be condoned & praised? Seeing the collapse of any tyrannical government's building or their activists is something for freedom fighters to be proud of. The American Revolution was all about fighting the British Crown through militant action, especially after the invasion of Concorde & Lexington on April 19, 1775 by British troops.
If people have no right to shoot law enforcement officers & armed force members destroying liberty, life, & property, then our society has failed to be a free society. Don't allow government to decide what liberty is. You know what individual means & know right from wrong & defend these truths at all costs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)