OCCUPIERS AGAINST THE RICH AND POWERFUL
November 13, 2011
Ever since the first squatters began to occupy Wall Street in early October with a plethora of complaints, the thought went through the minds of many people about what the actual agenda might be. Civility began to decline in the 60s when civil disobedience followed Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals patterned after labor unions negotiating with management and, of course, some SEIU members are willing participants in this movement that is a natural magnet for people looking for trouble.
After my last article about the squatters a Tacoma, Washington lady wrote that she was 48 and she seemed insulted that I had suggested if some of the whiners were looking for work, they could help pick the apples in the Wenatchee area. She said she couldn’t leave her business and her family and indicated other protesters were in similar conditions. This sounded like many have jobs. We also saw thousands take their money from the really big banks charging for debit transactions and put their money into Credit Unions so where’s the beef with these folks? The movement under the guise of “free speech rights” seems to be on a destructive course with no positive end game in sight with the exception perhaps of possibly Martial Law and gun confiscation after a few more get killed. As I draft this article, there have been three.
Democrats and Republicans alike were struggling to make sense of the Wall Street protests and attempting to figure out how to respond to the growing nationwide movement. These folks pitched tents in front of the New York Stock Exchange to protest what they deem is unfair because some get richer than others. Presidential candidate Michelle Bachman is suggesting the 45% of people who pay no taxes be asked to sacrifice a little even from their entitlement checks. President Kennedy said we should not ask what our country can do for us but what can we do for our country and our country indeed is in dire financial trouble. As these squatters set up camp in many bigger cities, the rest of us wondered how long it would last and how disruptive to others it would be and when it might turn to destroying property and deaths? What amazes me is how well organized these folks are.
For instance, in Salem people wearing yellow tape armbands were the “peacekeepers.” The U.S. hugely subsidizes the gigantic United Nations but it hasn’t been able to bring peace to our troubled world, so how can a few young folks with yellow armbands expect to do it? Then there are the red arm-banded communicators who keep the smart phones and laptops going in order to stay in constant touch with other Occupy groups elsewhere. Our little group in Salem was part of a much larger network around the country but who donated tents, food and medical supplies?
As I draft this article, Sam Adams, the liberal Democrat Portland, Oregon mayor who has been extremely tolerant with the squatters for more than three weeks has given them until midnight on Sunday, November 13th to move out. Some of them are packing up and going home not wanting to have an arrest record but there are always the anarchists in their midst paid to keep the kettle boiling and with social networking capabilities some Portland members have put out the clarion call for others to join them prior to the eviction so I wouldn’t be bit surprised if we saw Portland burning on Sunday morning.
Police are concerned with those still remaining who are building shields and makeshift weapons – including nails hammered into wood – in preparation for when authorities attempt to clear the parks. Protesters have been advised to prepare with gas masks, avoid wearing contact lenses and to be sure to write an emergency legal-aid number on their bodies. One protester says it’s worth getting beat and arrested for justice, peace and freedom. City budgets are already being stretched to the limit to clean up these camps and police overtime. Will this end up lawsuit heaven for liberal trial lawyers who make a living off of these types of “rights” cases? The 11/11/11 AP indicated the closure of the Portland camp presents a potential for violence, as at least one dozen Black Bloc anarchists have taken up residence in the encampment where sanitary conditions have worsened day by day and businesses complained of theft and there were reports of rapes and other criminal activity and always the aroma of marijuana smoke and recently one heroin overdose.
ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT
It is my opinion this all started when President Barack Obama began cheerleading against the “rich and powerful” which somehow seemed like an oxymoron because he gets so much money from them. But then I discovered quite by accident in a March 1981 American Opinion who might be involved behind the scenes. The article entitled “Confirming the ‘Liberal Establishment’” by Robert W. Lee, a graduate of the University of Utah and a former corporation president. He explained the influence the Council On Foreign Relations (CFR) have had in our government devoted to influencing American foreign and domestic policies to suit designs for World Government envisioned by CFR founders.
Our Founders gave the media First Amendment rights to be whistleblowers but the CFR’s influence in the major media is substantial when we consider that its total membership stands at a mere two thousand. Some have asked how the establishment gets away with what it does without more whistles being blown by the news media. At least part of the answer may be the Establishment owns or controls so many of the whistles which brings to my mind the Hegelian Dialectic where the Republicans and Democrats have converged in the past to accomplish pretty much the Marxist agenda – two steps forward and one step backward until consensus is reached.
A COMMON CAUSE AGAINST THE RICH AND POWERFUL
While most of the groups mentioned in the Lee’s article dealt directly with government, or the mass media, or academe, the Establishment-launched COMMON CAUSE, a direct-action lobby. It hoped to mobilize suburban “Liberals,” the poor, minorities, students and others. The article says late in 1970, newspaper advertisements were run throughout the nation announcing formation of Common Cause to serve as a “people’s lobby” representing all Americans against the “rich and powerful.” John Gardner, the organization’s chairman, signed the ads. But absent from the ads were the facts that Gardner was just another one of the “good ole boys” who had served as President Johnson’s Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare and had a membership in the CFR, as well as serving as vice president of the Carnegie Corporation, a trustee of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, a board member of Shell Oil, New York Telephone Company, American Airlines and Time, Inc. Quite a record for the leader of an alleged crusade against the “rich and powerful.” The truth, of course, is that the very Establishment conceived the organization it claimed to oppose. Does that sound like Occupy Wall Street?
And here is where it gets even more interesting. Contributions to Common Cause at the time of its organization during the final three months of 1970 came from Chase Manhattan Bank and no less than five different Rockefellers and tax-exempt foundations. These foundations initially began as noble philanthropies but have since been infiltrated and now grants go to their favorite left-wing organizations so they can continue to carry on their skullduggery under the radar while altering life in the U.S. This grant-making process might be compared to the forced union dues only to find the dues are used to promote the left-wing agenda that many of these workers oppose.
Without this early Establishment funding, Common Cause couldn’t have so much as paid for those ads, which launched its program allegedly to defend the interests of the common man against entrenched interests. And then Lee wonders how many of the 225,000 members of Common Cause had any idea of how completely they were being used. And may I suggest one of the groups behind this Occupy movement is the Communist Party that takes great pleasure in labeling such willing participants as useful idiots. Common Cause is still in operation and especially during an election season, we’ll see the name noted in some newspaper article or some bill may be at its request. There are chapters in each state.
I keep hearing protesters say their squatting is democracy at work. WRONG! This is mobocracy. As early as 1912, President Woodrow Wilson stated, “This country is no longer a Republic, but is now a Democracy.” Professor Alexander Fraser Tyler said, “A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always VOTE for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that Democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, and followed by a Dictatorship.” This statement brings us to the current crisis.
When our Founders declared independence from the government of England, they included in their indictment of King George III the following:
He has erected a multitude of new officers and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people…
A San Francisco radio talk show host, Dr. Bill Wattenburg appropriately calls the swarms of officers that head these unconstitutional federal and state government agencies “certifiable nincompoops.” They are appointed by governors and presidents to head these agencies with no accountability. Legislators pass the laws but others fill in the details. A workforce of nearly two million civilian federal employees churn out a mind-numbing number of rules in the nearly one thousand federal A to Z departments, agencies and divisions that enforce them. Take into consideration the salaries that are higher than in the private sector, the bountiful retirement and health care benefits and this is why our U.S. government is bankrupt.
In 1945 the Senate approved the U.N. Charter that paved the way for Congress to enact the Administrative Procedure Act in 1946 (Public Law 79-404) allowing the creation of unconstitutional agencies and then on March 27, 1969, Republican president, Richard Nixon, gave us a White House Directive for the “restructuring of government service systems” by creating ten regions to administer the fifty states. As a result, when any governmental entity receives federal assistance, it yields that portion of federally-funded activity to the federal rules and regulations.
Many of you, no doubt, heard Texas Governor Perry stumble at the debate recently when he said he was going to eliminate three agencies: Commerce, Education and he couldn’t think of the third, which eventually came out as Energy. Standing to his left was the only longest, true Constitutional candidate for the presidency, Congressman Ron Paul, who put up five fingers for the agencies he wants to eliminate. I didn’t see the whole debate, only clips of Perry’s gaffe, so I wonder if Paul who the media and GOP, in general, likes to ignore or ridicule, was later asked what five agencies he wanted to eliminate. I know President Reagan promised conservatives he was going to eliminate the Department of Education but, according to Charlotte Iserbyt, instead he quietly followed President Eisenhower’s 1958 lead of merging U.S. and Soviet education systems and followed up with the U.S. Soviet education agreements in 1985.
PARENS PATRIAE (Government by Parent)
Up until 1921, when the federal Sheppard-Tower Maternity Act was passed creating birth “registration” or what we know as the birth certificate, people noted the birth of their babies in the Family Bible. It was known as the “Maternity Act,” and was sold to the American people as a law that would reduce maternal and infant mortality, protect the health of mothers and infants and for other “other purposes.” One of those other purposes provided for the establishment of a federal bureau designed to cooperate with state agencies in the overseeing of its operations and expenditures. This can be seen as the FIRST ATTEMPT of “government by appointment” or cooperation of state governments to aid the federal government in usurping the legislative process. Assuring this compliance, it then became necessary for all new borns to have a social security number.
Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!
The Super Committee has until November 23rd to come back to the full Congress and the President with recommendations for cutting $1.2 trillion from the budget over the next 10 years. Do you really believe they will have achieved bipartisan results? I fear Christmas this year will find the stockings hung on the fireplace mantle empty because someone is going to have to start cutting all the entitlements or declare America bankrupt. President Barack Obama already took more than $500 billion from Medicare to jumpstart his Obamacare- H.R. 3200. In addition, on pages 1003 to 1005, it is noted that 36 months after the March 23, 2010 signing, a microchip will be required in every citizen. (Rev. 13:16-18) The FDA approved a class II implantable device – a radio frequency transponder system for patient identification and health information. You do the math!
� 2011 Betty Freauf - All Rights Reserved