American Policy Center » 2006 » July
- Is Arlen Specter Finally a Patriot?
- Globally-Acceptable Truths in the Land of Eden
- Why We Must Advance the Principles of Freedom
- Do Americans Understand the Threats They Face?
July 27, 2006
By Tom DeWeese
It was the front page, banner headline of The Washington Times: “Specter puts border first, Open to deal on illegals.” It appeared Senator Arlen Specter had finally come around to seeing it our way.
The article’s first sentence read, “Sen. Arlen Specter said he rates border security as the No.1 priority for an immigration bill and said he is open to a compromise that sets goals for border and interior enforcement before a guest-worker program and path to citizenship for illegal aliens kicks in.”
Such a statement was a far cry from the outrageous bill Specter helped broker through the Senate just a few weeks before. That bill demanded not only guest-worker provisions, but gave illegals in-state tuition for college; assured illegals will be paid a prevailing wage; assured illegals can’t be fired for being here illegally; assured illegals are eligible for Social Security; and assured tax dollars will go to radical immigrant-rights groups so they can help illegals adjust their status.
Senator Specter assured us that this bill was the correct way for America to deal with illegal aliens. He rejected criticism of the bill. He ignored a letter from 71 members of the House warning the Senate not to pass a bill containing amnesty for illegals. He ignored phone and letter writing campaigns from Americans. Senator Specter knew best.
So why the change? Well, it could have been a second article buried back on page nine of the same newspaper, which reported on the findings of Washington pollster Frank Luntz. He had written a private letter to Congress that Americans are not only ready for an overhaul of illegal alien policy, “they are demanding it.”
Luntz went on to say, “Any Republican who votes for legislation on illegal immigration that walks, talks, looks or smells like amnesty will reap the wrath of a Republican electorate who see more and more reasons to stay home in November.”
In other words, Ol’ Arlen, whose not up for reelection this year, darn it, could lose his chairmanship of the powerful Judiciary Committee. And ol’ Arlen loves power. So he started looking for a way out of the mess he had helped make with the Senate’s immigration bill.
Actually, it wasn’t a hard thing for a man of his slippery tongue to do. He just reversed the priorities as written in the bill. All he had to do was jump on the bandwagon for border security and put out a press release saying so. The result: headlines saying Arlen Specter now supported border security.
The danger was in the small print, where he said, he would ” insist that the final bill include a guest-worker program and a path to citizenship for many illegals…” The House bill calls for no amnesty plan and House members have refused to consider it. This is just a little sleight of hand by Arlen to slip it in.
So, in reality, Arlen Specter hasn’t changed anything. He just moved the cheese around in the trap hoping to catch the House napping. Now, after his magnanimous offer to join the patriots, he’ll blame the radical fringe conservatives for being unwilling to compromise as the reason we won’t have a worthwhile change in immigration policy in this congress. Of course, it won’t be Arlen’s fault.
And here’s another Senator I’d never turn my back on…
Senator Mike DeWine. I really shouldn’t have to say more here. Just the name of this weasel should put shutters down the spine of any American who cares about limited government, free markets and individual liberty. He has betrayed them all at one time or another. Oh yes, and when he runs for re-election, he always calls himself a “conservative.” My fellow Ohioans, please, please keep this piece of paper you are now holding, and take it into the voting booth this coming November.
Here’s Senator DeWine’s pitiful record (the short version):
In 1998 he lied to conservative members of the Senate to get their votes for his Workforce Development Act, the third plank of the School To Work, Goals 200 restructuring of America’s schools. He said Phyllis Schlafly supported it. She didn’t.
In 2002, Senator DeWine was one of six Republicans to vote against drilling for oil in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). That got him wild praise and support from forty-two of the nations most radical environmental groups – it got you $3.00 per gallon gas.
And in 2006, Senator DeWine has become the first Senate candidate in the nation to be endorsed by The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. The group sited his efforts to block legislation that prevents gunshot victims from suing gun manufacturers.
Now isn’t it funny that the only ones who seem to approve of Senator DeWine’s service in the Senate are the far left? And isn’t it odd that the only people who seem to vote for him are right of center Americans WHO ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION!
July 27, 2006
By Tom DeWeese
I’ve written many times of the assault on individual thought through behavior modification techniques such as “Critical Thinking” as a tool to lash out at one’s values system, and the use of “situation ethics” problems to challenge attitudes, values and beliefs.
These tools are fully employed in today’s government school classrooms as a means to create a new kind of thinking that is coordinated to fit a specific worldview. “Thought control” is a much easier way to describe it.
It’s vital to understand this process and to be aware of its tactics so one doesn’t fall victim to its use. The pressure to rethink ones values is seemingly everywhere, from textbooks and classrooms to television commercials to on-the-job training courses. We are constantly asked how we can be so certain about anything. We are told there are no absolutes. We are told to just live for the moment. History is eliminated from civics courses. Math is questioned as to whether it is exact. Science is ignored for political gain.
How did we lose our common sense? When did the ability to think rational thought become replaced with a whine? Where do these ideas come from?
Much to my annoyance, one of the perpetrators of this anti-reason idiocy thrust his own pompous irrationality on me through a series of astonishing e-mail letters that I tried hard to ignore. His name is Donald Sagar and he is president of his own think tank called the Eden Institute. He is also a representative to the United Nations for the Association for World Education. One has to view his website at www.edenorg.com to fully appreciate his delusion.
Mr. Sagar wrote to me one quiet Sunday afternoon to disagree with my articles dealing with global warming, which he most certainly had found while playing with his Google keys on his computer.
His first line told me everything I needed to know about Mr. Sagar’s value system. The e-mail began, “Science aside…” Obviously Mr. Sagar didn’t want to be bothered by mere science when he had loftier goals in mind. But he went on, “It is inherently illogical and otherwise irresponsible to suggest that human activity does not possess the potential to alter the Earth’s climate.” Yeah, I’ve gotten this kind of stuff before in response to my articles. What he’s saying is, no matter what science tells us, I “FEEL” that man is damaging the Earth, therefore I insist that it be true.
He then went into an orgy of really big words like quantitative and qualitative to prove his point. The guy really needs a course in people communications. He pushed the point that there are “6.6 billion people on earth destroying some 25 million acres of forest annually.” Of course, with the population growing, more and more destruction was the only result we could ever expect, according to Mr. Sagar. (These dire statements, by the way, have been proven time and again to be untrue.)
Incredibly, he then argued that “energy usage worldwide is increasing at an alarming rate of speed as 3rd world countries continue to modernize.” My first thought was he could help cut down on some of that energy use if only he would shut off his computer and leave me alone. But one must not miss the completely astonishing rationale of his statement. He apparently believes that people who live in third world countries are simply animals who should always live in mud huts, walk 5 miles a day for their filthy water and cook over the quaint campfire in the center of the village.
Such arrogance. Such irrational stupidity. I was tempted to fire off a fast finger burner to inform this idiot that modernization and the higher standard of living that comes with it is the only way individuals can actually take time to think about protecting the environment. But I really didn’t want to encourage him into thinking I wanted to have a dialog.
He then ended his correspondence with his real purpose for writing, saying, “What I would ask of you is to stop disseminating misinformation, so that those of us who are trying to make a real difference in the world have one less obstacle to overcome.”
I thought better of making a case. I really didn’t feel like wasting my time on such a fop. Instead, against my better judgment, I sent him a brief reply designed to make my feeling known and to make it plain I didn’t want a dialog. I said, “Science aside??? I think that says it all about your argument, no matter how many big words you use. Don’t bother me with your pretentious intellectual claptrap. It bores me.”
However, experience has taught me that this wouldn’t be the end of it. Sure enough, the next day, there he was again. He was on a mission to save my soul. He wrote back, saying, “This response just goes to show what a self-consumed digit you really are, Tom.” Then he started using that word “quantitative” again. That was followed by an incredible attack on science: “Science has absolutely no idea of what preceded the current universe… and no way to hazard a guess about what the future holds for mankind – unless of course the creations of science are used to definitively destroy that future.”
Are you getting this? According to Mr. Sagar, science knows nothing and is only a destructive force. We used to call these guys Luddites. But he is bordering on Neanderthal. Yet he kept challenging me to see how “intellectually adept” I am.
What an incredible waste of human life, and my time, this guy was becoming. So, again, I sighed, and fired off the message that would surely end this silly exercise. (Yes, I know. If I had simply deleted the message I wouldn’t risk getting another reply, but this was too outrageous to let go.) So I wrote, “I thought I made it clear. I have no interest in what you have to say. I consider you people to be Nazis and thugs. And nothing you have to say means a rat’s a– to me. I have to deal with the victims of your lies. Can I be any clearer? Do not write me again.”
Comes the answer: “Tom, You’ve become so obsessed with your own thinking that you’re incapable of hearing anybody else’s ideas any more. I don’t know where this God complex came from, but it is definitely counterproductive to the message you are trying to get out.” Now, two messages back, he was saying he wanted me to stop getting my message out. Now he is giving me pointers on how to do it better – as long as I use his logic and message of course.
He then went on to say, “As far as your association of me to the ‘nazis’ is concerned, perhaps you subconsciously see a parallel to yourself here. Why else would you bring up such a thing?” He then said I was like “listening to a skin head with hair.”
So who is Donald Sagar and why does he care what I have to say? Why do you and I care what he has to say? He has created the Eden Project, which “provides a realistic way to create a dynamic global model for identifying, collecting, analyzing, and distributing cultural information relative to the resolution of critical issues.” Wow. Now what does that mean? Well, by reading on one finds that Mr. Sagar assures us he has developed the ability to define “certainty.” Apparently this is something no human has ever been able to do before. He now claims, having done this incredible feat, that he can prove the existence of God.
He goes on to say the Eden Project can now define our problems on earth and fix them. Here is what the problem is, according to Mr. Sagar: “Because of the relentless increase in the quantity and complexity of knowledge in the world, we are experiencing a clash between cultures that prevents all but the most capable of surviving with any meaningful identity in tact.” Did you catch that? The reason we have wars, poverty and misery is because there is too much knowledge.
But, according to his website, he hasn’t just dreamed up his incredible feat. No, no, no. According to the opening paragraph which describes what the Eden Project is, he says, “This project will provide decision makers with a ‘pre-qualified’ “option” for stemming mankind’s current slide into chaos.” Now reading further one finds that this “pre-qualified” option means that he simply asked a bunch of ivory tower types to critique his work. They agreed and, poof, we have a new way of thinking. Facts don’t matter. He already said science knews nothing. Difference of opinion isn’t to be considered. They could only mess up our new well-ordered thought process.
Simply put, Mr. Sagar begins with what he considers to be certain “globally acceptable” truths, such as Global Warming; human beings are destructive to the environment; men are unthinking brutes who must be controlled from their own actions. It doesn’t matter if any of this gibberish is true. Once this premise is established then Mr. Sagar’s theories are easy to put into place.
Now he is free to establish a “group think” pattern that disallows contrary thought. It attacks anyone who thinks “outside the box.” Propaganda becomes universal truth. All he needs now is for those in power and their ability to apply force to make it so. Now you know why I compared him to Nazis.
In fact, he is in desperate need to get the rest of us to stop thinking and using our own experiences along with academic and scientific absolutes to draw our own conclusions. Once that is established, it is easy to reject morality, and then only a short step to accepting the idea that people of third world nations should live out their days in total poverty – for the common good. It is then a very short journey to accepting euthanasia as a means to rid us of the elderly who are no longer useful for the village. And then on to accepting the final solution of forced abortion for population control.
This is the reason why your children are being deliberately “Dumbed Down” in government schools. The premise of “globally-acceptable truth” is the very root of today’s public school curriculum. This is the foundation on which our new society is to be based, according to Mr. Sagar. And he says I have a God complex?!
He is dangerous to you and me because he is not alone. His ideas have been endorsed by very influential global mouthpieces. Who they are is almost as astonishing as what they say about the Eden Project, which they all endorse. You’ll find the letters posted on the Eden Project website.
First there is the letter from Susan Reed from the World Education Fellowship, who praises the Eden Project as being in the same spirit of the original charter of the UN. “I feel that the Eden project is a meaningful step in the direction that mankind must go…”
Then comes the letter from none other than Robert Muller, Assistant Secretary General of the UN and one of the main players in the global agenda to reorder society. He says, “I am referring to the need to establish a body of objective, globally acceptable information to serve as a foundation for global education… Its (Eden Project) formula for identifying universally acceptable objective data is truly unique. It achieves this distinction by establishing a global standard for inquiry.”
Other supporters include K.B. Mathur, Director General of UNESCO, Dale Ott, of the World Council of Churches, and many more heads of global and international organizations who seek to impose a new way of thinking on the world for their own political agenda. Most telling was a quote from Keith Smiley, President of Mohonk Consultations: “The planet earth and its people have been experiencing an information explosion. The uncontrolled expansion of information is dangerous since it tends to diffuse meaning and purpose.”
These people are telling us that humans armed with knowledge are dangerous to the new order they are trying to impose on us. Yet it is their policies which have created chaos and poverty throughout the world, the very issues they now seek to remedy with their new thought process. They seek to pull the strings to stop anyone from using reason and knowledge to fix it.
Poverty and ignorance are not natural states for human beings. It is fixable. It is simply a result of very bad government which prevents individuals from being free to use their abilities to achieve their own happiness, prosperity, and personal security.
Governments which deny individual commercial action among free individuals; deny the ability to own and control private property; and tax the self-earned wealth from the industrious are the root of poverty and misery and consequently, damaged environment.
We used to call such policies communism. Today we have a much gentler sounding name — Sustainable Development, now the official policy of the United States, all 50 states and nearly every city and small town in the nation. Sustainable Development is, of course, a top-down control of every aspect of our lives, from land use to community development to job availability to transportation to the foods we eat to our children’s education system. It is the policy Mr. Sagar’s “new think” was created to help implement.
Sustainable Development is restructuring our lives, and is targeting our children through an educational regime that seeks to develop collective attitudes, values and beliefs. Sustainable Development documents expressly call for the elimination of private property and freedom that private property supports. It supplants long-standing State laws, and causes irreparable harm to our economy and our society. Yet to Mr. Sagar, these concepts we call freedom are nothing more than delusions.
He and his fellow travelers are very dangerous people. They use every sort of deception, half-truth and non-science to implement this concept of virtual captivity for the human spirit. In support of such hysteria as global warming, they move to implement heavy restrictions on development through policies with names like Smart Growth and The Wildlands Project. All of it is heavily funded through taxpayer dollars and wealthy foundations promoting the policy’s political agenda.
The looming battle of ideas should be recognized as a classic—and perhaps ultimate – battle between Liberty and Tyranny. The social, economic, and political transformations Sustainable Development requires will mean the suppression of unalienable rights for all people.
Mr. Sagar and his Eden Project intend to box in the parameters of allowable thought and innovation. His goal is to control the voice of individuals he and his ilk deem to be renegades who will just muck up the order of things. That is why he found my writings so disturbing and was so desperate to engage me in debate.
So, here Mr. Sagar, is my response. Yours is a philosophy of death, designed to control and kill the spirit of Man. I view you to be the enemy of all that I hold valuable, including reason and knowledge. Do not write me again. I have no interest in light-hearted, spirited, intellectual word play with a killer of reason.
By Tom DeWeese
Freedom21 National Conference
July 20, 2006
“Freedom.” It’s the most used, most misunderstood, most misused word in the English language.
Every movement, every revolution, every special-interest campaign uses the word Freedom to explain their motives and to draw us in to their cause.
Everybody wants freedom. We fight under the banner of “Live Free or Die.” But, no cause ever won a campaign or a war under the banner “be happy under tyranny.”
But “Freedom” is also a word that can be used to enslave us. The word “Freedom,” in the wrong hands, with the wrong motives or agenda can be a butcher’s knife.
What do you mean when you cry out for freedom? Che Guevara, the man who helped set up the brutal communist regime in Cuba, was called a Freedom Fighter. Mao Tse Tung was called a Freedom Fighter. “Free the masses,” cried Lenin.
There are those who tell us that that a hungry man is not free. That for everyone to be free we must all first be sure everyone is fed. We must all take the responsibility to share the wealth to assure that every man, woman and child marches forward together before any of us can be free.
Others tell us that we can’t truly be free until we are all safe. We cannot be free, they say, as long as people own guns. How many times have you heard it said, “I would gladly give up some of my freedoms to be safe from the threat of terrorism?” Or my favorite: “If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear from intrusive government searches and data banks. We need these intrusions to preserve out freedoms.”
Some say that the only way to assure we are free is to live a healthy life. The only way for that to happen, according to them, is for government to rule, regulate and control what they eat.
Others believe that fencing in property takes away everyone’s freedom of movement. The Indians, they tell us, were free of fences. Private property, they say, stifles freedom. And still more tell us that borders among countries close us off from each other and stifle trade and commerce. Open the borders and give us “Free Trade.”
There are whole schools of economics teaching us that taxing the rich evens the playing field and frees everyone else of the burden of having to be responsible for earning a living. Some people, say these academics, just aren’t cut out for such tasks. Life is oppressive. We must free people of the burdens of life.
The new government school curriculum frees the children from the burden of having to know how to spell properly, or memorize boring dates or multiplication tables. That gives them the freedom to be creative and to think loftier thoughts beyond stifling academic rules.
But if you truly mean to live a life in freedom, be very careful about how the word is being used. Because such use of metaphors and ambiguous weasel words are really a trap. In these cases, the goal isn’t freedom. It’s total control. It feeds on your good will and generous nature. But it doesn’t mean freedom.
George Orwell once wrote, “Political language…is designed to make lies sound truthful…and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”
Tyranny Vs Freedom
So what is ”Freedom?” In the political sense, there is only one crucial principle that separates freedom from slavery: the absence of physical coercion from government.
There isn’t good slavery Vs bad slavery. There aren’t good dictatorships Vs bad dictatorships. The good gang Vs the bad gang. There is Freedom Vs Tyranny.
If you truly stand for Freedom, then you are accepting the premise that you have natural or God-given rights. Rights you were born with. It means you stand for individual liberty. That you have the right to your own life; that you have the right to the fruits of your labor; and you have the right to pursue your own happiness.
Only a totalitarian would tell you there is no time for joy. Only one who wants to own your life would say that the drive to win a ball game, or a boat race, or a track meet are a waste of time. Human joy and voluntary action are the rewards of freedom.
And it’s vital to protect intellectual freedom — the freedom to own your thoughts and ideas. Intellectual freedom cannot exist without economic freedom.
If you accept the premise of Freedom, then, in order to achieve it, you must also uphold a political system that guarantees and protects these rights. There is only one such system. Capitalism. Free Enterprise. And I don’t mean the misnamed euphemism: “Free Trade.”
All of these things are the essential tools of maintaining a free society. Step on any of them, for any reason, and you begin to destroy the existence of a free society.
In a Free Society there is no need for agents of the government to fan out among us to gather data, inspect the quality of products or license services. You do that with your freely made decisions and dollars.
You choose which products to buy and which services to use. That creates competition. To attract your dollars, companies lower prices, improve the quality of products and services. Those who don’t, go out of business. No need for meat inspectors, health inspectors, building inspectors and the like. No need for government to set utility rates, cable rates, or regulate phone companies.
In a Free Society, government shouldn’t be in the energy business. It shouldn’t be holding congressional hearings to rule on the kind of toilet you should have in your home.
And in a Free Society — monopolies cannot exist. Today, we like to blame big corporations for many of the bad things in our lives. It’s true many are run by some very nasty people. They use their wealth and power to promote their own political agendas. They can flood the marketplace with inferior products, charge outrageous prices and suck the life out of their competition. But, you see, they can only do that if we let go of our control over the government and allow them to use it against us for their own gain.
Today, big corporations work hand in hand with government. They spend big bucks to buy politicians to pass laws to hurt competition or to give themselves most favored status. And that’s why we have monopolies.
A monopoly can only exist through the sanction of some function of government, either through licensing, franchising or some other sort of protection. In fact, by watching this process, one major truth comes screaming out at you – the bigger government becomes – the more power major corporations have over our lives.
That’s because free enterprise – your right to choose – and your individual ability to control the free market – disappears. Corporations spend more of their time and resources padding the pockets of politicians in order to gain special favors, than caring about the products they want to sell you.
The politicians get more powerful. More agencies spring up in Washington. The corporations get a bigger share of the pot. And the consumer is just the pawn in the game.
In a free society, you are never the pawn. You control the game. If you want to limit the power of corporations, limit the size and power of government. It’s that simple.
Now, if this all sounds completely bizarre, or utopian, or quaint, or old fashioned to you, then that is a testimony of how far we have come from the Free Society our Founding Fathers created for us. Because all of these things were once American ideals and policies. And it was during that time in American history that the United States became the most advanced, prosperous, healthy, happy place on earth to live.
Ever-growing government power and the end of reason
What changed? We surrendered the ability to reason and to take responsibility for our own lives – instead giving it to government to make sure we are safe.
There is an endless supply of examples to show how government intrusion into the market place and our personal lives destroy a free society. In fact, what was once a slow process by government– perhaps moving so slowly that many didn’t even notice – has become a tsunami.
The public school system is a major one. Here, the very ideals of liberty and a free society are being totally obliterated as public schools become used at propaganda tools rather than a place for teaching basic academics.
Government education is an oxy moron. Government school curriculum is simply the political agenda of whatever gang is in charge at the time.
Today, schools are busy making patients out of our children in order to pump them with mind altering drugs and strip search their souls through government sanctioned mental health screening. And the Bush Administration actually called such mental health screening the New Freedom Commission.
There are now more psychologists on the payroll of public schools than teachers, as we, the taxpayers, are forced to pay an average of $10,000 per year, per student to educate our children in government institutions that teach no academics. The result is an abuse of innocent children beyond description.
These things don’t happen in a free society. Because teachers in a free society understand they are your children and not just a resource for a global village.
The imposition of environmental regulations has become the greatest threat to ownership and control of private property.
Our Supreme Court has now declared that there is no private property and that any community is free to take any property it wants for private development. Again, the Sustainable Development public/private partnerships help the elite to profit from someone else’s pain.
The politicians get more power. Their buddies, the chosen developers, make money building the project. The real estate agents have a new product to sell. The community makes more tax revenue. Everybody’s happy in the well-ordered society. Of course the property owner has his dreams shattered, but the common good must always be considered over a few malcontents.
The legalized assault on private property has given rise to a horde of powerful non-elected government agencies like planning commissions, transportation commissions, homeowner associations, neighborhood councils, and stakeholders consensus councils.
It provides a power structure to an army of activists called non-governmental organizations (NGOs) who work in partnership with all the councils and associations to make and enforce policy. There is no place in a Free Society for the legalized theft of private property.
Now we see these controls spreading to new areas of our lives. Most recent is a new kind of tag system is now being imposed on the farms of the nation, called the National Animal Identification System (NAIS).
Its purpose is the same tired excuse – protect the common good. Well, they don’t exactly say it that way. This time it’s to protect the national food system from Mad Cow and other dreamed up disasters.
Small farmers find they have to tag all of their animals and register them with the US Department of Agriculture. So extreme are the regulations, that, for example, owners have to register and tag every single animal on the farm. If they move even one, they have to notify the USDA.
The financial burden is so great on the small, mom an pop farms, the only possible result will be for them to go out of business – leaving all of our food to be grown by massive farm corporations.
No one is served by such idiocy. Of course, it’s not really about protection of anyone. It’s about control. The end result is a soft fascism leading to a police state.
Ban it! Ban it! Ban it!
The true purpose of these policies is the implementation of Sustainable Development. Sustainable Development has three components: global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction.
Sustainable Development is anti-free enterprise, anti- individual liberty and anti-limited government. Sustainable Development has no place in a free society.
A free society protects its property owners and businesses and helps them to go about their lives, unencumbered.
A free society doesn’t set up spy mechanisms to track the whereabouts of all of its people through a national ID card, as has now been established in the Patriot Act and the Real ID Act — no matter what the excuse or current crisis.
A free society doesn’t close down whole industries and towns at the whim of special interests groups who use made up excuses like spotted owls.
A free society honors its borders and protects its people from outside invasion. It doesn’t give the hard earned wealth of its people to criminals who ignore our laws and our borders to invade us.
And in a free society, government doesn’t tell its citizens where they can or can’t place a manger scene at Christmas.
But today, now that the floodgates are open to allow government intrusion into any and all aspects of our lives, politics has become a power struggle between two very similar camps. Republicans. Democrats. Left. Right. Liberals. Conservatives. Twiddle Dum. Twiddle Dee.
The bigger government gets, the more money there is for politicians to make and the more power they have to wield — the less interest they have in a quaint idea about limited government and human freedom.
Political parties that have become drunk with power are not sober enough to remember their platforms, their histories, their promises, or their oath of office.
And so the dream of a free society grows ever dimmer. Instead we grow almost immune to the daily invasion by government into our lives. We endure massive restraints on the free market as vital products are banned.
DDT is banned, because a special interest group says so. Now millions over the world die needlessly because there’s now nothing strong enough to counter the swarms of mosquitoes that carry malaria. Our own cities are threatened by West Nile Disease. It doesn’t have to be that way.
Oil companies are banned from drilling oil we so desperately need. In ANWR, and in the Gulf of Mexico, there is more oil than we may ever need. We could completely end our dependency of any foreign oil. It could end the threat of terrorism. We could watch the economy soar. But we can’t because the agenda of those with power and money control the Congress. It doesn’t have to be that way.
There are movements to ban over the counter natural supplements, and fast food, and air conditioning, and recreational vehicles, and the consumption of meat, and cars, and suburban housing, and the family pet, and plastics, and fireplaces, and on and on.
All because one or one hundred special interests have a political agenda to do it. And because we have surrendered to them control of our government. The floodgates have been opened.
Ban it. Ban it. Ban it. Ban it. These are the sounds of the bombs going off in a war for control. The war against freedom.
The one statement that should never be uttered in a free society is: “ban it.” A free society cannot exist under this weight.
Globally-Acceptable Truths
As I’ve said before, and will say again and again: we’ve lost our core values necessary to live in a free society. We’ve given up reason. And we’ve replaced it with whims and whines.
True, those whines are being carefully orchestrated by a few with a specific agenda, who know exactly how to move you into their predetermined direction. Some describe it as a conspiracy. If so, it isn’t very secret. You can find bold descriptions of how it’s being done in books, and policy papers and all over the Internet.
But let me give you a very specific example of how it’s being done, and I’ll even give you a website address so you can see it for yourself.
I’ve written many times of the assault on individual thought through behavior modification techniques such as “Critical Thinking.” This is just one tool used to lash out at one’s values system. Another is the use of “situation ethics” problems to challenge attitudes, values and beliefs.
These tools are fully employed in today’s government school classrooms as a means to create a new kind of thinking that is coordinated to fit a specific worldview. Some call it the global village. “Thought control” is a much easier way to describe it.
Elsewhere in our society, the pressure to rethink ones values is seemingly everywhere, from textbooks and classrooms to television commercials to on-the-job training courses.
We are constantly asked how we can be so certain about anything. We are told there are no absolutes. We are told to just live for the moment. History is eliminated from civics courses. Math is questioned as to whether it is exact. Science is ignored for political gain.
How did we lose our common sense? When did the ability to think rational thought become replaced with a whine? Where do these ideas come from?
Much to my annoyance, one of the perpetrators of this anti-reason idiocy thrust his own pompous irrationality on me through a series of astonishing e-mail letters that I tried hard to ignore.
His name is Donald Sagar and he is president of a think tank called the Eden Institute. He is also a representative to the United Nations for the Association for World Education. One only has to view his website at http://www.edenorg.com to fully appreciate his delusion.
Mr. Sagar sent an e-mail to me one quiet Sunday afternoon to disagree with my articles dealing with global warming, which he most certainly had found while playing with his Google keys on his computer.
His first line told me everything I needed to know about Mr. Sagar’s value system. The e-mail began, “Science aside…” Obviously Mr. Sagar didn’t want to be bothered by mere science when he had loftier goals in mind. But he went on, “It is inherently illogical and otherwise irresponsible to suggest that human activity does not possess the potential to alter the Earth’s climate.”
Yeah, I’ve gotten this kind of stuff before in response to my articles. What he’s saying is, no matter what science tells us, I “FEEL” that man is damaging the Earth, therefore I insist that it be true.
Incredibly, he then argued that “energy usage worldwide is increasing at an alarming rate of speed as 3rd world countries continue to modernize.” My first thought was he could help cut down on some of that energy use if only he would shut off his computer and leave me alone.
But one must not miss the completely astonishing rationale of his statement. He obviously is one of those who advocate that people who live in third world countries are simply animals who should always live in mud huts, walk 5 miles a day for their filthy water and cook over the quaint campfire in the center of the village.
This first e-mail was followed a day later with a second correspondence that was an incredible attack on science: “Science has absolutely no idea of what preceded the current universe… and no way to hazard a guess about what the future holds for mankind – unless of course the creations of science are used to definitively destroy that future.” Are you getting this? According to Mr. Sagar, science knows nothing and is only a destructive force.
So who is Donald Sagar and why does he care what I have to say? Why do you and I care what he has to say?
He has created the Eden Project, which, he says, can define our problems on earth and fix them. Here is what the problem is, according to Mr. Sagar: “Because of the relentless increase in the quantity and complexity of knowledge in the world, we are experiencing a clash between cultures that prevents all but the most capable of surviving with any meaningful identity in tact.” Did you catch that? The reason we have wars, poverty and misery is because there is too much knowledge.
But, he hasn’t just dreamed up his project for his own amusement. Of course not. According to the opening paragraph in describing the purpose of the Eden Project, he says, “This project will provide decision makers with a ‘pre-qualified’ option for stemming mankind’s current slide into chaos.”
Now reading further one finds that this “pre-qualified” option means that he simply asked a bunch of ivory tower types and self-appointed globalists intellectuals to critique his work. They agreed and, poof, we have a new way of thinking. Facts don’t matter. He already said science knows nothing. Difference of opinion isn’t to be considered.
Simply put, Mr. Sagar begins with what he considers to be certain “globally acceptable” truths, such as Global Warming; or that human beings are destructive to the environment; or that men are unthinking brutes who must be controlled from their own actions. It doesn’t matter if any of this gibberish is true. Once this premise is established then Mr. Sagar’s theories are easy to put into place.
Now he is free to establish a “group think” pattern that disallows contrary thought. It attacks anyone who thinks “outside the box.” Propaganda becomes universal truth. All he needs now is for those in power, with their ability to apply force, to make it so. He would refer to it as the political process.
For it to work, it is essential that he get the rest of us to stop thinking and using our own experiences, along with academic and scientific absolutes, to draw our own conclusions. Once that is established, it is easy to reject morality, and then only a short step to accepting the idea that people of third world nations should live out their days in total poverty – for the common good.
It is then a very short journey to accepting euthanasia as a means to rid us of the elderly who are no longer useful for the village. And then, an even shorter step to accepting the final solution of forced abortion for population control.
He is dangerous to you and me because he is not alone. His ideas have been endorsed, promoted and implemented by very influential global mouthpieces. Who they are is almost as astonishing as what they say about the Eden Project, which they all endorse. You’ll find the letters posted on the Eden Project website.
One is a letter from none other than Robert Muller, Assistant Secretary General of the UN and one of the main players in the global agenda to reorder society. He says, “I am referring to the need to establish a body of objective, globally acceptable information to serve as a foundation for global education…”
Other supporters include K.B. Mathur, Director General of UNESCO, the man in charge of implementing global education policy in our public schools. There is also Dale Ott, of the World Council of Churches, and many more heads of global and international organizations that seek to impose a new way of thinking on the world for their own political agenda.
Most telling was a quote from Keith Smiley, President of Mohonk Consultations: “The planet earth and its people have been experiencing an information explosion. The uncontrolled expansion of information is dangerous since it tends to diffuse meaning and purpose.”
These people are telling us that humans armed with knowledge are dangerous to the new order they are trying to impose on us.
Where in today’s life are you familiar with the implementation of Globally acceptable truth – at least in a very mild form? You use it everyday. It’s a practice called political correctness.
It started with the banning of certain ethnic jokes. Then, we were condemned for employing certain stereotypes. Then businesses were told they couldn’t even ask prospective female employees if they were married or had children. Today, we aren’t allowed to use the term illegal aliens. No matter what you call it, this is thought control –globally acceptable truths and information. It’s the only way you will be permitted to think.
Imagine the consequences such thought control will have on the human race. Thomas Edison wouldn’t have been allowed to even think about such radical changes as alternatives to candle wax in our well-ordered society. The Wright Brothers would have been hanged as heretics to suggest man could fly.
This is the process with which your children are being deliberately “Dumbed Down” in government schools. The premise of “globally-acceptable truth” is the very root of today’s public school curriculum. This is the foundation on which our new society is to be based, according to Mr. Sagar.
The New Dark Ages
We used to call such policies communism. Today we have a much gentler sounding name — Sustainable Development, now the official policy of the United States, all 50 state governments, and nearly every city and small town in the nation.
Sustainable Development is, of course, a top-down control of every aspect of our lives, from land use to community development to job availability to transportation to the foods we eat to our children’s education system. It is the policy Mr. Sagar’s “new think” was created to help implement.
Sustainable Development documents expressly call for the elimination of private property and freedom that private property supports. It supplants long-standing State laws, and causes irreparable harm to our economy and our society.
Yet to Mr. Sagar, these concepts we call freedom are nothing more than delusions. He and his fellow travelers are very dangerous people. They use every sort of deception, half-truth and non-science to implement this concept of virtual captivity of the human spirit.
In fact, Al Gore and those pushing the Global Warming agenda are literally using Mr. Sagar’s globally acceptable truth to promote that agenda. To them, the door to debate or contrary opinion is closed. Their predetermined, acceptable truth says so.
Now, in support of such fantasy, they move to implement heavy restrictions on human progress for their own political ends. Through the policies of Sustainable Development and the “globally-accepted truth” as planned by Donald Sagar, we are very quickly being led back to the tyranny and to the darkest ages of human history.
Mr. Sagar and his Eden Project intend to box in the parameters of allowable thought and innovation. His goal is to control the voice of anyone he and his ilk oppose. That is why he found my writings so disturbing and was so desperate to engage me in debate.
The last time the human race was faced with such an attack on reason and freedom was during the Inquisition in the 13th Century. Then, most of Europe lived under the tyranny of one small, self appointed group of men — who made the decisions about what proper thought and conduct was to be.
Anyone who disagreed was charged with heresy and called a lunatic. Most were automatically found guilty and were either ruined, tortured or killed. People lived in terror. Human progress ground to a halt.
The Terrible Road to Consensus
But, you say, that could not happen today. We are educated. We understand what true freedom is. We will fight till our dying day.
I will give you this warning. It is entirely possible that in just a very short time all of us could be following Mr. Sagar’s rants — and actually praising them as our own. How can it happen?
Let me explain by calling your attention to a film I viewed recently. It was called “Conspiracy.” This film dramatically documents a real event. The entire screenplay takes place during a single two-hour meeting.
As the opening credits role, we see the staff of a very fine resort preparing the food, which will later be served on the finest china. Wine will be enjoyed from the finest crystal. There couldn’t be a more genteel, civilized setting. The participants of the scheduled meeting are some of the most accomplished and respected leaders of their nation. In a short time they begin to arrive.
One by one, fifteen invited participants eventually enter the room and take their place around the table. The mood is jovial as they exchange greetings to friends and acquaintances.
Though none is fully aware of the purpose for the gathering, they anxiously await the arrival of the meeting’s leader. He is known and respected by them.
With a flourish, he arrives. He is jovial, soft-spoken, smiling, calm, congenial, and he makes sure to address each participant with a warm greeting or a quick personal remark. All are at ease.
The day is January 20, 1942. The meeting begins. The leader is Reinhard Heydrick. He is the top aid of Heinrick Himmler and the head of the main office of the Nazi SS. His second in command is Adolph Eichmann. The meeting has been called specifically to discuss the “storage problem of the Jews.”
They calmly discuss the problems the government will soon face as they conquer more countries with Jewish populations. It is described as a simple logistics problem. Soon 11 million Jews will be under Nazi control. What to do?
They begin to discuss the need to remove Jews from everyday society. The administrator in charge of the Warsaw Ghetto discusses the health problems he is facing. He brings up the need for suitable housing.
The administrator in charge of German public works projects discusses the need for using more Jews in work crews. He seeks to keep them healthy for more work. The discussion turns to Jewish immigration – the need to move them from country to country.
Then the term evacuation is used. One participant asks what the difference is. Col. Heydrick smiles and asks if he might postpone that answer just now. He calmly lets the discussion continue around the room.
Concerning the issue of immigration, Col. Heydrick says calmly, once the policies are in place “there will be no Jews in Europe.” There is applause around the table.
As the meeting progresses, protests to issues are calmly put aside. Several times, Col. Heydrick asks that the objections be postponed because they will be dealt with later in the discussion.
One official, who works directly with the German Chancellery to carry out the government’s Jewish policy, argues that “We had an understanding about what the policy with the Jews was to be.” We are to use them in the work force,” he says.
Suddenly, as if a revelation has just come to him, one military leader said, “I shot 30,000 Jews. Is what I did an evacuation?” “I need a clarification of words.”
The discussion pauses as Col. Heydrick considers the answer. Before he can answer, the Chancellery bureaucrat says, “that is not what the Furer` told me. He has denied that killing the Jews is to be our policy.”
Col. Heydrick calmly answers him, “and it will continue to be denied.” The room goes silent, as all understand the meaning of that comment.
When the discussion gets heated, Col. Heydrick calls for a break and asks for snacks and drink to be brought in. As the participants break up into small groups to eat and talk, the Colonel pulls the protesting official aside for a private discussion. Before it is over, the protesting participant is calmed and agreeable.
As the meeting resumes, Col. Heydrick says with satisfaction, “If I may speak for the group, we are moving along.” He firmly, but softly guides the discussion.
Finally, the discussion of evacuation takes a turn. Some Jews, the group is told, will be evacuated swiftly. “Can we all agree that evacuation means elimination?” says Col. Heydrick.
In that one moment, everyone understands the direction of the meeting. The discussion turns to methods. And then Adolph Eikeman reveals the creation of the gas chambers and discusses their incredible efficiency.
They break for lunch. As they return the Colonel says, “it is now our purpose to make the plan work — not to discuss the ifs.” It becomes clear what the policy is to be.
As the meeting moves to conclusion, Col. Heydrick asks each of them if there are any disputes left to face “with what we have agreed.” There are no disputes.
One by one, each agrees to the plan “we have made.” The meeting ends as Col. Heydrick says, “good, we have accomplished something.”
In the course of 2 hours, over good food and wine, respected politicians and political leaders have sat in a room and have been slowly, and expertly maneuvered to agree with a plan to completely eliminate an entire race of human beings from the face of the Earth. This was a professionally facilitated consensus meeting.
What does the story mean to you today? That is exactly the tactic being used in every single city council meeting, county commissioner meetings, state government hearing and Congressional hearing in this nation to impose the UN’s agenda 21 into American policy.
The use of consensus, led by a professionally trained facilitator, armed with a predetermined outcome. This is how Sustainable Development is being implemented to replace our Republic. And they are making you think it is your idea.
Words have no meanings. Principles and the rule of law are just quaint ideas. First, we accept Mr. Sagar’s Globally-accepted truths, removing reason from the discussion. Then we just fill in the blanks. Evacuate. Eliminate. Same difference.
I have been harshly criticized for overlaying the Sustainable Development logo over a Nazi swastika on one of my DVDs. Now you know why I did it.
These tactics can only be used against someone unaware of the purpose. If you get into the spirit of the meeting, agree to even a tiny concession, the process is underway.
The need for roots
If you don’t have a solid root philosophy of life, based on freedom’s principles, then you are just blowing in the wind. And a professional facilitator is trained to blow you in his direction. Deep roots of freedom provide the anchor to keep you in place.
My friends, it is easy to be afraid. To believe there is no hope. To be fatalistic about freedom’s future. I have heard such talk more and more in the past few years.
You must remember that those who are perpetrating this tyranny fear you more than anything else. Because you have right and knowledge and reason on your side.
As far as our immediate battles are concerned, forget about the millions who blow in the wind between our enemies and us. They have no say in the matter because they refuse to think. The battle is between them and us.
Remember this quote from Sam Adams, the man who truly started the American Revolution at a time when he was literally the only one on the continent thinking about Independence. He said, “It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds.” There is no compromise for truth. No compromise for liberty. We are told today that words and ideas have no meaning.
We are told that the Founding Fathers really weren’t so special. But, my friends, it matters what the Founding Fathers had to say. It matters, because they understood that free individuals, when left alone, could accomplish anything. And they believed it to their dying day.
The fact is they never took their eye off the goal of creating a truly free society dedicated to the celebration of human happiness. They knew that our fate doesn’t have to be strife, poverty and war. Pain and sorrow don’t have to be natural states for mankind.
Our founders knew that these things are caused by those who endeavor to control the lives of others for their own ends. And they did everything in their power to create a system to prevent it. It was their life’s work. It must be ours.
On his deathbed, July 4th 1826, Thomas Jefferson’s last words were, “is it the Fourth?” He understood the full meaning of what he had helped to create exactly 50 years before.
And just a day before, a huge celebration for the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence was planned in Quincy, Massachusetts. Citizens came to John Adams, who was also on his deathbed. They asked him what they should say at the ceremony on his behalf. Adams thought for a minute and then said, “Independence forever.” They asked him if he’d like to say a little bit more. He told them, “Not one word!”
This is our legacy. This is why we are here today, to fight the battles to preserve what they spent a lifetime to create. Can we do any less for the generations to follow us?
Tolerance is not our goal. Compromise is not our goal. Defeat is not acceptable.
Freedom. See it. Feel it. Demand it. Win it.
July 10, 2006
By Tom DeWeese
Several weeks ago I asked American Policy Center supporters and DeWeese Report readers some important questions regarding their stand on issues in an effort to help direct APC’s legislative efforts. Some of the answers were surprising and revealing.
I asked readers to prioritize legislative issues that APC should work on. The overwhelming majority listed passing Rep. Ron Paul’s American Sovereignty Restoration Act ( HR 1146) as the number one priority. That was no surprise to me and it is certainly APC’s number one priority. APC has already turned over more than one million petitions to Congress demanding a vote on the bill. Now, APC is making plans for a renewed effort to build support when the new congress opens in January.
However, I was most surprised to learn that a majority of APC supporters believe that UN “reform” means “ending UN inefficiency and scandals so the UN can fulfill its destiny as a tool for peace.” People, people, people – you are not paying attention. The worst thing that can happen to our liberty is for the UN to get “efficient!” The proper answer to this question is that “reform” of the UN actually means to strengthen and empower the UN into a position of global governance.” If you don’t understand this important point, then you will be easily tricked by Kofi Annan’s double speak about UN reform. The only reform of the United Nations we need is to close it down.
Moving on to other issues, it was not surprising that stopping illegal immigration was an almost equal priority to getting us out of the UN. In fact, I think if my survey were held today, after the illegal immigrants marched and protested in our streets, many more would have picked this as their number one priority. I see grave danger facing our nation if we don’t properly address this vital issue. Rest assured APC will continue to take aggressive efforts to stop this invasion of our nation.
The third issue in order of priority, according to APC supporters, is protecting private property and passing the Private Property Protection Act. As APC has been warning for more than ten years, the governments assault on private property is the greatest threat to individual liberty. It’s great to know that our supporters put this at such a high priority.
However, according to their answers, concern over the issue of Sustainable Development is barely a bleep on the radar screen. Please understand that Sustainable Development is the root of all of the assaults on your liberties. It affects not only your property, but what is taught to you children in school and the kind of society we will be allowed to have if this ruling principle of Sustainable Development is allowed to become entrenched.
For those who listed the UN as our greatest threat, it must be understood that Sustainable Development is that threat. Sustainable Development is a product of the UN’s Agenda 21 policy and is designed to give the UN power to remake our entire society into its preplanned image. If you fear the UN then you must stand up and oppose Sustainable Development.
It is also disappointing that I have apparently not property educated my supporters and readers on the latest government land grab called National Heritage Areas. These programs are springing up all over America under the excuse that they are simply honoring some historic event that occurred in the designated area and that benevolent government is just trying to help local tourism. Bull. These areas have specific borders with specific rules and regulations over private property.
The use of Eminent Domain and federal funding create yet another curse on private property rights. Most telling of the magnitude of the threat is the government’s refusal to consider informing property owners in the designated area that the Heritage Area is even being considered. Government control in secret is a threat to liberty. And that’s just what Heritage Areas are. The American Policy Center is the leading organization in the nation to oppose that threat. I’ll try to do much more to educate my supporters on this vital issue.
Finally, my greatest disappointment came from answers concerning the enforcement of national ID cards and government control of public education. Hardly any listed privacy rights and education as issues of interest. More than 25% said they agreed that a national ID card is needed to protect us from terrorism.
Oh my, I have my work cut out for me!
