Being A Criminal

As in just about every other culture on the planet, Americans are raised to respect "authority." They are taught that obedience is a virtue, and that the measure of whether you're a good person is whether you're a "law-abiding taxpayer" who "plays by the rules." Likewise, we're taught that the bad guys are all "criminals" who "have a problem with authority."

People with brains have a problem with authority. And while being at odds with "authority" and "the law" does not automatically make someone a good person, it also doesn't automatically make someone bad, either. Whether someone respects and honors the individual rights of other people is what matters. The trouble is, so many people, including those in the pro-freedom "movement," still have a desire to receive the approval of authority.

Try asking yourself, or the people you know, "Are you willing to be a criminal?" Most will vehemently say no. But why? These days, when politician scribbles are called "laws," what does it mean to be a "criminal" anyway? All it means is that someone disobeyed any one of the myriad of arbitrary politician commands and demands. Why should anyone feel bad about that? (The truth is, by that definition we're ALL criminals, since the sheer volume of "laws" makes it impossible to even KNOW all of them, and impossible to obey them all.)

But shouldn't "laws" against murder and theft be obeyed? Yes and no. People should refrain from committing theft and murder, but NOT because there are "laws" against them. Theft and murder are wrong because they deprive others of their rights, not because some political windbags sat down and scribbled a "law" about it. In fact, most thefts and murders that occur today are seen as necessary, if not good, because those crimes have been declared "legal" (and are called "taxation" and "war").

So my question for today is, are YOU willing to be a criminal? By that, I'm not asking if you're willing to commit real crimes--the kind with victims--because I hope you're not. I'm asking whether you would ever be willing to do the right thing, even when "authority" tells you to do the wrong thing. If not, please stop pretending to be pro-freedom.

With all of the lobbying in favor of or against this or that legislation, or in favor of or against this or that politician, the supposedly pro-freedom "movement" is constantly reinforcing the notion that we need the PERMISSION of tyrants to be free. If we have unalienable rights, then by definition, we don't NEED any "law" or any "government" to bless our freedom. If, for example, we have the RIGHT to say what we think, then we have the right to use outright force to stop anyone from trying to silence us. If we have the RIGHT to be armed, then we have the right to shoot any "law- enforcers" who try to disarm us. If we have the RIGHT to not be randomly stopped, interrogated, searched, and so on, then we have the right to forcibly RESIST when the American fascists try to do those things to us. And the fact that open resistance to tyranny is "illegal"--as it always has been throughout history--doesn't make a speck of difference.

Of course, resisting control freaks is often hazardous, and one must pick his battles carefully. Nonetheless, I ask you all again, are you ready to be criminals? The way things are going, you will very soon have to choose between being at odds with "authority" or being a completely conquered sheep. The megalomaniacs won't give you another option. So which will it be? Are you capable of doing the RIGHT thing, even when doing so puts you at odds with "government," "the law," "the police," and all the other superstitions which the belief in "authority" spawns?

Larken Rose
http://www.larkenrose.com

P.S. It's a little ironic that my own "criminal record" consists of one "crime" that I didn't actually commit.

P.P.S. While I hope my new book, "The Iron Web," wakes up a lot of "normal" people, the way Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" did, I also want it to spread through the freedom movement--as it seems to be doing--to shake a lot of "semi-advocates" of freedom out of their remaining authoritarian mindset, so they stop wasting so much time and effort on begging the tyrants to let us be free.

P.P.P.S. I couldn't be more thrilled--almost embarrassed, actually-- that in his review of "The Iron Web" for Strike the Root, Jim Davies called my book "the best work of fiction I have read this Century." (And I didn't even have to bribe or threaten him!) The entire review can be found here: http://www.strike-the-root.com/91/davies/davies10.html

Quotes

"The only way for a reporter to look on a politician is down." H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)

"The mere title of Lawyer is sufficient to deprive a man of public confidence. The most innocent and irreproachable life cannot guard a lawyer against the hatred of his fellow citizens." --John Q. Adams

"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges' views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice." -- Justice Hugo L. Black ( U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1886 - 1971).

"If we know the truth, we must tell it; if we don't, we must learn it!" It is critical to our spirit.

"It is not the function of our government to keep the Citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the Citizen to keep the government from falling into error." American Communications Ass'n v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382, 442.

Cops: Public Servants or Fascist Pigs? (Part 6)

Larken is in top form again. I agree with him. The problem is that we have an entrenched paradigm of inherited "English" law. If you care to study the history of "Law" in Europe you will find that there was a better form of law the preceded English common law. It was Celtic Law. Celts are the ancient peoples of Europe. Their ancient law form was egalitarian, fair, not respecting of rank other than if you were of a higher rank than you had more obligation to follow the law. If you didn't then your punishment was greater. These laws were eventually codified as what is known as Irish laws.

The beginning of the 17th Century saw English law and rule prevail in Ireland and the Irish laws outlawed and declared barbarous. These "barbarous" laws had been what had kept the English from implanting its feudal system in Ireland and from completing its conquest of Ireland for four centuries. These ancient "barbarous" laws of Ireland have since been recognized as the most advanced system of jurisprudence in the ancient world, a system under which the doctrine of the equality of man was understood and under which a deeply humane and cultured society flourished.

These ancient Irish laws have come to be called The Brehon Laws from the Irish term "Brehon" which was applied to the official lawgiver. They were transmitted orally and with extreme accuracy from generation to generation by a special class of professional jurists called Brithem (judge in early Gaelic). These laws are of great antiquity and antedate the coming of the Celts to Ireland. St. Patrick is credited with codifying these laws in the 5th Century. His efforts fill five volumes and are known as the Senchus Mor. its ordinances are named C'ain Padraic after St. Patrick. These five volumes which have come down to us, however, are only a small portion of the old Irish laws which covered almost every relationship and every fine shade of relationship, social and moral, between man and man.

While the Brehon, or lawgiver, administered the law, the aggregate wisdom of nine leading representatives was necessary to originate a law or to abolish it. The nine needed for the making of a law were the chief, poet, historian, landowner, bishop, professor of literature, professor of law, a noble, and a lay vicar. Impartiality is the salient characteristic of all the laws for all the ranks. The king himself was bound by law to do justice to his meanest subject. The democracy of these laws is shown in dozens of ways. For example, a king carrying building material to his castle had the same and only the same claim for right of way as the miller carrying material to build his mill (no blocking the way for common folk as the "motorcade" comes through); the poorest man in the land could compel payment of a debt from a noble or could levy a distress upon the king himself (no "sovereign immunity"); the man who stole the needle of a poor embroidery woman was compelled to pay a far higher fine than the man who stole the queen's needle.

The Brehon Law was based on an individual's identity, defined in terms of clan and personal wealth. Honor was evaluated in terms of personal wealth and each person's wealth or honor price reflected his legal status in the community. In the sight of the law, the bishop, king, chief poet, and public hospitaller (person who owned and operated guest houses for no fee) were in the same rank and a like fine or honor price was payable for the killing of any of the four. The Irish law expected most from those who had received the most from God. For example, a member of the clergy might be fined double that of a lay person for the same offense. For certain offenses, lay people of rank were deprived of half their honor price for the first offense and all their honor price for the third offense. Clerics, on the other hand, would not only lose all their honor price for the first offense, but would be degraded as well. An ordinary cleric could, by doing penance and suffering punishment, win back his grade; a cleric of higher rank, such as a bishop, however, not only lost his honor price and was degraded for the first offense, but he could never again regain his position.

The Brehon Law applied to all areas of life and reflects the values of the people. While women in the Western World have been emancipated for less than a century, women in ancient Ireland were nearly on an equal footing with men. They were queens in their own right and led troops into battle. Women always held a place of respect in Celtic society and were accorded their rights as well. It took English law and civilization "to put women in their place." Ironically, the stamping out of the Brehon Laws, and with them the rights of women, was finally accomplished under Queen Elizabeth of England.

In ancient Ireland, under Brehon Law, the lowest clansman stood on an equal footing with his chieftain. For example, it is recorded that when several Irish Kings visited Richard II in Dublin, the Irish kings sat down to dinner with their minstrels and entire retinue as was their custom. The English were appalled by such a display of egalitarianism and soon rearranged things so that the Irish royalty ate separately from the rest of their attendants. The Irish gave in to this demand of the English in order to be courteous guests even though it went very much against their inclination and custom.

Unfortunately for us we have inherited the English system with all its warts, bad teeth and BO. Remember the Sheriff of Nottingham? How is he that different from today's fascist policy enforcement porcines? Not much. Both are unquestioning toadies to an elite class trying to stay out of the reach of the common person.

It is time for a paradigm shift!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cops: Public Servants or Fascist Pigs? (Part 6)

By Larken Rose

Once again, it's time to determine whether American "police" are noble public servants or fascist pigs. The good news is, rendering a verdict this time can easily be done after the first four seconds (literally) of the example video (which is about eight minutes long):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-taU9d26wT4

Now, I don't think this needs much explanation. Beating up little old ladies, in their own houses, in order to disarm them? Randomly disarming everyone, right and left, pointing GUNS at them in the process, when there wasn't even the suspicion that the people had committed any crimes? Barging into homes and destroying property without a shred of due process, without even the allegation that the person had done anything wrong? Do I really need to point out that any "officer" who would engage in such things is a fascist pig? I hope not. Here's some more Nazi thuggery, in case you needed any:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sm5PC7z79-8

But what's worth pointing out here is that this is NOT a case of a "bad apple" here and there. This was widespread, premeditated, officially-sanctioned fascism. When you have the damn chief of police openly declaring that he and his fellow Nazi swine intended to disarm EVERYONE (except themselves, of course), then don't tell me that I shouldn't say that ALL American police are fascist pigs.

In that second clip, one fascist swine, Chris Montgomery, this time from the "National Guard" (I wonder who's going to guard us from the "guard"?) laments how tough it is to have the job of being a fascist pig, disarming, maybe even SHOOTING Americans. Sorry, but I don't sympathize. In fact, if the local fascists in YOUR town ever declare that they are going to disarm everyone, and you see Chris Montgomery and his fellow Nazis walking down your street, you would be absolutely justified in shooting that fascist bastard in the head at the first opportunity, and shooting every other jackboot who is with him. When they've openly declared their unconstitutional, illegal, immoral, tyrannical intentions, what more justification could you possibly need?

Once again, let me state the obvious truth: if you have a RIGHT to self-defense, and the RIGHT to keep and bear arms, then by definition you DON'T NEED "government" permission to do so. And, in fact, when authoritarian thugs tell you that you don't have the right, you STILL DO, and you have the right to use whatever force is necessary to protect your rights, including shooting jackboots.

I wonder how many fascist thugs in New Orleans did things that would have justified their intended victims blowing their damn heads off. Probably almost all of them (at least all of the ones shown in those videos). On the other hand, I wonder how many cops DIDN'T violate everyone's rights? Any? Were there ANY "law enforcement" people in New Orleans who REFUSED to partake in the officially-sanctioned Gestapo garbage? I haven't heard of any.

So don't complain when I say that ALL American police today are fascist pigs. When I see some evidence to the contrary--like someone with a badge, a spine, and a brain (if anyone in the country still has all three) doing something to STOP the police state absurdities going on all over then country, then I might regain a speck of respect for "law enforcement." But not before.

Larken Rose
http://www.larkenrose.com

Cops: Public Servants or Fascist Pigs? (Part 5)

He is right you know. ALL cops are bad cops. ALL cops are fascist pigs. If they were good people they would not be cops. It is either abuse by commission or abuse by omission. Either way they are abusive of your rights by blindly carrying out unlawful but "legal" orders. They are the enforcers of the statutory corporate policies of the ruling junta under the guise of "law." Face it folks. This is one of the points of conflict in the undeclared American civil war between freedom and despotism. The poLice of today are no different than the Redcoats of yesterday.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

By Larken Rose
http://www.larkenrose.com

(Warning: My language gets a little caustic in the message below, but nothing worse than a PG rating.)

Once again, it's time to put American "law enforcement" to the test, to see if they are noble public servants, or fascist pigs. This time, let's have some audience participation. Let's play, "Spot the Fascist Pig" while viewing the following video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5Kl8Abi7ag

So, did you have any trouble spotting the fascist pig? Well, let's see. Did you choose the sadistic bastard beating up the defenseless girl (Deputy Pig Paul Sheen)? If so, you only get a "C." While it's very likely that that thug was indeed a fascist pig, the evidence in this video didn't actually prove that.

Again, let's remain clear in our terminology. "Officer" Sheen is obviously a sadistic piece of excrement, but was there actual evidence of the fascist mindset? Not really. Someone who doesn't pretend to be "authority" could still exhibit such violent, bullying behavior. As a result, the violence, by itself, is NOT proof of genuine fascism. I guess one could make a case that anyone who would characterize a girl daintily kicking off her shoe as "assaulting an officer" is pretty likely to be a fascist pig, but it's not nearly the strongest case shown in the video.

I know the video is unpleasant to watch--at least if you're a human being--but I ask that you watch it again, keeping your eyes on the OTHER cop. Here is the link again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5Kl8Abi7ag

Now recall the test for fascism. Does that guy--the one NOT actually beating up the defenseless girl--look like his goal is to protect the innocent? Hardly. Does he look like a defender of truth and justice? Uh, no. Does his failure to intercede, and in fact his assistance in the assault (though relatively minor), show that he is a fascist pig whose loyalty is to his fellow thugs, no matter what they may be doing? Absolutely. Being able to assist in such abuse and oppression when one is NOT enraged is a BETTER indication of the fascist mindset than someone having a violent temper tantrum (which may instead merely indicate that someone is a stupid, violent animal).

But even if you chose the thug's "assistant" as the fascist pig in this case, you still only get a "B." It was really a trick question. The correct answer was: the thug's assistant AND the "spokesman" for the gang of Nazi swine, who refused to condemn actions that were obviously illegal, unjustifiable, and downright despicable. Instead of openly condemning such blatant evil, Sergeant Jim Laing, like the spineless little worm he is, refuses to comment. (I'm assuming the guy is the fascist gang's "spokesman," but what good is a "spokesman" who refuses to SAY anything?)

Several people, including my brilliant wife, have recently taken issue with me seeming to imply that ALL police are "fascist pigs." Well, that is EXACTLY what I am implying, and this is a perfect example of WHY I believe that. Being fascist pigs is OFFICIAL POLICE POLICY across the country. The other cop in the room, does he try to stop the vicious attack committed by his fellow "officer"? No. Does he even seem slightly shocked or surprised? No. He calmly ASSISTS in the abuse.

I'm sure many of you would have many well-deserved, less-than- complimentary words for the thug himself, but I'd like to add a few for the thug's "assistant": You are a worthless, cowardly piece of crap. You don't deserve a shred of respect, regardless of your stupid badge and your imagined "authority." You are not a man, you aren't even a human being. I hope everyone you know, all your friends and family, see that video, and see what kind of spineless maggot you are. And I appreciate you giving such a fine example of how courageous and principled the "men and women in blue" are. You are a Nazi pig, and you'd be doing the world a favor if you go jump off the nearest cliff.

While I'm at it, how about a few words for the floundering, evasive police "spokesman"? Dear Mr. Spineless propagandist. You would have made Joseph Goebbels proud. My only hope is that some day some noble "law enforcement" officers, not realizing that you are a member of their club of inferiority complex, sadistic scumbags, beat the living hell out of you, until one of two things happen: 1) you die, or; 2) you suddenly find yourself able to identify evil as EVIL, even when it is committed by one of your fellow "officers."

One--just ONCE--I want to hear some police "spokesman," when asked about such a blatant example of police abuse, say something like, "I think that Officer Paul Sheen is a cowardly piece of crap, and given the chance, I'd gladly pound the living hell out of him myself." When THAT happens, instead of their predictable butt- covering, obfuscating and excuse-making, THEN I might regain some respect for "law enforcement." Until then, they're all fascist pigs as far as I'm concerned.

Larken Rose
http://www.larkenrose.com

(P.S. As I'm finishing up this message, it's coming up on 11:00 p.m. And as luck would have it, just down the road from my house, the local fascists have once again set up their warrantless, suspicionless, random stop of everyone, in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment. So how many cops do you think refused to participate in it? I'm guessing: NONE. So does anyone still want to complain when I say that ALL American cops are fascist pigs? Being fascist pigs is now OFFICIAL POLICY of all American police departments. And you'll see more evidence of that in upcoming messages.)