Category Archives: Psychology and Manipulation

A tale of two movies—one I saw: GET OUT and one I didn’t: VERSCHWINDE!

First let me tell you about the movie (VERSCHWINDE!) I didn’t see:  In this movie, set in the 1920s, a very handsome young blonde haired and blue-eyed White Christian German man (let’s call him “Erwin Christoph Rommel”) falls in love with a beautiful German Jewish Lady (let’s call here “Rose Adele” who invites him to meet her parents beautiful country home for a weekend, as a token symbolic act of how serious their relationship as become.  

Rose Adele’s parents (let’s call them “the Armandsteins”) are extremely modern progressive scientists from Vienna, a psychologist and a neurosurgeon, to be precise.   Christoph, Adele Rose’s young German beau is from a poor family, no visible career or aspirations, down on his luck in the Weimar Republic’s post-“Great War” depression before the World Wide Depression of 1929.  

The young lady’s parents (the “Armandsteins”) make intense small talk always alluding to the young man’s status as a non-Jew from a poor background, noting his physical beauty and attractiveness.   This all makes young Christoph feel very nervous and uncomfortable, as does the fact that other young Christian Germans like himself work as the servants to this family—-and basically refuse to speak like normal young Germans and seem to act only as caricatures of happy subordinates, wound up to speak platitudes of praise and thanksgiving of their somewhat degraded status.  

As the weekend evolves, it turns out that the Armandsteins, Adele’s Jewish parents, and all of their extremely wealthy Jewish friends are members of a group that agrees and conspires to enslave White Christian German men and make use of them as sex-toys or else for medical experiments in the corrupt and decadent style of 1920s Germany and Austria…. The mother, a psychoanalyst (let’s assume he was a student of Sigmund Freud, perhaps named “Anna”) hypnotizes young Christoph and partially controls or influences his mind….  Meanwhile Adele’s Father D. Armandstein conducts a ritual game of some sort with the other like-minded Jewish guests at the weekend party, which is a regular annual family event of some kind, and reveals some sort of intent to target young Christoph for an unusual but clearly unpleasant fate of some kind or other.  

The climax of this movie comes when the Jewish Father Neurosurgeon Armandstein (acting like a mad scientist Frankenstein or Frankenfurter or whatever…) attempts to perform a brain transplant from Christoph to a blind Jewish art-dealer.  Christoph plays along until one of Adele Armandstein’s slightly dimwitted brothers prepares to transport him to the surgery room, and then breaks loose and kills or disables everyone in the Jewish family and begins to escape… only to be greeted at the gate by someone who at first looks like State Police, and then turns out to be a childhood friend who is a Nazi member of the SA…. the Sturmabteilung…. the predecessor to the Nazi SS of greater fame and infamy in the 1930s and 40s…

The movie ends with heroic celebration of the brilliance and heroism of the paramilitary office German National Socialist Movement which saved young Christoph from the fate of other young Germans hypnotized and enslaved by this clearly insane, repulsive Jewish family …  

I repeat: I have not seen this movie Verschwinde for a simple reason—it doesn’t exist (or if it does, it’s quite a coincidence…. please advise me if you know of anything like even remotely like it).   Verschwinde is the sort of movie that might well have been produced in the 1930s or early 40’s with the seal of approval of Paul Joseph Goebbels….  but it’s fairly certain that if such a movie were produced today, it wouldn’t premier at the Sundance festival or be generally released to massive audiences all over the United States in 2017….

But now let me tell you about the movie I DID just see today, Wednesday, March 15, 2017:  GET OUT, which did in fact premier at the Sundance Film Festival on January 24, 2017, and generally released by Universal exactly one month later, on February 24, 2017.   I walked out feeling, quite frankly, stabbed in the back (an historically appropriate but exceedingly uncomfortable feeling for the IDES OF MARCH…).

Chris Washington in GET OUT is not a White Christian German a young black African-American man, while Rose Armitage appears to be his very normal girlfriend.  They seem like quite a comfortable, typical modern interracial couple…. and they do indeed go for a family visit to meet Rose’s parents because, implicitly, in the modern way, they are getting really serious even though they always live together—there’s even a whiff of that horrible old tradition of “matrimony” in the air….

Bottom line folks—just rewrite the scenario I gave you for Verschwinde except that Upper Class White Americans are planning to use and destroy a young good-looking black man.  You can read a thousand on-line reviews of GET OUT—you can go see it yourself.

My point is simply this: IF “VERSCHWINDE” as I have described it above were a real movie and actually even made and existed, it would be immediately and universally characterized as a textbook example of RACE HATE movie.  The ADL (Anti-Defamation League) would Such a movie could never be made or released in modern times and, if it were, it would be suppressed and decried as the epitome of “blood libel” against the Jews, on the order of the story of Little St. Hugh of Lincoln….

So my question is—has America really sunk so low that it is acceptable to make movies like this where White People are the science fiction monsters exploiting blacks?

Oh, the SA aren’t really in this movie GET OUT, of course, but the equivalent paramilitary investigative and oppressive organizer of Chris Washington’s rescue is from the TSA—that’s right, the folks who frisk you at the airport… the Transportation Safety Agency.  I think the comparison with the original paramilitary organ of the National Socialist German Workers Party is completely appropriate….   This is Science Fiction as Historical Metaphor an Allegory… this is Science Fiction as Political Advocacy….

In case you didn’t know, my friends and fellow Americans, it is OK to hate white people and portray them as ignorant, insane monsters who pray on black people…. But just try to make Verschwinde!, and see what reception you’ll get at Sundance…..  Is the concept of hate according along racial lines any different?  Are upper class WASPS really so much worthier a target than Upper Class Jews?

I CHALLENGE EVERYONE READING THIS POST TO TELL ME HOW IT WOULD REALLY BE DIFFERENT IF THE ETHNIC IDENTITIES AND TIMES AND PLACES WERE CHANGED?  WHAT DOES IT MEAN ABOUT OUR SOCIETY TODAY THAT IT IS COMPLETELY ACCEPTABLE TO MAKE THIS MOVIE ABOUT WHITE PEOPLE BEING EVIL TO BLACK PEOPLE, BUT IT WOULD BE A COMPLETE ABOMINATION TO MAKE THE NAZI MOVIE ABOUT THE JEWS?

Follow Brother Nathaniel!

When Murder is just Tough Love: the Culture and Practical Reason of Terrorism after the Quatorze Juliet

A close friend sent me a cute French electronic card for Bastille Day 2016.   And what a Bastille Day it turned out to be, eh?  Think about it!!! A third massive attack on the French people in about a year… But… Cui Bono? What is an attack but an invitation to a counterattack? So if you’re going to start a war, your attack should always be something that weakens the enemy in some regard, right? But NONE of these stupid Muzzies seem to get that, do they? They always attack innocent civilians—everywhere they go, or at the most they attack government bureaucrats….What kind of logic is that? You attack people to prod them into attacking you, but all of your attacks seem carefully designed to arouse ire and anger among the populace while leaving the infrastructure of war that will be used against you completely intact and untouched. Is it just me or is there something wrong with this picture? It’s almost like the people making the attacks ONLY want to make the people MORE willing to counter-attack them back? How is that logical?

Holidays are very important, especially those with fireworks.  I have never lived in France or Quebec, but by the time I was 18 I had lived in London, Dallas, Los Angeles, New Orleans, and Honduras, and whether it’s New Years’ Eve, Guy Fawkes’ Day, the Fourth of July, the 15th of September, or the Queen’s Birthday, fireworks celebrations are really great.  So I try to imagine what would have happened if there had been a bombing during one of those holidays in any of the places I ever habituated…. and what would have been the purpose.  

And what of the Quatorze Julliet?  My grandmother was a Francophone and Francophile native of Louisiana and my Texas-born grandfather’s life took him from Galveston to “the City” on a regular basis, plus I took French in High School and College, and several of my professors were Francophones and Francophiles at Tulane and during those years—including  Archaeologists Harvey Bricker and Cynthia Irwin-Williams who had both studied under Hallam Movius, and from them all, I obtained a love for and habit of celebrating July 14, Bastille Day.

Terrorism, traditionally understood, is a species of poor-man’s war or revolution.  As such, it is inherently secretive and illegal.  War is open and honest: Austria declared war on Serbia, so Russia declared war on Austria, Germany was required by treaty to go to war with Russia to defend Austria, Britain was required by treaty, etc., and so the Great War of 1914-1918 began.  BUT EVERYBODY KNEW IT.

When terrorist organizations claim responsibility after the fact for their crimes… they are doing just that, they are claiming criminal responsibility… and when criminals claim responsibility for anything, you have to wonder: why?

And so I think to myself, what do the April 1995 Bombing of the Oklahoma City Federal Building, 9/11/01 in New York City and Washington, 7/7/05 in London, Dylan Storm Roof’s murderous assault in Charleston last June 17, Charlie Hebdo in France, and now this latest atrocity in Nice all have in common?  

Well, they neither advance any coherent revolutionary plan, nor weaken the countries they attack.  They all happen either on days with interesting numbers or anniversaries.   But the truck bombing that took out 84 yesterday, including two American tourists apparently, just “takes the cake” on Bastille Day—which now joins Guy Fawkes Day and 9/11, 7/7 and 6/17/15 anniversary of the collapse of Denmark Vesey’s 1822 slave uprising in Charleston as “false flag” or stage events of terrorism.

Bastille Day was already a slightly fictitious holiday because, as Louis XVI wrote in his diary, on 14 July 1789, “Nothing Important Happened.”  A mob knocked down an old prison with one prisoner, but the embattled King with a short life-expectancy didn’t even notice, under his peculiar circumstances.  As my son likes to say—the 14th of July was really a tragedy for the future of French Tourism—the Bastille, Mediaeval relic fortress that it was, would have been a major attraction had it survived…  But the French know how to make a good party out of a bad deal—and very few American Fourth of July Cookouts EVER equal the average 14 July party in France or among Francophile/Francophones worldwide… the comparison of the food and wine alone…. oh well, never mind.

But I keep trying to think to myself: if I were an Islamic Freedom-Fighter or would-be Caliph, would attacking innocent people over and over again at random make any sense?  What would I be hoping to accomplish?  What would be my goals?  What good TO ME AND MY CAUSE could possibly inure from committing such crimes?

A sophisticated and coordinated attack in the United States followed by a similar attack in London, and then a decade later two similarly “low tech” attacks in France, and a bunch of random attacks in the meantime… scattered around the world.  Shootings at Fort Hood in Texas, connected or not?  Who knows?  The Boston Marathon whatever it was, connected or not?  Who knows?  The Chattanooga, TN veteran shooting, connected or not?  Who knows?

What is absolutely certain is that SOMEONE wants to create the image of Islamic terror as a world-wide phenomenon that requires  coordinated security and response.  If I were an Islamic Freedom-Fighter or would-be Caliph, would this kind of premonitory strategy seem like a good idea to me?   The answer is NO.

Revolutionary terrorism needs to be targeted on ONE government, one regime, one power structure—and it needs to be consistent and persistent enough to destabilize a society or at least an elite.  The pattern of Islamic Terror since the original 1993 World Trade Center bombing is NOT THAT.   The movement around the map, the focus on NON-STRATEGIC, NON-MILITARY, NON-INFRASTRUCTURE targets is very consistent.

The murder of innocent people was an integral part of Timothy McVeigh’s and Dylan Storm Roof’s approach in distinctly non-Islamic terrorist events in the United States—and their two attacks had no more coordinated relationship to any ideological goals than the long line of supposed Islamic terrorist events.  Even my dearly departed, mild mannered, deeply religious late mother said, way back in April 1995, “if they call themselves Patriots and wanted to make a meaningful statement, they really should have bombed the IRS.”  And if Dylan Storm Roof were really a racist White Supremacist, the LAST associations he would have wanted to make were the killing of elderly black people during a prayer meeting at a conservative African Methodist Episcopal Church on the 193rd anniversary of the Suppression of one of the most famous Slave Rebellions in U.S. History: this sort of symbolism all plays for the OTHER side—and so does bombing the French Riviera during Bastille Day celebrations.  

IF you want to make sure to build your enemies’  anger and take every step possible to ensure that NOBODY has any sympathy for your cause, (a) make sure nobody knows what your cause is and (b) do things in random places but on important days to make sure people remember the randomness.

In short, to my mind, there is absolutely ZERO chance that the Nice attack on Bastille Day was organized by anyone sincerely to advance the Islamist cause.   You want to bomb a target on a holiday?  If you’re a real revolutionary, you seek a target like an electrical power plant or water pumping station or even a sewerage processing plant where you can disable your opponents entire city and infrastructure in some really inconvenient and expensive way.  Osama bin Laden was a structural engineer and IF he had been in charge of 9-11, as a plot against the United States, I’ve always said his targets of choice would have been the undefended dams along the Colorado River, in order to cutoff the water supply to evil sinful cities like Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Phoenix, and the California “Inland Empire.”

So none of these attacks, my friends, are about an Islamic agenda for World Domination or even in revenge for the (indisputable) wrongs suffered by the Arab and Islamic people generally at British, French, and most recently American Imperialist hands….

WHO WANTS TO DIVIDE AND CONQUER THROUGH TERROR?  The Radical Islamic World?  Or Powers, Princes and Potentates MUCH Closer to Home!

All these attacks, in my opinion, reflect a “tough love” strategy of the United States, French, and British Governments to “soften up” the people and by long-term repetitive pseudo-Pavlovian conditioning make them (i.e. US, the free and responsible people of America and Europe) willing to accept an all-encompassing, eternal “Thousand Year” Police State—exactly what Strom Thurmond predicted was the goal in his “Dixiecrat” Platform of 1948.  They want to impose the police state for our own good and our own protection, don’t you understand?  That’s why modern government false-flag murder is just TOUGH LOVE.  And if you don’t like it, well, tough s__t, you know, my fellow Americans: “We have to break a few eggs here and there to prepare for you our New World Order of Omelette—-they’re all for you, you know!  But we know you’re too stupid to want this wonderful highly organized Police State where we can organize and regulate all of your lives, so we have to scare you into it.”  

In other words: Tales of Terrorism function for the modern media  motivated masses exactly the way Perrault’s or Grimm’s Fairy tales did in days of yore…. scary stories are INSTRUCTIONAL!  You need to scare the children by telling them about the BIG BAD WOLF and what he did to Little Red Riding Hood, or about what the Witch did to Hansel & Gretel with her candy house, so that they will live in constant fear of strangers and of attempting to strike out on their own.  FEAR!  FEAR!  FEAR!  “You’ve got to be taught to hate and fear, it’s got to be taught from year-to-year, it’s got to be drummed in your dear little ear, You’ve got to be carefully taught.”

DALLAS WAS JUST PERFECT!

The Dallas Police Murders last week, which suspiciously took place on the now recurring date of 7/7, were not Islamic either, but they served the fear purpose and the “Divide and Conquer” purpose to a degree unmatched in any other attack.  Black people killing black cops—a recipe made by Machiavelli in Hell….

Peaceful black protesters complaining about police brutality were forced to hide behind the police lines when one or more black gunmen murdered 5 and injured 7 more.  DID THIS ADVANCE THE CAUSE OF “BLACK LIVES MATTER”?  No, but it was a boon for American Renaissance (and I write this as a regular reader  of and a subscriber to AmRen).

To feed the ignorant white suburban paranoia of blacks attacking whites was a simple stroke of Genius on the part of the Obama administration—all of a sudden, we have forced a portion of the black population into making a choice: either they act out the worst fears of the white middle class suburbanites or they support the Police.  Obama, as usual, was totally two-faced, but two-faced is how the supporters of the police state need to be: they need to FOMENT inter-racial violence on the one hand and then condemn murder on the other, because THIS STRATEGY SUPPORTS INCREASING THE POWER AND THE EFFICACY OF THE STATE.

The way to satisfy the Black Lives Matter movement is to suppress white-conservative expression and culture and desires to be left alone in an essentially segregated society.  To satisfy the White AND Black Middle and Upper Classes, the government must enlarge (a better word might be to engorge) the police state and enhance the power of the police to protect them from the rising black tide.

Now I read AmRen and similar publications and websites because I support what I perceive as their key long-term goals, namely segregation of the races to maintain cultural continuity.  Strangely enough, many black civil rights advocates share these goals, and I wholeheartedly support those who do.  BUT I HATE INJUSTICE, UNFAIRNESS, and  OPPRESSION and the way the POLICE STATE MAXIMIZES all three.  And the only thing that all the terrorist murders of the past 21 years since Oklahoma really have in common is: they justify oppressive measures and unfair oppression.

I totally disagree, then, with the advocacy of increased police power and authority which the reaction to Dallas has engendered both among the White and Black Middle Class.   Whites may believe that the police are on their side, but my experience in life is quite the opposite.  The calibre and IQ of men (and women) who opt for a career in law enforcement are not the highest, and police ONLY support the “side” that pays them directly (namely the State and City power structures, and the banks and other large institutions who support those) AGAINST ALL THE PEOPLE, REGARDLESS OF RACE CREED, OR COLOR.

One feature of modern society that deeply distresses me is the increasingly lack of respect among people.  The police do not respect anyone’s rights, as can be seen from countless examples in various fields of law enforcement, from domestic relations to enforcement of judicial foreclosures.  But ordinary people, too, do not respect each other’s rights, space or property, and depend for all protection on the police or state power generally as arbiters of everything.  Individuals need to take responsibility for all things, including their own protection and that of their loved ones and property.

Concern over lack of respect is, I think, a unifying theme in both the radical White and radical Black Lives Matter movements.  

Quatorze Juillet  (Edith Piaf)

Il me vient par la fenêtre
Des musiques de la rue.
Chaque estrade a son orchestre.
Chaque bal a sa cohue.
Ces gens-là m’ont pris ma fête.
Je ne la reconnais plus.

Dans ma chambre, je me chante
L’air que nous avons valsé.
Je regarde la toquarde
Où tes doigts se sont posés.

Tu m’as dit : “Tu es si belle.”
Et tu as, l’instant d’après,
Ajouté : “La vie est bête.”.
J’ai compris que tu partais.
Si tu ne reviens jamais,
Il n’y aura plus de quatorze juillet.

Il me vient par la fenêtre
Un murmure qui s’éteint,
Les chansons d’une jeunesse
Attardée dans le matin.
N’allez pas troubler mon rêve.
Allez rire un peu plus loin.

Que m’apporte, que m’apporte
Cette joie de quelques heures ?
Je suis morte, je suis morte
Et je t’ai déjà rejoint
Et mon corps est près du tien
Mais personne n’en sait rien…

The 14th of July

He comes to my window
The music in the street
Each stage has its orchestra
Each dance has its crowd
These people took my celebration
I don’t recognize it anymore

In my room, I sing to myself
The air that we waltzed in
I watch the infatuation
Where your fingers encountered mine

You tell me “you are so beautiful”
And you after a moment
Added “life is stupid”
I understood that you left
If you never come back
There will not be another 14th of July

He came to my window
A murmur that has extinguished
The songs of youth
Lingering in the morning
Don’t go troubling my dream
Laughing one step further away

That brings me, that brings me
The joy of a few hours
I’m dead, I’m dead
And I already reached you
And my body is close to yours
But nobody knows anything…

State vs. National Citizenship—the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1 must be Repealed—Time to Bite the Bullet, Folks!

Donald Trump has won a lot of national support for his position that “anchor babies” are not U.S. Citizens.  https://www.yahoo.com/politics/birthright-citizenship-where-the-2016-127093585661.html

Despite their appetite for socialism and socialist engineering of U.S. Demography, I think it is fair to say that few if any the Radical Republican Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment ever dreamt of or envisioned a situation where millions of “huddled masses” and “wretched refuse ” types of people would come to America just to have babies to enroll in schools and obtain other welfare entitlements. 

No, the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment was to create a national standard for citizenship and civil rights, and to abolish the notion that the States of the United States were equivalent to the “States” who obtain membership in the United Nations.  

State citizenship was the weakest point of Cousin Abraham’s Northern policy during the War:  while many Radical Republicans wanted to call Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis, and every other Confederate Officer and Politician, a “traitor”, these charges simply would not stick for one single reason.  From 1776-1868, the individual states were the ones which established and determined citizenship, and so Lee was right to think of himself as a Virginian (about a 10th or 12th generation Virginian, in fact) by both the doctrines of ius solis and ius sanguinis.  Jefferson Davis might have been born in Kentucky, but he was a “naturalized” Mississippian.  Pierre Gustave Toutant-Beauregard was a 6th or 7th generation Louisianian, like Lee, either by ius solis or ius sanguinis

So Lee and Beauregard were unquestionably citizens of their own home states, and NOT of the United States.  They might have been employed in the armies of the United States, or, like Davis, also officers of the United States Government in its legislative (Senate) and Executive Branches (where Davis was Secretary of War).

But by every pre-War understanding, the Confederate leaders were not CAPABLE of betraying a Country WHICH NEVER EXISTED.  Like the States they belonged to, the Confederate Leaders could resign from the service of the Union, but in no legal or moral sense could they be called “traitors” to it, because (at least before 1868) the UNION WAS NOT A SINGLE SOVEREIGNTY.  Yes, indeed, quite simply, there WAS no such thing as “United States citizenship” prior to the Fourteenth Amendment—just a very generalized “American” citizenship which dependent on the collaboration and contribution of the ratifying states.  And that is why “Birth of a Nation” (by D.W. Griffith) was so correctly named: a collection of closely cooperating and allied free nation-states (small Jeffersonian Democracies) went to war with each other in 1861, and they were, afterwards, at gunpoint, forced into one single new country.

This was the debate that framed Barack Hussein Obama’s Presidency—so long as he could convince (fool?) a majority of the people into believing he was born in Hawaii, he was eligible, under the ius solis doctrine of the 14th Amendment, to be President.  But if a ius sanguinis standard should be applied, Obama’s rather famous Kenyan father stood as an absolute obstacle to his eligibility.  So as Dinesh D’Souza had shown in his brilliant movie Obama 2016, Obama’s goal as President was absolutely to abolish both the identity and nature of American society and culture.  Now the 44th President effects this transformation largely through emotionally manipulative lies and psychological manipulation, rather than democratic process or law.

But, indeed, the language of the Fourteenth Amendment’s “citizenship” clause is clear enough in making “soil” more important than “blood,” and has been consistently applied by the Supreme Court for over a hundred years to mean that literally anyone born in the United States, for any reason, automatically is an American Citizen.  This is obviously a disaster for the Country and many have written about it, including the mad Texan elf of Clearwater, Florida, Robert M. Hurt, Jr.:

Trump Is Right: Anchor Babies Do Not Rightfully Become US Citizens

http://bobhurt.blogspot.com/2015/08/trump-is-right-anchor-babies-do-not.html

What Hurt proposes is essentially changing the law by reinterpreting the law, and this often does not work so well—and could in fact be described as the source of much of modern America’s woes—allowing the Supreme Court to say that night is day and day is night is getting old, 62 years after Earl Warren became Chief Justice, 113 after Oliver Wendell Holmes brought Massachusetts “progressivism” to the Court, paving the way for the New Deal for whose eventual triumph (through popularity over constitutional rigor) Holmes might be considered a kind of Prophet….

Among Holmes’ most famous pronouncements is that, “an experiment, as all life is an experiment” (Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616, 630 (1919)).  Allowing, or even encouraging, population replacement—the “Browning of America”—is among the left’s favorite long-term social goals and experiments, and (admittedly) all of us who oppose the Browning of America are classified by Salon.com, the Huffington Post, and the New York Times, among others, as vile racist reactionaries. 

But I can live with that.  As far as the way out, though, as far as how White America can preserve itself, I don’t think that verbal games such as Robert M. Hurt, Jr., Donald John Trump, and many others will work.  

No, I always prefer dealing with issues directly and in taking a “full-frontal” approach.  The Fourteenth Amendment resulted from a massive war of Centralization of Power.  The only politician in MY LIFETIME who ever addressed the problem directly was San Diego Mayor and later California Governor and Senator Pete Wilson: who directly advocated repeal of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment during the 1980s.  He is almost totally forgotten now, but when I was in Law School, I remember thinking his approach was sound.  Repeal of the Citizenship Clause would be clear statement that unlimited immigration and population replacement via “anchor babies” is and ought to be intolerable.

People don’t realize it, but prior to the War of 1861-65 between the North and the South, MANY NORTHERN STATES if not most of them, DENIED CITIZENSHIP of any kind to blacks.  (the last state to have such a law was Oregon, which literally made it simply illegal to “be a negro” in the State of Oregon— to enter the state at all, under any pretext, was cause for imprisonment, fine, and immediate removal to the state lines upon release.

While “the Underground Railroad” was very famous, you might ask yourself, “if Abolitionist sentiment was so strong in the North, (a) why was the underground railroad “underground” and (b) why did it end up in Canada?  The answer is that since Northern States had enacted “no black citizenship” laws, being “free” in most places meant nothing. 

The way history is taught and discussed in modern America, it’s not always quite clear, but Chief Justice Roger Taney, in Scott v. Sanford was actually adopting a MERGER of both the Northern and Southern positions in his (plurality against Freedom for Slaves by Crossing State Lines) decision in 1857 (every Justice on the Court rendered a Separate opinion in that case). 

Justice Taney said that no negro could ever be a citizen of the United States.  So he was ALREADY (by usurpation) establishing a Federal rather than a state standard of citizenship—THAT IS WHY THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT WAS ENACTED—the whole War Between the States and 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution can be considered an effort to Overrule the “Dred Scott” ruling— but what many people forget is that Taney had already taken the critical first step by attempting to impose NORTHERN standards of Citizenship NATIONWIDE— ironically, this ruling (if it had been allowed to stand) might well, would almost certainly, have had the bizarre effect of “outlawing” or depriving tens of thousands of free (and many slaveholding) blacks in Louisiana of their citizenship, professional licenses, and right to vote. 

So the real problem was Taney’s (1857, pre-War) judicial “stealth” transition from allowing STATES to determine Citizenship to his rather clumsy attempt to impose a NATIONWIDE standard for citizenship.  The Fourteenth Amendment was the “Radical Republican” answer to this. 

Ironic, isn’t it?, that when properly understood, the Fourteenth Amendment was just as oppressive to the Northern States as to the Southern States.  Northern States could no longer ban black people. (Although the remarkable State of Oregon did not repeal it’s African-exclusionary laws until 1926, and only ratified the Fifteenth Amendment until the centennial of that State’s admission to the Union in 1959)(Oregon’s 1844, pre-state, pre-war position on slavery was that all blacks, free or slave, should be whipped and lashed twice a year until they left the territory).

Former California Governor Pete Wilson, by contrast with both Roger Taney and Donald Trump, understood that and would have returned to the individual states the power to determine citizenship by repeal of the “birth clause” of the Fourteenth Amendment.  One can easily imagine, almost too easily, how permitting the states to determine citizenship would be nearly equivalent to allowing secession—because Hawaii, for example, could pass a law decreeing that no “Howlees” (i.e. Anglo-Saxon or other European Whites) could ever be citizens of Hawaii—and so effectively dissolve the ties between that improperly annexed Island State and the rest of “the Union.”  (Hawaii currently has the most radical and politically “real” and active secessionist movement in the USA).

Even if the States COULD determine citizenship, the balance of the 14th Amendment still protected everyone “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States with regard to Civil Rights…. so even if there were no “national standard for citizenship” there could still be a “national standard for civil rights.”
 

EVERYONE can create (“originate”) their own money (“banknotes”), if licensed by the Federal Government? Even a Rutgers Basketball Coach?

This is a part of the Federal statute that regulates “individual” promissory note originators:

12 U.S. Code § 5103 – License or registration required (a) In general

Subject to the existence of a licensing or registration regime, as the case may be, an individual may not engage in the business of a loan originator without first—
(1) obtaining, and maintaining annually—

(A) a registration as a registered loan originator; or
(B) a license and registration as a State-licensed loan originator; and
(2) obtaining a unique identifier.
(b) Loan processors and underwriters

(1) Supervised loan processors and underwriters

A loan processor or underwriter who does not represent to the public, through advertising or other means of communicating or providing information (including the use of business cards, stationery, brochures, signs, rate lists, or other promotional items), that such individual can or will perform any of the activities of a loan originator shall not be required to be a State-licensed loan originator.
(2) Independent contractors

An independent contractor may not engage in residential mortgage loan origination activities as a loan processor or underwriter unless such independent contractor is a State-licensed loan originator.

A PERSONAL LOAN FROM A FRIEND OR A
SECURITIZED CREDIT ORIGINATION?11-05-2014 Kennedy v Stringer Original Complaint USDC DNJ

(4)          Plaintiff Melvene Lynn Kennedy is the owner of a restaurant facility (currently closed, non-operational) called “Uncle Seas”, located at 879 Springfield in Irvington, New Jersey, executed a promissory note payable to C. Vivian Stringer, as described in a complaint filed on behalf of C. Vivian Stringer by Peter J. Hendricks on or about June 7, 2013.
(5)           Plaintiff has sought proof, which has been repeatedly denied and refused, in the state Court proceedings, that the C. Vivian Stringer had or has any rights of ownership and/or enforceability of the promissory note, which appears to have been processed through the First Baptist Church of Lincoln Gardens, in Somerset, New Jersey, Senior Pastor “Buster” Soaries, and a coordinate and related pair of institutions CDC Properties and Central Jersey Development Corporation (http://cjcdc.org/affiliates.php), both operating in fact under Federal Banking and Community Development Law, but masquerading as a personal act of monetary assistance based on friendship rather than commerce.
(6)           Plaintiff Melvene Lynn Kennedy agreed to the interest rate of 18%, in whole or in part because of the special trust and confidence which she reposed in her long-time sports coach and mentor, Defendant C. Vivian Stringer; Kennedy
alleges that this interest rate was unlawful for a federally guaranteed and secured
loan, that further that it was unfair, inequitable, and unconscionable in any legal or equitable sense, as was the entire transaction, being based on fraud, “false identities” and deceit.
(7)      Plaintiff executed a mortgage in favor of C. Vivian Stringer, at Stringer’s request and direction, but in coordination with the First Baptist Church of Lincoln Gardens. Plaintiff sought in State Court has never been allowed to see any evidence of whether the money came from C. Vivian Stringer, but the check appears to have issued either by the First Baptist Church of Lincoln Gardens or else CDC Properties or else Central Jersey Community Development Corporation.  Plaintiff asks, how does this make C. Vivian Stringer a creditor entitled to foreclose? What is her injury standing? Plaintiff alleges that C. Vivian Stringer has no standing but merely a status, a de facto, or even de jure, title of nobility namely, as an “individual originator of credit.”
(8)               Plaintiff ’s promissory note was never filed with the Court, in violation of New Jersey Law, at the time of the initiation of the foreclosure. Plaintiff believes that C. Vivian Stringer never owned or managed the underlying note or mortgage at any time after closing on May 7, 2010, and that her June 7, 2013 suit for foreclosure was fraudulently filed, and constitutes a conspiracy, with the other defendants, to effect a theft by false pretenses, under color of New Jersey Court Procedures and Federal Banking and Credit Law.
The New Jersey Foreclosure Process
(9)       Foreclosure Litigation in New Jersey, under the New Jersey Fair Foreclosure Act (FFA) and related statutes, begins with a Notice of Intent to Foreclose which precedes the filing of a formal judicial complaint for foreclosure. The Statutory Notice of Intent to Foreclose requires essentially the same standards of disclosure and provision of information than State Rules of Court, but in practice, the New Jersey Superior Courts waive most of the formal “proof of ownership” requirements, as they have in this case.  12-19-2014 Kennedy v Stringer Docket Report Showing Stringer MTD filed 12-17-2014

HISTORICAL CONTEXT AND BACKGROUND (Originally published on this blog May 27, 2009, 23:27:29 PM)

        Paper “banknote” money is, of course, NOT expressly authorized by the United States Constitution, in fact, arguably, it is specifically forbidden by Article I, Section 10 that ” No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts….”  The purpose of paper money (“emitting Bills of Credit”) is and has always been to create easy and quick credit for the FEDERAL government.  This Country was created in large part by the issuance of Fiat Money—the Continental Dollar, which gave rise to one of the earliest sarcastic currency jokes still “in circulation” as part of the English language, “That’s Not Worth a Continental.”

Banks can do the same thing by “originating promissory notes”, “emitting credit” or “approving credit”—and all promissory notes accepted by National Banking Institutions under the definitions of 12 U.S.C. §1813(l) MUST treat approved promissory notes as “the equivalent of cash.”  In effect, any person who can approve credit formally can create money from thin air.

National Banking Associations do that, but a former associate of mine, the well-known Orange County Dentist Dr. Orly Taitz, was able to approve credit through her Dental Office, and upon accepting notes, was able to issue herself money.  She actually DID this in the case of my friend the late (died tragically and very prematurely last December) Major Stefan Frederick Cook….. who never came anywhere near Orly’s dental office….but sought Orly’s “legal” services…. and she had him apply for credit through her dental office.  She never, however, got him into a dental chair so far as I am aware….although he may have felt his teeth had all been extracted by the time his little whirlwind tour with her was over….  I have the greatest respect and regard for Major Stefan Frederick Cook, and I am sorry that Orly’s impetuosity (and my assistance  to her in acting impetuously) may have injured his amazing military career unnecessarily, but that is a different story for a different day: the point is that issuing credit under the national system, whether you are a Bank or a retailer or a retail provider of dental services or anything else: IS the creation of money from thin air.  Creating money from thin air facilitates instant gratification of the kinds and types of which both Henry Ford and Sigmund Freud definitely and enthusiastically approved, albeit for radically different reasons.  Aldous Huxley made the connexion between Ford and Freud’s attitude towards instant gratification in his masterpiece “Sci Fi Horror” book: Brave New World.

       “The Money Multiplier” effect is something that ever student of Freshman economics learns about and then forgets in later life as s/he goes through a normal American life-style creating money by signing credit card notes, mortgages, car loans, EACH of which is multiplied several times within a month or two at the maximum, thereby creating the oversupply of money which that same student of Freshman economics will doubtless hear of on the news, possibly during his middle age, as “inflation” measured by the “consumer price index.”  Gold and silver are not immune from inflation: during historical gold and silver rushes the value of these commodities has shrunk to unbelievably low levels in mining communities and areas where they are super-abundant.  Spain of the “Golden Age” (16th-17th centuries) is often said to have been crippled in comparison with Holland, Germany, and Great Britain by the inflationary effect of vast surplus gold derived from the post-Columbian conquests of Mexico, Peru, Colombia, and Bolivia.  Why develop?  Why produce anything at all when you can stay drunk on easy gold and never have to work?

Why develop just and fair economic and political systems when you can decorate your churches with oceans of gold and then leave them in charge of regulating society and culture through well-funded courts of inquisition who are responsible to no one?  Money = power, power corrupts, and abundant money = absolute power which can corrupt absolutely.  These truisms are too well known to bear much discussion.

         “Formal” market economies have always depended upon an exchange rate based on some form of central commodities.  Before gold and silver the Ancient Romans and Germans used horses and cattle as currency (the word “pecuniary”, meaning, “of or relating to money” is derived from Latin “pecus”—preserved in Spanish words and phrases such as “Agropecuario”—which means “relating to commercial farms and ranches and similar products and services”).

         Among the ancient Aztec and Maya of Mexico, Cacao beans and cotton cloth were used as currency, (this was the sweetest economy in history, where money literally did “grow on trees” and could be made into chocolate at any time).  And in fact the Southern Americans of the Confederate States of America effectively tried (but failed) to use cotton as currency again in the 1860s, but were rebuffed by and ultimately lost their bid for independence as a result of the scorn heaped on them by gold-loving British and French bankers of the middle part of the 19th century.  Thus “Dixie” fell in large part because of its dependence on paper money such as the “Dix Dollars” (Ten Dollar–French language) bill issued by the antebellum Banque de Nouvelle Orleans which had given the region its nickname in the time leading up to secession in 1860-61.  Cowerie shells were famously used by certain pre-modern tribes in the Western Pacific.  The honest advantage of commodity based currencies—and their fatal flaw, from the standpoint of modern social-welfare economics—is that they are inevitably finite.

            No matter how easy it is to pan for gold, grow cotton, raise cattle, or cacao beans, or collect cowerie shells, it cannot be done instantaneously.  And for governments (like the U.S.) which want to build sophisticated nuclear missiles, launch satellites, sponsor vast educational programs which seem to lower the overall national levels of literacy and awareness, try through redistribution of the wealth to make “every man a king”, and generally realize Rumpelstiltskin’s dream of spinning straw into gold without actually doing the work of spinning even, paper money is the only “commodity” sufficiently malleable and manipulable to work.

The Impossible Dream…

The Impossible Dream….

Is restoration of a Constitutionally Limited Government in America an Impossible Dream?  Is there any way that we can right the unrightable wrongs against freedom and individual autonomy that have been done in the name of “progress”, “protection,” “public safety” and “security?”

If such restorations and rectifications indeed lie out side of the realm of the possible, I still agree with this song that it is better that we dream of such things and “be willing to march into hell for a heavenly cause”, than that we let our dreams die in peaceful and quiet despair….

I confess that the discovery of Obama’s Executive Order 13603, entered last March 16, 2012, has had a profound effect on me.  I think that almost all of our OTHER struggles are hopeless and in vain now, until we can start overturning some of these terrible perversions of executive power into dictatorship….

They say that Rock Hudson and Jim Nabors were gay lovers, and if so, who cares?  They were quiet and civilized about it and it doesn’t diminish one bit the fact that Jim Nabors has a beautiful voice and performs this stirring song of idealized knighthood and heroic dreaming far better than Peter O’Toole managed during his otherwise masterful performance as the Knight of the Woeful Countenance in the movie “Man of La Mancha.”

Was the world really a poorer place when people kept their eccentricities private?   Freud taught us that guilt lies at the very foundation of civilization and civilized life—I don’t know whether that’s true or not—I find a lot of Freud’s notions bizarre and anthropologically/historically untenable.   But in its milder forms of modesty and keeping our private lives private, is “guilt” really such an awful thing?  My long-term assistant Peyton went up to San Francisco about a year ago for a vacation and found himself in the middle of a “gay pride” day.  The stories he told me about what people were doing in the streets were not something that would make me proud (gay OR straight).   Sigmund Freud may have been a Jew and Henry Ford may have hated Jews, but isn’t it odd how they both promoted the culture of “instant gratification” and constant change in lifestyle and behavior of all kinds which culture has come to dominate our world?

Old Gossip, Still Floating Around—I deny it (again) just for the record—and discuss some Patriot Myths….

Gossip about me and Orly Taitz remains on the web, which just shows how completely uninformed and stupid information on the web really can be, and how much damage it can do over the long run.  I just discovered a little bit of remnant misinformation tinged with stupid insult that I think needs to be addressed:

“Charles Edward Lincoln III was Orly Taitz’ Law Clerk during her representation of Maj. Stefan F. Cook and Capt. Connie Rhodes. He is thought to have been the author of her Motion for Recusal which wound up costing her $20,000 in sanctions.

Now the simple truth is this: Orly and I had a big fight about that motion and SHE is the one who insisted on going around insulting Judges—I tried as hard as I could to restrain her myself.  As I have stated many times, I grew up in a family with several Federal Judges as friends in Dallas (including Sarah Hughes and Barefoot Sanders).  I lived near and met U.S. Judges around Tulane and Harvard, I studied under some present and (at that time) future Judges at the University of Chicago.  While I was at law school I served a term as an judicial extern to Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (it was one of the greatest intellectual experiences of my life) and after law school I held an ordinary judicial clerkship with Kenneth L. Ryskamp on the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.  During all of these experiences, I came to know and worked with judges whom I deeply respected.  

Now I have never had much use for the common California practice of holding lawyers in contempt for insulting Judges or the Judicial process, but I did find a funny case history about such a case of undeniably counterproductive (if extremely revealing) contempt just yesterday on the first day of summer, and I highly recommend it as instructive and fairly amusing reading: Hanson v Superior Court.  Either we need more lawyers like this Hanson guy, or we really don’t need any lawyers at all—I wonder which it is?

Anyhow, back to the piece above accusing me of being responsible for Orly’s sanctions: NOT.  Definitely not.  I suspect Orly and Yosi spread this bit of malicious gossip themselves, but it just ain’t so, folks….

I certainly started the motion and provided her with all the citations she ever used (including the Cohens v. Virginia Citation about treason against the Constitution: Cohens v State of Virginia) and with some of the text (I have done motions to recuse before), but I did so fighting with her every step of the way.

Before she attacked Judge Clay D. Land in Columbus I as already fighting with her about the need to respect the Judges before whom we appeared.  I was totally opposed to her attacks on Judge David O. Carter (who I thought was a wonderful judge, and still think is one of the best, certainly in Orange County, possibly anywhere).  Orly claimed that HER SUPPORTERS wanted her to take a strong stand against the Judge in the Connie Rhodes case, and that she had to do what HER SUPPORTERS wanted to.  Many of these were retired military types who (understandably) hated and loathed Obama with a purple passion, and that’s why they were Orly supporters.

I called this “litigation by Patriot pod committee” a very dangerous strategy and technique to proceed, especially since most of these folks were just barely off the “everything in the Courts is admiralty” boat and shouldn’t be trusted as legal or constitutional advisers.

For those neither involved in nor familiar with the Patriot-Constitutionalist Conservative movement, I make reference here to one of the stupidest and most counterproductive of all “Patriot myths” about the Courts and legal system: namely that the Courts are all operating (secretly) under British Admiralty Law, that the “BAR” stands for “British Admiralty Registry”, and that the United States government is secretly still controlled, through the operation of Admiralty law, by the Queen of England.  I originally thought the only possible origin of this myth was in amazing overdoses of cocaine mixed with bourbon, but after Hurricane Katrina I had occasion to settle a number of property loss cases in New Orleans and vicinity and saw admiralty terms in the settlement agreements.  Of course, I asked what was going on, with these very normal and  (as respectable as they can be) insurance lawyers.  It turns out that the “admiralty” and “British Influence on the Courts” myth actually has some historic foundation in the post World War II development of the Southern USA Oil Offshore Oil Industry, more than JUST BP’s involvement in drilling wells, and that it is this kernel of truth which has just provided enough historical grounding in the history of the Southern USA Oil business that the “British Admiralty Registry” myth won’t go away easily or die a natural death, as it certainly should.

Anyhow, I totally disclaim any responsibility for Orly’s unwarranted attacks on Judges.  If she had ever really listened to me, her litigation would have been conducted in a much better researched, more dignified, and more responsible matter, but she was basically out there to become “famous or infamous”, just so long as she got headlines.   As I have written before, I now think that her entire involvement in the Article II eligibility movement was designed to derail Philip J. Berg and to discredit the real constitutional lawyers who were trying to expose Obama’s crimes and lies—before the really got serious, as they have in the past year.  

In my opinion, Obama probably owes his survival as President to Orly Taitz’ completely incompetent litigation show.  I think this was an intentional plan from the very beginning concocted by Orly and her husband Yosi, and that Orly is neither a genuine conservative nor a Constitutionalist in any sense.  I have yet to see firm evidence that Orly is a spy either for Israel or China, but I strongly suspect that she is working for some foreign agent to weaken and destroy America by making a laughing stock out of true conservatives.

Many of us are convinced that those who keep on purveying the “Everything is Admiralty” and “the USA is under British” (or in the alternative, or in addition, Vatican) control are likewise acting as agents for the government.   Some of them are just illiterate.  Anyone who completed the most elementary secondary education in Latin, of course, winces with pain when some of the modern patriots claim that our “inalienable” rights (in-ale-e-en-able) should be read as “unalienable rights” (un-a-leen-able) rights, interpreting that ancient concept of natural birthright to a commercial notion of “rights upon which no lien can be imposed.”  This is the purest poppycock but people persist in believing it.  Just like some people think that Orly is still really working AGAINST Obama.

We have moved back our New Orleans Seminar to the end of July, and we will have a panel discussion on Patriot Myths at that Seminar.  Patriotic Shreveport Louisiana Lawyer Tommy Cryer died a couple of hours after I talked to him the night he agreed to appear at that Seminar, and I intend to dedicate a part of the Seminar to his memory.  Cryer, along with Larry Becraft and Donald W. MacPherson, was among the top anti-IRS Lawyers in the United States, and an inspiration to many people fighting this corrupt system around the Country—but Orly was NEVER on their side, or interested in their work or what they had to say, more’s the pity…..