This information provided by The Federal Observer, http://www.federalobserver.com
By Michael Bragg
|STILL TIED UP IN KNOTS!|
Boy I am steamed! Why you ask? Well, it seems in their usual illogic, our government elitists have decided to leave American citizens (and foreigners who fly while in the several States) sitting ducks for another airplane hijacking. Yes ladies and gentlemen, in their infinite wisdom they have decided that they would rather shoot down airliners with F-16's, -- certainly killing all on board -- than to let the pilots arm themselves as a last line of defense against two bit terrorists with box cutters trying to commandeer their plane. I guess the Bush and Ashcroft regime aren't as "gun friendly" as they would have us to believe, and this speaks volumes to their lip service to the Second Amendment. Moreover, in a ridiculous contradiction, the Bush regime stated that is was "too dangerous" for pilots to arm themselves, however they did not explain how a locked and loaded F-16 with orders to terminate the flight was less dangerous than a pilot with a .45. I guess it's just that new math they teach at government schools.
Another very important point given a pass by the few media outlets who reported on this outrage, is the fact that John Magaw, the undersecretary with the Department of Transportation who made the announcement in testimony before a Senate committee, is also the former head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms! So, should we really be surprised at this "decision"? I liked how The Oregon Firearms Federation put it when they stated, "Magaw cited his experience in 'law enforcement' while explaining that he would prohibit pilots from having the ability to defend their aircraft. If the history of the BATF [remember Waco?] is any indication and Magaw is now in a position of power at the Transportation Department it would be wise to carefully consider staying away from airplanes at least until the next election."
In my (sometimes not so) humble opinion, this latest insult is but one in a long and continual line of government gone bad. It has gotten to the point to where I have really had to ask myself whether our so-called leaders are really looking out for our best interests. In fact, I am about to the point where I feel that they are directly, and even worse -- INTENTIONALLY -- taking away our ability to defend ourselves and I do not expect it to get any better. If anything, I expect it to get much worse especially if and when we have another "terrorist" attack on our soil. Our founders knew that it was the natural progression of government to brandish its beastly fire in the face of Liberty and eventually, Liberty would consign should the people not be ever vigilant in its protection. This is why they placed the second most important protection of Liberty against a tyrannical and oppressive government where it is: SECOND! Our government, despite the propensity to believe they are idiots, knows full well that once our citizens become fully dependent upon it for our protection, we will then be defenseless to its tyranny. Face it folks, they DO NOT want us able to protect and defend ourselves because to be able to do so would usurp their power and subjugate them to OUR service, not us to theirs. In addition, they want us to believe we cannot defend ourselves without them because if we ever realize we can take care of ourselves, their services in that respect will no longer be needed.
But why did I say the Second Amendment is the second most important you ask? A close look at the First Amendment and a little thought reveals the answer. Our founders believed in the ability of man to govern himself, and, as the most important protection of this right, he had to be able to worship, speak, associate, and make decisions WITHOUT the interference and influence of government. These were the very Liberties NOT allowed under the rule of King George III. Worship yields man to the commands of his God, which in turn guides man in his speech, association and decisions with himself as well as others. The final clause "to [be able to] petition the government for a redress of grievances" is the last line of diplomatic defense of the citizens should their Liberties be threatened. As our founders repeatedly and constantly petitioned the King to address his taxation, oppression, and murder, they followed the pattern of the first amendment perfectly. Freedom of religion gave them the wisdom that our rights come from God himself - NOT the government. Freedom of speech and association afforded them the motivation and momentum needed to rally the people to their cause. And after their redress attempts to the King went unheeded, they were left with no other course of action than to Declare Independence and cast off the old government that had become destructive to their Liberty and "institute [a] new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them [seemed] most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
Are the First and Second Amendments void?
That is a very tough question with a very disturbing answer. In our current world we can pretty much say what we want as evidenced by what you are now reading. However, the ability to worship and assemble are under siege by politically correct Marxists and thought police in many institutions from our schools and universities to the very offices in which we work. But by far the most treacherous threat we face is the ability to petition our government for redress of grievances. One such example is that of the "Tax Honesty Movement" where thousands of citizens including Attorneys, CPA's and former IRS agents simply want the government to hold a hearing and to show them the laws allowing the government to extort income from the backs of hard working Americans. So far, the DOJ, IRS, Congress and Treasury have lied, used scare tactics, threatened, dubiously imprisoned and seized assets of many people in an attempt to keep the truth from the peoples eyes and cover up the biggest scam of the century. I will not list all the details now, but for more information see my Benedict Bartlett piece or We The People Foundation.
So, I feel I have made a pretty good (but quick) argument that much of the First Amendment is all but null and void, but what of the second? Again, I believe that not only does the Second Amendment protect our right to arm ourselves against burglars, rapists, murderers, terrorists and even invading armies, but it more importantly is a last line of defense against an oppressive and tyrannical government. So, if you jump through all the hoops and restrictions and are able to acquire the firearms that they will allow you to have, how can we defend ourselves against F16's, smart bombs, tanks and mortars should they be used against our own people? If you don't believe this could happen have you forgotten Waco and Ruby Ridge? In this light do you really believe we have a Second Amendment? If they will not even allow a pilot to protect himself, his plane and the crew and passengers aboard, do you really think they will allow US to protect ourselves from the even greater threat of their oppression and tyranny? I don't believe so.
About the Author
Michael Bragg is a member of the Libertarian Party of North Carolina where he has a day gig in sales. He is an lifelong songwriter, musician, wanna-be webmaster or studio engineer in his spare time (which is always uncommon). He proudly serves The Libertarian Party of Forsyth County as Outreach Director and is Co-Founder, Columnist and Webmaster for Liberty For All - Online Magazine.
Copyright (c) Liberty For All 2002
E-Mail Michael Bragg