Yes, yes, yes! And more.
Since we have had this blog, almost a year now, we have dealt with many issues important to America. We have always stressed that the dangers to our great country go beyond just Islam. Islam, in many ways, is an external force, alien to America, although we have had plenty of subversive groups living amongst us throughout our history. Jihad, we have stressed, has both overt and covert components, and we do not want to lose focus on either.
We have also stressed the fact that America suffers internal rotting as well as that provided by Islam. There are very destructive forces coming from this chronic assault on the Enlightenment ideas and ideals which created America as the brightest spot in all of mankind's history. Currently, the handiest term to label these forces comes from the forces themselves, namely "postmodernism." "Postmodernism" literally wages war on "modernism," and "modernism" consists of recognition of the supremacy of reality over thoughts, wishes, and desires; the supremacy of reason over any alternatives; the supremacy of the individual and the Rights of Man over the group, the state, or the collective. Finally, "modernism" recognizes that the finest social, political, and economic system ever devised by man is capitalism, which creates and sustains freedom and improves well-being wherever it is tried. "Postmodernism" seeks to enchain peoples with socialism and all necessary to create socialist states and populaces.
We have also stressed that the Left, the sole repository of "postmodernism," has allied itself with jihadists in an unholy alliance, with the jointly held, single goal of destruction of the United States of America and the concepts of freedom, reason, and Rights. We have frequently called these internal forces of destruction America's fifth column, as many others have as well.
Until 6-23-2005, we dealt with the foregoing enemies of America because of their pervasiveness and persistence without becoming just another political blog. We have tried to present consistently the "whys" and explanations behind event. We have wanted to break through the ignorance and comfortable indolence of Americans who too often have been too willing to be comfortable with their ignorance and sound-bite "knowledge."
We have to add this decision by the Supreme Court and possible the court itself to our list of fifth column adversaries. This decision MUST BE REVERESED A.S.A.P.
The Supreme Court decision to erase property rights (on 6-23-2005) is more dangerous than anything we have written about over the past year. Superficial effects will show up soon as local and state governments create coercive monopolies resembling fascist corporativism of Mussolini. These, as terrible as they will be, will be the least damaging effects.
We pointed out in our 6-24-2005 blog that this Supreme Court property rights abrogation decision puts a dagger right through the heart of America, and right now NO ONE IS RECOGNIZING THE SIGNIFICANCE at the right level. If one understands the nature, origin, and meaning of the Rights of Man, then he or she will see the real--and very practical--result of this "SCOTUS" decision, one that will come about long range in incremental steps, one which will wipe out this child of the Enlightenment, America.
We have repeated and will continue to do so that our Founders very properly recognized the four fundamental Rights of Man: Life, liberty, property, and pursuit of happiness. They did not stress the right to property well enough, however.
The most fundamental right is that of life, which means that a living human has total sovereignty and responsibility for himself or herself. He and she need the right of liberty to sustain that life. That life itself is tangible and has very tangible needs, and every human needs tangibles--i.e., PROPERTY--to sustain and further his and her lives and to pursue happiness. That is why the right to property is almost sacred in its importance.
When you declare that right to property can be abrogated by any "legal" group (and the reasons do not matter), then you have blocked the means by which humans sustain their lives independently. In other words, you have blocked the means by which humans preserve, sustain, and experience their lives. Put another way, you have BLOCKED THE RIGHT TO LIFE of every American, in total defiance of the Constitution of the United States of America.
What the 6-23-2005 decision does is replace the sovereign rights of the individual with so-called socialist "group rights." There are ONLY INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS. Only in Orwellianism are there "group rights." What "group rights" means is legalized plunder by gangs, including the government. This inversion by the Supreme Court puts the individual at the mercy of the state. People live no longer BY RIGHT, but by permission, at the whim of the state (defined in part as the legal concentration of delegated power). The American government was established to preserve and protect the rights of its citizens, not become the instrument of their destruction. SCOTUS destroyed this on 23 June 2005--IF IT IS ALLOWED TO STAND.
If we do not reverse this decision, we will be looking at the last days of the Republic. Bring on Caesar.
Here are the fine words of Always On Watch:
Are you familiar with the analogy of the frog in the water? As long as the water is gradually heated up, the frog won't jump out; over time, he gets cooked and doesn't even know what's happened.
Yesterday's court decision will first be applied to New London, Connecticut and possibly to Anacostia, D.C. (the ballpark project). The average American will not be worried. "The revival of these areas benefit the community" will be the prevailing comment.
But, as you allude to in your commentary, once rights are eroded, bigger steps are taken over time. How long will it take for yesterday's decision to impact property owners in the suburbs?
I live on a lot which developers want to acquire, and a nicer home here would certainly bring in more revenue for the county. Can that increased revenue be justification for exercising eminent domain? Maybe not immediately, maybe not in my lifetime, but I predict that the likelihood is great that yesterday's decision will be extended to deprive individuals of the right to own private property in prime areas.
Now, maybe what I'm about to say is reaching a bit, but bear with me. Here where I live, many of the larger developers are Muslim-owned companies. Already, we county residents know that such developers have an "in" with the zoning board and can get approval of building projects when other smaller companies cannot. I know whereof I speak, because the only developers interested in my prime suburban lot are those which are Muslim-owned. And the house in which I live, my grandmother's house which dates back to pre-WWII days, doesn't fit in very well with the new McMansions which surround me now. Right now, I have the choice as to whether or not to sell to any developer. But will the day come when the county exercises eminent domain and forces me to sell? And at what price? Just who determines what is the fair price?
The decision of June 23 is a dangerous blow to our right to private property. Yet the news blabs on about other insignificant matters which won't matter a few years from now.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home