Words of Wisdom from Eric Larsen, R.T., and The Oliver Arts & Open Press

CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER: ONLY TRUTH MUST BE THE FOUNDATION OF  POLITICAL POLICY

December 19, 2011 For the past several days the National Defense Authorization Act has been in the news, and understandably so. Drafted by senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), the bill changes the nature of national life by aiming to declare all United States national territory a part of the "battlefield" in the War on Terror.  If the bill is passed, in other words, every place and every thing within the nation's boundaries--your front lawn, your dog run, your kitchen hallway, your stamp collection, the closet you keep your clothes in, the bed you lie down to sleep in--will be part of the battlefield--the battlefield where the so-called war on terror is being waged.    Now, if a person is on or in a battlefield, it follows that that person is on or in a place where the rules of battle pertain, that is, where military law pertains.   Suppose that the rules of battle were in place, say, at the intersection of 77th Street and Broadway in New York City. Would the rules of civil law also still pertain? Does anyone know? And does anyone know just exactly who would have the authority to make such a decision--the decision as to whether military law pertained or civil law pertained?    We at Oliver have been discussing questions like this one quite energetically, feeling them to be of immeasurable importance. None of us believes for a moment that the drafters of the bill themselves thought such questions all the way through, or that those drafters were fully conscious of them in the first place. The bill, after all, is not based on political or historical knowledge, or on responsible socio-cultural thinking, or on the desire of patriots or men of conscience to do what is best for a free democratic republic dedicated to liberty and governed under Constitutional law.     No, this is a bill born of and dedicated to the perpetuation of an enormous, obscene, and absolutely ruinous lie--the lie of 9/11 and all the subsequent lies that that lie has led to--and it is a bill therefore dedicated only to the well-being of those people and institutions that  can benefit from that lie, and, concomitantly, to the destruction of all other people and institutions. It is dedicated, that is, to the ever-growing profit of the military and corporate state while, as far as the nation's people are concerned, it is dedicated not only to crushing their political freedoms of every kind but also to destroying  the freedoms of conscience and of spirit without which any nation will die or, one way or another, eventually be destroyed.     Knowing the bill to be this destructive and pernicious, some on the Oliver staff were surprised and encouraged to learn that Congressman Jerrold Nadler (Dem., NY), in an interview with Keith Olbermann (see it here), had spoken publically and with conviction in opposition to it. This was a greatly interesting development. Some proposed that a meeting be arranged with Representative Nadler in order that a group could convey its support for his opposition to the bill. Who knew? Maybe even, given his thinking in this case, he would be open to looking at some of the major new scholarship on 9/11, like Dr. Judy Wood's Where Did the Towers Go-the Evidence of Directed Free-Energy Technology on 9/11, the all-important , paradigm-changing book that The Oliver Arts & Open Press has promoted--with good reason--fervently.    In short, Jerry Nadler had created a breath of hope--hope that maybe, conceivably, possibly, the right thing still could be achieved through the otherwise calcified, ossified, petrified, bought-and-paid-for institution of national elected leadership. And so, what happened?   What happened was that another staff member, Oliver's greatly valued assistant editor, "R.T.," who had been quiet (but obviously thoughtful) up to this point, spoke out.    He wrote an email and sent it to the rest of the Oliver staff. Here it is, for those interested; and, with it, this communication will come to a close: I smell a rat [R.T. wrote]. I watched Carl Levin announce on the Senate floor that those two amendments [asking that the bill be written so that arrestees not be treated as war criminals, since then they would be protected by the Geneva Conventions, but that they be treated instead as "enemy combatants," since then they would be protected by nothing whatsoever] were requested by the White House. After a time, I came to think of only three likely possibilities about this request: 1) it's an election year, and O'bomba [sic] wants to look like a hero and veto this bill because of these amendments (hoping that no one lets the cat out of the bag about the fact that he requested them), or 2) he's lying about vetoing it, or 3) he's delaying the bill via a threatened veto, because he's against it, but for the reasons Ron Paul stressed: he wants every last shred of citizen protection out of the bill before he signs it.    White House officials are now saying that they will recommend he sign it, because: 1) either those protections will be removed when the two bills go to committee to be blended together as the final bill, or 2) his handlers can live with the bill the way it's written, because it fulfills the mandate they wanted, or 3) enough justices on the Supreme Court have secretly seen the final bill and a majority are on board to either refuse to hear a challenge or have agreed to side with the White House lawyers' interpretation of it, should it come before them. In fact, this is where it could actually get more damaging. If the White House lawyers make an argument that expands the provisions to include even more dangerous language, and if the court agrees with the bill, and if that language changes, becoming even more clearly Constitution-shredding,  then we could get even more screwed. We have to get real. These black robed devils are now our Inquisitors in the American Toledo led by our own Torquemada. What the Pope says is law, and their jobs are to enforce Papal doctrines.    My guess is that this Congressman from NY [Nadler] is trying to look clean by protesting this bill. Then why didn't he filibuster it? Why didn't any of them filibuster it? Why did Rand Paul in the Senate fight the bill and then vote for it? I don't know enough about how these houses run, but I would have made a Mr. Smith Goes to Washington scene. None of these "patriots" has ever done that in the last thirty years. What Congressman or Senator has openly called anyone that votes for this kind of Enabling Act stuff traitors? Where is the word "treason"  mentioned in Congress? Where? Where are the red faces, the righteous outrage, the body-tensing anger, the screaming rage? Politeness is a virtue? It's death. I read once that a Dutch Jew forgot to lock his house when he was rounded up and got permission to go back and lock it. This is the kind of delusion that surrounds us on all sides.     The American political class are all frauds, all of them. What would it take for one of them to finally use the word "traitor": the allowing of the military to shoot to kill suspects on the streets? Allowing  the rape of small children of "terror" suspects as a message for other would-be terrorists? Where is the fight against this? There isn't any because they don't give a damn. I think, personally, that this guy [Nadler] wouldn't pay you any attention about anything you brought to him. I don't trust him. I don't trust any of them. Why should I? What ground is there for trust? Even the quality of his suit [the suit he was wearing on the Olbermann interview] tells me he's been at the trough too long. He doesn't buy his suits at the "buy one get one free" Men's Warehouse. I guarantee it. Why didn't Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich filibuster this bill in Congress? They're all full of purest baloney. This bill is likely the end for people like us. This is obviously the biggest danger since Woodrow Wilson jailed anti-war protesters during WWI. Eugene Debs simply made a speech against entry into WWI and was jailed under the Espionage Act of 1917. He was sentenced to ten years in prison. Lucky for him, Harding pardoned him after three. Wilson was a weakling. Ten years? Ha, that's nothing. We won't make that mistake today. A measly ten years. No, we want them to rot and die, so just keep 'em in there forever. Where are the anti-SB 1867 Congressmen or Senators in their home states? Why aren't they going on the big network television stations in their states and organizing rallies against Obama's signing the bill, and why aren't they asking the citizens to organize as to which eligible traitors in "government" are to be recalled? But not a peep, only silence for us all, only silence as we get sold into militarism and tyranny. Where are the Stop Obama protesters? Forget about Wall Street. This new anti-Wall Street game is a fake, it's a set up. They should have been sitting in at both Houses and the White House where the real danger is located. Congress enabled these criminal protest-activities on Wall Street. The state is the source of our trouble. This Occupy bowel movement came along at just the right time to point the crowd in the wrong direction. Is it an accident that politicians are supporting the Occupy movement? Of course, they want them focusing away from themselves. It's perfect. "Don't look at us making Nuremburg Laws, look over there at those new suits with the leather briefcases. They're the guilty ones!" Where are the blind Democratic Party supporters? My big fat tub-of-lard cousin, if she's still alive, would totally ignore this outrage. I can hear her now, "Oh, he's such a nice black man. I worked for his campaign here. We need a black president. A black man will follow through on his promises. Black folks just need a chance to show us how good they are." Yeah, just like women are more gentle and peace-generating than men, except for Hitlery Clinton, Margaret Thatc.... Where's this Soros-funded "MoveOn?" They are as silent as death after the echo of the bullet fades out on Gunsmoke. A vote of 93 to 7. It's unstoppable. You don't get in the way of a juggernaut or you will get crushed to death. We're on our own, spectators inside a movie that someone else has written, a nightmare from which we can't wake. The Grimm Brothers and Iron John can't give us advice. You can't warn the captain of the iceberg-ship when his boat is already sinking, settling down toward its final grave. It's an old story, a story repeated down the ages. We're just the latest evolution of it. We're harboring a delusion if we think that we're different from those older generations. We aren't. Scientists tell us the 5,000 year-old iceman in the Alps was just like us. Maybe his name was Cain, and he had a brother named Abel who shot him in the back with an arrow. Nothing has changed in all those years. What did the indigenous people on this continent do? They survived. That is our job, our mission, our religion, our guiding star. To stay alive, to survive, even this, when the light is fading like a guttering lamp. RT