Black Crawling Systems Archive Release 1.0/Black Crawling Systems Archive Release 1.0 (L0pht Heavy Industries, Inc.)(1997).ISO/tezcat/New_World_Order/Liberty_Times_2.txt

Text File | 1996-07-08 | 10KB | 188 lines

From the Radio Free Michigan archives

ftp://141.209.3.26/pub/patriot

If you have any other files you'd like to contribute, e-mail them to
[e-mail].
------------------------------------------------

*****************************
*              *            *
*  THE LIBERTY **************
*  TIMES       *            *
*****************************
*                           *
*****************************
*                           *
*****************************
**
Many people have asked me to come up with proof or further explain my
Position on the UN and any possible takeover or establishment of a
world Government.  Below is a response I sent to someone who asked some
very good questions about my position.  I have reprinted it here for all.
As always I invite any and all comments.



David,

You ask what proof I have that the federal government and the UN are
trying to take away our rights as American citizens.  The proof about the
federal government is easy to come by both with direct evidence and some
more "philosophical" beliefs on my own part.

First of all, the Brady law that was passed early this year is a ban on
certain things (i.e. guns) that certain administrations and courts for
years past say were constitutionally protected.  I personally do not own
an assault weapon, but I find it unbelievable that the government of the
US would pass a law to limit the ownership of any weapon.  I defy anyone
to tell me that a person who has never committed a crime, who buys a
weapon legally from a gun shop, and registers it would commonly commit a
violent crime with it.  Purchasing a gun in and of itself does not make a
someone a criminal.  I am sure you realize this so I will not go on about
it.  The Brady law alone does constitute an intrusion on ever persons
rights in this country whether they do now, or ever will own a weapon of
any kind.  I say this because, now they cannot get these weapons.

Did you ever think in you wildest dreams that our government would start
to chip away at the Bill of Rights?  This is what has happened this year.
So my view of weapon laws are not specific to the law, but more
conceptual.

Secondly, the Bill of Rights guarantees rights, it does tell the
government what the people of this country cannot do, it says what they
may do.  The fifth amendment states that, "No person shall be held to
answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment
of an indictment of a Grand Jury..."  This amendment does not say that the
government can indict someone using a grand jury it guarantees that you
will not be subject to arbitrary or summary judgments without the
government meeting its burden of proof.  Likewise, the constitution does
not specifically state that the right to bear arms is restricted to muzzle
loading weapons, or non-assault "style" weapons, or weapons which at some
point in time are considered to scary for the general public to have, or
weapons that a crack cocaine dealer might use to protect his useless
existence.

My point is (and you probably wondered when I might arrive at it), that
any reduction or "modification" of the literal meaning of what is
painfully plain to me is dangerous to our life as we know it.

To decide if the government is taking away our rights and to make the leap
that this means this is a prelude to a UN takeover you need to ask
yourself a question or two.

First of all when will you really know if the federal government and the
establishment is allowing the UN to take over more control of this
country.  The answer is likely that the average citizen will not ever
realize it, even if the Norwegian army is patrolling Main Street in your
local community.  I suppose you have to look at several events and
conclude that it is now possible and maybe even likely that the US will
submit more and more to the will of the UN.

You might say to yourself that the US has a great deal of influence and
control over the UN and that we can veto anything as a permanent member of
the UN Security Council, and this is true.  However, the governments we
have had will benefit from what some term the introduction of the New
World Order.  These people who are already the richest in the world will
become even richer.  They are members of the elite groups such as the
Council on Foreign Relations, a liberal think tank that advocates the
elimination of geographical borders and the establishment of a world
government and the Trilateral Commission founded by some of the richest
men in the world to eliminate all economic borders.  Once these two
borders are destroyed what is left?

The members of these groups include people at all levels of the
government, media, and corporate America, and when I say all levels I mean
the CEOs of the top five companies in the world, former president of the
US, owners of the television networks and major newspapers (including the
New York Times, Time Magazine, and The Washington Post).  Every Secretary
of State and almost every ambassador to the UN since Truman was president
has been a member of one of these two groups.

So does our veto in the Security Council protect the citizens of this
country or does it only ensure that someday all that we fear might happen
actually will?

The second thing you need to ask is what needs to take place in order for
the country to be taken over by the UN?  Three things are generally
accepted as what must happen in order for a population to be seized
without a great deal of  time or actual fighting (what the military terms
counter insurgency), and the non-violent way is the only way the NWO folks
see this working in the initial phases of a takeover.  For a counter
insurgency to work the government must do the following:

1) Register the population
2) Control the economy and the money supply of the country
3) Disarm the population

These are the most basic elements and we should examine how possible it is
that they have happened or might someday happen.

Registering the population is an important element because it lets those
taking over know where you are at all times, the registration will work
because unless you are registered you cannot get a job, open a bank
account, or receive any other benefits.  Now, has this happened?  You
Social Security Card registers you in this country, and you cannot do any
of the above mentioned things without giving them "your number."  Be very
wary of any attempts to automate this registration process further (i.e.,
the Health Security Card, debit cards, or any kind of Federal ID cards).
So I think we can safely assume that the first requirement has been or is
well on its way of being met.

Controlling the economy and ultimately the money supply is a done deal.
If you don't think so watch CNBC and see how the Fed controls the money
supply on a daily basis.  If you would like to elaborate more on this just
let me know.

The third and perhaps the most important and in many ways most difficult
step for the US, is to disarm the public.  Citizens who cannot fight back
will surely fall quickly and easily.  The need for an easy defeat or no
fight at all is because any use of the US Army to help the UN (and I will
cover that in a moment) will need to be non-violent.  The elite realize
that the US Army will not kill its own people for very long without
starting lose its appetite for the battle.

Many people ask, as you have are we more free because we have weapons and
why do we make such a big deal about the second amendment, and people
further state, why do we even need guns in our homes?  The first thing I
will say to you is that if the first steps toward a takeover have already
occurred, then we can only protect what little we have left.  We have the
right to bear arms because our history is unique in this country, we rose
out of struggle and we will continue to struggle to preserve the republic
it is our nature and it is good.  At the conclusion of the original
Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin was asked, "what have you
wrought?"  He simply answered, "a republic, if you can keep it."  The
Declaration of Independence was the Promise, the Bill of Rights was the
fulfillment, and the Second Amendment is the ultimate insurance policy for
the people of this country.  I will say simply that the people of this
country have more liberties because of the Bill of Rights, not just the
Second Amendment.  However, to eliminate or reduce any of these rights
will surely destroy them all.

Finally, you ask about the US Army taking on the citizens of this country.
 I think this is much too simplistic and would turn too many stomachs.  I
think that the US Army would be involved, but in a limited way.  I think
we will see state & local police forces under the command of the
Department of Justice doing most of the dirty.  And yes, I think that if
it came down to a shooting war, we would see many foreign troops
introduced into the country to eradicate the problem.  I do not think
there are organized foreign troops of any significant size in our country
currently, although make no mistake the US military is training soldiers
from all over the world at our military posts being paid for with your tax
dollars, I have trained with them.

I hope this clears some things up for you David, thank for writing and
keep in touch.

------------------------------------------------
(This file was found elsewhere on the Internet and uploaded to the
Radio Free Michigan archives by the archive maintainer.


All files are ZIP archives for fast download.

 E-mail [e-mail])