On What Legitimate, Ethical Authority?

What legitimate, ethical authority do the highest levels of our Fed Gov't have to...

1.  launch a pre-emptive war?  [as in the case of the 2003 Iraq invasion by the USA];

2.  tell Iran that it can't have a nuclear program?  [when Israel has ~ 200 nuclear weapons, and the USA is developing or upgrading so-called "tactical" nukes];

3.  impose sanctions on Russia for intervening in a civil war?  [when the highest levels of our Fed Gov't do the same thing on an almost regular basis];

4.  develop (paraphrased) "tools to guide Venezuela in the direction it needs to go"?  [Venezuela is a sovereign nation...it can go in any direction it so desires];

5.  insist (via the IMF and/or World Bank) that any particular country undergo "austerity"?  [when the USA is the largest debtor nation in the world...and there's no visible austerity imposed by our Gov't];

6.  spy on our allies?  [and then condemn other nations for doing the same to us];

7.  act as the world's Police Force?  [without any U.N. authorization];

8.  refuse to return Guantanamo (which essentially was stolen by us) to Cuba?;

9.  refuse to recognize the sovereignty of Native American Indian Nations?  [said sovereignty being guaranteed by numerous Treaties...all of which have been broken by the Feds];

10.  launch weaponized drone strikes into countries (e.g., Pakistan), killing both SUSPECTS and innocent civilians, when the "intelligence" identifying the suspects largely is from cell phone meta-data?  [Pakistan has told our Gov't to cease and desist more than once.]
..................................................................................

The answer to all of the above is...NONE.  There is no legitimate, ethical authority for those actions.  Every patriot (as opposed to nationalist) should point that out... loudly and repeatedly.

Not just my opinion.  Be Well

Shifting Gears: Paying Homage to Gonzo, Part 1

The U.N. announced today that it's sending a Peace Keeping force to Texas.  This action was prompted primarily by the following.  A portion of the mini-series documentary (produced by Ken Burns), The West, describes how Mexicans and American Indians were mistreated and their lands stolen by Texans in the 1800s.  In a cameo appearance in the film, the former Texas Governor, Ann Richards, had this to say (paraphrased) in her sickenly sweet, Texas drawl:  "It is very unfortunate when things like that happen, but [when people say "but", nothing is important except whatever follows] that's what happens whenever people are conquered.".  Such a statement, of course, begs for an answer to this:  is that what supposedly honorable, God-fearing people do to others?  And this:  is conquering people something that Americans should have done?

In a related story, the U.N. (made into a totally anachronistic body by the Corporatocracy) further announced that after it was done in Texas, it would proceed to each of the other forty-nine States in order to seek redress on behalf of the American Indians.  The Secretary-General, Kofi Obama (no relation), intimated to this reporter that he feared the whole exercise would be to no avail.  "Basically, we've been castrated by Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan Chase, CitiGroup, Bank of America, and AIG [part of the Oligarchy].", he said.  "How so?", I asked.  "Well," he replied, "their wholly-owned subsidiary, your Fed Gov't, is---at their direction---way behind on U.N. dues payments.  That puts us in a financial bind."

In another related story, the State of Texas (which generally believes itself to be a separate country, not subject to most U.S. laws) is preparing for the U.N. invasion by constructing a 15-feet-high, electrified fence around its entire border.  I spoke with the Head of the Texas Dept. of Public Safety and asked, "What about U.N. helicopters and/or paratroopers?".  He replied, "Oh, they can't afford those.".  He went on, "Besides, even if they get in, we'll do them like we do the Fed EPA:  just ignore them.  There's not a damned thing they can do about it.".

I recalled the brief time that I had lived in Texas, and thought, yes, that's pretty much what Texas does---if it doesn't like something from a higher authority, it simply ignores it.  The municipal water in the small town in which I lived did not meet EPA water quality standards (according to the town's own report).  The explanation given in the Annual Water Quality Report was this (paraphrased):  all water is contaminated to some degree.  The report went on:  we're working to correct the situation, but your water is safe by State Standards.  The report was exactly the same a year later.  Meanwhile, just to be safe, I drank bottled water.

Just my opinion.
Dr. Gonzo