"Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Nations and peoples who forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms." - Robert Heinlein

I really wasn't going to do this so soon. Really, I wasn't. I was planning illustrative columns about what New Orleans taught us, and other such things. But this pops up again, seems to be important, and forces me to respond.

George W. Bush made an October 4 request to Congress to consider effective repeal the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which prohibits the use of the military in domestic policing except for the purpose of quelling a revolution. Citing the theoretical possibility that Asian avian flu, now only transmittable from bird to human, could mutate into a human-to-human form, Bush said:

"If we had an outbreak somewhere in the United States, do we not then quarantine that part of the country? And who best to be able to effect a quarantine? One option is the use of a military that's able to plan and move. I think it's an important debate for Congress to have."

Well, I agree with one thing. It is a very important debate for the Congress to have. That debate should be held at your impeachment hearings, and at your subsequent trial for treason, after which, hopefully, you will be hanged.

Overturning Posse Comitatus would allow troops to break into houses and apartments and sweep the streets for flu victims, and forcibly contain them in Guantánamo-style camps. They could seal off cities or whole states. These extreme measures could also be deployed against U.S. citizens after hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, or even election disputes--whenever and wherever a president decides they are necessary.

Mr. Bush is apparently not that happy that three governors, one the former head of the RNC, when he demanded the Katrina situation be remedied by turning over all authority to the federal government, told him to pound sand. So he is now seeking to have the authority to willy nilly suspend the powers of governors of states.

And what would these federal troops do? Well, the National Guard in New Orleans allowed themselves to be videotaped going from house to house, and mansion to mansion, knocking down doors, searching for weapons, handcuffing owners and humiliating them. One was asked whether he would shoot residents if they resisted. Yes, he would, he said. He added, "It’s surreal. You never expect to do this in your own country."

Yeah, I agree, it is surreal when suddenly one realizes that they as an American to preserve basic civil rights guaranteed under the Constitution to every American, will probably have to wind up killing American troops sent to trample on those rights.

Bird Flu: Real Crisis or Invented One?

Well, look. You cannot expect me to get all riled up over the Bird Flu. Apparently not even 100 people have been killed by it yet. Hell, DOCTORS kill more people each year than the Bird Flu has. I've heard all manner of argument as to whether the Bird Flu is even real, if it is a bioengineered event, or whether it is a version of another disease merely being called Bird Flu. I'll let the conspiratists hash this out. However, there is one thing that is crystal clear.

And that is this: the government is clearly looking for an excuse to use to impose dictatorial powers. They are shopping this crap around, almost in desperation to become the next Hitler or Stalin. I don't know if this was the scheme all along, or if it is just being speeded up because of the Bush Cabal's pending indictments and impeachment. I have to, in no uncertain terms, declare that this must be nipped in the bud, by any and all available means.

Shooting them comes into play... again

We've had eight advisories as to what to do already. In case you missed, them, see www.lizmichael.shooting.htm . So here is Advisory #9....

Advisory #9: The Family Pets

If any agent of the government comes to destroy any of your family pets, kill them.

Does that sound like to strong an order to take? Well, let me ask you. Where will you draw the line at the tyranny? If you will not draw it at saving the lives of your family members against a predator, and pets are your family members, they are part of your "pack" or "flock"... if you will not stand against the tyranny there, where exactly are you going to stand. If you will not stand for your own family, frankly, you deserve to be carted off away to a gulag or to an American Auschwitz. You're not really a man, or a woman. I would call you a sheep, but even bighorn sheep are aggressive to their enemies. So you aren't even THAT.

Does the "judgment of God" concern you as to taking the life of a human predator? Look at it this way. God has appointed you guardians of your own domestic animals. Yes, you. You have a duty to feed them ,water them, see to their health. You also have a duty to guard them against predators. It doesn't matter if the predators are the federal government, and consists of human thugs: your duty is as God-given as if this were a burglar or a would be rapist.

I can hear the cries and whines now: "well what if this is to quell a disease outbreak". And I respond in the following manner: we are a nation of laws not of men. All property which is to be seized or destroyed constitutionally requires an act of the court to do so, for each instance, and due process must be followed. For those who cry that it cannot happen here, it already has. Let me tell you what happened recently in California during an Exotic Newcastle Disease outbreak in 2003...

"One Norco woman suffered a nervous breakdown when men from the task force killed her two parrots before her eyes after pretending to ‘test’ them for END in a contaminated death truck parked outside her house."

"Randy Walker, who is appealing the state’s plan to kill his backyard flock of 200 birds showing no sign of the disease, said that he was badgered on his property by the California Department of Food and Agriculture Task Force. A Task Force worker told him 'he had no right to appeal and threatened to have him arrested if he attempted to stop the killing. ' "

There were something like at least 100,000 backyard birds destroyed in this manner. Even though veterinarians considered the practice counterproductive for actually eradicating the disease, and that quarantining flocks is the more efficient method.

I need to make this declaration to any government workers who try to murder any backyard flocks or family pets of mine. I am going to kill you. I'm going to tell you this flat out, so you are forewarned. And I may not wait until you actually arrive at the property. I may preemptively strike you if I know you are in the neighborhood doing this. And there are thousand of pet owners who feel exactly as I do. Your wife is going to be a widow, and your children will be fatherless. I will see to it, and I will swear upon heaven and earth to destroy you. And if you actually manage to kill some of my best friends, I will hunt each of you down like dogs until I kill you or you kill me. And then, my friends and allies will do the same, once one of you kills me. Moreover, please also be advised. I am of the opinion that I am legally entitled to kill you, and not only morally entitled to kill you, but commanded by God to kill you.

Is this some theory I just cooked up recently? No. I was planning to do this in 2003 if you had come for my birds. I had the gun loaded, cocked and aimed at your collective heads. So did some of my neighbors. I will not hesitate to do it again, and this time, I actually have had more time to plan. So Advisory #9 has been in effect in the Michael household for three years almost. I just didn't tell anyone about it.

Advisory #10: Essential Travel

If any agent attempts to obstruct essential travel, shoot them or otherwise eliminate them. I leave open the definition of "essential travel" to you. It could be any one of a hundred things. It could even be one of these "Catch 22" things, like the government compelling you to appear someplace, but the government simultaneously preventing your ability to get to said place. Here again, constitutional and natural rights trump a quarantine, particularly a quarantine over a faked disease.

Advisory #11: Chipping, or "The Mark of the Beast".

I have discussed this with a number of people. It is believed that some type of "national emergency", could be an epidemic, could be terrorism, could be any number of things, will be a first step used to order that individuals be implanted with chips to allow authorities to monitor their every movement. Also, with nanotechnology, it is conceivable that we could be chipped WITHOUT OUR KNOWLEDGE, through the use of a vaccine, or some other method.

So we have concurred with the following advisory. Anyone who forces you or your family to be so chipped, or anyone who does it against your will and without your prior knowledge, kill these people. This includes ANYONE participating in the operation that uses this force, and it includes to officers and employees of the company that makes the chips.

To those involved in the chipping of human beings, let me say this. The biblical prophecy may have prophesied that you will do it. But the prophecy did not guarantee you that you will live a long life after you have done it. And if you understand the divine penalties for having done this, and having to explain it to your Creator... well, I think you need to do a little reading about what happens to the people having taken the Mark of the Beast.

Advisory #12: Forced Vaccinations

If any agent of any organization attempt to by duress force a vaccination upon you, shoot them.

There are reasons for this that transcend the Mark of the Beast nanochip scenario, and transcends the plain old civil liberties argument. The best example of this is the Swine Flu non-epidemic. Swine Flu turned out to be a complete bust. However, it so happens the vaccine for swine flu killed more people than the swine flu actually did.

Vaccines have also proven to be a modus operandi to induce genocide. The likely source of the HIV virus which causes AIDS was a hepatitis vaccine. It is why the disease seemed to take off in Africa and among the western male homosexual community at first... because these were the groups having problems with hepatitis, and needed the vaccine against it. Although I do not believe this was a deliberate attempt to genocide the gay community, I DO believe it was a designed attempt to genocide African blacks.

So vaccines are something you want to attempt to avoid for you and for your children these days. Particularly if you are in a target group some cabal of government scientists may want to kill.

Advisory #13 Defending Your Food Sources

If any agent of any organization attempts to confiscate or sabotage your food sources, kill them.

On of the aspects of the Asian Avian Flu epidemic is that preemptive bird culling removed a lot of poultry out of the food chain. For already struggling and hungry people, this presents a problem. It is a problem that you should not allow. Remember that Stalin's most successful genocidal weapon was starvation. Starvation is something that is used commonly in Africa as a weapon of war. You must defend your food sources.

And not just against the government. Against corporations as well. Monsanto, for instance, through its Terminator seed technology, has attempted to confiscate the farms of people with whom it does not even have a contract with, claiming violation of patent rights.

Part of the technology for these so called affinity cards at supermarkets is to enable authorities to identify those who are stocking up on food and emergency supplies. It sounds sick, doesn't it? But things like this have happened, all over the world, in the past 100 years.

Advisory #14 Defending Your Vehicles

One of the things that happened in New Orleans was that police willy nilly confiscated vehicles. Often, this impeded the ability of the citizenry to escape the very situations the mayor had called upon them to flee. One police official actually commandeered a bus which had been hired to take tourists out of the city.

Seeing that this could happen at any time, you need to realize that defending your vehicle is just as essential as defending your guns and defending your family and family pets, and may provide for escape from a situation where you may need to escape. Never let them, or other common street thugs, separate you from your vehicles. Your lives may depend upon this. So you need to be willing to shoot to kill over this essential item.

An advisory to police officers and federal agents

YOU ARE BEING USED!!! You are being used, satiated with a little bit of perceived power, carrying out the orders of a power elite, orders which YOU and your family are not exempt from. The power elites want to destroy the middle class. Most of you in law enforcement, and the military, if you will but look at it a minute, ARE the middle class they want to destroy. Why do you want to do the bidding of a bunch of rich sons of bitches, when all you're getting out of it is a subsistence check. Hell, some of you military people's families are receiving FOOD STAMPS for crying out loud.

Also, keep the following in mind. I am trying to be fair here. Many others of the American people won't be as fair. If you are identified as having killed a family pet, both you and your family and your own pets may become the target of retaliation by a citizen whom you offended. Or maybe your office headquarters will be blown up in retaliation: you know, like the Murrah building. Am I saying these thing should happen, and do I approve of them? No, and no. But I guarantee they will. Your actions may get your family, both the one in blue and the one at home, killed. Or how about if you kill that elderly old woman down the street, because she fought you to try and keep her precious birds alive... and then you face the wrath and retribution of all her family and friends.

In short, you don't want to go here. If you do go here, and you end up on a slab, your wife a widow, and your children fatherless, or if conversely, an offended citizen decides to make YOU the widower, or kills your kids, or tosses a poisoned steak to your favorite police dog, you only have yourselves to blame at this point. You've been warned.

You know what the solution is. I've already told you. Quit. Or do your duties following the constitution and not some brotherly code. Or be prepared to be the targets of assassination.

"Bring It On!"

Oh, yeah. Mr. President, if it is a revolution you want, then it is a revolution I propose to give you. If you begin to use troops to subdue American civilians at home, as if they were revolutionaries, I intend, personally, to legitimize any such deployment of troops by actually giving your stooges a revolution to fight. To quote, well, YOU, Mr. President: "Bring It On!". And when it's all over, I have a noose prepared with your name on it. After a fair trial, of course, unlike the one you propose through the Patriot Act to deny me.

Copyright 2005, LizMichael.com. Permission to reprint in entirety and unedited for content granted expressly, so long as LizMichael.com is referenced.

Home
Political Links
News
Soap Box
Cartridge Box
Jury Box
Humor
Boycott
America's Least Wanted
Biography
Contact Liz

A Vice President, by definition, will always receive less scrutiny than the fellow at the top of the ticket. Fortunately for Dick Cheney, that lower profile works out quite nicely since, according to author John Nichols, it affords him greater ease in secretly running the government. Nichols chronicles Cheney's many different incarnations: unsuccessful student flunking out of Yale twice, young political operative, Ford administration chief of staff, Wyoming congressman, Secretary of Defense, Halliburton CEO, and finally Vice President. What all these steps have in common, argues Nichols, is a nearly insatiable hunger for power satisfied by Cheney's knack for insinuating himself, Zelig-like, into important places in order to advance. The most compelling sections of Dick: The Man Who Is President deal with Cheney's heading of George W. Bush's vice-presidential search committee and declaring himself the best man for the job, a process Nichols claims was a complete sham from the start. Once in office, Cheney gained historically unprecedented access and power, Nichols claims, simply because no one could stop him. Though Cheney has a deeply conservative voting record and is credited with leading the "neoconservative" school of thought that guided the foreign policy of Bush's administration, Nichols points out that Cheney was known as a moderate in his time with Ford but with Ford's defeat and the rise of Ronald Reagan, shifting hard to the right was simply a more expedient path to power. Dick is more an examination of motives and methods than a strict biography. As such it doesn't move linearly through time, instead jumping around to demonstrate how past events inform current situations. And though Dick Cheney probably wouldn't appreciate Nichols' relentlessly critical approach, it's interesting to see a bright light shone on a man who does so much work in secret undisclosed locations. --John Moe

While numerous books have been written criticizing the policies and practices of the George W. Bush administration, few have been as foreboding about the meaning of those policies and practices as Mark Crispin Miller's Cruel and Unusual. In Bush and company, Miller sees a regime comparable to the most ruthless authoritarian dictatorships of the modern era and warns that Americans, skillfully duped by a corrupt government and a complicit mass media, are blithely accepting the curtailing of their liberties and the eradication of their democracy. The attacks of September 11, 2001 and the tremendous fear and insecurity they generated among the American people provided, in Miller's estimation, ample opportunity for Bush and company to move the country to a place where dissent is crushed by force, wars are started on lies, and democratic elections will soon be a thing of the past. Cruel and Unusual makes a compelling case by providing massive amounts of evidence, some concrete and some speculative, although at times the sprawling range of his subject matter harms Miller's attempts to form a cohesive argument. And for someone writing a book about George W. Bush, Miller is awfully preoccupied with the treatment President Bill Clinton received from the press and right-wing activists. Particularly strong, however, are passages related to the build-up to war in Iraq and the discrediting of weapons inspector Scott Ritter, who insisted that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. Miller provides transcripts from cable news talk shows where administration spokesman attack Ritter with the apparent assistance of like-minded hosts while Ritter himself doggedly defends himself and persistently rejects the main reason given for war. Cruel and Unusual is one of the most energetic and dire criticisms of the Bush administration but its urgency is matched by the crimes it sees being committed. --John Moe

Bringing to bear the latest findings on the conflict and recasting the scholarly debate, Finkelstein points to a consensus among historians and human rights organizations on the factual record. Why, then, does so much controversy swirl around the conflict? Finkelstein's answer, copiously documented, is that apologists for Israel contrive controversy. Whenever Israel comes under international pressure, another media campaign alleging a global outbreak of anti-Semitism is mounted.
Finkelstein also scrutinizes the proliferation of distortion masquerading as history. Recalling Joan Peters' book From Time Immemorial, published to great fanfare in 1984 but subsequently exposed as an academic hoax, he asks deeply troubling questions here about the periodic reappearance of spurious scholarship and the uncritical acclaim it receives. The most recent addition to this genre, Finkelstein argues, is Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz's bestseller, The Case for Israel.
The core analysis of Beyond Chutzpah sets Dershowitz's assertions on Israel's human rights record against the findings of the mainstream human rights community. Sifting through thousands of pages of reports from organizations such as Amnesty International, B'Tselem, and Human Rights Watch, Finkelstein argues that Dershowitz has misrepresented the facts.
Thoroughly researched and tightly argued, Beyond Chutzpah lifts the veil of controversy shrouding the Israel-Palestine conflict.