Zion, IL
By A.B. Dada
—
At a church I was making a delivery at this weekend, an assistant pastor mentioned to me that he’s hearing more and more about Ron Paul, but still hates his foreign policy. He asked me the status quo neoconservative question: “Don’t you think it’s wiser to take the war over there than to bring the war over here?”

My answer was: “No. Bring the war over here.”

He was shocked. Literally floored. With his mouth agape, and before he could respond, I told him I’d post a blog post for him, and him alone, but share it with the public. I think it’s a worthy post to share with others, because it opens up a realistic eye to this so-called war, and the definition of “them.”

When many think of “them” bringing the war to us, they think of 9/11. 9/11, a tragic event, an event that could have been prevented with less government, not more. No government in the world can prevent guerilla attacks. It isn’t possible. Yet private organizations can, and do, prevent outbreaks of mad people every day. I saw a drunk youth booted out of a shopping mall by armed guards once. It was fast, and no rights were violated. When 9/11 happened, my claim to fame was that I foresaw the event just 7 months earlier. I ran an email newsletter read by around 2000 people. I was ranting and raving about the inability of the airlines to monitor security, about the inability of pilots to arm themselves, about how ridiculous it was that pilot doors weren’t even locked (a year before 9/11, I witnessed an old lady accidentally open the flight-deck). Before 9/11, few listened. They felt secure. The day after 9/11, I was stuck in San Diego, and I received hundreds of emails asking me how I knew there would be an attack. My response was: “Because government got in the way.”

Terrorist attacks are infrequent even in the Middle East. We hear about all the ones that happen, but if you were to plot them out on a world map, you’d see they mostly happen in the same 2 or 3 locations. What is unique about those locations is the massive oversupply of government agents in those areas — agents there to supposedly secure the area. Yet just miles away from the most popular place for terrorists to attack, you see peaceful private citizens going about their lives: going to movies, eating fast food, shopping, living. The common sign is not where the terrorists are, but where uninvited agents of war exist.

So I welcome the idea of bringing the war over here, for many reasons:

1. Reducing our foreign aggression would reduce the amount of innocent casualties that occur. I find it horrific that our government doesn’t keep track of how many innocents are murdered during our dalliances in foreign lands. I want to know. I think I have a right to know. It’s a more important fact than how many enemy combatants are killed. I also think that by not killing innocents, we’ll anger far fewer people. Blowback’s a mean enemy.

2. Reducing our foreign aggression would reduce the amount of money we spend on military games. It’s a massive figure, and when money matters get large, I have a law I wrote: “The bigger a monetary amount grows, the less understandable it is to common people.” When I mention to someone that a $100 car radio was stolen at the mall, they understand. When I mention that billions of dollars a year are stolen because of the Federal Reserve’s inflationary policy, they look like they didn’t hear me. Big numbers mean little connection to reality for most people. So I’ll put it this way: the U.S. government has to tax 10,000,000,000 people (about the size of the world’s population) $100 each to pay for the Iraq war. That’s 10 billion people paying $100 each. It’s staggering, since it takes a few hundred years for a single person to count up to a billion. They still don’t understand.

3. Reducing our foreign aggression will definitely reduce the amount of hatred aimed at the U.S. government. I’ll be in the Middle East with my wife on December 27th, less than 15 miles from Iran. We’re going shopping and sightseeing, and we’ll eat good food. I’ll take photos. It’s not a bad place to be. The people I know in the Middle East are constantly shocked at our saber-rattling, and many of them can’t understand why “we” hate “them” — most of the countries we supposedly hate looked very much like our own home towns. The photos you see in the paper and on TV would be akin to someone going to the California desert and calling it America. It’s called lying.

4. I know my neighbors in Illinois. Most of them are packing heat. That’s what a conservative area calls for: people using their God-given inherent right to protect their homes. I’d love to see any army, organized or not, try to walk 5 miles into the U.S. The U.S. army would be ridiculously undermanned if it had to repel an enemy attack. The U.S. private citizens would not be. We have 300 million adults in the U.S. We’re spending $1 trillion on a war that we’re losing, just as we’ve lost every war since the day after WWII ended. $1 trillion divided by 300 million adults = $3333 per adult. That’s more than enough money to arm every adult with a single firearm and enough ammo to last years. Personally, I gave up my gun ownership beliefs, but that’s the wonderful aspect of freedom: if the enemy has no idea who is armed, they’re less likely to attack. John Lott’s great book “More Guns, Less Crime” showcases how towns with few gun restrictions are the safest, and towns with heavy gun restrictions are the most dangerous. Criminals know what the laws are, and they know that the average resident will follow them. Why rob in a town with many legal guns when you can rob in a town with strict gun laws?

Seriously, bring it on. I know my neighbors wouldn’t stand for it. It doesn’t matter who attacks, because the minute a madman goes on a rampage, I can see 50 million or 100 million Americans not standing for it.

It’s a good answer. Let people hate us for our freedoms, our Imperialism, our love of Britney Spears, our use of trans-fat laden foods, or even our ice cream variety. What are they going to do? Come here? If they do, there is only two groups to blame: the attackers, and those who pretend to defend us.

We can defend ourselves. We don’t need the police (who can’t defend anyone while they write their traffic citations and play Dog the Bounty Hunter with those who jump bail on a minor pot charge). We don’t need the Army. All we need are individiuals who understand that they may be called to defend their families, their home, their neighbors and their towns. No one can destroy freedom except those voted to protect it. And if you’re familiar with the past 90 years, you understand that is exactly the case. 9/11 should have been responded to by returning more rights to individuals. Instead, we chose the wrong people.

Zion, IL
By A.B. Dada
—
I’ve decided that from now on, my official title will be “President of the United States of America.” I hereby declare that title for myself, and for every person within the borders of any U.S. territory or state. Including illegal aliens. You, kind reader, are also the President of the United States of America. Your non-English speaking neighbor is, too. So are his kids.

Why have I had to make this declaration? Because I’ve noticed that Americans, of which I include those born here, abroad, and those who skipped over the border illegaly, have forgotten so much about how this Republic exists. We are not a nation, we are a Republic of 50 Nations and a few territories that are not pro-freedom enough to realize that they, too, are independent nations.

As 50 Nations, which is the definition of a State (a State is a country in its own), we made a decision a long time ago that we would elect a staff of people at a Federal/Republic level that would work for us with one primary intent: to make sure that the countries (”States”) that we live in do not trample on the rights we have as individual, given by God or inherently the moment you are born or conceived. There are many rights that all individuals of all countries and races and religions share: We inherently have the right to speak freely. We have the inherent right to prevent uninvited visitors from coming into our homes, and from forcing themselves to live there. We are inherently free to assemble with other people we like, but we’re also inherently free to decide not to assemble or do business with people we don’t like. We’ve the inherent right to practice whatever religion we want, or none at all. We’re free (inherently!) to travel as long as we don’t trespass, and we’re free to keep quiet if anyone questions us about illegal activities. We’re all free, from birth to protect our bodies and our properties from trespass, with force if necessary. We’re free to demand compensation if those we elect usurp our freedoms or trespass on our properties or bodies.

These are freedoms that every man has, just by being born (or conceived, depending on your definition of life). Those freedoms are inherent in all men: Americans, Mexicans, Canadians, Iraqis, Australians, and even the Chinese. They’re born with them. You’re born with them. No one can GIVE you those freedoms, and no one is allowed to take them away. No one.

When the 13 countries in the New World decided to unite, they didn’t decide to unite as one big country. It wasn’t an option. Instead, they decided to stay as separate countries, that is, States, but they were fearful of one another. They decided to elect a Federal branch of government for one sole purpose: to respect those inherent (”God-given”) rights that all are born with, regardless of nationality or citizenship, and to force the other countries to also respect those same rights. That’s what the Federal government was enacted to do. The States also knew that other countries not agreeing to these rules on States might decide to attack a single State, so they decided to give the power to call up a defensive army to this Federal Republic. The army would be called up from the various States to repel an attacker. The army would be composed of State armies, private militias, and individuals who voluntarily would commit to defending the land of other States (countries) within this Republic. Then the army would go home, back to farming, horseshoeing, running the saloons, the whorehouses, the main street stores and inns. It would dissolve, impossible to track down once the attack on another country (State) was stopped.

These 13 countries (States) also didn’t trust one another when it comes to money. Historically, all countries have harmed the individual by taking away their ability to choose what form of money they’d use. Some used dirt, others sand, some wheat, some used cows. Some used gold and silver, which for 6000 years had been the only safe form of a bartering medium. Since the 13 countries didn’t trust each other with money, they decided to force each other to pay their debts to individuals, and to other countries, only in gold and silver. Individuals were free to use whatever bartering medium they thought was good, and accept or deny how they were paid. The countries also gave the power to physically coin a currency to the Federal Republic, but that was only for the coins that the countries themselves used — individuals were free to barter between each other in any currency available and preferred.

The 13 countries were also fearful of pirates on the open seas, so they decided to band together and protect the borders on the seas with a united Navy/Coast Guard. This was not to be used to attack, but to watch for pirates and attackers. It was purely defensive.

There was really to be no leader of these 13 countries, which quickly grew to 50 countries, united as a Republic only to protect those inherent rights that all are born with. The President of this Republic had one task: enforce the laws of the Republic, if they followed the points above. Does the law restrict the inherent freedom to speak of any individual, foreign or domestic, that any of the 50 countries deal with? If so, the law can’t exist. The President can ignore it, and force the Republic to ignore it. Does a law or an action force an individual, foreign or domestic, to speak when they don’t want to? That is an illegal activity, and this President should immediately force the agent to stop it. Does a law or action trespass on a person’s body or property? If so, the law can not exist at any level, and force should be used against the government perpetrator.

The President of the Republic is not there to lead individuals, but to lead in force against any usurping of individual rights by any of the 50 countries (”States”), or any government body above or below them. The President does not lead, we as individuals do. The President’s sole power is not to make laws or decisions, but to Execute the few powers the Republic does have, and to ignore the powers that may breach those inherent, “God-given” rights that all men are born with.

If an illegal alien is captured by any government, those rights are still theirs. They’re born with it. The Rule of Law of the Republic, the Constitution, does not grant many rights specific to citizens, but to all People who are affected by the Republic or the countries themselves. Yes, the countries can kick them out, but they can’t force them to speak, jail them without telling people why, providing for their freedom to consult with a lawyer, know the charges against them, and ask for a jury. If for some strange and illegal reason the Republic or any individual country is acting outside of its borders (grossly illegal, immoral and unconstitutional), it has to understand that the foreign people they are harassing, killing, maiming and angering also have inherent rights that they can not trample on.

Some of these powers and restrictions are modified if the Republic is called to go to a defensive war, but we have not had a Declaration of War since World War II, so anything the Republic or the individual countries are doing internationally is illegal and should be stopped by the President (who again, is not a leader).

It is obvious that the recent Presidents, going back 90+ years, have ignored their oaths to the Constitution, their promises to protect the rights of the individuals (foreign and domestic), and to restrain the Republic from hurting the freedoms that all people are born with. This is why I declare all individuals to be the new President. It is now your job to remind others that they are free; the others can be people born within any of the 50 United Countries of the American Republic, or foreigners, or aliens residing in the borders of the 50 United Countries of the American Republic. Remind them that they are responsible for themselves and their families, first and foremost. No one is supposed to trample on the rights they were born with, the very rights that give them ability to succeed or fail. Most failure comes from individuals lying, or being lazy, or relying on someone else using force for their profit. No one fails because of bad luck, because we all have the ability to protect our families and heirs in the cases of bad luck. You might be dead, but you can protect yourself today using the market providing insurance policies out there.

We must realize that all humans are born free, even if someone else disagrees. We mortals do not need others to lead us together, as we all have different needs, abilities, and desires. We must lead ourselves, and when we do, we can be positive influences on our heirs. When we teach our heirs to lead themselves, too, they will be prepared for all risks and rewards in life. When we rely on others to lead us, we no longer have the knowledge that we are sovereign individuals responsible for our own actions.

When the current President of the Republic leaves office, the next President of the Republic will likely follow in his footsteps in forgetting that he or she is not there to lead us, but to make sure that the 50 countries don’t harm our ability to lead ourselves. Ron Paul might be the least aggressive in harming our individual rights, so I do believe he would do a good job returning the job of President to being a mere aggressor against the 50 countries themselves. That’s why I like the guy — he doesn’t want to lead me anywhere, or force me to do anything. He’ll leave me alone, but if the Country of Illinois tries to control me, he’ll step right in and give them the smack-down.

Sounds good to me.