Whats the Big Deal About Swine Flu?

September 06, 2009
Swine Flu: Path to Martial Law?

By John Griffing

Could a form of martial law be imminent? Obama appears ready to cross the Rubicon, and all he needs is a killer virus.

Let’s connect some dots.

Remember President Obama’s Executive Order basing 80,000 active troops at home for the first time in the history of the peacetime military establishment to “help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack….”

Now connect that information to the recent announcement that the military has established regional deployment locations all across the United States to “assist civilian authorities in the event of a significant outbreak of the H1N1 virus this fall, according to Defense Department officials.”

Civil unrest and crowd control? Significant outbreak of the H1N1 virus this fall? What do they know that we don’t?

Swine flu has been made into a crisis in the minds of the public, even though swine flu, or H1N1, is the most non-lethal “killer” virus ever uncovered. As a cataclysmic event demanding military assistance, it ranks near zero. It is doubtful whether swine flu could even be classified as an “epidemic,” much less a “pandemic.”

Regular influenza, the common flu, kills 36,000 people every year. The 1918 flu pandemic killed an estimated 50-100 million people worldwide over a period of two years, approximately one-third the population of Europe at that time. Global swine flu deaths topped just 1,000 this year.

But President Obama is predicting death tolls of 90,000 and possible infection of up to half the US population.

While every life matters, in statistical terms swine flu is a comparatively minor problem, which makes the hype by those in government and the military all the more suspicious.

The National Guard is even practicing mock takeovers of public schools in the event of an “H1N1 riot,” a description that elicits mixed responses. What kind of riot could arise out of a flu that has only killed 1,000 worldwide? Washington certainly seems to be looking for some rationale for enhanced domestic military involvement, whether credible or not.

Martial law has essentially been on the table since President Obama took office, thanks to the Bush Administration’s dramatic revisions of the Posse Comitatus Act —which limited deployment of the US military at home—in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. With impeccable timing, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has gone before Congress asking for the unprecedented authority to base 400,000 soldiers in communities all across the United States.

A recent US Army War College Report even outlined the conditions under which martial law could be introduced, listing:
…unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters are all paths to disruptive domestic shock. [Emphasis added.]

The CDC is finalizing quarantine regulations formulated during the Bush years that provide for quarantining “a large group of persons” suspected of having swine flu or other illnesses listed in an executive order. This means that President Obama can quarantine anyone as long as they have an illness he determines to be dangerous. These new regulations even permit "provisional" quarantine of persons not actually carrying any virus. In one section, the regulations empower the president to quarantine anyone that does not agree to be vaccinated, an ominous condition since recent investigations have revealed that swine flu vaccines can cause serious medical complications. Thousands of doctors have voiced strong opposition to the proposed swine flu vaccine, due to its association with neurological disorders. No matter, a bill before the Massachusetts State Senate would permit authorities to enter homes and detain without warrant citizens who do not agree to be forcibly vaccinated. Iowa just released a new Orwellian quarantine policy directive that states in the event of a swine flu outbreak, “your home and other less restrictive alternatives are not acceptable.” These moves appear to be the result of federal incentives advancing mandatory vaccination.

The Army hasn’t missed a step, putting out ads for “Internment/Resettlement Specialists.” And, though most of the wild claims about “FEMA camps” have been appropriately and properly discredited, the fact remains that the Homeland Security Department has signed a $385 million contract with Halliburton subsidiary KBR Construction to build such facilities on an “as-needed” basis.

If you’re not already feeling nervous, revisit President Obama’s spine-chilling campaign pledge:
We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.With the Serve America Act, this alarming proposition has become reality. The broad authority given to this force is staggering. Section 1505 gives the newly created National Civilian Community Corps the power to address national “needs” related to “natural and other disasters,” “infrastructure improvement,” “environmental stewardship and conservation,” “energy conservation,” and “urban and rural development.” The legislation reiterates that the corps will “combine the best practices of civilian service with the best aspects of military service.”

Nowhere have these two spheres ever been combined that tyranny has not resulted.

If these recent events were mere coincidence, Americans could peacefully go about their business. But Obama is no ordinary President. This is the man who began his political career in the home of terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, former members of the notorious Weather Underground that plotted the deaths of 25 million Americans in "re-education camps."

Even so, it sounds crazy, doesn’t it? Mass internment and quarantine of Americans? Martial law used illegally to quell opposition to government policies? After all, this is America, not some banana republic.

But this is not the America of even 10 years ago. This is President Obama’s brave new America. Differences of opinion are criminalized, violating freedom of conscience in the deepest sense. Freedom of the press is assaulted with newspaper “bailouts” and diversity requirements imposed on local radio stations. Children face the possibility of weeklong, year-round education, effectively circumventing parents and making children wards of the state. Czars govern in the place of elected officials. Key private sector companies are now under the direct control of the President.

The President has even proven willing to use healthcare reform to target the elderly, recasting human life in terms of the collective good. The White House has even urged fellow citizens to inform on opponents of Obama’s healthcare bill. In this environment, the prospect of martial law doesn’t sound that far-fetched.

But isn’t this unconstitutional? No matter. The Constitution means nothing to President Obama, who has repeatedly implied the need to “break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution….”

Thomas Jefferson had a different view:
Confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism...In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.

But when the President considers the Constitution to be nothing more than an archaic suggestion, no travesty is unthinkable. And the unthinkable is only a manufactured flu pandemic away. I desperately hope I am wrong in connecting these dots, but in light of the President’s stated agenda, and his known track record on ethical issues, the possibility of abuses must be considered. After all, stranger things have happened.

Clear, consistent, and unwavering

I've had a belly full of the elements of the conservative party who are begging to move to the center. I can't understand why they don't understand that conservatives LOSE when we are in the center. We call ourselves conservatives for a reason. If I wanted to move to the center, then I would call myself a moderate. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?
------------------------------------

June 01, 2009
May Posterity Forget You Were Our Countrymen
By Lance Fairchok

There is something about D.C. that saps the will and dulls the intellect of conservatives. Prolonged exposure makes them fretful and risk-averse, even timid with controversial issues. Rather than standing on the fundamental values that define American conservativism such as fiscal restraint, limited government, low taxes and free markets, they sidestep and tap-dance, befuddled by the "bi-partisan" opiates peddled by Socialist Democrats.

Perhaps they are worried about re-election more than the core issues. Their long record of misreading the national temperament, rolling over on leftist initiatives, and pushing the wrong candidates has alienated conservatives of all stripes. They squandered the mandate voters handed them in 2004. Vast numbers have now registered Independent in protest. When you don't fight back, you lose. Socialist calls for "bipartisanship" are a trick conservatives fall for again and again, a tool they use to undermine us; they do not pretend to follow it. So why do we listen to political traitors like Colin Powell or fence-sitting bureaucrats like Tom Ridge? Why do we give the advice of "big tent" moderates any credence? Because our opponents tell us to, and, like fools, we listen.

Tom Ridge, the former Homeland Security Secretary and a towering intellect compared to its current head, recently criticized Rush Limbaugh on CNN. His comments closely echoed the kumbaya nonsense that convinced John McCain that there was an ethical political high road that would gain him the votes he needed. The Democrat Socialists never bothered to go there, but McCain foolishly did.

Ridge said:
"I think for the American public, for the Republican Party to restore itself, not as a regional party, but as a national party, we have to be far less judgmental about disagreements within the party and far more judgmental about our disagreement with our friends on the other side of the aisle," Ridge said. "I think a lot of our commentators are being shrill." In response to a question about Limbaugh, "Yes, Rush Limbaugh has an audience of 20 million people. A lot of people listen daily to him and live by every word. But words mean things and how you use words is very important." He further said, "Well, I think Rush articulates his point of view in ways that offend very many. It's a matter of language and a matter of how you use words. It does get the base all fired up and he's got a strong following. But personally, if he would listen to me and I doubt if he would, the notion is express yourselves but let's respect others opinions and let's not be divisive."

Well how's that working for you, Tom? In case you have not noticed, we are in a crisis contrived and perpetuated by the very people you wish us to be respectful of, whom you call "our friends on the other side of the aisle." Not being divisive has bought us a socialist in the presidency and thieves in congress and a ticket on a bullet train to disaster. "Shrill" conservative commentary is a leftist canard, there is no shriller voice than a socialist scorned. So he tells us not to offend the opposition that is working hard on stealing our children's future and squandering our nation's treasure. How can conservatives take the Republican Party seriously when such people are running it?

Colin Powell's treachery was very Obama-esque, with high-minded rhetoric and no tangible explanation for the citizens that at one time respected him. Always a political general, he is adept at seeing where the political wind blows, and his loyalties seem to be correspondingly shallow. The Valerie Plame fiasco is proof of that. Powell and his subordinate Richard Armitage let a good man hang out to dry, knowing full well it was Armitage who was responsible. Whether they remained silent from cowardice or had a more malign purpose, the result was the same. Powell is like Obama in that he sounds somber and wise, but when his words are examined without the timbre of his voice and his "style," they fall flat, all rhetorical flourish without substance.

(Senator John Kerry called Powell's comments endorsing Obama "eloquent.")

"But which is the president that we need now? Which is the individual that serves the needs of the nation for the next period of time? And I come to the conclusion that because of his ability to inspire, because of the inclusive nature of his campaign, because he is reaching out all across America, because of who he is and his rhetorical abilities--and we have to take that into account--as well as his substance--he has both style and substance--he has met the standard of being a successful president, being an exceptional president. I think he is a transformational figure. He is a new generation coming into the world--onto the world stage, onto the American stage, and for that reason I'll be voting for Senator Barack Obama."

Let me say what most Republicans feel. When Colin Powell came out in support of Barack Obama, he effectively renounced Republicanism. Powell spat in the face of all conservative Americans and all his dissembling on Sunday gab fests does not change that fact. Obama is unmistakably and unabashedly socialist in his policies; he is the embodiment of the radical left and his policies are a disaster for our nation. Powell knows there will be no forgiveness. So when he criticizes "right wing" conservatives such as Rush Limbaugh, he is merely appeasing his new masters and weakening the party he has already betrayed.

It's not just Limbaugh. When any conservative figure is perceived as pivotal to the success of the Republican Party, the Socialists go gunning for them, they use every stratagem and deceit they can, they concoct and exaggerate, they ridicule and they lie. Sarah Palin, Ted Stevens, Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, Tom Delay, Dick Cheney and Rush Limbaugh are all examples. The smears, slander and character assassination are a tactic they are not shy about using. The press is their ally, repeating every absurd and fallacious talking point, stacking panels with Socialist apologists and shouting down conservative perspectives. Inevitably, they find a Republican quisling, like Powell, to parrot their words, to reinforce them in the minds of the voter, giving them validity, and undermining the values they pretend they support.

It is fashionable in elite Republican circles to turn up your nose when Limbaugh is mentioned, he is so embarrassingly proletarian, so annoyingly common, and he has no Ivy League pedigree. He is "divisive," he is "offensive," he is "polarizing;" in short; he is a hell of a lot more effective than the gang in charge that let the opposition define the issues and the debate. Their arrogance fits nicely into the Socialist plan, they just pepper in accusations of racism, drug addiction, and misogyny and presto, you have a national smear campaign. Love him or hate him, Limbaugh is doing something. He is clear and consistent, and despite the criticisms of those who have never listened to him, he articulates what many millions believe and current events reinforce. He is the thin strand of principle holding us together in a leadership vacuum.

All the ever-so-reasonable sounding reprimands, admonishing us to be less "partisan" and to "reach out rather than criticize" and to "tone down the rhetoric" have an underlying purpose, to weaken a party already crippled by a deficit of self-confidence. It is an old Alinsky trick to place conservative perspectives in a negative moral context and hammer away; eventually, the opposition will grow disillusioned, its animating energy diminished. It works. Our tremulous elites are endlessly distracted by focus groups and straw polls, talk show pundits and the ravings of corrupt legislators that couldn't tell the truth to save their souls.

These country club conservatives are convinced that standing on conservative principles will be a failure.

Either you believe in your principles or you do not. If not, you might as well go the way of the wretched Arlen Specter. You fight honorably, but you fight to win, because the alternative is a failed America. There is not much time, 2010 is our last chance. Once the trillions in stimulus fill the Democrat party coffers and cement their cronies into government, the nation is theirs, and just like the title on James Carville's newest book proclaims, ‘40 More Years, How The Democrats will Rule the Next Generation,' we will be powerless to stop the destruction of our institutions.

Yes, Carville used the word Rule. Not serve the nation, not govern, not lead, but rule. The word speaks volumes to the underlying belief system and motivations of the Socialist Democrats. This is not paranoia or conspiracy nuttiness, this is real. They fully intend to manipulate, steal, propagandize and deconstruct everything we cherish, everything we hold dear as Americans. If they succeed, the country will be unrecognizable in a few years time. Even the soviet era newspaper holdover PRAVDA is warning of the catastrophe of American Marxism on its pages (and hell is likely freezing over).

If the citizens are content to be sheep, they deserve the chains the Socialists are forging. Stopping Obama and the socialists in congress is vital to our survival as a free republic. There will be no greater cause in our lifetimes. It is not rocket science. If we do nothing, they win. They have chosen to become the enemies of liberty, the fifth column that undermines the Republic.

Here is a clear simple message from the heartland to the sorry excuses for conservatives that run the Republican Party: We do not want leftist-lites. We want principled and outspoken leaders that do not give a damn about the good opinion of the corrupt press or foreign princes or the approval of the "other side of the isle." We want you to go for the jugular, we want you to expose the corruption, uncover the deceit, shout out your condemnation and outrage and hit them again and again and again.

We want you to get mad at the trillions in theft and act mad. Do not pull your punches and do not back down from the fight. We want you act like Patriots and save this country, because the consequences, despite our wealth and despite our power, are the same as they were at our founding.

The first title for this article was "Republican Cowards, Neo-Con Quislings & Conservative Fools" but then I remembered Samuel Adams' words to those who quavered in their support of the American Revolution. It appears that the fight against tyranny is not over, so the words ring with meaning for Americans yet again.

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!"
Samuel Adams