I was delighted to hear that a Muslim terrorist was caught in NYC the other day. Mayor Bloomberg and his people assured us that the “lone wolf” (a phrase repeated ad nauseum) had been apprehended. Hurray! Unless you are one of those worrywarts concerned about the millions of other “lone wolves” still out there, you can now rest secure in your bed at night. But I am going astray; that is not what this article is about. Link Link
This article will mainly concern itself with three points of interest that my recent column on separating the USA into conservative and liberal areas raised with readers: i.e. pro/con views, and “the God issue.” The pro views expressed by my readers (those in favor of separation) ruled the day, so let me start by discussing that possibility in a bit more depth.
The Pro View:
One thing that readers brought up (on both sides of the border) was the inclusion of parts of Canada into any new republic. The western provinces and territories (British Columbia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta provinces, and the Yukon and Northwest territories) were the ones mentioned, although I suspect that areas of the eastern provinces might be interested as well. The liberals can have Ontario and Quebec — at least those parts that elect to stay liberal/Progressive. Link
Possibly a new republic would run from Alaska (most of it) down through the Yukon and Northwest territories, British Columbia (Vancouver Island would probably be ceded to the liberal enclave running from Seattle down to San Diego), Alberta, Saskatchewan, western Washington, western Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and on down to the southern ports in Texas and along the Gulf coast. With expansion to the east and west included, the new republic could conceivably have much more land mass and resources than either country alone currently possesses; plus good harbors on both coasts and on the Gulf of Mexico — and oil would move smoothly up and down the central corridor. Liberals not welcome.
Do I think that such a separation is likely to be achieved peacefully? Honestly, no I do not, but nonetheless I believe that preparations should be made, so that if (some would say when) the bottom falls out, the framework for a new republic will be in place, and movement toward forming a new country from the ashes of the old one(s) will be facilitated. In other words, when the SHTF the plans to surf the tsunami should already be on hand. To be concerned, and prepared, for when the bottom falls out is by no means being Chicken Little-like these days. The sky is falling.
There is no need for me to enumerate the many huge problems facing America and the world today — the economic saber rattling of Germany, the hyper-inflation poised to swallow up the value of the US dollar, the 12th Imam rulers in Iran, the GWOI (Global War On Islamists), and on and on it goes. Any number of events could initiate a precipitous fall into social chaos and violence — on any given day. That is not alarmist cant, but simply the facts. Link Link Link
In addition, I might mention the lopsidedly male Chinese population that is the result of decades of slaughtering female babies, both before and after birth (a tragedy culturally condoned, and exacerbated by China’s “one child” policy). To get the Chinese male mind off the lack of available women a war would be just the thing; which is not to mention that the surplus male population suits the militant homosexual AKA Far Left agenda to a “T” — win/win baby! Link
[Sidebar: I can only hope that the abomination at Penn State will at last start the unraveling of the extensive, influential, and powerful underground homosexual/pederast network embedded in America (and the world). Also, I should mention that India has the same problem as China regarding excess males (also due to female genocide). China and India are next door to each other and both have nuclear weapons -- does anyone else sense a potential problem?] Link Link
Be that as it may, the idea here is not for the violent overthrow of any government, but the need to put plans in place for the making of a new republic should the old one fall. I am talking about the same sort of thing that George Soros does to countries that he wishes to take over — install the framework for a new government so that it will be ready to go into operation when the old one falls (pushed, in Soros’ case). The phoenix would surely become an iconic symbol in any such new republic. Link
Soros has set up shadow governments in several countries, including here in the US. In 2000 Sen. John McCain was the keynote speaker at the “Soros Convention” in Philadelphia (so named by the late Robert Novac), held at the same time as the Republican Convention there. Link
A shadow government such as I am describing (one honoring God, small government, the Founding documents, rule of law, the Ten Commandments, and barring liberals), would come into play only in the event of a catastrophic failure of the US and Canadian governments — which given the current state of affairs is a very real possibility, and one for which prearranged plans should be on hand, and ready to be implemented at a moment’s notice. Alliances and networking for such a republic should begin now, while there is still time. Negotiations will be nigh impossible once the bottom falls out, the electric grid shuts down, and communication becomes erratic or nonexistent.
Liberals “mess their nest” wherever they go, and then move on to other, cleaner, saner areas in order to get away from the results of their own irresponsibility and idiocy. Wherever they move to they quickly begin to foul their new nests. You could see examples of this phenomenon as liberal Californians moved into Texas and other western states.
When I was a young teen I worked at a state park in New Jersey. One of my jobs was cleaning up the garbage that people left behind, and I noticed that the areas where I had cleaned up were the areas that these sorts of people were attracted to (ignoring the areas that were still messed up by them or their ilk). They would then proceed to trash the newly clean area that they had found. I did not know at the time that I was witnessing a liberal phenomenon. Wherever liberals go they bring their garbage with them — and leave it.
The Con View:
Whether they were pro or con about the idea of separating the United States into liberal and conservative areas, readers were unanimous in their opinion that “liberals must go!” I have discussed the pro viewpoint; what about the con viewpoint, those who felt that separating the United States is a bad idea?
As I say, the folks who want (insist) on keeping the union together have no love for liberals, but their attitude is basically “Shut up or get out!” – or even “Shut up and get out!” If liberals do not like the United States, then we should gift them with a one-way ticket to the garden spot of their choice: Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, Iraq, Yemen, Uzbekistan…well the list just goes on doesn’t it. As one reader put it, we need “a reverse Mariel boatlift.” “Here’s your ticket. No need to write, toodle-oo.” Link
If you think I am joking, think again. One way or another, at some point or another, the treasonous scum among us must be expelled — and anyone who supports one world government is treasonous scum. I remember watching a video of the late news anchor Walter Cronkite a few years back, and being stunned by what he was saying to a fawning audience — how it was time for a one world government, and America’s race was run. I remember Cronkite from my days as a teen watching “Uncle Walter” on TV in the ’60s.
When did “Uncle Walter” turn into such an arrogant, seditious twit? Was he always that way, or was it something that snuck up on him over the years? The liberals who applauded him were traitors one and all, and there is no doubt that they were representative of millions like them. Those people are anti-American traitors to the bone, and have no place in our republic. For self preservation “we the people” simply must be rid of them — one way or another. (Keep in mind when I say liberals I’m including many so called “moderate” Republicans as well). Link
I am not joking in the slightest — it is a simple question of survival. As I mentioned earlier I do not believe that such a scenario can or will happen as things stand — but once the SHTF all bets are off, and any new republic must be vigilant and firm in rooting out and expelling these traitors from our midst.
The God Issue:
Now the “God issue.” Should atheists be lumped in with liberals? I would argue that although they should not be welcomed, due to their general lack of a firm moral underpinning (atheists were banned from giving courtroom testimony in early America for just this reason – it was a given that they could not be trusted), they should be admitted into any new republic for the sole reason that some of them are actually truth seekers, and not just self-centered, self-indulgent twits. Admitted but not welcomed. Link
Like liberals, atheists are generally a blight, a plague, a curse upon humanity. The list of Far Left atheist tyrants is a blood-smeared catalog of psychotic socio-paths: Robespierre, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, and others too numerous to name. The liberals do their best to cover up, muddy up, ignore, and downplay the truth in this regard, but the truth will out — and the truth is that atheism is at heart a virtueless, valueless, meaningless doctrine that acts as a cover for letting the human ego do what it longs to do anyway — play God. (“This town ain’t big enough for the two of us Sheriff — one of us has got to go”).
I have dealt at length with this subject in the past, so rather than reinvent the wheel let me use a couple of brief excerpts from my past articles. In my article “Atheism 101″ I gave a version of the story of Creation as told by atheists:
“Yea, in the beginning there was Nothing, and Nothing begat nothing — not even darkness. Nothing be praised! Then lo, for no reason Nothing became All That Is; yea Stuff happened to happen (all praise No Reason). Then behold, the pointless fumbling of the Hand of Chance (praised be Its name) breathed Life unto Itself. Lo, and Dead Stuff begat Live Monkeys! And it came to pass that the monkeys begat humans, such as Bill Maher. Thanks for Nothing!” Link
Behind the Byzantine facade erected by atheistic apologists over the centuries, there is nothing at all. Dorothy’s exposure of the true nature of the phony and bombastic Wizard of Oz is as nothing compared to the bleak nothingness you find behind the curtain hiding the true nature of atheism. The empty end game of atheism is alluded to in the conclusion to my article “Atheism Revisited.” Link
“Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven,” right atheists? Of course it is. …Enjoy your ego while you can — then again, why would you? You must believe that you and everyone else are valueless, motiveless, meaningless meat automatons — devoid of all dignity, purpose, or promise. That is, unless you have lied to yourself about the full ramifications of atheism — and surely you are much too smart, sane, and honest to have deluded yourself like that — right?”
Atheists typically set up a religious Straw Man that they use as justification for their ego-centricity. They generally pick some puerile depiction of God and say “I refuse to believe in that!” Well guess what — so do I. The thing is, instead of rejecting spirituality because I found some of the answers offered in this world unpalatable, I kept looking. Atheists generally find an excuse to stop believing in anything other than themselves, and stop right there – “that’ll do.” Rather than being involved in some valiant search for the truth, the typical atheist is merely looking for a convenient pretext that will allow them to wallow in their glorious self. Their lame excuses do not impress me.
There are more varieties of decent religious teachings than you can shake a censer at — with so many legitimate paths to spiritual growth, the atheists lame excuses don’t hold water. Below is a brief discussion of the major religions.
The Major Religions:
Buddhism: I have no problems whatsoever with Buddhism, especially the Pure Land and Zen varieties. The Four Noble Truths and The Eightfold Path are wonderfully sound verities to base a life on. Buddhism has nothing to say about God, one way or the other — so why don’t atheists flock to Buddhism? Because as I’ve said, the real reason most atheists reject God is because they want to be God (even if unconsciously). While Buddhism sidesteps the issue of God, they do practice humility and other virtues which are anathema to the liberal credo of “if it feels good do it.” Are there Buddhist atheists? I would imagine so. Do I want hear from any of them? No – but I do wish them well; they belong to the minority of atheists who are on a sincere spiritual quest.
Hinduism: Hinduism’s great diversity makes it very much a mixed bag — are they worshipping Krishna or Kali, Brahman or Ganesha? As the world’s oldest religion it has branched into many sects over the millennia, with a vast plethora of gods and goddesses — some of them are exemplary; some not so much. I give it a thumbs-up as a belief system — although depending on the variety of Hinduism being practiced that could become an enthusiastic “thumbs up.” Like all of the world’s major religions it has variations that run the gamut from the sublime to the ridiculous.
Judaism is, of course, part of our Judeo/Christian heritage, and as such is an integral part of our culture. Without Judaism we would have no Ten Commandments, and no Jesus — but when good Jews go bad, oy vey: Karl Marx, George Soros, Saul Alinsky…the list goes on, and on. It is important to note, however, that these “bad” Jews were and are almost exclusively atheists. Although they may have had a Jewish cultural background, they were/are not by any means practicing Jews. Why disenfranchised Jews can turn into such anti-social parasites is a subject beyond the scope of this article. Before I leave the subject of Judaism let me make mention of the Messianic Jews, who believe that Jesus was/is indeed the Messiah (Mashiach).
I will soon discuss Islam and Christianity, but first I would like to give some mention to the world’s religions that are not one of the major faiths. The Baha’i, the Sikhs, Native American spiritual teachings — these and some other small religions are legitimate spiritual paths, and should be welcomed into any new republic.
Special mention should be made of the Sufis: I had darshan with the Sufi Pir Vilayat Inayat Khan in 1975, and I have no doubt that he was one of the holiest and spiritually evolved people it has ever been my privilege to know. Also, I am a great admirer of the works of Jalaluddin Rumi, the Sufi sage and poet from 13th century Turkey. I love the Sufis as a whole, and I have the utmost respect for their teachings — but there are Sufis and then there are sufis. The Sufis are historically connected with Islam (more about that in a moment), and while they have often been the subject of persecution by orthodox Muslims, there is that connection — so although I would welcome them into any new republic, they would need to be carefully vetted. Now — on to Islam.
Islam is not really a religion at all. It is an amalgamation of cultural, legal, political, economic, and religious doctrines, of which religion is one facet. The teachings of Islam are diametrically opposed to the foundational principles of freedom and religious tolerance handed down to us by the Framers of the United States, and Islam has no place in any free republic. Add the Muslim concept of taqqiya to the mix, and you cannot trust any Muslim as far as you can throw them — and I mean a heavy Muslim.
[Sidebar: Even the meaning of the word taqiyya (there are various spellings) is often disguised by taqiyya. A Muslim might tell you that taqiyya is nothing more than a means whereby a poor defenseless Muslim is permitted to practice dissimulation in order to protect his faith or life. Actually it is the practice of lying like a rug in order to lull your enemy (and any non-Muslim, or infidel, is an enemy) to sleep concerning your true intentions, ie. the triumph of Islam over all other religious, political, economic, or legal systems. Do I believe that there are decent, wonderful, honest Muslims? Yes, but as the saying goes, "when you lie down with dogs...." Given the practice of taqiyya how can any Muslim be trusted? He or she seems nice? He or she says they are a patriotic American? I agree with Sir Winston Churchill who said of Islam "No stronger retrograde force exists in the world"]. Link
The Far Left and liberals love Muslims because the Islamic aversion to freedom and fondness for totalitarianism fits the liberal agenda like a glove. Hitler adored them: “Under the Arab, [in Spain] the standard attained was wholly admirable. …Then with the advent of Christianity, came the barbarians.” Muslims generally, and Islamists certainly, also share with the Left a disdain for, if not hatred of, Judeo/Christian traditions (for reasons that I explored in my article “Nazi Homosexuals and the Slow Steady Seduction of America”). Link
Allowing Muslims to freely move into and around the United States is not practicing religious tolerance and freedom of expression — it is practicing suicide. Word! There will be no place for them in any new republic — let the liberals keep them if they want them so badly. Many liberals know that what I am saying is true, but have chosen to betray the United States for their own nefarious ends. For those who are simply ignorant of the facts, a day’s research into the history and practices of Islam (from a non-liberal source) will show the truth of what I have written — any doubt remaining after educating yourself about the subject is the result of willfully choosing to remain deluded. Such people make good dhimmis. Link Link
Before I get started on this final section of the article I would like to make something very clear: I am as wary of religious tyranny as I am the tyranny of secularism. The Founding Fathers had the right of it — there must never be an official state religion in a free republic. That is not to say that I do not believe that the United States should be a Christian nation — I believe so with all my heart. Indeed I do not see how it can succeed otherwise, but the installation of any one branch or sect of Christianity as the official religion of the republic must be prevented, as the Framers knew. That being said, let’s move along.
Last, but certainly not least, I will discuss Christianity. The problems facing Christianity today are many — Liberation Theology and liberal church NGOs just to name a couple (the influential and liberal Catholic organization CCHD was started by Saul Alinsky for God’s sake — Saul Alinsky). In any new republic there will need to be a separating of the flock as part of the liberal/conservative split. Link
Be that as it may, there are simply too many problematic issues for me to begin to address them in this article. Instead I will focus on why I feel that Christianity offers the best template for building the moral foundation of any free republic. I will be brief, and therefore not address certain issues that perhaps I should, but hopefully I can make my point(s) clearly.
Note: What follows is, of course, strictly my opinion, and I do not speak for any orthodox sect or faith. I consider myself to be a Christian, but I am a non-denominational Christian, and although my preference is for Christianity and I certainly accept Jesus as my savior, I have no dog in the hunt.
Let me explain why I have chosen Christianity as my path to salvation (not to be confused with enlightenment – although there’s overlap). Hopefully my reasons will help clarify why I feel that Christianity is so important to the success of any republic.
On the surface, the mundane level, the thing that I have always found the most attractive about the Gospels is the way that Jesus changed things. He was a world-class iconoclast, and pro-active mover and shaker of the first order — which has always appealed to the rebel in me.
He thumbed His nose at the calcified religious dogma and ecclesiastical humbugs of His day, and a key part of His mission was to demonstrate that God wants to change things for the better in this world, if we would only let Him do so through us.
Whether you believe that Jesus served as the clearest channel ever to exist for God to work His will through, or that Jesus was God Himself, the wonders and miracles recounted in the Gospels are mind boggling in their scope and power. And those are just the ones we know about, for as John writes “And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.” Link
The importance of belief to the Christian ethos cannot be overemphasized — “Fear not: only believe.” The long-term relentless attacks on the Bible and Christianity by the atheistic Left have had a dulling, numbing effect on Christianity as a whole — many American Christians today do not believe, they only half believe, if that. Link
The importance of belief is highlighted in the Gospels by the story of Jesus’ trip to His home town, where perhaps because of familiarity with Him and His family, the townspeople did not believe in His abilities to heal and work miracles. As recounted in Matthew 13:58 “And he did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief.” It is important to note that the word “unbelief” is another way of saying that the townspeople believed all right — they believed that Jesus could not perform miracles — and so He could not. Link
Imagine that — stopping God in His tracks through the power of belief! That is how powerful and important belief is. If you are a Christian of lukewarm faith you might want to try believing. How would it be if you were sure that the miracles recounted in the gospels were true? That the Crucifixion and Resurrection actually happened? That Jesus is God, is present, is our Redeemer? If you have the time, take a moment and let the balm of belief fill you.
After the death and resurrection of Jesus the apostles did not leave Jerusalem and disperse to the four corners of the world, and often martyrdom, just for grins. It takes a great psychic upheaval, a monumental change in consciousness and spirit, to embark on such journeys, with so little means, and so much danger involved.
What if the Gospels are telling the truth about what happened around 2,000 years ago? Despite the errors and addendums that may have slipped into the New Testament during the centuries between when they were first written and their codification, what if the truth that they are based on is so vibrant and powerful so as to make any minor discrepancies that may have crept in irrelevant? What if?
We live in “an age of sanctimonious secularism,” to borrow Kelly O’Connell’s phrase. Unbelief is the dogma of our time. But what if the narcissistic mirror of atheism is reflecting back nothing but the warped projections of a deluded ego, and the glory of God shines all around us if we but had the eyes to see — or more to the point, a state of consciousness able to apprehend? Link
Transcending the mundane level are other levels of consciousness. As William James (1842-1910) famously put it, “Our normal waking consciousness, rational consciousness as we call it, is but one special type of consciousness, whilst all about it, parted from it by the filmiest of screens, there lie potential forms of consciousness entirely different.”
Experiments in quantum physics have proven the importance of our state of consciousness — how it changes reality. Believing does make a difference. Reality is not just a matter of “seeing is believing,” reality is also a case of “believing is seeing.”
A strong belief in the righteousness of the project may be the key to the successful creation of any new republic, and the teachings of Jesus may provide the strongest foundation for cultural stability and peace. I believe they will.
As important as belief is, there is something that transcends even that — experience. If you are blessed with the experience of the Christ it will, as Thomas Merton wrote, “set free the song of everlasting glory that now sleeps in your paper flesh like dynamite.” Then you will know, and any remnants of unbelief will disappear. Link
Born in June of 1951 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Jim O’Neill proudly served in the U.S. Navy from 1970-1974 in both UDT-21 (Underwater Demolition Team) and SEAL Team Two. A member of MENSA, he worked as a commercial diver in the waters off Scotland, India, and the United States. In 1998 while attending the University of South Florida as a journalism student, O’Neill won “First Place” in the “Carol Burnett/University of Hawaii AEJMC Research in Journalism Ethics Award.” The annual contest was set up by Carol Burnett with the money she won from successfully suing the National Enquirer for libel. Over the last few years, Jim has regularly written for Canada Free Press and now has a personal blog, ConstitutionalWrites.com.
Graphics and video added by Gulag Bound