Donald Trump Wears A Hard Hat: Get Ready to Move…Again, by Dr. Steven Nur Ahmed

 

A report by Reuters on December 19, 2016, written by M.B. Bell and Joshua Schneyer, identified thousands of areas across the United States where lead poisoning is worse than it is in Flint, Michigan: “A Reuter examination of lead testing results across the country found almost 3000 areas with poisoning rates far higher than in the tainted Michigan City.” Reuters stopped their count at 3000. There are thousands more.

For over 100 years, scientists and scholars have known of the deleterious effects of lead poisoning on the human body particularly the brain in young and old persons. But we will not rehash the scientific findings of the specific effects of lead poisoning in this article. Nor shall we examine the criminal proceedings now in process against those responsible for the lead poisoning disaster in Flint, Michigan. Those subjects are not the main point I want to make here because there is another crisis looming on the horizon and it will be a collateral effect of lead testing results across the nation.

A demographic crisis is forming. It will displace millions of Descendants of Slaves out of inner cities across the United States. The crisis will put gentrification into hyper-drive and there will be no stopping it from happening because there are no credible reasons to make the argument that it would not be legal nor is there a persuasive moral argument that it should not happen.

Bell and Schneyer identified Flint, Michigan; we can add to that Detroit; Chicago, Illinois. They also identified the city of Baltimore, Maryland; Missouri;  Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Cleveland, Ohio; Philadelphia and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania; South Bend, Indiana. But there are thousands more cities across the nation wherein children and adults suffer brain damage due to lead poisoning.  

Let me put it another way, it will be the great migration in reverse. But this time with no hope of a higher quality of life in an industrial urban setting with plenty of blue collar and domestic jobs.[1] What is going to happen may or may not be more pressing because of Donald Trump’s election to be our 45th President of the United States.

It is not a Republican nor Democratic nor Libertarian scheme, for the political bosses are but emissaries; rather, it is a corporate scheme to turn leaded inner city infrastructures into healthy and vibrant life centers with plush recreational parks for the power elite.

Donald Trump will become the President of the United States on January 20, 2017. He is uniquely qualified to carry the corporate ball down field and to make their plan a reality because his expertise is in the field of building construction and eminent domain. When they see an opening in the line, corporate America crashes everything and moves the ball through it.They will be awarded billions of tax payer dollars by getting government contracts. They will for the most part be white owned companies. 

That begs the question: what will be the rational used to trigger the crisis? My answer is that it will be based upon ‘condemnation policy’ for public health and safety purposes. It will be legal. Lead infested infrastructures are a cause for public health and safety action by local, state, and federal governments. The U.S. Constitution gives governments the legal authority to have such policy.

The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides for the legal acquisition of private property under what is called ‘eminent domain’. Therein it states: “…nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

What that means is that governments have a legal duty. Governments must provide due process of law to the property owner. Governments must serve a legal or natural person who owns the property a notice of the date and place a court proceeding is to take place. They must cite the law upon which such a notice is based. Governments must make it clear that their aim is to take away the property of the holder of title. Governments must provide for such a private owner a day in court to argue why the government has no legal or rational basis to take their property.

Secondly, if a government takes a private property then it must pay the owner fair market value for that property. Then and only then can a government legally take private property for public use or purposes.

Supreme Court decisions have expanded the limits of governments’ right to seize private property from owners. Those decisions are of vital importance to us because they will enable us to see the corporate strategy or play book for taking lead infested environments and booting out descendants of slaves.

The problem that Descendants of Slaves have in relation to eminent domain is more complex now than ever before. Keep this in mind, most Descendants of Slaves who live within inner cities where lead is a public health and safety issue…do not own the property wherein they live. That means that: 1. No notice will be given to them of court proceedings to take property; they will usually get 30 to 60 days to move, and 2. though the owners will get fair market value compensation from government, the fact is that most Descendants of Slaves will get no compensation whatsoever. With little or no money and priced out of high rent neighborhoods, most Descendants of Slaves will have nowhere to go.[2] New Supreme Court decisions now make all of this not just possible but highly likely.

In Kelo v. City of New London,[3] 545 U.S. 469 (2005), the Supreme Court of the United States held that  the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another private owner to further economic development is constitutional: “In a 5–4 decision, the Court held that the general benefits a community enjoyed from economic growth qualified private redevelopment plans as a permissible “public use” under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.” That decision made ‘public use takings’ synonymous with ‘public purpose’. The court privatized the 5th amendment takings clause.  If a company can prove that it plans the broad and vague phrase ‘public purpose’ to a court, then it can legally take private property and remarket it for profit.

The test employed under Kelo v. City of New London is a simple one: “…if an economic project creates new jobs, increases taxes and other revenues, and revitalizes a depressed (even if not blighted) urban area, it qualifies as a public use.” Justice Stevens wrote in that decision: “the Court long ago rejected any literal requirement that condemned property be put into use for the general public”[4] The foundation has been laid. Cities across the nation will take advantage of this diction to attract a wealthier population while pushing out poor whites and descendants of slaves.

There will be many other collateral effects. Some will be beneficial. For example, there will be a steep decline in black on black homicide and violent crime. There will be a steep decline in the number of Descendants of Slaves incarcerated. There will be a steep decline in the number children who are exposed to lead and other heavy metal toxins. Just to name a few.

Some of the harmful collateral effects will be increased poverty among descendants of slaves; few jobs which provide a livable wage; greater spatial difficulty accessing vocational and college institutions; the end of national grass root social justice organizations which depend upon a concentrated population of Descendants of Slaves for support; social alienation among poor and wealthy Descendants of Slaves; drug abuse will increase; fertility rates will decrease even lower than now; the marriage rate will continue to decline and will become the lowest in the nation; the traditional ‘black church’ will wither away.

The black church will be replaced by ecumenical churches which abandon Descendants of Slaves primarily because they are generally poor. Instead they will reach out to non-descendants of slaves as the religious priests struggle to keep their revenue streams fluid; and lastly, there will be an increase in more psychopathic individuals making claims to you on social media that you should give them your money.[5]

The fabric and texture of the lives of Descendants of Slaves in America is about to undergo such a radical change that many will suffer what the sociologist Emile Durkheim described as ‘anomie’. Consequently, suicide rates among Descendants of Slaves will rise significantly over the next 10 years.

Adding to the overall post-modern disenfranchisement of Descendants of Slaves is new technology. New technologies such as Nano technology, Bio- technology, Robotic technology or artificial intelligence, and an increasing demand for brain driven workers has made most Descendants of Slaves literally obsolete.    

Great play writers know that there are only three ideal types in drama. One is comedy. One is tragedy. And one is a combination of both called…tragicomedy. Descendants of Slaves have no doubt played all three of these types for three centuries and continue to do so. 

But all plays must inevitably come to an end. So, now, the curtain draws slowly on this one, too. I know you want to hear something good, something positive for the new year. You want to see fireworks; sparklers and such. But I’m not going to lie to you. I don’t want your money because I know what true wealth is; and I don’t need you to be up in my face crowd pleasing me.  So, I don’t need to sugar coat what I say to you.  It will be an unhappy new year for Descendants of Slaves.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] The Great Migration was the movement of 6 million African-Americans out of the rural Southern United States to the urban Northeast, Midwest, and West that occurred between 1910 and 1970. Wikipedia

[2] Section 8 housing will place many of them far out into the suburbs.

[3] 545 U.S. 469 (2005)

[4] 545 U.S. 469

[5] This can already be seen on Go Fund Me cites as well as You-tube, Facebook, et al.

THE POPULATION FLUSH CYCLE, by Dr. Steven Nur Ahmed

Sheeple

There is a population flush cycle. It churns the population of the United States as if in a blender at the whim of the power elite. At the turn of the 20th century, 88% of all immigrants to the United States were white Europeans. They were allowed to immigrate into America because its 19th century population size was too sparse to fuel its industrial revolution and its consequent consumption boom. In order for the power elite of the gilded age to prosper financially and to maintain ‘white supremacy’, all three conditions had to occur simultaneously.

Sparsely populated territory in the United States was a major problem for the power elite of that time. Land defined national identity. Without manpower, such land could not be held nor developed. Without the manpower to neither hold the land by military force nor develop it by slave or cheap indentured servant labor Britain could not justify it as part of their colonial empire nor could the newly formed United States justify itself as a new nation.[1]

To solve both the problems of 1. removal of unwanted populations and 2. under-population, they employed ‘population flush’.  Population flush involved forcefully pushing indigenous people off their land while simultaneously attracting Europeans to the land and forcefully importing Africans onto the land so that both those populations could hold and develop the land in the name of the newly founded United States.[2]

Population Flush

Periodically and depending on social, economic, and military needs and circumstances, the power elite will turn the immigration ‘on’ switch to full throttle because they need human bodies for material exploitation just like any other natural resource. It is the vast force of immigrant instinctual energy that the power elite wish to harness to build and drive their empire to total world domination.

More and more Europeans were allowed to immigrate into the United States because it was important for the power elite to maintain institutional white supremacy. The U.S. Congress defined the constitutional phrase ‘free persons’ as ‘free white persons’. Thus, white supremacy was the law of the land. Secondly, because African American slave women had a much higher fertility rate than any other ethnic group in the United States.

African American females had 8 babies per female between the ages of 15 and 45 in 1800 compared to Caucasian females’ fertility rate of 7 babies per female for the same age range. Had it not been that millions of white people were imported into the United States, America would have become naturally racially integrated much earlier in the 20th century than it did. What initially drove down fertility rates was urbanization and industrialization. But that necessitated an ever increasing influx of ‘white persons’ from Europe in order to maintain white supremacy in numbers and in political and police power. 

 black fertilityrate 

Furthermore, booming service sectors, as well as coal, iron, and oil industries necessitated bodies to work in them, but not black bodies. Military involvement in World War I necessitated millions of soldiers. So white males immigrated to the United States and assumed employment in the growing manufacturing and military industries. They were limited only by their own natural limitations. Black people were segregated by law at the turn of the 20th century.[3]

The European immigrant tsunami continued to reverberate throughout the early and middle 20th century. Through a major depression white men and women got relief through the Social Security Act of 1935, the Minimum Wage Act of 1938, The Welfare Act of 1935, and ‘the Works Progress Administration program’ or WPA under the Roosevelt ‘New Deal’.

After World War II, white men and women benefited from the: Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944 or the G.I. Bill.[4] They bought homes and they and their children attended colleges and Universities for free. America was at its peak. It afforded to the White Supremacists’ baby boom generations a historically unparalleled experience of affluence in the United States.  They have come to be called ‘Greatest Generation’ but in truth they were the ‘greatest racially privileged generation of all time’. But what goes up must come down so says the law of gravity.

During this same several decades a shift slowly occurred.  Both black and white women started to have fewer babies. By 1970, the fertility rate for black women had fallen to 3 per female between 15 and 45 and for white women it had fallen even more to 2 babies per female for the same age group.  And now in 2016, for black women a fertility rate of 1.8 and for white women a fertility rate of 1.9, both beneath replacement level.[5]

What happened? What stopped the baby boom in its tracks? Why is America now compelled to import spermatozoa and ova?

The answer is simple. First in 1959-60 the birth control pill was approved by the FDA and introduced into the market place via hospitals and family physicians. Secondly, in 1972-73 the United States Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade, made abortion legal. Since that year there have been over 56,000,000 abortions had by U.S. women. That number nearly offsets the approximately 66,000,000 baby boomer babies born between 1946 and 1964. Thirdly, manufacturing jobs have been steadily exported overseas to exploit cheap labor. That has made the cost of living rise far too high for many Americans to have large families or even to get married early in their 20s. It has been recently reported by the Pew Research Center that 36% of all men 18 to 31 live at home with their parents.[6]  Three reasons were given:

Declining employment. In 2012, 63% of 18- to 31-year-olds had jobs, down from the 70% of their same-aged counterparts who had jobs in 2007. In 2012, unemployed Millennials were much more likely than employed Millennials to be living with their parents (45% versus 29%).

Rising college enrollment. In March 2012, 39% of 18- to 24-year-olds were enrolled in college, up from 35% in March 2007. Among 18 to 24 year olds, those enrolled in college were much more likely than those not in college to be living at home – 66% versus 50%.

Declining marriage. In 2012 just 25% of Millennials were married, down from the 30% of 18- to 31-year-olds who were married in 2007. Today’s unmarried Millennials are much more likely than married Millennials to be living with their parents (47% versus 3%).”

In 1960, the median age at first marriage in the United States was 22.8 years for males and 20.3 for females compared to 28.2 years for males and 26.1 for females in 2010.

Those statistical figures signal to the power elite that African Americans who are descendants of slaves will soon be finished as a viable population in the United States. Descendants of slaves will generally be unable to compete in the economy except in the entertainment markets including sports. 

The power elite are those owners and CEOs of the most powerful and wealthiest corporations and financial institutions in the United States.They are not necessarily those individuals listed in Forbes Fortune 500. The 100 wealthiest Americans are not necessarily of the power elite because power and wealth do not always go together. One may be rich and not powerful. But power always goes with wealth, military and police force.

If we assume all present social and economic trends remain steady in slave quarters within inner city communities, what can we predict? We can predict that descendants of slaves will for all intents and purposes disappear as a politically and economically relevant ethnic group by the end of the 21st century. As the sociologist Sidney M. Wilhelm asked back in 1970: “Who Needs the Negro?”

The same holds true for lower and middle class white men and women. They now are coming to realize that being ‘white’ is not enough to get economic privilege in the new world order.

Already, the white middle class which for the last 70 years has brought home the bread and butter for Uncle Sam is now held up solely by credit debt. It is becoming more and more difficult to keep up the façade of middle class status and conspicuous consumption.

Most middle and lower class families have an income to debt ratio which is heavily tilted on the side of debt. That is also reflected in the national ‘debt to GDP’ ratio. Both they and the Federal government are for all practical purposes bankrupt.

The demise of white people in the United States is also evidenced by the life-span for white males. It is falling lower and lower every year. And this is just the beginning. It was reported in the April 20, 2016 edition of the Wall Street Journal that: The number of years a white American born in 2014 could be expected to live fell to 78.8 years from 78.9 years the year before, according to the CDC. The change was driven largely by women.”

However, elite white males with higher incomes which allow them to afford new stem cell treatment health care can expect to become the new ‘Alpha’ males in the ‘Brave New World’ they are now engineering with biotechnology and robotics. They will live long, healthy, wealthy lives.

Those are just simply the facts. Those facts are not presented by me to be a moral argument. Though I do have a moral position. Rather, those facts beg a question: why did the United States Supreme Court sanction the abortion of millions of babies? Could they not foresee that the nation would become dependent on importing millions upon millions of immigrants to fill the population vacuum? Immigrants who are not acculturated to the American way of life. There is an answer.

Global-Hands-Public-Domain

The power elite do not want a settled population with family roots dating back 400 years to colonial times. They do not want a historically knowledgeable population, a population of critical thinkers, a population of people who now know for instance that both the Republican and Democratic political parties are corrupt and corrosive to the very fabric of our democratic process. The power elite prefer a climate of social and political confusion and lower class cultural and economic instability.

The power elite want public confusion because they thrive in environments rich with political and economic confusion. For them, confusion is a resource. With it, they are better able to manipulate a docile population from their Tower of Babel.

The power elite want a population already conditioned to live under dictatorships and authoritarian governments of every kind. They want a population with a high tolerance for both political corruption and death squad law enforcement. They want a population willing to pay 50% of their wages in Taxation. They want a population which having not known the tradition of freedom will be willing to sign freedom away for a bag of Cheetos. That is the answer. That is why we are now in the height of a population flush cycle.

Today, the population of the United States is simply a human resource. Like a fossil fuel, Americans are burnt up, their energy exploited at the whim and pleasure of the power elite, and then when they have become old they are discarded as waste one generation after another onto a pile of human refuse. For it is the power elite who control the levers of an ever oscillating population flush cycle to serve their purposes.

 

[1] The Nomos of the Earth, by Carl Schmitt, Telos Press Publishing, 2006

[2] Johnson vM’Intosh, 21 U.S. (8 Wheat.) 543 (1823)

[3] Plessy vFerguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896)

[4] P.L. 78-346, 58 Stat. 284m

[5] United States Census, National Vital Statistics Report, 2010

[6] A Rising Share of Young Adults Live in Their Parents’ Home

      A Record 21.6 Million In 2012 BY RICHARD FRY

 

 

THOU SHALT NOT WAGE A RELIGIOUS CRUSADE IN THE NAME OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, by Dr. Steven Nur Ahmed

 

Crusade 1

Millions of right wing religious and secular conservatives in the Republican party are increasing their push to repress Islam and Muslims in the United States. Those same people and the media which propagandize their views are also voices for war against Islam and therefore against all Muslims in the world. Except for the exercise of their own right to freedom of speech, Donald Trump’s (and Republicans like him) proposed State and Federal policies for Muslims are unconstitutional because they would restrict Muslim speech and are thus tyrannical by definition.  

Those same people and media intentionally ignore those parts of the first amendment which do not serve their immediate political agenda but nevertheless run parallel to the right to free speech.

Muslims may practice their religious beliefs in the United States because “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”. Here, the preposition ‘respecting’ means that no ‘religious beliefs’ in the United States can be legally recognized as a natural nor legal person under the law. A religious belief is not constitutionally required to be incorporated under States’ corporate laws and thus need not be a ‘legal person’. The term ‘establishment’ means simply ‘articulable beliefs’ even in the absence of any concrete infrastructure.

For example, a specific set of religious beliefs cannot be sued in civil court. Nor can a warrant be issued under the fourth amendment to arrest a ‘religious belief’ to appear in a criminal court because all religious beliefs operate outside the jurisdiction of both civil and criminal law. That is what it means to have ‘religious freedom’ in the United States. Therefore, Islamic beliefs held by persons in the United States cannot be criminalized nor can ‘Islamic beliefs’ be named as a tortfeasor in a civil complaint. 

Islam as a set of beliefs cannot be legally prohibited from being believed by people and Islamic beliefs cannot be prohibited from being practiced in the United States and its protectorates. That is so because only ‘natural persons’ who commit an act which violates a State or Federal statute, or crime against humanity can be arrested and denied freedom under either State or Federal criminal law. 

Crusade 2

No ‘natural person’ who commits a crime in the name of a particular religion can be charged in the name of his or her religion; only a person or group of persons can be charged with violation of a clearly defined criminal statute. Further, beliefs cannot be criminally charged because neither state nor federal law can ‘recognize’ the ‘beliefs’ of a religion.

Islamic faith is not a natural or legal person. Therefore, only an individual or corporation that commits a criminal act can be held responsible even though he or she or it may claim to be Islamic. For Islamic religious beliefs cannot ‘act’ to commit crimes. Nor can Islamic religious beliefs form an ‘intent’ to commit a criminal act. Both common law and statutory law clearly state that only natural persons and legal persons can form an intent and commit an act that violates a State or Federal criminal statute.

Therefore, it would be unconstitutional for any state or for the federal government to indict a natural person as being identical to a ‘religious belief’ or to indict a religious belief as being identical to a ‘natural or legal person’.  Such a distinction between a person’s actions and his or her ‘religious beliefs’ is a manifestation of the legal superiority of the first amendment precept of separation of church and state. A man or woman cannot be detained nor killed for his or her religious beliefs. 

Neither would it be constitutional under the first amendment for the federal government to wage war against Islam anywhere for crimes committed by an individual or group of individuals even though those people may claim to be adherents to Islamic beliefs. For to wage war against Islam everywhere would be to wage war not against natural persons but against ‘Islamic religious beliefs’ and the idea which gives rise to those beliefs and therefore it would be war against all Muslims in the United States, too.

YOU MAY BE LEGALLY DECEIVED, by Dr. Steven Nur Ahmed

lcdc-liar-main_full

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” (First Amendment, United States Constitution).

 

Read carefully the two clauses: “Congress shall make no law 1)… abridging the freedom of speech and 2) or the press…” What those two clauses mean is that Congress cannot deny any citizen their right to speak or publish to the general public including the world public. But the right to speak and publish is double edged. Under the Constitution you may be legally deceived.

 

Freedom of speech in the United States does not limit a person, government, for-profit or non-profit corporation from lying to you.  Everyone in the United States has a LEGAL right to tell the truth or to lie to you. Once you understand this fact you will understand why there is so much controversy in media, economics, religion, and politics. Therefore, no person except under oath in a court of law can be prosecuted for perjury. There are only a few exceptions under the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Other government agencies are vague in their policies about lying to the public.

 

For example, in New World Communications of Tampa, Florida v. Akre, 866 So.2d 1231 (Dist. Ct. App. Fla. 2003) the court’s interpretation of FCC Section 448.102 concluded that “News broadcasters have no obligation to tell the truth.” this is so, they reasoned, because the FCC news distortion policy is not qualified as a law or statute.

 

Given these legal facts one should not be surprised that politicians make outrageous lies when campaigning. They know that their speech is legally protected speech as long as they do not tell such lies in a court of law under oath.  They even know that they can lie in court as long as they are not under oath.  But politicians are not the only ones who lie unabashedly to the public.

 

Media personalities also know that lying is protected speech. So, they purposely generate controversy on important issues to debunk truth or to simply deceive the public.

 

Religious spokes persons know that they too have a legal right to lie under the Constitution. Their lying far exceeds the lies politicians make because they preach more often to the public.  Anyone in the Unites States can claim that they are ‘God’ or God’s Messenger or that they are filled with the ‘holy spirit’.  They have a legal right to express that under the constitution. It does not matter that they are lying. No one or government can prohibit them from making such claims. Unlike politicians, such religious persons can even make such claims in a court of law under oath and not be prosecuted. So, what should truth seekers do under these circumstances? There is an easy solution to the problem of both lying politicians and religious frauds.

 

Every politician running for a national Federal office from president on down to the Congress should be made to submit to a lie detector test administered by neutral expert citizens from whom they seek votes not from his or her official party affiliates.

 

So egregious has the level of political and religious deceit become that every religious spokes person who makes a claim to divinity or the holy spirit or some other non-human mandate to speak to the people should be forced to submit to a lie detector test. Lie detector testing is standard practice in the FBI, CIA, DEA, the military, and in other high security venues of government.  Our personal security as citizens is just as important.

 

If in either case the party refuses to submit to a lie detector test they should be summarily dismissed as a liar and thus should get no support from the people or particular religious institution.

 

Lie detector tests are not admissible in a court of law as evidence to prosecute or support a claim for the plaintiff but they can facilitate the public with weeding out those who would deceive us.  You will be shocked at the numbers of political and religious liars who refuse to take the test or who fail it.

 

Welcome to Earth Colony: WE, THE PEOPLE, ARE IN CHARGE!

 

war2

Though the moral argument for a ‘just war’ has its roots in older Indian texts; the Western world traces the theory to St. Augustine of Hippo, St. Thomas Aquinas, and later schools of thought in Europe.  The idea is based upon ‘proportionate justice’.  Proportionate justice in turn is based upon the assumption that rewards and punishments can be meted out rationally and thus fairly.

The theory of just war belies yet another assumption.  That assumption is that moral people can determine whether or not an act of military aggression is justified based upon facts and if warranted how much aggression should be acted out on an aggressor.

They also argued that a war is unjust and illegitimate if it is rationalized on the grounds of ‘national self-interests’, ‘individual interests’ or if the people needed to support the war do not want war.  Here, they clearly assumed that a democratic scale of measure would be used to make decisions on war and peace.

One problem the American people face is that the plutocrats who have amassed control of Federal and State governments do not act upon moral grounds unless the consequences of doing so will benefit them.  We are left with this fact.  Plutocrats generally are amoral persons and some of them are evil.  Therefore, theological or philosophical moral arguments against a military strike on Syria would not be persuasive to them.

Yet another problem faced by the American people is the problem of ‘legality’.  One might think that even in the absence of theology and or philosophy at least there can be a consensus on rules or law.  But plutocrats bend, change, and ignore laws so that no matter what the circumstance their purposes are served.

The Constitution vests the American people with the power to declare war and to fund war.  Limited wars must also be approved by Congress.  Neither the President nor the Supreme Court has inherent war power.  That power is solely vested in the People who at the end of the day fight the wars and shed blood.  Nevertheless, the facts of history compel us to be on notice.

5,000 years of human history afford us not only a clear understanding about the nature of war and the kinds of persons who wage it but of the reasons for which war is waged.  War is waged to dominate, control, exploit, and profiteer off more peaceful folk and their resources.  Wars waged for those purposes are not waged on principles of legality.  On the contrary, they are waged outside of civilized law unless those laws benefit those whose intent is to plunder the wealth of others.

Therefore, arguments on the legality of a strike against Syria would not be persuasive to those who intend to wage war.  They push aside all rules of evidence that stand in their way.  For example,

One method used by the plutocrats is the ‘false-flag’ method. It is analogous to a police officer planting a gun on an innocent person or claiming that he or she saw a gun to justify either arresting or killing that innocent person.

Hitler used a false-flag to trigger the invasion of Poland.  Sixty million (60) dead later the Nuremberg War Crimes Hearing had to sort out and weigh the evil involved in World War 2.

Lyndon Johnson used a false-flag to arouse public sentiment for bombing North Vietnam.  Thirty five years later and over 50,000 dead Robert McNamara confessed that it was an unjust war. See the documentary: ‘The Fog of War’.

George Bush used a false-flag to argue that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and to arouse the American people to bomb and invade Iraq.  Now, over 50,000 casualties and 1.5 trillion dollars later it is generally acknowledged that the allegations against Iraq were false. Now, it is President Barak Obama.

The plutocrats in a faceoff with the American people subscribe to a Darwinian world view.  They are persuaded that conflict is a universal law of nature and that the stronger necessarily dominate the weaker in nature and so, too, in politics.  Theirs is an amoral theory of justice in an amoral universe, but they are rational.  It is the zero sum game; it is the game of ‘all or nothing’ they play.  So, what argument must be used by the American people to persuade them to stand down?

Only a utilitarian argument will persuade them. The American people must make a utilitarian argument to the plutocrats who have amassed control over the White House and much of Congress.  That argument to them must be that the cost of them acting against the will of the American people will immeasurably outweigh what they augur their gains or benefits to be from war with Syria.  They must be persuaded to understand that what Congress now knows is that a military strike against Syria is against the will of the people. They must be persuaded that torrents of rage will rain down on Congress and the lobbyist they are financially beholden to if the will of the people is ignored and that the rage will be unbearable.

Neither the President nor the Supreme Court has war power.  War power is solely vested in the People of the United States who at the end of the day are those who fight the wars and suffer loss of blood.  We the People must make it categorically and unequivocally clear to all that we, the People, are in charge of this government.