Competing Views: Bill Clinton v. Pastor Lindstedt

[Librarian]

Competing Views: Bill Clinton v. Pastor Lindstedt



http://www.whitenationalist.org/foru...=1962#post1962
http://whitenationalist.org/lindstedt/grenhavn.html
http://www.pastorlindstedt.org/grenhavn.html

greenhaven press, inc.
Post Office Box 289009
San Diego, CA 92198-9009
(619) 485-7424
Fax (619) 485-9549


December 8, 1998


SOUTHWESTERN MISSOURI LIBERTARIAN
SOUTHWESTERN MISSOURI LIBERTARIAN
ATTN EDITOR
RT2 B0X 2008
GRANBY MO 64844



PERMISSION IS REQUESTED to include the enclosed edition of Martin
Lindstedt's July-August, 1995 article, "UnCommon Sense," as an article
in Greenhaven Press's forthcoming anthology Terrorism, edited by
Laura Egendorf. The book will be a collection of pro and con
essays (we call them "viewpoints") on the subject and will be used in
high school and college classrooms and by students researching papers
or preparing for debates. All volumes in our Opposing Viewpoints
Series are intended to help teach critical thinking skills.

To help students more easily access the material, we retitle the
articles, insert subheads, and, if necessary, do some minor editing
(for style, to clarify time references and names, etc.; any
deletions -- usually done because of our length requirements -- are
indicated with ellipses), and insert an editorial cartoon, graphic,
or quotation from another source, which will be identified and set so
as to be obviously from another source. We credit the original source
on the first page of each article.

We ask for one-time, nonexclusive English-language rights in the U.S.
and Canada, for 4,000 copies in papercover @ $12.95 and 3,000 in
library binding @ $20.95, over 5 years, and running at about 200
pages. Publication is expected to be November 1999. If we need
someone else's permission, please tell us whom as soon as possible;
otherwise, we will accept your grant of permission as confirmation
that you are sole owner of the rights to the material referred to
above and that you control reprint rights. Please include a
statement indicating that our proposed use and editing is approved
or just sign this letter to so indicate. Please contact me if you
have any questions. Thank you!

Bob Anderson
PermissionsManager, xl38
Direct Fax: (619) 485-8019
boba@greenhaven.com

BA/pg

[Bubba Caligula]

I'm gonna blame a vast right-wing conspiracy for OKC in 1995.

[PastorLindstedt]

The Right to Revolution

*** UnCommon Sense *** -- The Right to Revolution



http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...ted=1#post1965
http://whitenationalist.org/lindsted...l#uncommonsens
http://pastorlindstedt.org/swmolb12.html#uncommonsens

Between the Revolutionary War's opening shots fired at Concord & Lexington on April 19, 1775 and the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, the Founding Fathers and the citizenry had to make a decision as to whether they would negotiate with King George to restore their rights as Englishmen or seek to found a new nation. A man called Thomas Paine published on January 10, 1776 a small pamphlet called Common Sense. Colonists up and down the seaboard read his stirring call to action. George Washington himself said it turned doubt into decision -- for independence.

This is the first part of a series. Its goal is to also turn doubt into decision -- to restore a Constitutional Republic -- by all and any means necessary.

** The Right to Revolution **

THIS MONTH WE CELEBRATED A HOLIDAY commemorating the Revolution which founded this country. The true meaning of the Declaration of Independence is Mankind's Right to Revolution. For example, examine these first key phrases of that document:

WHEN in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. -- We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

I CANNOT SUM UP ANY BETTER THIS RELATIONSHIP of the state as servant and the Individual as Master. If a person withdraws his consent from government, then government has no further right to control his actions, not that it ever did have a right to rule, only an obligation to serve and protect. That person can be said to have a Right to Revolution.

The other great document which arose from the First American Revolutionary War, the Constitution, is silent on what happens if one party, the one supposed to be weaker, starts violating the provisions of this social contract. It's no secret the government violates the Constitution and steals the lives, liberties, and property of its citizens. It's no longer bound by Law. The state will not respect the Individual unless the Individual has the power to destroy the state. Then it's too late. There's a simple reason why the Constitution is silent regarding government violation of Law: It's self-evident the older document, the Declaration of Independence, takes precedence. Then a person's Right to Revolution can no longer be delayed or denied.

The current system is based upon theft, not law. Social Security steals from the earnings of the young to give the elderly a pittance of what could have been retained savings. The educational system steals children from their parents and money from property owners to indoctrinate children to worship government. The poison fruits from this poison tree are illiteracy and barbarism. Politicians, bureaucrats, and judges produce new decrees enabling "government-enforcement" agencies to terrorize citizens with impunity, putting the lie to badges saying they "Protect and Serve." Huge national debts intended to enslave future generations -- if they allow it -- are run up by politicians to buy votes today. But the death of the current system is in sight. Soon there will be nothing left to steal, as bands of degenerate looters roam the land, clawing for dwindling means of survival, and honest men produce only what they can defend.

Although the present regime pretends to be a democracy where the people rule, what happens when people withdraw their consent, their persons and property from government clutches? We know full well the consequences of taking back our freedoms. Our property is seized by the IRS. We might spend some time in jail. We might even be murdered by government agents. Ask Randy Weaver or the ghosts of one of the Koresh children.

Today, if you would be free, you better figure out the costs involved. Once you choose freedom, your only choices will be either to knuckle under for the moment or fight. But once you start knuckling under, then you will do it again, because cowardice is habit-forming and you probably won't fight until you are cornered like a rat. He who lives by running away, lives to run another day. If you choose to fight, then you will have to keep fighting until either the enemy is dead or you are. There is no resigning from the underground.

Every day when I hear government officials lying about their crimes, from the First Crook on down to the local policeman, I detect the tone of "You must believe this because you must." I am supposed to become an accomplice in their thefts, kidnappings and murders by the act of willfully believing outright lies. Supposedly, patriotism consists of condoning government crime because the government does all this for me and in my name. Well, I'm not buying this evil nonsense any more. Government is a fictional entity created in our own minds, and since we create it willingly in our own minds, we find it beautiful. But the reality is a nightmare, and the actors are evil men doing evil for its own sake, believing themselves safe from any accountability. No more! No more!

The government is morally, mentally, and financially bankrupt. It forces free men to hand over further credit at gunpoint. Civilization is breaking down. The future is one vast grey cloud of totalitarianism from here to the horizon. These now and future great hurts seem bearable only to those who would benefit from them. For the rest of us, enough is enough, and we will not suffer any more wrongs, simply because things were better in the past. Now we will fight, and bring about a different, hopefully better future.

.

FOR EVERY SINGLE EVIL AGAINST WHICH THE FOUNDING FATHERS REBELLED, we have allowed ten.

Taxes? Even King George III didn't dare impose an income tax. The colonists threw subsidized, cheaper, better tea than the smuggled stuff into Boston Harbor. The colonists rebelled over total taxes of less than five percent per person. Compare that to the 70 percent taxation of today.

Loss of Liberty? This country imprisons over 1.3 million people and we have just beaten Russia as the country which imprisons the most of its citizens per capita. Over one half of one percent of our citizens are in jails. Some of them deserve to be in prison. But most of them are in prison not because they violated another human being's life, liberty, or property but because they didn't obey the government monster's latest whim.

Government murder? George III's redcoats only killed five Bostonians at the Boston Massacre, and they had to undergo trial. How many people were killed at the Waco Holocaust by the "government-enforcers" of our day using flame-throwing tanks? Ninety-some men, women, and children. The rascals responsible have not only not been tried for murder, they got promoted. The rest of us get to see unhung murderers investigating themselves and smarmily telling us that "Mistakes were made, but they brought it upon themselves." Ignored is the fact gun-control laws violate the Constitution and are nothing more than a power grab by cowardly Fascists who dislike the idea of being shot or hung by an enraged populace. These cowardly jack-booted government thugs went ballistic because the trapped Davidians shot back. They lied about drug labs in order to use tanks, and soon after the fire destroyed the evidence. They cut those people off from outside contact, and now that they are dead, they can make up whatever story they please about the people they killed. Government agencies investigated themselves and we are supposed to believe the resulting whitewash? The Nazis, the Communists and George III, for all their faults, were far more honest.

Now Oklahoma City comes up and we are supposed to believe government's continually changing stories and how targeted Patriot groups are responsible for the bombing. When you look at factors of ability, opportunity, and who benefits from this crime, there can be only one credible suspect: Criminal Government. By trying to blame the armed citizenry for this crime, we see not the beginning, but the middle of the beginning of a great civil war between the people and their would-be kings.

WHAT WOULD THOMAS PAINE HAVE TO SAY, if he were alive today, about the actions of the degenerate government of our time? Perhaps we can look at what he had to say about King George III after his troops burned down Portland Maine in the winter of 1775 and drove the inhabitants out to freeze.

Men of passive tempers look somewhat lightly over the offenses of Britain, {government} and, still hoping for the best, are apt to call out, Come we shall be friends again for all this. But examine the passions and feelings of mankind. Bring the doctrine of reconciliation to the touchstone of nature, and then tell me, whether you can hereafter love, honor, and faithfully serve the power that hath carried fire and sword into your land? If you cannot do all these, then are you only deceiving yourselves, and by your delay bringing ruin upon posterity. Your future connection with Britain, {government} whom you can neither love nor honor, will be forced and unnatural, and being formed only on the plan of present convenience, will in a little time fall into a relapse more wretched than the first. But if you say, you can still pass the violations {by government} over, then I ask, Hath your house been burnt? Hath your property been destroyed before your face? Are your wife and children destitute of a bed to lie on, or bread to live on? Have you lost a parent or a child by their hands, and yourself the ruined and wretched survivor? If you have not, then are you not a judge of those who have. But if you have, and can still shake hands with the murderers, then are you unworthy the name of husband, father, friend, or lover, and whatever may be your rank or title in life, you have the heart of a coward, and the spirit of a sycophant.

AMEN. FURTHERMORE . . .

Reconciliation is a fallacious dream. Nature hath deserted the connection, and Art cannot supply her place. For, as Milton wisely expresses, "never can true reconcilement grow where wounds of deadly hate have pierced so deep."

No man was a warmer wisher for reconciliation than myself, before the fatal nineteenth of April, 1775 (Massacre at Lexington),{Waco, Ruby Ridge, and Oklahoma City, April 19, 1992, 1993, 1995} but the moment the event of that day was made known, I rejected the hardened, sullen tempered Pharaoh of England {Washington} for ever; and disdain the wretch, that with the pretended title of Father of his people, can unfeelingly hear of their slaughter, and composedly sleep with their blood upon his soul. . .

I have heard some men say, many of whom I believe spoke without thinking, that they dreaded independence, {freedom} fearing that it would produce civil wars. It is but seldom that our first thoughts are truly correct, and that is the case here; for there are ten times more to dread from a patched up connection than from independence. I make the sufferers case my own, and I protest, that were I driven from house and home, my property destroyed, and my circumstances ruined, that as man, sensible of injuries, I could never relish the doctrine of reconciliation, or consider myself bound thereby. . . .

Every day wears out the little remains of kindred between us and them, and can there be any reason to hope, that as the relationship expires, the affection will increase, or that we shall agree better, when we have ten times more and greater concerns to quarrel over than ever?

Ye that tell us of harmony and reconciliation, can ye restore to us the time that is past? Can ye give to prostitution its former innocence? Neither can ye reconcile Britain {the government} and America {the people}. . .

We fight neither for revenge nor conquest; neither from pride nor passion; we are not insulting the world with our fleets and armies, nor ravaging the globe for plunder. Beneath the shade of our own vines are we attacked; in our own houses, and on our own lands, is the violence committed against us. We view our enemies {terrorcrat government enforcers} in the characters of highwaymen and housebreakers, {houseburners} and having no defence for ourselves in the civil law; are obliged to punish them by the military one, and apply the sword, {rifle} in the very case, where you have before now, applied the halter {rope}.

.

THIS PAINE WAS NO UNCLE TOM. He saw what needed to be done, so he urged his countrymen to exercise their Right and fulfill their Duty, and so they waged their Revolution.