Thursday, May 12, 2011

Fundamentally Speaking....


"Achieving life is not the equivalent of avoiding death."

-Ayn Rand (Author, 1905-1982)

As people are bombarded with the intricate details of the "Great Bin Laden Myth" and then debate whether the bearded cave dweller
wanted to attack rural, small town America, fundamental questions concerning the role of government are consistently popping up. Whereas, in this day and age, most people will tell you government is an absolute necessity, few can intelligently express where the line should be drawn. As government continues to severely betray the public trust with illegal wars, fraud, and debt slavery; many people are realizing government should not have any say when it comes to what people want to eat, how they medicate themselves, and what they trade between each other in the attempt to enjoy prosperity.

Life in the United States is becoming difficult to discern why we even have rules and governments; are the rules in place to help people or corporations? Recently,
the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that federal law trumps state law in allowing companies to use arbitration clause to prohibit consumers from joining class action against the companies. In this specific case, a cellular phone company had advertised a "free" phone with membership but charged the couple sales tax on the full retail price of the phone. The couple charged for deceptive practices on the $30.22 At & T was able to scam from them using deceptive corporate trickery.

"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach himself."

- Thomas Paine (Author, 1737-1809)

Thirty dollars isn't much paper money to sue for, as the Federal Reserve continues to print gobs and gobs of cash on the road to hyperinflation. This is, however, a dangerous precedent to set when we consider the Supreme Court's view of their power and the power of government. Does government have the right to tell the people what it must or mustn't eat?
Watch this clip of newly appointed Supreme Court troll Elena Kagan decline to answer whether government has a right to tell the people what they can eat (her befuddlement starts at the 0:54 mark).

Even scarier is to examine a corporation like Monsanto's relationship with the federal government's "watchdog" agency, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Policy makers like Michael Taylor, who used to be Monsanto's lawyer, jump back and forth from the FDA to Monsanto easing approval for genetically modified organisms, all of which pose a significant health risk to all living things.
Taylor was crucial in getting hormones approved to be injected into cows which can make them produce 10% to 15% more milk.

Schoolchildren act inside the government's petri-dish for control- the public school system. In Chicago's Little Village Academy,
school administrators banned lunches brought from home. Other places like San Antonio, Texas, have spent $2 million to photograph students' lunch trays and later take a snapshot of the leftovers.

Where will it end? It never will if you trust the government as a dog to its master and eat whatever they say is good for you. They abuse the people they have brainwashed the most, like their own
Army which they feed oil-contaminated Gulf shrimp.

No comments: