Heartstrings #6

Elected Dictatorships

by

Amitakh Stanford

19th September 2011

This world is familiar with authoritarian rule. Whether the dictator is a king, queen, chancellor, pontiff, president or prime minister, when a despot is in power, the people suffer. Sometimes it is the position that holds the power, other times it is the person in the position who renders it authoritarian.

The Romans had Nero and Caligula, the British endured the murderous Hanovers, especially the Georges, the French followed Napoleon in his megalomania, Germans were led by Hitler, Russians were abused by Stalin, Cambodians suffered under Pol Pot; the list goes on and on, forwards and backwards in time. Today, the dictators have dressed up their abusive powers in new clothing. Many hide behind democratic labels, but their essence and actions mirror absolute despots.

Prime Minister David Cameron is the front person for British governmental affairs. He was elected to his seat in the House of Commons by the people, and appointed by his party to lead the government. The British people did not want to bomb Libya and kill so many innocent civilian Libyans, but Cameron insisted on it, and pulled NATO (NATA) into his jealous hatred of Colonel Gaddafi. The Lords did not stop Cameron from exercising the Queen's power. In other words, the power to launch wars appears to have been abdicated to the position of the Prime Minister. A democratically elected Prime Minister is killing in Libya against the wishes of the majority of Britons. What more could define a tyrant?

The excuse for Cameron's war in Libya was that Gaddafi was wrongfully punishing and killing his own people, therefore, Libya needed to be bombed until there was a regime change. Who was Cameron to decide for the Libyan people? When British people protested in the streets of London and elsewhere, Cameron had his police arrest and imprison them. An iron-fist policy was carried out to quash any political protest. The government conveniently called all of the protesters “looters, thieves and thugs”. Very harsh prison sentences have been meted out, even to juveniles. This is how democracy works in the United Kingdom!

In Israel, boycotts have been quashed by new laws prohibiting such types of protest. In France, freedom of religious expression in public is severely restricted; they are not allowed to pray in the streets or wear religious symbols. With this sort of religious bigotry, it is no wonder that French President Sarkozy was so keen to join Cameron's war wagon, dragging France, against the wishes of the majority of French people, into war against Libya. Sarkozy was democratically elected, but he behaves like a tyrant, taking the power of war-making from the people.

American President Obama was also elected democratically. He, too, joined Cameron's bitter dispute with Gaddafi. He went to war against Libya without congressional permission or support. This was only possible because the American Congress has also abdicated its powers to the President, which goes against the Constitution of the United States, and, therefore, against the wishes of the American people.

Clearly, the Libyan war demonstrates that a single democratically elected despot can drag an entire alliance into a war, supposedly conducted for humanitarian purposes. Cameron's war against Gaddafi has led to the decimation of Libya and the killing of thousands of innocent civilians. The NATA rebels are said to be directed by people and groups who are on the American list of “foreign terrorist organizations” under the American Patriot Act. If that be the case, every American official who is responsible for sending aid to the Libyan rebels is guilty of “knowingly” providing “material support” to terrorists under 18 USC § 2339B. This would include the American Secretary of State, and even the President of America. To support known and labelled “foreign terrorist organizations” is a very serious crime in America. Yet, Britain has convinced America to violate its own laws. The American people's wishes do not count.

Recently, in the small town of Stowe, Vermont, a new branch of the American Homeland Security Agency has been established. The locals are wondering what is going on and why the HSA should be in their town. At the same time, the town is flying Union Jacks everywhere. It seems that Stowe and the HSA have completely forgotten that America had to fight a bloody war of independence from Britain.

Tent cities are springing up all over America because of such hard economic times. The recession drags on and on. So many young and old are now homeless, living in tents. Yet, the American government spends trillions of dollars prosecuting undeclared wars in the name of fighting against terrorism. Now, the Libyan war shows that NATO (NATA) is sponsoring and maintaining terrorist groups. If the NATO rebels ever take power, it will be woe to the Libyan people. One must assume that the Secretary of State put these groups on the “foreign terrorist organizations” list for good reasons.

Obama's government should not be backing terrorists. The American people are against the war. They desperately want and need help at home. The American soldiers should be told the truth. They are fighting a British despot's war. Congress could stop this war, but it will not. Instead of fighting Cameron's war against Libya, they should look after their own American people. The number of Americans living below the poverty line is heartbreaking. This should never have happened in such a once wealthy and powerful country like America! The current and past presidents have chosen to fund foreign wars instead of taking care of their own people. The nation is bankrupt from its presidential warring addiction. The recession is ongoing and heading for depression. The government has made bad choices for the people at the latter's expense. The only way to stop the inevitable economic depression in America is to stop all the foreign wars immediately.

The lawful Libyan government, under Colonel Gaddafi, has been forcibly turned into a resistance group that is fiercely fighting the NATA rebels, defending their country against extremely long odds. The Libyan people know that if the Western-sponsored rebels occupy the country, they will let the West strip it of all remaining liberties and wealth, all under the guise of enforced democracy and for supposed humanitarian purposes. The Gaddafi “insurgents” know that if the West gets military bases re-established in Libya, it will be almost impossible to eject them, as Gaddafi did earlier. One of the reasons that Gaddafi is targeted is that he closed down Western military bases in Libya.

The United Nations has occupied Korea for over 60 years. They will not leave the Sudan or other parts of Africa because of the resources there. They follow the British model of imperialistic divide and conquer. The British divided India into segments, forcing refugees to flee east and west. Berlin was divided by British design into east and west, as was all of Germany for that matter. Korea and the Sudan have been divided north and south, again by British imperial design. The Soviet Union was dismantled by the British-American alliance. Palestine is occupied by the British-American-Israeli alliance. It is all the same divide and conquer strategy. The strings of the puppeteer are concealed, but Britain and America are marionettes for the European Qualas, who have striven to convert freedom-based lands into despotic tyrannies.

The people have been tricked into thinking that if they have a democracy, they have a voice. This is an utter fraud, a terrible deception that has been played out on the people. The European Qualas have been able to convince people that if they can vote, they have freedom. Thus the deceptive argument goes, the more they vote, the freer they are. This has been carried to the extreme in Australia, where people are forced to vote in mandatory elections, and, because of this, the Australian people accept that they have freedom.

The European Qualas have so corrupted the political process, especially in the British Commonwealth countries, that people think that they are free if they have elections. They have likewise corrupted the positions of the elected officials. It is not so much that Cameron, Sarkozy and Obama are tyrants, but the positions they hold as heads of state have been corrupted into despotic seats. In other words, as their predecessors before them, they, too, have the power of despots because of the positions they occupy. These positions have systematically been enhanced in power by subtle and obvious moves directed by the Qualas and their agents. In short, there is a worldwide conspiracy to steal liberty from the people directed by the blank faces. However, this does not excuse those in the despotic seats from exercising powers contrary to true democratic principles.

The people of Britain, France and America should demand their leaders relinquish their despotic powers, especially the unilateral power to wage aggressive wars against others. They talk about democracy, yet their actions are totally in opposition to democracy. It is unjust for anyone to wield such unilateral power. Monsters have been created; the positions are too powerful for any one person to hold.

On a smaller scale, Australia has developed into a free-appearing yet authoritarian nation. Australians have virtually no express constitutional rights. Even the right to free speech is only implied. The present Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, barely holds government. Were any of her Labor Party members to vote against any of her bills, they would fail. So what Gillard does to hold onto power is to force every member of her party to vote her way. This means that the only vote in all of Australia that matters is Gillard's vote. Nothing more thoroughly defines an absolute dictator. The members of her party are doing nothing whatsoever to represent their constituencies. They must vote as die Fuhrerin demands. Gillard is ramming through the very unpopular Queen's carbon tax and ETS. She will not allow a conscience vote by any Labor members. She orders them to follow her because she is “on the right side of history”. Gillard was not even the people's choice for Prime Minister – she only occupies the position by default of the Australian political process. She sits in a tyrant's seat, and is an absolute despot, arrogantly ignoring the wishes of the majority of Australians. If this can happen on a small scale in Australia, it can certainly happen in France, Britain or America. It is ironic that nations with despotic seats are quick to call others tyrants and punish their people for having despots in power.

In regard to America, the European Qualas realised that the founders had protected Americans from European style despotism in their Constitution, which separates the powers into Legislative, Executive and Judiciary. The Qualas have been gradually stripping the power from the Congress by getting the Judiciary to usurp the power to interpret the Constitution, thereby turning the Court into a very powerful body that literally has control over all legislation. The Qualas have influenced presidents to usurp other powers from the Congress as well. The Congress, which is supposed to represent the people, has relinquished congressional power without the consent of the people. In truth, the Congress is derelict of its duties.

The former Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, Warren Burger, endorsed the Constitution as the Chairman of the Bicentennial Commission for the Constitution with these words:

In the last quarter of the 18th Century, no nation in the world was governed with separated and divided powers providing checks and balances on the exercise of authority by those who governed. A first step toward such a result was taken with the Declaration of Independence in 1776, which was followed by the Constitution drafted in Philadelphia in 1787; in 1791 the Bill of Rights was added. Each had antecedents back to the English Bill of Rights, the Magna Carta, and beyond.

The work of 55 men in Philadelphia in 1787 was another blow to the concept of the divine right of kings . . .

The principal goal of the Bicentennial Commission is to stimulate an appreciation and understanding of our national heritage – a history and civics lesson for all of us. This lesson cannot be learned without first reading and grasping the meaning of this remarkable document – the first of its kind in all human history.

The position of President has become a replacement kingship, elected every four years. The seat is one of dictatorship. The Congress is responsible for letting the people down by abdicating its powers to the Judiciary and the Executive branches of government.

Once again, the European Qualas have successfully pursued their agenda. Freedom is the antithesis of tyranny. America has almost lost all that their ancestors fought against King George III for. The Qualas have tricked Americans into giving nearly all their rights to the federal government. In 1787, the Constitution read in Article I Section 3:

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

The European Qualas agents corrupted this guarantee that every state would have a say in the federal government and the Congress by appointing their senators. In 1913, the Constitution was amended to strip the states of the power of appointment and have senators elected in open elections by the people. While this appears fairer, those with money and power are always elected and re-elected. The Qualas see to this. Since 1913, the states have lost almost all say in what goes on in the federal government. Even if the individual states opposed the position of the Presidency becoming a despotic seat, they have lost their say because they have lost their seats in the Senate.

There are those who argue that the President should be impeached for overstepping his power, but that is not the real problem. It is not the President that is the problem, but the position of the Presidency. For the people to begin reclaiming their power back, they ought to demand the repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment and return the appointment of Senators back to the individual states. Only then will the protections afforded by the separation of powers that the founders installed into the Constitution begin to return to the people. The Senate will have to answer to the individual states instead of the President. Only the Congress can constitutionally declare war. With Senators appointed, as contemplated by the founders, it is unlikely that aggressive wars will be unnecessarily waged in the future.

A call to change the regime of another country coming from a despotic seat is indeed hypocritical, unjust and completely undemocratic.

© 2011 Amitakh Stanford