Corrupt Government
See other Corrupt Government Articles
Title: ‘Neutralizing’ John Lennon: One Man Against the ‘Monster’
Source:
The Rutherford Institute
URL Source: http://www.rutherford.org/publicati ... on_one_man_against_the_monster
Published: Oct 5, 2015
Author: John Whitehead
Post Date: 2015-10-06 18:19:44 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 5778
Comments: 31
“You gotta remember, establishment, it’s just a name for evil. The monster doesn’t care whether it kills all the students or whether there’s a revolution. It’s not thinking logically, it’s out of control.”—John Lennon (1969) John Lennon, born 75 years ago on October 9, 1940, was a musical genius and pop cultural icon. He was also a vocal peace protester and anti-war activist and a high-profile example of the lengths to which the U.S. government will go to persecute those who dare to challenge its authority. Long before Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden were being castigated for blowing the whistle on the government’s war crimes and the National Security Agency’s abuse of its surveillance powers, it was Lennon who was being singled out for daring to speak truth to power about the government’s warmongering, his phone calls monitored and data files collected on his activities and associations. For a little while, at least, Lennon became enemy number one in the eyes of the U.S. government. Years after Lennon’s assassination it would be revealed that the FBI had collected 281 pages of files on him, including song lyrics, a letter from J. Edgar Hoover directing the agency to spy on the musician, and various written orders calling on government agents to set the stage to set Lennon up for a drug bust. As reporter Jonathan Curiel observes, “The FBI’s files on Lennon … read like the writings of a paranoid goody-two-shoes.” As the New York Times notes, “Critics of today’s domestic surveillance object largely on privacy grounds. They have focused far less on how easily government surveillance can become an instrument for the people in power to try to hold on to power. ‘The U.S. vs. John Lennon’ … is the story not only of one man being harassed, but of a democracy being undermined.” Indeed, as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, all of the many complaints we have about government today—surveillance, militarism, corruption, harassment, SWAT team raids, political persecution, spying, overcriminalization, etc.—were present in Lennon’s day and formed the basis of his call for social justice, peace and a populist revolution. For all of these reasons, the U.S. government was obsessed with Lennon, who had learned early on that rock music could serve a political end by proclaiming a radical message. More importantly, Lennon saw that his music could mobilize the public and help to bring about change. Lennon believed in the power of the people. Unfortunately, as Lennon recognized: “The trouble with government as it is, is that it doesn’t represent the people. It controls them.” However, as Martin Lewis writing for Time notes: “John Lennon was not God. But he earned the love and admiration of his generation by creating a huge body of work that inspired and led. The appreciation for him deepened because he then instinctively decided to use his celebrity as a bully pulpit for causes greater than his own enrichment or self-aggrandizement.” For instance, in December 1971 at a concert in Ann Arbor, Mich., Lennon took to the stage and in his usual confrontational style belted out “John Sinclair,” a song he had written about a man sentenced to 10 years in prison for possessing two marijuana cigarettes. Within days of Lennon’s call for action, the Michigan Supreme Court ordered Sinclair released. What Lennon did not know at the time was that government officials had been keeping strict tabs on the ex-Beatle they referred to as “Mr. Lennon.” FBI agents were in the audience at the Ann Arbor concert, “taking notes on everything from the attendance (15,000) to the artistic merits of his new song.” The U.S. government was spying on Lennon. By March 1971, when his “Power to the People” single was released, it was clear where Lennon stood. Having moved to New York City that same year, Lennon was ready to participate in political activism against the U. S. government, the “monster” that was financing the war in Vietnam. The release of Lennon’s Sometime in New York City album, which contained a radical anti-government message in virtually every song and depicted President Richard Nixon and Chinese Chairman Mao Tse-tung dancing together nude on the cover, only fanned the flames of the conflict to come. The official U.S. war against Lennon began in earnest in 1972 after rumors surfaced that Lennon planned to embark on a U.S. concert tour that would combine rock music with antiwar organizing and voter registration. Nixon, fearing Lennon’s influence on about 11 million new voters (1972 was the first year that 18-year-olds could vote), had the ex-Beatle served with deportation orders “in an effort to silence him as a voice of the peace movement.” Then again, the FBI has had a long history of persecuting, prosecuting and generally harassing activists, politicians, and cultural figures, most notably among the latter such celebrated names as folk singer Pete Seeger, painter Pablo Picasso, comic actor and filmmaker Charlie Chaplin, comedian Lenny Bruce and poet Allen Ginsberg. Among those most closely watched by the FBI was Martin Luther King Jr., a man labeled by the FBI as “the most dangerous and effective Negro leader in the country.” With wiretaps and electronic bugs planted in his home and office, King was kept under constant surveillance by the FBI with the aim of “neutralizing” him. He even received letters written by FBI agents suggesting that he either commit suicide or the details of his private life would be revealed to the public. The FBI kept up its pursuit of King until he was felled by a hollow-point bullet to the head in 1968. While Lennon was not—as far as we know—being blackmailed into suicide, he was the subject of a four-year campaign of surveillance and harassment by the U.S. government (spearheaded by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover), an attempt by President Richard Nixon to have him “neutralized” and deported. As Adam Cohen of the New York Times points out, “The F.B.I.’s surveillance of Lennon is a reminder of how easily domestic spying can become unmoored from any legitimate law enforcement purpose. What is more surprising, and ultimately more unsettling, is the degree to which the surveillance turns out to have been intertwined with electoral politics.” As Lennon’s FBI file shows, memos and reports about the FBI’s surveillance of the anti-war activist had been flying back and forth between Hoover, the Nixon White House, various senators, the FBI and the U.S. Immigration Office. Nixon’s pursuit of Lennon was relentless and in large part based on the misperception that Lennon and his comrades were planning to disrupt the 1972 Republican National Convention. The government’s paranoia, however, was misplaced. Left-wing activists who were on government watch lists and who shared an interest in bringing down the Nixon Administration had been congregating at Lennon’s New York apartment. But when they revealed that they were planning to cause a riot, Lennon balked. As he recounted in a 1980 interview, “We said, We ain’t buying this. We’re not going to draw children into a situation to create violence so you can overthrow what? And replace it with what? . . . It was all based on this illusion, that you can create violence and overthrow what is, and get communism or get some right-wing lunatic or a left-wing lunatic. They’re all lunatics.” Despite the fact that Lennon was not part of the “lunatic” plot, the government persisted in its efforts to have him deported. Equally determined to resist, Lennon dug in and fought back. Every time he was ordered out of the country, his lawyers delayed the process by filing an appeal. Finally, in 1976, Lennon won the battle to stay in the country when he was granted a green card. As he said afterwards, “I have a love for this country.... This is where the action is. I think we’ll just go home, open a tea bag, and look at each other.” Lennon’s time of repose didn’t last long, however. By 1980, he had re-emerged with a new album and plans to become politically active again. The old radical was back and ready to cause trouble. In his final interview on Dec. 8, 1980, Lennon mused, “The whole map’s changed and we’re going into an unknown future, but we’re still all here, and while there’s life there’s hope.” That very night, when Lennon returned to his New York apartment building, Mark David Chapman was waiting in the shadows. As Lennon stepped outside the car to greet the fans congregating outside, Chapman, in an eerie echo of the FBI’s moniker for Lennon, called out, “Mr. Lennon!” Lennon turned and was met with a barrage of gunfire as Chapman—dropping into a two-handed combat stance—emptied his .38-caliber pistol and pumped four hollow-point bullets into his back and left arm. Lennon stumbled, staggered forward and, with blood pouring from his mouth and chest, collapsed to the ground. John Lennon was pronounced dead on arrival at the hospital. He had finally been “neutralized.” Yet where those who neutralized the likes of John Lennon, Martin Luther King Jr., John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X, Robert Kennedy and others go wrong is in believing that you can murder a movement with a bullet and a madman. Thankfully, Lennon’s legacy lives on in his words, his music and his efforts to speak truth to power. As Yoko Ono shared in a 2014 letter to the parole board tasked with determining whether Chapman should be released: “A man of humble origin, [John Lennon] brought light and hope to the whole world with his words and music. He tried to be a good power for the world, and he was. He gave encouragement, inspiration and dreams to people regardless of their race, creed and gender.” Sadly, not much has changed for the better in the world since Lennon walked among us. Peace remains out of reach. Activism and whistleblowers continue to be prosecuted for challenging the government’s authority. Militarism is on the rise, with police acquiring armed drones, all the while the governmental war machine continues to wreak havoc on innocent lives. Just recently, for example, U.S. military forces carried out airstrikes in Afghanistan that left a Doctors without Borders hospital in ruins, killing several of its medical personnel and patients, including children. For those of us who joined with John Lennon to imagine a world of peace, it’s getting harder to reconcile that dream with the reality of the American police state. For those who do dare to speak up, they are labeled dissidents, troublemakers, terrorists, lunatics, or mentally ill and tagged for surveillance, censorship or, worse, involuntary detention. As Lennon shared in a 1968 interview: I think all our society is run by insane people for insane objectives… I think we’re being run by maniacs for maniacal means. If anybody can put on paper what our government and the American government and the Russian… Chinese… what they are actually trying to do, and what they think they’re doing, I’d be very pleased to know what they think they’re doing. I think they’re all insane. But I’m liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That’s what’s insane about it.” So what’s the answer? Lennon had a multitude of suggestions. “If everyone demanded peace instead of another television set, then there’d be peace.” “Produce your own dream. If you want to save Peru, go save Peru. It’s quite possible to do anything, but not to put it on the leaders….You have to do it yourself. That’s what the great masters and mistresses have been saying ever since time began. They can point the way, leave signposts and little instructions in various books that are now called holy and worshipped for the cover of the book and not for what it says, but the instructions are all there for all to see, have always been and always will be. There’s nothing new under the sun. All the roads lead to Rome. And people cannot provide it for you. I can’t wake you up. You can wake you up. I can’t cure you. You can cure you.” “Life is very short, and there’s no time for fussing and fighting my friends.” “Peace is not something you wish for; It’s something you make, Something you do, Something you are, And something you give away.” “If you want peace, you won’t get it with violence.” “Say you want a revolution / We better get on right away / Well you get on your feet / And out on the street / Singing power to the people.” And my favorite advice of all: “All you need is love. Love is all you need.”
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Duhhhhh! Every freaking one of them was a dedicated Communist that called for the destruction of America. It would have been criminal to NOT have investigated and watched them. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Actually they were all accused of being communists, and Lennon's own statements show that he was not calling for the destruction of the United States. Nixon’s pursuit of Lennon was relentless and in large part based on the misperception that Lennon and his comrades were planning to disrupt the 1972 Republican National Convention. The government’s paranoia, however, was misplaced. Left-wing activists who were on government watch lists and who shared an interest in bringing down the Nixon Administration had been congregating at Lennon’s New York apartment. But when they revealed that they were planning to cause a riot, Lennon balked. As he recounted in a 1980 interview, “We said, We ain’t buying this. We’re not going to draw children into a situation to create violence so you can overthrow what? And replace it with what? . . . It was all based on this illusion, that you can create violence and overthrow what is, and get communism or get some right-wing lunatic or a left-wing lunatic. They’re all lunatics.” In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much His statements might not have stated that,but if the US had followed his suggestions it would have been the end of our country. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
You say you want a revolution You say you'll change the constitution In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much 20/20 hindsight The gov't should have spent more resources spying on the Obamas; and less time spying on John Lennon "Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD . . . " ~Psalm 33:12a
Pre-Yoko. BTW,not being for a violent revolution doesn't mean you are against a political revolution. John Lennon was a globalist asshole that talked a good game,but moved to the US so he could avoid paying the high taxes in England that paid for everything he supported politically. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Quite a few of us are in favor of a political revolution, why aren't you? 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 In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much Why is any sane person in favor of the current political revolution,which happens to be the only game being played? Yes,I am and will always remain opposed to ANY political revolution that threatens American sovereignty (which dipshit Lennon was promoting),and the US Constitution/Bill of Rights. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I'm pretty sure that John Lennon would have been just "okey dokey" with the current white hut regime and dear leader, the boy emperor. And all the rest of his Marxist allies in his party. What we have now is what Lennon (Lenin?) was singing about. "Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD . . . " ~Psalm 33:12a
I disagree - Lennon was against corrupt and criminal government period. I don't think he distinguished between Democrats and Republicans. If a Dem had been President instead of Nixon, Lennon would be just as adamant about ending the war and would have come under just as much FBI scrutiny. What we have now is what Lennon (Lenin?) was singing about. What we have now is everything Lennon was against. He may have been a utopian dreamer, but to paint him as a violent revolutionary is disingenuous. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much And all the rest of his Marxist allies in his party. He would have gotten wood at the mere thought of it,and would have been heartbroken if he didn't get invited to the Off White House for parties. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I disagree - Lennon was against corrupt and criminal government period. I don't think he distinguished between Democrats and Republicans. HorseHillary! It was a public pose. Like all the other lefties multi-millionaire dreamers,he was in love with the theory and the public image the theory gained him,but in real life he was a hypocrite that wasn't willing to pay the taxes his publicly posed theories promoted. Ever heard of the Beatles song "Taxman"? Lennon promoted all the policies of the British Labour Party in public,but he moved to the US to avoid the huge tax bill millionaires in England have to pay to support their corrupt system. At least Paul remained in England put his money where his mouth was. If a Dem had been President instead of Nixon, Lennon would be just as adamant about ending the war Two points,here. 1: Who ISN'T against war? Do you really think Nixon was happy about it? 2: He was playing to his audience. Otherwise he would have been going after the North Vietnamese in public even stronger than he went after Nixon. After all,it was the North Vietnamese that were the invaders,not the South Vietnamese and not the Americans. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Lennon promoted all the policies of the British Labour Party in public,but he moved to the US to avoid the huge tax bill millionaires in England have to pay to support their corrupt system. You think the song "Taxman" was PROMOTING the British tax system? So what if he moved to the U.S. to avoid paying exorbitant taxes in England? 1: Who ISN'T against war? Do you really think Nixon was happy about it? Now you are claiming that Nixon was AGAINST the Viet Nam war? 2: He was playing to his audience. Otherwise he would have been going after the North Vietnamese in public even stronger than he went after Nixon. Your love for the Viet Nam war has clouded your objectivity. That entire debacle will forever remain a dark stain in American history. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much Do you understand everything backwards? HOW could you possibly read what I wrote and understand it to say that song promotes the British tax system? True,LENNON promoted the British tax system for others,but not for him. He hauled ass to America,where he didn't have to pay so much in taxes to support the leftist crap he pushed in public. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
It would be simpler for you to just admit you don't have the first clue about what you are writing about,and be done with it. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Again, so what if he came here to avoid taxes? The point is that he was not the Communist "menace" that you and J Edgar Hoover make him out to be. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much You made the claim that Lennon should have protested against the North Vietnamese. Yeah - like it was their fault. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much You: I disagree - Lennon was against corrupt and criminal government period. I don't think he distinguished between Democrats and Republicans. You: If a Dem had been President instead of Nixon, Lennon would be just as adamant about ending the war and would have come under just as much FBI scrutiny. You: What we have now is everything Lennon was against. You: He may have been a utopian dreamer, but to paint him as a violent revolutionary is disingenuous. I just don't see it that way. Let me go back to two famous anti- war "activists" of the 60s and the 70s to illustrate my point - Jane Fonda and folksinger Joan Baez. JOAN BAEZ V. JANE FONDA Don Kates, the author of many books on gun control and the history of gun rights and gun control, passed along these recollections from a friend who was a Vietnam war vet. They concern two very different activists against the Vietnam War: Jane Fonda and Joan Baez: - See more at: http://historynewsnetwork.org/blog/11490#sthash.ZvAJ5aH6.dpuf I see John Lennon as more of a "Jane Fonda" type of Leftist versus a Joan Baez type. "Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD . . . " ~Psalm 33:12a
I haven't read anything that would indicate that Lennon gave support to the North Vietnamese like Fonda did. You posted (referring to Fonda) : ...she so clearly sided with a party to a war: North Vietnam. She absolutely refuses to acknowledge that she wasn't just a part of the anti-war or pacifist fringe in the United States at the time, but was in fact a true believer and supporter of North Vietnam during its war with the United States. If you have any quotes where Lennon said or did similar things, I'd like to see them. Ms. Baez and Gen Tayor were trapped in Hanoi during the entire"Linebacker II" Christmas bombing raids over and around that city--in which I again was heavily involved. Ms Baez made no bones about her pacifist beliefs and her hatred of wars. Yet, even after suffering through some of the most intense bombing raids of the entire Vietnam War, when asked by her hosts/watchers to make anti-US statements, she stuck to her beliefs, saying she hated all war by all sides, no matter what. I am saying that Lennon's views were more aligned with those of Joan Baez - they both hated war in all forms. Which also leads me to believe that Lennon would be opposed to the current war party (Democrats) as well as the previous one (Republicans). I think both Baez and Lennon realized that both parties are equally pro war. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much Good post, thanks for sharing it. Non auro, sed ferro, recuperando est patria
I think both Baez and Lennon realized that both parties are equally pro war. It's not so much what Lennon said or did - it's what he didn't do or say. A lot of the "coffee-house" liberals and Leftists of the 60s & 70s - the Greenwich Village types - were simply partisans. They had a perfect villain in Nixon. He was paranoid and looked the part. A perfect foil. BTW - I'm not here to defend Nixon - he was no conservative. But post-Vietnam, there were certainly no shortage of wars for Lennon to oppose. How about the Cambodian Khmer Rouge (75-79) for an example? Oh wait - that was Communist. Never mind. Funny how Lennon's anti war "activism" seemed to coincide with just the VN War. And then there's this (from the article): Hmmm . . . who came to ascendancy in 1980? Why, none other than that old bane of the Left, the Gipper himself. Coincidence? "Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD . . . " ~Psalm 33:12a
Again, so what if he came here to avoid taxes? It's good to know that hypocrisy doesn't disturb you when it comes to people you admire and who would rule over you,given a chance. The point is that he was not the Communist "menace" that you and J Edgar Hoover make him out to be. I never said he was a communist "menance". He DID support communism in words and deeds,and the idiot he married was one of the "stylish Marxists" of the 60's and 70's that was personally worth millions,and wouldn't spend a nickel of her own money to feed a starving baby. Lennon was a communist "SYMPATHIZER" who identified with all of their agenda on an "intellectual" basis,but just didn't think any of it should apply to the "more evolved people" like him. He just wanted to feel noble and good about himself while pretending to care about other people. Like I said before,he was a "shithead". Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Yeah - like it was their fault. It WAS their fault,you freaking cretin! WTF do you think it was that invaded South Vietnam? What next,are you going to try to claim that WW-2 wasn't the fault of the Japanese and the Germans? Well,to be fair it was also the fault of the Soviet Union,that gave them permission and promised to give them money and material support. China was also involved in this,too. Did you not learn ANY history in school? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Thank you! I have no idea HTF "Mr Wage and Price Controls" became known as a "conservative". A "Commissar" maybe,but not a conservative. BUT....,to give him the credit he deserves,he DID do his duty to try to end the VN war by taking the war to the enemy in their marshalling areas by invading Laos and going after their supply and infrastructure there was well as their main force combat units. As for the North Vietnamese,they were STILL claiming they had no troops in the south the day their tanks rolled into Saigon,and the press let them get away with it. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
It was the staged Gulf of Tonkin false flag operation which led to the U.S. sending troops there. Johnson and Secretary of Defense McNamara used it to coerce Congress and the American people to start a war they neither wanted nor needed. The effect was to give Johnson legal justification for deploying US conventional forces and the commencement of open warfare against North Vietnam. Of course we already had advisors there, but this pack of lies foisted on the American citizens was what was actually to blame. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much It was the staged Gulf of Tonkin false flag operation which led to the U.S. sending troops there. Ok,you really are an ignorant fool. The North Vietnamese started infiltrating South Vietnam as soon as it was created,and had mainforce NVA units all along the Ho Chi Minh Trail years before the staged "Gulf of Tonkin Incident". Truth to tell,and even according to the North Vietnamese,they started planning on taking over the whole country after WW-2 while they were still fighting the Japanese. Who the hell do you think it was that provided the money and leadership,as well as the personnel to create the Viet Cong? Johnson and Secretary of Defense McNamara used it to coerce Congress and the American people to start a war they neither wanted nor needed. You might want to consider learning some actual history. The First American soldier killed in Viet Nam was killed on Sept 26,1945. www.history.com/this-day-...soldier-killed-in-vietnam I may be wrong,but I remember the Gulf of Tonkin incident happening much later than 1945. I PERSONALLY know US Army advisers that were sent to VN in 1961 to observe and advise the SVN government on how to deal with the guerrillas being sent down from NVN to overthrow their government. IIRC,the first advisers were actually sent in 1959,but I didn't know any of them. The first OBSERVERS were sent DURING WW-2. Pure unadulterated HorseHillary. You are clearly the product of a leftist education. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
No one is disputing that the U.S. had an advisory presence in Viet Nam at that time and into the 50's and early sixties. The point here is that U.S. combat units were not deployed until 1965, and only after Johnson used the Tonkin incident as a pretext to war. What the hell did we gain by getting involved in that war anyways? In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much WRONG! Tbe first CONVENTIONAL COMBAT UNITS were not deployed until 1965. AND....,LBJ didn't really need the bogus attack on the US Navy to justify sending in ground troops because there were already US Soldiers fighting the communists on the ground in VN as advisers. The US Navy attack was just a handy tool to get attention and provide him with the cover he needed. USSF troops fighting in VN was known and had been reported on before then,and was "old news". Truth to tell,he didn't even need the bogus attack on the US Navy. He was the president and the Dims had firm control over Congress. All he needed to do was give the order. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
He's a John Lennon lovin, drug lovin, cop hating, rich hating Occupy tool. Of course he's been brainwashed left. If Hillary woke up one morning with a love for guns... she'd be a Deckard with saggy tits. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much Way to go, queer bait - jumping in to the thread to post your usual blather. Here's the facts: yeah I like John Lennon, so what? The guy has contributed more to society with one song than you have ever done in your entire pathetic life. Drugs? Don't use them. But it doesn't take a meth-head to realize the toll that your precious drug war is taking on the freedoms and liberties of all Americans, not just drug users. Cop hating? Yeah, as I have told you time and time again, I hate the bad ones....I hate the system that allows cops to walk off scot-free after committing egregious crimes against innocent citizens. I hate the fact that GOOD cops are ostracized, harassed and threatened for blowing the whistle on the bad ones. I hate the fact that bad cops are able to go to another department after being FIRED for misconduct at their previous department and I especially hate their us versus them militarized mindset and the highway robbery committed under insane asset forfeiture laws. You don't fucking get it, do you badge bunny? Your entire world view is based on your "service" as a cop. Rich hating Occupy tool? I defy you to post a link to any comment that I made supporting the Occupy movement. I hate the ELITIST scum who game the system to accumulate their wealth with the help of paid-off politicians and who wish to see the "useless eaters" as they call us eliminated. I hate the elitist pricks like Bill Gates with their eugenics beliefs, the Rothschild's, Goldman Sachs and other New World Order scum who have looted for centuries. As far as your Hillary comment - it is just too absurd to even comment on. You are indeed the epitome of a bleating, idiot sheeple - your simplistic, knee-jerk responses are reminiscent of the stereotypical low IQ Republican party whore - no imagination, railing impotently at the world, spewing your ignorance and stupidity for all to see. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to MuchThen again, the FBI has had a long history of persecuting, prosecuting and generally harassing activists, politicians, and cultural figures, most notably among the latter such celebrated names as folk singer Pete Seeger, painter Pablo Picasso, comic actor and filmmaker Charlie Chaplin, comedian Lenny Bruce and poet Allen Ginsberg.
#2. To: sneakypete (#1)
Every freaking one of them was a dedicated Communist that called for the destruction of America.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#3. To: Deckard (#2)
Lennon's own statements show that he was not calling for the destruction of the United States.
#4. To: sneakypete (#3)
(Edited)
if the US had followed his suggestions it would have been the end of our country.
Well, you know We all want to change the world
You tell me that it's evolution
Well, you know We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don't you know that you can count me out
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it's the institution
Well, you know
You'd better free your mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow “Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#5. To: Deckard (#0)
#6. To: Deckard (#4)
#7. To: sneakypete (#6)
not being for a violent revolution doesn't mean you are against a political revolution.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#8. To: Deckard (#7)
Quite a few of us are in favor of a political revolution, why aren't you?
#9. To: sneakypete (#8)
#10. To: Rufus T Firefly, sneakypete (#9)
(Edited)
I'm pretty sure that John Lennon would have been just "okey dokey" with the current white hut regime and dear leader, the boy emperor.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#11. To: Rufus T Firefly (#9)
I'm pretty sure that John Lennon would have been just "okey dokey" with the current white hut regime and dear leader, the boy emperor.
#12. To: Deckard (#10)
I'm pretty sure that John Lennon would have been just "okey dokey" with the current white hut regime and dear leader, the boy emperor.
#13. To: sneakypete (#12)
Ever heard of the Beatles song "Taxman"?
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#14. To: Deckard (#13)
You think the song "Taxman" was PROMOTING the British tax system?
#15. To: Deckard (#13)
Your love for the Viet Nam war has clouded your objectivity. That entire debacle will forever remain a dark stain in American history.
#16. To: sneakypete (#15)
He hauled ass to America,where he didn't have to pay so much in taxes to support the leftist crap he pushed in public.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#17. To: sneakypete (#15)
It would be simpler for you to just admit you don't have the first clue about what you are writing abou
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#18. To: Deckard, sneakypete (#10)
Me: I'm pretty sure that John Lennon would have been just "okey dokey" with the current white hut regime and dear leader, the boy emperor.
Me: What we have now is what Lennon (Lenin?) was singing about.
For those who don't quite understand, being in favor of one side over another in a war is not"anti-war" activity. To the contrary! The articles about her and her"apology" (for choosing the wrong vehicle of publicity, not for her position in favor of the enemy) should not continue repeating the canard that she engaged in"anti-war activities" when she so clearly sided with a party to a war: North Vietnam. She absolutely refuses to acknowledge that she wasn't just a part of the anti-war or pacifist fringe in the United States at the time, but was in fact a true believer and supporter of North Vietnam during its war with the United States.
By contrast, look at the trip to Hanoi that famous folk singer Joan Baez, with Brigadier General Teleford Taylor (well-known Nuremberg war prosecutor) made just two and one half months after Jane Fonda's notorious propaganda visit. Ms. Baez and Gen Tayor were trapped in Hanoi during the entire"Linebacker II" Christmas bombing raids over and around that city--in which I again was heavily involved. Ms Baez made no bones about her pacifist beliefs and her hatred of wars. Yet, even after suffering through some of the most intense bombing raids of the entire Vietnam War, when asked by her hosts/watchers to make anti-US statements, she stuck to her beliefs, saying she hated all war by all sides, no matter what. We fighting men heard Baez's statements as soon as they were made. Somehow, we ignorant warriors were sophisticated enough to recognize the difference between Baez's anti-war statements and Fonda's open promotion of North Vietnamese victory--an apparently too-subtle distinction that has escaped the press even today. Most of us respected Baez's view, even if we differed with it--and acknowledged her right as an American to express that view even during a war. I was able to talk personally to Ms Baez about that several years later; she was pleased that we warriors certainly understood her point.
#19. To: Rufus T Firefly (#18)
(Edited)
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#20. To: Rufus T Firefly (#18)
I see John Lennon as more of a "Jane Fonda" type of Leftist versus a Joan Baez type.
#21. To: Deckard (#19)
If you have any quotes where Lennon said or did similar things, I'd like to see them.
By 1980, he [Lennon] had re-emerged with a new album and plans to become politically active again.
#22. To: Deckard (#16)
He hauled ass to America,where he didn't have to pay so much in taxes to support the leftist crap he pushed in public.
#23. To: Deckard (#17)
(Edited)
You made the claim that Lennon should have protested against the North Vietnamese.
#24. To: Rufus T Firefly (#21)
BTW - I'm not here to defend Nixon - he was no conservative.
#25. To: sneakypete (#23)
It WAS their fault,you freaking cretin! WTF do you think it was that invaded South Vietnam?
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#26. To: Deckard (#25)
It WAS their fault,you freaking cretin! WTF do you think it was that invaded South Vietnam?
#27. To: sneakypete (#26)
You might want to consider learning some actual history. The First American soldier killed in Viet Nam was killed on Sept 26,1945.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#28. To: Deckard (#27)
The point here is that U.S. combat units were not deployed until 1965, and only after Johnson used the Tonkin incident as a pretext to war.
#29. To: sneakypete (#26)
You are clearly the product of a leftist education.
#30. To: GrandIsland (#29)
(Edited)
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#31. To: GrandIsland (#29)
(Edited)
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]