Entries from October 21, 2007 - October 27, 2007
MAHANTIA
As grassroots resistance continues to coalesce in response to the Janus-faced tyranny of big government and big business, I started speculating today on what such a coalition could name itself. I came up with the acronym MAHANTIA - Mad As Hell And Not Taking It Anymore - only to find that certain folks had beaten me to it. Google the term and see what you find. There is an increasing number of people out there who are Mad As Hell And Not Taking It Anymore, and the acronym is showing up as expressive of the will not to "speak truth to power", as the liberal-left pantywaists say, but to speak DEFIANCE to power. I think it is a good term, very catchy, and hence might have the potential to make its way into the public consciousness, serving as a watchword denoting the reclamation of individual liberty and state sovereignty.
But, what is it that we're mad about and not going to take anymore? The following is only a partial listing, and several of these items are interrelated:
1. Illegal Immigration
2. The Islamification of the West
3. Multiculturalism
4. The loss of individual liberty
5. The loss of state sovereignty
6. The klounacracy in Washington DC
7. Tax and spend liberals
8. Tax and spend "conservatives"
9. The Patriot Act
10. Wars waged for the purposes of "preemption" and "nation-building"
11. The export of American jobs and "outsourcing" of customer service to places where the English language might as well be Hindi.
12. The idiocy and shallowness of popular culture
13. The oppressing of Judeo-Christian religion
14. Gun control
15. Mob rule
16. Political correctness
Hear us, you moronic purveyors of political correctness, you klounocrats, you conniving state capitalists, you Nanny Statists, you globalists, liberal and "conservative" alike: we have had enough of you. You will not further strip us of our rights, property and sovereignty, and, what's more, you will return to us what you have taken from us. You will not erase our borders, our language, and our culture. You will not foist your precious "Unions" upon us, and, what's more, you will devolve what power you currently have back to the state and local level, and you will do so in the interest of the common good, which you no longer represent, assuming you ever did.
To our dumbed-down electorate, which continues to elect the klounocrats: we will no longer be effectively ruled by you, the half-wit mob. Rodney King was wrong: we in fact cannot all get along, and the solution to that will entail some sort of formal separation between you and us. The Middlebury Institute has some ideas about how this might be effected.
The freemen of these United States and of Europe are serving notice upon all of you: your reign is ended. Step aside. MAHANTIA.
Caedmon
Post a Comment
Wake Up, Rise Up, You English!
More depressing news from Great Britain:
Press Statement from THE CAMPAIGN for an INDEPENDENT BRITAIN, October 23, 2007
Since the Treaty of Rome and European Communities Act 1972, Britain has ceased to be a legally independent nation. Majority voting in the EU Council of Ministers automatically applies to Crown, courts, Parliament and people "without further enactment" (see Clause 2 – 1 ECA 1972).
Successive treaties have extended the powers of the original Treaty. Now a larger overall treaty the "Reform Treaty" - has been proposed under the German Presidency, likely to be signed in a final version before the end of this year under the Portuguese Presidency.
On June 7, 2007, Britain’s Foreign Secretary, Margaret Beckett, appeared before the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee to be questioned about the Council of EU Ministers’ meeting planned for June 21/22. The ESC meeting had been specifically planned to ascertain the proposals by the German Presidency for the forthcoming conference so that our government and people would have some knowledge of the new treaty. They were stunned to hear that no draft proposals for the new treaty had been received from the German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
On the evening of June 19, the British Representative in Brussels was handed the draft proposal from the German Presidency (Document 11177/07) for the European Council to issue a "mandate" or instruction for the imminent Intergovernmental Conference of the representatives of EU member states as to how they should go about establishing a "Reform Treaty". This document, effectively a German diktat, of 31 pages and two small print detailed annexes, was accepted en bloc at the EU Council meeting attended by Tony Blair on June 21/22 without any record of debate.
This then became what is now called the "mandate" from the Council to the Intergovernmental Conference for its detailed work of putting together a treaty incorporating what is already in force together with many controversial additions. Subsequent questions have revealed that the government had not received any prior draft of the proposals from the Germans before June 19.
Minutes of meetings by Select Committees of the House of Commons reveal that the terms of this Reform Treaty agreed on June 21/22, had not only been drafted in Brussels under the then President Merkel, Chancellor of Germany, assisted by officials of the European Commission, but were accepted en bloc by heads of EU governments, less than two days after their publication. This left no time for national governments to consult their colleagues and still less their departments of State since the proposals were only given to them at most two days prior to the meeting. It would appear that this text was produced by officials of the German foreign office assisted by those from the European Parliament and EU Commission.
On Monday June 25, Tony Blair gave a verbal report to Parliament neglecting to mention that a copy of the so-called "mandate" had been lodged in Parliament’s Vote Office and available to MPs from the morning of June 25, so most MPs and all the public were entirely ignorant of the commitment by the British government, and governments of all EU member states. It had become accepted as a mandate or instruction from the European Council. The Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) itself is the body which, in the rules and organisation of the EU, is responsible for its own agenda. The European Council has no formal powers to instruct it.
Very soon afterwards Tony Blair tendered his resignation to the Queen and a couple of days later both he and Margaret Beckett surrendered their seals of office and responsibility and were no longer directly accountable to Parliament and people for one of the biggest surrenders in British history. Tony Blair left office to the ringing applause of MPs whom he had recently agreed to disempower permanently from the control of many areas of this nation’s life.
When questioned last week during a meeting of the European Scrutiny Committee, Minister for Europe, Jim Murphy, confirmed that the mandate is complete, closed and will not be reopened. The obligations entered into cannot be changed. The Minister stated that the process now is for the Reform Treaty to be translated into legal language into the principal and many other languages of member states, covering some 300 articles and declarations.
In spite of this major and largely unknown departure from established practice, Angela Merkel got her way. The procedures of proposals into the new treaty illustrate central power which could hardly be seen as compatible with any democratic principle. Objections from the Czech Republic and Poland were ruthlessly rejected. Without support from one large member country, they were powerless to resist. Nations of Europe and beyond opposed the building of a Euro-state by force of arms between 1939 and 1945. The democratic voices of the peoples of Europe must now be heard and acted upon by all peaceful means to reject this EU Constitution/Reform Treaty.
The European Scrutiny Committee of the House of Commons published a report on October 9, 2007 (Ref HC 1014). This concluded that the provisions of the proposed "Reform Treaty" were, for all practical purposes, the same as the EU Constitution, rejected by the French and Dutch peoples and upon which almost all sitting MPs had, in their election manifestos, promised their electors a referendum.
Statement issued on behalf of the Campaign for an Independent Britain (CIB), the cross-party coalition defending British sovereignty and freedom, by Dr Bob Spink MP, Chairman; George West, Edward Spalton and Nigel Spearing, for the CIB National Committee.
The positive thing to be noted about this is that at least there are such dissenting voices as the Campaign for an Independent Britain and the British National Party (which is slowly but surely increasing in numbers).
But what happens if "peaceful means" fail? Here's hoping the Brits rediscover John Locke and reconsider their revolutionary brethren in the United States.
It all rather reminds me of a quote from the historian B. Bruce Briggs, who wrote this in the context of what he called "The Great American Gun War". American proponents of strict gun control are:
those who take bourgeois Europe as a model of a civilized society: a society just, equitable, and democratic; but well ordered, with the lines of responsibility and authority clearly drawn, and with decisions made rationally and correctly by intelligent men for the entire nation.
To such "sheeple", Briggs contrasts:
a group of people (whose). . . model is that of the independent frontiersman who takes care of himself and his family with no interference from the state. They are conservative in the sense that they cling to America's unique pre-modern tradition- a non-feudal society with a sort of medieval liberty writ large for every man. To these people, sociological is an epithet. Life is tough and competitive. Manhood means responsibility and caring for your own.
If Europeans don't acquire more of this "independent frontiersman" (i.e., libertarian) mentality, I'm afraid we'll see more and more of this type of thing in Europe. And as Briggs implies, the same "bourgeois European" mentality exists here in the States as well, threatening American liberty and sovereignty. But I think the situation is quite different here, in that we currently have enough "independent frontiersman" to keep such tyranny at bay. (According to the estimates I've seen, about one quarter to one third of the American adult populace - most of whom live in the South and Midwest.) In addition, even in the muddled minds of all the other Americans there is this notion that civil liberties are to be protected no matter what, and I think this means there is a pool of *potential* "independent frontiersman" out there. This gives me a certain amount of hope that America won't go the way of Europe, but of course I don't know for sure. Thus the need to cultivate "eternal vigilance", as so many of our American and European heroes have noted.
Buchanan: The Global Warming Hucksters
http://buchanan.org/blog/?p=873
Like the panics of bygone eras, this one has the aspect of yet another re-enactment of the Big Con. The huckster arrives in town, tells all the rubes that disaster impends for them and their families, but says there may be one last chance they can be saved – but it will take a lot of money. And the folks should go about collecting it, right now.
This, it seems to me, is what the global-warming scare and scam are all about – frightening Americans into transferring sovereignty, power and wealth to a global political elite that claims it alone understands the crisis and it alone can save us from impending disaster. . . .
The mammoth government we have today is a result of politicians rushing to solve “crises” by creating and empowering new federal agencies.
As I've been saying all along, and as anyone with a brain knows, the Global Warming hysteria is nothing more than the precursor to the Greenie-Socialist power grab over which the Greenie-Socialists have been salivating for decades. Agrarianism is one thing, but this has nothing to do with that. This, rather, is merely the latest pitch for an irrational and oppressive statism combined with a New Age Gaia worship of which we want no part. Our answer to the Greenie-Socialists is therefore, "no". No, we will not submit to you.
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks: Multiculturalism threatens democracy.
“Multiculturalism has led not to integration but to segregation,” Sacks wrote in his book, an extract of which was published in the Times of London.
Indeed. All multiculturalism does, besides create the cult of victiimology, as Sacks notes, is to create unnatural groupings of people that can only lead to cultural and political strife. We see it everywhere in Europe and North America, where the High Priests and Priestesses of Political Correctness remain unhappily ascendant. As the blogger at Rebellion observes:
In other words, the powers that be seek to wreck natural harmony in order to create an artificial need for an all-powerful central bureaucracy. It’s as if Thomas Hobbes had to resort to importing waves of aliens and reenact Babel to prove that people cannot voluntarily work together, therefore justifying the Leviathan—and that’s exactly what Big Government must do to prove its relevance.
Are they catching on in Europe, however? Here's a possible indication of hope from Switzerland.
