No Civil Liberty
For
Servicemen?
By
Rev. Ted Pike
22 April 2010
 Since
2006, the Southern Poverty Law Center has been actively petitioning
the government to crack down on “extremists” in the
military. Now a Newsweek
blog post reveals that they quietly succeeded last November.
The US government has updated its policies about participation in
“supremacist” organizations by members of the military.
Previously, active-duty military could get away with belonging to
“extremist” groups. They were allowed to exercise freedom
of speech and association by participating in politically incorrect
groups of all kinds. Not anymore. The new
regulations say military “must not actively advocate supremacist
doctrine, ideology or causes” or “otherwise advance
efforts to deprive individuals of their civil rights.”
 Newsweek
explains: “In November 2009, after complaints that military-service
members were posting racist and other ethnic slurs on NewSaxon.org,
a social-networking site for white supremacists, the Pentagon tightened
its policy. In addition to forbidding service members from engaging
in `active' participation in extremist groups, the new rules also
forbid any military personnel from `actively' advocating `supremacist
doctrine, ideology or causes.'”
The
guidelines say military personnel have the right to publish their
thoughts on their own computers, on their own time. But how many
will do so, when their writing may be considered supportive of “supremacist”
causes?
'Publication
of such matters by military personnel off-post, on their own time,
and with their own money and equipment is not prohibited; however,
if such a publication contains language the utterance of which
is punishable under Federal law or otherwise violates this Instruction
or other DoD issuances, those involved in printing, publishing,
or distributing it may be disciplined or face appropriate administrative
action for such infractions.'
In
2006, SPLC president Richard
Cohen sent a letter to then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
asking for a zero-tolerance policy toward military “extremists.”
In September 2009, “SPLC officials were invited to brief staff
members of Sen. Joe Lieberman’s Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs.” Like the Jewish Anti-Defamation
League—architect of hate crime laws worldwide—the SPLC
is a Jewish civil liberties front committed to rooting out any hint
of white pride or Christian revival.
What is a “Supremacist?”
The
new military code does not mention “extremism,” an ambiguous
and politicized term created by Jewish media as early as the 1950s.
It was coined to denigrate and destroy anti-Communist figures such
as Joseph McCarthy and organizations such as the John Birch Society.
The problem with military outlaw of “supremacists” is
that the term is even more politicized and self-serving than “extremist.”
It was invented by ADL/SPLC to discredit opponents of the excessive
and discriminatory privileges given to blacks under the Civil
Rights Act of 1964.
Today,
“white supremacist” is consistently applied by Jewish
media to vilify millions of Americans who request nothing more than
that the government recognize the fact that our nation has been
historically and primarily white in population, leadership and creativity.
Through discriminatory affirmative action programs, whites have
been forced to the “back of the bus” behind blacks,
Latinos, and other minorities who are not required to meet the same
academic standards to be admitted into high-tier educational institutions
or hired into public service positions as policemen, firemen, etc.
White
supremacists do exist; they dehumanize blacks and demonize Jews,
claiming both are misfits of the evolutionary process. There is
also a persistent belief among many “Christian identity”
followers that Jews are literally the spawn of Satan, the product
of copulation between Satan and Eve. As such, many identity followers
believe that Jews are beneath redemption and meant to be ruled by
the true Israel, descendants of the “lost ten tribes of Israel”
which allegedly migrated westward and populated Western Europe.
Yet
the government should be slow to ban even these supremacist groups—unless
they advocate imminent violence. The three great monotheistic religions—Christianity,
Judaism and Islam—are themselves “supremacist”
in believing their way will someday triumph over all others. Most
Christians believe Christ will someday rule the earth “with
a rod of iron” in benevolent supremacy. Judaism teaches that
a Jewish messiah will do the same (after destroying all “idolaters”).
Islam believes that, eventually, belief in Allah and his prophet
Mohammed will overwhelm the idolatrous polytheism of the “infidels.”
Each
of these religions encourages its adherents to practice assertive,
relentless faith and action to make their own supremacist vision
a reality. This poses a dilemma: How can the new military guidelines
permit such socially accepted supremacism but ban others? The only
workable, non-discriminatory criterion is to ban an alleged supremacist
group if it incites violence against others or denial of their civil
rights. If it doesn’t and its ideas (intolerant or extreme
though they may be) are confined to the realm of lawful speech,
the military has no business discriminating against them. Even Christ
called the Samaritans “dogs” (Mark 7:27) and Paul said
the people of Crete are “slow-bellies and liars” (Titus
1:12). These were racial slurs which must certainly be condemned
by ADL/SPLC, but historically have done no harm—just as pride
in white heritage, although popularly viewed with contempt by our
ADL-propagandized society, also does none.
Chill on Free Speech Gets Colder
Will
the military keep all this in mind in deciding which “supremacist”
groups are off limits? I doubt it. They have already shown themselves
naïve, manipulated by ADL/SPLC to adopt a term these Jewish
“civil liberties” fronts have made especially villainous.
SPLC and Jewish Newsweek are jubilant over the new military code
because they know the term “supremacist” will not mean
Jewish supremacist or Islamic supremacist to most military
jurors, but “white supremacist.” If the accused serviceman
indeed strongly believes America should be a predominantly white,
Christian, male-led society and wants to engage with groups holding
those beliefs, then there is a high probability his, and only his,
free speech and association will be forbidden.
Although
ADL/SPLC did not get what it most wanted (banning of participation
in “extremist” groups), they got a close second. The
next step is for the military to indict service members for participation
in right-wing “supremacist” groups. If that happens,
ADL, SPLC, and ACLU, those Jewish groups which most truly epitomize
the word “supremacism,” will gather and circle around
such cases like jackals, determined to see the offending military
“thought criminal” vanquished.
As
with all “speech crimes” laws, the new military guidelines
don’t even attempt to define their most pivotal term: “supremacism.”
The least that is accomplished by criminalizing speech through ambiguous
terms is to create uncertainty and fear in the normally spontaneous
enjoyment of our God-given right to free expression. This is the
first “chill” on our First Amendment freedom. If not
resisted now, it will be followed by successive arctic assaults
on free speech. The end result freezes the whole world into one
great gulag.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
TALK
SHOW HOSTS: Interview Rev. Ted Pike on this topic. Call
(503) 631-3808.
 The
freedom-saving outreach of Rev. Ted Pike and the National Prayer
Network is solely supported by the sale of books, videos, and your
financial. All gifts are tax-deductable.
NATIONAL
PRAYER NETWORK,
P.O. Box 828, Clackamas, OR 97015
America First Books Editor's
Note
For
those new to the hate bill controversy that is the topic of most
of Rev. Pike's work, please link to the following articles:
 Alert
to Congress Regarding Hate Bills and the False Flag Attack Threat
by America First Books publisher William B. Fox. Two-thirds
down the web page please find the essay "The
Hate Crime Law Concept: It is all very sinister for at least nine
major reasons."
Also,
earlier on this same page I comment:
Although
Rev Ted Pike is completely independent from Captain May and myself
in terms of his political and religious views, the threats we
address all stem from the same corrupt power elite. I mention
in my concluding remarks below that this elite “would mobilize
us into domestic tyranny and foreign wars, while distracting us
from economic depression and the groups that brought it about.”
This
is the real problem, not the lack of more “hate crime”
laws. If anything, we need even more freedom of speech to speak
truth to power, sort out our problems, and develop peaceful strategies
to handle high level malefactors. This is why we urgently need
for members of Congress to not only take a principled stand and
stop all hate crime legislative initiatives, but to also roll
back all the existing hate crime laws currently on the books.
Hate
crime laws actually pose a major national security threat. They
condition Americans to feel that certain types of thought are inherently
immoral or illegal, even if they do not result in any form of violence
or infringement on the rights of others.
In
our articles related to false flag attacks, Capt.
Eric H. May and I have discussed strong evidence that Mossad-CIA
was behind 9-11, the mere "thought" of which would some
day be outlawed once hate crime oversight bureaucracies become firmly
implanted in America. We can expect government hate crime overwatch
entities to experience the usual cancerous growth and abuse of power
that libertarian writer and Presidential candidate Harry Browne
described in his classic book Why
Government Doesn't Work.
Please
find out more about the hate crime issue in the Rev
Ted Pike archive.
Please discover important
alternative religious and secular viewpoints on freedom of speech
issues at America First Books:
a) The
Rev Ted Pike archive
b) The
Religious Crisis page
These web pages address not only conservative
Christian and Christian Zionist viewpoints, but also secular, anarcho-libertarian,
atheist, pagan/natural religion (particularly Asatru/Odinist), racial
nationalist, and "miscellaneous other" perspectives.
|
at
the Battle of Cowpens, S. Carolina, 1781