Starting with first principles and the scientific method
America First Books
Featuring ebooks that find a truer path in uncertain times

Rev Ted Pike Archive


 
 

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.




Flag carried by the 3rd Maryland Regiment at the Battle of Cowpens, S. Carolina, 1781

© America First Books
America First Books offers many viewpoints that are not necessarily its own in order to provide additional perspectives.