Uncle
Sam is not Santa Claus
Don Cormier
No
Virginia, Uncle Sam is not Santa Claus, although they do have a few things
in common. Both are old men with beards. Both wear unusual
clothes, which are partly colored red and white. Both have reindeer
— Santa Claus has at least eight, and Uncle Sam has a few up in Alaska.
Both give things away to people all over the world, but Virginia, the way
they give things away is very, very different.
Santa
Claus gives toys once a year to children who are nice, and sometimes even
to children who are naughty. Uncle Sam gives things away more frequently,
but his criteria for who gets what is somewhat obscure — it usually requires
a lawyer, a tax consultant, and an expert in foreign relations to explain
the flow.
Santa
Clause uses magic and magic elves to provide the toys he gives away.
Uncle Sam gets his resources from the taxpayer, who has to work like a
magic elf from January 1st to mid-year to pay the bill. If Santa
Clause did what Uncle Sam does, each Christmas some children would find
that some of their toys had been taken away and given to other children.
In that situation, you can just imagine how upset the children would be,
so you can get some idea why Uncle Sam's taxpayers are restless.
I'm
sorry Virginia, there really is no Santa Claus, but yes, there is really
an Uncle Sam, and he'll go on existing, as long as people believe that
they need some strong, parental figure to take care of them — and as long
as they wish for a real Santa Claus.
So,
wake up Virginia. If you need a mythological figure to make your
day, try Liberty. She's tolerant, enlightened, and self-sufficient
— just as we all should be.
I dispute the notion that liberty is a female principle.
I think the Statue of Liberty must be a transvestite.
Global Gun Grabbers: The United Nations and One-World Gun ControlThis article is reprinted from the September 1996 issue of The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor. The address of the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor is P.O. Box 84904, Phoenix, Arizona 85071
The
United Nations and other New World Order groups have been quietly campaigning
over the past few years for
global gun control, which would lead
to mass firearms confiscations around the world, but especially in America.
A
worldwide ban on private firearms ownership is not a new idea, but it has
gained momentum since 1994. The concept was promoted by U.S.
Senator Glenn Taylor of Idaho immediately after the end of World War II.
Every year from 1945 to 1950, Taylor introduced resolutions that called
for global disarmament. The blatantly pro-U.N. Taylor called for
a world government that would "disarm [private citizens] down
to the last gun."
In
1958, Grenville Clark (former president of United World Federalists) and
Louis B. Sohn co-authored World Peace Through World Law. The book
called for a U.N. military that would have
"a coercive force of overwhelming
power."
Local
police departments would be virtually disarmed under the Clark/Sohn plan.
They wrote, "No nation shall allow the possession by its internal
police forces of any arms or equipment except of the types permitted by
the regulations of the [U.N.] General Assembly ... and in
no case shall the number of revolvers and rifles combined exceed one for
each member of the internal police forces. Draconian limits
on ammunition were also spelled out.
Although
provision for "licensed" gun ownership were mentioned in World Peace,
they were just camouflage. Clark and Sohn would ban ownership of
"any
military equipment whatsoever" [McAlvany Ed. Note: That means
ALL guns!] and allow ammunition production only "so far as the General
Assembly may authorize."
The
globalist duo obviously feared the possibility that "police forces,
supplemented by civilians armed with sporting rifles and fowling pieces
[shotguns] might conceivably constitute a serious threat to a neighboring
country in the absence of a well-disciplined and heavily armed world
police."
Clark
and Sohn's power-hungry mindset is identical to what can be found today
among politicians of both major parties. Ask Ted Kennedy, Mark Hatfield,
Charles Schumer, John Chaffee, Dianne Feinstein, Christie Todd Whitman,
Patrick Moynihan, Pete Wilson, and Janet Reno what they think about the
plans outlined in Global Peace, and you would receive an enthusiastic
endorsement of same.
"The
diabolical plan for total national and individual disarmament spelled out
by Clark and Sohn in 1958 was initiated by the CFR coterie in the
Kennedy Administration and has been carried forward by CFR one-worlders
in each successive administration,"
wrote William Jasper, senior editor of The New American (P.O.
Box 8040, Appleton, WI 54913).
Jasper
declared, "This conspiracy for empowering the United Nations with unprecedented
and unparalleled force, if allowed to succeed would establish a global
tyranny so monstrous that the murderous regimes of Hitler, Stalin and Mao
would pale by comparison."
Have
you noticed the gun controversy in England in the aftermath of the Dunblane
killings? Such tragedies as Dunblane are a welcome resource for anti-gun
reformers, who shamelessly take advantage of the wrecked emotions of the
survivors to promote the disarmament agenda. Nobody wants to consider
that the British government has probably killed more children (so-called
collateral casualties) than Thomas Hamilton ever dreamed of murdering.
Before we consider disarming the alleged psychopaths, let's disarm the
governments.
 |
 |
