A small black child picks up a phone and calls the FBI's Terrorist Tip Line.
"Spare me the surprised indignation Huey. You know we've been tapping your phones for years. Whatcha got?" the voice on the other end demanded.
"I'm very serious. I know several Americans who have helped train and finance Osama bin Laden ..."the kid says.
"Okay, give me some names."
"All right, let's see. The first one is REAGAN. R-E-A-G ... Hello?"
The comic strip ends.
The boy was Huey Freeman, the creation of comic strip writer Aaron Magruder, a young black activist with a degree in African-American studies from the University of Maryland who has been inking his social satire of black Americans trying to adjust to life in the white suburbs since his days in College Park Diamondback (back when your humble correspondent used to go to school there -- 1995/96-ish). Since he finished his degree in 1998 his career had spiraled -- he was picked up by the Source, a major black culture magazine in the United States -- and went into national syndication in most major daily newspapers a few months later.
But readers of those same major dailies, most of them owned by corrupt Zionist publishers who have been baring their fangs since the 9-11 bombings demanding war for Israel, didn't get a chance to see the comic strip we mention above. Nor did they get to see the strip where Magruder's character explains that George Bush funded the Taliban. Or the one in which the young avatar of "black male rage" compares Bush and bin Laden, sarcastically stating how glad he is not to live in a country run by the privileged son of an oil baron who thinks it his duty to go hurling bombs at foreign countries. Something Magruder was saying didn't match the agenda of America's shadow elite, and so Magruder got the boot.
The first to reject him, the one to do so most publicly, was Mortimer Zuckerman, head of the Conference of President's of Major Jewish Organizations, a conglomerate body of 55 Jewish organizations who come together in a yearly meeting to decide on a single policy line on Israel to which the entire organized Jewish community in the United States is expected to adhere. Zuckerman, who owns the New York Daily News and US News and World Report magazine, made it a point to yank Magruder's strip, saying it doesn't belong being published in New York -- shadow government-speak for "opposition to war is contrary to the interests of America's Zionist-Jewish community." And it also wasn't surprising that the largest media organization to step up in Magruder's defense -- though a number of secondary papers, like Entertainment Weekly, did run relatively unbiased articles – was TheBlackWorldToday.com, a website that has come under attack in the past few weeks by groups like the ADL and the Wiesenthal Center -- self-proclaimed "defense" organizations who have insisted the black publication's denunciations of imperialism are in fact cloaked manifestations of anti-Semitism and borderline illegal pro-terrorist dissent.
But Magruder isn't the only one seeing that in the post-9-11 world all levels of American government and its ruling class feel free to trample on the promise of Constitutional liberty. One only has to witness two recent incidents in Philadelphia, each ostensibly independent of the "war on terrorism", where both left and right wing activists have seen themselves stepped on.
BLOWS TO THE LEFT
On December 8, 2001, nearly 600 people from a variety of radical left-wing and communist organizations dedicated to the liberation of Pennsylvania state prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal marched from a rally at Philadelphia City Hall to the city's Ethical Cultural Center for a second round of speeches. While leaving the corner of 13th and Locust Street, and approaching the second gathering spot, a police officer lost his balance and fell off his bicycle. Someone in the crowd shouted an obscene remark, mocking his clumsiness. The officer responded by drawing his baton and wading into the crowd. Soon a fight broke out. By the end of it, two young women, including a small Asian woman who couldn't weigh 120 lbs, were hospitalized with serious broken bones, a third woman had been stripped naked and beaten by the cops, and five others had been detained -- eight overall.
Six of them were later charged. The small Asian-American woman, identified by the International Action Center as Hai Au Huynh, had her tailbone broken after the large policemen, in one photo at least three of them, all over six feet tall, beat her mercilessly in the street with their billy clubs. To cover their own tailbones, the police then charged her with felony incitement to riot and felony assault -- in their police report, the officers claim they were so afraid of being physically injured by a small women less than half their size that they were forced to break her spine in order to put her down.
Such reasoning had to be expected from a police department that in 1985 used helicopters to drop firebombs on a townhouse that was being used as a base for a black militant organization called MOVE. The resulting fire, which destroyed several blocks of Philadelphia's working class neighborhoods, and which killed at least eleven people, mostly women and children, never resulted in any prosecutions or arrests. The Mayor was lauded for burning down dozens of homes in the name of "fighting crime", and unlike even the survivors of Waco, no documentary on the destruction ever made it into neighborhood video stores. Knowledge of the event, even today, is largely confined to the politically aware fringes of the left-wing and black-racialist movements.
So it should also be of no surprise that a young woman who had her jaw broken by a police billy club was jailed on an $80,000 bond -- again, the armed male police officers described the "fear" they felt when this small young woman "attacked" them -- and that the men who tried to assist them, and who were eventually overpowered by police, were similarly charged and held as if they were the ones who had initiated the melee.
Some claimed it was poetic justice. The young right-wing woman from my earlier article, "Raw Power"(https://www.pravdareport.com/news/russia/26921-n/), laughed when she heard the story -- many of the activists involved in this demo were members of Philadelphia ARA -- and in her mind were being paid back for attacking and beating her outside a punk rock show in DC several months before. But in a sense the situation was sad, for this same right-wing organizer was involved in fighting her own battle to free two right-wing political prisoners captured by the Philadelphia police during a different kind of protest.
BLOWS TO THE RIGHT
Plastering stickers on city sign posts is a common activity for political dissidents, left and right. Before the anti-globalization protests in Washington, DC, last year, organizers sent out teams of youths with water-soluble and bio-degradable organic paste and reams of fliers to cover the metropolis' light posts and utility boxes, as well as the walls of abandoned buildings (which abound in a city which 1/6th of its population has deserted in the past decade). For the National Alliance, currently the largest and most active National Socialist and white supremacist organization in the United States, plastering downtown city streets with bumperstickers is an almost daily activity. Local newspapers in the United States record nearly two to three instances of it a week.
So when Dale Smith, 18, and Keith Carney, 20, both out-of-towners visiting the the Pennsylvania capital for an impromptu rendezvous with their neo-Nazi comrades, posted stickers on signposts by the town's Korean and Vietnam war memorials advising white women not to have sex with blacks because of the significant difference in AIDS infection rates between white and black males, they didn't expect to have the book thrown at them. Though they may be technically infringing some city law, to hit them with a felony would be like charging a man who tossed a crumpled sheet of paper from his car window under the city's criminal trash-dumping laws -- laws designed to stop people from leaving bags of raw garbage strewn on city streets. A common response from a police officer would be to ask them to tear the sticker down and move on. But not in the post 9-11 world.
According to a Pravda contact in the FBI's Hate Crimes unit, the federal government urged city prosecutor's to make an example of the two National Alliance youths. Each one was arrested and charged with a variety of nonsensical crimes -- "destruction of institutionalized property", "desecration of a veteranized object" and "ethnic intimidation" -- all felonies carrying cumulatively a minimum five years in prison. The one youth, Smith, was originally jailed on a $15,000 bond despite having never had a criminal record. The other, who had a prior conviction for a petty assault, was jailed on a $10,000 bond. The bonds were paid that night and the two were released. But the case got stickier when they showed up for arraignment.
In violation of the Constitutional edict prohibiting the setting of excessive bail, a Philadelphia judge, acting under the special provisions of the laws of the Commonwealth (Pennsylvania being, like Virginia and Massachusetts, technically a Commonwealth rather than a state), let their initial bail stand but set a second bail -- this time for $50,000 each -- and the two were then immediately jailed again.
Such actions are very unusual in American courts, and are regarded as underhanded if not un-Constitutional. Only in a society where Constitutional law has broken down and been replaced by the political law of vested ruling class interests could such a judicial action be allowed to stand.
The National Alliance is fighting the charges. It's leader, William Pierce, has pledged money not only to bail out the two youths, but has hired an attorney who is challenging the Constitutionality of both the vandalism and ethnic intimidation statutes. A National Alliance source told Pravda yesterday that they expect this trial to be "precedent setting" and hope to take it to the State Supreme, if not the US Supreme, court. With their recent growth in membership and the success of their business ventures, it appears the Alliance will be able to fund their case all the way as well.
But why are they having to? Why is a young girl with a broken jaw being held on $80,000 bond in one Philadelphia jail cell, while a young skinhead with no means of his own is held on $50,000 bond in a cell down the street? Neither one of these young activists had committed a real crime, yet both were targeted by law enforcement authorities as political dissidents, and in one case physically beaten in front of witnesses, while in the second case jailed on felony charges for the act of attaching a bumpersticker to a sign. One was lucky enough to have a financially secure organization to defend him; the other still languishes as comrades attempt to raise the money for her freedom. Neither, in the end, will get justice, as at the very minimum the system will have extorted from them thousands, if not tens of thousands, of dollars, and their recourse against the police authorities who have committed these crimes against them -- aggravated assault in one case, wrongful imprisonment in another -- are virtually nil.
But neither of these abuses are the worst that have occurred in America this week, as we witness the tragic revival of forced labor in the supposedly "liberal" state of New Jersey.
SLAVERY BACK IN EFFECT
Monmouth County Superior Court Judge Clarkson S. Fisher decided he was a strike-breaker. Following in the footsteps of Ronald Reagan, when Reagan ordered the air-traffic controllers back to work in 1984, Fisher issued a court order he felt would break the Monmouth County teacher's union. The teacher's union, in solidarity with the public school's secretarial and administrative staff, had walked out and were refusing to return to class over disagreements with the local school board over the cost of their health care coverage. Currently, the teachers pay $250 per year. The board wants them to pay $800 per year. It is a typical labor-management dispute.
Typical until Fisher stepped in, and made this ruling: Any school employee who refused to work was to be jailed until they changed their mind. The implications of that were horrible. It was literally a re-instatement of slavery. Under Fisher's ruling, the teachers were not able to quit their jobs, or to refuse their work, or even to be fired for refusing to come to the classroom. They had lost their freedom to choose their occupation, and were ordered jailed if they did not work for the state -- they were to be forced to labor at a wage set by the government and imprisoned for not doing so.
To those who think "Oh, he can't mean it", as of December 7, 2001, two hundred teachers, taken in alphabetical order, had been led in handcuffs to the local jail. Another 800 workers, to start with, had been ordered to appear in court to be imprisoned. And these were not criminals. As one woman, Katie Connelly, told the World Socialist Web Site, "I’m a soccer mom, I drive a van and I have a dog." Not a criminal type at all.
But don't they know there's a war on? And when the government, without the support of the people, declares war on any enemy the puppet masters pull out at random, even a small time judge in a small time county gains the authority to enforce slavery, in violation of the Constitution's 13th Amendment, which clearly states:
"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States"
What crime had they been convicted of? Contempt of court? But what was the court order they had shown contempt for? It was an order to work against their own volition. So why wasn't the court order for involuntary servitude found un-Constitutional? Because Constitutional law itself no longer exists within the United States.
At first these seem like disparate cases -- Left-wing extremists, right-wing extremists, middle-of-the-road soccer moms. What could these people have in common? What they have in common is that they are all victims of the same state apparatus. Stripped of their Constitutional right by a monster they, with their petty rivalries and silly gang warfare, with their party-line hatred and their irrational belief that it is each other, and not the power structure, which is their prime enemies, have brought into creation in the belief it will help their side in their war of all against all, these people now reap the consequences -- vicious beatings, summary arrests, forced labor -- of challenging the golden idol they have raised above them.
"Be friendly unto me, for I am the servant of the savior of those that you have put upon the highest." So Aleister Crowley was said to have prayed (at least that one Ministry song quotes him that way ;-D ). So the government is the savior of those men we have allowed to take power over us, and then we see the works of their servants -- the police and the courts who now only consider the interest of the king, and not the law of the land, in handing out their decisions.
With the mechanisms of the demagogue -- the mass media, the newspapers, and the television -- firmly in the hands of the American people's chief enemies, and with a government that sees little use for its citizens except as economic units of labor designed to reap profits, the situation for the American worker seems bleak. Despite what events ultimately reverse the situation, the immediate future seems to offer nothing but a declining standard of living and a decline in those freedoms and liberty that make life worth living. How long is it before entire towns -- and not such entire professions of entire towns -- are ordered into prisons by the capricious whim of an out-of-control magistrate?
The only light of hope is the fact that these kinds of injustices -- the banning of political commentary, the targeted beating of defenseless women, the summary arrest of political activists, the forced labor of thousands of "civil servants" -- are fueling a rise in anti-government activity, not among the mainstream of militantly mediocre protest groups, but on the revolutionary fringes of the left and right. America's armed right wing and it's leftist anti-globalist both draw their strength from the same acts of oppression, and from the same desire to change the nature of a system that mechanically destroys the nation's working people. Though they differ on their vision of a future, they share a common vision of the present, and they struggle for the same goals -- justice in the courts, access to the political system, protection against extra-judicial beatings and extra-legal arrests -- even as they struggle against each other and allow the all-present voice of the television and the media to drive them into confrontation.
No system like that of the present day United States -- lawless and chaotic, with justice being nothing more than what a gang can get away with -- whether that gang is a private club or a part of the police -- the United States power structure will eventually fall when people realize that the aliens that rule them have no more power than the people are willing to give. As an unnamed US official recently told the Washington Times:
"The lesson being drawn from the Afghan experience is this: ... When you threaten [a] tyranny and when it looks like it can’t stand, then what happens is those who may be aligned with it for practical reasons, for survival reasons, start to abandon it."
So when someone figures out how to weaken the US control mechanisms enough that the public is without their television and daily newspapers for as little as two or three weeks -- when someone manages to create a situation of panic as occurred in the United States on the day of 9-11 attacks -- the US tyranny, with its lawless government and its capricious exercises of power, will likewise collapse.
Government must be rooted in the nature of the people it governs. Without that root, it loses legitimacy, becomes alien, and collapses. In America, the Constitution is legitimacy, and the only question for a government that doesn't recognize it is how long until that government collapses.