Allison Bricker

THE REGION, INDIANA – As someone who came to the defense of Dr. Chuck Baldwin upon the release of the MIAC report last year, it is very disheartening to me upon reading his latest post to discover he is nothing more than a charlatan in the vein of Beck, promoting his brand of collectivism under the guise of Liberty. In his latest article, which from the title onward is filled with an over abundant use of logical fallacies and half-baked collectivist rhetoric, he attempts to correlate being queer, a government take-over of health care, and violating immigration law as one in the same, ergo “Guilt by Association”.

How he can resort to such nonsense after he was the victim of such flawed fallacy whereby the Department of Homeland Security via the MIAC sought to place him and his supporters on par with abortion clinic bombers is mind-numbingly depressing.

However, perhaps even more alarming is his dearth of knowledge on that of which he speaks, specifically stating in reference to homosexuality in the military he writes:

“…turning the modern American army…into a hodgepodge of foreigners, gang members, women, homosexuals, and mercenaries. (It worked out so well for Rome!)”

Dr. Chuck Baldwin
Up Next: Open Gays In The Military And Amnesty For Illegals
March 26, 2010

Well Chuck, first it was the Ancient Greeks who advocated open same-sex relationships in the military to boost morale¹ prior to the assimilation in the Roman Republic proper. Perhaps Dr. Baldwin meant that the fall of Rome was due to homosexuals, in which case he would still be wrong as same-sex relations were well tolerated in Rome from prior to the reign of the notoriously flamboyant Caligula around 41 AD right up until the coronation of Theodosius in 380 AD.

Whereby, with Theodosius’ ascent to Emperor, he immediately outlawed the practice of all other religions, except for the Nicene orthodoxy of Christianity, forbid the Olympics, and closed down the Temple of Zeus. Further, he then ordered all Romans to pledge allegiance to the Bishop of Rome, and set about passing decrees restricting same-sex relationships punishable by death.²

Moreover, upon learning that the town of Thessaloniki revolted and assassinated his military governor for refusing to release a queer charioteer who made a pass at the governor, Theodosius ordered immediate retaliation upon the town resulting in the massacre of its 7,000 inhabitants including women and children. Consequently, after the death of Theodosius, Rome fractured never again to be united as one.

Thus, should my line of argument seek to pin the fall of Rome on one “Christian Soldier” type emperor who thought the appropriate retaliation was to murder and enforce religious doctrine by use of the state’s coercive power? Or should the example set by Theodosius taint my views towards all Christians as murderous thugs?

The simple fact of the matter is that Rome fell due to variety of circumstances ranging from perpetual Imperial Conquest, massive government subsidies, destruction of the currency, and the elevation of the “Executive Branch” i.e. the emperor over that of the Roman Senate, not due to the tolerance of one demographic or another.

Nevertheless, Dr. Baldwin then proceeds to attempt to buttress his skewed timeline of history with an appeal to the majority, i.e.:

“I have spoken with hundreds (literally) of active duty and retired frontline soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen, and I can unequivocally say that not one of them supported allowing sodomites to serve openly in the US military–especially in combat units. Not one! And the vast majority of them were also opposed to women serving in combat units.”

Dr. Chuck Baldwin
Up Next: Open Gays In The Military And Amnesty For Illegals
March 26, 2010

Well Chuck that is dandy, but just because a majority views something as proper and correct does not imbue said policy with morality. So using this logic, one could justify the invasion of Iraq, as a majority thought Saddam responsible for the attacks on 9/11. Alternatively, perhaps because the majority at one time thought women should also be prohibited from voting that should still be the case, or that a majority also once opposed integrating the armed services there should still be segregated barracks. Were any of these in hindsight valid reasons for the policy because the majority thought them to be the proper moral course?

Chuck, I am really sorry that possibly you and those who you have spoken with would perhaps prefer to see women barefoot, pregnant in the kitchen doing “women’s work” letting only the strong strapping heterosexual men be the ones killed in unnecessary war, but Chuck, have you ever considered examining another possible reason for lifting the Don’t ask Don’t Tell policy?

Has it ever occurred to the good doctor that perhaps the motivations behind lifting the Don’t Ask Don’t tell policy could be two-fold? While on the surface it appeals to the collectivist LGBT people group as fulfillment of campaign pandering, the actual motivation might just be based on cold calculated mathematical limitations.

That maybe with our military spread throughout the world in various never-ending conflicts, with many now going on their third and fourth deployments that perhaps lifting the ban and letting all who would like to serve helps stave off a more severe method, such as a draft or even longer deployments.

Let us face candid facts Chuck, the military is tired, the men and to your interviewees dismay the women too, are tired, weary of war, weary of being away from their families, and that excluding anyone at this point makes the aforementioned all that much closer to reality.

However, it seems unlikely dear Chuck that you would allow yourself to entertain such a possibility, as it would be counter to your main motivation, ergo your own self-promotion by inflaming divisions via wedge-issue collectivist tactics. With you as the opportunist hoping to seize upon those disaffected in general with politics and small segments of the liberty movement thereby allowing you to form your own little people-group to support your next run for office.

Shame on you, and how dare you sully the Liberty Movement with your self-aggrandizing attempt to link a socialist take over of the health care industry, and breaking the law with being queer.

WTF Chuck. (NSFW)

Source(s): ¹“Homosexuality and Civilization” by Louis Crompton, Harvard University Press, page 69 • ²Elements of General History of Ancient & Modern” by Alexander Fraser Tytler, Oliver and Boyd Press 1872 •

Tarrin Lupo

How easy is it for you, your family, and friends to now be labeled a domestic terrorist? Take the fun quiz and find out if you are now an enemy of the state. I also discuss what you can do if you are in fact a “domestic homegrown radical” as defined by the Federal government.  Can you now be jailed indefinitely without even a trial? We answer all these questions and also solicit the hosts of Free Talk Live for their opinions in the video that follows.

Further Reading… (to help decide if you too might be an “enemy” of the state)

“National Planning Scenarios-2006″ by D.H.S. “The Modern Militia Movement” by M.I.A.C. “Rightwing Extremism” by D.H.S. “Leftwing Extremism” by D.H.S. “Militant Extremists in the U.S. by C.F.R. “The Modern Tyranny Movement by S.M.I.A.C.

Allison Bricker

Loyal readers, the disdain for the Constitution and attempt to link my support of Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) to the likes of  abortion clinic bomber, Eric Rudolph angered me greatly. Thus I offer for your review “The Smoking Argus Daily Information Analysis Center” report entitled “The Modern Tyranny Movement”. If it were not such an egregious tactic as to attempt to scare law enforcement into believing that those who support the Constitution or display the Gadsden flag, view police as “the enemy” then perhaps this report would be entirely tongue in cheek. However, this government’s attempt to suggest that we wish to incite violence is wholly unacceptable, and thus we the people demand a formal public apology.

So until we get that apology please enjoy and help spread the S.M.I.A.C  counter-report based upon the Missouri Information Analysis Center’s disgraceful document.

Click icon to open or “right-click” and select “Save Link As…” to save PDF locally.

Allison Bricker

Penn Jillette on half of Penn and Teller sat down with Fox News’ Glenn Beck Thursday evening, March 18th, 2009 to discuss the absolutely ludicrous associations contained within the Missouri Information Analysis Center report on the Modern Militia Movement. As originally editorialized by Allison Bricker earlier in the week, the report attempts to advise law enforcement officers that support for former Presidential candidate Ron Paul could be an indication that the individual is a domestic homegrown radical.

Download full MIAC Report

The Smoking Argus

In an irony that could only come from government, Denver PBS station KBDI aired Aaron Russo’s America: Freedom to Fascism. As loyal readers of The Smoking Argus Daily know, the film is one of litany of items listed in the Missouri Information Analysis Center’s report that is considered a movie watched by homegrown radical terrorists. Additionally, during the standard PBS membership drive intermissions, Gary Franchi of RestoreTheRepublic.net is interviewed by Sherry Bernson of KBDI and speaks at length about the FEDERAL RESERVE as well as our stolen liberties at the hands of an over reaching government.

The Smoking Argus Daily, applauds the continuing effort of Mr. Franchi and KBDI for their willingness to spread a view not often expressed anywhere, let alone on government television.

Please take a moment to thank KBDI at 1-800-690-5234.

On the Web: RestoreTheRepublic • KBDI • Aaron Russo’s America:Freedom to Fascism

Allison Bricker

This past week, sensitive documents from the Missouri Information Analysis Center were leaked to the public. The M.I.A.C. report designated “UNCLASSIFIED//LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE”, seeks to put supporters of Dr. Ron Paul, those tired of the endless banker bailouts, and just about anyone else who dare question the Federal government on par with Neo-Nazis and abortion clinic bombers.¹

It disturbs me greatly to bear witness as our Federal government continues to expand its program of correlating dissent with domestic terrorism. Fellow readers, this despicable tactic is precisely why many of our Founding Fathers sought to engross humanity’s inherent liberties into the Constitution via The Bill of Rights. Among these rights derived solely from nature, is the right to free speech; even speech deemed unpopular or critical of one’s government.

FBI-JTT/MCSD Domestic Terror Brochure

Truth be told, the tactic of linking those criticizing the central authority as outright enemies of the state, whether it be king or government is as old as humanity itself. This is how students of the enlightenment, ergo Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, et al knew the absolute necessity of prohibiting government regulation of speech. The Founding generation witnessed first hand “Royal Governors” and legislatures executing and imprisoning their fellow colonists for speaking out against the crown.² These unjust decrees backed by the weight of the sword, were necessary in the eyes of the loyalist governments. They feared dissent would gradually give rise to critical thinking, which in turn would demand answers and accountability, and thus dissent was seen as a direct threat to their ever corrupting grip on power.

Even members of the founding generation were tempted by the corrupting influence of power. Fearing a threat to his own power and pressured by the Hamiltonian faction, President Adams signed into law a series of legislation that went on to become known as “The Alien and Sedition Acts” . Thankfully, the passion for politics by Americans from all walks of life, denounced the acts so roundly, along with the repudiation of the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions, that it helped propel Thomas Jefferson into the Presidency over incumbent John Adams. President Jefferson immediately pardoned all those found guilty of the Acts which he let expire upon his election.³

At the time it was an uniquely American philosophy that power must challenge power, or as James Madison wrote:

“Ambition must be made to counteract ambition… It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government”

James Madison
Federalist No. 51
February 8th, 1788

Consequently, the eradication of this ideal is repeatedly articulated by the Federal government in its most recent attempt to cast dissent as the enemy to its brand of Neo Patriotism. For this purpose sheds sunshine as to why the central authority and its agents seek to establish an interrelationship by equating the Founding Fathers to terrorists. Regrettably, the video to the right establishes that the central authority has waged their war of reeducation at least since July of 2001 prior to the intial hyper call to nationalism/Neo patriotism following the September 11th attacks.

However, this is just another example of an ever increasing amount of pejorative rhetoric towards the central authority’s own compact, the U.S. Constitution. The M.I.A.C. report desires to reinforce the correlation made both in the F.E.M.A training video above and the Phoenix F.B.I. Joint Terrorism Task Force/Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department’s brochure⁴ of those who reference and defend the Constitution as terrorists. Moreover it attempts to handcuff supporters of Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) to the likes of Eric Rudolph, the 1996 Olympic park bomber. As a result, if those of us who merely supported Representative Ron Paul during the campaign are dangerous homegrown radicals according to M.I.A.C., then how does one think they view Dr. Paul, who publicly declared himself to be “The Champion of the Constitution”?⁵

During the course of the previous administration, both officials and their old-media shills demonized individuals who dared speak out against the Bush Doctrine as unPatriotic, unAmerican, and/or traitors. Now we are told by socialist scribes⁶ that dissenting against the “economic terrorism” id est the central bank manipulated credit crisis, is also unpatriotic. If we are no longer allowed to question or criticize the government’s domestic or foreign policies without being painted as homegrown radicals, is there any semblance left at all of our republic? Should I instead just pledge blind allegiance to President Obama and be content with my “right” to criticize a group of B-list celebrities or no talent wannabee singers on “Dancing with the Stars” or “American Idol” respectively?

Therefore, since our temporary browser cookie indicates that various members of the U.S. Senate are regular readers of “The Smoking Argus Daily”, I respectfully request an answer one way or the other as to whether or not my political philosophy and associations are terrorist in nature.

According to the M.I.A.C. report, you just might be a terrorist if…

	You display or use the “Gadsden Rattlesnake” Flag/Symbol.
	You have watched the “Anti-Federal Reserve System” – Zeitgeist Movie.
	You support a repeal of the 16th Amendment – the Income Tax.
	You supported the candidacy of Representative Ron Paul (R-TX).
	You are a member of The Committees of Safety.
	You oppose mandatory citizen service for those aged 18 to 24 per Rahm Emanuel’s proposal.
	You oppose the Security and Prosperity Partnership being out of the jurisdiction of Congressional oversight.
	You support the abolition of the FEDERAL RESERVE private central bank and favor a return to Constitutional money.
	You oppose any further restrictions on the inherent right to bear arms.
	You have watched Aaron Russo’s “America: Freedom to Fascism”
	You oppose any additional bailout bills for failing banks and/or private companies.

Dear members of the Senate:

Please think of the checklist above as my 21st century “petition for Redress of Grievances”. Tis a fact of candid reality that when a government seeks to cast all dissent as terrorism, we are most certainly flirting upon the precipice of tyranny.

Respectfully,

Allison Bricker

Source(s): ¹Missouri Information Analysis Center – Strategic Report – 02/20/2009 • ²The Trial of Peter Zenger 1735 • ³ “Our Presidents & How We Make Them” by A.K. M^cClure – HARPER & BROTHERS Publishers © 1905 • ⁴ Phoenix F.B.I Joint Terrorism Task Force/Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department – Domestic Terrorism Brochure • ⁵WMUR/CNN Republican Presidential Primary Debate – Manchester, NewHampshire – June 5th, 2007-Part 1 • ⁶ New York Times “Herbert Hoover Lives” by Frank Rich, published January 31st, 2009