“Hostile to the United States” Part B: Internal countries, organizations, and individuals

By Nathan Barton

In my first segment, I discussed the 2013 NDAA and its language allowing gathering of information (spying) from external countries, organizations, and individual hostile to the United States now or in the past.  It seems to include a good 90 percent of the countries on the planet, and many tens of thousands of organizations and billions of individuals in those countries.  It includes virtually every nation now identified as an “Ally” by the United States, and most of the rest of the world. But what about internally?

The NDAA does not distinguish between external and internal “countries, organizations, and individuals” in its authority.  What, then, does that include? In the first segment, I talked about American Indian (AmerInd) nations  (sometimes, disrespectfully called “native American nations”).  These nations, legally called “dependent domestic nations” (an oxymoron) since 1831, have been largely hostile to the US government, whether accepting the “protection” and “guardianship” of the federal government or not.  (There are a few exceptions, of course, as I mentioned.  The Shoshone, the Crow, and a few others have not actually gone to war against the United States or one of the States, but certainly many of their actions can be considered “hostile” in the past and today. But internal hostility is far from limited to 310 AmerInd nations (and reservations) scattered from Point Barrow to the Everglades, and the two or three million enrolled (and non-enrolled) members of those nations.

Let us look at some others and get the magnitude.  Remember, the NDAA applies to “countries” and “organizations” and “individuals.” The easiest to deal with is the old Confederate States of America:  the eleven states which actually seceded and formed a new government.  Clearly today recognized as a “country” of four years duration, except possibly by the Courts of the United States.  Theoretically, those original states no longer exist: they were replaced by NEW entities which were readmitted to the Union during Reconstruction.  And obviously, almost 150 years later, there are no individuals which were part of or served that country still living.  Organizations?  Both the SCV (Sons of Confederate Veterans) and UDC (United Daughters of the Confederacy) as well as many other organizations, were established by and for the support of individuals who were hostile – and therefore, the organizations can be considered hostile.  Millions of Americans have been members or are now so. But there is more:  although the states were extinguished, there were and are many municipalities which existed in 1861 and supported secession and were NOT “dissolved.”  I do not count counties (pun intended) because counties are considered units of state government.

And we must remember that the movement of 1860-1861 was not the ONLY secession movement organized and hostile to the US government.  We know that in the early 19th century (1810s and 1820s) that several of the New England states were hostile to DC and proposed or planned secession, although they did not actually do so.  We know that during the War between the States, a planned “Northwest Rebellion” led by Democrats was very much hostile to the Lincoln government, planning to split off Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin.  Successors of those states, or the actual states themselves, still exist. In more modern times, we have the Alaska Independence movement, we have the various attempts to reestablish a new Texas Republic, and we have similar attempts to separate Vermont, New Hampshire, Wyoming, and elsewhere.

None of these are actually the state governments themselves, but organizations within them, which are hostile.  But many of the states themselves ARE hostile, some on a continuing basis, or have BEEN hostile to the US government, ranging from anti-desegregation states (Arkansas and Louisiana come to mind) to anti-Spanish-American War, anti-Philippine Annexation, anti-Vietnam War, anti-seatbelt, anti-drinking age, and all sorts of other kinds of and reasons for opposition to the dictates and actions of Congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court.  Indeed, maybe ANY states in which the people, legislature, or representatives in majority EVER were opposed (“hostile to”) ANY action of the US government can be on that list.  Hard to think of even one of the fifty which would not be in that category.

As for other organizations, well, internal organizations?  The list is even larger.  Let us start with the anti-ratification/anti-Federalist organizations of the 1780s and move forward, to include virtually every political group from the Republican Party and the Grand Old Army (Union veterans) to the Communist Party USA( and its hundreds of splinters) and Young Americans for Freedom to the SLA and Black Panthers (New and Old).  And let us not forget the religious groups, including the Roman Catholic Church and the Church of Jesus Christ Latter-Day Saints.  Even the League of Women Voters has been hostile to DC now and then.  And do not forget private business – even if in public ownership.  That leads us to individuals.

What constitutes “hostile?”  It appears, based on the way the government in DC – the “messiah” and his minions, and the raving of Congress and its staff, and the decisions of the Supreme Court and all its downstream courts, that any disagreement, including  minor ones, with the federal government, in which ANY action is threatened or encouraged,  can be considered “hostile” to the US government.

Did you question your tax bill?  Try to avoid or reduce or – gasp – evade taxes?  Did you disagree with the NPS closing your favorite restaurant or necking place? Did you cut off a US government plated vehicle?  Did you discourage someone from enlisting?  Did you argue with the extension agent on which crops to plant?  Did you complain because your school tried to follow federal guidelines and stopped serving french fries, or stopped singing “Here Comes Santa Claus” for the winter concert?

All of these actions are hostile: the NDAA apparently “gives” authority to the NSA, FBI, BATFE, DEA, USDA, FDA, PHS, IHS, FHWA, FCC, and two dozen additional agencies to be selected to read your e-mail, listen to your phone calls, record your television watching habits and browsing history, check your spelling on your documents on- or off-line, and use GPS to record your trips to the grocery store and the pawn shop and the church building.

If not now, then later.  How much later?  Did you hang around that seventeen-year-old girl too much when you were nineteen in college, thirty years ago?  Fair game: there is no statute of limitations for NSA to “investigate” and collect data.  Did you collect signatures to get Goldwater on the ballot in your home state in 1964?  Did you pick up a numbers ticket from Greasy Joe Luciano’s racket in Pittsfield, MA, in 1982?  (Talk about organizations hostile to the US government: the Mob, the Mafia, Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, and friends of George McGovern AND GG Liddy all fit in that group.)

I am SURE that somewhere, someplace, somehow in America’s fifty states and dozen territories there are people who were NEVER and are not NOW hostile to the United States – and also over the age of five.  But like Abraham in Sodom and Gomorrah, it might be difficult to find TEN really quickly.  Certainly no American sailor, airman, marine or soldier who ever looked at, and cussed their pay statement, can be considered to have never been hostile.  With this wording, even the “messiah’s” Consort herself, Queen-bee Michelle, might have been hostile, because she said “this is the first time I’ve been proud of my country” as an adult.

The bottom line is this:  Congress has constantly given and will and does continue to give the various secret police entities (“intelligence community”) a blank check to gather information on anyone, anywhere, anytime – essentially in the entire world.  That such power is clearly unconstitutional and in violation of every moral principle accepted by Americans for ten generations is a worthless argument against it.  They have the power, and they not only make the rules, but ignore the very rules they make.  When they write things like this, it is little more than arrogance on their part: see, we will do whatever we want to, and you can’t stop us.  It is force: not the open, brute force of the whip, the mailed fist, the pistol or Taser or shock baton, but still force:  intimidation and threats and constant pressure are the tools of violence, always backed up by sheer force.

Which brings us to the point of both parts of this article.  You and I and virtually everyone, every organization, and every country on this planet have been deemed hostile to the United States government.  It is already collecting information in every possible way and awaiting the right opportunity to take action on that information against you, your contact, your neighbors and friends and family.

So, what will you do about it?

About TPOL-Nathan

Nathan Barton is a christian, self-governor (free-market anarchist), husband, father, professional engineer, Engineer army officer, private businessman, and writer, teacher, and preacher. He works and lives mostly in four western states, and is Southern by heritage and Westerner by birth, upbringing, and choice.
This entry was posted in Nathan's Rants and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to “Hostile to the United States” Part B: Internal countries, organizations, and individuals

  1. JdL says:

    You seem to be very knowledgeable on the matter, so let me ask, why is the term “native American” disrespectful? At one time, in the ’60′s or ’70′s, it was demanded as the ONLY acceptable term by a number of vocal members of [that group]. It is of course true that their ancestors arrived only a few tens of thousands of years ago, the blink of an eye in geologic , or even human evolutionary terms, but they were in fact “native” when explorers and settlers arrived from Europe.

    And how is the term “American Indian” appropriate or non-disrespectful? India is, as I’m sure you’re aware, an actual country far far away from America, which is not in any way connected to the people who settled in America. Why does Christopher Columbus’s brain fart carry so much weight, and the patina of legitimacy?

    • MamaLiberty says:

      I’ve sent your comment to Nathan, and expect he will answer soon.

      As for me, I have no idea why “Native American” would be any more disrespectful than AmerInd, but I can accept that it is if they say it is. I think we need to grow away from group names and become individual sovereigns, but each person has to decide that for themselves.

      • JdL says:

        As for me, I have no idea why “Native American” would be any more disrespectful than AmerInd, but I can accept that it is if they say it is.

        So can I, though it can be dizzying trying to keep up with what term is respectful and what term is considered an insult. I’m always curious to know WHY each is which, especially when the judgements are so mutable.

        I think we need to grow away from group names and become individual sovereigns, but each person has to decide that for themselves.

        Agree 100%. When I got married in North Carolina a few years ago, we were required to fill out an application including a box for “Race”. I entered “Human” and was told that we could not get married unless I entered an approved word there, and that “Human” was not on the list. Freeping obscene, I thought, but my wife-to-be requested I not make an issue of it, so I didn’t. Wonder if that’s why that marriage didn’t last? ;-j

        • MamaLiberty says:

          Possible, JdL… Those who insist on seeking government “permission” for personal relationships are not quite ready to become sovereign individuals, I think. As for me, I don’t fill out government forms, surveys, things like that very often. Actually, I can only think of one… the “driver’s license” form every four or five years (can’t remember which). The funny thing is that nobody has even asked to look at the fool thing in almost ten years.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>