The Chuck Baldwin Page
Below you’ll find articles written by Pastor and former Vice-Presidential Candidate Chuck Baldwin. I am a subscriber to his articles via email, and will be sharing many of them with you on this page.
Is Obama Really Preparing For Civil War?
By Chuck Baldwin
December 11, 2009
This column is archived at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20091211.html
According to an obscure report in the European Union Times (EUTimes.net),
“Russian Military Analysts are reporting to Prime Minister Putin that US
President Barack Obama has issued an order to his Northern Command’s
(USNORTHCOM) top leader, US Air Force General Gene Renuart, to ‘begin
immediately’ increasing his military forces to 1 million troops by January
30, 2010, in what these reports warn is an expected outbreak of civil war
within the United States before the end of winter.
“According to these reports, Obama has had over these past weeks ‘numerous’
meetings with his war council abut how best to manage the expected implosion
of his Nation’s banking system while at the same time attempting to keep the
United States military hegemony over the World in what Russian Military
Analysts state is a ‘last ditch gambit’ whose success is ‘far from
certain.’”
The EU Times article continues by saying, “To the fears of Obama over the
United States erupting into civil war once the full extent of the rape and
pillaging of these peoples by their banks and government becomes known to
them, grim evidence now shows the likelihood of this occurring much sooner
than later.”
The Times story goes on to say that there are “over 220 million American
people armed to the teeth and ready to explode.”
The Times article concludes by saying, “Though the coming civil war in the
United States is being virtually ignored by their propaganda media, the same
cannot be said of Russia, where leading Russian political analyst, Professor
Igor Panarin has long warned that the economic turmoil in the United States
has confirmed his long-held view that the US is heading for collapse.”
Many of us would be inclined to pooh-pooh such a story, but then there is
this column from Bloomberg.com entitled “Arming Goldman With Pistols Against
Public,” written by Alice Schroeder. According to Ms Schroeder:
“‘I just wrote my first reference for a gun permit,’ said a friend, who told
me of swearing to the good character of a Goldman Sachs Group Inc. banker
who applied to the local police for a permit to buy a pistol. The banker had
told this friend of mine that senior Goldman people have loaded up on
firearms and are now equipped to defend themselves if there is a populist
uprising against the bank.”
There is no doubt that the American people have good reason to despise these
international banksters epitomized by Goldman Sachs. Even one of Goldman’s
poster-boys, Henry Paulson, US Treasury secretary and former Goldman CEO,
admitted that the American people were fed up. Schroeder quotes Paulson as
saying, during testimony to Congress last summer, “[People] were unhappy
with the big discrepancies in wealth, but they at least believed in the
system and in some form of market-driven capitalism. But if we had a
complete meltdown, it could lead to people questioning the basis of the
system.”
Schroeder correctly opines, “There you have it. The bailout was meant to
keep the curtain drawn on the way the rich make money, not from the free
market, but from the lack of one. Goldman Sachs blew its cover when the
firm’s revenue from trading reached a record $27 billion in the first nine
months of this year, and a public that was writhing in financial agony
caught on that the profits earned on taxpayer capital were going to pay
employee bonuses.”
Schroeder concludes her column by saying, “And if the proles [proletariat:
plebs, working class, peasants] really do appear brandishing pitchforks at
the doors of Park Avenue and the gates of Round Hill Road, you can be sure
that the Goldman guys and their families will be holed up in their safe
rooms with their firearms.”
So, do Wall Street and Russian analysts know something that we don’t know?
Is this why George W. Bush initiated USNORTHCOM to begin with? Is this why
Barack Obama is beefing up USNORTHCOM? This would help explain the reports
of all those potential detention camps that have been constructed (including
the abandoned military installations that have refurbished security fences,
guard towers, etc., around them). Has the American people’s disgust with
these crooks and thieves within the federal government and Wall Street
reached a boiling point?
There is no question that people are angry, and for good reason.
The fraudulent financial policies of the Federal Reserve and its lackeys in
the White House and Congress have literally bankrupted the country. Real
unemployment is most likely over 20%. Taxes (along with costly fees,
regulations, restrictions, penalties, mandates, etc.) at every level are
going through the ceiling. America’s jobs have been outsourced. Barack Obama
continues G.W. Bush’s irresponsibility, digging America deeper and deeper
into foreign entanglements, at the cost of trillions of dollars and
thousands of lives. The IRS continues to harass and harangue honest
citizens, squeezing them like the proverbial turnip. And now, add the
insanity of a global climate treaty being hammered out in Copenhagen, and a
universal health care bill being rammed through Congress, and the outlook is
even gloomier.
I feel very comfortable in saying that the usurpations of power, the
encroachments upon liberty, and the arrogant tax-and-spend policies
emanating from Washington, D.C., and Wall Street these days are far more
egregious than what George Washington and the boys were enduring in 1775-76
at the hands of the British Crown. There is no doubt in my mind that if
Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and Sam Adams were alive today, they would
have given cause for the Goldman Sachs banksters to retreat to their bunkers
years ago!
The fact is, we do need a revolution! But not a revolution of anarchy and
pitchforks. (The history of France should be ample evidence of the futility
of this strategy.) We need a revolution of the individual states: to reclaim
their sovereignty and fight for the liberties of their sovereigns (We the
People). That is exactly what our forefathers did in ’76.
America’s founding document (the Declaration of Independence) declares that
our states are “free and independent.” And so they are. We are not “one
nation” with one all-powerful central government. We are a confederation of
nation-states, united in a voluntary union, with each State reserving to
itself the power and authority of self-determination, and ceding to the
federal government limited, specifically delineated duties and
limitations–limitations that have been totally ignored to the point that,
for all intents and purposes, our once-great constitutional republic has
been thoroughly expunged. Therefore, it is NOW time for the states to stand
up to this meddlesome, every-growing tyranny that is known as Washington,
D.C., and defend the rights and liberties of their citizens!
What Dr. Ed Vieira (an attorney with 4 earned degrees from Harvard, who has
successfully argued cases before the US Supreme Court) wrote a few weeks ago
should serve as a template for every State governor and legislature that
truly cares about liberty. See Ed’s column at:
http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin201.htm
As Vieira says, the states should resurrect their militias. Many–if not
all–states have the legal authority for such entities in their
constitutions. In some states they are called the State Guard. Some plainly
use the word “militia.” Whatever they are called, they need to be activated.
And all that is necessary for this to be accomplished is the order of the
governor. It’s that simple!
And as Vieira said, states need to adopt an alternative currency–including,
and most especially, gold and silver. In other words, they need to develop
their own private economies, complete with their own banks and exchange
mediums. They also need to reject the multinational agribusiness and develop
their own in-State agricultural and energy businesses.
I would dare say that the first State that determines to follow Vieira’s
sagacious counsel (and rumblings of this have already begun in states such
as Alaska, Oklahoma, Texas, Montana, New Hampshire, Indiana, Tennessee,
South Carolina, etc.) would have so many liberty-loving patriots flock there
that its economy would explode with prosperity–resulting in a domino effect
of many other states following suit–and the revolution that this country so
desperately needs would indeed take place. Furthermore, such a revolution
would be constitutional, lawful, moral, and, yes, in compliance with the
laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.
In the meantime, is Barack Obama really worried about civil war? He might
be. It is my observation that Washington politicians and bureaucrats are the
most paranoid people on the planet. The problem is–as with most
power-hungry Machiavellians–their paranoia often translates into more
oppression and less liberty for the citizenry. And if this is true, it
simply means that the states need to hurry up and do what needs to be done!
*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by
credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php
(c) Chuck Baldwin
NOTE TO THE READER:
This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.
To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/subscribe.php
To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/unsubscribe.php
Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact
and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web site address is included.
Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com
Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address
is P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Florida, 32526. When responding, please
include your name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all
respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.
Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com
US Troops Wearing UN Colors
By Chuck Baldwin
November 17, 2009
This column is archived at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20091117.html
According to a report in World Net Daily, “Troops in the United States’
USNORTHCOM ranks appear to have adopted a shoulder patch showing a North
American continental design, with an emphasis on United Nations colors,
giving evidence of the strength to integrate North America.
“The patch reveals the continent of North America in the orange and blue
colors typical to the U.N.
“It also carries the image of a mosque to designate the unit’s service in
North Africa in World War II.”
The report also states, “The design of the patch with the U.S. eagle image
superimposed seems to imply a hierarchy in which the U.S. 5th Army exerts
its military command under the authority of USNORTHCOM, with its domain
defined as all North America, including the U.S., Mexico and Canada, for the
United Nations, as implied in the orange and blue motif.”
See the report at:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=115275
As most of my faithful readers know, USNORTHCOM is a combatant command
“created to respond to national emergencies in North America.” Readers
should also be aware that the US and Canada signed an agreement earlier this
year allowing the armed forces from one country to assist the armed forces
of the other country during a “domestic civil emergency, EVEN ONE THAT DOES
NOT INVOLVE A CROSS-BORDER CRISIS.” (Emphasis added.)
Creation of a North American Union has long been the goal of the elitists at
the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and sister organizations. This
objective is so far along now that anyone who would question it simply isn’t
paying attention–or has an ulterior motive for denying it.
In fact, I have chronicled much pertinent information relative to this
burgeoning North American Union on my web site. I encourage readers to
review (and share) the information I have accumulated on this page. See it
at:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/nau.html
Readers will recall that former President George W. Bush, then-Canadian
Prime Minister Paul Martin, and then-Mexican President Vicente Fox signed
the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) on March 23, 2005, in Waco,
Texas. The SPP was based upon the CFR’s Task Force report entitled “Creating
a North American Community,” which was issued just prior to the Waco
gathering. Remember, too, that the SPP was signed without any knowledge,
oversight, or consent of the US Congress–or any Canadian or Mexican
legislative body either, for that matter.
As the WND report states, “The unannounced goal of the SPP was to create a
North American Union by advancing the trade integration realized in NAFTA
into continental political integration through the creation of some 20
trilateral bureaucratic working groups and the North American
Competitiveness Council, or NACC, composed of 30 North American business
executives–10 each hand-picked by the chambers of commerce in the three
countries.”
In this regard, it makes absolutely no difference whether a Republican or
Democratic President sits in the Oval Office. President Barack Obama is
pushing forward with the same internationalist policies as did his
predecessors, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George Herbert Walker Bush.
(And, no, Martha, nothing would have changed had John McCain been elected
last year.)
For the most part, the leaders of both major parties in Washington, D.C.,
are globalists. With few exceptions, they have all bought into the CFR’s
philosophy of internationalism. The fact that we even have such a military
command as USNORTHCOM–and even more, that the unit is wearing insignia with
UN colors and a three-nation, North American patch–without the slightest
protest from virtually any US congressman or senator, demonstrates the
apathy of Washington elitists regarding America’s merger into a
multinational governing structure.
Add to the compliance of Washington politicians the US Chamber of Commerce,
the US military Joint Chiefs of Staff, the mainstream news media (with the
exception of Lou Dobbs, and look what happened to him: CNN reportedly paid
him $8 million to leave the network), the National Education
Association–along with the vast majority of America’s top educational
institutions, and even America’s leading churchmen (for example: mega-church
pastor and Pied Piper author, Rick Warren, and Southern Baptist spokesman,
Richard Land, are both members of the CFR). In other words, virtually every
major institution in America is betraying our country’s sovereignty and
independence.
Even Big Labor is, for the most part, silent in its opposition against
international unification. Where is the union-led protest of President
Obama’s policy reversal to continue President Bush’s plan allowing Mexican
trucks to roll down US highways? Where is Big Labor’s opposition to Obama’s
decision to continue pushing the goals and objectives of the CFR and Chamber
of Commerce via the SPP and related supranational agreements?
Without a doubt, the attempted merger of North America is well underway. But
this, too, is part of a much bigger picture. The destruction of the dollar,
the formation of a global currency, the development of a new UN army (of
which USNORTHCOM is the prototype), perpetual war, state-sponsored fear
mongering over super-hyped “pandemics” such as the Swine Flu, the push for
universal health care, etc., all serve the purpose of collapsing US
sovereignty and independence, and creating global government.
Of course, one thing the elitists driving this global merger are counting on
is the continued apathy and indifference of the American people. Obviously,
an awakened, energized, and angry populace could seriously jeopardize their
pernicious plans. They are somewhat rattled at the success of grassroots Tea
Parties, etc., but they are counting on the major news media and
establishment churches to keep the sheep asleep.
If America’s pastors would wake up and begin sounding the clarion call for
freedom and independence (as did their brave forebears), they could–almost
single-handedly–turn the country around. Until they do, it is left to the
rest of us to keep Thomas Jefferson’s “spirit of resistance” alive.
As for me and my house, we plan to do our part by pledging no loyalty to the
North American Union, the UN, or any other globalist entity.
P.S. We are shipping THE FREEDOM DOCUMENTS now! Our supply will only last a
couple of weeks. These make terrific Christmas gifts. To order, go to:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/products.html
Or, to read my initial column that describes THE FREEDOM DOCUMENTS, go to:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20091113.html
*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by
credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php
(c) Chuck Baldwin
NOTE TO THE READER:
This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.
To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/subscribe.php
To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/unsubscribe.php
Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact
and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web site address is included.
Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com
Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address
is P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Florida, 32526. When responding, please
include your name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all
respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.
Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com
Questions Regarding The Fort Hood Massacre
By Chuck Baldwin
November 20, 2009
This column is archived at:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20091120.html
By now, virtually everyone has read and reread the copious news accounts of
the terrible shooting a few weeks ago at Fort Hood, Texas. This column will
not attempt to add new details to what is already a highly scrutinized
tragedy. However, I do want to pose three basic questions that, to me, are
extremely glaring and, for the most part, absent from the discussion.
Question 1: Why were the soldiers not armed?
After all, this is a military base; more than that, it is an Army base that
emphasizes the training and equipping of frontline, combat-ready soldiers.
For the most part, these were not clerks or cooks; these were combat troops.
Fort Hood is home to the 1st Cavalry Division (the largest Division in the
Army). Troops stationed at Fort Hood have engaged the enemy in virtually
every hot theater of war to which American forces have been deployed. In
recent conflicts that means Somalia, Bosnia, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.
Without a doubt, these are among America’s bravest and best.
So, how is it that these intensely trained, disciplined, rugged, highly
qualified warriors are not allowed to carry their own weapons on base? This
makes about as much sense as the policy forbidding airline pilots from
carrying their own handguns on board commercial airliners, or teachers not
being allowed to carry their own handguns in the classroom. After all,
judges are granted the authority to carry their own firearms into the
courtroom. If we can trust lawyers, we should be able to trust soldiers,
airline pilots, and teachers.
Question 2: If the federal government–including the Department of Homeland
Security, the Department of Defense, etc., with billions of dollars worth of
technology; tens of thousands of snoops, spooks, and intelligence gatherers;
and myriad Patriot Act-type laws–could not protect US soldiers on one of
the most tightly secured and heavily guarded military installations in
America, how can anyone in the country possibly not break out in cacophonous
laughter when politicians tell us we need to surrender more liberties so
that they might pass more laws to protect us crummy little peons? Or is it
that, because Hasan was a Muslim, the politically correct nincompoops in
charge gave him a pass?
Consider: we have learned that the shooter, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, had
attempted to make contact with people associated with al Qaeda; that
numerous classmates of Hasan had reported his anti-American views, which,
according to a column written by Dennis Prager, “included his giving a
presentation that justified suicide bombing and telling classmates that
Islamic law trumped the U.S. Constitution”; and that Hasan had a long
history of pro-Islamic, anti-American activity. All of which begs an answer
to the question, How could such an individual not only be allowed in the US
military, but also be allowed to advance to the rank of Major?
I think most of my readers have the answer to this question figured out: we
have an out-of-control, politically correct federal government that only
senses danger from conservatives, libertarians, Christians, pro-lifers, Tea
Party protesters, and anti-UN, anti-IRS, pro-Second Amendment activists–and
supporters of Ron Paul and Chuck Baldwin, of course. To this politically
correct federal leviathan today, anti-American jihadists, militant Black
Panthers, or illegal aliens who have committed felonious crimes in Mexico
pose no risk to anyone, and must be “understood.”
As Prager quotes NPR’s Tom Gjelten: since Hasan had never been in combat, he
must have suffered from “pre-traumatic stress disorder.” No, I’m not
kidding. That’s what he said. (I’ll pause while you pick yourself up off the
floor from laughing.)
To the politically correct crowd running things in Washington, D.C., anyone
coming from a socialistic, Big Government, or anti-American point of view is
harmless, and anyone coming from a conservative, Christian, constitutional,
or pro-American point of view is dangerous. Can one imagine how the
mainstream media, federal police agencies, and the Southern Poverty Law
Center would have reacted had Hasan shouted “Jesus is greatest!” instead of
what he really said, “Allah is greatest!” right before opening fire?
If one rejects the notion that political correctness favoring Muslims (and
every other minority in the United States) had anything to do with the Fort
Hood shooting, then we are back to the original question: If the federal
government–including the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of
Defense, etc., with billions of dollars worth of technology; tens of
thousands of snoops, spooks, and intelligence gatherers; and myriad Patriot
Act-type laws–could not protect US soldiers on one of the most tightly
secured and heavily guarded military installations in America, how can
anyone in the country possibly not break out in cacophonous laughter when
politicians tell us we need to surrender more liberties so that they might
pass more laws to protect us crummy little peons?
Are we now really supposed to believe that all these Patriot Act-type laws,
which allow the federal government to trash the Constitution and Bill of
Rights–and poke its ubiquitous and meddlesome nose into every corner and
crevice of our lives–are actually doing anything to make us safer? You’ve
got to be kidding! The only thing they are doing is stealing our liberties.
If the Fort Hood massacre proves anything, it proves that.
Question 3: How could one man (with no combat experience) armed with only
two handguns fire over 100 rounds (demanding he reload at least 3 times)
into a crowd of scores and hundreds of fearless combat-trained warriors? I
must confess: this is the question that bothers me the most.
According to the official story, Hasan was the only shooter, and he was
allowed to fire at will into a crowd of America’s finest warriors for at
least 4 minutes, reloading at least 3 times, firing over 100 rounds of
ammunition, killing 13 people, and wounding over 30–and was finally taken
out by civilian police officers AFTER EXITING THE BUILDING. I’ve got to tell
you: I cannot get my brain around this one.
Again, these soldiers are warriors. They not only know how to fight, they
know how to fight unarmed. They are trained to risk their lives. They are
trained to do whatever is necessary to take out the enemy. Had even a small
group of soldiers rushed the shooter (especially if they came at him from
multiple directions) there is no way that Hasan would not have been
subdued–and most likely killed. Yes, a few of the on-rushers would have
been hit, but Hasan could not have gotten them all. That is a fact! And yet,
we are supposed to believe that Hasan was not only unmolested by soldiers
inside the building, but he was allowed to leave the building entirely, and
then get shot by civilian policemen? Again, this explanation makes
absolutely no sense to me. None.
Initial reports said there were multiple shooters. If that was the case, the
scenario is much more plausible. If multiple shooters had opened fire from
various vantage points–especially if they had rifles–it would have made
unarmed resistance extremely difficult. That scenario would make sense. The
“one shooter with two handguns” explanation makes no sense.
I realize that no unarmed man wants to rush an armed attacker. Of course,
some who would do so would probably die, but again, these are trained
warriors. Furthermore, this was an all-or-nothing, kill-or-be-killed
environment: something these men are trained for. If untrained civilian
passengers on flight 93 on 9/11 could rush and thwart armed attackers on
board a commercial airliner from a narrow aisle way and stop a hijacking–a
task infinitely more difficult than for a group of highly trained
professional soldiers outnumbering an attacker by scores or hundreds in a
large building–tell me again how Hasan was able to open fire with only two
handguns, kill and wound scores of people, and calmly walk out of the
building unscathed? Again, this makes no sense.
Of course, all of the above is predicated upon the public accounts of the
events being a truthful representation of what actually occurred. Which,
after trying to comprehend the plausibility of what we are being told, is
becoming increasingly difficult to believe. But then again, I haven’t
believed much that the federal government or major news media has told me
since John F. Kennedy was assassinated. And I must say, this story serves
only to further fuel my skepticism.
P.S. And one more time: we are shipping THE FREEDOM DOCUMENTS now: 50 of
America’s great historical documents in one volume. Our supply will last
only a couple of weeks. These make terrific Christmas gifts and can be found
only here:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/products.html
Or, to read my initial column that describes THE FREEDOM DOCUMENTS, go to:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20091113.html
*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by
credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php
(c) Chuck Baldwin
NOTE TO THE READER:
This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.
To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/subscribe.php
To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/unsubscribe.php
Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact
and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web site address is included.
Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com
Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address
is P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Florida, 32526. When responding, please
include your name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all
respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.
Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com
