Attn: Sul Ross State University Alumni. Sign the petition if you haven’t already. — jtl, 419

change.org

Sign the Petition

Or go to: https://www.change.org/p/alumni-long-live-the-bar-sr-bar?recruiter=6513563&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_initial&utm_term=psf_combo_share_initial&recruited_by_id=17a7aa10-6924-11e3-8c9e-5f9becafb6b4&utm_content=fht-24626511-en-us%3A1

and sign the petition. — jtl, 419

Michelle F started this petition to President, Sul Ross State University Pete Gallegos 3 minutes

On September 9, 2020, it was made aware to the general community that a group of students at Sul Ross State University are advocating to have the name of Sullivan Ross stripped from the school’s name. Without citing any reason other than he served in the Confederacy, concerned alumni, donors, and supporters of Sul Ross State University have come together to keep the University’s name. 

As many of you know (and some of you may not be aware of), Sullivan Ross also:

  • raised cattle and farmed for several years.
  • served as a Texas Ranger.
  • served in the Confederate army, as did thousands of Texans including the entire 1883 inaugural faculty at The University of Texas.
  • was elected Sheriff of McClennan County (1873-1875).
  • was a member of the 1876 Texas Constitutional Convention and served as a state senator (1881-1883).
  • was elected Governor of Texas and, during his two terms, he championed public education and oversaw the construction of the new capitol building.
  • became president of the Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas (1891) and under his leadership that troubled institution flourished and gained respect throughout the state.
  • continued to lead the efforts to expand African-American rural schools when radical Democrats wanted to de-fund support of local black education and he halted numerous attempts to attack the funding for Prairie View, fighting and demanding the Legislature to do the right thing. He won — and provided additional funding and jobs after establishing one of the first agricultural experiment stations at an African-American college in the United States.
  • supported the full funding for the proposed hospital for the “Deaf, Dumb and Blind Colored Institute” (today MHMR) when proposed by African-American Sen. William Holland.

When he died in College Station on January 3, 1898, Texans mourned and extolled him for his courage, his dedication to the state and his public spirit.

In 1917 the Texas Legislature named a newly created Normal School in Alpine, Texas, in his honor – Sul Ross Normal College – which became Sul Ross State University in 1969.

There cannot be a name change without Texas legislation. Please sign this petition and reach out to the following about your concern and status of our beloved SRSU: 

Do your part and LONG LIVE THE BAR SR BAR!

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation

Here are the details of the communist organization that calls itself Black Lives Matter.

Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation (BLM Global Network Foundation) is the national, organizing chapter of a network of 16 local Black Lives Matters chapters. [1] It is the primary organizational outgrowth of the more decentralized Black Lives Matter movement, and is a fiscally-sponsored project of the Tides Center, a subsidiary entity of the Tides Foundation, a major left-of-center donor-advised fund. [2]

Mission and Activities

BLM Global Network Foundation was founded in 2013 by activists Patrisse Cullors, Alicia Garza, and Opal Tometi in response to the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida. [3] Cullors, Garza, and Tometi created and popularized the “#blacklivesmatter” hashtag on social media that was instrumental in the early growth of the Black Lives Matter movement. [4] BLM Global Network Foundation was under the fiscal sponsorship of Thousand Currents (formerly the International Development Exchange). [5] Thousand Currents officially transferred control of BLM Global Network Foundation to Tides Center in July 2020. [6]

BLM Global Network Foundation claims that its mission, and the mission of the Black Lives Matter movement generally, “is to build local power and to intervene in violence inflicted on Black communities by the state and vigilantes.” Advocating against the use of excessive force by law enforcement against African-Americans is central to the BLM Global Network Foundation mission,[7] and the movement as a whole gained national prominence after the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, in which Black Lives Matters protestors played central roles in organizing demonstrations against police. [8] BLM Global Network Foundation co-founder Cullors wrote at the time that the Black Lives Matter movement was “rooted in grief and rage but pointed towards vision and dreams.” [9]

BLM Global Network Foundation organizes protests against allegedly unjustified killings of African-Americans by police. In 2017, it organized protests and petition drives to demand that Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey prosecute five Inglewood, California, police officers involved in the shooting of two African-Americans who were sleeping in the officers’ police car. [10] The officers were fired but not prosecuted, and eventually sued the city for discrimination and unlawful termination, settling out of court for $8.6 million. [11]

In 2019, BLM Global Network Foundation unveiled its #WhatMatters2020 campaign, an effort to increase African-American turnout in the 2020 presidential election and “build collective power and ensure candidates are held accountable for the issues that systematically and disproportionately impact Black and under-served communities across the nation.” The campaign features voter registration drives in minority communities and especially among younger black voters. [12]

In 2020, BLM Global Network Foundation began advocating for releasing inmates from prisons and local jails in response to the spread of COVID-19 in those institutions, as well as for limitations on arrests during the pandemic to prevent viral spread in jail populations. [13]

BLM Global Network Foundation also sponsors “Black Lives Matter Arts+Culture,” which seeks to “disrupt the status quo of the art world by uplifting emerging Black artists who speak audaciously, who are unafraid, and who stand in solidarity with the most marginalized among us.” [14] In 2017, BLM Global Network Foundation sponsored “The Provocateurs: A Master Series,” where “[a]rtists give 12-minute TED-style talks about their practice and journey as a provocative Black artist.” [15]

BLM Global Network Foundation has been noted for its links to communist ideology. In 2020, video of an interview from 2015 resurfaced in which BLM Global Network Foundation co-founder Patrisse Cullors declared that she and fellow co-founder Alicia Garza were “trained Marxists.”[16] When Cuban dictator Fidel Castro died in 2016, the organization published an article on Medium that declared “we must push back against the rhetoric of the right and come to the defense of El Comandante,” and ended with “Fidel Vive!”[17] Susan Rosenberg, the vice-char of the board of directors of BLM Global Network Foundation’s former fiscal sponsor Thousand Currents, was a convicted member of the May 19th Communist Organization responsible for multiple bombings in the 1980s.[18]

Several of BLM Global Network Foundation’s affiliated local chapters make statements in opposition to capitalism on their official websites, including Black Lives Matter DC[19] and Black Lives Matter Chicago.[20]

Organizational Structure and Internal Disagreements

BLM Global Network Foundation has asserted that it does not control the Black Lives Matter movement generally or even set the policy agenda for chapters within its network, claiming that it is a “leaderful,” not “leaderless” movement[21] that relies mostly on local leadership and activism as opposed to national leadership or policy advocacy. [22] The organization has been subject to internal disagreements between more moderate “reform” activists and more strident “abolition” activists who seek wholesale transformation of the criminal justice and political systems. [23] This dynamic has led some critics to argue that BLM Global Network Foundation and the Black Lives Matter movement generally disingenuously encourages radical and strident rhetoric, especially against police officers, and then disavows acts of violence against those officers committed by persons associated with or sympathetic to the movement. [24]

One example of the split between reformist and abolitionist camps is the conflict between BLM Global Network Foundation co-founders Garza and Tometi. Garza has been described as advocating “for staying outside of existing power structures” and as “not interested in playing ball with Democratic politicians for the sake of a few concessions here and there—or, worse, being used as a photo op prop by politicians.” By contrast, Tometi advocated working with the leadership of the Democratic party to enact legislative changes, especially in immigration policy. The relationship between the two founders deteriorated and Tometi has not been involved in the management of BLM Global Network Foundation since December 2015. [25]

The Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation has been confused with the Black Lives Matter Foundation, a separate independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit based in Santa Clarita, California with which it has no affiliation.[26] Thousand Currents, the former fiscal sponsor of BLM Global Network Foundation, reported more than $90,000 in combined grants to the Santa Clarita-based Black Lives Matter Foundation in its 2017[27] and 2018[28] tax filings. Thousand Currents later explained that these tax filings were erroneous, that no money was actually provided to the Black Lives Matter Foundation, and that the money was sent to local Black Lives Matter chapters.[29]

In audits covering fiscal years 2018[30] and 2019,[31] Thousand Currents reported $2,622,017 and $3,354,654, respectively, in donor-restricted assets for BLM Global Network Foundation. These audits also showed that 83.3 percent of BLM Global Network Foundation expenditures were for personnel, consultant, and travel costs during the three year period from 2017-2019, while about 6 percent were for grants to outside organizations, including to local Black Lives Matter Chapters.[32]

Donors

Among the largest donors to the group, at least indirectly, is the Ford Foundation, which in 2016 gave $100 million to the Black-Led Movement Fund, a fund administered by the philanthropic intermediary Borealis Philanthropy. [33] The Black-Led Movement Fund has in turn provided general operating funding to the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation several times since 2016. [34]

Organizations that had donated to BLM Global Network Foundation through its former fiscal sponsor Thousand Currents between 2015 and 2019 include the NoVo Foundation ($1,525,000), the W.K. Kellogg Foundation ($900,000) and Borealis Philanthropy ($343,000).[35]

In 2015, Politico reported that members of the Democracy Alliance, a network of left-leaning high-dollar donors and grant makers organized by billionaire financier George Soros and Taco Bell heir Rob McKay, were encouraged to consider making large-dollar grants to the Black Lives Matter movement. Left-leaning mega-donors Tom Steyer and Paul Egerman were also listed by Politico as invited participants. However, it is unclear how much money eventually went to BLM Global Network Foundation from this gathering. It has also been reported by the Washington Times that Soros has given groups associated with the Black Lives Matter movement more than $33 million from his Open Society Foundations (OSF), though it is again unclear if BLM Global Network Foundation directly received funding from OSF. [36] [37]

On June 11, 2020, BLM Global Network Foundation acknowledged the “generosity and support of donors” when announcing a $6.5 million fund to support grassroots organizing work at any of its affiliated chapters.[38]

FOLLOW FLYOVER PRESS ON FACEBOOK

Check out our WebSite

A Handbook for Ranch Managers

A Handbook for Ranch Managers.  In keeping with the “holistic” idea that the land, the livestock, the people and the money should be viewed as a single integrated whole: Part I deals with the management of the natural resources. Part II covers livestock production and Part III deals with the people and the money. Not only would this book make an excellent basic text for a university program in Ranch Management, no professional ranch manager’s reference bookshelf should be without it. It is a comprehensive reference manual for managing the working ranch. The information in the appendices and extensive bibliography alone is worth the price of the book.

You might also be interested in the supplement to this Handbook: Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference Manual.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Song for the Day: Mel Tillis — Good Woman Blues

It is so sad that another great one is gone (whose gona fill their shoes?)

Buyer Assistance:

Land and Livestock International, Inc. is in a position to assist the buyer in purchasing ranches anywhere in the Western United States and Northern Mexico. Pre – purchase services include help with due diligence, estimates of carrying capacity and potential for improvement, cash flow projections, etc. Post purchase services include everything from part time consulting to complete turn-key management.

We are not licensed real estate brokers nor are we licensed appraisers. We work only for the buyer for a negotiated fee.

Contact us at info@landandlivestockinternational.com or through our web site at www.landandlivestockinternational.com 

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

ARMED CITIZENS MUST DEFEND THEIR COMMUNITIES FROM RIOTING MOBS IF THE POLITICIZED POLICE WILL NOT

Thomas Sowell put it this way: “If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism.” Note that he did not say “the government” or “the police department.” He said YOU.

I am. How about you? — jtl, 419

Flyover-Press.com

Matt Bracken via American Partisan

Thomas Sowell put it this way: “If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism.” Note that he did not say “the government” or “the police department.” He said YOU.

I am. How about you? — jtl, 419


ARMED CITIZENS MUST DEFEND THEIR COMMUNITIES FROM RIOTING MOBS IF THE POLITICIZED POLICE WILL NOT

In societies living under the Rule of Law, sworn Law Enforcement (LE) officers have always been considered fully justified in applying lethal force against violent mobs during arson riots, such as those which have been occurring with regularity in American cities during the terrible summer of 2020. This was the intent and meaning of police officials publicly “Reading the Riot Act,” announcing over a loudspeaker that a violent mob had been declared to be an unlawful assembly, that is to say, a riot. Rioters who lingered on the street after that final warning could be engaged by LE…

View original post 840 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

‘Alpine State University’ movement starts, as students seek to change Sul Ross State University name

By Beck Andrew Salgado via The Big Bend Sentinel

ALPINE — As many universities across the country have seen students coming together to protest statues of individuals on campus, Sul Ross State University is no exception. Lawrence Sullivan Ross, the namesake of the West Texas university, served as a general for the Confederacy during the Civil War and fought to uphold slavery. Because of this, his legacy, perpetuated through statues on A&M and SRSU campuses and in the name of Alpine’s lone university, has begun to sour quickly.

Cory McMahan, a football player and member of the newly formed Black student council, said that the football team has met multiple times over the summer to talk about the legacy of Ross. McMahan himself had this to say about attending a school named after a Confederate general:

“It’s hard to be proud of the school you are representing when you play, when you know someone like Sul Ross didn’t represent me or didn’t care about me,” said McMahan.

McMahan expressed that a lot of players on the football team were also conflicted about having to represent someone with a sordid history. Because of this, most of the team has agreed that they would like to have the Sul Ross statue taken down.

James Parker, also a football player and the president of the university Black student council, commented on the matter, saying he doesn’t know if he would have attended Sul Ross if he knew who Sullivan Ross was.

“I’m not proud of what he [Ross] stood for … so I’m all for his statue being removed, because if he didn’t stand for what was right, I don’t see the point of it being there,” said Parker.

Just weeks after returning back to campus, an incident occurred where students dressed the Sullivan Ross statue on campus in a Black Lives Matter shirt. The clothing was a violation of certain rules around school statues, which resulted in Sul Ross police taking it down. The school’s action aggravated some students, who said they didn’t feel that Sul Ross police or administration understood the scope of the situation, especially considering the recent events in Kenosha where an unarmed Black man was shot seven times in the back by police.

Because of the incident, a group of students led by football players and members of the Black student council at Sul Ross have started the “Alpine State University” movement.

At the center of this movement, which spread quickly on social media, is the goal of getting the school’s name changed from Sul Ross State University, which has been the name since its inception in 1917, to Alpine State University.

In response to the statue incident, university officials sent out an email addressing the situation, saying that Sul Ross State University is committed to ensuring a safe, supportive and inclusive campus environment in which all students are able to exercise their right to freedom of speech and expression.

Additionally, the university committed itself to a variety of actions. The Office of Diversity, Equity & Inclusion will start the first dialogues for students on all sides of the conversation to come together and speak about the issues at hand.

SRSU President Pete Gallego charged the Diversity, Equity & Inclusion committee with reviewing current guidelines and drafting a new policy regarding the Sully statue that protects students’ right to free speech on campus. Gallego also announced a faculty and staff virtual forum to discuss the impact of racism, marginalization and inequality in higher education and society.

Last Tuesday afternoon, the first meeting between administration, including President Pete Gallego and members of both the football team and the Black student council, was held. This meeting resulted in the removal of the university’s SR emblem from both the football team equipment and field.

The administration also said that they are willing to help raise money to fund a memorial dedicated to remembering the first Black woman to attend SRSU, to be located near the main mall of campus.

McMahan said that he was very happy with the changes that came from the meeting with administration, however, he did express that he wants to see continued commitment from the university to achieve the Alpine State University movement’s end goal.

“We would like to change the name of the school after removing the statue, and I think there is a good chance that there will be a change coming soon,” said McMahan.

McMahan said the movement gives him and his teammates a chance to express their emotions towards the name “Sul Ross.”

He also clarified some of the details of the movement and its relationship to things like Black Lives Matter. “I just want the people to know that we realize all lives matter, but the discrimination needs to stop. We will not stop fighting for equality until we get a change; we will not stop fighting for justice until there is a change; we will not stop protesting until Black lives truly do matter,” said McMahan.

A decision on whether the Sul Ross statue will be removed has not yet been made. As for the name of the school, because of SRSU’s status as a state school, the institution would have to get approval from Texas legislatures to confirm a name change.

Black Student Council President Parker has said that he and others are working to organize a Black Lives Matter march on campus, but a date has not yet been set.

FOLLOW FLYOVER PRESS ON FACEBOOK

Check out our WebSite

The Betrayed: On Warriors, Cowboys and Other Misfits

The Betrayed: On Warriors, Cowboys and Other Misfits. Although woven around the experiences and adventures of one man, this is also the story of the people who lived during the period of time in American history that an entire generation was betrayed It is the story of the dramatically changing times in which this personal odyssey took place. It is the story of the betrayal of an entire generation of Americans and particularly the 40% (of the military aged males) of that generation that fought the Vietnam war.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Song for Today: If You’re Thinking You Want A Stranger (There’s One Coming Home)

More hair, less hat. — jtl, 419

Options for Homeland Defense, Inc. (Protecting Liberty through Private Firearms Ownership)  

“Owning a handgun doesn’t make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician.” – Jeff Cooper

Call for a pizza, a cop, and an ambulance and see which one arrives first.

In Warren v. District of Columbia the court ruled, and the Supreme Court upheld, that “(T)he desire for condemnation cannot satisfy the need for a special relationship out of which a duty to specify persons arises.” Because the complaint did not allege a relationship “beyond that found in general police responses to crimes,” the court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint for failure to state a claim.

The bottom line is that your local police are not legally obligated to protect you, the average citizen. In addition to the Warren case, there are hundreds of court rulings which state that cops are not legally responsible for protecting individual citizens. For example, see Zelig v. County of Los Angeles.

The government can’t protect you as you saw on September 11, 2001 as well as during the Washington, DC area “sniper” rampage and the plethora of active shooter events that we have had since.

In fact, the government could very well be our greatest fear, due to its propensity to murder people because of their ideas (See Ruby Ridge, ID and Waco, TX).

A simple internet or youtube.com search of “the police state” or “police brutality” will reveal literally thousands of violent crimes (from assault to cold blooded murder) committed by the State’s costumed emissaries of officially sanctioned violence (aka The Police State) against harmless and innocent people.

So, who does that leave to protect you, your life, property and family? The one and only answer is: YOU It is your duty and personal responsibility to protect yourself and your loved ones.

This responsibility is a natural right given to us by God as human beings and guaranteed to us as individuals by the Constitution of the United States of America.

Options for Homeland Defense, Inc. offers professional weapons and tactics training that will make the difference. Instructed by experienced combat veterans—guys that have “been there and done that.” It offers private instruction at its privately owned range and mobile training teams are available. All interactions are confidential and discrete.

Contact: You can contact us via email at editor@flyover-press.com or through any of the contact or email links on our Web Site at www.flyover-press.com

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

The Global Police State is Swiftly Rising.

Bob Livingston Alerts

There is always an excuse for the establishment of totalitarian restrictions on the public. There is always a reason, and often these reasons are made to sound logical and practical at the time. In Germany after WWI and into the early 1930s Bolshevik activists and the German Communist Party (KPD) engaged in aggressive economic sabotage, street violence and even assassinations. This along with the Great Depression led to German middle-class support for the National Socialist Party and the Third Reich (fascism).

Much of history’s focus is on the horrors of the Nazis, but many people are unaware of the extreme threat of communist revolution in Europe during this era, a threat that was used by the Nazis as a perfect rationale for constructing a police state. Arguably, without the existence of hardline communism, the fascists never would have had the public support needed to rise to power.

In Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution, the Cheka secret police were established in the name of preventing “counter-revolution.” This is an interesting aspect common to communism in particular. They desperately cling to the narrative that they are still the revolutionaries, even when they have all the power. Thus, the “revolution” never ends because there are always people who disagree with communism. Anyone who refuses to comply with Marxist mandates becomes an “imperialist enemy” and bogeyman and is held up as an example of why the revolution must perpetually continue. The police state must exist forever.

During the 1918 Spanish Flu outbreak, a virus with a much higher death rate among younger Americans compared to today’s coronavirus, major U.S. cities such as New Orleans instituted martial law measures and lockdown on the economy; closing schools, churches, public transportation and places of leisure. Of course, claims in the wake of COVID, these measures did little to nothing to stop the spread of the virus and the public became frustrated with their inability to function in the day-to-day economy (sound familiar). The population began to rebel against restrictions that were leading to financial decay, and there was little governments could do about it.

I’ve noticed that the mainstream media has attempted to rewrite the history of the Spanish Flu as if martial law measures were a success, even though ultimately the flu ran its natural course in the majority of U.S. cities. Infections and deaths continued unabated until the virus burned itself out and disappeared (no working vaccine was ever produced though there were many failed attempts based on the assumption that the disease was bacterial rather than viral). Martial law actions failed miserably and only served to drag out the timeline of the virus.

One could argue that a hundred years ago governments did not have the same tools at their disposal as they do now. But are we really that much further ahead? Virologists have been working on an effective SARS vaccine for almost two decades with little success. The idea that they could come up with a working vaccine for COVID in the span of a year (as many governments are suggesting) seems absurd. History shows us that when vaccines are rushed into production by authorities very bad things happen.

Regardless of lockdown measures, infection rates continue to climb in many nations, thereby justifying even more lockdowns. This creates an endless cycle of economic instability that the public cannot endure, and many people are beginning to wonder what purpose of the pandemic restrictions serve? It’s obviously not to slow the virus and save lives as an effective vaccine is unlikely to be developed in time for the lockdowns to matter. But, if you wanted to quickly implement a totalitarian system, then using a global health threat as justification might be the ticket.

The problem for the establishment will be this: How can they keep the tyranny going once they have it? Ultimately, for a totalitarian system to work, it needs a large portion of the public to support it on principle. The public has to believe that the loss of their liberties is necessary to their survival for the long term.

What I find most interesting is the disparity in response to the two sides of the crisis. For example, the law enforcement response to the BLM and ANTIFA riots has been rather subdued and passive. I was in Pittsburgh for the G-20 event in 2009, and I can tell you from experience that the police response was vicious and highly coordinated, and this was against groups that were doing nothing more than chanting slogans in the street.

There was no rioting and minimal damage to private property, yet law enforcement deployed full force measures including Spartan formations, sound cannons, rubber bullets and armored vehicles. Watch video footage of the G-20 in Pittsburgh and then compare it to the riots in Portland, Seattle, Minneapolis, New York, etc. It should become clear to you that police are being ordered to hold back the majority of the time.

Another glaring issue is the media response to the riots. They refer to the protests as exclusively peaceful despite mass looting, destruction of private property and violence. They treat BLM as untouchable and act as an attack dog against anyone criticizing the actions of social justice organizations. The issue of social distancing and virus spread is dismissed or ignored when it comes to BLM.

By extension, examine the mainstream media response to the protests against coronavirus lockdown restrictions. No riots, no looting, no violence on the part of conservative and moderate protesters, yet the media demonizes them as if they are a threat to the very fabric of our society. Look at how quick authorities have been to arrest people who refuse to follow lockdown restrictions and consider how aggressive arrests have been in other countries like Australia or the U.K. for doing nothing more than posting messages on Facebook.

I think my point here is clear. The establishment supports the social justice violence and unrest and is cracking down hard on any resistance to medical tyranny. The hypocrisy is evident.

But this brings up some questions. Why are they so keen to allow the BLM riots to continue? As noted at the beginning of this article, I think the strategy is evident. It’s a two-pronged attempt, a bait and switch. If the Marxists are successful and meet little resistance from the public, they will tear down the current system, and the elitist institutions that fund them, like George Soros’s Open Society Foundation and the Ford Foundation, will use the opportunity to build an Orwellian collectivist society from the ashes.

On the other hand, as in Germany in the 1930s, the civil unrest caused by hard left groups could also convince the general public that martial law measures are an acceptable solution and that they are willing to sacrifice constitutional protections in order to rid themselves of the threat. There have been examples of this recently when federal agents initiated black bagging of a protester in Portland using unmarked vans; all I saw from most conservatives was cheering. This would undoubtedly lead to a long-term totalitarian structure that, once again, benefits the elites that inhabit every aspect of government including Trump’s White House.

In both cases, the power elites get what they want — a police state.

In terms of the pandemic response, a police state is already being established in many nations, and with most Western people’s predominantly disarmed, there is little chance they will be able to resist the crackdown that will ensue as they try to protest the restrictions. But what about in America?

This is why it does not surprise me that the BLM riots are being encouraged so openly in the U.S. Look at it this way… if the elites cannot get us to go along with medical tyranny for fear of sparking an armed uprising from conservatives with actual training and ability, they figure maybe they can trick us into supporting martial law in the name of defeating the political left.

The only solutions are to refuse to support either option. We must repel the establishment of medical tyranny and stand against any overstep of state and federal governments against the constitution when it comes to protests. Riots and looting can be dealt with and dealt with within the confines of the Bill of Rights. Also, once again, I would point out that in almost every place where armed citizens organize and take up security measures in their communities the protests remain peaceful or they don’t happen at all.

There is no legitimate excuse for a police state. There is always another way. Anyone that tells you different has an agenda of their own.

To truth and knowledge,

FOLLOW FLYOVER PRESS ON FACEBOOK

Check out our WebSite

A Handbook for Ranch Managers

A Handbook for Ranch Managers.  In keeping with the “holistic” idea that the land, the livestock, the people and the money should be viewed as a single integrated whole: Part I deals with the management of the natural resources. Part II covers livestock production and Part III deals with the people and the money. Not only would this book make an excellent basic text for a university program in Ranch Management, no professional ranch manager’s reference bookshelf should be without it. It is a comprehensive reference manual for managing the working ranch. The information in the appendices and extensive bibliography alone is worth the price of the book.

You might also be interested in the supplement to this Handbook: Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference Manual.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Song for Today: Gary Stewart — Out Of Hand

Gary Stewart was one of the top best of real country music to be looked
over by the “snobs” of Nashville! They’re loss!!!

Buyer Assistance:

Land and Livestock International, Inc. is in a position to assist the buyer in purchasing ranches anywhere in the Western United States and Northern Mexico. Pre – purchase services include help with due diligence, estimates of carrying capacity and potential for improvement, cash flow projections, etc. Post purchase services include everything from part time consulting to complete turn-key management.

We are not licensed real estate brokers nor are we licensed appraisers. We work only for the buyer for a negotiated fee.

Contact us at info@landandlivestockinternational.com or through our web site at www.landandlivestockinternational.com 

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Mile Markers of Tyranny: Losing Our Freedoms on the Road from 9/11 to COVID-19

If you do not do another productive thing today, read this. John Whitehead was monitoring the evolution, parasitic growth and development of the Police State in America long before I wrote Seven Reasons Why There is no Such Thing as a “Good” Cop. — jtl, 419

By John W. Whitehead via Activist Post

“No one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end.”—George Orwell

You can map the nearly 20-year journey from the 9/11 attacks to the COVID-19 pandemic by the freedoms we’ve lost along the way.

The road we have been traveling has been littered with the wreckage of our once-vaunted liberties, especially those enshrined in the Fourth Amendment.

The assaults on our freedoms that began with the post-9/11 passage of the USA Patriot Act laid the groundwork for the eradication of every vital constitutional safeguard against government overreach, corruption and abuse.

The COVID-19 pandemic with its lockdowns, mask mandates, surveillance, snitch lines for Americans to report their fellow citizens for engaging in risky behavior, and veiled threats of forced vaccinations has merely provided the architects of the American police state with an opportunity to flex their muscles.

These have become mile markers on the road to tyranny.

Free speech, the right to protest, the right to challenge government wrongdoing, due process, a presumption of innocence, the right to self-defense, accountability and transparency in government, privacy, press, sovereignty, assembly, bodily integrity, representative government: all of these and more have become casualties in the government’s ongoing war on the American people. In the process, the American people have been treated like enemy combatants, to be spied on, tracked, scanned, frisked, searched, subjected to all manner of intrusions, intimidated, invaded, raided, manhandled, censored, silenced, shot at, locked up, denied due process, and killed.

What the past 20 years have proven is that the U.S. government poses a greater threat to our individual and collective freedoms and national security than any terrorist, foreign threat or pandemic.

In allowing ourselves to be distracted by terror drills, foreign wars, color-coded warnings, partisan politics, pandemic scares, and other carefully constructed exercises in propaganda, sleight of hand, and obfuscation, we failed to recognize that the U.S. government—the government that was supposed to be a “government of the people, by the people, for the people”—has become the enemy of the people.

Indeed, the U.S. government has grown so corrupt, greedy, power-hungry and tyrannical over the course of the past 240-plus years that our constitutional republic has since given way to an idiocracy, and representative government has given way to a kleptocracy (a government ruled by thieves) and a kakistocracy (a government run by unprincipled career politicians, corporations and thieves that panders to the worst vices in our nature and has little regard for the rights of American citizens).

Although the Bill of Rights—the first ten amendments to the Constitution—was adopted as a means of protecting the people against government tyranny, in America today, the government does whatever it wants, freedom be damned.

“We the people” have been terrorized, traumatized, and tricked into a semi-permanent state of compliance by a government that cares nothing for our lives or our liberties.

The bogeyman’s names and faces have changed over time (terrorism, the war on drugs, illegal immigration, a viral pandemic), but the end result remains the same: in the so-called name of national security, the Constitution has been steadily chipped away at, undermined, eroded, whittled down, and generally discarded with the support of Congress, the White House, and the courts.

What we are left with today is but a shadow of the robust document adopted more than two centuries ago. Sadly, most of the damage has been inflicted upon the Bill of Rights.

Here is what it means to live under the Constitution, post-9/11 and in the midst of a COVID-19 pandemic.

The First Amendment is supposed to protect the freedom to speak your mind, assemble and protest nonviolently without being bridled by the government. It also protects the freedom of the media, as well as the right to worship and pray without interference. In other words, Americans should not be silenced by the government. To the founders, all of America was a free speech zone.

Despite the clear protections found in the First Amendment, the freedoms described therein are under constant assault. Increasingly, Americans are being arrested and charged with bogus “contempt of cop” charges such as “disrupting the peace” or “resisting arrest” for daring to film police officers engaged in harassment or abusive practices. Journalists are being prosecuted for reporting on whistleblowers. States are passing legislation to muzzle reporting on cruel and abusive corporate practices. Religious ministries are being fined for attempting to feed and house the homeless. Protesters are being tear-gassed, beaten, arrested and forced into “free speech zones.” And under the guise of “government speech,” the courts have reasoned that the government can discriminate freely against any First Amendment activity that takes place within a government forum.

Activist Post Recommended Book: Snitch Culture: How Citizens Are Turned Into The Eyes And Ears Of The State

The Second Amendment was intended to guarantee “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” Essentially, this amendment was intended to give the citizenry the means to resist tyrannical government. Yet while gun ownership has been recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court as an individual citizen right, Americans remain powerless to defend themselves against SWAT team raids and government agents armed to the teeth with military weapons better suited to the battlefield. As such, this amendment has been rendered null and void.

The Third Amendment reinforces the principle that civilian-elected officials are superior to the military by prohibiting the military from entering any citizen’s home without “the consent of the owner.” With the police increasingly training like the military, acting like the military, and posing as military forces—complete with heavily armed SWAT teams, military weapons, assault vehicles, etc.—it is clear that we now have what the founders feared most—a standing army on American soil.

The Fourth Amendment prohibits government agents from conducting surveillance on you or touching you or invading you, unless they have some evidence that you’re up to something criminal. In other words, the Fourth Amendment ensures privacy and bodily integrity. Unfortunately, the Fourth Amendment has suffered the greatest damage in recent years and has been all but eviscerated by an unwarranted expansion of police powers that include strip searches and even anal and vaginal searches of citizens, surveillance (corporate and otherwise) and intrusions justified in the name of fighting terrorism, as well as the outsourcing of otherwise illegal activities to private contractors.

The Fifth Amendment and the Sixth Amendment work in tandem. These amendments supposedly ensure that you are innocent until proven guilty, and government authorities cannot deprive you of your life, your liberty or your property without the right to an attorney and a fair trial before a civilian judge. However, in the new suspect society in which we live, where surveillance is the norm, these fundamental principles have been upended. Certainly, if the government can arbitrarily freeze, seize or lay claim to your property (money, land or possessions) under government asset forfeiture schemes, you have no true rights.

The Seventh Amendment guarantees citizens the right to a jury trial. Yet when the populace has no idea of what’s in the Constitution—civic education has virtually disappeared from most school curriculums—that inevitably translates to an ignorant jury incapable of distinguishing justice and the law from their own preconceived notions and fears. However, as a growing number of citizens are coming to realize, the power of the jury to nullify the government’s actions—and thereby help balance the scales of justice—is not to be underestimated. Jury nullification reminds the government that “we the people” retain the power to ultimately determine what laws are just.

The Eighth Amendment is similar to the Sixth in that it is supposed to protect the rights of the accused and forbid the use of cruel and unusual punishment. However, the Supreme Court’s determination that what constitutes “cruel and unusual” should be dependent on the “evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society” leaves us with little protection in the face of a society lacking in morals altogether.

The Ninth Amendment provides that other rights not enumerated in the Constitution are nonetheless retained by the people. Popular sovereignty—the belief that the power to govern flows upward from the people rather than downward from the rulers—is clearly evident in this amendment. However, it has since been turned on its head by a centralized federal government that sees itself as supreme and which continues to pass more and more laws that restrict our freedoms under the pretext that it has an “important government interest” in doing so.

As for the Tenth Amendment’s reminder that the people and the states retain every authority that is not otherwise mentioned in the Constitution, that assurance of a system of government in which power is divided among local, state and national entities has long since been rendered moot by the centralized Washington, DC, power elite—the president, Congress and the courts.

If there is any sense to be made from this recitation of freedoms lost, it is simply this: our individual freedoms have been eviscerated so that the government’s powers could be expanded.

Mind you, by “government,” I’m not referring to the highly partisan, two-party bureaucracy of the Republicans and Democrats. Rather, I’m referring to the Deep State—the corporatized, militarized, entrenched bureaucracy that has set itself beyond the reach of the law and is unaffected by elections, unaltered by populist movements, and staffed by unelected officials who are, in essence, running the country and calling the shots in Washington DC, no matter who sits in the White House.

This is a government that, in conjunction with its corporate partners, views the citizenry as consumers and bits of data to be bought, sold and traded.

This is a government that spies on and treats its citizens as if they have no right to privacy, especially in their own homes.

This is a government that is laying the groundwork to weaponize the public’s biomedical data as a convenient means by which to penalize certain “unacceptable” social behaviors.

This is a government that subjects its people to scans, searches, pat downs and other indignities by the TSA and VIPR raids on so-called “soft” targets like shopping malls and bus depots by black-clad, Darth Vader look-alikes.

This is a government that uses fusion centers, which represent the combined surveillance efforts of federal, state and local law enforcement, to track the citizenry’s movements, record their conversations, and catalogue their transactions.

This is a government whose wall-to-wall surveillance has given rise to a suspect society in which the burden of proof has been reversed such that Americans are now assumed guilty until or unless they can prove their innocence.

This is a government that treats its people like second-class citizens who have no rights, and is working overtime to stigmatize and dehumanize any and all who do not fit with the government’s plans for this country.

This is a government that uses free speech zones, roving bubble zones and trespass laws to silence, censor and marginalize Americans and restrict their First Amendment right to speak truth to power. The kinds of speech the government considers dangerous enough to red flag and subject to censorship, surveillance, investigation, prosecution and outright elimination include: hate speech, bullying speech, intolerant speech, conspiratorial speech, treasonous speech, threatening speech, incendiary speech, inflammatory speech, radical speech, anti-government speech, right-wing speech, left-wing speech, extremist speech, politically incorrect speech, etc.

This is a government that adopts laws that criminalize Americans for otherwise lawful activities such as holding religious studies at home, growing vegetables in their yard, and collecting rainwater.

This is a government that persists in renewing the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which allows the president and the military to arrest and detain American citizens indefinitely.

This is a government that saddled us with the Patriot Act, which opened the door to all manner of government abuses and intrusions on our privacy.

This is a government that, in direct opposition to the dire warnings of those who founded our country, has allowed the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to establish a standing army by way of programs that transfer surplus military hardware to local and state police.

This is a government that has militarized American’s domestic police, equipping them with military weapons such as “tens of thousands of machine guns; nearly 200,000 ammunition magazines; thousands of pieces of camouflage and night-vision equipment; and hundreds of silencers, armored cars and aircraft,” in addition to armored vehicles, sound cannons and the like.

This is a government that has provided cover to police when they shoot and kill unarmed individuals just for standing a certain way, or moving a certain way, or holding something—anything—that police could misinterpret to be a gun, or igniting some trigger-centric fear in a police officer’s mind that has nothing to do with an actual threat to their safety.

This is a government that has allowed private corporations to get rich at taxpayer expense by locking people up in private prisons for non-violent crimes, while providing Corporate America with a source of cheap labor.

This is a government that has created a Constitution-free zone within 100 miles inland of the border around the United States, paving the way for Border Patrol agents to search people’s homes, intimately probe their bodies, and rifle through their belongings, all without a warrant. Incredibly, nearly 66% of Americans (2/3 of the U.S. population, 197.4 million people) now live within that 100-mile-deep, Constitution-free zone.

This is a government that treats public school students as if they were prison inmates, enforcing zero tolerance policies that criminalize childish behavior, failing to teach them their rights under the Constitution, and indoctrinating them with teaching that emphasizes rote memorization and test-taking over learning, synthesizing and critical thinking.

This is a government that is operating in the negative on every front: it’s spending far more than what it makes (and takes from the American taxpayers) and it is borrowing heavily (from foreign governments and Social Security) to keep the government operating and keep funding its endless wars abroad. Meanwhile, the nation’s sorely neglected infrastructure—railroads, water pipelines, ports, dams, bridges, airports and roads—is rapidly deteriorating.

This is a government whose gun violence—inflicted on unarmed individuals by battlefield-trained SWAT teams, militarized police, and bureaucratic government agents trained to shoot first and ask questions later—poses a greater threat to the safety and security of the nation than any mass shooter. There are now reportedly more bureaucratic (non-military) government agents armed with high-tech, deadly weapons than U.S. Marines.

This is a government that has allowed the presidency to become a dictatorship operating above and beyond the law, regardless of which party is in power.

This is a government that treats dissidents, whistleblowers and freedom fighters as enemies of the state.

This is a government—a warring empire—that forces its taxpayers to pay for wars abroad that serve no other purpose except to expand the reach of the military industrial complex.

This is a government that has in recent decades unleashed untold horrors upon the world—including its own citizenry—in the name of global conquest, the acquisition of greater wealth, scientific experimentation, and technological advances, all packaged in the guise of the greater good.

This is a government that allows its agents to break laws with immunity while average Americans get the book thrown at them.

This is a government that speaks in a language of force. What is this language of force? Militarized police. Riot squads. Camouflage gear. Black uniforms. Armored vehicles. Mass arrests. Pepper spray. Tear gas. Batons. Strip searches. Surveillance cameras. Kevlar vests. Drones. Lethal weapons. Less-than-lethal weapons unleashed with deadly force. Rubber bullets. Water cannons. Stun grenades. Arrests of journalists. Crowd control tactics. Intimidation tactics. Brutality. Contempt of cop charges.

This is a government that justifies all manner of government tyranny and power grabs in the so-called name of national security, national crises and national emergencies.

This is a government that exports violence worldwide, with one of this country’s most profitable exports being weapons. Indeed, the United States, the world’s largest exporter of arms, has been selling violence to the world in order to prop up the military industrial complex and maintain its endless wars abroad.

This is a government that is consumed with squeezing every last penny out of the population and seemingly unconcerned if essential freedoms are trampled in the process.

This is a government that believes it has the authority to search, seize, strip, scan, spy on, probe, pat down, taser, and arrest any individual at any time and for the slightest provocation, the Constitution be damned.

In sum, this is a government that routinely undermines the Constitution and rides roughshod over the rights of the citizenry.

This is not a government that believes in, let alone upholds, freedom.

So where does that leave us?

As always, the first step begins with “we the people.”

Those who gave us the Constitution and the Bill of Rights believed that the government exists at the behest of its citizens. It is there to protect, defend and even enhance our freedoms, not violate them. Our power as a citizenry comes from our ability to agree and stand united on certain freedom principles that should be non-negotiable.

It was no idle happenstance that the Constitution opens with these three powerful words: “We the people.” In other words, we have the power to make and break the government. We are the masters and they are the servants. We the American people—the citizenry—are the arbiters and ultimate guardians of America’s welfare, defense, liberty, laws and prosperity.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we have managed to keep the wolf at bay so far. Barely.

Our national priorities need to be re-prioritized. For instance, some argue that we need to make America great again. I, for one, would prefer to make America free again.

ABOUT JOHN W. WHITEHEAD

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People  is available at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.

Publication Guidelines / Reprint Permission

John W. Whitehead’s weekly commentaries are available for publication to newspapers and web publications at no charge. Please contact staff@rutherford.org to obtain reprint permission.

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.

Options for Homeland Defense, Inc. (Protecting Liberty through Private Firearms Ownership)  

“Owning a handgun doesn’t make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician.” – Jeff Cooper

Call for a pizza, a cop, and an ambulance and see which one arrives first.

In Warren v. District of Columbia the court ruled, and the Supreme Court upheld, that “(T)he desire for condemnation cannot satisfy the need for a special relationship out of which a duty to specify persons arises.” Because the complaint did not allege a relationship “beyond that found in general police responses to crimes,” the court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint for failure to state a claim.

The bottom line is that your local police are not legally obligated to protect you, the average citizen. In addition to the Warren case, there are hundreds of court rulings which state that cops are not legally responsible for protecting individual citizens. For example, see Zelig v. County of Los Angeles.

The government can’t protect you as you saw on September 11, 2001 as well as during the Washington, DC area “sniper” rampage and the plethora of active shooter events that we have had since.

In fact, the government could very well be our greatest fear, due to its propensity to murder people because of their ideas (See Ruby Ridge, ID and Waco, TX).

A simple internet or youtube.com search of “the police state” or “police brutality” will reveal literally thousands of violent crimes (from assault to cold blooded murder) committed by the State’s costumed emissaries of officially sanctioned violence (aka The Police State) against harmless and innocent people.

So, who does that leave to protect you, your life, property and family? The one and only answer is: YOU It is your duty and personal responsibility to protect yourself and your loved ones.

This responsibility is a natural right given to us by God as human beings and guaranteed to us as individuals by the Constitution of the United States of America.

Options for Homeland Defense, Inc. offers professional weapons and tactics training that will make the difference. Instructed by experienced combat veterans—guys that have “been there and done that.” It offers private instruction at its privately owned range and mobile training teams are available. All interactions are confidential and discrete.

Contact: You can contact us via email at editor@flyover-press.com or through any of the contact or email links on our Web Site at www.flyover-press.com

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

How Lincoln Won the Republican Nomination

In America the tariff rate was the lowest of any year of the nineteenth century, 15% on average, in 1857.  The Confederate Constitution that was adopted in 1861 outlawed protectionist tariffs altogether, allowing only for a modest “revenue tariff” in the 10% range… The Northern states, by sharp contrast, were hell bent on imposing eighteenth-century British mercantilism on America, with the new Republican party as their political weapon.

By Thomas DiLorenzo via LewRockwell.com

“The tariff is to the government what a meal is to the family.” Abraham Lincoln, Speech in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Feb. 15, 1861

By the mid 1850s Great Britain had abolished its “corn laws” that imposed heavy tariffs on agricultural imports and had become essentially a free-trade country.  This was a result of the heroic efforts of the “Manchester School” of free-trade economics led by businessmen Richard Cobden and John Bright.  France was moving in the same direction thanks to the equally brilliant writings and speeches of Frederic Bastiat, who precisely labeled protectionism as “legal plunder.”  Many other countries of the world were doing the same, working to abolish this hoary remnant of eighteenth-century “mercantilism,” the European system of economic policies that benefited politically-connected businesses at the expense of consumers and everyone else.  Government of crony capitalists, by crony capitalists, and for crony capitalists was being stamped out.

In America the tariff rate was the lowest of any year of the nineteenth century, 15% on average, in 1857.  The Confederate Constitution that was adopted in 1861 outlawed protectionist tariffs altogether, allowing only for a modest “revenue tariff” in the 10% range.

The Northern states, by sharp contrast, were hell bent on imposing eighteenth-century British mercantilism on America, with the new Republican party as their political weapon.  This included not only protectionism but also corporate welfare for road, canal, and railroad-building corporations and a national bank controlled by politicians modeled after the Bank of England.  It was the rotten, corrupt, economically-impoverishing British system without the British.  It was also a system that they intended to keep them in political power indefinitely by linking the moneyed elite of the Northern states to the government with their party being the primary vehicle of legal plunder.  Since the South was an agricultural society with relatively little manufacturing compared to the North, it would be on the paying end of all of this political plunder.

All of this is why historian Richard Bensel correctly pointed out in his book, Yankee Leviathan, that a protectionist tariff was the “keystone” of the Republican party platform of 1861 (a platform that also pledged not to disturb Southern slavery, which it called “the domestic institutions of the states”).  It is also why the Republican party chose Abraham Lincoln as its presidential nominee.

The story of how Lincoln, a career-long protectionist, secured the Republican nomination and snatched it away from far more famous and experienced politicians such as William Seward of New York, is told in a July 1944 article in the American Historical Review by historian Reinhard H. Luthin.  The article is entitled “Lincoln and the Tariff.”

Luthin writes of how Lincoln proudly boasted that he had made more speeches promoting protectionism or legal plunder than on any other subject.  He stumped for Whig party protectionist candidates for decades, and established himself as the most rabid mercantilist in American politics, the political son of Alexander Hamilton.  As the general counsel of the Illinois Central Railroad who had represented all the major railroad corporations in the Mid-West, he was a card-carrying member of the Northern corporate elite who traveled on the legal circuit in a private train car courtesy of the Illinois Central, accompanied by an entourage of Illinois Central executives (See John Starr, Lincoln and the Railroads).  As such, the Illinois plutocracy sponsored and financed his candidacy.  A key part of their strategy was to use Lincoln’s protectionist credentials to win over the steel-manufacturing state of Pennsylvania which had the second-largest number of electoral votes at the time. Joseph Medill, the influential editor of the Chicago Press and Tribune, sold the Lincoln candidacy to the Pennsylvania Republican party by pointing out what a slick politician he was, “an old [Henry] Clay Whig, right on the tariff and . . . exactly right on all other issues.”

Being a slick, conniving, manipulating master politician, Lincoln understood that there was a downside to being such an outspoken proponent of legal plunder.  The plundered might not like it and were not likely to vote for him.  Consequently, to sell himself to the Pennsylvania Republicans, led by such odious characters as Thaddeus Stevens, he sought to convey his hyper-protectionist views to them privately.  He sent his friend, Judge David Davis, to speak to Pennsylvania Republicans with original copies of eleven of his protectionist speeches.  Another personal envoy, one William Reynolds, was sent to Stevens alone.

Pennsylvania political hack Simon Cameron understood Lincoln’ s dilemma of how to plunder the general population without the population discovering the plot to plunder it beforehand.  So he instructed Judge Davis that “Nothing about these speeches must get into the newspapers.”  Lincoln’s strategy succeeded.  Luthin wrote of how the Pennsylvania and [equally protectionist] New Jersey delegations “were terrific in their applause over the tariff resolution, and their hilarity was contagious, finally pervading the whole vast auditorium.”  One eyewitness called it “frantic jubilation.”

Our conquering hero returned to his hometown of Springfield, Illinois to a political rally featuring an “immense wagon” with a gigantic sign proclaiming the main campaign theme of “Protection for Home Industry!”  This was also the slogan at the bottom of the official 1860 Republican party presidential campaign posters featuring Lincoln and Hannibal Hamlin.

The Republican party succeeded in more than doubling the average tariff rate on imports with the Morrill Tariff, passed by the House of Representatives during the 1859-1860 session, long before Southern secession, and finally the senate.  It was signed into law by President James Buchanan of Pennsylvania two days before Lincoln’s inauguration, having been steered through the Congress by Justin Morrill, a steel manufacturer from Vermont; steel manufacturer Thaddeus Stevens, Senator John Sherman of Ohio (the famous general’s brother), Simon Cameron, and wealthy Rhode Island textile mill owner James F. Simmons.  Lincoln would sign ten more tariff-increasing bills in the next four years, increasing the average tariff rate from its pre-war level of 15% to 50-60%.  It would remain in that range, for the most part, until the adoption of the federal income tax in 1913.

On his inauguration day Lincoln understood that he owed everything politically to the protectionists in the Republican party who got him elected.  That is why, in his first inaugural address, which I think of as his “slavery forever speech,” he made an ironclad defense of Southern slavery, even supporting the Corwin Amendment to the Constitution that would have prohibited the federal government from ever interfering with Southern slavery.  But on the issue of the tariff he was uncompromising and threatening.  It was his “duty” to collect the newly-doubled tariff tax (which accounted for at least 90 percent of federal tax revenue at the time), but “beyond that,” he said, “there will be no invasion” or “bloodshed.”  Thus, he literally threatened “invasion” and “bloodshed” in any state that refused to allow its citizens to be plundered by the Northern plutocracy’s protectionist tariff.  His first act of war was a naval blockade of the Southern ports, citing only one reason for it:  tariff collection.

For at least the previous year, before any Southern state seceded, Republican party newspapers in the North had been calling for the bombardment of Southern ports with the understanding that a protectionist 50% tariff in Northern ports, and a modest 10% (or 0%) tariff in Southern ports would be very bad for Northern business interests.  The trade of the world would flee New York,

Boston, Providence, and Newport harbors, the longtime hubs of the transatlantic slave trade where slaves were used to build the slave ships, and go to Charleston, New Orleans, and other Southern ports.  Lincoln complied with their wishes, committing the biggest political miscalculation in American history, thinking that his war would last only a few weeks or months, after which he would sit on his throne as the plunderer-in-chief, an American King George III.

The Best of Thomas DiLorenzo

Buyer Assistance:

Land and Livestock International, Inc. is in a position to assist the buyer in purchasing ranches anywhere in the Western United States and Northern Mexico. Pre – purchase services include help with due diligence, estimates of carrying capacity and potential for improvement, cash flow projections, etc. Post purchase services include everything from part time consulting to complete turn-key management.

We are not licensed real estate brokers nor are we licensed appraisers. We work only for the buyer for a negotiated fee.

Contact us at info@landandlivestockinternational.com or through our web site at www.landandlivestockinternational.com 

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment