Postscript

Distinguishing ones humanity in others is not always a human concern. If it was the polity would not have allowed the Swartos to be treated as less than citizens according to laws conditions invalidated from the beginning. Therefore, after what is approaching 40 years of suffering governments despicable abuse it still has no indictment. Probably hasn’t even taken it to a grand jury for fear of being rejected and exposed as criminals. Star Chamber secrecy makes it impossible to know. Either way using the law to conceal its perpetrators guilt by forbidding the disclosure of an ongoing (illegal) investigation is mere gamesmanship. Even so, I will indulge myself with a hopeless demand. Take your complaint to a grand jury if you haven’t already and if you have then accept its judgment and submit to the law. Every day added is another in governments ongoing complicity and by time the theft of our very lives! Let us free!

The courts role in this matter is not clear. Specifically the facts of the case to which the governments complaint addresses itself. If the courts were duly apprised of all the facts it would be apparent to any judge that the “investigation” was illegally started for other than legal reasons and that when government initially came up short in having me killed simply drew out the investigation. Additionally, I have been making so much noise, so to speak, with my writing that any judge who denies knowledge of this government charade is too dull to be on the bench, the rest are complicit. In these circumstances the court is a criminal accessory and warrants issued to surveil and hurt us illegitimate. As time passed and venues changed the few courts that have not already been “liberalized” may have been intimidated by the government to continue supporting this exercise in state terrorism. This is not improbable, for the government that yielded to terrorism against the Swartos will countenance that same threat being wielded against judges (or anybody else) who would intervene on our behalf. Whereas those judges of the left are likely willing participants. It is highly probable for these reasons that no court has ever obstructed the governments behavior in this case. And from where the nascent civil war draws its increasing strength. The level of institutional corruption in the system has reached self-sustaining levels. The people who formerly held the deed to government have been disseized and the law turned against them.

This has negative implications for nationhood. National identity rooted in just sentiments that support our principles—liberty and the intrinsic equality of human beings being foremost—are the life blood of our republic. While such sentiments may not be shared unanimously their pervading presence identifies us as one people. When this emotional aspect of the voluntary society ceases so do just supports for western values and American principles that cohered a heterogeneous people into one nation.

Because of our human nature conservatives view the world as in need of “constant renewal according to timeless truths and rich traditions,” many of our leaders see it as “in need of re-ordering according to master plans devised by enlightened experts,” (Margaret Thatcher)

Marxists would throw out those transcendent truths and traditions that have stood the test of time and replace them with obedience to “the party” that atomizes individual minds into a congealed conformity with its every ukase. For it is their ambition to abolish the Christian God. And make the very thought of god verboten:

“It was Dostoevsky who drew from the French Revolution and its seething hatred for the Church the lesson that ‘revolution must necessarily begin with atheism.’ But the world had never before known a godlessness as organized, militarized, and tenaciously malevolent as that preached by Marxism. Within the philosophical system of Marx and Lenin and at the heart of their psychology, hatred of God is the principal driving force, more fundamental than all their political and economic pretensions. Militant atheism is not merely incidental or marginal to communist policy; it is not a side effect, but the central pivot. To achieve its diabolic ends, communism needs to control a population devoid of religious and national feeling, and this entails a destruction of faith and nationhood. Communists proclaim both of these objectives openly, and just as openly put them into practice.” –Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (Taken from a Nancy Pearsey tweet)

On the other hand, “America is...the place...where the Christian religion has kept the greatest real power over men’s souls; and nothing better demonstrates how useful and natural it is to man, since the country where it exercises the greatest influence is at the same time the most enlightened and the most free.” –Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America (ibid)

Enmity for Christianity is inimical to liberty. Besides the fact that Christianity was and is a voluntary part of a cohering national identity governments teleology is to see to the good of the people. Thus the first amendment prohibited a national religion and guaranteed the free exercise thereof. This continued to define individual liberty and with it the freedom to aspire to transcendent standards of justice. Marxists—fascists, communists, socialists, totalitarians—believe that the truth can be whatever one wants it to be and can be forced on people according to the desire of the state. In this way the state becomes the creator of truth and values. This is as absurd as Dualism’s bad power defending its perversion of good—to make good serve bad ends. Yet most people know the difference between right and wrong and though they may be downtrodden and subjugated to a state that would reduce them to cogs in its soulless machine that doesn’t go away.

If terrorism is defined by intimidation and violence against institutions and populations when military action is not feasible then the world is full of terrorists. Unruly protests in Minneapolis Minnesota have resurrected memories of Kent State, where the guardsmen were eventually acquitted. In Minnesota however recriminations are traded daily and both sides believe they are right. ICE meanwhile is overworked and underappreciated even called terrorists, but that is hyperbole. The real terrorists are the ones who, ever since George Floyd died of police negligence, have cleverly upped the temperature of their civil war by allowing more than 10 million illegal immigrants to storm the country, coupled with the millions of illegals already living here that may be a politically insurmountable number of people to be removed, for more often than not when persons here illegally and legally—who become illegal when they ignore agreed to legal procedures—flout the law government, unless dragged into it, refuses to enforce the law in a timely manner, leaving ICE to play the bad guy with, moreover, no clear idea of who is who. The protesters are just useful idiots, polezni durak, who have bought into the Marxist propaganda—law’s bad, any attempt to enforce it is worse, and ten million or more people sashaying into the country from the worlds nations illegally, in addition to the millions of others already here,* makes perfect sense—if you’re a libertarian anarchist. That’s how they justify the bumptious protests, name calling, and threats of violence. People get tired, ICE got tired. The protesters seem energized even festive, it’s all fun and games. Until it’s not.

*Good estimates for the number of illegals in this country—from all countries—are hard to come by. We do know that according to one Hispanic actor around 20% of the U.S. population is Hispanic and because of that he has proposed and advocates that the country owes them 20% of everything it has—while others hold that there is an unrestricted “right” for people south of the border to immigrate to the United States. Not a logical premise nor proposition, but still held by some.

Law is meant to bring order. Societies protect themselves with it. Remove its authority and you are left with chaos and the rule of entitled progressive protesters who represent a Marxist point of view that would supersede individuals with a collective made up of replaceable parts. Making life cheap and human beings enslaved to the central government which will now tell you what the group thinks, therefore what you will think. That is the lefts side.

On the right side stands law enforcement that would conserve order by law. But sometimes its political masters can misuse its authority. Hence laws that legalize lethal force on civilians who do not appear to fit the stereotypical description of hardened criminals can play into the hands of Marxist propagandists who will exacerbate ill will for law enforcement. For example, after she was confronted one woman was shot for attempting to drive away from police. A bad decision, preceded by another when the shooting officer tactically positioned himself near the front of her vehicle so as not to be run over but nevertheless struck. She tried to turn away from him to the right and he shot her—a number of times. In spite of being struck he easily walked away from it. The service forced him out tacitly acknowledging he made a costly mistake. He didn’t have to position himself near the vehicle thereby triggering the use of lethal force that was completely out of proportion to the nature of her original offense. Coupled with fatigue and stress, and perhaps residual anger, lapses in judgment can more readily occur and bring one to the line that separates the honorable from dishonorable intent that would be illegal but for the politics. Should that occur it will be cheered on by the lawless ignoble who will be happy to see the rest of the people they contend with shamed when the offense seemingly does not rise to the level of punishment administered. This can be reused on the innocent.

Police take orders. If their orders are to confront someone who has had the misfortune to unknowingly become a non-lethal threat to government they will. When that results in unknowing surprise officers, identified as such or not, are still licensed by government to use lethal force. In this way persons like Trump, who avoided Vietnam for fear of losing his life, can put others at risk while sitting on the sidelines safe and giddy with the anticipation of his enemies deaths.

The probability of which may be furthered by holding 12,000 new officers—hired in less than a year thanks to $50,000 hiring bonuses—to lower hiring standards, then holding them to lower training standards so to rush them into service. (Taken from George Will’s comments on News Nation, 1/11/2026) Though from experience it is clear that going city by city, state by state is not a long term solution. Nor the militarization of the country. Assuming—with lots of salt—that privileging some lawbreakers over others is not governments goal Congress needs to produce coherent immigration policy in spite of Democrats who favor a Marxist world view of immigration that would make reform practically impossible.

Accept that premise and the question becomes one of appropriately doing it anyway—re-forming our views to save the west. On this topic Gad Saad has some thoughts worth thinking. “In order for the west to win this civilizational battle it must 1. Proudly and unequivocably defend western values. 2. Reject cultural relativism and the unicornia vision of multiculturalism. 3. Recommit to individual over the celebration of collective identity politics. 4. Recognize that all cultures are not equal. 5. Recognize that all religious beliefs are not equally consistent with western values. 6. Recognize that all immigrants are not equally likely to assimilate and adopt western values. 7. Recognize that immigrants that espouse intolerable values that seek to destroy our civilization will be deported en masse. 8. Implement a rational immigration policy that recognizes the importance of cultural homophily. Which is basically the idea of choosing immigrants who hail from cultures that possess similar values to those of host nations. 9. Exhibit zero tolerance for seditious belief systems. Such systems can be criminalized if they constitute an existential threat to our freedoms and liberties.

That last requires qualifying. Sedition is not always bad. Witness the American Revolution that produced the greatest nation on earth juxtaposed with Muhammadian Islam that John Quincy Adams briefly elucidated as the counterpoint to Christianity and you see the difference:

“In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar, the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust, by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST. TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE.” And to repeat, like false prophets everywhere, even of those faiths that purport to be Christian, he made it all up. (Ryan S. Walters, @ryanswalters73, 12/17/2025)

Freedom and liberties can be taken to extremes. Some libertarian economists would disagree on issues of drugs and prostitution but only because they have fallen in love with theories that when applied to reality do not work. For example, economists might say that when two parties agree to a transaction both benefit. But regarding decriminalized or legalized drugs and prostitution there are a world of negative consequences that people will bear and that the community will share in and be forced to deal with.

Marketing drugs is to market addiction, decriminalization has the same result. Encouraging drug use to become ingrained and spread the pain to all facets of culture. Given the inventiveness of chemists and the greed of their masters an abundance of opportunities and costs of addiction would fill store shelves and the “institution” would become perhaps too big to fail. Or too big to disestablish. Either way society would get the bill in deaths, disabilities, crime, high insurance and medical costs and the grief of lives diminished and futures lost to imprudence, while the instigators make a lot of money from a racket that almost runs itself. At the same time parents will justify themselves to their children, habituating them just as some now do with gambling. One definition of gamblers is losers, by sanctioning drug use the nation would join them.

(*Kevin Sabet has written a book, Smokescreen, that makes some of the same points and—in my words—exposes arguments for marijuana’s legalization as dangerous and full of misrepresentations that result in no good except to allow politicians to perhaps gain favor with potential donors and fill investors pockets with money, no matter who gets hurt.)

This is not a moral argument against gambling but against encouraging immoral excess that ruins individuals and communities so others can extract profit. Some will object that people ought to be free to make their choices. Sounds good in theory but in practice society’s youth whose minds as to risk assessment are not fully developed until their mid 20’s will be at risk when maturing in the womb of a society that surrounds its members with high risk opportunities to blemish their “social credit scores” for life and reduce their opportunities for good lives. That includes sequestering them away from many jobs for which good judgment and unclouded minds are critical. Creating an untouchable class.

Prostitution, legal or decriminalized, inhabits the mind with indelible memories that scar them for life. Breaking the mind to a nightmarish hopelessness and making genuine intimacy nearly impossible. At the cost of their dignity, prostitution, legal or not, serves business interests while establishing the individual as a disposable asset to be written down or depreciated by time. In other words, the assets value decreases with time and use. All this is self-evident when so many prostitutes brief lives end in death. And no matter the denials, just as now, whether of legal age or not, targets will be acquired and technology deployed to ensure supply, girls who will never know they didn’t have a chance, that monied terrorists predetermined their lives as slaves by governments consent. For to have a fully compliant prostitute requires a degrading enculturation, starting the sooner the better, childhood is no deterrent. During this time she can be desensitized to the ugliness of what she does by incremental steps that will slowly draw her into a life from which there is no escape and end with her readiness to fully service depravity that mandates her debasement. If all this sounds inhuman that’s because it is. When some human beings treat other human beings as property both of them and the society they inhabit are the worse for it.

In this government is the great enabler keeping secrets for the powerful to keep the political class safe. There is always more than one one-sided civil war battle taking place and no politician or institution willing to sound alarms for self-defense. The president is resolute in if not publicly defending the status quo keeping his mouth shut on its evils. Unlike his careless claims to settling eight wars domestic terrorism would require sustained energy and a focused attention sustained by a magnanimity of character the president does not constitutionally possess. Rather he seems intent on acquiring as many invented honors and trinkets of office as he can get while subverting world order. Thus the country is treated to the Trump version of cow pie bingo. One never knows where the president will go next. But because he has we know he will.

Trump appears to be in a psychological nose dive, aka, the runs. Attacking and alienating allies with tariffs for opposing his position on Greenland, imitating Putin by threatening military action against them and blaming Norway for the private Nobel Committee’s not awarding him the peace prize when he sent Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store a pitifully juvenile text complaining about being overlooked for the Nobel.

“Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize...I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America.” Trump also said that only a “Complete and Total Control of Greenland” by the U.S. could secure the world. (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2026/01/19/trump-letter-norway-nobel-peace-greenland/88251326007/)

It appears that the world is at risk of Donald Trump. He just admitted that his emphasis on peace was a political design meant to garnish him with the medal and came close to threatening war as a consequence of not getting it. Those are the words of insanity, only such could countenance his pretextual scheme to aggrandize himself at the expense of national security. The good of which he now claims he will put first by pursing a Utopian world peace—when he’s not carrying through on his threat of war—over which his benevolence will reign as El Numero uno on the Board of Peace. Given his less than lucid remarks the president at least requires help ordering his thoughts. (Personally, I think he’s as crazy as an outhouse rat.)

I am not sorry for having criticized Donald Trump with all possible vehemence. Trump has taken some worthy positions for some unworthy reasons. Namely, self-interested scheming to run up his political stock. He looks good in the public eye but when the public’s not looking he can be as treacherous as the next traitor. Events speak for themselves, he has plotted my death, protected those who would have made my child a sex slave, and stood by while my family members die one at a time because he does not have the courage to confront the FBI, hoping that maybe all memory of the covert generational wrongs that preceded us can be covered up. He fawns over dictators and tyrants that mirror his deeds. He likes to make noise and noisy events, and cruel amusements. Using law enforcement to exploit children seems to please him. Separating them from their families and sending them to who knows where, a la Joe Biden, maybe more. While refusing to raise one dainty finger to protect them as Texas has found.

Deescalation is not his style. Materialized in the escalation of events in Minneapolis by sending combat outfitted ICE agents to protests that might not have turned into riots if as a former police chief observed they had been met with relatively benign regular police while holding the former in reserve out of sight and mind of the protesters. In Iran he promised protesters help that never came and got them killed in a cynical ploy to use the protesters as cannon fodder in his multifaceted conflict with the regime. The complexity of which he is probably unaware nor does he care. This is in character.

The last thing he wants to do is take on Putin which might be less consuming than Iran since Russia would probably take care of regime change itself, while a multitude of inherent Iranian complications would probably, at the very least, make any conflict much more time-intensive. So he’s busied himself creating a world of activity, propositions, and programs to distract from the Ukrainian tragedy and its implications for the west. Thus Greenland and NATO become more bad guys in his narrative while Putin who invaded Ukraine for no good reason and has never made a single concession to peace is invited to sit on Trumps Peace Board.

Trump pretends to be a lion strutting and roaring but has the lineaments of a sheep. No bite, just lots of bleat. More suited to pirouetting on the public stage with the isolationists he finds congenial than the company of the strong and courageous. Trump wants total control just as those he admires, to please himself. He punches down from his aerie of authority established by those he thinks not of emulating but of overcoming their legacy with his unfettered authority. To do publicly what could have been done privately and more effectively. His negotiating style evidently requires the public humiliation of his diplomatic interlocutors. Embarrassing them for all the world to see with maximalist demands that have gone so far as to threaten to kill allies. And in the end the United States will get what Greenland already gave, complete cooperation.

The surface has been scratched and revealed Trump to be something other than the patriot he claims. The United States is a western nation. Trump would make it into an autocracy in the image of China and Russia. Disgracing himself, the country, his lineage, and his immediate family by betraying the country’s legacy. He is a traitor, and his achievements are not superior to everyone and every accomplishment that came before him.

Meanwhile Trump claims he is running Venezuela. Yet the brothels are still open and people are being arrested and persecuted for what we would consider free speech violations. Making him a cheap imitation of a Putinesque authoritarian and a creature of the inhuman left. Yet putting one thing beyond him. The suppression of the fact that he has taken sides against the west, and moreover Ukraine by not supporting and allowing that country to defend itself with all vigor. Ostensibly he seeks peace but in Ukraine’s case the way to peace is probably through war. Putin declared war for no rational reason on neighboring Ukraine and has been raping and murdering ever since. Providing every reason Ukraine should be allowed to make war on Russia in self-defense.

Trump has lately been laying further plans for my demise following the falsifiable theory that might makes right. I subscribe to the theory that in these circumstances one must be able to take the first punch.

Time will tell, still it is something Trump doesn’t have in unlimited supply. He has less than three years left in office and he’s out. No more whining, no more riots. Out. And naked. No more authority to dictate. As the rest of his term evaporates he becomes progressively weaker, for he has less time to exert power. Eventually leaving him out in the cold minus the power of office. Also, he’s threatened a lot of people and made a lot of enemies. The only “friends” he may have left are Putin and Xi; and they will probably move on to the next dupe. Thus a fat old man, naked and afraid, will have the tables turned on him.