Original source URL: http://www.icssa.org/article_detail_parse.php?a_id=530&pg=1&rel= Rise of the Fourth Reich By: ABID ULLAH JAN Published: The Frontier Post, Nov 09, 1999 On June 15th, 1998, long before the Clinton Administration's strong backing of Mr. Nawaz Sharif and the subsequent criticism of the military take over in Pakistan, Public Television in the US aired its documentary, "The People's Century, Master Race." The documentary outlined the rise of the Nazis and some of the principles that governed their thinking. Shown were the dancing Germans who welcomed their new leader with joy and worship. Shown were the Jewish and Gypsy persecutions and murders along with others who would not conform to the national dream. Since they were not of "The Order", and could not be made to conform, they were deemed expendable. As the documentary progressed, it became clear, though unintended, that the much vaunted New Order now sweeping the world does not use the name "Nazi" but is fully involved with its principles in the name of promoting democracy. It does not require a Nazi to eradicate dissent at home and abroad. This eradication happens in America, Israel and in most other countries. The Nazis used various forms of propaganda as is done these days to form public opinion and bring everyone into support of the so-called international community and its leader the Fourth Reich in Washington. Eradication of dissent to the New World Order and subjugating a people need only a good sell out democrat, like Benazir or Nawaz Sharif. The Western leaders, who preach democracy, do not, in fact, practice it. Not even the Fourth Reich gains the presidency by popular majority vote. The chief of the United Nations does not even pretend to be elected in this way. The EU foreign ministers at their meeting in Luxembourg on November 15 are expected to decide the fate of "undemocratic" Pakistan. They must keep in mind that when men rule, and that rule has not been given to them by popular consent, there must be force and coercion to sustain it. Unlike our much-criticised military government, this was true in Germany and it is true in America as well. Like the American government that dislikes popularly supported governments in places like Tehran, Islamabad, Khartoum etc, the National Socialist German Workers' Party of the Nazis would not tolerate divergent ideologies. All were to be brought into the grand and Third Reich. There were to be no nationalities holding back. This is also true for the US and UN. Those who are not co-operative and supportive of the New Order are viewed as pariah states, and the national propaganda machine and international sanctions are used to starve the offending state into submission. Preaching democracy is one thing and practising it is another. Holding elections does not mean that a functional democracy is in place. To say the least, the two political parties in the US have become so mixed in with the government that they have convinced voters that they are government. In fact, it is a two party dictatorship in which it is hard to distinguish where one begins and the other leaves off. The following faults and foibles make the US permanent democracy worse than our temporary military rule. * Political parties often illegally take over powers reserved for government. * Strong party discipline weakens the power of elected officials, often forcing them to go against the wishes of their constituents. * State and local rules, drawn up by the two parties, purposely discriminate against millions of independents, who are virtually unrepresented in American political life. * The ability to run for office as an independent on the same basis as the two parties or to start a solid third party movement is cut down by the entrenched system. * The "initiative" which grants direct democracy to the voters is denied to most Americans. * The ability of citizens to reject or approve legislation through the referendum does not exist in most states or on the federal level as it does in many democratic nations. * Majority rule does not exist in most American elections. * The primary system for the nomination of presidential candidates is often foolish, and the result undemocratic. * The laws that elect the President, from the Electoral College to a possible choice in the House, are irrational. The military government in Pakistan is not acceptable to the EU even if more than 90% of the Pakistanis approve it. On the other hand, the government in Washington is acceptable even if more than 50% of the Americans stayed out of the elections. It is ironic that as the major parties gather more power, their support is shrinking dramatically. In 1952, only 23% of American called themselves Independents. This number has increased by more than 60%, and is rising yearly as voters become increasingly disillusioned with democracy as it is in the US. The American democracy is permitting politicians who lose elections to be declared the winner. In the trade, this is called a plurality, but it actually means that most people voted against he so-called winner. More than 90% of the world and the US citizens do not even know what is going wrong with their democratic system. The same thing happened in 1992, when Bill Clinton won the presidency with only 43% of the vote in a three-way split. It also happened in 1990 in Connecticut, when former Senator Lowell Weicker won the governorship with 40% of the vote. Bill Clinton is not the first minority president. In fact, there have been eleven, the most grievous case being John Quincy Adams, who got only 31% of the popular vote and became President by virtue of a victory in the House of representatives. American presidential election system is the most convoluted and the least democratic in the Western world, but the sad reality is that none of the UE members look at the series of compromises between the US state and federal apparatus that creates an anti-democratic monster, under which the Americans have painfully lived for over two hundred years. It is the Electoral College, which could not care less about how many people voted for whom in the election. It only cares about votes per state. So ridiculously askew is that ballot counting that when Clinton skinned by with only 43 per cent of the popular vote, he was Mr. State Champion incarnate, taking 68% of the Electoral vote! Very few American know it is not fair and they are not aware of its potential distortions. States are awarded an Electoral College number equal to their population, which seems reasonable. But it is a winner-take-all system. A victory of one vote gives the candidate all the electoral votes of that state. For example, the candidate who gets 6 million votes against his opponent's 5,999,999 in California wins all fifty-four Electoral votes, almost 20% of what is needed for national victory. That is pretty poor democracy even if compared to our popularly supported military rule, because we can imagine an even worse scenario. To win California's giant Electoral prize, a majority is not required. All that is needed is one vote more than the next candidate. I minor parties were to take 4% of the vote in California, for example, that would leave 96% for the major candidates in a three-way race. The victor of that, with only 32.1%, or less than one third the votes, would take the entire giant prise. Hardly a democracy. This indirect election of the president of the US is more a violation of common sense than the military take over in Pakistan as the causes and consequences in our case are clearly known and everyone understands inevitability of the military rule at the moment. If the Electoral College is undemocratic, what follows when no one gets a majority of that body is even worse. The vote is then thrown into the House of Representatives -- where it should never be. But what most people do not know is the devil in the peculiar details. The House can chose the President from any one of the top three vote getters, regardless of how well they did in the actual election. If a candidate received only 10% of the popular vote and none of the Electoral College vote, the partisan House could still name him as President of the United States! Another kicker in the face of democracy is that House members cannot vote individually. Only states can vote. And each state, regardless of population or the size of its delegation, gets only a single vote. So, California, with fifty-one Congressmen, is only as powerful that day as Vermont with one Congressman. To win the presidency in the House, the candidate needs only twenty-six votes from the states, one greater than half the fifty cast. It would have been better if the undemocratic practices were limited to this extent. But here starts the process of what we call "political victimisation" under the strict state of national emergency that is in place since March 9, 1933. When General Musharraf declared emergency in Pakistan, it was criticised in many Western capitals as tantamount to Martial Law without the knowledge that the powers available to the Executive branch since March 1933 have effectively placed the American people in slavery, by nationalising the vital industries and removing the common law from their court system. The police state that is well in Placed in the US violates immigrants', minorities' and children's rights. The public has no idea about how expose and eliminate the wave of violence and killings of Americans everywhere at the hands of government law enforcement officers and officials of the judiciary. Such claims of human rights violations would seem questionable, at best, were it not for the fact that people like a fourteen-year veteran of Congress and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Department of Agriculture under Nixon have themselves been the focus of "political retribution." According to The Idaho Observer, the "Seven-term U.S. Congressman, George Hansen (R. Idaho) was punished severely for having the audacity to implement a plan which would make Congress instantly accountable to the American public. " Hansen, author of "To Harass Our People, an indictment of the IRS," was also the architect of the Congressional Accountability Project (CAP) which was...to use national TV and a 1-900 number to instantly post congressional floor votes and public response to them." This legislation met with a hostile congressional response and began a series of events in the life of the congressman that makes the term "bizarre" seem woefully inadequate. The real substance of Rep. Hansen's nightmare began when James Cole, special counsel to the House Ethics Committee went after Hansen on alleged violation of Title 18 sec. 1001 of the United States Code. He was accused of lying to the government by omitting specific information on his financial disclosure statement. Even after the Supreme Court handed down its decision, years later, vacating Hansen's conviction and calling the litigation a "wrongful prosecution." Hansen got the relief and thousands of others are still languishing in the American prison system for showing dissent and making efforts to change the status quo. It shows that the U.S. does not tolerate resistance by its citizens, but feigns such human concern when other nations seek to stop rebellious elements and remove the corrupt leaders in their own societies. By fostering and supporting dissenters and sell outs, the U.S. is able to weaken the fabric of nationalistic states and make them more pliable for the new system of things now being set up. Nations, which have a strong love for country, must be demoralised and diminished. The US, EU and international bankers particularly make the same kinds of efforts towards Islamic groups who are strongly individualised and not susceptible to control by the New World Order. While Nazi Germany wielded its control in obvious and open ways, the New International beast, sometimes misnamed in American propaganda as the "family of nations", is using deceit and chicanery to destroy the ethnic and nationalistic societies and bring them into complete submission to the new super government of the Fourth Reich now taking charge over all kindred and people. The conclusion of the matter is laid at the feet of the people. The "Master Race" film reasoned concerning the duplicity and knowing ignorance of the German people in regards to Hitler and his purposes for world control and the annihilation of certain populations. The modern propaganda machine of the West mentions nothing of its own willing ignorance. While enforcing different kind of sanctions against sincere governments aiming at good governance, the Western leaders support oppressive and corrupt regimes in the name of protecting democracy and lie to their population regarding their true political purposes in enforcing a new order on nations around the world. No matter how they cut it, they cannot claim a better state of morals than the Nazis. If the truth were exposed, they cannot even claim the morality of the Nazis. -- -------------------------------------------------------- Escaping the Matrix website: http://escapingthematrix.org/ cyberjournal website: http://cyberjournal.org Community Democracy Framework: http://cyberjournal.org/DemocracyFramework.html Subscribe cyberjournal list: •••@••.••• (send blank message) Posting archives: http://cyberjournal.org/show_archives/ cyberjournal blog (join in): http://cyberjournal-rkm.blogspot.com/ Moderator: •••@••.••• (comments welcome)
