Caller: “Hey man. Hey, they’re running another checkpoint just outside town. It’s up by Mica Flats.”
Me: “What?! You’re kidding!”
Caller: “Yeah, my wife just drove past it and called me to tell me about it. It was an ISP [Idaho State Patrol] checkpoint and there were guys in camo up on the hill observing, apparently.”
Me: “That’s crazy. Thanks for the call.”
It was Tuesday, September 15, 2009, and I had journeyed with a friend to a patriot rally in Hamilton, Montana to hear featured guest speaker, 81 year old M.J. “Red” Beckman, legendary co-author of the two volume series, The Law That Never Was.
This was the second call to me in as many weeks regarding first-hand accounts of local area checkpoints. Just two weeks earlier I had received a call from a friend and patriot describing his first-hand account of another “optional” checkpoint. He explained to me how the checkpoint was set up in such a way as to indicate it was optional to motorists. The trouble was, the “option” to the checkpoint was a u-turn – across the double yellow line. He told me when he opted for the latter; he was run down by law enforcement, stopped, interrogated, cited, and is now subsequently embroiled in a legal battle for his presumed freedom. Unfortunately, more troubling than these draconian measures, are the facts surrounding our present state of military rule, and the ignorance of most to it.
Today in America, many people are waking up. We discuss issues more broadly than in any other time in recent memory. But when it comes to specifics – and the tougher, sometimes life-changing specifics – it seems we’ve made an unspoken agreement something like this; I promise not to ask hard, life-altering questions so please promise me you won’t share the hard truths that may alter my reality. This is a don’t ask don’t tell policy of another nature, but I believe many people are realizing the urgency of coming to grips with our indolence.
As bizarre and Orwellian as it may seem, I am constantly amazed things aren’t worse. I am amazed, not because I believe unsubstantiated or hyperbolic media accounts, but because I read the amalgamation of documentation shaping Public Policy – what we now call Government – bearing remarkable resemblance to the words of Thomas Jefferson, as penned in the Declaration of Independence, “....a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism....” For those interested, following is not a comprehensive treatise, but a distilled outline of specifics; some of which you’re aware, and others perhaps you are not.
Today in America, we suffer from an inflicted gradual Public anesthetization. From 1952 – 1954 the House Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations known alternatively as the Cox Committee and the Reece Committee after its two chairmen, Edward E. Cox and B. Carroll Reece; was commissioned by House Resolution 561 of the 82nd Congress to investigate allegedly un-American activities funded by major American foundations – most notably; The Rockefeller Foundation, The Ford Foundation, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and The Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation. The Committee uncovered shocking evidence of a coup by international industrialists to overthrow America and ‘create a comfortable merger’ with the Soviet Union. The Committee’s findings were perhaps best summarized by assistant research director Thomas M. McNiece in his report to the Committee titled The Economics of the Public Interest: “These original studies of the public interest disclose that during the 4 years 1933-36 a change took place which was so drastic as to constitute a revolution. They also indicated conclusively that the responsibility for the economic welfare of the American people had been transferred heavily to the executive branch of the Federal Government, that a corresponding change in education had taken place from an impetus outside of the local community, and that this revolution had occurred without violence and with full consent of an overwhelming majority of the electorate..... In seeking to explain this unprecedented phenomenon, subsequent studies pursued by the staff clearly showed it could not have occurred peacefully or with the consent of the majority unless education in the United States had been prepared in advance to endorse it.”
During the Committee’s investigation, Mrs. Catherine Casey was enlisted to review the minutes of the board meetings for the Carnegie Endowment. The minutes revealed that from the very beginning, members of the board discussed how to alter life in the United States; how to change the attitudes of Americans to give up their traditional principles and concepts of government to become more receptive to what they referred to as the collectivist model of society. Reece Committee research director Norman Dodd later recalled a private conversation with Ford Foundation President Rowan Gaither in which Gaither intimated: “....we operate in response to directives, the substance of which is that we shall use our grant making power to alter life in the United States so that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.”
Because of the anesthetization precipitated by this ‘second American Revolution’ most Americans fail to comprehend the dire situation in which we presently find ourselves. The Introduction to Senate Report 93-549 (93rd Congress, 1st Session, 1973) by the Senate Special Committee on the Termination of the National Emergency summarizes the situation we face today – a situation far worse today than it was in 1973: “A majority of the people of the United States have lived all of their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years [now 76 years], freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency. The problem of how a constitutional democracy reacts to great crises, however, far antedates the Great Depression. As a philosophical issue, its origins reach back to the Greek city-states and the Roman Republic. And, in the United States, actions taken by the Government in times of great crises have - from, at least, the Civil War - in important ways, shaped the present phenomenon of a permanent state of national emergency.”
The Foreword to the Report states in part: “Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency. In fact, there are now in effect four presidentially proclaimed states of national emergency: In addition to the national emergency declared by President Roosevelt in 1933, there are also the national emergencies proclaimed by President Truman on December 16, 1950, during the Korean conflict, and the states of national emergency declared by President Nixon on March 23, 1970, and August 15, 1971.
These proclamations give force to 470 provisions of Federal law [hundreds more since 1973, particularly in the Clinton administration since Jan 21, 1993]. These hundreds of statutes delegate to the President extraordinary powers, ordinarily exercised by the Congress, which affect the lives of American citizens in a host of all-encompassing manners. This vast range of powers, taken together, confer enough authority to rule the country without reference to normal Constitutional processes.
Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens.”
On September 18, 2001, just one week after the tragic events of September 11, the Congressional Research Service released the updated report 98-505 titled National Emergency Powers, pointing to the aforementioned Report’s findings, and reaffirming sweeping dictatorial powers claimed by the Executive Branch.
As a brief aside with regard to emergency powers; the Idaho Pandemic Influenza Response Plan states on page 4: “The Idaho Military Division’s Bureau of Homeland Security (BHS) is responsible for overall planning, direction, and coordination of statewide response operations. During a state-declared disaster, Idaho operates under an incident management system.... All of Idaho’s state government agencies participate in this system....”
The Plan further states on page 1: “The decision to implement the response phase of this plan will be made by [one person] the State Health Official. The decision to terminate the response portion of this plan and begin recovery operations will also be made by [one person] the State Health Official. The criteria for termination may include .... Mass vaccination .... and/or the outbreak did not materialize.”
The Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) website details all state and federal declarations of disaster and emergency at http://www.fema.gov/news/disasters.fema. According to the FEMA site data, the most recently enacted, surreptitiously declared disaster in Idaho, ostensibly declared for Spring 2008 flooding which never occurred, was on July 31, 2008, and remains in force to this day. In simple terms, this proves the Idaho Military Division’s Bureau of Homeland Security (BHS) remains the de facto government for the state of Idaho, pursuant to emergency powers. Other states with presently enacted, and in some cases multiple emergency or disaster declarations include: GA, NY, TN, KY, IA, NB, ME, IL, KS, MO, OK, AR, SD, AK, FL, WV, MS, IN, MN, WA, OR, VT, NH, HI, MA, and of course, Washington D.C.
When the Southern states walked out of Congress on March 27, 1861, the quorum to conduct business under the Constitution was lost. The only votes that Congress could lawfully take, under Parliamentary Law, were those to set the time to reconvene, take a vote to get a quorum, and vote to adjourn and set a date, time, and place to reconvene at a later time. Instead, Congress abandoned the House and Senate without setting a date to reconvene. Under the parliamentary law of Congress, when this happened, Congress became sine die (Latin, pronounced see-na dee-a, meaning “without day”) and thus ceased to exist as a lawful deliberative body – and the only lawful, constitutional power able to declare war was no longer lawful, or in session.
The Southern states, by virtue of their secession from the Union, and some Northern bloc state legislatures also adjourned sine die, and thus, the states which were parties to creating the Constitution ceased to exist. On April 15, 1861, President Lincoln issued Executive Order 1, the first Executive Order of any American President, and the nation has been ruled by the President under Executive Martial Order ever since. When Congress was reconvened under the military authority of the Commander-in-Chief and not by Rules of Order for Parliamentary bodies or by Constitutional Law; placing the American people under martial rule ever since that national emergency declared by President Lincoln and subverting the Constitution for the United States of America as the Supreme Law of the Land. No constitutional provisions then in place afforded power to the actions taken and presumed to place the nation under the new form of control.
Aware he had no authority to issue Executive Orders, President Lincoln commissioned General Orders No. 100 April 24, 1863 as a special field code to govern his actions under martial law and justify the seizure of power, ostensibly extending the laws of the District of Columbia, under contrived provisions of Article I, Section 8, Clauses 17-18 of the Constitution beyond the boundaries of Washington, D.C. and into the several states. General Orders No. 100, also called the Lieber Instructions and the Lieber Code, extended The Laws of War and International Law onto American soil, and the United States government became the presumed conqueror of the people and the land.
This clandestine Martial Rule continues in perpetuity, and a sleeping nation has been under the military authority of the Commander of Chief of that military – the President – ever since. Constitutional law under the original Constitution is enforced only as a matter of keeping the public peace under the provisions of General Orders No. 100 under martial rule. Under Martial Law, title is a mere fiction, since all property belongs to the military except that which the Commander-in-Chief may, in his benevolence, exempt from taxation and seizure and upon which he allows the enemies of the Republic to reside.
President Lincoln was assassinated before he could complete plans for reestablishing Constitutional government in the Southern States and end the Martial Rule by Executive Order. The 14th Article in Amendment to the Constitution created a new citizenship status for the new expanded jurisdiction. The 1873 Slaughter-House Cases, (83 U.S. 36) clearly reveal Amendment XIV relating particularly to the freed black slaves. But recent legislation tells another tale. For instance, a report on the Regulatory Improvement Act of 2007 cites language most recognize from Amendment V “The Constitution provides that the Government may not deprive anyone of life, liberty, or property without ‘due process of law.’” but attributes this language to Amendment XIV, Section 1 – not Amendment V. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/T?&report=hr390&dbname=110&
New laws for the District of Columbia were established and passed by Congress in 1871, supplanting those established Feb. 27, 1801 and May 3, 1802. The District of Columbia was re-incorporated in 1872, and all states in the Union were reformed as Franchisees of the Federal Corporation so that a new Union of the United States could be created. The key to when the states became Federal Franchisees is related to the date when such states enacted the Field Code in law. The Field Code was a codification of the common law that was adopted first by New York and then by California in 1872, and shortly afterwards the Lieber Code was used to bring the United States into the 1874 Brussels Conference and into the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907.
The 1917 Trading with the Enemy Act (Public Law 65-91, 65th Congress, Session 1, Chapters 105, 106, October 6, 1917) passed by Congress defined, regulated, and punished trading with enemies of the Credit Monopoly of the 1913 Federal Reserve Act – fundamentally antithetical to the Constitutional Republic – who were then required by that act to be licensed by the government to do business. The National Banking System Act (Public Law 73-1, 73rd Congress, Session 1, Chapter 1, March 9, 1933), Executive Proclamation 2038 (March 6, 1933), Executive Proclamation 2039 (March 9, 1933), and Executive Orders 6073, 6102, 6111 and 6260 prove that in 1933, the United States Government formed under the executive privilege of the original martial rule went bankrupt, and a new state of national emergency was declared under which United States citizens were named as the enemy to the government and the banking system as per the provisions of the Trading with the Enemy Act. The legal system provided for in the Constitution was formally announced in the 1938 Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins (304 US 64, 82 L.Ed. 1188) Supreme Court decision. On April 25, 1938, the Supreme Court overturned the standing precedents of the prior 150 years concerning Common Law in the federal government, and declared there is no federal general common law. Incidentally, Congress has no power to declare substantive rules of common law applicable in a State, be they local or general in nature, commercial law, or a part of the law of torts.
If the Common Law is nothing else, it is the history of the struggle of trial by jury against the civil law of the Roman (private international law) and Germanic Empires. Law that is ministerial and inquisitorial is not the Common Law .... it is the feudal civil law of Rome and Germany.
The significance of the Erie RR Decision is supremely monumental. It marked a fundamental shift away from the principles of the General Federal Common Law – the Law of the Land, as identified in the 1842 Swift v. Tyson case – and toward a Soviet style government best identified by a peculiar statement first used by the Supreme Court nearly 140 years ago in the 1875 case Farmers and Mechanics Bank v. Dearing, 91 U.S. 29. The most common derivation was cited by Justice Brandeis in the 1919 case United States v. Babcock, (250 U.S. 328) “When the state creates rights in individuals against itself, it is not bound to provide a remedy in the courts, and it may withhold all remedy, or it may provide an administrative remedy and make it exclusive, however mistaken its exercise.”
In subsequent years a dramatic shift has calcified and gained totalitarian momentum. In 1942 Justice Jackson delivered the opinion in Wickard v. Filburn, (317 U.S. 111) – citing Interstate Commerce Clause – the Supreme Court stated the Federal Government has the plenary authority to regulate what it subsidizes. In today’s world, think DHS and FEMA subsidies, for starters.
In 1945 the United States gave up any remaining sovereignty when it signed the United Nations Treaty, making all American citizens subject to United Nations jurisdiction by proxy. The ‘constitution’ of the United Nations may be compared to that of the old Soviet Union, or the revised U.S. Constitution drafted by Rockefeller funding and proposed by Nelson Rockefeller, then Senate president, in his 1976 HCR 28, which called for an unlimited Constitutional Convention. This was only four years after Nixon’s Executive Order 11647 divided the nation in to 10 administrative regions on February 14, 1972 (Federal Register February 12, 1972, Vol. 37, No. 30), which also established the Federal Regional Council for the newly designed 10 regions. By the way, who are the regional directors, and where do they meet? And remember, the term soviet simply means council or committee.
So what’s the tie-in today? By proxy, the supreme U.S. and indeed global governing body, or shadow government as some call it, is the Administrative Fourth Branch of the Federal Government, with the DHS and FEMA seated securely atop it. The aforementioned instrumentalities are elements of it. In 1946 Congress passed the Administrative Procedure Act, which it proclaimed as a new Bill of Rights. During Congressional Testimony prior to its passage, Senate Judiciary Chairman, Senator McCarran had these words: “We have set up a fourth order in the tripartite plan of Government which was initiated by the founding fathers of our democracy. They set up the executive, the legislative, and the judicial branches; but since that time we have set up a fourth dimension, if I may so term it, which is now popularly known as administrative in nature. So we have the legislative, the executive, the judicial, and the administrative....
This is not a government of men. It is a government of law; and this law is a thing which, every day from its enactment until the end of time so far as this Government is concerned, will touch every citizen of the Republic.
Senate bill 7 [the Administrative Procedure Act], the purpose of which is to improve the administration of justice by prescribing fair administrative procedure, is a bill of rights for the hundreds of thousands of Americans whose affairs are controlled in one way or another by agencies of the Federal Government. It is designed to provide guaranties of due process in administrative procedure.
It touches every phase and form of human activity, and it deals with that which at the opening of my statement I described as the fourth dimension or fourth branch of our democracy. In other words, by the Constitution the executive, the legislative, and the judicial branches of our Government were set up; but now we have a fourth branch, the administrative form of our Government....”
Citing the 1937 President’s Committee on Administrative Management Report, McCarran further stated, “The independent administrative agencies of the Federal Government have been said to constitute ‘a headless fourth branch’ of the Government, a haphazard deposit of irresponsible agencies and uncoordinated powers whose institution [does] violence to the basic theory of the American Constitution that there should be three major branches of the Government, and only three....”
In 1986 the John Marshall Law Review published James P. Hill’s article, The Third House of Congress Versus the Fourth Branch of Government: The Impact of Congressional Committee Staff On Agency Regulatory Decision-Making in which Hill noted: “This article presents a simple yet unsettling proposition: regulatory decision-making, among the most intrusive and pervasive aspects of federal activity, is largely the product of two politically unaccountable bureaucracies. Unelected congressional committee staffs and unelected regulatory agency officials comprise these two politically unaccountable bureaucracies. Both of these bureaucracies have developed outside the constitutional framework. Modern regulatory decision-making, therefore, is not the result of formal directives or interactions between the regulators and their constitutionally elected masters. Instead, modern regulatory decisions-making is the result of only informal negotiations between the unelected congressional committee staff members and the unelected regulatory agency officials.”
This Administrative Fourth Branch comprised of independent agencies consolidates in itself powers and functions of the three duly constituted branches, abrogating the separation of powers. Its tyranny grinds on, largely without the slightest public consideration, yet today as Senator McCarran stated in 1946, the lives of virtually every American “are controlled in one way or another by agencies of the Federal Government” – by this new soviet style bill of state-created rights, or better, feudal privileges.
At this point you may recall, in his April 27, 1961 Address before the American Newspaper Publishers Association, President John F. Kennedy warned: “....we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.
Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.”
In 1966 Bill Clinton mentor and Georgetown Professor, Carroll Quigley’s seminal work, Tragedy & Hope: A History of the World In Our Time was published. On page 324 Quigley wrote: “The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreement arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank, in the hands of men like Montagu Norman of the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, Charles Rist of the Bank of France, and Hjalmar Schacht of the Reichsbank, sought to dominates its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.”
In the Heritage Foundation’s First Principles Series #16 titled The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government, Ronald J. Pestritto observes: “For those who hold the Constitution of the United States in high regard and who are concerned about the fate of its principles in our contemporary practice of government, the modern state ought to receive significant attention. The reason for this is that the ideas that gave rise to what is today called "the administrative state" are fundamentally at odds with those that gave rise to our Constitution. In fact, the original Progressive-Era architects of the administrative state understood this quite clearly, as they made advocacy of this new approach to government an important part of their direct, open, comprehensive attack on the American Constitution.”
Some will recall during the 2008 CNN Presidential YouTube debates, when asked if she was a liberal, Hillary Clinton responded: “I prefer the word "progressive," which has a real American meaning, going back to the progressive era at the beginning of the 20th century. I consider myself a modern progressive....”
On page 38 in None Dare Call It Conspiracy, Gary Allen wrote: “....the ultimate advantage the creditor has over the king or president is that if the ruler gets out of line the banker can finance his enemy or rival.” In Billions for the bankers: Debts for the people, Sheldon Emry outlines three types of conquest; the third being economic. He writes: “The third method can be called economic conquest. It takes place when nations are placed under ‘tribute’ without the use of visible force or coercion, so that the victims do not realize they have been conquered. ‘Tribute’ is collected from them in the form of ‘legal’ debts and taxes, and they believe they are paying it for their own good, for the good of others, or to protect all from some enemy. Their captors become their ‘benefactors’ and ‘protectors’.
Although this is the slowest to impose, it is often quite long lasting, as the captives do not see any military force arrayed against them, their religion is left more or less intact, they have freedom to speak and travel, and they participate in "elections" for their rulers. Without realizing it, they are conquered, and the instruments of their own society are used to transfer their wealth to their captors and make the conquest complete.”
In 1999, the Financial Stability Forum (FSF), the Financial Sector Assessment Plan (FSAP), and the G-20 were simultaneously and ostensibly created as a three-pronged attack. The plot goes something like this: the FSF was presented as an august body of financial experts to advise IMF member nations from on high in times of national or international crisis. The FSAP was presented as a financial health monitor and early warning system, while the G-20 was presented as the financial and administrative nexus or bridge between the world’s top bankers and administrative officials. The trouble is, these same people also own and regulate the only game in town – the global credit monopoly. And they in turn regulate their own promulgated economic crises. In fact, in the Dominican Republic FSAP reports, the IMF even admitted their audit sparked a run on the nation’s second largest bank, and a 14-17% loss in GDP. In reality, the three are a self-edifying circle with each pointing to the other and extolling the merits and virtues of the other.Meanwhile the FSAP creates and exposes what they’ve termed systemic risk (CHAO), the FSF along the way happens to have been proposing solutions (ORDO) uniquely tailored to that particular complex crisis – remarkable. The G-20 loosely represents the bankers’ stranglehold on kings and presidents, as Gary Allen wrote, much like a terrorist who takes a hostage at gunpoint and forces the hostage to eschew concerns of would-be rescuers.
In Propaganda, Edward Bernays, father of modern PR and nephew of Sigmund Freud, wrote: “We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.”
In July, 2008 the Group of Thirty (G30), a coterie of 31 of the world’s most influential bankers’ bankers including Paul Volcker, Timothy Geithner, Larry Summers, Paul Krugman, Mario Draghi, Jean-Claude Trichet, and others, created a Steering Committee of only four individuals with Paul Volcker as chairman. On January 15, 2009 the Committee released a brief titled Financial Reform: A Framework for Financial Stability remarkably calling for all the same emergency measures world leaders have touted at each of this year’s G-20 summits. Incredible – were they psychic? The most cursory investigation reveals G-20 leaders parroting G-30 Steering Committee directives verbatim. Question: If four men produced a report virtually every nation in the world is preparing to follow, who’s really in charge?
The endgame here is simple: we are currently witnessing the Federal Reserve Act redux. The reason it escapes even the attentive eye is because in 1913 it was monetary, but this time it’s regulatory. The FSAP presently underway in the U.S. includes an IMF and World Bank mandated audit, albeit self-assessed, of the Federal Reserve. Why isn’t the H.R. 1207 crowd mentioning that unprecedented audit? The final results of the U.S. FSAP are scheduled to be released next year. You can expect to see the past two years worth of crises, the Pandemic issue, and more all dovetailed in to the announcement around mid 2010 of another unparalleled financial crisis. This will usher in sweeping regulatory overhaul that will effectively gut and offshore all our financial regulatory control mechanisms, which Joan Veon has said is the last vestige separating us from the global monolith.
The death knell of America in the international industrialists’ coup will be this sweeping regulatory reform – the regulatory equivalent to its monetary twin, the 1913 Federal Reserve Act coup – arising from promulgated crises, advocated by the G-20, implemented by the Financial Stability Board (formerly FSF) through the newly appointed American Regulatory Czar, and subsequent to the continued economic erosion revealed or exacerbated by the FSAP.
These measures are designed to acclimate and anesthetize us to fully offshore financial mechanisms using BIS proxies IMF, World Bank, and FSB and the G-20 is the administrative BIS mouthpiece of this overhaul (better, overthrow) of every nation’s financial system. This further offshoring and centralization of our former American economic constructs will likely herald a heretofore unknown level of tyranny at home and abroad.
We all have defining moments in our lives. The Bible states to whom much is given much will be required. America has long been regarded as the Land of Promise. So the question is; where has this freedom brought us, and what have we done with the ‘much’ we have been given? For us, this is a defining moment. Because you see, America has become a DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL NATION.
Here are three simple steps to recapture and reclaim America:
Step One: become your own expert. There is a saying in Network Marketing cirles; if you take a person who knows nothing and get them excited, all you’ve made is a motivated idiot. More than one hundred years ago, men like Woodrow Wilson wrote America would soon be “governed by experts”. And today the number of think tanks and NGO’s smithing policy directives is staggering. I would submit to you that we all suffer from a terminal deficiency of ‘expertise’.
Step Two: stabilize yourself. According to the CRS Report RL33627 titled NATO in Afghanistan: A Test of the Transatlantic Alliance “The purpose of the mission is the stabilization and reconstruction of Afghanistan.” Let’s stabilize ourselves so we don’t need to be stabilized and reconstructed.
Step Three: take over from the inside out. This really isn’t as sinister as it sounds. It simply means discussing your new knowledge and experience with people after you gone through steps one and two – and not before.