Tyrone Woods VS. Treason

Barely a month ago, I wrote an article about the Bloodiest Scandal in America’s History—Operation Fast and Furious.  Today, I regretfully admit that Operation Fast and Furious is no longer the bloodiest scandal in America’s history.  Several weeks ago, the US Ambassador to Libya was murdered in Benghazi, along with three staffers.  Back then, I wrote about the lack of respect our current President has garnered in the world community, and the absence of executive response to the diplomat murders.  Since then, events have shifted much further to the treacherous than I even thought possible.

We now know that there was a Navy SEAL, Tyrone Woods, on the roof of the compound during the attack.  He had to violate three (!) direct, executive orders just to get there, all the while only trying to save the lives of the Americans inside.  Tyrone is one of those guys who exemplifies the very best humanity has to offer.  He was one of the greatest men to walk this planet.  He has already become a personal hero of mine.  He deserves the respect, deep admiration, and love of every single freedom-loving man, woman, and child in the world.  Because Tyrone had something that very few men possess.  He was not at the compound when the attack happened.  He was not serving protection for the Consulate.  And therefore, he was under no obligation whatsoever to put his life in harm’s way just to protect the Ambassador.

But Tyrone went anyway.  Then he was ordered to stand down—presumably by the Situation Room.  Now he was not only free from any obligation to protect the Ambassador, but he was also under orders to stay away from the scene.  Tyrone knew that disobeying orders, especially coming from the top of the flag pole, meant he would almost certainly be court martialed, and dishonorably discharged.  But he wasn’t a coward like those watching him onscreen in the White House.  He counted not his life dear unto himself, choosing to disregard all orders, and threw himself into the middle of the heat in a desperate rescue attempt.

This is how Tyrone ended up on the roof of the US Consulate in Benghazi.  In the distance, he could actually see the location from which the lethal mortar rounds were being fired.  Realizing that there was firepower in the sky, he did what any good special ops soldier would do.  He lazed the target for aerial assault, illuminating his own position to the enemy at the same time.  This brave act cost Tyrone Woods his life.  But the air support never engaged the enemy.  Once again, executive orders had forced the overwhelming American air assets to stand down.  In other words, someone—Obama or closely associated—deliberately facilitated the murder of two Navy SEALS, a US Ambassador, and a staff member.

Article Three, Section Three of the United States Constitution defines an act of treason against the United States as such:

“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.”

Someone in the White House commanded—more than once—available offensive aerial and ground assets to stand down, refusing them clearance to engage an active enemy attack upon American personnel on the ground.  At the very least, this is aiding the enemy.

I do not say this lightly.  Charges of treason are perhaps the most serious anyone can direct at a fellow countryman.  But I will not be misunderstood here: whoever gave the order to available military assets to stand down must be tried for treason.  It’s the least we can do for the brave men who died that day, including the indomitable Tyrone Woods.

Mr. Woods, you may have died without ever seeing that air support engage the enemy.  You may have given your life without ever knowing why your own Commander in Chief was abandoning you.  But you did not die in vain.  You have inspired a generation of Americans to go above and beyond the call of duty, sometimes in the face of evil and perverse leadership.  You will be remembered.  Your death will be avenged.  “Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.” – Romans 12:19.

Today we remember Tyrone Woods, US Navy SEAL; Glen Doherty, US Navy SEAL; Sean Smith, U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer; J. Christopher Stevens, U.S. Ambassador to Libya.  And our prayers go out to the families of these heroic men as they learn to live without husbands, brothers, fathers, and sons.

A Republic, If You Can Keep It

After years of deliberation and debate, the historical moment had come.  At the end of all discussions and decisions, the final draft of the United States Constitution was finished.  In hindsight, we now know that what arose from that document has become nothing less than the greatest superpower Earth has ever known.  At the close of that momentous day, a lady approached the esteemed Benjamin Franklin, and asked a simple question:

“Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

Ben Franklin’s response has rung through the ages, and is ringing still—though growing dim:

“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

What a powerful answer!  Sadly, I’m not sure too many Americans know what a Republic actually is, or why this country was designed as such.  We are constantly hearing the word “Democracy” thrown around like it’s the greatest thing since sliced bread.  And a Democracy does sound good—in theory.  But there is a very important reason why the Founding Fathers chose not to create a Democracy in this country, instead founding a Republic.  At this point in the article, I feel obliged to define my terms.  When I use the term Democracy, I’m referring to Direct Democracy.  This is in opposition to Representative Democracy, which is more or less a Republic.  There are many ways to define a Republic, but they all basically boil down to the following: a system of government where the people vote for a group of individuals to represent their desires and best interests in the decisions of that country.  This generally includes multiple layers and branches of representation—local, state, federal, etc.  In fact, the more layers, and the more spread out the power is between the branches, the better off the Republic.  This is because the primary reason for a Republic is to eliminate the possibility of mob rule.

Mob rule—or Mobocracy—is what inevitably happens when Direct Democracy is implemented in any given free state.  If the people directly govern themselves, then a loud, angry mob will end up with the power to control everyone else—simply because their group is the largest.  A Republic removes that possibility by separating the decision-makers from the people.  You see, if an angry mob wants to have any real power in a Republic, they have to all calm down and quietly vote.  If they have enough votes to elect their chosen representative, then that person will join a governing body along with many other elected representatives from different areas—who will all be counterbalanced by other branches of the Republic.  In other words, the mob’s influence is silenced.

Some of you might be thinking about the French Revolution right about now.  Truly, France had a Democratic revolution only a few short years after our own.  But France’s revolution ended much differently.  The reasons for this are all over the map, but there are some very important things to note.  The revolutionaries in France violently deposed all existing political leadership without a unified plan of what to replace them with.  Eventually they set up a council of decision-makers, chosen by Direct Democracy—directly by the people, in other words.  It soon became apparent that the council was unable to satisfy all the desires of the anarchic mob that elected them, and the results are easy to imagine: bloodshed, lots and lots of bloodshed.  In desperation, the council asked the military to restore order in the streets.  A man by the name of Napoleon Bonaparte responded with pleasure.  He took control of the streets, and consequently decided to take control of the country—electing himself as dictator of France.

What happened to France in the late 18^th century?  France experienced the painful Democratic wheel of death.  Every Direct Democracy in history has become a Dictatorship.  Does the phrase “Power to the People” sound familiar?  Like Democracy, it sounds good in theory.  But history tells us that power should never rest directly in the hands of the people.  Why?  Once again I’ll use the mob analogy.  If there are 100 people in a given state, and they are using a system of Direct Democracy, everything must be decided by a majority vote.  Let’s say they’re voting on whether or not to build a state capitol building.  Two people form a mob, which quickly grows by threats and intimidation.  Soon, the mob has acquired the needed 51 votes, and those two original mob leaders have now gained control of the entire state.  But couldn’t the police protect against the mob?  Yes, but if the mob controls the government, you can bet your top dollar that the police will be a bit one-sided in their “protection.”  Anyone remember the KGB—Russian Secret Police?  That’s exactly how horrors like the Nazi Gestapo are created.

Now, suppose those 100 people formed a Republic instead of a Democracy.  They split themselves into groups of ten.  Each group of ten voted among themselves to elect one representative.  The ten representatives from the ten groups formed the legislature of their government, which made their laws.  The first law was that order must prevail, and any and all criminal or mob activity would be brought to swift justice by a trial of peers.  Now those ten legislators are allowed to vote for a single executive official, who will occupy the second branch of government.  This executive will then choose three judges, thereby creating the third branch of government.  Of course these judges will need to be approved by the legislature, thus lessening the chance of executive bias in court.  The judicial branch then hires five police officers to ensure that those two rowdy mobsters are rounded up, convicted by the judges, and finally sent to jail where they will no longer be a threat to the public.

Does it all make sense now?  Perhaps now you understand why the so-called “Democracies” in Egypt and Libya are failing so miserably.  In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood is equal to our analogy of the mob, and they have already taken control over the government.  If a Republic would’ve been setup instead of a Democracy, the influence of the Brotherhood would be kept in check by the layers of representation, and the other branches of government.  A similar scenario is unfolding in Libya as I write this, which brings me to the last part of Benjamin Franklin’s response to that lady’s question in 1787.

Can we keep our Republic?  Will we grow weary of the tenuous nature of a trilateral government?  A Republic is designed to operate slowly and sluggishly on purpose.  This is designed to ensure that nothing drastic is pushed into play without first being appropriately tested and tried.  If we continue to allow the power of the Executive Branch to grow, and look the other way as the Judicial Branch writes its own laws, the Legislative Branch will shrink to insignificance—and Direct Democracy will take its place.  Once the Legislative Branch has been bypassed, the Judicial Branch will be soon become nothing more than a pawn of the Executive Branch.  And eventually, as shown earlier, Direct Democracy will result in a mob-elected executive, commonly referred to as a dictator.

America, we’ve been warned.  Please don’t let this happen.  Don’t forget about Rome.  Rome was a successful Republic for 500 years, but eventually they became an Empire—ruled by one man.  I’m guessing no one thought it was possible for Rome to fall.  And I’m pretty sure some of you are thinking America couldn’t possible become a Dictatorship.  But you’re wrong.  The United States of America will inevitably share the fate of Rome unless we the people are willing to heed the warning of Dr. Franklin.  Thank God we have “A Republic, if [we] can keep it.”

Seven Steps to a Safer Sovereignty

What is foreign policy?

A nation’s foreign policy is the comprehensively predetermined method of creating and nurturing relations and demeanor with any and all foreign nations and peoples.

What is the purpose of foreign policy? A nation’s foreign policy is all about the power of perception.  A nation with a strong, stiff foreign policy will be perceived as a bad target to mess with.  A nation with a weak, soft foreign policy will inevitably be messed with over and over again.  I know this makes common sense, but for those of you who like to argue: look into history, and tell me what happens to the “peace for our time” Neville Chamberlains of the world.  Forget about fuzzy feelings around the pool party when you’re dealing with foreign policy.  Nations are headed by leaders who are usually power-hungry—otherwise, why would most of them be leaders in the first place?  This ensures that many nations—small and large alike—will constantly be searching for opportunities to make a statement in the world.  They want to have an influence on other nations, have a say in things, if you will.  It only makes sense that the world of foreign policy is a dog-eat-dog world.  It’s brutally cold, and the inexperienced and soft types lose miserably every time history writes a page in the book of time.

Theodore Roosevelt, 26^th President of the United States, stated his foreign policy this way: “Speak softly and carry a big stick, and you will go far.”  You see, foreign policy has almost nothing to do with the number of bombers America has in hangers across the world.  It has almost everything to do with whether or not we’re willing to use those bombers, and when, why, and how.  If we pacify, pacify, and pacify—and continue to hold back from using our arsenal, we might as well not have one.  The whole idea behind having a big stick is that you speak softly most of the time, but every now and then, you have to use the big stick to remind the world that it’s still there.

This article was inspired by the present Middle Eastern crisis, and how miserably our current leadership is handling the situation.  Our Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton, has just done her part to appease the “hurt feelings” of the Muslims, after they murdered our own Ambassador to Libya.  Excuse me?  Isn’t that exactly what Mr. Chamberlain did with a man by the name of Adolf Hitler in 1938?  The very next year, Hitler invaded Poland, and literally set the world on fire.  Good thinking, Mrs. Clinton.  This has nothing to do with Hilary as a person, although I’ve heard that the Secret Service is quite fed up with her attitude.  This has everything to do with an absolute lack of knowledge in the area she is supposed to be an expert in—foreign policy.  It takes merely a marginal grasp of history to know the basics of why “Peace through Power” is the only successful type of foreign policy.

I’ve simplified this proven approach in the following seven steps to a safer sovereignty:

1.            We have the most powerful military in the world.

2.            We are willing to use that power.

3.            We are careful not to abuse that power.

4.            If you harm one of our own, we will make an example of you.

5.            Other aggressors will learn from this example.

6.            Fewer will be foolish enough to attempt the same.

7.            Americans—and allies of ours—will be safer as a result.

Folks, we are dealing with an extreme lack of leadership in this country, especially in the area of foreign policy.  If we don’t replace our current leadership by next year, we will see horrific things happening on a continually escalating scale until liberty as we currently know it is only a memory.  Was that a threat?  Yes it was.  There are many more things I don’t know than things I do, but I’ve accumulated an extensive knowledge of history and foreign policy throughout my childhood and into my adult years.  I’m not throwing out some scare tactic to sway potential voters, although it would be justified.  No, I’m making a confident prediction about the imminent collapse of the American Way of Life, if we don’t do something about our leadership soon.

If this wasn’t an election year, I’d be calling for a special election to replace this administration.  You say that’s drastic.  I say the situation in the Middle East is growing into something much more than just drastic.  It’s becoming a threat to freedom and safety of the entire world.

You asked for hope and change in 2008.  You’ve gotten it.  Are you happy?

(K)no(w) Respect = (K)no(w) Peace

“U.S. Ambassador to Libya Is Killed” – Wall Street Journal

“Protesters Burn US Flags Outside Tunisian Embassy” – Fox News

“U.S. ambassador killed in city he tried to save” – CNN

“Obama ‘unable to meet’ Israel PM Netanyahu” – BBC

“Egypt protesters pull down U.S. flag at embassy in Cairo” – LA Times

“The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims” – US Embassy, Cairo, Egypt

Do any of the above statements bother you?  Do feelings of anger rise within you as these headlines fall across your eyes?  Does it hurt to think about all of these things happening on the 11^th anniversary of the September 11^th, 2001 terrorist attacks on the Twin Towers?  Do you think the timing was an accident?  Maybe you can’t hear me; let me say it a little louder:  Does this inflame you?  Do you feel anything at all?  Does America even have feelings left to be hurt?  I hope so, but if you listen to the Obama Administration, you wouldn’t think so.  Every single man, woman, and child in this country should be absolutely outraged at these attacks.  It should infuriate us.  The honor of our country, our flag, and our God is being trampled and assaulted on a grand scale.  Let me ask you this.  If killing the US ambassador and three of his staff members isn’t an act of war, what is?  What is it going to take for the once-again “sleeping giant” to wake up?

I don’t have all the strategic options laid out before my eyes at the moment, so I can’t give specific advice regarding retaliation.  BUT DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.  RETALIATE!  Let me be very clear:  This can’t be allowed to happen again.  They have quite literally asked for war.  They should quite literally get one.  You can’t tell me our expansive intelligence net doesn’t have some locations of terror cells where these guys are coming from.  Oh, but they’re in Egypt, and that’s an ally of ours.  Guess what?  I don’t care.  What ally of ours would allow the American Flag to be pulled down in front of our Embassy?  Find the terrorist camps; bomb the living daylights out of them.  Yep, I’m talking F/A-18 Hornets; I’m talking the big boys, B-1’s; and how about letting a couple B-2 Stealth Bombers out of their cage in Missouri?  I’m not saying civilian bombings (although with some Muslim countries, the line between civilian and insurgent is very blurry—even non-existent—sometimes).  I’m saying laser-guided annihilation of anyone and everyone connected in even a faint way with any of what happened to our Ambassador to Libya, his staffers, and our Embassy.

A foreign Embassy is set up in a given country for the express purpose of conducting diplomacy with that nation.  When that Embassy is ransacked, and the Ambassador is murdered, diplomacy has officially ended in all forms.  It’s time to drop the hammer.  America has been the laughingstock of the world for three and a half years now; it’s time we call an end to the madness.  If we show the “audacity” of bombing a terror cell in Egypt, where will the terrorist run to hide?  Pakistan?  We know—with 100% surety—of terror cells in Pakistan: why haven’t they been bombed?

Folks, we’re at war with terrorist groups who have committed thousands of acts of open warfare upon American interests, and American citizens.  If any of our “allies” decide to knowingly harbor one of these groups in any way, shape, or form, they have chosen to no longer be our ally.  Can you be allies with a country while harboring the enemies of that same country?  Are you in third grade yet?  Perhaps I’m not being fair to the thousands of preschoolers who understand that concept better than our President.  Oh, but Pakistan has nukes!!!  Yep, and we happen to know exactly where they are.  They couldn’t even get one off the ground before we destroyed the entire operation.  Remember, a nuke can’t launch like a web browser.  There are several stages in deploying a nuclear warhead into the outer atmosphere (where it could actually reach our shores, if they in fact have reliable intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of carrying a nuclear warhead—doubtful).  In fact, the USS Los Angeles—a ballistic missile submarine equipped with more nuclear warheads than the entire country of Pakistan—or one of its cousins is currently sitting quite tidily near the coast of Pakistan, waiting for the very possibility.

We’ve been “speaking softly” for far too long.  Now it’s time to use the “big stick.”  The world may never love us in its entirety, but they must inevitably respect us.  And only respect can ensure peace.