coup d'état

 



Throughout history there have been despots and tyrants who have taken over countries or large people-groups.  When the take-over was complete the person in charge had achieved almost absolute power to impose personal will over the majority of people in that country or people-group.  We call them by various names like Czar, ruler, dictator, Chairman, Chancellor, Führer, King or Supreme Leader.  Governments created by these types of people are referred to as totalitarian, Monarchs, autocracies or Realms.  These types of leaders and governments were formed in many different ways; sometimes by quickly using force to topple those in power.  The least violent way has been the gradual changing of the government by working through the government process from the inside to accomplish the goal of complete take-over.

 

The  coup d'état.  This is simply a strike against the state to displace the government with another force, usually from forces, sometimes military if they are willing and complicit, but more often, political, inside the current government.  Either way, these following steps are usually similar steps that have been observed throughout history that paves the way for these takeovers.  A look at those past countries and their leaders have displayed a pattern. 

 

1. They implemented a new Ideology.  Generally the first step was the establishment of an ideological premise that seemed logical and offered solutions to the problems outlined in the society or current government.  This helped people get on board with new ideas to accept the fundamental change that was to come.  Generally that new ideology contained some target group who had to be eliminated from society because they were blamed for the ills experienced by the society.  Those groups have generally been religiously oriented groups whose allegiance is directed toward God rather than man.  The most recent example of that was the Jewish culture in the 1930's under the Nazi ideology.

 

2.  They used Policies, regulations and laws.  A flurry of new regulations help set the pace for a set of new policies that would change the way people lived and did business.  Policies, regulations and laws had a tendency to set the standards and bend the practices into a direction the leaders wanted the people to travel.  This was especially important in the beginning as the new leadership implemented the policies and laws that would ultimately disarm the population from any weapons they may have had.

 

3.  They issued Executive orders from the established leader.  This served to circumvent any competing pushback from anyone in authority who attempted to go a different direction or stand firm on the status quo.  It also helped to deflect any inquiries from other government officials with their questions about changing practices that may have been occurring.

 

4.  They created dependent populations.  This was a tremendous help in countries where the people had a part in selecting the government officials.  If the new leader could keep them dependent either at or below the poverty level they would be beholden to the new leader and continue to vote for transformation.  For longevity rule, it became necessary for generational poverty with government dependence with allegiance to the ideology sponsored by the government.  

 

5.  They created crisis situations.  This was essential; people became much more compliant when they were in crisis.  They grasped leadership, any leadership that would change or remove the crisis.

 

6.  They controlled crisis through imposed restrictions.  Of course the freer a people had been living, the more difficult it was to take those freedoms.  However, crisis caused people to spend their capital and freedom was a type of capital they would give away if the crisis could have been removed from them personally and placed on the backs of others.

 

7.  They took control of financial institutions.  This was a two-edge sword.  They believed all financial institutions like banks and investment firms had to be castigated in order to become the enemy of  the people.  If the people could have been taught they were the victims of the richest citizens of the country it was easier to bring the institutions under control.  Class warfare was a favorite; pitting the poor against the rich.  When the rich land owners and industry lords were seen as taking the wealth illegally or unjustly, it gave the poor the authority to move against the rich with justification for redistributing the wealth.

 

8.  They used existing government agencies as political instruments.  This was especially true if the government agencies were the law enforcement agencies, or the tax collection agencies.  They were ones with specific powers that ultimately controlled the population that could have been more easily brought under control if individual assets were confiscated.  Through regulations and special taxes imposed on the people, the government agencies responsible for implementing the laws and collecting the taxes became legitimate tools to control the people and their personal assets.

 

9.  They took control of media outlets to control their message.  This was essential for a less violent take-over.  If the media could become a chorus in-synch with the leader's message, it was easier to discredit the dissenters' voice as the transformation proceeded.  Tied to that control of media was the redefinition of proper language.  A filtering process for "news" disseminated to the people-at-large was used to make sure the "right" message was delivered.  That message had to be controlled through "talking points" issued from the leaders so the message was consistent and in line with the ideology.  

 

10.  They established an internal communication monitoring system.  It was essential to know what people were saying and doing; it made it easier to know what they were thinking.  If every form of their communication could be monitored to find the trends of dissention, it became much more flexible in deflecting all opposition.

 

11.  They took over the education system.  For sure the new leader had to re-brand the elementary, secondary and university learning environments.  Curriculum had to be rewritten to conform with the new message of transformation, teachers and professors had to be on-board to preach the message and reshape the minds of those who were in their prime socialization years. 

 

12.  They made alliances with outside countries whose ideology was consistent with the new leader's.  It made it much easier for assimilation, especially as the immigrating groups from other countries were migrating to the new leader's country.

 

13.  They marginalized or eliminated Christianity from the citizens.  Karl Marx called religion the "Opium of the people."  Judeo-Christianity offers the antithesis to totalitarianism and teaches love, peace, tolerance, forgiveness and allegiance to God alone.  Judeo-Christians look beyond the political structures of the day and place their faith in Christ alone, looking to Him and the work He did on the cross regarding their personal salvation.  Their world-view moved beyond the current events while they focused their eyes and hearts toward eternity.  For that reason, among others, Christians were more difficult to control and generally were eliminated as much as possible.

 

If we look at the history of the world we find these steps have been systematically implemented as the new leaders took over.  This was especially true when the take-over was meant to happen without outright fighting in the streets.  This pattern can be seen in all the great historical empires of the past:  Greece, Rome, Europe.  More recently, China, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Soviet Union, Cuba and many of the Middle Eastern and African countries.  There is a lot to be gained from a study of history.

 

Jim Killebrew

Scandal

 



There is a lot of media air-time and words spent talking about the unconscionable targeting by the IRS of conservative groups seeking to gain status as a charitable organization in order to obtain tax exempt status.  One point of contention and disgrace of the practice is that it specifically targeted only select groups that had words like patriot, or tea party as part of its title.  The charge is that other, more liberal, organizations were not treated so unfairly by not being targeted for a microscopic review of the organization with questions that actually risked restricting individual's and organization's rights to privacy.  This scandal has reached proportions that may result in the firing of high-ranking officials of the IRS and possibly even Administration Cabinet-level officials.

 

As egregious as this scandal is, when we put it in perspective with another incident that occurred in 1973, it becomes questionable that this incident is quite so enormous by comparison.  That incident was the Roe vs. Wade decision that legalized the death of children by legally taking their lives through abortion based on a woman's right to choose.  Talk about targeting conservative groups think about abortion targeting only unborn babies.  Those babies have been legally targeted by the lawmakers at the state and federal level.  No other group has been targeted for such treatment; if they were, it would cause a scandal that could be heard around the world.  Those babies' rights have been completely ignored for all these years; a number of human lives that have accumulated to over 56,281,000 infant souls taken from this world through abortion completely legally.

 

The fact alone that these two scandals can stand side-by-side in our society with one being viewed as perfectly legal, and even desired by so many in our country, while the other is viewed as the atrocity it is, demonstrates the sliding toward almost total immorality and the decline of civility in our culture.

 

Jim Killebrew 

Military heroes

 

Without a doubt our service men and women are owed our deep gratitude for their service to our country.  They have voluntarily taken on the responsibility of service and sacrifice to our country that has sustained the freedoms all of us have come to love.  They are all heroes and should be counted as such.  In addition to those who are serving or served in active duty in all branches of service there is another group that deserves the title "hero".  That group is the family of those who have served throughout the world ensuring the continued presence of the American way of life. 

 

Spouses:  Mostly women, but many men have been and are married to a person in the military service.  Home fires have been kept burning; life continues to move on even when the military spouse is ten thousand miles away.  Bills have to be paid, oftentimes with less than adequate funding available, all the challenges of running a household must continue without the help of the absent spouse, children must continue to be cared for, questions answered, nurtured almost as a single parent, juggling the daily life of school attendance and all social activities.  In many cases the spouse is also working to help "make ends meet" and have to manage without the immediate advice of the absent spouse, and certainly without the actual working alongside with the spouse when that person is stationed away from home.  Perhaps the heaviest burden of all is living on a minute-by-minute basis each day with the constant realization that at any moment actual harm can befall their loving spouse in the pursuit of defending freedoms for all of us.  That is a heavy burden that most people whose spouse is not in "harm's way" simply may not understand.

 

Children:  A child whose parent is serving in the military and particularly those who are away from home, have a very difficult time coping with the absence of the parent.  The child is constantly reminded the parent is away doing a job that is meant to provide safety for citizens of our country.  The child, depending upon the age of the child, shares the dreaded "harm's way" burden knowing there may be notification on any day at any time of an event that will change his/her life forever.  On a daily basis there are many activities completed without the presence of the absent parent:  School activities, sports activities, church attendance, movies, meals, bedtime, vacations, homework, meeting friends, chores, eating out and just plain conversation.

 

Parents:  Parents of any age have a profound sense of apprehension when their child serves in the military, especially during war time and when the child is serving in a war zone.  Of course there is a great sense of pride from those who know the immense responsibility and honor the child has in being part of a network of a "Band of Brothers" who are protecting the freedoms of American citizens.  Even in the presence of that pride, however, there is a sense of loneliness that comes from knowing their in-law child and their grandchildren are suffering through their child's absence due to the job.

 

Siblings:  Brothers and Sisters of the person serving in the military are both proud and concerned at the same time.  Sibling relationships can sometimes be shaky or solid depending on the individual siblings.  As adulthood arrives with most siblings as happens when they begin to arrive at the age of eligibility to join a military service, a bonding begins to form that sets aside childhood or adolescent rivalries and is replaced by acceptance of decisions, support for choices and respect of person.  As with the other relations from family, the sibling has that gnawing sense of anxiety of the unknown, especially if the sibling is in a war zone that creates an environment of harm's way.

 

Grandparents:  Grandparents have all the feelings expressed and felt by other family members, but generally they have one feeling and awareness that others may not have.  With grandparents the likelihood exists that they have experienced both sides of the military in their lifetime.  Likely the grandpa has been in the military, perhaps in a war zone that has put him in harm's way.  The grandma remembers the hardships she faced during the WWII or Korea  period with rationing, restrictions, limited resources in the family budget and the constant waiting for the war's end.  Perhaps the grandparents were involved in the Viet Nam War that not only changed the political landscape of America, but the civil discourse as well.  They may well understand the turning tide of American sentiments toward the military when they grow war-weary.  They have an empathy that feels the pain of a grandchild who makes sacrifices only to return to a hostile neighborhood.

 

Ultimate Sacrifice:  Finally, those spouses, children, parents, siblings and grandparents who have answered that door with uniformed men standing on the porch knowing what the message they carried contained, are counted as heroes of the heroes.  As they stand at the door listening to the message of Brothers in Uniform deliver the untimely news from a "Grateful Nation" that regrets to inform the family of the loss, their minds soar to the darkness of grief while their hearts sink to the depths of loss.

 

When we celebrate the Memorial Day with our picnics, cookouts, car races, family get-to-gathers and a hundred other freedoms of our choice, we should also remember those who provided the ultimate sacrifice of defending those freedoms.  But not only that, we should remember all those families who supported and surrounded their military person with love and a bit of anxiety, fear and trepidation by suffering all the "what-if's" during the time they waited for the homecoming.  We should remember their standing tall as they learned of the supreme sacrifice their loved one made to secure and maintain the peace and freedom of our wonderful country.  In all respects they have earned the right to be called heroes as well.

 

Jim Killebrew             



Public servant

 

This is a misnomer if I ever saw one.  We think about our politicians who are supposed to be representatives of "We the People" in our government system referring to themselves as "public servants".  This is a government "of the people, by the people and for the people", and those representatives have traditionally through the years been called "public servants."  Those elected to offices throughout our land, especially to state and federal offices, have made careers out of their offices when they can.  Oftentimes, however, instead of following what the framers of our government envisioned as "citizen leadership" with people stepping up to serve the electorate and all others who did not vote for them, returning back to their profession and home after serving a term or two, they have found ways to be re-elected for many terms making the office a career that even provides retirement benefits.

 

Those changes from citizen leadership to career politicians has yielded a process that has become a culture of political leadership that goes well beyond the representation of those whose interests matched the person elected for the first term.  Having gained "seniority" the politician also gained power and position through constant re-election.  Having gained power and authority, the politician begins to garner favor among the "special interest" groups that supply more tangible benefits to the politician that exceeds the "will" of those constituents who initially elected him/her to the high office.  We now find representatives of our government making voting decisions based on poll results that go well beyond the local constituents.  We find politicians voting on spending plans along "party" lines that benefit people in other locations other than local districts.  "Favors" are exchanged for votes with politicians voting for policies and laws that go well beyond the will of the people who first elected them.

 

Now we are witnessing a corruption of power with career bureaucrats that have been appointed or hired by the politicians who have created careers for themselves.  There is a "culture of power" obtained by those in "government" who wield that power to sway politicians and impose their will on the people to gain what the culture of power is seeking.  We witness that with the records from reporters and editors in the Associated Press (AP) being collected by the very government department that should be upholding the laws for We the People.  Instead we witness the erosion of privacy and a bit of the Constitution the representatives are obliged to uphold and protect.  We are witnessing the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) wielding power to target conservative groups whose ideology does not agree with the power brokers in the government agency.  Now we are being told the IRS is going to be the oversight government agency that will implement the healthcare for every American.  Will they really be true public servants, or will they make servants out of the public?

 

Is it any wonder the American people are losing trust in those politicians who are supposed to protect the rights of We the People?  They are no longer public servants, they are overlords in control of the people who have been made the "servants" to an overreaching government.

 

Jim Killebrew       



Negotiate with God

 

Genesis 18:16-33 tells us about Abraham negotiating with God about the fate of Sodom.  God has seen the wickedness in Sodom and has told Abraham he is going to destroy the city.  Perhaps fearing for his nephew Lot and his family who lived in Sodom, Abraham began a negotiation reminding God that it may not be right to destroy all the city when righteous people are living there.  God agreed to spare the city if fifty righteous people could be found.  Perhaps Abraham knew the character of the city that he knew there might not be fifty righteous people living there.  So he began to negotiate with God; if forty-five can be found will the city be spared?  God agreed with that number.  However, Abraham continued to negotiate downward in increments of five until he finally reached the number ten.  If ten righteous people can be found in the city can it be spared?  God agreed with ten.  Of course we know by reading the full account that even that number could not be found; ultimately God passed judgment over the city and destroyed the city.

 

 

 

I wonder if sometimes we don't have the same heart as Abraham as we live in a world that we are seeing devolve with corruption, greed, sin and wickedness as each day passes.  God has clearly stated His requirements for living and has laid them out in the Bible for all to know.  I believe if we listen closely we will find that people are negotiating with God trying to convince Him to change His mind about what He has commanded and clearly made known. 

 

The problem is that we really are no different in character and personality than those people in Sodom so many years ago.  Even in our negotiations we falter and stumble inevitably further into sin even if God has provided the Grace to accept our negotiated terms.  We can never be satisfied with what we have since when we move outside of God's Grace we revert to our sin nature and never find satisfaction; we always want more than what we have. 

 

Through the process of negotiation we forget that God, the Creator of the Universe, sets all the boundaries, establishes His commands and communicates to us what He requires.  His Grace is sufficient for each of us, but we believe we need more, and ultimately desire more.  We bargain with God to bend a little, "I know God you have stated you want us to love our enemies and do good to those who persecute us, but you know how sweet vengeance is.  Could we just strike back a little, just to teach our enemy a lesson?"  "We know God you are not a respecter of persons and you look on the heart rather than the outside of a person, but surly you can understand that there are different ethnic groups and class distinctions that have to be recognized in our cultures and since we are living here we should parcel out the stations in life for different people groups, shouldn't we?"

 

God is not slack, as some men count slackness, but He will render judgment in spite of our futile efforts to negotiate His changing His mind.  Perhaps the best thing for us to do is submit to His Grace and allow Him to provide for us His power through His Spirit to strengthen us to live within the provisions He has already made for us, and refrain our futile attempts to negotiate a change of mind for Him.

 

Jim Killebrew



Self radicalized

 

It seems this term "self radicalized" is being tossed around a lot intimating that people who are already in America are somehow independently, without the help of anyone outside their sphere of influence is helping them to become "radicalized" to engage in terrorist activities.  This was the almost immediate conclusion the Administration drew regarding the two men who were charged with the Boston Marathon bombing; they were "self radicalized."

 

That seems almost like an "oxymoron" where a person can become influenced to the extent of being "radical" about some cause without there even being a cause to be a part of.  In the case of the Boston bombing where bombs were made, detonation devices were constructed, certain materials were used in combination that closely resembled the same combination used in other bombings in other parts of the world, containers to carry the explosive material were common to other bombings in the Middle East, and now three other people have been arrested in connection with the two who carried out the bombing.  Not being an expert in these matters, it still seems that just on the surface of the evidence so far one would have to at least consider the two bombers may not have been working alone.

 

Therefore, if all of those similarities exist, the components, type of explosives, canisters (pressure cookers), types of shrapnel, the older brother traveling to Russia for six months, reading and studying the material published by radicals in Islam, then how can the Administration conclude within just hours of the bombing and arrest of the one brother that they were "self radicalized"?  Could it be that has to be the conclusion in order to fit the narrative the Administration has projected that they have destroyed the capability of terrorist actions world-wide?  If so, it seems like a very dangerous position to turn a blind eye to extended investigations, restricting theories of cause to just a narrow narrative and shutting down interrogation efforts prematurely to curtail the collection of further threats.  Those actions, it seems, could put the citizens of America in further danger.

 

Jim Killebrew     

Instant military

 



It is all well and good the suspected bombers in Boston were stopped from taking more lives, injuring more people and doing more damage.  There is no doubt those two brothers were identified, found and neutralized in a record amount of time.  We saw the people in the neighborhood cheer and applaud as the law enforcement, federal agents, state police and local police left the arrest site.

 

There is just one thing to remember regarding this incident.  Local and state police were federalized, the government stepped in and "locked down" an entire American city, military-like tactical gear was brought in to a city with heavy armored vehicles and automatic weapons of war, they marched through the streets, closed down the entire city and went from house to house searching inside without warrants.  If it wasn't called marshal law it resembled it so closely one could scarcely tell the difference.

 

Without a doubt people rested easier when the suspect was found and apprehended.  Yes, the law enforcement agencies along with the federal and state agencies coupled with the military saved the day.  One lesson we should learn, however, should be that what we witnessed in a five-day period after an horrific incident, the capability of military-like armaments and law enforcement under the leadership of the political structure can so easily and quickly come together to enact a marshal law type of control that immobilizes citizens in a sequester to their homes and subjects them to searches without the benefit of warrants from the court.  This should give us pause to realize this action is not so difficult to accomplish in America given the right circumstances.

 

Jim Killebrew