Additional Titles





Related Article:



Other Stuter Articles:

Governance Bankrupting

K12� ... Panacea
or Plague?

Banning Violent
Video Games

Out Of Chaos,

Are Public

Safe Schools?

Destroying A Nation

Words Have Meaning

Children Will Be Children?

Homeschools, Private Schools, and Systems Education

More Stuter Articles:





By Lynn Stuter

July 28, 2003

A triumphant President Bush, on July 23, 2003, in announcing to the world the deaths of Oday and Quday, the sons of ousted Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, that they had committed a multitude of uncivilized and heinous acts against the people of Iraq.

Isn't this the pot calling the kettle black?

Let us not forget Waco in Texas where men, women and children were shot to death and burned to death by agents of the United States government because of the religious beliefs of those people. Then there is Ruby Ridge in Idaho where federal agents, in two separate but related incidents, shot and killed the wife of Randy Weaver as she held their infant daughter in her arms, and shot Samuel, the Weaver's 14-year-old son, in the back, killing both him and his dog, Striker. Why? Because Randy Weaver refused to become an informant for the government after the government set him up.

These are but two of many instances in which agents of the United States government have killed American citizens because of the beliefs of those citizens or because those citizens would not do what the government wanted.

How is that different from what Oday and Quday Hussein did as the "enforcers" of Saddam Hussein's policies?

In the instance of the Branch Davidians at Waco, it was their beliefs that brought them into conflict with the government. Does not the First Amendment of the United States Constitution prohibit the government from interfering in the free exercise of religion? Albeit that the religious beliefs of the Branch Davidians was cultic in nature, their beliefs were still their religion and subject to First Amendment protection from persecution.

The government had no business in Waco, just as the government had no business at Ruby Ridge, a fact which became abundantly clear when the government settled a lawsuit brought against them by the Weaver family concerning the siege at Ruby Ridge. That aspect of the saga did not, however, receive near the media attention or coverage as the siege of Ruby Ridge did, the media showing its obvious bias as the mouthpiece of the government.

And what about the official religion of the United States government, established in violation of the First Amendment prohibiting an official state religion? What about Humanism and New Age, both considered cults in their beliefs and practices, both being taught in government schools (which violates the First Amendment) across the nation under the flag of "creating the future" flown by Goals 2000, the School to Work Act, and the Workforce Investment Act, setting up the system to create the future as envisioned by the Humanist/New Age progressive (aka, socialist/communist) thinkers.

What is the difference between the cultic religious beliefs of the Branch Davidians and the cultic religious beliefs of Humanism/New Age? Both are cults. Why is one deemed okay but not the other?

Is the Branch Davidians practicing their religious beliefs, or the Weaver family practicing their religious beliefs, worse than the government establishing a state religion in violation of the First Amendment then killing people who have different religious beliefs?

Beyond this, New Age is seeped in Eastern mysticism, Satanism, and devil worship. And society wonders why ...

� we have kids who show up in public with their hair dyed black, wearing black eye makeup, black lipstick and black nail polish, dressed in ghoulish "Gothic" attire;
� we have kids who have no qualms about killing;
� swastikas, the anarchy symbol (shown below) and other anti-Christian symbols are appearing everywhere.

Recently, in a community in eastern Washington, a van parked in an area used by local residents offering private vehicles "for sale" was spray painted on the side with "666" followed by the inverted pentagram within a circle. "666" symbolizes the mark of the beast. According to Berit Kjos, authority on occult symbols, the inverted pentagram within a circle is an occult symbol used in all kinds of Hermetic magic, satanic rituals and medieval alchemy. In this same community, at various times, swastikas have been painted on roads, fences, rocks and signs. The same is true of the anarchy symbol, shown at the left. A variation of this symbol has the "A" intersecting a circle. This community is known to have a large New Age following.

In the words of the attorney Gerry Spence, who successfully defended Randy Weaver following the siege at Ruby Ridge, when we are willing to sacrifice those we deem social misfits by virtue of the fact that we do not agree with their religious beliefs, it is not long before the rest of society will be subject to the granting of rights arbitrarily by those in power according to their own passions and opinions. In short, when rights are only afforded to those with whom we agree, those rights become arbitrary and capricious -- subject to the whims of those in power. Under this construct, personal rights and property are no longer secure or safe.

Knowing this, our Founding Fathers established rule by law via the Constitution with equal protection under the law via the Bill of Rights. And when taking the Oath of Office, our elected representatives swear to uphold those two documents, to uphold the law, to provide equal protection under the law, irrespective of personal beliefs, opinions, or affiliations.

As so aptly demonstrated by what happened at Waco and Ruby Ridge, equal protection under the law has been replaced by rule by man -- with rights at the whim of those in power as practiced in the "democratic society" we hear continually that our nation is. While we may now be a democratic society, our nation was established as a constitutional republic. The people have never voted to change that, making our current form of government unlawful, ie, a rogue government.

In the words of James Madison in Federalist Paper #10, such a construct (democratic society) leads, inevitably, to unrest and violence as people rebel against the whimsical edicts of those in power.

But Waco and Ruby Ridge didn't happen under President Bush's watch? That may be true. However, did President Bush, then living in Texas (he became governor of Texas in 1994), condemn the barbaric acts that Clinton and Reno committed at Waco? If he did, the media never made light of it.

Whether President Bush or former President Clinton, whether Republican or Democrat, the building of systems governance, diametrically opposed to and the antithesis of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, goes forward without a hitch. No better example of that exists than the No Child Left Behind Act, the Bush strategic plan that continued the Clinton strategic plan laid out in the Improving America's Schools Act (IASA).

Before pointing fingers at the rulers of other countries, and invading those countries under false premises (such as weapons of mass destruction), the leaders of the United States would do well to clean up their own act, and the people of the United States would do well to hold their leaders accountable for their failure to uphold the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

� 2003 Lynn M. Stuter - All Rights Reserved

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts

Mother and wife, Stuter has spent the past ten years researching systems theory with a particular emphasis on education. She home schooled two daughters, now grown and on their own. She has worked with legislators, both state and federal, on issues pertaining to systems governance and education reform. She networks nationwide with other researchers and citizens concerned with the transformation of our nation. She has traveled the United States and lived overseas. Web site: E-Mail:







"Before pointing fingers at the rulers of other countries, and invading those countries under false premises (such as weapons of mass destruction), the leaders of the United States would do well to clean up their own act, and the people of the United States would do well to hold their leaders accountable for their failure to uphold the Constitution and Bill of Rights."