Eric Peters

You have probably heard that Congress – Leftists abetted by a majority of Republicans – recently emitted a new federal policy that automatically inducts young men and women into what is styled the “Selective Service” system. By which is meant the involuntary servitude system, despite the latter having supposedly been made constitutionally unlawful after the federal government forced the Southern states to accept being governed without their consent.

The federal government specializes in such etymological jujitsu – which is to say, mind-fucking.

It is not enough that the Southern states that attempted to depart from a “union” they no longer wished to be bound to were forced back into the “union,” after a bloody war of subjugation. The war of subjugation was styled a “civil war,” implying the Southern states sought to deny the people of the Northern states their right to be governed by the federal government they’d consented to be governed by. The framing the people of the South as “insurrectionists” and “rebels” is exactly what King George III styled the American colonists who successfully seceded from Great Britain four-score and seven years prior.

Never mind that.

Similarly this business of involuntary servitude being putatively illegal. What then is this business of the “draft” – as the dragooning of young men (and now, young women) into “service”? Are they free to say no to such service? If they are not, then is it not involuntary servitude?

What else would you call it?

The apparatchiks of the federal apparat know it – while at the same time denying it. This derangement was elaborated by Orwell in his novel, 1984 – which delves deeply into the psychology of etymology; the deliberate use of language to mind-fuck people.

A recent and highly relevant example being the deliberate use of the word vaccine to peddle drugs that were nothing of the sort. It was used deliberately because those pushing the drugs knew people would be more likely to accept being “vaccinated” if they believed that taking these drugs would prevent them from getting or spreading the dread sickness they’d been hectored to believe would otherwise kill them and pretty much everyone else, too.

Would people have taken the drugs if they’d been told the best they could hope for was that their symptoms would be “less severe” – a hypothetical benefit that cannot be objectively quantified?

The question answers itself.

And that is why the drugs pushed were deliberately misrepresented as “vaccines.”

Similarly, young men (and now, young  women) are told they are not being dragooned into involuntary servitude; they are told they are being enrolled into the Selective Service system. The italics to reflect the lack of consent. Young men (and now, young women) are not asked whether they’d like to enroll.

They are enrolled.

Just the same as cattle are “enrolled” into trucks and sent to feed lots and thence to the abattoir. In this case, located somewhere in Ukraine. That is to say, Keeeeeeeeev – as the supercilious herders of human cattle like to say it. The affect is deliberate, to demonstrate how sophisticated the herd-masters are.

No American young men (or women) have yet been dragooned by the Selective Service system into involuntary servitude but the recent automatic-enrolling is certainly ominous, strongly suggesting such “service” will soon be required. Else why “enroll” every American young man (and woman)?

Will American young men – and women – refuse such “service”? Here’s hoping. But the mind-fuckery has been so effective that hope may be misplaced. How many young American men (and women) know that the war of 1861-1865 was not a “civil war”? How many of them believe that Father Abraham freed the slaves – as opposed to enslaving everyone? How often do you hear people in that age cohort speak of the American war for independence – connoting understanding of what was fought for beginning in 1775 and ending in 1783? And by dint of that, an understanding of what the Southern states were fighting for beginning in 1861 – that ended in 1865?

How many can square the plain language of the First, Second, Fourth and Fifth amendments to the Constitution with the everyday reality that they are not permitted to speak freely when the government says they may not; that they must beg permission from the government to possess the arms the Second Amendment states they have a right (rather than a conditional privilege) to possess? That they are not free from arbitrary searches when the government says a “compelling interest” over-rides the right clearly described in the Fourth Amendment? That they are required by law to witness against themselves – contrary to the Fifth – when they fill out and sign the tax forms they are forced by law to fill out and sign?

Maybe a stint of “selective service” in Keeeeeeeeeeeeev will serve to get them thinking about such things.

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.