Month: October 2009
Right-Wing Newsmax.com Scrubs Article Positing Military Coup to Resolve ‘Obama Problem’
On Sept. 29, the right-wing magazine Newsmax published and then scrubbed from its Web site an article by John L. Perry titled, “Obama Risks a Domestic Military ‘Intervention,'” in which Perry provided at point-by-point rationale for the the idea that U.S. military officers could launch a coup against the nation’s elected government.
(Media Matters grabbed the text of the Newsmax article, which you can view here (PDF), and we posted the text in a Web page. Go here.)
According to the Newsmax rationale, military officers could legally launch a coup against the government because, unlike enlisted personnel who swear to “obey the orders of the president of the United States,” officers swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
This loophole in their oath-swearing, according to Newsmax, provides military officers with a legal basis for overthrowing the government.
The article then provides a laundry list of outrages that could form the basis of a rationale for a military coup:
- The citizenry is scared of Pres. Obama’s policies that are changing the country so that it “may not be recognizable as America by the 2012 election.”
- The economy is “ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation [and is] is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.” (This is typical Newsmax/Fox disinformation. As everyone knows, all the financial outrages Perry listed were caused by the greed and incompentence of Republicans, particularly George W. Bush and his GOP-controlled Congress.)
- Pres. Obama is “waging an undeclared war on the intelligence community” — by which he means the investigation into torture of detainees by CIA and other intelligence officers ordered by Bush, Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and other top Bush administration officials.
- The “dismantling” of the missile defense system is leaving us unprotected — even though the administration has announced it will be replaced with a more efficient and targetted system.
- “They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.”
- “They can see the nation’s safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before.”
The Tea Bagger rhetoric — including a jibe at the president for having “bonded with his twin teleprompters,” which could also be said about all his immediate predecessors as well as at such right-wing leading lights as Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity and every bikini-model newsreaders at Fox — lends a discordantly trivial tone to what amounts to an argument for the most profound act of high treason ever committed against the United States.
The folks at Media Matters flagged the Newsmax article on Wednesday. On Thursday, the article was removed, without comment, from the Newsmax Web site. However, a Newsmax representative released this bit of non-contrition to Media Matters and other outlets:
In a blog posting to Newsmax John Perry wrote about a coup scenario involving the U.S. military. He clearly stated that he was not advocating such a scenario but simply describing one.
After several reader complaints, Newsmax wanted to insure that this article was not misinterpreted. It was removed after a short period after being posted.
Newsmax strongly believes in the principles of Constitutional government and would never advocate or insinuate any suggestion of an activity that would undermine our democracy or democratic institutions.
Mr. Perry served as a political appointee in the Carter administration in HUD and FEMA. He has no official relationship with Newsmax other than as an unpaid blogger.
Of course, if the Newsmax writer hadn’t intended to promote the rationale for treason, he wouldn’t have written it, and if Newsmax hadn’t endorsed it, they wouldn’t have published it.
And he may be an “unpaid blogger” but he was described as “a prize-winning newspaper editor and writer who served on White House staffs of two presidents [and] a regular columnist for Newsmax.com.” Elsewhere we learn that he has been writing a weekly column for Newsmax since 1999, a year after it was founded.
Mormon Church Quietly Endorses Polygamous Marriages of Excommunicated Fundamentalists – in the Afterlife
Mormon fundamentalists — representing the sects of Mormonism which embrace early Mormon teachings that made polygamy a central part of the Mormon faith — are among the deceased people whose multiple marriages are now recognized by the LDS Church. Many polygamists who became Mormon fundamentalists were excommunicated from the LDS Church because they supported polygamy. The LDS Church has disowned Mormon fundamentalists. In sharp contradiction, the LDS temple system systematically validates the plural marriages of dead ex-Mormon polygamists through its marriage sealing rituals.
An example of many such individuals is Rulon Clark Allred, who was excommunicated from the LDS Church in 1940 for practicing polygamy. Allred was the leader of the Utah-based group of Mormon fundamentalists, known as the Apostolic United Brethren (AUB). A naturopath by profession, Allred was murdered in his office in Murray, Utah, on May 10, 1977, on the orders of Ervil LeBaron, the head of a rival polygamous group. At the time of his death, Allred was the husband of at least seven wives, the father of forty-eight children, and the spiritual leader of thousands of Mormon fundamentalists.
Mormon records show that Rulon Allred has been sealed by proxy to five of his wives: Katherine Lucy Handy, from whom he was divorced; Beatrice Marjorie Lloyd; Ethel Jessop; Mabel Finlayson; and Ruth Rachel Barlow. Allred was sealed to two of his wives, Ethel Jessop and Ruth Barlow, on December 16, 2008 in the Ogden Utah (LDS) Temple. Ethel Jessop became a plural wife of Rulon Allred in 1945 — five years after his excommunication from the LDS Church. Allred’s posthumous sealing to Jessop in 2008 was an LDS endorsement of Allred’s post-excommunication polygamy.
LDS proxy rituals for Rulon Allred appear to be ongoing. Allred was sealed to Mabel Finlayson on September 17, 2009 in the Panama City, Panama, (LDS) Temple. LDS files also indicate Allred is “Ready” to be sealed to Melba Finlayson, Mabel’s twin sister.
As though killers will share an eternal reward with their victims, Ervil Morrell LeBaron — the Mormon fundamentalist behind the death of Rulon Allred — was sealed by proxy in 2002 to Delfina Salido, from whom he was divorced. LeBaron is in the process of being sealed to several of his other wives. LDS records show that marriage sealings for LeBaron to Maria De La Luz (Mary Lou) Vega and Lorna Chynoweth are currently “In progress.” A marriage sealing for LeBaron to Yolanda (Lina) Rios is listed as “Ready.”
Helen Radkey is a Salt Lake City–based researcher into the practices of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints whose groundbreaking research showing that the church was continuing to posthumously baptize victims of the Holocaust sparked outrage in recent years. Her most recent article for Pensito Review was Mormons Posthumously Baptize Notorious Killers.
© Copyright 2009, Helen Radkey—Permission is granted to reproduce, provided content is not changed and this copyright notice is included.
Text of Article in Which Newsmax Promotes Military Coup against United States
Obama Risks a Domestic Military ‘Intervention’
By: John L. Perry
Originally published by Newsmax.com on September 29, 2009 10:35 a.m. and expunged from the Newmax site later the same day
There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.
America isn’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn’t mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:
- Officers swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to “obey the orders of the president of the United States.”
- Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized.
- They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office.
- They can see that the economy — ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation — is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.
- They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home.
- They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as America’s troop strength is allowed to sag.
- They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.
- They can see the nation’s safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before.
So, if you are one of those observant military professionals, what do you do?
Wait until this president bungles into losing the war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan’s arsenal of nuclear bombs falls into the hands of militant Islam?
Wait until Israel is forced to launch air strikes on Iran’s nuclear-bomb plants, and the Middle East explodes, destabilizing or subjugating the Free World?
What happens if the generals Obama sent to win the Afghan war are told by this president (who now says, “I’m not interested in victory”) that they will be denied troops they must have to win? Do they follow orders they cannot carry out, consistent with their oath of duty? Do they resign en masse?
Or do they soldier on, hoping the 2010 congressional elections will reverse the situation? Do they dare gamble the national survival on such political whims?
Anyone who imagines that those thoughts are not weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America’s military leadership is lost in a fool’s fog.
Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a “family intervention,” with some form of limited, shared responsibility?
Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.
Military intervention is what Obama’s exponentially accelerating agenda for “fundamental change” toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama’s radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible.
Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem. Just don’t shrug and say, “We can always worry about that later.”
In the 2008 election, that was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass.
John L. Perry, a prize-winning newspaper editor and writer who served on White House staffs of two presidents, is a regular columnist for Newsmax.com.
