Column by Lawrence M. Ludlow.
Exclusive to STR
On Saturday, January 8 in Tucson, Arizona, a man shot Gabrielle Giffords, a woman who is an executive member of a well known, brutal organization that is ostentatiously headquartered in a large number of lavish facilities in Washington, D.C. This organization is so large and pervasive that it systematically steals vast amounts of money from millions of people; rewards its servants and allies handsomely; regularly engages in turf wars with other vicious agencies and kills tens of thousands of innocent people in the process (collateral damage); forces some people to surrender honestly earned income to other people; dictates the kinds of foods, beverages, and drugs that peaceful people can ingest; forces people to “purchase” unwanted and wanted “services” from monopoly providers against their will; runs dozens of prison camps where people are incarcerated for engaging in peaceful behaviors that are forbidden to all but members of the gang; dictates where and when people can conduct business to feed their families; injects syphilis and other dangerous substances into unknowing victims; forces people to surrender their children to institutions where these children learn to obey members of the gang and also may learn some valuable skills (not very well) to make them capable of generating more wealth for the violent organization; has spawned the growth of many smaller criminal drug gangs in urban and suburban areas by making substances illegal (again creating innocent victims of those living near turf battles); and regularly engages in the systematic kidnapping, torture, secret renditioning, and targeted assassination of people worldwide.
The man who shot Gabrielle Giffords did not say if he was responding to any or all of the reprehensible practices of Ms. Giffords’ gang when he shot her. It now appears that he may have been mentally unbalanced or have felt he had another reason to act as he did. He also shot a decision-making arbitrator (or “judge”) that is employed in a related offshoot-gang of Ms. Giffords’ organization as well as an assistant of Ms. Giffords. Furthermore, he shot a number of innocent passersby – victims that would normally be labeled as “collateral damage” if the perpetrator of the shooting had been an authorized member of Ms. Giffords’ gang. These victims have not been discussed nearly as much in the state-controlled press, which serves its masters faithfully. In addition, since Ms. Gifford’s gang is in the habit of imposing a special category of more severe “federal” penalties for actions taken against its privileged members – as opposed to actions taken against the lower-status non-members – the shooter will pay a heavier price for having harmed Ms. Giffords than he will for having harmed the civilian subjects of these rulers.
Those of us who do not advocate the initiation of force or fraud are not surprised by these events. The organization represented by Ms. Giffords has “led by its own example,” and the attacker appears to have mimicked the behavior of the gang represented by Ms. Giffords when he shot her. Ms. Giffords’ gang is now considering the implementation of additional tactics to protect the hierarchy of her organization from similar attacks. This means further restricting the very few free activities remaining to the unfortunate people who live in the geographical areas currently controlled by this gang.