| Review
of
Lies The Government Told You, by Judge Andrew P. Napolitano (Hardcover, 2010)
(You can print this review in landscape mode, if you
want a hardcopy)
Reviewer:
Mark Lamendola, author of over 6,000 articles.
If you are a citizen of the United States, this is a
"must read." It is a "must read" because if you don't understand the
message contained herein, you are powerless over what's being done to
you.
Your single greatest cost, financially and in many
other aspects, is the federal government. You should know the truth
behind about what your sacrifices in freedom, property, and dignity are
buying you. Novocain is great when you're having dental work done,
but "mental Novocain" that deadens your political nerves exposes you to
egregious harm.
If you are one of those folks who votes for candidates
put forth by The Party, think of this book as the red pill (thanks,
Morpheus). Seeing reality empowers you. Not seeing it allows others to
enslave you.
Which is why the federal govt uses lying and deception
as its basic modus operandi and has done so ever since Andrew Jackson
left office (there's a reason why they sent not one, but FIVE assassins
after him).
No doubt, some folks will have an emotional rather than
factual response to Napolitano's book and dismiss it out of hand. Not
due to logic or reality, but due to the dissonance that comes with
having delusions and beliefs challenged by what is the reality rather
than what you've been told is the reality.
How accurate is Napolitano's take on things? He's
hitting the mark at 100%, in terms of the evidence he cites, the logic
he uses, and the major points he makes.
Disagreements
I do disagree with him on some issues. For example, he
believes a government is wrong to ban certain ingredients in food.
Hydrogenated oil is not a risk factor, but a cause, of colon cancer.
It's a recognized poison. It is not a new law to ban this in food. It's
enforcement of existing laws against deliberately poisoning people. A
poison doesn't have to be immediately lethal to be illegal to use on
someone. Deb Green is serving life in prison, and her story involves
poisoning her husband over time.
Our author says that, in the case of food ingredients,
people have the right to choose. I don't know anybody who grills the
staff at a restaurant to get a list of all of the ingredients of the
food, every condiment, every sauce, bread, and so forth. Try doing that
sometime, and see how your dinner companions react and if they ever
invite you out with them again.
People aren't making this choice. When they are
poisoned, it's a unilateral action. It isn't a nanny state to protect
people from being poisoned. He cites antismoking laws as similarly
intrusive, but these laws aren't there to protect people who suck
cigarette butts. These laws are there to protect innocent bystanders
from being forced to breathe in deadly poisons as a condition of
participating in society.
Aside from these misconceptions on Napolitano's part,
he's written essentially a Citizen's Guide to Wading Through the
Propaganda and Manipulation.
History: fact vs. fiction
I caught the history bug back in the early 1970s and have been a
voracious reader of primary, secondary, and tertiary sources--those
beyond the grip of our state-owned writers of fiction who call
themselves "historians" (in contrast to actual historians) and beyond
the grip of the statist mudstream media. The commonly accepted versions
of history and the history visible in the actual records are starkly
different.
I didn't have to look at the extensive and bibliography of
well-regarded sources to see that Napolitano did his homework and wasn't
regurgitating some political dogma. This reliance on reality was evident
throughout the book. The lies and excuses surrounding every major
initiative of the federal government since Andrew Jackson left office
were told, and are still told, for a reason. Napolitano correctly
identifies that reason in this book.
Many people refuse to look at the truth, because they want to believe
their government is benign. The language manipulation is also a barrier
to "going outside the Matrix." The United States never had a Civil War,
for example. By definition, such a war means an insurgent power attempts
to seize the controls and institutions of government. In Lincoln's War
(a very bloody one, at that, and one that was patently illegal), the
South seceded because the North acted in gross violation of the
Constitution. The South had its own government at the time that
Lincoln's forces invaded it. So, it wasn't a civil war. Fiction writers
posing as historians call it that to serve an agenda.
Now, here's a kicker for you. Read the autobiography of General
Ulysses S. Grant. Remember, he was the Union General who defeated the
South and he was the US President who succeeded Lincoln's hapless VP.
Not once did Grant use the phrase "civil war." He called it "the war
between the states." This is an important distinction.
Not once in this book does Napolitano fall prey to false labels, and
I find that quite impressive. No fiction for this guy, only the facts.
Another concept he gets is that laws are not always legal. In fact,
most of the laws passed in the past 100 years are not legal. Of all the
laws passed since 1980, the percentage of legal ones is probably less
than 1%. If you doubt that, start reviewing them. You'll probably quit
in exhaustion before finding one that's legal.
In any organization, all of the rules must flow from the bylaws. It
doesn't matter if you're a bowling league or a chess club. If the rule
conflicts with the bylaws in letter or in spirit, it's not legal. It's
"outside the bylaws" and therefore cannot bind the members of the
organization. When an organization is a sovereign state, we call its
bylaws a constitution. In the USA, we have Amendments that are outside
the Constitution. Unfortunately, our system requires that the courts
correct the errors of the executive and legislative branches but this is
not something the courts are always willing to do. So we have illegal
alterations to our Constitution and illegal laws flow from those.
We also have illegal laws with no basis in the Constitution or its
illegal amendments, and we have illegal laws that directly contradict
the Constitution. Relying on the courts to fix these is like fixing car
defects after a car is built, rather than fixing problems as soon as
they arise during the process of building it. For example, a bent frame
comes on the assembly line and you address that only after the car is
built (study modern manufacturing methods if you don't understand this
example). This creates a great deal of waste and cost, just like our
broken government does.
The solution is to fix the legislative process. Napolitano correctly
states this, as well.
Just how broken is our legislative process? Napolitano gives a good
example in his discussion of the incorrectly named "Patriot Act," which
had nothing to do with patriotism and which provided zero benefits to
the American people. The bill was written expressly to eviscerate the
Bill of Rights. Members of CONgress were given a printout of the bill
only a couple of days before voting on it. The bill was 342 pages of
complex material in tiny type--simply massive. Obviously, nobody had
enough time to read that monstrosity, much less understand it, in so
short a time. Yet, this bill passed almost unanimously.
Anyone looking at the contents of the bill can see it should not have
gotten a single vote. But nearly every member of CONgress voted for it,
without bothering to find out what the bill even meant.
One way this travesty was sold to CONgress was it had a four year
sunset on it. The bill is completely illegal, yet it has been renewed
not once but twice! The second time was during the Obama
misadministration, by the Democrat-controlled CONgress. Anyone who
doubts D = R needs to wake up, and the history of this bill is a very
strong pot of coffee.
To sum up: if you want to be an informed citizen, make this book part
of your collection. If you want to be a diligent citizen, you need to be
quoting from this book and discussing its facts and contents with your
"elected" (mis)representatives and with other people who vote. Not in a
dogmatic way, but use the truth you gain from this book to get others to
question the lies we are constantly, brazenly told.
This book consists of 17 chapters and a Conclusion, presented in 316
enlightening pages. It has 24 pages of densely-packed notes that would
expand to about 50 pages if written in the same font as the text (Can
you say, "He did his homework?"). These weren't 6th-tier sources,
either. The solidity of the source material is unusual and impressive.
And it shows in the quality of the text.
Each of the 17 chapters discusses a particular lie. It goes into
general and specific cases, refutes the lie with verifiable facts, asks
questions, exposes logical fallacies, and so forth. In all, excellent
analysis of each of these lies. This book is well-researched,
well-written, and badly needed in our time of Constitutional crisis and
rampantly illegal government activities. |