RWT neither endorses nor supports the statements and speculations alleged within this essay, although we do respect the author’s right to express his opinions.

Normally, I try to stand clear of political discourse, but I heard something on the radio this morning that really got me thinking. Gentlemen, the potential for a clusterfuck of epic proportions looms in the immediate future, and if it occurs I’m concerned that there’s gonna be a lot of unnecessary bloodshed. It looks like the suits might just decide to pull on their elbow-length rubber gloves and start hucking handfuls of shit at the proverbial fan — bereft of the merest inkling of the possible implications. But what spectacular misfire of anti-brilliance could render such dire results? Why, the proposal that another ill-thought law be immediately passed to better protect us all from the toothless lion of "domestic terrorism."

Toothless??? Aye, I believe I speak the truth. Sure, America’s various "freedoms" have allowed a small number of potentially violent groups to promulgate — and not only do many of them hold bizarre (if not hateful) worldviews, but some of them actually are known to have stockpiled weapons and even engaged in "commando training" (neither of which is technically illegal, provided certain guidelines are adhered to); but since observing our government’s response to the tragedy of September 11^th, most of them have either disbanded or ceased their obnoxious activities. Furthermore, nearly every group recognized as "subversive" by the government has been heavily infiltrated by informers, spies, saboteurs, agents provocateur, undercover operatives, deep cover sleepers, and other intelligence "assets." Not only is there a file on nearly every active member of these groups (as well as a detailed floor-plan of their homes), but if they ever started acting squirrelly the feds could take out their entire organization in a single day, if they had a mind to (even if they’ve turned their headquarters into a fortified bunker equipped with gas masks, automatic weapons, and homemade boobytraps). Regardless of what most fearmongering security "experts" (whose livelihoods depend on a generalized state of high anxiety) might claim, we have little to fear from hordes of pathetic militant losers who spend their SSI checks on camouflage pants and subscriptions to Soldier of Fortune. Remember, over the past decade violent crime has decreased by approximately 33%, yet the news media (particularly television news) has drastically increased their coverage of violent crime by approximately 472%, thus creating the illusion of a "violent crime epidemic"— don’t believe the hype!

Yet the pudgy-faced suits are afeared. "I’m so afraid of the salad bar at Ponderosa! What if some whacko spiked it with anthrax???" I can hear them lament. "Oh, me too! I’m scared of the Chinese buffet! Anyone could just walk up and poison everything! Y’know, there oughta be a law. . ." And now I hear on the radio that there will be "voluntary federal guidelines" for the food service industry to follow, in order to better protect us from the threat of terrorism. The proposed guidelines include criminal background checks for all employees as well as unspecified safeguards for buffets and salad bars. The moment these voluntary guidelines were proposed, a thunderin’ herd of our "elected representatives" began hollerin’ that voluntary guidelines were insufficient — they needed to be mandatory. So now an entirely new federal agency will probably need to be formed — a legion of armed "salad bar sentinels," if you will. But what am I complaining about? It certainly seems perfectly reasonable to safeguard our nations food supply, doesn’t it? Perhaps I’m just some naive "pro-freedom loonie" who happens to be "soft on terrorism" (if not an actual sympathizer)? Please, hear me out. . .

Consider the facts:

     1.) Violent crime has decreased significantly, yet it remains the primary fear of the average American due to grossly disproportionate (as well as unnecessarily sensationalistic) media coverage. The end results of this PSYOPS campaign have been:

          a.) unwarranted fear and anxiety amongst the populace;

          b.) widespread support for harsher sentences, "mandatory minimums," trying juvenile offenders as adults, and a massive increase in prison construction;

          c.) widespread support for "more laws;" restrictions on our Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms; less oversight on questionable law enforcement activities; and an enormous increase in electronic surveillance, monitoring, and eavesdropping;

          d.) especially amongst the white middle and upper classes, an almost pathological fear of teenagers in small groups has developed — this fear increases substantially if the teenagers are playing music or acting "rowdy," and increases a great deal more if some of them happen to be (gasp!) colored. If a Black or Latin teenager happens to be wearing a Starter jacket, baggy pants, expensive sneakers, and a modest gold chain, the average fearful citizen would probably support his immediate abduction by the Gestapo "for reasons of public safety." Is this blatant racism? Not necessarily — it is simply the result of irrational fear due to a combination of ignorance and the insidious mechanisms of the corporate news media. After all, "They fit the profile," don’t they?

What does this sound like to you? Perhaps the foundation of a totalitarian "fortress society?" Whether this is the intended goal or not, the potentiality is clearly evident. (Gee, not only must I be a "paranoid anti-government whacko," but I’m "soft on crime" as well! — at least that’s the standardized "spin" official Public Relations vampires use to ridicule and discredit any attempt at rational criticism of their policies)

     2.) Realistically, "domestic terrorism" is not a serious threat. The Oklahoma City bombing was an isolated incident (about which a great many unanswered questions still remain, as well as disturbing allegations of a government cover-up of certain facts), and the majority of fringe militant groups (primarily racially and religiously oriented ones) are being allowed to operate undisturbed simply so the federales can better keep tabs on them (too much pressure might force them underground — or could even force them to fragment into "splinter groups" or "cells," which we might very well lose track of). Although a few groups are known to have stockpiled literal warehouses full of small-arms ammunition, dynamite, and Ammonium Nitrate fertilizer — and a select few have even acquired small amounts (you don’t need very much) of various chemical and biological agents (particularly: LSD, Hydrocyanic Acid, Nicotine Sulphate, Ricin, Dioxin, Viral Meningitis, flesh-eating Staphylococcus "superbugs," "Mad Cow" disease, and extremely potent strains of Botulism), it is highly unlikely that they would actually use these capabilities except in some sort of "Doomsday Scenario." Their leadership may very well be crazy, but most of them aren’t stupid (unlike the majority of their "troops"). Unless Ollie North’s beloved "REX-84" scenario (see also "Operation GARDEN PLOT") somehow goes into effect (highly fucking unlikely — the projected blowback is far too costly), the average citizen has little to fear from outlaw militias.

     3.) In recent years, a number of "new laws" seemed to have taken on a life of their own, spreading like a fungus or replicating like a computer "worm" as dozens of new amendments were added at the whim of our "elected representatives" (I suspect some of this may’ve be due to lack of self-esteem — they feel "important" if they succeed in gaining support for new legislation — "Yep, that there’s my law! Behold what I have created!" If you want a good example, just look at the legal attack on "assault weaponry" from a state of relative unregulation in the mid 80's to a virtual ban just twenty years later — this was all done in gradual increments over a period of time, and they’re still passing new laws restricting their ownership and criminalizing their accessories.). The proposed guidelines will require "voluntary" (but eventually mandatory) criminal background checks on all food service industry employees. But what, exactly, will be their definition of "food service industry?" Some possibilities include: restaurant employees (including: chefs, prep cooks, wait staff, dishwashers, maintenance, and management) — especially in the "fast food" franchises; supermarket associates (including: truck drivers, freight handlers, stockers, maintenance, and possibly even cashiers); employees of bottling plants and canneries; employees at various food processing plants; slaughterhouse workers; farmers; dairy workers; sales representatives; deliverymen; and even pushcart vendors! Virtually anyone who comes into contact with food (or food additives) at any point (production, packaging, shipping, distribution, preparation, or retail sale — as well as any support staff who could potentially come in contact with food if they had a mind to) could face the possibility of a criminal background check through the NCIC system. But is this necessarily cause for concern? After all, you wouldn’t want a convicted felon to prepare your next meal, would you? As those everpresent hidden cameras have clearly shown us on many "investigative" televison shows, persons with criminal proclivities might be tempted to spit on your burger or even pee in the deep-fry vat! Who knows what a nefarious felon might do — especially if he "doesn’t like the looks of you". . . .

     4.) However . . . the "food service industry" (as defined above) employs over 50% of the "unskilled labor" force (a derogatory, classist, and very misleading catch-phrase), most of whom toil for long hours under sub-standard conditions for pennies above minimum wage and no benefits ("health insurance" which costs $75 per week {for family coverage, sans dental} with a $200 deductible does not count). And where, oh where, do you think all the nasty felons go after they’ve "paid their debt to society" and have been released back amongst civilized folk? Well, since their record bars them from any form of government employment (even municipal garbageman!), school employment (even night custodian!), hospital or nursing home employment (even in the laundryroom!), professional employment (barred from obtaining any state issued license, and the background checks on most "white collar" employment nowadays even entails a review of one’s credit history), or public office (even dogcatcher!), they are relegated primarily to low-paying entry-level "careers." If a felon isn’t lucky enough to get one of the few jobs available to him which might pay a living wage (construction, transportation, auto mechanics, carpentry, welding, or other skilled blue-collar jobs), he’ll probably end up in the "food service industry" in some capacity (in the event that he actually attempts to find legitimate gainful employment). Now, let us examine what might happen in the event that evidence of a past criminal conviction (even forty years ago — those things never go away unless you repeatedly petition the court and threaten litigation — and, even then, you still might be denied justice because either the court could refuse to approve your valid request for a restoration of your civil rights, or you might reside in one of the many states which will not expunge a criminal conviction — instead offering a nearly worthless certificate of "good conduct" or "relief from civil disabilities" which allegedly serves to deter unlawful discrimination in employment {indeed, many employers are prohibited from inquiring too deeply into a job applicant’s criminal history, other than to ask if they’d been convicted of a felony within the past five years}) results in the expulsion of ex-offenders from the workplace en masse:

          a.) First and foremost, these industries will be totally fucking crippled. Consider this — in all of the aforementioned industries, 20% of the workers are terminated from employment overnight by government decree — who will replace them, and when? (remember, they’ll still need to be trained);

          b.) People (employers as well as their employees) will try to circumvent this unjust mandate through whatever means necessary — expect to see a brisk black market business in various types of false identity papers springing up immediately ("it’s not just for illegal immigrants anymore!");

          c.) When the full scope of this bureaucratic goatfuck is revealed in all its magnitude, the public backlash will be intense. After a few hundred sorry testimonials are heard, even the most cold-hearted upper-middle-class whitebread yuppie scum will begin to sympathize with the plight of their oppressed brethren (Stockholm syndrome?)

          d.) And, perhaps most importantly, the 20 million ex-offenders who lose their jobs are gonna be really pissed off!!! Do we, as a country, want to risk causing widespread domestic unrest in the name of public safety? HOLY FUCKING SHIT! Consider the possibilities. . . .

               1.) First, most felons are non-violent offenders, with the vast majority being incarcerated for minor drug possession charges with stiff mandatory minimums. A few are even in simply for being a druggie’s friend or family member ("conspiracy" or "misprison of felony"). And stacks of books are filled with little known and unheard of federal regulations (the "secret laws") — all of which are felonies (one silly example would be the act of attempting to reuse a canceled postage stamp!), but are usually only directed at whistleblowers, activists, and other pesky troublemakers.

               2.) The violent felony offenders, you ask? Yeah, you can reasonably expect at least 10% of them (a conservative estimate, noting past activities as well as a generalized history of alcoholism, drug abuse, and mental illness) to immediately snap and go on a bloody rampage. As a rule, predatory sociopaths tend to have poor social skills and a marked inability to deal with stressful situations (as well as a tendency to use violence to achieve their goals). Many of these people (if you’d deign to call ‘em that) live in a demented phantasy world, and their sudden unemployment due to official sanction would give irrefutable "proof" of their persecution. Imagine the devastation of 250,000 simultaneous workplace shootings as they all snap at once . . . the more level-headed ones would be even more dangerous, sniping at BMWs and firebombing prestigious residences in hopes of "offing a suit." They’d make the L.A. riots look like fucking Romper Room (there’s a big difference between an immature tantrum and total war).

               3.) Regardless of the nature of their crimes, a significant percentage are probably making a valiant effort to "go straight" and "work within the system" by being productive workers and avid consumers. Many of them have even attempted to start a family (a few of them even went so far as to get married). If they have worked hard within their profession for many years — and have shown the proper aptitude — perhaps they might’ve even been elevated to a supervisory position. What message would we, as a country, be sending to these disenfranchised wage-slaves? Do you think they might be tempted to redirect their energies in a far more negative way? How do you think this negativity might manifest? And who would share the blame?

Basically, the core of what I am attempting to convey is this: "If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!" A shitload of lip-service has been devoted to the boogyman of "domestic terrorism" in recent years (with the three results being: an annihilation of civil liberties, the alarming militarization of municipal police departments {what does East Bumblefuck need with stormtrooper costumes and MP-5 submachineguns?}, and a generalized mood of fearful helplessness amongst the populace), and a thinking man might start trying to conceptualize what the "Master Plan" might be ("Oh, that’s paranoia talking! We all know that History is the simple result of mere blunders and coincidences, don’t we?"). Some people think that many of society’s biggest problems (drugs, crime, poverty, alienation, etc.) were not the result of mere dumb luck, no — they seem to feel that the breakdown of society has been premeditated (paranoid? Perhaps, but there is ample evidence to back these claims up — and a great deal of it is actually credible.). According to this deeply disturbing theory, in order for the ruling elites to reach their eventual goal of world domination, they must first surreptitiously create a series of crises in order to then "save" us through legislation, regimentation, disarmament, and possibly even extermination (does this seem ludicrous to you? Have you ever heard about the subjects of game theory and economic warfare? Are you familiar with America’s eugenics program during the thirties and forties? How about Project PAPERCLIP? From that perspective, those crazy rants actually start to make sense . . . although, of course, I would never dare to propose such a hypothesis!). Think about it though, from that perspective a non-existent threat could easily be conjured up in the real world through a carefully contrived series of suggestions, actions, and subtle manipulations. "If the (threat) did not exist, it would be necessary to create (it)!" This bizarre conspiralogical theory could conceivably be applied to many of the tragic events in recent History (even including a few things you wouldn’t normally suspect, unless you were aware of the sinister technologies available for such misuse). If I had a mind to, I could go into specifics and even name names, but that would be inappropriate behavior on my part (and you probably wouldn’t believe it anyway — I’m not even sure that I believe it). This country is going down the shitter, and the only explanation which seems to make any sense is simply too horrible to contemplate. The motivation of unbridled corporate avarice is frequently cited, but this goes above and beyond that to the realm of the diabolic . . . it cannot be true (however, the concept of being manipulated by evil puppeteers somehow seems slightly less distressing than being subject to the blind chaos resulting from society’s unnatural dependance upon an inefficient bureaucracy staffed with apathetic morons).

The "domestic terrorist" is not a viable threat to National Security, but you have seen one example of how, through an apparently misguided and illogical attempt to pass an ill-thought-out "preventative measure," a veritable "rebel army" could be raised almost spontaneously (just take their jobs away, brand them on the forehead with an "F," and toss them out on the streets with no prospects — not even welfare). He does not now exist, but it is possible to create him. I truly hope the suits reconsider.