A few answers to readers’ comments on recent pieces

Let me first say how much I appreciate people taking the time to write, whether from a favorable or unfavorable view. I have learned a good deal from those who kindly take time to read what I write.

At some point in the last six-weeks, I received an e-mail telling me the blog has been defaced a bit. So far I have tried to cope with the problem — placing articles a bit farther down from the page top — but have not found a way to fix it.

Then, about 7 or 10 days ago, I received another e-mail saying that my responses to readers’ comments were not appearing on the blog. I checked and found that to be the case. I have not found a way to fix that either.

Anyway, below are the responses that I have so far written on some of the comments received about the last three blog pieces. I will continue to put responses in this format until I can fix the problems.

Again, many thanks for your comments. MFS


The Jewish-American media elite intends to kill the republic,” 2 November 2016

In reply to Mike Phillips.

Thanks for writing. None of them is CIA inventions. They are the inventions of (a) devout Muslims and (b) the Russian invasion of Afghanistan (1979) and the USG’s pots-1945, bipartisan interventionist foreign policy that is thoroughly hated across the Muslim world, as well as by any right-thinking American. MFS

In reply to Jacques.

Thanks for writing. I have detested that elite most of my adult life. It has given Trump nothing but negative/lying coverage since the start of the primary season. Indeed, they have been more despicably anti-Trump than parts of the liberal media. Have you been on vacation for the past 18 month? MFS


The choice in 2016: Liberty or the yoke,” 29 October 2016

In reply to Jacques.

Thank you for writing. I have, incidentally, answered everyone of the comments you have sent. Slavery was legal/constitutional at the time of the Civil War. The slaves were freed by a Civil War that prepared the ground for the 13th-15th amendments. The Civil war was not waged to free the slaves. Lincoln could not have fought the South to free slaves because he would have been fighting an unconstitutional war and he would have had almost no popular support. The slaves were freed by constitutional amendments, as it should be in a constitutional republic. Without question, the Confederate nation was opposing what it perceived as tyranny, and perception is always reality. As in, I perceive you as a hopeless fool. MFS

In reply to Warren.

Thank you for writing. Yes, the anti-Federalists almost to a man saw what the new constitution could and has lead to, and that is why the liberal academy has for so long tried damn them as complainers, cranks, and men with no alternative plan. The anti-Federalists are as, if not more, important than the Federalists because they never for a second forgot that man is a fallen creature and will behave tyrannically given half a chance. On the other side, Washington, Madison, and some others were of the exact same mind. Had the Founders lived forever we might have been okay, but here we are with a traitor/butcher/felon running for president and access to all the arbitrary power the anti-Federalist warned off. Time is running out. Finally, I am about have way through a new book on the anti- Federalists. The book is by William A. Watkins Jr. and called Crossroads of Liberty. I think it is excellent in showing how much liberty was lost at the Constitutional Convention in 1787. MFS


Of course the 2016 election is rigged, here’s how, and what it may yield,” 17 October 2016

In reply to Jacques.

Thanks for writing. Do you have a script from the DNC that you use for these witty and compelling notes. I always try to be polite, but I’ll tell the truth. If your grandparents are alive today, they must surely regret the mess you have made of the opportunities they won for you at high personal costs. You and your kind wouldn’t get up off your asses to do anything for yourselves if it required going farther than the refrigerator, and so you depend on a criminal, Wall-Street whore like Hillary to take as much money as possible from people who work and give it to you worthless, narcissistic, and lazy creeps. Grow up and get to work, and learn what it feels like to have half of America get paid from what you earn. MFS

In reply to Z.V. Dongone.

Thanks for writing. The media is completely biased in favor of the left and of suffocating liberty and the republic at all times. Because they have neither respect for, nor knowledge of the citizenry, they covered Trump initially to bedevil the Republican Party establishment and — given Trump’s wealth — reinforce the idea that Wall Street owns the party. (NB: You’ll note the media has been largely silent now that we know that Hillary is Wall Street’s aged but bought-and-paid-for whore.) After it became clear that Trump had struck a nerve in the populace and had growing support, the coverage simply continued and grew increasingly negative toward Trump and vastly more pro-Clinton, especially in what they chose not to report about Clinton’s criminality. It is all of a piece really, and has been for nearly half a century. I read yesterday that the public record shows 96-percent of all the media people — reporters, editors, pundits, media owners, anchors, etc. — who can be identified as having made a contribution to a presidential candidate in the 2016 race gave their money to Hillary. I would say that the 96-percent figure is a pretty clear proof of bias if any more was needed. MFS

In reply to Charles Byrd.

Thanks for writing. For my money, Rand Paul never made clear where he stood and so came off as one who would trim as the situation demanded. I thought the material on his website was especially confusing in this regard. This may be unfair because part of the lens through which I see Rand Paul is his dad, whom I never had to worry about straying off course. I also think that Rand Paul and the 15 or 16 other candidates missed what is truly clear about the Republican Party; namely, that it, as well as the Democratic Party, are well and truly hated by much of the citizenry. There was Trump and 16 other candidates, and the latter group would have run Romney-like campaigns and would not have gotten down in the gutter where Hillary and her party live and thrive, and which is the only place in which they can be beaten. Hillary would have mopped the floor with any of the other fifteen, moreover, because all of them would have been made to look like Romney by the Clinton machine, and all would have played the role of the well intentioned but soon-to-be-defeated gentlemen because they would have not spoken frankly and in the blue-collar idiom, as Trump has, about her criminality, treason, greed, arrogance, run-away corruption, and the obvious hatred in her heart for non-elite white Americans and this republic. Anyway, I am no expert on any of this, but I am confident of one thing. Trump is the last chance for our republic, and much of the election depends on whether Christians and Protestants can see, and act accordingly, on the what I think is the irrefutable fact that if they turn their back on Trump — a fallen creature just as I and they all are — they in fact turn their collective backs on themselves and their children, and volunteer to see the closest thing to heaven on earth turned into a genuinely hellish tyranny that intends to finish banning faith from the public square and constitutional liberty and order from the republic and its citizens. MFS

Author: Michael F. Scheuer

Michael F. Scheuer worked at the CIA as an intelligence officer for 22 years. He was the first chief of its Osama bin Laden unit, and he helped create its rendition program, which he ran for 40 months. He is an American blogger, historian, foreign policy critic, and political analyst.