Ripe for Regime Change

by Thomas Paine (pen name for a professional published author)


Russia Today reports:

“The Prosecutor General’s Office has ruled…the National Democratic Institute, chaired by a former Secretary of State (Albright,) poses a threat to Russian security and constitutional order. It proposed including this NGO on the list of undesirable organizations.

According to NDI’s website the group operated in Russia directly since the 1980s. In 2012 it closed its office in the country, but continued to implement its programs through partner organizations.”

Memo to the Russian government:  It’s about time you found out who Marie Jana Korbelová is! (2-minute video):

In 1948 this dour, diminutive imperialist of great turpitude immigrated to my country, the United States, becoming a citizen in 1957.   She lost her Czech accent, anglicized her name, married a filthy rich Gentile newspaper heir, got a passport… then a diplomatic passport…before putting her genocidal tendencies on public display in 1996 by stressing the value of starving to death, a half-million Arab Muslim children, in order to force feed an all-you-can-eat buffet of regime change down the throat of one Saddam Hussein.

In Yugoslavia, Iraq,Syria,Libya, Ukraine and elsewhere, the PNAC NeoCons have ruined entire nations and gleefully bombed peoples back to the Stone Age to achieve ends that have nothing to do with the national security of the United States.  They have also ruined the United States in a more insidious way. 

Three Manhattan towers were demolished, bombs detonated inside the Pentagon accounting wing, 3000 Americans burnt alive and an entire nation bamboozled so that NeoCons like Albright could finally get their Iraq itch scratched after killing off a half a million kids didn’t get the job done.

Memo to the American people: The Hitleresque logic used by a Jewish Czech immigrant to publicly proclaim, in your name and mine, that the extermination of half a million brown children is “worth it,” is the same logic that claims behind closed doors…that culling 3000 American sheep on September 11 was a small price to pay to take down Saddam Hussein and ensure that the United States would “secure the realm” for the remainder of the “New American Century.”

If you think this is an outrageous screed, then go inform yourself about the U.S.S. Maine, the Lusitania, the Reichstag fire, Pearl Harbor, Operation Gladio and the 1962 Northwoods Project to shoot down American airliners, blame Castro, go in and take him down for good.  Sound familiar?

It’s 2016 and these NeoCon usurpers got some regime change itch something fierce!  That´s why Madam Albright´s crew was in Moscow.  Thankfully, the Russians came to their senses and expelled Soros, Halfbright and their “foundations.”   Frankly, we patriotic Americans don´t want them back.  She and her fellow European Soros (real name Schwartz) need to be stripped of their U.S. passports and put in jail.

Outline for Regime Change

Texas Governor Greg Abbott has a great idea: the Texas Plan.

The plan calls for a constitutional convention that would radically re-arrange the states’ and the peoples’ relationship with the federal government via new amendments to the current constitution.

Abbott and his supporters are admittedly motivated by a range of right-wing issues from slaying Obamacare to stopping gay marriage.  This writer sees even more profound possibilities that would be music to the ear of many a liberal and progressive.

The Founding Fathers rejected the Divine Right of Kings.

We, the Founding Sons, reject the NeoCon “right” to rule America and dictate what national security means.   We’re not going to sit back and watch intelligence agencies blow stuff up all over the place then put us under lockdown in our own homes then watch us like fugitive slaves every time we step outside.  Our national security is undermined because of, not inspite of, the NeoCons.

But the good news is, we will write a new constitution and we will make it stick.  Since the NeoCons are  obsessed with regime change, we will hand it to them on a silver platter.

We have not had a constitutional convention since 1787… 229 years ago.  As they say, it’s about that time.  Massachusetts is already thinking about it.

But working within the current framework of government is foolish.   As of 2016, reform via court rulings, running for congress and voting is largely symbolic.

However, we must not discourage people from trying. As frivolous as voting may be, people need to decide that for themselves.

We must encourage all people to vote and participate in the full knowledge that choosing between Pepsi and Coke is not a real choice, but the ongoing effort to disenfranchise certain people via the criminal just us system demonstrates that the vote still has residual power, especially at the local level.

Looking to South Africa for precedent, we need a new constitution to form the framework of a new United States government that will phase out the current one.

Step 1: Constitutional Convention

Our idea is more radical than the Texas Plan.  We intend to bypass not only the Congress, but the state legislatures as well.  We call for a convention to be held in person and broadcast live on CSPAN and the Internet.  Once we have the support of a few hundred people willing to put some effort into this, a time and place can be secured.

Compare and contrast the constitutions of nations.  Draft a new constitution, including a new Bill of Rights and publish it on the Internet for public comment during an extended period.  Advertise as expenses permit.

Step 2: Public Ratification of the New Constitution

There are many possible paths to legitimacy even though it will not have the force of law for some time.  The key is to have broad, diverse support that does not hinge on a burning controversy e.g. gay marriage.

Unanimity is not a requirement, nor is approval by mass media pundits.  Count on their dismissal of and opposition to the idea of new constitution just as Abbott is being defamed as a closet Confederate who wants to re-fight the Civil War.  Again and again, the blogosphere muddles minds by making unfounded accusations against his Texas Plan.

The new constitution we have in mind will of necessity, not go to state legislatures or Congress for approval; politicians do not vote their powers away.  Instead, one or more persons residing in each of the 3,143 counties of the United States could cast a ballot publicly.  New regime supporters might already hold local political office or they might be community leaders with bases of support already in place.   The key is to differentiate between one person one vote in every county and the current one dollar one vote system dependent upon influence peddling.   This is a key difference with the Texas Plan proposed by right wing Republicans.   Our process will be structured to favor popular participation while putting pressure on the establishment to spend ever more money to either co-opt the new constitution movement or condemn it.   Asymmetrical strategies are available so that money spent opposing the new constitution can help it gain acceptance, especially in the early stages of what will be a multi-year effort.

Since Democrats and Republicans are the sole incumbent of the current regime, they are at a big disadvantage in any debate.   It´s easy for the upstart new regime to gain the upper hand because the incumbent is responsible for all that has gone on before.

Third parties can never win elections in the current duopoly.  In a nation of 323 million, the political class and significant donors number less than 100,000…far less than one percent of the population.  One of our goals is to introduce a parliamentary democracy affording broad representation of numerous small political parties.  Here again, we are radically different from the Republicans who are mad about tyranny in Washington only when it diverges from their own views.

The prospect of gaining a platform in the new government (the new Washington regime) can motivate thousands of organizations in all states to vote in favor of the new constitution, get involved and help shape the new republic in ways currently not available to them.   An alternative body of representatives, albeit without the force of law, can start to take shape.

Achieving Sufficient Consensus 

Ideological and religious tests must be avoided.  Fracturing along racial, ethnic and regional lines must be prevented.  We need the Patriot community to work hand in hand with Occupy and Black Lives Matter.  We need active and retired police and military to have a place at the table with civil liberties and human rights groups who loathe police brutality.  We are not an ideological movement.  There is no need to like or agree with someone personally in order to do business with that person.  A police officer who knows that the war on drugs is a fraud is an invaluable asset to the new regime.  A Marine who understands the implications of World Trade Center 7 is an indispensable ally to our new armed forces.

Identity politics, litmus tests and insoluble controversies about gender, religion, language and race must be set aside if the new regime is to achieve momentum.   A constitution defines and limits powers of the state.  It is not the place to settle social issues, e.g. abortion.  This is where we will lose the Evangelicals.  We say that the purpose of a constitution is to define the relationship between citizens and their government, not settle old scores by regulating behavior and making government the enforcer.  Whether the behavior to be curbed is a conservative or liberal issue does not matter.  As a rule, the less intrusive the constitution, the better.  Less is more.  Plan on abolishing government regulations, not creating new ones.

A consensus about everything is not a prerequisite for the new regime to take power.  There will always be disagreements and common ground must be sought.  Take climate change.  Instead of arguing, let’s all agree that the largest source of greenhouse gas is the war machine:  the Iraq and Syria Wars since 1990 and 2011 dwarf all other sources of pollution.  The new regime will renounce wars of aggression and that will be more beneficial to the atmosphere than a billion solar panels, Priuses and Teslas.

Step 3: Constitution Ratified, The American Opposition Forms NGOs, Gets Diplomatic Recognition.

The American Opposition aka the future regime is both liberal and conservative and  it is neither.  By design, it´s hard to pin down. There is no single issue or personality to rally around, only general consensus that the wars on terror and drugs are massive frauds, the Bill of Rights and constitution must be restored and the NeoCons taken into custody.  If some states want to recognize marriage as between a man and a woman only, that is their right.  It is a violation of the principal of the separation of church and state for Washington to force gay marriage on communities who don’t accept it on religious grounds.  Would Washington behave this way towards its Muslim terrorist clients in Syria and Libya?  Would Washington force them to observe gay marriages?  Would it demand that its Neo-Nazi clients in Kiev uphold gay rights too?

The American Opposition will form non-governmental organizations worthy of international recognition.  This will impose a cost on the old regime should it try to repress the formation of a new one.

When the time comes, the FED along with the Democrat and Republican party leadership must be placed under arrest by military and law enforcement at last willing to uphold basic current Constitutional, Federal, and state laws to end both US political parties’ leaderships’ obvious crimes centered in war, money, and lying.

Step 4: Assume the Functions of State

The current government including the Congress, the Supreme Court and the executive branch must be lawfully retired, and the Democrat and Republican parties must be lawfully disbanded until a new government is established that allows for multiple parties in Congress.  Afterwards, the Democrats and Republicans can return to compete in a multi-party democracy.


Those interested in attending an online convention to draft a new constitution can drop a line at

Daniel Bruno,new republic new Bill of Rights

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
  • y3shuA imMANu3l


  • Southernfink

    Course it is, what goes around comes around, it’s just a matter of time.

  • ICFubar

    To call for a constitutional convention is to declare a national emergency under law. Under a national emergency the Commander in Chief is the head of State. To erect a popular movement to call for a constitutional convention is within the law but to act upon and institute a convention, under the law is an act of insurrection by the people under Hague Convention and Lieber code embodied within the Hague Convention. What is not understood here is that the original “The United States in Congress Assembled”, the original Confederation, was a bankrupt entity which passed its sovereignty to an entity named “the United States of America” (small “t”) which became the “constituter” of the original Confederation. Under law a “constituter” is one which assumes the debts of another, the original Confederation, bankrupt in this case, owing and never repaying 18 million gold livres to the French national entity referred to as the “Crown”. This new entity is a then a foreign body occupying the original Confederation under definition of the Hague Conventions and Lieber Code. Lieber Code lays out what an occupying military force must follow in maintaining public order and institutions for the occupied territory and people under international law, the catch phrase being, as long as that population is peaceable. Lieber Code also defines insurgency or the phrases we so often hear, insurgents and enemy combatants and such. This presents a problem to this idea of engaging in a popular constitutional conference.

    • I respond solely for the benefit of other readers. Your assumptions are wrong and, like kicking a football one second of one degree too wide of the mark, your conclusions land in the stadium’s public rest room. For starters, calling for a constitutional convention on CSPAN neither creates nor empowers anyone to declare a “state of emergency. ” The rest of the convoluted mumbling about the Vatican, little t, the Hague, etc. could have been written by a troll in Bangalore, India or an artificial intelligence algorithm at Booze Allen Hamilton.

      • ICFubar

        What I wrote will never be stated as such but I can guarantee that the authorities will treat any such new government with its new constitution as a rebellion, which is fine as long as people enter into an insurgency with their eyes wide open. When I first heard these statements put forward I researched them and found most to be highly accurate enough to hold legal water, so believe what you will. Whether the authorities would or would not act would have to be seen but the essence of what I have written, with a lot more to back it up is factual, all hidden in plain sight. example

        • Naaaah. Lawyers and painters turn white to black. Insurgency and rebellion is when some angry minority rises up in violence and gets put down. That’s not what this is. If you take 1000 middle aged, well spoken and diverse Americans in just 1000 counties spread over the 50 states who publicly commit to a new constitution, they could claim more members and legitimacy than the Congress, with its single digit approval ratings. Washington would have a hard sell convincing the world that these 1000 Americans are insurgents and terrorists.

          • ICFubar

            I’ll agree lawyers, and possibly painters, are a deceitful lot, able to swindle little old ladies out of their inheritance, or entire peoples of their rights as defined under their Constitution. Personally I like the idea of the American people holding a Constitutional Convention whether the authorities would consider that action an call to rebellion or just something to be ignored as having no weight in LAW. I should have said this in my original comment so as not to set people on edge. Cheers.

    • This is the missing link for most today. October 23, 2014 America’s perpetual state of emergency

      WASHINGTON — The United States is in a perpetual state of national emergency. Thirty separate emergencies, in fact. An emergency declared by President Jimmy Carter on the 10th day of the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979 remains in effect almost 35 years later.

      • ICFubar

        Yes, the most egregious being the Continuity of Government Act proclaimed to be in effect by V.P. Cheney (Bush was out of contact apparently if that can be believed) on the morning of 9/11/2001 which suspends in whole or part (no one exactly knows what was suspended) the American Constitution. This Act must be renewed every six months and is as far as I know still in effect today. Congress on many occasions has asked the executive branch, including Obama’s, if or what parts of the Constitution are in effect, but never to my knowledge has ever received any reply on their question.

        • Did you miss understand this part? An emergency declared by President Jimmy Carter on the 10th day of the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979 remains in effect almost 35 years later.

          • ICFubar

            that is is why I wrote “yes” to your comment. In 1933 FDR amended the Trading with the Enemy Act under the declaration of a national emergency, This declaration is still in force today.

          • This is why I ask questions and never assume anything. Thank you for your understanding. This only proves the Republic died after the Bankster coup with the creation of the Federal Reserve with zero reserves.

  • May 5, 2016 – Thomas Jefferson on “Voting the Bums Out”

    Effective strategy is essential when it comes to the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson had some important advice on what to do about politicians giving us bad policy – and politicians who “assume undelegated powers.”