Skip to content

Month: July 2017

“It Can’t Happen Here” Video

I linked to this video by Larken Rose at the end of my previous post, but I thought that, while it may be a bit long maybe it’s a good idea to post this again. Rose makes some very good points about the police state in Amerika. “It Can’t Happen Here.”

Hate the State

Like Murray Rothbard, yes I “hate the State.” And I love freedom. There are many good reasons to hate the State, as Rothbard wrote about the hundreds if not thousands of them.

And there is plenty of cognitive dissonance on the part of conservatives who constantly criticize those on the Left for being “authoritarian,” and for promoting censorship and the politically-correct police state, while at the same time the conservatives are constantly endorsing the police state. They LOVE armed and uniformed government police with a passion, those talk radio ditto-heads. Why, the worst are the Salem radio talk hosts, especially Hugh Hewitt, Michael Medved and Dennis Prager who are really State-worshiping authoritarians whose love of the State is dripping with moral relativism as they preach “moral values.”

But most of the American people don’t listen to talk radio, yet most of the people are authoritarians themselves, people who don’t really have a good understanding of the concepts of unalienable rights as noted in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution, which attempts to protect the rights that all human beings have inherently, rights which preexist the formation of any government and which preexist the formation of any nation.

According to the Daily Sheeple, Keith Wood was convicted of jury tampering, because he was outside on a public sidewalk handing out pamphlets which describe how juries have the right of nullification if they are to decide on what they believe to be unjust laws. Wood obviously has a right to be on the public sidewalk and distribute his literature. That’s thoroughly protected by the First Amendment. But sadly, Wood was the victim of a statist jury, most of whom probably went to government schools and were indoctrinated to trust that all laws on the books are just laws. The statist jury was convinced that Wood was guilty of trying to influence a jury by handing out pamphlets on a public sidewalk.

And the “judge” wouldn’t let Wood’s attorney inform the jury of their rights, or even use the First Amendment as part of his defense, according to Reason.

Well, yeah he was trying to “influence” them by informing them of their rights which he has a right to do, and they have a right to know. What, you think the judge or prosecutors are going to inform the jury that they have a right to nullify bad laws? Sorry, not in statist Amerika, where prosecutors and judges have quotas and who like to carve another notch of “guilty” on their statist belts.

And another example of cold-blooded murderous incompetence by government police this week has been when Southaven, Mississippi government police went to the wrong address, and they shot an innocent man, Ismael Lopez who had no criminal record or any warrant against him, shot him dead from outside the closed door to his home, and they lied about it by accusing him of having a gun which he didn’t have.

And the suspect they were supposed to arrest, at a home across the street, says that he has been dragged into a dispute with false accusations.

These are yet further reasons why not to be a brainwashed, authoritarian government-police worshiper.

As I wrote in my post three years ago (with a link removed) on privatizing police and national security,

Sadly, many Americans worship the local government-monopolized police, and would never consider “privatizing” such an endeavor. In a recent article, William Grigg describes the way policing monopolies have developed into a worshiped caste of gods for whom the average Joe and Mary must kneel and fall to the ground. (Many other articles by William Grigg describe one situation after another how this phenomenon has developed, in just about every district throughout the People’s Republik of Amerika.)

And Bill Buppert has a five-part series just recently, titled, “Badged Serial Killers: the Growing Murder Culture of Cops.” Part 1 concentrates on the cops killing of animals, Part 2 concentrates on “peace officers” cruelty against children, Part 3 discusses the cops’ war on women, Part 4 deals with cops’ violence against elderly people, and Part 5 discusses the cops’ violence against disabled people. By Part 5, Buppert notes that the police-criminal apologists are probably glad the series has ended.

Also, see the Cato Institute’s blog on police misconduct, Radley Balko’s articles located at HuffPo, Washington Post, and the website Copblock.

I don’t think that statist authoritarians would like the idea of privatizing local community policing and security, because that would take power and authority away from the State. A lot of people went through 12-16 years of government schooling (or government-controlled private schooling), had a lot of flag-waving government-worship indoctrination, and were brought up to never question government authority, especially uniformed, badged and armed government police.

I doubt that Donald Trump would go for the privatization stuff. He’s a police statist, as we have seen from his and AG Jeff Sessions’s vicious drug war escalation, and Trump’s anti-freedom, nonsensical trade and immigration policies. Trump is all about central planning and government authority. Freedom and free markets are not on his agenda.

But recently Trump demonstrated his understanding of liberty and the Constitution in his tirade against due process, presumption of innocence and common decency, when he belched (according to Reason), “when you see these thugs being thrown into the back of a paddy wagon,” … “And I said, ‘Please don’t be too nice.’ Like when you guys put somebody in the car and you’re protecting their head … You know, the way you put their hand over, like, don’t hit their head, and they’ve just killed somebody. Don’t hit their head. I said, ‘You can take the hand away, OK?'”

After reminding readers that it’s “illegal for law enforcement to beat or otherwise use excessive force on suspects who are presumed innocent until proven guilty,” Reason noted, “in Suffolk County, New York, where Trump was speaking, a police chief was sentenced last year to four years in prison for orchestrating the cover-up of the beating of a [suspect].”

And then there’s the government police “asset forfeiture,” in which the “men in blue” steal cash from innocent people most of whom wind up never even being charged with any crime. According to WaPo, government police stole more from innocent victims than actual burglars did in 2014. I’m sure The Donald is proud of that.

You see, in a just, moral and civilized society, all people would be equal under the law. Everyone is accountable under the law, regardless of one’s occupation, wealth, or social status. And no one has official authority over others.

But what a mistake it was in the “civilized” West to have the community assign to the agents of the State some kind of arbitrary legal authority over others. That’s nuts. It’s an open policy that some people (agents of the State) are permitted to commit criminal acts against others, and get away with it.

But the talk radio ditto-heads love it, because they love authority, especially government authority. And they have no real understanding of the Second Amendment, which was written to reaffirm the right of the individual to keep and bear arms, which is a part of the right to self-defense, not only to defend oneself from common street criminals, but the right to defend oneself from government tyranny as well. Alas, the authoritarian State-worshipers don’t get that.

What we are seeing is a developing full-blown tyranny in the police state of Amerika. Sadly, the deniers who love and worship government authority just don’t see any comparison between what Amerika is becoming and Nazi Germany or Soviet Union. And yes, it can happen here.

John McCain Acts Like a Traitor Again

After promising the voters of Arizona that he would vote to repeal ObamaCare (a.k.a. the Affordable Care Act), and after consistently making repealing ObamaCare a #1 priority throughout his 2016 reelection campaign, Sen. John McCain betrayed the voters of Arizona (and the American people) by voting against repealing the atrocity, and then being the swing vote last night against the “skinny” repeal of the individual and employer mandates, a bill that also would have eased some other regulations.

Now, McCain’s recent medical situation of removal of a blood clot which then indicated that he has brain cancer, has nothing to do with his bad decision-making, because he has been wrong on just about every issue, from his warmongering and foreign interventionism to his Democrat-lite domestic policy views. It may be that he knows there won’t be another reelection bid for him, so, unlike last year’s reelection campaign this time he is really voting on behalf of his true loyalties — to Big Pharma and Big Insurance who have benefited hugely from ObamaCare. I can’t say that he is voting his “conscience” because he doesn’t have one, in my view.

There is good evidence that John McCain doesn’t have a conscience, and that he is a thoroughly loathsome and despicable degenerate, certainly not a hero.

So I am going to repost a post I did from two years ago to go with this latest news about the U.S. Senate and specifically John McCain’s vote to save ObamaCare, the means to single payer universal government-run health care, although the subject of this older post is to do with McCain’s time in Vietnam and his role along with John Kerry in covering up the American POWs who were left behind in Vietnam.

Is John McCain a Hero Or a Traitor?

July 19, 2015

Donald Trump is in trouble again, this time for his comments on John McCain not being the “hero” that many people think he is simply because he was a prisoner of war and supposedly tortured during the Vietnam War. There are good reasons to ask, Has anyone actually seen those “more scars than Frankenstein” that McCain allegedly has from being tortured? It actually might not be true.

Former American Conservative magazine publisher Ron Unz has this article on John McCain’s alleged role as a disseminator of communist propaganda while a POW in the Vietnam War, and notes that McCain may have lied about being tortured in order to cover up his alleged propagandizing on behalf of the North Vietnamese. Unz links to this article from Counterpunch which goes into detail about it. The article in Counterpunch refers to two Vietnam War vets who were also POWs and who are extremely skeptical of McCain’s claims, referring to this article from the Phoenix New Times. Unz also refers to the lengthy article by Sydney Schanberg who in 2010 wrote about the other scandal that most people don’t know about, that of McCain along with John Kerry as U.S. Senators engaging in official cover-up of the many American Vietnam War POWs who were left behind in Vietnam. If you are interested in all this, check out those articles.

So, Donald Trump may actually be right that McCain is no hero.

Unz writes:

Placed in this context, John McCain’s tales of torture make perfect sense. If he had indeed spent almost the entire war eagerly broadcasting Communist propaganda in exchange for favored treatment, there would have been stories about this circulating in private, and fears that these tales might eventually reach the newspaper headlines, perhaps backed by the hard evidence of audio and video tapes. An effective strategy for preempting this danger would be to concoct lurid tales of personal suffering and then promote them in the media, quickly establishing McCain as the highest profile victim of torture among America’s returned POWs, an effort rendered credible by the fact that many American POWs had indeed suffered torture.

Once the public had fully accepted McCain as our foremost Vietnam war-hero and torture-victim, any later release of his propaganda tapes would be dismissed as merely proving that even the bravest of men had their breaking point. Given that McCain’s father was one of America’s highest-ranking military officers and both the Nixon Administration and the media had soon elevated McCain to a national symbol of American heroism, there would have been enormous pressure on the other returning POWs, many of them dazed and injured after long captivity, not to undercut such an important patriotic narrative.

I must reemphasize that I am not an expert on the Vietnam War and my cursory investigation is nothing like the sort of exhaustive research that would be necessary to establish a firm conclusion on this troubling case. I have merely tried to provide a plausible account of McCain’s war record and highlight some of the important pieces of evidence that a more thorough researcher should consider. Unlike the documentation of the POW cover up accumulated by Schanberg and others, which I regard as overwhelmingly conclusive, I think the best that may be said about my reconstruction of McCain’s wartime history is that it seems more likely correct than not. However, I should mention that when I discussed some of these items with Schanberg in 2010 and suggested that John McCain had been the Tokyo Rose of the Vietnam War, he considered it a very apt description.

Freedom of Speech in America

Here is my latest article on Activist Post, Freedom of Speech in America

July 26, 2017

The Daily Caller has an article about an Art professor who was run out of town by militant LGBT morons and made to resign from the School of the Art Institute of Chicago. According to the Daily Caller, Michael Bonesteel “was lecturing on the work of Henry Darger when he displayed a particular painting showing young females with male sex organs. Bonesteel suggested that the disturbing scene might indicate that Darger was a victim of sexual abuse as a boy. This theory apparently outraged a transgender student in his class, who issued a formal complaint.”

Now, first of all, this is an Art class, not a Psychology class. The professor’s psychoanalysis doesn’t really add up to me. But anyway, it really takes a lot of chutzpah for that student to actually file a complain against the professor, just because the student felt offended by some little discussion of a painting and its sexual connotations.

The young people these days are incredibly narcissistic, and, rather than the student trying to deal with his/her “triggered” fragile sense of being, instead he/she initiates the process of destroying the professor’s career. That is how pathologically selfish many of today’s young people are.

And then another student “made ‘accusations of racism and homophobia’ against Bonesteel and objected to the teacher not offering advance warning that he was going to say ‘rape’ during the class discussion. Another complaint was lodged.”

Can you believe this? You have to warn the delicate snowflakes that you might say a word that might “trigger” something? So, these little dysfunctional creeps want to force others to have to be self-conscious of every word they might utter, that might offend, trigger, or “microaggress.” How can anyone live that way?! It’s nuts!

According to the Daily Caller, Bonesteel “has since described the art institute has having a ‘toxic environment’ [Ya think?] and working at a college that ‘feels more like a police state than a place where academic freedom and the open exchange of ideas is valued’.”

The colleges and universities used to be the places where freedom of speech flourished, and where there was actual tolerance of various forms of speech that some people might have thought to be “offensive.” But no more, unfortunately.

One problem with the young people is that so many of them now are brainwashed with irrational beliefs and assertions. They act like trained robots responding to the official “offensive speech” of the day, or anything remotely similar to that.

Unfortunately, many faculty and college administrators are going along with the fascist anti-free speech persecution of those who may not have neurotically planned every single word and syllable precisely in a way that would be permissible every second of the day in the classroom or outside the classroom.

Do we really want a society in which everyone must be completely conscious of every word one is saying or might say, for fear that some moron might report us to “the authorities”? In Germany during the 1930s and 1940s, it wasn’t just the secret police that people feared. Germans were encouraged to report on their neighbors, co-workers, and family members any kind of speech or behavior that could be considered disloyal to the regime, although, according to historian professor Robert Gellately, the motivations of many Germans for reporting on people included jealousy, greed and other “petty differences.”

Why does it seem that that is happening all over again? But this time it isn’t “loyalty to the regime” (except when Obama was the Dear Leader, of course), but adherence to idiotic political correctness and obsession with race and gender. The brainwashing includes denying that human beings consist of two and only two sexes, male and female, and a viciously enforced bias against “white males,” as well as this extra protection for little snots from hearing “triggering” words or phrases, particularly in the racial area.

And this made-up “transgender” stuff. And yes, that’s all made up. No one is “transgender,” but there are people now who are confused about their actual gender or in denial of it, which is probably a part of a larger confusion about themselves and their lives in general. And I have a right of freedom of speech to express my views about that, by the way. Just as any college student or otherwise young person has a right to question today’s irrational politically correct speech codes, and not be punished for it.

Which brings me to the people who have more power over the rest of us than some pathetic fascists on college campuses: The U.S. Congress. What are they up to now? On behalf of AIPAC, Congress is set to pass restrictions on what Americans may or may not say or think about Israel. According to Glenn Greenwald and Ryan Grim, the bill is to criminalize support for the international boycott of Israel, making that a felony, and those who violate the law “will face a minimum civil penalty of $250,000 and a maximum criminal penalty of $1 million and 20 years in prison.”

The article points out that the bill has many sponsors in both the House and the Senate, and so far, not one member of Congress has denounced the ant-freedom of speech bill. That’s because many of them are gutless wonders, and they know that any criticism of Israel causes one to be accused of anti-Semitism or “Holocaust denial,” accused reflexively by ignorant people who do not seem to actually think about what the critic has said.

Now, I’m not a part of any boycotting campaign. However, I do think that the U.S. government should cut all foreign aid to Israel and every other country, because the U.S. Constitution doesn’t authorize the federal government to distribute U.S. treasury funds to foreigners. It also doesn’t authorize the government to have its military bases and troops stationed on any other foreign territory that is not U.S. territory, so all U.S. foreign military bases need to be closed down and all U.S. troops need to return to the U.S. But I digress.

You see, the campaign to criminalize speech won’t stop at just supporting a boycott against Israel. It will then include any criticism of Israel in any way, which some countries have attempted to outlaw or have outlawed, such as Canada and France. I’ve already written plenty of criticism of Israel and Zionism, including explaining why I am not a Zionist. And a lot of that is online. My criticisms are legitimate, and those who feel “offended” can write their own criticisms in response rather send the speech police after me.

In America, the so-called founders seriously believed in the protection of speech, thought and conscience, and the protection of the people’s criticism of government officials, of the Regime, of noteworthy public figures, of religion and religious figures and of other social matters and norms, and of other countries. That is why the early Americans wrote the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

It might be helpful for members of Congress and college professors and students to take a look at the Constitution and at some literature that has been written about the First Amendment and freedom of speech. Because eventually, they will see their own views and expressions suppressed or criminalized by the people in power later on.

Activist Post | Creative Commons 2017

National Review Endorsing Soviet-Style Healthcare?

The crazed neocons at the National Review are now pushing single payer health care. National Review in the past was known as a “conservative” magazine, but obviously not now. In the video below, NR executive editor Reihan Salam explains why single payer health care should be considered (to further take the entire medical system down with the rest of Titanic Amerika). He obviously was inspired by SovietCare. (I thought the people at National Review were against communism…)

Salam begins by saying something nice about free markets, but then says you have to have a “safety net,” i.e. a government safety net. He makes the assumption that government must “step in” when people are going bankrupt to get expensive medical treatment. But the question is, will government step in in a “sane, sensible” way that saves taxpayers money, or will it step in in a way that costs huge amounts of money for those providers who are “gaming the system”?

Now, we’re talking about government, you know. “Sane”? “Sensible”? “Sane and sensible government”? What planet is he on?

So, Salam makes all these irrelevant points, and seems to be throwing in some pro-free market talking points at times. But the point is, he really is suggesting that conservatives and Republicans perhaps ought to get with the Democrats on single payer. However, he may be merely propagandizing on behalf of more federal government control over the people, which is what the national security state seems to want and would explain why this push for single payer, or nationalized government-run health care. That wouldn’t be a surprise given National Review‘s history as a CIA front.

Salam should read Soviet dissident and defector Yuri Maltsev’s article on Soviet medicine, as well as Anna Ebeling’s article. And try considering why exactly ObamaCare is failing and why totally free markets in health care would be better for everyone.

Nevertheless, Salam really does crack me up with his Twilight Zonish, Star Trekish facial expressions, and Tucker Carlson also with his “trying to wrap my brain around your proposals” perplexed face throughout the interview.

Some Recent Thoughts I’ve Had

White House spokesman Sean Spicer has resigned, and is being replaced by Sarah Huckabee Sanders. That’s good, because I didn’t like hearing a “spokesman” who sounded like he was still in middle school.

Prediction: the thorns of the Republican party will cave, like Mike Lee, etc., and sign on to the Trump-Ryan-McConnell compromise on health care and pass it with Trump signing this newest version of socialized medicine. Republicans love socialism just as much as Democrats, and they ALL have enriched themselves via socialist redistribution schemes. So, no more ObamaCare, but hello RethugliCare.

It’s amazing how the people of the Left and their mainstream media flunkies have been obsessed with this Russia-Russia-Russia narrative, just because they hate Donald Trump. The whole Russia witch hunt is based entirely on fake news, it’s all made up. And I’m not a Trump supporter as readers of this blog know. And the reason the government groupies of the mainstream media hate Donald Trump is all to with political correctness! They hate him with a passion because he has said some tasteless things that were said to be “sexist” or “racist,” even though he is clearly not a racist. (He might be a “sexist,” but I would say it’s just that he’s old-fashioned, nothing wrong with that.)

So it’s all based on political correctness and things he has said, and not really his policies. The mainstream media snowflakes don’t even understand that on those particular social issues Trump actually agrees with them. And I have pointed this out before, in which he has pro-gay marriage, affirmative action, and he supports transgender bathroom switching. In other words, Ted Cruz was right about one thing, Trump is about “New York values.”

And while Trump is bad on other issues, such as immigration, the drug war, and military-worship and foreign interventionism, the Left and media don’t care about those issues. They care about things Trump says, and as long as he says politically incorrect things, that’s what matters.

Speaking of the Left and all that stuff, Salem Radio talk host Dennis Prager was quoted as tweeting, “The news media in the West pose a far greater danger to Western civilization than Russia does.” And he got a lot of flak for it.

I’ve heard Prager on his radio show quite a lot assert how “morally superior” the West is. However, the governments of the West have not been morally superior, they have acted immorally. For instance, when the militaries of the U.S. and Europe targeted civilian population centers for death, such as Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and Dresden during World War II, and their many other atrocities. These Western governments have mass-murdered many more millions of innocent human beings than Islamic terrorists have killed, it’s not even close. (But sadly, it’s too politically incorrect to point out those truths.)

Or when the U.S. government started a war of aggression against Iraq in 1991 for no good reason, bombing and destroying civilian water and sewage treatment centers and imposing sanctions to intentionally prevent the Iraqis from rebuilding and thus their having to use untreated water, talk about sadistic and evil. The U.S. police state engages in so much evil, from starting two new wars of aggression after 9/11, the bureaucrats’ due process-destroying Patriot Act, evil torture of innocents, spying on innocents, spying on their own fellow innocent Americans without suspicion, and as I mentioned in my previous post, “asset forfeiture” a.k.a. theft, robbery, thuggery, hooliganism, etc. But the conservatives defend all that with blind, unthinking obedience. It’s hard to take Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, Hugh Hewitt, Mike Galagher, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity et al. seriously.

So I just wanted to conclude that another good thing besides Sean Spicer resigning would be Robert Mueller resigning as special counsel on the Russia-Russia-Russia “investigation” i.e. witch hunt. Mueller is a long time friend of former FBI director James Comey, and many of the lawyers Mueller hired for this practice of injustice are Clinton-Obama Democrats and Democrat donors. So the whole thing will be biased. It’s thoroughly disgusting.

And I don’t want the Congress to impeach Trump because that will give us a President Full-Blown Neocon Warvangelical Mike Pence. He would be much worse. At least Trump is doing something good by shaking up the Establishment in some way, and he is playing the media like a fiddle, easily getting them to expose themselves for who they really are. Trump’s policies suck, but at least those little things count for something.

What a Shame the Corrupt, Police-Statist Sessions Won’t Resign as AG

Attorney general Jeff Sessions says today that he has no plans to resign, following Donald Trump’s public criticism of Sessions in his recusing himself regarding the Russia-Russia-Russia investigation. That’s too bad. We can do without a thieving crook fascist as attorney general. He wants to strengthen so-called civil asset forfeiture. That is, government police and prosecutors stealing from innocent people their cash, not even charging the victims with crimes, just stealing their money away from them. That is why I call Sessions a “thieving crook fascist” without hesitation.

According to the WaPo, “A 2015 Institute for Justice report found that between 1997 and 2013, 87 percent of the Department of Justice’s forfeitures did not require any criminal charge or conviction.” Jeff Sessions is a former prosecutor. I think he has some loyalty to his fellow prosecutors and all the government police I’m sure he helped to loot the public. These government bureaucrats really don’t believe in the “rule of law,” as they constantly brag.

Speaking of police, Becky Akers writes of the latest episode of police hysterics, in which a lady called government police, thinking they would help her son who had just broken up with his girlfriend. Here’s a shocker: the government police came over and shot the guy dead. (Hmm, that sort of thing never happens!)

Becky writes:

This time, it’s a young man depressed over breaking up with his girlfriend. He retreated to his bedroom, explaining to his parents that he wanted to be alone. But his girlfriend had already called the cops because she was “[c]oncerned about his state of mind.” Mistake #1.

Mistake #2: “[His mother] felt certain the police would help her son. The great-granddaughter of a small-town police chief in New York, she said she has always felt safe around police.” Meanwhile, his poor dad not only talked to the cops when they called, per the girlfriend’s request, he later phoned the thugs again. You won’t be surprised when I tell you the police of Hingham, Massachusetts, sent a small army, including a SWAT team, to “help” a guy who only wanted some solitude for his broken heart. An all-night siege ensued, I kid you not. As the article’s headline puts it, “His parents said he just needed to sleep. A SWAT team came instead.”

In the meantime, never, never, never, NEVER call the cops. NEVER. NEVER. These homicidal maniacs will kill you and your family soon as look at you.

Some of the talk radio personalities I listen to absolutely worship the government police, mainly because they worship government, a.k.a. the State, in my view. There is nothing that government’s armed “men in blue” could do wrong or that gets criticized by the conservatives. As commenter “Donxon” wrote in Robert Wenzel’s blog regarding government police planting drugs to criminally frame innocent people, “What is it with conservatives and cop-worship? It’s juvenile and silly, like a 6 year old being obsessed with Spider Man.”

Yup.

Repealing ObamaCare, and Asset Forfeiture

It appears that the newest revision of the Republicons’ “Repeal and Replace” of ObamaCare does not have enough votes in the Senate. So now they are considering a full repeal and not replace, a repeal which they already voted on in both houses and sent to Obama who vetoed it in 2015.

Yes. Repeal ObamaCare. The problem is, however, that if the repeal passes and Trump signs it, they will delay it for two years. So they can figure out a “replacement plan.” Sorry, but just replace it with freedom. No delaying the repeal, please, because there’s no reason to delay the repeal.

Repeal it now, root and branch, and just let the insurance companies, medical patients and consumers, doctors and hospitals all make their own adjustments. They can and will do this, and more people will have what they want in health care and afford it, if you meddlers in Washington would just get the hell out of their way!

But no, the control freaks want to have a “plan” in place. Well, excuse me, but every one of your government plans sucks, and destroys what you are intruding yourselves into. Just look as bankrupt Social Security, Medicare, and everything else from the drug war to the Iraq war. You people in Washington really suck at everything you try to do, because it is not your place to get yourselves involved in health care, retirement planning, or nation building.

No more government plans, please.

And also in the news was the ignorant attorney general Jeff Sessions, who is actually worse than Janet Reno, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, and John Mitchell combined. Sessions is bragging about wanting to increase “asset forfeiture” thefts of innocent people by police and DEA/FBI/ATF thugs. Doesn’t Sessions understand the ideas of due process and presumption of innocence? This neanderthal ignoramus is a vicious drug warrior, is totally opposed to free market capitalism when it comes to immigration, labor, and employment, and he wants government police to steal from people who have not been convicted of anything. And worse, he wants to steal from people for acts that are totally peaceful, non-crimes such as involving drugs, in his fascist drug war. I hope he is impeached or fired by Trump because this Sessions guy is incredibly ignorant and his policies are as un-American as you can get. Perhaps replacing Sessions with Judge Andrew Napolitano would be a good idea? Sessions really needs to read the U.S. Constitution, because I don’t think he has ever seen it.

More Articles of Interest

Paul Craig Roberts on my how things have changed in Amerika.

Becky Akers on transgenderism and the State.

Istvan Marko, J. Scott Armstrong, William M. Briggs, Kesten Green, Hermann Harde, David R. Legates, Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, and Willie Soon say that REAL climate science shows that Trump was right to exit the Paris agreement.

Justin Raimondo asks, Was Trump Jr. framed?

Zero Hedge asks, Why did AG Loretta Lynch grant Trump Jr.’s Russian lawyer a special Visa to enter America?, and discusses a report that Lynch may have tapped Paul Manafort’s phone during the meeting with the Russian lawyer.

Robert Wenzel says that the Donald Trump Jr. meeting is more proof that there was no Russian collusion.

Edward Herman discusses fake news on Russia in the New York Times, 1917-2017.

James Bovard discusses Obama’s AWOL anti-war protest.

Jonathan Newman on Trump’s Maoist steel obsession.

Robert Murphy discusses the private production of roads. (Comments)

Radley Balko on how the NRA’s allegiance to cops undermines its credibility on gun rights.

Jacob Hornberger says that in America both liberals and conservatives embrace socialism.

Wendy McElroy says that de facto federal legislation of cryptocurrency is nigh.

Claire Bernish on AG Sessions’s revival of “D.A.R.E.” to hook more kids on drugs and bolster prison profits.

And Philip Giraldi asks, Why is Nikki Haley still Trump’s UN ambassador?

What Is “Offensive” or Unacceptable And What Is Not, In Civilized Society

My previous post was about the Orwellian “Ontario Human Rights Tribunal” who ordered a landlord to pay $12,000 fine for his act of “discrimination” against a Muslim tenant because the landlord didn’t take off his shoes when entering the apartment.

When something like that happens, an act of utter injustice against an innocent person like that landlord, perhaps the landlord-victim ought to immediately have the complainers charged with harassment, and endangerment as well. Reporting an innocent person to the government for some non-crime or non-issue (“discrimination”) is exposing that innocent individual to possible deprivation by government of his liberty and possible theft of his finances, as we have seen in that case. The victim might also consider having the members of that government board charged with theft or extortion in their stealing $12,000 from him.

Another example, as I have mentioned here before, is the same-sex couples who sue bakers who don’t want to bake a cake for their same-sex wedding, or florists who don’t want to make flower arrangements, and so on. In the cases I read about, the same-sex couple was easily able to find a different baker or florist who would provide services for them, but they sued the initial ones anyway.

People do not have a right to force or order someone else to do extra labor to serve them. If a baker doesn’t want to bake a cake for you, that’s too bad. In those cases in which the couple sues the baker $150,000 to punish him, that baker should immediately have the couple charged criminally with extortion and harassment, because frankly that’s what that is.

This “discrimination” crap is getting so out of hand now. The SJWs particularly of the LGBT variety are very selfish and narcissistic, in which the whole world revolves around them, you must do what they say or else, and if others don’t accept their lifestyle then such acceptance must be forced on them by law.

Another related issue is local bureaucrats and law enforcement catering to political correctness and their fear of offending people. For example, the San Francisco subway authority won’t release videos of crimes being committed against commuters, violent crimes such as assaults and thefts, according to Robert Wenzel. Releasing those videos could cause a “racially insensitive commentary” and “create a racial bias in the riders against minorities on the trains.”

Well then what is the point of having surveillance videos? How stupid is this? What these officials are doing is actively covering up crimes, they are literally committing obstruction of justice in the name of political correctness. The officials themselves should be charged with obstruction, and aiding and abetting of violent criminals. This obsession with “bias” and “race” is endangering the lives of innocent people now, this obsession with how or what people might think about others based on race.

Whatever happened to Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream of viewing others not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character? What people are doing today is the opposite of what Dr. King believed. They are paranoiacally obsessed with race and skin color, and other superficial things that don’t have actual importance in life.

Now, regarding the violent crimes in the city (or outside of the city), if most of those kinds of crimes are committed by black people, then why don’t you tell them to stop committing crimes against innocent people? And sure, there are plenty of white people who commit crimes, but the numbers of black people committing crimes are higher than those committed by white people.

And please don’t call me a “racist” for pointing out facts. Unlike today’s “liberals,” I actually care about minorities or people of color.

If we want today’s young people to stay out of trouble and to develop a respect for others, it would be helpful to them if the government would stop legislating the young people’s entry-level employment opportunities out of existence, as Walter Williams just this week once again pointed out, using the minimum wage as an example. When bureaucrats impose or raise a mandated minimum wage for entry-level jobs, many employers can’t afford to pay their entry-level workers such higher wages, so the employers cut the jobs entirely.

Walter Williams, the author of Race and Economics, noted that unions have for decades been scheming to use minimum wage laws to lock black workers out of higher paying jobs. And George Reisman showed how minimum wage laws force low-skilled workers to have to compete with higher skilled workers. The government and its evil bureaucrats pit this group of people against that group, one against the other.

And besides the minimum wage, other regulations, tax-thefts, etc., are imposed on businesses by bureaucrats that make it more difficult or impossible for black entrepreneurs to even start a business.

As Jacob Hornberger wrote, “Imagine how many black entrepreneurs in the inner cities could start up businesses if there was no minimum wage law. They could start up the business by hiring black teenagers in the area at, say, $5 an hour. Everyone would benefit — the teenagers, the business owners, and the consumers. Alas, owing to minimum wage laws, we never see those businesses come into existence. It’s what libertarian economists Frederic Bastiat and Henry Hazlitt termed the unseen consequences of government programs.”

Besides wage and price controls and business regulations and fees imposed by greedy, power-hungry government bureaucrats, the racist drug war also makes it difficult for young black youths to get their foot in the door. By the way, the racist drug war is being imposed and operated by bureaucrats, Democrat and Republican, white and black, Asian and Hispanic, bureaucrats of all colors, shapes and sizes. Bureaucrats are very evil, they are criminals, in my view.

As Ron Paul pointed out, yes the drug war does have racist origins, and it is still being carried out in a very racist way, mainly against black people. Dr. Paul has called Donald Trump and attorney general Jeff Sessions’s stepping up of the war on drugs quite authoritarian. (But not alcohol that is perhaps the preferred drug of Washington’s elites. They MUST have their booze!)

Legalize all drugs, because this nanny state stuff is ridiculous and is really hurting the country. The nanny state drug war is teaching Americans that they need not take responsibility for their own actions and decisions. Mommy and Daddy gubmint will decide for you what you may or may not ingest in your own body!

Speaking of responsibility, it would be helpful for the “black community” to discourage all forms of violence, and to raise their children to have respect for others. You know, remind them that stealing is immoral? Remind them that initiating aggression against others is unacceptable. Aren’t mothers doing that with their kids anymore? And if not, why not?

And also, how about discouraging drug usage, and ostracizing those who are involved in drugs, are taking drugs or dealing or selling them. And encourage that young males either use birth control or if they get their girlfriends pregnant then marry them and be a husband and father. Take some responsibility for your life, for heaven’s sake.

We Shouldn’t Mock the West As Very Orwellian Now?

This article on WND begins:

Canada is now fining its citizens for offending people of the Islamic faith.

John Alabi, 53, is a Christian and a landlord who lives in the Toronto area and is being ordered to pay a fine of $12,000 by the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal because he failed to remove his shoes when he entered the apartment he was renting to a Muslim couple.

His crime? Religious discrimination, according to the tribunal.

The tenants were planning to move out of his rental home, and he says he gave the couple the required 24-hours notice that he would be showing the apartment to another tenant.

So, the owner of the property is violating the tenants‘ “human rights” because he didn’t take off his shoes? His not taking off his shoes is “discriminating“!

Was he guilty of a “microaggression”?

Where will all this end?

You know, eventually microaggressions and discriminatory acts will be when people complain about others trespassing on their own property. If someone such as “squatters” decide to take over someone’s property, the owner can’t complain. If he does, that’s “discrimination.” That’s a “microaggression.”

A white person goes into a store to buy stuff and scares a snowflake because of his being a white person, that’s “discrimination” and a “microaggression” that’s violating the snowflake’s “human rights.” The snowflake has a right to sue the white guy, or even bring criminal charges against him of “terrorizing.”

If a Jewish person goes outside wearing a yarmulke and causes a Muslim to be terrified, that’s a microagression. Take off the yarmulke, or you’re under arrest.

If someone complains against a drunk driver for crashing into his car, that’s a “microaggression” against the drunk driver. Drunks have a right to drive recklessly and crash into others’ cars. (Or pedestrians.) Dare not discriminate against drunks or other “persons with disabilities.”

And if an individual is assaulted by another and goes to the police to report the assault, that’s also “discrimination,” and the complainer should be arrested for violating the assaulter’s human rights. And yes, I really believe that we will eventually see this kind of Orwellian crapola. Will certain people of certain races or religions have a “right” or a “human right” to assault others or do whatever they want? And yes it will matter what the people’s skin color or race or religion is, based on the past discrimination and other crimes by people in the past, such as slave owners, etc.

Or am I way off on this?

Soviet Amerika Created by the Alleged Anti-Commie Government Goons and Spooks

This past week Donald Trump has been in Poland. Please stay there, we’re better off with him there, anywhere but here. The conservatives on talk radio have been defending him like they would with Ronald Reagan. Well, even though I disagree with Trump on just about everything, I do appreciate his manipulating the mainstream media into exposing their true beings from within their drug-burned brains. They are bending over backwards to expose themselves as partisan hacks.

Now, I’m not a collectivist and I don’t believe in group identity politics, but I can say that most of the media are not for telling the truth, for getting the entire who, what, where, when, why, how, etc. Their news coverage is agenda driven, and now it’s to the point of lying and making stuff up, such as the “Russia-Hacking-the-Election-Russia-Trump-Collusion” lies.

It’s made up, but many of them in the media actually believe the “Russia-Hacking-the-Election-Russia-Trump-Collusion” lie  because that is what the top intelligence people have told them, despite the lack of evidence to prove those assertions. I’m not even sure the people in the intelligence community actually believe it. And that is because they themselves are agenda driven. Supposedly the G-men and spooks are fixated on the Commies-Are-The-Enemy narrative, but some people don’t particularly believe their sincerity because the NSA, FBI and CIA are aware of the CIA’s (and others’) ability to hack or manipulate a computer device and leave the cyber fingerprints of others to blame (such as Russians) for the hacking.

I wonder what the conservatives and talk radio dittoheads have to say about Donald Trump’s sending federal agents or FBI/ATF goons in to local districts to enforce local or state laws, such as gun laws. Adam Dick writes about the feds now helping Chicago and other districts in confiscating “illegal guns.” I wonder what all the anti-gun control pro-2nd Amendment conservatives think about all that.

The Posse Comitatus Act is supposed to restrain the military from getting involved in local law (sic) enforcement, but should there be some sort of rule against other federal goons from engaging in such local “enforcement”? When we have federal agents roaming the streets in Amerika, and if you support that, then you may want to re-read Article III Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution, which defines Treason, referring to mainly those who would turn the guns and enforcement apparatus against the people of the states, including the kind of unconstitutional Chicago gun-grabbing about which Adam Dick writes.

And what could possibly go wrong with such a policy? After all, this current President Donald Trump thinks that eminent domain is a wonderful thing, he believes in central planning on steroids, government-controlled trade and universal health care, he won’t touch entitlements, and he’s a militarist warmonger despite all his rhetoric in 2016. So why should we assume that his pro-2nd Amendment rhetoric in 2016 was actually sincere?

Unfortunately, I think that the conservatives’ love and adoration for armed government authority and government police outweighs their alleged support of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. i.e. if there were a choice between having an armed citizenry and a disarmed government or an armed government and a disarmed citizenry, the conservatives would choose the latter.

And Trump called North Korea “dangerous,” yet, as Tom Knapp pointed out, while North Korea hasn’t invaded another country since 1950 (that being South Korea), the U.S. government has invaded and bombed many other countries and caused the deaths of millions since then. But the True Believers in “American Exceptionalism” think that’s okay. The U.S. is above the law and the U.S. government can act lawlessly and murderously with impunity. America is God’s chosen nation and it rules the world. Get those gooks, Donald. Right?

And what a government we have in Washington, with only a few members of Congress supporting legislation to ban the U.S. government from arming and funding terrorists, as Alice Salles writes about regarding the Stop Arming Terrorists Act, sponsored by Rand Paul and Tulsi Gabbard. In the same way that we could put Planned Abortionhood out of business, and other rackets, we could end the U.S. government’s welfare for Boeing at al. by repealing the 16th Amendment, as well as the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and the Revenue Act of 1913. (By the way, 1913 was a very bad year, in case you didn’t know.)

Once this country had allowed the federal government (or even state or local governments) to demand payments from the people without any voluntary contract, and made such transactions involuntary, then you have legalized and institutionalized theft and the enslavement of the people and their labor.