Skip to content

Month: January 2018

Some Enlightening Articles on the Bumbling Bureaucrats’ Idiocy

Stuck inside because of global warming snowstorm blizzards or extreme deep freeze caused by global warming? Need something good to read? Try these items:

James Bovard writes about the Cliven Bundy-FBI debacle and why the feds need to be leashed, and Why Ruby Ridge still matters.

Christopher Preble says the “Cotton Doctrine” is more wars, less security. (Yes, ignoramus warmonger Tom Cotton is just right to head the CIA.)

Justin Raimondo on the Iranian rebellion: everybody’s wrong. And John Feffer says that Trump and the neocons are exploiting the Iran protest movement they know nothing about.

And James Risen writes about his life as a New York Times reporter in the shadow of the war on terror.

Washington, DC (District of Craziness)

This article by Norman Solomon discusses the social media hysteria over “Russian interference” in the 2016 election, and cites a Washington Post article admitting there’s very little evidence (i.e. no evidence) of Russia interfering or manipulating in the election in any way.

And Paul Manafort is suing special counsel Robert Mueller with the accusation that Mueller is going outside his authority in investigating the Russia-Russia-Russia fake news fiasco.

Meanwhile, Page Six has an inside source claiming that the grand jury indicting Manafort consists of possible Trump haters.

“The grand jury room looks like a Bernie Sanders rally,” my source said. “Maybe they found these jurors in central casting, or at a Black Lives Matter rally in Berkeley [Calif.]”

Of the 20 jurors, 11 are African-Americans and two were wearing “peace T-shirts,” the witness said. “There was only one white male in the room, and he was a prosecutor.”

What could go wrong?

Manafort is also suing deputy AG Rod Rosenstein. Well, how about the crooked neanderthal AG himself, Jeff Sessions, who is not concerned with “Justice,” but rather with going after people involved with marijuana — “States’ rights” be damned. You see, the reason that bureaucrats in Washington go after “illegal drugs” is because those drugs compete with the bureaucrats’ precious booze drugs. Never mind the fact that drunken boozers cause a lot of accidents and deaths on the roads, get diseases such as liver cancer or Alzheimer’s, and that boozing drunks break up marriages and families. But the Washington drunks gotta have their booze! So they go after potheads (and political opponents). So brave.


Government Is Not a “Necessary Evil.”

Well, after my post of two days ago on government buffoonery and conservative authoritarianism, already yesterday I heard both Dennis Prager and Michael Medved on the radio saying more annoying things, more finger-nails-against-the-chalk-board stuff. It’s bad enough we have this constant 0-10° (F) temps outside and now another snowstorm tomorrow. But what are my choices on the radio, a conservative, another conservative, and loony-leftists on the NPR stations.

Dennis Prager was going on about how evil communism is, and the evil things that communists did throughout the 20th century. But these authoritarian conservatives rarely if ever bring up the evil crimes committed by the U.S. government, the communists statists in Washington. Who the hell starts wars against other countries that were of no threat to us, as our government has been doing?

George H.W. Bush started a war against Iraq in 1991, bombed and destroyed Iraq’s civilian water treatment centers and imposed sanctions to prevent repairs intentionally to cause the Iraqi people to have to use untreated water which caused diseases and hundreds of thousands of deaths.  That’s not evil?

And then his son George W. Bush started two wars of aggression against two countries, Iraq a second time, and Afghanistan, neither of which was any threat to the U.S., and neither of which was involved in 9/11 (which wouldn’t have happened had the first Bush President not started his war in 1991 and imposed those murderous sanctions which Clinton continued throughout the 1990s!).

But many people obediently rationalize such aggressions on behalf of their beloved belligerent rulers. The double standard of the True Believers in American Exceptionalism is amazing. I guess you really have to be brainwashed to accept this notion that it’s morally acceptable for the U.S. government to invade, bomb and occupy foreign territories but it wouldn’t be morally acceptable for foreign regimes to do the same to America.

The True Believers in American Exceptionalism including the aforementioned conservatives believe in group identity politics, in my view. Just like those on the Left who live their lives based on group identities, race, gender, etc. A I have said before, nationalism is a form of collectivism, and it is destructive, and immoral.

This collectivist nationalism stuff is why we have the “Build the Wall!” useful idiots, on talk radio and other commentators like that floozie Ann Coulter who are obsessed with seeing Americans all as one collective and wanting to lock out the foreigners, as they lump all foreigners with the actual criminal ones. Collectivists who do not understand the ideas of individualism, private property and free markets see foreigners who are in the U.S. territory without a bureaucrat’s permission as “criminals.” Real advocates of free-market capitalism don’t build government walls, they don’t use the armed power of government to lock out workers, producers and consumers. No, real advocates of free markets are traders, and want to expand their trading associations and contracts, not limit them.

If there is a government wall on the border, with armed guards and Ann’s beloved snipers, get ready for future administrations who will use the wall to keep the people in, not out. That’s what I mean by “useful idiot.”

And also yesterday, I heard Michael Medved on the radio discussing the announced retirement of government fossil Orrin Hatch, who might be replaced by the power-hungry Willard Romney. And Medved was saying that people shouldn’t be cynical about politics and that wannabe parasites like Romney shouldn’t be criticized or laughed at.

Politics is a noble endeavor, according to the statist Medved. Honestly, these Salem Radio talk show personalities are perfect examples of the “most dangerous superstition,” as Larken Rose would put it.

Sorry, the truth is that politics is inherently dishonest, immoral and leads to evil and destruction. And worse, Medved and many of today’s conservatives are intellectuals, i.e. apologists for the State and its evil destruction.

According to Franz Oppenheimer in his book The State, there are two main ways of acquiring wealth, the political and the economic. The economic means is the way of voluntary exchange, by trading peacefully via voluntary contracts. The other way that today’s statists and intellectuals favor, the political means, is the way of coercion, the way of confiscation of the property and wealth of others, the way of the State. This is why today’s conservatives defend the income tax, and don’t call for its outright repeal.

As Murray Rothbard pointed out:

The “political means” siphons production off to a parasitic and destructive individual or group; and this siphoning not only subtracts from the number producing, but also lowers the producer’s incentive to produce beyond his own subsistence. In the long run, the robber destroys his own subsistence by dwindling or eliminating the source of his own supply. But not only that; even in the short-run, the predator is acting contrary to his own true nature as a man.

We are now in a position to answer more fully the question: what is the State? The State, in the words of Oppenheimer, is the “organization of the political means”; it is the systematization of the predatory process over a given territory.

And it is the State, or more precisely its “leaders” and its dupes and hired guns, who criminally start wars and cause death and destruction and blowback, as well as subjugates and enslaves its own people. If you want to oppose immorality and evil, then you would have to criticize, not idolize, the State. Especially the evil U.S. government.

The Latest Examples of Statism, Government Buffoonery, and Liberal and Conservative Authoritarianism

There have been many recent examples of U.S. government buffoonery and nationalist authoritarianism (or authoritarian nationalism, if you prefer). While I don’t have all day now, I’ll try to cover some of the important developments recently.

Activist Post has an article by Rachel Blevins on how the mainstream media and the FBI have pushed another fake terror attack even when their patsy resisted. There are still many people who refuse to believe that the FBI would deliberately pick some young mentally deficient Muslim or convert, motivate him to commit “jihad,” set him up with materials to entrap him in order to thwart the FBI’s own FBI-concocted plot. “Why, the FBI wouldn’t do that, we trust the FBI to do the right thing,” say the True Believers. Even after years and years now of the FBI concocting their own plots to thwart and many articles and books written about all that, there are still people who don’t know about what the bureaucrats in Washington are doing. Or if they do hear about it they don’t believe it, because, being submissive obedient sheeple like the Salem Radio talk show hosts and other dittoheads, they have a blind faith in the gubmint bureaucracy that rules over them.

Related to all that, Glenn Greenwald has this article about the Israeli regime requesting Facebook to delete accounts the regime decides are causing “incitement,” when really most of the account holders are merely Palestinian activists who are attempting to inform one another on the various crimes taking place there, as well as in some cases people merely criticizing the regime. And the double standard! Greenwald writes: “As Al Jazeera reported last year, ‘Inflammatory speech posted in the Hebrew language … has attracted much less attention from the Israeli authorities and Facebook.’ One study found that “122,000 users directly called for violence with words like ‘murder,’ ‘kill,’ or ‘burn.’ Arabs were the No. 1 recipients of hateful comments.’ Yet there appears to be little effort by Facebook to censor any of that.”

I have heard some people assert that criticism of Israel is “anti-Semitic.” And, speaking of Salem Radio nudniks, while writing that criticism of Israel is not anti-Semitic, Dennis Prager has stated that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitic. Hmm, I don’t see much of a difference. I am critical of Zionism and Israel because I am not a collectivist. During the 20th Century, if people needed a “safe haven,” they could’ve come to the U.S. (If only FDR didn’t turn the Jews away and make them go back to the concentration camps, that is.) There was no practical need to fabricate a new artificial country in the Middle East. I am also not a Bible believer which Prager is, and the current state of Israel is based mainly on the Bible, and not on practicality, and certainly not based on morality. Prager goes on about “morality” constantly on his radio show, yet he supports immoral policies, like invading Iraq, and has said that the U.S. military involvement in the Vietnam War was a good thing, because “communism is bad.” (And now we have a united communist North and South Vietnam. And because of the U.S. military’s involvement, many innocent civilians were murdered, as well as 58,000 Americans dead. But I digress.)

No, criticism of Israel is generally not referring to the whole state of Israel, but its regime and its military. The Israeli government deserves to be criticized when it wages war on the million people of Gaza, it bombs civilian homes and schools, and imposes a blockade which prevents Gazans from getting outside Gaza just to get medical treatment in Israel, and when the regime enables so-called settlers to seize lands away from Palestinians. So, if I criticize Israel, it is not because I am an “anti-Semite,” or a “self-hating Jew,” but because I am anti-militarism, anti-police state, anti-socialism and anti-central planning. The same thing applies to my criticism of Washington, by the way.

There is another thing with the Salem Radio talk hosts and other dittoheads, in their politically correct siding with the “protesters” in Iran. That is because they hate the Iranian regime and blame them as the “#1 sate sponsor of terror,” even though these conservatives rarely if ever criticize the Saudi regime, which actually IS the #1 state sponsor of terror! You see, because of their blind faith in central planning and in a militaristic and covetous approach to international relations, many people don’t understand that it was the CIA who imposed a coup in Iran in 1953 (and for oil, of course) and propped up the Shah and his SAVAK police state, which tyrannized and thus radicalized many in Iran leading up to the Revolution of 1979 and rule by the Ayatollahs since then. That probably wouldn’t have happened had the CIA not imposed a coup and forced a totalitarian police state on the Iranians. But the True Believers in central planning love their CIA, their FBI and all the rest.

Speaking of being Against Central Planning, Walter Block has this new article on what to do with North Korea. Stop all the “war games” (i.e. provocations), take all U.S. troops out of South Korea (and, I would add, out of Japan and all the other areas out there, including removing all U.S. ships from the entire region), encourage talks and reunion between North and South, unilateral free trade between the U.S. and North Korea. I’m not sure about appointing Dennis Rodman as ambassador, but whatever.

Sadly, many of today’s conservatives and authoritarian nationalists act in the same way as they criticize the Left and the college snowflakes of acting, with hysteria, with chicken-little-ish running around in circles being afraid of all the monsters, like Iran and North Korea. That’s because they believe the propaganda being spoon-fed to them by their beloved bureaucrats of the regime in Washington, like the college snowflakes believe all the propaganda about “triggering,” “microaggressions,” and racists, etc.

So the American militarists who thrive on having an enemy “over there,” no matter who it is, will not approve of any kind of diplomacy or acting morally. They don’t see the U.S. government and military’s actions outside the U.S. for the past century as immoral. Many people are raised with an authoritarian mentality, in addition to blindly worshiping their rulers in Washington. They really believe that America is “divinely inspired,” and the U.S. regime in Washington may do whatever it wants outside the U.S., including starting wars of aggression and bombing other countries, regardless of the hundreds of thousands of innocents who are murdered by the regime. (Noam Chomsky recently discussed “why the world hates America,” listing one immoral and criminal act of militaristic aggression after another committed by the U.S. regime in Washington.) But, as Lawrence Wittner discusses, the “Merchants of Death” continue to survive and prosper. Collectivism, socialism, and central planning, folks, that’s what militarists stand for, really.

Related to all this, Laurence Vance writes about the “So what?” Christians. He writes:

I have written many times about Christian jihadists, Old Testament Christians, Christian armchair warriors, theological schizophrenics, Christian Coalition moralists, nuclear Christians, Janus Christians, evangelical warvangelicals, Catholic just war theorists, reich-wing Christian nationalists, theocon Values Voters, imperial Christians, pro-lifers for mass murder, Red-State Christian fascists, bloodthirsty Christian conservatives, beam Christians, nuclear Christians, Christian Coalition moralists, double-minded Christians, Christian warmongers, God and country Christian bumpkins, sniper theologians, Christian military idolaters, conservative Christian militarists, and members of the Christian axis of evil.

The So what? Christian, when presented with some negative assertion about the U.S. government, the U.S. military, U.S. wars, or U.S. foreign policy, instead of inquiring as to its validity, doing some research, or spending more than three seconds thinking about it, dismisses it with “So what?,” usually followed by some ridiculous statement.

Here are some examples.

The U.S. military has bombed Afghan wedding parties: So what? The bride and groom were going to produce potential terrorists.

The U.S. military has killed thousands of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan: So what? They are just collateral damage.

And he lists many more examples of the “So what?” Christian moral relativists. But sadly, many of the So what? moral relativists also consist of Jews, atheists and people of other non-Christian beliefs. (e.g. Salem Radio dittoheads Dennis Prager and Michael Medved who I have heard rationalize many, many immoral U.S. government policies. Yech.). I’ll bet that they don’t view themselves as moral relativists, yet they are exactly that.

Speaking of authoritarians, Justin Raimondo’s recent article discusses the “liberal” version of the aforementioned authoritarian American militarist conservatives, in the “liberals” own acts of domestic witch hunting. And Charles Burris adds some further comments on that, with many links to follow. Both give a good historical perspective on the witch-hunters of the Left.

The Salem Radio hosts and dittoheads don’t realize just how close to the Left they really are in their collectivist ideology and authoritarianism, but that is why I’m here, to point that out. (Also, Ron Paul discusses the relationship between political immorality and personal immorality.)

Speaking of the Left and their crusades, the lawsuit of over $100,000 by the lesbian couple was upheld by a court as the bureaucrats of the court show that they stand with extortion as a means to punish others who exercise their right to freedom of thought and conscience, and upheld by a court to further empower activists to enslave others to serve them involuntarily. The lettered imbeciles of the appeals court wrote that bakers who refused to bake a cake for the lesbians caused “emotional harm” to the lesbians in the bakers’ quoting the Bible! Well, ignorant robed “judges,” how about the “emotional harm” done to the bakers in the lesbian activists’ crusade in dragging innocent people through the courts in order to extort money from them as well as causing the closing down of their business, even though said lesbian couple was nevertheless able to find another baker right away who would bake a stupid cake for them! Talk about criminally narcissistic! If someone does that to you, and they go to police and courts, it might be a good idea to fight back by insisting that they immediately be arrested and criminally charged with extortion, harassment and theft.