Skip to content

Month: June 2018

The Supreme Bureaucrats Narrowly Protect Your Cell Phone Data from the Police State

The U.S. Supreme Court decided 5-4 that government police must get a warrant to acquire location data in people’s phones. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion and was joined by the four liberals, with the four “conservatives” dissenting in their support of the police state and criminal gestapo tactics for government police to search and track people.

The data in your cell phone are what I would call part of one’s personal “effects,” and are protected by the Fourth Amendment which states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Your whereabouts are also part of your personal effects, in my view. And I think this should apply whether the data in question exist in one’s cell phone or on the provider’s servers (which obviously are the provider’s property). Perhaps there needs to be a specification in one’s cell or phone provider contract that specifically addresses one’s data and who may access the data and with whose permission. There needs to be more providers like Joseph Nacchio who attempted to protect his Qwest Communications customers from the criminal intrusiveness of the feds in their post-9/11 hysteria.

And what is wrong with “conservatives” like Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Anthony Kennedy in their shameful defense of the police state?

The true conservative’s answer to these questions of police searching without a warrant is that the laws they are enforcing are bad laws and should be repealed. They shouldn’t even be enforced. There needs to be a moral reinforcement by the Supreme Court in addressing bad laws by outright asserting that the laws themselves are resulting in the violation of the lives and liberty of the people, and for no good reason.

Government should not be tracking an individual unless it has a reason to suspect someone of criminal activity. And by “criminal,” I mean actual criminality, such as assault, theft or robbery, fraud, rape, murder, etc. The aforementioned case in particular did happen to involve robberies. But the problem with many of these cases is that they revolve around drugs and the goddamn drug war, as well as the many, many laws on the books regarding finances, laws which shouldn’t be on the books. So in many cases the government and its enforcers are the criminals in their violating the right of the people to be secure in their persons, papers, houses, and effects, in the government’s attempts to enforce the thousands of laws on the books which should not exist.

And it’s not as much regarding the “right to privacy” as it is the “right to be secure.” The “right to be secure” means to be protected from over-zealous, incompetent or corrupt and possibly criminally-minded government enforcers of illicit rules of bureaucracy and immoral prohibitions, many enforcers of which have caused great damage to the lives and liberty of innocent, peaceful people.

Trump’s Soviet Regime

The Center for Investigative Reporting reports that the innocent children who are being kidnapped and involuntarily imprisoned by U.S. government criminals are being given psychiatric drugs, involuntarily. In some cases they are held down and being made to receive injections, or are being given pills they are told are “vitamins,” but all which seem to be making the kids “dizzy, listless, obese and even incapacitated.” This story was discussed on Democracy Now.

According to the Center for Investigative Reporting,

One child was prescribed 10 different shots and pills, including the antipsychotic drugs Latuda, Geodon and Olanzapine, the Parkinson’s medication Benztropine, the seizure medications Clonazepam and Divalproex, the nerve pain medication and antidepressant Duloxetine, and the cognition enhancer Guanfacine.

“Parents and the children themselves told attorneys the drugs rendered them unable to walk, afraid of people and wanting to sleep constantly, according to affidavits filed April 23 in U.S. District Court in California” in their lawsuit against attorney general Jeff Sessions.”

There are other abuse allegations as well:

Shiloh is among 71 companies that receive funds from the federal government to house and supervise immigrant children deemed unaccompanied minors. These are the places set up to receive the more than 2,000 children separated from their parents in the past six weeks under the new Trump administration policy as they leave temporary way stations at the border.

An investigation by Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting found that nearly half of the $3.4 billion paid to those companies in the last four years went to homes with serious allegations of mistreating children. In nearly all cases reviewed by Reveal, the federal government continued contracts with the companies after serious allegations were raised.

Socialism Gives Us the Police State

In my previous post I made reference to “the gubmint siccing its armed and badged goons after people,” which sounds like the police state to me. Well, the police state coincides much more with socialism than with free-market capitalism. And I’m clarifying free-market capitalism as distinguished from State capitalism or crony capitalism, which probably wouldn’t exist without the coercive tax-thefts we have had in place especially since 1913.

One example of the police state associated with socialism is the education system, which has been socialized, seized and controlled by the government. If parents instead want to homeschool their kids, they must get government approval of their plans and their curriculum. What if the parents don’t get government approval and they homeschool the kids anyway? The local bureaucrats will sic the police on the parents. And there are truancy laws. The parents must send the kids off to government schools or to government-approved private schools. If the parents don’t send the kids to school, what happens to them? The local bureaucrats sic the police on them and arrest them. All that is a police state. It is not a free market in education. It is not education freedom. It is not freedom, period.

Another example is the TSA. Airport security has been socialized by the government, in its exploitative and neanderthal reaction to 9/11. By law, all airport security screeners must be federal employees (i.e. parasites). In contrast to this police state at the airports, if security were run by the airlines themselves in the free market, their private security agents and screeners would not get away with sexually molesting innocent people or assaulting them, and would be accountable under the rule of law. Government employees such as TSA or police are not accountable under the rule of law because the government IS the law.

The drug war is also an example of socialism and the socialist police state, not the free market. The government tells you what you may or may not ingest into your own body, and punishes you with violence if you disobey. In the drug war, the government seizes ownership of your body. Otherwise, if you own your own body you have the freedom to put into it whatever you want, but you are responsible for the consequences of your own decisions and actions. In the socialist drug war, the police state occurs when disobeying the government’s diktats against buying, selling or possessing certain things the government says you may not buy, sell or possess.

The free market — that is, sans government prohibition — causes prices to be lower and thus the incentive to push or traffic in drugs for profit is just not there. The higher prices on the black market that create those incentives are caused by government prohibition of drugs.

Why can’t bureaucrats and social activists just leave people the hell alone? Why do these people need to sic government police on innocent people?

Throughout the United States of America, many social activists — from the do-gooders on the left to the religionists and flag-wavers on the right — get their state and federal legislators and city councilors to make new laws to force the people to do this or that, or to prohibit the people from doing this or that, “under penalty of law.” Meaning, if you disobey their diktats they will sic the gubmint police after you. If something is punished by a fine and you don’t pay it, you will be arrested. Petty theft, as well as examples of abduction, involuntary imprisonment and government endangerment of innocent people.

My point is, the apparatus of legislating in which disobedience causes an innocent person to be criminally assaulted and caged is an apparatus of socialism. In a free market, the individual owns one’s own person and justly acquired property and all associations, transactions, interactions are voluntary. The basic rules of society are don’t steal or defraud, and don’t use aggression against others. Instead, what we have now in socialist Amerika is the police state. Not good.

Why Do Millennials Want Socialism?

Lawrence McQuillan on the Independent Institute’s blog writes about polls in which millennials today favor socialism and communism as their favored socioeconomic system, like 51% of them. Well, the main reason why 51% of them oppose and only 42% support capitalism is because most of them are just plain ignorant of what capitalism and socialism actually are, and ignorant of actual history of actual historical events which prove why one system is better and the other is not.

One reason for the ignorance is that the government schools don’t teach the youngins about actual history, and instead are tax-funded propaganda factories, indoctrinating and shaping the young people to resent and envy the success of others and to covet the fruits of others’ successes. Some cases in point to show the results of the socialist indoctrination centers include the anti-Amazon “head tax” in Seattle that is now gone and the “millionaires’ tax” in Massachusetts that was already struck down.

The bottom line on that is that bureaucrats are parasites who just can’t steal enough of other people’s wealth and earnings.

There is a difference between funding for the homeless or other social programs voluntarily and funding them coercively and involuntarily. Why do today’s social activists insist on the involuntary taking from others to exercise charitable initiatives? They can easily raise funds for worthy causes with voluntary contributions.

My answer to that is that many of the schemes that the social activists come up with are unworthy schemes (just peruse any item of legislation from your city council or state legislature, or Congress), that would or could never get funding voluntarily. Coercion and force and the threat of the gubmint siccing its armed and badged goons after people is the only way to fund unworthy schemes.

And at the same time that government schools indoctrinate the young, the schools work to instill a duty to conform to the majority consensus, and the authoritarian teachers stifle and punish the intellectual curiosity and independence impulses of the youngins and discourage individualism. This is why we have the intolerant snowflakes and cultural Marxists we have today. And the brainwashed flag-wavers and authoritarian nationalists on that side as well are products of government school indoctrination.

McQuillan also mentioned the many “socialist” candidates now on the ballots of several states for public offices and for elected judgeships. God help us all, if there is a god.

Sadly, many of the young just don’t know what actual capitalism is, and they don’t know that socialism and communism have “brought more human suffering and death to the world than any other socioeconomic system,” as Lawrence McQuillan explained in his article.

Just look at the suffering in Venezuela. The socialist Maduro government seized the means of food production and distribution away from private ownership and control, and now we have shortages, long lines, and mass starvation.

In stark contrast, just look at the grocery stores in the U.S. Mostly well-stocked shelves, many, many choices and no real long lines. Certainly no lines going around the block. Yes, this is what the free market has wrought. This is a result of private ownership of the means of food production and distribution in the U.S.

Yet, the resentful, the envious and the covetous don’t care about this actual empirical evidence that supports the benefits of freedom, free markets and the private ownership of the means of production.

And as I have mentioned in my most recent posts, the anti-free market, anti-immigration nationalists who want the government to control the lives of foreigners as well as employers and others within the U.S., are themselves socialists. The whole scheme of government central planning immigration controls are a socialist scheme, thoroughly anti-free market.

Actual freedom goes with the concepts of self-ownership, non-aggression, private property and free markets. You make use of your own body and labor, your intellectual and physical labor, your own capital and earnings and property, and you sell your labor or products or services to anyone you want, or buy whatever you want from anyone you want, it’s your choice. In freedom you aren’t required to get the government’s permission for any of those things, you don’t report your own private matters to the government, and the government doesn’t steal from you your earnings or your own wealth.

And there are some people who have been falsely led to believe that capitalism “enslaves” people, such as the employer “owns” the workers. Yes, some people really believe that.

But in my 2013 post on capitalism, I wrote,

“Owning people” doesn’t fit into capitalism. “Owning people” is what the State does under socialism. If by “capitalism” you mean “free market capitalism,” then the “capitalists” do not “own” — nor can claim any kind of ownership of — their workers, their employees. In actual free-market capitalism, no one is forced to have any association with or to do any labor for any employer one doesn’t want to work for. In free-market capitalism, your contracts with other associates or your employers are voluntary, and you are free to go work elsewhere if you don’t like that employer. In a free system, you own yourself.

Claiming actual ownership of others is the enslavement of them. And that’s what socialism does, by the State’s (regardless of its using the rhetorical guise “the public”) seizing ownership of industries, wealth and “the means of production,” which includes the people. The people are the most important amongst the means of production.

In that 2013 post I mentioned some informative articles and books to check out, such as Capitalism and the Free Market by Sheldon Richman. And also The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality by Ludwig von Mises (And the anti-immigration crowd fit into this kind of mentality, quite frankly.), Making Economic Sense by Murray Rothbard (.pdf), Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy by Joseph Schumpeter, and Markets Not Capitalism by Charles W. Johnson and Gary Chartier (Intro and TOC).

Also, read Soak the Poor and Taxation is Robbery by Frank Chodorov, and the classic Economics in One Lesson, by Henry Hazlitt.

If only the education system weren’t socialized, with the gubmint seizing control over the education of the young, and with education under the control of central planning bureaucrats, federal, state and local. If we only had education freedom and a free market in education, there would definitely be less ignorance among the young. And without a doubt they would know what socialism and capitalism really are, and would not choose socialism, that’s for sure.

The Immoral Anti-Immigration “Law” Bureaucrats and Enforcer Thugs

I wish I had more time to be able to write these posts. Yesterday’s post was longer than I had intended, and I don’t even know if I covered everything. The bottom line on this immigration issue, for me, is that central planning doesn’t work. Not in national security, health care, caring for the environment, immigration, whatever. But the people who are loving the Trump anti-foreigner stuff LOVE central planning in immigration. “Send them all back!” they scream. Bring on the police state, even though the ICE goons are going after American citizens. Yay! We hate outsiders, we hate foreigners is their message. Especially these talk radio ditto-heads. They are True Believers in American Exceptionalism, and true believers in Washington’s central planning controls that don’t work. They are just really dumb, or are extremely intellectually dishonest (or both).

Don Boudreax has a terrific post on Cafe Hayek regarding the difference between “law” and “legislation.” The law is mainly what would be common sense in a civilized society such as don’t steal, don’t defraud and don’t use aggression. Duh. But legislation are arbitrary rules, some or many of which have no sense and the enforcement of which actually violates the lives and liberty of innocent, peaceful people. But there are many ignorant statists who believe that “The law is the law, and that’s that,” like we heard from the moron Jeff Sessions the attorney general thug. (Unlike that neanderthal thug who is alleged to be the chief “law enforcement officer,” Ron Paul on the other hand understands the difference between law and legislation in his recent column suggesting that innocent people whose lives and persons are violated by TSA goons should sue the TSA for assault.)

As long as immigrants are acting peacefully (see Leonard E. Read: Anything That’s Peaceful .pdf) and haven’t violated the persons or property of others, then morally (and should be legally) you leave them the hell alone! There’s something wrong with the authoritarian collectivist nationalists like the crackpot ditto-heads who don’t see it that way.

And by the way, the biggest reason that the immigrants from Central America and Mexico (and elsewhere) are running up to the U.S. to escape tyranny, drug lords and sex traffickers is the DRUG WAR! Let’s end the drug war and we won’t have nearly as many people trying to get here. Oh wait, the talk radio ditto-heads and Donald Trump are vicious drug warriors and they don’t want to end that. They’re like the dog chasing its own tail and then biting it!

And regarding my saying that this anti-immigration policy is a “socialist” policy, notice how the ICE thugs are arresting innocent, peaceful people at their JOBS, people who are actually working and being productive people. Why don’t the enforcers arrest the “illegal” immigrant people at the welfare offices, if that’s a major complaint about the immigrants getting on welfare? (It’s because socialists like the bureaucrats and their enforcers who hate foreigners and love power don’t care about welfare parasites, because they themselves are welfare parasites, tax-eaters, living off the labor and productivity of others to do their “enforcing” against innocent, peaceful people.

Anti-Immigration Nationalists and Conservatives’ Entitlement Mentality, Group Identity Politics, and Unjust Laws

While the conservatives constantly criticize the people on the left, the college campus totalitarians, and the government media (a.k.a. mainstream media), as obsessed with group identity politics and having an entitlement mentality, many of today’s conservatives and nationalists and Trump supporters are themselves guilty of all those things. And they are the biggest collectivists as well. And it’s really annoying.

They are not supportive of private property rights, the free market, independence, they certainly are not individualists. These people, these conservatives and nationalists are themselves obsessed with group identity. Except they would not admit to it, obviously.

Their “America first” rhetoric and their ignorant views in economics and their emotionalism quite frankly is just as bad as the emotionalism from the left in their own group identity rantings. Oh, we’re Americans and “we” shouldn’t allow people to enter the country illegally. This need to separate illegal from legal is their excuse, with the unjust laws they cite that are just more examples of socialism and central planning.

With their compulsion to be dependent on government bureaucrats to protect them from “illegals” and “invaders,” they just don’t get America, which was founded on the ideas of individualism, private property and voluntary exchange.

Sadly, many people believe that central-planning government bureaucrats can somehow control the movements of millions of people, in and outside of this huge territory that spans millions of square miles and contains over 300 million people. It’s just impossible. Central planning doesn’t work. So the conservatives and nationalists need to be told this. But unfortunately, after an upbringing of spending 12 years sitting in government classrooms many people are just plain ol’ indoctrinated to have a blind faith in their rulers and the rulers’ protection, worship the flag and get a lump in their throat when hearing some song at the ball games.

So, the anti-immigration, anti-foreigner crowd are hard-core collectivists in their group identity obsessiveness. For example, this Mexican worker is applying for a job at a business over in Colorado or wherever in the U.S. The worker is peaceful, is traveling through peacefully, and hasn’t actually harmed anyone. He has nothing to do with any other immigrants who might be committing crimes against innocents. So, in this case what you do is leave the peaceful one alone. Presumption of innocence is a basic way for decent people to treat others. If you have no reason to suspect him of being dangerous, then you leave him alone. Don’t get in his way.

And that’s the American way. Leaving innocent people alone is the American way, not the Soviet way or the Nazi way, or the Venezuelan way, or the British way, but the American way. But the nationalists don’t understand that. They’re absorbed in this “citizenship defines who one is” crap to a pathological degree. “If that guy isn’t approved by the government, then we keep him out, even if he’s peaceful” is their mentality.

And they also don’t get the free market either. The nationalists have this entitlement mentality, just like the leftists. If Bob the business owner is hiring, then he will hire the workers he has determined to be most qualified for the job. If a Mexican or Guatemalan applies for the same job that three Americans have applied for, and if that non-American happens to be more qualified (and would work to best serve the customers), as determined by Bob, then if Bob wants to hire that Mexican then Bob hires that Mexican, and you don’t interfere with that. THAT’S the “free market,” not the government-controlled market that the nationalists prefer.

You see, Bob owns his business, not you, and not the government. So Bob controls every aspect of his business, in a free society. But these nationalists don’t believe in private property rights, just like the leftists. The nationalists ultimately believe that the government or the “community” has final ownership rights of each business or property within the territory.

And with their entitlement mentality, the nationalists instead believe, ignorantly, that only Americans are “entitled” to be hired at that job at Bob’s business, even if the American applicants aren’t as qualified as the Mexican one.

Sorry. The one who has the “entitlement” at Bob’s business is Bob. Morally and ethically, BOB is the one who is entitled to determine who enters his property, who he does business with, and who works there.

And there’s another doozy, this idea that immigrants are “stealing jobs from Americans.” Jeepers creepers, so what do they do, go into a business and put a gun to the boss’s head and say, “You better hire me at that job instead of that American,” or “You better fire that guy and give me his job, or else!” Yeah, right.

And immigration freedom and freedom of movement and freedom of association with property rights also means that the local church people and other voluntary organizations have a right to take in anyone they believe to be seeking safety and asylum from drug lords and sex-traffickers. The sick, deranged anti-foreigner crowd want to send innocent people back to those places of violence and tyranny. How shameful!

Unfortunately, the leftists are just as bad in their anti-property and anti-free market views. Okay, they are worse. Many of them now want the government to take ownership of industries away from private people. If you point out the Soviet Union or currently Venezuela to them, they don’t listen.

Just as the conservatives don’t listen to non-group identity, non-collectivist arguments in favor of freedom in immigration, labor and employment.

Sadly, conservatives and nationalists advocate evil in the name of this group-identity obsession of theirs, this nationalism obsession.

And Attorney general Jeff Sessions — worse than Eric Holder, John Mitchell and Janet Waco all combined — says that the immigration laws are “The Law,” which must be obeyed. He cites the Bible and says that it instructs people to obey the government without question. (Hmm, what has he been smoking?)

As Laurence Vance wrote in his column on Romans 13 and obeying the government, “Only a madman would say that obeying the government in Romans 13 is absolute. Even the most diehard Christian apologist for the state, its military, and its wars would never think of saying such a thing…Obeying the government is not absolute when the government commands something that is contrary to the word of God…”

No, if there are unjust, immoral and “un-Christian” laws on the books, they need to go. Laws that are just laws are those that say, Don’t steal, don’t defraud, and don’t use aggression against others.

Unfortunately, many people in America are socialists and/or fascists, and they naively and ignorantly want bad laws on the books, the enforcement of which actually consists of armed government goons and badged thugs using aggression against innocent people who have not harmed anyone.

And I just wanted to mention this again in concluding: in an appearance on Meet the Press, Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, regarding just laws versus unjust laws, “I think we all have a moral obligation to obey just laws. On the other hand, I think we have a moral obligation to disobey unjust laws, because non-cooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. I think the distinction here is that when one breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, he must do it openly, he must do it cheerfully, he must do it lovingly. He must do it civilly, not uncivilly. And he must do it with a willingness to accept the penalty. And any man that breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust and willingly accepts the penalty by staying in jail in order to arouse the conscience of the community on the injustice of the law, is at that moment expressing the very highest respect for law.”

In the immigration issue, the ones without a conscience are the ICE agents, the ignorant and evil Jeff Sessions and their fellow travelers.

The Inspector General Report on the FBI, Hillary Email Investigation

James Bovard says the Inspector General’s report on the FBI and Clinton emails shows secrecy threatens democracy.

Mollie Hemingway has these 11 quick things to know about the Inspector General’s report.

Zero Hedge with an article that says the IG report confirms Obama lied about Hillary email server.

Zero Hedge with an article on FBI agents calling Hillary “President” while investigating her, texted “screw you Trump” on election day.

And the Daily Caller with an article that says impeachment is on the table for Rod Rosenstein.

The Drone Strike Initiators Are Feeling Bad About Killing Innocent People?

It appears that the CIA and military drone warriors, the ones who actually operate the murder drones from their offices, are suffering from PTSD. They are “traumatized” by their sending drone bombers over Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria or Pakistan to drop bombs on wedding parties and funerals. So traumatized, in fact, according to the New York Times article, that they often experience “a surge of adrenaline, as analysts in the room exchanged high-fives.”

But with one of the drone murderers, the “distress began with headaches, night chills, joint pain. Soon, more debilitating symptoms emerged — waves of nausea, eruptions of skin welts, chronic digestive problems.” Good. You mean, I should have sympathy for these guys?

One of those guys had seen doctors who couldn’t come up with a diagnosis for those symptoms. Hmm, how about a severe case of guilty conscience? Ya think? (Except for those killers in which the military intentionally suppresses their consciences, however.)

But the NYT article does mention that the drone murderers are suffering stress and anguish for moral reasons:

…“moral injury” began to appear more frequently in the literature on the psychic wounds of war, but with a slightly different meaning. Where Shay emphasized the betrayal of what’s right by authority figures, a new group of researchers expanded the focus to include the anguish that resulted from “perpetrating, failing to prevent or bearing witness to acts that transgress deeply held moral beliefs,” as a 2009 article in the journal Clinical Psychology Review proposed. In other words, they defined it as a wound sustained when soldiers wading through the fog of war betrayed themselves, through harmful acts they perpetrated or watched unfold. This definition took shape against the backdrop of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, chaotic conflicts in which it was difficult to distinguish between civilians and insurgents, and in which the rules of engagement were fluid and gray.

Perhaps the killers hired by evil government also have some intuitive sense of who the real aggressors are in these wars. After all, Iraqis, Afghans, Yemenis, and Syrians didn’t come over here and invade the U.S. and bomb our cities and towns, murdering innocents. No, it was the U.S. government and military who invaded and who have been bombing those countries for 25 years, since well before 9/11. If you really believe that all these wars overseas that were started by the U.S. government is “retaliation” for 9/11, then you’ve been duped.

Regarding distinguishing between civilians and “insurgents,” the Nobel Peace Prize winner Obama and his minions came up with the “Kill Lists,” in which various known “militants” names were placed on the list, to be targeted by the Obama and now Trump killer drones, sans due process of course. However, to make it easier for them to distinguish, the masters in Washington determined that “all military-age males” were to be considered “militants,” and murdering any one of them was allowable.

Regardless of who’s on the “Kill List,” 90% of those killed by the drone strikes are civilians, not even those labeled “militants.”

You see, when one country’s military (the U.S.) goes and invades another country — a war of aggression and thus criminal as defined by the Nuremberg tribunal — shouldn’t you expect the inhabitants of the targeted territory to fight back? But, as long as the government propaganda machine calls them “militants,” I guess you can get away with it.

I know, a lot of people in the U.S. don’t see it that way, because they have been so propagandized and bamboozled into believing the crap that George W. Bush (and his father 10 years earlier), and Obama and Trump have been feeding the American sheeple — and yes, it’s been a brainwashing for the masses.

But one thing has changed now since the Obama years of drone-killing-innocents. A U.S. judge has allowed a lawsuit to go forth by a U.S. citizen against the regime because he was placed on the “Kill List.” However, the judge, Rosemary Collyer, did not allow other lawsuits by non-U.S. citizens, because apparently, only U.S. citizens are allowed due process. She wants to say that that is an American thing, and that the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights only applies to Americans.

But no, that is not true. The rights listed in the Bill of Rights are not rights that the government gives to people, based on their citizenship status or whatever. Many ignorant people believe that, unfortunately.

The Bill of Rights lists some of the rights that ALL human beings have inherently. Unalienable rights, according to the Declaration of Independence. The rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. The right to due process, the right to presumption of innocence, the right to require accusers to present evidence against the accused to prove accusations and the right of the accused to refute evidence or testimony to defend oneself, especially against false accusations. It’s basic.

The Bill of Rights lists rules that the government must follow as a means of protecting the natural rights that all human beings have. The government may not violate ANYONE’s natural rights to life and liberty.

It’s really too bad that U.S. government drone murderers have a guilty conscience and it’s keeping them awake at night. And yes, they are “murderers” because they are targeting and killing innocent people. “War” is no excuse.

So, it’s not only Orwellian to put someone’s name on a list to be killed without trial or due process. It’s murder, and evil. But many people still think that’s justified and they rationalize such government criminality based on ignorance and brainwashing. Honestly, the simple-minded and childish prattle I hear on conservative talk radio to justify the criminal Bush-Obama-Trump war policies. And they’re the ones who complain about the absence of due process with Donald Trump being framed by the national security state and the witch-hunting government media repeating the “intelligence” community’s assertions with no evidence to back it up.

Israel Wants to Ban Documenting Military Crimes – Will the U.S. Follow?

According to Jason Ditz of,

Israel’s parliament is expected to approve a bill that would formally ban reporting on Israeli military operations in the occupied West Bank, including distributing existing reports or photographs on social media, under threat of five-year prison terms.

Advocates are arguing that reports on their actions to support the occupation “harm national security,” and also hurt the “soldiers’ spirit.” The Israeli government has had multiple incidents in recent years where soldiers killing Palestinian civilians in the occupied territories have proven embarrassing.

Ouch. “Embarrassing“! We’re talking PTSD territory here.

I know, I know, the worshipers of the U.S. military and Israel and its military want to say, “Let them do their job,” allegedly to “protect the citizens.” Because a lot of people think like collectivists and they believe the propaganda about the “terrorists.” Never mind that many people being killed are innocent and haven’t harmed anyone. The conservatives especially are ultra-collectivist-minded when it comes to Israel or the wars that U.S. government started. We especially see that collectivism crapola in the immigration issue here.

But as I wrote in my article on why I am not a Zionist,

Apparently, violence perpetrated by Israeli soldiers against Palestinians happens a lot. And the Israeli organization Breaking the Silence has shown that beating Palestinian children is a regular occurrence.

According to Breaking the Silence’s report on soldier testimonies regarding the 2008-09 Gaza war, “testimonies describe use of … white phosphorus ammunition in densely inhabited neighborhoods, massive destruction of buildings unrelated to any direct threat to Israeli forces, and permissive rules of engagement that led to the killing of innocents … and … harsh statements made by junior and senior officers that attest to the ongoing moral deterioration of the society and the army.” Another controversial story focused on Israeli soldiers with t-shirts joking about shooting pregnant Palestinian women and children.

So of course anyone anywhere has the right to report on government agents, bureaucrats or military, who inflict aggressions against innocents.

As I wrote in my post on freedom of the Press and the right to access information about the government (pertaining to U.S. policy),

Government-persecuted U.S. Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning (formerly known as Bradley Manning) has written this op-ed in the New York Times. Quite a surprisingly brave publishing decision on the part of the normally war-endorsing Regime-kissing NYT, I think.

Manning details the complicity by the U.S. military in the corruption of Iraqi elections in 2010, and notes that one reason why most Americans weren’t informed of this is because of the way embedded news journalists are chosen by the military. Mainly they choose journalists who had in the past shown a bias in support of the Regime’s current policy or war. Journalists who may have shown evidence of critical reporting were rejected for embedding. Journalists competing against one another tend to end up with reporting that is more flattering to the military officers and ruling bureaucrats than reporting that is accurate or objective.

In my view, the First Amendment really protects any American who wants to take the risk in going overseas to witness what our government and military are doing to people in other countries, and report on it. Contrary to the fascist Feinstein, the First Amendment protects everyone’s right to be a reporter, researcher, and cover news events and write about them. If the U.S. military is invading and occupying foreign territories that are not U.S. territories and thus they have no “right” to be on them and are at their own risk, then ANY American who wants to take that risk can go over there and report on events, with or without a military bureaucrat’s approval. And by “risk” I mean that when anyone goes onto a foreign territory he must abide by the foreigners’ rules and must also understand the dangers of entering foreign territories, and so forth. And further, the American people have a right to know what their government military or diplomats are doing in other countries on their behalf, what deeds (or misdeeds) are being performed by employees of the government who work for the American people.

The right of the people to know what the government is up to as far as coverage of military’s actions overseas also applies to domestic issues such as NSA spying. As Judge Andrew Napolitano pointed out, “In the clash between government secrecy and public transparency, the Framers placed a value judgment in the First Amendment . . . An informed public is more likely to make better decisions than an ignorant one.”

A World of People Living a Life of Irrationality and Myths

You know, one of the frustrations I have with this writing is that some people like my anti-war, pro-civil liberties views but then they don’t like my anti-SJW stuff or pro-free-market stuff, and others like the anti-SJW and pro-free-market stuff but don’t like my anti-war and pro-immigration stuff.

I think that a lot of people are influenced by propaganda and that’s why some people support the national security state and the wars, and some people are nationalists and anti-immigration, while others support the SJW agenda. Many people are brainwashed on all sides these days. Oh, well. But I keep trying to insert some rationality into the discussion.

And what particular issues are in desperate need of a rationality slap? Well, for starters the colleges and universities are now filled with Orwellian crackpots, many of them with tenure (and some universities require that you are irrational to get tenure!), in which the important things are “diversity” and “inclusion,” not intellectual curiosity and truth. And by diversity we are talking about diversity in skin colors and ethnic backgrounds, not diversity in thought. In today’s colleges and universities diversity in thought is not only discouraged but suppressed, and forbidden. You must conform your thoughts to the consensus view, especially when it comes to the LGBT agenda, anti-religious bias, and group identity politics.

For instance, in a recent article by Walter Williams, we learn that colleges and universities are not only being ruled in the humanities and social sciences by identity-obsessed nudniks, but are now lowering their standards in the STEM fields in the name of “diversity” and “inclusiveness.” Dr. Williams makes reference to math and engineering professors claiming absurdities such as that proficiency in math is a part of “white privilege,” and that “scientific knowledge itself is gendered, raced, and colonizing.”

So, what are they doing about those terrible problems in the STEM fields now? Dr. Williams quotes the Manhattan Institute’s Heather MacDonald, who states that “Mathematical problem-solving is being deemphasized in favor of more qualitative group projects; the pace of undergraduate physics education is being slowed down so that no one gets left behind.”

Slowing things down, lowering the test score standards and grade requirements. In other words, while the institutions of “learning” are stepping up the ideology-enforcement, emphasizing identity politics and the SJW agenda, they are giving actual knowledge and scientific inquiry the heave-ho.

If you’re a young person who hopes to invent new and useful things, participate in the progress of society and help to improve the society’s standard of living, forget it. Instead, you vill conform, suppress your own thoughts, and repeat mindless diatribes to get a passing grade and get your B.S. or B.A., your masters or your Ph.D.

You probably recall the Google employee James Damore who wrote a controversial memo asserting that women just aren’t drawn to the STEM fields as much as males. It’s just a basic fact of life, and, instead of dealing with that and just admitting the truth about that, Damore was given the Soviet gulag treatment at Google, which cracks down on ANY diversity in thought and opinion, any kind of questioning of the mindless SJW robot mantras.

In James Damore’s failed lawsuit against Google, the lawsuit stated: “Google furnishes a large number of internal mailing lists catering to employees with alternative lifestyles, including furries, polygamy, transgenderism, and plurality, for the purpose of discussing sexual topics. The only lifestyle that seems to not be openly discussed on Google’s internal forums is traditional heterosexual monogamy … For instance, an employee who sexually identifies as ‘a yellow-scaled wingless dragonkin’ and ‘an expansive ornate building’ presented a talk entitled ‘Living as a Plural Being’ at an internal company event.”

Hmm, perhaps that Google employee is looking for a job in Washington at the Pentagon? Just asking.

Another example of the craziness of our society now is this transgender stuff. It’s over the top now. They’re letting boys join the girls sports teams in the schools now. In Connecticut, for example, a freshman boy who identifies as a girl has actually won, according to the Blaze, the “girls 100-meter and 200-meter dashes at the Connecticut high school Class M state championships.”

Well, duh. Of course boys will win these athletic championships when they’re competing on the girls’ teams. Biologically, males have a big advantage physically over females. That’s just a fact, in most cases. A lot of people don’t like hearing that bit of truth, because it goes against what they’ve been brainwashed with in the government schools and from pop culture over the past decades in our now-Orwellian universe.

You can call that guy a “transgender,” and “female” if you want to. But he’s a male. If people want to live a lie, I say let them. But don’t make me go along with the lie.

In a book by Bruce Jenner, now known as “Caitlyn Jenner,” Jenner wrote that when he plays golf with the ladies, “I outdrive them by 150 yards and they still like me.”

And more recent articles about Bradley Manning, now known as Chelsea Manning, refer to him as “Chelsea,” which is fine. If I were to ever meet him, I would address him as he prefers to be addressed. Although, he was “Bradley Manning” when he courageously leaked documents and videos to WikiLeaks, he was “Bradley Manning” when he was arrested and placed not only into the hoosegow but in solitary confinement for 3 whole years pre-trial by the military psychopaths, and he was “Bradley Manning” when he was put through the kangaroo sham trial and sentenced to many years in prison. However, I will not refer to him as “she” and “her,” because that is not the truth. Sorry if that offends people.

In my view, transgenders’ confusion about their actual gender seems to be only a part of their general overall confusion about themselves as individuals. In those cases with the kids, they’re only young kids, or teenagers. They’re still going through a major phase in their physical and biological growth and development, and their emotional development as well. As I referenced here, kids who go through periods of identifying as the opposite gender will most likely outgrow it, so it’s best to not encourage it. It is actually not healthy to encourage it. But the cultural Marxists who control the government schools are indoctrinating and brainwashing the kids with all this Orwellian, irrational claptrap to do long-term damage to our society.

Of course, many people now have been influenced by the cultural brainwashing, and their predictable reaction to my writing the preceding paragraphs would probably be that I am a “hater,” or that I “just don’t understand,” or whatever. I really don’t know how to get to those who are brainwashed through 12 years of government schooling propaganda, and who believe in living a lie.

And unfortunately, there are many on the other side who like my writing those things, but who themselves are brainwashed with their own ideologies, such as their belief in the mythology of nationalism and their indoctrinated faith in the national security state. They don’t like my writing about the war crimes of the U.S. military for the past many decades, the intentional provocations of the CIA of foreigners and creating terrorists to justify expanding tax-funded budgets and so on. And on immigration the nationalists like the talk radio ditto-heads really believe in the myth of a collective ownership of a territory, and that immigrants are “breaking into” the country, into “our” home of America without a bureaucrats’ permission to enter. The nationalists support the anti-immigration police state, separating families, “send them back to where they came from” (like FDR sent the Jews back to Nazi Germany, and so forth).

So a lot of people believe strongly in their particular ideologies, and it’s difficult to get through to them on many issues. I hope I’m not called a “hater” by the people on the left, or a “traitor” by the nationalists for writing these things. But people really need to lighten up and be a little more open-minded.