Skip to content

Tag: hysteria

More Articles with More Reasons to Distrust the Gubmint

Brandon Smith on Red Flag laws: once the Pandora’s box of pre-crime and hearsay evidence is opened, the sky is truly the limit.

Bretigne Shaffer discusses civil disobedience in the forced-vaccine issue.

Pepe Escobar says we are all hostages of 9/11.

Jon Rappoport discusses some earlier questions about the gold stored at the NY Federal Reserve Bank just blocks away from the WTC on 9/11, and possible witness intimidation during the 9/11 Commission hearings.

Washington’s Blog asks, Why would Iran attack the Saudis NOW?

William Astore on the F-35: A wasteful weapon for America’s forever wars.

Barbara Boland on the tell-all book James Mattis didn’t want published.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation on the courts protecting the people’s right to force government to purge records of their First Amendment activities.

Chris Hedges on the CIA and our invisible government.

Laurence Vance asks, What is it that libertarians don’t get about the military?

Patrick Cockburn on Saudi Arabia’s plans for us to forget about the murder of Khashoggi.

And Daniel McAdams points out the healthcare advantages our rulers have over We the Sheeple.

Further Leftist Hysteria and More Reasons to Abolish the Supreme Court

Occasionally the Neocon Review has an informative article. This time the Review writes about a recent New York Times-published accusation about Supreme Bureaucrat Brett Kavanaugh from his much younger years.

The allegation, Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly write in a New York Times story adapted from their forthcoming anti-Kavanaugh book, is this: “We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. Ramirez’s allegation. A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student.”

It looks like Pogrebin and Kelly’s new book is a reaction to Molly Hemingway and Carrie Severino’s book, Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court. But I could be wrong.

But in the Review article, we learn that

The book isn’t released until Tuesday, but Mollie Hemingway got a copy, and she writes on Twitter: “The book notes, quietly, that the woman Max Stier named as having been supposedly victimized by Kavanaugh and friends denies any memory of the alleged event.” Omitting this fact from the New York Times story is one of the worst cases of journalistic malpractice in recent memory.

Hence the “New York Slimes.” Now, frankly I couldn’t care less whether the activists impeach Kavanaugh or smear him or libel or slander him. As a lower court judge, Kavanaugh rubber-stamped many police state abuses, and his reading of the Fourth Amendment shows that he has not read the Fourth Amendment. Kavanaugh has stated that the Fourth Amendment “allows governmental searches and seizures without individualized suspicion when the Government demonstrates a sufficient ‘special need’ – that is, a need beyond the normal need for law enforcement – that outweighs the intrusion on individual liberty…”

So, Kavanaugh sees things in the Fourth Amendment that just aren’t there, in the same way a drunk sees pink elephants. Can you see just how far government judicial bureaucrats will go to excuse and rationalize the government’s criminal violations of the right of the people to be secure in their persons, their houses, their papers, and their effects?

Kavanaugh is a judicial rubber-stamper of the surveillance state, Gitmo, the War State, and the CIA, and really a corrupt apparatchik of the bureaucracy and the national security state. Kavanaugh and the other Justices (sic) on the Supreme Parasites wholeheartedly reject the principles of liberty of America’s founders. So why do we need those bureaucrats?

As Ryan McMaken of the Mises Institute has referred to them, the Supremes are the “American version of the Soviet politburo.” But liberals and conservatives need them to aid and abet those political activists’ shoving their social agendas down our throats!

And the reason that Dr. Christine Ballsey Ford and the others were attempting to smear Kavanaugh at last year’s confirmation hearings was not because they are concerned about his statist, police-state views. Those people on the left couldn’t care less about civil liberties. Just look at all the intrusions into our civil liberties imposed on innocent people by Obama with ObamaCare, NDAA, the drug war and his being the “deporter in chief.” And look at all the intrusions each and every one of the current Democrat candidates for President wants to impose on us. Forcing all of us into a one-size-fits-all Medicare for All scheme, confiscating firearms from people who have not harmed anyone, and more tax-stealing.

No, what the people on the left are hysterical over is abortion! That’s all they care about, along with their obsessions with race and skin color and their brainwashed sexual-perversions agenda. But no, it’s abortion. They are terrified that the Supreme Soviets in Washington will overturn Roe v. Wade. Which should be overturned because it’s a BAD decision.

The activists on the left are after Kavanaugh or any other possibly anti-abortion judge is because they have been brainwashed to believe that abortion is their “Rite of Passage,” and that all those millions and millions of girls and young women MUST have an abortion i.e. kill their offspring as a Rite of Passage. Generations now of women are brainwashed with this sick anti-human social agenda.

As Dr. Bernard Nathanson, a founding member of “National Abortion Rights Action League,” or NARAL, wrote in his and his group’s psy-opping the Supreme Court in the 1970s to get them to rule favorably in Roe v. Wade,

We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000 but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000. Repeating the big lie often enough convinces the public. The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around 200 – 250 annually. The figure constantly fed to the media was 10,000. These false figures took root in the consciousness of Americans convincing many that we needed to crack the abortion law. Another myth we fed to the public through the media was that legalizing abortion would only mean that the abortions taking place illegally would then be done legally. In fact, of course, abortion is now being used as a primary method of birth control in the U.S. and the annual number of abortions has increased by 1500% since legalization….

I am often asked what made me change my mind. How did I change from prominent abortionist to pro-life advocate? In 1973, I became director of obstetrics of a large hospital in New York City and had to set up a perinatal research unit, just at the start of a great new technology which we now use every day to study the fetus in the womb. A favorite pro-abortion tactic is to insist that the definition of when life begins is impossible; that the question is a theological or moral or philosophical one, anything but a scientific one. Fetology makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception and requires all the protection and safeguards that any of us enjoy.

Why, you may well ask, do some American doctors who are privy to the findings of fetology, discredit themselves by carrying out abortions? Simple arithmetic: at $300.00 a time 1.55 million abortions means an industry generating $500,000,000 annually, of which most goes into the pocket of the physician doing the abortion. It is clear that permissive abortion is purposeful destruction of what is undeniably human life. It is an impermissible act of deadly violence. One must concede that unplanned pregnancy is a wrenchingly difficult dilemma. But to look for its solution in a deliberate act of destruction is to trash the vast resourcefulness of human ingenuity, and to surrender the public weal to the classic utilitarian answer to social problems.

So, it’s all about abortion. The people on the left are obsessed with abortion and killing their offspring. They will lie and make things up, about medical statistics, about judicial nominees and government judges.

I hope that, if another Justice (sic) retires or dies in the next year or two, Trump will this time nominate Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett. In her own nomination hearings for the lower court, Judge Barrett was the target of an anti-religion grilling by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Shady Pines). Feinstein said that Judge Barrett’s decisions may be too influenced by her religious “dogma.” Barrett is a religious Catholic.

Wikipedia indicates some of Judge Barrett’s decisions have so far been pro-Second Amendment, protecting the Fourth Amendment, not protective of a police officer’s “qualified immunity,” and not favorable to Title IX (involving the  egregious violation of a male student’s right to due process in a sexual assault allegation).

I really hope that a Supreme Bureaucrat leaves the High Court so that we can get an Amy Coney Barret nomination, and watch the fireworks, see the hysterical abortion fanatics make fools of themselves just as they have been doing regarding Brett Kavanaugh. Such a nomination will drag those lefty wackos out of their respective psychiatric hospitals and give us some good entertainment, that’s for sure.

So, we are getting it from all sides of the statist coin here. The leftists with their sick agendas and political correctness fascism, and we are also getting it from the so-called conservatives with their police-state fascism as well.

We really need to completely abolish the Supreme Court and restore the Tenth Amendment. And we need to get some kind of movement going in which if government orders you to do something you don’t voluntarily agree to you just don’t do it, and there are no consequences, because you have not harmed anyone by not following the government’s fascist orders (including participating in “Medicare for All”), and at the same time, if the government prohibits you from doing something or owning or possessing something that is not a harm to others or is not anyone’s else’s business then you just have it anyway and there are no consequences, because your disobeying the government’s prohibition of this or that has not harmed anyone.

Get rid of the Supreme Court. It is truly one of America’s and freedom’s worst enemies.

Declaring the Wrong People as “Domestic Terrorists”

The City of San Francisco government has declared the National Rifle Association (NRA) to be a “Domestic Terrorist Organization.” And now the NRA is suing the city for violating people’s “free speech rights for political reasons” and for “trying to blacklist anyone associated with the NRA from doing business there.”

And Judge Andrew Napolitano has some important comments on the city’s declaration, and asks if government has freedom of speech rights. And the answer is No.

But exactly what has the NRA organization done that’s of a “domestic terrorist” nature? I’m sure that not one of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors can answer the question, because the answer is … nothing. But if the Board want to declare people as “domestic terrorists,” why don’t they point to the actual individuals who have done things that actually terrorize people or commit acts of violence that result in terrorizing people?

For example, the El Paso shooter. The gun maker or the organization that promotes firearms had no responsibility for what the shooter did. If he had rammed his car into a crowd and killed 22 people, should we declare the auto maker, the car dealership and AAA as a “Domestic Terrorist Organization”? Of course not.

People are hysterical now, and they need to calm down.

Your 9/11 18th Anniversary Primer

Today is the 18th anniversary of the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks on the New York World Trade Center, the Pentacon, and in Pennsylvania. Where was I on that day? Well, I was here in this same apartment sitting at my table doing some writing and my father (now deceased) called at around 10 am saying that their trip that they were going to go on that day was canceled and he told me why. Hmm.

The government’s propaganda began immediately on that day and after. 99% of the news media were the White House press spokesmen. There was no discussion of the attackers stated motives, or the history of U.S. government and military’s invasions, bombings and occupations of the Middle East in the 10 years prior to that time. Anyone who did mention those things was labeled “Anti-America,” or “blaming America” for the attacks. Sean Hannity has been especially bad in that regard ever since that time. He is the worst of the worst as far as apparatchiks for the national security state are concerned. I just thought I’d mention that.

However, given that Hannity and all the other radio ditto-heads are accepting of the idea that actual U.S. government FBI, CIA etc. abused their powers including FISA spying in the Russiagate fiasco, maybe now some of these obedient worshipers of the national security state can at least consider the possibility that the official 9/11 narrative isn’t what the government has been telling us for 18 years. (But, I am not holding my breath.)

So, I’m sure that a lot of people reading this post will just skim it and not really take it seriously or click on any of the links for further information. This is because they are satisfied with what the government and its spokespeople of the mainstream media have been telling us since September 11, 2001. All these things they haven’t heard about must be merely whack-job “conspiracy theory” and all that. But there are still some people who are open to the truth.

In the years prior to the attacks, Congressman Ron Paul had several times warned that the U.S. government’s interventionist policies and war that it started against Iraq and elsewhere and Iraqi sanctions would cause blowback and retaliation within our shores. (And the response? Crickets.)

Addendum: For information on the U.S. government’s pre-9/11 sanctions on Iraq throughout the 1990s and their effects, see Jacob Hornberger, Sanctions: the cruel and brutal war against the Iraqi people, and James Bovard, Iraqi sanctions and American intentions: blameless carnage?

It’s amazing just how brainwashed so many people can be by daily propaganda, watching the TV news, listening to chickenhawk warmonger conservative talk radio, and so forth. “Al Qaeda.” “Osama bin Laden,” and “Islamic” were words that people heard over and over and over, but they rarely heard about Saudi Arabia and blowback.

I don’t know what else to write so I will post links to some new and old articles on the subject, and maybe some videos.

James Bovard on the 9/11 Commission, a bootlicking national disgrace.

Paul Sperry from the New York Post writes this week how Robert Mueller helped Saudi Arabia cover up its role in 9/11.

Related to that, a year ago “28 Pages,” which documents Saudi Arabia’s role in 9/11, had an exclusive article on FBI telling a counterterrorism agent not to help 9/11 victims build their case against Saudi Arabia because that might harm U.S.-Saudi relations. (Doh!)

Prior to 9/11 the FBI were told by the Bush Administration to lay off the bin Laden family and Saudi connections to terrorism.

Paul Craig Roberts writes today:

Over the years I have reported the findings of scientists, engineers, and architects that indicate that the official story is false.I had an open mind for two reasons.One is that having been an engineering student, I could tell the difference from a building falling down from asymmetrical structural damage and a building blowing up.The other is that having been involved in policy issues in Washington for a quarter century I knew that such a humiliating defeat suffered by the world’s only superpower at the hands of a few Muslim terrorists would have brought instant demands from the White House, Congress, and media for investigation into how every aspect of the American national security state failed simultaneously on one morning.Instead the White House resisted the 9/11 families demands for an investigation for one year and never delivered a forensic investigation.Instead, the country was given a 9/11 Commission Report that was merely the government’s official story of what happened.No heads rolled.No one was fired or even reprimanded.To hold no one accountable for such a massive failure and humiliating defeat is not a believable response if the official 9/11 story is true.

Washington’s Blog: Everything we’re doing now was planned before 9/11. And Washington asks, Will the mainstream media ever report on the numerous admitted false flag terror attacks? Many examples given. And another post about U.S. government’s foreknowledge and aiding and abetting the terrorists.

The Guardian: Osama bin Laden had ties to CIA

David Ray Griffin asks, Where is the evidence that Osama bin Laden had responsibility in 9/11? (Remember, Hannity et al. have been complaining ad nauseam, and rightly, that people accusing Trump of “Russia collusions” do not have any evidence, and so on. Evidence is important.) The FBI’s 10 most wanted list included Osama bin Laden because of the African embassy and USS Cole bombings, but NOT because of 9/11 because they had no evidence linking the two. Further info from the Muckraker Report. Read Griffin’s book, Osama bin Laden: Dead or Alive?

In 2009 the Daily Mail asked, Has Osama bin Laden been dead for 7 years?

An early 2002 Dan Rather CBS News report on bin Laden’s serious illness:

A December, 2001 Fox News story, still online: Bin Laden already dead.

Of course, how could Osama bin Laden have been killed and thrown out to sea by SEAL Team 6 in 2011 if bin Laden had already died in 2001 or 2002? Paul Craig Roberts again with some questions.

Another question to ask is what caused the helicopter crash in Afghanistan that killed several SEAL Team 6 members who were involved in the Osama bin Laden “killing” just a couple months before that.

And Paul Joseph Watson on the Bin Laden fable shortly after he was “killed” in 2011. While Steve Watson explains the U.S. government’s history of fake bin Laden tapes.

Former CIA asset Susan Lindauer, a whistleblower who was railroaded and labeled a psychiatric case by USGov, explains more truth about 9/11, and the missing security tapes for the World Trade Center.

Here is an interview in which Lindauer tells about her experiences:

James Corbett with an hour-long discussion on who was really behind the 9/11 attacks:

And here is a video documentary from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth explaining the evidence that explosions brought down the World Trade Center, and not the fire caused by planes crashing into the buildings:

I admit it. I’m a “truther.” That’s because the truth is important. And as the late Justin Raimondo wrote, the opposite of a “truther” is a “liar.”

Orwellian: Washington, DC Will Determine Who Has “Mental Illness”

Jon Rappoport has this excellent analysis of calls for a new agency to determine who is mentally ill or mentally unstable and thus may not have a gun. Once diagnosed with “mental illness,” psychiatrists will give these newly diagnosed “mentally ill” people psychiatric drugs, so that they probably WILL become violent! Doh! (Is there anyone more “mentally ill” than our typical Washington bureaucrat? Just askin’.)

A Deranged Society in Amerika Has a “Straight Pride” Parade

There was a “Straight Pride” parade, with 36 arrested and 4 police officers injured, in Boston. Many police officers had to act as shields between the “Straight Pride” people and the demonstrators, some of whom were saying that they needed to have a presence there to shout down the “Straight” morons and also accuse the “Straight” people of advocating hate and discrimination against gays and lesbians, and other LGBTQZZZZZ activists.

So, can someone please tell me why heterosexual people must go to this public event to say unequivocally that they are “Straight” Pride? What exactly does “Straight” mean, anyway? And I thought that “gay” meant “happy” or “joyous.” (Apparently not.)

I think that all this is going on, as idiotic as it is, because the LGBT activists have gone way off the deep end, in such an extreme, far removed from advocating “gay rights” or protecting themselves from the violence of anti-homosexual thugs. In the old days in America gays were victims of such violence, just because of being gay. But that doesn’t really happen that much now. It does happen in Saudi Arabia, Iran and other more repressive areas, in which those places’ governments are inflicting such harm against people just for being homosexual.

But sadly in Amerika, in which “social justice” warriors are being brainwashed in the schools from their earliest days to believe in a lot of crap they believe now, the violence is going in the reverse. Whether it’s gays and lesbians or other members of the LGBTQ+++ community, Black Lives Matter or other black or minority activist groups, abortion groups or other leftist organizations, the violence is being perpetrated against conservatives, anyone with a “MAGA” hat, and even police now, regardless of any particular police officer’s record or himself respecting the rights of protesters, etc.

And all over on the college campuses we have speech codes, lists of the many words or phrases that one may not speak, or else, and professors getting fired for using the “n-word” merely in historical context such as describing a ’60s Civil Rights march dialogue, and so on.

During the 1980s a common phrase, including being written as graffiti on buildings and street posts, was “Silence = Death.” This was in reference to the AIDS crisis that was mainly hitting the male homosexual community (if that is a “community”). In the old days if someone was homosexual that meant he had to be hush-hush about it, or risk getting some sort of abuse or even evicted or fired from work. But the AIDS crisis brought about silence that included being silent about ways to protect themselves from getting the HIV and then possibly AIDS, that at the time was a death sentence.

But now, silence is what the people on the left want, not only from those with whom they disagree on political and social issues, but from EVERYONE! Anyone caught uttering certain, specific phrases or words (example) will be disciplined, like it’s the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany.

People are getting censored from Google, Facebook and Twitter. And they are getting “de-platformed,” which in some cases can threaten people’s livelihoods.

Speaking of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, unfortunately many of today’s young people are not educated in the history of those 20th Century, socialist, totalitarian societies. They have NO idea that they are being brainwashed to believe the same kinds of statist ideologies and myths of things that don’t exist in reality. They have no idea that they are acting like little fascists now. I don’t like being around the young people now, quite frankly, because I’m afraid some little innocent thing I might say could elicit the brainwashed twerp to then call the police on me!

And speaking of people to fear, we now have “Antifa,” which stands for “Anti-First Amendment,” gang thugs who actually start fights with, beat up on, put in the hospital those whose views they don’t like or even journalists like Andy Ngo who are merely covering a public event.

And the word “hate” is thrown around like it no longer means anything, because the ones who are accusing others of “hate” are themselves the ones spewing hate, foul language and inflicting violence on others. They do it in public, on Twitter, in restaurants, everywhere.

Now, are you parents out there? In your 30s, 40s or 50s? Are any of those young people your kids? What the hell did my generation (mid-50s) do to the next generation? What the hell is wrong with MY generation?

So, it is those people on the left who are driving a bunch of schmucks to have a moronic “Straight Pride” parade and wasting the very nice holiday weekend weather when they could have done something more worthwhile.

How Will Authoritarians (e.g. Donald Trump) Use “Red Flag” Laws?

Pastor Chuck Baldwin has some commentary on the calls for “Red Flag” laws, in which people are urged to report to the police someone they think might be “dangerous,” and the police will then confiscate that person’s guns, if he or she has guns. Chuck Baldwin writes:

If law-abiding gun owners don’t call their U.S. senators en masse, and I mean posthaste, you are very likely to wake up one morning around 4am to the sound of a SWAT team breaking down your door to confiscate your guns, prepared to kill you or any member of your family who resists. Why? Perhaps because a gun-hating neighbor hates you having guns or a relative doesn’t like you and is looking for any way to “teach you a lesson” or your ex-spouse is looking for any way to “get even” with you or an anti-gun cop with a grudge wants to send a political message or a family doctor or school teacher overheard one of your children talk about how many guns daddy has and became alarmed, etc., ad infinitum.

Plus, the FBI has just recently stated that if you believe in “conspiracy theories,” you are a “domestic terrorist threat.” That statement is from an FBI intelligence bulletin from the bureau’s Phoenix field office, dated May 30, 2019. That FBI designation alone could very easily precipitate a “red flag” gun confiscation order being rendered against you.

And Donald Trump himself recently demonstrated how dangerous “red flag” laws are. In a tweet on August 13, President Trump said,

“Would Chris Cuomo be given a Red Flag for his recent rant? Filthy language and a total loss of control. He shouldn’t be allowed to have any weapon. He’s nuts!”

Are you paying attention? Donald Trump was threatening to use a “red flag” law to authorize police agencies to take away an American citizen’s Natural God-given right of self-defense simply because Trump didn’t like what the citizen said—about him.

Folks, don’t you see? Those in authority can use “red flag” gun confiscation laws against ANYONE they want and for ANY REASON they want.

In other words, there doesn’t have to be a reason. Under “red flag” laws, all it takes for police to come and seize your guns is for someone to make a “red flag” accusation against you. That’s it. And, yes, it really IS that easy.

“Red flag” laws not only eviscerate the 2nd Amendment, but the 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment, 5th Amendment, 6th Amendment, 7th Amendment and 8th Amendment.

All this most recent hysteria is in response to two mass shootings, in El Paso and in Dayton. The hysterical masses are calling for “common sense gun laws,” yet their proposals are not common sense. They are irrational, knee-jerk responses.

We do not seem to be hearing the non-hysterical, rational responses to those shootings. Why aren’t people bringing up the points that actually are “common sense” points?

Such as, if someone at the El Paso Walmart had been armed, that person could have disabled the shooter early on and saved many lives. Why do we never or rarely hear that point being made? I don’t even hear the “conservative” talk radio ditto-heads say that, quite frankly.

Speaking of the talk radio ditto-heads, Daniel McAdams (of the Ron Paul Institute) stated that he has been banned from Twitter permanently, because he called Sean Hannity “retarded,” even though it is actually the truth. Searching Twitter for “retarded” will find many results by other people using that term. But I digress.

Back to the gun rights issue. Another point that we don’t hear being made is that most of these mass shootings, I think it’s about 98%, occur at “gun-free zones.” The psychopaths prefer gun-free zones because they know that there is little to no chance that someone might shoot back at him.

But no, let’s continue to be irrational and play little games with people’s lives, because the people on the left love power and control. And they want to disarm others and make them defenseless because it’s easier for communists, fascists, and other totalitarians to impose their orders and diktats onto others who can’t defend themselves.

And further compromise people’s security by making “Red Flag” laws so that disgruntled neighbors and ex-wives can take revenge.

Lew Rockwell on Rothbard and War

Lew Rockwell gave an important antiwar speech, discussing Murray Rothbard’s antiwar views, at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity’s conference on “Breaking Washington’s Addiction to War.”

I especially liked these passages, which describe Rothbard’s basic point of view on war:

War distorts our sense of what service to others truly means. Only to members of the military are we urged to say, “Thank you for your service.” Toward the great entrepreneurs who extend our lives and make them more fulfilling, we are taught to be envious and resentful. They are most certainly not thanked for their service.

The state is able to get away with its aggression thanks in part to its manipulation of language. A soldier who perished in the Iraq war was said to have been “serving his country.” What could that mean? The war was launched on preposterous pretexts against a leader who had not harmed Americans and was incapable of doing so. If the war was in the service of anything, it was the imperial ambitions of a small ruling group. By no means did such a mission, which diverted vast resources away from civilian use, “serve the country.”

War distorts reality itself. Schoolchildren are taught to believe that the American soldier purchased their freedom by his sacrifices. Blasphemous bumper stickers compare the American soldier to Jesus Christ. But in what way was American freedom threatened by Iraq, or Panama, or Somalia? For that matter, how could any 20th-century adversary have managed an invasion of North America, given that even the Germans couldn’t cross the English Channel?

But this carefully cultivated mythology helps keep the racket going. It increases the superstitious reverence people have for past and present members of the military. It puts critics of war on the defensive. Indeed, how can we criticize war and intervention when these things have kept us free?

In short, war is inseparable from propaganda, lies, hatred, impoverishment, cultural degradation, and moral corruption. It is the most horrific outcome of the moral and political legitimacy people are taught to grant the state. Wrapped in the trappings of patriotism, home, songs, and flags, the state deludes people into despising a leader and a country that until that point they had barely even heard of, much less had an informed opinion about, and it teaches its subjects to cheer the maiming and death of fellow human beings who have never done them any harm.

And I like the individualistic view Lew Rockwell gives here:

If we believe in the cause of peace, putting a halt to aggressive violence between nations is not enough. We should not want to bring about peace overseas in order that our rulers may turn their guns on peaceful individuals at home. Away with all forms of aggression against peaceful people.

The people and the warmakers are two distinct groups. We must never say “we” when discussing the US government’s foreign policy. For one thing, the warmakers do not care about the opinions of the majority of Americans. It is silly and embarrassing for Americans to speak of “we” when discussing their government’s foreign policy, as if their input were necessary to or desired by those who make war.(4) Never use “we” when speaking of the government.

But it is also wrong, not to mention mischievous. When people identify themselves so closely with their government, they perceive attacks on their government’s foreign policy as attacks on themselves. It then becomes all the more difficult to reason with them – why, you’re insulting my foreign policy!

Likewise, the use of “we” feeds into war fever. “We” have to get “them.” People root for their governments as they would for a football team. And since we know ourselves to be decent and good, “they” can only be monstrous and evil, and deserving of whatever righteous justice “we” dispense to them.

The antiwar left falls into this error just as often. They appeal to Americans with a catalogue of horrific crimes “we” have committed. But we haven’t committed those crimes. The same sociopaths who victimize Americans themselves every day, and over whom we have no real control, committed those crimes.

Now, it would be nice if he would apply such individualism philosophy to the immigration issue!

More News and Commentary

Alex Knight has the real reasons why the people on the left are so hysterical over guns.

Judge Andrew Napolitano says the Trump NSA wants to continue spying on innocent Americans without suspicion or warrant.

Jacob Hornberger says to look to China to learn about America (see above).

John Solomon with an article on another FBI failure involving the Clintons and James Comey.

Elias Marat on a new study revealing how ADHD drugs alter the structure of children’s brains.

Matt Agorist on a mom thrown in jail and her child stolen, to punish her for treating child’s cancer with CBD oil.

Robert Murphy with a study finding that planting trees reduces carbon better than carbon taxes.

Jon Rappoport on Scuzzball Twitter, Inc.

Murray Rothbard on the impossibility of equality.

And Randall Holcombe with three assumptions the people on the left make about economic inequality.

Jeffrey Epstein and the Dishonest Media Labeling Others “Conspiracy Theorists”

Now that Jeffrey Epstein is either dead from murder or suicide, or been taken off to escape justice or be interrogated by goons, we are getting the usual “conspiracy theorist” label by those who are either very dishonest or just plain dumb, naive or ignorant.

Especially with those in the media as well as apparatchiks, we get a good view as to who someone really is when they immediately label someone as “conspiracy theorist” when that person isn’t obediently and gullibly believing every word that “officials” and their media stenographers tell us.

Perhaps there are those who immediately call someone a “conspiracy theorist” for merely questioning the official narrative, because the alternative explanations (with facts or circumstantial evidence given) cause the labelers anguish. For example, we’d rather not hear about someone such as allegedly Epstein sexually exploiting or abusing teenage girls. But further, it is more distressing when it turns out to be an elaborate scheme that involves many, many people, well-known or not, and that a lot of innocent young girls are being abused by all those scum.

I have a feeling that some of the high-profile people who have been involved in Jeffrey Epstein’s escapades include people in the news media, as well as politicians, Wall Street cronies and other very well-known personalities not involved in finance or politics. Craig Murray analyzes whether some events in the past involving Bill Clinton and Epstein are mere coincidences.

And Caitlin Johnstone writes about the labeling of people as “conspiracy theorist,” and about an NBC reporter Ken Dilanian who warns of “conspiracy theorists” who aren’t buying the official narrative. Apparently Dilanian is also a known CIA asset. So who is the real “conspiracy theorist” here?

There are many obedient sheeple in the news media now, either just out of authoritarian devotion to their rulers in Washington, or just out of a naive and gullible simpleton mentality. Some of them will literally repeat word for word whatever government officials tell them in their “news” reports.

As I wrote in this post last December,

For example, Glenn Greenwald pointed to court historian Douglas Brinkley’s fawning interview of Barack Obama, and that “journalists joyously dance with top officials, swing on their tires, are creepily grateful when they’re sprayed in the face by their squirt guns, and play fun beach games with the very campaign officials they’re ostensibly covering.”

…some examples provided by Greenwald have included Bob Schieffer kissing up to former NSA directer Michael Hayden, and Bob Shieffer hatchet-jobbing Ron Paul on foreign policy. And Scott Pelley’s “13 uninterrupted minutes of drooling propaganda” interview of Obama defense secretary Leon Panetta, how Wired manipulated chat logs to aid and abet the government’s persecution of Army whistleblower Bradley Manning, and Diane Sawyer and Brian Ross’s anti-Iran fear-mongering (things haven’t changed much).

We have just gone through more than two years of “Trump-Russia collusions” conspiracy theory, and it was all theory because not only was there never any evidence for such collusion or Trump-Russia conspiracy, and the Mueller Report says just that, but there has been no evidence that the DNC computers or emails were actually hacked.

But the “Trump-Russia collusions” and “Russian election meddling” false narratives i.e. “fake news” propaganda were being disseminated by the news media over and over and over, so many Americans really believed it all. Now, not so much.

So we don’t really have a “news media” now, we have a government media, the propaganda wing of the U.S. government. And it’s not just the national media, but many or most local news media outlets throughout the U.S. That’s because a lot of people are just easily propagandized.

But also a lot of people in the media are too damn lazy to do actual fact-checking, actual investigative research, and instead they tend to take information that a government official gives them as the word of God.

So this “conspiracy theorist” label being thrown around and directed toward those who question the official narrative is distressing, especially, as Johnstone pointed out in her article, when our beloved yet decrepit FBI tells us that “conspiracy theorists” are the new “domestic terrorism” threat.

And that is distressing because we now live in an age false accusation, an era of ignorance and hysteria regarding many issues, including the paranoid and triggered college snowflakes, and the climate fanatics who call people “deniers” and who want to jail or kill the “deniers.” And an era of false accusation now being the norm, such as with Title IX abuse. The accusations against Brett Kavanaugh were false accusations with NO evidence to back them up. And I detest Kavanaugh, if you didn’t know, but I still think the truth is important.

And the whole “Russia collusions” matter was a false accusation against a political candidate and then sitting President.

Charles Burris posted two posts on eugenics on the LRC blog. I’m not sure if it was because of the Epstein case now in the news, because we have heard that Jeffrey Epstein was into eugenics. The Burris posts are The Eugenics Crusade and Selling Murder: The Killing Films of the Third Reich.

In the 2nd Burris post, he writes about the “documentary Selling Murder: The Killing Films of the Third Reich, the single most important film about the Nazi’s Aktion T-4 euthanasia program.” He says “It shows exactly how the Nazis marginalized people with disabilities and mental illnesses by making them less and less until it became acceptable to exterminate them.”

That reminded me of the climate fanatics calling people “deniers” and wanting to jail them or have the “deniers” killed. Have you heard that?

But, speaking of references to the “mentally ill,” we are hearing of the importance of gun-buying background checks, using FBI or otherwise government databases, of course. And people want to take guns away from those labeled “mentally ill,” because the gun-grabbers want to disarm already more vulnerable people and make them even more defenseless.

However, the problem here is how “mentally ill” will be defined, and by whom. Given that the U.S. is becoming more like a USSA, an American Soviet Union, it seems to me that civilians or “any non-government employee” who owns an illegal gun will eventually be determined to be a “danger” or a “terrorist” by the “authorities.” Or determined to be “mentally ill” by our whacked out Xanaxized society and by the gubmint in Washington. But not just gun owners, also people who don’t share the “transgender” ideology, people who support the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence, people who live “off the grid,” etc., etc. Yeah, those “mentally ill” people.

And, oh yes, “conspiracy theorists.”