Skip to content

Tag: police state

Trump Signs Executive Order Pandering to Jewish Voters and Israel

Published by scott lazarowitz on December 12, 2019

So now we hear that Donald Trump has signed an executive order determining what “anti-Semitism” is, like including criticism of Israel or Judaism, and punishing such speech as thought crimes by denying federal funds to colleges and schools or other programs shown to allow or tolerate “anti-Semitism” on campus.

As Kelley Vlahos at The American Conservative writes,”What it really will do is put a chill on speech, as skittish administrations shut down protests, screen speakers, and monitor classrooms for unsanctioned criticisms against Israel.” Yep.

Alan Dershowitz, otherwise known as “Mr. Freedom of Speech” and “Mr. First Amendment,” supports this and was there at the Trump Order-signing ceremony. Oh well. There goes that one. So much for Alan Dershowitless. He used to say that a worse alternative to bad speech is no speech — but now, when it comes to Israel he is for silencing others with whom he disagrees. May we now call him “Mr. Censorship”?

But this should be a further example why we need to:

1. Abolish all government redistribution of wealth schemes altogether. No one should receive funds that were taken involuntarily from others. That’s stealing. (Abolish the income tax, too.)

2. Get the government out of education. Abolish the federal Department of Education. Total separation of education and State in a free society.

3. Repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and all its subsequent Amendments, or strike any parts that apply to privately owned property. Only the government may not “discriminate” against people based on religion, national origin, sex or race. It should not apply to people in their private associations or economic matters. Otherwise, it is a thought crimes act. This current executive order imposed by the orange fascist is based on Title VI of the Act.

Unfortunately, politicians pander to a very sensitive spot in American politics: support for Israel. Many politicians tremble at the thought of not being seen as a big supporter of Israel, so they overdo it. (See Rand Paul and his “Stand with Israel Act.” Pander, pander, pander, Rand.)

And then there are the True Believers, the zealous Christian Zionists like George W. Bush, Mike Pompeo, and our current vice president Mike Pence who support Israel and “the Jews” mainly because the zealots believe in “End Times,” and the “Great Tribulation,” the “Rapture,” and all that icky stuff. They only support “the Jews” because they are looking forward to those End Times when, in order for Jews to be saved they will convert to Christianity and become believers in Jesus Christ as The Savior. Or else, they won’t be saved.

But regarding Trump’s fascist threats against colleges and schools, academic institutions used to be places encouraging debates from all perspectives, the expression of any ideas, including uncommon, dissenting and even abhorrent ideas. But as we know now, the political correctness and intolerance give us silencing of uncommon, dissenting and supposedly abhorrent ideas. Apparently believing that there are only two genders is now an abhorrent idea. Some people including the moron President think that criticizing Israel is an abhorrent idea, no matter what its government does.

But if you criticize Israel now, you are an “anti-Semite” (or a “self-hating Jew” in my case). There are many sound reasons to criticize Israel, just as there are many sound reasons to criticize the United State of Amerika. I do the latter all the time here. Why is Israel so special? Why is Israel such a snowflake that it can’t endure some critical opinions?

I personally am not a Zionist, because I am not a collectivist and don’t believe in group identity politics. That is what Israel is all about. Zionism is a political movement for over 100 years encouraging the world’s Jews to move to that one location, based on the Bible and Biblical scriptures. It isn’t based on living a better life, because if it were then Jews should be encouraged to live in the United State of Amerika. Israel is a socialist nation based on government central planning, and a militarist police state, much more than the U.S. Imagine TSA and U.S. border control “your papers please” but not just in the airports or on the border, but throughout the whole country.

And why must there be a “Jewish State”? Should there be a Christian state? An Islamic state? Or an atheist state? Duh.

People should live where they want to live, where they feel most comfortable, where it’s economically or culturally best for them, and so on. If they want to live in some kind of neighborhood covenant based on Judaism, then do that. But to seize an entire territory, which is what the British Empire, the U.S. and other Western governments and their militaries did during the 20th Century, and have it be an artificial country based on a particular religion at the expense of people who hold different religious views, then we have not only a theocracy but an entire country that’s based on the negation of freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

But we’re not allowed to say those things or give those opinions. People dare not consider those concepts or those ideas of dissent from the usual dogma they’ve been fed since their early childhoods.

So, unlike Israel where there is no Constitution or Bill of Rights or a First Amendment protecting freedom of speech, in the United State we DO have those things. And we can say whatever we want about the bureaucrats and criminals of the U.S. government (sorry for the redundancy), just as we can say what we want about Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and worse, the U.K.

Even here in Amerika, we can say what we want about religions. Including Judaism. That’s not “hate speech,” or “discrimination.” I can say that Judaism and Christianity are not my thing, even though I consider myself Jewish because I was raised in a Jewish family. But I don’t believe in a lot of the Biblical teachings. I think that Judaism is, like Christianity, a very authoritarian religion. But then, I can’t think of a religion that is not authoritarian. And I can criticize it for that reason if I want to.

Just like the conservatives and talk radio personalities we hear are constantly criticizing Islam, another extremely authoritarian religion. Right?

Speaking of authoritarians, the Orange One is extremely authoritarian in his imposing an executive order to stifle freedom of speech on college campuses in the name of pandering to Israel and Jewish voters.

Don’t Trust CNN, CBS, New York Times, et al. for Truthful Reporting, Only Propaganda

Published by scott lazarowitz on December 12, 2019

One thing we have gotten from the DOJ inspector general report on the FBI’s politically motivated “mistakes” and “incompetence” with the FISA applications for warrants to spy on Carter Page using the Steele dossier as the “intel,” is how either ignorant and incompetent or just dishonest and corrupt the “news” media have been these past 2 or 3 years now in their defending the national security state. And it’s not the “deep state,” because it’s out in the open.

And now we have an impeachment of Trump based on a phone call. As soon as Trump won the election in 2016, Democrats were immediately calling for him to be impeached. They’ll take anything as an excuse to impeach him. And the “news” media have been carrying the establishment apparatchiks’ water.

As I wrote here, the “news” media have been propagandizing on behalf of Hillary Clinton and Democrats and lying or lying by omission on behalf of smearing or framing The Donald. And I’m not a Trump supporter as you already know, but I think the truth is important.

The late investigative journalist Robert Parry wrote, “The hatred of Trump and Putin was so intense that old-fashioned rules of journalism and fairness were brushed aside…Hatred of Trump had become like some invasion of the body snatchers –or perhaps many of my journalistic colleagues had never believed in the principles of journalism that I had embraced throughout my adult life.”

But, as Glenn Greenwald noted, “The political media is designed to be adversarial because it is supposed to serve as a scrutinizing check on the claims of those in power, not serve as worshipful, propagandistic amplifiers of those claims.” In that article Greenwald cites many instances in which our modern “news journalists” enmesh and schmooze themselves with government power-grabbers, becoming useful idiots for the national security state.

Americans need to divorce CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, Washington Post, Newsweek and Time, and all the other propaganda forces who shill for the State.

If you want more truthful news and analysis on the FBI, the FISA revelations, and the national security state and media’s campaign of propaganda and framing against Trump, then the following recent articles would be better for that. A lot of detailed information including from the DOJ inspector general report that you won’t get from mainstream media:

Peter Van Buren gives some actual details from the DOJ inspector general’s report on FBI spying on the Trump campaign.

Zero Hedge with an article on the DOJ inspector general testifying this week that FBI should have stopped surveilling Carter Page.

Rowan Scarborough with an article on FBI misleading FISA court judges of Christopher Steele’s truth record.

Ray McGovern on the inspector general whitewashing the FBI.

This article on the Last Refuge tells of how ambassador Marie Yovanovitch perjured herself before Congress, and explains Sen. Lindsey Graham’s motive for whitewashing, that he’s all hat and no cattle.

And, Zero Hedge with an article on the FISA report revealing that Clinton meddled in the 2016 election.

More News and Commentary

Published by scott lazarowitz on December 4, 2019

Larry Johnson with what the Horowitz report should conclude.

Zero Hedge: AG William Barr disputes major inspector general report based on evidence.

Thomas DiLorenzo: The impeachment inquiry is one big criminal campaign financing scam.

Moon of Alabama on a new study showing that “Russian trolls” did not “sow discord,” and influenced no one.

Jim Davies on continuous war.

Kelley Vlahos asks, Was Sheldon Adelson acting as bag man for CIA in the Julian Assange case?

Ron Paul with a better way to fight the drug cartels than Trump’s militarist approach.

Thomas Knapp on what the “war on terror” will look like if Trump adds Mexico’s drug cartels to the mix.

Spencer Ackerman: Trump is first to use the Patriot Act to detain a man forever.

Jacob Hornberger: The Pentagon’s destruction of the Bill of Rights.

Lawrence Reed: Why the Pilgrims abandoned common ownership for private property.

Germinal Van: Africa’s socialism is keeping it poor.

Laurence Vance on private property rights and freedom of association.

Robert Wenzel: Jared Kushner’s plan to seize massive amounts of private property in Texas.

James Bovard on Deval Patrick’s past scandals and catastrophic cover-ups.

Tom Woods comments on the assertion that using statistics means you’re “silencing women’s voices.”

Caitlin Johnstone: Narrative managers faceplant in hilarious OPCW scandal spin job.

Moon of Alabama: OPCW manufactured a pretext for war by suppressing its own scientists’ research.

Doug Bandow on Tulsi Gabbard’s attacking other Democrats regarding $6.4 trillion “regime change wars.”

Andrew Moran: Central bankers have declared war on your savings.

Walter Williams discusses fraud in higher education.

And Art Carden: The struggle to get education away from the State. (Ya think? After all the above?)

Shocker: BureaucRATS and Their Media Mouthpieces and Scribblers Are Not Our Friends

Published by scott lazarowitz on November 28, 2019

It appears as though House Democrats are rethinking their strategy to remove Donald Trump from the White House. They may still be writing articles of impeachment, but they have no case against him with the “controversial” phone call with the Ukrainian president, just as they had no case in Russia-Russia-Russia.

I have never seen such a mass of hysterical activists in their hatred of one guy. Many of these people in Warshington need some kind of counseling. They are deranged. But then, on the other side we have the flag worshipers and military worshipers who agree with acquitting or pardoning murderers and war criminals. Oh, well.

Anyway, during this whole impeachment farce that’s been going on since before Trump was even elected, the “news” media have led the charge in their lying and propaganda, and their corruption. We already know how dishonest many in the moonstream media were in their trying to help Obama get elected in 2008, and in their trying to help Hillary Rotten Clinton in 2016.

Just this week I heard on Sean Hannity’s radio show, which at times is like fingernails against the chalkboard, Mark Simone being interviewed along with Joe Unconcha. Simone noted how corrupt the “news” media are now, and he named Chuck Toady but didn’t want to mention other names. (That’s me referring to “Toady,” not Simone.) And that’s right. Chuck Toady is extremely corrupt and dishonest, especially in the way he words some of his questions for Trump supporters on the Sunday blab show (which I hear on Bloomberg Radio, because I stopped watching TV 25 years ago — no surprise there). And I have heard George Snuffleupagus do this as well. They persist on asking the same question over and over, questions that are a part of an ongoing false narrative they seem to want to reinforce in the minds of the viewing sheeple.

The propaganda media along with the politicians and activists whose main priorities are abortion, race and identity politics, have gone off the deep end, if that’s possible. During Iran-Contra Ronald Raygun would refer to the Press as the “sharks” coming after him shouting questions, but during all the 1990s Bubba Clinton investigations like Whitewasher Bubba had his defenders in the media. Now we have CNN the Most Untrusted Name in “News” with Unreliable Sources host Brian Helter-Stelter calling Trump supporters a “cult.” Are you serious? Well, many of the Trumpies really do behave in a cultish way, with the flag worship and all, but with the zombies on the left there is no comparison. We have the abortion cult, the race cult, and LGBT cult. Speaking of the LGBT cult, some people are wondering if Mayor Pete Bada-Bing (Bada-Boom) is going to be the first gay President, but we already had one. Oh, well.

And now we hear from leaks and drips that the Horowitz IG report is going to whitewash FBI spying on the Trump campaign? And it looks like AG Barr is also engaged in whitewashing, just as he’s whitewashing the Jeffrey Epstein suicide “conspiracy theories,” and on and on. Lather, rinse, repeat. And will we ever know whether it’s only a conspiracy theory that FBI and CIA are a pedophile cult? If so, maybe that’s why the cover-ups. What a bunch of sickos. Especially many in the “news” media as well. As Lew Rockwell said to a New York Slimes reporter intruding on the Mises Institute, these scribblers for State press releases are a part of the Regime. And as former CIA officer John Kiriakou wrote just recently, the mainstream media who shield FBI malfeasance are our enemy. That’s not good, in a “Constitutional Republic.” (Or perhaps it’s more of a rethuglic. “A rethuglic, if you can keep it,” as Ben franklin might say.)

So, everything we already know up to now is really a “conspiracy theory.” Go figure. The government life-long parasites, Barr, Horowitz, Durham, et al. are apparatchiks, no different from Soviet Schiff! They are the swamp, and it appears there will be no draining, people. I hope that turns out to be incorrect, of course.

More News and Commentary

Published by scott lazarowitz on November 28, 2019

Sharyl Attkisson has the least-biased impeachment guide.

John Solomon says there are many documents that could change the Ukraine scandal if Trump released them.

Eddie Scarry on the NYT memory-holing its own report that Ukraine interfered in 2016 election.

James Bovard suggests sending Thanksgiving greetings to Chelsea Manning, a.k.a. Bradley Manning.

Jacob Hornberger discusses guns and violence.

Joy Pullmann says that media propaganda about Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s health is irresponsible.

Brian Shilhavy with Ann-Marie Timmerman on doctors and CPS in medical kidnapping.

And Health Impact News with an article on a doctor who doesn’t want to consider Gardasil vaccine as cause of patient’s seizures, because such disclosure would result in loss of research funding.

The Late TV Host John McLaughlin in 1970s Interviews on Nixon Impeachment

Published by scott lazarowitz on November 20, 2019

There really are some similarities between Richard Nixon’s impeachment situation and Donald Trump’s impeachment situation now, in my view.

With Nixon what I would call the entrapment scheme included CIA breaking into DNC offices, etc., and then E. Howard Hunt getting Nixon to attempt to cover up the whole thing. I believe it was a pre-planned scheme concocted by national security apparatchiks and not really of Nixon’s own doing. Why would the national security state do this? They were clearly motivated by Nixon’s talks and detente with Russia and China, much like what Trump has been trying to do now with Russia and other foreign regimes.

Because Nixon’s attempts to relax the Cold War threatened the government parasite gravy train in Washington, the national security apparatchiks wanted to get rid of Nixon. Assassinating him was obviously not good given that they knocked off a previous President, Kennedy, who had tried to have talks with Russia and push for peace. There were many skeptics of the Warren Commission’s attempt to whitewash the truth. Such an assassination being by a “lone nut” has not been believed by the non-gullible.

Currently we have national security state operatives, a.k.a. “deep state” (although it’s not so deep now, is it?) who didn’t like Trump openly criticizing the FBI’s mishandling of terrorism and 9/11 or their inability to prevent 9/11, as well as Trump’s criticism of the Iraq war.

So the national security state actively and illegally used FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign and the Trump White House flunkies, they made up a fake dossier to frame The Donald, hired a special counsel to go on a fishing expedition for further framing, which nonetheless exonerated Trump. And now they are doing impeachment hearings based on one phone call, whereas they can easily take ANY phone call between Obama or Bush and others and make something up to criminalize such phone calls.

During the 1970s Jerry Williams interviewed the late TV news host John McLaughlin several times. Here are two of those interviews, in which they discuss the Nixon impeachment hearings. McLaughlin was severely defensive of Nixon, and Jerry Williams was someone who hated Nixon like you wouldn’t believe. Hearing these interviews, I am amazed by Jerry’s ability to bite his tongue and remain objective.

For those who don’t know, Jerry Williams was a talk radio personality from the 1950s to the 1990s, heard mainly in Boston on WMEX, WBZ and WRKO, and in Chicago on WBBM, and was one of my favorites on talk radio during the 1980s.

The first video is from November of 1973. At that time McLaughlin was known as Father John McLaughlin, when McLaughlin was still an active Catholic priest while working for the Nixon administration.

In this first interview, one of the callers was giving McLaughlin the third degree regarding what “mistake” Richard Nixon had made that McLaughlin was referring to, for example was it the Watergate break in? and so forth. There was a tense back and forth between McLaughlin and the caller that we rarely hear now on talk radio.

McLaughlin also discusses some aspects of the Nixon impeachment hearings that have some similarities to what we’ve been hearing in today’s news regarding Trump.

In the 2nd video, the page says it is from March of 1974, but the graphics on the beginning of the video have the date of July 1973. It’s 1974 because at one point Jerry Williams read from a newspaper column he said was from 2/27/1974. At the end of the video was the station’s on-the-hour newscast that included mention of Harold Wilson officially becoming British Prime Minister which was March 4, 1974.

Toward the beginning of the 2nd video, Fr. McLaughlin and Jerry Williams talk about McLaughlin’s “two hats,” his hat as a priest and his separate hat as a hack assistant to the President, Richard M. Nixon.

Obviously, the point of view that I expressed above regarding the national security state’s taking down Nixon is not expressed by either of these two on the radio. Even Nixon himself believed that he shouldn’t have stupidly covered up the Watergate break-in crimes of CIA, but I now see it all as planned out by them in order to ensnare Nixon toward impeachment or resignation. Gerald Ford, by the way, was a “deep stater” if there ever was one.

Today’s Anti-Immigration Nationalists And Their Love of Central Planning and the Police State

Published by scott lazarowitz on November 20, 2019

Thomas DiLorenzo writes on LRC about the curse of American nationalism, with reference to the recently published Volume 5 of Murray Rothbard’s Conceived in Liberty, transcribed from Rothbard’s handwritten notes and edited by Patrick Newman. DiLorenzo quotes Rothbard regarding the early American nationalists,  such as “Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, Sam Adams, John Hancock, Thomas Paine…” who wanted to “destroy the original individualist and decentralized program of the American Revolution.”  DiLorenzo writes that “Conceived in Liberty tells the story, chapter and verse, of how these men subverted and overthrew the principles of American freedom that inspired the American Revolution with their ‘devious and sinister machinations,'” as Rothbard would put it.

Now, I don’t know whether DiLorenzo agrees with me on the immigration issue. But that is one issue in which today’s nationalist conservatives go off the deep end, and abandon their supposed advocacy of private property and free markets in the name of American nationalism and their deeply indoctrinated worship of “America” with all the myths and glorification that go with it.

Today’s conservatives are supporters of centralization and government central planning in many aspects of life. And they love the tyrannical national security state. With the faux “war on terror” and the wars on drugs and immigration, today’s nationalist conservatives are police statists and militarists. Not big on individualism, decentralization or privatization, these people.

One of today’s extreme nationalists, Michelle Malkin, has been on the talk shows promoting her anti-immigration and “stand with ICE” tour and her book, Open Borders, Inc.

Stand with the police state, you mean. Certainly not stand with freedom, and the ideas of the Declaration of Independence, such as unalienable rights.

Now Malkin is being snubbed by conservative groups because of her defense of someone named Nick Fuentes who has been accused of being an anti-Semitic Holocaust denier and a racist. Malkin still insists on defending Fuentes, despite his controversies. I don’t know why. And her tour is now being banned by the intolerant academic fascists on the left, including the latest being Bentley College.

Malkin, and her anti-immigration cohorts Donald Trump, Ann Coulter et al. have this collectivist, nativist ideology that overrides whatever support they might ever have for the founding principles of America.

In fact, regarding the immigration issue, in one of the Founders’ complaints against the King in their Declaration of Independence, Jefferson wrote:

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

Do they know this? So, these so-called conservative people of today are really anti-free market, anti-private property and anti-freedom of association. As I wrote in this post summarizing several past posts on immigration, when you have genuine free markets people sell their labor or goods to employers or customers, and such contracts are between them and don’t involve third parties unless specifically noted. And in a society of freedom and free markets people come and go as they please. No police state at the border, no having to report to government bureaucrats. As I wrote in that post, statists look to the ruling government bureaucrats for validation.

In contrast to the free society, if you favor the current system that consists of workers and employers having to get the government’s permission to do business or trade, then that is socialism, not capitalism and not freedom. Private property rights are such that an individual owns his own labor and sells it to an employer in a voluntary contract. When you have to get a third party’s permission or ultimate authorization in these things, then the real owner is that third party, not the laborer or employer. In the current system of government ownership of the people and “their” property, that third party owner is the U.S. government.

There are a lot of myths thrown around in the immigration debate, and one of them asserts or implies some kind of collective ownership of the U.S. territory as a whole, but there is no such collective ownership. If so, then such an arrangement overrides private property rights.

Once again I ask, why aren’t these so-called conservatives spending their time and activism on getting rid of the welfare state if they’re worried about “illegals” coming and getting on welfare? Because they LOVE the welfare state! They love Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Otherwise they would constantly advocate those socialist programs be abolished.

But there shouldn’t be government confiscation of private wealth or earnings — that’s criminal. There shouldn’t be government-imposed redistribution in any case, whether redistributed to other people here or to foreigners. Those schemes are immoral, illegitimate, and criminal, in my view.

And why are today’s conservatives so short-sighted, like the ones on the left? They don’t seem to want to address the causes of the “illegals” and the caravans coming up from the southern border. Such causes include U.S. government’s foreign interventions and foreign aid to corrupt regimes in Central America, and the “war on drugs.” The immigrants are fleeing because of the violence as consequences of drug prohibition. But sadly, many of today’s conservatives support the drug war and the nanny state in which we must turn to gubmint to tell us what we may or may not consume in our “own” bodies. Today’s conservatives support siccing the goon government police on innocent, peaceful people who haven’t harmed anyone, just as is the case with immigrants. It is the goons of ICE, that Michelle Malkin et al. love so much, who are the thugs.

And given that many more violent crimes are committed here by U.S. citizens than by immigrants, the fact that these “conservatives” spend so much time and activism only concentrating on the unauthorized entrants to the territory, then that tells me that it’s not about crime, it’s not about “stealing Americans’ jobs,” it’s not about welfare, it’s all about foreigner hating, and that’s it. It’s about collectivist nativism, and envy and covetousness as well, very much like that of the left.

If today’s conservatives such as Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh and all the ditto-heads really favored the principles of America’s founding, they would promote unrestricted free markets, protection of private property, decentralization and abolishing of the police state.

More News and Commentary

Published by scott lazarowitz on November 17, 2019

Jacob Hornberger: America’s soldiers did not fight or die for freedom.

John Whitehead: Casualties of war: military veterans have become America’s walking wounded.

James Bovard: As the deep state attacks Trump to rave media reviews, don’t forget its dark side.

Ray McGovern: Ukraine for dummies.

Becky Akers: Mr. Bill and the Marxists.

Robert Wenzel reviews Rand Paul’s book, The Case Against Socialism.

NY Post: 10 reasons why this impeachment “inquiry” is really a coup.

Aaron Maté: The Brennan Dossier: all about a prime mover of Russiagate.

Lew Rockwell: Ron Paul, hero.

Elizabeth Nolan Brown and Paul Detrick: Politicians want to destroy Section 230, the Internet’s First Amendment.

John Solomon: The real Ukraine controversy: an activist U.S. embassy and its adherence to the Geneva Convention

Robert Levering: How anti-Vietnam War protests thwarted Nixon’s plans and saved lives

Paul Craig Roberts: The latest false news on the Trump impeachment.

And Moon of Alabama: Trump and Zelensky want peace with Russia. The fascists oppose that.

Law Prof: Adam Schiffty Now Trying to Reshape the Facts

Published by scott lazarowitz on November 13, 2019

Law professor Jonathan Turley has a post today on Adam Schiffty now “suddenly injecting the possible use of bribery as a basis for the impeachment of President Donald Trump,” a scheme that is “both constitutionally and historically unsound … would undermine the credibility of the impeachment effort by struggling to reshape the facts into a more compelling criminal image,” and “will only raise questions of the legitimacy of the effort.” (Note: Prof. Turley isn’t referring to the corrupt, lying congressman as “Adam Schiffty,” I’m doing that.)