Skip to content

Month: October 2013

The Orwellian National “Security” Agency: Making Everyone Less Secure

Glenn Greenwald, with his Guardian colleagues James Ball and Bruce Schneier, details how the NSA and the GCHQ have compromised Tor users’ browser security and been able to take over their computers.

Hmmm. I wonder how many terrorists or terrorist wannabes use Tor. So it is yet another disclosure to tell us that the NSA’s main work, if you want to call it “work,” is to violate Americans’ privacy and security, and make Americans less safe and less secure. That is why the title, “National Security Agency” is so Orwellian.

Cindy Cohn and Trevor Timm of the Electronic Frontier Foundation have this article which explains how the NSA with further exploits and backdoor creations of computer vulnerabilities, make us less safe and less secure. So really, we can no longer distinguish between regular private hackers/criminals and the government ones. Like the other 3-letter dirty word agencies, the NSA is just another criminal racket masquerading as a “security agency.”

And in this video interview with a State-stenographer BBC biddy, Greenwald defends his journalistic role in collaboration with Edward Snowden in revealing to the people the crimes of their own governments against them. The BBC biddy attempts to accuse Geenwald of practically aiding and abetting terrorists. In response, Greenwald clarifies that what they have done is reveal not that the NSA has been spying on terrorists (that terrorists already know about), but that the NSA has been spying on innocent people not suspected of anything. He says that the role of real journalists here is to prevent people in power from lying to the people over whom they rule.

Hysterical Police Again

Infowars has this further info on the lady from Connecticut who was murdered in cold blood by Washington, D.C. police.

The “paranoid conspiracy theory” cynic in me smells something rotten in Denmark with this DC police shooting of the unarmed lady near the Corrupt Capitol building. Why would someone who was said to be a “happy” and “stable” person, despite her supposedly suffering from postpartum depression, drive through barriers and act like a crazy lady with a baby in her car?

And what was she doing driving all the way down to Washington from Connecticut?

For some reason, the Michael Hastings story comes to mind, regarding his car being hacked and taken over by certain criminal elements. I know, I know. “Paranoid conspiracy theorist.” But why would they do that to this lady? Just to cause a situation in which police (working without pay because of a government shut-down) can shoot her up and claim that their presence is necessary to protect the Rulers? Like to make more people criticize Republicans for “shutting down” the government? Is that too cynical to even suspect? Looking at the video of the lady speeding like a wild person, and putting all the facts thus far together, things here just don’t make sense.

Or perhaps it was because she was black? Were any of the trigger-happy officers black?

UPDATE: Okay, now I’m hearing in the news that the lady was “delusional” and thought that Obama was “stalking her.”

While some people interviewed described her as “always happy” and “stable,” as I noted above, and they couldn’t believe that she was the one involved there in Washington, other people (mainly investigators, so far as I can tell) are saying that she was “delusional.” Her mother said she was “depressed” and was hospitalized.

My conclusion is that Ms. Carey had probably been taking anti-depressants, that we know can have serious side effects. But will we ever find out the true story here? If she was on prescription psycho-meds will the media cover that up in the name of its continuing protection of Big Pharma’s Big Profits?

With “Libertarians” Like This, Who Needs Statists?

Dale Steinreich has this article on LewRockwell.com, asserting that the conservatives (of all people) gave us the origins of ObamaDisaster, a.k.a. the “Affordable (sic) Care (sic) Act.” Well, he’s really referring to the more specific early creators of this government-controlled health care, particularly this mandate stuff. But conservatives are statists just as “liberals” are, and statists love mandates, they love telling other people what to do, attempting to control and arrange other people’s lives, and ordering people around.

In the article linked above, Steinreich reminds us of Willard Romney and Hermione Gingrich who love health insurance mandates, but he concentrates on supposedly libertarian proposals for “free-market” health care which are in no way “free-market,” because they are nevertheless designed within the current statist system of ultimate government control over everyone’s medical matters.

Steinreich points to a John Goodman (who blogs at the Independent Institute’s Beacon blog — why, I don’t know). I already have seen Goodman’s posts there mainly on health care and ObamaDisaster for the past year, and I could already see that he was not a libertarian nor a “free-market” advocate.

For example, according to Steinreich, in Goodman’s so-called Health Savings Accounts, he now wants Roth Heath Savings Accounts (RHSAs), which would “combine the RHSAs (holding after-tax dollars and allowing tax-free withdrawals) with fixed-sum tax credits.” And Goodman wants to have “Health insurance retirement accounts (HIRAs) funded by a new 4-percent payroll tax split between workers (2 percent) and employers (2 percent).  With the Chilean social security system as a model, the revenue would be invested by ‘private security agencies’ [read: Wall Street].”

Now, I am assuming that Goodman’s proposals are what he wants to see as part of a government law which organizes these things — as an alternative to the Democrats’ DisasterCareless (i.e. “RepublicanCare”) — at least that’s what it sounds like to me. No wonder Goodman’s proposals are endorsed by the Heritage Foundation, the Stato Institute, and the Weak Standards Weekly Standard.

You see, a real libertarian wouldn’t call for “health insurance retirement accounts funded by a new 4% payroll tax split between workers and employers.” No, first the real libertarian would say that there should be NO payroll tax, period!

And a real libertarian, in my view, would also suggest that individuals should not be dependent on their employers for health insurance. (Just who was it that started this thing with getting employers involved in workers health care or insurance matters? That has contributed to screwing things up royally in the long run.)

And a real libertarian would not be proposing some kind of system for “after-tax dollars,” or “fixed-sum tax credits.” No, the real libertarian advocates that the tax system be abolished root and branch, as it is nothing but theft, and that there should be no government involvement or central planning in anyone’s private medical matters, period.

And no, saying, “Well, since we have this tax system in place, and there’s really nothing we can do about it (Doh!), we might as well put in some kinds of ways for people to afford ‘health care’ such as getting the government to give special credits for this or that, etc, etc, etc.”

Sorry — No. Way.

Libertarians should insist: “Get rid of the damn tax-thefts, for crying out loud!” And keep government bureaucrats out of our private medical matters, period! And then we’ll talk.

Actually, personal responsibility, self-respect and self-care are a part of the libertarian philosophy, as I see it. Thus, part of the real libertarian philosophy should include advocating that people take care of themselves so they can prevent illnesses, so they don’t have to see a “doctor” too often. And yes, emergency or catastrophic situations occur. This may sound harsh, but as long as those situations could occur in the future, it is yet another reason why individuals and families should be encouraged to save and have some sort of emergency fund set aside. And when there is no longer a government stealing from the people, then there would be many more charities around to help those in need. And when there is no longer a government imposing fascist medical regulations for no good reason, then the costs of medical care would crash down.

Jeepers, this medical care stuff really isn’t all it’s cracked up to be, anyway. And when ObamaDisaster turns into SinglePayer and then SovietCare, we will have even less informed and educated “doctors,” as they will be State-loving, Pharma-worshiping government bureaucrats, just as in the Soviet Union. (Ugh, they’re bad enough already now!)

So all these “conservative” (i.e. statist) proposals as alternatives to government medical care are nothing but central planning fantasies being proposed by people who do not understand what a genuine free market is. A genuine free market would exist when there is freedom across the board. No government bureaucrat or legislative central planning whatsoever.

And by the way, if you are interested, Steinreich also wrote this article on 100 years of medical fascism 3 years ago. And Lew Rockwell has some suggestions on what should be done regarding insurance.

And, FYI, I wrote this post (with links to other informative articles) on Dr. Elaina George vs. Kathleen Sebelius.

Hypocrite Harry Reid

In July, 2007, Senate Democrats led by Hypocrite Harry wanted to have a vote to end the war in Iraq and bring the troops home by April 30 of ’08. The Republicans filibustered Reid’s call for a vote. According to Politico at that time,

Reid has made similar threats throughout the year — to keep the Senate in nights, weekends and vacations — as well as filing frequent cloture motions, although he has only once kept the Senate in session during a weekend.

Do you remember when Hypocrite Harry had his little slumber party, his little all-nighter with mattresses brought into the Senate chambers? And they were actually laughing and joking about it at the time.

The Washington Pest seemed to defend Reid’s slumber party antics. And the New York Times, with all the propaganda that’s fit to fabricate, wrote in its editorial at the time regarding the Republicans’ filibuster and Hypocrite Harry’s all-night slumber party,

The minority leader, Mitch McConnell, notes the Democrats engaged in similar guerrilla tactics when they were in the minority. But Mr. McConnell should keep in mind that voters can tell the difference between principled resistance and political showmanship.

“Principled resistance”? Ugh! So now, the media pundits and government sycophants are accusing the House Tea Party Republicans of “political showmanship” in their holding up the annual spending bill and causing this “government shut-down.” However, their motivations are based on the principle that something as atrocious and dangerous as ObamaScare is, as Harry Reid and the Goebbels media keep telling us, the “law of the land.”

Obama’s UnhealthyCare is the “law of the land,” despite how already thousands of jobs have been cut, or full-time jobs turned to part-time, and many doctors leaving the profession because they don’t want to be slaves, and vast majorities of the American people in most polls are saying that they want the Affordable Care Act repealed because it is extremely destructive, intrusive and will not help people to be “healthier.”

Yes, the issue of the 2007 Democrats’ wanting to end the Iraq War is different from the 2013 issue of Republicans wanting to end ObamaCare. But this shows what hypocrites we have in powerful offices and in the “news” media.

The Oath Keepers Are Going “Operational”

Corresponding with my post yesterday, even the Oath Keepers recognize that the Rulers are preparing for something, and it is not good. “Not good” in the sense of not good for us and our liberty and prosperity (although good for the power-grabbers, usurpers and otherwise government criminals with power).

If you are not familiar with Oath Keepers, according to their very lengthy explanation of who they are and who they are not,

Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of current and formerly serving military, police, and first responders  who pledge to fulfill the oath all military and police take to “defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” That oath, mandated by Article VI of the Constitution itself, is to the Constitution, not to the politicians, and Oath Keepers declare that they will not obey unconstitutional orders, such as orders to disarm the American people, to conduct warrantless searches, or to detain Americans as “enemy combatants” in violation of their ancient right to jury trial

And they clarify the oath that enlisted military personnel must take:

While the enlisted oath does contain a pledge to obey the orders of the President and of commanding officers, that is still preceded by a pledge to “defend the Constitution,” and is also qualified by the requirement that such orders be  “according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.”    Any order, by anyone, that is not constitutional or according to regulations, is unlawful and military personnel are not obligated to follow such orders – and, in fact, are obligated to refuse.

As I pointed out in this recent post in reference to local government police officers who have also sworn an oath to obey the Constitution, you military people out there as well as “LEOs” are morally and legally obligated to disobey unlawful orders imposed by your commanding officers including the President of the United States. Unlawful orders include the order to confiscate firearms from private people or otherwise seize property without warrants or probable cause, as well as the order to arrest or detain civilians who are not suspects and with no reason to suspect them of anything.

And now, given the sense that Obama and the federal government he has taken over are up to something and preparing for something, the Oath Keepers are going “operational” and forming “special civilization preservation teams.” It really is informative to read how these people think and operate. I on the other hand do not “prepare” in this kind of way. Frankly, I’m just not prepared in case “something happens.” And given all the police abuse all across America, with government police obviously not taking their oaths seriously and seeming to only be in the business of bullying and thuggery rather than “protecting the people,” I am trying not to be too pessimistic regarding how our local police here (and military personnel as well) will be acting toward us mere civilians when the SHTF.

Some Good Reads

Anthony Gregory has this post on the standing army and the Third Amendment, modern police/military enmeshments, and the sheeple’s acceptance of all this treasonous police state.

Justin Raimondo has this one on the military contractor parasites and their whining over a government “shut-down.”

Some people ask if the United States can trust Iran. But Sheldon Richman asks, Can Iran trust the United States?

Butler Shaffer explains how the government control freaks want to suppress and/or control speech on the Internet.

Jacob Hornberger suggests we should shut down the non-essential drug war and shut down the non-essential National-Security State.

Karl Denninger shows how ObamaCareless really is killing people.

Washington’s Blog shows how lack of privacy destroys the economy.

Wendy McElroy’s friend Brian C. questions the U.S. government’s use of atomic bombs against civilians in Japan during World War II.

Emmett Harris writes about Obama using an 1884 horse law to regulate tax preparers.

Shut Down the Government, But Not the Power Grid

Mac Slavo of the SHTF Plan blog has this post today on how the U.S. government and local bureaucrats seem to be preparing for something other than “peace and stability.” Slavo says that something is going on. He refers to the many DHS and FEMA disaster drills being conducted between September 25th (last week) and this November 14th, including the November 13-14 power grid drill that I wrote about recently. And as I mentioned in that post, Slavo also brings up the coincidences of past drills occurring at the same time as actual disasters or acts of terrorism, such as the Boston Marathon bombings, Sandy Hook and and the 7/7 London bombings.

And as I wrote in my post about the drills and coincidences, it is a good idea to inform other people of what is going on and the facts of past events, in relation to the upcoming DHS power grid drill this November. If there is a grid failure and a major power outage and/or a terrorist attack or some sort of actual disaster at that time, there will be good reason to conclude that it will be a false flag, and we will know who is responsible for it.

And if something does happen, count on “liberal” Obama and his fellow police statists of the 57 states to call for martial law. As we saw during Katrina, expect the “law enforcers” to act unlawfully, and, with bank runs, ATMs not working and food shortages, after just a few days there will be many very hungry people, and expect the “law enforcers” themselves to join the looters, the home invaders and so forth. And expect the “officials” to steal the people’s guns and make them defenseless, because that is what the State does.

Because of how America has decayed socially and morally as well as economically, such criminality is likely to occur, whereas had the same kind of situation occurred during the 1950s or ’60s I don’t think such criminality would have been so widespread as it would be in a similar scenario in current times. That is just my opinion on that.

In fact, in a new column just today Walter Williams, the author of Race and Economics: How Much Can Be Blamed on Discrimination?, and The State Against Blacks, discusses the gun control issue, and says it isn’t a matter of banning guns or making them less accessible or strengthening background checks. Rather, it’s a matter of morality. The widespread violence committed today with guns and other weapons, by police as well as by civilians, is due to the moral decline in America.

Important origins of America’s moral decline and rise of the evil police state include collectivism, statist redistribution schemes, government plundering of private property, government usurpation of education and government’s destruction of the family. Hans-Hermann Hoppe explains some of the connections in his book, Democracy: The God That Failed. Here is the Intro. And here is Murray Rothbard on the State versus Liberty.

So, if we are going to have power-grabbing government bureaucrats deliberately wreaking havoc with our power grid vulnerability as a means of giving themselves even more power, and a collapse of society that America has never seen even worse than the Great Depression, we can blame it on democracy, which is nothing but mob rule and tyranny of the majority. And we can blame it on dependence, complacency, intellectual laziness and materialism. The past century has been quite a trip, from some freedom to total slavery. Well, “good for you,” as Elizabeth Warren would say.

So there really would be good news with an actual government shut-down, and not the phony one we seem to be experiencing now. Jeff Berwick of Dollar Vigilante explains how in a real government shut-down there would be sooooo much more freedom. Can you believe that? Actual freedom? And that includes not only the freedom of a little kid to have a lemonade stand without some non-productive government parasite sticking his/her/its nose in the kid’s business, but also no government police goons disarming innocent civilians. That would mean that anyone who wants a means of self-defense can have it, and the crime rate would go way down because thugs, rapists and murderers would know that if they tried anything they probably wouldn’t survive such an attempt. (But, thanks to gun control, the fascists make many people defenseless and the thugs know they’ll get away with it.)

And also, with freedom we wouldn’t have complete government control over this power grid thing, upon which the livelihoods of millions of people are totally dependent.