A LITTLE REBELLION

Hillary's Thugs

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton giving a speech condemning governments that arrest protesters and do not allow free expression - while representing a government that cages millions, creates "free speech zones," and hunts down whistleblowers - is sickening enough.

But just to add to the irony, the heroic Ray McGovern was assaulted and carried out by police during Clinton's speech, as David Swanson reports:

As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave her speech at George Washington University yesterday condemning governments that arrest protestors and do not allow free expression, 71-year-old Ray McGovern was grabbed from the audience in plain view of her by police and an unidentified official in plain clothes, brutalized and left bleeding in jail. She never paused speaking. When Secretary Clinton began her speech, Mr. McGovern remained standing silently in the audience and turned his back. Mr. McGovern, a veteran Army officer who also worked as a C.I.A. analyst for 27 years, was wearing a Veterans for Peace t-shirt.

Blind-sided by security officers who pounced upon him, Mr. McGovern remarked, as he was hauled out the door, "So this is America?" Mr. McGovern is covered with bruises, lacerations and contusions inflicted in the assault.

Mr. McGovern is being represented by the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF). "It is the ultimate definition of lip service that Secretary of State Clinton would be trumpeting the U.S. government's supposed concerns for free speech rights and this man would be simultaneously brutalized and arrested for engaging in a peaceful act of dissent at her speech," stated attorney Mara Verheyden-Hilliard of the PCJF.

Mr. McGovern now works for Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in the Adams Morgan neighborhood of Washington, D.C.

End The American Caliphate

The usual neocon chickenhawks in the media have been using the revolutions in Egypt and across the Middle East to once again bring out the "radical jihadist Muslims are taking over the world and establish a worldwide Islamic Caliphate" bogeyman (Juan Cole has a great article on the anti Muslim Brotherhood paranoia).

My first response to this nonsensical fear-mongering is usually: what about the American Caliphate? For decades, the US government has used bombs, bribes, sanctions, coups, and assassinations to influence and control Arab governments and to get Muslims to bow down, kiss the ring, and submit to the might of the American military empire.

All of this is done, of course, in your name and with your tax dollars.

Muslims, like all of us, just want to be free and have a stake in the future of their own communities, cities, and countries, not live under the heel of a foreign power. As Laurence Vance at the LRC blog writes:

I note that the cry of the Muslim masses in Tunisia, Egypt, and elsewhere in the Middle East is not for Islamofascism, global Islamic conquest, a global Caliphate, the worldwide establishment of Sharia law, a new holocaust, suicide bombers, and terrorists attacks, but for more freedom—something they supposedly hate us for.

But, some would say, their idea of freedom is not real freedom. Oh, then they must be Republicans.  Like Republicans in the United States that claim to believe in freedom as long as it is not the freedom to use incandescent light bulbs, smoke marijuana, and purchase Sudafed over the counter.

Instead of fretting over some nonexistant global Islamic conspiracy, we Americans could actually take a lesson from these Muslim (and Christian) protesters in Egypt. They gathered by the hundreds of thousands in peaceful protest, sick of Mubarak's torture-police-state.

Meanwhile, here in "the land of the free," our torturers and police statists get standing ovations and book deals, our government runs up trillions of dollars of deficits, and Congress re-extends the PATRIOT (haha) Act with barely a whisper.

Islamic Caliphate? We need to end the American Caliphate, DC's domestic and international killing, taxing, and looting empire.

The Bread-and-Circus Racket

I had an epiphany this weekend, and have seen the error of my anti-state ways. The United States of America, this bastion of freedom, truly is the indispensable nation. We are the world's sole superpower, policing the globe with warships and bases that liberate oppressed peoples and bring stability to a chaotic world. We are the new Rome; except Pax Romana was just an ancient and hollow shell compared to the near-holy blessings of Pax Americana.

After watching the Super Bowl yesterday, how can you blame me? Before the game, an over-serious spot ran where Colin Powell reminded Americans of our precious heritage and values. The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, sealed in glass (like a dinosaur in tar or a mosquito in amber), sparked revolts against "a foreign tyranny" and laid the foundations of our Republic. Powell should know; he burned villages to the ground in Indochina in the name of these documents.

But they were just getting warmed up. Before kickoff, not one, but TWO state-and-war worshiping nationalist anthems were sung, while occasionally panning to the fatigued cannon fodder stationed in God knows where, soon to lose limbs for Lockheed Martin and their minds for Madam Hillary.

And then the jets. Ah, those theftillion dollar killer machines, wowing the crowd as they fly inches away from each other, spewing out tax dollars while some Americans are losing their homes and starving on the streets. Flags wave, medal-covered generals hold their hearts, and the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Can you blame me for being sucked into this madness? Instilling the citizenry with chest-swelling patriotism is, of course, the intention of this huff-and-puff racket. America is strong and mighty. Nothing to worry about, folks, it's all being taken care of by the experts. Freedom. Democracy. Pound it it in there, pound it in good to keep us coming back to those voting booths and consenting to our serfdom, begging for a longer leash or some free goodies.

Don't get me wrong. I love football, and I have ever since I can remember. I grew up watching old clips of Johnny Unitas inventing the audible, Gale Sayers making every one miss, Montana to Taylor, and then witnessed Young to Rice, Kurt Warner put on a show, and Brett Favre break every record there is.

But it has turned into the bread-and-circus of the Romans, the gladiator games on steroids (literally). An excuse for the state to show-off, to remind every one of the immense power at its disposal, and condition subservience. The Roman Empire passed out bread, the American Empire subsidizes it. The Romans sacrificed Christians and other slaves, we sacrifice our liberty and soverignty in tax-slave funded stadiums.

This year's state circus really seared into me as I came to the conclusion that every little aspect of American life is now soaked with military themes.The quarterbacks are field generals, leading his soldiers into battle. And like the actual soldiers we "support" with cute bumper stickers, their post-retirement trauma and injuries are swept under the rug. Man up, soldier, this is WAR.

You can't escape it. Military recruiters invade schools and lie to kids, promising them money and showing them war-soaked video games. Stores have "military discounts." Nearly every month has a holiday directly related to war, and even on religious holidays, we are reminded to "think of the troops who have died for our freedoms." Highways and streets are dedicated to killer generals. And nearly all of the money confiscated from us at gunpoint, or the threat of gunpoint, gets swallowed in the Pentagon's bloody vacuum.

Especially after 9/11, the event that "changed everything." You can see it in the language. The President is the "Commander-in-Chief." We now live in "the homeland," fighting "crusades," "long wars," and "existential threats." Torturing people to death becomes "enhanced interrogation," or what the Nazis called "Verschärfte Vernehmung." A million Iraqis liberated of their lives become "collateral damage." Raining death and destruction like cowards from the sky is "shock and awe." Slavery is Freedom. Ignorance is Strength.

And as George Orwell reminded us, the state's manipulation of language not only frames the debate in the state's terms, but are tools for power expansion. Since the Department of Bombing People Into Submission, or as some call it, "the Department of Defense," is busy liberating the world, there emerges the Department of Terrorizing Us Into Submission. I think Janet Napolitano refers to it as the Department of Homeland Security, but it really is little more than a large government program designed to wear down Americans' spirits by imposing draconian restrictions on liberty. Resist, and we'll only clamp down harder. Passive acceptance is the goal.

Scratch that. Passive acceptance is an unworthy emotion to the state, an institution that from it's Pharaonic inception has wanted to be God. Not even submission will do, for it is a jealous God. We are supposed to love our illusions of freedom and representative government, to embrace our chains, to risk our lives in foreign countries for its glory. This is why words like "courage," "honor," and "bravery" are attached to being ripped in half then flown home in a box covered in the red, white, and blue. It is the ultimate honor.

Just don't tell to that the dinner tables with an empty chair or the toddler without a dad or the parents who have to bury their son instead of the other way around. Or what about the ones that come back (barely) alive? So what if they can't sleep, go insane, can't get medical treatment, or are permanently scarred by what their medal-seeking officers told them to do? This is WAR, kill or be killed.

Whenever I ask myself: where has our liberty, the liberty that is at least theoretically recognized in the US Constitution, gone? I always find myself coming to one conclusion, the same answer I stumbled upon yesterday afternoon during the pre-game nationalistic nonsense: our liberties are buried under the weight of all this god damn state weaponry.

Buried under, both figuratively and literally. Entire cities are completely dependent on military bases for their livelihood. Jobs, jobs, jobs. Half of our incomes (the fruits of our labor, and therefore, our liberty) are stolen to build a hegemonic global empire of bases in other people's countries, a standing army, hydrogen bombs, F-22s, cruise missiles, those wonderful tools of domination.

And we are hardly safer because of it. In fact, our military-industrial-congressional-complex not only puts innocent Americans at risk through blowback, but puts the entire human race at risk. A true and prudent defense of this country would require a fraction of 1% of what the US government spends. Political neutrality, trade, and privately-owned firearms are the real defense of a free people.

But war and empire, like all government programs, must be funded by the threat of imprisonment if one does not contribute (textbooks call this phenomenon "taxation"). The state has the unique ability to offset the costs of its actions onto 300 million permanent "customers," so something so destructive of wealth and property like war comes naturally to government. People have to be compelled to pay for war; they have far better things to do with their money and would bring pitchforks if showed the actual bill of what the Pentagon actually does.

Economic liberty (and liberty in general) is antithetical to war, which is why we have so little of the former and so much of the latter.

But the circus goes on, at every professional sports event or campaign stop, uttering out the polished and euphemistic phrases that distract people from what really goes on in their name and with their money.

Buzzing jets, flag-soaked choruses, half-assed odes to "our men in uniform;" this is all window dressing and PR for the institutionalized looting, theft, fraud, coercion, and mass murder that is the modern nation-state. Smoke and mirrors, the velvet glove that is placed over the iron fist. The Empire is a lie, an empty suit, eating out the soul of the American Republic. A racket.

Don't Choose Another Master

A couple days ago, I posted an article concerning Sterling T. Terrel's highlighting of East Africa's Mauritania as the freest country in all of Africa and how this can be applied to the Arab revolutions.

Stefan Molyneaux has a great video stressing a similar point about the future Egypt, and revolutions in general. Pharaonic Egypt was the birthplace of the modern state 6,000 years ago, and how fitting it would be for Egypt to also be the state's graveyard. Look around you, Egyptians, at all of the chaos and disorder that this terrible institution has given you, and refuse to submit to a different master.

 

The US Empire, Unmasked

Watch this video about the largest wealth-confiscating, liberty-destroying government program in the history of the world: the US Empire. It truly is a monster, turning boys into killers, countries into mountains of skulls, and sucking out the soul of the last vestiges of true American liberty. War, as Randolph Bourne famously said, truly is the health of the state. 

The Case For Relegalizing Drugs

(Via PolicyMic.com)

In American political culture, it is hard to find an issue or debate in which the concept of "freedom" is not invoked. We are told that our troops fight for it, that the government protects it, and that America, sine her inception, has been dedicated it.

But like most phrases that leak out of the mouths of politicians or the corporate talking heads in the media, there is very little substance behind it. And we as a society claim to value the liberty of the individual, yet have been derelict, or passively indifferent, to it's actual application and defense.

Take, for example, the now decades long "war on drugs." Of course, goes the common narrative, the government should ban or heavily regulate the consumption and sale of drugs. They're dangerous. And even kids might use them!

But the moral and philosophical implications of drug prohibition (or any prohibition) state that the government has an ownership claim to all or a portion of your body and the decisions an individual chooses to make regarding his/her body. In "the land of the free," this is the ultimate denial of freedom.

The prospect of all drugs being legal and available is a frightening concept to most precisely because we have been conditioned to accept restrictions on freedom for vague abstractions like "the public good," and have embraced the chains of our servitude. Freedom is responsibility, which makes us uneasy to accept the consequences of it.

But all we need to is look in our not so distant past to see what drug legalization would look like.  Before WW1 all drugs were legal and sold on the market like any other product. It wasn't perfect, of course, as there were addicts and many other problems that accompany the use of hard and addictive drugs. But as Jacob Huebert points out in Libertarianism Today:

And although America did have addicts in the nineteenth century (perhaps as much as 0.5 percent of the population), there are some things it notably did not have. Most important, there was virtually none of the violence, death, and crime we associate with the present-day drug problem. Most drug users were not street criminals; instead, the typical addict was, as author Mike Gray put it, "a middle-aged Southern white woman strung out on laudanum." Many or most opium addicts led more or less normal lives to keep their addiction hidden.

This is because a culture of freedom tends to breed a culture of responsibility.

Even if the moral virtues of liberty and individual choice when applied to drug use don't convince, then there are many tangible events that suggest major reform is needed. Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), a group of current and former members of law enforcement advocating drug legalization, know first hand how drug prohibition increase crime rates, gangs, cartels and distract police from prosecuting real violations of persons and property.

Or what about the case of Portugal, who decriminalized drugs and is witnessing a decrease in drug crime and addiction? Or how drug prohibition has directly related to the spread of crystal meth?

As Thomas Jefferson said, "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." It's time we applied this wisdom to our drug policy.

California Judge Defends Gun Rights

Just days before former California Governor Arnold "I was addicted to being Governor" Schwarzenegger's awful ammunition registration bill would have taken place, a California judge declared the law unconstitutional.

Gun rights supporters won a major legal victory last week when a California judge struck down as unconstitutional a law that they say would have effectively banned online sales of handgun ammunition just days before it was to have taken effect.

Surprising, yes, considering California is such a "liberal" state, and as the story reports, this decision will likely have a huge effect on California's large market for online ammunition sales.

So load up, folks, because although this is definitely a victory for gun rights, governments are always salivating at the thought of disarming us while simultaneously heavily arming their costumed thugs.

San Francisco's Sit/Lie Law: the Signs of a Police State?

Last April, I blogged about San Francisco's "sit/lie" law and all the things that are wrong with it.

By having the privilege of being able to see a lot of San Francisco on a daily basis, I can see why an issue like this would be of interest to city officials. The amount of panhandlers and homeless on the streets is staggering and sad, but when all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

The law essentially makes it a crime to sit or lie on public sidewalks, which is a typical government response (pass a law!) to a problem largely created by government.

For example, how many of San Francisco's (or any other major city) homeless are veterans that were sent thousands of miles away in a war to kill and die for a government that routinely denies them basic medical care when they get back? Or what about old government legislation, passed during WW2, that forced employers to provide health insurance, thus individuals losing both if fired? Or the permanent underclass that is created by the government's insane prohibition of drugs?

It truly is exhausting cataloging the extent in which state intervention into society has incredibly harmful, counterproductive, and often unforeseen consequences, but even more frustrating that the solution to these problems is always....more laws, more force, more government.

And as it turns out, as this Alternet article explains, this law that kicked in last month was propelled by wealthy donors and business interests eager to shift the burden onto a coercive third party with very police-stateish implications. Corruption and crooked collusion in government? Who knew?

I know the "officials" and big, important people in the San Francisco city government (or any government) could ever contemplate the idea that they are fundamentally incapable of solving social problems, but I have a simple solution: stay as far away from this issue as possible; the more you do, the worse it gets.

For starters, why not lessening (or even eliminating!) the restrictions on starting businesses and acquiring employment, from licensing to the infinite amount of regulations and fees to minimum wage laws. All of these discourage economic growth and the free marketplace and make a life selling drugs or engaging in violent crime that much more appealing.

And secondly, give back the money taken from us through taxation so that we may spend it (and donate it) in the manner we see fit. That way we can volunteer, give money to charities, and provide for those less fortunate than us in the most moral and efficient way possible: voluntarily.

The TSA, Gun Control, and Drunk Driving Laws

They're all based on the same totalitarian, pre-crime principle, says Eric Peters:

Consider: You are liable to arrest for “drunk driving” in America today even if you aren’t driving at all. You merely have to be in your car – even if you’re in the passenger seat and the car is parked. People who have had one too many and decided to sleep it off in their car have been arrested for DWI just the same as if they had been straddling the double yellow at 65 MPH with a gin and tonic in one hand and their left leg hanging out the window.

The courts have said that drinking “x” amount of alcohol not only defines “impairment” – it also amounts to intent to drive drunk, whether you’re driving or not. And that intent- imputed, perceived, ginned-up out of nothingness –  is what matters. 

Is it really a great leap to imagine that political speech – hatriolic speech, as it is being styled – will soon be treated the same way? That to say or even to think  something – anything – that smacks of criticism of government and its flunkies will shortly be regarded as tantamount to shooting people?

Gun laws – and the TSA – already operate on this principle.

You have no record of criminal misconduct or mental illness. You’re a taxpayer, a responsible citizen. Yet in several states (and of course, Washington, D.C.) you’re assumed to have criminal intent, and thus, denied the right to own a firearm. If you possess one anyway – even if you have done nothing with it to harm or even threaten to harm another person – then you’re subject to being cuffed and stuffed just the same as if you had actually used it to threaten or harm others.

Pre-crime again.

The TSA subjects people at random – and en masse – to rough and humiliating searches, including invasive physical pat downs, just like cops do to felony suspects. Not because of anything they’ve actually done or even hinted they may do but only because the TSA apes impute “terrorist intent” to anyone who desires to travel by commercial airplane.

Ipso facto.

Just like having a drink before you drive makes you a “drunk” driver – no matter how good your actual driving happens to be.

We’ve upended perhaps the most basic concept of Western jurisprudence – that for their to be a crime, or wrongdoing, there must be an actual criminal act, or wrongdoing.

But a society that embraced the tar baby of pre-emptive wars should not be surprised to wake up one day to find it is now also snuggling the concept of pre-crime – with all its consequences. God bless America. Land of the Free.

The Silver Lining of the Obama Administration: A Left/Right Coalition?

(Via PolicyMic.com)

In his recent piece concerning the first two years of Barack Obama's presidency, Samuel Hamilton argues that President Obama should be praised for his legislative victories and his ability to compromise on important issues. Obama's accomplishments or failures can be (and have been) debated ferociously, and Hamilton makes some excellent points about how much criticism of Obama has been unfair and partisan.

Halfway through his first term, what the Obama presidency is accomplishing has less to do with the utility of his proposed policies, but more to do with the fact these policies are bringing a welcome and radical ideological shift.

When former presidential candidate Ralph Nader appeared on Andrew Napolitano's "Freedom Watch" last week and lavishly praised Republican Congressman Ron Paul and the "conservative/libertarian wing of the Tea Party," there emerged the silver lining of the Obama administration: the possibility of a Left/Right coalition that could shake up American political discourse for years to come.

Despite Obama's sobering rhetoric, his insistence on fulfilling President George W. Bush's third term is warping the traditional partisan divide. Obama, the "liberal Democrat," has extended the PATRIOT Act, expanded the war in Afghanistan and spread it into Pakistan, is launching unmanned drone strikes in multiple countries, and has drastically increased cartelizing state intervention into the marketplace.

As dangerous and counterproductive as these policies are, they are having the unintentional consequence of disrupting the outdated liberal/conservative divide.

When it comes to policy, liberals and conservatives in power vary little, and every few years they swap control of the federal government and reward the political interests that helped get them elected. This "divide-and-conquer" strategy has been used for centuries, where citizens bicker and quarrel with one another while ignoring those in power that tax, loot, spend, and bury them in debt.

Thanks to the spread of the Internet and the availability of nearly instantaneous information, issues are beginning to be framed not in Left or Right, but in terms of individual liberty vs. government control.

For example, in a poll taken last December, a significant majority of Americans supported auditing the counterfeiters at the Federal Reserve. Coincidentally, a bill (HR 1207) proposed on the House floor by Congressman Paul (R-TX)  that aimed to audit the Fed received support from arch-conservative Senator Jim Demint (R-SC) and admitted socialist Bernie Sanders (I-VT). HR 1207 currently has over 320 co-sponsors in the House, which also means that there a lot of Congressmen who love having their own printing presses in order to sell F-22s and bailout crooked banks.

What do Left and Right exactly mean when Noam Chomsky and Naomi Wolf are criticizing the Obama administration for it's economic corporatism and expansion of Bush's "war on terror" and conservatives are supporting gay marriage and the financial costs of military empire?

Since 21st century America resembles the Soviet Empire more than the peaceful, commercial Republic Thomas Jefferson envisioned, Left and Right are recognizing that it is coercive state power that lies at the heart of the mess we're in. It is radical, yes, but a system of government that imprisons millions, takes half of your income, and wages perpetual war deserves a radical opposition.

Restoring the Bill of Rights, stopping corporate welfare, sound money, starving the Pentagon; these are things Americans (especially younger generations) are getting behind now that they are refusing to be boxed into labels of Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative.

So thank you Mr. Obama (and you neocons too) for digging us into an even deeper mess. You have bankrupted our grandchildren and left foreign cities in ashes, and we're fed up. You have shown the American people that Democrat bombs maim just like Republican bombs, that deficits and violations of personal liberty grow no matter who is in charge.

In other words, there is no such thing as "abusing power;" power itself is the abuse. And with every new war and corporatist law, a Left/Right coalition with this axiom as its flag will only grow.

Anti-Government Violence? What About Government Violence?

I always find it funny when the media goes into hissyfits about the supposed threat and danger that the rise of "anti-government sentiment and violence" poses, usually attached with not so subtle references to anyone or group that happens to be to the Right of Barney Frank.

If you ask me, I really enjoy the daily beatings our criminal politicians take on a daily basis on the web. Even if it comes from people who I disagree with on the Right or the Left, a healthy skepticism of government is always a good thing.

Especially in 21st Century America. Think about any major problem that this country is facing: the economic crisis, unemployment, debt, pointless wars, a collapsing dollar. Who's the common culprit?

From the Federal Reserve's manipulation of the currency to coward chickenshit Senators sending other people's sons to kill and die in foreign countries, it is those who have power and decision-making authority over our lives and property (the government) that have screwed things up.

People are right to be angry. But before we dismiss this anger or even worry about possible violence that might ensue from this anger, why not do what the media fails to do, and examine government violence.

Forget the outright, in-your-face violence that states love to engage in, like carpet bombings, occupations, torture, starvation sanctions, and pointing automatic weapons in frightened citizens' faces while servicing warrants.

It goes deeper than that. Way deeper. The root of statism and government power, no matter how much fluffy window dressing is draped on it (democracy! the social contract! we the people!), is the institutionalization of violence.

The only way a state can acquire funds is through taxation, which is an Orwellian word for theft done on a massive scale. If you don't pay your taxes, you'll get a few polite letters in the mail. Resist even further, including defending yourself against armed agents entering your house, and you will be locked in a soulless government cage.

Is it any surprise that an institution with this violence inherent in its core uses violence so liberally?

Of course violence, whether done with "anti-government" sentiment or any other, should be condemned. But focusing only on the occasional private criminal while blatantly ignoring the omnipresent state gun and its gang of armed enforcers is worse than not seeing the forest for the trees; it's philosophical negligence and excusing coercive power.

Radley Balko at The Agitator blog has an excellent article detailing the recent expansion of violent state power that barely gets a word in the media that is owned and heavily regulated by the state. I highly recommend reading it.

The Value of a Muslim Life in the Eyes of the US Empire

According the murderous and sadistic US government, Muslim deaths in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan, Somalia (and the other countries the US is sure to be intervening in) at the hands of the US war machine are nothing more than an ignorable statistic. Collateral damage, as the Politburo calls the mountain of skulls the US military leaves in its path:

ALLAN NAIRN: Well, now, as the U.S. is losing its edge economically, it has one clear comparative advantage. And that’s in killing. And it’s using it. Obama has increased the attacks on Afghanistan, Pakistan. Brookings Institution last year estimated that for every one militant, as they put it, killed in Pakistan, the U.S. drones kill 10 civilians. –Allan Nairn: As U.S. Loses Its Global Economic Edge, Its "One Clear Comparative Advantage is in Killing, and It’s Using It," Democracy NOW!, December 29, 2010

 How does The Drone Equation compare to other approved "collateral damage" equations? Well, during the Bush Administration, if a bombing strike was expected to kill more than 29 innocent men, women and children, the White House had to approve it. What would that be like . . . .

In the case of The Obama Administration, the acceptable "collateral damage" kill number has, apparently, been increased to 50 innocent civilians.

On the bright side, if you stay with groups larger than 50, the U.S. militaryindustrialcongressional complex may at least need a presidential order before it can kill you by mistake.

Gabrielle Giffords, Jared Loughner, and Madness

The great philosopher and author Stefan Molyneux making sense of the recent Arizona shooting:

True News: Gabrielle Giffords, Jared Loughner and Madness - The funniest bloopers are right here

 

Happy New Year Californians

Last week, I posted a story about some of the ridiculous things Americans are being arrested for these days by our compassionate and caring government.

The trouble with having thousands and thousands of government "laws" is not they do not have the best intentions behind them, but because state law necessarily implies the use of force against person or property if said law is broken.

In other words, when coercive laws become more and more omnipresent and passively accepted as instituted for "our own good," "public safety," or "order," state violence becomes a part of daily life and a more accepted way of handling social problems.

There are other (and more rational, empirical, and moral) ways to legislate behavior and punish transgressions that are inevitable in any society that tend to spontaneously arise when authority over these matters is decentralized and taken out of the hands of political busybodies.

Manners, customs, sanctions, and public and private ostracism have existed for centuries and not only do not require the initiation of force as state law does, but are far more practical and efficient.

This is why any government law that encroaches farther than the protection of our life, liberty, and property (like protection against murder, rape, theft, fraud, pollution, etc.) can not be tolerated. Like a cancer, the legislative authority governments claim over us can only grow and grow, and with it the spread of institutionalized coercion.

This is why it is with great, but not surprising, disappoint that California is welcoming in the new year with 725 new laws, everything from social media networking, the banning of trans-fat, and new fines for marijuana possession.

And always remember: ignorance of the law is no excuse! Read up, Californians, you never know when peaceful human action may indeed be against the law.

End the Police State

And repeal the PATRIOT Act, says Ron Paul:

The year 2011 brings in a host of opportunities and challenges to America. Will we accelerate toward economic insolvency by continuing the policies that have created this crisis, or will a new Congress elected on the energy of the Tea Party movement find the courage to change course?

With the new Republican majority in the House I will have the opportunity as a subcommittee chairman to take a careful look at our domestic monetary policy. I’m excited by the prospect of real oversight of the Federal Reserve, but I also hope to focus on the important ways in which our foreign policy and monetary policy are related. Just last week the Financial Times reported that the limited oversight of the Federal Reserve allowed by the passage of a watered-down version of my Audit the Fed bill revealed that approximately 55% of the loans made available under the largest Federal Reserve bailout program – termed “auction facility” – went to foreign banks. This is just but one example of the real cost to Americans of maintaining its empire overseas and it cries out for more transparency and oversight.

This is why it is key for us to understand that our foreign policy and current economic crisis go hand in hand. Some have promised to lead us back to fiscal responsibility while asserting that any reduction in our foreign and military spending is off the table. They would like us to believe that we should not only continue spending as much on the military as the rest of the world combined, but they actually call for an even more aggressive U.S. policy abroad. They believe we should continue to bomb Pakistan, Yemen, Afghanistan and elsewhere, that we must impose even more crippling sanctions on countries like Iran while moving steadily on to yet another Middle East war that is not in our interest. They represent the failed policies of the past and they would like to lead us down a dead-end street. We must resist the temptation of their neocon-inspired scaremongering.

There will be much work for us to do in the next year and in the next Congress. We need look no further than the grossly unconstitutional and immoral policies of the Transportation Security Administration, demanding that we either be irradiated or fondled to travel in our own country, to see that those who would deprive us of our civil liberties on the empty promise of full security will not be given up easily. We must continue standing up to them and we must not compromise.

We must not allow the out-of-control Department of Homeland Security to impose an East-German like police state in the U.S. where neighbors are encouraged by Big Brother or Big Sister to inform on their neighbors. We must not accept that government authorities should hector us via television screens as we go about our private lives like we are living in Orwell’s 1984.

I’m optimistic that the incoming members of Congress understand the importance of what they have been entrusted with by the American people. But I do hope that those who elected them will watch their actions and their votes in Congress carefully. An early indication will be the upcoming vote on re-authorization of the anti-American PATRIOT Act. Defeating once-and-for-all this police state legislation will be a great way to start 2011 and the 112th Congress.

We must move ahead with confidence. Our numbers are growing. Happy New Year!

Bradley Manning's Gulag

PFC Bradley Manning, the heroic soldier who leaked information about US war crimes to Wikileaks*, is currently been held at a Marine Gulag in Virginia.

Here is what Manning, who has not been convicted of any crime, is going through in the land of the free. Via Eric Garris at the Antiwar.com blog:

David House, a friend of Bradley Manning, was allowed to visit him at the brig where he is currently imprisoned. He basically confirmed the mistreatment that has been outlined by Glenn Greenwald and others:

– Solitary confinement in a small cell 23 hours a day
– No sleeping allowed from 5am to 11pm (5am wake-up)
– No exercise allowed in cell (allowed to walk in chains one hour a day)
– No personal items in cell

House described a “remarkable decline in his psychological state and physical well-being.” He also said the Pentagon is not telling the truth about his conditions. House recently wrote an article describing the visit.

Read the rest (and see an interview with David House on MSNBC) here.

*If you scroll down on the right side of my blog page, you will see the "Collateral Murder" video, which was one of the items that Manning leaked to Wikileaks. It shows what is the rule, not the exception, of a foreign, imperialist power occupying a country.

Americans in Chains

'The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates' -Tacitus

Here are a few examples of the extent of the American police state, courtesy of The Economic Collapse Blog:

#1 A Michigan man has been charged with a felony and could face up to 5 years in prison for reading his wife's email.

 #2 A 49-year-old Queens woman had bruises all over her body after she was handcuffed, arrested and brutally beaten by NYPD officers.  So what was her offense?  The officers thought that her little dog had left some poop that she didn't clean up.

#3 A 56-year-old woman who was once a rape victim refused to let airport security officials feel her breasts so she was thrown to the floor, put in handcuffs and arrested.

#4 In Milwaukee, one man was recently fined $500 for swearing on a public bus.

#5 Several years ago a 12-year-old boy in South Carolina was actually arrested by police for opening up a Christmas present early against his family's wishes.

#6 In some areas of the country, it is now a crime to not recycle properly.  For example, the city of Cleveland has announced plans to sort through trash cans to ensure that people are actually recycling according to city guidelines.

#7 A 12-year-old girl from Queens was arrested earlier this year and taken out of her school in handcuffs for writing “Lex was here. 2/1/10" and “I love my friends Abby and Faith" on her desk.

#8 Back in 2008, a 13-year-old boy in Florida was actually arrested by police for farting in class.

#9 The feds recently raided an Amish farmer at 5 AM in the morning because they claimed that he was was engaged in the interstate sale of raw milk in violation of federal law.

#10 A few years ago a 10-year-old girl was arrested and charged with a felony for bringing a small steak knife to school.  It turns out that all she wanted to do was to cut up her lunch so that she could eat it.

#11 On June 18th, two Christians decided that they would peacefully pass out copies of the gospel of John on a public sidewalk outside a public Islamic festival in Dearborn, Michigan and within three minutes 8 policemen surrounded them and placed them under arrest.

#12 A U.S. District Court judge slapped a 5oo dollar fine on Massachusetts fisherman Robert J. Eldridge for untangling a giant whale from his nets and setting it free.  So what was his crime?  Well, according to the court, Eldridge was supposed to call state authorities and wait for them do it.

#13 Once upon a time, a food fight in the cafeteria may have gotten you a detention.  Now it may get you locked up.  About a year ago, 25 students between the ages of 11 and 15 at a school in Chicago were taken into custody by police for being involved in a huge food fight in the school cafeteria.

#14 A few years ago a 70 year old grandmother was actually put in handcuffs and hauled off to jail for having a brown lawn.

 

In The Name of 'National Security'

Nearly every increase in the power of the US government has been due to war and imperial adventures overseas. It is when a state decides to go to war that the iron fist behind the velvet glove "social contract" nonsense really materializes.

In our short existence as a country, war has been used as the most effective excuse to restrict civil liberties. From imprisoning dissenters, erecting a vast surveillance and police state, income tax withholding, and burying us and future generations in un-payable debt, war truly is the health of the state.

And it's trusty sidekick, the vague and abstract term "national security," is always uttered out of the mouth of anyone attempting to expand the scope of the state and end arguments.

We must ______ (carpet-bomb Muslims, restrict speech, impose starvation sanctions, or any evil government program you can think of) for the sake of "national security," and this euphemism that is used to maintain the institutional structures of empire is detrimental to liberty, as Jack Hunter explains:

 

 

 

People Who Touch Your Junk

Via Boingboing.net:

 

The CIA, Wikileaks, and the Self-Parody of Government

When it comes to self-parody, there really is nothing like the gummint. As much as I hate the state and everything it represents --coercion, theft, fraud, immorality, mass murder, self-aggrandizement, the largest obstacle to peaceful cooperation-- it does provide constant entertainment.

Sure, the actions of governments (260 million dead not counting state wars) and the opportunity costs that are lost every time it confiscates wealth and property are incredibly depressing, but you have to laugh at it like a bully taking himself too seriously.

Just look at the CIA's recent response to assessing the "threat" posed by Wikileaks. It's called the Wikileaks Task Force. That's right. WTF.

WTF!?? You couldn't make this stuff up.

The CIA, known for it's stubborn unwillingness to share information with other federal agencies, unsurprisingly came to the conclusion that even with these bitter and rivalrous wars that exist between all of the dozens of intelligence gathering agencies, "by and large the system has worked."

But as Mark Follman points out in an article for Mother Jones, this simply isn't the case:

In his indispensable 2006 book 'The Looming Tower,' journalist Lawrence Wright investigated the devastating effect of turf battles among the CIA, FBI and NSA prior to the 9/11 attacks. Wright's book, as I detailed in an essay for Salon, made a persuasive case that the 9/11 plot may well have been foiled if not for fatal duplicity on the part of the CIA, which jealously guarded its intelligence gathering from the criminal-investigation focused FBI. A crucial opportunity apparently came and went in late 2000:

In Yemen, [FBI agent] Soufan was on the trail of an al-Qaida figure closely connected with Nawaf al-Hamzi and Khaled al-Mihdhar, two Saudi-born al-Qaida operatives who would later help seize planes on 9/11. The CIA had surveillance photos of all three men together from an al-Qaida summit in Malaysia the previous January, but when Soufan came knocking for information, the CIA slammed the door shut. It was part of what Wright calls 'a bizarre trend in the US government to hide information from the people who most needed it.'

WTF indeed.

At least we know the federal government's good for a few things. Wrecking economies, devaluing our money, killing lots of people, crushing liberty, and squabbling over vital intelligence that puts Americans at risk.

And now we can add self-parody to the list. As the great Will Rogers said, "I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts."