Peter Schiff on CNBC 12/29/10

Thursday, December 30, 2010

Read more...

State Lawlessness on the Rampage

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

The year 2011 will bring Americans a larger and more intrusive police state, more unemployment and home foreclosures, no economic recovery, more disregard by the US government of US law, international law, the Constitution, and truth, more suspicion and distrust from allies, more hostility from the rest of the world, and new heights of media sycophancy.

2011 is shaping up as a brutal year for American democracy. The Republican Party has degenerated into a party of Brownshirts, and voter frustrations with the worsening economic crisis and military occupations gone awry are likely to bring Republicans to power in 2012. With them would come their doctrines of executive primacy over Congress, the judiciary, law, and the Constitution and America’s rightful hegemony over the world.

If not already obvious, 2010 has made clear that the US government does not care a whit for the opinions of citizens. The TSA is unequivocal that it will reach no accommodation with Americans other than the violations of their persons that it imposes by its unaccountable power. As for public opposition to war, the Associated Press reported on December 16 that “Defense Secretary Robert Gates says the U.S. can’t let public opinion sway its commitment to Afghanistan.” Gates stated bluntly what has been known for some time: the idea is passe that government in a democracy serves the will of the people. If this quaint notion is still found in civics books, it will soon be edited out.

In Gag Rule, a masterful account of the suppression of dissent and the stifling of democracy, Lewis H. Lapham writes that candor is a necessary virtue if democracies are to survive their follies and crimes. But where in America today can candor be found? Certainly not in the councils of government. Attorney General John Ashcroft complained of candor-mongers to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Americans who insist on speaking their minds, Ashcroft declared, “scare people with phantoms of lost liberty,” “aid terrorists,” diminish our resolve,” and “give ammunition to America’s enemies.”

As the Department of Justice (sic) sees it, when the ACLU defends habeas corpus it is defending the ability of terrorists to blow up Americans, and when the ACLU defends the First Amendment it is defending exposures of the lies and deceptions that are the necessary scaffolding for the government’s pretense that it is doing God’s will while Satan speaks through the voices of dissent.

Read more: Here

Read more...

Rapidly declining inventories setting up massive price inflation?

Sunday, December 26, 2010




Above: The price increases for both silver and gold in terms of Marks during hyperinflation in Weimar Germany


Source: Here

Read more...

Was Jesus Christ, Libertarian?

“Then the scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery and made her stand in the middle. They said to him, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. Now in the law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?" They said this to test him, so that they could have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and began to write on the ground with his finger. But when they continued asking him, he straightened up and said to them, "Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." Again he bent down and wrote on the ground. And in response, they went away one by one, beginning with the elders. So he was left alone with the woman before him. Then Jesus straightened up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" She replied, "No one, sir." Then Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go, (and) from now on do not sin anymore." (John 8: 3–11)

As we approach the new year with conservatism again ascendant in the political sphere, this story of Jesus’ uncompromising libertarianism seems even more timely than stories of his birth, despite the approach of his celebrated birthday. Nowhere does Jesus admonish “social conservatives” more harshly.

There is an important distinction here. By “social conservative,” I do not mean anyone who disapproves of certain human behavior. The freedom to follow the dictates of one’s conscience was the first inalienable right recognized by the founders of our nation. If one truly believes that homosexuality, adultery, or other “non-conservative” behavior violates the laws of God, it is that person’s inalienable right to disapprove of it, even to voice his disapproval of it, regardless of the anguished cries of the political correctness lobby on the left.

However, no one has a right to use violence against those who engage in behavior that does not harm another person, regardless of whether or not that behavior violates the laws of God. Since all laws are enforced under the threat of violence (as this story also makes wonderfully clear), Jesus makes it clear in this passage that it is not for men to enforce the laws of God. With the exception of cases in which one human being has harmed another, the right to punish the behavior of others is reserved for God.

It is important to recognize that Jesus does not condone the sin that the anonymous woman has committed. When he has shamed away the mob who would have stoned her, Jesus commands her to sin no more. Neither does he insinuate that her behavior might not have consequences for her soul. With flawless libertarian reasoning, Jesus teaches us the true meaning of freedom: that God grants us the liberty to do as we wish, even to reject him and his laws, but that we also bear the full consequences of our actions. If we harm another person, then we are subject to the laws of men. However, it is for each individual to determine the will of God according to his conscience and to choose whether to act accordingly or not. There never has been nor can there ever be any body of corruptible men who can save an individual’s soul.

This is by no means the only place in the gospels that Jesus teaches us this lesson. His entire public ministry was one admonishment of the hypocritical, socially conservative theocracy after another. Indeed, it is the Jewish state that is Jesus’ chief antagonist throughout the gospels. He is noticeably disinterested in the more secular Roman government, despite its tyranny over his people. While he certainly doesn’t approve of the Romans, he has no interest in political revolution. As Jesus tells Pilate, “my kingdom is not of this world.” (John 18:36). However, his own government does not merely commit secular, political oppression against its people. It usurps the authority of God and attempts to judge in his place. For this, Jesus constantly lets loose his most venomous admonishments.

Read more: Here

Read more...

NSC Study Shows You are More Likely to Killed By a Cop Than a Terrorist

Thursday, December 23, 2010

See this video as an example



After 9/11, the fear of another attack on U.S. soil cleanly supplanted the fear of having one`s penis chopped off by a vengeful lover in the pantheon of irrational American fears.

While we`re constantly being told that another attack is imminent and that radical Islamic fundamentalists are two steps away from establishing a caliphate in Branson, Missouri, just how close are they? How do the odds of dying in a terrorist attack stack up against the odds of dying in other unfortunate situations?

The following ratios were compiled using data from 2004 National Safety Council Estimates, a report based on data from The National Center for Health Statistics and the U.S. Census Bureau. In addition, 2003 mortality data from the Center for Disease Control was used.

-- You are 17,600 times more likely to die from heart disease than from a terrorist attack

-- You are 12,571 times more likely to die from cancer than from a terrorist attack

-- You are 11,000 times more likely to die in an airplane accident than from a terrorist plot involving an airplane

Read more: Here

Read more...

Awaiting the Storm by Fred Reed

Monday, December 20, 2010

Flags. These are always a bad sign. Hardly a politician appears on television who doesn’t stand in front of an American flag, sometimes three American flags. A venomous nationalism now poisons the air, and grows. We are off and rolling.

The trappings of fascism spread. General David Petraeus, commander of the Eastern Front, poses with the President in the White House in combat fatigues. The country is now the Homeland, reminiscent of the Nazi Fatherland and the Soviet Motherland. We hear of American Exceptionalism, the ritual self-idolization beloved of pathological nationalism. Blood and Soil. The American Dream. Ubermenschen. All we need is a short Austrian.

We may get one. The times ripen for a man on a horse. (Or perhaps a woman: Twitler of Alaska looms.) An ignorant population, unread, unfamiliar with the outside world, focuses its anxieties on troubling dark things lurking abroad, the brown hordes from the south, the rising Chinese, inexplicable Moslems who want to kill all Christians. Sooner rather than later such a mob finds solace in an angry unity. From an unhappy lower middle-class spring Brown Shirts. Wait.

Things come together: Falling standards of living across a country in irremediable decline, diminishing expectations, growing anger in search of focus, a sense of a birthright being stolen as preeminence drifts across the Pacific. Here is fertile soil for some strange crop not yet clearly seen.

It will play out against a backdrop of totalitarian watchfulness all too imaginable. A digital world lends itself to tyranny, making it, I think, inescapable. For practical purposes, the capacity to store data is infinite, to network it across the world, to track, to scan, to watch. This is not the place for a disquisition on the technology of surveillance. Just note that the machinery exists for a totalitarian watchfulness beyond Stalin’s wettest dreams. The government wants this, pushes for it daily, and gets it. You can’t spend a dollar, take a flight, or send an e-mail without a federal office watching. It is getting worse and cannot be stopped. Surveillance is too easy.

We will be told, are being told, that to be safe we must submit, that enemies within and without are upon us, that terrorists spawn plots everywhere. Where communists once hid in every closet and the House Un-American Activities Committee, HUAC, hunted them, now we have Islamo-terrorists hunted by Homeland Security.

What matter civil rights when the Moslem is at our throats? The price of liberty is eternal vigilance, and the vigilance ends liberty.

Hysteria darkly flowers. Homeland Security now wants to train us in how to react to a nuclear attack, à la 1950. Scare’m, keep’em scared, tell them you are protecting them, and they will kiss your boots. An Australian publishes embarrassing cable traffic from American embassies, and politicians call for him to be killed by the CIA. The agency is revered as a sort of clandestine Batman and Robin, defending America secretly where evil swirls in the coming night. Kill, kill. On subways we are told to watch each other, to report curious behavior to the authorities. Nothing can stop this.

Constitutionality becomes a fading memory. Random searches in train stations, genital examinations in airports, the decline of habeas corpus, the evasion of the duty of Congress to declare wars, on and on. The government does what it wants. There is no recourse. We are told that it is to make us safe. I haven’t asked to be made safe.

The genius of American politics is to espouse democracy while keeping political power from the people. The trick is to have barely distinguishable candidates for the presidency who carefully avoid mention of substance – the wars, for example, or affirmative action, guns, abortion. These elections, if so they be, allow people to wave placards, roar invective about throwing the rascals out and returning to traditional American etc. The dust settles and things remain as they were.

Governance does not rest with the people. Today, decree replaces legislation, and must, for our safety. If Homeland Security says you must go through a CAT scan, naked, and singing the Star Spangled Banner, then you have to do it. There is no recourse. You can unelect an elected official, but there is no way to get at a bureaucrat. If you do not submit, you go to jail.

Shortly we will hear the death rattle of free expression. No government sees an advantage to itself in a free press, though countries with decent governments feel much less threatened. Our government fears nothing more.

America has a carefully controlled press that appears free because it is not explicitly controlled by the government. But the real power in America rests with the big corporations and their lobbies, with Wall Street, whose personnel move in and out of the formal government at will. All of the traditional media, radio, newspapers, and television, are owned by large corporations. How curious that they do not question large corporations.

Read More: Here

Read more...

Opinion: You Might Be Committing a Federal Crime

Friday, December 17, 2010

(Dec. 17) -- Here's one proposition not up for partisan debate: America is woefully overcriminalized, and the criminal law is woefully overfederalized.

Today there are nearly 4,500 federal criminal laws on the books, and most of them have been added in just the last few decades.

A groundbreaking, nonpartisan study conducted this year by the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the Heritage Foundation revealed that many of these laws lack even the most basic protection: an adequate criminal intent requirement. That means Americans can be convicted and thrown in prison for doing something -- actually, one of thousands of seemingly innocuous things -- they had no idea was against the law.

This overcriminalization has real-world consequences. Throwing in prison people who didn't intend to break the law, or who violated laws that shouldn't be crimes in the first place, imposes an unnecessary burden on taxpayers to pay for their senseless incarceration. This would never be a good use of taxpayers' funds, and it makes even less sense given our current staggering deficits.

Then there are the impacts on individuals and businesses, which are challenged every day to try to figure out what conduct is legal, what is punishable criminally and what some of these laws even mean. Their liberty and their property are at stake. Is this the American way?

This fall, the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security held a hearing, to a standing-room-only crowd, exploring the problem of overcriminalization and possible solutions. Ranking member Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, was visibly moved by the compelling testimony of expert witnesses and actual victims who relayed horrific stories of lost property -- and years spent in jail -- for completely innocuous actions they had no way of knowing were illegal.

Read More: Here

Read more...

Rolling porno scan vans?

Sunday, December 12, 2010

Read more...

Grandma Got Molested At The Airport

Read more...

Airport Insecurity Persists

Saturday, December 11, 2010

Read more...

Ron Paul: America Is The Biggest Counterfeit Machine In The History Of The World

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Ron Paul told Morning Joe this morning that he is "heartened" to see that the Debt Commission embraced his and Barney Frank's call to at least look into spending cuts in the military but even that does not totally reassure him because you "need to change the policy, you can't quit one weapons system and think that's a solution if you still want to be policemen of the world."

Said Joe Scarborough: "Republicans who claim to be small deficit hawks want to stay in Afghanistan for another decade, want to continue everyone of these weapons systems. We can't balance this budget. We can't sustain ourselves fiscally if we keep spending money on these two wars."

Meanwhile, Paul thinks you could take $10 billion from building embassies and bases and but $5 billion of it into medical or unemployment benefits "to tide us over" and "put $5 billion against the deficit."

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/ron-paul-on-morning-joe-2010-12

Read more...

Obama White House pressured Spain to drop Bush torture prosecution

Thursday, December 2, 2010

By Daniel Tencer
Wednesday, December 1st, 2010 -- 10:42 pm

Obama White House pressured Spain to drop Bush torture prosecution, leaked cable shows.

The Obama administration went to the mat to defend its predecessors from a torture prosecution in Spain last year, a leaked State Department cable shows.

The cable, released by WikiLeaks this week, shows that senior US diplomats teamed with Republican lawmakers -- including a former Republican Party chairman -- to put pressure on Spanish officials to drop a criminal investigation into the Bush administration's use of "enhanced interrogation techniques."

In the spring of 2009, Spanish Judge Balthasar Garzon launched an inquiry into six Bush officials linked to the torture policy. They were then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales; Cheney adviser David Addington; Pentagon lawyer William Haynes; Pentagon official Douglas Feith; and Jay Bybee and John Yoo from the Office of Legal Counsel.

Read More: Here

Read more...

  © Blogger template On The Road by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009

Back to TOP