Steve G.

Posts Tagged ‘Department of Homeland Security’

Susan Hogarth: An Open Letter To Bob Barr

In Activism, Congress, Libertarian, Libertarian Convention, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Libertarian Politics 2008, Medical Marijuana, Politics, Presidential Candidates, War on May 17, 2008 at 7:30 pm

The following is reprinted with permission from the author.Susan Hogarth

An Open Letter to Bob Barr: Some Questions

By Susan Hogarth

Mr. Barr,

Thank you for joining the Libertarian Party in our efforts to bring greater freedom to Americans. In light of the very short time between your campaign announcement and the national convention, your antilibertarian congressional record and disinclination to fully repudiate it, and your refusal to answer a single email from me while you were serving as my regional representative on the Libertarian National Committee over the past year, I thought that I would circulate my questions to you publicly, in the hopes that someone, somewhere, will get some straightforward answers from you. To others reading this open letter — I hope that you will take whatever opportunity is afforded you to ask at least one or two of these questions of Mr. Barr. No candidate should garner our nomination without having satisfied the majority of delegates that he will steadfastly champion both the Libertarian Party and the libertarian message.

I’ve separated my questions into categories.

Support for the Libertarian Party and the libertarian message:

  1. Why has the leadership PAC bearing your name continued to raise and distribute funds to support Republican congressional candidates in districts where a Libertarian either is or could be running even after you joined the LP’s governing board? Do you not consider recruiting and supporting Libertarian candidates to be an essential part of the LP leadership’s mission? Will your leadership PAC continue to support Republicans if you are selected as the LP’s presidential nominee?
  2. In a radio interview in Charlotte, NC this week, you indicated that Republicans should support you because your candidacy will bring out voters who are dejected by McCain, and will now vote for Republican candidates down-ballot. What will you do to promote Libertarian Party candidates down-ballot?
  3. You have said that there are parts of the LP’s platform that you disagree with. Can you be specific? What parts of the LP’s platform do you agree with?
  4. Why have you consistently sold yourself in interviews as ‘conservative’ rather than ‘libertarian’? Do you think that ‘libertarian’ and ‘conservative’ are the same thing?

Questions about some of your antilibertarian votes in congress:

  1. PATRIOT Act – you voted ‘for’ the Act. Would you vote the same way again? Do you think it was a mistake to trust the sunset provisions?
  2. Do you still support an anti-flag-desecration amendment to the constitution? How does this tie in with your ideas of federalism? How does it support individual liberty?
  3. DOMA – you have indicated that DOMA was an exercise in federalism (devolving power to the states), but this does not explain the part of DOMA that defines marriage federally as man-woman only. Do you stand by this definition? In your state, would you support a government definition of marriage as man-woman only?
  4. You voted for the Medicare Part D prescription drug boondoggle while in congress. Do you stand by this vote, or repudiate it?

Explanation for some of your current seemingly antilibertarian positions:

  1. You talk about reducing U.S. military bases overseas, but not necessarily closing them. How many foreign countries do you think the U.S. needs to have military personnel in?
  2. Would you support an immediate end to the Afghanistan occupation? How long, as President, would you tolerate U.S. troops continuing to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan?
  3. You have made some welcome movement toward the idea of legalizing medical marijuana in a few cases, and have pointed to the Drug War as an issue where there should be greater state control. Aside from the federalism issue, do you support prohibition of marijuana (for any use) at the state level? Would you stand with Libertarian state-level candidates as a champion of ending prohibition?
  4. You have indicated that you support the idea of federal government resources being routed to South America to support governments that are allies of the U.S. government’s Drug War. Why would you support this sort of interventionism in the name of prohibition abroad? How does this tie in with your idea of federalism?
  5. You have indicated that you support the idea of economic sanctions against Iran as a sort of diplomacy. Sanctions strengthen dictatorships and punish citizens of both nations. Why would you support this sort of interventionism abroad and at home?
  6. Why do you support instituting an entirely new FEDERAL tax on Americans (national sales tax)? Is this the type of ‘federalism’ (or devolution of government power to the states) we can expect from you (i.e. a federalism of convenience)?
  7. You wrote ” Until all governments are willing to take a unified front to confront this problem, it is the duty of the federal government to secure our borders from criminals, terrorists and those seeking to take advantage of the American taxpayer.” Most terrorists, criminals, and freeloaders do not declare themselves as such at the border. How do you propose to separate the vast majority of people who want to come to the U.S. to labor honestly from these undesirables? Do you favor open immigration for all people who wish to come to the U.S. and who are not terrorists, criminals, or freeloaders?

___________________________

Susan Hogarth is a longtime libertarian activist, and a current candidate for the Libertarian National Committee. Her blog is at http://colliething.com

Advertisements

TIME: Do Americans care about Big Brother?

In Big Brother, Civil Liberties, Congress, Constitutional Rights, Corruption, Courts and Justice System, Law, Libertarian, Media, Police State, Politics, US Government on March 23, 2008 at 10:15 pm

Big BrotherTIME Magazine has published an article regarding the erosion of civil liberties, and the reaction of Americans to the news that the government is warehousing vast amounts of information on innocent citizens. Here is an excerpt:

A quick tally of the record of civil liberties erosion in the United States since 9/11 suggests that the majority of Americans are ready to trade diminished privacy, and protection from search and seizure, in exchange for the promise of increased protection of their physical security. Polling consistently supports that conclusion, and Congress has largely behaved accordingly, granting increased leeway to law enforcement and the intelligence community to spy and collect data on Americans. Even when the White House, the FBI or the intelligence agencies have acted outside of laws protecting those rights — such as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act — the public has by and large shrugged and, through their elected representatives, suggested changing the laws to accommodate activities that may be in breach of them.

Civil libertarians are in a state of despair. “People don’t realize how damaging it is to a democratic society to allow the government to warehouse information about innocent Americans,” says Mike German, national security counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union.

You can read the entire TIME Magazine article here.

Government unveils Real ID plans

In Big Brother, Civil Liberties, Congress, Fraud, Immigration, Law, Lies and the lying liars who tell them, Nanny State, Police State, Terrorism, US Government on January 11, 2008 at 12:03 am

Drivers license photo at DMVIn the next six years, Americans born after December 1, 1964 will be required to get more secure driver’s licenses under the Real ID Act. Real ID was passed in 2005, and is supposed to make it harder for terrorists, illegal immigrants, and con artists to get government issued identification. Originally the new IDs were supposed to be introduced this year.

States, however, have balked at the idea, believing it to be either unnecessary or unduly expensive. The ACLU has vehemently objected to the sharing of personal data among government agencies, which will occur under Real ID. While the Department of Homeland Security claims that the only way to make sure an ID is safe is to check it against secure government information, the American Civil Liberties Union says it will only make it more likely for identities to be misused or stolen.

Furthermore, the ACLU claims REAL ID will be the “first-ever national identity card system,” which “would irreparably damage the fabric of American life.”

While I’m glad to note that I will be exempt, at least until 2017, it still bothers me. It’s just too much like asking for my “papers”, as far as I’m concerned. On the other hand, at least the government realizes that someone my age (45 now, will be 51 when the law goes into effect) is highly unlikely to be a terrorist, which is what I have been saying all along whenever I get hassled about flying or whatever. I’m one of those people whose kids are out of the house, and now I’m joyfully awaiting the day when I have grandchildren. People like me are not terrorists, except when it comes to our daughters-in-law. 😉

Under Real ID, the cards will have three layers of security but will not contain microchips; and states will be able to choose which security measures they will put in their cards. Also, the driver’s license photograph would be taken at the beginning of the application instead of at the end, in order to keep the applicant’s photo on file to check for fraud.The government expects all states to start checking the social security numbers and immigration status of license applicants.Most states already check Social Security numbers, and about half already check immigration status. Some states are already using many of the security measures of REAL ID. For example, California expects the only real change in their current procedure will be to take the photo at the beginning of the application rather than at the end.

Once the social security and immigration checks become practice nationwide, Homeland Security will move on to checking with the State Department when people use a passport to get a drivers license (why don’t they already do that?), verifying birth certificates, and checking to make sure the person doesn’t have more than one license.

As if getting a drivers license and dealing with the DMV bureaucracy isn’t already a major pain in the ass, it will get worse. And it will be easier for people to steal your identity. Hmmmm ….. this sounds like a very, very bad idea to me. Just get states to do what they should already be doing (check social security numbers, check immigration status, check to make sure they’re who they claim to be when they use a passport to get a drivers license, require that lost or stolen licenses be reported within a certain period of time) and everything should be fine.

Law-abiding American citizens should not get an even bigger hassle in dealing with government red tape, just because a few people are assholes. And I will always be wondering whether the jerk clerk at the DMV is stealing my identity more thoroughly than any thief ever could, thus encouraging widespread paranoia and the attendant reliance upon the government which comes with it.
Of course, that’s what the government wants. They want us to depend upon them for everything, because that gives them power over us. God forbid that everyone simply be responsible for themselves.

_______________________________

Source: CNN “US Unveils New Driver’s License Rules”

Originally posted by ElfNinosMom on Adventures in Frickintardistan

Happy Bastille Day. We need a new one.

In Big Brother, Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights, Corruption, George Bush, Guantanamo, History, Human Rights Abuses, Personal Responsibility, Police State, Politics, Protest, Second Amendment, Terrorism, War on July 15, 2007 at 6:40 am

Originally posted yesterday on my blog for Bastille day. Forgot to transfer it over til today. Oh well, better late than never…

According to wikipedia,

On 5 May 1789, Louis XVI convened the Estates-General to hear their grievances. The deputies of the Third Estate representing the common people (the two others were clergy and nobility) decided to break away and form a National Assembly. On 20 June the deputies of the Third Estate took the Tennis Court Oath, swearing not to separate until a Constitution had been established. They were gradually joined by delegates of the other estates; Louis started to recognize their validity on 27 June. The Assembly re-named itself the National Constituent Assembly on 9 July, and began to function as a legislature and to draft a constitution.

The blue-blooded Chimperror, Cesar Potus George Dubai-ya Bushitler II, has brung back the clergy and the nobility back to a level of undue influence in civic life. Perhaps we need a new storming of the Bastille?

In the wake of the 11 July dismissal of the royal finance minister Jacques Necker, the people of Paris, fearful that they and their representatives would be attacked by the royal military, and seeking to gain arms for the general populace, stormed the Bastille, a prison which had often held people arbitrarily jailed on the basis of lettre de cachet. Besides holding a large cache of arms, the Bastille had long been known for holding political prisoners whose writings had displeased the royal government, and was thus a symbol of the absolutism of the monarchy.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. The general populace being increasingly outgunned by regime agents? Check. People jailed arbitrarily? Check. Political prisoners? Check. Absolutist, hereditary rulers? Check.

The storming of the Bastille was more important as a rallying point and symbolic act of rebellion than a practical act of defiance.

Shortly after the storming of the Bastille, on 4 August feudalism was abolished and on 26 August, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen was proclaimed.

Ending feudalism and having citizens rights? Yeah, we kinda need that again. Check!

Impeach Bush-Cheney; Cheney goes first!

In Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights, Corruption, Crime, Democracy, Democrats, George Bush, Libertarian Party-US, Personal Responsibility, Police State on July 13, 2007 at 10:09 pm

So I recently got me a myspace page and forwarded an impeachment bulletin.

A myspace bulletin debate ensued….

A reply to my bulletin, with my comments….

Bulletin Message —————–
From: Shane
Date: Jul 8, 2007 2:27 PM

Where were these people back when all this was started? They were going along with it. The Democrats voted for the USA PATRIOT ACT without even reading it; now they’re all horrified about it.

paul) Why assume it’s all Democrats? Numerous people for impeachment from all parties, and independents, even some Republicans! And some people did back the “war on terror” in the beginning and have come to realize they were wrong. Glad to have them on board. Others, like me, strongly opposed the wars, the invasions of our civil liberties, the massive growth in government spending under Chimperror George II, the dictatorial powers he has claimed in violation of the constitution, and have called for impeachment for quite a few years now. I’m happy so many people are agreeing with me now – even Democrats!

As to why any Libertarians would oppose impeaching the Bush fascist regime is beyond me. The LP called for Clinton’s impeachment, but not for the same reasons the Republicans did. If anyone thinks Dubai-ya! has been more faithful to the constitution, can I please get an intro to your drug dealer? Why the double standard?? Impeach Bush-Cheney!

Shane:

The Democrats voted for the authorization for the Iraq war when there was plenty of evidence it was all a fraud; now they’re all horrified that they were “lied to.” The Democrats voted for the military tribunals, and now they’re all horrified about the treatment of prisoners. The Democrats voted for the Military Commissions Act and the suspension of habeas corpus, and now they’re all horrified at the loss of our rights.

paul:

Individualists ought not refer to people collectively. Democrats are tens of millions of people, the vast majority of whom don’t get to vote on these things.. and many opposed them, including some of the ones who did get to vote on them, they were not unanimous votes. Some voted wrongly in the past and have admitted so; others are still voting wrongly on these matters, and should be pressured to change their votes or be removed from office in the next election.


congressional democrats: not too old to be spanked

Shane:

Why now? Why did they wait all this time to turn against it all and call for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney? Because now, their impeachment and removal from office would mean that a Democrat, Nancy Pelosi, would become President. That’s the only reason. They don’t care about your rights; they only care about power.

Stop being conned. Support Ron Paul and your local Libertarian candidates. That’s the only way out of this mess.

paul) I support
Steve Kubby

I like Ron Paul, and I wish he would introduce impeachment formally in Congress. It’s the right thing to do and would be great for getting him attention! The best thing he has done so far is stand up to
Ghouliani
.

Most of the people backing impeachment are not doing it because of Pelosi.
I know I’m not. I supported impeachment ever since Dubai-ya stole his FIRST election and have even circulated a petition for impeachment and got thousands of signatures, and that was in 2003.

To the ones who only now have realized that the Chimperror and puppetmaster Cheney are war criminals: welcome on board! To those who are still not on board, what are you waiting for?

Demand impeachment NOW…while we are still allowed to!

paul

http://pauliecannoli.wordpress.com

Last Free Voice

facebook

>—————– Bulletin Message —————–
From: paulie
Date: Jul 8, 2007 8:47 AM

—————– Bulletin Message —————–
From: Cops Say Legalize All Drugs
Date: Jul 7, 2007 4:38 P

ImmiGREAT!

In Civil Liberties, Economics, Immigration, Personal Responsibility, Police State, Politics on June 29, 2007 at 9:22 pm

Border wall boondoggle: even dumber than I thought!


http://freestudents.blogspot.com/

So a gaggle of right-wing racists and faux libertarians want to build a wall on the border. They are going to “secure” the borders. Nice.

So what does securing the borders mean? Well, one taste of it is that the historic right of Americans to cross into Canada or Mexico without a passport is gone. To travel you have to a government document giving you permission to do so. You can see why I think the “libertarians” who support this measure are not really libertarians at all.

And they want to build a big wall on the Mexican border. Also nice. Real nice. (You do know I’m being sarcastic.)

Since the United States was founded (and before) the borders with Canada and Mexico were never “secure”. Never. So the communities developed often without regard of that imaginary line in the dirt.

Now the authoritarians want “secure borders” and that means problems. It doesn’t mean problems for would-be terrorists. After all the 9/11 criminals didn’t cross the border illegally. They came in with government permission. They had passports and the US government said to them: “Welcome to America. Want some flying lessons?”

No one came in through Canada or Mexico. They didn’t cross the borders but flew in and handed over their permission slips to the hall monitors at the airports. They were roaming around killing people because they passed government security and had state permission to be in the US. You would think the government would look at how they approve would-be terrorists to enter the US. Instead Americans are being forced to get passports to spend a few hours shopping in Mexico. Read the rest of this entry »

UCLA student handcuffed and repeatedly tasered for refusing to show ID

In Big Brother, Civil Liberties, Communism, Constitutional Rights, Cops Gone Wild, Human Rights Abuses, Iran, Law Enforcement, Middle East, Police Brutality, Police State, Protest, Terrorism on June 28, 2007 at 3:54 am

Per YouTube description:

Nov 14th, 2006, around 11:30 pm, Powell Library CLICC computer lab, UCLA: student shot with a Taser multiple times by UCPD officers, even after he was cuffed and motionless.According to eye witnesses, it started when student Mostafa Tabatabainejad did not show a Community Service Officer his student ID. Eye witnesses said the student was on his way leaving the lab when a UCPD officer approached and grabbed him by the exit of the lab. He objected to the physical contact by loudly repeating “don’t touch me”, and this is the point where the video starts.

According to wikipedia, Mostafa Tabatabainejad is a fourth-year student of philosophy and Middle Eastern and North African studies at UCLA. He is an American citizen of Iranian descent. He was 23 years old at the time of the incident and is Baha”i’ by religion.

God forbid that detainees should actually have rights …..

In Constitutional Rights, George Bush, Guantanamo, War on June 21, 2007 at 9:31 pm

By MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 7 minutes ago

WASHINGTON – The Bush administration is nearing a decision to close the Guantanamo Bay detainee facility and move its terror suspects to military prisons elsewhere, The Associated Press has learned.

Senior administration officials said Thursday a consensus is building for a proposal to shut the center and transfer detainees to one or more Defense Department facilities, including the maximum-security military prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., where they could face trial.

President Bush’s national security and legal advisers had been scheduled to discuss the move at a meeting Friday, the officials said, but after news of it broke, the White House said the meeting would not take place that day and no decision on Guantanamo Bay’s status is imminent.

“It’s no longer on the schedule for tomorrow,” said Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council. “Senior officials have met on the issue in the past, and I expect they will meet on the issue in the future.”

Three senior administration officials spoke about the discussions on condition of anonymity because they were internal deliberations.

Expected to consult soon, according to the officials, were Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff, National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace.

Previous plans to close Guantanamo ran into resistance from Cheney, Gonzales and former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. But officials said the new suggestion is gaining momentum with at least tacit support from the State and Homeland Security departments, the Pentagon and the Intelligence directorate.

Cheney’s office and the Justice Department have been against the step, arguing that moving “unlawful” enemy combatant suspects to the U.S. would give them undeserved legal rights. Read the rest of this entry »

At least we don’t have to worry about Anarchy anymore…

In Big Brother, Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights, Law Enforcement, Police State, Terrorism on June 19, 2007 at 11:12 am

anarchy-cartoon.jpg

h/t Kingdom of Fear by way of
Francois Tremblay

Immigration hysteria + “Fair” tax = Police State USSA

In Big Brother, Civil Liberties, Communism, Constitutional Rights, Fraud, History, Immigration, Law Enforcement, Police State, Taxation, Terrorism, War on June 1, 2007 at 4:22 pm

UPDATE 6/2: Claire Wolfe reports that current employees will also have to apply for government permission to keep their jobs.

Recently, I wrote about how immigration hysteria being used as an excuse for rise of a US police state.

Here, Mark Yannone documents some of the proposed mechanics of this connection are being put together. Like me, Yannone believes that the Trojan horse of a fraudulent “fair” tax will also be a key building block of this disturbing development. This guy, this guy, or maybe this one could easily be the perfect candidate to put the finishing touches on a domestic system of fascism.

Makes a lot of sense, except for this picture of ol’ Kris Kristofferson. What’s he got to do with it?

UnemployedStop the Experiment

by Mark Yannone

Half in jest, I’ve long referred to employment regulation as government’s attempt to make employment illegal. Legislation like the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 makes the federal government’s desire for complete control over our lives more evident than ever.

By ignoring existing immigration law for years, the law enforcement failure—in conjunction with welfare programs and other socialist policies—has helped to produce conditions that make Soviet-style control of its citizens a more palatable “solution” to the government-engineered problems associated with illegal immigration.

Is this draconian legislation the last straw for those who assert their inalienable right to earn a living without government interference? Maybe . . . if it were rigorously enforced. But it could never be fully enforced as long as we have cash. So, once again, Americans will have to surrender more freedom for the sake of the success of a government program. When our money is 100 percent digital, enforcement will be fairly easy, except where barter is used. Barter will include what was previously considered legitimate money: gold and silver coins. Of course, such transactions will have to be outlawed, but they won’t stop. Barterers who are discovered will lose their assets and what remains of their freedom to teach the rest of us that such behavior is ill-advised.

The final step in the system will be the implementation of the world’s most controlling system of taxation, currently referred to as the FairTax, a 30 percent national sales tax that will require everyone to receive a monthly living allowance from the federal government, transferred electronically into their bank accounts (as long as the citizen remains compliant).

The economy in such a government-controlled society cannot thrive. As it deteriorates, law enforcement will grow increasingly difficult and expensive, so the measures used will become extreme. Given the history of mankind, we can expect these enforcement tools to include labor camps and extermination. And if you think that can’t happen in our system of government then you must have missed the National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive from the White House.

The world is a living laboratory. The experiments outlined here have already been performed, and the results were all negative. They don’t need to be repeated, and you don’t need to continue to live as a lab rat.

Read the rest of this entry »

Immigration hysteria being used as an excuse for rise of US police state

In Civil Liberties, Communism, Constitutional Rights, George Bush, History, Immigration, Nanny State, Police State, Terrorism on May 17, 2007 at 4:32 pm


“And he causes all, both great and small, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark” (Rev.13:16-17)

Earlier we reported that the illegal immigration hysteria is being used to justify the construction of an American gulag, which has been the subject of plans for rounding up large numbers of Americans, not just immigrants.

In addition to SS numbers, as well as walls such as the one Bushling wants on the border with Mexico, and concentration camps, police states are well known for requiring their subjects to carry their papers and produce them on demand.

Immigration is being used as an excuse to implement this same system in America.

Homeland Stupidity reports:

Read the rest of this entry »

Adolf Giuliani: As Far From Libertarian As Possible

In Big Brother, Censorship, Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights, Corruption, Crazy Claims, Drug War, Economics, Fraud, History, Law Enforcement, Personal Responsibility, Police State, Politics, Second Amendment, Taxation, Terrorism, War on May 11, 2007 at 6:47 am

Despite what a certain milk shake would like you to believe, Rudolf Giuliani Mussolini is As Far From Libertarian As Possible (click on the link to read about his early history as a psychotically deranged persecutor of victimless white collar “criminals”).

Even some of Giuliani’s admirers admit he has fascist tendencies. The amazing record of corruption and perfidy simply boggles the mind. Giuliani even had the incredible temerity to
try to stay on as mayor after his term was over.

Check out the comments at Serf City. Giuliani abused his mayoral office to go after cabbies, artists, street vendors, porn,
sex-related businesses, and anyone who did business without a license. His phony tax cuts were merely deficit spending – putting the tax bill on future victims, plus interest, while ducking the responsibility for his out of control spending, a favorite ploy of scumbag Rapepublicneoconartists.

Ron Moore reports,

Let’s take the pot smokers. One study points out that under Rudy’s Broken Windows policy, public-toking arrests rose 2000% from about 2000 in 1994 to over 50,000 by 2000 ( Harcourt & Ludwig, Reefer Madness: Broken Windows Policing and Misdemeanor Marijuana Arrests in New York City, 1989-2000 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=948753). The study also finds that this had no measurable effect on violent crime.”

Furthermore,

Unfortunately, Rudy’s broken windows policy didn’t apply to Rudy’s buddies in the New York Police Department. An April 1999 article in Crime and Delinquency (Zero Tolerance: A Case Study in Police Policies and Practices in New York City, Judith Greene) points to a 75% increase in new civil rights claims against the police for abusive conduct. The article also points to a sharp increase in the number of complaints which resulted in no arrest and no summons and where there was no suspicion of criminal activity. Um – just why were people being stopped? What was Mayor Rudy’s response to growing concern about police misconduct? According to the article the new Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB) funding was cut 17% compared to the agency it replaced.

Victim disarmament? According to Mike Blessing, Giuliani said on one of the

morning empty-talk shows that “We shouldn’t just try one of these [”gun control”] plans, we should try them all.”

Giuliani libertarian?

King George Dubai-ya Dubai-ya III Bush has gone a long way towards creating a fascist Amerikkka. Rudolf the coke nosed Fascist would go all the way. No libertarians should even remotely consider being fellow travellers in helping Ayatollah Giuliani set up his gulag regime.

We look upon authority too often and focus over and over again, for 30 or 40 or 50 years, as if there is something wrong with authority. We see only the oppressive side of authority. Maybe it comes out of our history and our background. What we don’t see is that freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be. Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do.

-Rudy

This is why we can’t have nice things.

In Big Brother, Crazy Claims, Law Enforcement, Libertarian, Police State, Terrorism on May 10, 2007 at 2:23 pm

Jesus tits, does Alabama suck.

This is what the mouth-breathing yokels in their government have to say about small-government types, under the context that we’re all terrorists: Read the rest of this entry »

Dana Rohrabacher, Traitor to Liberty

In Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights, Crazy Claims, George Bush, History, Libertarian, Middle East, Military, Personal Responsibility, Police State, Politics, Republican, Terrorism, War on May 9, 2007 at 6:38 am

Via Brad Spangler

Dana Rohrabacher wants me dead. Well, not just me. Dana Rohrabacher wants a whole bunch of Americans dead.

“I hope it’s your family members that [sic] die,” said US Rep. Dana Rohrabacher to American citizens who questioned the Bush administration’s unlawful extraordinary rendition policies.

Rohrabacher, bring it you fucking traitor.

“But in 1969-71, Dana Rohrabacher was the most successful and most beloved libertarian activist… he was a close friend of mine until he crossed the line with his campaign for Congress. — Samuel Edward Konkin III

This reminds me. I’ve been trying to get confirmation as to whether Rohrabacher was a warmonger during the Vietnam War. As a former anarchist and follower of an actual pacifist, Robert LeFevre, it would have been illogical, but I would like independent reports from those who actually knew Rohrabacher back then.

More States Reject Real ID Act

In Big Brother, Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights, Libertarian, Nanny State, Police State, Politics on April 19, 2007 at 8:28 pm

Is it Aaron Russo’s movie that should get credit for this or maybe people in these states have the common sense to do the honorable thing to reject such unconstitutional legislation. Both governors of Montana and Washington this week have signed bills reject the Real ID Act

The Washington state bill is part of a growing rebellion against an expensive federal mandate that the American Civil Liberties Union says would threaten personal privacy. The new state law says Washington will not implement the new Real ID system unless: Uncle Sam foots the bill, the government takes steps to ensure that privacy and data security concerns are addressed and the system doesn’t place unreasonable costs or record keeping burdens on the average citizen.”This is another unfunded mandate from the federal government and, even worse, it doesn’t protect the privacy of the citizens of Washington,” Gregoire said in signing the bill.”Washington will not spend the $250 million without a guarantee of privacy and federal funds to help fund it.” Montana’s law blocks the state from implementing the national rules.

There already is a list of unfunded mandates that the state have to comply with including the No Child Left Behind Act. The federal government and their over-bloated debt and budgets have shifted these costs to the states in order to pay for a police action over in Iraq. Read the rest of this entry »

Open Forum on Immigration

In Big Brother, Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights, Immigration, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Personal Responsibility, Police State, Politics, Terrorism, War on April 18, 2007 at 6:02 am

This is an attempt to get Andy and Gary to stop sending this stuff to my email.

Here you go guys, have at it.

Source material for the debate:

1 (continues for 12 pages when you hit (“previous entries”).

2

The Case for Free Trade and Open Immigration


Both sides

OK, now you can quit copying me on those emails! Thanks.

The American Freedom Agenda

In Big Brother, Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights, George Phillies, Iraq War, Law Enforcement, Libertarian Party-US, Middle East, Military, Personal Responsibility, Police State, Politics, Terrorism, War on March 23, 2007 at 9:37 am

The American Freedom Agenda
has come forward with a
Freedom Pledge
which has been endorsed by some Libertarian candidates, including Steve Kubby and George Phillies (in the comment section at LP blog). We hope all the other candidates sign it too.

LP Presidential nomination Candidates, supporters and staff, please let us know any other candidates you know who have signed it!

Freedom Pledge after the jump:

Read the rest of this entry »

Posse Comitatus ftw!

In Civil Liberties, Democracy, Democrats, Police State, Politics on February 23, 2007 at 12:55 am

The New York Times had an interesting piece about a recent attempt to undo the worst excesses of the Military Commissions Act of 2006.

A disturbing recent phenomenon in Washington is that laws that strike to the heart of American democracy have been passed in the dead of night. So it was with a provision quietly tucked into the enormous defense budget bill at the Bush administration’s behest that makes it easier for a president to override local control of law enforcement and declare martial law.

The provision, signed into law in October, weakens two obscure but important bulwarks of liberty. One is the doctrine that bars military forces, including a federalized National Guard, from engaging in law enforcement. Called posse comitatus, it was enshrined in law after the Civil War to preserve the line between civil government and the military. The other is the Insurrection Act of 1807, which provides the major exemptions to posse comitatus. It essentially limits a president’s use of the military in law enforcement to putting down lawlessness, insurrection and rebellion, where a state is violating federal law or depriving people of constitutional rights.

There is a bipartisan bill, introduced by Senators Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, and Christopher Bond, Republican of Missouri, and backed unanimously by the nation’s governors, that would repeal the stealthy revisions. Congress should pass it. If changes of this kind are proposed in the future, they must get a full and open debate.

It’s not perfect, but it’s a start. Keep bringing us back our civil liberties, Democrats, and we might just let you keep your jobs.

Connecting the dots on foreign and energy policy

In Corruption, Democracy, Economics, Iraq War, Middle East, Politics, War on February 5, 2007 at 8:13 pm

GreginOz shot off an email to me today, with a fascinating link. It’s an article on AlterNet about the planning for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and about the Bush Administration’s obliquity concerning the 9/11 commission.

I’ll come out and say that I doubt the government was directly behind the 9/11 attacks. But they certainly have used the attacks to their fullest potential, and have been less than forthcoming about what happened, and the paper trail certainly raises some intriguing questions.

I’m not a believer in any 9/11 conspiracy theories, but I sure would like those questions answered. And, thankfully, this article doesn’t delve into speculation; it merely presents all the facts known to date and lets the reader come to conclusions (or not come to conclusions) on their own.

So yeah, read this article.

More on the Boston Mooninite bit…

In Humor, Media on February 3, 2007 at 11:34 am

…by way of Something*Positive, my favoritest webcomic in the whole wide world.