Holocaust In Cambodia

A good article on the destruction of the Cambodian society and its people by the communist Khmer Rouge in the 1970's. This genocide seems to be all but forgotten nowadays:


Thirty Years On, the Holocaust In Cambodia and Its Aftermath Is Remembered

Drug War Madness

Judge James Grey, Ron Paul and others comment on the foolishness of the drug war.

October's Nanny of the Month

Reason TV names the nanny of the month for October 2009:

Liars, Cheats and Whores

Jack Hunter says that Representative Alan Grayson should not have apologized for calling Federal Reserve advisor Linda Robertson a "K Street Whore." Hunter says that Grayson did not go far enough because Washington DC is full of liars, cheats and whores.

Managed Health Care is Corporatism

Texas Congressman Ron Paul says our managed health care system is corporatism, it is not a free market.

The Injustice of Civil Forfeiture

Paul Jacob comments on the injustice of civil forfeiture laws and a challenge before the Supreme Court:

Not Robbed Until Proven Guilty

You are "innocent until proven guilty" in America, with one big exception: Under civil forfeiture laws, police don't have to prove that a crime has actually been committed in order to seize your property. And once your boat or car is stolen by your government, the burden falls to you to prove your stuff is innocent.

Police departments are getting rich from the loot they seize from folks never convicted of a crime. As the Institute for Justice argues, civil forfeiture laws provide an ugly incentive for police "to enforce the laws in ways designed to maximize forfeiture income rather than to minimize crime."

Now a challenge has reached the U.S. Supreme Court. Alvarez v. Smith concerns six people whose property was seized by Chicago police, though three of them were never charged with a crime.

The Institute for Justice, the Cato Institute, the ACLU and the Reason Foundation have filed amicus briefs arguing that due process was denied.

In favor of more free-wheeling civil forfeiture are a number of state governments, the National Conference of State Legislatures, the National Association of Counties, the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors and other groups representing government entities that spend the proceeds from the seized loot.

During oral arguments, Judge Sonia Sotomayor asked the pertinent question, "You take the car and then you investigate?"

Backwards justice is no justice at all.

This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.

Sanctions Are An Act Of War

Texas Congressman Ron Paul explains how sanctions are foolish and dangerous.

The Climate of Liberty in Washington State

Rachel Hawkridge, the chair of the Washington Libertarian Party shares a bit about what got her involved in the freedom movement and the climate of liberty in Washington State.

H1N1 Emergency

Texas Congressman Ron Paul discusses the H1N1 emergency, health freedom, and Obama's interesting decision. He points out the failure of the government's vaccination program. Do you want these people running your health care?

Federal Reserve Needs Full Disclosure

From Texas Congressman Ron Paul:

Anything Less Than Full Disclosure is Unacceptable

Last week a new bill was introduced in the Senate to audit the Federal Reserve. Some backers of my bill HR1207 and the existing Senate companion bill S.604 were a little miffed at this, but depending on how you think about it, this new legislation poses no great threat to our efforts.

With the economy in shambles, people are looking for answers - not just because of lost savings on Wall Street, but because of lost houses on Main Street. Because of the many problems we face, the Federal Reserve and its powers over the economy have come under scrutiny. This translates into a lot of political pressure on Congress. With all the House Republicans signed on as co-sponsors and over half of the Democrats, HR 1207 has enormous bipartisan support. It would be disingenuous for Washington not to embrace the principles behind this bill after all the promises for transparency. How can one credibly argue for more transparency in government in one breath and defend the secrecy of the Federal Reserve in the next?

However, there is still very powerful resistance to the disclosures that HR 1207 would require and efforts to weaken it will continue to pop up before this issue is settled.

The good news is that Washington is responding and the Federal Reserve has become the issue. Concerned Americans need to keep the pressure on by continuing to define what we want, and what we do not want.

One major concern is that HR 1207 constitutes some kind of power grab for Congress. Congress would not do a better job dictating interest rates or managing money supply growth than the Federal Reserve does for exactly the same reasons: Congress is not the free market. Any select group of people, no matter how wise and educated, simply cannot replace the wisdom of the market. HR 1207 does not seek to replace the wisdom of the Fed with the wisdom of Congress. That would be a giant step backwards. HR 1207 simply asks for full disclosure, and I am agreeable to allowing for a reasonable lag time to calm the fears that Congress intends to dictate monetary policy.

What we do want, what we insist upon, is that no longer will decisions that carry so much economic weight be made in absolute secrecy. We want to know what arrangements the Fed makes with other governments and central banks. We want to know who is benefitting from the actions of the Fed and what deals are being made. The Fed is already reacting to pressure by scaling back its liquidity facilities and returning to more traditional monetary policy through direct asset purchases. With nearly $800 billion in mortgage-backed securities on its books already, $800 billion in Treasury securities, and no real limit to what the Fed can acquire, there is a tremendous opportunity for malfeasance. We need to know who the Fed deals with, what they buy, how much they spend, and who benefits. As good as any step towards Federal Reserve transparency is, anything less than full disclosure at this point is unacceptable.

Global Warming Political Science

From Lew Rockwell.com an article on the poor quality science behind global warming theory:

Global-Warming Crusade

by George Giles

The Global-Warming Crusade has been prosecuted vociferously for more than 20 years. Far too many scientists have jumped on this politically hot topic and its corollary public-grant-funding potential. An intragovernmental body has been created for this. This entity called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been created to lend legitimacy to this fraud. Taxpayers from all over the globe have been, and will continue to be bilked to put up this large and slick monument to questionable science. The site has made copious amounts of material available for free. By all means download it, don't buy any of these ponderous tomes; save some trees.

I have been a critic of this effort for almost 20 years. Global Warming is a massive threat to humanity, so the story goes, such that only massive and dramatic government intervention can save us from its "effects." This intervention would come as socialist policies designed to cripple the economies of capitalist countries whose carbon dioxide emissions (it is alleged) are turning the planet in a pressure cooker.

My criticism takes two fronts of argument: firstly what mankind can do with all our technological wizardry is next to nothing compared to the immense forces of the natural world and secondly because I actually have some expertise in these types of mathematical models. I was critical of Al Gore's award-winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth before it was even released. I have offered a criticism that is both elementary to understand, and very simple that easily shows basic flaws in the data.

Ironically the world's foremost expert on Atmospheric Physics, MIT Professor Dr. Richard Lindzen has not participated in this charade (IPCC). He is a vigorous and vocal critic of this IPCC hype. Many others have realized that this farce was nothing more than a crude attempt to implement socialism and control of the economy via environmental regulation based on mendacious, uncritical, and fundamentally wrong interpretations of this "science."

I eschewed these models based upon years spent performing mathematical modeling on a variety of topics, one of them being, atmospheric physics. Lots of people are now recognizing that Global Warming does not exist. The temperature peaked in 1998 and things have been getting colder in the intervening years.

A bold theory has emerged from Dr. Henrik Svensmark that is actually experimentally verifiable. Dr. Svensmark's thesis is that cloud formation is a much more important climate driver for temperature change than carbon dioxide–type "greenhouse gases" whose concentrations change in the parts per million. It is bold because it is simple and easily verified.

Almost every human being has experience with temperature changes on a cloudy day. Cloudy days are inevitably cooler than sunny days. The answer is obvious: less of the sun's heat radiation gets to the surface. Clouds also serve to reflect significant amounts of the sun's radiation back into space.

What controls cloud formation? Global-warming advocates will say it is evaporation from the surface and the oceans. Any school boy can demonstrate the flaw in this argument. Pour water on your skin on a warm day and the evaporation cools the skin as it removes the heat of vaporization from the surface of the body. Humans depend on this (sweating) heat removal mechanism to survive. Thus warm temperatures will serve as a buffer for average temperature change if evaporation is considered as a forcing function.

Dr. Svensmark's excellent book The Chilling Stars exposits that ionized and high-energy particle absorption in the atmosphere is the pre-dominant mechanism for cloud formation. He has an impressive amount of detailed scientific evidence to prove this fact. It is based on literally hundreds, if not thousands, of independent experiments.

If you only buy one book on the global-warming/climate-change debate this is the one to procure. The science he lays out is compelling and is valid over time frames of hundreds of millions of years. Most of the global-warming debate centers on ice core experiments that look back in time for only a few hundred thousand years. This model has many flaws because the results are very sensitive to the mechanism of specimen collection and the particular gas analysis tools chosen.

High-Energy Physics is one of the most accurate scientific theories to date. A primary tool in this endeavor is the cloud chamber. The cloud chamber is a controlled volume of water vapor such that high-energy particles enter the chamber and leave trails characteristic of the type of particle and the energy of the particle. Cloud chambers have been used for more than a century and their physics is long-established and well-understood. Most detectors in high-energy physics derive much of their design from cloud change–type measurements. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and the Stanford Linear Accelerator have detectors based upon these types of scattering principles.

The trail of high-energy particles in the cloud chamber show, unequivocally that high-energy particles streaming (what physicist's call flux) into the atmosphere form clouds in greater and lesser amounts corresponding to hotter and colder epochs of the planet's history.

What is the source of this particle flux? Threefold mainly, some stream from the sun (spaceweather.com), some from inside our galaxy the Milky Way, and the rest come from outside of the Milky Way from the myriad and incredibly violent events like black hole formation, accretion disk acceleration, magnetic flux tube formation and destruction, magnetar and quasar jets, etc. We live in a very docile and calm neighborhood in an immense volume of conditions very hostile to life as we understand it.

There is nothing that can be done about any of these three sources (except perhaps to call out the Oh-Oh-Squad); they stream down from all directions around the earth as they will. Most of these were created billions of years ago and are just now reaching the Earth. The conclusion then is that if Dr. Svensmark's theory is correct than global-warming/cooling is just another of Nature's characteristics that man can do little to control, so a debate and policy changes based upon this are feckless. The most rational thing we can do about climate change is to stop wasting taxpayer's money on dubious scientific programs that produce questionable data that lead to a foregone conclusion: socialism.

In closing let's review some unpleasant, but accepted historical facts. Some 600 million years ago the Earth was completely covered in ice that was a mile thick on average, No life existed here. The sun then, was about 10% younger than it is now so it was still on the same stellar evolutionary rung as currently. Only 100 million years later the snowball planet melted and life became abundant. This tells us that the planet can freeze, and the freeze can kill everything. Just 50 years ago the scientific consensus was that global cooling was the expected trend for the future not warming. An ice age on the scale of the one just 20,000 years ago caused glaciers to form as far south as Tennessee. Canada was completely smothered as were much of Russia and the northern half of Europe.

This most recent ice age would have dramatic effects on the human population; billions would die as food production plummeted. The planet can support less than 10% of the current population with subsistence farming as the technology of the day. Not to mention the fact that the most productive farmland on the planet would now be glaciated exacerbating this trend.

On the other hand what does a slight amount of global warming portend? The North Pole might completely melt. A significant part of the Antarctic ice shelf might also melt. This would raise average sea levels slightly. Oceans cover 2/3 of the planet's surface; the average depth of the ocean is about a mile. A rise in sea level of say 10 feet (much larger than expected) would change the shoreline for a lot of real estate that was put too close to the water anyway. It would not make much difference to mankind's ability to survive. Cropland would not be massively destroyed. Florida real estate would take a beating, but then it was never a good idea to overpopulate what is essentially a large sand bar.

If you go to a farm that is more than 100 years old you will almost never find that the farmhouse is in the valley or on the shoreline. Farmers were much too smart to make that mistake. They built on hilltops! Why? They learned the hard way about shifting shorelines, water and what it can do to your life and livelihood.

In closing let's just stop wasting breath on global warming, the science is of such poor a quality that it should be ignored. It is at its heart a mendacious attempt designed to strip prosperity from millions that have it and billions more that want it.

"Global-warming Political Science" is the product of an affluent society that allows a spoiled rich brat like Al Gore to get a Nobel Prize for telling un-truths. The American people fired him! He is currently unemployed and for a good reason; he has no job skills of any value, as would many of the "scientists" prosecuting the global-warming crusade if the market were free to choose.

We cannot predict weather accurately for more than a week, why should we allow the same predictions to be accepted for all of the future? The answer is we should not.


October 26, 2009

George Giles [send him mail] is the founder of the Gonzo School of Economics, the radical branch of Austrian Economic Theory. He was the youngest Republican ever elected in 1972 at age 17. You could be elected at age 17 if the office was not assumed until after age 18. It only took 3 months of local GOP meetings to become a virulent Libertarian ever after.

Copyright © 2009 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given

The Budget Deficit For Dummies

Reason TV tries to get a handle on the $1.4 trillion deficit.

From Reason TV:

The U.S. budget deficit for fiscal year 2009, which ended in September, was a record-shattering $1.4 trillion, equal to about 10 percent of Gross Domestic Product.

In case you're wondering, the previous record had been set in...2008.

$1.4 trillion dollars is a lot of money and it's hard to get your mind around that figure. One way to appreciate the sum is to think of it in terms of all the things that you could buy with that dough.

The budget deficit, for instance, would pay for more than 1.2 billion nights at Rep. Charles Rangel's vacation condo in the Dominican Republic. And that's just for starters.

Don't worry if you have trouble doing the math, because you'll get another chance next year.

The Obama administration has just released its estimate for the fiscal year 2010 budget deficit. The number? Another $1.4 trillion.

Kirsten Tynan of the Fully Informed Jury Association

Kirsten Tynan of the Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA) sat down with Motorhome Diaries crew while they were in Montana. Tynan gave an overview of FIJA and explained that a juries protect society from dangerous individuals and also protect individuals from dangerous government.




From FIJA:

Juries protect society from dangerous individuals and also protect individuals from dangerous government. Jurors have a duty and responsibility to render a just verdict. They must take into account the facts of the case, mitigating circumstances, the merits of the law, and the fairness of its application in each case. The recognition of the authority and right of jurors to weigh the merits of the law and to render a verdict based on conscience, dates from before the writing of our Constitution, in cases such as those of William Penn and Peter Zenger. Should this right ever be suppressed, the people will retain the right to resist, having an unalienable right to veto or nullify bad and oppressive laws, and in fact then would be morally compelled to do so.

Jurors, as the representatives of the people, hold no personal agenda during any trial and most certainly not the government’s agenda. Let us not forget that the prosecutors, judges, arresting officers and the forensic investigators in most cases are all a part of and receive their paychecks from government, with personal power bases to build and personal careers to protect through the productivity of successful prosecutions resulting in convictions. Jurors have no such stake in the outcome, and are, in fact, the only truly objective individuals in the courtroom.

The role of our jurors is to protect private citizens from dangerous government laws and actions. Many existing laws erode and deny the rights of the people. Jurors protect against tyranny by refusing to convict harmless people. Our country’s founders planned and expected that we, the people, would exercise this power and authority to judge the law as well as the facts every time we serve as jurors. Juries are the last peaceful defense of our civil liberties.

FIJA works to restore and protect the role of the juror, and the institution of Trial by Jury. We sponsor educational seminars for legal professionals, publish commentary, develop and present Amicus briefs when the institution of the jury is at issue, provide interviews to the media, speak at functions and in classrooms, and of course distribute educational literature. Our newsletter The American Juror is published quarterly. We articulate that the authority of the jury is the right that protects all other rights.

Objective Journalism A Myth

Jack Hunter comments on the illusion of media objectivity.

Tavis Smiley Interviews Ron Paul

Tavis Smiley interviews Texas Congressman Ron Paul on his PBS show on October 21, 2009.

Part I:




Part II:

Soupy Sales, Rest In Peace

Soupy Sales passed away yesterday. Here is a clip from his show in the 60's:






And another:

Why More Troops in Afghanistan?

An alternative view of why more troops are being called for in Afghanistan. From Lew Rockwell.com:

The Real Reason for More Troops in Afghanistan

by Michael Gaddy

We can all look back at the wonderful decision that was made to send more troops to Korea. If we had not, we could have been bogged down in a quagmire there that would have required 50 plus years of American lives, involvement and money. What a wonderful decision it was to send more troops to Vietnam. If we had not, we could have lost over 58,000 soldier's lives; killed millions of Vietnamese soldiers and civilians and been forced to flee the country with our tails between our legs, deserting our allies to the horrors of communist retribution. Good thing our wonderful leaders had the wisdom and courage to send "more troops." Now we are forced with the same dilemma; send more troops or face military defeat.

The question is: why are we in Afghanistan in the first place? Now that time has erased the emotions of retaliation for the events of 9/11 and our country elected a new leader who campaigned on the principle of bringing an end to our involvement in these costly wars, why the call for more troops? Could it be we are again simply following the dictates of the power cabal as Major General Smedley Darlington Butler so eloquently outlined in his outstanding work, War is a Racket?

Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of our quest for empire over the past six decades realizes that Obama’s contemplation of whether to send additional troops to Afghanistan is simply those who control him providing Obama with the opportunity to look "presidential." The decision to send additional troops was reached prior to the situational comedy of General McChrystal’s leaked "confidential report" to the Washington Post and Obama’s National Security Advisor’s public admonishment of McChrystal’s failure to follow the chain of command. All of this is nothing but a well-rehearsed, though poorly camouflaged hoax. Additional troops will be sent to Afghanistan within a very short period of time and Obama really has no say in the matter. The question is: why?


Could it be the US-installed puppet government in Afghanistan has new suitors who represent a very real threat to the United State’s control of Afghanistan and her abundant natural resources? Is the entry of Russia and Chinese influence into Afghanistan the real reason for the need for more troops? Russia reportedly made its entry back in 2007 with the reopening of its embassy in Kabul. The Soviet Foreign Minister, Sergei Ivanov, met privately with President Karzai and offered military assistance through the Collective Security Treaty Organization. (CSTO) The CSTO is made up of Russia, Belarus, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. Russia is the driving force in this organization, as one might understand, due to the economic and military weakness of the other members. There were meetings with CSTO delegation in Kabul and neither the US nor the UK were invited. Were the US/UK coalition (NATO) allowed to solidify its position in Afghanistan, it would create a territorial split between Russia, China and Iran. Russia will do whatever is necessary to prevent this growth of power and influence in the region, I believe.

Moscow is certainly concerned with the Pentagon’s plan to deploy Special Operations forces into the Central Asian States to conduct "foreign internal defense missions." This translates into increasing military activity, which is better known as the "spreading of democracy," by military force.

NATO, following the CFR-introduced agenda, is campaigning for increased cooperation with Moscow in the region to "facilitate the fading of Russia’s lingering imperial ambitions." These are the words of Zbigniew Brzezinski, author of the NATO report. Surely, Putin will see through this smokescreen.

Russia has also cancelled all of Afghanistan’s Soviet-era debts and is moving to help Kabul rebuild the Afghan infrastructure. The increase of trade between Afghanistan and Russia, which was at the $190 million mark in 2008, is also a move to create a vision of Russia as an ally to the people of Afghanistan with the US and NATO appearing as the foreign invader.

What has prompted the governments in Moscow and Beijing to converge with the forces of NATO in Afghanistan? Is it purely a protectionist strategy or are those governments there for the same reason we initiated the war in 2001: an abundance of natural resources?

China has made its moves to secure as many of the natural resources located in Afghanistan as it can. Almost one year ago, in November of 2008, China, acting through the China Metallurgical Group Corporation and the Jiangxi Copper Company, secured the Aynak Copper Mine in Logar Province. This copper mine is reported to be the largest in the world and has been basically inoperative since the Soviet Invasion in 1979. China has agreed to a 2.9-billion dollar investment in the infrastructure of the area including a power plant and possible railroad into Pakistan. If I were an Afghan citizen, whom would I support in my country, a nation that is actually contributing to a better life or one that is indiscriminately bombing my fellow citizens?

Now, when it appears our puppet Karzai may have been influenced by a better offer from Russia, China, or both, the Obama administration, strongly supported by the neocons, is seeking to perhaps replace Karzai with a new election, suddenly proclaiming the election the US just supervised to have been corrupt. Members of both political/criminal parties now openly support the war in Afghanistan as being necessary to our national defense, with the question being, not, do we send more troops to Afghanistan to bleed and die for oil and minerals, but how many? I’m sure our influence in NATO will bring about the necessary conclusions in order to facilitate our attempt to replace our own political puppet. Karzai has obviously jumped the traces of US control by participating in meetings outside of the US political purview with China, Russia and even in this agreement, which included Iran and Pakistan. The construction of this pipeline was due to start last month. Russia and China see this new pipeline as crucial to their retention of power in the region and will make the necessary military movements to insure their investments.

Financially crippled due to our continued wars for empire and the printing of billions of new dollars to repay political cronies in the financial world has left us in a precarious position in Afghanistan. We will try to counter the financial prowess of China, to whom we owe billions and their military ties to Russia with the blood and lives of tens of thousands of new US military forces. When China calls in our financial markers, and they will if challenged, what will become of our country? We are about to escalate a war we cannot win. How long will it be before Americans care more for the lives of their children than they do for the state and refuse to participate in the madness?


October 20, 2009

Michael Gaddy, an Army veteran of Vietnam, Grenada, and Beirut, lives in the Four Corners area of the American Southwest.

Copyright © 2009 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Limited Government an Oxymoron?

Thomas E. Woods, Jr.of the Ludwig von Mises Institute and Doug Casey of "The Casey Report" discuss the credit crisis, free markets and limited government with Dennis McCuistion.

Free Market Health Care

Minnesota Free Market Institute Senior Policy Fellow Craig Westover discusses what free market health care would look like. It is not what we have now.

Think About the Power! Terrorists are Everywhere!

Here is one of the latest propaganda pieces, from LA, to incite fear and encourage spying on your neighbors.



And here is another version, this time from Colorado, on the "Eight Signs of Terrorism". According to this video, asking questions, taking pictures, heck even getting a job could be a sign of terrorism.



The likelihood of anyone being killed or injured in a terrorist incident is next to none. The likelihood of anyone suffering under an all too powerful government is almost guaranteed.

Whole Foods' Health Care

Reason TV covers the health care plan provided to its employees by Whole Foods. The plan puts the employee more in charge of their own health care. Not surprisingly many employees like the plan and it saves money too.

From Reason TV:

In August, Whole Foods CEO John Mackey argued in the pages of the Wall Street Journal that the solution to America's health care crisis was to be found in "less government control and more individual empowerment."

His own company's unique health care plan, Mackey wrote, covers 90 percent of employees, costs less than health insurance plans, and provides a "very high degree of worker satisfaction."

But for the sin of not supporting a government take over of health care, labor unions and left-wing activists called for a boycott of Whole Foods, claiming that Mackey's solutions were unworkable and his employees were unhappy.

Reason.tv talked to protesters, Mackey, and employees about "the Whole Foods alternative to ObamaCare."

More on Medicinal Marijuana

The Liberty Cafe Show talks to some people working to pass a medical marijuana law in Florida.




From the Liberty Cafe:

The medicinal properties of cannabis, or marijuana, are widely misunderstood. This is in large part to decades of misinformation and propaganda against the hemp plant itself. More and more research is showing that the THC in marijuana is beneficial in the treatment of many illnesses. Please take the time to learn about the benefits of medical marijuana. Some day it may just be you or your loved one that would benefit from the many healing properties found in THC. Don't you deserve to make the choice for yourself?

Some of my reference sites:

Marijuana Policy Project

Drug War Facts

The American Medical Marijuana Association

NORML

Americans for Safe Access

The American Alliance for Medical Cannabis

Just some of the illnesses treated by Medical Marijuana:

Cancer, Parkinson's, Huntington's Disease, Alzheimer's, Multiple Sclerosis, AIDS, chronic pain, glaucoma, hepatitis C, rheumatoid arthritis, HIV, epilepsy, Crohn's disease, anorexia, nail patella, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig's Disease), chronic nervous system disorders, cachexia or wasting syndrome, chronic or intractable pain, severe nausea, seizures, severe or persistent muscle spasms, diabetes mellitus, dystonia, fibromyalgia, gastrointestinal disorders, gliomas, hypertension, incontinence, MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus), osteoporosis, pruritus, sleep apnea, Tourette's syndrome, migraine headaches, depression, post traumatic stress disorder, attention deficit disorder, bipolar disorder, menstrual cramps and excessive bleeding, diarrhea, tuberculosis, elephantiasis, asthma, hemorrhoids, anemia, rabies, insomnia. (source: PUFMM.org)

Tired of Being Duped by Hot Air Conservatism

Jack Hunter comments on Lindsay Graham's "Hot Air Conservatism" and how the jig may be ending for Graham and all the other big government Republicans. Hunter states that more people are no longer buying the lies from the Republican leadership that talks the talk of limited government, but never walks the walk.

US Base in Okinawa Faces an Uncertain Future

From Al Jazeera:

The US defense secretary Robert Gates is visiting Japan as its new government signals it wants to review military ties with Washington.

While Tokyo says it is committed to the strategic alliance, Japan's newly-elected prime minister has said he wants a "more equal" relationship.

One of the key issues is the future of a major US military base on the island of Okinawa.

Chip In

From Reuters:

DELRAY BEACH, Fla.--(Business Wire)--

VeriChip Corporation ("VeriChip" or the "Company") (NASDAQ:CHIP) today announced that it has selected Raytheon Microelectronics España (operating as "ELCAN Optical Technologies") for the production of the Company's radio frequency identification (RFID) implantable microchips, including its existing VeriChip microchip for patient identification, its new 8 millimeter microchip for use in Medical Components, Inc.'s (Medcomp) vascular access medical devices, and its glucose-sensing RFID microchip currently under development with RECEPTORS, LLC.

Get chipped, remember it's for your own good. What harm could come? I mean nobody would ever use this technology for bad, would they? This technology would never be expanded to trace your every move would it?

Ron Paul Responds To Lindsey Graham

Ron Paul responds to Lindsey Graham.


Part I:



Part II:

Hemp Farmers Arrested For Planting Hemp Seeds

Farmers plant hemp on the lawn of the DEA to protest the ridiculous US law that bans the growing of industrial hemp in the United States. Hemp is not marijuana, it is not a drug, it is an important cash crop in the rest of the world with many valuable uses. It is another innocent victim of the insane war on some drugs in the US.

Video here.

Why Are We Following The Soviet Example?

Texas Congressman Ron Paul comments on the situation in Afghanistan:

Saving Face in Afghanistan

This past week there has been a lot of discussion and debate on the continuing war in Afghanistan. Lasting twice as long as World War II and with no end in sight, the war in Afghanistan has been one of the longest conflicts in which our country has ever been involved. The situation has only gotten worse with recent escalations.

The current debate is focused entirely on the question of troop levels. How many more troops should be sent over in order to pursue the war? The administration has already approved an additional 21,000 American service men and women to be deployed by November, which will increase our troop levels to 68,000. Will another 40,000 do the job? Or should we eventually build up the levels to 100,000 in addition to that? Why not 500,000 – just to be “safe”? And how will public support be brought back around to supporting this war again when 58 percent are now against it?

I get quite annoyed at this very narrow line of questioning. I have other questions. We overthrew the Taliban government in 2001 with less than 10,000 American troops. Why does it now seem that the more troops we send, the worse things get? If the Soviets bankrupted themselves in Afghanistan with troop levels of 100,000 and were eventually forced to leave in humiliating defeat, why are we determined to follow their example? Most importantly, what is there to be gained from all this? We’ve invested billions of dollars and thousands of precious lives – for what?

The truth is it is no coincidence that the more troops we send the worse things get. Things are getting worse precisely because we are sending more troops and escalating the violence. We are hoping that good leadership wins out in Afghanistan, but the pool of potential honest leaders from which to draw have been fleeing the violence, leaving a tremendous power vacuum behind. War does not quell bad leaders. It creates them. And the more war we visit on this country, the more bad leaders we will inadvertently create.

Another thing that war does is create anger with its indiscriminate violence and injustice. How many innocent civilians have been harmed from clumsy bombings and mistakes that end up costing lives? People die from simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time in a war zone, but the killers never face consequences. Imagine the resentment and anger survivors must feel when a family member is killed and nothing is done about it. When there are no other jobs available because all the businesses have fled, what else is there to do, but join ranks with the resistance where there is a paycheck and also an opportunity for revenge? This is no justification for our enemies over there, but we have to accept that when we push people, they will push back.

The real question is why are we there at all? What do our efforts now have to do with the original authorization of the use of force? We are no longer dealing with anything or anyone involved in the attacks of 9/11. At this point we are only strengthening the resolve and the ranks of our enemies. We have nothing left to win. We are only there to save face, and in the end we will not even be able to do that.

Tour A Fallout Shelter

Motorhome Diaries takes a tour of a an elaborate fallout shelter in Montana. I remember in elementary school in the 60's we used to have civil defense drills in case of the bomb. We would hide under our desks. A lot of good that would have done!

From Motorhome Diaries:

Last week we visited Bozeman, Montana to see our friend Rachel Maxam. On our first night there we were introduced to her friend, Brian, who just so happens to own and maintain a working bomb shelter with his family. Brian was kind enough to take us on a very thorough tour of the shelter that was built in the 80's and stocked with food in order to help 300 people survive a nuclear attack. Despite being one of several shelters built at the same time, the one we visited in Paradise Valley is currently the only one being actively maintained.

Realizing Freedom

Tom G. Palmer, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and vice president of international relations at the Atlas Economic Research Foundation discusses his latest book Realizing Freedom: Libertarian Theory, History, and Practice with Reason senior editor Michael C. Moynihan.

Montana Policy Institute

Motorhome Diaries' Pete Eyre interviews Carl Graham of the Montana Policy Institute.




From the Montana Policy Institute:

Who are we?

The Montana Policy Institute is a free market think tank focused on Montana issues and Montana solutions. We are a tax exempt 501c(3) nonprofit corporation dedicated to providing information and ideas to Montana citizens and policymakers. We seek to broaden the debate beyond looking to government for solutions to state challenges, and to make state and local government more accountable to the people they serve. MPI's goal is to become the premier resource for free market, individual freedom educational and informational products. But more importantly, MPI's efforts will result in concrete actions that promote the liberty, prosperity, and quality of life for all Montanans.

What is our mission?

The Montana Policy Institute will equip Montana citizens and decision makers to argue for policies that are based upon a respect for individual freedom, an expectation of individual responsibility, and the notion that government should be the avenue of last rather than first resort.

How do we do it?

MPI gives people tools to argue for individual liberty, smaller government, and freedom of choice when considering state policy options.

We provide research materials and forums that reinforce the value to society of letting individuals consider their unique circumstances, and decide what is best for them.

MPI broadens policy debates beyond the belief that government intervention should be the avenue of first, rather than last resort. Our policy solutions propose that:

•All Institutions have important roles (voluntary, business, community, family, and government)

•All People can contribute through their backgrounds and unique circumstances and goals

•All Disciplines may hold policy solutions (science, economics, ethics, law, history...)

•All Times matter. Long-term consequences are as or more important than short-term impacts

MPI focuses on state issues while collaborating with like-minded state and national organizations. We seek out opportunities to reduce the intrusion of state government mandates while making state government more transparent and accountable.

The Nanny State Versus The Light Bulb

Nick Gillespie of Reason TV comments the upcoming bans on incandescent light bulbs.

From Reason TV:

In September, the European Union banned the sale of 100-watt incandescent light bulbs, with lawbreakers facing up to $70,000 in fines. Over the next few years, bans on lower-wattage bulbs kick in. In the United States, similar legislation comes into play in 2012. The idea is to kick start the market for compact fluorescent lights (CFLs), which use less energy than conventional incandescents. Although CFLs present any number of problems (even beyond a much higher initial cost), governments all over the globe are determined to make them the new standard.

Invented in its modern form by Thomas Edison in 1879, the light bulb became synonymous with a brilliant idea. Now, it seems, it's just one more symbol of a nanny state that increasingly dictates more choices in our public and private lives.

Officer in School Assault Faces Rape Charge and Previously Had Killed a Man

I posted this video a few days ago showing a police officer assaulting a student in school:




More information on the officer involved has come to light. From the Chicago Tribune:

A Dolton cop caught on camera allegedly breaking a 15-year-old special needs student's nose for failing to tuck in his shirt has a troubling history that includes killing a man in a case of disputed self-defense and is now in an Indiana jail on an unrelated rape charge.

Christopher Lloyd, 38, was identified Thursday by his father Charles Lloyd and Dolton Mayor Ronnie Lewis as the officer who in May was recorded by a school security camera scuffling with 15-year-old, 140-pound Marshawn Pitts at the Academy for Learning in Dolton.

An attorney hired by Pitts' parents released the video this week, calling the incident an "unprovoked attack" on a vulnerable child. The video, which has no audio, appears to show the officer slamming Pitts against a locker, wrestling him to the ground and pinning him.

Christopher Lloyd was arrested last month and charged with sexually assaulting a woman he knew at her home in Hammond, his father said.

According to Lake County, Ind., court documents, he held a pillow over the woman's face while sexually assaulting her Sept. 14 and had previously threatened her with a knife.

Lloyd, who's being held in lieu of $110,000 bail, faces up to 20 years behind bars if convicted of rape, criminal deviate conduct, criminal confinement and sexual battery, said Diane Poulton, spokeswoman for Lake County's prosecutor.

A lawsuit filed by his ex-wife, Nicole McKinney, last summer alleges he gunned down her new husband Cornel McKinney in front of their children outside their home on Feb. 17, 2008.

A Robbins police officer at the time, Lloyd was suspended after the shooting but eventually found work with Dolton police in January, his father said.

Though an autopsy shows he shot McKinney 24 times, the lawsuit alleges, he was not charged because Chicago police accepted his explanation that he had acted in self-defense.

Breaking News: Obama Wins Another Award

Reason TV covers breaking news on another award won by President Barack Obama:

Michael Moore Admits That Capitalism Is Not The Problem

From Mike Shanklin:

Michael Moore speaks at George Washington University about his new film "Capitalism: A Love Story". Chad Swarthout, senior at GWU, asks a question about free market economics and the government's role in it, and Moore admits easily that the system we have now is not true capitalism

Apparently, Moore's motivation is "what little optimism he has left" in the very system that he admits is flawed and probably a direct cause of today's economic and political crises.

Moore fails to ever address the original question, so here it is again, Michael, in paraphrase:

Is a free market and a system of private property, which is essentially capitalism, really the problem? Or is it really the fact that we give too much power to the government in which big businesses have a heavy hand in?

Ron Paul's View on the Obama Nobel Peace Prize

Texas Congressman Ron Paul comments on Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize. Paul says that Obama's policy is not pro peace, but he talks better than Bush. Dr. Paul says that Obama has neutralized the anti-war left, even though Obama is carrying on the neocons' war position.

David Brooks is Just Another Neocon

Jack Hunter comment on David Brooks who attempts to portray himself as a conservative, when he is really just another in a long line of neocons.

The Strange Case of the Hardin Montana Prison

A report on the strange case of the empty prison in Hardin Montana. From Motorhome Diaries:

The crew of the Motorhome Diaries exposes the serious errors the government of Hardin, Montana made when it gambled the money of it's taxpayers on the construction of a prison. They wanted to cash in on the lucrative business of sheltering prisoners, regardless of whether there were victims in their so-called crimes. When the State of Montana refused to move prisoners to this never-used jail the town desperately sought to capitalize on the impending closing of Guantanamo Bay and later the offer by the so-called American Police Force. Neither scheme looks like it will work out and the taxpayers still have an empty prison.

At least they have plenty of room for the politicians who steal money from citizens on schemes such as this.

Covert US Operations in Pakistan

The United States is expanding its covert operations under the helm of Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama.

From Russia Today:

Barack Obama receives Nobel Prize as US plans to increase troops in Afghanistan. While in Pakistan, the ever expanding number of American security firms are causing concerns.

Blackwater, known for its controversial tactics in Iraq, is now reportedly working in Pakistan.

Another US-contracted company, InterRisk, were raided last month by Islamabad police.
Priya Sridhar talks on latest developments with RT's contributor Wayne Madsen.

Libertarian Response to President Obama's Nobel Prize

From the Libertarian Party:

Libertarians suggest Nobel announcements should be moved to April Fool's Day

WASHINGTON - The Libertarian Party today suggested that, in the future, the announcement date every year for Nobel Prizes be moved to April 1.

"Unlike the gullible people who listened to The War of the Worlds radio broadcast in 1938 and thought Martians really were attacking the United States, when I heard this morning that Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize, I changed the channel in disbelief. But, the same thing was being said in multiple places," Libertarian National Committee Chairman William Redpath said.

"The gravity of the Nobel awards has not been augmented by some of their recent selections, including today's announcement, last year's award of the Economics prize to Paul Krugman, or the 2007 Peace Prize to Al Gore, whose global warming theories he will not defend in open debate. Maybe an early Springtime announcement date would be more appropriate."

Redpath continued, "I didn't know that it was the role of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee to be handicapping the future performance of individuals and organizations. Nonetheless, we congratulate President Obama on his award and hope that three-and-a-quarter or seven-and-a-quarter years from now the Nobel Peace Prize Committee will be seen as prescient.

"President Obama will best fulfill the promise of peace that the Nobel Committee apparently sees in him by not trying to cure all the ills of the world, but by working to make the United States an example for the other nations of the world through implementation of a Libertarian foreign policy--military non-interventionism combined with free trade policies in fact, and not just in rhetoric. With those guiding principles, the world will be a freer, safer and more prosperous planet at the conclusion of the Obama Administration."

The Warmaker Wins the Nobel Peace Prize

So Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. Hmm.. Let's see he is waging war in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. He has been saber rattling at Iran since before he became President. But he wins a "peace prize" for making a few meaningless political speeches. The Nobel Peace Prize apparently has very low standards.

Phoenix Cop Shoots Homeowner Instead of Intruder

A Phoenix cop in pursuit of a criminal shoots a homeowner in the back six times, with no warning and allegedly the cop and his superior try to cover up the mistake.

From ABC News:

When Tony Arambula managed to corner an armed intruder in his son's bedroom he expected police to come to his aid.

Instead, a Phoenix police officer confused Arambula for the intruder and shot him six times before realizing his mistake, a moment captured on the 911 call with a simple "F**k."

Even after realizing their mistake, Arambula said he was treated roughly, being dragged out of the house and transported briefly on the hood of a police car.

Now Arambula, 35, who survived but faces a lifetime of pain, is suing the city of Phoenix and the officers who responded to his house that night.

The lawsuit, filed in Maricopa County Court, alleges that Phoenix Police Officer Brian Lilly and his on-scene supervisor, Sgt. Sean Coutts, quickly conspired to cover up the mistake, not realizing that 911 was still recording Arambula's call for help.

The Phoenix Use of Force Board cleared the officer of any wrong doing. From the Arizona Republic:

A Phoenix police officer who mistakenly shot an armed homeowner during a search for an intruder was cleared of wrongdoing this week by a committee that reviews such shootings.

The ruling by the Phoenix Use of Force Board determined Officer Brian Lilly acted within police policy in the incident, in which he fired six shots at the homeowner amid the confusion of a home invasion last September.

The shooting hospitalized homeowner Tony Arambula, who earlier this year sought a $5.75 million settlement in the case.

Lilly and Phoenix Sgt. Sean Coutts were named in a lawsuit filed last week in Maricopa County Superior Court.

Arambula, 36, was armed and holding a suspect at bay when he suffered gunshot wounds to his back and arm, according to the complaint.

Arambula claimed Lilly shot him twice as he lay bleeding on the floor of his living room, his wife and two young sons nearby.

The Arambula's have filed a lawsuit against the Phoenix police and the officers involved in the incident. From the Phoenix New Times:

In the new lawsuit filed yesterday in Maricopa County Superior Court, Arambula (via Manning)- alleges that statements made by Lilly after the shooting are contradicted by a recorded 911 phone call, indicating a possible cover-up. A transcript of the call attached to the suit states that Lilly was asked by his supervisor, Sergeant Sean Coutts, whether he knew a gun was "down there."

Lilly reportedly answered, "I don't know. I heard screaming and I fired."

Arambula had been standing with his own handgun in the doorway of his son's room, on the phone with a 911 operator. The intruder, Angel Anastacio Canales, 28, was sitting on the floor. Then the first bullets from Lilly's weapon punched through Arambula's back.

The recording makes it clear Lilly knew he "fucked up," but that a supervisor, Sergeant Sean Coutts, told him, "Don't worry about it. I got your back... We clear?"

A few hours later, Lilly told internal affairs investigators that he fired only after Arambula pointed a gun his direction, the lawsuit states.

Police kept Arambula's wife and kids from visiting Tony at the hospital until after investigators could interview him. The lawsuit also states that police tried to damage Arambula's reputation and deflect blame toward the homeowner. Police visited a gun dealer who had sold Arambula a handgun and allegedly "suggested that Tony may have illegally obtained weapons," the lawsuit says.

So how do you shoot someone in the back if they are pointing a gun at you?

Protecting Us From Orchids

At first glance you might think this is a story from the Onion, but no it is no joke. The government is really conducting SWAT team raids and imprisoning people because they overlooked filing some paperwork on imported orchids. Two years in prison for missing some paperwork?

From the Washington Times:

"You don't need to know. You can't know." That's what Kathy Norris, a 60-year-old grandmother of eight, was told when she tried to ask court officials why, the day before, federal agents had subjected her home to a furious search.

The agents who spent half a day ransacking Mrs. Norris' longtime home in Spring, Texas, answered no questions while they emptied file cabinets, pulled books off shelves, rifled through drawers and closets, and threw the contents on the floor.

The six agents, wearing SWAT gear and carrying weapons, were with - get this- the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Kathy and George Norris lived under the specter of a covert government investigation for almost six months before the government unsealed a secret indictment and revealed why the Fish and Wildlife Service had treated their family home as if it were a training base for suspected terrorists. Orchids.

That's right. Orchids.

By March 2004, federal prosecutors were well on their way to turning 66-year-old retiree George Norris into an inmate in a federal penitentiary - based on his home-based business of cultivating, importing and selling orchids.

Mrs. Norris testified before the House Judiciary subcommittee on crime this summer. The hearing's topic: the rapid and dangerous expansion of federal criminal law, an expansion that is often unprincipled and highly partisan.

Chairman Robert C. Scott, Virginia Democrat, and ranking member Louie Gohmert, Texas Republican, conducted a truly bipartisan hearing (a D.C. rarity this year).

These two leaders have begun giving voice to the increasing number of experts who worry about "overcriminalization." Astronomical numbers of federal criminal laws lack specifics, can apply to almost anyone and fail to protect innocents by requiring substantial proof that an accused person acted with actual criminal intent.

Mr. Norris ended up spending almost two years in prison because he didn't have the proper paperwork for some of the many orchids he imported. The orchids were all legal - but Mr. Norris and the overseas shippers who had packaged the flowers had failed to properly navigate the many, often irrational, paperwork requirements the U.S. imposed when it implemented an arcane international treaty's new restrictions on trade in flowers and other flora.

Protecting Us From Untucked Shirts

Another example of a cop who abuses authority. From Dolton, Illinois:

15-year-old Marshawn Pitts was brutally beaten by a Dolton police officer, because his shirt wasn't tucked in. Pitts was a student at the Academy for Learning High School in Dolton, which claims to be a school for children with learning disabilities. In this video, the officer, whose name has not been released, is seen slamming Pitts into lockers, and then slamming him facedown on the floor. The officer then puts the 15-year-old boy into a dangerous chokehold. When all was said and done, Pitts had a busted lip and a broken nose. Pitts is now suing the school and the Dolton Police Department.

US to Become an Economic Wasteland?

This interview was recorded back in August before Peter Schiff officially announced his candidacy for Chris Dodd's Senate seat.

From Reason TV:

Peter Schiff, president of the brokerage firm Euro Pacific Capital, has become famous as the man who accurately predicted the housing and financial collapses of 2008. Now he wants to become famous for being the Ron Paul-type outsider (complete with moneybombs!) who unseats longtime Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd.


Schiff, co-author of the forthcoming Crash Proof 2.0: How to Profit From the Economic Collapse, is among the most prominent adherents to the Austrian School of economics, with its emphasis on sound money and limited government. In this Reason.tv interview with Reason Editor in Chief Matt Welch, shot at FreedomFest in Las Vegas just days after Schiff announced the formation of his exploratory committee, the potential politician warns that the U.S. is headed toward Zimbabwe-like hyperinflation unless Washington changes course.

Dollar Hegemony Is Over

Gerald Celente comments on the end of dollar hegemony.

From Russia Today:

The Independent newspaper has reported that Middle Eastern countries along with Russia, Japan, China and France are holding secret meetings to end oil trading using the dollar. So what does this mean for the American dollar and the future of the global economy?

Largest Mass Execution in US History

Pete Eyre gives an overview of the Minnesota Sioux Massacre.

From Motorhome Diaries:

When in Mankato, MN the Motorhome Diaries crew shot a video about the largest mass execution in U.S. history - the result of a conflict that flared up in 1862 between the U.S. government and the Dakota Indians. In this video MHD's Pete Eyre gives an overview of the background that set the stage for this event and shared a few of his thoughts in an attempt to uncover how such an event can be prevented/mitigated in the future.

Young Americans Are Disillusioned With The Two Party System

Russia Today's Priya Sridhar reports on young Americans who have had it with the two party system:

Partisan politics has always created a lot of drama in the United States and many people say it's also prevented a lot of things from being accomplished in Washington. So now more than ever young Americans are becoming disillusioned by the two party system in this country and saying it's time for some real change when it comes to politics. One of the movements that's picked up quite a following is the Libertarian Party.

Iraq War Veteran Adam Kokesh Talks with Michael Maresco

Iraq War veteran and member of Iraq Veterans Against the War, Adam Kokesh talks about his campaign for Congress with his Campaign Volunteer Recruiter Michael Maresco.




About Adam:

While Adam was attending the Native American Preparatory School in San Ysidro, New Mexico, one of his mentors was a former Marine Captain who inspired him to enlist in the United States Marine Corps at the age of seventeen. After graduation, he went to boot camp, an experience he has described as an enjoyable challenge. He completed Marine Combat Training at Camp Pendleton, the Cannon Crewman Course at Fort Sill, then reported to his reserve unit in Pico Rivera, California in order to attend Claremont McKenna College.

While majoring in Psychology and Government at CMC, Adam volunteered to go to Iraq in December of 2003. As a principled non-interventionist, he didn't think the war was going to be worth the cost or in America's best interest, but believed that after the invasion, rebuilding constituted a responsible foreign policy. After an arduous application process, Corporal Kokesh was accepted for transfer to the 3rd Civil Affairs Group. When he left for Iraq in February of 2004, he was enthusiastic about the mission, and believed that he would be risking his life to help the Iraqi people and make America safer.

During his service in Fallujah, Adam was promoted to Sergeant and awarded a Combat Action Ribbon and Navy Commendation Medal. But his frustration with getting the resources necessary for the Civil Affairs mission led him to question the premises of the occupation. After coming home and successfully dealing with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), Adam took some time to gain perspective on his experience. He realized that, the greatest enemies of the Constitution to which I swore an oath to support and defend, are not to be found in the sands of some far off land, but rather occupying the seats of power, right here at home!

After receiving an honorable discharge in November of 2006, Adam moved to Washington, DC to pursue a master's degree in Political Management at George Washington University. Since then, he has taken it upon himself as an activist to continue to honor his oath to the Constitution and the principles of liberty behind it.

Adam is personally committed to using his life to make the world a better place. By speaking out, he is pulling people out of their bubbles where, they don't consider things that don't immediately effect their quality of life or the moral implications of their actions. Driven by a deep intolerance for injustice, Adam has also done extensive work to alleviate, minimize, and prevent the human suffering that inevitably arises from forceful government intervention.

In addition to addressing the kind of suffering he experienced first-hand in Fallujah, he has organized to help veterans struggling with PTSD, railed against 4th Amendment violations, and stood up against the Federal Reserve. He never loses sight of the long-term goal of inspiring a new commitment to the ideals of liberty so that we may embrace a truly free society in which the aggressive use of force is not tolerated, and the blessings of liberty are shared by all.

Did Mossad Hijack the Arctic Sea?

Was the Israeli spy agency Mossad involved in the hijacking of the Russian cargo ship the Arctic Sea? Russia Today's Dina Gusovsky interviews investigative journalist Wayne Madsen.

From Russia Today:

So many questions arose several weeks ago after Israel's PM Benjamin Netenyahu apparently went missing because he was having a secret meeting in Russia with President Dmitry Medvedev. But what exactly did they discuss and why were these talks so urgent? RT contributor and investigative journalist Wayne Madsen says the purpose of his trip was to arrange for the release of Mossad commandos apparently involved in the hijacking of the ship the Arctic Sea.

A Foreign Policy of Bribing and Bombing Other Nations

Texas Congressman Ron Paul comments on our disastrous foreign policy:

Bombs and Bribes

What if tomorrow morning you woke up to headlines that yet another Chinese drone bombing on US soil killed several dozen ranchers in a rural community while they were sleeping? That a drone aircraft had come across the Canadian border in the middle of the night and carried out the latest of many attacks? What if it was claimed that many of the victims harbored anti-Chinese sentiments, but most of the dead were innocent women and children? And what if the Chinese administration, in an effort to improve its public image in the US, had approved an aid package to send funds to help with American roads and schools and promote Chinese values here?

Most Americans would not stand for it. Yet the above hypothetical events are similar to what our government is doing in Pakistan. Last week, Congress did approve an aid package for Pakistan for the stated purposes of improving our image and promoting democracy. I again made the point on the floor of the House that still no one seems to hear: What if this happened on US soil? What if innocent Americans were being killed in repeated drone attacks carried out by some foreign force who was trying to fix our problems for us? Would sending money help their image? If another nation committed this type of violence and destruction on our homeland, would we be at all interested in adopting their values?

Sadly, one thing that has entirely escaped modern American foreign policy is empathy. Without much humility or regard for human life, our foreign policy has been reduced to alternately bribing and bombing other nations, all with the stated goal of “promoting democracy”. But if a country democratically elects a leader who is not sufficiently pro-American, our government will refuse to recognize them, will impose sanctions on them, and will possibly even support covert efforts to remove them. Democracy is obviously not what we are interested in. It is more likely that our government is interested in imposing its will on other governments. This policy of endless intervention in the affairs of others is very damaging to American liberty and security.

If we were really interested in democracy, peace, prosperity and safety, we would pursue more free trade with other countries. Free and abundant trade is much more conducive to peace because it is generally bad business to kill your customers. When one’s livelihood is on the line, and the business agreements are mutually beneficial, it is in everyone’s best interests to maintain cooperative and friendly relations and not kill each other. But instead, to force other countries to bend to our will, we impose trade barriers and sanctions. If our government really wanted to promote freedom, Americans would be free to travel and trade with whoever they wished. And, if we would simply look at our own policies around the world through the eyes of others, we would understand how these actions make us more targeted and therefore less safe from terrorism. The only answer is get back to free trade with all and entangling alliances with none. It is our bombs and sanctions and condescending aid packages that isolate us.

Motorhome Diaries Visits the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

Motorhome Diaries stopped at the headquarters of the Foundation for Economic Education. Wayne Olson, current chairman of Foundation for Economic Education's Board of the Trustees details the founding, mission, strategy and tactics utilized by Foundation for Economic Education to spread the ideas of liberty.

Things You Should Know About Iran

By way of Jack Hunter here is a list of things Americans should know about Iran by Juan Cole of the Global Americana Institute:

Belief: Iran is aggressive and has threatened to attack Israel, its neighbors or the US.

Reality: Iran has not launched an aggressive war in modern history (unlike the US or Israel), and its leaders have a doctrine of “no first strike.” This is true of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, as well as of Revolutionary Guards commanders.

Belief: Iran is a militarized society bristling with dangerous weapons and a growing threat to world peace.

Reality: Iran’s military budget is a little over $6 billion annually. Sweden, Singapore and Greece all have larger military budgets. Moreover, Iran is a country of 70 million, so that its per capita spending on defense is tiny compared to these others, since they are much smaller countries with regard to population. Iran spends less per capita on its military than any other country in the Persian Gulf region with the exception of the United Arab Emirates.

Belief: Iran has threatened to attack Israel militarily and to “wipe it off the map.”

Reality: No Iranian leader in the executive has threatened an aggressive act of war on Israel, since this would contradict the doctrine of ‘no first strike’ to which the country has adhered. The Iranian president has explicitly said that Iran is not a threat to any country, including Israel.

Belief: But didn’t President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threaten to ‘wipe Israel off the map?’

Reality: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did quote Ayatollah Khomeini to the effect that “this Occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time” (in rezhim-e eshghalgar-i Qods bayad as safheh-e ruzgar mahv shavad). This was not a pledge to roll tanks and invade or to launch missiles, however. It is the expression of a hope that the regime will collapse, just as the Soviet Union did. It is not a threat to kill anyone at all.

Belief: But aren’t Iranians Holocaust deniers?

Actuality: Some are, some aren’t. Former president Mohammad Khatami has castigated Ahmadinejad for questioning the full extent of the Holocaust, which he called “the crime of Nazism.” Many educated Iranians in the regime are perfectly aware of the horrors of the Holocaust. In any case, despite what propagandists imply, neither Holocaust denial (as wicked as that is) nor calling Israel names is the same thing as pledging to attack it militarily.

Belief: Iran is like North Korea in having an active nuclear weapons program, and is the same sort of threat to the world.

Actuality: Iran has a nuclear enrichment site at Natanz near Isfahan where it says it is trying to produce fuel for future civilian nuclear reactors to generate electricity. All Iranian leaders deny that this site is for weapons production, and the International Atomic Energy Agency has repeatedly inspected it and found no weapons program. Iran is not being completely transparent, generating some doubts, but all the evidence the IAEA and the CIA can gather points to there not being a weapons program. The 2007 National Intelligence Estimate by 16 US intelligence agencies, including the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency, assessed with fair confidence that Iran has no nuclear weapons research program. This assessment was based on debriefings of defecting nuclear scientists, as well as on the documents they brought out, in addition to US signals intelligence from Iran. While Germany, Israel and recently the UK intelligence is more suspicious of Iranian intentions, all of them were badly wrong about Iraq’s alleged Weapons of Mass Destruction and Germany in particular was taken in by Curveball, a drunk Iraqi braggart.

Belief: The West recently discovered a secret Iranian nuclear weapons plant in a mountain near Qom.

Actuality: Iran announced Monday a week ago to the International Atomic Energy Agency that it had begun work on a second, civilian nuclear enrichment facility near Qom. There are no nuclear materials at the site and it has not gone hot, so technically Iran is not in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, though it did break its word to the IAEA that it would immediately inform the UN of any work on a new facility. Iran has pledged to allow the site to be inspected regularly by the IAEA, and if it honors the pledge, as it largely has at the Natanz plant, then Iran cannot produce nuclear weapons at the site, since that would be detected by the inspectors. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton admitted on Sunday that Iran could not produce nuclear weapons at Natanz precisely because it is being inspected. Yet American hawks have repeatedly demanded a strike on Natanz.

Belief: The world should sanction Iran not only because of its nuclear enrichment research program but also because the current regime stole June’s presidential election and brutally repressed the subsequent demonstrations.

Actuality: Iran’s reform movement is dead set against increased sanctions on Iran, which likely would not affect the regime, and would harm ordinary Iranians.

Belief: Isn’t the Iranian regime irrational and crazed, so that a doctrine of mutally assured destruction just would not work with them?

Actuality: Iranian politicians are rational actors. If they were madmen, why haven’t they invaded any of their neighbors? Saddam Hussein of Iraq invaded both Iran and Kuwait. Israel invaded its neighbors more than once. In contrast, Iran has not started any wars. Demonizing people by calling them unbalanced is an old propaganda trick. The US elite was once unalterably opposed to China having nuclear science because they believed the Chinese are intrinsically irrational. This kind of talk is a form of racism.

Belief: The international community would not have put sanctions on Iran, and would not be so worried, if it were not a gathering nuclear threat.

Actuality: The centrifuge technology that Iran is using to enrich uranium is open-ended. In the old days, you could tell which countries might want a nuclear bomb by whether they were building light water reactors (unsuitable for bomb-making) or heavy-water reactors (could be used to make a bomb). But with centrifuges, once you can enrich to 5% to fuel a civilian reactor, you could theoretically feed the material back through many times and enrich to 90% for a bomb. However, as long as centrifuge plants are being actively inspected, they cannot be used to make a bomb. The two danger signals would be if Iran threw out the inspectors or if it found a way to create a secret facility. The latter task would be extremely difficult, however, as demonstrated by the CIA’s discovery of the Qom facility construction in 2006 from satellite photos. Nuclear installations, especially centrifuge ones, consume a great deal of water, construction materiel, and so forth, so that constructing one in secret is a tall order. In any case, you can’t attack and destroy a country because you have an intuition that they might be doing something illegal. You need some kind of proof. Moreover, Israel, Pakistan and India are all much worse citizens of the globe than Iran, since they refused to sign the NPT and then went for broke to get a bomb; and nothing at all has been done to any of them by the UNSC."

Cracking the Education Monopoly in Los Angeles

A policy to allow students in some of Los Angeles' worst schools to choose to go to a charter school comes up for a vote. No surprise, the teachers' union opposes this very small move toward educational choice:

From Reason TV:

In "Unlocked," Reason.tv told the story of the successful fight to transform Locke High, one of Los Angeles most notorious public high schools, into a charter school.

Charters are public schools, often run by private nonprofit organizations, that give students an alternative to traditional schools and principals and teachers more local control over how campuses are run. The transformation of Locke High, completed over objections from the teachers union, marked the first time an existing school in the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) was turned into a charter school.

On August 25, 2009, the LAUSD took another major step toward cracking the public school monopoly in the nation's second-largest school district.

Thousands gathered in downtown Los Angeles to sound off on a revolutionary school choice resolution put before the school board. Parents donning My child, My choice t-shirts faced off against union members and others who opposed the resolution, which would give students in some of LA's worst schools the choice to attend charter schools. In the end, the resolution passed by a six-to-one vote. Now, roughly 250 of LAUSDs 800 traditional public schools are eligible to become charters.

"Cracking the Education Monopoly" is produced by Ted Balaker and Hawk Jensen, who also narrates. Nathan Chaffetz field produced.