tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-130290032024-03-23T13:23:35.442-05:00BabblogThe Blog of James Babb. Libertarian perspectives on Pennsylvania and national politics.
jamesbabb@mac.com, http://www.jamesbabb.comJames Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.comBlogger199125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-3619211401497648412008-07-17T12:43:00.001-05:002008-07-17T12:43:57.400-05:00It Is Good for One To Be Free by Charles GoyetteIt is good for one to be free, and we would cherish liberty even if she traveled alone, but she does not. Because Prosperity and Peace are both the companions of Liberty.War, the spirit of destruction, is the destroyer of Prosperity and Liberty. Should any wonder, then, that Americans are losing both their freedom and their well-being?<br/><br/><a href='http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig5/goyette3.html'>read more</a> | <a href='http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/It_Is_Good_for_One_To_Be_Free_by_Charles_Goyette_2'>digg story</a>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-70523549739271896342008-05-08T14:30:00.004-05:002008-05-08T14:46:06.672-05:00"Everyday Anarchy"Here is a new pocket book from Stefan Molyneux. You can read the PDF or listen to the audiobook version.<br /><span style="font-style:italic;"><br />A philosophical examination of our ambivalence towards spontaneous order, political compulsion and the liberty of the everyday...</span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.lulu.com/items/volume_63/2488000/2488026/1/preview/detail_2488026.jpg"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://www.lulu.com/items/volume_63/2488000/2488026/1/preview/detail_2488026.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />This book is a must read (or listen) for anyone frustrated with the government.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.box.net/shared/static/mh7t3nzpc8.mp3">High Quality Audio</a><br /><a href="http://www.box.net/shared/static/deaehfq8go.mp3">Low Quality Audio</a><br /><a href="http://www.box.net/shared/static/bic2do4ws8.pdf">PDF</a><br /><br />Check out other books, videos and a great podcast <a href="http://www.freedomainradio.com">here</a>.James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-91301781141454778922008-04-14T22:37:00.002-05:002008-04-14T22:53:32.828-05:00Take Your Money Back<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.blogger.com/video.g?token=AD6v5dylpi1FSPcOIeGE8DmAVoo896kDNqFX9TZ8KWHXByHSQnlO21ZH-ICaTmtlmQH_BrnCdnEVvHttBJA' class='b-hbp-video b-uploaded' frameborder='0'></iframe>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-11217669508332541002008-03-26T12:20:00.003-05:002008-03-26T12:26:02.450-05:00Ruwart interview on Libertarian AlternativeDr. Mary Ruwart is seeking the Libertarian Party's nomination for President. Here is a video interview from 2004.<br /><br />For more information about her campaign visit: <a href="http://www.votemary2008.com">www.votemary2008.com</a>.<br /><br /><embed style="width:400px; height:326px;" id="VideoPlayback" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=-5551304134750964274&hl=en-CA" flashvars=""> </embed>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-74964119883348663162008-03-25T11:37:00.003-05:002008-03-25T11:54:18.351-05:00Killing and Dying in Iraq for Nothingby Jacob G. Hornberger<br /><br />At the five-year anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, the U.S. government has hit another milestone — 4,000 U.S. soldiers dead.<br /><br />And what have those soldiers died for? They died for the same thing that 58,000 soldiers died for in Vietnam — nothing.<br /><br />Well, okay, not exactly nothing:<br /><br />(1) They died to oust a dictator from office that U.S. officials didn’t like, only to be replaced by a radical Islamic regime that has aligned itself with Iran, which U.S. officials are still considering starting a war against.<br /><br />(2) They died because U.S. officials need to save face through some sort of “victory” (whatever that means) despite the fact that the U.S. government has no legal or moral right to be in Iraq.<br /><br />(3) They died in the destruction of an entire country, one whose government and citizenry had never attacked the United States and which, in fact, did not want a war with the United States.<br /><br />(4) They died as part of an imperial adventure that has sent the U.S. economy into a tailspin, led by a dollar whose value, not surprisingly, continues to plunge in international markets.<br /><br />At least we know the exact number of U.S. soldiers who have died in Iraq. Early on, the Pentagon decided that Iraqis killed in the war simply would not be counted. That’s why there are only estimates of Iraqi dead, estimates that go as high as a million. The idea was that since the goal of helping the Iraqi people was considered a noble one, no one should really care how many of them died in the operation. In the minds of U.S. officials, no price was too high in the number of Iraqi deaths to achieve their goal.<br /><br />In a fascinating use of language, U.S. military officials are still referring to the Iraqis they kill as “terrorists” rather than as “insurgents.” For example, according to a front-page article in today’s New York Times, “American forces on Sunday reported killing ‘12 terrorists’ who had attacked ground troops east of Baquba.”<br /><br />But what U.S. officials never explain is why a person who is fighting to rid his country of an illegal foreign occupier (a war of aggression was punished as a war crime at Nuremberg) is a “terrorist.” I thought that a terrorist was a person who attacked civilian targets for political ends. Since U.S. occupation forces in Iraq are military personnel, not civilians, why are those Iraqis who are trying to oust the occupiers considered “terrorists?”<br /><br />As the occupation of Iraq continues indefinitely, there will of course be more deaths, American and Iraqi. According to yesterday’s Washington Post, at least American widows or widowers receive half-a-million U.S. dollars for the loss of their spouses. While the U.S. government sometimes makes nominal payments to Iraqis, mostly Iraqis survivors are left with nothing but anger, resentment, and grief, which shouldn’t surprise anyone, especially since no one asked their consent to the U.S. invasion and occupation of their country.<br /><br />Jacob Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. Send him <a href="mailto:jhornberger@fff.org">email</a>. <br /><br /><a href="http://digg.com/political_opinion/Killing_and_Dying_in_Iraq_for_Nothing">digg story</a>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-74154029030413844102008-02-27T15:20:00.004-05:002008-02-27T16:14:28.244-05:00Are Cubans Freer than Americans?by Jacob G. Hornberger<br /><br />The U.S. government’s policy toward Cuba is a textbook example of the malevolence and hypocrisy of U.S. foreign policy.<br /><br />In the wake of Fidel Castro’s resignation as Cuba’s president, U.S. officials, led by President Bush and members of Congress, appear all too ready to have the U.S. government “help” the Cuban people achieve democracy and freedom.<br /><br />Now, doesn’t that notion suggest a love and concern for the welfare of the Cuban people?<br /><br />Yet, look at the cruel, inhumane, and brutal economic embargo that the U.S. government has enforced against Cuba for decades. Year after year, U.S. officials have steadfastly enforced the embargo with the full knowledge of the horrific adverse effects it was having on the Cuban people. U.S. officials simply blamed the economic misery on Castro’s socialism, even while Castro blamed it on the embargo. The truth is that the Cuban people have been squeezed by both sides of the vise — Castro’s socialism and the U.S. embargo.<br /><br />In calling for a change in direction in Cuba, U.S. officials suggest that Castro’s communist, totalitarian regime is a miserable place in which to live. That’s certainly true. But then what do U.S. officials do to people who escape Cuba? They attack them on the high seas with such weapons as water cannons, then they kidnap them, then they cooperate with Cuban communist coast guard officials, and then they repatriate the defenseless refugees back into the communist society that U.S. officials say is a miserable place in which to live.<br /><br />Meanwhile, both Republicans and Democrats continue to tell us that sacrificing 60,000 American men in the Vietnam War was worth it to try to prevent the South Vietnamese from having to live under communist tyranny. Now, they say that it’s worth it to use U.S. force to repatriate people into communist tyranny in Cuba.<br /><br />Oh, did I mention that there is no U.S. embargo against Vietnam today and that Americans are free to travel to Vietnam and trade with the Vietnamese communists?<br /><br />U.S. officials, both Republican and Democrat, usually limit their criticisms to Castro’s political system rather than his socialist economic and educational systems.<br /><br />Why is that?<br /><br />The answer is simple: Castro’s economic and educational systems are no different, in principle, than those embraced by Republicans and Democrats. That makes them very uncomfortable because they’ve always felt that while Castro is a Cuban socialist, Republicans and Democrats have always been “American free-enterprisers.”<br /><br />Consider the core element of Castro’s economic system: free, universal health care. Sound familiar? Isn’t that what Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama want? And the Republicans aren’t much better. Don’t they continue to be proud supporters of Medicare and Medicaid and don’t they have their own plans for more federal intervention into health care?<br /><br />Consider the core element of Castro’s educational system: free public schooling for Cuban children. Can you show me even one U.S. official, either Republican or Democrat, who opposes free public schooling for American children?<br /><br />Consider the secondary elements of Castro’s economic system: licensing for businesses, income taxation, equalization of wealth, drug laws, economic regulations, old-age retirement assistance, subsidies, a central bank, and government-issued paper money.<br /><br />How many U.S. officials, either Republican or Democrat, oppose any of those programs here in the United States?<br /><br />Consider these features of Castro’s legal system: kangaroo military tribunals, condemnation of independent criminal-defense attorneys, denigration of an independent judiciary, torture, denial of due process, arbitrary arrests, no restrictions on search and seizure, and indefinite incarceration. Why, those principles are a dream-come-true for U.S. officials, especially the Republican ones. Why would it surprise anyone that they established their torture camp in Cuba rather than the United States?<br /><br />Americans view the embargo against Cuba only as an attack on the well-being of the Cuban people, but it is much more than that. It is also an attack on the freedom of the American people. If an American travels to Cuba and spends money there without the permission of U.S. officials, he will be criminally and civilly prosecuted by his own government. Doesn’t freedom entail the fundamental right to travel wherever you want and spend your money in any way you want?<br /><br />While Cubans understand that the economic and educational systems under which they live are socialism, Americans honestly believe that their economic and educational systems, albeit the same, are “free enterprise.”<br /><br />Given Goethe’s pithy observation, “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believed they are free,” one cannot help but wonder whether the Cuban people, despite their misery and suffering, are actually freer than Americans.<br /><span style="font-style:italic;"><br />Jacob Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. Send him <a href="mailto:jhornberger@fff.org">email</a>.</span>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-49869095865987156762008-02-24T22:19:00.001-05:002008-02-24T22:22:32.701-05:00Ron Paul Music Video by Aimee Allen<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/R3b8zAdkV3Q&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/R3b8zAdkV3Q&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-14232502017455679532008-02-11T12:17:00.000-05:002008-02-11T12:18:26.428-05:00McCain: The downfall of the GOP<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3gwqEneBKUs&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3gwqEneBKUs&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-74479217868935178382008-02-02T05:17:00.001-05:002008-02-02T05:17:28.956-05:00Electing Our DictatorThe debate between Obama and Clinton over Iraq, along with the positions on Iraq taken by the Republican presidential candidates (except for Ron Paul) reflect what the presidential race is all about. It might not be politic to say so but the fact is that what Americans will be electing in November is not just a president but also a dictator<br/><br/><a href='http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2008-02-01.asp'>read more</a> | <a href='http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Electing_Our_Dictator'>digg story</a>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-15511885932818311382008-02-01T10:46:00.001-05:002008-02-01T10:51:23.054-05:00Ron Paul QuotesRon Paul Quotes from RonPaulBlogs.com<div><br />“We can achieve much more in peace than we can ever achieve in these needless, unconstitutional, undeclared wars.”<br /><br />“Don’t we know if we sacrifice security for liberty we lose both, that’s what is happening in this country today!”<div><br />“If you look at every problem we’re facing today its because for the lack of rule of law and the constitution.”</div><div><br />“We live way beyond our means, with a foreign policy we can’t afford and an entitlement system that we have encouraged.”</div><div><br />“With politicians like these, who needs terrorists?”</div><div><br />“NO! I’m saying that we should take our marching orders from our Constitution!”</div><div><br />“…[the neo-cons] said we’d be in-and-out in 3 months, it’d be ducksoup, and it wouldn’t cost a thing because the oil would pay for it.”</div><div><br />“When we make a mistake, it is up to the people through their representatives to correct the mistake, not continue the mistake.”</div><div><br />“We stood up to the Soviets when they had 40,000 nuclear weapons, and now we’re fretting about third-world countries with no Army, Navy, or Air Force, and we’re getting ready to go to war.”</div><div><br />“They don’t attack us because we are rich or free but becuase we have been over there.”</div><div><br />“I am just absolutely convinced that the best formula for giving us peace and preserving the American way of life is freedom, limited government, and minding our own business overseas.”</div><div><br />“When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads.”</div><div><br />“The freedom message unites us all, it does not divide us.”</div><div><br />“I am an imperfect messenger, but the message is perfect.”</div><div><br />“There’s a risk I could win.”</div><div><br />“Terrorism is a tactic. You can’t have a war on a tactic”</div><div><br />“Freedom Is Popular!”</div><div><br />“Aggressive wars, income taxes, national IDs, domestic spying, torture regimes, secret prisons, Federal Reserve manipulation — we don’t have to take it any more.” — Ron Paul, Sept 27, 2007</div><div><br />Q and A<br />“I would start with the departments. . . the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, Department of Homeland Security. . .”</div><div><br />On if he would abolish the IRS:<br />“Immediately!”</div><div><br />On the war on drugs:<br />“You wanna get rid of drug crime in this country? Fine, let’s just get rid of all the drug laws.”</div><div><br />On foreign policy:<br />“If we think we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred then we have a problem. . .”</div><div><br />On Romney consulting lawyers for war:<br />“This idea of consulting lawyers absolutely baffles me– Why don’t we open the constitution and read it! You’re not allowed to go to war without a declaration!”</div><div><br />On the Iraq war:<br />“The only weapon of mass destruction in Iraq is the US military.”</div><div><br />On the Iraq war:<br />“We just marched in, we can just march out.”</div><div><br />So which one is your favorite? Do you have any more that you like?<br /><br /><a href="http://ronpaulblogs.com/speeches/ron-paul-quotes/">read more</a> | <a href="http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Ron_Paul_Quotes_4">digg story</a></div></div>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-24485333216218286692008-01-29T10:51:00.001-05:002008-01-29T10:51:46.949-05:00The War on Immigrants Is a War on FreedomIf a businessman wishes to associate with a foreigner, either personally or in a business relationship, why shouldn’t he be free to do so? Under what moral authority does the government interfere with a person’s freedom to associate with another person?<br/><br/><a href='http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2008-01-25.asp'>read more</a> | <a href='http://digg.com/political_opinion/The_War_on_Immigrants_Is_a_War_on_Freedom'>digg story</a>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-84533316720103543992008-01-06T23:37:00.000-05:002008-01-06T23:42:41.750-05:00The real deal.A presidential candidate actually answering real questions from real people. What a contrast to the Fox and CNN gameshow BS.<br /><br /><object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WxldrCsVByA&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WxldrCsVByA&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object><br /><br /><br /><object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8VQcpmfT0f4&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8VQcpmfT0f4&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-55808524713925428812007-12-29T01:33:00.000-05:002007-12-29T01:44:22.386-05:00**A List of Fox's sponsors** HIT THEM WHERE IT HURTS!<span style="font-weight:bold;">From dailypaul.com:</span><br /><br />Please add other sponsors or additional contact info in the comments.<br /><br />• Crest Whitestrips & Dawn (both Proctor & Gamble) 513-983-1100<br />• Delphi (Driving Products) 1.888.809.9800<br />• Mercedes Benz 1-800-367-6372<br />• Comcast 1-800-COMCAST<br />• Subaru 1-800-782-2783<br />• GMC Suv's 1-800-551-4123<br />• Best Buy 1-888-237-8289<br />• Travelocity 1 888.872.8356<br />• Capzasin 1 (423) 822-5020<br />• New Phase<br />• Orbitz 1-888-656-4546<br />• Ditech.com 1-800-DITECH-3<br />• eloan.com (415) 786-3317<br />• Toyota 1 800-331-4331<br />• Centrum (Wyeth) 1-800-322-3129<br />• Nextel (aka Sprint)1-800-639-6111<br />• Vehix.com 1.866.698.3449<br />• Gold Bond (Chattum) 423-821-4571<br />• Aspercreme " "<br />• webmd.com via email or webmd.com via other (212) 624-3700<br />• American Express 1-877-877-0987, 1-800-525-3355<br />• Holiday Inn Express 1 800-315-2621<br />• M Professional unk<br />• priceline.com 1-800-774-2354<br />• L. L. Bean 1-800-441-7513<br />• Jet Dry (Dishwasher Products) 1-800-820-8939<br />Chemistry (Matchmaking Web Site)<br />Bankrate.com (Mortgages)<br />Cars Direct.comJames Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-25746284719077835242007-12-21T18:58:00.001-05:002007-12-21T19:04:05.231-05:00The Official Media Guide to Attacking Ron PaulLiberty Maven has uncovered a letter from the office of the “Main Stream Media Czar”. Unfortunately, the letter was not signed by name, only title. We didn’t even know there was such a thing as a “Main Stream Media Czar” prior to discovering this letter. My only reaction to this letter was, “it all makes so much sense now.” Here is the letter itself, transcribed word for word.<br /><br /><br /><blockquote>We in the main stream media all know that Ron Paul cannot win the presidency because of his extremist views. Given this fact, it is important we don’t allow him the same media coverage as our preferred candidates. It is true that we must give him some coverage, but it is also true that we must adhere to the “Mass Media Ron Paul Rule” when giving him coverage during this campaign season. Generally, the “Mass Media Ron Paul Rule” can be summed up in two words:<br /><br />Marginalize him.<br /><br />Here are some wonderful tactics to utilize when applying the “Mass Media Ron Paul Rule:<br /><br />Continually label him as a long shot candidate. This is the most important of all the tactics so we list it first. Sure, it is true that Ron Paul has won or placed high in many straw polls across the country but we must never mention it. Instead, in every article or television news story copy we should use one or more of the terms “dark horse”, “long shot”, “barely registering in the polls”, “quixotic”, or “gadfly”. If we can do this consistently, our job is complete.<br /><br />Attack his supporters. Ron Paul has a stellar personal record with his marriage of over 50 years, 5 children, and 18 grandchildren. His political record is also exemplary with him never voting to raise taxes and always voting in accordance with the Constitution. Because of this, attacking him on his record is a daunting task. The best method to marginalize him is to attack his supporters. This can be accomplished by calling his supporters names like “kooky”, “crazy”, “conspiracy nutjobs”, “paultards”, and the like. This is classic “guilt by association” and works well on the apathetic electorate.<br /><br />Call him “Libertarian” as much as possible. Continually giving him the libertarian label is a great covert method of Ron Paul marginalization. This reinforces that he’s not really a Republican even though he has held office as a Republican for 10 terms. We find that if you are in radio or television you may even say the word “libertarian” using a negative tone during questions. This perpetuates the extremism inherent in Ron Paul’s policies even though the word libertarian simply means: one who believes in liberty.<br /><br />Continually ask him if he’s planning on running as a third party candidate. This tactic should be used often. It accomplishes two things. First, it suggests that he is not a serious candidate for the Republican party. Second, it will get him on record as saying he won’t run for a third party. If he should happen to run third party at a later date he can be attacked for changing his position.<br /><br />Ask him if he would support the GOP nominee if he doesn’t win. Ron Paul is against the Iraq war and wishes to bring the troops home from overseas in order to help stem the tide of government overspending. This makes him different than all of the other Republican candidates who support keeping our troops overseas indefinitely. As media we must make all attempts to not only marginalize his candidacy, but also marginalize his steadfast message of linking the cost of the war on terror to our economic woes here at home.<br /><br />Focus on his campaign strategy rather than his message. Ron Paul’s message of freedom, prosperity, and peace should be overshadowed by talk of his successful grassroots campaign. The more we focus on how he raises money and the types of supporters he has, the less time he has to talk about his message that is sure to resonate with most Americans. We must make all attempts to block or cloud that message. If it were to get out, it could spell doom for our chosen candidates.<br /><br />Attack him for not returning donations from fringe supporters. White supremacists and prostitutes have donated money to Ron Paul and that is bad. We can use our political correctness and superior morality as a weapon and ask him why does he not return that donation money. After all a white supremacist would do more good with having an extra $500 in his pocket than a doctor who has delivered over 4000 babies while preaching peace and equal rights for everyone.<br /><br />Abolishing the IRS is crazy. Attacking his stance on abolishing the IRS and replacing it with nothing is also effective. After all most Americans don’t know that we could do without the income tax if we just went back to the same level of government spending that we had in the 1990’s. A great method is to reply to his answer with an incredulous “replace it with NOTHING? How can the government function?” comment. This tactic will scare people into believing in how the government always has our best interests at heart. It will help people ignore the fact that Ron Paul also wants to cut government spending drastically in order to balance the budget.<br /><br />Label him an isolationist for his foreign policy views. Since he wants to bring our troops home from not just Iraq, but all of the 130 other occupied countries he should be deemed an isolationist. It doesn’t matter that Ron Paul wants free trade and travel with other countries and thus is not truly an isolationist. The people will believe what we tell them to believe.<br /><br />This directive gives us several tactics to be used in the fight against Ron Paul’s candidacy for president. We should use them all and use them often. After all Ron Paul’s message of freedom, prosperity, and peace is antiquated and has no place in our authoritarian world.<br /><br />Sincerely,<br /><br />The Main Stream Media Czar</blockquote><br /><br /><a href="http://www.libertymaven.com/2007/12/19/the-official-media-guide-to-attacking-ron-paul/">read more</a> | <a href="http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/The_Official_Media_Guide_to_Attacking_Ron_Paul">digg story</a>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-2733146357799805942007-12-19T20:46:00.000-05:002007-12-19T20:59:27.624-05:00Bill of Rights Under Bush: A Timeline<div id="xg" class=" xg_widget_forum xg_widget_forum_topic xg_widget_forum_topic_show"><div id="xg_body"><div class="xg_colgroup"><div class="xg_3col first-child"><div class="xg_colgroup"><div class="xg_2col first-child"><div class="xg_module"><div class="xg_module_body pad"><div class="discussion"><div class="firstpost"><div class="description"><strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">Just so we remember how we got where we are:</span></strong></div><div class="description"><br /></div><div class="description"><strong>2001</strong><br /><br /><i>January</i><br /><br />Presidential directive delays indefinitely the scheduled release of presidential documents (authorized by the Presidential Records Act of 1978) pertaining to the Reagan-Bush administration. <a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E01E0DB143EF93AA35755C0A9679C8B63&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Organizations/V/Vanderbilt%20University">Link</a><br /><br />Bush and Cheney begin process of radically broadening scope of documents and information which can be deemed classified. <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2114963/">Link</a><br /><br /><i>February</i><br /><br />The National Security Agency (NSA) sets up Project Groundbreaker, a domestic call monitoring program infrastructure. <a href="http://tumerica.blogspot.com/2007/10/wen-want-you-to-give-us-your-phone.html">Link</a><br /><br /><i>Spring</i><br /><br />Bush administration order authorizes NSA monitoring of domestic phone and internet traffic. <a href="http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/48/17009">Link</a><br /><br /><i>May</i><br /><br />US Supreme Court rules that medical necessity is not a permissible defense against federal marijuana statutes. <a href="http://www.jointogether.org/news/headlines/inthenews/2001/supreme-court-rules-against-3.html">Link</a><br /><br /><i>September</i><br /><br />In immediate aftermath of 9-11 terror attacks, Department of Justice authorizes detention without charge for any terror suspects. Over one thousand suspects are brought into detention over the next several months. <a href="http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/us_law/OIG_report.pdf">Link (pdf)</a><br /><br /><i>October</i><br /><br />Attorney General John Ashcroft announces change in Department of Justice (DOJ) policy. According to the new policy DOJ will impose far more stringent criteria for the granting of Freedom of Information Act requests. <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/2002/01/17/sinrod.htm">Link</a><br /><br /><i>September-October</i><br /><br />NSA launches massive new database of information on US phone calls. <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm?csp=34">Link</a><br /><br /><i>October</i><br /><br />The USA Patriot Act becomes law. Among other things the law: makes it a crime for anyone to contribute money or material support for any group on the State Department’s Terror Watch List, allows the FBI to monitor and tape conversations between attorneys and clients, allows the FBI to order librarians to turn over information about patron’s reading habits, allows the government to conduct surveillance on internet and email use of US citizens without notice. The act also calls for expanded use of National Security Letters (NSLs), which allow the FBI to search telephone, email and financial records of US citizens without a court order, exempts the government from needing to reveal how evidence against suspected terrorists was obtained and authorizes indefinite detention of immigrants at the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities.<br /><br />NJ Superior court judge and civil liberties scholar Anthony Napolitano, author of A Nation of Sheep, has described the law’s assault on first and fourth amendment principles as follows, “The Patriot Act’s two most principle constitutional errors are an assault on the Fourth Amendment, and on the First. It permits federal agents to write their own search warrants [under the name “national security letters”] with no judge having examined evidence and agreed that it’s likely that the person or thing the government wants to search will reveal evidence of a crime… Not only that, but the Patriot Act makes it a felony for the recipient of a self-written search warrant to reveal it to anyone. The Patriot Act allows [agents] to serve self-written search warrants on financial institutions, and the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2004 in Orwellian language defines that to include in addition to banks, also delis, bodegas, restaurants, hotels, doctors' offices, lawyers’ offices, telecoms, HMOs, hospitals, casinos, jewelry dealers, automobile dealers, boat dealers, and that great financial institution to which we all would repose our fortunes, the post office. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act">Link 1</a> | <a href="http://reason.com/news/show/123496.html">Link 2</a><br /><br /><i>November</i><br /><br />Executive order limits release of presidential documents. The order gives incumbent presidents the right to veto requests to open any past presidential records and supercedes the congressionally passed law of 1978 mandating release of all presidential records not explicitly deemed classified. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13233">Link</a><br /><br /><b>2002</b><br /><br /><i>Winter</i><br /><br />FBI and Department of Defense (DOD), forbidden by law from compiling databases on US citizens, begin contracting with private database firm ChoicePoint to collect, store, search and maintain data. <a href="http://govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=32802&printerfriendlyVers=1">Link</a><br /><br /><i>Spring</i><br /><br />Secret executive order issued authorizing NSA to wiretap the phones and read emails of US citizens. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html">Link</a><br /><br /><i>Spring</i><br /><br />Transportation Security Adminstration (TSA) acknowledges it has created both a “No Fly” and a separate “Watch” list of US travelers. <a href="http://www.inthesetimes.com/issue/27/02/feature3.shtml">Link</a><br /><br /><i>May</i><br /><br />Department of Justice authorizes the FBI to monitor political and religious groups. The new rules permit the FBI to broadly search or monitor the internet for evidence of criminal activity without having any tips or leads that a specific criminal act has been committed. <a href="http://seclists.org/politech/2002/May/0124.html">Link</a><br /><br /><i>June</i><br /><br />Supreme Court upholds the right of school administrators to conduct mandatory drug testing of students without probable cause. <a href="http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=5322">Link</a><br /><br /><i>November</i><br /><br />Homeland Security Act of 2002 establishes separate Department of Homeland Security. Among other things the department will federally coordinate for the first time all local and state law enforcement nationwide and run a Directorate of Information and Analysis with authority to compile comprehensive data on US citizens using public and commercial records including credit card, phone, bank, and travel. The department also will be exempt form Freedom of Information Act disclosure requirements. The Homeland Security department’s jurisdiction has been widely criticized for being nebulously defined and has extended beyond terrorism into areas including immigration, pornography and drug enforcement. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeland_Security_Act">Link 1</a> | <a href="http://www.conservative.org/columnists/keene/030805dk.asp">Link 2</a><br /><br /><b>2003</b><br /><br /><i>February</i><br /><br />Draft of Domestic Security Enhancement Act (aka Patriot Act 2), a secret document prepared by the Department of Justice is leaked by the Center for Public Integrity. Provisions of the February 7th draft version included:<br /><br />Removal of court-ordered prohibitions against police agencies spying on domestic groups.<br /><br />The FBI would be granted powers to conduct searches and surveillance based on intelligence gathered in foreign countries without first obtaining a court order.<br /><br />Creation of a DNA database of suspected terrorists.<br /><br />Prohibition of any public disclosure of the names of alleged terrorists including those who have been arrested.<br /><br />Exemptions from civil liability for people and businesses who voluntarily turn private information over to the government.<br /><br />Criminalization of the use of encryption to conceal incriminating communications.<br /><br />Automatic denial of bail for persons accused of terrorism-related crimes, reversing the ordinary common law burden of proof principle. All alleged terrorists would be required to demonstrate why they should be released on bail rather than the government being required to demonstrate why they should be held.<br /><br />Expansion of the list of crimes eligible for the death penalty.<br /><br />The United States Environmental Protection Agency would be prevented from releasing "worst case scenario" information to the public about chemical plants.<br /><br />United States citizens whom the government finds to be either members of, or providing material support to, terrorist groups could have their US citizenship revoked and be deported to foreign countries.<br /><br />Although the bill itself has never (yet) been advanced in congress due to public exposure, some of its provisions have become law as parts of other bills. For example The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 grants the FBI unprecedented power to obtain records from financial institutions without requiring permission from a judge. Under the law, the FBI does not need to seek a court order to access such records, nor does it need to prove just cause. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_Security_Enhancement_Act_of_2003">Link 1</a> | <a href="http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2004/01/61792">Link 2</a><br /><br /><i>March</i><br /><br />Executive order issued which radically tightens the declassification process of classified government documents, as well as making it far easier for government agencies to make and keep information classified. The order delayed by three years the release of declassified government documents dating from 1978 or earlier. It also allowed the government to treat all material sent to American officials from foreign governments -- no matter how routine -- as subject to classification, and expanded the ability of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to shield documents from declassification. Finally it gave the vice president the power to classify information. <a href="http://ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2004a/010904/010904a.php">Link 1</a> | <a href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/eoamend.html">Link 2</a><br /><br /><i>March</i><br /><br />In a ruling seen as a victory for the concentration of ownership of intellectual property and an erosion of the public domain, the Supreme Court in Eldred v. Ashcroft held that a 20-year extension of the copyright period (from 50 years after the death of the author to 70 years) called for by the Sonny Bono copyright Extension not violate either the Copyright Clause or the First Amendment. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eldred_v._Ashcroft">Link</a><br /><br /><i>April</i><br /><br />In Demore v. Kim, the Supreme Court ruled that even permanent residents could be subject to mandatory detention when facing deportation based on a prior criminal conviction, without any right to an individualized hearing to determine whether they were dangerous or a flight risk. <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/04/30/MN270981.DTL">Link</a><br /><br /><i>Fall</i><br /><br />The FBI changes its traditional policy of destroying all data and documents collected on innocent citizens in the course of criminal investigations. This information would, according to the bureau, now be permanently stored. Two years later in late 2005 Executive Order 13388, expanded access to those files for "state, local and tribal" governments and for "appropriate private sector entities," which are not defined. <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/05/AR2005110501366.html">Link 1</a> | <a href="http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-13388.htm">Link 2</a><br /><br /><i>Fall</i><br /><br />As authorized by the Patriot Act, the FBI expands the practice of national security letters. NSLs, originally introduced in the 1970s for espionage and terrorism investigations, enabled the FBI to review in secret the customer records of suspected foreign agents. This was extended by the Patriot Act to include permitting clandestine scrutiny of all U.S. residents and visitors whether suspected of terrorism or not. <a href="http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2003/11/61341?currentPage=2">Link</a><br /><br /><b>2004</b><br /><br /><i>January</i><br /><br />The FBI begins keeping a database of US citizens based on information obtained via NSLs. <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/05/AR2005110501366.html">Link</a><br /><br /><i>Spring</i><br /><br />John Ashcroft invokes State Secrets privilege to forbid former FBI translator Sibel Edmunds from testifying in a case brought by families of victims of the 9-11 attacks. Litigation by 9-11 families is subsequently halted. <a href="http://www.counterpunch.com/edmonds07092004.html">Link 1</a> | <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibel_Edmonds">Link 2</a><br /><br /><i>June</i><br /><br />Supreme Court upholds Nevada state law allowing police to arrest suspects who refuse to provide identification based on police discretion of “reasonable suspicion.” <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57604-2004Jun21.html">Link</a><br /><br /><b>2005</b><br /><br /><i>January</i><br /><br />Supreme court rules that police do not need to have probable cause to have drug sniffing dogs examine cars stopped for routine traffic violations. <a href="http://www.opinioneditorials.com/guestcontributors/rcurry_20050127.html">Link 1</a> | <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-01-24-drug-dog_x.htm">Link 2</a><br /><br /><i>June</i><br /><br />Supreme Court rules that the federal government can prosecute medical marijuana users even in states which have laws permitting medical marijuana. <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/06/AR2005060600564.html">Link</a><br /><br /><i>Summer</i><br /><br />The Patriot Act, due to expire at the end of 2005, is reauthorized by Congress. <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/21/patriot.act/">Link</a><br /><br /><i>Winter 2005</i><br /><br />Senate blocks reauthorization of certain clauses in Patriot Act. <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4536418.stm">Link</a><br /><br /><b>2006</b><br /><br /><i>March</i><br /><br />Senate passes amended version of Patriot Act, reauthorization, with three basic changes from the original including: recipients of secret court orders to turn over sensitive information on individuals linked to terrorism investigations are not allowed to disclose those orders but can challenge the gag order after a year, libraries would not be required to turn over information without the approval of a judge, recipients of an FBI "national security letter" -- an investigator's demand for access to personal or business information -- would not have to tell the FBI if they consult a lawyer. New bill also said to extend Congressional oversight over executive department usage guidelines. Shortly after bill is signed George Bush declares oversight rules are not binding. <a href="http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=16579">Link 1</a> | <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/03/24/bush_shuns_patriot_act_requirement/">Link 2</a><br /><br /><i>June</i><br /><br />Supreme court rules that evidence obtained in violation of the “knock and announce” rules can still be permitted in court. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudson_v._Michigan">Link</a><br /><br /><i>September</i><br /><br />US Congress and Senate approve the Military Commissions Act, which authorizes torture and strips non- US citizen detainees suspected of terrorist ties of the right of habeas corpus (which includes formal charges, counsel and hearings). It also empowers US presidents at their discretion to declare US citizens as enemy combatants and subject to detention without charge or due process. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Commissions_Act_of_2006">Link 1</a> | <a href="http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20061011.html">Link 2</a> | <a href="http://www.10zenmonkeys.com/2006/10/23/detention-and-torture/">Link 3</a><br /><br /><i>October</i><br /><br />John Warner Defense Authorization Act is passed. The act allows a president to declare a public emergency and station US military troops anywhere in America as well as take control of state based national guard units without consent of the governor or other local authorities. The law authorizes presidential deployment of US troops to round-up and detain “potential terrorists”, “illegal aliens” and “disorderly” citizenry. <a href="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-5122">Link 1</a> | <a href="http://www.bordc.org/threats/hr5122.php">Link 2</a><br /><br /><b>2007</b><br /><br /><i>May</i><br /><br />National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51) establishes a new post-disaster plan (with disaster defined as any incident, natural or man-made, resulting in extraordinary mass casualties, damage or disruption) which places the president in charge of all three branches of government. The directive overrides the National Emergencies Act which gives Congress power to determine the duration of a national emergency. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Directive_51">Link 1</a> | <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2176185/pagenum/2">Link 2</a><br /><br /><i>June</i><br /><br />In “Bong Hits for Jesus” case Supreme court rules that student free speech rights do not extend to promotion of drug use. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morse_v._Frederick">Link</a><br /><br /><i>July</i><br /><br />Executive Order 13438: "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq, issued. The order asserts the government’s power to confiscate the property “of persons determined to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose or effect of threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq or undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people."<br /><br /><i>October</i><br /><br />The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Act passes the House of Representatives 400 to 6 (to be voted on in the Senate in 2008). The act proposes the establishment of a commission composed of members of the House and Senate, Homeland Security and others, to "examine and report upon the facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States” and specifically the role of the internet in fostering and disseminating extremism. According to the bill the term `violent radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change, while the term 'ideologically-based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.” <a href="http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=43&ItemID=14396">Link 1</a> | <a href="http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h1955/show">Link 2</a> | <a href="http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3388/examining_the_homegrown_terrorism_prevention_act/">Link 3</a><br /><br />Vote for this on <a href="http://digg.com/politics/Staggering_Timeline_of_Bush_Era_Civil_Rights_Violations">Digg</a> | <a href="http://politics.reddit.com/info/625ai/details">Reddit</a></div></div></div> </div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-40143348756236988332007-12-18T20:20:00.000-05:002007-12-18T20:24:06.896-05:00Joe Scarborough interviews Ron Paul 12/18Thank you Joe Scarborough for showing proper respect to the doctor. You are a refreshing change from the MSM robots.<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JBoLgxP1Lgw&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JBoLgxP1Lgw&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-23322853393110323902007-12-16T20:11:00.001-05:002007-12-16T20:18:35.896-05:00Top 10 Reasons to Overthrow Your GovernmentFrom openjesus.org:<br />The Top 10 Reasons to Overthrow Your Government<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">10. The “Two Party System” is not democratic. </span>Democrats and Republicans work hard together to keep additional parties from gaining momentum, even to the point of staging presidential debates themselves to lock other candidates out (ask anyone from the League of Women Voters, they’ll explain it). Any party which operates over a long period of time becomes irreparably corrupt, as do the individuals who come from those parties.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">9. The War on Drugs is unjust.</span> First and foremost, the full text of the 10th Amendment of the Bill of Rights states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” If the Constitution doesn’t call for something as a specific function of the federal government then it can’t get involved. Anyone locked up on a federal drug charge is well aware of their actual status as political prisoner. Besides being an absolute violation of the Constitution itself, the War on Drugs is largely unjust because it is the primary tool by which people are commoditized for use in the prison system, which brings me to my next point.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">8. Your prison system is random and for-profit.</span> Based on the existing laws, more than half of all Americans are already criminals. Obscure, rarely-enforced, and sometimes unjust laws are used to maintain a massive prison population for the sole purpose of generating continuous profit for the bloated justice system and corporations which supply and maintain penitentiaries. Your government has put capitalism above human rights by regulating crime as a lottery system where you are the ticket and prison is the prize.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">7. The illusion of safety. </span>The Constitution outlines only a few legitimate functions of the federal government, one of which is to “provide for the common defense.” Instead of providing this Constitutionally-mandated function, however, your federal government makes you take your shoes off and steals your deodorant before you can board an airplane.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">6. The government is intentionally keeping you stupid. </span>Not that it matters anymore, but the federal government does not have the Constitutional power to mandate or involve itself in any way with education. Why is it that children are not provided the most basic education, that the United States continues to fall behind in science, and that very few of you even recognize the flagrant criminality in your own “elected” officials? An uneducated population is a docile population, at least on the political front. Eighty percent of you probably couldn’t tell me what a federalist is, but that’s not your fault.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">5. The Internet.</span> The most functional tool for the spread of Democracy in the history of mankind (perhaps excepting the Maxim gun) is under assault by communications companies attempting to remove its core neutrality, and your government is barely resisting. In fact, some might go so far as to suggest that your government is actually complying in this effort. Given the government’s track record with education, insurance, and finances, I’d say the Internet in its current state has about six months to live. As a side note, China also imposes federal controls in the Internet.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">4. Your government spies on you.</span> If you told General George Washington that the federal government of the United States of America was tapping phones, snatching emails, and laying down more complex infrastructure to collect the daily lives of Americans he would join Al-Qaeda. The 4th Amendment makes it extremely clear that personal privacy is not to be violated by any level of government. There is no excuse for this type of behavior.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">3. You could get arrested for even reading this.</span> Voiced dissent has always been critical to the democratic process, but ruminations unsupportive of the political status quo will always be something of a target to those wield the dual blades of power and corruption. To quote Thomas Jefferson, “The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then.” To quote George Bush, “Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.” I am deservedly a little scared, as you also should be.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">2 . Your politicians are criminals. </span>One of the early tenets of the United States of America was “no taxation without representation.” Politicians accept huge wads of cash from corporations and interest groups to pass laws which benefit only the top few men (and a couple of women) in industry. Sometimes they store this cash in their freezer. Sometimes they have the corporations make a “donation” to their private charities. Even when you, The People, reach a frenzied consensus your demands are ignored, but only because you didn’t bring a suitcase full of Benjamins.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">1. Because you’re supposed to.</span> The United States was born of rebellion and maintains that its citizens cannot be disarmed. You are a nation of checks and balances, one of which contains the dual assertion that The People are armed and that poppycockery should not be tolerated. The founding fathers wanted you to use your voices to keep your government from becoming corrupt and unconstitutional, but left you a loophole in case they managed to seize power regardless. Loophole, meet the present; The present, allow me to introduce the 2nd Amendment.<br /><br />*Note to the FBI: The preceding column was written purely as satire, and is not in any way suggesting that I am “with the terrorists.” I love the USA! Go USA! USA! USA! USA!<br />.<br/><br/><a href='http://www.openjesus.org/2007/top-10-reasons-to-overthrow-your-government/'>read more</a> | <a href='http://digg.com/political_opinion/Top_10_Reasons_to_Overthrow_Your_Government'>digg story</a>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-20836030541259009492007-12-14T20:24:00.001-05:002007-12-14T20:24:53.824-05:00Immigration Controls and the Police StateOne of the things that fascinate me about the immigration debate is those people who say that they favor closed borders but simultaneously oppose the police-state programs that are necessary to enforce such a policy.<br/><br/><a href='http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2007-12-14.asp'>read more</a> | <a href='http://digg.com/political_opinion/Immigration_Controls_and_the_Police_State'>digg story</a>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-22082775747894491782007-12-14T19:55:00.000-05:002007-12-14T19:56:42.090-05:00Ron Paul on Mad MoneyFinally, somebody in the media is smart enough to question the Federal Reserve.<br /><br /><object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Nq7Li1MOF2Y&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Nq7Li1MOF2Y&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-24372779799668825632007-12-08T22:00:00.000-05:002007-12-08T22:03:19.613-05:00Meet-Up Groups: Giuliani v Clinton v Huckabee v Obama v Paul<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v700/twane217/Meet-UpGroupsCompared.gif"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px;" src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v700/twane217/Meet-UpGroupsCompared.gif" border="0" alt="" /></a>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-60144754369670189452007-12-08T17:36:00.000-05:002007-12-08T17:38:55.867-05:00The Soviet-Style Attack on NORFEDby Jacob G. Hornberger, November 21, 2007<br /><br />It would be difficult to find a better example of federal heavy-handedness than the recent six-hour federal raid on NORFED, the National Organization for the Repeal of the Federal Reserve and Internal Revenue Code. In fact, it would be virtually impossible to distinguish the NORFED raid from similar raids conducted by Soviet and Chinese communist officials against private businesses operating in those countries.<br /><br />After all, by confiscating all the assets of the company, including its coins, computers, records, and equipment, the feds have totally shut down the NORFED operation. But where is the court order authorizing them to shut down this privately owned business? The answer: There is no such court order. All federal agents had was a search warrant issued by a federal magistrate.<br /><br />Here’s what the feds did that enabled them to engage in their Soviet-style attack on NORFED. Unlike the system that existed in the Soviet Union and that still exists in Communist China, the U.S. government is precluded by law from simply closing down businesses it doesn’t like or that it is feels are violating the law. If the government wishes to have a business shut down, the law provides a remedy called an injunction, which is a formal order issued by a judge that requires a person or business to cease and desist from engaging in a certain operation.<br /><br />In order to secure a federal injunction, the petitioner files an application for the injunction with a federal district judge. The judge sets a date for the hearing on the application and gives notice to the respondent of the application and the hearing. What is significant about the hearing on the temporary injunction is that the respondent has the right to be present to defend his side of things. He can have his lawyer present, cross-examine witnesses, present witnesses, introduce evidence, file motions and briefs, and make legal arguments to the judge.<br /><br />At the conclusion of the temporary-injunction hearing, the judge can either grant or deny the request for a temporary injunction. If he grants it, he sets a bond as a prerequisite to the issuance of the injunction, in order to protect the respondent from damages suffered if it later turns out that the injunction was wrongfully issued. The respondent has the right to appeal the grant of the injunction to the federal court of appeals, which ordinarily grants priority to such cases because of their importance and urgency. Unless the court of appeals vacates the temporary injunction, it remains in effect until a trial on the merits is later held, which may be a trial by jury. At that time, it is determined whether to make the temporary injunction permanent.<br /><br />What makes the injunction process fair and just is that it permits both sides to be heard. It also protects the respondent by requiring the petitioner to file a bond in an amount intended to compensate him for damages suffered during the pendency of the injunction, including claims filed by irate customers. (Among the assets the feds seized were coins that had been purchased and paid for by NORFED’s customers.)<br /><br />So, did the FBI and Justice Department employ the injunction process to close down the NORFED operation? Did they ask a judge for a temporary injunction to shut down the operation? Did a federal judge enter an order enjoining NORFED from continuing to operate its business?<br /><br />The answer is “No” to all of those questions. Instead, what the feds did was engage in a sneaky, back-handed, perhaps even fraudulent, trick of using a search warrant to accomplish the same thing that an injunction accomplishes, but without the procedural due-process protections provided by the injunction process.<br /><br />A search warrant and an injunction involve two completely different procedures, and each serves a distinct function. For one thing, a search warrant is used in criminal cases while injunctions are used in civil proceedings. The search warrant is used when law-enforcement officers suspect that there is evidence of criminal activity inside a particular location. An officer will appear before a federal magistrate, which is a position lower than a federal district judge, and ask for permission to search the particular locale. In support of the application for a search warrant, the officer must file an affidavit (i.e., a statement under oath) describing with specificity the evidence, the suspected crime, and why he believes the evidence is located in that place.<br /><br />For example, suppose the cops receive information that a gun used in a murder is located inside a person’s home. They are not permitted to simply drive up to the home, enter it, and begin searching. Instead, they must apply for a warrant. If the warrant is issued, they go to the home, enter it, and search for the weapon. If they find it, they can seize it as evidence.<br /><br />That’s the purpose of a search warrant — to seek evidence in a criminal case, not to shut down a person’s privately run business. After all, it’s not as if selling coins is akin to selling drugs — just ask the Franklin Mint or any coin dealer.<br /><br />When the FBI went to the magistrate in the NORFED case, its affidavit alleged that NORFED was engaged in illegal activity, primarily violating the government’s monopoly over the issuance of money.<br /><br />One problem, however, is that NORFED denies that it has broken the law in any respect. It contends that the issuance of its coins is not illegal, a position that is at least inferentially substantiated by the fact that the feds have taken no action to seek injunctive relief for the several years that NORFED has been in business, not even in the context of a federal lawsuit that NORFED has filed seeking a declaration that its activities are legal, a suit that is still pending in federal district court. Indeed, while the feds have known of NORFED’s operation for years and have even had agents secretly infiltrate the organization, they have never secured a criminal indictment against the operation.<br /><br />Moreover, even if the government is correct in its allegation that NORFED is violating the government’s money monopoly, as an American business NORFED nonetheless has the right to argue and show that the government’s money monopoly is unconstitutional. While NORFED would have had the opportunity of presenting its constitutional arguments in a temporary injunction hearing, the government’s Soviet-style search-warrant ruse prevented NORFED from doing so prior to its business being shut down and its assets confiscated and carted away.<br /><br />Did the FBI and the Justice Department have sufficient time and opportunity to seek injunctive relief instead of using the sneaky search-warrant procedure that enabled them to mount their Soviet-like raid? Absolutely. For one thing, federal judges are a dime a dozen in Washington, D.C. The feds could have sought an injunction from any of them, including the federal judge who is presiding in the pending litigation between NORFED and the feds. That of course would have permitted NORFED to be heard and to present its case before a federal district judge, something that the FBI and the Justice Department obviously feared or abhorred. At such a hearing the government would have had the burden of proving that NORFED had truly been violating some federal law with its coin business. NORFED, for its part would have had the opportunity of showing the contrary or of showing that such a law is unconstitutional. But who needs some stinking injunction before a federal judge, where the victim has notice and the opportunity to be heard, when one can simply use the sneaky device of a criminal search warrant to shut down someone’s private business, Soviet-style?<br /><br />Consider a comparable example. Suppose someone opens a postal delivery business to compete against the U.S. Postal Service in the delivery of first-class mail. Can the FBI legally send its gendarmes out and conduct a Soviet-style raid on the business, as it has done with NORFED? No. Instead, the government must go to federal court and secure an injunction requiring the privately owned business to cease and desist its competitive ways. In fact, that is exactly what happens whenever someone has the audacity to compete against the U.S. Postal Service in the delivery of first-class mail.<br /><br />But here we have the feds using Soviet-style tactics to raid and shut down a privately owned business without providing the victim advance notice or opportunity to be heard. Even worse, in order to deceptively preserve the appearance of legal process to cover up its Soviet-like behavior, government officials abuse the criminal process, perhaps even with the fraudulent failure to disclose their real intentions to the federal magistrate who issued the search warrant.<br /><br />In a civilized country based on the rule of law, people cannot have their lives, liberty, and property taken away from them without notice, hearing, opportunity to be heard, and other fundamental aspects of procedural due process. Unfortunately, in the post-9/11 world in which we now live, anything goes as far as federal power is concerned. The heavy-handed, perhaps even fraudulent, Soviet-style attack on NORFED is proof-positive of that.<br /><br />Jacob Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. Send him <a href="mailto:jhornberger@fff.org">email</a>.James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-70950789018782688762007-12-08T16:55:00.001-05:002007-12-08T16:55:44.424-05:00Ron Paul will soon take to the skyEnough with research on the Internet, or watching the political debates on television or listening to sound bites on the radio. In just a few days, Ron Paul supporters will give the eastern half of the United States a new way to campaign: from a blimp.<br/><br/><a href='http://www.smallgovtimes.com/story/07dec07.paul.sky/index.html'>read more</a> | <a href='http://digg.com/politics/Ron_Paul_will_soon_take_to_the_sky'>digg story</a>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-53245012733058663832007-12-05T22:21:00.001-05:002007-12-05T22:21:54.960-05:00Bush and His Scary (Nonexistent) WMDs in IranThe CIA and 15 other U.S. spy agencies (yes, 16 in all!) have issued a National Intelligence Estimate reporting that Iran halted its nuclear-weapon program in 2003, contradicting what Bush and Vice President Cheney have been suggesting for the past 4 years.<br/><br/><a href='http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2007-12-04.asp'>read more</a> | <a href='http://digg.com/world_news/Bush_and_His_Scary_Nonexistent_WMDs_in_Iran_2'>digg story</a>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-31779254554768713132007-12-05T22:20:00.001-05:002007-12-05T22:20:10.735-05:00Should socialist education be saved or scrapped?I challenge anyone: Show me a better model of socialism than public schooling and use any country you want, including China, North Korea, Cuba, and the former Soviet Union. You’ll have a hard time meeting the challenge. Now, ask yourself: Is it possible that socialism can be made to succeed?<br/><br/><a href='http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2007-12-05.asp'>read more</a> | <a href='http://digg.com/political_opinion/Should_socialist_education_be_saved_or_scrapped'>digg story</a>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13029003.post-5627746759213304872007-12-05T17:18:00.001-05:002007-12-05T17:18:17.524-05:00Cop Mistakes Gun For Taser; Kills man, No Charges FiledThe officer got the order to "electrocute" but thought she heard "execute" so she blasted a handcuffed man in custody, instead of just tasering him. No charges were filed for this "honest mistake."<br/><br/><a href='http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/017457.html'>read more</a> | <a href='http://digg.com/world_news/Cop_Mistakes_Gun_For_Taser_Kills_man_No_Charges_Filed'>digg story</a>James Babbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16809366892143234514noreply@blogger.com0