lewrockwell--2020-02-11--The Lessons of Richard II

The Lessons of Richard II

For reasons best known to myself , last week I read a short book about Richard II , the English king who came to the throne at age 10 and was deposed 22 years later , in 1399 , and murdered the following year .
It seems that Shakespeare got him more or less right , at least if the chronicles of the time got him right .
Richard II was a young man of very poor judgment and a strong sense of entitlement ( a common and disastrous combination ) , though he was not evilly intentioned in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his court favorites with gifts and honors , at the expense , of course , of the rest of the population , then—as now—the taxpayers .
Shakespeare memorably described the beneficiaries of Richard ’ s extorted largesse as the caterpillars of the commonwealth .
Is there any commonwealth , any political system , any polity , without them ?
It is part of Shakespeare ’ s unique genius that when we hear or read Richard ’ s great speeches during and after his deposition by his cousin who was crowned Henry IV , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though he has never been presented to us as anything but a very flawed man and ruler , but empathize with him to the extent that we actually , in some sense , become him : Richard II , though a king , is us .
Amazon.com Gift Card i ... Buy New $ 15.00 The book about him suggested that there was much criticism of Richard at the time , but that it never got to the root of the problem , which was the very nature of the medieval political system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ failed as an individual , not that corruption and misrule were inherent in the very feudal system of which he was at the summit .
This was a system in which the only remedy for incompetence or worse was overthrow , usually accompanied by murder .
Richard ’ s critics , according to the author , were blinded by their assumptions about what a political system must be like , which explains the shallowness of superficiality of their complaints against Richard .
We , with the advantage of more than six centuries of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and at greater depth than the contemporaries with Richard , who could not think other than medievally .
The Best of Theodore Dalrymple

For reasons best known to myself, last week I read a short book about Richard II, the English king who came to the throne at age 10 and was deposed 22 years later, in 1399, and murdered the following year.
It seems that Shakespeare got him more or less right, at least if the chronicles of the time got him right. Richard II was a young man of very poor judgment and a strong sense of entitlement (a common and disastrous combination), though he was not evilly intentioned in the manner of later dictators. He showered his court favorites with gifts and honors, at the expense, of course, of the rest of the population, then—as now—the taxpayers. Shakespeare memorably described the beneficiaries of Richard’s extorted largesse as the caterpillars of the commonwealth. Is there any commonwealth, any political system, any polity, without them?
It is part of Shakespeare’s unique genius that when we hear or read Richard’s great speeches during and after his deposition by his cousin who was crowned Henry IV, we not only sympathize with him, though he has never been presented to us as anything but a very flawed man and ruler, but empathize with him to the extent that we actually, in some sense, become him: Richard II, though a king, is us.
Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $15.00 (as of 12:45 UTC - Details) The book about him suggested that there was much criticism of Richard at the time, but that it never got to the root of the problem, which was the very nature of the medieval political system. His critics thought only that he failed as an individual, not that corruption and misrule were inherent in the very feudal system of which he was at the summit. This was a system in which the only remedy for incompetence or worse was overthrow, usually accompanied by murder.
Richard’s critics, according to the author, were blinded by their assumptions about what a political system must be like, which explains the shallowness of superficiality of their complaints against Richard. We, with the advantage of more than six centuries of distance, can see things more clearly and at greater depth than the contemporaries with Richard, who could not think other than medievally.
No doubt this is so, and allows us to enjoy a certain and pleasant sense of superiority. How could they, the medievals, have been so blind as not to see what was in front of their noses, and which we now see at a glance? Of course, there took place in Richard’s reign the famous Peasants’ Revolt of 1381, but first it was not really a revolt by peasants, and second it had no real demands to make other than that the rulers should become personally honest and selfless, which is something the world has rarely, if ever, seen, and the likelihood of which has scarcely grown in the interval.
Read the Whole Article
The Best of Theodore Dalrymple


lewrockwell--2020-02-11--Biological Weapons: A Useful and Timely Factual Overview

The US government and its many agencies and educational and health institutions , have for many decades conducted intensive research into biological warfare , in many cases strongly focused on race-specific pathogens .
In a report to the US Congress , the Department of Defense revealed that its program of creating artificial biological agents included modifying non-fatal viruses to make them lethal , and genetic engineering to alter the immunology of biological agents to make treatment and vaccinations impossible .
The military report admitted that at the time it operated about 130 bio-weapons research facilities , dozens at US universities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the purview of the US Congress and the jurisdiction of the courts .
This knowledge hasn ’ t been a secret for a long time .
In a classified 1948 report by the Pentagon ’ s Committee on Biological Warfare , the main selling point was that : A US Army operating manual from 1956 stated explicitly that biological and chemical warfare were an integral operating portion of US military strategy , were not restricted in any way , and that Congress had given the military “ First Strike ” authority on their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Congress to remove this first-strike authority was defeated by the White House and bio-chemical weapons expenditures increased from $ 75 million to almost $ 350 million .
That was an enormous amount of money in the early 1960s .
( 3 ) Against the Left : A Ro ... Llewellyn H Rockwell Jr Best Price : $ 13.57 Buy New $ 8.00 US Defense Secretary Robert McNamara ( image on the right ) executed 150 top-secret bio-weapons programs in the 1960s , performing bio-weapons experiments and field tests on an unwitting public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ often against American citizens .
McNamara ordered the Joint Chiefs of Staff “ to consider all possible applications ” of these agents against enemy nations in a coherent plan for a total “ biological and chemical deterrent capability ” , the plan to include cost estimates and an “ appraisal of international political consequences ” .
( 4 ) ( 5 ) In the year 2000 , The Project for the New American Century ( 6 ) ( 7 ) produced a report titled , “ Rebuilding America ’ s Defenses ” , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy ambition for America .
Their report called itself a “ blueprint for maintaining global US preeminence … and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests.
” The authors , their genocidal mentality obvious , stated : The US Army ’ s Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick , Maryland is the military ’ s main facility for research on biological warfare .
It comprises 80,000 m² .
By the mid-1980s , this bio-weapons section of Fort Detrick was receiving nearly $ 100 million per @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of many sections .
When Japan invaded China , one of Dr. Ishii ’ s ( unit 731 ) grand successes was to develop methods of mass-producing fleas and ticks infected with the plague and other lethal pathogens for distribution among civilian populations – which is how the Americans learned to weaponise insects – to breed and disseminate ticks infested with Lyme Disease from their secret Plum Island Germ Laboratory in New York State .
This was also the source of the US programs of breeding and disseminating mosquitoes and fleas infected with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ North Korea , to say nothing of the domestic mosquito programs the US inflicted on its own people .
Founded on Ishii ’ s human research , the US military developed an entomological ( insect ) warfare facility , and initially prepared plans to attack Russia and the Soviet States with entomological bio-weapons .
The facility was designed to produce 100 million yellow fever-infected mosquitoes per month , its output tested on unwitting American civilians by dropping infected mosquitoes and other insects over large portions of the US .
As is so typical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beginning in the 1950s and 1960s were given juvenile appellations like “ Project Big Buzz ” and “ Project Big Itch ” and “ Operation Mayday ” ( 8 ) ( 9 ) ( 10 ) , but were tests of the feasibility of producing billions of insects , infecting them with lethal pathogens , then loading them into munitions and dispersing them over Russia from aircraft or even missiles .
From a US Army report from March of 1981 , one writer noted that “ you can marvel at how much ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cost to launch a yellow fever-infected mosquito attack on a city – with a handy “ Cost per Death ” chart included !
.
” The Dugway Sheep incident is worth attention as well .
( 11 ) Then we had “ Operation Drop Kick ” ( 12 ) , designed to test various ways of dispersing infected insects over large geographical areas , the tests carried out over various parts of the continental US , including most of the East Coast .
We had “ Project SHAD ( Shipboard Hazard and Defense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2000 , we had “ Project Bacchus ” designed to determine the feasibility of constructing an anthrax production facility in a foreign country while remaining undetected .
There were other of these programs of course , all with foolish names and all designed to assess the dissemination of infected insects and other lethal pathogens into civilian populations .
They were kept very secret since they were illegal in domestic law and contravened international law and many weapons treaties that other nations signed with the US in good faith .
In addition to Fort @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bio-weapons ordnance plant at Vigo , Indiana , which was a massive production facility that specialised in biological pathogens , and capable of producing 275,000 bombs containing Botulinum or one million anthrax bombs per month .
The fermenter tanks at Vigo contained 250,000 gallons , or about one million liters , making it , according to reports , by far the largest bacterial mass-production facility in the world .
This was not a recent development ; Vigo was fully operational during the Second World War , essentially a bio-anthrax factory , one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1944 for 500,000 anthrax bombs , and which Churchill stated should be considered only the “ first installment ” .
Vigo was eventually turned over to Pfizer for “ antibiotics manufacture ” and was replaced in the mid-1950s by a new state of the art facility at the Pine Bluff Arsenal .
( 13 ) ( 14 ) ( 15 ) The Daily News published an article on 24 September 2005 , in which it detailed US Army plans for bulk purchases of anthrax , relating a series of contracts that had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Sunshine Project , which emanated from the military ’ s Dugway Proving Ground in Utah .
These notices asked various companies to tender for the production of bulk quantities of anthrax , as well as to produce “ significant volumes ” of other biological agents .
One contract specified that the tendering company “ must have the ability and be willing to grow ( anthrax ) in 1,500-litre quantities ” , and “ must also be able to produce 3,000-litre batches ” of unspecified other biological agents .
( 16 ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s military is producing lethal biological pathogens in quantities of millions of liters , it is time to stop pretending we are not engaged in biological warfare .
It is of no comfort that the military might claim these to be “ harmless ” strains of pathogens , since ( 1 ) any facility capable of producing benign pathogens can easily produce lethal varieties and ( 2 ) there is no such thing as ‘ harmless ’ anthrax .
There is no material difference between a defensive and an offensive biowarfare program , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ self-defense ” when producing millions of liters of anthrax .
Even the US Government Accountability Office , in its 1994 report on these programs , stated that US military ’ s Biological Defense Program contained “ scores of divisions , departments , research groups , bio-intelligence and more , by no means all related to “ ‘ defense ’ in any sense ” , and were by nature belligerent and offensive military programs .
We are nevertheless assured that the US “ has never used biological weapons ” , by the same people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ production of anthrax and other “ pathogens ” in multiple batches of 3,000 liters .
Dissembling propaganda is impossible to avoid in America , even in official military medical textbooks .
There were other sites and facilities besides Fort Detrick that were constructed by the US military solely for the development of bio-weapons , including the Horn Island Testing Station in Mississippi which was meant to be the primary bio-weapons testing site , and the Plum Island Germ Laboratory in New York State from which the military spread Lyme Disease among half the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Plum Island facility was designed exclusively to develop and test lethal animal pathogens that could destroy an enemy nation ’ s food supply – as the US attempted to do in North Korea .
Deadly strains of foot-and-mouth disease were one result of this research , which the Americans later shared with their fellow psychopaths at Porton Down in the UK – who put it to good use .
An additional portion was the development , testing and production of bombs containing what was called a “ vegetable killer acid ” , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and most cultivated vegetable crops .
I have a strong suspicion that many of the recent bird flu and swine flu epidemics originated from pathogens created at Plum Island .
The textbook titled , Medical Aspects of Biological Warfare ( 2007 ) , published by the US military ’ s Surgeon-General , admits to the establishment of “ a large-scale production facility in Pine Bluff , Arkansas ” , with the new plant featuring “ advanced laboratory … measures enabling large-scale fermentation , concentration , storage , and weaponisation of microorganisms ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 10.00 And it does also admit that by 1951 , the US had produced its first biological weapons , anti-crop bombs , and “ antipersonnel ” munitions , having “ weaponised and stockpiled ” all these .
It adds that the CIA had independently “ developed weapons using toxins including cobra venom and saxitoxin for covert operations ” , but that unfortunately “ all records regarding their development and deployment were destroyed in 1972 ” when the information became public .
( 18 ) And the US military has tried to weaponise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Guatemala Syphilis project , where they infected thousands then left them to die .
The official narrative , while admitting the criminality , stubbornly adheres to the tale of a charitable purpose of testing medications – for thousands who were specifically denied the medicines that would have saved their lives .
( 19 ) The US military appears desperate not only to find biological ways to kill nations of people , but is equally interested in methods of destroying their food supply .
Accordingly , it also confessed to another several dozen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crop and plant disease agents had been released , in experiments to test methods of destroying the entire food plant life of an enemy nation .
In 2012 , Japanese media revealed that the United States government had tested specific , DNA-engineered crop-killing bioweapons in Okinawa and Taiwan during the 1960s and early 1970s , and that the US military tested some of these within the continental US as well .
They were also applied in Vietnam .
The purpose of Agent Orange was never as a defoliant as claimed , but developed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rice crops and to sufficiently contaminate the soil to prevent re-growth .
This text is Part I of a 3 Part article .
Note to readers : please click the share buttons above or below .
Forward this article to your email lists .
Crosspost on your blog site , internet forums .
etc .
Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman .
He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms , and owned an international import-export business .
He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ international affairs to senior EMBA classes .
Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West .
He can be contacted at : 2186604556 @ qq.com .
He is a frequent contributor to Global Research .
The original source of this article is Global Research .

The US government and its many agencies and educational and health institutions, have for many decades conducted intensive research into biological warfare, in many cases strongly focused on race-specific pathogens.
In a report to the US Congress, the Department of Defense revealed that its program of creating artificial biological agents included modifying non-fatal viruses to make them lethal, and genetic engineering to alter the immunology of biological agents to make treatment and vaccinations impossible. The military report admitted that at the time it operated about 130 bio-weapons research facilities, dozens at US universities and others at many international sites outside the purview of the US Congress and the jurisdiction of the courts.
This knowledge hasn’t been a secret for a long time. In a classified 1948 report by the Pentagon’s Committee on Biological Warfare, the main selling point was that:
“A gun or a bomb leaves no doubt that a deliberate attack has occurred. But if … an epidemic slashes across a crowded city, there is no way of knowing whether anyone attacked, much less who”, adding hopefully that “A significant portion of the human population within selected target areas may be killed or incapacitated” with only very small amounts of a pathogen. (1) (2)
A US Army operating manual from 1956 stated explicitly that biological and chemical warfare were an integral operating portion of US military strategy, were not restricted in any way, and that Congress had given the military “First Strike” authority on their use. In 1959, an attempt by Congress to remove this first-strike authority was defeated by the White House and bio-chemical weapons expenditures increased from $75 million to almost $350 million. That was an enormous amount of money in the early 1960s. (3) Against the Left: A Ro... Rockwell Jr, Llewellyn H Best Price: $2.85 Buy New $8.00 (as of 07:59 UTC - Details)
US Defense Secretary Robert McNamara (image on the right) executed 150 top-secret bio-weapons programs in the 1960s, performing bio-weapons experiments and field tests on an unwitting public, sometimes in foreign countries but most often against American citizens. McNamara ordered the Joint Chiefs of Staff “to consider all possible applications” of these agents against enemy nations in a coherent plan for a total “biological and chemical deterrent capability”, the plan to include cost estimates and an “appraisal of international political consequences”. (4) (5)
In the year 2000, The Project for the New American Century (6) (7) produced a report titled, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”, which contained a radical and belligerent Right-Wing policy ambition for America. Their report called itself a “blueprint for maintaining global US preeminence … and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests.” The authors, their genocidal mentality obvious, stated:
“Advanced forms of biological warfare that can ‘target’ specific genotypes may transform biological warfare … to a politically useful tool.”
Bio-Weapons Research Institutions
The US Army’s Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick, Maryland is the military’s main facility for research on biological warfare. It comprises 80,000 m². By the mid-1980s, this bio-weapons section of Fort Detrick was receiving nearly $100 million per year, and this was only one of many sections.
When Japan invaded China, one of Dr. Ishii’s (unit 731) grand successes was to develop methods of mass-producing fleas and ticks infected with the plague and other lethal pathogens for distribution among civilian populations – which is how the Americans learned to weaponise insects – to breed and disseminate ticks infested with Lyme Disease from their secret Plum Island Germ Laboratory in New York State. This was also the source of the US programs of breeding and disseminating mosquitoes and fleas infected with cholera and Yellow Fever in China and North Korea, to say nothing of the domestic mosquito programs the US inflicted on its own people.
Founded on Ishii’s human research, the US military developed an entomological (insect) warfare facility, and initially prepared plans to attack Russia and the Soviet States with entomological bio-weapons. The facility was designed to produce 100 million yellow fever-infected mosquitoes per month, its output tested on unwitting American civilians by dropping infected mosquitoes and other insects over large portions of the US. As is so typical for the US military, these projects beginning in the 1950s and 1960s were given juvenile appellations like “Project Big Buzz” and “Project Big Itch” and “Operation Mayday” (8) (9) (10), but were tests of the feasibility of producing billions of insects, infecting them with lethal pathogens, then loading them into munitions and dispersing them over Russia from aircraft or even missiles.
From a US Army report from March of 1981, one writer noted that “you can marvel at how much (or how little) it would have cost to launch a yellow fever-infected mosquito attack on a city – with a handy “Cost per Death” chart included!.” The Dugway Sheep incident is worth attention as well. (11)
Then we had “Operation Drop Kick” (12), designed to test various ways of dispersing infected insects over large geographical areas, the tests carried out over various parts of the continental US, including most of the East Coast. We had “Project SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense). Then, as late as 2000, we had “Project Bacchus” designed to determine the feasibility of constructing an anthrax production facility in a foreign country while remaining undetected. There were other of these programs of course, all with foolish names and all designed to assess the dissemination of infected insects and other lethal pathogens into civilian populations. They were kept very secret since they were illegal in domestic law and contravened international law and many weapons treaties that other nations signed with the US in good faith.
Selected Articles: War against Iran or North Korea?
In addition to Fort Detrick, the US military has a bio-weapons ordnance plant at Vigo, Indiana, which was a massive production facility that specialised in biological pathogens, and capable of producing 275,000 bombs containing Botulinum or one million anthrax bombs per month. The fermenter tanks at Vigo contained 250,000 gallons, or about one million liters, making it, according to reports, by far the largest bacterial mass-production facility in the world.
This was not a recent development; Vigo was fully operational during the Second World War, essentially a bio-anthrax factory, one of its first orders being from Winston Churchill in 1944 for 500,000 anthrax bombs, and which Churchill stated should be considered only the “first installment”. Vigo was eventually turned over to Pfizer for “antibiotics manufacture” and was replaced in the mid-1950s by a new state of the art facility at the Pine Bluff Arsenal. (13) (14) (15)
The Daily News published an article on 24 September 2005, in which it detailed US Army plans for bulk purchases of anthrax, relating a series of contracts that had been discovered by Edward Hammond, director of the Sunshine Project, which emanated from the military’s Dugway Proving Ground in Utah. These notices asked various companies to tender for the production of bulk quantities of anthrax, as well as to produce “significant volumes” of other biological agents. One contract specified that the tendering company “must have the ability and be willing to grow (anthrax) in 1,500-litre quantities”, and “must also be able to produce 3,000-litre batches” of unspecified other biological agents. (16) (17)
When a nation’s military is producing lethal biological pathogens in quantities of millions of liters, it is time to stop pretending we are not engaged in biological warfare. It is of no comfort that the military might claim these to be “harmless” strains of pathogens, since (1) any facility capable of producing benign pathogens can easily produce lethal varieties and (2) there is no such thing as ‘harmless’ anthrax.
There is no material difference between a defensive and an offensive biowarfare program, and even fools cannot claim “self-defense” when producing millions of liters of anthrax. Even the US Government Accountability Office, in its 1994 report on these programs, stated that US military’s Biological Defense Program contained “scores of divisions, departments, research groups, bio-intelligence and more, by no means all related to “‘defense’ in any sense”, and were by nature belligerent and offensive military programs. We are nevertheless assured that the US “has never used biological weapons”, by the same people who were simultaneously tendering contracts for the production of anthrax and other “pathogens” in multiple batches of 3,000 liters. Dissembling propaganda is impossible to avoid in America, even in official military medical textbooks.
There were other sites and facilities besides Fort Detrick that were constructed by the US military solely for the development of bio-weapons, including the Horn Island Testing Station in Mississippi which was meant to be the primary bio-weapons testing site, and the Plum Island Germ Laboratory in New York State from which the military spread Lyme Disease among half the area population.
One portion of the Plum Island facility was designed exclusively to develop and test lethal animal pathogens that could destroy an enemy nation’s food supply – as the US attempted to do in North Korea. Deadly strains of foot-and-mouth disease were one result of this research, which the Americans later shared with their fellow psychopaths at Porton Down in the UK – who put it to good use. An additional portion was the development, testing and production of bombs containing what was called a “vegetable killer acid”, and which could destroy cereals, grains, and most cultivated vegetable crops. I have a strong suspicion that many of the recent bird flu and swine flu epidemics originated from pathogens created at Plum Island.
The textbook titled, Medical Aspects of Biological Warfare (2007), published by the US military’s Surgeon-General, admits to the establishment of “a large-scale production facility in Pine Bluff, Arkansas”, with the new plant featuring “advanced laboratory … measures enabling large-scale fermentation, concentration, storage, and weaponisation of microorganisms”. Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $10.00 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details)
And it does also admit that by 1951, the US had produced its first biological weapons, anti-crop bombs, and “antipersonnel” munitions, having “weaponised and stockpiled” all these. It adds that the CIA had independently “developed weapons using toxins including cobra venom and saxitoxin for covert operations”, but that unfortunately “all records regarding their development and deployment were destroyed in 1972” when the information became public. (18)
And the US military has tried to weaponise venereal diseases, leading to travesties like the Guatemala Syphilis project, where they infected thousands then left them to die. The official narrative, while admitting the criminality, stubbornly adheres to the tale of a charitable purpose of testing medications – for thousands who were specifically denied the medicines that would have saved their lives. (19)
The US military appears desperate not only to find biological ways to kill nations of people, but is equally interested in methods of destroying their food supply. Accordingly, it also confessed to another several dozen (at least) occasions where devastating crop and plant disease agents had been released, in experiments to test methods of destroying the entire food plant life of an enemy nation. In 2012, Japanese media revealed that the United States government had tested specific, DNA-engineered crop-killing bioweapons in Okinawa and Taiwan during the 1960s and early 1970s, and that the US military tested some of these within the continental US as well. They were also applied in Vietnam. The purpose of Agent Orange was never as a defoliant as claimed, but developed instead to destroy Vietnam’s entire rice crops and to sufficiently contaminate the soil to prevent re-growth.
This text is Part I of a 3 Part article.
Part II The Geopolitics of Biological Weapons
Part III Genetically Modified Seeds: Conceived as a Weapon*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He can be contacted at: [email protected]. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Notes
(1) www.nasonline.org/about-nas/history/archives/collections/cbw-1941-1948.html
(2) https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-2004-08-01-0408010004-story.html
(3) https://usacac.army.mil/sites/default/files/misc/doctrine/CDG/cdg_resources/manuals/fm/fm27_10.pdf
(4) http://archive.vva.org/archive/TheVeteran/2006_03/featureSHAD.htm
(5) https://rielpolitik.com/2016/08/07/cover-up-project-shad-deception-in-open-waters/
(6) https://www.loc.gov/item/lcwa00010308
(7) https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Project_for_the_New_American_Century
(8) https://blackthen.com/operation-big-itch-operation-drop-kick-fleas-infected-mosquitoes-dropped-black-towns/
(9) https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Operation_Big_Itch
(10) http://self.gutenberg.org/articles/operation_may_day
(11) https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Dugway_sheep_incident (This article has many useful references)
(12) https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Operation_Drop_Kick
(13) https://www.thenation.com/article/bioterrorism-hits-home/
(14) https://libcom.org/files/Churchill%20and%20Poison%20Gas.pdf
(15) https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=232989
(16) https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn8044-us-army-plans-to-bulk-buy-anthrax/
(17) https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18725184-800-us-army-plans-to-bulk-buy-anthrax/
(18) Medical Aspects of Biological Warfare; https://repository.netecweb.org/items/show/325
(19) https://www.cbsnews.com/news/guatemala-syphilis-experiments-in-1940s-called-chillingly-egregious/
The original source of this article is Global Research.


lewrockwell--2020-02-11--Long Before Trump, We Were a Divided People

In a way , Donald Trump might be called The Great Uniter .
Bear with me .
No Republican president in the lifetime of this writer , not even Ronald Reagan , united the party as did Trump in the week of his acquittal in the Senate and State of the Union address .
According to the Gallup Poll , 94 % of Republicans approve of his handling of his presidency , in his fourth year , despite the worst press any president has ever received and the sustained hostility of our cultural elites .
Only Bush I in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Bush II in the first months of the 2003 Iraq War registered support like this .
Only one Republican , Sen. Mitt Romney , and only after having consulted God himself , joined Speaker Nancy Pelosi and voted with Sen. Chuck Schumer ’ s caucus to bring down the president .
The Death of the West : ... Patrick J. Buchanan Check Amazon for Pricing .
When have Republicans ever exhibited the home-team enthusiasm they demonstrated during that State of the Union address and the post-acquittal gathering in the East Room ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ such support for a Republican as they do for Trump at his mammoth rallies ?
Heading for November , this is a party united .
But not only is Trump the great uniter of the GOP .
He is the great uniter of Democrats .
Every Democrat but three in the House voted to impeach and remove him .
Every Democrat in the Senate voted to convict and expel him from office and prevent his ever running again .
In Iowa and New Hampshire , evicting Trump from the Oval Office seemed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Getting Trump out of the White House seems far more important to Democrats than getting U.S. troops out of the endless Middle East wars .
But while he has made more than a small contribution to our savage partisanship , is Trump really the cause of the uncivil war in America ?
Or is his presidency , like Gettysburg , simply the battlefield upon which America ’ s cultural and political war is currently engaged ?
Consider .
Bernie Sanders ’ nationalization of health care and abolition of private health insurance for 150 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that has never been reconcilable with Trump ’ s belief in the superiority of the private sector , a belief reflected in Trump ’ s tax cuts for corporations and individuals and his deregulation policies .
Democrats ’ unanimous support for “ reproductive rights ” is in eternal conflict with the traditionalist belief in a God-given right to life , as well as with Trump ’ s pledge to nominate justices who will overturn Roe v. Wade .
Still , the battles over the Supreme Court nominations of Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kavanaugh .
Immigration may determine the destiny of the West .
Yet , Democrats believe in tearing down Trump ’ s wall , an end to deportations , extending welfare benefits to border-crossers and granting sanctuary from border security agents for criminals here illegally .
That Americans of European descent , 90 % of the nation in 1960 , close to 60 % today , will , in 20 years , be less than half of the population , is for Democrats a cause of ceaseless celebration .
America , they contend , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ place than we have ever known when a far smaller share of the population is white .
The greater the racial , credal , cultural and ethnic diversity , the better the country .
Churchill , Hitler , and ... Patrick J. Buchanan Best Price : $ 9.48 Buy New $ 14.00 Yet , Americans of European descent , headed for minority status , provide 85-90 % of all Republican votes in presidential elections .
What Democrats are cheering portends the demographic death of the GOP .
Republicans are a more nationalist and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bush presidencies .
But the Democratic Party has become a politically correct institution where Joe Biden is forced to explain stands that he took when he was a moderate Democratic senator from Delaware .
His opposition to the forced busing of children from neighborhood schools into inner-city schools was attacked as racist .
He had to apologize for his friendship with Southern senators like Jim Eastland and his role in the Clarence Thomas hearings .
He has been made to confess for voting to authorize the 2003 war on Iraq .
Biden is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used to be as a senator .
Apparently , he has not moved far enough .
Even James Carville is castigating his own party ’ s candidates for talking about “ reparations or any kind of goofy left-wing thing out there.
” “ It ’ s like we ’ re losing our damn minds , ” said Carville .
Is Trump responsible for what Carville himself sees as an irrationality and irresponsibility taking on epidemic proportions inside the Democratic Party ?
Or has Trump ’ s success maddened Democrats into manifesting who they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what may yet prevent them from being taken seriously as a party that can lead the nation ?
We were divided long before Trump got here , and we will remain so long after he departs .
The Best of Patrick J. Buchanan

Shop all books by Pat Buchanan
In a way, Donald Trump might be called The Great Uniter.
Bear with me. No Republican president in the lifetime of this writer, not even Ronald Reagan, united the party as did Trump in the week of his acquittal in the Senate and State of the Union address.
According to the Gallup Poll, 94% of Republicans approve of his handling of his presidency, in his fourth year, despite the worst press any president has ever received and the sustained hostility of our cultural elites.
Only Bush I in the first months of the 1991 Gulf War and Bush II in the first months of the 2003 Iraq War registered support like this.
Only one Republican, Sen. Mitt Romney, and only after having consulted God himself, joined Speaker Nancy Pelosi and voted with Sen. Chuck Schumer’s caucus to bring down the president.
When have Republicans ever exhibited the home-team enthusiasm they demonstrated during that State of the Union address and the post-acquittal gathering in the East Room? When have working- and middle-class voters shown such support for a Republican as they do for Trump at his mammoth rallies? Heading for November, this is a party united.
But not only is Trump the great uniter of the GOP. He is the great uniter of Democrats. Every Democrat but three in the House voted to impeach and remove him. Every Democrat in the Senate voted to convict and expel him from office and prevent his ever running again.
In Iowa and New Hampshire, evicting Trump from the Oval Office seemed the one issue that animated every candidate. Getting Trump out of the White House seems far more important to Democrats than getting U.S. troops out of the endless Middle East wars.
But while he has made more than a small contribution to our savage partisanship, is Trump really the cause of the uncivil war in America? Or is his presidency, like Gettysburg, simply the battlefield upon which America’s cultural and political war is currently engaged?
Consider. Bernie Sanders’ nationalization of health care and abolition of private health insurance for 150 million Americans is grounded in a socialism that has never been reconcilable with Trump’s belief in the superiority of the private sector, a belief reflected in Trump’s tax cuts for corporations and individuals and his deregulation policies.
Democrats’ unanimous support for “reproductive rights” is in eternal conflict with the traditionalist belief in a God-given right to life, as well as with Trump’s pledge to nominate justices who will overturn Roe v. Wade.
Still, the battles over the Supreme Court nominations of Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas predated by decades the battle over Brett Kavanaugh.
Immigration may determine the destiny of the West.
Yet, Democrats believe in tearing down Trump’s wall, an end to deportations, extending welfare benefits to border-crossers and granting sanctuary from border security agents for criminals here illegally.
That Americans of European descent, 90% of the nation in 1960, close to 60% today, will, in 20 years, be less than half of the population, is for Democrats a cause of ceaseless celebration.
America, they contend, will be a far, far better place than we have ever known when a far smaller share of the population is white. The greater the racial, credal, cultural and ethnic diversity, the better the country. Churchill, Hitler, and... Patrick J. Buchanan Best Price: $9.48 Buy New $14.00 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details)
Yet, Americans of European descent, headed for minority status, provide 85-90% of all Republican votes in presidential elections. What Democrats are cheering portends the demographic death of the GOP.
Republicans are a more nationalist and populist party than they were in the Bush presidencies. But the Democratic Party has become a politically correct institution where Joe Biden is forced to explain stands that he took when he was a moderate Democratic senator from Delaware.
His opposition to the forced busing of children from neighborhood schools into inner-city schools was attacked as racist. He had to apologize for his friendship with Southern senators like Jim Eastland and his role in the Clarence Thomas hearings. He has been made to confess for voting to authorize the 2003 war on Iraq.
Biden is far to the left of where he used to be as a senator. Apparently, he has not moved far enough.
Even James Carville is castigating his own party’s candidates for talking about “reparations or any kind of goofy left-wing thing out there.”
“It’s like we’re losing our damn minds,” said Carville.
Is Trump responsible for what Carville himself sees as an irrationality and irresponsibility taking on epidemic proportions inside the Democratic Party?
Or has Trump’s success maddened Democrats into manifesting who they are and what they believe, and what may yet prevent them from being taken seriously as a party that can lead the nation?
We were divided long before Trump got here, and we will remain so long after he departs.
The Best of Patrick J. Buchanan


lewrockwell--2020-02-11--9 ‘Anti-Cancer’ Fruits To Include in Your Diet

Specifically , fruits such as pineapple , apple , avocado , lemon , banana , grapes , and tomato have been found to be the most effective in preventing and eliminating cancer cells .
Many studies have supported the immense benefits of fruits against cancer .
A review of 206 studies has concluded that a higher vegetable and fruit intake is associated with lower risks of cancer in the lungs , colon , stomach , pancreas , and oral cavity .
A study conducted in California found that recurrence of cancer in women was reduced by half with the consumption @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in conjunction with regular exercise .
Researchers from Ohio State University also found that high intake of fruits caused retardation in the proliferation of cancer cells , which means that fruits can also slow down the rate at which cancer cells multiply .
The Bromelain enzyme found in pineapples , for instance , is capable of breaking up the protective layer in tumors .
It is found in the stem and fruit of pineapples .
It can also promote DNA repair and normal growth of cells .
Hence , apart from its cancer-killing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and stronger .
Sodium Bicarbonate : Na ... Mark Sircus Best Price : $ 7.25 Buy New $ 10.32 Procyanidins , found in apples , can induce apoptosis , or natural death , in cancer cells .
Apple peel also contains compounds called triterpenoids that are highly effective in stopping the growth of cancer cells , especially those diagnosed with : This is primarily why it is highly advised to eat the skin of apples after they are washed thoroughly .
Clinical cancer research has also shown evidence that grape seed extract can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a protein called JNK , which encourages apoptosis in cancer cells .
The antioxidant Resveratrol , found in grape seeds , can also influence natural death of cancer cells in the : Grape seed extract and Resveratrol , in fact , have been incorporated in many health supplements because of their therapeutic properties .
Some compounds in bananas have been found to be effective in preventing further production of leukemia and liver cancer cells .
High consumption of bananas was also linked to a decrease in the risk of : They are also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the muscles and heart .
Citrus fruits are an excellent source of Vitamin C. They also provide significant amounts of folate , dietary fiber , potassium , and beta-carotene .
Citrus fruits are most beneficial in the following cancers : Studies have shown that citrus fruits are advantageous for heart disease , arthritis , and gallstones .
There are several studies showing that Lemon has the property to fight cancer ; lemon in general contains vitamin C , which is already a cancer-fighting agent , while lemon extract affects only the malignant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The sweet berries are potent anti-cancer compounds .
According to research on mice , BLACK RASPBERRIES showed reductions in : The berries inhibited the whole spectrum of tumors from being promoted and initiated .
The berries contain ellagic acid which inhibits the tumor genesis .
BLUEBERRIES are one of the strongest sources of antioxidants .
They also contain cancer-fighting substances called phytochemicals , and are rich in potent antioxidants ( anthocyanosides ) and resveratrol .
STRAWBERRIES are also a high source of antioxidants , folic acids , and vitamin C. They have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cancer .
One cup of strawberries provides 100 % of the daily recommendation of vitamin C. Pomegranate is rich in tannins and flavonoids , both antioxidants which have drawn attention for their healing properties .
Preliminary research suggests pomegranate extract can help prevent the growth of : Kiwi is well-known for its high vitamin C content , boasting even more than oranges .
It is also a powerful antioxidant , as Vitamin C prevents free radical damage .
Kiwi consists of flavonoids and carotenoids that protect DNA from the damage or oxidative stress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vitamins , kiwi is a strong immune booster .
It proves its effectiveness in healing different cancers like : Kiwi extracts inhibit cancer cell proliferation , and its active photochemical , catechin , helps in the prevention of cancer and reduces the toxicity of anti-cancer agents .
The tree is called Graviola in Brazil .
Soursop contains prickly green fruit that happens to kill cancer 10,000 times more than chemotherapy drugs — without harmful side effects to healthy cells .
Extracts of the tree selectively kill the malignant cells in 12 types of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Know Abo ... Jeffrey Anshel OD Best Price : $ 10.78 Buy New $ 11.84 Dietitians recommend eating fresh fruits to obtain a higher amount of anti-cancer compounds .
A cancer fighting diet would ideally contain two thirds fruits and vegetables .
Contact Dr. Adem to get help on your cancer case or follow his Facebook page for regular updates .
• Have Pineapples Ever Been Used For Cancer Treatment ?

Specifically, fruits such as pineapple, apple, avocado, lemon, banana, grapes, and tomato have been found to be the most effective in preventing and eliminating cancer cells.
Cancer Fighting Foods
Many studies have supported the immense benefits of fruits against cancer. A review of 206 studies has concluded that a higher vegetable and fruit intake is associated with lower risks of cancer in the lungs, colon, stomach, pancreas, and oral cavity.
A study conducted in California found that recurrence of cancer in women was reduced by half with the consumption of large amounts of vegetables and fruits in conjunction with regular exercise.
Researchers from Ohio State University also found that high intake of fruits caused retardation in the proliferation of cancer cells, which means that fruits can also slow down the rate at which cancer cells multiply.
Pineapples
The Bromelain enzyme found in pineapples, for instance, is capable of breaking up the protective layer in tumors. It is found in the stem and fruit of pineapples. It can also promote DNA repair and normal growth of cells. Hence, apart from its cancer-killing properties, it makes normal cells healthier and stronger. Sodium Bicarbonate: Na... Mark Sircus Best Price: $7.25 Buy New $10.32 (as of 10:37 UTC - Details)
Apples
Procyanidins, found in apples, can induce apoptosis, or natural death, in cancer cells. Apple peel also contains compounds called triterpenoids that are highly effective in stopping the growth of cancer cells, especially those diagnosed with:
Liver
Colon
Breast cancer.
This is primarily why it is highly advised to eat the skin of apples after they are washed thoroughly.
Grapes
Clinical cancer research has also shown evidence that grape seed extract can kill three-fourths of leukemia cells by triggering a protein called JNK, which encourages apoptosis in cancer cells. The antioxidant Resveratrol, found in grape seeds, can also influence natural death of cancer cells in the:
Lungs
Bowel
Skin
Breast
Stomach
Prostate.
Grape seed extract and Resveratrol, in fact, have been incorporated in many health supplements because of their therapeutic properties.
Bananas
Some compounds in bananas have been found to be effective in preventing further production of leukemia and liver cancer cells. High consumption of bananas was also linked to a decrease in the risk of:
Colorectal cancer
Brain cancer
Leukemia
Esophageal cancer
Oral cancer.
They are also rich in potassium, which is good for the muscles and heart.
Citrus Fruit
Citrus fruits are an excellent source of Vitamin C. They also provide significant amounts of folate, dietary fiber, potassium, and beta-carotene. Citrus fruits are most beneficial in the following cancers:
Stomach cancers
Mouth cancers
Larynx cancers
Pharynx cancers
Studies have shown that citrus fruits are advantageous for heart disease, arthritis, and gallstones. There are several studies showing that Lemon has the property to fight cancer; lemon in general contains vitamin C, which is already a cancer-fighting agent, while lemon extract affects only the malignant cells, leaving the healthy cells unharmed.
Berries
The sweet berries are potent anti-cancer compounds. According to research on mice, BLACK RASPBERRIES showed reductions in:
Oral cancer
Esophageal cancer
Colon cancer
The berries inhibited the whole spectrum of tumors from being promoted and initiated. The berries contain ellagic acid which inhibits the tumor genesis.
BLUEBERRIES are one of the strongest sources of antioxidants. They also contain cancer-fighting substances called phytochemicals, and are rich in potent antioxidants (anthocyanosides) and resveratrol.
STRAWBERRIES are also a high source of antioxidants, folic acids, and vitamin C. They have shown to decrease the risk of esophageal cancer. One cup of strawberries provides 100% of the daily recommendation of vitamin C.
Pomegranate
Pomegranate is rich in tannins and flavonoids, both antioxidants which have drawn attention for their healing properties. Preliminary research suggests pomegranate extract can help prevent the growth of:
Breast cancer
Prostate cancer
Colon cancer
Lung cancer
Kiwi
Kiwi is well-known for its high vitamin C content, boasting even more than oranges. It is also a powerful antioxidant, as Vitamin C prevents free radical damage. Kiwi consists of flavonoids and carotenoids that protect DNA from the damage or oxidative stress that is cancer. Being packed with vitamins, kiwi is a strong immune booster. It proves its effectiveness in healing different cancers like:
Liver cancer
Stomach cancer
Breast cancer
Lung cancer
Kiwi extracts inhibit cancer cell proliferation, and its active photochemical, catechin, helps in the prevention of cancer and reduces the toxicity of anti-cancer agents.
Soursop
The tree is called Graviola in Brazil. Soursop contains prickly green fruit that happens to kill cancer 10,000 times more than chemotherapy drugs — without harmful side effects to healthy cells. Extracts of the tree selectively kill the malignant cells in 12 types of cancer, including: What You Must Know Abo... Anshel OD, Jeffrey Best Price: $3.56 Buy New $11.75 (as of 10:45 UTC - Details)
Colon cancer
Lung cancer
Prostate cancer
Breast cancer
Pancreatic cancer
————————-
Dietitians recommend eating fresh fruits to obtain a higher amount of anti-cancer compounds. A cancer fighting diet would ideally contain two thirds fruits and vegetables.
Contact Dr. Adem to get help on your cancer case or follow his Facebook page for regular updates.
SOURCES
Reprinted with permission from Collective Evolution.


The Constitution

The posthumous release of Murray Rothbard ’ s fifth volume of his early American history series , Conceived in Liberty , is a cause of celebration not only for those interested in the country ’ s constitutional period , but also for the present day as the nation is faced with acute social , economic , and political crises .
The fifth volume , The New Republic : 1784-1791 , stands with Boston T. Party ’ s 1997 release , Hologram of Liberty , as a grand rebuttal of the cherished notion held by most contemporary scholars , pundits on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many libertarians who believe that the US Constitution is some great bulwark in defense of individual liberty and a promoter of economic success .
Rothbard ’ s narrative highlights the crucial years after the American Revolution focusing on the events and personalities that led to the calling for , drafting , and eventual promulgation of the Constitution in 1789 .
Not only does he describe the key factors that led to the creation of the American nation-state , but he gives an insightful account of the machinations which took place in Philadelphia and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which has become , in the eyes of most conservatives , on a par with Holy Writ.What Might Have Been While Rothbard writes in a lively and engaging manner , the eventual outcome and triumph of the nationalist forces leaves the reader with a certain sadness .
Despite the fears expressed by the Antifederalists that the new government was too powerful and would lead to tyranny , through coercion , threats , lies , bribery , and arm twisting by the politically astute Federalists , the Constitution came into being .
Yet , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way around and the forces against it had prevailed ?
It is safe to assume that America would have been a far more prosperous and less war-like place .
The common held notion that the Constitution was needed to keep peace among the contending states is countered by Rothbard , who points out a number of instances where states settled their differences , most notably Maryland and Virginia as they came to an agreement on the navigation of the Chesapeake Bay .
[ 129-30 ] Without a powerful central state to extract resources @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country would have been difficult to undertake .
Thus , the US ’ s disastrous participation in the two world wars would have been avoided .
Furthermore , it would have been extremely unlikely for a Confederation Congress to impose an income tax as the federal government successfully did through a constitutional amendment in 1913 .
Nor would the horrific misnamed “ Civil War ” ever take place with its immense loss of life and the destruction of the once flourishing Southern civilization .
The triumph of the Federal government ended forever “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , no doubt , inspired centralizing tendencies throughout the world , most notably in Germany which became unified under Prussian domination .
In a failed attempt in 1786 to enact an impost tax under the Confederation , Abraham Yates , a New York lawyer and prominent Antifederalist , spoke of decentralization as the key to liberty as Rothbard aptly summarizes : Yates also warned that true republicanism can only be preserved in small states , and keenly pointed out that in the successful Republics of Switzerland and the Netherlands the local provinces retained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taxing power in Congress would demolish state sovereignty and reduce the states , where the people could keep watch on their representatives , to mere adjuncts of congressional power , and liberty would be gone .
[ 64 ] Antifederalists , such as Yates , had a far greater understanding of how liberty and individual rights would be protected than their statist opponents such as Alexander Hamilton and James Madison .
The Antifederalists looked to Europe as a model , which , for most of its history , was made up of decentralized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the other hand , got much of their inspiration from the Roman Republic and later Empire .
There is little question that an America , with the political attributes of a multi-state Europe , would be far less menacing to both its own inhabitants and to the rest of the world than what it has become under the current Federal Leviathan if the Constitution never passed .
Speculation aside , historical reality meant that America would be fundamentally different than it would have been had the Articles of Confederation survived , as Rothbard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ myths surrounding the American Constitution – which continues within conservative circles to this very day – is that the document limits government power .
After reading Rothbard , such a notion can only be considered a fairy tale !
The supposed “ defects ” of the Articles of Confederation were adroitly used by the wily nationalists as a cover to hide their real motives .
Simply put – the Articles had to be scrapped and a new national government , far more powerful than what had existed under the Articles , had to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The nationalists who went into the convention agreed on certain broad objectives , crucial for a new government , all designed to remodel the United States into a country with the British political structure.
” [ 145 ] In passing the Constitution , the nationalist forces gained almost all they had set out to accomplish – a powerful central state and with it a strong chief executive office , and the destruction of the states as sovereign entities .
The supposed “ checks and balances , ” so much beloved by Constitution enthusiasts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ central state ’ s largesse .
Checks and balances exist within the central government and is not offset by any prevailing power , be it the states or citizenry .
There was no reform of the system as it stood , but a new state was erected on the decentralized foundation of the Confederation .
Why the idea of the founding fathers as some limited government proponents is a mystery .
As it developed , the Presidency has become the most powerful and , thus , the most dangerous office in the world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of situations and created crises themselves over the years , the Presidency , especially in foreign policy , is largely immune from any real oversight either from the legislature or judiciary .
This was not by happenstance .
From the start , the nationalists envisioned a powerful executive branch , and though the most extreme among the group were eventually thwarted in their desire to recreate a British-style monarchy in America , the final draft of the Constitution granted considerable power to the presidential office .
As they did throughout the Constitutional proceedings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of what an executive office in a republic should be , by subtle changes in the wording of the document as Rothbard incisively explains : As if this was not bad enough the office was given the ability to create departments within its own domain .
The totalitarian federal agencies that plague the daily lives of Americans were not some later innovation by the Progressive movement or New Dealers , but had been provided for within the document itself .
The efforts of those opposed to the various social welfare schemes of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effect through the various Cabinet departments , have been in vain since the power was given to the Presidency and has been taken advantage of by nearly all of its occupants .
Rothbard ’ s analysis of the chief executive office is especially pertinent since the nation is once again in the midst of another seemingly endless presidential election cycle .
The reason that the office has attracted so many of the worst sort ( which is being kind ) is because of its power .
If elected , the ability to control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not only one ’ s fellow citizen , but peoples across the globe is an immense attraction for sociopaths !
Rothbard makes the compelling case that the Constitution was a counter revolution , which was a betrayal of the ideology that brought about the Revolution : There was , however , always a “ conservative ” element within the revolutionary leadership that admired Great Britain and wanted to replicate it in America .
It was only when there was no alternative to British political and economic oppression that they joined with their more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Conservatives did not go away after independence , but would continue to push for an expansion of government under the Articles and finally , after most of their designs were consistently thwarted , did they scheme to impose a powerful central state upon the unsuspecting country .
Yet , they would not have triumphed had a number of key liberal-libertarians of the revolutionary generation moved to the Right during the decade following independence .
Rothbard shows why he is the master in power-elite historical analysis in his discussion of this tragic shift , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any future politically decentralized America : As the country ’ s elite became more statist and as political ( Shays Rebellion ) and economic ( a depression ) factors played into their hands , conservatives seized the opportunity to erect on America a powerful national government : The Mises Institute and the editor of the book , Patrick Neumann , must be given immense credit for bringing this important piece of scholarship into print .
Once read , any notion of the “ founding fathers ” as disinterested statesmen who sublimated their own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that of their country will be disavowed .
Moreover , The New Republic:1784-1791 is the most important in the series since the grave crises that the nation now faces can be traced to those fateful days in Philadelphia when a powerful central state was created .
Volume Five shows that the problems of America ’ s past and the ones it now faces are due the Constitution .
The remedy to the present societal ills is not electing the “ right ” congressman , or president , but to “ devolve ” politically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For the future of liberty and economic well-being , this is where efforts should be placed and Murray Rothbard ’ s final volume of Conceived in Liberty is essential reading if that long , arduous , but much necessary task is to be undertaken .

A Review of Murray N. Rothbard’s Conceived in Liberty, Vol. 5
The posthumous release of Murray Rothbard’s fifth volume of his early American history series, Conceived in Liberty, is a cause of celebration not only for those interested in the country’s constitutional period, but also for the present day as the nation is faced with acute social, economic, and political crises. The fifth volume, The New Republic: 1784-1791, stands with Boston T. Party’s 1997 release, Hologram of Liberty, as a grand rebuttal of the cherished notion held by most contemporary scholars, pundits on the Right, and, surprisingly, many libertarians who believe that the US Constitution is some great bulwark in defense of individual liberty and a promoter of economic success.
Rothbard’s narrative highlights the crucial years after the American Revolution focusing on the events and personalities that led to the calling for, drafting, and eventual promulgation of the Constitution in 1789. Not only does he describe the key factors that led to the creation of the American nation-state, but he gives an insightful account of the machinations which took place in Philadelphia and a trenchant analysis of the document itself which has become, in the eyes of most conservatives, on a par with Holy Writ.
What Might Have Been
In a failed attempt in 1786 to enact an impost tax under the Confederation, Abraham Yates, a New York lawyer and prominent Antifederalist, spoke of decentralization as the key to liberty as Rothbard aptly summarizes:
Yates also warned that true republicanism can only be preserved in small states, and keenly pointed out that in the successful Republics of Switzerland and the Netherlands the local provinces retained full control over their finances. A taxing power in Congress would demolish state sovereignty and reduce the states, where the people could keep watch on their representatives, to mere adjuncts of congressional power, and liberty would be gone. [64]
Antifederalists, such as Yates, had a far greater understanding of how liberty and individual rights would be protected than their statist opponents such as Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. The Antifederalists looked to Europe as a model, which, for most of its history, was made up of decentralized political configurations. The Federalists, on the other hand, got much of their inspiration from the Roman Republic and later Empire. There is little question that an America, with the political attributes of a multi-state Europe, would be far less menacing to both its own inhabitants and to the rest of the world than what it has become under the current Federal Leviathan if the Constitution never passed.
Speculation aside, historical reality meant that America would be fundamentally different than it would have been had the Articles of Confederation survived, as Rothbard points out:
The enactment of the Constitution in 1788 drastically changed the course of American history from its natural decentralized and libertarian direction to an omnipresent leviathan that fulfilled all of the Antifederalists’ fears. [312]
Limited Government Myth
One of the great myths surrounding the American Constitution – which continues within conservative circles to this very day – is that the document limits government power. After reading Rothbard, such a notion can only be considered a fairy tale!
The supposed “defects” of the Articles of Confederation were adroitly used by the wily nationalists as a cover to hide their real motives. Simply put – the Articles had to be scrapped and a new national government, far more powerful than what had existed under the Articles, had to be created as Rothbard asserts: “The nationalists who went into the convention agreed on certain broad objectives, crucial for a new government, all designed to remodel the United States into a country with the British political structure.” [145]
In passing the Constitution, the nationalist forces gained almost all they had set out to accomplish – a powerful central state and with it a strong chief executive office, and the destruction of the states as sovereign entities. The supposed “checks and balances,” so much beloved by Constitution enthusiasts, has proven worthless in checking the central state’s largesse. Checks and balances exist within the central government and is not offset by any prevailing power, be it the states or citizenry.
There was no reform of the system as it stood, but a new state was erected on the decentralized foundation of the Confederation. Why the idea of the founding fathers as some limited government proponents is a mystery.
The Chief Executive
As it developed, the Presidency has become the most powerful and, thus, the most dangerous office in the world. While its occupants certainly took advantage of situations and created crises themselves over the years, the Presidency, especially in foreign policy, is largely immune from any real oversight either from the legislature or judiciary. This was not by happenstance. From the start, the nationalists envisioned a powerful executive branch, and though the most extreme among the group were eventually thwarted in their desire to recreate a British-style monarchy in America, the final draft of the Constitution granted considerable power to the presidential office.
As they did throughout the Constitutional proceedings, the nationalists cleverly altered the concept of what an executive office in a republic should be, by subtle changes in the wording of the document as Rothbard incisively explains:
[T]he nationalists proceeded to alter . . . and exult the executive in a highly important textual change. Whenever the draft had stated that the president ‘may recommend’ measures to the Congress, the convention changed ‘may’ to ‘shall,’ which provided a ready conduit to the president for wielding effective law-making powers, while the legislature was essentially reduced to a ratification agency of laws proposed by the president. [190-91]
As if this was not bad enough the office was given the ability to create departments within its own domain.
In another fateful change, the president was given the power to create a bureaucracy within the executive by filling all offices not otherwise provided for in the Constitution, in addition to those later created by laws. [191]
The totalitarian federal agencies that plague the daily lives of Americans were not some later innovation by the Progressive movement or New Dealers, but had been provided for within the document itself. The efforts of those opposed to the various social welfare schemes of the past, which have been put into effect through the various Cabinet departments, have been in vain since the power was given to the Presidency and has been taken advantage of by nearly all of its occupants.
Rothbard’s analysis of the chief executive office is especially pertinent since the nation is once again in the midst of another seemingly endless presidential election cycle. The reason that the office has attracted so many of the worst sort (which is being kind) is because of its power. If elected, the ability to control, regulate, impoverish, and kill not only one’s fellow citizen, but peoples across the globe is an immense attraction for sociopaths!
A Coup d’état and Counter Revolution
Rothbard makes the compelling case that the Constitution was a counter revolution, which was a betrayal of the ideology that brought about the Revolution:
The Americans were struggling not primarily for independence but for political- economic liberty against the mercantilism of the British Empire. The struggle was waged against taxes, prohibitions, and regulations – a whole failure of repression that the Americans, upheld by an ideology of liberty, had fought and torn asunder. . . . [T]he American Revolution was in essence not so much against Britain as against British Big Government – and specially against an all-powerful central government and a supreme executive. [307]
He continues:
[T]he American Revolution was liberal, democratic, and quasi-anarchistic; for decentralization, free markets, and individual liberty; for natural rights of life, liberty, and property; against monarchy, mercantilism, and especially against strong central government. [307-08]
There was, however, always a “conservative” element within the revolutionary leadership that admired Great Britain and wanted to replicate it in America. It was only when there was no alternative to British political and economic oppression that they joined with their more liberal-libertarian brethren and decided for independence.
Conservatives did not go away after independence, but would continue to push for an expansion of government under the Articles and finally, after most of their designs were consistently thwarted, did they scheme to impose a powerful central state upon the unsuspecting country.
Yet, they would not have triumphed had a number of key liberal-libertarians of the revolutionary generation moved to the Right during the decade following independence. Rothbard shows why he is the master in power-elite historical analysis in his discussion of this tragic shift, which would spell the death knell to any future politically decentralized America:
[O]ne of the . . . reasons for the defeat of the Antifederalists, though they commanded a majority of the public, was the decimation that had taken place in radical and liberal leadership during the 1780s. A whole galaxy of ex-radicals, ex- decentralists, and ex-libertarians, found in their old age that they could comfortably live in the new Establishment. The list of such defections is impressive, including John Adams, Sam Adams, John Hancock, Benjamin Rush, Thomas Paine, Alexander McDougall, Isaac Sears, and Christopher Gadsden. [308-09]
As the country’s elite became more statist and as political (Shays Rebellion) and economic (a depression) factors played into their hands, conservatives seized the opportunity to erect on America a powerful national government:
It was a bloodless coup d’état against an unresisting Confederation Congress. . . . The drive was managed by a corps of brilliant members and representatives of the financial and landed oligarchy. These wealthy merchants and large landowners were joined by the urban artisans of the large cities in their drive to create a strong overriding central government – a supreme government with its own absolute power to tax, regulate commerce, and raise armies. [306]
Conclusion
The Mises Institute and the editor of the book, Patrick Neumann, must be given immense credit for bringing this important piece of scholarship into print. Once read, any notion of the “founding fathers” as disinterested statesmen who sublimated their own interests and that of their constituents to that of their country will be disavowed. Moreover, The New Republic:1784-1791 is the most important in the series since the grave crises that the nation now faces can be traced to those fateful days in Philadelphia when a powerful central state was created.
Volume Five shows that the problems of America’s past and the ones it now faces are due to the Constitution. The remedy to the present societal ills is not electing the “right” congressman, or president, but to “devolve” politically into a multitude of states and jurisdictions. For the future of liberty and economic well-being, this is where efforts should be placed and Murray Rothbard’s final volume of Conceived in Liberty is essential reading if that long, arduous, but much necessary task is to be undertaken.
Originally published at Antonius Aquinas.


lewrockwell--2020-02-12--Why Lomeli and Not the Other 49,999?

Why Lomeli and Not the Other 49,999?

The unthinkable has befallen one of the TSA ’ s gate-rapists : he has not only been arrested in the performance of his “ duties , ” he ’ s actually facing charges .
Take a moment to recover : the shock immobilized me a good while , too .
The Thieves and Sexual Assailants have pawed men , women and little kids for 19 very long , torturous years at Amerikan airports , plunging their hands up shirts and down britches , strip-searching grandmothers , chortling over naked passengers , stealing second base on the pretext that women hide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ boys .
In short , the TSA hourly commits all manner of atrocity—and with nauseating impunity , too .
Each time a victim cries “ Rape !
” , the agency ’ s blatantly false boilerplate claims that it “ strives to treat every passenger with dignity and respect… ” Adding insult to injury , it “ investigates ” itself and—surprise !
—declares its sadists innocent .
To choose one example from millions : after “ British singer Morrissey said ” that a “ San Francisco TSA worker … went straight for my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ finger down my rear cleavage , ” the TSA averred that its “ officer followed standard operating procedures in the screening of this individual.
” Need we further testimony that sexual assault is not only the TSA ’ s “ job ” but its official policy ?
However violent or offensive its degenerates ’ depredations , it vigorously defends both .
Until now .
For reasons no sane serf can fathom , the State of California and the TSA itself are denouncing one of the latter ’ s leches for what he is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Novel of ... Becky Akers Check Amazon for Pricing .
This being the government , though , its immensely delayed justice doesn ’ t even begin to satisfy .
For starters , prosecutors have charged 22-year-old Johnathon Lomeli not with molestation but with “ one felony count of false imprisonment for intentionally and unlawfully detaining an individual through the use of fraud or deceit .
” Second , they imply that he and he alone of the TSA ’ s 50,000 goons is guilty of sexual assault .
And for proof , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Which is to say that though a pale imitation of due process finally caught up with ol ’ Johnathon , his fellow fiends may safely continue wallowing in depravity .
I despise Lomeli as I do all the TSA ’ s brutes , but even I couldn ’ t blame him for asking , “ Why me ?
Everyone else gets away with it !
” Lomeli kicked off his criminal career last summer at Los Angeles International when he “ allegedly trick [ ed ] an airline passenger into showing him her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pants.
” Nothing new there : despite its protestations that it does not strip-search passengers , the TSA in fact does .
Frequently .
And I ’ ll bet Lomeli didn ’ t even break a sweat while “ tricking ” his prey : given the debauchery travelers expect from these blue-gloved barbarians , he probably barked but a single command before the poor woman was unbuttoning her shirt .
That brings us to the first of those distinctions without a difference : the TSA insists that only “ an officer of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Why its cretins imagine such abuse will soothe passengers when the Feds not only tolerate but encourage sodomy , we can not begin to guess .
And even if we pretend that none of the TSA ’ s pervs are that perverted , assault is assault regardless of the predator ’ s sex .
I have yet to hear any survivor of rape lament , “ Oh , if only a person of my own sex had attacked me , I wouldn ’ t be nearly as traumatized !
” Ergo , since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government damns his vice rather than paying him for it .
( Wonder whether his lawyer will advise Lomeli to plead that he felt up–sorry , felt like a woman that day , and therefore no crime occurred… ) And here ’ s our second distinction without any substance : after that first flash of flesh , Lomelli “ took ” the lady “ to what he said would be a private room for more security screening … But once they were alone on an elevator , she said he told her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The woman said Lomeli told her he had to make sure she still had nothing in her bra , requiring her to lift her shirt ‘ to show me your full breasts.
’ He also again looked down her pants , she said , before telling her she was free to go and adding that she had nice breasts.
” Abducting Arnold -- A No ... Becky Akers Check Amazon for Pricing .
Lomeli ’ s leering diverges very little from other way-too-close encounters with the TSA—unless you ’ re a statist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fanciful contrasts : as California ’ s attorney general solemnly thundered , “ The felony allegedly occurred outside of the primary security screening area.
” Ah , yes , that magical “ primary security screening area ” !
It whitewashes crime and renders sexual assault “ a welcome reassurance of safety.
” Those few yards of enchanted real estate , dear reader , make all the difference .
Nor do Our Rulers fret about creating checkpoints that confuse passengers into allowing or even cooperating with such grotesque violations as Lomeli ’ s .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Women deserve to be treated with dignity and respect everywhere … There is no excuse for this kind of alleged behavior .
It ’ s not okay on the street , it ’ s not okay in our schools , and it ’ s certainly not welcome at the airport.
” Tell it to the TSA , buddy .
Forty-nine thousand , nine hundred and ninety-nine of its savages still infest airports , degrading women every moment of every day .
Not to be outdone in hypocrisy , the TSA “ called [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unacceptable and an affront to the hardworking [ sic ] and committed members of our workforce [ sic ] .
’ ” An “ affront ” ?
C ’ mon : it was job-training .
The Best of Becky Akers

The unthinkable has befallen one of the TSA’s gate-rapists: he has not only been arrested in the performance of his “duties,” he’s actually facing charges.
Take a moment to recover: the shock immobilized me a good while, too. The Thieves and Sexual Assailants have pawed men, women and little kids for 19 very long, torturous years at Amerikan airports, plunging their hands up shirts and down britches, strip-searching grandmothers, chortling over naked passengers, stealing second base on the pretext that women hide bombs in their bosoms, and fondling boys. In short, the TSA hourly commits all manner of atrocity—and with nauseating impunity, too. Each time a victim cries “Rape!”, the agency’s blatantly false boilerplate claims that it “strives to treat every passenger with dignity and respect…” Adding insult to injury, it “investigates” itself and—surprise!—declares its sadists innocent. To choose one example from millions: after “British singer Morrissey said” that a “San Francisco TSA worker … went straight for my private bits and then he put his finger down my rear cleavage,” the TSA averred that its “officer followed standard operating procedures in the screening of this individual.”
Need we further testimony that sexual assault is not only the TSA’s “job” but its official policy? However violent or offensive its degenerates’ depredations, it vigorously defends both.
Until now. For reasons no sane serf can fathom, the State of California and the TSA itself are denouncing one of the latter’s leches for what he is: a criminal. Halestorm--A Novel of ... Akers, Becky Buy New $2.99 (as of 11:05 UTC - Details)
This being the government, though, its immensely delayed justice doesn’t even begin to satisfy. For starters, prosecutors have charged 22-year-old Johnathon Lomeli not with molestation but with “one felony count of false imprisonment for intentionally and unlawfully detaining an individual through the use of fraud or deceit. ” Second, they imply that he and he alone of the TSA’s 50,000 goons is guilty of sexual assault. And for proof, they offer two specious, microscopic distinctions.
Which is to say that though a pale imitation of due process finally caught up with ol’ Johnathon, his fellow fiends may safely continue wallowing in depravity. I despise Lomeli as I do all the TSA’s brutes, but even I couldn’t blame him for asking, “Why me? Everyone else gets away with it!”
Lomeli kicked off his criminal career last summer at Los Angeles International when he “allegedly trick[ed] an airline passenger into showing him her breasts and letting him look into her pants.”
Nothing new there: despite its protestations that it does not strip-search passengers, the TSA in fact does. Frequently. And I’ll bet Lomeli didn’t even break a sweat while “tricking” his prey: given the debauchery travelers expect from these blue-gloved barbarians, he probably barked but a single command before the poor woman was unbuttoning her shirt.
That brings us to the first of those distinctions without a difference: the TSA insists that only “an officer of the same gender” will grope us. Why its cretins imagine such abuse will soothe passengers when the Feds not only tolerate but encourage sodomy, we cannot begin to guess. And even if we pretend that none of the TSA’s pervs are that perverted, assault is assault regardless of the predator’s sex. I have yet to hear any survivor of rape lament, “Oh, if only a person of my own sex had attacked me, I wouldn’t be nearly as traumatized!”
Ergo, since the male Lomeli ogled a female, the government damns his vice rather than paying him for it. (Wonder whether his lawyer will advise Lomeli to plead that he felt up–sorry, felt like a woman that day, and therefore no crime occurred…)
And here’s our second distinction without any substance: after that first flash of flesh, Lomelli “took” the lady “to what he said would be a private room for more security screening … But once they were alone on an elevator, she said he told her he could do the screening right there. The woman said Lomeli told her he had to make sure she still had nothing in her bra, requiring her to lift her shirt ‘to show me your full breasts.’ He also again looked down her pants, she said, before telling her she was free to go and adding that she had nice breasts.” Abducting Arnold--A No... Akers, Becky Buy New $2.99 (as of 10:30 UTC - Details)
Lomeli’s leering diverges very little from other way-too-close encounters with the TSA—unless you’re a statist. Then you discern all sorts of fanciful contrasts: as California’s attorney general solemnly thundered, “The felony allegedly occurred outside of the primary security screening area.” Ah, yes, that magical “primary security screening area”! It whitewashes crime and renders sexual assault “a welcome reassurance of safety.” Those few yards of enchanted real estate, dear reader, make all the difference.
Nor do Our Rulers fret about creating checkpoints that confuse passengers into allowing or even cooperating with such grotesque violations as Lomeli’s. Meanwhile, the prosecutor huffs, “Women deserve to be treated with dignity and respect everywhere … There is no excuse for this kind of alleged behavior. It’s not okay on the street, it’s not okay in our schools, and it’s certainly not welcome at the airport.”
Tell it to the TSA, buddy. Forty-nine thousand, nine hundred and ninety-nine of its savages still infest airports, degrading women every moment of every day.
Not to be outdone in hypocrisy, the TSA “called [Lomeli’s] alleged behavior ‘unacceptable and an affront to the hardworking [sic] and committed members of our workforce [sic].’”
An “affront”? C’mon: it was job-training.
The Best of Becky Akers


Elephants Unseen

Certain ideas , although as outrageous as elephants in the living room , are not perceived as such because , while present , their presence is so common and expected as to render them virtually invisible .
But perhaps , one day , maybe on awakening from a nap , we see them clearly and wonder “ What are THEY doing here ?
Have I been blind ?
” The answer , of course , is “ yes.
” If you ask someone to show you money , you will very likely be shown a dollar bill .
You object @ @ @ @ @ @ @ piece of paper !
Ah , you are told , perhaps rather smugly , “ We don ’ t need to use metals for money .
We use paper for money.
” But in that case , why isn ’ t there ten times as much paper in a TEN as in a ONE dollar bill ?
Afer a moment of confusion , your correspondent corrects himself .
“ Well , the paper isn ’ t actually the money , but a promise to pay money .
It ’ s clearly labeled a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the matter , were it true , but it isn ’ t .
The company issuing the note—the Federal Reserve—will laugh at you if you present one of their notes for payment .
If you look up the law establishing the Federal Reserve , you will find that its notes are “ obligations of the United States , ” meaning , of course , that they are obligations of the taxpayers .
What an elephant !
The banking cartel can go into the marketplace and use its “ notes ” to buy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who will ultimately be expected to redeem the notes !
In fact , however , the notes are self-redeeming .
Years ago I sent a Federal Reserve Note to the secretary of the Treasury , William Miller , with the request that he do whatever was required by law to satisfy the obligation of the United States .
He promptly replied that his only obligation was to return my note , which he did .
In other words , a Federal Reserve Note/government obligation redeems itself .
An IOU payable with—another IOU !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ through our society— and that ’ s just a small part of the herd !
When a prominent politician dies or retires , you will , without a doubt , hear him referred to as a “ public servant.
” We will be told that a nation is grateful for his years of service , and that as a mere youth , he aspired to a career as a public servant .
Another whopper of an unseen elephant , perhaps because few , if any of us , have servants , or have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the movies .
But isn ’ t it interesting that in the movies servants do as their masters dictate , whereas the “ public servants ” have US do as THEY dictate .
And if you actually found yourself blessed ( ? )
with servants , would you expect them to sit you down and tell you how you were to behave , what you had to do , or not do , how much you were to pay them , what their hours would be , and how you would be punished @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tickets you for traveling five miles over the speed limit will also be referred to as a public servant , which , evidently , must mean that he is “ serving ” you when you gives you that ticket .
And the judge in traffic court—another servant—is serving you when he fines you for committing this non-crime .
What kind of servants deprive you of your money or your freedom ?
A contestant on a TV quiz show , if a veteran , will likely be thanked for his service by the host @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consisted in imposing our Rulers ’ will—-democracy !
!
!
—upon befuddled natives in some poor mid-east country , but let ’ s not quibble .
Thanks for your service !
!
!
It may be a service indeed to the military/industrial complex , but the typical American only knows he ’ s paying for it—or else .
You were probably thrilled to learn that the U.S. now has a new branch of the military , the Space Force , which will serve us by bringing democracy to Martians .
Wake up and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ You ’ d be better off if he were to leave .
The Best of Paul Hein

Certain ideas, although as outrageous as elephants in the living room, are not perceived as such because, while present, their presence is so common and expected as to render them virtually invisible. But perhaps, one day, maybe on awakening from a nap, we see them clearly and wonder “What are THEY doing here? Have I been blind?” The answer, of course, is “yes.”
MONEY
If you ask someone to show you money, you will very likely be shown a dollar bill. You object: but it’s just a piece of paper! Ah, you are told, perhaps rather smugly, “We don’t need to use metals for money. We use paper for money.” But in that case, why isn’t there ten times as much paper in a TEN as in a ONE dollar bill? Afer a moment of confusion, your correspondent corrects himself. “Well, the paper isn’t actually the money, but a promise to pay money. It’s clearly labeled a NOTE.” That would be an end of the matter, were it true, but it isn’t. The company issuing the note—the Federal Reserve—will laugh at you if you present one of their notes for payment. If you look up the law establishing the Federal Reserve, you will find that its notes are “obligations of the United States,” meaning, of course, that they are obligations of the taxpayers. What an elephant! The banking cartel can go into the marketplace and use its “notes” to buy whatever it needs from the very people who will ultimately be expected to redeem the notes!
In fact, however, the notes are self-redeeming. Years ago I sent a Federal Reserve Note to the secretary of the Treasury, William Miller, with the request that he do whatever was required by law to satisfy the obligation of the United States. He promptly replied that his only obligation was to return my note, which he did. In other words, a Federal Reserve Note/government obligation redeems itself. An IOU payable with—another IOU! A veritable gang of elephants running amok through our society— and that’s just a small part of the herd!
PUBLIC SERVANTS
When a prominent politician dies or retires, you will, without a doubt, hear him referred to as a “public servant.” We will be told that a nation is grateful for his years of service, and that as a mere youth, he aspired to a career as a public servant. Another whopper of an unseen elephant, perhaps because few, if any of us, have servants, or have even encountered a servant, except in the movies. But isn’t it interesting that in the movies servants do as their masters dictate, whereas the “public servants” have US do as THEY dictate. And if you actually found yourself blessed (?) with servants, would you expect them to sit you down and tell you how you were to behave, what you had to do, or not do, how much you were to pay them, what their hours would be, and how you would be punished for disobedience?
The traffic cop who tickets you for traveling five miles over the speed limit will also be referred to as a public servant, which, evidently, must mean that he is “serving” you when you gives you that ticket. And the judge in traffic court—another servant—is serving you when he fines you for committing this non-crime. What kind of servants deprive you of your money or your freedom?
A contestant on a TV quiz show, if a veteran, will likely be thanked for his service by the host. His “service” might have consisted in imposing our Rulers’ will—-democracy!!!—upon befuddled natives in some poor mid-east country, but let’s not quibble. Thanks for your service!!! It may be a service indeed to the military/industrial complex, but the typical American only knows he’s paying for it—or else. You were probably thrilled to learn that the U.S. now has a new branch of the military, the Space Force, which will serve us by bringing democracy to Martians.
Wake up and discover the pachyderm on your sofa. You’d be better off if he were to leave.
The Best of Paul Hein


Liberals

A woman walked by our front porch .
We had the screen door open for fresh air .
( I rebuilt my hand made screen door last summer ) .
The woman ’ s dog was off the leash and came right up onto our front porch .
The woman was talking into her smart phone as she took photos of our front garden .
My wife went out there and said , “ Hello ?
” It was so rude .
No respect for private property .
That is very common here in the SF Bay Area .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much anymore .
They keep intruding into our space with no respect .
Sorry , our home is not part of your Kumbaya hippie commune .
The liberal engineer who works at the Geysers Geo Thermal plant has his BERNIE sign in his front yard across the street .
Back in 2007 I made a chalk drawing on the corner of our lot on the sidewalk promoting Dr. Ron Paul .
It was all red , white , and blue “ Peace , Prosperity , and Liberty ” .
Immediately Michael , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asking me about Dr. Paul .
I mean he got really close to me .
( Michael is 5 ’ 8′ and maybe 160 lbs . )
I ’ m 6′ and a bit heavy at 190 lbs .
I wasn ’ t afraid of Michael .
It was an odd experience .
Here in Healdsburg the liberals are always in everyone ’ s business .
I ’ ve had the police called on me twice by neighbors while we were building fences around our property ( which were legal and still here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on their neighbors for just about anything .
It ’ s disgusting .
And yes I ’ ve fought back with the police department and the mayor , who is a friend of mine .
He ’ s from Lincoln , Nebraska , too .
Of course he ’ s surrounded with commies on the local city council .
I miss Butler Shaffer .
He was from Lincoln , too .
But the climate is nice and we have good friends here .
The soil is so fertile .
You can grow anything @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a year .
The Best of Tim McGraw

A woman walked by our front porch. We had the screen door open for fresh air. (I rebuilt my hand made screen door last summer). The woman’s dog was off the leash and came right up onto our front porch. The woman was talking into her smart phone as she took photos of our front garden. My wife went out there and said, “Hello?”
It was so rude. No respect for private property. That is very common here in the SF Bay Area. We don’t talk to our neighbors much anymore. They keep intruding into our space with no respect. Sorry, our home is not part of your Kumbaya hippie commune.
The liberal engineer who works at the Geysers Geo Thermal plant has his BERNIE sign in his front yard across the street. Back in 2007 I made a chalk drawing on the corner of our lot on the sidewalk promoting Dr. Ron Paul. It was all red, white, and blue “Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty”. Immediately Michael, the engineer, was suddenly at my side asking me about Dr. Paul. I mean he got really close to me. (Michael is 5’8′ and maybe 160 lbs.) I’m 6′ and a bit heavy at 190 lbs. I wasn’t afraid of Michael . It was an odd experience.
Here in Healdsburg the liberals are always in everyone’s business. I’ve had the police called on me twice by neighbors while we were building fences around our property (which were legal and still here.) Folks call the cops here on their neighbors for just about anything. It’s disgusting. And yes I’ve fought back with the police department and the mayor, who is a friend of mine. He’s from Lincoln, Nebraska, too. Of course he’s surrounded with commies on the local city council. I miss Butler Shaffer. He was from Lincoln, too.
But the climate is nice and we have good friends here. The soil is so fertile. You can grow anything. We get two crops of oranges a year.
The Best of Tim McGraw