This is the Way to Bring About Change

Here’s a guy who gets it:

Fed up with what he views as crappy treatment from the TSA, the owner of a restaurant near Seattle-Tacoma International Airport has decided to put all TSA agents on his No-Eat List.

“We have posted signs on our doors basically saying that they aren’t allowed to come into our business,” one employee tells travel journalist Christopher Elliott. “We have the right to refuse service to anyone.”

She says that whenever a TSA agent attempts to dine at the restaurant, “we turn our backs and completely ignore them, and tell them to leave… Their kind aren’t welcomed in our establishment.”

The restaurant claims that 90% of its patrons are in agreement with their stance and that the local police have actually helped escort TSA workers off the premises.

“Until TSA agents start treating us with the respect and dignity that we deserve, then things will change for them in the private sector,” says the employee.

Published in: on February 26, 2011 at 5:13 pm  Comments (3)  
Tags: ,

A lil’ Agitating

An individual recently asked me how I thought the government was violating the limitations imposed by our constitution. The following is my response to that question.

The U.S. Constitution and the first ten amendments thereof (commonly called the Bill of Rights) were written in the plainest English possible by this country’s founding fathers. It was never meant to be interpreted by a bunch of cross-dressing, furniture abusers. With this in mind I shall quote parts of it that any individual with a fourth grade education can understand, and provide examples of violations of those parts.

Amendment I: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Religion is perhaps the only Natural Right enumerated in the constitution that hasn’t been trampled; however considering the increasing occurrences of “reasonable restriction” interpretations I doubt it will stay intact for long. This country’s love of democracy, which this country was never intended to be (we were founded as a constitutionally limited republic) and the shamefully more common usage of “diaper head” and “camel F-er” in this country to describe Muslims I give this last remnant of the Bill of Rights less than ten years.
Freedom of speech: I missed “free speech zone” while reading that. Not that I would, but try using the word, fag, or nigger on your local college campus and see what happens.

Freedom of press: Even though Wikileaks isn’t even headquartered in this country, our government has tried repeatedly to shut it down and jail the owners.

Right to peacefully assemble and seek redress: When World War One veterans calling themselves the Bonus Expeditionary Force marched to Washington D.C to demand the compensation promised to them they were attacked by our government. These veterans had brought their families with them and “a number” of them were murdered.

Amendment II: A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

The American militia was (and still is) composed of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age. The militia of our revolutionary war era was equipped (by themselves) with firearms vastly superior (rifles) to those issued to the regular army (smooth bore muskets) of every nation (including our own) of that time. However now days the general population can’t legally own even the standard issue infantryman’s weapon (a select-fire AR-15.)

I own several weapons that can’t be kept, let alone bared in several states of this union (they are legal here in Montana.) How are those people in California and Washington D.C. to name only two places not having their Rights infringed?

Amendment III: No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Soldiers may not be quartered in our homes; however we are being forced to quarter them by money stolen from us via taxes.

Amendment IV: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Secure in their persons:


Secure in their houses: Our government has decided in Section 218 of the PATRIOT ACT that they don’t need a warrant to “sneak and peek”

Secure in their papers, effects: The government has declared that they don’t need any type of warrant to read, or copy any piece of Email, that you send or receive. This also applies to all cellular phone conversations.

Amendment V: No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Ask José Padilla (an American citizen) if he was deprived of his liberty without due process while he was locked up for three and a half years at a military prison even though no charges were filed during that time.

Amendment VI: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

As mentioned above José Padilla certainly didn’t receive a speedy trial, which if I recall correctly must take place within six months.

The Right to a jury trial is perhaps the last and strongest defense we have against this tyrannical government and because of this they have already taken steps beyond secret tribunals to limit it. Today you can be denied a jury for ANY crime that carries a possible maximum punishment of less than a year. You will also be denied a jury for any tax crime even if the punishment could be incarceration in excess of a year. However, the constitution specifically says ALL criminal prosecutions shall have a jury trial.

The true power of this Right is explained here:

Amendment VII: In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

The government bypassed this right (being tried at common law) by declaring that this doesn’t apply unless the twenty dollars are Morgan silver dollars, or older. I’m not kidding!

Amendment VIII: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

The definition of excessive is very subjective, however I’ve heard of many cases where I thought the fine excessive. Such as: United States v. Bajakajian, where the defendant was fined over $350,000 becuase he took more than $10,000 out of the United States.

Cruel and unusual punishments: What are the chances of being ass raped while in prison? Like that’s not bad enough what are the chances of contracting AIDS from that experience. I can’t think of anything crueler than dying a slow horrible death from HIV?

Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The constitution was written as a limiting document in which the few allowable powers of the government were enumerated in Section Eight. These powers were described in detail, and were less than thirty in number. They included such things as coining money, establishing post offices and a patent office. This amendment was a further check against the day (that did unfortunately arrive) when the government would try to assume more authority than it was granted. This amendment (and a better educated populace) was responsible for the drafting of the Eighteenth Amendment (prohibition) in 1919. The proof that this amendment is being violated everyday in this country is that a prohibition style amendment was never ratified to make marijuana (and other drugs) illegal, such as they were forced to pass for alcohol.

Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

My own state of Montana about a year ago passed a bill that stated we could ignore federal firearm laws as long as the firearms were built in Montana for Montanans, this piece of legislation was based on the Tenth Amendment. All medical marijuana laws are also based on the tenth amendment. The federal government’s response to these state level laws (raids of California dispensaries, and threats to Montanans) are proof of the violation of this Right.

I think these examples make it clear that the populace of this country live with only a small fraction of their Natural Rights being respected by this tyrannical government. There are many more horror stories about violations of our Rights I wanted to write about but this is already long enough. Feel free to share other examples as replies.

Die Weiße Rose

I just finished reading an awesome book about a Nazi resistance group that operated inside WWII Germany titled, Die Weiße Rose (The White Rose) today. Like most people who stood up against a tyrannical government the people in the resistance came to an early death. My most comforting thought about this book was the fact we wouldn’t face nearly the risks those kids did today because of the internet. I should have known that view was too idealistic… like I told a friend about FIJA several years ago; this is like a game of chess and like the clauses granting jury-less tribunals, actions have been taken against this too.

The proposed legislation, introduced into the US Senate by independent senator Joe Lieberman, who is chairman of the US Homeland Security committee, seeks to grant the President broad emergency powers over the internet in times of national emergency.

US President Barack Obama would be granted powers to seize control of and even shut down the internet under a new bill that describes the global internet as a US “national asset”.


So with all the efficiency of disseminating information the net has brought us could we too be caught dumping subversive pamphlets down a stairway someday too.

Why I Support a Flat Tax…Again

Since Montana has slipped back into winter and I can’t work outside and detailing Roberta (the wood cook stove) took only two days here’s a lil’ agitatin’ for you all.

A long long time ago, it seems like last century…Oh yeah, it was, I thought the idea to tax everyone at the same rate was kind of clever and definitely fairer than the graduated/sliding scale madness we had…Still have. This was back before I realized taxation was nothing more than pimped out robbery.

Theft, plain old fashioned gun in your face theft is all taxation is. Sure the guys who ultimately show up holding the guns have tin badges… even though now days you won’t see them because when they show up they will be wearing all black and have nothing shiny on. In a most revealing case of irony they will also be wearing those same types of masks bank robbers wear. They won’t scream “your money, or your life,” because if they have come they will be collecting them both.

They will steal every cent you have, either through fines and penalties or through the money you will have to pay a lawyer in an attempt to avoid switching what little freedom you still have for a florescent orange jumpsuit. They will take all your money. An excellent Randian argument can be made that by taking the fruits of your labor they have taken your life, but these bastards aren’t kidding around they will take the whole lump sum, if you stop voluntarily giving them the payments.

I haven’t read the SWAT team manual so this is all deduced from actual events involving them; however their first rule after breaking down the door in the middle of the night is to shoot the family dog. If the family lacks a dog, they will kick the cat, bludgeon the parrot or asphyxiate the family’s pet fish. This is a critical step in informing the citizen that they have made a bad tax decision. This procedure has replaced the old fashioned “Police, open up,” statement. If the home owner makes any attempt to protect their property or family the tax collectors will shoot them, dead, usually in front of their spouse and kids.

I might have gotten a little carried away there and provided more information than the average American wants to hear, but I wanted to explain exactly how hard it was for me to embrace any type of taxation again. Now, I will explain exactly why I do support a Flat Tax … again, and also explain that for the exact reason that I support it is why it will never ever happen.

A mind numbingly large percentage of this country actually makes money…wait that’s the wrong phrasing…receives stolen money because of our current tax system. Like the pimps that live near some of them, when April 15th comes around they aren’t complaining about deductions or 1099s all they are thinking is “Bitch had better have my money.” In this case…like most cases involving the government, you, the tax payer, are the bitch.

But my good reader is probably still wondering why I have gone back to supporting a flat tax. Some I won’t name names (like Kirsten or FF) have probably made mental if not actual written “smack down notes” as they have read this because of the title.

So here’s the beef….the meat….the whole enchilada; I want those inner-city, hillbilly and suburban hand-out sucking non-productive leechlike members of society as pissed off as I am. Not only would this make me feel a sense of justice has returned to my life, but a pissed off section of population that has nothing to lose is exactly what we need right now.

Change didn’t come from electing a black president. Hell, it wouldn’t have mattered if the president was a black lesbian woman who was born in Mali. The government’s only desire is to preserve the status quo, they don’t want change. If you want to see change like this country hasn’t seen since the 1700’s picture it with a flat tax…picture what all those welfare queens would do if instead of receiving thousands of dollars a year they had to start paying taxes.

Free Beer….Today?

Almost seventy seven years ago on December 5th, 1933 the 21st Amendment to the Constitution was ratified and Prohibition was abolished in the United States. However the writing was on the wall before that. On April 7, 1933, eight months prior to the official repeal of Prohibition the Cullen-Harrison Bill, permitting the resumption of the manufacture and sale of beer and light wines was passed. This date is often (mistakenly) celebrated as the end of prohibition. However, the real story begins long before even that piece of legislation.

“Because of the high acquittal rate in prohibition cases during the 1920s and early 1930s, prohibition laws could not be enforced. The repeal of these laws is traceable to the refusal of juries to convict those accused [and clearly guilty] of alcohol traffic.”
Alan Scheflin and Jon Van Dyke, Jury Nullification: The Contours of a Controversy, Law and Contemporary Problems 43, No.4, 71 (1980).

We as a people used one of our most powerful rights to end Prohibition long before the government gave up forcing it upon us. This is a power we all have, though few know about it. Today, just speaking about this Right to those who most need to know can result in incarceration. This right is the fact that every juror has the duty to judge not only the facts of the case but also the law that brought the case before them. Judges and prosecutors will deny this right, and have instigated a procedure to separate any possible jurors who know about it, called Voir Dire. The government is afraid of this right and has taken drastic (unconstitutional) actions to limit it as much as they can by forming “special” tax, divorce, custody, social services courts, and secret tribunals. They have also denied the right to a jury trial to all petty offenses, most misdemeanors and some felony charges. However, the right to be judged by our neighbors and have this country’s laws likewise judged remains where it always has; with the people.

The Right for a person to be tried by his peers (neighbors) instead of a government or church official(s) is debatably the most fundamental right of a free person. This right predated our “Bill of Rights”; it was one of the first Rights of an Individual enumerated in the Constitution (Art. III Sec. 2.) It was so important to the founders of this country they enumerated it again in “The Bill of Rights” in two separate amendments (VI, VII.) However, the enumeration of this Right predates even the founding of this country. It was first written about in an ancient Greek play called The Eumenides (500BC), and was undoubtedly the method used by most primitive tribes even before written history, in judging possible morally questionable behavior. The fact that this country is attempting to (unconstitutionally) subvert this right with juror-less trials and tribunals should have the people of this country very worried. The violation of this Right allows the government to harm, or even kill, anyone at anytime for any reason with impunity.

Today I will be deadening the pain of our government’s betrayal of this Right by hefting a few beers at one of our local saloons, which is celebrating the end of Prohibition by giving everyone a free alcoholic beverage. I’ll be the guy explaining to the other patrons that Jurors knowing their Rights and acting upon them is what is allowing them to enjoy their beverage of choice. As you drink your next alcoholic beverage I’d like you to ponder the following quotes about Jury Nullification:

JOHN ADAMS (1771): It’s not only ….(the juror’s) right, but his duty, in that case, to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgement, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court.

JOHN JAY (1794): The jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy.

ALEXANDER HAMILTON (1804): Jurors should acquit even against the judge’s instruction….”if exercising their judgement with discretion and honesty they have a clear conviction that the charge of the court is wrong.”

SAMUEL CHASE (1804): The jury has the right to determine both the law and the facts.

OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES (1920): The jury has the power to bring a verdict in the teeth of both the law and the facts.

U.S. vs. DOUGHERTY (1972) [D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals]: The jury has….”unreviewable and irreversible power…to acquit in disregard of the instructions on the law given by the trial judge.”

Much more information, including how this Right of Jury Nullification helped end slavery can be found at The Fully Informed Jury Association website.

Published in: on April 7, 2010 at 8:11 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , , ,


A friend of mine once told me a person doesn’t really qualify as a Montanan until they’ve got twenty winters under their belt. He said there was a fifty percent reduction if those winters were spent in what we call “West Dakota” or “The Flats”. I’ve traveled though that area twice and I’d have to say I agree with him. I’ve considered petitioning for a reduction for myself since we live off-grid on the side of a mountain. I haven’t because I doubt that would impress a man who lives off-grid in a seven by seven foot shack. People up here are a tough bunch. My favorite bartender here spent her first two winters in a wall tent. It doesn’t take long for a person to learn to tell the difference between a real Montanan and someone who just has a summer place. A real Montanan will look you in the eye and not rush anything while you talk with them. They don’t use wishy-washy phrases like “I believe” or “I think” or “I hope”. This is a land of absolutes. Hoping doesn’t save the life of a stuck calf at 3:00AM on a subzero February morning. A real Montanan doesn’t “think” a tree will fall in a direction that won’t kill those men sawing around him; he knows. A real Montana doesn’t “believe” the elk will be bedding down during a blizzard, he knows because he’s spent the time to learn the ways of this country, and this country won’t accept excuses.

I have lived here in Montana for five years. I wasn’t lucky enough to have been born here but at least I was lucky enough to have been born in the Rocky Mountains. I came from what I thought of as the sparsely populated corner of Colorado. I didn’t really understand what sparsely populated meant until I got here. There are places here that a person looking hard will get eyestrain before they find any people.

“The Last Best Place” is a phrase often used to describe this state. Some people will add “to Hide” to that also. We have a reputation for having “unusual” people here. I never met Ted Kaczynski or “Uncle Teddy” as he’s called up here, but I know people who have. The same goes for the Trochmanns who founded The Militia of Montana. I never met Elizabeth Clare Prophet, or any of The Freemen but I understand how all these people came to call Montana home.

Ever since people formed clans and tribes there have always been those of us who haven’t belonged. Until recently this wasn’t problem. We would just strike out for “parts unknown” maybe after flipping a bird in the direction we left behind. The places beyond the edge of the maps were where we couldn’t be found. We embodied the wilderness we called home and it shaped us at least as much as we shaped it.

There are no places left for a person to disappear to in this modern world. I fanaticize about a day that private colony ships can leave for astral bodies but I doubt I will live to see it. Those of us stuck here have to make do the best we can. We are, generally speaking, peaceful people who just want to be left alone. If given the option we will relocate to find what we seek before attempting to force our views on others. This just makes sense because having others views forced on us is what we are trying to escape.

Montana is one of the few States left in this union that still has a remnant of the freedom to be different this country was founded on. Our politics and laws reflect this sense of freedom; we have waged more state sovereignty battles than any other state. We have drafted a secession bill, twice, we said “hell no” to the national I.D. plan, we were the first state to declared we could make any firearms we want no matter what the federal government thought, we were the only state to abolish speed limits, anybody can conceal carry without a permit in over ninety nine percent of the state, we told the feds we wouldn’t enforce any laws contrary to our medical marijuana law, our open contain law is a zero point/fifty dollar fine that can be paid on the side of the road while you’re still holding your beer as long as you aren’t drunk, every citizen in this state is issued a de-facto license to have guns within the federal gun free school zones outside of schools, and I know there are even more pro-freedom laws that I’m forgetting.

I like to envision the population of this country like the wine in a brandy distiller’s equipment: the more volatile elements are released as the federal government turns up the heat and we all collect here where it’s cooler. Left behind is an off-flavored inert residue in the rest of the country, and a intoxicating but dangerous mixture here. With the growing number of Rights violating laws being passed at the federal level I expect the exodus of freedom seeking individuals from the other states to continue here for some time. I expect in the near future we will see a show down with the federal government. It is my dearest wish that this is a bloodless revolution that leads to the sovereign country of Montana being formed. However, I also know how dangerous a cornered animal can be and that’s basically what us here in Montana have become.

Free State Project RIP

We have a political activist from New Hampshire visiting our little mountain town this week. Last night while I helped participate in trying to right the latest outrage to take place out there; I came to the happy realization that something like that wouldn’t happen here. That cop wouldn’t be able to show his face anywhere in town without being ridiculed. There is a positive aspect for the small town gossips. It’s not the fact that if you get a thrown in jail for DUI everyone in town knows within twenty four hours, (THIS WAS NOT ME) even if this happened in a town thirty miles away. It’s not the fact that if you get drunk and are playing grab ass with someone weighing three hundred pounds (ALSO NEITHER BEING ME) everybody knows within a few days. It’s not the fact that if you get laid off, have Mono, diarrhea, marriage troubles, erectile dysfunction, don’t kill your elk, go home to the wrong house (I WAS NOT INVOLVED IN ANY OF THESE) or need to put disclaimers after any possible rumor source in a blog post. The nice part of the local rumor mill is that everybody knows if a cop or politician (or anyone) is trying to get away with something. In fact I have a friend who when drunk becomes the meanest ninety pound chick I’ve ever known. Not that long ago one night after the bar closed she took a swing at someone missed and cold-cocked one of the local deputies who was trying to disperse the crowd. The cop didn’t charge her with assault since it was an accident. Or maybe he didn’t like the prospect of having to explain to everybody how a ninety pound girl managed to punch him. Another nice aspect of the small town rumor mill is its primary function of dispersing entertaining stories (like the last one) to all members of the community.

The political activist visiting us is a member of The Free State Project. I also was a member of the FSP until the state vote chose New Hampshire about six years ago. The Project was a brilliant plan to move lots of libertarian activists to one small state and basically take over the political system. I have since evolved to Anarcho-capitalism from libertarianism and can see the flaw in their plan; voting is a use of force. The FSP members wish to force their beliefs upon those living there who may not share those beliefs. I do happen agree that their beliefs (dissolution of most government) are nobler; however, it still doesn’t justify the use of force. Their plan is no better than the plans of those they fight since they all use the method. Spooner said it best:

The principle that the majority have a right to rule the minority, practically resolves all government into a mere contest between two bodies of men, as to which of them shall be masters, and which of them slaves; a contest, that — however bloody — can, in the nature of things, never be finally closed, so long as man refuses to be a slave.

Putting aside the ethics of voting let’s take a comparative look at their results versus right here where I live.
I went back to 2000 instead of 2004 because of how difficult NH makes it to find results for anyone except the R’s or D’s. Anyone who wants to spend more time than the hour I spent can gather the data and post it as a comment. I also included Ron Paul.

New Hampshire 2000 Harry Browne 2757, 0.48%
Montana 2000 Harry Browne 1,718 or 0.4%

New Hampshire 2008 Bob Barr (Lib.) 2,173 .3%
New Hampshire 2008 Ron Paul 1,092 votes .15%
Total of “Freedom oriented” votes cast .45%

Montana 2008 Bob Barr 1,300 votes 0.3%
Montana 2008 Ron Paul 10,230 votes 2.2%
Total of “Freedom oriented” votes cast 2.5%

I did not save links on these, as I said it took forevar to find the ones for NH. If you think you have a reliable source that differs on the data feel free to post it as a comment.

As the data shows Montana has shown over a six fold increase in “pro-freedom” votes and New Hampshire has shown a .03 decrease in “pro-freedom” votes. If we leave Ron Paul out of the equation both states show decrease in “pro-freedom” votes but New Hampshire’s is almost 20% worse. If we leave Barr out of the equation New Hampshire show a 300% decrease in freedom votes, and Montana shows an almost six fold increase in freedom votes. I hate to say it (not really) but those of us who told them they would be out paced by Taxachusetts statists in NH appear correct.

Just to rub some salt in the wound I’ll post my own counties numbers; in 2000 Harry Browne received 0.88% of the vote and in 2008 Ron Paul received 4.60% and Bob Barr received 0.41%.

Have Fun, Be Free

I used to get political burn out about once a year when I was a libertarian activist. It seemed to me my world was going to hell because as hard as I worked to end tyranny in the world it continued to accelerate towards an Orwellian state.

Laws were invented by man to protect individuals from harm. For a long, long time laws were only an enumeration of universally believed concepts such as killing, hurting or stealing from someone was wrong. Today in America there are literally millions of pages of laws. How did we get here? I think the following excerpt from Rand’s masterpiece Atlas Shrugged explains it best:

There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

If we accept this as the most plausible explanation for the plague of victimless crime laws we have now, it’s obvious that even those who make these laws don’t believe in them. This theory is supported by the regularly reported hypocrisy we see in the press, such as the politician who made a name for himself with his “family values” platform being caught having a homosexual extramarital affair.

Something changed in the way I perceived the world a few years ago. Unlike most of the major ideological shifts that have occurred in my life, I can’t pinpoint an exact event that caused this. I realized that if everyone who believed that a new law was wrong just ignored it there would be no way for it to be enforced. I knew that if I chose to not wear a seat belt, or raise goats in town, or shorten a rifle, or make corn liquor, or smoke an untaxed cigarette (or other plants for that matter) that no one would be harmed. If no one was hurt there was no crime. I knew this but I didn’t really believe it. I was angered and saddened because I knew I would obey those new laws even though they were nothing but victimless, malum prohibitum rubbish. It wasn’t the law or even the system I had problems with; it was my own cowardice. I didn’t have the strength of character to make a stand and knew I’d submit and that my submission would help give the new draconian laws validity.

I don’t think there is any quick or easy way to fix the harm done unto us by all the past generations, at least collectively. I do believe that we can all individually realize our own freedom by living the change we want to see. We need to have the conviction and the courage to make that stand, to honestly say “No, I don’t believe that this is wrong.” We need to live our lives however we choose and allow everyone else to do the same. Simply refusing to submit isn’t enough though; we need to believe strongly enough that it isn’t even a conscious process. We need not to waste one moment of our precious lives to the predators of liberty. Then we can effortlessly and truly have fun and be free.

A Few Questions

What is inherently wrong with this next sentence I found at this major mainstream media outlet?

Two civilians thwarted an attempted terrorist attack Tuesday when a vehicle loaded with explosives attempted to crash through the front gate of a U.S. base in the Afghan capital, according to the U.S. military.

I doubt one in a thousand Americans could spot the flaw. We have been so conditioned to think the way we are told that hardly anyone really thinks anymore.

What does the following military order authorize?

“You are accordingly authorized to employ your forces without restriction…. [operations] should now be focused on the morale of the enemy civil population population….”

For those who still can’t see the flaw, look at the following definitions:

a surprise attack involving the deliberate use of violence against civilians in the hope of attaining political or religious aims

Military operations between enemies

Each of the first two quotes fits one (and only one) of the two definitions.

The military order was issued by Air Vice Marshal Sir Norman Botterly in 1942 and led to the Fire Bombing of Dresden Germany by the USAF and the RAF. The bastards chose to call it “Morale Bombing” but it was nothing less than a terrorist attack, which is what the first definition is.

The CNN reporter chose to label the events he reported as a “terrorist attack” but they clearly fit the second definition of warfare.

Who are the terrorists?


Published in: on December 5, 2009 at 10:57 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Fr33 Agent

A while ago I was a member of an anarchist social networking site called Bureaucrash. This site was composed of mostly anarcho-capitalist members with enough anarcho-socialists to verbally abuse to keep it interesting. The site helped facilitate a lot of political activism (mostly back East) and it appeared to be really making some difference. Somewhere along the way news got out, and us anarchists were out numbered by Republicans and other statists. Well I stopped going and didn’t really think about it again until the Motorhome diaries boys stopped by to visit us here in P-Burg. One of them was the past Crasher-in-Chief (that I had worked with in the past) and it was from them I first heard about Fr33 Agents, and was urged to join. Well I’ve been busy, etc. but have finally joined. I haven’t done anything except sort of set up my page but will be doing more over there as time this winter permits.

Visit FR33 Agents