Google Search

Saturday, October 1, 2011

Are We Worthy of Freedom?

Rick Gedeon

Fact is, you cannot appease tyranny. Once people understand that the thirst of tyrants cannot be quenched, then people will begin to realize and appreciate the severity of their circumstance. The United States of America is no longer. We are ruled by the color of law, and peaceful protest is now brutally crushed; two clearly undeniable indicators that America has fallen into the hands of the authoritarians.

The Constitution tells us that we have the right to peaceably assemble, yet we are obligated to register for a permit in order to assemble. A permit that can be denied, by the way, as it was for the group Food Not Bombs when they decided to give away food at Lake Eola in Orlando. The FBI had FNB on the terror watch list, too! This group that feeds the hungry has even been tracked via GPS and infiltrated by government spies, reminiscent of Soviet Russia's brutal NKVD tactics.

?As we reported above the F.B.I., Homeland Security and other agencies focused on disrupting Food Not Bombs before national political conventions. We urge the organizers in Florida and North Carolina to make sure their publications include statements supportig (SIC) nonviolent direct action. We also encourage all activists to tell anyone joking about violence or suggesting the use of arson, bombs or other violence that they are not welcome at our meetings. We do not want any more Food Not Bombs volunteers to be arrested on charges of terrorism. We can see that the government is still interested in disrupting Food Not Bombs. An article on the use of GPS tracking of Food Not Bombs volunteers was published in SPIN. Battle Brews Over FBI?s Warrantless GPS Tracking By Kim Zetter in SPIN on May 9, 2011.? "?"?? FNB, May 12, 2011 "?St. Petersburg, Florida

When the public at large constantly witnesses the brutal assassination of individuals by police in the street, they seem to watch without a sense of moral responsibility, and eventually people become inoculated by the State's violence. These public executions are ubiquitous and we've seen them so often that it no longer affects us as it should. Case in point--the recent slaying of Kelly Thomas at the bloody hands of the Fullerton Police Department. Not one of the onlookers did anything to stop the slaughter taking place in full view of the public. Same occurrence with the cold-blooded execution of Oscar Grant at the hands of the BART Police. Meanwhile, Oscar Grant's government assassin, Johannes Mehserle, received a total of 292 days in prison; less than Michael Vick got for fighting dogs. Oscar is dead while Johannes is now free to roam the streets.

Mr. Jeffrey Weaver received a longer sentence for allegedly making threats concerning Oscar Grant?s murderer.

Jeffrey Weaver was located through IP addresses linked to his statements and was arrested and charged for transmitting threatening communications in interstate commerce. Mr. Weaver was sentenced to 3 years in federal prison and 3 years of probation. Nevermind that these were just words, and that Weaver was on the other side of the country in Virginia when he made these alleged ?threats.? Nevermind that the Supreme Court declared in Brandenburg v. Ohio that government cannot constitutionally punish general advocacy of force or lawlessness. Such advocacy for violence and lawlessness may only be punished if it meets 3 elements ? intent, imminence, and likelihood. (Source)
And people continue to watch their country die.

Activism in the District of Criminals

Similarly, several activists recently decided to open a lemonade stand and sell lemonade for ten cents as a response to the government shutting down several lemonade stands set up by children throughout the United States. Moments later, several cops arrived at the scene only to intimidate the children who showed up to purchase the lemonade. A female officer blatantly assaulted one of the cameramen. Then the same female cop proceeded to cite the group with "vending without a permit". The video appeared to show at least 10 cops arrive at the scene. One fellow who was grossly obese barked "ma'am this is not an option anymore you are under arrest!" They used violence to arrest peaceful activists. They used more than 10 cops with a combined salary of over a million dollars annually to arrest people for selling lemonade! Afterwards, this visibly disturbed Officer was asked "segregation was a crime in the ?50s would you enforce that law?" For which the officer responded "unfortunately I wouldn't be an officer at that time. If I was I would enforce that law."

This can mean two things:

1. He loves his job as a cop across the space-time continuum

2. He would have been proud to serve the State even against his own people

Both meanings are disturbing. But, what was more revealing from this episode, was what was said afterwards; you could hear one of these brave men justify their miserable excuse for their tyrannical behavior by stating that he has a good job that pays him six figures even though he thought it was absurd what he was doing.

The dictionary defines prostitution as:

The act or an instance of offering or devoting one?s talent to an unworthy use or cause.
The oppressed and the oppressor in this case share one thing in common. Both don't like their situation. The oppressor justifies his actions on behalf of the State by reassuring himself that he's only doing it for the money. And the oppressed tell themselves that their condition is only temporary, thus constituting a fleeting moment of necessary hardship.

Anti-war movement is mum

History will look back and put the onus of the destruction of America partly on the Neoconservative movement ? the architects of the September 11 terrorist attacks. More importantly, I believe history will look back at all of the cowards who remained silent during this time of great evil, and the detriment of America's demise will fall squarely upon their shoulders.

Dr. King once stated that, "The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict." Over a million Iraqis are dead and continue to die, and the Anti-war movement has lockjaw. After Obama's election, the anti-war movement said that they did not want to protest Obama because they were afraid that racists might join them in their calls for impeachment.

They did not want to take part in the admonishment of a black president in fear of being called racist or bigots.

Who needs controlled opposition with the mentality that has infected America?
_
Rick Gedeon is graduate from USAF Air University, amateur historian, and anti-imperial/anti-police brutality activist. Rick Gedeon has traveled extensively throughout the US and Asia. A political marketer, routinely bringing together and forging alliances with different political organizations that share similar goals. He considers himself a Political Atheist and sympathizes with many Libertarian causes. He can be reached at rick_gedeon@hushmail.com


Latest Commentary
- Two Kinds of Selfishness
- Automated Killing: The Total Immorality of the U.S. Government and Its Military
- Armed Troops Burn Down Homes, Kill Children To Evict Ugandans In Name Of Global Warming
- WashPo: 'Why Ron Paul is winning the GOP primary'
- We the Ruled
- Back Room Deals Revealed
- We Will Execute Who We Want, When We Want, And F-You If You Disagree
- Why the Government Is WORSE than a Gang of Criminals

Just doin' my job was not a good enough excuse for the nazis in N?rnberg, they all got hanged. I thought we've learned that lesson by now that this petty thought leads to great evil. A moral being should always exercise judgement and must deny orders should they be immoral that is the point where despotism breaks down. Of course it never happens.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, Bandwidth Throttling, and Breaking Promises on the Internet

by Stephan Kinsella

I taught computer law in 1998-1999 at South Texas College of Law. How things have changed. The course would now probably be called ?Internet Law? or Cyberlaw, though much of the subject matter would be similar (online contracts, spam, computer/Internet related crimes, intellectual property as applied to computer related issues, privacy and data collection, and jurisdictional issues). One thing we covered was the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, or CFAA (wikipedia; statute). The case we studied here was United States v. Morris,

an appeal of the conviction of Robert Tappan Morris for creating and releasing the Morris worm, one of the first Internet-based worms. This case resulted in the first conviction under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
The aspect of the case we focused on was the fact that someone could be found guilty of tampering under the CFAA even if it couldn?t be shown that he intended to cause damage; the mere unauthorized access was sufficient for conviction.

Like many federal statutes, the scope is arbitrary, artificial, and unjust, and the terms often vague and unclear, and thus subject to manipulation and extension by the state, prosecutors, and judges. (This is one reason legislation is an inappropriate way of ?making? law ? see my "Legislation and Law in a Free Society.") Thus, we now have the CFAA being used in, of all things, the ?Net Neutrality? debate. As discussed by Internet lawyer Evan Brown, in a recent case, some

plaintiffs sued Time Warner (the provider of Road Runner High Speed Online internet access), alleging, among other things, that Time Warner's alleged "throttling" of plaintiffs' internet communications violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 USC 1030 ("CFAA"). Specifically, plaintiffs alleged that without their authorization, Time Warner sent forged reset packets which frustrated plaintiffs' peer-to-peer communications (e.g., BitTorrent and other P2P mechanisms) as well as their use of Skype.
The court ?denied the motion to dismiss and let the case move forward.? So now it?s potentially a federal crime to throttle bandwidth to make Internet communications more efficient. Incredible. (The opinions is here.)

See also the recent column by Orin Kerr about possible uses of/extensions of the CFAA to apply it to ?breaking promises? on the Internet. As he writes there:

Tomorrow's Wall Street Journal is running an op-ed I authoredon the proposed amendments to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. It begins:
Imagine that President Obama could order the arrest of anyone who broke a promise on the Internet. So you could be jailed for lying about your age or weight on an Internet dating site. Or you could be sent to federal prison if your boss told you to work but you used the company's computer to check sports scores online. Imagine that Eric Holder's Justice Department urged Congress to raise penalties for violations, making them felonies allowing three years in jail for each broken promise. Fanciful, right?
Think again. Congress is now poised to grant the Obama administration's wishes in the name of "cybersecurity."

The little-known law at issue is called the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. It was enacted in 1986 to punish computer hacking. But Congress has broadened the law every few years, and today it extends far beyond hacking. The law now criminalizes computer use that "exceeds authorized access" to any computer. Today that violation is a misdemeanor, but the Senate Judiciary Committee is set to meet this morning to vote on making it a felony.

The problem is that a lot of routine computer use can exceed "authorized access." Courts are still struggling to interpret this language. But the Justice Department believes that it applies incredibly broadly to include "terms of use" violations and breaches of workplace computer-use policies.

Breaching an agreement or ignoring your boss might be bad. But should it be a federal crime just because it involves a computer?

Is this any surprise in an age where normal people are convicted of ?wire fraud? or ?mail fraud?, statutes originally ?meant? for organized crime? (Hmm, ?mail fraud??yet another reason to let the US postal service wither and die.)

1. A Libertarian Take on Net Neutrality; Net Neutrality, Congress, and Obama: The Scuffle Continues; Against Net Neutrality; Net Neutrality Developments; see also Harvard's Yochai Benkler on Net Neutrality and Innovation. []

2. See his post ISP's alleged throttling of BitTorrent and Skype violates Computer Fraud and Abuse Act; also see the discussion by Brown and others in this week?s episode of This Week in Law []


Latest Big Brother/Orwellian
- FBI's 'Stingray' Cellphone Tracker Stirs a Fight Over Search Warrants, Fourth Amendment
- Another TSA Employee Accused of Rape
- NYPD planted undercover cops at 'Ground Zero Mosque' protests last year
- Big Sis Tags Coffee Cups With Big Brother Eye
- E-Verify: De Facto National ID and the End of Privacy
- Congress Debating If Putting A Fake Name On Facebook Should Be A Felony
- Enhanced Pat-Downs At NFL Games? America Is Rapidly Turning Into A High-Security Prison
- TSA and Unproductive Labor

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here

Is Financial Instability The New Normal?

by Michael Snyder

The financial world is officially going crazy.? Can you believe what is going on out there right now?? Financial markets have been jumping up and down like crazy for months and this is creating a lot of fear.? Other than during the financial crisis of 2008, in the post-World War II era have we ever experienced as much financial instability as we are seeing right now?? Should we just accept that massive financial instability is going to be part of "the new normal" in the financial world?? The wild swings that we are witnessing in the global financial marketplace are making a whole lot of people very nervous right at the moment.? When markets go up, they tend to do it slowly and steadily.? When markets go down, a lot of times it can happen very rapidly.? Also, as I have mentioned before, more major stock market crashes happen during the fall than during any other time of the year.? The last major financial crisis happened during the fall of 2008, and things are starting to look a little bit more like 2008 with each passing day.? The last thing the global economy needs right now is another major financial meltdown, but that may be exactly what we are about to get.

The Dow got absolutely hammered once again on Thursday.? It was down almost 400 points, and it has lost a total of 674.83 points over the last two days combined.

In case you are wondering, yes, that is a very big deal.

It represents the largest two day decline that we have seen since November 2008, and at this point the Dow is on pace to have its worst week since September 2008.

Over the past two days, more than 900 billion dollars of "paper wealth" has disappeared.

Hopefully you did not share in that pain.

A couple of days ago, I discussed 21 signs that the financial world was on the verge of a nervous breakdown.? But I had no idea that things would get so ugly so soon.

So what comes next?

One of the keys is to watch what the "insiders" are doing.? Often they will say one thing and do another.

At the moment, corporate "insiders" are selling 7 dollars of stock for every 1 dollar of stock that they are buying.

Over the past couple of weeks, "insider" investing behavior has changed dramatically.? The following is from an article that was recently posted on MarketWatch....

The insiders have vanished.

Chief executives. Board members.

The head honchos. The people who know.

Just a few weeks ago, they were out in force, buying up shares in their own companies with both hands.

No longer. They've disappeared. Almost overnight.

"They've stopped buying," says Charles Biderman, the chief executive of stock market research firm TrimTabs, which tracks the data.

For some reason, this almost always starts happening before a crash.? So obviously this is not a good sign.

A lot of normal investors have been pulling large amounts of money out of stocks as well.? The following is from a report in the Financial Post....

Investors have pulled more money from U.S. equity funds since the end of April than in the five months after the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., adding to the $2.1 trillion rout in American stocks.

About $75 billion was withdrawn from funds that focus on shares during the past four months, according to data compiled by Bloomberg from the Investment Company Institute, a Washington-based trade group, and EPFR Global, a research firm in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Outflows totaled $72.8 billion from October 2008 through February 2009, following Lehman's bankruptcy, the data show.

Are you starting to get the picture?

Not only that, but a third very troubling sign is that an extraordinary number of bets has been placed against the S&P 500.? As I noted the other day, if there is a stock market crash in the next few weeks, somebody is going to make a ton of money....

We are seeing an amazing number of bets against the S&P 500 right now.? According to CNN, the number of bets against the S&P 500 rose to the highest level in a year last month.? But that was nothing compared to what we are seeing for October.? The number of bets against the S&P 500 for the month of October is absolutely astounding.? Somebody is going to make a monstrous amount of money if there is a stock market crash next month.
It doesn't take a genius to see all the dark financial clouds that are gathering on the horizon.

And all of the bad news that is constantly coming out of Europe is certainly not helping things.? For example, yesterday S&P slashed the credit ratings of seven different Italian banks.

Credit downgrades have become so frequent that we hardly even notice them anymore.

Pessimism is everywhere right now.? Suddenly it seems like almost everyone is predicting that another "recession" is coming....

*According to a recent Harvard Business Review survey, 70 percent of global business leaders believe that a global recession is "somewhat likely" or "very likely" in the coming months.

*Economist Nouriel Roubini says that we are "already in recession".

*When asked by CNBC what he thought about the possibility of another recession, George Soros said the following the other day....

"I think we are in it already."
As fear spreads, it is only going to make global financial instability even worse.? If something doesn't change, we could soon have a full-blown panic on our hands.

So why should the rest of us care if global financial markets crash and a bunch of bankers lose a whole lot of money?

Well, unfortunately our entire economic system is based on credit.? When the last financial crash happened in 2008, the credit markets got really tight.? Economic activity started to freeze up.? We entered a deep recession and unemployment skyrocketed.

As much as many of you may want to see the house of cards fall down, the reality is that when it does it is going to deeply hurt millions upon millions of innocent people too.

During the last recession (which never really ended), millions of Americans that lost their jobs also lost their homes.

Back in 2006, the home vacancy rate in America was 11.6%.

In 2009, the home vacancy rate was 12.6%.

In 2010, the home vacancy rate was 13.1%.

Just like the number of Americans on food stamps, this is a figure that just keeps going up and up and up.

Could we eventually live in a country where one out of every five homes is standing empty?

The truth is that the U.S. economy is in the middle of a long-term decline.? The economy declined badly while George W. Bush was in office, and the decline has accelerated since Barack Obama entered the White House.

As I wrote about yesterday, the American people are feeling really depressed about the economy and 80 percent of them believe that we are in a recession right now.

So what kind of a mood are they going to be in if there is another major financial crisis and unemployment jumps up by several more percentage points?

We live in unprecedented times.? The financial world has become incredibly unstable, and none of us is really quite sure what "the new normal" is going to look like after all of this is over.

But one thing is for sure - things never stay the same for long.

The way that things have been in the past is not how things are going to be in the future.

A "perfect storm" is coming.

Everything that can be shaken will be shaken.

You better get ready.


View the original article here

Child rapist to get less time than pot grower

Incarcerated weed offenders to skyrocket
By Ethan Baron, The Province


Prime Minister Stephen Harper is getting tougher on pot growers than he is on rapists of children. Under the Tories' omnibus crime legislation tabled Tuesday, a person growing 201 pot plants in a rental unit would receive a longer mandatory sentence than someone who rapes a toddler or forces a five-year-old to have sex with an animal.

Producing six to 200 pot plants nets an automatic six-month sentence, with an extra three months if it's done in a rental or is deemed a public-safety hazard. Growing 201 to 500 plants brings a one-year sentence, or 1? years if it's in a rental or poses a safety risk.

The omnibus legislation imposes one-year mandatory minimums for sexually assaulting a child, luring a child via the Internet or involving a child in bestiality. All three of these offences carry lighter automatic sentences than those for people running medium-sized grow-ops in rental property or on someone else's land.

Read More


Latest Tyranny/Police State
- A Tale of Two State-Sponsored Killings
- SWAT Teams Execute Man's Farm Animals With Shotguns
- It's Been Quite a Day in the Police State!
- Columbia MO police officer fired for excessive force
- Cops Vs. Cameras: The Killing of Kelly Thomas & The Power of New Media
- Kelly Thomas begged for his life from 'menacing' officer, D.A. says
- Citizen Recording Of Police Proves Officer Lied About Arrest
- Charges Dropped Against Man Who Faced Life In Jail For Recording Cops

Harper is a fucking Moron. Maybe he has some mental issues that could be resolved with a G-damn lobotomy. No differant than the retards in this cuntry when it comes to marijauna knowledge and shaping insane draconion laws that make zero sense.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here

Peter Schiff on Greta Van Susteren

Peter Schiff on Greta Van Susteren - informationliberationinformationliberation
The news you're not supposed to know...Breaking NewsBrowse by CategoryAnalysisHighlightsMultimediaLatest CommentsArchivesRSS FeedSyndicationAboutContact
Multimedia
An Introduction to Austrian Economics: Understand Economics, Understand EverythingThe Century of the Self: The Untold History of Controlling the Masses Through the Manipulation of Unconscious Desires
The Disappearing Male: From Virility to Sterility
The Obama Deception: The Mask Comes OffOperation Gladio: The Hidden History of U.S. Sponsored False Flag Terrorism in Europe
How America Can Be Saved: A Lecture by Hans-Hermann Hoppe(more)Article posted Sep 21 2011, 5:06 PMCategory: EconomySource: YouTubePrint
Peter Schiff on Greta Van Susteren


SHARE: Share Tweet submit to reddit Digg! submit to Stumble Upon Email This


Latest Economy
- Twist Paves the Way for QE III
- Is Financial Instability The New Normal?
- Gov't paid $600 million in benefits to dead people
- Marc Faber to Reuters: You dont need the fed to tell you something is wrong
- Gold & Silver Crashing Hard: Gold Down to $1630/oz, Silver $29.90/oz
- Is Gold No Longer A Safe Haven? Not According To Capital Economics: "Gold Will Surge When Euro Crisis Escalates"
- Rosenberg Presents The Three Ways Bernanke Disappointed The Market, And Why It Is Dumping
- Commodities Fall to Nine-Month Low









No Comments PostedAdd Comment

Add CommentNameComment

* No HTML


Verification *Please Enter the Verification Code Seen Below 

PLEASE NOTEPlease see our About Page, our Disclaimer, and our Comments Policy.

FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston ChurchillSearch

Advanced SearchLogin Username:

Password:

Remember Me
Forgot Password?
Register
Most Popular Judge Rules Cops Beating Up Seizing Diabetic They Thought Was Drunk Is A-OK - 09/08Nervous Breakdown? 21 Signs That Something Big Is About To Happen In The Financial World - 09/21TSA and Unproductive Labor - 09/17Man faces life in prison for planned Federal Reserve protest - 09/07During commercial break of Wednesday's GOP debate, Perry physically grabbed Ron Paul and got in his face - 09/08Abolish the Police, Arm the Citizens - 09/19Cops kill man for honking at them - 09/06WI Judge: No "Fundamental Right" to Own a Cow, or Consume Its Milk...Am I Making Myself?Clear? - 09/22
HighlightsThe Missing Lesson From Norway: Never Trust a Man in Uniform"They're Only Out To Make Cold Hard American Cash"; Park Police Crack Down on Bicycle Cabs in DC18 Signs That Life In U.S. Public Schools Is Now Essentially Equivalent To Life In U.S. PrisonsEighth Grader Executed for Scaring a CopFeds Drop All Charges Against 27 Head-Shop Owners They Falsely Accused of Being Terrorist Drug DealersStraight-A College Student Faces 125 Years In Jail For Producing Fake IDsTexas Cops Ticket Thousands of Schoolchildren to Raise Revenue, Some as Young as 6-Yrs-OldHouston Police Chief: Videotaping or Criticizing Police May be Sign You're a Cop-Killer(more)
 Top

View the original article here

Government Is Force

A license to aggress.
by Sheldon Richman


Some pundits really don?t understand why libertarians dislike government and therefore want it to do little, if anything at all. Unable to grasp the reason, the pundits assign bad motives to those who disparage government: They don?t like poor people, or workers, or the sick, or education.

But what?s so hard to understand? Government is significantly different from anything else in society. It is the only institution that can legally threaten and initiate violence; that is, under color of law its officers may use physical force, up to and including lethal force ? not in defense of innocent life but against individuals who have neither threatened nor aggressed against anyone else. ?Government is not reason. It is not eloquence,? George Washington reportedly said. ?Government is force; like fire it is a dangerous servant ? and a fearful master.?

That?s not a controversial description of the State. Even people enthusiastic about government would agree.

Given this unique feature, then, why isn?t everyone wary of the State? Whether or not one thinks it?s necessary, it?s dangerous by its very nature, and we ought to assume it will remain so no matter how many paper checks and balances and bills of rights are thought to contain it.

Yet if you talk about government this way, you will be eyed warily and even marginalized. (Observe the current presidential campaign.) This is not confined to just one side of the political spectrum. Progressives and conservatives each have their pet areas where they enthusiastically wish to see the force of government unleashed. Each then regards anyone else?s wariness as a defect. So Progressives, who reputedly care about privacy, have no problem, for example, with intrusion into that most personal of matters: medical care. Here they trust power and dismiss rational fears of arbitrary bureaucratic control over health and life. On the other hand, conservatives, who preach freedom and free enterprise, are eager to trust power when the objective is policing the world, hounding unauthorized immigrants, and persecuting manufacturers, merchants, and consumers of unapproved substances.

We are all raised to believe that using force (except in self-defense) is wrong. We?re taught not to hit other people or take their things. This applies to our associations as well. Yet as we grow, we are expected to believe that one institution ? government ? gets to operate by different rules. No one ever explains why.

Tacit Consent

Sure, if you push hard enough, you will hear pseudo explanations. Someone will inevitably invoke tacit consent. You know: You choose to live here and those are the rules ? love it or leave it. But the assertion that we all somehow agreed to be coerced is ludicrous, and Charles Johnson asks if consent is even possible when the withholding of consent is deemed impossible.

Moreover this argument implies that the government owns the country, including your property, which begs a big question.

Push harder, and someone will invoke democracy, but again that really gets us nowhere. In my lifetime the only elections have been to determine who would run the government, not what its powers, if any, would be. (Yes, candidates sometimes promise to reduce government power, but since one officeholder can?t keep such a promise, it?s not terribly meaningful.) The fiction of democratic representation is more intended to contain dissent than to describe reality. Let?s get real: The average congressional district has more than 600,000 residents. Taxation with representation has yet to be realized.

Most people would agree that the sign of an individual?s maturity and rationality, not to mention social skills, is her understanding that the cooperation of others must be obtained exclusively through persuasion. If you want something from someone you make an offer or an argument. You don?t demand, bully, or terrorize. And yet we tolerate an institution that demands, bullies, and terrorizes as a matter of course across a large and growing range of matters. It doesn?t demand merely that we not harm others or take their belongings. It bullies us into turning over our money for all kinds of purposes. It demands that we comply with its (ever-changing) rules about what we consume, how we manage our medical care, and in what manner we trade with others ? and whom those others may be. And it increasingly terrorizes us in its brutal crusade against self-medication.

Routinely Hassled

It matters not for my purpose today whether the government?s officers think they are looking out for our welfare, indulging their taste for power, or doing the bidding of well-connected and well-heeled interests. The result is the same: We are routinely hassled in our efforts to live, to cooperate, and to mutually benefit one another. We are the economy they presume to manage.

Apologists for power will claim that without expansive government, the weak will be vulnerable to the strong, the masses to the rich. But that appeal falls apart when one reviews the history of government and realizes that, appearances aside, power ultimately sides with the strong and the rich against the rest. Indeed, power ? what Bastiat called ?legal plunder? and shelter from competition ? is the source of their strength and a good deal of wealth.

Economic and social theory furnish ample reason for wariness about the State. But we mustn?t let moral theory take a back seat. Government, even when it appears to do good, diminishes our freedom and humanity. How revoltingly ironic that people who claim to champion goodwill and cooperation regard violence as a legitimate means to their ends.


Latest Commentary
- Two Kinds of Selfishness
- Automated Killing: The Total Immorality of the U.S. Government and Its Military
- Armed Troops Burn Down Homes, Kill Children To Evict Ugandans In Name Of Global Warming
- WashPo: 'Why Ron Paul is winning the GOP primary'
- We the Ruled
- Back Room Deals Revealed
- We Will Execute Who We Want, When We Want, And F-You If You Disagree
- Why the Government Is WORSE than a Gang of Criminals

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here

The Case for Hyperinflation in the US

by The Dollar Vigilante

Earlier this month, Gary North penned an article on LewRockwell.com entitled, "Mass Inflation, Yes; Hyperinflation, No".

In it he stated the following:

"The United States is not going to get hyperinflation unless Congress nationalizes the Federal Reserve System.

It will get mass inflation at some point: anywhere from 15% per annum to 30%. But it is not going to get 50% or 100% or more.

Why not?

1. The temporary nature of the payoff
2. The fear of getting blamed
3. The boom-bust cycle

While he makes good points for each, we take exception based on historical precedent, common sense and factual data.

1. The Temporary Nature of the Payoff

Gary North states:

"Hyperinflation lasts only a few years. People in the hard-money camp ought to know this, but they tend to forget.

Those economic forecasters who keep telling us the dollar will fall to zero forget the obvious: big banks are creditors. Bankers lose when a currency falls to zero."

And, yes, that is correct. The bankers (who are all artificial, non-free market entities in this non-free market financial system) would lose everything if the currency goes to zero.

However, that has never stopped them before. In fact, during many of the hyperinflations of our time, including Weimar and the ongoing hyperinflation in Argentina, the last people to see the causes of the hyperinflation (money printing) are the central bankers and the economists of the banks.

Remember, they've all been brainwashed with modern day Keynesian economics, which is witchcraft and delusionary. They actually believe that inflation is caused by prosperity... and not money printing. That's why the following quotes were made during the Weimar Republic hyperinflation after they had already had thousands of percent gains in prices:

And, even when the US dollar goes to zero, it does not mean the banks are out of luck. Not if they were like the French banks in the beginning of the 20th century. In a book published in 1912, called "Fiat Money Inflation in France", Andrew White recounts how the government changed the rules and stated that all debts increased along with the issuance of further currency, so that for every so many additional assignats printed, one's debts increased by 25%.

The US Government owns all the guns. It would not be beyond them to state that all debts held in dollars are now held in the New Dollar. Or, what they will likely name, the "Patriot dollar".

As Congressman Pete Stark stated, "The Federal Government can do most anything in this country."

2. The Fear of Getting Blamed

Here, Gary North states that thanks to the internet and Ron Paul, too many people understand what the Federal Reserve does and they won't allow them to go into hyperinflation.

He makes a good point here that the public is more aware than ever about the Federal Reserve criminal enterprise.

However, in order for Ben Bernanke to stop he would have to admit that everything he has focused on for his entire life and achieved has all been a lie. Not many people have this kind of ability to admit complete error in their ways after having their entire persona based on the false information.

Plus, the entire US media propaganda organization stands as ready and willing as ever to back the Federal Reserve until its dying days. Paul Krugman at the New York Times has been wrong for years and years about absolutely everything yet he is still thought of by many people as being a "smart" economist - despite his calling for a housing bubble after the tech bubble and now having resorted to stating that the best way to get the American economy on track is through a massive, fake alien invasion.

Remember, that almost every US economics PhD, every major economist at most banks and people like Bernanke and Krugman will all have to admit they were all fools in order for them to stop with their Keynesian witchcraft. Most white, older men who look in the mirror and see they are monsters rarely admit their flaws... they tend to take us all down into hell with them rather than, as the Japanese say, "lose face".

In Japan, at least, when a finance minister realizes his policies haven't worked he usually kills himself. We can only hope for the same from Krugman and Bernanke.

3. The Boom-Bust Cycle

Here, Gary North states that because of the boom-bust cycle, the US will be forced to stop printing money before entering hyperinflation. As example, he states how Volcker was forced by rapidly rising prices to slow money printing and allow T-Bill rates to rise to 22% to stop the inflation.

There is only one problem with this. The US Government debt in 1979 was hardly anything as it had only been 8 years since Nixon delinked the dollar from gold. Today, however, the US Government (and most western governments, ask Greece) have had plenty of time to build up mountains of debt.

Today, as we showed here, an interest rate of only 11.1% will effectively take all real income of the US Government just to pay for the interest alone.

In other words, raising the interest rates to even 11% this time around will destroy the US Government.

That's why Paul Volcker, who was on a "panel of experts" advising Barack Obama already quit and left town on January 5th of this year. He took out his calculator, punched in a few numbers, looked around and decided it was time to retire.

Greenspan left on similar premises right before his housing bubble burst.

CONCLUSION

Gary North makes some good arguments. And he very well could be right. But historical evidence, common sense and the amount of current US debt makes stopping this train towards hyperinflation a lot tougher job than it looks.

We aren't counting on it. Even if all we have is "mass inflation" our portfolios, heavily laden with gold and gold stocks will do very well. If we do get US hyperinflation, many dollar vigilantes are also prepared for that as well, having left or in the process of moving assets outside of the US, getting a second passport (like here in the Dominican Republic) or expatriating outside of the western world.

Hyperinflation isn't fun. And we aren't as convinced as Gary North that it is so impossible.
__
Subscribe to The Dollar Vigilante today to keep abreast of the latest news, information and how to protect yourself and your family from the mass or hyperinflation to come.


View the original article here