In Memory of Becky Akers

Another important libertarian writer has died (of cancer), Becky Akers, who was very prominent on the LewRockwell.com blog. Lew Rockwell posted this message from, apparently, Becky’s husband:

My darling Becky went very peacefully at 1:10 Monday morning. She made a beautiful little sound of goodbye and a tear formed in her eye. She is at peace.

Becky wrote for several different organizations, but many readers knew her as Becky Akers of LewRockwell.com. Thank you so very much for your support of her efforts to promote liberty for over twenty years.  

God bless you. 

She was a Bible-believing Christian and advocate of liberty, and a passionate opponent of government interventionism in both domestic affairs and foreign policy. LRC readers especially knew her for her anti-TSA blogs and articles and more recently her anti-face mask and anti-CovidCon blogs as well.

I remember going to LewRockwell.com as I do every day, and delighting in seeing another new Becky Akers blog. Her writing was clear, clever and creative and, of course I agreed with much of what she had to say.

Here are her article archive and blog archive on LewRockwell.Com.

Her writing has also appeared on the Christian Science Monitor, the Washington Post, Barron’s, the New York Post, American History Magazine, the Independent Review, Military History Magazine, and the Ottawa Citizen. 

And she’s written for The New American, and the Foundation for Economic Education as well. On her FEE article archive page, it states that her writing has also appeared on forbes.com, wnd.com, alternet.com, and ammoland.com. And she’s also had articles on the Daily Caller as well.

There was no more passionate opponent to the CovidCon, as she called it, or the Covid scamdemic, than Becky Akers. (Except ME, of course!) And she certainly opposed the fascist mandates, whether they were mask mandates, vaccine mandates  (mandates for dangerous, experimental mRNA drug injections fraudulently referred to as “vaccines” that are not vaccines), or testing mandates and forcing people to have swabs shoved up their noses.

Oftentimes Becky referred to “Parson Goat,” which I think refers to Christian ministers who obediently complied with mandates and required their congregations to muzzle and suffocate themselves or get drug injections for no good reason, or who closed their churches for no good reason.

Her article, The Church of Covid, is a typical example of her such writing criticizing the betrayals by church people. She wrote:

The plandemic has unleashed poltroons, fiends and mountebanks on us, but few are more contemptible than Parson Goat.

Why? Because we expect evil from politicians and bureaucrats. Tony “Can’t Keep My Story Straight” Falsi behaves according to his nature; anyone who trusts this lifelong Marxist is as ludicrous a fool as he is. Ditto for the other bureaucrats in “Public Health.”

As for that roll of criminals ranging from Governor “Nuisance” Newsom in Californiastan through “Killer” Cuomo in The People’s Democratic Republic of New York, they’re politicians. ‘Nuff said.

But Parson Goat—graduate of seminary, preacher of the Word of God, supposedly devoted to Jesus Christ and His Gospel—well, much was given him, and so we require much from him.

Alas, he’s failed to deliver. To us and to the Lord, that is.

But he’s cooperated handsomely with Our Rulers to spread COVIDCon ever since he closed God’s house in direct violation of Scripture. Then, when politicians permitted him to re-open, he forced his sheep[le] to muzzle themselves, despite the Bible’s injunction to honor differing convictions.

Now comes his worst offence, if that’s possible: he’s turning our churches into Jab Joints.

All to enthusiastic if demonic applause from the corporate media: “…perhaps no one has been more effective at reaching older Black Virginians than pastors, preaching the lifesaving benefits of immunizations from the pulpit.” Yeah, why waste time on the Gospel when you can spout Marxist propaganda instead? One cleric even blasphemes “the blood of a lamb that kept the angel of death away” at Passover—and prefigured our Savior—by comparing it to The Jab: “This vaccine could be seen as putting blood on the doorpost,” he said. “We’re hoping and praying to get this plague to move on.” (Seriously, Buddy? I guess we can lay the myth of “systemic racism” to rest once and for all if you’ve led such a cushy life you dignify the flu as a “plague.”)

Parson Goat is never more infuriating than when he dabbles in politics. First off, he’s almost always illiterate in the subject; I’ve never met the cleric who can morally distinguish taxation from theft or explain why bureaucrats may properly steal from us but we sin if we rob them.

Second, Goats are intractable in their ignorance.

But we’ll give this heretic the benefit of the doubt and assume he’s obtuse rather than crooked—so obtuse he hasn’t considered his culpability when The Jab’s victims begin dying, losing vision, suffering paralysis, and convulsing. Yo, Parson: the government granted Big Pharma an exemption from liability—which leaves you as the chump holding the bag.

Here is a blog she wrote on the religious exemptions to mandates for the “vaccine” that’s not a vaccine.

Here is one of her many blogs on the masks, sharing some of her readers’ comments on the useless self-suffocating devices.

Sometimes she was quite overt in her criticism of the sheeple complying with the unnecessary mask diktats: “Yo, Masked Morons: take a lesson and give up your security-blanket before it becomes a long-standing practice.”

Sadly, I think the masks are now becoming a long-standing practice among the True Believer sheeple.

And she continues in this blog: “And the Stockholm Syndrome prompts many of our fellow hostages to prattle that after all, the government has our best interests at heart, so we should obey its commands, however ludicrous or even harmful they may be.”

And this blog is titled, “More on Masks, Unfortunately,” in which Becky wrote:

Meanwhile, most of the Masked Morons apparently overlook this detail about their newest toy as well: “Masks get saturated with moisture from the mouth and nose after about 20 minutes. Once they’re wet, they no longer form a barrier against viruses trying to come through or exit.”

“Or exit.” Think about that. The gentleman who sent me both these stories boasts a scientific background; he’s so knowledgeable in his field of “injury biomechanics” that he’s testified in court as an expert witness all over North America. And he phrased that idea this way: “The face mask is a petri dish for growing pathogens. Why should people be required to wear biomedical waste on their face and expose others to this toxic brew?”

He also “checked the CDC website. They warn that any employee must immediately wash hands after even touching the mask. I see employees of supermarkets fiddling with their masks all the time. They are transmitting viruses and bacteria to everything they touch thereafter.”

Eeeewww. So all you clerks can quit giving the Great Unmasked dirty looks.

At this point, studies abound proving the dangers of constantly sporting a mask, both to the wearer and to others. The politicians issuing these decrees prize their own power above all else; they couldn’t care less about imperiling us, so long as their reign continues. And the folks who obey their edicts despise facts and logic; they run on emotion, as Our Rulers well know. The serfs want to feel good about themselves. Politicians’ ceaseless injunctions to “protect others” resonate far more loudly with them than do any pleas to respect freedom. Then, too, masks are a very visible and relatively simple way for a True Believer to broadcast his Marxist faith in Leviathan.

Besides the CovidCon scamdemic, “vaccines” that are not vaccines and masks, Becky had also written many blogs and articles on the fascist TSA.

I searched LewRockwell.com for “Becky Akers TSA,” and there are just too many articles and blogs by Becky on the “Thieves and Sexual Assailants,” as she would call them. For example, in this post Becky described how TSA whistleblowers are treated, and how TSA is a hostile work environment.

And I wanted to quote from a particularly good one. In “NFL, DHS, TSA (Apologies To the Few Members of the Alphabet I Left Out),” Becky wrote about the TSA wannabes of the NFL:

Sure, I’m a sexist: I expect men to be men. And I expect men who tackle and fight other men on fields as drenched in testosterone as the NFL’s to exhibit that manliest of virtues, courage. But no: the NFL’s fraidy-cats bleated in 2011 that the police-state should grope “all fans … from the ankles up … to improve fan safety.” Right. Why don’t such Nervous Nellies admit that sexual assault of every attendee is far more dangerous than whatever peril they’re pretending to prevent? Instead, they treat folks who’ve shelled out megabucks for tickets as criminals rather than customers. Then they pull the same scam the TSA does, with that Satanic agency as their accomplice: they sell fans the right to enter stadia as they used to, free of manhandling, just as the TSA sells “PreCheck” to passengers fed up with its groping.

Moreover, according to an article TK forwarded me, the busybodies at the Department of Homeland Stupidity  inflict themselves on hapless fans in yet another way: “…federal agents who usually fight terrorists [sic for ‘who usually gate-rape innocent passengers’] are stalking [Minneapolis’] skyways and scrutinizing shopping tags to figure out if they can seize” the “fake Super Bowl merchandise … flooding into the Twin Cities this week…”

It’s a big problem, according to the National Football League.

“Before last year’s Super Bowl in Houston, agents [sic for ‘thugs’] with the Department of Homeland Security [sic for ‘Insecurity’] — working [sic] with local law enforcement — confiscated more than 260,000 counterfeit items worth more than $20 million, court records show. A total of 56 people were arrested for selling illegal merchandise, including fake tickets to the big game.

“And that wasn’t the biggest haul. That happened in 2016, when 450,000 illegal items worth $39 million were seized.”

And what is Our Rulers’ response to the “big problem” troubling their cronies at the NFL? “On Monday, a Hennepin County judge granted the league and its agents permission to seize all suspected contraband without the notices typically required in court.” Ah! Do I smell the TSA’s rank stench as it coaches the NFL on ditching such niceties as search warrants and other constraints on badged bullies?

I despise sports nor ever attend a game, so it’s easy for me to ask why anyone in his right mind not only tolerates but actually pays –and pays a lot — for such abuse. But then I wonder the same thing about passengers on airlines.

Besides her articles on the TSA, CovidCon and the suffocation devices, Becky also wrote about the FBI’s concocting terrorism plots in order to thwart them, such as when the CIA and NYPD helped in such a noble effort.

As a historian, Becky was also enthusiastically interested in the American Revolution and the Founding of America, which she termed more recently, Amerika. She had written two novels, Halestorm and Abducting Arnold.

Her first novel, Halestorm, is available at Amazon, which has this description:

Handsome, brilliant, memorable: he was the wrong man for the wrong assignment. No wonder his first mission behind enemy lines was also his last. But from his failure came the hope and determination that birthed a new nation.

The name’s Hale, Nathan Hale, the most endearing hero of the American Revolution. Halestorm presents the true—well, mostly true; OK, partially true—story of the legendary 21-year-old spy who hanged after regretting he had only one life to give for his country.

Early death ought to be enough disaster for any guy, but Nathan also has a spirited sweetheart, a penchant for puns—and a deadly rival for his lady’s hand.

Filled with love and conflict, murder and betrayal, Halestorm stirs our deepest emotions as it transports readers to the exotic world of Revolutionary America and asks, “What would you choose: love, honor, or freedom?”

And her sequel to Halestorm, Abducting Arnold, is also available at Amazon, which has this description:

Benedict Arnold is the archetypal traitor—or was he? Abducting Arnold is historical fiction at its best, richly dramatizing the American Revolution’s most brilliant officer while turning little-known history into an edge-of-your-seat thriller.

Cry, laugh, exult and rage as you read of General Arnold’s attempt to betray the Patriots’ Cause. When his fellow officers foil his treachery in the nick of time, Arnold flees to British lines in New York City, the most wanted man in America.

Now, three months later, a young woman joins him. Clem Shippen is as skilled in the kitchen as she is homely, a cousin-in-law with scarce prospects for marriage who has previously served as Arnold’s cook. But this time there’s an added ingredient: she is also a spy for General George Washington. He hopes to kidnap the traitorous Arnold and smuggle him back to American lines for trial and execution with Clem’s enthusiastic help. Enthusiastic, that is, until she realizes that Arnold may be a hero after all—and uncovers explosive information tying her fate and that of the new country to his…

A novel of espionage, heartbreakingly close calls, and profound betrayal, Abducting Arnold will entrance you from its opening pages to its surprising denouement!

And I wanted to repost this April 13, 2020 interview here that Becky did with Patriot’s Lament radio, regarding the Covid hysteria and the Soviet Amerikan churches closing down in their obedience to their real god, the State. She was a knowledgeable Bible-believing Christian who defended civil disobedience. In the interview she also addressed the TSA (“Thieves and Sexual Assailants”) and the parents who willingly bring their precious children to airports to be criminally assaulted by TSA thugs and rapists.

I sure did look forward to Becky Akers’s blogs and articles, and found her and her writing to be inspiring. She definitely had an influence on me, that’s for sure. Her passing is quite a loss, and is truly a loss for the liberty movement.

Obama Already Imposed a “Ministry of Truth”

The Biden DHS wants to impose some kind of new agency to go after “disinformation” that some critics have referred to as the new Orwellian “Ministry of Truth.” But the Obama regime had already imposed such a totalitarian censorship agency.

I wrote this post on December 27, 2016, that was after that presidential election between Trump and Hillary, and as the Washington Pest and other “news” i.e. propaganda outlets were on their way to disseminate the fake news about “Trump-Russia collusions” to try to reverse the outcome of the 2016 election.

Here is that post, The Feds’ New “Ministry of Truth”:

Many people are worried now about the new federal “Ministry of Truth,” which supposedly will be imposed on us now that Obama has signed H.R. 5181, the Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act, that includes a federal “Center for Information Analysis and Response.” Such an agency, according to WND, will use taxpayer funds to infiltrate educational institutions and news media to aid government bureaucrats to determine what is the real truth and what is “fake news.” Like we can trust bureaucrats and their media and academia sycophants who propagandize daily — dishonestly promoting everything from the Iraq War to ObamaCare — to let the American people know what the “truth” is!

But I don’t think such an agency will last very long. There is something called the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. (Yes, it’s still the “law of the land,” when I last checked, regardless of the court kooks and degenerates who rubber-stamp bureaucrats’ insatiable cravings for power.) And the First Amendment states:

“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.”

I am hopeful that courts will overturn this new law as unconstitutional, unless Donald Trump thinks he can benefit from such an agency as long as it still exists and exerts power. So far, he has demonstrated NO understanding of the concept of freedom of speech, as well as freedom of trade, free markets, and all the rest. If we’re lucky, someone might give him a copy of the U.S. Constitution and he might actually read it and get some analyses from constitutional lawyers such as Jonathan Turley and John Whitehead. (But, being the realist that I am, I’m not holding my breath.)

The Latest Realistic Commentary on the Russia-Ukraine Issue

There are many people now who are ignorantly and stupidly just repeating propaganda and the anti-Russia talking points of the warmongers who want to continue expanding U.S. government and military overseas, and apparently want World War III. I am just here and watching all this unfold. The mindless crap is unbelievable.

Meanwhile, Laurence Vance discusses what Americans should do if they are concerned about Ukraine.

Jonathan Turley has a great post about the politicians and commentators labeling war opponents as “traitors.” And the artistic venues like the Metropolitan opera kicking long-time opera stars off the stage because they will not sufficiently denounce Vlad Putin. Really, Peter Gelb? You take after Joseph McCarthy, apparently? And it seems that Claire McCaskill, Alyssa Farah, Ana Navarro, and Whoopi Goldberg, of MSNBC, CNN and “The View” all must have a cumulative IQ of about 75, if that much.
David Stockman has this historical summary of the Russia-Ukraine situation, with his own usual witty commentary mixed in. And Joseph Solis-Mullen has some unpleasant facts that we’re not supposed to say about the war in Ukraine.

And Jacob Hornberger reminds us of JFK’s rejection of the national security state’s anti-Russia animus.

Talk about the War Criminal Pot Calling the Kettle Black

March 18, 2022

In the propagandized spirit of the sheeple’s faithfulness to the State, many now including Joe Biden and Sen. Limpy Graham, and many Americans in general, are calling Vlad Putin a war criminal in Putin’s invasion and attack on cities and civilians in Ukraine. But what about Americans’ own government’s crimes?

Sadly, many Americans are very much self-centered narcissists in their denial and rationalization of the war crimes their own government and military have been committing for a century. That’s “American Exceptionalism” in a nutshell: When foreigners bomb and murder innocent people they are “war criminals,” but when our government murders innocents that’s perfectly acceptable.

Our government and military attacked and bombed and murdered millions of innocent civilians over the past century, in Germany, Japan, Iraq and Afghanistan, and other areas. In recent years, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Joe Biden have earned the title, “War Criminal.”

I wish I had more time to write about this now, so here is an article I wrote in 2017 on Activist Post regarding some of the more recent U.S. government/military war crimes, and the blowback they cause.

U.S. Government Interventionism and Wars Provoke More Violence: NYC Bombing

December 12, 2017

Another terrorist bombing, an “amateurish” pipe bombing/attempted suicide bombing, in New York City on Monday morning, in which no deaths occurred but three were injured as well as the suspect.

So, will this latest Islamic extremist turn out to be yet another FBI patsy? The FBI finds some mentally deficient young Muslim male, radicalizes him and motivates him to want to commit jihad, provides him with weapons and materials and then sets him up in the FBI’s own concocted entrapment scheme. (See Glenn Greenwald and Trevor Aaronson on this. And Matt Agorist’s essay on recordings that reveal FBI urging a Muslim patsy to carry out a mass shooting to “defend Islam.”)

Or perhaps the latest NYC bomber’s being influenced by ISIS propaganda on the Internet will be used as a new excuse for the control freaks in Washington to impose further intrusions and spying on the Internet? Who knows?

But once again, this week’s New York City terrorist bomber has said just about the same thing that most of the past terrorists have said. According to the New York Post:

Akayed Ullah, 27, who is from Bangladesh and was living in Brooklyn, told authorities he was trying to exact vengeance for decades of violence against Muslims in Gaza, Syria and Iraq, saying in sum and substance from his hospital bed: “They’ve been bombing [my people] and I wanted to do damage here,” sources said.

The truth is, most of the terrorists have been on record stating that their motivation for violence is retaliatory.

As Sheldon Richman pointed out in 2011,

The Pentagon’s own Defense Science Board Task Force came to this conclusion in 2004 when Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld asked it to evaluate the Bush administration’s war policies. The report is worth quoting at length:

“American efforts have not only failed [to separate the vast majority of nonviolent Muslims from the radical-militant Islamist-Jihadists]: they may also have achieved the opposite of what they intended.

“American direct intervention in the Muslim World has paradoxically elevated the stature of and support for radical Islamists, while diminishing support for the United States to single-digits in some Arab societies.

“Muslims do not ‘hate our freedom,’ but rather, they hate our policies. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the longstanding, even increasing support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan, and the Gulf states….

“[Since 9/11] American actions and the flow of events have elevated the authority of the Jihadi insurgents and tended to ratify their legitimacy among Muslims….”

Richard Reid, the would-be shoe-bomber, told his sentencing judge, “Your government has killed two million children in Iraq…. Your government has sponsored the rape and torture of Muslims in the prisons of Egypt and Turkey and Syria and Jordan with their money and with their weapons.”

Glenn Greenwald wrote further in 2016:

Beyond such studies, those who have sought to bring violence to Western cities have made explicitly clear that they were doing so out of fury and a sense of helplessness over Western violence that continuously kills innocent Muslims. “The drone hits in Afghanistan and Iraq, they don’t see children, they don’t see anybody. They kill women, children, they kill everybody,” Faisal Shahzad, the attempted Times Square bomber, told his sentencing judge when she expressed bafflement over how he could try to kill innocent people. And then there’s just common sense about human nature: If you spend years bombing, invading, occupying, and imposing tyranny on other people, some of them will want to bring violence back to you.

In July 2016 Greenwald also discussed another previous terrorist attack:

Eleven years ago today, three suicide bombers attacked the London subway and a bus and killed 51 people. Almost immediately, it was obvious that retaliation for Britain’s invasion and destruction of Iraq was a major motive for the attackers.

Two of them said exactly that in videotapes they left behind: The attacks “will continue and pick up strengths till you pull your soldiers from Afghanistan and Iraq. … Until we feel security, you will be targets.” Then, less than a year later, a secret report from British military and intelligence chiefs concluded that “the war in Iraq contributed to the radicalization of the July 7 London bombers and is likely to continue to provoke extremism among British Muslims.” The secret report, leaked to The Observer, added: “Iraq is likely to be an important motivating factor for some time to come in the radicalization of British Muslims and for those extremists who view attacks against the U.K. as legitimate.”

And as I wrote in July 2016, regarding attacks in France:

The blogosphere and twitterverse are exploding with reactions to the latest terror attack in France, the truck that drove through a big crowd of people attending Bastille Day festivities and killed 84 people and injured many more … It looks like such a “state of emergency” not only didn’t stop the November 2015 Paris stadium and concert hall attacks that killed 130 and injured many others, but it didn’t stop this new truck-driving attack … the November Paris attacks were in retaliation against France’s military bombings in Syria and Iraq.

The U.S. government and other Western governments’ own terror attacks on the Muslim world continue to this day.

See U.S. airstrike kills family of eight, U.S. drone strike kills three civilians and four “suspects,” US admits Syria airstrike that killed 46 but denies targeting mosque, Panic spreads in Iraq, Syria as record numbers of civilians are reported killed in U.S. strikesU.S. airstrikes kill at least 43 civilians in Syria’s RaqqaU.S. military airstrikes kill many more civilians in just 48 hours, and U.S. military battles Syrian rebels armed by CIA.

Western government violence and drones target weddings, funerals, rescuers, and civilian hospitals.

So how do the warmongers in Washington think their victims in other countries will react to their government violence?

Does President Donald Trump even know that most of the victims of the drone bombings that he continues to authorize are innocent civilians? (And President Barack Obama’s drone strikes killed innocent civilians 90% of the time, according to documents released by an intelligence source.) In less than two months as President, Trump’s CIA and military drone strikes had already gone up 432%.

“Will we ever learn?”

In 1991 President George H.W. Bush started a war of aggression on Iraq, bombed Iraq’s civilian water and sewage treatment centers and imposed sanctions to prevent them from rebuilding, which forced the Iraqis to have to use untreated water, which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents. These acts of criminal aggression by the U.S. government against civilians, in addition to the U.S. military occupations in the Middle East, led to the 9/11 terrorist attacks which some people had warned would be such aggressions’ likely outcome.

Prior to all that, during the 1950s the CIA imposed a coup on Iran to replace the Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh with the U.S. puppet Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. The CIA propped up the Shah’s totalitarian police state, SAVAK, from the 1950s up to the Iranian Revolution of 1979 that included the extremists’ taking of American hostages.

Would we have such Islamic extremism coming out of Iran all these years had the CIA not committed such crimes and atrocities against that other country?

These interventionist foreign policies, of starting wars against other countries that were of no threat to us, imposing coups and regime change, propping up police states, and committing criminal invasions, occupations and bombings, inevitably cause blowback, including the most recent bombing in New York City.

But it seems that most people have been so propagandized especially since 9/11 to only look at mainly the Islamic extremism itself, but refuse to consider the natural outcomes of interventionist foreign policies, criminal wars of aggression, and U.S. government support for foreign totalitarian police states.

Activist Post | Creative Commons 2017

The Evangelicals and Christian Zionists Want More War

Laurence Vance writes:

They’re  back. Some of the greatest supporters of Bush’s wars in Afghanistan were evangelical warvangelicals, bloodthirsty Christian conservatives, and fundamentalist Christian militarists. What I starting to hear from the Christian grapevine is that in some evangelical, conservative, and fundamentalist churches the same stupid and evil things are being said regarding the situation in Ukraine. Ignorant and unlearned Christians think that Ukraine was just minding its own business when Russia attacked for no reason, Putin is another Hitler who wants to take over Europe, and the United States should “do something” to stop him.

Let them or their sons and daughters be the first to go fight on behalf of Ukraine. I say it is not worth one drop of American blood, just like Iraq and Afghanistan was not worth one drop of American blood. And yet, I am said to be unpatriotic.

Yes, that is what I’ve been hearing now. But it’s people on all sides of the political spectrum now who want war. Very Irrational people. I never thought I would see the day when the “liberals,” “leftists,” “progressives” would be the warmongers. But that is what we have now. Besides the bloodthirsty Christian warvangelicals.

Laurence is also referring to the Dick Cheneys and George Bushes of the world.

In fact, I think that the Christian evangelicals and what I call the Christian Zionists are the ones who want war — any war, as long as there’s war — because they are Bible thumpers who believe in the “End Times,” and probably actually want the “End Times” to happen. They probably want nuclear war.

According to the New York Times, in 2019 then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was one of those Bible-thumping Christians (and still is):

Mr. Pompeo talks about the rapture. “We will continue to fight these battles,” he said at a “God and Country Rally” in 2015, because there is a “never-ending struggle” until “the rapture.”

“Be part of it,” he said at the meeting, at the Summit church in Wichita, Kan. “Be in the fight.”

In November, Mr. Pompeo told a reporter for The New York Times Magazine that the Bible “informs everything I do.” The reporter noticed an open Bible in his office, with a Swiss Army knife marking his place at the end of the book of Queen Esther.

Hmm. The “Rapture.” Oy, vey.

Mike Pence and George W. Bush are also a part of that crowd.

My understanding of the Christian Zionists and the “born again” people are this. They are so supportive of “The Jews” and of Israel because they hope for the “Rapture” and the End Times and they hope to make Jews “see the light” and decide to convert to Christianity (for the Jews to be “saved,” and all that stuff). So, obviously I don’t agree with them on those points.

Anyway, now the “liberal” warmongers — along with the Christian Zionists, neocons and all points between — want more war, now with Russia via “no-fly zones” this time to protect Ukraine. (I’m seeing similarities between “Kuwait” and “Ukraine” now. Arg.)

More News and Commentary

Naomi Wolf: On the Subtlety of Monsters: We have to Talk about Nazism. How Our Times Do Indeed Echo an Earlier Totalitarian Era

Richard Ebeling: Government Planning Brings Neither Freedom, Prosperity, Nor Equality

Joseph Mercola: Health Officials Deny Even a Single Death From Covid Shots

Jacob Hornberger: The Cold War Racket Never Ended for the U.S.

Lew Rockwell: Why Die for Ukraine?

Jon Rappoport: Covid: Why Did Mega-Corporations Accept the Lockdowns?

Steve Watson: Report: Yale Students Warn That Covid Tyranny Has Turned Campus Into Stasi-Like ‘Surveillance State’

Brian Shilhavy: Government VAERS Data Reveal 15,600% Increase in Heart Disease Among Under 30 Year-Olds Following Covid Vaccination

Washington Examiner: BLM’s Millions Unaccounted For after Leaders Quietly Jumped Ship

Gateway Pundit: Quebec Bans Unvaxxed From Buying Groceries Unless They Are Accompanied by a “Health Warden” Who Will Ensure They Only Buy Food and Medicine

And The Federalist: Why The Wall Street Journal Is Wrong About The 2020 Election

It’s Crickets from Democrats and Media Regarding Violence from the Left

Andy Ngo on Twitter shows how Twitter still allows leftists to advocate violence.

More from Andy Ngo, to do with January 6th and how the people on the left committed acts of violence in Washington against the Trump regime.

I loathe and detest hypocrisy and double standards.

And The Federalist has this article showing 8 times left-wing protesters broke into government buildings and “assaulted democracy.

Now, why do conservatives still cling to this “democracy” thing in the same way that those on the left do? I think that the conservatives really ought to read Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s great book, Democracy, the God That Failed. And that is what I have to say about that.

A 9/11 Primer on the 20th Anniversary of 9/11

I wrote this post 2 years ago on the 18th anniversary of the September 11th attacks in 2001. So, Saturday is the 20th anniversary and I am reposting this. It gives information that, if you are still very young, your parents and teachers probably didn’t give you about 9/11. And if you are older it gives you information that the brain-dead, zombie government-stenographer mainstream “news” media also didn’t give us, and they still don’t. (I also will have a new post with commentary on this 20th anniversary shortly.)

Post from 2 years ago:

(Originally posted on September 11, 2019)

Today is the 18th anniversary of the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks on the New York World Trade Center, the Pentacon, and in Pennsylvania. Where was I on that day? Well, I was here in this same apartment sitting at my table doing some writing and my father (now deceased) called at around 10 am saying that their trip that they were going to go on that day was canceled and he told me why. Hmm.

The government’s propaganda began immediately on that day and after. 99% of the news media were the White House press spokesmen. There was no discussion of the attackers stated motives, or the history of U.S. government and military’s invasions, bombings and occupations of the Middle East in the 10 years prior to that time. Anyone who did mention those things was labeled “Anti-America,” or “blaming America” for the attacks. Sean Hannity has been especially bad in that regard ever since that time. He is the worst of the worst as far as apparatchiks for the national security state are concerned. I just thought I’d mention that.

However, given that Hannity and all the other radio ditto-heads are accepting of the idea that actual U.S. government FBI, CIA etc. abused their powers including FISA spying in the Russiagate fiasco, maybe now some of these obedient worshipers of the national security state can at least consider the possibility that the official 9/11 narrative isn’t what the government has been telling us for 18 years. (But, I am not holding my breath.)

So, I’m sure that a lot of people reading this post will just skim it and not really take it seriously or click on any of the links for further information. This is because they are satisfied with what the government and its spokespeople of the mainstream media have been telling us since September 11, 2001. All these things they haven’t heard about must be merely whack-job “conspiracy theory” and all that. But there are still some people who are open to the truth.

In the years prior to the attacks, Congressman Ron Paul had several times warned that the U.S. government’s interventionist policies and war that it started against Iraq and elsewhere and Iraqi sanctions would cause blowback and retaliation within our shores. (And the response? Crickets.)

Addendum: For information on the U.S. government’s pre-9/11 sanctions on Iraq throughout the 1990s and their effects, see Jacob Hornberger, Sanctions: the cruel and brutal war against the Iraqi people, and James Bovard, Iraqi sanctions and American intentions: blameless carnage?

It’s amazing just how brainwashed so many people can be by daily propaganda, watching the TV news, listening to chickenhawk warmonger conservative talk radio, and so forth. “Al Qaeda.” “Osama bin Laden,” and “Islamic” were words that people heard over and over and over, but they rarely heard about Saudi Arabia and blowback.

I don’t know what else to write so I will post links to some new and old articles on the subject, and maybe some videos.

James Bovard on the 9/11 Commission, a bootlicking national disgrace.

Paul Sperry from the New York Post writes this week how Robert Mueller helped Saudi Arabia cover up its role in 9/11.

Related to that, a year ago “28 Pages,” which documents Saudi Arabia’s role in 9/11, had an exclusive article on FBI telling a counterterrorism agent not to help 9/11 victims build their case against Saudi Arabia because that might harm U.S.-Saudi relations. (Doh!)

Prior to 9/11 the FBI were told by the Bush Administration to lay off the bin Laden family and Saudi connections to terrorism.

Paul Craig Roberts writes today:

Over the years I have reported the findings of scientists, engineers, and architects that indicate that the official story is false.I had an open mind for two reasons.One is that having been an engineering student, I could tell the difference from a building falling down from asymmetrical structural damage and a building blowing up.The other is that having been involved in policy issues in Washington for a quarter century I knew that such a humiliating defeat suffered by the world’s only superpower at the hands of a few Muslim terrorists would have brought instant demands from the White House, Congress, and media for investigation into how every aspect of the American national security state failed simultaneously on one morning.Instead the White House resisted the 9/11 families demands for an investigation for one year and never delivered a forensic investigation.Instead, the country was given a 9/11 Commission Report that was merely the government’s official story of what happened.No heads rolled.No one was fired or even reprimanded.To hold no one accountable for such a massive failure and humiliating defeat is not a believable response if the official 9/11 story is true.

Washington’s Blog: Everything we’re doing now was planned before 9/11. And Washington asks, Will the mainstream media ever report on the numerous admitted false flag terror attacks? Many examples given. And another post about U.S. government’s foreknowledge and aiding and abetting the terrorists.

The Guardian: Osama bin Laden had ties to CIA

David Ray Griffin asks, Where is the evidence that Osama bin Laden had responsibility in 9/11? (Remember, Hannity et al. have been complaining ad nauseam, and rightly, that people accusing Trump of “Russia collusions” do not have any evidence, and so on. Evidence is important.) The FBI’s 10 most wanted list included Osama bin Laden because of the African embassy and USS Cole bombings, but NOT because of 9/11 because they had no evidence linking the two. Further info from the Muckraker Report. Read Griffin’s book, Osama bin Laden: Dead or Alive?

In 2009 the Daily Mail asked, Has Osama bin Laden been dead for 7 years?

An early 2002 Dan Rather CBS News report on bin Laden’s serious illness:

A December, 2001 Fox News story, still online: Bin Laden already dead.

Of course, how could Osama bin Laden have been killed and thrown out to sea by SEAL Team 6 in 2011 if bin Laden had already died in 2001 or 2002? Paul Craig Roberts again with some questions.

Another question to ask is what caused the helicopter crash in Afghanistan that killed several SEAL Team 6 members who were involved in the Osama bin Laden “killing” just a couple months before that.

And Paul Joseph Watson on the Bin Laden fable shortly after he was “killed” in 2011. While Steve Watson explains the U.S. government’s history of fake bin Laden tapes.

Former CIA asset Susan Lindauer, a whistleblower who was railroaded and labeled a psychiatric case by USGov, explains more truth about 9/11, and the missing security tapes for the World Trade Center.

Here is an interview in which Lindauer tells about her experiences:

James Corbett with an hour-long discussion on who was really behind the 9/11 attacks:

And here is a video documentary from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth explaining the evidence that explosions brought down the World Trade Center, and not the fire caused by planes crashing into the buildings:

I admit it. I’m a “truther.” That’s because the truth is important. And as the late Justin Raimondo wrote, the opposite of a “truther” is a “liar.”

Blame George W. Bush for the Afghanistan Fiasco

Don’t blame Joe Biden for the problems in Afghanistan as U.S. troops are withdrawn and the Taliban takes over the war-torn “graveyard of empires.” Blame George W. Bush. He started the war, based on lies.

Bush started this war of aggression against Afghanistan and authorized the U.S. military to invade a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.

Why did Bush order the invasion, bombing and occupation of Afghanistan in the first place?

After 9/11 the Taliban were harboring al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, and Bush demanded that the Taliban release bin Laden to the U.S. government. The Taliban required Bush to provide evidence of bin Laden’s role in the September 11th attacks, and Bush said, “There’s no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he’s guilty.”

Who needs evidence with these things? Certainly not the President of our great USSA, that’s for sure.

The truth is, there was never actual evidence tying Osama bin Laden to the 9/11 attacks, believe it or not. (Although there was a link between bin Laden and the CIA!) Ed Haas at “The Muckraker Report” during the 2000s contacted the FBI regarding why its Most Wanted poster for Osama a.k.a. Usama bin Laden did not mention the 9/11/2001 terrorist attacks, only the 1998 African embassy bombings. Haas wrote:

The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”

Surprised by the ease in which this FBI spokesman made such an astonishing statement, I asked, “How this was possible?” Tomb continued, “Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11.” I asked, “How does that work?” Tomb continued, “The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice than decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, Bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connected Bin Laden to 9/11.”

But there is very good evidence linking the Saudi regime to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The “28 Pages” from the congressional Joint Inquiry revealed those connections.

Who knows why just days after the 9/11 attacks, “a special charter flight…whisked 11 members of Osama Bin Laden’s family off to Saudi Arabia” from Boston, according to investigative reporter Greg Palast.

But George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were obsessed with invading Afghanistan and Iraq from the get-go. According to MSNBC and the BBC, and the Washington Post, Bush was planning to start a war against al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, and a war against Iraq, well before 9/11/2001. (Those Internet links are thanks to Washington’s Blog, which sadly is no longer around.)

Bush started the war in Afghanistan, and did the same against Iraq, also a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. Bush’s father George H.W. Bush started the first war in Iraq, for no good reason, in 1991. That war, the bombings, sanctions and no-fly zones were continued by Bill Clinton, causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians throughout the 1990s, leading up to 9/11/2001.

So not only is the Afghanistan failure George W. Bush’s (and Dick Cheney’s) fault, but I am hearing especially conservatives on the radio complaining about now Afghanistan is now going to be an authoritarian, theocratic Sharia Law society, “thanks to Joe Biden.”

But guess what? Thanks to Bush and Cheney, Afghanistan already has been a Sharia Law society since the Bush administration agreed to the new Afghan Constitution in 2004-2005, which makes Islamic Sharia Law as the law of the land there. (Didn’t you know that?)

As Jacob Hornberger wrote here, the Afghanistan Constitution states:

Article One

Afghanistan shall be an Islamic Republic, independent, unitary and indivisible state.

Article Two

The sacred religion of Islam is the religion of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. Followers of other faiths shall be free within the bounds of law in the exercise and performance of their religious rituals.

Article Three

No law shall contravene the tenets and provisions of the holy religion of Islam in Afghanistan.

And it’s the same in Iraq in its constitution also from the mid-2000s, thanks to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Speaking of Jacob Hornberger, a very important must-read article from 2005 he wrote is The Troops Don’t Defend Our Freedoms.

The ones to blame for the terrible situation in Afghanistan right now are George W. Bush and Dick Cheney (and all their neocon interventionist cohorts), because foreign interventionism and especially starting wars of aggression against other countries, besides being immoral and criminal, have long-term consequences.

Another Anniversary of U.S. Atomic Bombing of Japan

It’s the 76th anniversary of the U.S. military dropping the atom bomb on Hiroshima, Japan, and slaughtering tens of thousands of innocent civilians. On Monday it will be the 76th year of the U.S. military dropping The Bomb on Nagasaki.

Many Americans are indoctrinated to rationalize the bombings and mass murder as justified, whether to “save millions” more or to “end the war,” or whatever. But it is never justified to murder an innocent person, war or not.

Here are some articles to read that contradict the government-approved official misinformation most people have been given in their government schools and by their parents or elders. The articles also point out the moral depravity of government rulers such as President Harry Truman who authorized the bombings.

Ralph Raico: Harry Truman and the Atomic Bomb.

Justin Raimondo: Hiroshima, Mon Amour.

Jacob Hornberger: Why Aren’t Hiroshima and Nagasaki War Crimes?

Edward Curtin: The Satanic Nature of the Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

And finally, a must read: Murray Rothbard: War, Peace, and the State

Happy Secession Day!

On the LRC blog, Thomas DiLorenzo linked to one of his past articles, Happy Secession Day, and I thought it was appropriate now, for this day at this time.

From the article:

… America’s most prominent secessionist, Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration, was very clear about what he was saying: Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and whenever that consent is withdrawn, it is the right of the people to “alter or abolish” that government and “to institute a new government.” The word “secession” was not a part of the American language at that time, so Jefferson used the word “separation” instead to describe the intentions of the American colonial secessionists.

The Declaration is also a states’ rights document (not surprisingly, since Jefferson was the intellectual inspiration for the American states’ rights political tradition). This, too, is foreign to most Americans. But read the final paragraph of the Declaration which states:

“That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British crown and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved; and that, as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and do all other things which independent states may of right do (emphasis in original).”

Each colony was considered to be a free and independent state, or nation, in and of itself. There was no such thing as “the United States of America” in the minds of the founders. The independent colonies were simply united for a particular cause: seceding from the British empire. Each individual state was assumed to possess all the rights that any state possesses, even to wage war and conclude peace. Indeed, when King George III finally signed a peace treaty he signed it with all the individual American states, named one by one, and not something called “The United States of America.” The “United States” as a consolidated, monopolistic government is a fiction invented by Lincoln and instituted as a matter of policy at gunpoint and at the expense of some 600,000 American lives during 1861—1865.

On the Right of the People to Nullify Federal Diktats

It looks like we will have a turn to the left with more socialism if Joe Biden gets in power, which means President Kamala Harris, and probably AOC as the Speech and Thought Commissar who will distribute a long list of those the administration has determined to be “racists,” etc, i.e. anyone who disagrees with the Regime.

So this will be a time in which those who believe in the freedom and principles of the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights will have to seriously consider, if not full secession and genuine independence then nullification of the further federal edicts that Biden or Harris will attempt to shove down our throats. (And this isn’t just because of the illegitimacy of their presidency given that they imposed a coup via a massive organized racketeering operation of fraud and vote tampering and fabricating.)

To get a good idea on the right and importance of nullification, I recommend Tom Woods’s book from 2010, Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century. Here it is at the Mises Institute store, and Amazon.

I have quoted before from this blog post by Tom Woods and will again, in his explanation of the relationship between the states and the federal government:

If you and I give a third person (call him Person C) a limited power of attorney to help govern our affairs, and that person oversteps the boundaries outlined in the contract we signed, who gets to decide if Person C is in violation of the contract? Is it Person C himself? Or is it you and I, the people who wrote and signed the limited power of attorney in the first place? Likewise, the states, as the principals to the constitutional compact, have a far better logical claim to be the judges of constitutionality than their agent, the federal government.

In Woods’s Liberty Classroom page on nullification, he writes:

1) The states preceded the Union.  The Declaration of Independence speaks of “free and independent states” that “have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do.” The British acknowledged the independence not of a single blob, but of individual states, which they proceeded to list one by one. Article II of the Articles of Confederation says the states “retain their sovereignty, freedom, and independence”; they must have enjoyed that sovereignty in the past in order for them to “retain” it in 1781 when the Articles were officially adopted.  The ratification of the Constitution was accomplished not by a single, national vote, but by the individual ratifications of the various states, each assembled in convention.

2) In the American system no government is sovereign.  The peoples of the states are the sovereigns.  It is they who apportion powers between themselves, their state governments, and the federal government.  In doing so they are not impairing their sovereignty in any way. To the contrary, they are exercising it.

3) Since the peoples of the states are the sovereigns, then when the federal government exercises a power of dubious constitutionality on a matter of great importance, it is they themselves who are the proper disputants, as they review whether their agent was intended to hold such a power.  No other arrangement makes sense.  No one asks his agent whether the agent has or should have such-and-such power.  In other words, the very nature of sovereignty, and of the American system itself, is such that the sovereigns must retain the power to restrain the agent they themselves created.  James Madison explains this clearly in the famous Virginia Report of 1800.

There is further information on that Nullification resource page. And Woods answers some of the objections to Nullification, such as the claims that it violates the Constitution’s supremacy clause, that it doesn’t appear in the Constitution, that the Supreme Court ruled against the idea, that it was used by the southern states to defend slavery, and other objections.

So of course people have the right to live their lives however they want, as long as they are peaceful. Given that the Declaration of Independence recognizes the unalienable right of each individual to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then of course the people of the states have a right to nullify federal diktats.

For example, healthcare. As I wrote in my June of 2011 article on disobeying dictators,

Now, by “disobeying dictators,” I am not advocating violence, but only that people live their lives as they see fit, as long as they do not intrude on anyone else’s equal right to do the same with their lives. So there comes a time when civil disobedience is in order. By civil disobedience, I mean acting in defiance of government-imposed rules and dictates that have nothing to do with protecting life, liberty and property. This includes individual- or state-nullification of federal orders. I believe in the Non-Aggression Principle and oppose the use of aggression as an initiated means toward an end.

Like in the old Soviet Union, Obama’s government-controlled medical scheme will not only be harmful medically, but the increasing police state we are experiencing will be used to enforce the controls, and also will be used against individuals who show dissent from the government’s authoritarian dictates.

We The People don’t need all that, and we don’t want it. We want freedom and peace. (At least I do.)

Now, what would happen if doctor’s offices, hospitals, medical equipment manufacturers, drug and supplement makers, and insurers just decided to do their business with their consumers – honestly and peacefully, and without aggression or fraud – and totally ignore federal regulations, mandates, fees, licensure laws and other intrusions? Frankly, those intrusions’ only real purpose is to protect established physicians and businesses’ profits from prospective competitors and start-ups. (The medical establishment was already corrupt well before ObamaCare.)

The contracts involved in the relationships between doctors or other medical providers and patients, or between insurers and patients, are private contracts, and third parties such as government bureaucrats sticking their big noses into those private contracts are committing acts of criminality, of trespassing, in my opinion.

Acts of nullification are necessary for Americans to be better served in their medical needs. With freedom, the consumers would determine what is needed, not the government, and the producers would serve the consumers – quality of medical care would then rise and the prices would fall.

So I definitely recommend Tom Woods’s book on nullification, which people should send to their state legislators and even their U.S. congressmen and senators.

On the Amazon page it quotes “from the inside flap”:

Unconstitutional laws are pouring out of Washington…but we can stop them.

Just ask Thomas Jefferson. There is a “rightful remedy” to federal power grabs–it’s called Nullification.

In Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century, historian and New York Times bestselling author Thomas E. Woods, Jr. explains not only why nullification is the constitutional tool the Founders envisioned, but how it works–and has already been employed in cases ranging from upholding the First Amendment to knocking down slave laws before the Civil War. In Nullification, Woods shows:

* How the states were meant to be checks against federal tyranny–and how a growing roster of governors and state attorneys general are recognizing they need to become that again
* Why the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution reinforces the rights of states to nullify unconstitutional laws
* Why it was left to the states to uphold the simple principle that an unconstitutional law is no law at all
* Why, without nullification, ordinary Americans will continue to suffer the oppression of unjust, unconstitutional laws
* PLUS thorough documentation of how the Founding Fathers believed nullification could be applied

Nullification is not just a book–it could become a movement to restore the proper constitutional limits of the federal government. Powerful, provocative, and timely, Nullification is sure to stir debate and become a constitutional handbook for all liberty-loving Americans.

We already have a lot of federal bureaucracies and agencies which shouldn’t exist and should be abolished along with all of their regulations and fees and fines. None of them is authorized by the U.S. Constitution, and if they exist, then the people have a right to nullify them. Of course, it is helpful if such nullification is made official in state laws by the state legislatures.