“Freedom had been hunted round the globe; reason was considered as rebellion; and the slavery of fear had made men afraid to think. But such is the irresistible nature of truth, that all it asks, and all it wants, is the liberty of appearing.”

– Thomas Paine

To perversely paraphrase Bastiat:  “The state is the great fiction within whose tax jurisdiction it deems itself free to fine, kidnap, cage, maim and kill its taxpayers and tax clients.”  It tends to be more gentle with the latter than the former.

High Tax Commissioner Obama recently ordered the robot murder of two acknowledged American citizens, Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, in yet another undeclared hostility zone in the Middle East in Yemen.  No trial and no appeal, simply the remote control killing of two Americans in a foreign country.  No empire in history has ever isolated its more obnoxious and deadly behavior in foreign lands simply to the latest imperial conquest, all the countries have eventually brought it all back to their homelands like disease vectors.  Wait for it because all the bloodshed and dismemberment we have visited on the rest of humanity will be brought home and used with vigor and no restraint whatsoever as the powers that be emanating from Mordor on the Potomac become more and more desperate as their economic ignorance and chicanery force their hand at increased savagery to preserve their way of life. The United Kingdom shows what will happen to a nation that seeks to rule the world, is reduced to colonial rock formations dotted around the globe and starts to practice empire on its own citizens.

We are all used to news coming over the transom everyday of yet more innocent women and children maimed and killed by our troops or their proxies in the multitude of statist squabbles around the globe.  We are bludgeoned day after day with the news of cops misbehaving violently across the fruited plain.  The prisons are bloated with the largest per capita population on Earth in the land of the free. Millions of tax dollars are spent in a death penalty system that morbidly worships a premeditated killing of a human being accused of a capital crime.

When stripped of the gaudy music and patriotic bunting, nation states are simply tax jurisdictions whose primary purpose is the forced redistribution of wealth and privilege. We are vampire nation quite literally as tens of millions of hapless subjects are drained of the proceeds of their labor and investment for no better reason than a lack of recourse to say no to the mugger.  The wealth is expropriated through taxes, regulations and work rules that choke efficiency and effectiveness at every turn. The rough analog is the Helot relationship to the Spartan ruling class. You work and follow the rules you did not sign up for in a system rigged to ensure that your compliance is ultimately on pain of death if not followed to the letter.  In other words, government promises security in exchange for a disproportionate share of your time and efforts.  Slavery is alive and well in America, it is simply of a more ephemeral variety.  One is convinced that even though you are not owned directly by a master, your taxing and tithing is necessary to sustain your freedom in exchange for all the good things provided by government. Your non-compliance with any of these diktats from the nomenklatura will result in the aforementioned fining, kidnapping, caging, maiming and killing (one can call this the ladder of slave resistance penalties) depending on the severity of the claim and the resistance of the citizen-slave being taken to task.

In the past, I have often been accused of oversimplification when I point out that the institution and existence of police forces is the one essential element to yoke large herds of humanity to statist plunder.  Absent their activities, the politicians would have no means whatsoever to enforce their rapine and murderous ways.  None.  So let’s peel the onion and examine one of the sustaining beliefs that inform the very essence of police power:  the ability of the state to initiate violence.  There are reams of busy jurisprudence that speak to the very right of the state to injure and kill its citizens.  In order to have the peaceful society that the government insists is its plot and raison d’être, it must have the power to kill.  Not only the power for its enforcers to protect themselves but the power to initiate violence; if there were a contract, it would not be one you would sign except under duress (there is a pattern here).  The contract would read: you have the right to do what we tell you and if you resist or fail to comply, you are ultimately subject to death at the hands of our enforcers. Period. If said enforcers murder you, they will be subject to investigation by themselves and will most likely go on to enforce more “contracts”. No matter how petty the crime nor how malum prohibitum the offense, the state has invested itself with the power to kill.  It has no choice, for who would willingly surrender without threat of violence nearly sixty percent of their income, allow their family members to be sexually assaulted, or not eat foods the government does not approve of?

The only way a state can sustain itself is to employ the necessary apparatchiks who will do the most heinous acts of violence against their fellow citizens and to codify the willingness to initiate aggression and in the end, maim or kill anyone who resists or refuse to comply.  Even if that person is an unarmed homeless man who is 130 pounds dripping wet.

The government is barbarism and not civilization.  Much like the moral amnesia that allowed slavery to thrive for five millennia, mankind has been hoodwinked, cajoled and coerced into thinking the state is the only way to organize society and any other notion makes you an outlaw.  How many times have you ever questioned the veracity of a law in polite conversation only to hear that must be the way of the world and there is no other method?

There is no greater moral government than a man’s self-ownership and there is no greater injustice than denying that very thing to a man .


“It is incredible how as soon as a people become subject, it promptly falls into such complete forgetfulness of its freedom that it can hardly be roused to the point of regaining it, obeying so easily and willingly that one is led to say that this people has not so much lost its liberty as won its enslavement.”

– Etienne de la Boétie

Copyright © 2011 by zerogov.com



“While this America settles in the mould of its vulgarity, heavily thickening to empire,

And protest, only a bubble in the molten mass, pops and signs out, and the mass hardens,

I sadly smiling remember that the flower fades to make fruit, the fruit rots to make earth.

Out of the mother; and through the spring exultances, ripeness and decadence; and home to the mother.


You making haste, haste on decay; not blameworthy; life is good, be it stubbornly long or suddenly

A mortal splendor; meteors are not needed less than mountains: shine, perishing republic.

But for my children, I would have them keep their distance from the thickening center; corruption

Never has been compulsory, when the cities lie at the monster’s feet there are left the mountains.


And boys, be in nothing so moderate as in love of man, a clever servant, insufferable master.

There is the trap that catches noblest spirits, that caught–they say–God, when he walked on earth.”

– Robinson Jeffers  Shine, Perishing Republic

Jeffers, the lyrical and unsung poet of the American West had his finger on the pulse of the war machine in Mordor on the Potomac.  He was an opponent of the American entry into WWII (The War to Save Josef Stalin) and this put him on the path to poverty and obscurity.  His poetry is among the best America produced in the 20th century but he remains in obscurity because he dared to question the war machine.

There is talk now of entering into a more active conflict with Pakistan.  The millions of maimed and murdered bodies that have already been the American offertory for world peace are simply not enough and the US death machine marches onward.  This war will come home and not only in the broken minds and bodies of the veterans but in the machinations of our rulers who will find all kinds of new stratagems and toys to better control their cattle here at home.  Combine this with the many opportunities afforded by the economic calamities the government has authored and you have a recipe for even worse times ahead.

On reflection, I cannot support a single conflict America has engaged in since 1898 but I do know the only legitimate conflict is fought on one’s own soil to defend your kith and kin from barbarism and enslavement.  I am opposed to all initiated aggression on principle but I am no pacifist.  I believe in a robust and compelling response to initiated aggression.

We are a people born in conflict and steeped in a culture of self-defense despite the disregard with which our most holy and vaunted Founding Rulers viewed such a culture.

It was on this day, September 30 in 1776 that George Washington wrote a despairing letter to his nephew complaining of the poor performance of his militia.

“I am wearied to death all day with a variety of perplexing circumstances, disturbed at the conduct of the militia, whose behavior and want of discipline has done great injury to the other troops, who never had officers, except in a few instances, worth the bread they eat.” Washington added, “In confidence I tell you that I never was in such an unhappy, divided state since I was born.”

Mighty strong elixir from one of history’s least deserving Battle Captains whose talents for warfare were among the poorest of any field commander.  The man who won three of the nine major battles he fought against a foe that was engaged in a global conflict with great powers on the European continent. If it weren’t for the “sideshow” aspect of the North American conflict to the British, military defeat would not have been visited upon them except at the hands of guerrillas.  As we see from the letter referenced above, Washington did not think very highly of his most pure volunteers, the militia.  No, Washington needed dragooned and conscripted fodder that would better enable his military ambitions.

His incompetence and sheer martial stupidity ranks up there with General William Hull from 1812who was the only General in US history to be handed a death sentence at a courts martial.

Washington went on after the conflict to be granted and expect tremendous honors and respect for not having lost the war.  He and his evil crony, Alexander Hamilton, went on to harness the thirteen colonies under a devilishly clever contraption called the Constitution that went on to create the post-1898 national security state after the vicious consolidation of the Anti-Constitutionalists in the South in 1865.  Since that time we have been a nation at war every year without missing a beat.  Here is a partial list of military mischief around the globe by America just between 1901-1929. Or fast forward to marine landings in Lebanon in 1958 or the US threatening Iraq with nuclear annihilation in 1958 for threatening to invade Kuwait.  I need not bore you with the military mischief visited on the Earth since 1991 by the “city on the hill”.

My point is that despite the patriotic noise and media flash-bangs tossed in our laps everyday to assure the sheeple that we are a nation of peace is a crock.  We are a jingoistic nation bent on world domination because we know what is best for the rest of the world much like the domination and intimidation practiced by the Federal government domestically on their tax cattle. Every empire brings their practice of martial terror abroad home (witness the decline of the UK) and you ain’t seen anything yet.

In the end, militias will be the only answer to defend ourselves from our own government.  I am not referring to the bloated and ill-kitted media darlings who populate the fever-dreams of the Southern Poverty Law Center and their Fusion Center clients in the Fatherland Security apparatus. I am referring to the growing band of malcontents in America who see the writing on the wall and are preparing for the collapse and coming endarkenment with Gold, Guns and Groceries (G3).  Not the conspiricists or the local redneck hunting club; these would be the former military veterans or shooting hobbyists or men who simply know their measure and consider metrosexuality to be a weakness.  These are men of the gun.  The disparaged men of Washington’s time who knew a stand-up fight in line sixty meters from their Redcoat opponents would not allow them to fight another day.

These are the men who in small packs or leaderless loners will finally take back what they consider theirs.  That would be their autonomy to live an unmolested life free of the institutionalized aggression of a tax jurisdiction prettily dressed up as a nation state.

War is ugly and should be avoided but free men have an obligation to demonstrate that slave retention can be a costly enterprise for the plantation owner.  There are dark times ahead and a large facet of good luck is meticulous preparation.  Training will be a vital aspect of those who find themselves among the living in a few years.

Resist, Helot.

“General Hugh Percy [after the Regular defeat at Lexington-Concord on 19 April 1775] shared the opinion that the colonists would never fight, or if they did, they would be ineffective. After his fighting retreat, he wrote to General Harvey, in England: “… during the whole affair the Rebels attacked in a very scattered, irregular manner, but with perseverance and resolution, nor did they ever dare to form into any regular body. Indeed, they knew too well what was proper, to do so.

Whoever looks upon them as an irregular mob, will find himself much mistaken. They have men amongst them who know very well what they are about, having been employed as Rangers against the Indians and Canadians and this country being much covered with wood, and hilly, is very advantageous for their method of fighting. . . . “.

Copyright © 2011 by zerogov.com

“The only tyrant I accept in this world is the still voice within.”

~ Mahatma Gandhi

I have been working on a contract that will come to bind you, dear reader. This contract will give myself, and those I employ, the power to seize your property whenever we deem it to be necessary and proper. This contract can be amended at anytime and can only be interpreted by myself, and those I employ.

You say you would never sign such a contract?

No worries, your signature is not needed. I have, in good faith, taken the time to have many of my Friends and Neighbors sign it. Those who have signed it, have, with their signatures, legally bound you to this contract. I know, I know, it seems unfair and perhaps somewhat unjust. That is why I will provide you with arbitration, and I promise I will see to it that this method of arbitration will be as objective as possible. This Arbitrator will be paid by me through funds I have stolen…errr…extracted from you through the barrel of m….errr…through taxation. You see, I only sign the paychecks, the money comes from you; it’s more than fair this way. You couldn’t possibly be competent enough to use your own money to buy your own arbitration, so I must force it upon you. This Arbitrator, this Judge, will be addressed as “The Honorable”, or, “Your Honor” and he will have almost unlimited powers within his court. If you choose to disrespect or disrupt “the Court” you will be caged for an indeterminate amount of time. However, before you are thrown into a cage, you will have a chance to grovel at the feet of the Court. Maybe this most Honorable Man will show mercy on you, or perhaps not. Even though your money and property is extracted to pay for this Public Servant, it is not your place to question him in his court. All dissenters must be punished, this is the only way to maintain the absolute authority of “the Court”.

You say this contract would never be upheld in a court of law?

I feel completely confident that this contract that I have so carefully crafted will meet all of the legal requirements the Court itself is founded on. Surely that must be sufficient, surely this contract would be upheld by any Judge in this Country. I am here to inform you, Dear Reader, that I will be venturing down to my local Courthouse to have the Court review this contract. Please start to prepare your property for confiscation, and keep it ready for me to seize at a moments notice. Of course you can keep “your” property if you pay an annual sum of money set by myself, or the bureaucrats I employ. We will work out the details after I have made everything legal, which I’m sure should be no problem at all. Especially with the legal use of the persuasion of power literally at my fingertips.

What do you think would happen to me if I presented this contract to any Judge in this Country to try and have it enforced?

I’ll bet I would find myself in a cage charged with contempt of court rather quickly. Now, brace yourselves for this, every Little Tyrant in this country enforces this sort of bogus contract every day. Let’s look at  local municipalities for an example. Year after year, Faceless Bureaucrats stay busy scribbling down laws ad infinitum, in a never ending attempt to part you with your property. Without your Local Little Tyrant, these people who you have probably never met before would be no different than some roving gang of Thugs trying to steal your property. Magically, and through the weird ritual known a legislation, these Bureaucratic Thugs can jot some legalese down on paper and you now are forced to abide by it, and if you don’t, men with guns will issue you some piece of paper demanding your presence at the courthouse. In this contract that you allegedly agreed to simply by being born here, there is an amendment specifically barring involuntary servitude, but this amendment is null and void when your presence is required at the courthouse. You can be summoned to appear, and if you don’t comply you could be fined or caged.  At the courthouse, you will stand in front of one of these LittleTtyrants and even though you never agreed to any of this malum prohibitum madness you will no doubt be parted with some of your hard earned property if this Little Tyrant finds you to be “guilty”. Any of you reading this take should take one day out to go sit in the back of your local courthouse.  After reading this, I’ll guarantee you the visit will be surreal, and I’ll even wager that 90% of the guilty charges will be non-violent offenses. There is no honor here, don’t bother looking, you will find none. The only thing you will witness on this visit is an efficient system set up to rob the serfs blind. That’s the scam folks, line ’em up, and rob ’em, it’s that simple.

Let’s look at the the scam on the national level. The “Supremes” as they are called, are nothing more than the Biggest Little Tyrants. It seems these folks have the final say in the business of systematized tyranny. Again, it’s the one-sided contract where these Tyrants source their power. Men I never met, and ones who have been dead for over two hundred years have somehow given these “Supremes” the power to regulate just about everything I do in my day to day life. We need to find the source of the Tyrants magical ink and burn it in the fires of Mordor. These Robed Lawyers are the ones who get to interpret this contract that I have never signed or agreed to. They are the ones who get to tell me what rights I have and what rights I don’t have. What firearms I can use and which ones I can’t. Where I can protest and where I can’t. What healthcare I must purchase, and when. We need to understand something, and we need to understand it quickly. This system was set up by lawyers, and it it kept by lawyers. When a lawyer ascends to the rank of Judge, he is not honorable, he is a lawyer with a robe on. He is a lawyer who has just become a Little Tyrant. A Tyrant that now has the power to enforce a contract upon you that you never agreed to. This same Little Tyrant would throw me in jail for trying to enforce my contract. Philosophically and factually there is no difference between the contracts, except his gang is bigger than mine.

These Little Tyrants would have us believe they are fair and just. That they are the true Arbiters of Justice. How can this be? Every time I have been to court, or even when I drive by I see the Federal, State, and County flags waving out front. This is a political statement all on it’s own. If the Little Tyrant inside of that building is issued a State paycheck, sits on a bench the State paid for, and flies the State Colors inside and out, do you really think you are going to get a fair trial if the State charges you with a crime? If I chose to fly a flag of my choice outside of my courthouses and forced you to show up you would be disgusted and revolution would most certainly brew in this country, but no one thinks twice about it now. Years of patriotic propaganda, and government schooling have brain-washed whole generations into abandoning their critical thinking skills when it comes to the American injustice system. Flying an American flag in front of a courthouse or even in one should be just as absurd as flying a Russian or Chinese flag in and around these Corporate Establishments. Something that should have been revolting from the beginning is now commonplace and accepted. Your children pledge their allegiance to the same flag that will be waving on the day the  local Little Tyrant will rob them of their property. Indeed, some of these children will even die in battle defending the flag that has flown over some of the worst injustices the world has ever known, and it flies in every courtroom in this country. This is the depth of the indoctrination. Think about it.

About five years ago I made a deal with myself to never again stand for these Little Tyrants. The robe, the rising for the Judge, the way he sits above you, it all has a purpose. Every bit of this ritual is meant to trigger your fear. Be victims of it no more. If a man would use his power to cage you for not standing up for him he is a Coward and a Sociopath, and he does not deserve your respect. I vowed to myself I would stand for no one less than my Wife, the Women of my Family, my Father, and my Grandfathers. Everyone else has to earn it. If I am held in contempt for it, so be it. In the movie Rob Roy, the protagonist says that “honor is a gift a man gives to himself”, if the State can make one-sided deals, so can I.

Maybe the reason we are treated like serfs is because we act like serfs. This is not 12th Century England.


“So now, who will help me bake this bread?
Who will be the first to speak, and leave complacency for dead?
I’ve done all I can on my own, yet stagnant minds persist to squeeze blood from this stone, but… I won’t bleed for you. I’ve no need for you. Death will be the day I concede to you.”


Publisher’s Note:  September 17 is the day the serfs in the tax jurisdiction known as America celebrate Constitution Day.  We hear all the usual ill-informed and ahistorical notions celebrating what was in essence one of the most savvy and lucrative political coups in Western history. The Antifederalists were right, the Constitution was an elegant trap to shackle an entire nation to a system to empower the few over the many and the banksters over the entire system of commerce.  The respective states which had signed separate peace agreements with the United Kingdom in 1783 were merely political and inferior subsidiaries to the greater national power emerging in Mordor on the Potomac.  The Constitution created a Soviet style system well before the Bolsheviks were even contemplating such a scheme.  Whenever you hear some of your friends and neighbors extolling the virtues of the Constitution, read them Spooner’s quote and see how they address that particular conundrum. -BB

By rendering the labor of one, the property of the other, they cherish pride, luxury, and vanity on one side; on the other, vice and servility, or hatred and revolt.

~ James Madison

“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain — that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.”

~ Lysander Spooner

Today, 17 September 2009, is Constitution Day. There will be paeans, abundant commentary and church-like observances of the glories of this document in making us the most blessed nation on planet earth. This essay suggests a contrarian thesis. The Constitution is an enabling document for big government. Much like the Wizard of Oz, the man behind the curtain is a fraud. In this case, for all the sanctimonious handwringing and the obsequious idolatry of the parchment, it sealed the fate of our liberties and freedoms and has operated for more than 200 years as a cover for massive expansion of the tools and infrastructure of statist expansion and oppression. Among the many intellectual travels I have undertaken, this is one of the most heart-breaking I have ventured on. I want to acknowledge the compass-bearers who sent me on this journey: Kenneth W. Royce (aka Boston T. Party) and his seminal book, The Hologram of Liberty and Kevin Gutzman’s Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution. For most of the political spectrum in America, the document represents their interpretation of how to make this mortal coil paradise. Even in libertarian circles, it is taken as an article of faith the Constitution is a brilliant mechanism to enlarge liberty and keep government at bay. That is a lie.

The document was drafted in the summer of 1787 behind closed doors in tremendous secrecy because if word leaked out of the actual contents and intent, the revolution that had just concluded would have been set ablaze again. They were in a race against time and did everything in their power to ensure that the adoption took place as quickly as possible to avoid reflection and contemplation in the public square that would kill the proposal once the consequences of its agenda became apparent. They were insisting that the states ratify first and then propose amendments later. It was a political coup d’état. It was nothing less than an oligarchical coup to ensure that the moneyed interests, banksters and aristocrats could cement their positions and mimic the United Kingdom from which they had been recently divorced.

The original charter of the drafters was to pen improvements to the existing Articles of Confederation. Instead, they chose to hijack the process and create a document which enslaved the nation. Federalist in the old parlance meant states rights and subsidiarity but the three authors of the fabled Federalist Papers supported everything but that. Their intent and commitment was to create a National government with the ability to make war on its constituent parts if these states failed to submit themselves to the central government.

As Austrian economists have discovered, bigger is not necessarily better. The brilliant and oft-dismissed Articles of Confederation (AoC) and Perpetual Union are a testament to voluntarism and cooperation through persuasion that the Constitution disposed of with its adoption. Penned in 1776 and ratified in 1781, the spirit and context of the Articles live on in the Swiss canton system and are everywhere evident in the marketplace where confederationist sentiments are practiced daily. The confederation’s design divines its mechanism from what an unfettered market does every day: voluntary cooperation, spontaneous information signals and the parts always being smarter than the sum A. confederation according to the Webster’s 1828 dictionary is:

  1. The act of confederating; a league; a compact for mutual support; alliance; particularly of princes, nations or states.

I would advise the readership to use the 1828 Webster’s dictionary to accompany any primary source research you may undertake to understand American (& British) letters in the eighteenth century. It is the source for the contemporary lexicon. It is even available online now.

Here is a simple comparison of the two organizing documents:


Articles of Confederation


Levying taxes Congress could request states to pay taxes Congress has right to levy taxes on individuals
Federal courts No system of federal courts Court system created to deal with issues between citizens, states
Regulation of trade No provision to regulate interstate trade Congress has right to regulate trade between states
Executive No executive with power. President of U.S. merely presided over Congress Executive branch headed by President who chooses Cabinet and has checks on power of judiciary and legislature
Amending document 13/13 needed to amend Articles 2/3 of both houses of Congress plus 3/4 of state legislatures or national convention
Representation of states Each state received 1 vote regardless of size Upper house (Senate) with 2 votes; lower house (House of Representatives) based on population
Raising an army Congress could not draft troops, dependent on states to contribute forces Congress can raise an army to deal with military situations
Interstate commerce No control of trade between states Interstate commerce controlled by Congress
Disputes between states Complicated system of arbitration Federal court system to handle disputes
Sovereignty Sovereignty resides in states Constitution the supreme law of the land
Passing laws 9/13 needed to approve legislation 50%+1 of both houses plus signature of President

Note that the precept of individual taxation was an end-run against state sovereignty from the very beginning. If the Congress does not wish to violate state sovereignty, then they will simply prey on the individuals in the states. It should be obvious that the AoC was not a recipe for government employees from top to bottom to use the office to enrich themselves so a scheme was afoot to precipitate and manufacture dissent over the present configuration of the central government apparatus which for all intents and purposes barely existed. The AoC was intolerable to a narrow panoply of interests and the Federalist Papers appeared between October 1787 and August 1788 to plead the case for a newer form of “Republic” authored by three individuals: James Madison, John Jay, and Alexander Hamilton. The British had sued for peace in 1783 and the AoC were still in effect until 1790. Time was ticking to erect the new government apparatus that would strengthen the central government to eventually mimic the very tyranny which caused British North America to put the English Crown in the hazard. The Anti-Federalists rose up in response and provided what I consider one of the most splendid and eloquent defenses of small government penned in our history.

When the Constitutional Convention convened on 1787, 55 delegates came but 14 later quit as the Convention eventually abused its mandate and scrapped the AoC instead of revising it. The notes and proceedings of the cloistered meeting were to be secret as long as 53 years later when Madison’s edited notes were published in 1840.

The Anti-Federalist Brutus avers in Essay I in October 1787:

“But what is meant is, that the legislature of the United States are vested with the great and uncontroulable powers, of laying and collecting taxes, duties, imposts, and excises; of regulating trade, raising and supporting armies, organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, instituting courts, and other general powers. And are by this clause invested with the power of making all laws, proper and necessary, for carrying all these into execution; and they may so exercise this power as entirely to annihilate all the state governments, and reduce this country to one single government. And if they may do it, it is pretty certain they will; for it will be found that the power retained by individual states, small as it is, will be a clog upon the wheels of the government of the United States; the latter therefore will be naturally inclined to remove it out of the way. Besides, it is a truth confirmed by the unerring experience of ages, that every man, and every body of men, invested with power, are ever disposed to increase it, and to acquire a superiority over every thing that stands in their way.”

The conflict was brewing between the Jeffersonians among the individualists and the Hamiltonian collectivists. The rhetorical lines were drawn and the fate of the nation eventually slid into the camp of the Nationalists.

George Washington wrote to John Jay on 1 August 1786:

“Many are of opinion that Congress have too frequently made use of the suppliant humble tone of requisition, in applications to the States, when they had a right to assume their imperial dignity and command obedience. Be that as it may, requisitions are a perfect nihility, where thirteen sovereign, independent[,] disunited States are in the habit of discussing & refusing compliance with them at their option. Requisitions are actually little better than a jest and a bye word through out the Land. If you tell the Legislatures they have violated the treaty of peace and invaded the prerogatives of the confederacy they will laugh in your face. What then is to be done? Things cannot go on in the same train forever. It is much to be feared, as you observe, that the better kind of people being disgusted with the circumstances will have their minds prepared for any revolution whatever. We are apt to run from one extreme into another. To anticipate & prevent disasterous contingencies would be the part of wisdom & patriotism.”

It appears even the much admired Washington was having none of the talk of independence and wanted a firm hand on the yoke of the states to make them obey their masters on high. Washington’s behavior in the Whiskey Rebellion cast away any doubts of the imperious behavior of the central government a mere four year after the adoption of the Constitution.

Patrick Henry gave the firmest defense of the skeptical posture when he questioned the precarious position the Constitution put to the state’s sovereignty on 5 June 1788 at the Virginia Ratifying Convention (the savvy Founding Lawyers ensured that the process of ratification was sped along by bypassing the bicameral house requirements and simply asking the states to conduct ratifying conventions):

“How were the Congressional rights defined when the people of America united by a confederacy to defend their liberties and rights against the tyrannical attempts of Great-Britain? The States were not then contented with implied reservation. No, Mr. Chairman. It was expressly declared in our Confederation that every right was retained by the States respectively, which was not given up to the Government of the United States. But there is no such thing here. You therefore by a natural and unavoidable implication, give up your rights to the General Government. Your own example furnishes an argument against it. If you give up these powers, without a Bill of Rights, you will exhibit the most absurd thing to mankind that ever the world saw — A Government that has abandoned all its powers — The powers of direct taxation, the sword, and the purse. You have disposed of them to Congress, without a Bill of Rights — without check, limitation, or controul. And still you have checks and guards — still you keep barriers — pointed where? Pointed against your weakened, prostrated, enervated State Government! You have a Bill of Rights to defend you against the State Government, which is bereaved of all power; and yet you have none against Congress, though in full and exclusive possession of all power! You arm youselves against the weak and defenceless, and expose yourselves naked to the armed and powerful. Is not this a conduct of unexampled absurdity? What barriers have you to oppose to this most strong energetic Government? To that Government you have nothing to oppose. All your defence is given up. This is a real actual defect. . . “

The Bill of Rights as we know them today were first introduced by James Madison in 1789 in response to the fears the emerging Constitution caused among the free men in these united States. They eventually came into effect on December 15, 1791. The Federalists were desperately opposed to the adoption of the Bill of Rights being insisted upon by Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson and other skeptics of central governance. As Brutus again so cleverly pointed out in the Anti-Federalist papers #84:

” This will appear the more necessary, when it is considered, that not only the Constitution and laws made in pursuance thereof, but all treaties made, under the authority of the United States, are the supreme law of the land, and supersede the Constitutions of all the States. The power to make treaties, is vested in the president, by and with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the senate. I do not find any limitation or restriction to the exercise of this power. The most important article in any Constitution may therefore be repealed, even without a legislative act. Ought not a government, vested with such extensive and indefinite authority, to have been restricted by a declaration of rights? It certainly ought.

So clear a point is this, that I cannot help suspecting that persons who attempt to persuade people that such reservations were less necessary under this Constitution than under those of the States, are wilfully endeavoring to deceive, and to lead you into an absolute state of vassalage (emphasis mine).”

The Bill of Rights nominations from the respective sovereign states originally numbered near 200 and the Founding Lawyers saw fit to include twelve (the two concerning apportionment and Congressional pay failed to pass) after much bickering especially by the most monstrous worthy of the time, Alexander Hamilton. A brilliant mind coupled with all the political knife-fighting skills needed to dominate the proceedings, Hamilton made sure that the tools of oppression and a financial yoke would be decorating our necks in perpetuity. Small solace can be taken in the aftermath of the duel between Hamilton and Burr on 11 July 1804 in that it took him close to a day to die.

Alexander Hamilton tipped his intellectual hand in a speech to the Constitutional Convention concerning the United States Senate, 06/18/1787 (quoted in the notes of Judge Yates):

“All communities divide themselves into the few and the many. The first are the rich and the well-born; the other the mass of the people … turbulent and changing, they seldom judge or determine right. Give therefore to the first class a distinct, permanent share in the Government … Nothing but a permanent body can check the imprudence of democracy.”

I am no fan of democracy as I see it as nothing more than a transformational accommodation to tyranny over time but one can infer from this quote that Hamilton fancied a class of people more equal than others who would have a disproportionate access to the levers of power over the great unwashed. Again, I am suggesting that the Constitution was a document designed from the beginning as a means to rob constituent and subsidiary parts of sovereignty and subject these subordinate elements to a national framework which made their position subservient to the Federal government. The desire of the Federalists was to install a national framework and cement the structure through the machinations of national banking, franking of a currency and debt creation. Keep in mind that all of the nattering on about the Federal Reserve today is a complaint against a Constitutional Frankenstein monster in its fourth iteration since the other attempts at national banks failed. You can guess who picked up the tab.

The Bill of Rights was finally passed on 15 December 1791 but it was much diluted and purposefully weaker and more ambiguous about the central government’s implied and explicit powers.

The Constitution took effect on 4 March 1789 with 11 states under it and two states not submitting ratification. North Carolina did ratify it when a promise of a future Bill of Rights was assured. Rhode Island refused and was the only state to put the Constitution to a popular vote where it failed on 24 March 1788 by an 11—1 margin. They eventually ratified it.

Hamilton now had the ways and means to make real his storied dream: “A national debt, if it is not excessive, will be to us a national blessing.” The moneyed interests saw the advantage of monetizing the debt. By assuming the state’s debts at the national government level, a means of controlling commerce and taxation became an implied task of the central government. This may have been the first incident of the debtors from the Revolutionary War convincing their Hamiltonian allies that if they had the national government bear the debt and relieve them of responsibility, this could be used as the means to establish the coveted national bank to start the issuance of government currency not to mention the driver for increased taxation.

All the puzzle pieces had finally locked into place. Royce eloquently explains what has transpired in Hologram of Liberty: “To put a ‘gun’ in the hands of the new national government was the primary object, the great sine qua non, of the Constitution. A comprehensive de jure authority of Congress backed with de facto guns.” The Confederation is defeated and the long train of usurpation, centralization and tyranny leaves the station for what has become American history.

Hamilton’s machinations and influence probably single-handedly turned the product of this secret confab into one of the most successful instruments of political oppression before even the creation of the USSR. What makes it even more sublime as a tool of big government is the sophisticated propaganda and hagiographic enterprise which has both spontaneously and through careful planning suborned the public’s skepticism of the nature of the machine erected to control their behavior, which has resulted in an almost religious observance of all things Constitutional. Carefully cultivated over two hundred years, this religious idolatry had certainly fogged the thinking of this writer for most of his adult life. This sleeper has awakened.

Ask yourself this question: have the robed government employees who read the Constitutional tea leaves for the most part defended individual liberty or have they rubber-stamped the exponential growth of power and control of the colossus that sits astride the Potomac?

“Our constitutions purport to be established by ‘the people,’ and, in theory, ‘all the people’ consent to such government as the constitutions authorize. But this consent of ‘the people’ exists only in theory. It has no existence in fact. Government is in reality established by the few; and these few assume the consent of all the rest, without any such consent being actually given.”

~ Lysander Spooner

See:  https://www.lewrockwell.com/buppert/buppert29.1.html


“All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome.”
– George Orwell

We all experience the world through the shared stories and anecdotes that illuminate who we are and where we come from.  Our educations, both formal and informal, drive the worldviews we develop over time.  These are influenced universally by the transmission mediums we listen to or read about.  Whether we are reading books (an increasingly uncommon practice), watching television, interacting on the internet or engaging in conversation with friends and family, all of these activities consistently and irrevocably develop and refine the way we view the world around us.  First and foremost, our language and employment thereof has the most significant impact on us.  I do not want to bother with the noxious collectivist apologias familiar to the deconstructionists like Chomsky and Foucault who profess that literary texts and contemporary conversation are freighted with the various Politically Correct bugbears like race, class and gender which to me is a neat but erroneous substitute for thinking things through.  But they do make an important point:  our language, in this case, English, informs and prejudices cogitation in an unconscious fashion that can short-circuit clear and conscious thinking.

For example, prior to 1860, the use of the phrase “the United States are” was far more common than the post-1865 notion of the “the United States is”.  Mark Twain “observed that the Civil War was fought over whether ‘United States’ was singular or plural”.  Some attribute this to Basil Lanneau Gildersleeve, Professor of Greek at Johns Hopkins University, who wrote in 1909 that “if I chose (sic), I might enlarge on the historical importance of grammar in general and Greek grammar in particular. It was a point of grammatical concord that was at the bottom of the Civil War – “United States are,” said one, “United States is,” said another.”

The genesis of a bloody and, in the end, inglorious conflict may have been a dispute over grammatical construction which informed the consciousness of millions.

The larger point is that a lack of specificity, introspection and careful use of language after a consistent regimen of critical thinking can turn entire peoples into Helot populations subject to the vicissitudes and grasping of their rulers.

We are surrounded day after day by friends, family and neighbors who have become wholly-owned subsidiaries of the State through the brilliant manipulation of the government media-education complex and its tentacles grasping at the articulation and meanings of words in our culture.

Here are a few examples:

  • “If we get the right man in office…”
  • “But if the cops go on strike, who will protect us?”
  • “If the government does not build roads, who will?” (My answer is always simple: people will)
  • “Guns are dangerous…”
  • “The government ought to do something…”

These are all crimes against the moral imagination because, in the end, what folks are actually saying is what level of violence must I employ against others against their will to force the surrender of their time and resources for my benefit?  There are no other explanations. Yet that is the foundational concept behind the lion’s share of the narrative framework in America.  Narratives and meta-narratives are the stories and legends that inform why people (and nation-states) do what they do.  These are the historical motifs like anyone can be president in the United States or one can become a millionaire if you simply work hard enough in America.  During the last three terms of George Bush II (2001- Present), the former is unassailably true.  The latter not so much after taxes are accounted for.  Most of these narratives are works of fiction founded in a nugget of truth.  For a variety of reasons to include human laziness and insecurity, the idea of living at your neighbor’s expense against their will has become the foundational characteristic for the American culture at large.  One finds small enclaves of libertarians, Free Staters and Rothbardian anarchists who think the exact opposite but they do not have tremendous influence on the culture at large nor is the majority of the population subject to believing that a non-slavery system will be superior to the tax/regulatory slave system currently popular around the globe.

Let’s be clear on the meaning of slavery, it is the means by which another person other than the individual has discretion on the use of that person’s time and resources absent a contract.  I am a skeptic of the notion of wage slavery but not of tax and regulatory slavery.  Our rulers can usually excuse the most barbaric excesses with a simple phrase:  “through lawful authority”.  I can certainly be homeless and avoid work and the concomitant burden of taxes and regulations but as soon as I am employed in an above-ground economy job or enterprise, the sky will darken while regulators and tax collectors parachute in.  One can play the legal definitional standards all you want and they are written by the government after all.  The bottom line is that I am supposed to have given implied consent to participation in the job market and having more than sixty percent of my earnings taxed,  a hundred percent compliance with the ocean of regulations that drown and harass productivity in this particular tax jurisdiction known as America and be responsible for having intimate knowledge of quite literally yards of Federal Regulations on a bookshelf.  Implied consent is nice legal fiction to get around the troublesome annoyance of a formal signed contract.

The American narrative is bended knee to constituted authority on pain of fining, kidnapping, caging, maiming or death if one deigns to disobey.  Notice I use more realistic terms than arresting or jailing so I don’t put a happy face on the horrors visited on tens of thousands of non-violent Americans every day by the police who are the enforcers for the Helot system in America.  This is not the land of the free and home of the brave, it is the land of the Helot and the home of the Vichy collaborator.  This is a country that prides itself on the Big Lie.  We thank veterans for keeping us free yet we have NEVER been threatened with invasion by a formidable power since the end of the War of Northern Aggression in 1865. American government-sponsored imperial wars abroad and support of noxious regimes has made not only Americans more threatened by our own government but given tremendous impetus to the number of entities which wish to wreak vengeance for the death and destruction we have visited on their countries abroad.  Whatever one thinks of the anniversary on 9/11 coming around the corner, the case for reaping what we have sown is much more robust after we have visited so much violence on the brown people of the planet.

We are told that taxes are the price ones pays for civilization yet the government employs the practice of initiated violence against its subject population to enforce its will, a hallmark of barbarism if there is any.  Don’t believe me?  Stop paying your taxes to any level of government and continue working.  Don’t pull over when the armed revenue agents’ vehicle lights are flashing in your rear-view in your car on your government roads with your privilege license.  Refuse to submit to arrest.  Own any firearm you wish even it violates one of the 271 major Federal firearms laws.  We could go on.  Yet most of your fellow subjects will grumble but will vociferously defend the most outrageous and stupid laws on the books as the price of freedom.  What?

Fix your language and your worldview.  I recently penned an essay where I equated ALL police activities in America as terrorism and used the government’s own definitional standards to buttress the case.  Terms like officer safety are ludicrous because on closer examination it means the citizens’ lives are always subservient to that of the very Thin (Black and) Blue Line charged with protecting the cattle milling about the country.

Stop falling into the linguistic trap of Orwellian doublespeak the government is so fond of.  Here is a short list of linguistic reality:

  • Taxation is theft.
  • Robed government employees are paid state representatives who will rule in the state’s interest.
  • Government spending is not an investment; it is a taking from the private sector.
  • Presidents are nothing more than Tax Commissioners.
  • Nation states when stripped of the patriotic bunting and jingoistic propaganda are nothing more than claimed (and conquered) tax jurisdictions where the subjects are drained of resources at gunpoint to subsidize the rulers and their parasites and looters who maintain their constituent power.
  • Terrorism is politically motivated violence against non-combatants which means that government’s very charter is a terrorist act.

The list is practically endless.  Your job is to cleanse your intellectual palette of all the flotsam and jetsam the government media-education complex has delivered since the Founding of the tax jurisdiction known as America and see it for what it is.  Once you have liberated your mind of the propaganda backwash and the silly euphemisms, you start to see what you have missed.

You live in a nation whose very functional basis is theft from the producers to subsidize those who have not earned what they receive. A country so choked by regulation and economic distortion that it has literally committed economic seppuku.  A country whose per capita prison population is the highest in the world and dwarfs the political and criminal inmates in the Gulag under the worst of the other Soviet Union in Eurasia.  It is too big not to fail.

The end is nigh.  We are wholly responsible for what rises from the ashes of a dead America.

Words have meaning.

“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”
– George Orwell

“I find it difficult to believe that words have no meaning in themselves, hard as I try. Habits of a lifetime are not lightly thrown aside.”

– Stuart Chase

“You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments: rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws….” ~ John Adams

As I have mentioned before, I am an Auto Mechanic. As part of my job I test drive customer vehicles to verify a complaint, and to recheck my work when it’s completed. The other Technicians I work with do the same thing, so when Law Enforcement has set up a speed trap, or are actively running radar in the area where most of us test drive, word spreads like wildfire.

But this time was different….

My buddy walked down to me and explained to me that he had just got stopped by the cops. I thought to myself that he must have been speeding, or committed the heinous crime of rolling through a stop sign, or some other arbitrary traffic infraction so I asked him what he had done. He told me that he had done nothing wrong, but a roadblock had been set up, and he went through it. He told me that the road was blocked off in either direction, and they were stopping both sides of the road. He explained the roadblock was rather large, and it was a collaboration between Local and State Law Enforcement. I asked if any Military was present, he said no, but said they sure did look and act like the Military.

He was not in his personal vehicle when they stopped him, and he was also wearing gloves.  Technicians wear gloves to protect themselves from chemicals, and other substances that could cause harm. He was asked to produce his license and registration. He pulled out his license, and held up the work order explaining to this Jackboot that this was not his vehicle.  He pointed to the Honda emblem on his shirt, and also pointed out the rest of his uniform.  The Officer then asked if there was anything in the van that he should know about. My buddy responded, again, that this was not his vehicle, and he has no idea what’s in the van. The Officer then noticed that he was wearing gloves, and for some odd reason became very alarmed. The officer asked him why he was wearing gloves. He said it’s for protection from oil, brake clean, and other harmful fluids in the shop. The officer then asked him if he was sure that was the reason he was wearing gloves. My friend, at this point puzzled, responded with yes. The Officer then took his license and work order and walked away. He came back in about two minutes and told him he was “cleared to leave”. It’s important to note that the armed State Employee who was busy interrupting the daily commerce of everyone who happened to drive down that road was concerned by my friend’s uniform. How bizarre, an armed man standing in the middle of the road with the rest of his armed gang was alarmed my a man trying to fix this person’s vehicle.

I asked him why they were stopping people, and he said they were looking for suspended licenses, expired registrations and vehicle inspections. I asked him if that was the official reason, if that was the story he had gotten from the cops.  He said no, but many of the numerous cars that were pulled over on the side of the road had expired vehicle inspections, and registrations(he is a State Inspector, it’s part of his job to notice these things). I asked him what he thought of the roadblock, and he told me he didn’t mind it, because he wasn’t doing anything wrong.  At this point the Activist in me wanted to grab my Best Friend (who I work with), and my camera to go and film this Tyranny, but the Father in me told me it was a bad idea, and that I was sure to end the day in a cage. Besides, we had started to build quite the audience of people anxious to hear about the roadblock. I thought to myself what a great opportunity to inject some freedom principles into the conversation.

After the story was retold we all sat around discussing what happened. The usual grumbling ensued, you know, the kind that usually follows any cop story. I asked the group if the cops have the right to do this, and EVERYONE responded with a yes. They said basically, yeah, it sucks, but they believe it has to be done for protection against drunk drivers and “illegals”.  I asked about the Bill of Rights, specifically the fourth amendment, and everyone gave me a blank stare like they were waiting for me to tell them what their rights were as human beings, so I did….

Amendment IV

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

I then explained how this roadblock was a violation of individual rights, and completely illegal. I then heard a voice say, “Oh, no it’s not, it’s completely legal”, it was a co-worker of mine who is a former Sheriffs Deputy, he was walking up with three other men. At this point the conversation had swelled to more than ten individuals. I was anxious to hear this man’s explanation on exactly how this sort of thing is “legal”.  He said as long as there is a pattern, and not random, it’s legal. He said as long as Law Enforcement was stopping every third car, or every red car, or every truck, it was legal. He said this is how it was legal to set up DUI checkpoints and still be Constitutional. He explained to the group that driving was a privilege, and that you give “implied consent” the moment you enter your vehicle and motor onto public roadways. Anyone who has read my articles knows I hate the phrase “implied consent”, and I was itching to question him on his logic. I asked him if it was legal for Law Enforcement to search every red house or every third house. He said that was different, because driving requires a license, owning a house does not. I asked him if I could opt-out of the mandatory tax that goes to fund the roads I am privileged to drive on, and he told me no. I wanted to clarify for the group, so I repeated, “so, let me get this straight, I am forced to pay for these roads under penalty of law, but it’s a privilege that I get to use them?”  I then asked, “tell me, how can an Officer force me to produce my license when I have done nothing wrong? Isn’t that unreasonable?” He said the reason this is legal is because the State issued that license and it’s really not mine, it’s State property. I then questioned the need for drivers licenses, since I can be made to hand over State property at any given time, do I really need to have it?

When I questioned the need for licenses the crowd kind of mumbled, and some started to question where I was going with this, I mean, licenses make us safer, right? I posed a question to the former Sheriffs Deputy, “if the State licenses me to drive a vehicle, and I prove myself unfit to operate that vehicle,  I crash and severely injure a person and destroy property, can the State be sued?”  He said no, that’s a job for the insurance companies to handle. I then asked, “OK, so what’s the purpose of the license?” He said, “Well, it’s just needed.” I pressed on, “No, why do we need them? If a private company is the entity that takes care of rectifying the loss of life or property, why do we need the damn license?”  He said, “well, insurance companies won’t insure you without a valid license.” I then asked, “isn’t that called Fascism?” I then addressed the group, “can anyone give me one good reason for the licensing of drivers?” I also reminded them that they were all Auto Mechanics, and that they needed no licensing when spinning wrenches, even though what we do, or fail to do could kill people. I could see the light bulbs starting to turn on at this point.

I returned to the point I was trying to make about the searching of houses. I asked the group what would happen if they stopped paying their property tax. Most of the group responded that if the failure to pay went far enough, the property would be seized by the county. I then asked, “well isn’t this a privilege then? Isn’t owning a house a privilege?” All that’s needed now was the license, and bang, the State could randomly search your house, and it would be completely legal. The former Deputy chimed in and said, “all these Officers were doing was following orders.” I was waiting for that old line to come out. I reminded this man that he once took an oath to defend the Constitution, and not to enforce the laws that dance around the Bill of Rights. I am an anarchist, and I see the Constitution as nothing more than a blueprint for a perpetual slave machine, but when it comes to freedom, I’ll take what I can get. I asked one more question of the former Deputy, “there are more than 20,000 gun laws on the books even though 2A clearly states–shall not be infringed– if a law was passed where you were made to turn in your guns, would you?” He reluctantly said, “yes….if it’s the law, I must respect it.” I said, “no you don’t have to respect it, the Bill of Rights does not grant you rights, it merely protects the rights you naturally have.” He said he was “impressed”‘with my knowledge of the Constitution and we both agreed to finish the conversation over a couple of beers.

I told the group that we are losing our rights one by one. One man spoke up and said, “we are not losing our rights, they are just trying to protect us so that we have more rights.” I asked him to enumerate just one right that he thought we were not losing, he couldn’t name one.

How can we say we are losing our rights if the majority of Americans don’t even know what rights they have? How can we say we are losing America if the majority of of Americans don’t even know what the idea of America was?

“When men yield up the privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty quits the horizon.” ~ Thomas Paine


“I share responsibility for mistakes that were made,” said ATF supervisor William G. McMahon about Operation Fast and Furious. (U.S. Congress / August 14, 2011)

“ATF is supposed to be the sheepdog that protects against the wolves that prey on our southern border, but rather than meet the wolf head-on, we sharpened its teeth and added number to its claws. All the while, we sat idly by watching, tracking and noting as it became a more efficient killer.”

– ATF Agent John Dodson, August 2011

Sheepdog or government lapdog?

The promotion of the three primary Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) should come as no surprise.  The government is the entity in everyday life that usually rewards venal, unprofessional and vicious behavior on the part of its apparatchiks because that is the primary means by which government gets things done.  The Fast and Furious Operation was designed as a sting by the ATF to allow straw purchases to flow to Mexico through the border states like Arizona where I live even though it has also been linked to a dozen crime scenes in the US.  This clown posse intended to allow the semi-automatic weapons to get into the hands of the drug cartels so they could be traced and used to identify who was who in the evil narco-conglomerates in the greater failed state known as Mexico.

I use the term failed state in the common patois but as far as I can see it is a wildly successful state – a government dominated economy rich in agricultural and natural resources squandered by the Soviet-style central planning that has informed Mexican politics since the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) took over in 1929.  The 1917 Constitution was an inspiration for the 1918 Russian Constitution for the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic.  Even though the PRI lost in 2000, the country continues to be a collectivist cesspool dominated by restriction on the most basic human rights.  It was not until 1992 that Mexico started to extricate the state from religion and lifted severe restrictions.  By Communist standards, Mexico is a close approximation of that wretched idea and like China, has been one of those rare Marxoid nations whose territorial ambitions have been rather muted and lazy beyond their contiguous borders.  I would suggest part of this lies in the unique brand of military incompetency that places Mexico among the worst armed forces in the history of mankind, a circumstance that has greatly benefited America’s yen for expansion into the southwestern portion of North America.

The ATF conducted their bumbling operation without even informing the American embassy in Mexico City which later came to bite them badly.  Let’s step back a moment.  A straw purchase is a violation of American gun laws because it allegedly permits a potential felon or other ineligible owner of firearms to get a firearm by having another person purchases it for them much like the idiotic alcohol consumption laws in America where an adult will purchase beer or wine or liquor for someone under age. I have stated before that we don’t need to enforce the 271 Federal gun laws on the books, we need to get rid of them and the thousands of state and local laws this has created such as the urban hellholes like DC and Chicago where gun possession by the lawful is rather problematic but not for criminal who…ahem…break laws for a living. We need to strive to make America number one in gun freedoms and not number nine behind the Khyber Pass, Finland and New Zealand where these countries have no restrictions on suppressors, for instance.

If I were to join the rest of the gun community in condemning the behavior of the ATF, I would be acknowledging that their violation of weapons laws and procedures was a bad event but I will not do that.  Don’t get me wrong, the BATF should not be funded and their very existence is thanks to the need to employ Prohibition-era Treasury agents to switch from alcohol regulation to another regulatory activity to retain them on the G-Man rolls.  Therefore, the 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA) became yet another employment opportunity for the state to create malum prohibitum laws out of whole cloth and cloak it in the mantra of public safety.  Soon to be followed by the 1968 Gun Control Act and a whole host of noxious Federal regulations impairing a man’s ability to arm himself with a weapon of his choice; no, I will not speak to the Second Amendment because it is attached to the very document that allowed all these regulations and laws to exist in the first place.  Sort of like waving a title and negotiating with the repo man from the bank as your car is being towed away.  Who will he listen to?

Are these three supervisors along with the head of the BATF part and parcel of a thugocracy and clearly illegitimate Federal agency?  Of course.  Notice I did not employ the silly phrase “rogue agency”?  Every last one of them are nothing more than tax and debt subsidized enforcement divisions whose sin qua non is the maintenance and expansion of government power and the reduction and elimination of private volition.  Nothing more and nothing less.

In the end, Operation Fast and Furious initiated a program that should be a natural part of commerce absent any regulation.  Think of it this way, the straw purchase is a legal fiction which assumes the government should have the ability to deny anyone it deems ineligible to arm and protect themselves even though it is absolved of any necessity nor impetus to provide protection for individual citizens, therefore leaving even violent felons in the hazard for protecting themselves. Of course, we know according to the government’s own statistics, only eight percent of the population in America’s federal penal colony is for violent offenders.

What goes unmentioned is the historical arms relationship between the US government and the Mexican armed forces and constabulary.  Everything from armored vehicles to thousands of weapons and millions of rounds has been transferred with the blessing of the US DoD and State Department.  One would imagine that the pristine reputation of Mexico for lack of corruption would insure these items never fell into the wrong hands of the narco-cartels who are a wholly owned subsidiary and creation of the US War against Altering Your Own Consciousness otherwise known as the War against Prohibited Vegetable Matter and Extracts.

So let’s review.  The US government declares a war on drugs and guns, it goes on to create a linkage between the two in the underground economy in Mexico that serves the seemingly insatiable market for these prohibited items in these united States.  The prohibition on drugs creates virtual shadow governments out of the drug cartels due to the tremendous monetary assets and violence methodologies they seem to wield.  The BATF is convinced that they alone can finger and nail all the bad actors in the illegal drug cartels by allowing US domestic buyers to break the law and make straw purchases for persons otherwise ineligible for purchasing firearms from Federal Firearms License dealers sanctioned by the BATF across the fruited plain.  We do know that the other clown posse, the DEA, was also complicit in the ill-fated operation. The DEA was even actively strengthening the Sinaloa cartel.  They allow said firearms purchase to penetrate the porous southern border with Mexico.  They are then surprised that the intelligence yield is negligible and they cannot account for 1,048 of the 1,418 (page 60) illegally purchased according to the clown posse at the BATF.  The strategy is to hire low hanging fruit in the US community with cartel connections and then let them feed the weapons into the pipeline down to Mexico?  Then they lose the trail?  I expect this kind of incompetence and investigative laziness because in the already low expectations of performance in the Federal law enforcement community, the BATF are among the most shabby, scurrilous and violent of all these alphabet agencies that plague the lives of everyday Americans.  They are the hybrid equivalent of Barney Fife and Felix Dzerzhinsky, a nasty brew of armed incompetence bent on enforcing gun laws that should not exist in the first place.

In conclusion, we should never be surprised when people in the government are promoted beyond their competence or rewarded for venal and dishonorable behavior.  These are the purest hallmarks of the political scum that rises to the top of every government enterprise throughout the history of man.  Whether professional politicians or their oily apparatchiks, remember that these are men whose every enterprise demands that they live off the proceeds of others and have the firepower to ensure that this notion of advancement absent merit is ruthlessly enforced.  Fast and Furious and the brilliant minds that crafted the fiasco were merely the latest in a long and prodigious march of the thugocracy and kakocracy that is the American government. They will not see a jail cell because they have badges unlike this woman who faces thirty years in the penal gulag. On the other hand, when an American lawman crosses the line:

“The three supervisors have been given new management positions at the agency’s headquarters in Washington. They are William G. McMahon, who was the ATF’s deputy director of operations in the West, where the illegal trafficking program was focused, and William D. Newell and David Voth, both field supervisors who oversaw the program out of the agency’s Phoenix office.”

I congratulate all of them and am thankful for a system that burns into American minds daily that we are merely the cattle to ensure that Mr. McMahon can continue to quite literally and figuratively feed at the government trough and be complicit in murder with a get out of jail free card.  The irony is that they skirted and warped laws that should not exist in the first place.  If the enforcers hold them in such disregard, why have them at all?  Sort of begs the question.  Like all cops throughout history, their task is not to serve and protect the hapless imperial subjects who are drained daily to feed them but to ensure that the statist structure they serve continues to retain and expand its power to force compliance and obedience from the exsanguinated citizenry.  Thugs do what they are regardless of the immorality of their actions.  I don’t want any weapons laws whatsoever.  No restrictions but I will entertain one until the government dissolves, a complete weapons prohibition both lethal and non-lethal for all law enforcement entities.  Period.  In the end, if I condemn the agency for not doing a more effective job enforcing bad laws, what does that make me?

Fast and furious, indeed.

“We stand for organized terror – this should be frankly admitted. Terror is an absolute necessity during times of revolution. Our aim is to fight against the enemies of the Soviet Government and of the new order of life. We judge quickly. In most cases only a day passes between the apprehension of the criminal and his sentence. When confronted with evidence criminals in almost every case confess; and what argument can have greater weight than a criminal’s own confession?”
— Felix Dzerzhinsky

Notes in the Margin:  I want to personally thank David Codrea and Mike Vanderboegh for their tireless efforts that led to the discovery of the latest BATF cavalcade of calamities.  If it weren’t for their insistent and dogged persistence, this may still be yet another of thousands of government crimes that go unreported.

Copyright © 2011 by zerogov.com

Publisher Note:  I don’t normally agree with Hanson’s prognostications beyond his masterful treatment of the ancient world of Greece and his occasional scribbling about the health and impending doom of his small business.  His militaristic instincts and neoconservative sensibilities have blunted the efficacy of his more contemporary ramblings but this particular missive is much more instructive.  I certainly see a far greater historical correlation to post WWII Britain than other comparisons that have been proffered.  Imagine if we had adopted the post WWII economic model adopted by Conrad Adenauer after 1949 leading to the Wirtschaftswunder that briefly led to an industrial revival that was strangled in its cradle by the welfare/warfare statist enthusiasts who then forced Germany to mimic the fascist economic models of the West.  The socialist Atlee was the instigator of taking Churchill’s more fevered dreams of a controlled economy and putting the wartime shackles on peacetime private industry.  Attlee claimed:   “The Labour Party is a socialist party and proud of it. Its ultimate purpose at home is the establishment of the Socialist Commonwealth of Great Britain – free, democratic, efficient, progressive, public-spirited, its material resources organized in the service of the British people.” Government is always at war with industry unless the private sector becomes a wholly-owned subsidiary of the government whether through outright expropriation like the British nationalization ventures or the American  variant using total regulatory and tax vertical and horizontal micromanagement to achieve the same objective of Keynesian economic fascism.  One would imagine that absent out trillions poured into the wars in the Middle east and the near trillion dollar annual defense budget, our economic house would be in better order but then again, the socialist theft transfer programs for the welfare state would most likely obviate those savings.  VDH is onto something here. BB

Clement Attlee

But now? Household credit-card and mortgage debt, for all the new frugality, remain high. Consumers are strapped, even those who have jobs and have not lost thousands in collapsed home equity and depleted 401(k) retirement plans, or made nothing in years from near-zero-interest savings accounts. In other words, we do not have a long-deprived public, flush with years of hoarded cash, just waiting with pent-up demand to buy brand new labor-saving devices and shiny new vehicles produced in converted tank and bomber factories. There is no need to add that in a pre-Great Society America, without food stamps, two to three years of unemployment insurance, and housing subsidies, there might have been more incentive to hustle for jobs.

Moreover, the world abroad in 1946 was hardly similar to the world in 2011. Review the prior status of our present global competitors: India was a backward colony and in civil turmoil. War-torn China was about to embark on the most self-destructive social experiment in human history. Two-thirds of a centrally planned Soviet Union was in shambles. Western Europe was near starving after years of bombing and Nazi strangulation. The future export powerhouses of Japan and Germany were in ruins. Brazil was pre-modern. The miracles of Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, and South Korea were still imaginary. A victorious Britain was full of self-doubt and exhausted, busy dismantling its colonial empire and nationalizing its steel, transportation, health, and energy industries.

In the immediate postwar years, only a capitalist, self-confident America was poised to supply foreigners with much-needed manufactured goods, expertise, and capital to raise the world from ruin. And from the profits, we were able to pay down our own staggering and unsupportable wartime-incurred debt. Note as well that in 1946 a self-sufficient oil-producing America was not guzzling down a half-trillion dollars’ worth of imported oil each year.

In short, in 2011 there is nothing that suggests the present massive borrowing will lead us to anything like the prosperity of the postwar years — a time when social spending and entitlements accounted for 30 percent, not 70 percent of the annual federal budget; when households both had cash and were eager to buy long-denied items; when America did not import high-cost oil (having recently supplied 80 percent of its wartime allies’ oil needs from domestic production); and when an unscathed industrial-powerhouse United States was alone on top of the world.

But if we must go back to the post-World War II era for an example to enlighten us about what the current Obama policies presage, then the similarities to the present are not to be found in 1940s America. A better guide is Clement Attlee’s 1946 United Kingdom, which, like Obama’s 2011 America, sought to retrench from the world scene, lead from behind, and establish a much-vaunted high-tax, big-government, cradle-to-grave redistributive welfare state — one whose legacy we have just witnessed in London’s streets.

Read the rest:  https://victorhanson.com/articles/hanson082811.html

Foreign intervention is the pride of American policy. It has been our raison d’être for a century, beginning with the Spanish-American war in the late 1890s and continuing without meaningful interruption. The people of these united States are amenable to these constant entanglements, it seems, because our enlightened system of democracy allows us to decide what is best for the rest of the world.

Our latest humanitarian effort is the destruction (and forthcoming rebuilding) of Libya. Our intervention in Libya is justified by international consensus, the dictator’s evilness, access to natural resources, and perhaps the specter of weapons of mass destruction. For this reason it is different and more justified than our entanglement in Afghanistan, which was justified by international consensus, the Taliban’s evilness, access to natural resources, and the bad acts of a wealthy Saudi; or our invasion of Iraq, which was justified by international consensus, the dictator’s evilness, access to natural resources, and the specter of nonexistent weapons of mass destruction.

Libya, I am told, is in Africa, a continent full of people who cannot be trusted with their own governance. This is obvious due to how poorly they’ve behaved themselves when conquered, ruled, armed and raped by Europeans. Furthermore, Africans are incapable of conducting successful revolutions without outside help; this is evidenced by the terrible situation in South Sudan. For this reason, it was absolutely necessary for the Western nations to render the rebels assistance against the Gadaffyduck regime, which had been previously armed by Western nations. After the promised short days (not weeks) of fighting, Gadaffyduck is deposed, and NATO forces have left the country.  This all occurred in March, several months ago.

The new Libyan government will be democratic, in the spirit of Afghanistan, Iraq, and the first French Republic. This will guarantee that the human rights of the Libyan people will be respected, and that the NATO powers will have uninterrupted access to Libya’s oil reserves. The National Transition Council (NTC), Libya’s interim government, is largely Muslim; this meets with popular approval after years of secular rule. Muslim populations ought to be allowed to select Muslim leaders, except in Palestine and Iran.

The Korean war persists into its sixth decade, complete with military bases and US troops. Okinawa and Rammstein remain occupied, just in case. Our boys at Guantanamo Bay remain ever-vigilant against the Spanish threat of the 19th century. Poland is a member of NATO, which still has a purpose years after the dissolution of the Warsaw pact. The sun rises, the sun sets, and hastens to the place from which it rose. Still I Hope for Change.

TSA on Red Alert

“The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.”
–  HL Mencken

I went to board a flight at Tucson on Monday and checked in my guns in a secure case at the ticket counter like I always do.  Usually I have to wait but they said they would page me if they needed me for anything.  I proceeded to the TSA Security Theater festivities to have my bags and body violated and was stopped by an agent from the ticket counter and asked to return.  The scan of my gun case indicated the weapon was loaded.

A loaded firearm has a round in the chamber by all gun community standards.  We are addressing the legal definition here and not the assumption that all firearms are loaded for safety purposes.  Search as I might, it was difficult to find a Federal definition for loaded but I did find this:

As typical legalese, this definition isn’t all that clear. Luckily, in 1996 the California Appellate Court ruled on the interpretation of “loaded firearm” in People v. Clark, (1996) 45 Cal. App. 4th 1147, 1152. Mr. Clark was arrested for allegedly having a loaded shotgun because, even though there were no shells in the chamber, there were shells in a compartment in the stock of the firearm. The court held that “attached in any manner to” the firearm was intended to encompass a situation where a shell or cartridge might be attached to a firearm or “loaded” for firing by some unconventional method.

 The court said:  “Under the commonly understood meaning of the term “loaded,” a firearm is “loaded” when a shell or car­tridge has been placed into a position from which it can be fired; the shotgun is not “loaded” if the shell or cartridge is stored elsewhere and not yet placed in a firing position.”

This certainly makes sense because imagine the difficulty of finding how a gun is loaded if the rounds are outside the firing chamber whether in a magazine, in someone’s pocket or at your house while you are in your car.  There is no one definitive answer to the question as is the way in American jurisprudence.  But People v. Clark (1996) is now considered case law even by CA criminal code so the round must be in the chamber for the weapon to be considered loaded.

You will find most training facilities are very specific about the command of load which means a round in the chamber.  My weapon was not loaded by any conventional definition.  There was a loaded magazine in the well but no round in the chamber which apparently constitutes a loaded weapon in hoplophobic circles.  I have traveled the gun in this configuration dozens of times.   The TSA clearly state no loaded weapons and I abided by the accepted 1996 CA Appellate Court ruling.   A Glock has three safety features in it that prevent it from firing unless the trigger is pressed.  With no round in the chamber in a locked gun case, it is not possible for the firing pin to fire a round and therefore the weapon was safe in addition to the presence of other rounds in magazines secured in magazine carriers in the case with the gun per the TSA’s own regulations.  The simplest fix is to clearly state no magazines in the weapon for travel instead of this bureaucratic doublespeak that is unclear and silly.  This being modern America, the Tucson Airport police were called to file a report on a “loaded” weapon in a case.

They were very cordial, and in fact, seemed a bit embarrassed to be called for such a mundane and obtuse non-violation.  They even pointed out it was not even actionable in the state of Arizona.  The police then removed the magazine, placed it in the case and ensured no round was in the chamber.  Two TSA drones came with the cop because “they were not pleased” a loaded firearm was in the case.  I tried to explain the firearm was in an unloaded condition but it appeared I might as well be explaining quantum mechanics to a house cat.  I had recently watched Idiocracy yet again and it appeared to be casting call for the movie.  No comprehension appeared and regulations were regulations.  Much like stop signs in America, the regulation was birthed in ignorance, served no explicit purpose for safety.  It defied the common sense usage and lexicon of guns across the fruited plain.

TSA Workin' It!

This is not the first time this has happened and the TSA is usually fairly hostile to gun owners lawfully transporting their firearms on trips.  They simply don’t understand their own regulations and they change and interpret them with the alacrity they execute their security theater – a clown posse whose entry standards for employment are below that of fast food franchises and whose professional standards match the legendary laziness their public behavior consistently portrays.  One almost feels as if they are picking on gun owners but parents are just as despised; just watch the behavior of the TSA to child carriers of all types and the doctrinaire institutionalization of child molestation as adults in uniforms grope children in areas that all other adults would be arrested for and classified as sex offenders if convicted.

I remain free now but who knows what the future portends.  After boarding my winged cattle car, it was made clear to me that the airlines may be publicly traded and “private” but they are now wholesale creatures of the state.  Why else would threats, fines and caging of miscreants be the only way to incentivize the behavior they wish to see on aircraft while you are hostage in the fuselage once airborne.  The flight attendants are rude with a barely discernible challenge to speak out against their ill-mannered ways so one can be manacled and kidnapped at your destination when the aircraft lands.  There was even a new Orwellian droning announcement at the airport government enclave threatening arrest if you “joked” about security.  I suspect other government agencies are closely watching the success of the TSA to condition Americans in the “airport government zones” to be compliant and obedient cattle to the commands of every uniformed goon in the facility.  Imagine a private venue like a mall, car dealership or department store (all concentrations of humans in one place vulnerable to attack) being treated like Americans are at airports.  They would become ghost towns and more brick and mortar retail outlets would become anachronism in the online shopping age.  I fly because I have to but I would much prefer to drive now.

TSA achieves nothing yet expends hundreds of millions every year employing the least qualified individuals in the country.  I suspect that when the currency collapse occurs and the TSA is dissolved for lack of funds, the homeless population will balloon as these uniformed dullards are released from the no skill positions they have with the TSA.  They may find employment as actors if Mike Judge does a sequel to Idiocracy or in police departments across the nation but their employability will otherwise be in severe doubt.

John Pistole, the head of the TSA, wants to expand their charter even further and visit the grief one experiences at the airport to every transportation venue in America.  I would modify their uniforms if they are looking for suggestions.  I would want them to don black lycra or spandex jumpsuits, military helmets two sizes too small and name-tags on large one foot diameter gold discs emblazoned with the TSA logo on chains around their necks to make it easier to confirm their own identities if they happen to forget their own names during the course of their duties. This would go a long way to convince the world we are serious about national security.

But take heart, the President promised us change and it is coming.  His policies in George Bush’s third term are doing the exact opposite of any economically rational system.  There is no more sure path to total economic and systemic destruction than the current direction the Federal government has taken.  Pistole and the whole fetid and iatrogenic TSA will be in the ash heap of history in months if not years when the whole fiscal house of cards crashes down around their ears.

Wait for it.

“A great wave of oppressive tyranny isn’t going to strike, but rather a slow seepage of oppressive laws and regulations from within will sink the American dream of liberty”

– George Baumler