Drive-up robber service: I'm lovin' it?
A disgusting parasite robbed an Albuquerque McDonald's drive up window Sunday evening. Follow the link and look at the guy. It's obvious he is scared senseless. As well he should be. (In addition to being dumb as dirt to let the camera get such a clear look at his face.) Someone out there knows him, and can make sure he'll never be able to do such a thing again and that the stolen property is returned to the rightful owner.
Speaking of justice- he is lucky there were no self-owning, responsible customers or staff present during his cowardly act of freelance taxation. Of course, since he robbed the drive up window, I suppose it would have been hard for customers inside to have seen what was going on. That's if anyone was even paying attention to their surroundings.
I can't help but think that anyone who complies with demands of a robber at a drive up window might be too compliant for their own good. Where's a big vat of extremely hot oil when you need one?
*
Donate?
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Questions arise in detective's crash
Questions arise in detective's crash
An Albuquerque police detective crashed his unmarked, stealth copmobile into a stop sign and through a bush before it came to rest near a home's garage. It is only fitting that this happened on Halloween weekend since he claims the cause was a phantom car that caused him to swerve before it disappeared. OK, so he claims the car was real and that it drove away, but there seems to be no sign of this car except in his report.
The LEOs who investigated the crash said they saw no signs that the detective had been drinking, but we all know cops see what they've been trained to see. And one thing they are definitely not trained to see (or perhaps, trained to not see) is another cop doing something wrong.
It seems suspicious to me that the news took over a week to surface. What does APD have to hide? That's not the only oddity, either. The wreck happened at 6AM, but the investigation seeks to discover "what actually took place that evening". I guess the mysterious Halloween spirit is real, and haunting the Albuquerque Police Department. Boo!
*
Donate?
An Albuquerque police detective crashed his unmarked, stealth copmobile into a stop sign and through a bush before it came to rest near a home's garage. It is only fitting that this happened on Halloween weekend since he claims the cause was a phantom car that caused him to swerve before it disappeared. OK, so he claims the car was real and that it drove away, but there seems to be no sign of this car except in his report.
The LEOs who investigated the crash said they saw no signs that the detective had been drinking, but we all know cops see what they've been trained to see. And one thing they are definitely not trained to see (or perhaps, trained to not see) is another cop doing something wrong.
It seems suspicious to me that the news took over a week to surface. What does APD have to hide? That's not the only oddity, either. The wreck happened at 6AM, but the investigation seeks to discover "what actually took place that evening". I guess the mysterious Halloween spirit is real, and haunting the Albuquerque Police Department. Boo!
*
Donate?
Control-freaks to 'discuss' the future of the internet
Control-freaks to 'discuss' the future of the internet
The future of the internet will be debated, and no doubt endangered, on November 16 in Albuquerque at a public hearing with Federal (Prevention of Free) Communications Commissioner, Michael Copps.
Rest assured, as if you had any doubt, that when anyone in government discusses "the future" of the internet or anything else, they are not speaking of leaving it alone to thrive or wither on its own. They are talking about taking control so that they can meddle or ration the resource in whatever way they feel is best for "the common good". And planning on making you pay for the privilege of having your liberty violated. This is always bad for for individuals.
It is also illegal according to the First Amendment, as if that would ever stop them. You are the enforcement clause of your rights. Don't look to a piece of old, faded paper to do your job for you.
*
Donate?
The future of the internet will be debated, and no doubt endangered, on November 16 in Albuquerque at a public hearing with Federal (Prevention of Free) Communications Commissioner, Michael Copps.
Rest assured, as if you had any doubt, that when anyone in government discusses "the future" of the internet or anything else, they are not speaking of leaving it alone to thrive or wither on its own. They are talking about taking control so that they can meddle or ration the resource in whatever way they feel is best for "the common good". And planning on making you pay for the privilege of having your liberty violated. This is always bad for for individuals.
It is also illegal according to the First Amendment, as if that would ever stop them. You are the enforcement clause of your rights. Don't look to a piece of old, faded paper to do your job for you.
*
Donate?
Monday, November 15, 2010
Results of elections
Results of elections
With every election I have ever heard of, the results are always the same: Liberty loses and The State wins. If you are even the slightest bit aware, you already know that will happen since the system is rigged.
I have zero faith that the "Tea Party-backed" politicians who won their elections will do anything but increase the breadth and depth of government. They may focus their efforts in different areas than the Democrats have been- I expect more religious justifications for violating liberties of Americans, more "patriotic" justifications for the cult of border-worship and the related demonization of hispanic immigrants in particular, and a mix of the two excuses for the endless parade of US-sponsored terrorism Orwellishly called "The War on Terror". All, historically proven Big Government favorites.
Believe it or not, this never-changing course makes me smile to myself. It isn't as hopeless as you might think if you were counting on liberty to be saved by an election (which is a ridiculous notion). The reason is that these election results are only the "official, government sanctioned results". The reality is that The State, with the help of its supporters, is killing itself bit by bit with each election. It loses more true-believers every day, and I don't think they are being replaced as fast as they are leaving. Even I used to vote.
I believe voting for a candidate is wrong, but that running for office, if you are a hard-core libertarian or anarchist, is a very good thing. I know, it sounds contradictory. But it isn't.
First of all, hard-core libertarians and anarchists aren't going to vote. Not for you or for anyone else. But, lots of very good, "almost there" folk will. And it is better to give those people a real alternative rather than allowing them to waste their vote on a statist shill. Also it is good to remember that there are a lot of really stupid voters out there who haven't got a clue who any candidate is or what they stand for and can't think deeply enough to even question the legitimacy of the system. It is good to funnel off some of those votes into a harmless candidate.
So, if you are a radical, hard-core libertarian or an anarchist who has the inclination, and you feel like dealing with the violations and scrutiny, go ahead and run for office under whichever party's banner you want. Just don't expect your own guys to vote for you.
In Albuquerque news: ABQ LEOs have shot 13 people so far this year; killing nine of them. At least the dead avoided being charged with the counterfeit "crime" of "aggravated assault against an officer" after being shot, because, you know, it's so violent to make a poor innocent LEO shoot you. They'd so much rather kill you in less obvious ways. I'm sorry, but the disingenuousness from these parasites just infuriates me.
*
Donate?
With every election I have ever heard of, the results are always the same: Liberty loses and The State wins. If you are even the slightest bit aware, you already know that will happen since the system is rigged.
I have zero faith that the "Tea Party-backed" politicians who won their elections will do anything but increase the breadth and depth of government. They may focus their efforts in different areas than the Democrats have been- I expect more religious justifications for violating liberties of Americans, more "patriotic" justifications for the cult of border-worship and the related demonization of hispanic immigrants in particular, and a mix of the two excuses for the endless parade of US-sponsored terrorism Orwellishly called "The War on Terror". All, historically proven Big Government favorites.
Believe it or not, this never-changing course makes me smile to myself. It isn't as hopeless as you might think if you were counting on liberty to be saved by an election (which is a ridiculous notion). The reason is that these election results are only the "official, government sanctioned results". The reality is that The State, with the help of its supporters, is killing itself bit by bit with each election. It loses more true-believers every day, and I don't think they are being replaced as fast as they are leaving. Even I used to vote.
I believe voting for a candidate is wrong, but that running for office, if you are a hard-core libertarian or anarchist, is a very good thing. I know, it sounds contradictory. But it isn't.
First of all, hard-core libertarians and anarchists aren't going to vote. Not for you or for anyone else. But, lots of very good, "almost there" folk will. And it is better to give those people a real alternative rather than allowing them to waste their vote on a statist shill. Also it is good to remember that there are a lot of really stupid voters out there who haven't got a clue who any candidate is or what they stand for and can't think deeply enough to even question the legitimacy of the system. It is good to funnel off some of those votes into a harmless candidate.
So, if you are a radical, hard-core libertarian or an anarchist who has the inclination, and you feel like dealing with the violations and scrutiny, go ahead and run for office under whichever party's banner you want. Just don't expect your own guys to vote for you.
In Albuquerque news: ABQ LEOs have shot 13 people so far this year; killing nine of them. At least the dead avoided being charged with the counterfeit "crime" of "aggravated assault against an officer" after being shot, because, you know, it's so violent to make a poor innocent LEO shoot you. They'd so much rather kill you in less obvious ways. I'm sorry, but the disingenuousness from these parasites just infuriates me.
*
Donate?
Sunday, November 14, 2010
The State- the definition
"The State"* is the term used to encompass the entirety of the concept of externally-imposed, coercive government, whether a small, local town council, or a global empire.
It is (obviously) composed of individuals who might or might not be enthusiastic about committing acts of evil on their own, but by working together under the myth of the legitimacy of authoritarianism, they can do nothing else. There is nothing good about "The State". It is, and always has been, criminal.
*Capitalized in order to ridicule The State's empty self-importance.
.
It is (obviously) composed of individuals who might or might not be enthusiastic about committing acts of evil on their own, but by working together under the myth of the legitimacy of authoritarianism, they can do nothing else. There is nothing good about "The State". It is, and always has been, criminal.
*Capitalized in order to ridicule The State's empty self-importance.
.
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Free-range idiots- they are out there
As a result of the recent election, the "localish" city government was denied the bond issues they were pushing to build a new jail and courthouse. A couple of days later one commissioner was quoted in the paper as saying: “Tell us how to do it. If somebody out there in TV land or somebody that comes to the meetings has an idea (we want to hear it).” and “We need the public’s help. As our bosses, what do you want us to do?”
So, I posted the following:
Surprisingly, and not in any way usual, my comment only got two replies. One of lukewarm agreement (who only slightly missed what I was saying by stating that "...I do believe certain individuals ... should be jailed for an appropriate time."), and a much more typical response.
That one demonstrated very clearly what people with functioning brains are up against. He said:
Did the idiot even read what I wrote, or is he just too stupid to comprehend the written word? Pinheads like this are why I sometimes wonder if it's even worth the effort.
*
Donate?
So, I posted the following:
I have my doubts you really want "help and solutions", but you did ask:
#1- Stop enforcing counterfeit "laws" (those which have no specific, individual, victim- "society" can't be a victim). No drug "laws", no gun "laws", no prostitution "laws". If someone commits theft, aggression, or fraud, using these or any other things as an excuse, prosecute the actual wrong acts, not the silly "crimes" that are simply based on emotional/religious ideas of what people "ought not do".
#2- The focus of any real justice system must be restitution, not imprisonment. Jailing a thief doesn't restore the victim to his pre-crime condition (what real "justice" is all about). In most cases, it doesn't help the victim of an attack, either.
#3- Let people defend themselves with the correct, fully-functional tools designed for defense, everywhere they may go without fear of becoming a victim of the "justice system".
Surprisingly, and not in any way usual, my comment only got two replies. One of lukewarm agreement (who only slightly missed what I was saying by stating that "...I do believe certain individuals ... should be jailed for an appropriate time."), and a much more typical response.
That one demonstrated very clearly what people with functioning brains are up against. He said:
"Yes, stop enforcing laws. That'll show em! That'll totally make this place safe and crime free. You're right dullhawk (apt screename), cutting assault and robbery rates is easy when you make assault and robbery legal."
Did the idiot even read what I wrote, or is he just too stupid to comprehend the written word? Pinheads like this are why I sometimes wonder if it's even worth the effort.
*
Donate?
Friday, November 12, 2010
Cops found "not guilty" of fabricating evidence
Cops found "not guilty" of fabricating evidence
Three cops who were accused of fabricating evidence against two suspects in a particularly cruel multiple murder case have been cleared by a jury. The "Torreon cabin murders" happened in December 1995, sixty five miles southeast of Albuquerque.
Of course they were cleared. Juries almost always find cops "not guilty". Yet, the preponderance of evidence shows that cops are more likely to be bad guys than the general population. They are not trustworthy. They have more in common with those in prison for crimes of extreme violence than they have in common with you or me. The job attracts damaged people who like to hurt others, yet are too afraid of doing it without the guns of The State backing them up to go freelance. Cowardly bullies with a cruel streak and a badge are a bad combination. Until police are reined in again, it is inevitable.
There are so many cases where cops fabricated evidence, lied under oath, filed false reports, and tampered with the crime scene for their own purposes that I wouldn't trust a LEO's version of events unless I saw the crime happen and the cop's version matched what I witnessed exactly.
So, did the cops really fabricate the evidence? Probably. But no one but the cops and those they accused will ever know the truth. Did those they tried to trap actually play some role in the murders? There is no way to know for sure.
It is important to know who really commits acts of aggression. Knowing the truth is much more important than getting a conviction or fooling the public into thinking you are "doing something". Real bad guys will eventually pay (sooner than later, if the right to own and to carry firearms were respected) with or without cops lying to catch them.
*
Donate?
Three cops who were accused of fabricating evidence against two suspects in a particularly cruel multiple murder case have been cleared by a jury. The "Torreon cabin murders" happened in December 1995, sixty five miles southeast of Albuquerque.
Of course they were cleared. Juries almost always find cops "not guilty". Yet, the preponderance of evidence shows that cops are more likely to be bad guys than the general population. They are not trustworthy. They have more in common with those in prison for crimes of extreme violence than they have in common with you or me. The job attracts damaged people who like to hurt others, yet are too afraid of doing it without the guns of The State backing them up to go freelance. Cowardly bullies with a cruel streak and a badge are a bad combination. Until police are reined in again, it is inevitable.
There are so many cases where cops fabricated evidence, lied under oath, filed false reports, and tampered with the crime scene for their own purposes that I wouldn't trust a LEO's version of events unless I saw the crime happen and the cop's version matched what I witnessed exactly.
So, did the cops really fabricate the evidence? Probably. But no one but the cops and those they accused will ever know the truth. Did those they tried to trap actually play some role in the murders? There is no way to know for sure.
It is important to know who really commits acts of aggression. Knowing the truth is much more important than getting a conviction or fooling the public into thinking you are "doing something". Real bad guys will eventually pay (sooner than later, if the right to own and to carry firearms were respected) with or without cops lying to catch them.
*
Donate?
Monday, November 08, 2010
New comments on an old post
I would like to draw your attention to some new comments on an old post. I am not being very "pragmatic" in my defense of liberty. Anyway, go here and read the rest of the comments.
Friday, November 05, 2010
The Fifth of November...
Remember, remember the Fifth of November,
The Government's tyrannical Plot,
I know of no reason
Why the Government's Treason
Should ever be forgot.
President, Congress, t'was their intent
To violate rights; our money they spent.
Thousands of laws, each a new crime;
Liberty, it seems, had run out of time.
Elections were held to pacify some,
A new batch of scoundrels to Washington come.
Wake up, wake up, your life is your own!
Wake up, wake up, YOU sit on the throne!
And how shall we live? In true liberty!
Thursday, November 04, 2010
Property rights: absolute with one limit
Property rights: absolute with one limit
Yes, I said long ago that I had written my last word on the Bubble Theory of Property Rights. Well, it keeps rearing its head, and the more I examine the concepts and counter-arguments, the more sure I am of where I stand. That still doesn't mean I am right.
Property rights are absolute (even if The State acts as if they are not). Property rights have only one limit: they end where the property ends. You can't claim ownership of your neighbor's house just because it is adjacent to your property, even if your property is completely surrounding his property and he must parachute to his house from deep space in order to avoid crossing your land. Your property lines are where your property rights end in this example. Those who own land in the middle of national forests still retain ownership of their own property (even if the feds aren't happy about it and seek to violate those property rights in myriad ways).
The same goes for smaller units of property such as a house or business and an individual allowed to enter that property. If you allow me to come onto your property, my body does not become your property even though it is engulfed by your property. My property "bubble" extends to the outer surface of my clothing because my clothes are still my clothes even if you allow me, and them, on your property. Your property rights end at my surface, and do not penetrate any deeper. So, anything beneath the surface of my clothes, as long as it remains only there, is occupying only my property even if I am surrounded and engulfed by your property at your permission.
You can insist I leave my rights behind if I enter your property, but the demand is no more valid than the demand that I become your unwilling sex slave if I enter your property. Slavery or murder is not OK just because you "only" do it on your own property. Now, obviously, anyone evil enough to make the demand that you relinquish your rights in order to enter their property is someone you should avoid if at all possible. It is better to avoid putting yourself in these situations if you can. You can cooperate or not as you see fit, but I don't consider it noble to kowtow to bad guys.
Added as clarification: It's not so much that I think I have a right to carry a concealed weapon onto other people's property, it is that I don't believe I have a right to forbid such on my own property. If I invite someone, I invite them as a sovereign individual with all their rights fully intact. I have no right to regulate what is in their pockets as long as it stays there in every way.
* * *
A federal jury in Albuquerque has convicted a Rio Rancho man of the "crime" of being a "convicted felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition". They've obviously never heard of FIJA.org.
The man was charged in the case in June 2009 after a cop stopped his car and during an undoubtedly unethical violation of property rights, found a .40-caliber pistol and ammunition in a computer bag.
Why was he stopped? Why did the cop illegally search the car? And why, if the man is still a danger who can't be trusted with a gun, was he running free? Anyone who can't be trusted with a gun can't be trusted. And rights can never be "lost".
On top of this, one of the two "felonies" he was previously convicted for was probably not even wrong. "Aggravated assault on an officer" is one of those false crimes that anyone who doesn't bow to a LEO's puffed-up "authority" quick enough, and is then put in a position of having to defend oneself from an attack by the authority-crazed cop, could be charged with.
*
Donate?
Yes, I said long ago that I had written my last word on the Bubble Theory of Property Rights. Well, it keeps rearing its head, and the more I examine the concepts and counter-arguments, the more sure I am of where I stand. That still doesn't mean I am right.
Property rights are absolute (even if The State acts as if they are not). Property rights have only one limit: they end where the property ends. You can't claim ownership of your neighbor's house just because it is adjacent to your property, even if your property is completely surrounding his property and he must parachute to his house from deep space in order to avoid crossing your land. Your property lines are where your property rights end in this example. Those who own land in the middle of national forests still retain ownership of their own property (even if the feds aren't happy about it and seek to violate those property rights in myriad ways).
The same goes for smaller units of property such as a house or business and an individual allowed to enter that property. If you allow me to come onto your property, my body does not become your property even though it is engulfed by your property. My property "bubble" extends to the outer surface of my clothing because my clothes are still my clothes even if you allow me, and them, on your property. Your property rights end at my surface, and do not penetrate any deeper. So, anything beneath the surface of my clothes, as long as it remains only there, is occupying only my property even if I am surrounded and engulfed by your property at your permission.
You can insist I leave my rights behind if I enter your property, but the demand is no more valid than the demand that I become your unwilling sex slave if I enter your property. Slavery or murder is not OK just because you "only" do it on your own property. Now, obviously, anyone evil enough to make the demand that you relinquish your rights in order to enter their property is someone you should avoid if at all possible. It is better to avoid putting yourself in these situations if you can. You can cooperate or not as you see fit, but I don't consider it noble to kowtow to bad guys.
Added as clarification: It's not so much that I think I have a right to carry a concealed weapon onto other people's property, it is that I don't believe I have a right to forbid such on my own property. If I invite someone, I invite them as a sovereign individual with all their rights fully intact. I have no right to regulate what is in their pockets as long as it stays there in every way.
* * *
A federal jury in Albuquerque has convicted a Rio Rancho man of the "crime" of being a "convicted felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition". They've obviously never heard of FIJA.org.
The man was charged in the case in June 2009 after a cop stopped his car and during an undoubtedly unethical violation of property rights, found a .40-caliber pistol and ammunition in a computer bag.
Why was he stopped? Why did the cop illegally search the car? And why, if the man is still a danger who can't be trusted with a gun, was he running free? Anyone who can't be trusted with a gun can't be trusted. And rights can never be "lost".
On top of this, one of the two "felonies" he was previously convicted for was probably not even wrong. "Aggravated assault on an officer" is one of those false crimes that anyone who doesn't bow to a LEO's puffed-up "authority" quick enough, and is then put in a position of having to defend oneself from an attack by the authority-crazed cop, could be charged with.
*
Donate?
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
Tribal leaders make bad ruling
Tribal leaders make bad ruling
The leaders of the Jemez Pueblo, northwest of Albuquerque, have banned a newspaper from tribal land because they think it sensationalized a story on a murder.
The tribal leaders claim they are exempt from the First Amendment. I agree, since the Bill of Rights only applies to governments of the US. I'm all in favor of governments not being affiliated or cooperative with that particular criminal organization.
However the tribal leaders are not exempt from the laws of right and wrong, and freedom of speech (and the press) still exists just as fully at the pueblo as anywhere else. Rights are no more subject to tribal "law" than to Federal "law". It doesn't matter if you are talking the right of free speech, the right of freedom of the press, the right of freedom of religion, the right of owning and carrying guns, the right to not testify against yourself, or anything else. "Laws" can never repeal even the most trivial right. A right doesn't cease to exist just because you happen to own (or control) property and you don't like the right.
By trying to violate freedom of the press they are exposing themselves as unworthy of the title of "leader" and are acting as Rulers instead. They are committing evil just as much as any government does when engaging in the same, wrong, acts. Individuals can decide, on an individual basis, whether they want to buy the paper or not. Try to convince them to boycott, don't use coercion.
*
Donate?
The leaders of the Jemez Pueblo, northwest of Albuquerque, have banned a newspaper from tribal land because they think it sensationalized a story on a murder.
The tribal leaders claim they are exempt from the First Amendment. I agree, since the Bill of Rights only applies to governments of the US. I'm all in favor of governments not being affiliated or cooperative with that particular criminal organization.
However the tribal leaders are not exempt from the laws of right and wrong, and freedom of speech (and the press) still exists just as fully at the pueblo as anywhere else. Rights are no more subject to tribal "law" than to Federal "law". It doesn't matter if you are talking the right of free speech, the right of freedom of the press, the right of freedom of religion, the right of owning and carrying guns, the right to not testify against yourself, or anything else. "Laws" can never repeal even the most trivial right. A right doesn't cease to exist just because you happen to own (or control) property and you don't like the right.
By trying to violate freedom of the press they are exposing themselves as unworthy of the title of "leader" and are acting as Rulers instead. They are committing evil just as much as any government does when engaging in the same, wrong, acts. Individuals can decide, on an individual basis, whether they want to buy the paper or not. Try to convince them to boycott, don't use coercion.
*
Donate?
Liberty's false friends
Liberty's false friends
You can't get more, or more complete, liberty for yourself by restricting it for others. Liberty is an interconnected web. Pull one thread and the entire structure is damaged.
"Immigration" is a good example. It shows why the Tea Party crowd is not helpful to liberty. You can't claim to be for liberty, but then advocate for government to be more powerful in "just one area"; more government control, but only when you "really want it". It always damages all liberty.
You also can't claim you are for liberty, but be enthusiastic about the government-controlled military. It doesn't work that way. The more powerful and bigger the government's military is, the more exceptions liberty suffers, and the more enemies the military creates to threaten you.
A lot of the Tea Party folk claim that these aspects of government power enhance liberty, after all, their justification goes, you can't be free if your country has been invaded and overrun. Yet, the country has already been invaded (by an ideology- collectivism) and overrun (by statists and authoritarians whose goals are the opposite of liberty). These are a greater
danger to your real, livable liberty than all the "terrorists" in the entire world could ever dream of being.
Add to these travesties the War on (some) Drugs, government-sanctioned or rationed marriage, entitlements, "gun control" that even Tea Partiers say is "reasonable", favoring one primitive and violent religion over another primitive and violent religion, the taxation that Tea Partiers are saying is "enough" rather than admitting it is ALL theft, and all the "required" permits, licenses, red tape, and other government violations of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... it adds up.
One example of those violations of rights and liberty that Tea Partiers are generally OK with: Two massage parlors in Albuquerque were raided and shut down yesterday by LEOs- for prostitution. Consensual trade, "even" in sexual gratification, between responsible, self-owning people is no one else's business. "Laws" attempting to control, forbid, or regulate
it are counterfeit "laws" and it is wrong to advocate or enforce such "laws". (Any "legitimate" massage provider who tipped off the LEOs to the prostitution should be shunned into bankruptcy. It isn't as if they were actual competitors... or were they?)
I'm certainly not perfect, and I have my preferences and opinions. Yet I recognize that liberty is the closest to "perfect" there is, and I can set aside my petty short-term desires to work toward that which I really want. Liberty for ALL, which includes me and those I love. You can't damage your enemy's liberty without doing damage to your own. This is a textbook example of "cutting off your nose to spite your face". It is just a simple truth, and it just isn't worth it.
When Tea Partiers, or anyone else who claims to value liberty, supports these enemies of liberty and their anti-liberty agenda it shows they haven't thought it through, or they are lying.
*
Donate?
You can't get more, or more complete, liberty for yourself by restricting it for others. Liberty is an interconnected web. Pull one thread and the entire structure is damaged.
"Immigration" is a good example. It shows why the Tea Party crowd is not helpful to liberty. You can't claim to be for liberty, but then advocate for government to be more powerful in "just one area"; more government control, but only when you "really want it". It always damages all liberty.
You also can't claim you are for liberty, but be enthusiastic about the government-controlled military. It doesn't work that way. The more powerful and bigger the government's military is, the more exceptions liberty suffers, and the more enemies the military creates to threaten you.
A lot of the Tea Party folk claim that these aspects of government power enhance liberty, after all, their justification goes, you can't be free if your country has been invaded and overrun. Yet, the country has already been invaded (by an ideology- collectivism) and overrun (by statists and authoritarians whose goals are the opposite of liberty). These are a greater
danger to your real, livable liberty than all the "terrorists" in the entire world could ever dream of being.
Add to these travesties the War on (some) Drugs, government-sanctioned or rationed marriage, entitlements, "gun control" that even Tea Partiers say is "reasonable", favoring one primitive and violent religion over another primitive and violent religion, the taxation that Tea Partiers are saying is "enough" rather than admitting it is ALL theft, and all the "required" permits, licenses, red tape, and other government violations of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... it adds up.
One example of those violations of rights and liberty that Tea Partiers are generally OK with: Two massage parlors in Albuquerque were raided and shut down yesterday by LEOs- for prostitution. Consensual trade, "even" in sexual gratification, between responsible, self-owning people is no one else's business. "Laws" attempting to control, forbid, or regulate
it are counterfeit "laws" and it is wrong to advocate or enforce such "laws". (Any "legitimate" massage provider who tipped off the LEOs to the prostitution should be shunned into bankruptcy. It isn't as if they were actual competitors... or were they?)
I'm certainly not perfect, and I have my preferences and opinions. Yet I recognize that liberty is the closest to "perfect" there is, and I can set aside my petty short-term desires to work toward that which I really want. Liberty for ALL, which includes me and those I love. You can't damage your enemy's liberty without doing damage to your own. This is a textbook example of "cutting off your nose to spite your face". It is just a simple truth, and it just isn't worth it.
When Tea Partiers, or anyone else who claims to value liberty, supports these enemies of liberty and their anti-liberty agenda it shows they haven't thought it through, or they are lying.
*
Donate?
Monday, November 01, 2010
You've got better things to do than vote
You've got better things to do than vote
And here are a few things to remind yourself of that truth in case you get tempted to play the rigged game:
* * *
"They're quick and slick, they're insincere..."
Yes, I know that line was originally referring to heffalumps and woozles, but it applies at least equally well to Democrats and Republicans (or any politician for that matter). You'll be surprised at how appropriate to politics this little song is. (I'm surprised no one has ever put the song to photos and clips of politicians who fit every description in the song.) Enjoy it and pay attention to the words: Heffalumps and Woozles.
* * *
From the blog of Kevin Wilmeth, the former and greatly missed Anchorage Libertarian Examiner, comes this explanation of how to (bring yourself to) vote on Election Day.
* * *
Feel free to Mock the Vote from wherever you happen to find yourself when the thought crosses your mind. Don't bother going to the polls to do it, or the vote will be mocking YOU.
* * *
For those of you interested in a local angle, here's an article by the amazing Will Grigg on a home-grown Albuquerque thug. An absolutely disgusting excuse for a human, but it's good to be aware that these parasites walk among us. People like this show why voting will never increase your liberty. You will still be forced to resist and break thugs of this sort at some point if liberty is to be rescued. Might as well get used to the idea.
* * *
I think, for my own amusement, I'll print out, on adhesive paper, the "button" I made to illustrate this article and wear it when I go out today. Feel free to use it, too, if you want.
*
Donate?
And here are a few things to remind yourself of that truth in case you get tempted to play the rigged game:
* * *
"They're quick and slick, they're insincere..."
Yes, I know that line was originally referring to heffalumps and woozles, but it applies at least equally well to Democrats and Republicans (or any politician for that matter). You'll be surprised at how appropriate to politics this little song is. (I'm surprised no one has ever put the song to photos and clips of politicians who fit every description in the song.) Enjoy it and pay attention to the words: Heffalumps and Woozles.
* * *
From the blog of Kevin Wilmeth, the former and greatly missed Anchorage Libertarian Examiner, comes this explanation of how to (bring yourself to) vote on Election Day.
* * *
Feel free to Mock the Vote from wherever you happen to find yourself when the thought crosses your mind. Don't bother going to the polls to do it, or the vote will be mocking YOU.
* * *
For those of you interested in a local angle, here's an article by the amazing Will Grigg on a home-grown Albuquerque thug. An absolutely disgusting excuse for a human, but it's good to be aware that these parasites walk among us. People like this show why voting will never increase your liberty. You will still be forced to resist and break thugs of this sort at some point if liberty is to be rescued. Might as well get used to the idea.
* * *
I think, for my own amusement, I'll print out, on adhesive paper, the "button" I made to illustrate this article and wear it when I go out today. Feel free to use it, too, if you want.
*
Donate?
Election day approaches- Avoid the trap (Don't vote!)
Election day approaches- Avoid the trap
I'm completely serious: Don't vote!
I'm not even saying you shouldn't vote because it lends a false air of legitimacy to an illegitimate system. Or because it encourages them- the control-freaks- to keep on "governing" as long as people keep consenting to be governed. I won't point out that if non-voting were not a threat to the illegitimate system, they wouldn't keep pressing that idea of "It doesn't matter WHO you vote for, just VOTE!" I won't even tell you you shouldn't vote because it is wrong for a majority to violate the rights of even one person.
Those are all true, of course, but not why I say today "Don't vote".
There are more practical reasons. Such as voting is an utter waste of your time. You could always find something more meaningful to be doing. The system is completely and totally rigged, and you can not improve the quality of your life one iota, in Albuquerque or anywhere else, by voting. Don't vote!
If you have any brains, yet vote anyway, your vote will be drowned out by the vast numbers of voters who are clueless idiots and vote with their feelings. That's how Mr. Hopenchange got elected, you know. And how Mr. "Withus-er-with-the-terrerists" got elected before that. While most people mean well, most people are not smart enough or aware of reality enough that they should be deciding anything for anyone else, even if doing so were not wrong. They feel that new "laws" will actually help people, and they allow themselves to be led down whatever path the Rulers point them toward. Don't be like them. Don't vote.
No candidate who would actually be a threat to the status quo will ever be allowed to take office, if they even manage to get on the ballot and then get enough votes counted in their favor to win. Never. Democrats and Republicans have the game fixed. Tea Party Republicrats are not serious about smaller government, except on the socially "conservative" (and still completely statist) issues they value, and LP candidates who are on the ballot are not going to be rogue enough to change anything, and may even be statist wolves in libertarian clothing. Even if they are liberty-embracing good guys, they will be powerless while the rest of the establishment politicians and bureaucrats conspire to fight over who gets to control the rudder of the government train while knowing that whoever wins the election, the train will stay on the tracks. If one side [sic] wins, they will advance their own anti-liberty agenda for a while, until the other side [sic] wins, and then an anti-liberty agenda coming from a different direction will be advanced. It's just like being swallowed by a snake. Yet there are some agenda items that remain the same through it all. Such as The War on (some) Drugs and the War on Guns. And theft in the name of entitlements and military spending. Police State USA will never be threatened by those working within the system.
Don't vote!
Even in cases where you feel you are voting in self defense such as against a tax or for "legalization" of marijuana, if the results are unpleasant enough for the government or take away some power, the results will be ignored. "Legalizing" pot, but then "taxing and regulating" it is no real improvement. You are just shifting the enforcement power to a different branch of government. And that power will still be used to steal money, and to kidnap and kill innocent people. Remember that "gun control", such as the National Firearms Act of 1934, wasn't originally a ban on functional firearms and safety equipment, but a "tax" scheme. Look how many people have been destroyed or killed through that.
Don't waste your time voting. Actually do something real, and ignore or violate the results of the election in whatever way you can until the train of The State goes off the cliff. Jump off now while you still can. Don't vote.
Since it is claimed that government exists by the consent of "the governed", remove your consent by refusing to participate in the rigged game that is placed before you. I do NOT consent. I will not be legitimizing those who seek to use you for Soylent Green. I will not be asking that force be used against you just because you are in the "minority". Not on my behalf! I will not be voting.
Join me. Don't vote.
*
Donate?
I'm completely serious: Don't vote!
I'm not even saying you shouldn't vote because it lends a false air of legitimacy to an illegitimate system. Or because it encourages them- the control-freaks- to keep on "governing" as long as people keep consenting to be governed. I won't point out that if non-voting were not a threat to the illegitimate system, they wouldn't keep pressing that idea of "It doesn't matter WHO you vote for, just VOTE!" I won't even tell you you shouldn't vote because it is wrong for a majority to violate the rights of even one person.
Those are all true, of course, but not why I say today "Don't vote".
There are more practical reasons. Such as voting is an utter waste of your time. You could always find something more meaningful to be doing. The system is completely and totally rigged, and you can not improve the quality of your life one iota, in Albuquerque or anywhere else, by voting. Don't vote!
If you have any brains, yet vote anyway, your vote will be drowned out by the vast numbers of voters who are clueless idiots and vote with their feelings. That's how Mr. Hopenchange got elected, you know. And how Mr. "Withus-er-with-the-terrerists" got elected before that. While most people mean well, most people are not smart enough or aware of reality enough that they should be deciding anything for anyone else, even if doing so were not wrong. They feel that new "laws" will actually help people, and they allow themselves to be led down whatever path the Rulers point them toward. Don't be like them. Don't vote.
No candidate who would actually be a threat to the status quo will ever be allowed to take office, if they even manage to get on the ballot and then get enough votes counted in their favor to win. Never. Democrats and Republicans have the game fixed. Tea Party Republicrats are not serious about smaller government, except on the socially "conservative" (and still completely statist) issues they value, and LP candidates who are on the ballot are not going to be rogue enough to change anything, and may even be statist wolves in libertarian clothing. Even if they are liberty-embracing good guys, they will be powerless while the rest of the establishment politicians and bureaucrats conspire to fight over who gets to control the rudder of the government train while knowing that whoever wins the election, the train will stay on the tracks. If one side [sic] wins, they will advance their own anti-liberty agenda for a while, until the other side [sic] wins, and then an anti-liberty agenda coming from a different direction will be advanced. It's just like being swallowed by a snake. Yet there are some agenda items that remain the same through it all. Such as The War on (some) Drugs and the War on Guns. And theft in the name of entitlements and military spending. Police State USA will never be threatened by those working within the system.
Don't vote!
Even in cases where you feel you are voting in self defense such as against a tax or for "legalization" of marijuana, if the results are unpleasant enough for the government or take away some power, the results will be ignored. "Legalizing" pot, but then "taxing and regulating" it is no real improvement. You are just shifting the enforcement power to a different branch of government. And that power will still be used to steal money, and to kidnap and kill innocent people. Remember that "gun control", such as the National Firearms Act of 1934, wasn't originally a ban on functional firearms and safety equipment, but a "tax" scheme. Look how many people have been destroyed or killed through that.
Don't waste your time voting. Actually do something real, and ignore or violate the results of the election in whatever way you can until the train of The State goes off the cliff. Jump off now while you still can. Don't vote.
Since it is claimed that government exists by the consent of "the governed", remove your consent by refusing to participate in the rigged game that is placed before you. I do NOT consent. I will not be legitimizing those who seek to use you for Soylent Green. I will not be asking that force be used against you just because you are in the "minority". Not on my behalf! I will not be voting.
Join me. Don't vote.
*
Donate?
Sunday, October 31, 2010
"The werewolf" (Happy Halloween!)
So, here's the deal: I'm a werewolf.
Of course, being one, I know that a werewolf is no more a "wolf" than a koala bear is a bear, or a guinea pig is a pig. It's just a case of convergent evolution that makes a primate look somewhat wolf-like; similar to the way a marsupial mole, which is more related to wombats than moles, looks very much like a regular garden-variety mole. The similarity goes beyond appearances so that the werewolf exhibits some very wolf-like behaviors. Except for the urge to be a part of a pack. Werewolves are not very social with one another. And those computer-generated "werewolves" seen in recent sappy, love-sick teen movies... those would just be "shape-shifters" turning into wolves, if they were real. Which they aren't! They are really pretty insulting to us. I suppose it's just entertainment; not to be taken too seriously. Not that all this explanation has anything to do with anything. It's just in my nature to ramble on about things no one really cares about. If you encounter one of us these distinctions will not seem important.
I first discovered my "talents" as a teenager when I was surrounded by a pack of feral dogs in the woods where I roamed as a youngster. I have always had a "problem" with dogs. It's not that I don't like them, exactly, but there is some primal rivalry there. And when I see dogs my teeth ache and an almost overwhelming urge to bite them rises up inside of me and settles in my jawbones under my teeth. At least that's the only way I can describe the feeling.
Anyway, back to the feral dogs. They had me treed, without a weapon. But as I sat up there a change began to take place. I can't say for sure that it was a physical change that time, but it was certainly a change. I began to growl deep in my throat, without even intending to. The dogs became unsettled. Instead of looking at me as something to attack, they began backing away from the tree while still watching me. My fear was evaporating as the dogs became more uncomfortable. Suddenly I just got out of the tree and the dogs took one look at me and ran. Fast! They never bothered me again, which was a relief as they had made my wanderings less pleasant than I would have liked.
Of course, being one, I know that a werewolf is no more a "wolf" than a koala bear is a bear, or a guinea pig is a pig. It's just a case of convergent evolution that makes a primate look somewhat wolf-like; similar to the way a marsupial mole, which is more related to wombats than moles, looks very much like a regular garden-variety mole. The similarity goes beyond appearances so that the werewolf exhibits some very wolf-like behaviors. Except for the urge to be a part of a pack. Werewolves are not very social with one another. And those computer-generated "werewolves" seen in recent sappy, love-sick teen movies... those would just be "shape-shifters" turning into wolves, if they were real. Which they aren't! They are really pretty insulting to us. I suppose it's just entertainment; not to be taken too seriously. Not that all this explanation has anything to do with anything. It's just in my nature to ramble on about things no one really cares about. If you encounter one of us these distinctions will not seem important.
I first discovered my "talents" as a teenager when I was surrounded by a pack of feral dogs in the woods where I roamed as a youngster. I have always had a "problem" with dogs. It's not that I don't like them, exactly, but there is some primal rivalry there. And when I see dogs my teeth ache and an almost overwhelming urge to bite them rises up inside of me and settles in my jawbones under my teeth. At least that's the only way I can describe the feeling.
Anyway, back to the feral dogs. They had me treed, without a weapon. But as I sat up there a change began to take place. I can't say for sure that it was a physical change that time, but it was certainly a change. I began to growl deep in my throat, without even intending to. The dogs became unsettled. Instead of looking at me as something to attack, they began backing away from the tree while still watching me. My fear was evaporating as the dogs became more uncomfortable. Suddenly I just got out of the tree and the dogs took one look at me and ran. Fast! They never bothered me again, which was a relief as they had made my wanderings less pleasant than I would have liked.
This part of my nature has saved me from aggressive dogs on several occasions. My lip curls, my teeth are bared, and the growl wells up from inside. The dog backs down.
There have been other times the werewolf has manifested itself as well. I know I have always had a tendency to howl at the moon. People just thought it was a quirk. They had no clue at the compulsion I felt and how I felt if I repressed the urge. It was almost as if I were drowning if I didn't let myself howl. A feeling of becoming something different- something "other"- would then flow through my entire body. It felt good. It was also a relief.
I soon discovered that if I were joking around with people, growling, and generally acting like a wolf, and if I didn't stop soon, it would take over. I would become animalistic and my human side would be submerged and become almost unreachable. It would be very hard to stay tame and to change back. Honestly, it scared me a bit the first few times it happened. I have mostly gotten control of that now. As long as no one backs me into a corner.
I think only one person who knows me has really seen the "werewolf me", and then only once. My first ex-wife was reading once when I entered the room. For some reason I growled and leaped in as I did. She screamed and recoiled so severely, with such an expression of terror on her face, that I panicked and looked behind me, certain from the reaction she gave that an indescribable demon was at my heels about to grab me from behind. Nope. It was just me. I tried apologizing but it wasn't very effective. And I was still terrified, too. I then knew this power I had needed to be controlled and kept hidden. I think I've done fairly well. But it is part of the reason I need large empty spaces to roam. I can't keep the werewolf bottled up all the time, and letting it out around people is a problem. Even at night.
It is still mostly dogs that seem to "know", and who trigger my "toothache" by their presence. You can't be expected to understand the craving to bite them that flows up my body and settles underneath my teeth. It feels as though my teeth will pop out of their sockets if I don't satisfy that urge.
So, the next time that person in line next to you seems to give off a different vibe, or seems a little wild and dangerous, listen to your instincts. Not all werewolves refuse to initiate force. Some may be authoritarians.
Trick or Treated like a criminal
If a "registered sex offender" once lived at your address, and moved without telling the authorities, or if the address is read wrong, you may get a surprise visit from a real pervert. And if you are not prepared to instantly comply with his aggressive demands to provide ID upon his (illegal and evil) request, expect to be violated in one or more ways.
Federal Marshalls, the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Department, and the New Mexico Probation and Parole Office will be checking up on those people who appear on the incomplete, inaccurate, and utterly useless "sex offender registry" on Halloween night in Albuquerque and Las Cruces. Be warned.
The standard collectivist/authoritarian lie is being dragged out of its coffin, propped up, and dusted off: "the effort is aimed at making sure children are safe". Sure it is.
* * *
The standard collectivist/authoritarian lie is being dragged out of its coffin, propped up, and dusted off: "the effort is aimed at making sure children are safe". Sure it is.
* * *
Want to really frighten your mainstream (probably even voting!) neighbors on this spooky and fun day? Dress as Liberty. Not the pitiful, harmless statue that commonly goes by that name, but REAL Liberty. The freedom to exercise your rights. All of them. A real Liberty who has the determination to back it up with justified, righteous force if those rights are violated in any way. Not aggressive; not looking for a fight; but a staunch refusal to be prey. That's what scares so many collectivists out of their droopy, soiled diapers these days.
*
Donate?
*
Donate?
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Friday, October 29, 2010
Pomeranian held hostage by abusers in city shelter
Pomeranian held hostage by abusers in city shelter
Some rules, such as "Don't attack", "Don't steal", or "Keep your (non-coerced) word" always make sense. Most other rules, especially arbitrary government or bureaucratic rules, don't. They are a substitute for thought. Just as "zero tolerance" policies in schools frequently forbid the "authorities" from distinguishing between a butter knife and a switchblade (both have their legitimate uses and neither should be forbidden anywhere), so do the rest of government's rules remove the human element- discernment- from the equation.
Now a family is suffering from bureaucratic mindlessness, as is their dog. Their pomeranian is being held by Albuquerque's Eastside Shelter, and the "law" says the dog can't go home until it has been neutered. But this particular pomeranian is a breeder. To neuter it would devalue the family's property. It's like if every time the city "impounded" (stole) a vehicle, it refused to give back the stolen property until the seats had been removed. And that's in addition to the ransom being paid.
To have a "no exceptions" policy that is based on anything less than an ethical principle is wrong. And there is no ethical principle that demands that you neuter someone else's dog. In fact, the ethical principle is that you shouldn't damage other people's property. But, governments shouldn't steal or lie or attack the innocent either, so their inability to grasp this simple concept isn't surprising. Evil can be found in the most trivial of places and is upheld by the most stupid of people. Why not tell them about it?
*
Donate?
Some rules, such as "Don't attack", "Don't steal", or "Keep your (non-coerced) word" always make sense. Most other rules, especially arbitrary government or bureaucratic rules, don't. They are a substitute for thought. Just as "zero tolerance" policies in schools frequently forbid the "authorities" from distinguishing between a butter knife and a switchblade (both have their legitimate uses and neither should be forbidden anywhere), so do the rest of government's rules remove the human element- discernment- from the equation.
Now a family is suffering from bureaucratic mindlessness, as is their dog. Their pomeranian is being held by Albuquerque's Eastside Shelter, and the "law" says the dog can't go home until it has been neutered. But this particular pomeranian is a breeder. To neuter it would devalue the family's property. It's like if every time the city "impounded" (stole) a vehicle, it refused to give back the stolen property until the seats had been removed. And that's in addition to the ransom being paid.
To have a "no exceptions" policy that is based on anything less than an ethical principle is wrong. And there is no ethical principle that demands that you neuter someone else's dog. In fact, the ethical principle is that you shouldn't damage other people's property. But, governments shouldn't steal or lie or attack the innocent either, so their inability to grasp this simple concept isn't surprising. Evil can be found in the most trivial of places and is upheld by the most stupid of people. Why not tell them about it?
*
Donate?
Thursday, October 28, 2010
ABQ couple had chemicals, guns, and books in home
ABQ couple had chemicals, guns, and books in home
An Albuquerque couple is in trouble for the chemicals they had in their home. Also, if the story is true, the male half of the couple initiated force against an innocent man. It gave the authorities a good excuse to whip up a dramatic overreaction so they could be seen to be "doing something". However, if his bombs don't work any better than he shoots, probably no one was in much danger.
I have to shake my head when I hear some authority get breathless over "dangerous chemicals". Every home is full of dangerous chemicals. It is the way they are stored and used that can be the problem. I see no indication this was the case. With this couple it is the fact that The State is scared (or wants to make people believe) that the chemicals might have been intended to be used against its assets that is the issue.
Other non-issues are also being brought up. Specifically that the home contained firearms, "biohazard materials", and books. Every home on the planet should contain several firearms. I would bet that many homes also have books that contain information about making explosives. And every home also contains "biohazard material" if you listen to The State and mainstream health authorities.
I see nothing other than the attack on the innocent man that requires any response from any third party. And that's assuming the innocent man really is innocent.
*
Donate?
An Albuquerque couple is in trouble for the chemicals they had in their home. Also, if the story is true, the male half of the couple initiated force against an innocent man. It gave the authorities a good excuse to whip up a dramatic overreaction so they could be seen to be "doing something". However, if his bombs don't work any better than he shoots, probably no one was in much danger.
I have to shake my head when I hear some authority get breathless over "dangerous chemicals". Every home is full of dangerous chemicals. It is the way they are stored and used that can be the problem. I see no indication this was the case. With this couple it is the fact that The State is scared (or wants to make people believe) that the chemicals might have been intended to be used against its assets that is the issue.
Other non-issues are also being brought up. Specifically that the home contained firearms, "biohazard materials", and books. Every home on the planet should contain several firearms. I would bet that many homes also have books that contain information about making explosives. And every home also contains "biohazard material" if you listen to The State and mainstream health authorities.
I see nothing other than the attack on the innocent man that requires any response from any third party. And that's assuming the innocent man really is innocent.
*
Donate?
How is your hoard of lead?
With the approaching elections comes the possibility of unhappy voters. While I doubt anything too serious will come of their unhappiness (voters are too easily placated), it is never a bad idea to use this as an excuse to check up on your stocks and supplies. Any excuse to do what you should do anyway, right?
One thing I like to inventory (and re-stock) from time to time is my supply of ammo. Like most other emergency supplies, even if you don't "need" it, you can always use it. And you can never have enough of it. It's just fun to go out and shoot up a few boxes for relaxation, and it is useful fun that keeps your skills honed.
Plus, it makes a great gift in my opinion- I have never gotten ammo from someone and wished I had gotten something else. (hint, hint- if any of my family is reading)
I also look at my stock of ammo as a bank account of sorts; even calibers you don't use in your own guns make good trade goods- and, with the Fed's vigorous counterfeiting operation, it will hold its value better than FRNs. So, check out your stocks, and refill any gaps.
Disclaimer: I did get paid for this endorsement. However, I have been a customer of theirs for years and have always gotten great service and have always been more than satisfied. I wouldn't have agreed to this had it been otherwise.
One thing I like to inventory (and re-stock) from time to time is my supply of ammo. Like most other emergency supplies, even if you don't "need" it, you can always use it. And you can never have enough of it. It's just fun to go out and shoot up a few boxes for relaxation, and it is useful fun that keeps your skills honed.
Plus, it makes a great gift in my opinion- I have never gotten ammo from someone and wished I had gotten something else. (hint, hint- if any of my family is reading)
I also look at my stock of ammo as a bank account of sorts; even calibers you don't use in your own guns make good trade goods- and, with the Fed's vigorous counterfeiting operation, it will hold its value better than FRNs. So, check out your stocks, and refill any gaps.
Disclaimer: I did get paid for this endorsement. However, I have been a customer of theirs for years and have always gotten great service and have always been more than satisfied. I wouldn't have agreed to this had it been otherwise.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)