End the War on Freedom

"No serious person thinks that we are in the middle of a civil-liberties crisis." -- Ann Coulter

Kevin Tuma - Hillary Potter and the Litany of Hogwash - cartoon commentary on the new book by Ms. Rodham-Clinton-Rodham. Hehe.

Jeff Cooper's Commentaries - Independence 2003 - The Declaration of Independence says our rights come from God, not government; the Sphinx 3000 pistol; Captain Tyler Heath, USMC, Mr. Cooper's grandson; the coaxial illuminator or "leopard light" on a Steyr Scout; mind-set is what wins; the pointless proliferation of commercial rifle cartridges; how to convince different nationalities to abandon ship; continued study of the art of war, hehe; we live here in the best of all worlds, game-wise; "being surprised is the unforgivable sin of the junior officer"; "the modern technique" versus "the elder technique"; "This preoccupation with safety in gunhandling has assumed truly ridiculous proportions"; explanation of the Gunsite raven; you can get away with murder, as evidenced by Lon Horiuchi and whoever did away with Vince Foster; Where's the body?; "Sure it's a lousy war, but it's the only war we've got!"; pistols are for men and women, rifles mostly for men only; "The Reunion at Whittington is set for 17,18,19 October".

"Islam is a religion in which Allah (God) requires you to send your son to die for him. Christianity is a faith in which God sent His Son to die for you."

John Ashcroft

...

Our travels remind us again of the linguistic advice that one should do business in English, diplomacy in French, command troops in German, make love in Spanish, and sing in Italian. In amplification one should do his cursing in Arabic, though this is complicated by the diversity of that tongue. Iraqi Arabic is not Egyptian. Syrian is not Saudi. And Jordanian is not Pakistani. Presumably the Koran is written in authentic Arabic, but only a high level scholar can say so. This may account for the curious doctrinary inconsistencies and contradictions that clutter up current political discourse. The teachings of the Prophet (may peace be upon him) seem oddly childish to Western ears, but they may be due mainly to linguistics. As I understand it, the Prophet banned translation of his book- evidently with good reason.

Mark Morford at SF Gate - The End Of The Deep End - more and more pools are being built without a deep end, or their deep ends are being filled in. A metaphor for our increasingly risk-averse and depth-averse society. [root]

This is vital. This is key. Because the end of the deep end means maybe, just maybe, we aren't allowing ourselves, our kids, those more vital, deeper explorations. That we are increasingly preventing them -- and ourselves -- from experiencing, on their own terms, those more profound risks and mistakes and gasping epiphanies.

Alfred A. Hambidge, Jr. at Strike the Root - A Personal Declaration of Independence - well said. [root]

Jim Keyworth at The Payson Roundup - Rancher shoots firefighting chopper - last year, they stole his water and refused to pay his bill, so this year, he shot at them. Makes sense to me, but he faces up to a year in prison for "interfering with the performance of federal officers or contractors". Pig f***ing nazis! [smith2004]

Ron Paul in the House of Representatives - Neo-Conned - an hour-long speech Dr. Paul gave yesterday, July 10. How the neocons came to power, who they are, what they believe, and how they have conned America into following their lead.

The modern-day, limited-government movement has been co-opted. The conservatives have failed in their effort to shrink the size of government. There has not been, nor will there soon be, a conservative revolution in Washington. Political party control of the federal government has changed, but the inexorable growth in the size and scope of government has continued unabated. The liberal arguments for limited government in personal affairs and foreign military adventurism were never seriously considered as part of this revolution.

...

Neo-conservatism has been around for decades and, strangely, has connections to past generations as far back as Machiavelli. Modern-day neo-conservatism was introduced to us in the 1960s. It entails both a detailed strategy as well as a philosophy of government. The ideas of Teddy Roosevelt, and certainly Woodrow Wilson, were quite similar to many of the views of present-day neocons. Neocon spokesman Max Boot brags that what he advocates is "hard Wilsonianism." In many ways, there's nothing "neo" about their views, and certainly nothing conservative. Yet they have been able to co-op the conservative movement by advertising themselves as a new or modern form of conservatism.

More recently, the modern-day neocons have come from the far left, a group historically identified as former Trotskyists. Liberal Christopher Hitchins, has recently officially joined the neocons, and it has been reported that he has already been to the White House as an ad hoc consultant. Many neocons now in positions of influence in Washington can trace their status back to Professor Leo Strauss of the University of Chicago. One of Strauss' books was Thoughts on Machiavelli. This book was not a condemnation of Machiavelli's philosophy. Paul Wolfowitz actually got his PhD under Strauss. Others closely associated with these views are Richard Perle, Eliot Abrams, Robert Kagan and William Kristol. All are key players in designing our new strategy of preemptive war. Others include: Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute; former CIA Director James Woolsy; Bill Bennett of Book of Virtues fame; Frank Gaffney; Dick Cheney; and Donald Rumsfeld. There are just too many to mention who are philosophically or politically connected to the neocon philosophy in some varying degree.

...

More important than the names of people affiliated with neo-conservatism are the views they adhere to. Here is a brief summary of the general understanding of what neocons believe:

1. They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual.
2. They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.
3. They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.
4. They accept the notion that the ends justify the means--that hard-ball politics is a moral necessity.
5. They express no opposition to the welfare state.
6. They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.
7. They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.
8. They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.
9. They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and
10. They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill-advised.
11. They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem.
12. They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.
13. Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should
14. 14. 9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.
15. They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists.)
16. They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.
17. They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party.

...

At the end of the Cold War, the neoconservatives realized a rearrangement of the world was occurring and that our superior economic and military power offered them a perfect opportunity to control the process of remaking the Middle East.

It was recognized that a new era was upon us, and the neocons welcomed Frances Fukuyama's "end of history" declaration. To them, the debate was over. The West won; the Soviets lost. Old-fashioned communism was dead. Long live the new era of neoconservatism. The struggle may not be over, but the West won the intellectual fight, they reasoned. The only problem is that the neocons decided to define the philosophy of the victors. They have been amazingly successful in their efforts to control the debate over what Western values are and by what methods they will be spread throughout the world.

Communism surely lost a lot with the breakup of the Soviet Empire, but this can hardly be declared a victory for American liberty, as the Founders understood it. Neoconservatism is not the philosophy of free markets and a wise foreign policy. Instead, it represents big-government welfare at home and a program of using our military might to spread their version of American values throughout the world. Since neoconservatives dominate the way the U.S. government now operates, it behooves us all to understand their beliefs and goals. The breakup of the Soviet system may well have been an epic event but to say that the views of the neocons are the unchallenged victors and that all we need do is wait for their implementation is a capitulation to controlling the forces of history that many Americans are not yet ready to concede. There is surely no need to do so.

...

Ledeen believes man is basically evil and cannot be left to his own desires. Therefore, he must have proper and strong leadership, just as Machiavelli argued. Only then can man achieve good, as Ledeen explains: "In order to achieve the most noble accomplishments, the leader may have to 'enter into evil.' This is the chilling insight that has made Machiavelli so feared, admired and challenging...we are rotten," argues Ledeen. "It's true that we can achieve greatness if, and only if, we are properly led." In other words, man is so depraved that individuals are incapable of moral, ethical and spiritual greatness, and achieving excellence and virtue can only come from a powerful authoritarian leader. What depraved ideas are these to now be influencing our leaders in Washington? The question Ledeen doesn't answer is: "Why do the political leaders not suffer from the same shortcomings and where do they obtain their monopoly on wisdom?"

...

I realize that all conservatives are not neoconservatives, and all neocons don't necessarily agree on all points--which means that in spite of their tremendous influence, most members of Congress and those in the administration do not necessarily take their marching orders from AEI or Richard Perle. But to use this as a reason to ignore what neoconservative leaders believe, write about and agitate for--with amazing success I might point out--would be at our own peril. This country still allows open discourse--though less everyday--and we who disagree should push the discussion and expose those who drive our policies. It is getting more difficult to get fair and balanced discussion on the issues, because it has become routine for the hegemons to label those who object to preemptive war and domestic surveillance as traitors, unpatriotic and un-American. The uniformity of support for our current foreign policy by major and cable-news networks should concern every American. We should all be thankful for C-SPAN and the Internet.

Add comment Edit post Add post