Go NH!

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Sat, 21 Feb 2004 13:00:00 GMT
From kaba:
"The safest place in the United States is the 'Little Italy' section of NYC. The bad guy doesn't know who is packing and who isn't. You don't mess with the mob." -- Anonymous

From muth:

"Politicians like to brag that they are beefing up the economy. Obviously, they don't know beef from pork!" -- Zig Zigler

# Ran Prieur - Democrats nominate Hitler - satire. Hehe. [unknown]

BOSTON. After switching their allegiance from anarcho-communist Howard Dean to ultra-liberal John Kerry, and then to liberal John Edwards, on the final day of their convention Democrats switched one last time to extreme moderate Adolf Hitler, convinced that he's the man who has the best chance of beating Bush.

"This election has never been about issues," said Democratic Party spokesman Heinrich Himmler. "It's not about whether we go to war, about military spending, or taxes, or the federal budget, or the environment, or civil liberties, or even abortion. That's the kind of starry-eyed idealism that killed us in '72. This election is about one thing -- getting that bastard Bush out of there, that lying, draft-dodging, coke-snorting, beady-eyed, stupid, bad, bad person. Hate him! Hate him! Hate him!"

# New Hampshire Legislature - SB454 passed the senate on Thursday. It has not yet gone to the house. A similar house bill, HB1271, is due out of the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee on March 11.

# TheWMURChannel.com - Senate Passes Bill To Allow Concealed Weapons Without Permit - a short story on the New Hampshire senate's passage of SB454. Be sure to vote in the poll in the middle of the page (to the right of the story text). [kaba]

# Angel Shamaya at KeepAndBearArms.com - KABA Writer Investigated for Questioning Civil Authority - Dave Codrea's rhetorical letter, the Liberty Belles copy of which I linked to on Thursday, has gotten him phone calls from a detective and two black and white police cruisers at his home. [lrtdiscuss]

I do find it bizarre that civil authority is so fearful of an armed citizenry that if they feel there is any chance of it happening, their response is to send armed men. It also confirms my opinion of the corrupt gangsters in charge of San Francisco's city government -- ready to use the force of law to advance their agenda, but publicly flout the law when it doesn't.

# I posted the following on the scopeny mailing list (membership required to read or post messages):

It's nice that the Constitution Party wants to restore the Second Amendment. I hope this means that they will do their best to repeal the Brady Bill, the 1968 Gun Control Act, and the National Firearms Act. I hope this means that they agree 100% with L. Neil Smith that "Every man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission."

The open borders issue is not important to me. Until we get rid of the very concept of welfare, including social security and medicare/medicaid, open borders are a problem. Once immigrants have to work for their living, we can once again open the country to all who wish to honestly support themselves.

Where in the Constitution is the federal government given the power to make any law having anything to do with drugs? I own my body. Therefore, I have the absolute right to ingest anything I want. I am responsible for the consequences. If I cannot support myself while intoxicated, I should be allowed to die in the street, and if I commit a crime while intoxicated, I should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, but no government may say anything whatsoever about what I eat, drink, smoke, or inject. Drugs should not be legalized. They should be completely deregulated.

But the abortion issue is the part of the Constitution Party's platform that really sticks in my craw. In my opinion, abortion is the mother's business and possibly the father's. Period. The government may not forbid it, and they also should not contribute a single penny of stolen tax money to a single abortion. But abortion arguments never go anywhere. Nobody ever moves an inch.

I'll also have to admit that though I honor other people's religious beliefs, and though I am a spiritually-oriented person, [Constitution Party presidential candidate] Mr. Peroutka's web site dripped way to much Christian dogma for my taste. I don't mind him being that way, but I won't vote for it. I'll stick with the Libertarians, when I can stomach voting.

# James Bovard at The Future of Freedom Foundation - The Neocon War on Peace and Freedom - A review of The End of Evil: How to Win the War on Terror by "David Frum, former speechwriter for President Bush, and Richard Perle, currently on the Pentagon's Defense Advisory Board." It seems to me that a good start in ridding the world of evil would be to hang these two for treason. If followed, their recommendations would likely destroy America. [smith2004 grabbe]

According to Frum and Perle, "Terrorism remains the great evil of our time, and the war against this evil, our generation's great cause.... There is no middle way for Americans; it is victory or holocaust." The terrorist threat is largely equated with the Muslim threat. Protecting Americans from terrorists requires toppling numerous Arab and Muslim regimes and compelling the reformation of much of Islam: "We must discredit and defeat the extremist Islamic ideology that justifies and sustains terrorism."


According to Frum and Perle, the evil of fundamental Islam requires the quashing of American privacy. They recommend a vast expansion of government surveillance, calling for the revival of Operation TIPS (Terrorism Information and Prevention System), which Congress forced the Bush administration to abandon. Frum and Perle declare, "To the astonishment of the administration, TIPS provoked an outburst of anger and mockery."


The End of Evil contains exhaustive details of abuses by Arab and Muslim governments and by Muslim terrorist groups. Specific cases of alleged terrorist attacks are repeatedly mentioned to justify a de facto all-out U.S. offensive against Muslim and Arab radicals.

But the authors never address the fact that governments kill far more people than do terrorist groups. From 1980 to 2000, international terrorists killed 7,745 people, according to the U.S. State Department. Yet, in the same decades, governments killed more than 10 million people in ethnic-cleansing campaigns, mass executions, politically caused famines, wars, and other slaughters. The 9/11 attacks made 2001 probably the only year in decades in which the number of people killed by international terrorists even approached 1 percent of the number killed by governments. Governments pose a far greater theat to peace and survival than do terrorist groups.


The Saudis fiercely opposed the Bush administration's plans to invade Iraq last year. On the flip side, the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz reported on April 5, 2003, "The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history." A week before Bush started the war, the Wall Street Journal noted, "The U.S. is soon likely to go to war in Iraq in no small part because of the arguments of thinkers who have graced the pages of Commentary magazine over the years." The American Israeli Political Action Committee (AIPAC) is widely perceived as the most powerful lobby in Washington, and AIPAC was gung-ho for the war.


Frum and Perle repeatedly urge the U.S. government to intervene to suppress anti-Israeli or anti-Semitic incitements at home or around the world. Yet, if someone wrote about Zionism the way The End of Evil writes about Islam, Frum and Perle would be first in line to accuse the writer of anti-Semitism -- and rightly so.

# Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership - Jews Should Develop a "Passion" for Self-Defense - instead of engaging in victim-mentality hand-wringing about imagined anti-Jew violence prompted by Mel Gibson's new movie, Jews should arm and learn to defend themselves against real violence. [stanleyscoop]

Cut the hand-wringing. Stop the cringing. Cease with all the accusations against a Catholic film director and an innocent, multi-denominational Christian audience.

If anti-Semitism is a problem--and it most emphatically is--change your mindset and prepare to defend against the real threat of violence. Don't just stand there ranting about a movie. Don't just stand there bemoaning even the hatred that's poised to sweep away you, your children, your sacred books, your community, your future.

Do something to stop to the very real violence against Jews.

Put the real anti-Semites on notice that Jews fight back. Jews won't just take it next time somebody tries to load the boxcars or drop the gas canisters. We won't even take it next time somebody wants to trash a synagogue or beat up a rabbinical student.

Instead, we'll be there armed--both with firearms and determination--to make sure that we Jews and all the values we stand for remain strong and free for many thousand more years.

The real, violently aggressive anti-Semites aren't the slightest bit moved when we complain about what helpless victims we Jews are. They'll understand us much better when they look down the barrel of our guns.

# Christopher Mayer at LewRockwell.com - The Debates of Liberty - A review of Wendy McElroy's book, The Debates of Liberty about Benjamin Tucker's 19th century periodical, Liberty. [lew]

Liberty, in this case, refers to the periodical edited and published by the great individualist Benjamin Tucker. In the course of its twenty-seven year existence, Liberty became one of many cauldrons bubbling over with radical thought in late 19th century America. It stands above many of its competitors for the quality of its content, in particular that which flowed from the biting pen of Tucker himself. The pages of Liberty were graced with some of the most prominent personalities in the movement -- Lysander Spooner and Auberon Herbert among them (men whose work are still in-print and readily available today). Liberty also feathered its cap with a number of other achievements that further served to solidify its position and importance, as summarized in the book. McElroy writes "Tucker and Liberty were the vital core around which a radical Individualist movement reconstituted itself in the wake of the Civil War and grew."

This radical movement is called Individualist Anarchism and is the name used to describe the political philosophy of Tucker and his merry band. Although it is difficult to characterize any political philosophy in general terms without doing it some injustice, it is safe to say that Individualist Anarchism opposed political solutions to social problems. It was a philosophy built on the primacy of the individual over collective bodies or classes. It supported voluntary associations against coercion. Individualist Anarchism is one of the roots of the libertarian tree of ideas and its influence is under-appreciated. Murray Rothbard, for one, specifically acknowledged his intellectual debt to Benjamin Tucker in his brilliant book Power & Market.

Given its importance and influence, the literature in this area seems rather thin. McElroy's book is a welcome addition and helps illuminate the evolution of libertarian ideas.

# Jeffrey A. Tucker at LewRockwell.com - The Turn of the Screw - to solve a host of annoying domestic problems, turn up your water heater to 130°. Entertainingly said. [lew]

Who came up with the idea that the standard temperature should be 120 degrees? The usual bunch: governments that want to impose a variety of deprivations on you, anti-energy people who think the less technological consumption the better, environmentalists who want to stamp out all things bright and beautiful, litigious lawyers who have intimidated heater makers, and safety freaks of all sorts. A quick search shows all.

We know these people. They are the people who say we should eat our own garbage, invite bats to live in our attics, and refrain from killing mosquitoes in the marsh. They are the ones who gave us toilets that don't flush and shower heads that don't spray. They seem to think we should all go around dirty and dissatisfied, and that anything resembling clean, neat, and, well, civilized has to be stamped out.

These people are always worrying about the risks of life, but what about the health risks of living in squalor of their creation?

Defy them all in one fell swoop! Turn your temperature up to 130 degrees. How hot is this? Contrary to the claims, it will not scald you. Imagine again a bowl full of water. Put your hand into this temperature and you will say: "Yikes!" or "Ouch!" or "Yeow!" and pull it right out and shake your hand in the air. However, it leaves nothing red, no burns, nothing awful. It is just what used to be called hot water before the lukewarm crowd changed everything.

How does yeast respond to 130 degrees? It dies. Bread bakers know this. You know what else dies? All the icky things mentioned above. They all die mercifully quick deaths at this temperature. Clean clothes! Clean sinks! Satisfyingly hot showers! Comfortable sheets! Clean-smelling mops! Plates that come out of the dish washer without dinner build-up on them! All of this awaits your act of defiance.

A brief note on shoes. Have you ever bought a new pair because your old ones...stank? Of course they did. Your socks are not getting clean. They infect your shoes. Oh sure, try to keep it at bay with Dr. Scholl's. It won't work. A shoe stink sticks forever. You thought you had a physical disability, and embarrassing foot odor problem. Nope. It's your hot water heater.

# United for Peace and Justice - March 20: The World Still Says No to War - less than a month to another worldwide day of protest against Bushnev's wars. [unknown]

# Kim du Toit - Just Suppose: The Results - Kim asked on Monday which rifle his readers would take if asked "to patrol the hills some miles from your house, for about four days" with 100 rounds of ammo. He got 426 responses, which he catalogues here by caliber, action type, and rifle name/type. My choice won. [kimdutoit]

The M1A / M14 is a clear winner: semi-auto, manly caliber, high-cap mags, accurate as all hell, reliable. Perhaps the U.S. Army should heed studies like this, instead of fucking around with new rifles and calibers. (Never mind, forget I said that.)


A few people wrote that they owned only a .22 rifle, and no serious battle rifle or shotgun. I must confess to being at a loss, here. You can buy a secondhand Winchester pump shotgun and 100 rounds of ammo for less than $300, or an SKS and 100 rounds for less than $150. Why would anyone not own a long gun?

It is the duty of every U.S. citizen to be prepared to serve in the militia, to supply their own weaponry and sufficient ammunition for four days in the field.

[climbs off soapbox]


I suppose everyone's curious as to which rifle I'd pick for this duty. No question: the M1 Carbine, with four 15-round mags and a few extra 10-round stripper clips. Reasons: extremely light, accurate enough, rugged enough, and powerful enough (with softpoint bullets: fuck the Hague Convention). If it was good enough for the Screaming Eagles in Normandy, it's good enough for me.

I'm too old and too unfit to play Rambo. But with this little rifle on my shoulder, I think I could keep up, and not make too big a fool of myself.

# Outdoors Best - 2004 Online SHOT Show Daily - a look at last weekend's SHOT show in Las Vegas from the Guns & Ammo family of magazines. Not very deep, but a few interesting articles and photos.

# Scott Smith at Gun Week - Beretta's CX4 Storm and 92G-SD Make a Great Match Battery - Mr. Smith reviews Beretta's (fairly) new 9mm carbine and pistol. [gunweek]

Add comment Edit post Add post