Alaska Carry in Trouble in New Hampshire

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Fri, 23 Apr 2004 12:00:00 GMT
# New Hampshire Legislature - SB454, "relative to carrying a concealed weapon without a license" has already passed the Senate. The House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee filed its report on Monday (click on "Docket" from the linked page). The majority deems it "Inexpedient to Legislate" (ITL). The minority says it "Ought to Pass" (OTP). Its floor date is April 29.

# Warblogging - Taking the Dover Test - the Busheviks have tried, but failed, to prevent photographs of flag-draped coffins of dead U.S. soldiers from being displayed. You can't hide the cost of war. Personally, I find the pictures of Iraqi children with limbs missing to be more disgusting. Our boys signed up for this war. They knew the risks. The kids did not. [warblogging]

# Ron Paul at - The Lessons of 9/11 - the 9/11 attacks hold many lessons for those who can see them, but the 9/11 Commission won't learn a single one. [lew]

Continuing to deny that the attacks against us are related to our overall policy of foreign meddling through many years and many administrations, makes a victory over our enemies nearly impossible. Not understanding the true nature and motivation of those who have and will commit deadly attacks against us prevents a sensible policy from being pursued. Guerilla warriors, who are willing to risk and sacrifice everything as part of a war they see as defensive, are a far cry, philosophically, from a band of renegades who out of unprovoked hate seek to destroy us and kill themselves in the process. How we fight back depends on understanding these differences.

Of course, changing our foreign policy to one of no pre-emptive war, no nation building, no entangling alliances, no interference in the internal affairs of other nations, and trade and friendship with all who seek it, is no easy task.

The real obstacle, though, is to understand the motives behind our current policy of perpetual meddling in the affairs of others for more than a hundred years.

Understanding why both political parties agree on the principle of continuous foreign intervention is crucial. Those reasons are multiple and varied. They range from the persistent Wilsonian idealism of making the world safe for democracy to the belief that we must protect "our" oil.


A "guns and butter" policy was flawed in the 60s, and gave us interest rates of 21% in the 70s with high inflation rates. The current "guns and butter" policy is even more intense, and our economic infrastructure is more fragile than it was back then. These facts dictate our inability to continue this policy both internationally and domestically. It is true, an unshakable resolve to stay the course in Iraq, or any other hot spot, can be pursued for years. But when a country is adding to its future indebtedness by over 700 billion dollars per year it can only be done with great economic harm to all our citizens.

Add comment Edit post Add post