Incredible that 9/11 is almost ten years ago. So much has changed. Including our attitude about free speech. After 9/11, it suddenly felt necessary to lower your voice in restaurants when criticizing the government. Who knows — waxing negative about U.S. policies in the Mideast might cause folks in the next booth to alert Homeland Security that a terror symp was downing a burger at Joe’s Grease N’ Go.

Speaking of grease and go, as the prep for invading Iraq ramped up so did attacks on speech. Pro-war pundits (aka the laptop bombardiers) suggested — or outright declared — that the various progressives, libertarians, and paleocons who expressed doubt about attacking a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, were traitors. Numerous patriots called for the heads of antiwar celebs. Sure, some of the latter were knee jerk anti-American. But since when does getting your britches in a bunch over the opinions of singers and actors qualify as “standing tall”? Then there was our much vaunted free press…

Until polls showed public support was waning, most of the fourth estate banged the drum for the Iraq war and kissed the rump of the Bush administration. Those on the right like to say that the mainstream media is overwhelmingly liberal. Maybe so in sentimental moments. But ultimately they worship at the altar of triumphant big government.

As Iraq wore on, and over several election cycles, tolerance of free speech seemed to be reviving. But the revival never completely took hold. Speech was still more likely to be viewed as a weapon rather than protected expression. The tendency was encouraged — and simultaneously made manifest — by broad, imprecise, and propagandistic terms such as “War On Terror” and “Hate Speech.”

Terrorism and discrimination are specific actions that can be defined and addressed. Terror and hate haunt the human condition. Both also have a non-evil place. Is it wrong to hate cruelty to children? Some wars are just; should military forces on the side of the angels not strive to inspire terror in their enemies?

Note re just wars: the Catholic Church under Pope John Paul II did not deem Iraq a just war. The Catholic theory of just wars doesn’t cover speculative ventures. Fighting Nazi invaders is one thing, attacking countries you perceive might pose a threat in the future is another. Self-serving motives are too likely to influence the perception of “threat.” (Catholicism can be so cynical about human nature.) Advocates of the war were annoyed that His Holiness didn’t get American exceptionalism. Neocon Catholic philosopher Michael Novak made like Henry VIII and tried to get the Pontiff to bend. Sorry, no divorce. Catherine is still your true wife.

Circa 1980′s, neocons had lauded John Paul II for his support of Solidarity, the non-governmental labor movement in Poland that triggered the fall of communism throughout the Eastern bloc. But the not-a-just-war decision blotted the Catholic copybook big time. (Besides, who wants to remember good things about unions?) Some on the right were so bugged by the Pope’s intransigence that they borrowed a meme from the left and snarked about pedophile priests. Bipartisanship is indeed possible!

Suppression of speech is another issue on which left and right can come together. Albeit with different apps. The left, which once championed free speech to the max, is traveling fast down the road of suppression. Covering over nasty words the way Victorian ladies allegedly covered furniture legs.* Baying for “civility.” Seeing hidden, murderous intent in political rhetoric and thought crime in dissent. Depicting non-compliant citizens as slaves to the right-wing rhythm. Meanwhile, those on the right who believed being against Bush and the Iraq war was treason, are outraged by those on the left who deem Tea Party talk inflammatory.

Though some may find it difficult to define inflammatory speech (in terms of directly connecting one person’s rhetoric to another person’s destructive action) both left and right have no problem recognizing it. Particularly when folks with whom they disagree are speaking it. As for all of us outside neat little ideological circles, it’s important to remember that suppression of speech, once started, tends to spread.

First they came for Sarah Palin and I snickered ’cause I’m not a right wing nut. Then they came for Keith Olbermann and I laughed ’cause I’m not a left wing loon. Then they — Oh. Wait. Who’s that knocking on my door?

Carola Von Hoffmannstahl-Solomonoff
Mondo QT

Send comments or confidential tips to:

mailto:editor@mondoqt.com

* Victorian ladies are oft said to have covered furniture legs with shawls in order to prevent said legs from arousing impure thoughts in male guests. The story is most likely apocryphal. Myriad photos from the period show plenty of naked leg. On the furniture, not the ladies.

The year 2011 brings in a host of opportunities and challenges to America. Will we accelerate toward economic insolvency by continuing the policies that have created this crisis, or will a new Congress elected on the energy of the Tea Party movement find the courage to change course?

With the new Republican majority in the House I will have the opportunity as a subcommittee chairman to take a careful look at our domestic monetary policy. I am excited by the prospect of real oversight of the Federal Reserve, but I also hope to focus on the important ways in which our foreign policy and monetary policy are related. Just last week the Financial Times reported that the limited oversight of the Federal Reserve allowed by the passage of a watered-down version of my Audit the Fed bill revealed that approximately 55 percent of the loans made available under the largest Federal Reserve bailout program, the Term Auction Facility, went to foreign banks! This is but one example of the real cost to Americans of maintaining its empire overseas, and it cries out for more transparency and oversight.

This is why it is key for us to understand that our foreign policy and current economic crisis go hand in hand. Some have promised to lead us back to fiscal responsibility while asserting that any reduction in our foreign and military spending is off the table. They would like us to believe that we should not only continue spending as much on the military as the rest of the world combined, but they actually call for an even more aggressive US policy abroad. They believe we should continue to bomb Pakistan, Yemen, Afghanistan, and elsewhere; that we must impose even more crippling sanctions on countries like Iran while moving steadily on to yet another Middle East war that is not in our interest. They represent the failed policies of the past and they would like to lead us down a dead-end street. We must resist the temptation of their neo-con inspired scare-mongering.

There will be much work for us to do in the next year and in the next Congress. We need look no further than the grossly unconstitutional and immoral policies of the Transportation Security Administration — demanding that we either be irradiated or fondled to travel in our own country — to see that those who would deprive us of our civil liberties on the empty promise of full security will not be giving up easily. We must continue standing up to them and we must not compromise. We must not allow the out-of-control Department of Homeland Security to impose an East German-like police state in the US, where neighbors are encouraged by big brother or big sister to inform on their neighbors. We must not accept that government authorities should hector us via television screens as we go about our private lives like we are living in Orwell’s 1984.

I am optimistic that the incoming Members of Congress understand the importance of what they have been entrusted with by the American people. But I do hope that those who elected them will watch their actions — and their votes in Congress — carefully. An early indication will be the upcoming vote on re-authorization of the anti-American PATRIOT Act. Defeat once and for all of this police-state legislation will be a great way to start 2011 and the 112th Congress. We must move ahead with confidence. Our numbers are growing. Happy New Year!

The growing revolt against invasive TSA practices is encouraging to Americans who are fed up with federal government encroachment in their lives. In the case of air travelers, this encroachment is quite literally physical. But a deep-seated libertarian impulse still exists within the American people, and opposition to the new TSA full body scanner and groping searches is gathering momentum.

I introduced legislation last week that is based on a very simple principle: federal agents should be subject to the same laws as ordinary citizens. If you would face criminal prosecution or a lawsuit for groping someone, exposing them to unwelcome radiation, causing them emotional distress, or violating indecency laws, then TSA agents should similarly face sanctions for their actions.

This principle goes beyond TSA agents, however. As commentator Lew Rockwell recently noted, the bill “enshrines the key lesson of the freedom philosophy: the government is not above the moral law. If it is wrong for you and me, it is wrong for people in government suits… That is true of TSA crimes too.” The revolt against TSA also serves as a refreshing reminder that we should not give in to government alarmism or be afraid to question government policies.

Certainly, those who choose to refuse the humiliating and potentially harmful new full body scanner machines may suffer delays, inconveniences, or worse. But I still believe peaceful resistance is the most effective tool against federal encroachment on our constitutional rights, which leads me to be supportive of any kind of “opt-out” or similar popular movements.

After all, what price can we place on our dignity, personal privacy, and physical integrity? We have a right not to be treated like criminals and searched by federal agents without some reasonable evidence of criminal activity. Are we now to accept that merely wishing to travel and board an aircraft give rise to reasonable suspicion of criminality?

Also, let’s not forget that TSA was created in the aftermath of 9/11, when far too many Americans were clamoring for government protection from the specter of terrorism. Indeed it was congressional Republicans, the majority party in 2001, who must bear much of the blame for creating the Department of Homeland Security and TSA in the first place. Congressional Republicans also overwhelmingly supported the Patriot Act, which added to the atmosphere of hostility toward civil liberties in the name of state-provided “security.”

But as we’ve seen with TSA, federal “security” has more to do with humiliation and control than making us safe. It has more to do with instilling a mindset of subservience, which is why laughable policies such as removing one’s shoes continue to be enforced. What else could explain the shabby, degrading spectacle of a long line of normally upbeat Americans shuffling obediently through airport security in their stocking feet?

TSA may be merely symbolic of much bigger problems with the federal government, but it is an important symbol and we have a real chance to do something about it. We must seize this opportunity, before TSA offers some cosmetic compromise or the media spotlight fades. If you don’t live in my congressional district, please consider contacting your member of Congress and asking him or her to cosponsor HR 6416, the American Traveler Dignity Act of 2010. With enough help, we can push the bill to a vote early next year. Unless grassroots Americans take action, federal agencies like TSA will continue to bully us and ignore our basic constitutional freedoms.

Howdy!

Welcome back to the Conspiracy, where we plot and plan and scheme and conspire for a freer world. In this program, El G Grande nails down many of the breaking stories that are key to seeing beyond the curtain of gubment, that help us understand the difference between a free society and the government. In this show, Gard discusses the news that more Afghan civilians dies in July than in the month prior, the news that Americans are being photographed naked in airports and the pics are being kept by the gubment, and the fact that the number of federal mortgage “aid” recipients who are defaulting on their loans is six times higher than originally reported!

NICE!

Enjoy, and work for freedom!

Join us at www.libertyconspiracy.com!

Be Seeing You!

As the title says, El G Grande has a few observations to offer about the conflict between one dogma of government (the so-called “war on drugs” and another, the so-called “war on terror”). He also discovers some lessons about the dogma that underlies them both…

BE SEEING YOU!

“People don’t know what fusion centers are,” says Catherine Bleish, who was the opening speaker at the 2010 New Hampshire Liberty Forum on March 19.

Fusion centers were created after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks as a way for local and state law enforcement agencies to share terrorism related information with the federal government, and vice versa. The idea quickly ran into problems, first among them the fact that there simply isn’t enough terrorist activity to justify the concept. Instead of shutting down as pointless, fusion centers gradually began expanding into sharing information about all crimes. Fusion center activity over the years has also raised concerns about government surveillance of legally protected political activity.

Bleish, who was led into becoming an activist by the 2008 Ron Paul presidential campaign, said she was informed of a report published by the Missouri Information Analysis Center, leaked in March 2009, which stated among other things that people with Gadsden flag and Ron Paul bumper stickers could be militia members or potential terrorists. Bleish, who is the executive director of the Liberty Restoration Project, spearheaded further investigation and activism, eventually leading to MIAC retracting the report.

“MIAC is a Department of Homeland Security fusion center,” she said during her speech. “These institutions are doing a lot of damage to the relationship between the general public and the law enforcement community.”

Bleish also runs Operation Defuse, a project to inform the public about the nature and activities of fusion centers and how those activities contribute to the federalization and militarization of law enforcement.

The New Hampshire Liberty Forum is an annual conference held by the Free State Project, a movement to bring 20,000 activists to New Hampshire to work toward reducing the size, scope and power of government and increasing individual liberty and responsibility. The project has signed over 10,000 participants, and over 800 have already moved. The Liberty Forum, and the project’s summer camping event, PorcFest, allow people undecided about the project to see the state firsthand and observe and participate in local activism.

["Big Brother is Watching" photo by Darren Tse/DA Creative Photography; CC BY-SA 2.0]

It’s tax season again. And for many of us, the idea of doing taxes and giving the IRS the pound of flesh they demand is a harrowing thought. One Austin, Texas, man, claiming to have been fed up with being ripped off by the IRS for over 20 years, flew a small plane into a building containing the local IRS office Thursday morning.

Joseph Andrew Stack, 53, flew a Piper Cherokee PA-28 into the side of the Echelon 1 building at 9430 Research Drive at around 10 a.m. Central time. According to FAA officials, the plane took off from nearby Georgetown Municipal Airport at about 9:40.

Stack was killed in the resulting explosion. Two people in the building were injured, and one person is unaccounted for, according to reports. The IRS said it is still trying to account for its 190 employees who were in the building at the time. News reports disagree on whether firefighters have been able to bring the building fire under control.

A lengthy diatribe posted to Stack’s web site this morning, since taken down at the request of the FBI, revealed that Stack suffered what he considered years of abuse by the IRS and laws meant to harm businesses like his, noting that “this rant could fill volumes with example after example if I let it.”

Stack’s apparent suicide note speaks of the irony of stockbrokers killing themselves after the 1929 crash, while after the 2007 crash the wealthy get bailed out at the expense of the poor, who pay for it all. (This much is true.)

“I know I’m hardly the first one to decide I’ve had all I can stand. . . . I can only hope that the numbers get too big to be white washed and ignored that the American zombies wake up and revolt; it will take nothing less.”

Federal officials are saying they do not consider this a terrorist attack. “At this time, we have no reason to believe there is a nexus to terrorist activity,” says a Department of Homeland Security news release.

Before leaving for the airport this morning, Stack set his home on fire, according to local officials. Worse, he apparently set the fire while his wife and daughter were away, leaving them shocked and distraught when they returned home to find it on fire.

It’s easy to understand what drove Stack over the edge: “In a government full of hypocrites from top to bottom, life is as cheap as their lies and their self-serving laws.” He makes a number of legitimate complaints about the U.S. government, grievances which we all suffer and are all unlikely to see redressed any time soon.

But Stack seems to think that if enough people kill themselves in government offices, perhaps taking some bureaucrats with them, the rest of the country will “wake up and begin to see the pompous political thugs and mindless minions for what they are.” Violence, he concludes, “not only is the answer, it is the only answer.”

I must disagree: Few people woke up after September 11; in fact, that event put nearly everyone to sleep. But the continuing decline of the U.S. economy which began in earnest in 2007 and shows no signs of stopping certainly began to wake people up.

Those of you who are desperate, understand first that you aren’t alone, and there are ways out of this mess which don’t involve killing yourself or IRS agents. A good place to begin would be to learn the economics behind how we were all taken for a ride. Then you can recognize and denounce the people who want to do more of the same to you. There is a way out, and it’s called liberty. Learn the philosophy of liberty, why it is the only way to have real prosperity, and then join the rest of us who are working hard for a free society.

Thanks for joining the Liberty Conspiracy, the shadowy group of plotters who are working towards freer societies, in any nation, and working for the elimination of nationalism, towards a paradigm that supports true freedom.

In this production, Gardner Goldsmith takes you with him as he travels to the Manchester, NH, Airport, and sees just how bureaucratic and inefficient the government-run system is.

Oh, and he offers some thoughts on airport bathrooms while he’s at it… not for the faint of heart!

Be Seeing You!

How does one look at a potential TSA Head who fears Americans more than the terrorists Americans often fear? One views him as more interested in protecting the US government than the US citizenry.

Gardner Goldsmith explains.

Then, listen for the latest news in what could be the most important Senate race in a decade, the MA race for the seat vacated by Ted Kennedy! Even though we abhor all government, this situation could mean either the passage or defeat of the medical fascism bill. Check it out!

Be Seeing You!

Two days after serving two journalists with subpoenas demanding that they reveal a confidential source, a move that prompted widespread backlash among frequent fliers, the Transportation Security Administration has withdrawn the subpoenas and returned a damaged laptop to one of the writers.

A TSA spokesman claimed Thursday that its investigation into who leaked a December 25 security directive was nearing completion and the subpoenas were no longer necessary.

The directive, issued immediately after a failed Christmas Day terrorist attack on a Detroit-bound airliner, specified temporary heightened security measures which international airports were to use on U.S.-bound flights. The directive was to expire Wednesday but has been revised and extended through the weekend, according to Homeland Security officials.

Steven Frischling, a freelance photojournalist and travel writer who also blogs for KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, received a copy of the directive anonymously and published it on his personal blog, Flying with Fish, on Sunday. On Tuesday armed TSA agents arrived at his house with an administrative subpoena and threatened him into surrendering his laptop. The agents wanted to know who sent him the document.

Christopher Elliott, a syndicated travel columnist, also received the directive and published it at his personal blog. He too received visits Tuesday from armed TSA agents, but he declined to cooperate and informed them that he would challenge the subpoena. As a result, his laptop never left his possession and his livelihood was largely unharmed.

Frischling wasn’t so lucky. Though TSA returned his MacBook laptop Thursday, he reports that it was damaged and nearly unusable, according to Wired.

While many states shield journalists’ confidential sources, a federal shield bill which passed the House in March has been stalled in the Senate. Even so, the bill would exempt from protection information which the government claims would help prevent an act of terrorism or harm to national security.

It’s unlikely any information in this security directive would have any negative impact on national security if released, since affected airports and airlines also had to publish much the same information to assist travelers through the security procedures. It’s also clear that Homeland Security cares more about plugging leaks in its bureaucracy than plugging leaks in homeland security.

From my own experience with having federal agents at my door, let me say this: Remember that if law enforcement shows up at your door, you are in no way obligated to speak to them, and in no way obligated to hand over anything immediately if they hand you a subpoena. You can and should challenge (move to quash) such a subpoena in court, if you receive one. You only have to surrender anything immediately if they have a search warrant, and only if the thing is named on the search warrant. Other than that, say absolutely nothing until you can consult a lawyer. Be polite, of course, when you ask them for their business card and send them on their way.

Finally, from Frischling’s description, it would seem the computer’s hardware may have been modified. Reportedly the TSA has offered to pay for a new computer; if true, I suggest he take a check and buy it himself — from the Apple Store, not online.