International Commentary (50)

FREEDOM! The Daughter of Davos Resigns

The legacy of New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern.

BY KENELM TONKIN, JANUARY 20, 2023


(Courtesy of cauldronpool.com)

Two extraordinary things happened yesterday.

First, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced her resignation effective, at the latest, early in February 2023. (Yes, New Zealanders need to endure her for a few weeks more!)

Second, I put out this short tweet yesterday together with a video of the Prime Minister, and it went viral. In a mere 180 minutes, it was seen by 67,400 people and was still swishing around the globe as I wrote this. After 8 hours, 165,000+!

You have to ask ‘WHY?’

Jacinda Ardern set a couple of records. She was the youngest female prime minister ever in 2017. Further, she gave birth whilst in office.

Of course, neither of these has anything to do with political achievement.

To be fair, we can probably agree that Jacinda Ardern is expressive.

Some went so far as to say she showed great empathy.

I think it more accurate to say any apparent empathy was self-consciously dispensed and exclusively to beneficiaries of her bias.

Any praise for expressiveness and empathy needs much closer scrutiny. It’s what she expresses that so confounds civil libertarians like you and me. And, if you don’t mind me expressing myself here dear reader, she showed a distinct lack of empathy for many during covid lockdowns, victims of which are generations not yet born as you’ll see. So read on.

Instead, what we observed was a smiling socialist, a Daughter of Davos, instinct over intellect, all feeling and no financial finesse. In short, she was a classical liberal’s nightmare.

Just look at the legacy she leaves after six reckless years in office:

  • Churches closed and a clergy laid bare in compliance;
  • Frequent meddling with the free market. The results: distortions in housing prices and a generation of first home buyers shut-out of their ownership aspirations;
  • A backlash against over-zealous covid restrictions and loss of personal freedoms, including creating a medical-apartheid defined by vaccination-status.
  • Conscientious objectors and the vaccine-hesitant were shunned socially, denied mobility, prevented from earning a living and targeted by government in ways the Stasi would have relished in Soviet-era East Germany;
  • Consequential increasing crime rates in the island nation;
  • Inflation sitting at 7.2%;
  • Food prices spiking 8.3% compared with the same time a year earlier;
  • Successive interest rate increases from New Zealand’s central bank;
  • A monstrous public debt! When she took office, the public debt was approximately $60 billion USD. Projections are that, based on all data currently available reflecting the decisions of her government, that the national debt will balloon to $151 billion USD by 2027. If the figure proves higher or lower than that, it will be the result of her successor’s policies, but you can see the economic vandalism on her watch. Put it this way, she led a government which racked-up triple the debt of all previous New Zealand governments combined. She went way over the credit card limit and left someone else to pick up the bill. Funny, right?
  • For a country with a population the size of Boston, it will take three generations at least to bring that debt to heel. We are talking inter-generational theft which will crush Zoomer Kiwis’ standard of living, their children and their grandchildren. That is to say, on the day after you, I and Jacinda Ardern meet our Lord and Maker, New Zealanders will be dealing with the Ardern Economic Catastrophe for another two generations thereafter;
  • Many of them will flee New Zealand and hollow this beautiful jewel of the South Pacific. They have been emigrating anyway, mainly to Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States;
  • A strategic flirtation with the Chinese Communist Party, a regime which openly persecutes people of faith, the Church included. Her Labour Party has long shunned our liberal democratic ally, America. It was a natural progression from that to openly calling for greater integration with the communists, a weak-kneed strategy in favour of firebrand authoritarianism with a chequebook over the cleansing-balm of liberty;
  • Consistent with that predisposition towards authoritarianism, civil liberties in New Zealand were shattered under her Governments. Emergency powers poised to be invoked again at any time are left in place;
  • Chinese Communist Party infiltration of New Zealand consulates and banks;
  • She openly lied about the efficacy of covid vaccines. “If you take the vaccine, you’ll still get covid but you won’t get sick and you won’t die” was a claim she made during the height of an hysteria of her own making, and contradicted by the science and the manufacturer.
  • More government restrictions on the access and use of water;
  • Crushing regulations on agricultural emissions;
  • Further shifting of the goal posts with hate speech laws without any safeguards as to who adjudicates what ‘hate speech’ actually is. You and I know these templated laws are now being used against Christians in other countries. She was heading down a dark path.

The adulation and applause had faded about a year ago. The shadowy World Economic Forum’s simping seemed impossibly distant now. Jacinda Ardern had to face the people of New Zealand imminently and the prospects weren’t promising.

With polling numbers in decline and the sparkle now tarnished, the Prime Minister did what all faithful authoritarians and central-planners do when their number is up. She spoke sweetly, smiled nervously, then scurried to the nearest exit hoping that the rule of law she undermined holds firm for her.

I was shocked my tweet went viral. I shouldn’t have been. Countless everyday people across the West, people like you and I, have had a gutful.

Excuse my plain writing. The Daughter of Davos was a symbol of all that has gone wrong over the last 3 years. So of course you cheered her departure.

I don’t think we’ll have to wait long before she re-emerges with an ostentatious job title and global brief somewhere in the world. “Poverty Ambassador-At-Large, World Economic Forum”, on $820,000 per annum, Davos chalet and chauffeur the obligatory perks on top sounds about right.

And when that happens, you and I can both smile knowingly that at least here she won’t have harmed anyone further. On her departure from the Land of the Long White Cloud, she will increase the average IQ of New Zealand, and not decrease that of the World Economic Forum.

Pardon me if I shed not a solitary tear.

International Commentary (48)

      Americans Suffer from Natural and Government-Created Disasters

By Ron Paul (lewrockwell.com), 4/11/2022

Last week Congress passed a continuing resolution and then adjourned until after the election. When Congress reconvenes, it will almost certainly pass a multi-billion dollars aid package for those impacted by Hurricane Ian. This spending will likely be labelled “emergency,” so Congress members will not even have to pretend they are offsetting the new spending with cuts in other, lower priority programs.

The failure of Congress to offset spending on disaster relief with cuts in other programs is one reason why I always voted against disaster aid when I was in Congress, even when the spending was for disasters that occurred in my district. Of course, I also opposed these bills because disaster relief is unconstitutional and immoral as are all other income redistribution programs.

When I voted against disaster relief, my office would receive angry calls from constituents. However, within several months many of those constituents would call back to say that after dealing with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) they realized that disaster victims would be better off without federal “help.”

Federally managed disaster relief is neither efficient nor compassionate. My office often heard from frustrated individuals whose plans to rebuild were put on hold because of delays in getting federal assistance.

My staff and I heard many horror stories of FEMA mistreating disaster victims. For example, FEMA was supposed to put a tarp on a house whose roof was destroyed in Hurricane Ike, but it put the tarp on the house next door, even though that house’s roof was fine. When the owner of the house that needed a tarp called FEMA, he was told it would be several weeks before FEMA could send someone out to correct FEMA’s mistake. The homeowner told FEMA that he would move the tarp himself with assistance of his neighbors. FEMA told him that anyone who touched the tarp without FEMA’s approval would be fined and maybe thrown in jail.

In the days following a hurricane, my staff and I also heard complaints from people about how government officials were preventing them from entering their own property. Of course, these restrictions were all claimed to be “for the people’s own good.”

FEMA’s failures are the inevitable result of placing authority over disaster relief in a large, centralized bureaucracy. Therefore, the problem cannot be fixed by changing personnel or updating or streamlining FEMA’s procedures. Instead, FEMA should be abolished, and responsibility for disaster relief should be returned to individuals, local communities, and civic and charitable organizations.

Individuals should be able to deduct from their income taxes 100 percent of the costs of recovering from a natural disaster. Businesses affected by a natural disaster should also be provided generous tax relief. Tax-free savings accounts could help Americans accumulate funds for use in the event of a natural disaster.

In 1900, a major hurricane devastated Galveston, Texas. Despite the fact that FEMA or other federal disaster relief programs did not then exist, the people of Galveston managed to rebuild their city. This proves that there is no justification for federal involvement in disaster recovery. The federal government should return responsibility for disaster relief to the people by shutting down FEMA. Congress should also ensure people have the resources to take care of themselves by ending the welfare-warfare state, repealing the 16th Amendment and the associated income tax, and auditing then ending the Federal Reserve.

International Commentary (47)

FBI SWAT Raids Home of Pro-Life Father of Seven

“The continued weaponization of the FBI and persecution of Biden’s DOJ against ordinary Americans is an outrage…”

BY ROD LAMPARD SEPTEMBER 27, 2022

Cauldronpool.com

The FBI, SWAT, and Department of Justice have unleashed hell on a Christian family from Bucks County, Pennsylvania.

Mark Houck, a pro-life counsellor, and his family of eight were violently awakened Friday morning by AR-15-wielding federal law enforcement officers pounding on doors, preparing to breach their home.

Houck’s wife, Ryan-Marie told LifeSite News, that their kids were screaming.

Despite her husband’s attempts to calm them, and communicate peacefully with the FBI, they kept pounding anyway.

After Houck let the agents in, they aimed their guns directly at both Houck and his wife. 

Fifteen vehicles arrived around 7:05am with sirens blaring, alleging that Houck had violated a Clinton-era law called the Freedom of Access to [Abortion] Clinic Entrances Act – more commonly referred to as the “FACE act.”

Ryan-Marie, also a homeschooling mum, said she asked the officers for a warrant, who responded, “they were going to take Houck whether they had one or not.”

A warrant was eventually produced, only after Ryan-Marie accused the FBI of kidnapping.

The DOJ of Eastern Pennsylvania has asserted that Houck’s arrest was due to an alleged altercation with a pro-Abortion protestor on October 13, 2021.

The incident is said to have occurred outside the Planned Parenthood Elizabeth Blackwell Health Centre on Locust Street in Philadelphia.

The DOJ alleges that Houck “assaulted a 72-year-old man, identified in the Indictment as ‘B.L.,’ because B.L. was a volunteer escort at the ‘reproductive health care [abortion] clinic.’”

In the first incident, the DOJ alleges that, “B.L. was attempting to escort two patients exiting the clinic when the defendant forcefully shoved B.L. to the ground.”

In the second incident, the DOJ explained, “the defendant [Houck] verbally confronted B.L. and forcefully shoved B.L. to the ground in front of the Planned Parenthood centre, causing injuries to B.L. that required medical attention.”

Refuting the charge, Ryan-Marie said, Houck was in attendance that day with his son, offering help, and they had done so for weeks.

On “several” of those times, both father and son were [allegedly] abused by the “pro-abortion protester.” He would speak to the boy saying “crude, inappropriate and disgusting things,” such as “your dad’s a fag,” and other statements that were too vulgar for her to convey.”

Ryan-Marie added, the pro-abortion protestor, “kept doing it and kind of came into [their son’s] personal space” obscenely ridiculing his father. At this point, “Mark shoved him away from his child, and the guy fell back.”

Houck’s wife noted that although the man had no injuries, he “tried to sue,” Houck. The case was thrown out of court. (Catholic News Agency said, the family is currently chasing video footage of the incident for Mark Houck’s defence.)

If convicted – in what amounts to an odd retrial, given the previous lawsuit’s outcome – the Pennsylvania Department of Justice declared, Houck will “face a maximum possible sentence of 11 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and fines of up to $350,000.”

Patrick Delaney of LifeSite News rightly questioned the timing of the raid on the Houck home and Houck’s subsequent arrest.

He concluded that the raid was part of a broader Biden campaign designed to intimidate political opponents through the weaponization of federal agencies, particularly ‘against pro-lifers, Trump supporters, conservative Christians, and medical freedom advocates.’

Delaney recalled events ‘in March, where the FBI rounded up 10 pro-life activists, including Joan Andrews Bell, with SWAT team raids that serve to intimidate and humiliate the accused through an exercise of excessive force.’

Then there’s the dubious Mar-A-Lago raid, Joe Biden’s “anyone not a Democrat, is a domestic terrorist,” speech in early September, and the current administration’s double standard on domestic terrorism.

There certainly appears, as Delaney argued, to be a declaration of ‘war on conservative Christians, with dozens of Trump allies having their homes raided via the “Gestapo tactics” being deployed by the FBI.’

Either way, the optics look bad for the Biden administration, and his Woke White House.

The Houck family’s current ordeal exemplifies Biden’s manipulation of the war on terror into a war on tax-payers.

This raid (and the others Delaney mentioned) makes the Democrats look like they’re out to win brownie points from their far-left militant constituency – e.g.: ANTIFA, Marxist professors, Black Lives Matter Inc. and the LGBTQ+ political religion.

Post Dodds, Biden naturally wants it to look like he’s doing the job the leftist hegemony put him on the throne to do: protect their Globalist interests.

Covertly punishing American citizens for the Supreme Court’s Dodds V. Jackson repeal of Roe V. Wade, is Biden simply trying to look busy before his bosses.

If “fighting for abortion rights” means fighting a war against pro-life American citizens, he appears to be happy enough to wear the collateral damage.

As their abortion fanaticism shows, votes mean more to Leftists than lives.

This is why far-left activists see no problem with using big government to orchestrate reprisals against anyone not aligned with their political agenda.

Thus, they treat tax-payers like ‘terrorists,’ and use their kids as political pawns. All without regard for the psychological damage it does to them, or the underlying harm it is doing to America’s democracy.

Since the Woke White House can’t fight the separation of powers without going to war against the Republic, they’re coming at things from a different angle, and dragging ordinary Americans into the cross-hairs of a refashioned “war on terror.”

Condemning the raid/s, candidate for Governor of Pennsylvania Governor, Doug Mastriano, nailed it, when he accused the Biden administration of abusing their power.

In a powerful statement shared by Jenna Ellis on Twitter, the retired Army colonel stated:

“The continued weaponization of the FBI and persecution of Biden’s DOJ against ordinary Americans is an outrage […] the show of force carried out by the Biden regime against ordinary Americans is an abuse of power that stands against the fundamental principles on which [the United States] was founded.”

Give-Send-Go campaign set up to support Mark, and the rest of the Houck family has currently raised upwards of USD $125,000.

The campaign is staring down the FBI, and the entire weaponised federal judicial system, with Houck’s supporters declaring they will ‘not back down,’ will not ‘stop fighting to protect the lives of Pennsylvania’s unborn children, and WILL NOT TOLERATE the harassment of our leaders by a corrupt and politicized justice system.’

Amen to that!

International Commentary (46)

Presidents Kill Because They Can

By Andrew Napolitano (www.lewrockwell.com), 4th August, 2022

What if the purpose of sending nearly $60 billion in cash and military aid to Ukraine is to extend the war Ukraine can only win if American troops become involved? What if the government is giving Ukraine more borrowed federal dollars in six months than Ukraine’s entire annual budget? What if the government wants American troops in this war to take the minds of American voters off the dismal economic, cultural and social mess that America has become?

What if American troops are present on the ground in Ukraine today? What if they are out of uniform so that the government has plausible deniability when asked if troops are fighting there? What if troops not in uniform who are captured may be summarily executed as spies? What if the government doesn’t care?

What if governments love war? What if war is the health of the state? What if war is an excuse to raise taxes, demand patriotism, curtail civil liberties and claim the loyalty of folks who want to be left alone? What if war transforms the culture of America from liberty to force? What if the true nature of government is a monopoly of force in a given geographic area? What if war allows the government to exercise more force at home as well as abroad?

What if war was the excuse for Abraham Lincoln arresting without trial over 3,000 journalists who were critical of him? What if war was the pretext for Woodrow Wilson arresting without trial Princeton students who read the Declaration of Independence aloud outside draft offices? What if war was the justification for Franklin Roosevelt locking up without trial 120,000 Japanese Americans in a barbed wire-surrounded camp in the Utah desert from which they could not leave, while their homes and businesses were destroyed?

What if the government reinstitutes the draft? What if the draft is prohibited by the Thirteenth Amendment, which outlaws slavery? What if slavery is government-enforced control of the individual’s will? What if the draft is slavery? What if the government would prefer to enslave young people, put them to work for forced low wages and then dispatch them to kill their Russian or Iranian counterparts?

What if presidents love to kill? What if the greatest act of mass murder — if measured by the number of deaths per second — in the history of the world was caused by Harry Truman when he ordered an atomic bomb to be dropped on a Catholic cathedral in Japan just days before Japan was to surrender in World War II?

What if Lyndon Johnson made up the non-incident in the Gulf of Tonkin so Congress would support his futile, unlawful, immoral war in Vietnam? What if Richard Nixon knew the Gulf of Tonkin incident never happened but he ordered the killings of thousands of Cambodians and Vietnamese anyway?

What if George H.W. Bush killed thousands of innocents so as to “liberate” Kuwait from Iraq? What if there was no conceivable articulable American interest to be served by such killings?

What if George W. Bush caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Afghans because of the negligent blindness of his own government on 9/11? What if he caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis because “Saddam tried to kill my daddy”? What if Barack Obama used drones to kill Americans in Yemen who were not charged with any crime, who had never engaged in any violence and who were peacefully sitting in an outdoor cafe when they were murdered?

What if Donald Trump directed the CIA to murder an Iranian general who was on his way to lunch with an Iraqi general in Iraq? What if there were no criminal charges against the Iranian general? What if the U.S. was not at war with Iran?

What if Joe Biden used drones to kill a 71-year-old cleric who was neither charged nor convicted of the 9/11 attacks? What if the government was afraid to arrest and try the cleric? What if the government has never tried any person for any crime for the 9/11 attacks? What if the last thing the government wants is a jury trial over who caused 9/11?

What if Biden’s drone killing was designed to foster patriotism, neutralize Republican critics by giving them what they want and change the subject from runaway inflation to secret government killings?

What if the government can only lawfully kill pursuant to a declaration of war duly enacted by Congress, or if a strike on the U.S. is imminent, as it was on the mornings of 9/11 and Dec. 7, 1941? What if the government was asleep at the switch on 9/11 and was more than willing to kill a million innocents in Afghanistan and Iraq to divert public scrutiny from its failures on 9/11?

What if on Dec. 7, 1941, the government silently rejoiced as it had successfully manipulated the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor, and was more than willing to sacrifice the lives of 2,400 sailors so as to change the attitude of Americans so they would support the U.S. entry into World War II? What if it worked?

What if the last declaration of war by Congress was against Japan, Germany and Italy in December 1941? What if all presidential killings since World War II have been unconstitutional, illegal, immoral, but generally lauded?

What if all modern presidents think they can kill any enemy, torture any foe, dispatch any troops, unleash any planes or drones, whether there is a congressional declaration of war or an imminent attack on the U.S. or not? What if presidential killing is contagious? What if Biden kills to deflect voters’ attention from inflation?

What if a well-timed presidential killing has become politics by other means? What if the more the government kills, the more the crazies among us do so? What do we do about it?

International Commentary (45)

                Julian Assange and Personal Freedom

By Andrew Napolitano (www.lewrockwell.com), 23/6/2022

I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude. Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)

It wasn’t until 1969 that the Supreme Court’s modern First Amendment jurisprudence made it clear that whenever there is a clash between the government and a person over the constitutionality of the person’s speech, the courts will give every benefit and draw every inference to the speaker, and none to the government. This is so because the freedom of speech is a natural right, and thus it is always to be presumed constitutional and lawful.

I have argued elsewhere that because the essence of government is the negation of liberty, this presumption against the government should always be the case. Even when it purports to be protecting liberty, the government — because its existence without unanimous consent is based on stealing liberty and property — should always be presumed wrong, immoral, unconstitutional and unlawful. But the courts have only made that so in the case of the freedom of speech.

I offer this brief philosophical and historical background in order to examine just how twisted the government’s views on speech have become in the Trump and Biden years, as the Department of Justice in both administrations has persecuted mercilessly and sought to prosecute aggressively the Australian journalist Julian Assange for his exercise of the freedom of speech.

Assange was the head of WikiLeaks, an international digital journalistic enterprise that specializes in publishing formerly secret matters about governments. In 2010, WikiLeaks acquired secret U.S. videos showing an attack on civilians and journalists in Baghdad perpetrated by Apache helicopters. The 2007 attack killed a dozen civilians and two Reuters employees. The George W. Bush administration had egg on its face, as it had previously denied that this attack had taken place.

The video also contained audio that revealed the cavalier, childish and remorseless attitude of the military personnel who perpetrated the deaths of these innocents.

In the ensuing weeks and months, WikiLeaks released hundreds of thousands of pages of secret classified materials and diplomatic cables, which further embarrassed the Bush and Obama administrations. The government claimed that this was the largest security breach of secret materials in American history. The documents revealed crimes and death on a grand scale.

WikiLeaks’ source for these secret materials was an Army intelligence specialist, Bradley Edward Manning. Manning was arrested and charged with numerous offenses, not the least of which was providing aid and comfort to an enemy, for which he was exposed to the death penalty. Manning pleaded guilty to some of the charges and was tried and convicted on the remainder of them.

He was sentenced to 35 years in a military prison. In 2017, President Barack Obama commuted Manning’s sentence to time served, and he was ordered released just hours before the inauguration of Donald Trump to the presidency.

Trump, who had been harshly critical of both Manning and Assange, ratcheted up his attacks on Assange and Obama after Manning’s prison release. His anger was interpreted by his Department of Justice so as to cause a grand jury in Virginia to indict Assange on 18 counts, including espionage. The DOJ then sought Assange’s extradition from London, whereupon he fled to the Ecuadorian Embassy there, where he resided in the basement for seven years until he was forcibly extracted by British police.

Last week, after four years of litigation, the British Home Secretary ordered his extradition to the U.S. Assange has two appeals remaining. Both will be based on newly discovered evidence of plans by the CIA to murder him.

The case against Assange is a sham and is motivated by the U.S. intelligence community and its colleagues in the DOJ. It is a sham because the First Amendment protects the freedom of speech of all persons, not just Americans. Even though the materials Assange and WikiLeaks received had been stolen by Manning, because they were and are of material interest to the public — drones targeting civilians, military actions in countries with which the U.S. was not at war and government lying to the public on a grand scale — the media is free to reveal them.

The Supreme Court announced this legal principle in the Pentagon Papers case in 1971. There, Daniel Ellsberg, a civilian employee of the Pentagon, stole classified materials that demonstrated that U.S. Army generals had been lying to President Lyndon B. Johnson and he had been lying to the public about military progress during the war in Vietnam.

When Ellsberg turned the materials over to The New York Times and to The Washington Post, the Nixon DOJ obtained a court order barring their publication. Within days, the Supreme Court lifted that order and issued an opinion further expanding First Amendment rights — the right to know what the government has done.

The court ruled that publishers are immune from civil and criminal liability when they publish matters of material interest to the public, even if the materials are stolen.

Ellsberg, like Manning, was indicted for espionage. Yet, when the trial judge in his case learned that the FBI had vandalized the office of his psychiatrist looking for his medical records, the judge dismissed the case.

The feds have perfected three things — lying, stealing and killing. In the Assange revelations, we learned that they have excelled at what they have perfected. They don’t care about the Constitution or the rule of law, both of which they have sworn to uphold. The deep state is motivated by a warped belief that its members are superior to the Constitution and can use the powers of government however they want, so long as they can get away with it.

They prefer the government’s unbridled liberty and the servitude of the rest of us. Assange is a hero. He exposed government without limits — the archenemy of personal freedom.

(43) Bloody Gina and her Team of Torturers

By Andrew Napolitano (www.lewrockwell.com) 9/6/2022

Last week, at a pretrial hearing at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba for Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, a Saudi who is charged with being the mastermind of an attack on the USS Cole in 2000 at which 17 American sailors were killed, the psychologist in charge of interrogating Nashiri described in vivid detail both the modern and the medieval techniques of torture used upon him.

The psychologist was called as a defense witness in order to demonstrate to the court that a good deal of the evidence that prosecutors plan to introduce against Nashiri was obtained directly or indirectly through, or was tainted by, his torture and thus cannot lawfully be used at his trial.

Torture committed by government officials and their collaborators upon a person restrained by the government is a felony punishable by up to 20 years in a federal prison, and its fruits are inadmissible in all courts. For many years, the CIA documented torture through video tapes of its disguised agents and contractors torturing its captives so it would have a record of the events without the need for revealing a participant’s identity.

But the tapes of Nashiri’s torture were destroyed by either the chief CIA official in the United States in charge of all torture or his then-chief of staff. Hence the live testimony last week. That chief of staff would go on to become the director of the CIA, Gina Haspel, nicknamed by her colleagues “Bloody Gina.”

This column will spare the reader the gruesome and stomach-churning details of Nashiri’s torture, but for the one medieval procedure. What caught the eyes of those of us who monitor these events was the mention of the name of the CIA official under whose watch the torture occurred and who wrote detailed, graphic descriptions of it to her bosses in Langley, Virginia. That official is the same Gina Haspel. She was the head of the CIA station at Thailand in 2002, at which Nashiri was tortured, and she was the senior member of the torture team.

Nashiri’s torture went on for four months, at the end of which the interrogation team concluded that Nashiri was being truthful and essentially said the same things under torture as he told interrogators prior to torture. But Bloody Gina does not trust testimony unless it comes with great fear and pain.

In 2006, Nashiri was shipped from Thailand to Gitmo, where he was charged with capital murder. His trial has not yet commenced. The testimony last week was one of many pretrial hearings ordered by military trial judges.

Nashiri, who has the same speedy trial rights as anyone being prosecuted by the U.S. government, has been waiting for his trial for 14 years. He is on his second team of military and civilian defense lawyers. His first team quit when they discovered that their communications with their client had been secretly listened to and recorded by federal agents.

Most judges would have dismissed the charges against the defendant for such criminal behavior by the government. But at Gitmo, where the judge and the prosecutors have the same boss — the Secretary of Defense — the niceties of due process are sometimes watered down.

The significance of Bloody Gina’s personal supervision of this torture cannot be gainsaid. It is the first time we have learned from a witness under oath that CIA torture was approved and supervised at the highest CIA levels. It is also the first time we have learned that a CIA director, earlier in her career, committed federal crimes, as each torture session is a separate felony.

We also learned that Bloody Gina may be an amateur historian. In the late 1400s, when the Medici in Florence had been deposed by a mad monk named Girolamo Savonarola, he instituted aggressive torture for those accused secretly of sins of the flesh, looking for their public confessions and the identities of their sexual partners.

He, like Bloody Gina, refused to accept testimony from a detained person unless it was obtained under torture. And he, like Bloody Gina, instituted a novel torture technique of hanging a victim by his arms secured behind his back so as to induce excruciating shoulder dislocation.

Those of us who believe that the Constitution means what it says have argued that attackers of U.S. military personnel who are not in combat pursuant to a congressional declaration of war should be tried in federal court and accorded constitutional protection from the government’s torturers. Had that been done, Nashiri’s case and all others at Gitmo would have been completed years ago, and the government would not be spending $500 million a year there while it continues to trash the Constitution.

I was surprised to learn that one of the torturers admitted to these crimes and implicated Bloody Gina. Torture by government officials — no matter their goal — is the most tyrannical government overreach imaginable. It presumes that there are no natural rights or moral standards; it utterly negates the personhood of the victim; it reveals that there are no limits to what the government can do and get away with. It is expressly prohibited by the Constitution and federal law.

Bloody Gina and her team of torturers may feel safe from American prosecutors, as the Nashiri tortures took place well outside of the statute of limitations — but not from all prosecutors. The International Criminal Court in The Hague claims jurisdiction over the entire globe, and Thailand — the place of Nashiri’s torture — is a signatory to the treaty that established the court. The ICC characterizes torture as a war crime that has no statute of limitations and recognizes no executive pardons.

When the Medici returned to power after a popular uprising deposed Savonarola, he was tortured by his own torturers before he was hanged for heresy. Torture is government without limits. Only limited government respects persons.

The Bill of Temporary Privileges

By Andrew Napolitano (www.lewrockwell.com), 5/5/2022

Last week, the [US] Director of National Intelligence, the data-gathering and data-concealing arm of the American intelligence community masquerading as the head of it, revealed that in 2021, the FBI engaged in 3.4 million warrantless electronic searches of Americans. This is a direct and profound violation of the right to privacy in “persons, houses, papers, and effects” guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.

For the past 60 years, the Supreme Court has characterized electronic surveillance as a search that can only be conducted pursuant to a warrant issued by a judge based on probable cause of crime, which itself must be presented under oath to the judge. The warrant must specifically describe the place to be searched and the person or thing to be seized.

By failing to comply with these constitutional requirements, the FBI violated the natural and constitutionally protected right to be left alone of millions of Americans.

Yet, all of this was perfectly lawful. How can government behavior be both lawful and unconstitutional at the same time and in the same respect?

Here is the backstory.

The Fourth Amendment was written in 1791 while memories of British soldiers searching colonial homes were still prevalent. The British used general warrants to justify their violation of colonists’ privacy. A general warrant was not based on probable cause of crime. It was generated whenever the British government persuaded a secret court in London that it needed something from foreign persons, the colonists. The British government did not even need to identify what it needed.

General warrants authorized the bearer to search wherever he pleased and to seize whatever he found. The Fourth Amendment was written expressly to outlaw general warrants and warrantless searches.

After President Richard Nixon used the FBI and the CIA to spy on his political opponents, Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, which prohibited warrantless domestic surveillance. Since the Fourth Amendment did so already, the prohibition was superfluous.

It was also toothless, as the new law set up a secret court — the FISA court — which issued surveillance warrants based not on probable cause of crime as the Fourth Amendment requires, but on probable cause of communicating with a foreign person. And the court, over time, kept modifying its own rules to make it easier for the National Security Agency –America’s 60,000 domestic spies — to spy on Americans.

Today, if you call your cousin in London, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court can authorize the NSA to spy on you. And if you then call your sister-in-law in Kansas, FISC can allow the NSA to spy on her and on the folks she calls and the folks they call.

This massive invasion of privacy produced huge amounts of data, which FISA required the NSA to keep to itself and use only to anticipate breaches of national security. The data acquired from spying on all fiber optic transmitted communications could not be shared with law enforcement since it had been obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment. That prohibition was known as the “wall” between the intelligence and law enforcement communities.

In 2008, after the Bush administration was caught in massive warrantless spying on Americans, Congress enacted amendments to FISA that removed the wall. Stated differently, the new law, Section 702 of FISA, which expires in 20 months, required all telecom and computer service providers to give the NSA unfettered access to their computers whenever the feds came calling — with or without FISA warrants — and also allowed the FBI access to the body of raw intelligence data that the NSA acquired.

The wall between the intelligence community and law enforcement is gone.

Every member of Congress has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution, yet by repeated majority votes and the signatures of all pre-Biden presidents since 2008 continually re enacting Section 702, Congress has permitted the FBI to bypass the Constitution. Thus, FBI spying is lawful because a statute authorizes it, but unconstitutional because the statute violates the Fourth Amendment.

Last week, the Director of National Intelligence, who is required by Section 702 to report all FBI access to the raw intelligence data, did so. But her record keeping is as sloppy as her fidelity to the Constitution. Thus, she reported 3.4 million FBI searches of raw intelligence data on Americans in 2021.

You’d think that meant that 3.4 million Americans had their emails, text messages, phone calls, medical and legal and personal records surveilled by the FBI. You’d be incorrect. To the feds, the word “search” refers to the input of a search term, like “Jan. 6” or “local militia” or “small government.” One FBI search thus can lead to the records of thousands of Americans.

It is hard to believe that senior management of the CIA, NSA and FBI can perpetuate these egregious constitutional violations with straight faces. But they do. And Congress permits it. Why? Because the CIA, NSA, FBI and their collaborators have dirt on members of Congress. Dirt.

The federal government is rotten to the core. Its officers and employees don’t believe that the Constitution means what it says. They will lie, cheat, threaten, bribe and steal to cut constitutional corners and remain in power.

The Fourth Amendment was written to protect the quintessentially American right to privacy. It is a critical part of the structure of the Bill of Rights.

Rather, it was.

Today, in America, we have no rights. A right is an indefeasible claim against the whole world — to think as you wish, to say and publish what you think, to worship or not, to defend yourself, to experience your life and exercise your liberty and use your property without a government permission slip, and to be left alone.

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, yet the rights it facially protects are now subject to government approval. The Bill of Rights is really a Bill of Temporary Privileges.

CIA Admits Feeding Americans False information about Ukraine

By Ron Paul (www.lewrockwell.com), 12/4/2022

Late last year, a Gallup poll showed that Americans’ trust in the mainstream media has fallen to its second lowest level on record. Only seven percent of Americans responded that they have a “great deal” of trust in the media.

That loss of trust has been well-earned by the mainstream media, and it explains the massive growth of independent media and alternative voices on social media. The response to the rise of independent media voices has been a rush to “cancel” any voice outside the accepted mainstream narrative.

Citizens of the Soviet Union would read manipulated media like Pravda not because the regime reported facts, but because truth was hidden between the lines of what was reported and what was not reported. That seems to be where we are in the US today.

Last week an extraordinary article appeared in, of all places, NBC News, reporting that the US intelligence community is knowingly feeding information it does not believe accurate to the US mainstream media for the American audience to consume.

In other words, the article reports that the US “deep state” admits to being actively engaged in lying to the American people in the hopes that it can manipulate public opinion

According to the NBC News article, “multiple US officials acknowledged that the US has used information as a weapon even when confidence in the accuracy of the information wasn’t high. Sometimes it has used low-confidence intelligence for deterrent effect…”

Readers will recall the shocking headlines that Russia was prepared to use chemical weapons in Ukraine, that China would be providing military equipment to Russia, that Russian President Putin was being fed misinformation by his advisors, and more.

All of these were churned out by the CIA to be repeated in the American media even though they were known to be false. It was all about, as one intelligence officer said in the article, “trying to get inside Putin’s head.”

That may have been the goal, but what the CIA actually did was get inside America’s head with false information meant to shape public perception of the conflict. They lied to propagandize us in favour of the Biden Administration’s narrative.

Those pushing the “Russiagate” hoax through the Trump years claimed that the goal of “Russian disinformation” was to undermine Americans’ trust in our government, media, and other institutions. Isn’t it ironic that the CIA itself has done more than the Russians to undermine Americans’ faith in the media by feeding false stories to establish a particular narrative among the American people?

After the Bay of Pigs disaster, President Kennedy has been quoted as wanting “to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.” That didn’t work out too well for him. As Senate Majority Chuck Schumer famously told Rachel Maddow in 2020, responding to the-President Trump’s criticism of the CIA, “let me tell you: You take on the intelligence community — they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.”

As more information about the activities of the US Intelligence Community in trying to bring down Trump come out, it appears that, for once, Schumer was right.

It’s time to revisit President Kennedy’s post-Bay of Pigs wish. The CIA using lies to propagandize the American people toward war with Russia is just one of thousands of reasons to scatter a million pieces of that agency to the wind.

An Empire of Lies

By Vasko Kohlmayer (www.lewrockwell.com), 11/4/2022

It has been said that America has become an Empire of Lies. Difficult as it may be to accept, this allegation is true. To deny this would be to fool ourselves. The truth is that over the last several decades America’s elites have erected a system in which lies permeate every aspect of our societal life.

Everywhere we turn, we encounter lies. We have now arrived at a point where nearly all our public institutions operate on lies: the government, media, education system, arts, military and even sports. A recent event is emblematic of the Empire of Lies in which we live.

On March 13, USA TODAY published its list of top twelve Women of the Year. One those “women” was one Rachel Levine. The problem is that Levine is not a woman.

Born Richard Levine, Levine is a biological male who has lived most of his life as a man. He married and fathered children by his wife. It was only after he turned fifty that he declared himself to be a “woman.”

Levine’s personal preferences notwithstanding, the incontrovertible reality remains that he is a man. Every cell in his body testifies to this fact by carrying within it the XY chromosomal combination which is characteristics of males.

Rachel Levine, born Richard Levine, is a biological male who was married to a woman and fathered children. Once someone is born a male, he can never become a woman, because this determination has been made on the deepest level of biological reality.

The sex of a person is an irreversible biological fact. This is how a Stanford geneticist expressed this truth:

“No amount of surgery, hormone injections or anything else will change someone’s DNA from a man’s to a woman’s (or vice versa). As you know, for humans, sex is determined by the presence of a Y chromosome – humans with an X and a Y chromosome are male and those with two X chromosomes are female. No current (or probably future) technology can replace a chromosome in all of our trillions of cells.”

One cannot become a woman by declaring himself one or by wearing make-up, skirts, wigs or painted nails. Neither can a man become a woman by hormonal treatments or surgical alterations to his body. However extensive such alterations may be, he will only be a surgically or hormonally altered male with XY chromosomes.

According to Dr. Paul McHugh, a Harvard-educated physician and formerly University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine:

“Transgendered men do not become women, nor do transgendered women become men. All (including Bruce Jenner) become feminized men or masculinized  women, counterfeits or impersonators of the sex with which they identify.”

But we do not need experts to confirm this. Nearly every normal person knows this intuitively and can immediately see this when presented with the evidence of their eyes.

There is an elemental chasm between biological males and real women that cannot be bridged. To say that Rachel Levine is a woman is therefore an obvious untruth. It is a lie. But it is not merely an ordinary lie. It is a flagrant lie whose immense falsity is evident to everyone with eyes to see. If you asked a thousand people – in an environment in which they would not feel threatened to express their true opinion – to tell you whether they think Rachel Levine is a genuine woman, nearly all would say “no.” Those who would say yes would be immediately suspected of visual or mental impairment.

To put it briefly, Rachel Levine is a man, and, therefore, he can never be a woman. Yet in America we pretend otherwise. This is gaslighting of the most brazen kind. Worse yet, this gross subversion of truth is not being practiced on some far fringes of American society. It is being practiced at its very heart and center.

USA TODAY is a major newspaper and a broadcasting company – in fact, it is the number one newspaper in America by circulation.

But it is not only USA TODAY that subverts the truth in this unabashed fashion. ALL major corporate media do it. All of them have consistently pretended that Levine is a woman and refer to him as such ever since he burst onto the national scene in 2020. This includes even such outlets as Forbes and The Economist, periodicals which one would have thought had still some contact with reality.

                                                                                                                                              When Levine became the United States Assistant Secretary for Health all media falsely represented him as a “woman.” When Levine was named an admiral in the United States Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, the media across the spectrum celebrated the event as a major milestone for women claiming that Levine was “the first female four-star admiral in public service.”

But it is not only the media who propagate the grossest of lies; it is also our government starting at the very top. When President Biden announced Levine’s nomination for the post of Assistant Secretary for Health, he referred to him as a woman. When Levine was being questioned during his confirmation hearing not a single US senator brought up the obvious issue of him being a man. Not one of them used this opportunity to ask him why he tries to pretend otherwise. They all pretended that the person sitting in front of them was a woman.

It is not only the highest levels of the US government that are actively subverting physical reality before them; it is government on all levels. As you may know, prior to his federal appointments Levine served as Secretary of Health in Pennsylvania. He was appointed to this position by Governor Tom Wolf who, of course, referred to him as a “woman.” Needless to say, Levine was confirmed to this role by the Pennsylvania State Senate who were all willing to go along and pretend that the man before them was a woman.

But it not only the American media and political establishment that lie and deny reality. Academia is equally intellectually and morally corrupt. To wit, the best athlete on the University of Pennsylvania women’s swimming team is a young man called Lia Thomas who until last season competed as a male. Thomas went on to become the NCAA swimming champion in 500-yard freestyle.

As you may know, the University of Pennsylvania also happens to be an Ivy League school. The Ivy Leagues are a group of elite universities that are considered among the best in the United State and, indeed, the world. The eight schools in this grouping include such prominent institutions of higher learning as Harvard, Yale and Princeton. As such they are supposed to represent the best and brightest among us. These schools compete among each other in the Ivy League conference. That they would allow a man to compete with – and soundly beat – genuine girls shows that our intellectual elites have collectively lost both their judgment and their minds.

Unfortunately, the same applies to our military and the medical establishment. The former now pays for sex transition surgeries for our military personnel. There are many serious problems with this, but the main one is that there can be no such a thing as “sex transition,” because such a thing is simply not possible. The very premise of the whole procedure rests on a lie. This lie is being propagated by the medical establishment that carries out these mutilating procedures. Furthermore, in their reality-subverting endeavours, they now refer to real women as “birthing persons.”

We do not need any more examples. It suffices to say that practically every American institution is now actively engaged in reality subversion. If we are as a society willing to lie about obvious unalterable physical realities, we must be lying galore about other things as well. And we most certainly do. The American regime and its media lie nearly about everything, and they do it vehemently and without ceasing. Do you want some recent examples?

What about the vaccines being perfectly safe and 95 percent effective?

What about Hunter Biden’s hard drive being Russian disinformation?

What about BLM being a peaceful movement concerned with racial justice?

What about Kyle Rittenhouse being a white supremacist intent on shooting peaceful BML protesters?

What about the claim that Joe Biden is an honest politician and a good man?

What about the SARS-CoV-2 virus coming from Wuhan wet market?

What about the claim that Anthony Fauci was a selfless public servant whose main concern in life is the well-being of his fellow citizens and public health?

What about the Canadian truckers being racists, fascist, misogynists and terrorists?

What about the claim (made in 2006) that we only had ten years to save the planet from a climate disaster induced by man-made global warming?

And do you still remember Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction?

All these were brazen lies promulgated by our fraudulent establishment.

Almost nothing that is said these days in public discourse is true. Our whole system is saturated in dishonesty, untruth and deception. Our public sphere exists in a tissue of lies.

Biden, Fauci, Walensky, CNN, NPR, the Washington Times, the Department of Justice, the FBI, Pelosi, Gates, Zuckerberg, Schumer and thousands of their friends – every one of them tells lies.

The dollar, along with our whole financial system, rest on a stupendous lie. The lie is this: the United States government will one day pay off its debts. This will never happen. Once the hour of reckoning arrives, this lie will cost us dearly. Lies, lies, lies and more lies everywhere.

And now the liars are using their media to push for and expand the war in Ukraine. If you really want to learn the truth about Ukraine please watch a 2016 lecture on the subject by Professor John Mearsheimer, one of the world’s leading experts on geopolitics and international relations.

                                                                                                                                                    A Supreme Court nominee recently claimed she did not know how to describe what a woman is. She said she is not a biologist. So, a Harvard-educated lawyer cannot tell us what a female is, and this nation is supposed to award her a lifetime appointment of great public trust. That woman – Kentaji Brown Jackson – is not exceptional in her extreme prevarication. Today nearly all public figures dissemble and lie as a matter of course.

Our system is so false and rotten that the so-called “fact checkers” are among the greatest liars to be found. Those who attempt to say the truth, on the other hand, are promptly censored and silenced. Paradoxically, the truth tellers are being cancelled by the fake “fact checkers” who are on the payroll of such frauds as Pfizer, Bill Gates, George Soros and their like.

Telling the truth has become a serious offence in America. We have, indeed, become an Empire of Lies. An Empire we certainly are, for the regime not only forces its lies on the American people but exports them to the rest of the planet. Our embassies, for example, now routinely hoist the LGBT flag which stands for the movement that, among other things, maintains that men can become women.

Our globalist leaders invade and destroy countries on the basis of lies, which they tell both domestically and internationally. In the early 2000s, the United States ordered Saddam Hussein to abandon his program of developing weapons of mass destruction. He did what we asked him to do, but we still accused him of having weapons of mass destruction. We then invaded his country under this false pretence and had him executed.

A couple of years later, we asked Moammar Khaddaffi to relinquish his WMDs. The US government promised him a hand of reconciliation and cooperation if he did. He complied and then we helped to have him killed.

Before being expelled from Afghanistan, our globalist-minded elites tried to export parts of their lie-based ideology by opening a department of gender studies at the University of Kabul. They could really not have chosen a more inappropriate setting for this this kind of gaslighting operation.

Is it any wonder that the American regime is being increasingly disliked around the world?

When polled by Gallup, people around the world consistently named the United States as the greatest threat to peace. The numbers were getting so bad that the American government pressured Gallup to stop asking this question. But the world’s collective judgment is not surprising given our record of sowing havoc, death and destruction: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria. There was a big lie attached to each of these disasters.

For this we can thank our corrupt globalist establishment. This establishment is now presided over by Joe Biden, a corrupt man who has sold out his country through various influence peddling schemes and other ploys involving his son. The plentiful evidence of his misdeeds is on the hard drive of his Hunter Biden. The FBI and the Department of Justice are in possession of this drive, but the regime has refused to launch an investigation into the crimes recorded therein. Not only that, but they have done everything they could to bury them under the lie of “Russian disinformation.”

Everyone who loves truth and America should be deeply upset and grieved by this.

A regime that is so profoundly steeped in dishonesty, deception, criminality and corruption can never prosper. The moral law that undergirds all existence – the Law of God – requires that its dark works be met with just recompense.

It is not good to be the Empire of Lies.

The Ukraine War (1)

By Iain Davis, (www.lewrockwell.com), 8th April, 2022

Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine has been presented to us, in the West, as unprovoked and unjustified. We have not been told about Russia’s legitimate security concerns in the face of NATO expansionism. Nor has Ukraine’s significant Nazi problem been honestly reported, with some Western propagandist even promoting them.

The Russian government claims that its recognition and defence of the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics (DPR and LPR) are born from “compassion” for the people who have been under siege for eight years. However, Russia also needs the new republics as satellite states, providing a foothold for its own national security as it opposes NATO’s advance.

It should be noted that Russia’s military actions, in trying to oust Nazis from their strongholds in Mariupol, Kharkiv and elsewhere, has led to the near destruction of many cities and towns in Eastern Ukraine. As of the 19th March the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCR) estimate that 847 civilians were killed in three weeks, primarily as a result of shelling.

The OHCR noted that the “actual figures are considerably higher” but could not be verified. Credible eye witness reports and video evidence indicate that the Nazis in Mariupol and other besieged areas had stopped civilians leaving through humanitarian corridors opened by Russia. There are many reports of Nazi (Asov) atrocities, including the murder of fleeing civilians.

NATO has courted Ukraine as a future alliance member for decades, taking firm steps to admit Ukraine along the way. This has never been acceptable to Russia, whose national security concerns have been consistently ignored.

Only days prior to the Russian attack, the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, delivered a speech at the Munich Security Conference threatening Russia, not only with a nuclear-armed Ukraine, but a NATO nuclear power on Russia’s south-western border.

Ukraine is a pinch-point for Russia’s natural gas trade with the European Union. The purpose of the Nord Stream pipelines, constructed in partnership with Germany, was to circumnavigate that problem. It raised the potential for greater EU independence from the US and, with an EU commitment to defence union, presented a possible threat to the US dominance of NATO.

Consequently, the US applied unrelenting pressure on the EU, including enforcing sanctions on German companies, to halt the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. In response to Russia’s official recognition of the DPR & LPR, German Chancellor Olaf Sholtz immediately announced that Germany would not certify Nord Stream 2 for operational use. Russia began it’s military operation in Ukraine three days later.

Please read Parts 1-3 of this series for an exploration of the evidence informing this analysis. This provides us with what we might call the “official-unofficial” explanation for Russia’s aggression. It is an appraisal founded upon the established, accepted concept of international relations.

 However, any such investigation is necessarily incomplete. It fails even to describe the globalist forces that are both ripping Ukraine apart and propelling Russia to act. We will explore these in Parts 5 – 6.

Before we do it is important to appreciate just how far we, as supposed democratic societies, have strayed from democratic ideals. This can be understood if we consider the extreme propaganda and censorship our governments are using, hobbling our ability to discern reality.

The Propaganda Environment                                                                                              

There is little chance that the issues we have already discussed will receive fair coverage in the Western mainstream media (MSM) and none at all that it will cover what we are about to consider. The West’s propaganda, in a rapidly evolving conflict, has at times been absurd.

Immediately following the launch of Russia’s military operation the Western MSM reported the unbelievable bravery of the Ukrainian border guards defending Snake Island in the Black Sea. They stated that 13 died in their valiant defence against a Russian “air and sea bombardment.”

Ukrainian President Zelenskyy said he would award the guards posthumous medals for gallantry. It soon emerged that this was a fabrication. None of them died and Russia took the Island without harming anyone.

The MSM reported that Russian forces deliberately targeted a Mosque in Mariupol where civilian woman and children were said to be sheltering. The Turkish media later revealed that the Mosque had not been struck by anything.