SHOCK HEADLINE!!!: Former Pentagon officials have warned that arms makers are exploiting the war in Ukraine to price gouge the Department of Defense. Shay Assad, who worked as a Pentagon contract negotiator for 40 years, told 60 Minutes that such firms overcharge the DoD for everything from “radar and missiles … helicopters … planes … submarines… down to the nuts and bolts.”
Today our esteemed military is asking for assistance from citizens who might have spotted an F-35 crash landing followed by its explosion into a fireball… which is somehow nontrackable by the entire Military. Because somehow, the esteemed agents of defense who can train Ukrainian pilots in the US can’t find an $80 million lost jet.
The scuttle is that the jet lost its tracking capability ( the mishap). Tracking and surveillance equipment are powered by rare earth minerals. Did Lockheed skip corners? Lockheed Martin’s F-35 stealth fighter uses 920 pounds of rare earths per plane in its electronic warfare systems, targeting radars, and electric motors.
African states are splintering. There are two factions; the ones accepting US/France colonization and those who declare their sovereignty. In the quest for Chips and Minerals, the US reliance on China is seen as purgatory. Having been culled from other nations, the US is now looking for Namibia to be their regime. Given both the President and Prime Minister are US trained groupies, Namibia’s government will likely give the US whatever it wants.
With a GDP over $12 billion, Namibia has a poverty rate over 50%. But the US sees the country as a potential for colonizing their resources. In particular: diamonds, oil, copper, uranium, and rare earth metals necessary for building defense systems. Currently, Namibia’s export partners include; South Africa, China, Belgium, Botswana, and Germany. The US is about to levy a heavy hand.
The countries with the greatest reserves in rare earth minerals are: China, Vietnam, Brazil and Russia.
As the US Military transfers weapons to Taiwan, General Milley has warned the US State Department that creating WWIII in Taiwan will not end well. Why? Our stock of military weapons is on empty. Perhaps we should curtail arming other countries like Afghanistan, Algeria, Argentina, Austria, Australia, Brunei, Barkino Faso, Bulgaria, Brazil and Barundi – and that’s just the A’s and B’s….
The US needs a friendly ally in Taiwan. They are the major supplier of chips to the US – and until that changes, the US will continue to court Taiwan. That shift is scheduled to occur in 2025 when the newly constructed largest in the world Intel chip plant in Ohio is operational. At that point the Taiwan courtship is over, and the need has been resolved. As is protocol, the US is likely to hand Taiwan to China and be done with it. Unfortunately, the Biden Administration has already made the declaration so there is no walking back the intent.
China provided necessary components for the US Military Industrial Complex. China decoupling was a mistake. The US Cabalists fatal error was not having ‘alternatives’ in place before demonizing the bad boy China. Now the fence is wobbly and no one seems to communicate leaving grandiose holes in the US trade partnerships. Including those rare earth metals/minerals necessary to restock weapon inventories! Hence – rape the African nation Namibia is the alternative presented by Center For Strategic Studies.
Recently Zelenskyy declared that he had personally seen the stocked US warehouses filled with weapons that should all be transferred to Ukraine for safe keeping. Not sure why our military thought it wise to show Zelenskyy the US stockpile – but then Zelenskyy has risen to heights of godly proportions in the bobble heads of the US Military and Congress.
Soon the IRS will have more ammo than the US military!
Between 2018 and 2022, before the war, 29 countries were arming Ukraine. The US, Poland, UK and Germany were the largest suppliers. This would give every indication that the war was being staged 4 years before it occurred.
Zelenskyy made his debut into the world as a gay porn dancer and yet the liberals who adore him demand that the US President be of the moral and ethical values of a saint. An odd excursion into OZ.
Regardless of whether the charismatic Milei ultimately wins the election, his campaign has sparked a young and powerful libertarian movement. His triumph in the primaries may be more significant than the Ron Paul Revolution of 2008 and 2012. The incredible fact is that he is successful.
The Austro-libertarian movement has the better ideas. They continue to be discussed, elaborated, and intellectually defended. But how can the right ideas be implemented? What good is it to be right if the reality is left-wing? In fact, most of the population, or at least public opinion, seems to be drifting further and further to the left, with cancel culture, climate hysteria, a sprawling welfare state and ever higher taxes and levies.
The right ideas and theories are there, but they have not yet been put successful in practice. How can this be changed? Of course, ideas are important, they must also be disseminated, from below, from the grassroots up. It’s an arduous process. And there has been undeniable progress in recent years. Nevertheless, the left-wing zeitgeist is rolling over the freedoms of citizens almost unhindered; most shockingly during the Covid crisis. The left tries to paint anyone who stands in the zeitgeist´s way as an extremist or even a Nazi.
Against this background, what can a successful strategy look like? Murray Rothbard addressed this question in an article in the Rothbard-Rockwell Report entitled Right-Wing Populism: A Strategy for the Paleo Movement. His contribution is groundbreaking and forward-looking. He anticipates the successes of Donald Trump in the United States and, more recently, of Javier Milei in Argentina.
Javier Milei is making a splash on all sides, because on August 13, 2023, he won the primaries for the presidency in Argentina. In the German media, he is described as ultra-right and ultra-libertarian. Recently, the Financial Times dealt with the self-confessed anarcho-capitalist in a column, in which the author insinuated that the libertarian Milei would follow the strategy of right-wing populism designed by Murray Rothbard in 1992. This gives rise to the question if that claim is true and what exactly is this right-wing populism?
According to the paleo-libertarian Rothbard, the program of right-wing populism includes 8 main points:
Radical tax cuts
Radical reduction of the welfare state
Abolition of privileges for “protected” minorities
Crushing criminals
Getting rid of bums
Abolition of the Federal Reserve
A program of America First (anti-globalist and isolationist)
Defending traditional family values
Indeed, Milei’s election manifesto is very much in line with Rothbard’s right-wing populism and paleo-libertarianism. Milei wants to radically reduce taxes. He never tires of calling taxes what they are, theft.
He also wants to radically grind down the welfare state and likes to illustrate the reduction in government spending and his proposal of reducing Argentinian ministries from 18 to 8 with a chainsaw. His “Chainsaw Plan” is intended to radically trim the state.
‘m always trying to strengthen my Plan B. That’s why I’m working on buying land so I can grow my own food– not just in a worst case scenario, but for my everyday health. And as an aspiring homesteader, I was lucky to have the opportunity to spend last weekend learning from Marjory Wildcraft who has over two decades of experience to share. (I made a video you can watch here.) You can learn from her as well (for free) in a very important educational webinar that teaches you how to grow your own food. “How To Grow Lots Of Food In A Grid Down Situation Even If You Have No Experience, Are Older, And Out Of Shape” This is for people who want the fastest and easiest ways to produce healthy and delicious meat, eggs, and vegetables. This educational webinar will cover: Current status of Global food supplyHow much land you needThe easiest and fastest foods to produceA full plan to be able to produce all your own foodHow to get started today This is a free event and the most popular part is the Q&A after the presentation! CLICK HERE to register to recieve 72 hours of access to this free educational webinar.
Your presenter is Marjory Wildcraft founder of The Grow Network which is an online community of over a half million homesteaders, backyard farmers, preppers, missionary organizations, and University researchers – all of whom are dedicated to backyard food production. National Geographic featured Marjory as an expert in off-grid living, she has hosted Mother Earth News’ Homesteading Summits, and she is also host of the annual Homegrown Food and Home Medicine Summit which reaches hundreds of thousands of viewers each year. Marjory is the author of “The Grow System: The Essential Guide to Modern Self-sufficiency from Growing Food to Making Medicine”. Growing your own food is like printing your own money! Register today. The most popular part of the free event is the Q&A after the presentation, so come with your questions you want answered! CLICK HERE to register for 72 hours of access to this free educational webinar. Thank you, Joe JarvisEditor of The Daily bell
To have a man like Obama publicly “forget” his role in the destruction of Libya and the carnage that has been wrought across the globe in the name of U.S. hegemonic policy is not so much insensitive as it is merely typical. We can sit back and say “shame on him” for such indifference, but maybe we need to look in the mirror and reserve the shame for ourselves. We are the ones who have continued to make it possible.
WASHINGTON D.C., USA – Sep 18, 2014: United States President Barack Obama during an official meeting with the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko in Washington, DC (USA)
Former U.S. President Barack Obama recently put out a tweet with a link to organizations that may be of some help to the people of Libya due to recent floods. NATO was absent from the list.
If you’re looking to help people impacted by the floods in Libya, check out these organizations providing relief: https://t.co/Vc9kbNgFuE
Whoever runs the former president’s social media is likely unaware why some responded with sarcasm or dismay that the former commander in chief who presided over the intervention that caused the ruination of Libya would post such a token tweet. That is, after all, the nature of politics: a distinct disconnect from outcomes and consequences by those who lie, cheat, and charm their way to the top of the pyramid of power.
In 2011, in the wake of the Arab Spring, energies washed across the region as people (and other elements) sought to overthrow dictators. Some were supported by the West, others like Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi were sacrificial foes to be toppled. In a media campaign to justify their war, U.S. and NATO warmongers invented claims about the tyrant when in reality the truth of his regime should have been sufficient. They needed another villain, so Ronald Reagan’s foe from the 80s was back. The U.S. supported opposition warlords, terrorists, and foreign fighters as Libya fell into a terrible civil war. Qaddafi was toppled and executed in the dirt, NATO airstrikes blasted away his kingdom, and to this day the destruction and repercussions remain. The Obama regime pushed for NATO and UN missions to stop “genocide,” but Libya ended up with slavery, terror, endless war, and poverty. U.S. involvement led to a catastrophe that will last a generation or more for the people of Libya, and Obama and Hilary Clinton are the chief architects of such misery.
President Obama certainly had charm; he was articulate and a stark contrast to the bumbling butt of Michael Moore and Will Ferrell punchlines, George W Bush or “Junior.” Obama was seductive to progressives and wealthy liberals. He even said antiwar things. He was the “Hope and Change” president, a contrast to the McCains and Romneys that ran against him. Obama seemed slightly human, not in a Bill Clinton sleaze manner but as a person who (to a degree) meant what he said. Instead, he would go on to boast about his ability to perform extra judicial killings and expand the legacy of his predecessor. He was nothing more or less than another U.S. president.
Outside of the ritual of American party politics, words like liberal, neocon, conservative, or progressive don’t really mean much to the rest of the world. Only the constant of another U.S. president and permanent fixture of a powerful U.S. government forces those words into conversations within an empire of lies, conveniently short term memories, and supposedly benevolent violence. So it is with such an insolent tweet that one could come to expect a man like Obama to make, without any sense of ownership. It’s much the same way that Junior could paint victims of the wars he helped make possible. Presidents are liars. They lie to themselves as much they do to the rest of the world. It is how they ascend the ranks of a hierarchy built on lies.
The astounding thing is that every cycle a population of enablers participate in the democratic ritual of selecting the political zombies who linger on like a miasma of death to the new up and comers, who seemingly come from the outside to shake things up. Obama was one such candidate, along with Donald Trump, Ronald Reagan, and even Richard Nixon in many ways. Although these presidents have a tendency of growing the thing they promised to shrink (or at least expand it in other areas), President Obama expanded the debt, the wars, and launched a new one against journalism. But he also looked nice on television, so for those who did not pay attention he was a leader to be proud of. Most voters don’t seem to pay attention. It’s the facade and packaging that matters most.
In contrast, authoritarianism is rooted in the notion that politicians, bureaucrats, and their favored special interests have the right to tread on everyone.
A 12-year-old Colorado boy became a victim of “woke” education when he was taken out of class and told he could not return unless he removed a Gadsden flag, or “Don’t Tread on Me,” patch from his backpack. The school backed down after a video went viral in which a school official told the boy and his mother that the problem with the patch is that the Gadsden flag’s origin is related to slavery and the slave trade. The school was criticized by individuals from across the political spectrum for seeming ignorance of the role the Gadsden flag played in the American Revolution. Among the critics was Colorado Governor Jared Polis, one of the few remaining Democrats willing to defend free speech from the woke mob.
This incident reminded me of a 2009 Department of Homeland Security “fusion center” report warning that individuals with Gadsden flag bumper stickers, or bumper stickers supporting my presidential campaign or the Libertarian or Constitution parties, were potentially dangerous extremists. After I and many other Americans objected, the offending report was withdrawn. But, the fact that it was issued in the first place, just like the fact the Colorado student was ever removed from class for his Gadsden flag patch, shows how the authoritarians view the “Don’t Tread on Me” symbol.
The reason the woke authoritarians hate the Gadsden flag has nothing to do with racism or extremism. It is because the flag represents a rejection of authoritarianism and an embrace of liberty. Benjamin Franklin originally used the rattlesnake to symbolize the rebellious American colonies. He chose the snake because the rattlesnake “never begins an attack, nor, when once engaged, ever surrenders.” In other words, rattlesnakes follow the nonaggression principle that forbids the use of offensive force against another’s person or property, but allows the use of force to defend against any violations of one’s rights — including those committed by government officials.
In contrast, authoritarianism is rooted in the notion that politicians, bureaucrats, and their favored special interests have the right to tread on everyone.
After I finished that book, I reflected on the lessons taught to me in school, such as history and economics. I realized I wasn’t told the entire truth and started on a wider literary journey. Throughout my literary voyage, I aimed to discover why schools distort and hide the facts. My trip included authors such as Walter E. Williams, Milton Freedman, Ludwig von Mises, and many others.
Thomas Sowell is an American political commentator and economist who’s authored books such as Discrimination and Disparities, Basic Economics, Economic Facts and Fallacies, and my personal favorite, Black Rednecks and White Liberals. His books span a range of topics, such as race in America, history, politics, education, and much more.
However, two contrary realities exist concerning how people feel about Thomas Sowell. Conservatives revere his work and are amazed by his intellect. On the other hand, people on the left despise his work and speak ill about him. They revoke his “black card” because he doesn’t fit the mold they’ve shaped for a black man.
Thomas Sowell is a man who is a courageous advocate for the truth and doesn’t care to appease any political party. In this article, I will explain how his work affected my point of view and why his work is essential to my literary journey.
Thomas Sowell awakened me to the truth that I’m not a victim.
For it is not the function of any state, including the United States, to right the sins of the Decalogue, to spread fire and devastation in order to bring freedom around the globe—as we murdered countless Vietnamese in the name of their “freedom.” And, above all, we must realize that nuclear war is a far bigger threat to liberty than Communism. How’s that for libertarian “realism”?
In short, libertarians must realize that just as, for them, liberty must be the highest political end, in the same way, peace and the avoidance of mass murder must be the highest end of foreign policy.
[Philosopher] Eric Mack [in his article “Permissible Defense”] uses a device employed by all too many libertarians—of holding the ideal free-market anarchist system or a limited government as virtually equivalent to the current State-ridden system. Thus, he points out quite correctly that isolationism makes no sense as a principle for a free-market protective agency; he leaps from there to the conclusion that, at least for an anarchist, it cannot be a binding principle for the State either. But for an anarchist, the existing State is not a benign if a bit overly cumbersome surrogate for a free-market protection agency. The State is organized crime, murder, theft, and enslavement incarnate. And even for laissez-faire liberals the existing State should be tarred with the same dire labels.
Isolationism is not a principle for free-market defense agencies because there would be no nation-state and therefore no foreign policy for anyone to worry about. But we live, unfortunately, in a world of nation-states, in which each State has arrogated to itself a monopoly of the use of violence over its assumed territorial area. Therefore, to limit the aggressive use of the State, to limit State violence over innocent people as much as possible, the libertarian, be he an anarchist or a laissez-faire liberal, necessarily arrives at the view that at least each State should confine its operations to that area where it has a monopoly of violence, so that no interstate clashes, or, more importantly, injuries wreaked by State A on the population of State B, will be able to occur. The latter point is particularly important in the days of modern technology when it is virtually impossible for State A to fight State B without gravely injuring or murdering large numbers of civilian innocents on both sides.
Therefore, “isolationism”—the confinement of State violence to its own territory—is an important libertarian precept, whether for an anarchist or not. Limiting government to its own territory is the foreign-policy analogue of the domestic injunction of the laissez-faire liberal that the State not interfere with the lives of its own subjects. And isolationism becomes all the more important in our modern age of advanced technological weaponry.
There is an important philosophical error that Mack makes about free-market defense agencies that is quite relevant to our concerns. He maintains that if A uses B as an innocent shield to aggress against C, it is perfectly legitimate for C to shoot B. The problem here is that Mack forgets about the rights of B. Suppose, after all, that B has hired his own defense agency sworn to defend his life and property, and that, for some empirical reason, the agency can’t get to A; would it not then be perfectly legitimate for B or his agent to shoot C in self-defense? The answer, of course, is yes. The error committed by Mack is to concentrate on one person, C, and to worry about what C’s moral course of action may be, while forgetting about B. On a deeper level, Mack’s error—also engaged in by many others, of course—is to confuse morality and rights, that is, to be concerned about what actions of C may or may not be moral while ignoring what the rights are of the various parties in the given situation. To put it succinctly, it may well be that in the shield situation, it is moral for C to shoot B in order to save his own life; but even though moral, it is also murder, and a violation of B’s rights. This error stems from Mack’s unfortunate view that rights as such all disappear in emergency, “lifeboat” situations.
Thus, the political philosopher should not be concerned with morality per se; he should be concerned with that subset of morality dealing with rights.
Unfortunately, as Douglas Murray wrote, “the growing divide…between what the people want and what a small elite at the top of politics, finance and the media want” are two different things. And yet remodeling society to a tiny minority’s image should be science fiction, not a syndrome of our weakness.
Mozart family on tour: Leopold, Wolfgang, Nannerl; watercolour by Carmontelle, c. 1763
GSTAAD—This is the best news since the Bush-Blair duo saved us from the nuclear holocaust Saddam was about to unleash upon us. Half a million—perhaps even one million—dead Iraqis later, we were, nevertheless, saved with minutes to spare, so we should always believe official sources. Especially when Uncle Sam is involved.
This time the good news is not nuclear but musical. The Mostly Mozart Festival has been canceled by New York’s Lincoln Center after fifty-odd years because of rising disdain for “elitism and exclusivity.” Instead, “the Criminal Queerness Festival,” as it’s called, is geared toward “neurodiverse audiences and the world’s first LGBTQIA mariachi group,” Welcome, Cardi B, Pusha T, and Snoop Dog; so long and goodbye, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.
I read that the final two Mostly Mozart concerts were packed, but in today’s low-life, celebrity-driven woke culture, disdain for great music and the miracle that is Mozart needs no excuses. Lincoln Center will probably soon be renamed George Floyd Memorial, or better yet, Black Lives Matter Hall. Art had, once upon a time, a responsibility to make the planet more beautiful. Mozart and thousands of others did just that. Now Damien Hirst and fellow “artists” like Snoop Dog make the planet as ugly as those who own their art or listen to their rap music. Wolfie, as I like to call the greatest of musical miracles, wrote six immortal operas including the Requiem, 41 symphonies, almost fifty concertos, 24 chamber works, and eighteen miscellaneous pieces, but is now replaced by “artists” who include the F-word, the N-word, and the S-word in every single woman-hating, violence-praising sentence of their singularly untalented noise. Bravo, and long live the decision-makers at Lincoln Center, who, incidentally, I have heard from an impeachable source, were all conceived by a chimp with a dose of the clap.
Never mind, as an eternal optimist said in Hiroshima after the blast, “It could get worse.” I know it could, but canceling Mozart for the cesspool that is rap and hip-hop is equivalent to choosing Lizzo over Lily James, or one with moles, boils, and warts over the divine Keira Knightley. And the irony is that no one from the packed house of the last concert dared say a word. That’s because the woke left defines what Americans can think and say nowadays, and no Christians, whites, or conservatives need apply, let alone Mozart fans.
What rankles is that aggressive minorities are imposing their ideology on the rest of us, and no one is doing anything about it. Rule Britannia and flag-waving at the proms should be ruled sacrosanct, as Mozart should have been at Lincoln Center. Unfortunately, as Douglas Murray wrote, “the growing divide…between what the people want and what a small elite at the top of politics, finance and the media want” are two different things. And yet remodeling society to a tiny minority’s image should be science fiction, not a syndrome of our weakness.
Aerospace giant Lockheed Martin describes the F-35 series on its website as the “most advanced fighter jet in the world,” as well as the “most lethal, stealthy and survivable aircraft.”
In other words it is the most expensive piece of junk on the planet…except for the Ford Class aircraft carrier that can’t launch or land planes half the time.