U.S. forces in Syria have been carrying out strikes against “Iran-backed” militias this week in response to a recent drone attack on the American base at Tanf and rocket attacks at two other bases in northeastern Syria.
The first U.S. strike this week came in response to an August 15 attack, and that was quickly followed up by another hit. These airstrikes reportedly targeted bunkers used by the militias and killed between six and 10 people.
A later militia strike at bases in Deir al-Zour resulted in three U.S. troops suffering minor injuries, and the U.S. responded to that with Apache attack helicopters on Wednesday, reportedly resulting in casualties. It remains to be seen if the clashes will continue, but there has already been considerable escalation in just a few days.
Keeping American troops in Syria has been a serious mistake that multiple administrations have failed to correct. The longer that U.S. forces illegally remain in that country, the more likely it is that one of these clashes will result in casualties that could have been avoided. The Biden administration may be reluctant to withdraw troops from another country after what happened during the Afghanistan withdrawal, but their continued presence in Syria makes them targets and does nothing to make the United States more secure.
Bottom line: The risk to U.S. forces in Syria is increasing, and there are no discernible benefits from keeping them where they are that justify taking that risk. Contrary to what Biden has said, the U.S. is still at war in Syria, but it shouldn’t be and it doesn’t have to be.
The real damage that has been done is psychological. The population has been put on notice that the government is now the servant of the drug pushers – i.e., the pharmaceutical cartels – and will use its power to all-but-bayonet-point the populace into taking the drugs pushed by these cartels. Not just these drugs.
But – so far – all indications are that he is just the Orange Man. Not only hasn’t he apologized for fronting for the drug pushers – for taking personal credit for pushing their drugs – he continues to push them, without apology.
Whatever your opinion of Alex Jones, the opinion he expressed the other day about the Orange Man is difficult to argue with – because it’s always hard to argue with someone when they’re right.
What Alex said was that Orange Man must repudiate the “vaccines” he was either duped into “warp speeding” into existence or was complicit in “warp speeding” into existence. If he repudiates them, it will be more believable that he was merely duped, which is understandable and forgivable.
We all err, after all.
But that is not what makes us human.
A human being, when he realizes he erred – especially when his error has resulted in harm – is mortified that he erred. He owns up to his error and does all he can to repair the harm caused, beginning with an admission and an apology to those who have been harmed.
This goes for all men, by the way – not just the Orange Man. All the men – and women – who blithely lined up to get the shots are just as guilty of having erred. Some, of worse – as in the case of those who wished harm upon those of us who didn’t blithely line up for the shots. Who didn’t just trust the Orange Man – or any men. Not the men (and women) pushing these drugs, at any rate.
It is incontestable that much harm has been done by these drugs styled “vaccines,” which are no such thing as they do not prevent the person injected with them from either getting or spreading the Dread Sickness they were told they would not get and could not spread.
The harm done is not merely physical, either – though that must not be minimized as thousands of people – at the least – have literally been put six feet under by them, according to the most conservative data accrued by the Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting System (VAERS) and that is likely a very small portion of the total, as hinted at by the data accruing about a large uptick in “all cause” deaths of people in the prime of life, that correlates with the “rollout” of the “vaccines.”
There is also the life-long damage done to those who developed myocarditis or pericarditis – a now admitted-to “adverse effect” of these drugs that the people who were injected with them were never advised of as a possibility by their doctors – who (per the TeeVee line) asked no questions about these drugs, themselves, thus becoming the willing dupes of those pushing them.
But this is merely the physical toll.
The real damage that has been done is psychological. The population has been put on notice that the government is now the servant of the drug pushers – i.e., the pharmaceutical cartels – and will use its power to all-but-bayonet-point the populace into taking the drugs pushed by these cartels. Not just these drugs. For if it is established (as it has been) that the government has both the right and the power to compel anyone to take a drug they do not wish to take then the precedent has been set for the pushing of other drugs. If you disbelieve that such a thing could and ever would happen, consider the income tax, which – when it became law – the populace was told would never affect them. Just the “rich.”
While some argued that the price hikes came days before the Act was signed by President Biden, and therefore weren’t definitive proof that Ford was just price gouging the government’s latest handouts, we think that argument has now officially been put to rest, with Ford now also increasing Mustang Mach-E EV prices between $3,000 and $8,100, depending on Model.
If you think this is new news, you haven’t been paying attention for the last 20 years.
Ford Hikes Mustang Mach-E Price By As Much As $8,000
It was just days ago we wrote about how Ford was hiking the price of its F-150 EV by almost exactly the same amount offered as an EV subsidy in the Biden administration’s new “Inflation Reduction Act”.
While some argued that the price hikes came days before the Act was signed by President Biden, and therefore weren’t definitive proof that Ford was just price gouging the government’s latest handouts, we think that argument has now officially been put to rest, with Ford now also increasing Mustang Mach-E EV prices between $3,000 and $8,100, depending on Model.
The company is “also increasing shipping costs by $200 on all models,” according to Automotive News’ Michael Martinez.
The company says the new price reflects “significant material cost increases, continued strain on key supply chains, and rapidly evolving market conditions,” according to The Verge. They provided a breakdown of the increases by model type:
Select RWD Standard Range: $46,895 ($43,895)
Select eAWD Standard Range: $49,595
California Route 1 eAWD Extended Range: $63,575 ($52,450)
It’s challenging to be a pessimistic libertarian. Luther was nearly assassinated, and his daughter almost killed in “Absolute Power,” but in the end everything worked out.
Don’t let the fact that the movie is fictional discourage you. Use fiction as a guideline and make your own movie real. If you feel your optimism fading turn up the grit and move ahead.
No one knows what the future will bring because the future doesn’t bring anything. People do. You and I and the rest of the world make the future, some more so than others—some a lot more so. The leading future makers of the past century—at least those who entered national politics—have left a long trail of blood and misery, and today’s political leaders are staying the course.
There’s an old saying: “Man proposes, but God disposes.” In other words: “If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.”
If the US government is today’s god, what chance do a relative handful of freedom-loving people have against such an institutional behemoth? We’re only a false flag away from martial law. The internment camps are built and ready for occupancy. The police are militarized and ready to carry out orders. The voters remain insouciant. This is no time for optimism. It’s time to run for our lives.
But before we take off, we would do well to take stock of our assets.
There’s a scene in the Clint Eastwood movie “Absolute Power” that illustrates the point I wish to make. Eastwood, as legendary jewel thief Luther Whitney, witnesses the murder of a young woman during one of his heists. The president (Gene Hackman) and his SS agents are the murderers. The victim is the wife of the president’s biggest supporter, an octogenarian billionaire (E.G. Marshall) whose mansion Luther was robbing.
Whitney was hiding behind a one-way mirror at the time but later learns he’s a suspect, because of the missing jewels. Luther knows the president’s henchmen will try to kill him before he can expose them and rather than fight such a powerful foe, he arranges to leave the country.
While at the airport ready to depart he sees a staged press conference on TV. It’s an appalling political spectacle. A mournful president is offering sympathy to the bereaved husband, who’s standing beside him. “This man has been like a father to me,” he announces, then turns to his friend. “I would give the world to lessen your pain.” He blots his eyes, apparently too choked up to continue.
Luther simmers with fury. “You heartless whore,” he says aloud to the TV. “I’m not about to run from you.”
Luther rediscovered his true grit.
He also had conclusive evidence in his possession, as well as a daughter he cared about. What about you? If optimism still seems like a stretch, ask yourself what it would take for you, an informed libertarian, to be pessimistic.
FILE PHOTOS: The ‘Baker’ nuclear weapon test is seen at Bikini Atoll, July 25, 1946; UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss. (Credit: Pentagon; UK Prime Minister’s Office)
UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss has declared that she is ready and willing to kick off thermonuclear warfare should she take over as prime minister, stressing her hawkish bonafides as she seeks to replace Boris Johnson.
Appearing at a town hall event in Birmingham on Tuesday, Truss was asked how she would feel about ordering “global annihilation” in the event of a nuclear standoff with a foreign adversary.
“I won’t ask you if you would press the button, you’ll say yes, but faced with that task I would feel physically sick,” said host John Pienaar, who went on to ask: “How does that thought make you feel?”
“I think it’s an important duty of the prime minister and I’m ready to do that,” Truss replied, drawing applause from the audience. When Pienaar asked again how that decision would make her “feel,” she simply stated “I’m ready to do it.”
Maybe some reflection is in order. There is no real security in the group, there is only consensus, confusion, and emptiness. The next time you find yourself asking others for a solution to your problems, or asking questions about your own freedom and how to attain it; stop, close your eyes, and seek your answers from within. When those answers come, trust them, and escape from the hellish and barren existence that is the non-thinking collective horde.
“A strong man cannot help a weaker unless the weaker is willing to be helped, and even then the weak man must become strong of himself; he must, by his own efforts, develop the strength which he admires in another. None but himself can alter his condition.”
Contrary to popular belief, “waking up,” as in seeking and accepting truth, is not something that requires outside assistance, force, or consensus. It is not something that can be bought. It is not something that can be given to you. It is not something that can at once happen to the collective masses. There is no solution that can awaken a people. There is no ‘leader’ who can awaken the herd. There is only the individual, and each individual is responsible for his own awakening. That oh so rare awakening means gaining for self the ability to think, to think as an individual, to think critically, to accept what he alone thinks, to seek and know truth, and to act on that individual knowledge. This fact, in my view, is why most all humans remain completely unconscious for their entire lives, never understanding truth, or anything of value or honesty, and living only to accept the opinions of others, especially government, media, celebrities, and so-called experts and authority figures. They have to remain in the crowd, never straying from the ‘group think,’ never taking a risk, and therefore, never having an original or independent thought. This is considered the ‘safe place,’ and in the minds of this collective, this means protection from reality.
I am asked almost daily: “What is your solution to this madness?” “What plan do you have to fix our problems?” “What are you doing to wake everybody up?” “Who should we ‘elect’ to save us?” I am heavily criticized at times for telling the truth instead of staying ‘positive.’ I am cursed for being too critical and ‘negative.’ Questions and comments such as these are a sure sign of an unconscious mind, a non-thinking person, and a proud member of the unawakened herd of sheep.
One major example of the unawakened are those who cling to one political party or the other. In essence, the ‘party’ is simply a substitute for the original herd. One is Republican, one is Democrat, one is red and one is blue, one is conservative and one is ‘liberal.’ In fact, they are both herds supported by non-thinking drones. By claiming to be one or the other, no thinking is necessary, as all thought is accomplished by the red or blue herd as a whole. Obviously, when one votes, he is choosing a collective side, and picking who is to be his ruler, and in doing so, he becomes a slave, but he also acquiesces to the ‘thinking’ of the group instead of thinking for himself. This political structure was no accident, as this designed hostility of one against another guarantees group ‘think,’ and therefore eliminates the need for individuality, self, and responsibility. The amount of time and energy put into this asinine circus is evidence enough of the worthlessness of it all.
By looking to others, by looking outside, and by searching for opinions from the group instead of believing in self, one becomes dependent on what is mostly propaganda, and exposes that he does not have any trust in himself. This is why these seemingly helpless people cannot fix themselves or face the truth. This is why capitulation and submission to authority by the masses is now so rampant. This kind of behavior is similar to addiction in that the more people who look away for answers instead of looking inward, the less likely they will ever change, and actually, they will usually become more and more dependent as time passes.
There is no way to know for sure, but my belief is that at least 80% or more (maybe much more) of this population are a part of the collective herd that has little or no ability to think on their own concerning matters of importance. I do realize that this is a startling conclusion to reach, but given all that has happened to date, how can this be doubted?
There is no way to awaken the herd by force, by political means, by demands, or even by persuasion. Each individual has to delve inside himself, and awaken his own spirit so he can find the courage to improve self instead of relying on the crowd. This will lead to seeking the truth, and that is the first step toward independence. This is not an easy task, because to trust self requires personal responsibility for every thought, every action, and every life situation. When this occurs, all fear disappears, and the minds eye opens to bright light instead of darkness.
Maybe some reflection is in order. There is no real security in the group, there is only consensus, confusion, and emptiness. The next time you find yourself asking others for a solution to your problems, or asking questions about your own freedom and how to attain it; stop, close your eyes, and seek your answers from within. When those answers come, trust them, and escape from the hellish and barren existence that is the non-thinking collective horde.
“It was when I stopped searching for home within others and lifted the foundations of home within myself I found there were no roots more intimate than those between a mind and body that have decided to be whole.”
~ Rupi Kaur
Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
free government is founded in jealousy and not in confidence; it is jealousy & not confidence which prescribes limited Constitutions to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power
Regardless of written constitutions and the laws on the books, individual liberty is always at risk. And as liberty goes, so goes our capacity to live well, to achieve the good life as rational, virtuous social beings.
The danger comes from left and right, both of which aspire to have a body of elders impose narrow cultural and moral norms on everyone, overriding our right to think for ourselves. (Progressives and National Conservatives have a lot in common in that regard, even if they differ on what is to be imposed.)
This point about the fragility of liberty was well understood by the Irish politician, judge, and orator John Philpot Curran (1750-1817), who said: “The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt.”
As often happens, variations of this insight have been attributed to other people, most famously Thomas Jefferson, who is widely and apparently erroneously thought to have said more pithily: “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.” Curran has missed out on the credit he deserves.
At any rate, we have a problem. Although liberty is never safe from political ambition or even good intentions, most people are understandably absorbed in raising their families, earning their livelihoods, and just plain living. Thinking about liberty, much less exercising vigilance, has a low priority — if it is on their agendas at all. I’m not finding fault; it’s just a fact.
Hence the need for a degree of specialization. Libertarians to one extent or another specialize in keeping watch over liberty and drawing the public’s attention to dangers from governments and nongovernment sources. These aren’t entirely two separate categories because if an influential segment of the public comes to believe that liberty must be curtailed, such sentiment could find its way into the halls of power. For example, if enough people decide that offensive words or obscene images are equivalent to violent acts, politicians may take up that cause and prohibit so-called hate speech and the like. This has happened in Great Britain, where citizens can be visited by the police, fined, and compelled to take a sensitivity course for posting something on social media that allegedly made someone feel anxious. So far, thanks to the tradition of free speech and press recognized in the First Amendment, that does not happen in the United States. But we mustn’t rest on our laurels. A violation could be just around any corner, and we can’t be sure from which direction it will come.
Although Jefferson did not say, “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.” we know he believed it. We know this because of his 1798 Kentucky Resolutions, which he wrote anonymously for the state legislature in opposition to the Alien and Sedition Acts of that year. The Acts were passed by the Federalist party-controlled Congress under Federalist President John Adams. (Jefferson, who was not a Federalist, was the vice president at the time.) As one description of the Acts puts it:
The Resolutions by Jefferson and Madison were provoked by the Alien and Sedition Acts adopted by a Federalist-dominated Congress during the Quasi-War with France; those Acts gave the president the authority to deport any alien whom he thought a threat and made it illegal to criticize the president or the Congress. Dozens of people were prosecuted under the Sedition Act, with prosecutions targeted at newspaper editors who favored the new Democratic-Republican party – Jefferson’s party. Seeing such political prosecutions of free speech as a fundamental threat to the republic, Jefferson referred to this period as a “reign of witches.”
Federalist support for the Acts was also fueled by Jeffersonian sympathy for the French Revolution. The government’s fears about French influence in the United States had reached a fevered pitch.
In his Kentucky Resolutions — a second, shorter resolution written by an unknown person passed in 1799 — Jefferson invoked the principle that the Constitution delegated only certain limited powers to the national government and therefore the states individually could check that government whenever it broke through the limits. Hence, the document declared the Alien and Sedition Acts “void and of no force” and requested their repeal. (Jefferson’s draft called for nullification, but that language did not make the final document. It did make the second version, however.)
In making his case, Jefferson wrote something that more people need to understand,
