My contacts in Afghanistan and Pakistan insist the attack came from extreme anti-American groups in Saudi Arabia and were planned in Germany and Spain. Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11. Neither did Iraq, as the Bush administration falsely claimed. Hamid Gul, the former head of ISI, Pakistan’s intelligence service, told me that the Saudis were behind 9/11.
It is unsettling to see a democratic government like the United States beating its chest over the high-tech murder of a retired jihadist, Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri.
The 71-year-old al-Zawahiri succeeded the assassinated Osama bin Laden as chief of the anti-US underground group, al-Qaeda. The mild-mannered, Egyptian had been a local doctor in Cairo, when the brutal secret police of US-backed dictator, Hosni Mubarak, arrested him. Though al-Zawahiri was not directly involved in the opposition, he was savagely tortured by Mubarak’s secret police, who were directly advised and financially assisted by US security experts and intelligence.
I never met Dr. al-Zawahiri, but I spent long hours with his teacher and mentor, Sheik Abdullah Azzam – who was also bin Laden’s spiritual guide and instructor. Call him the father of jihad.
After torture and jail, Dr. al-Zawahiri became radicalized, joining Osama bin Laden’s underground movement that was dedicated to ousting American influence from the Muslim world. Al-Zawahiri later joined bin Laden in Afghanistan, a free-fire zone for Islamic jihadists. According to Washington, any groups opposing US presence in the Mideast were without doubt `terrorists.’ Israel developed this terminology to discredit all Palestinian resistance groups.
The US claims Osama bin Laden and al-Zawahiri were the architects of the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington. But bin Laden and al-Zawahiri denied being involved though they applauded the bloody attacks. Bin Laden stated the attack on New York was payback for Israel’s destruction of PLO-occupied West Beirut in its 1982 invasion of Lebanon. No one in the West paid any attention.
To this day, I question if bin Laden and his group were actually behind 9/11. Tapes of bin Laden discussing the attack on New York shown on CNN turned out to be poorly made fakes.
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who has fiercely defended his country’s borders, language and culture, gave a 30-minute speech to a crowd of thousands of American admirers in Dallas on Thursday at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).
He painted a picture of America and Hungary facing twin fronts in a struggle against liberalism, globalists, communists, and “fake news.”
“The West is at war with itself,” he said, adding “The globalist can all go to hell. I have come to Texas.”
Amnesty International has come under pressure after releasing a report last week that said Ukraine’s fighting tactics are endangering civilians. The group said Sunday that it’s sorry for the “distress and anger” the release caused but said it “fully stands” behind the findings.
“Amnesty International deeply regrets the distress and anger that our press release on the Ukrainian military’s fighting tactics has caused,” Amnesty told Reuters.
“Amnesty International’s priority in this and in any conflict is ensuring that civilians are protected. Indeed, this was our sole objective when releasing this latest piece of research. While we fully stand by our findings, we regret the pain caused,” the group added.
The release from Amnesty about Ukraine’s fighting tactics said that Ukrainian troops were basing themselves in residential areas, including schools and hospitals, while there were “viable alternatives” that would not endanger civilians. Amnesty said that as a result of these tactics, Russian strikes targeted populated areas and killed civilians.
But Amnesty also criticized Russia and said these facts about Ukraine’s fighting tactics do not excuse Moscow’s “indiscriminate attacks.” But the findings from the organization still enraged officials in Ukraine. The head of Amnesty’s Ukraine office resigned after the report was issued, and accused the organization of being a tool of “Russian propaganda.”
Supporters of the NAP often appeal to it in order to argue for the immorality of theft, vandalism, assault, and fraud. Compared to nonviolence, the non-aggression principle does not preclude violence used in self-defense or defense of others.[71] Many supporters argue that NAP opposes such policies as victimless crime laws, taxation, and military drafts. NAP is the foundation of libertarian philosophy
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an unprecedented move to protect the safety and security of millions of Americans, the FBI has added itself to the FBI watchlist.
“When we reflected on the vast number of pedophiles, insurrectionists, frauds, and killers in our organization, we thought: ‘Holy cow! Someone needs to keep an eye on these weirdos!'” said FBI Director Christopher Wray to reporters. “That’s why today we have decided to place the FBI on the FBI watchlist so the FBI can keep a close eye on the FBI before the FBI does something terrible.”
Congress is demanding oversight of the FBI’s monitoring of the FBI, as the FBI has been known in the past to let the FBI get away with horrific crimes. The FBI in turn is monitoring the Congressional oversight committee in charge of overseeing the FBI’s oversight of the FBI. “Americans shouldn’t worry, we have this all under control,” said Wray.
Critics of the move expressed concern this may hamper the FBI’s ability to organize governor kidnapping schemes, insurrections, and mass shootings.
“Without the FBI at our disposal, we may have to turn to traditional partners such as the mafia to fight our political enemies,” said one anonymous Washington bureaucrat. “What’s the world coming to?”
At publishing time, the FBI announced they now have the FBI in custody. Unfortunately, they released the FBI from custody a few minutes later.
Roman Baber is a former Member of Ontario’s Provincial Parliament. He is running for Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada because he will not “sit back while Canadians are losing faith in Canada’s democracy and Canadian opportunity.” He was removed by Doug Ford from the Ontario government caucus after calling out the collateral harm of lockdowns in January 2021. Since then, Roman has been a staunch advocate in favour of a balanced covid response and in particular against lockdowns due to their toll on the health and mental health of Canadians. Roman brought legislation to cut MPP pay to CERB levels while Emergency Orders are in place, commenced and is in litigation against the Attorney General of Ontario over Canadians’ right to protest and worship outdoors and recently brought a Bill to outlaw workplace mandates. Roman is passionate about and is well familiar with justice, transit and autism policy. Roman was born and lived in the former Soviet Union until he was almost 9. He then lived in Israel until he immigrated to Canada with his family at age 15 and settled in the heart of the north Toronto district he now represents. Roman obtained a BA from York University and graduated from law school at the University of Western Ontario. During his last year of law school, Roman was a supervisor with the school’s legal aid funded clinic. Roman was called to the Ontario Bar in 2006 and practiced civil and commercial litigation until his election in 2018. He served as Chair of the Ontario Provincial Parliament’s Standing Committee on Justice Policy from September 2019 until January 2021. Roman is an occasional lecturer at an after-school program, engaging high school students on constitutional and criminal law topics. He loves Canadian kindness, the Toronto Raptors and his special someone, Nancy Marchese.
the military-industrial-congressional-media-academic-pharmaceutical-logistics-banking complex, the octopoid tentacles of which support one another by claiming that all of them are contributing to the greater good through defending values such as freedom and democracy
Nothing is more important at this unique moment in history than that we reject all efforts by pro-military propagandists to inculcate in the populace the central tenets of this cult: that offensive military action is a form of defense, and bombs have the power to do anything more than terrorize and destroy.
One of the most fascinating features of religious cults is that their tenets are impervious to empirical refutation, or even disconfirmation. Every apparent exception to the reigning narrative, every refractory datum, has a ready explanation compatible with the story already believed by the cult members. The teachings are in effect metaphysical, which is why the group is able to continue to recite what they regard as “the gospel” no matter what transpires.
Conceptually trapped within a fantasy world of their leader’s creation, the acolytes have been indoctrinated to believe that their leader is special and has privileged access to the truth. So devoted are his loyal followers that when the cult leader claims that he will effect a miracle, but this does not come to pass, they piously respond that they have not been faithful enough. The failure of the leader to do what he claimed he would do is taken to demonstrate not that he is a shyster or a fraud, but that he has not been adequately supported by the members of the group.
Accordingly, the cult members step up their proselytizing efforts and go out on street corners to sell flowers to bring in even more funds for their exalted leader. To outsiders this may seem utterly absurd, but to the members of the cult, it makes perfect sense. Strongly reinforcing their beliefs is the fact that everyone around them agrees. When an outsider approaches with the news that the group members have been conned and are laboring in a state of total delusion, they balk and spurn what they take to be the benighted critic. If he dares to persist in challenging their worldview, then they may label him either evil or insane.
These very same dynamics, witnessed in religious cult after cult since time immemorial, are observable throughout the military industrial complex or, to be more precise: the military-industrial-congressional-media-academic-pharmaceutical-logistics-banking complex, the octopoid tentacles of which support one another by claiming that all of them are contributing to the greater good through defending values such as freedom and democracy. It matters not to subscribers to the militarism creed that war itself is the most oppressive and tyrannical of means, imposing as it does the will of the killers upon anyone unlucky enough to live where they have decided to drop their bombs.
Nor is any importance attached to the actual effects of the bombing. No matter how many people are killed and maimed, military supporters continue religiously to bleat, “Freedom is not free!” convinced as they are that anything labeled “defense” is everywhere and always good. They rally behind calls for military intervention wherever and whenever the warriors please, and when a mission ceases in one place, they redirect their energies to the next so-called just war.
The church in this case may have been replaced by the military state, but the cult dynamics used to defend, maintain and promote the expansion of the institution are one and the same.
We must give the Devil his due. But the state insists upon its own agenda; it “cancels” researchers who adopt alternative plans; it threatens the medical licenses of physicians who pursue and recommend non-centrally planned medications, as in the case of COVID-19. It engages in affirmative action in both the private and so-called public sector which results in people less qualified occupying their laboratories in the first place.
This essay is dedicated to the memory of Witold Kwaśnicki, a Polish libertarian who recently passed away at the tender age of seventy. He died from pancreatic cancer. He expired not in a matter of years after diagnosis, nor even months. Rather, he succumbed in a matter of mere weeks. What a horrible disease that is.
I am now 80 years old. I full well realize that no one gets out of this alive; that my life expectancy is not what it was ten, twenty or thirty years ago. How do I come to grips with the prospects of my not too distant demise? How do keep my chin up?
I do so in two ways. First, I resolve to make each and every day, hour, minute (even second if I can) count. I try to enjoy myself all the livelong day (to a great degree through writing and speaking out in behalf of liberty). Yes, of course, everyone has chores. No life is a full bowl of cherries. But I do my best to appreciate whatever time I have left as much as possible. I have been doing this for decades.
The second way I try to achieve happiness in the face of inevitable death is try to understand its cause, such as from cancer. Why, then, do we now suffer from this dread disease? Surely, in 500 years this ailment will go the way of smallpox, polio, tetanus, hepatitis B, hepatitis A, rubella, hib, measles, whooping cough (pertussis), pneumococcal disease, rotavirus, mumps, chickenpox, diphtheria and others —which we have either eradicated entirely, or pretty much wrestled to the ground, so that they no longer constitute death sentences. Why are we still beset by cancer, and other such killers?
The only answer that satisfies me is that this is the fault of the government.
How so? First, they take some 50% of the goods and services we all produce. This impoverishes us. We are now half as wealthy as we would be without this malevolent institution seizing our hard-earned property. Murray Rothbard, Mr. Libertarian, maintains that a more accurate GDP calculation would subtract the government’s “contribution,” not add it to what emanates from the private sector. But matters are even worse.1
For what do the statists do with “their” share of our earnings? With their regulations, prohibitions, and compulsions they further reduce our economic power. As a rough estimate, we are now down to 33% of where we would otherwise be, without this pernicious institutional arrangement. Let us consider but one regulation that directly impinges on the search for medical cures. When and if a breakthrough occurs, government will limit profits; it will quell “profiteering” and price “gouging.” It will insist upon lowered drug prices. It is due to this threat that firms in this industry will have less of an incentive to do the necessary research than would otherwise be the case.
What does this have to do with death by cancer, heart attacks, kidney disease and other such debilitations? According to that old adage, “Wealthier is healthier,” the richer we are, other things equal, the more able we will be to rid ourselves of these medical scourges.
We must of course acknowledge that government does spend money not only on direct attempts to find cures for these horrid diseases, but also indirectly, through pure research. We must give the Devil his due. But the state insists upon its own agenda; it “cancels” researchers who adopt alternative plans; it threatens the medical licenses of physicians who pursue and recommend non-centrally planned medications, as in the case of COVID-19. It engages in affirmative action in both the private and so-called public sector which results in people less qualified occupying their laboratories in the first place.
We cannot claim that if the populace were three times as well-to-do as it is at present—in the absence of intrusive government—that all of this would go into basic or medical research. But more of it likely would. And we would be closer to quelling these diseases that plague mankind.
If government would get off the neck of the economy, we cannot be sure that under free enterprise cancer would be overcome. Perhaps, instead, it might be heart disease, strokes, lung disease, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, tuberculosis, cirrhosis.
A tried and true aphorism is that “To know, is to forgive.” I turn this around just a little bit. What keeps me going is, instead, “To know, is to obviate the pain that comes when we contemplate needless, premature deaths from tragedies such as pancreatic cancer.” Understanding the real cause of such abominations—government—makes it seem less of a threat, less terrible.
