MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Conspiracy Theories’

Republicans Have Always Dictated What Americans Can Think, Smoke, and Do with Their Money – The Future of Freedom Foundation

Posted by M. C. on March 13, 2021

We should never forget that Republicans do not for a minute believe that Americans can decide for themselves “how best to live their lives.”

https://www.fff.org/explore-freedom/article/republicans-have-always-dictated-what-americans-can-think-smoke-and-do-with-their-money/

by Laurence M. Vance

Democrats may want to censor what Americans can read and watch, but it is comical to hear Republicans complain about it, since they have always dictated what Americans can think, smoke, and do with their money.

We should never forget that Republicans do not for a minute believe that Americans can decide for themselves “how best to live their lives.”
[Click to Tweet]

Late last month, Democratic Representatives Anna Eschoo and Jerry McNerney, both of California, and both senior members of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, sent a letter to “12 cable, satellite, and streaming TV companies urging them to combat the spread of misinformation and requesting more information about their actions to address misinformation, disinformation, conspiracy theories, and lies spread through channels they host.”

Reads the letter,

Our country’s public discourse is plagued by misinformation, disinformation, conspiracy theories, and lies….

Nearly half of Americans get their news primarily from TV. However, not all TV news sources are the same. Some purported news outlets have long been misinformation rumor mills and conspiracy theory hotbeds that produce content that leads to real harm. Misinformation on TV has led to our current polluted information environment that radicalizes individuals to commit seditious acts and rejects public health best practices, among other issues in our public discourse.

The good members of Congress urged these companies to “combat the spread of misinformation” and requested of them information about their actions to address “misinformation, disinformation, conspiracy theories, and lies spread through channels they host.”

Two days after the letters went out, the House Subcommittee on Communications and Technology of the Committee on Energy and Commerce held a hearing on “Fanning the Flames: Disinformation and Extremism in the Media.”

In his opening statement, Committee on Energy and Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) acknowledged that “the First Amendment prohibits us from passing laws that inappropriately limit speech — even when it is controversial or overly partisan,” but then tried to justify Congress’s looking into “the spread of misinformation that causes public harm.”

Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Chairman Mike Doyle (D-Penn.) likewise affirmed the First Amendment, but then tried to justify Congress’s examining and evaluating media outlets “and the role they play in disseminating disinformation and fomenting extremism.”

The letter and the hearing did not go unnoticed by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.).

In a speech on the House floor the same day as the hearing, McCarthy warned that Democrats are trying to censor what Americans can read and watch:

It has never been Congress’s role to define and enforce journalistic standards. The 1st Amendment expresses [sic] prohibits the government from controlling what the press says, but Democrats are trying to give themselves the power to dictate what you can read and watch in your own home, and their assault on free speech goes beyond today’s disgraceful hearing….

These are members of Congress who are using their official position to coerce and control the information Americans can watch and access in their own homes.

They’re demanding more censorship, more de-platforming, and more control of what Americans can watch….

Democrats’ actions this week make it clear that the greatest threat to free speech today is not a law from Congress, which is bound by the 1st Amendment. The greatest threat is politicians who bully private companies to silence dissenting views.

McCarthy said that Americans can decide for themselves “how best to live their lives,” and they deserve to decide how to take care of their families or open their businesses during a pandemic, and they “deserve to decide to watch the news, judge the information they choose and draw their own conclusion about its accuracy.”

Now that they control both Houses of Congress and the presidency, the Democrats are clearly trying to do everything in their power to silence dissent, even if it means violating the First Amendment.

But who are Republicans to talk? They have always dictated what Americans can think, smoke, and do with their money. This is certainly just as bad as Democrats’ dictating what Americans can read and watch.

Republicans have always dictated what Americans can think.

The federal government outlaws discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, age, and other factors. Most states have similar laws. But to ban discrimination is to ban freedom of thought and freedom of association. In a free society, everyone has the natural right to think whatever he wants to think about any individual or group and the right to choose to associate or not associate with any individual or group on the basis of those thoughts. His thoughts may be erroneous, illogical, irrational, unreasonable, or nonsensical, and his opinions may be based on stereotypes, conjectures, prejudice, bigotry, or racism, but in a free society everyone is entitled to his own thoughts and opinions. And who supports discrimination laws? Republicans of course.

Republicans have always dictated what Americans can smoke.

Marijuana is classified by the federal government as a Schedule I controlled substance under the Controlled Substances Act. As a Schedule I drug, marijuana is said to have “a high potential for abuse,” “no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States,” and “a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug under medical supervision.” Possession of marijuana is a violation of federal law punishable by a maximum sentence of one year in jail and a minimum fine of $1,000 for a first conviction. Who supports marijuana prohibition laws on the federal level? Republicans of course. There are thirty-five states where the medical use of marijuana is legal, and fourteen states where the recreational use of marijuana is legal. Who opposes the legalization of marijuana on the state level? Republicans of course.

Republicans have always dictated what Americans can do with their money.

Although gambling in the United States is technically legal under federal law, the federal government does have a number of laws that regulate gambling. Each state can prohibit or regulate various forms of gambling within its borders. Only Nevada and Louisiana permit casino-style gambling statewide. Others states allow commercial casinos in some form, but generally restrict them to certain geographic areas. They also require state licensing and heavily restrict and regulate the gambling industry. Private gambling not done under the regulatory eye of the state is generally illegal in any form. And who supports gambling laws? Republicans of course.

Although it is legal for people to be paid to have sex — in front of a director, camera, and crew, and then, after production and distribution, in front of hundreds, if not thousands, of strangers — it is illegal for people to be paid to have sex in the privacy of their car, home, or hotel room. Although it is legal for consenting adults to have sex as often as they want and with as many different partners as they want, it is illegal if one of the parties pays the other for it. And although it is legal to pay for dinner and a movie to get some moments of intimacy with someone of the opposite sex, it is illegal to pay someone directly and skip the dinner and movie. And who supports prostitution laws? Republicans of course.

In a free society, people have the freedom to do what they will with their own money. Whether they “waste” it on gambling or prostitutes is their business and none of the government’s business.

But don’t Democrats support laws against discrimination, drugs, gambling, and prostitution? Of course they do. But Democrats don’t claim to be the party of the Constitution and recite a mantra of limited government, individual freedom, private property, free enterprise, and the free market.

The Democratic assault on the First Amendment is real. But we should never forget that Republicans do not for a minute believe that Americans can decide for themselves “how best to live their lives.”

This post was written by: Laurence M. Vance

Laurence M. Vance is a columnist and policy advisor for the Future of Freedom Foundation, an associated scholar of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and a columnist, blogger, and book reviewer at LewRockwell.com. He is the author of Gun Control and the Second Amendment, The War on Drugs Is a War on Freedom, and War, Empire and the Military: Essays on the Follies of War and U.S. Foreign Policy. His newest books are Free Trade or Protectionism? and The Free Society. Visit his website: www.vancepublications.com. Send him e-mail.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

7 Things That Were “Crazy Conspiracy Theories” Until 2020 Happened

Posted by M. C. on November 25, 2020

“Don’t be silly. Nobody is actually tracking you with your phone. You’re not Jason Bourne.”

Whoops. 2020 proved that was a lie when they rolled out contact tracing apps to make sure you didn’t breathe the same air as somebody who got a positive COVID test.

But governments aren’t having to market the chip as a method to track, trace, and control their populations. Instead, they are marketing the chip as a way to track and detect COVID and other coronaviruses. Clearly, this is a much easier sell to a public literally terrorized by their governments and mainstream media outlets for the last six months.

https://www.theorganicprepper.com/crazy-conspiracy-theories-2020/

by Daisy Luther

Remember back in the old days of, say, 2019, when anyone who talked about microchip implants, Americans being forced to show travel papers, and re-education camps was thought to be a crazy conspiracy theorist? And then 2020 rolled around and voila! It turns out those conspiracy theories weren’t so “crazy” after all.

And I’m not just talking about the government releasing info about UFOs.

We’re living in a time when someone will attempt to beat the crap out of you, burn your house down, or even kill you if you voted for the “wrong” presidential candidate. We’re being subjected to curfews, our movement is restricted, and our businesses have been forcibly shut down. One day, people will look back on this as the year that everything changed – or depending on how Americans respond to the mandates – the year we finally said enough.

Here are seven things that were considered crazy conspiracy theories…until now, when they’re becoming far too real.

#1) Universal Basic Income

Did you ever really think we’d live in a country where the government would tell private business owners when and how they could operate? Where workers would be told, “You can no longer go to work for your own good?”

Well, welcome to 2020.

22 million jobs were lost and only 42% of those were recovered by last August, when the country began to reopen. Millions of lost jobs were permanent losses, as businesses across the country fold under the weight of the restrictions that either don’t allow them to operate or the money problems of their former customers.

“It’s clear that the pandemic is doing some fundamental damage to the job market,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Analytics. “A lot of the jobs lost aren’t coming back any time soon. The idea that the economy is going to snap back to where it was before the pandemic is clearly not going to happen.”

…More than 10 million Americans are currently categorized as temporarily out of work. But historically, nearly 30% of people who tell the Labor Department that they are temporarily unemployed never get their job back, said Heidi Shierholz, senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal think tank.

“Even though we don’t know if the historical record will hold in this case, it’s an extremely valid concern that not all of those people are going to get called back,” she said.

People who are counting on businesses reopening their doors may be surprised to find that a temporary loss has become permanent one, said Zandi. (source)

Of the businesses that have closed, many will never reopen. Most harshly affected were small businesses.

About 60% of businesses that have closed during the coronavirus pandemic will never reopen, and restaurants have suffered the most, according to new data from Yelp. (source)

So we have not only people who became unemployed, but we also have business owners who’ve lost everything. As we go into the second round of lockdowns across the United States, it’s not a stretch of the imagination to think that some of the small businesses that have thus far managed to stay afloat will succumb to the economic effects of these mandates…taking with them even more jobs and plunging even more people into poverty.

Poverty is a vicious cycle and one seemingly small thing can suck those who are struggling into a vortex of fees and penalties from which emerging seems impossible. I’ve written about my own experiences with poverty here. The concern is that even fewer people will recover financially after this round of government mandates, leaving even more Americans broke, hungry, and homeless.

But don’t worry – the government is here to help and I mean that in the President Reagan threatening kind of way. They provided a “stimulus” check to everyone in America, gave such huge unemployment money to people that they made more staying home than they did going to work, and went so much deeper into debt that the number is simply unfathomable.

In effect, they paid people not to work. And it isn’t the fault of those people in most cases – the government forced their places of employment to close unless it was considered “essential.”

And that sounds a whole lot like Universal Basic Income. Or as I like to call it, modern feudalism.

Quite a few people are ready to give up their freedom so that someone else can take care of them.

They don’t think they’re giving up freedom. They’re convinced that they are embracing a smart, fair system that eliminates poverty. The greed, entitlement, and lack of ambition that seems inherent in many people today will have them slipping on the yoke of servitude willingly.

They feel like they deserve a living just for drawing breath. As Gawker’s headline reads, “A Universal Basic Income Is the Utopia We Deserve.”

The idea of a universal basic income for all citizens has been catching on all over the world. Is it too crazy to believe in? We spoke to the author of a new book on the ins, outs, and utopian dreams of making basic income a reality.

The basic income movement got a significant boost this week when the charity GiveDirectly announced that it will be pursuing a ten-year, $30 million pilot project giving a select group of Kenyan villagers a basic income and studying its effects. As an anti-poverty solution, universal basic income appeals to impoverished people in Africa, relatively well-off Scandinavians, and Americans automated out of their jobs alike. (source)

Sure, money for nothing sounds great on the surface.

But what would the real result of a Universal Basic Income be?

Feudalism. Serfdom. Enslavement.

UBI would fast-track us back to the feudalism of the Middle Ages. Sure, we’d be living in slick, modern micro-efficiencies instead of shacks. We’d have some kind of modern job instead of raising sheep for the lord of the manor.

But, in the end, we wouldn’t actually own anything because private property would be abolished for all but the ruling class. We’d no longer have the ability to get ahead in life. Our courses would be set for us and veering off of those courses would be harshly discouraged.

People will be completely dependent on the government and ruling class for every necessity: food, shelter, water, clothing. What better way to assert control than to make compliance necessary for survival? (source)

With this second round of lockdowns how many more jobs will go permanently down the tubes? What are all those people going to do for food? For rent? The government is going to give them money. And we can’t even argue, really, because everyone knows someone who has lost a job they had for decades and who can’t find other work.

They might call it something else, but Universal Basic Income is coming. And it’s coming soon.

#2) Travel Papers

Don’t be ridiculous. We’ll never have to show our “papers” to travel freely in the United States.

Doh.

Not until a COVID pandemic with all its subsidiary restrictions occurred. Back in March, days after I warned about the first lockdown, I wrote:

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Some Conspiracy Theories Are for Real — Strategic Culture

Posted by M. C. on July 6, 2020

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/07/02/some-conspiracy-theories-are-for-real/

 Philip Giraldi

What is the best way to debunk a conspiracy theory? Call it a conspiracy theory, a label which in and of itself implies disbelief. The only problem with that is there have been many actual conspiracies both historically and currently and many of them are not in the least theoretical in nature. Conspiracies of several kinds brought about American participation in both world wars. And however one feels about President Donald Trump, it must be conceded that he has been the victim of a number of conspiracies, first to deny him the GOP nomination, then to insure that he be defeated in the presidential election, and subsequently to completely delegitimize his presidency.

Prior to Trump there have been numerous conspiracy “theories,” many of which have been quite plausible. The “suicide” of Defense Secretary James Forrestal comes to mind, followed by the assassination of John F. Kennedy, which has been credibly credited to both Cuba and Israel. And then there is 9/11, perhaps the greatest conspiracy theory of all. Israel clearly knew it was coming, witness the Five Dancing Shlomos cavorting and filming themselves in New Jersey as the twin towers went down. Also the Saudis might have played a role in funding and even directing the alleged hijackers. And we have also had the conspiracy by the neocons to fabricate information about Iraq’s WMDs and the ongoing conspiracy by the same players to depict Iran as a threat to the United States.

Given the multiple crises currently being experienced in the United States it is perhaps inevitable that speculation about conspiracies is at its highest level ever. To the average American it is incomprehensible how the country has become so screwed up because the political and economic elite is fundamentally incompetent, so the search for a scapegoat must go on.

There are a number of conspiracy theories about the coronavirus currently making the rounds. Those libertarians and contrarians who choose to believe that the virus is actually a flu being exploited to strip them of their liberties are convinced that many in the government and media have conspired to sell what is essentially a fraud. One such snake oil salesman persists in using an analogy, that since more Americans are killed in automobile accidents than by the coronavirus it would be more appropriate to ban cars than to require the wearing of face masks.

Another theory making the rounds accuses Microsoft multi-billionaire Bill Gates of trying to take over the world’s healthcare system through the introduction of a vaccine to control the coronavirus, which he presumably created in the first place. The fallacy in many of the virus “conspiracies” that relate to a totalitarian regime or a crazy billionaire using a faux disease to generate fear so as to gain control of the citizenry is that it gives far too much credit to any government’s or individual’s ability to pull off a fraud of that magnitude. It would require people a whole lot smarter than the tag team of Trump-Pompeo or even Gates to convince the world and thousands of doctors and scientists that they should lock down entire countries over something completely phony.

Other coronavirus theories include that the virus was developed in the U.S., was exported to China by a traitorous American scientist, weaponized in Wuhan and then unleashed on the West as part of a communist plot to destroy capitalism and democracy. That would mean that we are already at war with China, or at least we should be. Then there is the largely accepted theory that the virus was created in Wuhan and escaped from the lab. Since that time Beijing has been engaging in a cover-up, which is the conspiracy. It is a theme favored by the White House, which has not yet decided what to do about it beyond assigning funny “Yellow Peril” names to the disease so everyone in MAGA hats will have something to chuckle about leading up to the November election.

But all kidding aside, there are some conspiracy theories that are more worth considering than others. One would be the role of George Soros and the so-called Open Society Foundations that he controls and funds in the unrest that is sweeping across the United States. The allegations against Soros are admittedly thin on evidence, but conspiracy mongers would point out that that is the mark of a really well-planned conspiracy, similar to what the 89 year-old Hungarian Jewish billionaire has been engaging in for a long time. The current round of claims about Open Society and Soros have generated as many as 500,000 tweets a day as well as nearly 70,000 Facebook posts per month, mostly from political conservatives.

The allegations tend to fall into two broad categories. First, that Soros hires protester/thugs and transports them to demonstrations where they are supplied with bricks and incendiaries to turn the gatherings into riots. Second, that Open Society is funding and otherwise enabling the destabilizing flow of illegal immigrants into the United States.

Soros and his supporters, many of whom are Jewish because they think they see anti-Semitism in the attacks on the Hungarian, claim to support democratization and free trade worldwide. He is, in effect, one of the world’s leading globalists. Soros claims to be a “force for good” as the cliché goes, but is it completely credible that his $32 billion foundation does not operate behind the scenes to influence developments in ways that are certainly not democratic?

Indeed, Soros accumulated his vast fortune through vulture capitalism. He made over $1 billion in 1992 by selling short $10 billion in British pounds sterling, leading to the media dubbing him “the man who broke the bank of England.” He has been accused of similar currency manipulation in both Europe and Asia. In 1999, New York Times economist Paul Krugman wrote of him that “Nobody who has read a business magazine in the last few years can be unaware that these days there really are investors who not only move money in anticipation of a currency crisis, but actually do their best to trigger that crisis for fun and profit.”

Far from a passive bystander giving helpful advice to democracy groups, Soros was heavily involved with the restructuring of former communist regimes in eastern Europe and had a hand in the so-called Rose Revolution in Georgia in 2003 and the Maidan Revolution in Ukraine in 2014, both of which were supported by the U.S. government and were intended to threaten Russia’s regional security.

Soros particularly hates President Vladimir Putin and Russia. He revealed that he is far from a benevolent figure fighting for justice in his March Financial Times op-ed (behind a pay wall) entitled “Europe Must Stand With Turkey Over Putin’s War Crimes in Syria.”

The op-ed is full of errors of fact and is basically a call for aggression against a Russia that he describes as engaged in bombing schools and hospitals. It starts with, “Since the beginning of its intervention in Syria in September 2015, Russia has not only sought to keep in place its most faithful Arab ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. It has also wanted to regain the regional and global influence that it lost since the fall of the Soviet Union.” First of all, Russia did not “intervene” in Syria. It was invited there by the country’s legitimate government to provide assistance against various groups, some of which were linked to al Qaeda and the Islamic State, that were seeking to overthrow President al-Assad.

And apart from Soros, few actual experts on Russia would claim that it is seeking to recreate the “influence” of the Soviet Union. Moscow does not have the resources to do so and has evinced no desire to pursue the sort of global agenda that was characteristic of the Soviet state.

There then follows a complete flight into hyperbole with: “Vladimir Putin has sought to use the turmoil in the Middle East to erase international norms and advances in international humanitarian law made since the second world war. In fact, creating the humanitarian disaster that has turned almost 6 million Syrians into refugees has not been a byproduct of the Russian president’s strategy in Syria. It has been one of his central goals.” Note that none of Soros’s assertions are supported by fact.

The Soros op-ed also included a bit of reminiscence, describing how, “In 2014, I urged Europe to wake up to the threat that Russia was posing to its strategic interests.” The op-ed reveals Soros as neither conciliatory nor “diplomatic,” a clear sign that he picks his enemies based on ideological considerations that also drive his choices on how to frame his ventures. Given all of that, why is it unimaginable that George Soros is engaged in a conspiracy, that he is clandestinely behind at least some of the mayhem of Antifa and Black Lives Matter as well as the flood of illegal immigration that have together perhaps fatally destabilized the United States?

 

© 2010 – 2020 | Strategic Culture Foundation | Republishing is welcomed with reference to Strategic Culture online journal www.strategic-culture.org.

Be seeing you

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

“Red Flag” Gun Confiscation Laws Are Even Worse Than You Think – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on August 30, 2019

Plus, the FBI has just recently stated that if you believe in “conspiracy theories,” you are a “domestic terrorist threat.” That statement is from an FBI intelligence bulletin from the bureau’s Phoenix field office, dated May 30, 2019. That FBI designation alone could very easily precipitate a “red flag” gun confiscation order being rendered against you.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/08/chuck-baldwin/red-flag-gun-confiscation-laws-are-even-worse-than-you-think/

By

Chuck Baldwin Live

As I said in this column last week, Republicans Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio are joining forces with liberal Democrats to soon enact “red flag” gun confiscation laws. I also reported on the push for the enactment of other gun control measures such as universal background checks being promoted on Capitol Hill and by the White House here.

Yes, Donald Trump is calling for “red flag” gun confiscation laws and universal background checks. Trump said, “I have an appetite for background checks. We’re going to be doing background checks. We’re going to be filling in . . . the loopholes.”

I urge readers to watch my 8-minute video exposing Donald Trump’s betrayal of his promise to protect the 2nd Amendment and share it with as many of your friends as you can. If we don’t convince our U.S. senators to reject these egregious gun control measures, THEY WILL BE PASSED, AND TRUMP WILL SIGN THEM INTO LAW. We have about two or three weeks to convince our senators to reject these new gun control laws. That’s it.

Please watch the video and share it with everyone you can.

If law-abiding gun owners don’t call their U.S. senators en masse, and I mean posthaste, you are very likely to wake up one morning around 4am to the sound of a SWAT team breaking down your door to confiscate your guns, prepared to kill you or any member of your family who resists. Why? Perhaps because a gun-hating neighbor hates you having guns or a relative doesn’t like you and is looking for any way to “teach you a lesson” or your ex-spouse is looking for any way to “get even” with you or an anti-gun cop with a grudge wants to send a political message or a family doctor or school teacher overheard one of your children talk about how many guns daddy has and became alarmed, etc., ad infinitum.

Plus, the FBI has just recently stated that if you believe in “conspiracy theories,” you are a “domestic terrorist threat.” That statement is from an FBI intelligence bulletin from the bureau’s Phoenix field office, dated May 30, 2019. That FBI designation alone could very easily precipitate a “red flag” gun confiscation order being rendered against you.

And Donald Trump himself recently demonstrated how dangerous “red flag” laws are. In a tweet on August 13, President Trump said,

Would Chris Cuomo be given a Red Flag for his recent rant? Filthy language and a total loss of control. He shouldn’t be allowed to have any weapon. He’s nuts!

Are you paying attention? Donald Trump was threatening to use a “red flag” law to authorize police agencies to take away an American citizen’s Natural God-given right of self-defense simply because Trump didn’t like what the citizen said—about him.

Folks, don’t you see? Those in authority can use “red flag” gun confiscation laws against ANYONE they want and for ANY REASON they want.

In other words, there doesn’t have to be a reason. Under “red flag” laws, all it takes for police to come and seize your guns is for someone to make a “red flag” accusation against you. That’s it. And, yes, it really IS that easy.

“Red flag” laws not only eviscerate the 2nd Amendment, but the 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment, 5th Amendment, 6th Amendment, 7th Amendment and 8th Amendment.

The enforcement of “red flag” laws is actually much worse than you think, so says Donald Kilmer, an attorney who has litigated and defended against many state and federal gun charges.

Everyone is debating “red flag” laws like they’re some new thing, but California has had variations of them for decades. We call them domestic violence restraining orders, civil harassment restraining orders, workplace restraining orders, elder abuse restraining orders, mental health seizures and prohibition orders, and, more recently, gun violence restraining orders.

They’re all meant to disarm dangerous people — but they’re all fundamentally flawed.

None of these red flag laws would have prevented recent mass shootings. And in my 23 years practicing law in the heart of Silicon Valley, I have litigated dozens of these cases. I’ve seen firsthand the practical enforcement problems that emerge in real-life cases.

These kinds of court orders are usually obtained from a judge ex parte. That’s fancy Latin for: The judge only hears one side of the story, it is not your side, and you may not even know about it until after the fact. Then they immediately strip you of fundamental constitutional rights for the duration of the orders. You’ll get your “full due process” hearing, but not until later.

And any violation of these orders is separately punishable as a crime. So even if you are innocent of the underlying conduct that inspired the “red flag” order, if you violate the order pending your hearing, you can still face criminal charges.

That kind of situation is ripe for danger. In one situation in Baltimore, police ended up shooting [and killing] a man when they came to collect his guns under a “red flag” law.

In one case in Southern California, a client had to pay a $1,000 ransom, that was reduced from an initial “offer” of $4,000, to get his 50-gun collection back.

Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.

To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.

As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.

Even if you win, the judge isn’t going to just hand your guns back to you at the end of the hearing. It’s probably a good idea to “lawyer up” just to go through the process of recovering your guns, so you don’t go to jail or prison for accidentally breaking an obscure firearm law or regulation. You wouldn’t want to set off a red flag.

Law-abiding gun owners better get a big whiff of reality SOON and realize that if they are going to maintain the right to keep and bear arms much longer, THEY must step up to the plate and defend that right—and I mean RIGHT NOW…

How much does the 2nd Amendment mean to you? Each of us will determine the answer to that question by what we do or do not do RIGHT NOW.

P.S. I, again, URGE readers to watch my 8-minute video regarding Trump’s betrayal of the 2nd Amendment and the push for the enactment of “red flag” gun confiscation laws and share it with everyone you can. In the video, I also include the phone numbers for both the White House and U.S. Senate, where you can call and voice your opposition.

Be seeing you

Will Red Flag Laws Become Red List Executions?

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

How the CIA Invented ‘Conspiracy Theories.’ – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on August 12, 2019

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/08/ron-unz/american-pravda-how-the-cia-invented-conspiracy-theoriesamerican-pravda-how-the-cia-invented-conspiracy-theories/

By

The Unz Review

Obviously, a large fraction of everything described by our government leaders or presented in the pages of our most respectable newspapers—from the 9/11 attacks to the most insignificant local case of petty urban corruption—could objectively be categorized as a “conspiracy theory” but such words are never applied. Instead, use of that highly loaded phrase is reserved for those theories, whether plausible or fanciful, that do not possess the endorsement stamp of establishmentarian approval…

These factors of media manipulation were very much in my mind a couple of years ago when I stumbled across a short but fascinating book published by the University of Texas academic press. The author of Conspiracy Theory in America[2] was Prof. Lance deHaven-Smith, a former president of the Florida Political Science Association.

Based on an important FOIA disclosure, the book’s headline revelation was that the CIA was very likely responsible for the widespread introduction of “conspiracy theory” as a term of political abuse, having orchestrated that development as a deliberate means of influencing public opinion.

During the mid-1960s there had been increasing public skepticism about the Warren Commission findings that a lone gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald, had been solely responsible for President Kennedy’s assassination, and growing suspicions that top-ranking American leaders had also been involved. So as a means of damage control, the CIA distributed a secret memo to all its field offices requesting that they enlist their media assets in efforts to ridicule and attack such critics as irrational supporters of “conspiracy theories.” Soon afterward, there suddenly appeared statements in the media making those exact points, with some of the wording, arguments, and patterns of usage closely matching those CIA guidelines. The result was a huge spike in the pejorative use of the phrase, which spread throughout the American media, with the residual impact continueing right down to the present day. Thus, there is considerable evidence in support of this particular “conspiracy theory” explaining the widespread appearance of attacks on “conspiracy theories” in the public media.

But although the CIA appears to have effectively manipulated public opinion in order to transform the phrase “conspiracy theory” into a powerful weapon of ideological combat, the author also describes how the necessary philosophical ground had actually been prepared a couple of decades earlier. Around the time of the Second World War, an important shift in political theory caused a huge decline in the respectability of any “conspiratorial” explanation of historical events.

For decades prior to that conflict, one of our most prominent scholars and public intellectuals[3] had been historian Charles Beard[4], whose influential writings had heavily focused on the harmful role of various elite conspiracies in shaping American policy for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many, with his examples ranging from the earliest history of the United States down to the nation’s entry into WWI. Obviously, researchers never claimed that all major historical events had hidden causes, but it was widely accepted that   some of them did, and attempting to investigate those possibilities was deemed a perfectly acceptable academic enterprise.

However, Beard was a strong opponent of American entry into the Second World War, and he was marginalized in the years that followed, even prior to his death in 1948. Many younger public intellectuals of a similar bent also suffered the same fate, or were even purged from respectability and denied any access to the mainstream media. At the same time, the totally contrary perspectives of two European political philosophers, Karl Popper[5] and Leo Strauss[6], gradually gained ascendancy in American intellectual circles, and their ideas became dominant in public life…

Meanwhile, Strauss, a founding figure in modern neo-conservative thought, was equally harsh in his attacks upon conspiracy analysis, but for polar-opposite reasons. In his mind, elite conspiracies were absolutely necessary and beneficial, a crucial social defense against anarchy or totalitarianism, but their effectiveness obviously depended upon keeping them hidden from the prying eyes of the ignorant masses. His main problem with “conspiracy theories” was not that they were always false, but they might often be true, and therefore their spread was potentially disruptive to the smooth functioning of society. So as a matter of self-defense, elites needed to actively suppress or otherwise undercut the unauthorized investigation of suspected conspiracies.

Even for most educated Americans, theorists such as Beard, Popper, and Strauss are probably no more than vague names mentioned in textbooks, and that was certainly true in my own    case. But while the influence of Beard seems to have largely disappeared in elite circles, the same is hardly true of his rivals. Popper probably ranks as one of the founders of modern    liberal thought, with an individual as politically influential as left-liberal financier George Soros claiming to be his intellectual disciple[7]. Meanwhile, the neo-conservative thinkers[8] who have totally dominated the Republican Party and the Conservative Movement for the last couple of decades often proudly trace their ideas back to Strauss.

So, through a mixture of Popperian and Straussian thinking, the traditional American tendency to regard elite conspiracies as a real but harmful aspect of our society was gradually    stigmatized as either paranoid or politically dangerous, laying the conditions for its exclusion from respectable discourse…

To some extent the creation of the Internet and the vast proliferation of alternative media outlets, including my  own small webzine[13], have somewhat altered this depressing picture. So it is hardly surprising that a very substantial fraction of the discussion dominating these Samizdat-like publications concerns exactly those subjects regularly condemned as “crazy conspiracy theories” by our mainstream media organs. Such unfiltered speculation must surely be a source of considerable irritation and worry to government officials who have long relied upon the complicity of their tame media organs to allow their serious misdeeds to pass unnoticed and unpunished. Indeed, several years ago a senior Obama Administration official[14] argued that the free discussion of various “conspiracy theories” on the Internet was so potentially harmful that government agents should be recruited to “cognitively infiltrate”  and disrupt them, essentially proposing a high-tech version of the highly  controversial Cointelpro[15] operations undertaken by J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI.

Until just a few years ago I’d scarcely even heard of Charles Beard, once ranked among the towering figures of 20th century  American intellectual life[16]. But the more I’ve discovered the number of serious crimes and disasters that have completely escaped substantial media scrutiny, the more I wonder what other matters may still remain hidden. So perhaps Beard was correct all along in recognizing the respectability of “conspiracy theories,” and we should return to his traditional American way of thinking, notwithstanding endless conspiratorial propaganda campaigns by the CIA and others to persuade us that we should dismiss such notions without any serious consideration.

Be seeing you

COINTELPRO against The Black Movement (1970s) · I Love ...

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

An Open Invitation to Tyranny – PaulCraigRoberts.org

Posted by M. C. on August 8, 2019

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/08/07/an-open-invitation-to-tyranny/

Paul Craig Roberts

The FBI has published a document that concludes that “conspiracy theories” can motivate believers to commit crimes.  https://www.scribd.com/document/420379775/FBI-Conspiracy-Theory-Redacted#download

Considering the growing acceptance of pre-emptive arrest, that is, arresting someone before they can commit a crime that they are suspected of planning to commit, challenging official explanations, such as those offered for the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, and Martin Luther King or the official explanation for 9/11, can now result in monitoring by authorities with a view to finding a reason for pre-emptive arrest.  Presidents George W. Bush and Obama created the police state precedents of suspension of habeas corpus and assassination of citizens on suspicion alone without due process.  If Americans can be preemptively detained indefinitely and preemptively assassinated,  Americans can expect to be preemptively imprisoned for crimes that they did not commit.

As Lawrence Stratton and I explained in our book, The Tyranny of Good Intentions, the historic achievement of forging law into a shield of the people is being reversed in our time as law is being reforged into a weapon in the hands of the government.  https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/155833/the-tyranny-of-good-intentions-by-paul-craig-roberts-and-lawrence-m-stratton/

The FBI document says that conspiracy theories “are usually at odds with official or prevailing explanations of events.”  Note the use of “official” and “prevailing.”  Official explanations are explanations provided by governments.  Prevailing explanations are the explanations that the media repeats.  Examples of official and prevailing explanations are: Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, Assad’s use of chemical weapons, Iranian nukes, Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the official explanation by the US government for the destruction of Libya.  If a person doubts official explanations such as these, that person is a “conspiracy theorist.”

Official and prevailing explanations do not have to be consistent with facts.  It is enough that they are official and prevailing.  Whether or not they are true is irrelevant.  Therefore, a person who stands up for the truth can be labeled a conspiracy theorist, monitored, and perhaps pre-emptively arrested.

Consider 9/11.  No forensic investigation of 9/11 was ever officially conducted.  Instead the destruction of the buildings was blamed on Osama bin Laden, and scenarios and simulations were created to support the allegation, not to find the truth.  Architects, engineers, scientists, pilots, and first responders on site cannot reconcile the official prevailing explanation with the facts.  The scientific and testimonial evidence that they have produced is dismissed as “conspiracy theory.”  It is those experts who stand on the evidence who are defined as conspiracy theorists, not those who created the story of Osama bin Laden’s 9/11 conspiracy.

Consider Russiagate.  Here we have an alleged conspiracy between Trump and Russia that was the official prevailing explanation.  Yet, to believe in the Russiagate conspiracy did not make one a conspiracy theorist as this conspiracy was the official prevailing explanation.  But to doubt the Russiagate conspiracy did make one a conspiracy theorist.

What the FBI report does, intentionally or unintentionally, is to define a conspiracist as a person who doubts official explanations.  In other words, it is a way of preventing any accountability of government.  Whatever the government says, no matter how obvious a lie, will have to be accepted as fact or we will be put on a list to be monitored for preemptive arrest.

In effect, the FBI’s document reduces the First Amendment, that is, free speech, to the right to repeat official and prevailing explanations.  Any other speech is a conspiratorial belief that can lead to the commission of a crime.

Every American should be greatly concerned that the government in Washington does not see this FBI document as an open invitation to tyranny, repudiate it, and demand its recall.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

How to Understand JFK Conspiracy Theories – The Future of Freedom Foundation

Posted by M. C. on November 15, 2017

Kennedy was reaching out to them in a spirit of peace and friendship at the time he was killed.

That my friends, along with Kennedy’s stated desire to ‘break the CIA into a thousand pieces’, is why the CIA and 60’s deep state took him out of the picture.

https://www.fff.org/explore-freedom/article/understand-jfk-conspiracy-theories/

First, no motive. Neither the Russians nor the Cubans had any motive to kill Kennedy. In fact, their desire was the exact opposite. They wanted Kennedy to live out his term and even be reelected. The last thing they wanted was for Kennedy to die in office and be replaced by Lyndon Johnson or be defeated in the 1964 election by Republican Barry Goldwater. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

10 More Crazy Conspiracy Theories That Became Conspiracy Facts

Posted by M. C. on May 22, 2017

http://theantimedia.org/10-conspiracy-theories-2/

Written by

(ANTIMEDIA) Generally speaking, conspiracy theories form where there is a vacuum of verifiable facts associated with a controversial, usually tragic event. The concept has evolved over the years and is a part of our popular culture. There are legions of conspiracy theorists and “truthers” who have devoted their lives to certain theories, and there are legions of skeptics who have devoted their lives to debunking those theories. All the while, conspiracy theories of every stripe and variety festoon the footnotes of history. Even the origin of the phrase itself is subject to conspiracy theory, as some researchers have argued that the CIA invented and promulgated the term in order to marginalize fringe thinkers and neutralize investigations.

 The internet has obviously had a profound effect on conspiracy theories, simultaneously helping and hurting the cause. While a world of information is at people’s fingertips, so too are alternate worlds of manufactured propaganda. While the Internet may appear to be a democratized, unfiltered path toward facts and truth, it is easily manipulated. Powerful corporations pay a lot of money to have their dirty laundry buried in the search results underneath contrived puff pieces.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »