Enstupidation..

by Fred Reed

I wonder what purpose the public schools serve, other than to warehouse children while their parents work or watch television. They certainly don’t teach much, as survey after survey shows. Is there any particular reason for having them? Apart from their baby-sitting function, I mean.

Schooling, sez me, should be adapted to the needs and capacities of those being schooled. For unintelligent children, the study of anything beyond minimal reading is a waste of time, since they will learn little or nothing more. For the intelligent, a public schooling is equivalent to tying an anchor to a student swimmer. The schools are an impediment to learning, a torture of the bright, and a form of negligent homicide against a country that needs trained minds in a competitive world.

Let us start with the truly stupid. Millions of children graduate—“graduate”—from high school—“high school”—unable to read. Why inflict twelve years of misery on them? It is not reasonable to blame them for being witless, but neither does it make sense to pretend that they are not. For them school is custodial, nothing more. Since there is little they can do in a technological society, they will remain in custody all their lives. This happens, and must happen, however we disguise it.

For those of reasonably average acuity, it little profits to go beyond learning to read, which they can do quite well, and to use a calculator. Upon their leaving high school, question them and you find that they know almost nothing. They could learn more, average not being stupid, but modest intelligence implies no interest in study. This is true only of academic subjects such as history, literature, and physics. They will study things that seem practical to them. Far better to teach the modestly acute such things as will allow them to earn a living, be they typing, carpentry, or diesel repair. Society depends on such people. But why inflict upon them the geography of Southeast Asia, the plays of Shakespeare, or the history of the nineteenth century? Demonstrably they remember none of it.

Some who favor the public schools assert that an informed public is necessary to a functioning democracy. True, and beyond doubt. But we do not have an informed public, never have had one, and never will. Nor, really, do we have a functioning democracy.

Any survey will reveal that most people have no grasp of geography, history, law, government, finance, international relations, or politics. And most people have neither the intelligence nor the interest to learn these things. If schools were not the disasters they are, they still couldn’t produce a public able to govern a nation.

But it is for the intelligent that the public schools—“schools”—are most baneful. It is hideous for the bright, especially bright boys, to sit year after year in an inescapable miasma of appalling dronedom while some low-voltage mental drab wanders on about banalities that would depress a garden slug. The public schools are worse than no schools for the quick. A sharp kid often arrives at school already reading. Very quickly he (or, most assuredly, she) reads four years ahead of grade. These children teach themselves. They read indiscriminately, without judgement—at first anyway—and pick up ideas, facts, and vocabulary. They also begin to think.

In school, bored to desperation, they invent subterfuges so as not to lapse into screaming insanity. In my day the tops of desks opened to reveal a space for storing crayons and such. The bright would keep the top open enough so that they could read their astronomy books while the teacher—“teacher”—talked about some family of cute beavers, and how Little Baby Beaver….

I ask you: How much did you learn in school, and how much have you learned on your own? Asking myself the same question, I come up with typing, and two years of algebra.

The bright should go to school, but it is well to distinguish between a school and a penitentiary. They need schools at their level, taught by teachers at their level. It is not hard to get intelligent children to learn things, and indeed today a whole system of day-care centers only partly succeeds in keeping them from doing it. They likelearning things, if only you keep those wretched beavers out of the classroom. When I was in grade school in the early Fifties, bright kids read, shrew-like, four times their body weight in books every fifteen minutes—or close, anyway. In third grade or so, they had microscopes (Gilbert for hoi polloi, but mine was a fifteen-dollar upscale model from Edmund Scientific) and knew about rotifers and Canada balsam and well slides and planaria. These young, out of human decency, for the benefit of the country, should not be subjected to public education—“education.” Where do we think high-bypass turbofans come from? Are they invented by heart-warming morons?

To a remarkable extent, dumb-ass public schools are simply not necessary. I asked my (Mexican) wife Violeta how she learned to read. It was through a Head Start program, I learned, called “mi padre.” Her father, himself largely self-taught, sat her down with a book and said, see these little squiggles? They are called “letters,” and they make sounds, and you can put them together….. Vi contemplated the idea. Yes, it made sense. Actually, she decided, it was no end of fun, give me that book…Bingo.

The absorptive capacity of smart kids is large if you just stay out of their way. A bright boy of eleven can quickly master a collegiate text of physiology, for example. This is less astonishing than perhaps it sounds. The human body consists of comprehensible parts that do comprehensible things. If he is interested, which is the key, he will learn them, while apparently being unable to learn state capitals, which don’t interest him.

What is the point of pretending to teach the unteachable while, to all appearances, trying not to teach the easily teachable? The answer of course is that we have achieved communism, the rule of the proletariat, and the proletariat doesn’t want to strain itself, or to admit that there are things it can’t do.

In schooling, perhaps “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs” isn’t a bad idea. If a child has a substantial IQ, expect him to use it for the good of society, and give him schools to let him do it. If a child needs a vocation so as to live, give him the training he needs. But don’t subject either to enstupidated, unbearably tedious, pointless, one-size-fits-nobody pseudo-schools to hide the inescapable fact that we are not all equal.

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheMilitantLibertarian/~3/yqX6mx1oAbY/

The Agitator

This video doesn’t show a dog killing, or a person killing, or a police beating. But in some ways, it’s more appalling than those sorts of videos. In it, you’ll see a “multi-agency” police task force arresting employees at a series of massage parlors in Houston. The businesses were apparently fronts for prostitution. The initial raid was conducted by a paramilitary police team, as you can see from the screen capture. In the video, the head of the task force steps out in full SWAT attire, including a balaclava, as he leads the women out of the building. He keeps the mask on throughout the video.

The women, all but one of whom were immigrants, are led out in handcuffs and leg shackles. One repeatedly struggles with and trips over her shackles on her way to the wagon. They all look terrified. The whole thing is stomach-turning. It’s an ugly, egregious, cock-waving display of power.

At worst, these these women provided a sexual service to willing customers in exchange for money. For that, a completely victimless crime, they get frog-marched in leg shackles on citywide TV.

But under that scenario the cops only look like bullies. There’s another possibility that makes them look thuggish and incompetent. In interviews with the local news, our brave and hooded vice warrior points out that these women could in fact be victims. That is, they may have been in the sex business involuntarily. We can’t know, he says, because they refuse to talk. He says they may fear that if they talk, their families back home will face repercussions.

Now let’s assume this is true. That means this multi-agency task force knew there was a possibility that these businesses were staffed with women who had been forced into prostitution. Aware of that possibility, they still scared the hell out of the women, cuffed and chained them, and—here’s the really galling part—tipped off the local news so it could all be put on TV. The humiliation is bad enough. But if there’s substance to the claim that these women fear retaliation against their families in their native countries, the potential repercussors now have video showing exactly which women were arrested. Back-slaps all around, guys.

And yes, there’s no question that the police tipped off the local news. Four (by my count) different TV stations don’t coincidentally show up at a run-of-the-mill strip mall just as a prostitution raid goes down. And while we’re passing out shame buttons, let’s slap a few on Houston’s local news teams, too. That’s you KHOU, Fox 26, ABC affiliate KTRK, andKPRC.  Think about what you’re putting on the air.  There’s no law that requires you to accommodate the police every time they want to flex their muscles on the evening news. In one of the videos linked above, the news team shoves a camera into a woman’s face as she’s stepping into the wagon. The reporter then shouts questions at the woman—this just after the reporter points out the possibility that the woman she’s humiliating and zooming in on may be a sex slave.

And about that balaclava. Yes, I realize the cop was probably protecting his identity. Take the hood off, and the next time he’s slabbed over a massage table, the 19-year-old Thai girl rubbing his back might recognize from TV, and decline to offer him extras. Thus ruining his investigation. He may also investigate other vice crimes, like narcotics, in which case revealing his identity could put him at risk. Understood. But here’s an easier way to protect your cover: Don’t call in the news cameras before you make your bust.

Look, I understand that cops enforce the laws, they don’t write them. And in this case it appears that (a) neighboring businesses were complaining, and (b) these massage parlors may have been engaged in sex trafficking. It’s hard to fault them for investigating (although in some of these massage parlor cases, the cops tend to investigate “to completion.”)

But how about some restraint? You’re “apprehending” 105-pound women here. Maybe you leave the ninja gear at home. Considering that you believe these women could be emotionally and/or physically abused, maybe you also do this bust quietly, bring along some social workers, and take the women away in vans. Maybe you have trained counselors talk to the women for a few hours before you give them the Whitey Bulger treatment. Then, once you have a better grasp on the nature of these businesses, you can hold yourself a press conference and bask in praise for keeping Houston safe from prostitutes.

You won’t get to go on TV dressed up in your riot gear that way. But you’ll at least know you’ve done your job with some professionalism—and some humanity.

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheMilitantLibertarian/~3/Kmqz5QKAR-U/

by William N. Grigg

After Daniel Chong was arrested in a federal drug raid, he wasn’t taken to Gitmo. Instead, the Feds thoughtfully arranged to bring Gitmo to him, nearly torturing him to death in the process.

Chong, a senior at the University of California-San Diego, was one of nine people swept up in an April 21 narcotics raid by the Drug Enforcement Administration. After his arrest he spent four hours handcuffed in a cell before being questioned. One of the agents who questioned Chong described him as someone who was “in the wrong place at the wrong time.”

After being interrogated, the student was told that he would be released and provided with paperwork to sign. He was then handcuffed and put into a five-by-ten-foot detention cell, where he was held for five days in conditions that qualify as torture under any rational reading of either domestic or international law.

The DEA’s story was that Chong was simply “forgotten.” A likelier explanation is that he was ignored, or even singled out for deliberate abuse. Chong shouted and screamed for help, kicking against the heavy door of his cell. Although his hands were cuffed, he managed to tear a small fragment from his jacket, which he shoved under the door in an effort to get the attention of his jailers.

Since Chong had no difficulty hearing conversations and other sounds outside his cell, there’s no reason to doubt that his pleas were heard, and simply disregarded.

For at least two days and nights, Chong was left alone, handcuffed, in complete darkness, and began to hallucinate. Fearing that he might die in captivity, Chong shattered his eyeglasses and used broken shards to carve the words “Sorry, mother” into his arm.

Although Chong has admitted he had gone to a friend’s house to commemorate “4/20,” an unofficial observance celebrating recreational marijuana use, he was not charged with a narcotics offense. Through its prohibition enforcement action, DEA managed to create conditions in which Chong ingested substances much worse for him than marijuana. Left for several days without food or water to sustain him, Chong made a futile attempt to trigger an overhead fire sprinkler, and then eventually drank his own urine. Tormented by the insistent protests of an empty stomach, he consumed a small amount of a white, powdery substance that was found to be methamphetamine.

By the time two agents “discovered” him, Chong was literally pleading for his captors to kill him. After being released, he was hospitalized for severe dehydration, renal failure, a perforated esophagus, and cramps. He had shed 15 pounds. He has never received an apology.

If a dog had been subjected to treatment similar to the abuse inflicted on Daniel Chong, those responsible would face felony charges. Thanks to the spurious principle of “supremacy clause immunity,” there is no measurable likelihood that the people who nearly tortured Chong to death will face criminal charges. It’s quite likely they will never be identified.

It’s not just the Feds employed by the DEA – an agency best described as the CIA’s slow-witted sibling – who enjoy this privilege.

No criminal charges have been filed against the Lee County, Florida Sheriff’s Deputies responsible for the torture death ofCleveland resident Nick Christie. The emotionally disturbed 62-year-old man was detained for several days in March 2009 after his frantic wife Joyce made the fatal mistake of calling the police for “help.”

Mr. Christie, who had recently been prescribed a potent anti-depressant called Lexapro, suddenly left his home in Cleveland to visit family in Ft. Myers. When he arrived at his brother’s house, Christie’s behavior became dangerously erratic.

Acting on the common and entirely misplaced assumption that police intervention is a good idea in situations of this kind, Joyce called the Lee County Sheriff’s Department to ask them to find Nick and get him to a hospital. After deputies found the retired boilermaker, they arrested him on trespassing charges.

Over the next 43 hours, Christie was repeatedly shackled in a restraint chair, hooded, and attacked with military-grade pepper spray. The chemical assault was so intense that it left other inmates gagging on the fumes. Christie, who suffered from respiratory and heart disease, pleaded with deputies to remove the spit mask because he couldn’t breathe. One inmate described how Nick turned “purple and almost blue” as he suffocated.

When medical personnel arrived to check on Nick, they were overwhelmed by the pepper spray residue. The victim died of heart failure two days after his arrest. The death was ruled a homicide – but the State Attorney’s office insisted that there is no evidence of criminal wrongdoing on the part of the deputies who tortured Nick Christie to death.

The same blanket immunity from prosecution shields the members of the thugscrum –at least ten and as many as fifteen officers – from Fresno, California, who beat, pepper-sprayed, and repeatedly tasered a man named Raul Rosas.

The police had arrived at Rosas’s residence on June 6 of last year in response to an unspecified “domestic disturbance.” When the police arrived, Rosas took refuge in the bathroom. One of the officers kicked open the front door and dragged out the unarmed man, who was immediately hit with a dose of pepper spray. The chemical weapon attack was a prelude to a full-scale onslaught: Witnesses reported hearing the sounds of a taser being used for at least eight to ten minutes.

After hog-tying Rosas, the assailants earned extra points for creative sadism by using a garden hose to drown him as he pleaded for water – a crude but effective simulacrum of waterboarding. This atrocity was witnessed by Rosas’s horrified children and several neighbors, who repeatedly warned that the victim was suffocating. “After some time had passed, [Rosas] had clear spit bubbles coming out of his mouth,” recounts a lawsuit filed by the victim’s family. “Witnesses observed [his] lips turn purple.”

When one of the witnesses told the cops they were killing Rosas, one of them sneeringly insisted that the victim was “faking it.” Eventually one of the officers felt for a pulse and found nothing. None of the officers involved in this torture-murder has ever been publicly identified, much less subjected to prosecution or administrative punishment.

Given the foregoing cases, it could be said that Pennsylvania resident Derena Marie Madison was comparatively fortunate: Although she was physically abused and humiliated, she wasn’t killed or severely injured.

At about 2:30 a.m. on February 3, 2011, Pennsylvania State Troopers Chad Weaver and Michael Zampogna pulled over a vehicle driven by Jamie Cornell, who was arrested on suspicion of driving while intoxicated. After Cornell was taken into custody, the troopers threatened to have the vehicle towed. This prompted Madison, who was a passenger, to exit the car in protest. This gave the troopers an excuse to arrest her for public drunkenness and disorderly conduct.

Shackled at the wrists and ankles, Madison was taken to a nearby State Police barracks, where she was chained to a bench with her hands cuffed behind her back. Without provocation, Weaver hit Madison with two blasts of pepper spray to her face. None of the other officers intervened.

Still trussed with handcuffs and leg shackles, Madison was unable to wipe the pepper spray residue from her face. In response to her pleas for help, several troopers – whom she couldn’t identify, because she was blinded from the pepper spray — carried her downstairs and outside the barracks. After being thrown to the snowy ground and doused with a large quantity of water, Madison blacked out. When she regained consciousness, she quickly realized that one or more of the assailants had urinated on her head, face, and neck.
Taken back to inside the barracks, Madison was chained to the bench again and briefly held before being released without receiving medical attention. Eleven days later, she was formally charged with public drunkness and disorderly conduct, and eventually found guilty on both charges.

Responding to Miss Madison’s lawsuit, the State Troopers didn’t contest her account; instead, they claimed that their actions were taken pursuant to their duties, and therefore they were protected by “sovereign immunity,” maintaining that “subduing persons is one of the acts law enforcement officers are employed to perform [and that] officers are also permitted to use force, if necessary, in the commission of their duties.”

Although the Troopers described Madison as an “out-of-control person,” there is no evidence that she did anything other than express her displeasure over the prospect of being abandoned once Cornell’s vehicle had been towed away.

Displaying an honesty uncommon among those in his profession, U.S. District Judge Gary L. Lancaster rejected the “sovereign immunity” claim. Repeatedly assaulting a handcuffed woman with pepper spray and urinating on her serves “no legitimate law enforcement purpose,” but indicates a “personal motivation, rather than intent to serve the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.” This raises the troubling possibility that behavior of this kind could be considered appropriate if it were “authorized” as a matter of official policy.

A similar possibility was raised by a ruling in the case of Niagara, New York resident Ryan S. Smith, who was tortured into providing a DNA sample to police.

Smith, a repeat offender, was suspected of involvement in a July 2006 home invasion and kidnapping. When three of the suspects took one of the hostages to another home, Smith allegedly remained behind to guard two small children, who had been bound and gagged. While there, the suspect helped himself to a soda, apparently unaware that by doing so he would leave behind potentially incriminating DNA evidence.

The DNA residue from the soda can was eventually matched by theFBI’s Combined DNA System (CODIS) with a sample previously taken from Smith. In August 2008, Niagara County Court Judge Sara Sheldon Sperrazza issued an order requiring Smith to provide a DNA sample via a painless swab of his inner cheek. Smith didn’t object, and the sample was taken without difficulty.

As Detective Lt. William Thomson would later testify, Assistant Niagara County D.A. Doreen M. Hoffmann, who is presiding over the prosecution of Ryan Smith, instructed the police that “we could use the minimum force that was necessary” to force the suspect to submit to a DNA test.

That formulation is a tautology, since it authorizes the use of any amount of force needed to extract the sample. As long as the police were reasonably careful in calibrating the duress the applied, they could continue escalating the level of force until it broke the suspect; wherever they end up would obviously be the “minimum” necessary to accomplish their objectives.

The police elected to use a taser in “drive stun” mode in order to force Smith to cough up the DNA sample. On the basis of that evidence – which was extracted through torture, albeit of a comparatively mild variety, Smith was hit with a 24-count criminal indictment. He was also charged with “criminal contempt of court”for forcing his interrogators to torture him.

When Smith’s defense counsel filed a motion to suppress the evidence based on Fourth and Fifth Amendment protections, the same Judge who issued the ex parte orders produced a ruling validating the use of taser torture as means of forcing compliance, as long as it’s not done “maliciously” or to “excess.”

Judge Sperrazza is “the first judge in western civilization to say you can use a Taser to enforce a court order,” complained Patrick Balkin, Smith’s defense counsel. He also pointed out that the precedent could inspire other practical applications of electro-shock “pain compliance”: “They have now given the Niagara Falls police discretion to Taser anybody anytime they think it’s reasonable. [Sperrazza's] decision says you can enforce a court order by force. If you extrapolate that, we no longer have to have child support hearings; you can just Taser the parent.”

In a lawsuit filed against the City of Niagara Falls, Smith alleged that he was “tortured into unconsciousness” by repeated Tasercharges. The police investigators insist that they were much gentler in the application of electro-shock trauma, but their testimony regarding the number and duration of shocks is mutually self-contradictory (as well as inconsistent with the record kept by theTaser unit itself).

Smith was eventually convicted of nearly two dozen offenses. Last March, the New York State Supreme Court overturned Smith’s conviction and ordered a new trial, ruling that the use of a taser to compel the prisoner to surrender a DNA sample was “excessive force.” At the time, Smith “posed no immediate threat to the safety of himself or officers, nor did he attempt to evade the officers by flight,” recounts the decision. Smith “was handcuffed, seated on the floor, and surrounded by three patrol officers and two detectives…. [He] did not threaten, fight with, or physically resist the officers at any time; rather, he simply refused to open his mouth to allow the officers to obtain a buccal swab.”

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheMilitantLibertarian/~3/SU5A5C1aX0U/

by Captain Eric H. May (via email)

For years my colleagues and I have been asking Ron Paul about a slew of petrochemical disasters in and around his Houston-area congressional district. Several of them occurred during federal terror exercises, and resulted in record profits for Big Oil. He has stonewalled not only us, but also his constituents on this life-and-death subject.

At last there may be cause for hope, though. During a Thursday Austin speech, Paul said he was concerned that a “false flag” attack might be used to plunge the United States into a war with Iran. Hopefully this means that he is now prepared to answer questions about what we believe to have been false flag events in his own back yard.

Some have suggested that Paul’s truther remarks are an attempt to appease false flag students who think that he is simply another establishment apparatchik, albeit one who poses as an anti-establishment rebel. After all, five years before this latest headline, Ron Paul Warns of False Flag in Town Hall .Speech, there was Presidential Candidate Fears “Gulf Of Tonkin” To Provoke Iran War. Between the two “candid candidate” moments, though, there has been half a decade of dodging, while wishful supporters supposed that their man was somehow different from the rest.

On March 3, 2008 W. Leon Smith, publisher of The Lone Star Iconoclast, presented a penetrating editorial about the real situation in Paul’s home district, which is as compelling now as it was then:

Time To Investigate Houston Is Now
The Lone Star Iconoclast (3/3/08)

Every time there is a disaster or “mistake” involving the petrochemical industry, gasoline prices shoot up. The federal government assures the American public that gasoline prices are going to continue to rise. In fact, recent official predictions suggest $4-a-gallon gasoline this summer.Thus lies the basis for governmental predictions of continued disasters and, ultimately, of an impending new 9/11. They say it’s not if, but when.

The powers that be — including senators running for re-election or a higher office and a lame president — have chosen to embrace the series of oil incidents as accidents. It wouldn’t be in their personal self interests to focus an investigation upon these continued “once-in-a-lifetime” events, for there are profits at risk. Besides, what better way to impose an indirect tax upon the American public?The candidates tout “change” in their speeches. In reality, “change” would be the removal of these parasites from the federal government. “Change” is not imbedding them deeper

These so-called public servants sprinkle upon themselves the image of a ruling class, when in reality they are merely useless employees who have blatantly plundered the public for their own personal gain.They are not patriots; they are thieves. Patriots by now would have taken appropriate actions to investigate why these incidents continue to occur, and then do something about it. This neglect makes them players — and profiteers.

For five years Captain Eric H. May, our military correspondent, has been warning the Houston area, dense with petrochemical targets, that it is the the nation’s foremost terror target. In this issue of The Iconoclast, in Spook and Nuke, he turns his attention to the curious campaign of Commander Brian Klock, an ultra-secretive naval intelligence officer. Klock is seeking the Republican nomination in Texas Congressional District 22, which is the heart of the terror targets zone that Captain May has long identified.

Captain May was the first military expert to analyze the Houston area as the target for “9/11-2B,” the “next 9/11? that official sources and major media constantly remind us is going “to be.”He has asserted that the real danger to the Houston area is not from a contrived terror threat called Al Qaeda, but from sources inside our own government. In his trenchant analyses, he has anticipated the dismal course of the Iraqi war at a time when retired officers senior to him were boasting of a war that was already won, or soon to be won. He has been right on the biggest issues before, and in the face of the most highly touted experts.

In the two years that he has been a writer for The Iconoclast, this newspaper has been intimately aware of his analyses and predictions.Two years ago he predicted to us a major petrochemical event in the Houston area for July 1, 2006. He was accurate to within one day, given the explosion of the Exxon Mobil refinery in the Houston suburb of Baytown, which drove oil to record prices.

In October 2007, The Iconoclast published his The Texas Triangle: Terror and Treason, in which he detailed the process by which he issued a red alert to southeast Texas just hours before the Oct. 18 explosion of a Dow Chemical pipeline in Port Arthur, which had been hosting military/police exercises simulating just that scenario a few days earlier. The Iconoclast staff was directly involved in that emergency alert.

Captain May’s notes and articles, provided to The Iconoclast, back up his claims to have issued the information to the FBI and local media that brought about a terror alert to southeast Texas on March 24, 2004. His prediction day for a major petrochemical incident was March 31, and he was off by one day again. The BP refinery in Texas City exploded on March 30, resulting in record profits for big oil.

In early July 2005, he predicted a July 27 event, and was contacted by the FBI as the day approached. Yet again, he was accurate to within one day, as the BP refinery in Texas City exploded on July 28, yet again resulting in record profits for big oil.

In mid January of 2006, he predicted the attempt of a nuclear attack on Texas City on Jan. 31. On Feb. 1, area residents were highly alarmed to find a U.S. military nuclear team on the Galveston beaches just south of Texas City.. Citizens went on record with their belief that Captain May’s alert had interdicted what was to be a false flag attack. Five news articles, three of them written before Jan. 31, offer invaluable insights on how and why he issued the alert, and what would have happened if he had not.

The rhymes are the “official” stories. The reasons lie in the profits garnered from a hidden agenda masked by a knowing and enabling force holding office.

The Iconoclast exhorts local and national political, military, and police leaders — if any with a conscience remain — to look into Captain May’s results in predicting petrochemical incidents in southeast Texas.Their unwillingness to investigate so far does not argue that this highly trained military intelligence officer is a mere conspiracy theorist, but rather that there is an official conspiracy to attack petrochemical targets in southeast Texas to induce oil profits at will, and perhaps to inflict mass casualties on American citizens.

For Captain May’s many articles on Ron Paul and the false flag operations in his district, refer to his Iconoclast columns, 2006-2009.

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheMilitantLibertarian/~3/Mr7BEHSGj6w/

by Josey Wales, BIN

Do you ever get the feeling that the mainstream media is feeding you a very watered-down and twisted version of the news?  Do you ever get the feeling that the federal government does not believe that the American people can actually be trusted with the truth?  It is exasperating to realize that the news that the public is being fed every single day is very heavily filtered and very heavily censored.  In a world where “spin” is everything, simply telling the truth is a revolutionary act.  Fortunately, the Internet has helped fuel the rise of the alternative media, and millions of Americans that are starting to wake up are turning to the alternative media for answers to their unanswered questions.  Increasingly, people are becoming willing to question the orthodoxy that is being shoved down their throats by the major news networks, and that is a very good thing.  The world is becoming an incredibly unstable place, and it is more imperative than ever that we all learn to think for ourselves.  We live during a time of great deception, and the lies are going to get even bigger and even more bold in the years to come.  If we don’t know why we believe what we believe, then we are in danger of falling for just about anything.

It is those that seek the truth that end up finding it.  If you just accept the version of reality that the system wants to feed you, then you are probably going to become what the system wants you to become.

But if you are not afraid to question everything, then you will have a chance to become everything that you were always meant to be.

So what are some things that we should be questioning right now?

The following are 21 unanswered questions that they don’t want you to look into….

#1 Why is the TSA being allowed to conduct warrantless searches at bus stations and train stations all over America?  According to an article in the Guardian, the following motto is displayed at the TSA’s air marshal training center: “Dominate. Intimidate. Control.”  Why is there no outrage over this?

#2 Why does the TSA believe that it is necessary to pat-down a 7-year-old girl with cerebral palsy?  Does touching the private areas of disabled little girls really improve our national security?

#3 Why does the Department of Homeland Security need Predator-B drones to patrol the border between the United States and Canada?

#4 Why is a militarized “Red Zone” being set up in Chicago three weeks prior to the upcoming NATO summit on May 20th and 21st?

#5 Why is the Milwaukee Red Cross being told to prepare for an evacuation of Chicago?

#6 Why is cesium-137 from the Fukushima nuclear disaster still showing up in milk in Montpelier, Vermont?  The following is from a recent Forbes article….

Radiation from Japan has been detected in drinking water in 13 more American cities, and cesium-137 has been found in American milk—in Montpelier, Vermont—for the first time since the Japan nuclear disaster began, according to data released by the Environmental Protection Agency late Friday.

 

#7 Why is there such little uproar over CISPA?  CISPA is going to allow companies to share our private online information with the government almost at will.  The following is from an article posted on the website of the Electronic Frontier Foundation….

CISPA creates an exception to all privacy laws to permit companies to share our information with each other and with the government in the name of cybersecurity. … CISPA’s ‘information sharing’ regime allows the transfer of vast amounts of data, including sensitive information like internet use history or the content of emails, to any agency in the government including military and intelligence agencies like the National Security Agency or the Department of Defense Cyber Command. Once in government hands, this information can be used for any non-regulatory purpose so long as one significant purpose is for cybersecurity or to protect national security.

 #8 Why aren’t more people in the mainstream media alarmed that the economies of 11 different western nations have plunged into recession?

#9 Why did an ounce of gold only cost $58 in 1972 but it costs more than $1660 today?

#10 Why has the median price of a new home risen from $17,200 in 1963 to $212,000 today?

#11 Why are so many banks issuing credit cards that can have information silently stolen off of them by any thief that is willing to invest in a contactless credit card reader?

#12 Why have most Americans never even heard of the University of Pittsburgh study that found that common vaccines that we give our children produce autism-like symptoms in monkeys?

#13 Why is Wall Street laying off thousands of workers if the economy is getting better?

#14 Why has Spain banned all cash transactions over 2,500 euros?

#15 Why is there such a push to get more kids to go to college if most college graduates cannot find a decent job once they graduate?  Why is Mitt Romney telling young Americans to borrow money from their parents to get the education that they “need”?

#16 Why does the mainstream media in America almost completely ignore the brutal terror attacks that happen regularly in many countries in Africa?  For example, just the other day more than a dozen Christians were killed by a terror attack in the northern Nigerian city of Kano.  Back in January, nearly 200 were killed in coordinated attacks in that same city.  So why does the U.S. media very rarely ever talk about this?

#17 Why was a radical activist who once stated that he “wished all Republicans were ****ing dead” invited to speak at the National High School Journalism Convention?  Is it any surprise that he declared to his audience of high school students that we should all “learn to ignore the bulls— in the Bible“?

#18 Why did Barack Obama recently update an old executive order so that now he will be able to take charge of all food, all energy, all health resources and all transportation resources in the United Stateseven in “non-emergency” situations?

#19 Why are federal government agencies stockpiling massive amounts of food and ammunition?  Do they know something that we don’t?

#20 Why will a mysterious Spanish company be reporting the election results for hundreds of U.S. jurisdictions on election day 2012?

#21 Why do “scientific reports” that proclaim that there is a desperate need for global population control get very prominent coverage in newspapers all over the western world?

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheMilitantLibertarian/~3/DebV1eyOAj8/