All You Need to Know

Print Friendly

About the mafia styled “government” is contained in this video:

In it, one of the many “crews” serving as muscle for this uber-mafia does what such crews always do: it destroys something owned by someone else in order to teach them (and everyone else) a lesson. That lesson, of course, is to never forget the violence that hangs over everything the mafia does – and which will be visited upon you in the event you ever step out of line.

In this case, the crew is the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol and the victim is a helpless Land Rover Defender  – and of course, its former owner. The Defender is a model Land Rover sells outside the boundaries of the U.S. Customs and Border Control’s (and EPA’s and DOT’s) “turf.” It is not a mafia-approved vehicle for sale here because it does not meet mafia-imposed requirements, particularly as regards the profusion of air bags and so on that the mafia insists every one of us must have – whether we’d like to have them or not.

Well, just as some people in the neighborhood refuse to pay the Black Hand for “protection,” just so there are people who think it’s no one else’s business what sort of vehicle they drive – especially as regards such things as air bags, the presence or absence of which in no way affects the well-being of other people.  They figure: Why should I be compelled to pay for things I feel no need for and do not want?The Black hand picture

Seems reasonable. Certainly not objectionable in the sense that such an exercise of free choice ought to invite a violent response. If we lived in a free country, it would not invite a violent response. You want air bags? Buy ‘em! You don’t want ‘em? Don’t buy ‘em. No one’s going to force you, either way.

Ah, but we don’t live in a free country anymore. The black hand is in control.

The Defender is the sort of vehicle once very popular here but now unavailable – legally – and thus, virtually nonexistent here. It is a serious SUV. In addition to not having air bags, it does not have carpet – or anything else that detracts from being among the most off-road-capable vehicles ever made. It is ideal for backwoods work and so beloved by people who actually use their SUVs for such work and who – unsurprisingly – aren’t much interested in the mafia-approved, leather-wrapped and air bag-festooned $50,000 absurdities that prowl suburbia but which their owners dare not actually take off-pavement (the lambs’ wool carpet might get soiled).

Land Rover stopped selling the Defender here about 20 years ago – because it could no longer do so legally.

That is, in compliance with the mafia’s orders.

Just as Volkswagen had to stop selling old Bugs here after about 1979 – but continued to build and sell them in Mexico for decades thereafter.

Thus, to get a Defender (or a VW Bug and numerous other such vehicles) prospective buyers have two options:

They could buy a used one built 20-plus years ago, before the mafia’s ban went into effect. Unfortunately, when it comes to Defenders, there aren’t many available – because of mafia-enforced scarcity. The handful of pre-ban Defenders are treasured by their current owners and when they do go up for sale, they sell for a lot of money.

The second option is what aroused the ire of the mafia: Sneak a newer and much less expensive (and thus, “illegal”) Defender into the country. People do this with old Bugs, too. It’s much less expensive to buy a 10 or so year-old Mexican Bug with solid floorpans than it is to buy a pre-ban 30-plus-year-old U.S.-legal example in need of major rust repairs.

This, of course, the mafia will not abide.

If you’re caught with an “illegal” gray market car – forget about it. And close your eyes, too. Because what will happen to the vehicle is exactly what happened to Sonny in that famous scene in the cinematic Godfather.

Watch the video – if you can (I could not stomach the whole thing and turned it off about three quarters of the way through). The “illegal” Defender was not merely crushed. It was savaged. The operator of the machine picked it apart like a sociopathic child pulling wings off a fly.crushed Defender 2

I cannot bear mindless destruction. This instinctive loathing led me, in time, to an intellectual loathing for the mafia and the inevitable realization that this thing called government is in fact the biggest, most dangerous mafia of them all. Don Corleone, after all, only controlled sections of New York. One could always move to Albany. But the government-mafia’s reach is almost omnipotent – and it is a much more vengeful and personally malignant entity.

The Don, after all, probably doesn’t care whether you drive a Volkswagen or a Hyundai – nor whether it has air bags or not. Your “safety” isn’t his concern; he just wants your money.

But this mafia-government wants it all. Your money – and your freedom. It will not allow you anything. Not even the choice to drive what you’d like to drive. There’s no amount of money.

Just – do as we tell you.

Or else.

Throw it in the Woods?

PS: We have thrown Google – and Google ads – in the woods. They blacklisted us – so we dumped them. See here for the full story about that. So, we need your support to make a go of it and keep EPautos rolling. Please consider supporting this web site in whatever way you’re able. The link to our “donate” area is here. Thanks in advance!

Share Button

  106 comments for “All You Need to Know

  1. Erik
    August 30, 2013 at 1:35 pm

    http://ppc.org/a-list-of-competitors-to-google-adwords/

    Maybe you’ve already looked into this, but the site I’m providing lists competitors to google ad-words. I have no idea if you can make any money from any of them, but you may want to see about using them.

    • August 30, 2013 at 1:46 pm

      Hi Erik,

      Thanks!

      We’re considering Amazon; it’s been recommended by several.

      But, ideally, we’ll operate from here on out on direct reader support. It cuts out the proverbial middle man, for one. For two, it means more of the stuff you come here for (the article and comments and community as opposed to more goddamn ads!) and for three, it gives us direct feedback. If people like this site, they’ll support it. If they think it stinks, they won’t.

      Sounds like a fair deal to me!

  2. Tor Minotaur
    August 30, 2013 at 12:37 pm

    In 1968 Gore Vidal called William F. Buckley Jr. a Crypto-Nazi to his face. Buckley responded by threatening to beat him up, saying: “Now listen, you queer, stop calling me a crypto-Nazi or I’ll sock you in your goddamn face and you’ll stay plastered.” All this on national network TV in front of 10 million viewers.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZY_nq4tfi24

    Crypto-fascism is a pejorative term implying a secret support for, or admiration of, fascism. The term is used to imply that an individual or group keeps this support or admiration hidden to advance their agenda without opposition.

    The term was created by Gore Vidal during a television interview about the chaos of the 1968 Democratic National Convention, Vidal described William F. Buckley, Jr. as a “crypto-Nazi”, later correcting himself as meaning to say “crypto-Fascist”

    Upon reflection and clear headed observation, it becomes clear that many leaders of the USSA has always been Crypto-Fascist to some degree or other.

    A page dedicated to the exchange and later developments
    http://www.pitt.edu/~kloman/debates.html
    – – – – –

    Fun fact – The Billy Jack theme – One Tin Soldier – was sang by Jinx Dawson – the lead the singer of Coven.
    http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/3078/jinxdawson.jpg

    • August 30, 2013 at 1:06 pm

      Vidal was a wonderful writer. I don’t agree with him politically, but he at least seemed to be an honest, old-school type of liberal. He consistently denounced the thug state and its wars, whether fronted by a Chimp or someone like Obama. Most of all, he wasn’t full of shit. He said what he thought and whether the listener approved or not interested him not at all.

      • Tor Minotaur
        August 30, 2013 at 1:53 pm

        Gore Vidal:

        “We should stop going around babbling about how we’re the greatest democracy on earth, when we’re not even a democracy. We are a sort of militarized republic.”

        “First coffee, then a bowel movement. Then the Muse joins me.”

        “Apparently, “conspiracy” is now shorthand for any truth deemed unspeakable by those in power.”

        “The genius of our ruling class is that it has kept a majority of the people from ever questioning the inequity of a system where most people drudge along, paying heavy taxes for which they get nothing in return”

        “We must always remember that the police are recruited from the criminal classes.”

        “Religions are manipulated in order to serve those who govern society and not the other way around.”

        “Congress no longer declares war or makes budgets. So that’s the end of the constitution as a working machine.”

        “As the age of television progresses the Reagans will be the rule, not the exception. To be perfect for television is all a President has to be these days.”

        “Democracy is supposed to give you the feeling of choice like, Painkiller X and Painkiller Y. But they’re both just aspirin.”

        “Envy is the central fact of American life.”

        “Every time a friend succeeds, I die a little.”

        “The United States was founded by the brightest people in the country — and we haven’t seen them since.”

        “Every four years the naive half who vote are encouraged to believe that if we can elect a really nice man or woman President everything will be all right. But it won’t be.”

        “Andy Warhol is the only genius I’ve ever known with an IQ of 60″

        “Apparently, a democracy is a place where numerous elections are held at great cost without issues and with interchangeable candidates.”

        “Fifty percent of people won’t vote, and fifty percent don’t read newspapers. I hope it’s the same fifty percent.”

        “Style is knowing who you are, what you want to say, and not giving a damn.”

        “The more money an American accumulates, the less interesting he becomes.”

        “The four most beautiful words in our common language: I told you so.”

        “It is not enough to succeed. Others must fail.”

        “A narcissist is someone better looking than you are.”

        “The unfed mind devours itself.”

        “I’m always a godfather, never a god.”

        “As societies grow decadent, the language grows decadent, too. Words are used to disguise, not to illuminate, action: you liberate a city by destroying it. Words are to confuse, so that at election time people will solemnly vote against their own interests.”

        “Today’s public figures can no longer write their own speeches or books, and there is some evidence that they can’t read them either. ”

        “How marvelous books are, crossing worlds and centuries, defeating ignorance and, finally, cruel time itself.”

        “Ayn Rand’s ‘philosophy’ is nearly perfect in its immorality, which makes the size of her audience all the more ominous and symptomatic as we enter a curious new phase in our society…. To justify and extol human greed and egotism is to my mind not only immoral, but evil.”

        “Miss Rand now tells us that what we have thought was right is really wrong. The lesson should have read: One for one and none for all.

        “The American press exists for one purpose only, and that is to convince Americans that they are living in the greatest and most envied country in the history of the world. The Press tells the American people how awful every other country is and how wonderful the United States is and how evil communism is and how happy they should be to have freedom to buy seven different sorts of detergent.”

        “We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing.”

        “There is something about the state putting the power to bully into the hands of subnormal, sadistic apes that makes my blood boil.”

        “Ultimately, totalitarianism is the only sort of politics that can truly serve the sky-god’s purpose. Any movement of a liberal nature endangers his authority and that of his delegates on earth. One God, one King, one Pope, one master in the factory, one father-leader in the family at home.”

        “anyone who sings about love and harmony and life [john lennon] is dangerous to someone who sings about death and killing and subduing [Nixon]”

        “The American reader cannot bear a surprise. He knows that this is the greatest country on earth…and evidence to the contrary is not admissible. That means no inconvenient facts, no new information. If you really want the reader’s attention, you must flatter him. Make his prejudices your own. Tell him things he already knows. He will love your soundness.”

        “You cannot get through the density of the propaganda with which the American people, through the dreaded media, have been filled and the horrible public educational system we have for the average person. It’s just grotesque.”

        “You know, I’ve been around the ruling class all my life, and I’ve been quite aware of their total contempt for the people of the country.”

        • Repeat When Necessary
          August 30, 2013 at 2:33 pm

          Thanks for those quotes, Tor! Gore Vidal was one of my favorite writers. A lot of these are new to me, but I particularly like the one about brands of aspirin. It so aptly sums up the non-choice we have in our 2-party system.

          I sometimes recall learning about the one-party elections in the former Soviet Union when I was in school, and I remember how odd it seemed then that people would go out and vote in such an election. But now, understanding better the true intent of our two-party system, the old Soviet system seems breathtakingly honest in comparison. There at least you knew you didn’t really have a choice. Here, you get a false sense of having a voice in the process by endorsing one of two flavors of the same War Party. Not only do we get a non-choice, we get a lie with it.

          The Ayn Rand quotes were new to me too. I imagine she has a few fans here, so I’ll be interested to hear what others have to say about that. (Not big into her myself, not so much because of her philosophy, but mostly because I think she’s an awful writer.)

          Robert

          • Tor Minotaur
            August 30, 2013 at 3:09 pm

            I personally consider Ayn Rand the best one-stop-shop to start thinking clearly.

            For all I know, she plagarized everything she wrote from Yiddish, French, Russian, and other source language novels and scholarly text I am unable to read, I don’t care, I find her a priceless resource.

            I give weight to Vidal’s words, and will endeavor to explore them further.

            American one-track-minds seem to see all cognitive dissonance as their enemy. Unless something neatly ties together with no contradictions or dissension whatsoever, they don’t want to think about it.

            Take my musings on organized religion. It might be the case I’m an active member of the KofC and often even help them, even though I only attend ELCA services and no one in my family has ever heard one word of Catholic theory from me.

            Or, take Hitler’s rhetoric which at least after being transcribed and then translated seems ridiculously naive. (He just ranted “Stage German”, other people transcribed his rants)

            I’m not surprised if many Jews, certainly rich banker Jews are out for themselves. Maybe they get more aid than every inner city black, hispanic, and single mother could ever dream of. Maybe the Jews helped the French, English, and Germans erect the monstrous UN to leash America.

            How else could only 6 million Israelis have a chance to pull the levers of power without having to use their own money, it might be said. Why wouldn’t their leaders be out for themselves, and happily sheer their neighbors’ sheep if he was dumb enough to let them?

            *Hitler wouldn’t talk in an Austrian dialect. Whenever he give speeches he would use a dialect, which he prefered be used by all Nazis.

            The dialect was mostly Standard German, but they emphasized the ‘r’ sound. So, they would have a rolling r if you could say so. In Standard German you barely hear an ‘r’.

            This adhered to a dialect called ‘Bühnendeutsch’ (stage German) where ‘r’s are fully pronounced. This dialect is used by actors because words need to be pronounced more clearly on stage in order for the audience to understand every word correctly.

            On top of that the Nazis always screamed when on stage in order to appear powerful.

            There is a secret tape of Hitler speaking on a private occasion. How he spoke in private situations was a long mystery. His voice was actually pretty calm and he only had a slight accent – it was said to sound mostly Bavarian but definitely not the common Austrian dialect you would expect.
            – – – – –

            – Why is it in every Middle East video, the only words uttered are allah akbar? Are supposed to believe that’s all they say? It seems much more likely, most hired actors aren’t comfortable saying too much else. They’re just trying to sound Arabic enought that we believe them as they pretend to unleash poisonous gas on villages or burn embassies, just a few throwaway lines while they do whatever the Haliburton script calls for them to do.

        • Repeat When Necessary
          August 30, 2013 at 3:33 pm

          “Stage German” — that’s a new one on me too, Tor! Thanks for the explanation. I wonder if the modern British accent was also derived from the stage.

          I heard an anthropologist on NPR once who had come across audio recordings made by researchers in the 1950s. These researchers had gone into the hills of West Virginia or someplace like that and found this community that had had very little contact with the outside world for the last couple of hundred years. They’d recorded conversations with some of the folks in the community. The theory proposed much later by the anthropologist on NPR was that the accent used by these people — which sounded much like a typical Southern drawl — was the typical *British accent* from the 18th century. It had been preserved in this WV community because of its almost complete isolation since the inhabitant’s ancestor emigrated from England. The implication was that the typical Englishman in the time of King George probably sounded more like Larry the Cable Guy than Hugh Grant. Fascinating!

          • August 30, 2013 at 4:32 pm

            That theory about British English is basically nonsense. Until the latter part of the nineteenth century there was no standard British English accent, but only regional accents with smaller class variations. Then regional variation declined (without ever vanishing, apart from some special cases), led by upper class standardising on patterns found among officers and in the universities, and to some extent found in the home counties around London, a standardising that was soon roughly copied by the middle classes. As the theatre was thoroughly disreputable until after that (when wealthy aristocrats started marrying chorus girls, much as impoverished ones started marrying American heiresses), stage accents drew on this rather than driving it at all. The home counties accents of today actually largely resulted from this too, though they did drive it a bit.

            American accents are related to past British ones, just not on any standard ones as those didn’t exist at the time. Rather, they drew on those in the localities and classes the immigrants came from at the time they left. New England accents connect to seventeenth century Lincolnshire and parts of East Anglia, “southern” accents (and, presumably, the ones the researcher found) connect to eighteenth century accents in southern England with a varying contribution from eighteenth century Ulster via the Scots-Irish, and so on. Accents evolve faster among larger groups and when different groups affect each other, so further west than the U.S. east coast accents evolved further as one-offs when the areas were settled, and then all the U.S. accents started to evolve faster once mass media came along – but until then (about eighty years ago) British accents changed faster except in a few big cities, so U.S. east coast accents outside those cities did reflect frozen snapshots of past British regional accents, with some class influence as well (but there was less variation by class than by region). Similar things happened in Australia, New Zealand, Southern Rhodesia and South Africa too, but with different “anchoring” regions, classes and dates.

          • Repeat When Necessary
            August 30, 2013 at 4:50 pm

            Great post, P.M. You obviously know this area of history/anthropology/linguistics quite well. Thanks for educating me! (It’s amazing the stuff I learn on this site!)

            Robert

          • Repeat When Necessary
            August 30, 2013 at 4:59 pm

            Also, P.M.: Your explanation about regional accents makes perfect sense. To be fair to the anthropologist I heard on NPR, he may have been linking that WV accent back to a specific region of England. I don’t remember for sure — it’s probably been 20 years since I heard that report.

          • Ed
            August 30, 2013 at 10:58 pm

            RWN, I’m not familiar with the NPR program, but I did live in Avery County, NC about 35 years ago. My coworkers whose families had been there for centuries, told me about some anthropologists studying the language of a community of people who lived in an area known as Lost Cove who had been isolated from the other communities in the area.

            As I remember what they told me, the terms and figures of speech used by the Lost Cove families dated back to Elizabethan Britain, and were terms that had fallen out of usage in other parts of the county. I don’t remember it being about accents, though. Anyway, Lost Cove is now part of some national forest and none of the people who were studied by the anthros live there now.

        • Garysco
          August 30, 2013 at 9:46 pm

          I find it interesting how harshly Rand is attacked. She was an admitted student of history, philosophies and people. Maybe she plagiarized some of their thoughts? I don’t know. Her philosophy really sets off the fireworks in those who think everyone is their brothers keeper, and to keep all of what you have earned is evil. To be forced to feed the poor (deserved or not) is the only good. She made it very clear that you are free to support and give away any or all of your wealth as you deem proper, but it is armed robbery to be forced to do it.

          Her harshest criticism was to the James Taggert and Dr. Floyd Farris types. Those that took (via government force) and redistributed it to their friends (fascism) in the dishonest name of compassion. That is the basis of the communist system, which results in universal misery, central bureaucratic control and crippling of future innovation. Witness todays Wall Street hedge fund etc. managers, who produce nothing, and their multi million dollar bonuses because of corrupt government meddling in a free market system. They are only vultures picking at the carcass the government has delivered to them.

          I marvel at the thinking that you are too stupid and greedy to run your own life, but are smart enough to vote for someone else (another stupid, greedy human) to do it for you.

          • August 30, 2013 at 10:20 pm

            Rand no doubt got millions of people thinking who otherwise might not have. That is to her eternal credit.

            Like all of us, of course, she had flaws. Among them was a startling blind spot as regards her own authoritarian/collectivist tendencies (viz, her insistence that members of her group admire the same artists as she – and revile those she reviled) as well as – in my opinion – her failure to base her ethics on the NAP and instead on the virtue of selfishness (her term). This made it all-too-easy to lampoon her – and by association, the ideas of self-ownership and free association.

            But, every movement requires its John the Baptist figures – and I’d argue she qualifies.

          • Ed
            August 30, 2013 at 11:10 pm

            Gary, yeah, I’ve seen some pretty harsh criticisms of her. I don’t know much about her personality other than what I’ve read, but I found her books unreadable. I tried reading “The Fountainhead” and “Atlas Shrugged” in high school and said to myself, this ol’ gal can’t write worth a shit.

            I was surprised to hear people taking on over her when I started meeting Libertarians back in the early ’90s. Matter of taste in writing, I guess. Tastes vary, which is why they keep making chocolate AND vanilla ice cream. ;-)

            One thing I’ve noticed, though; some of her “true believer” type followers, Objectivists, are some real assholes. The few I’ve known (in online forum settings only) are humorless, arrogant and somewhat hateful. I’ve never known anyone who identifies himself as an objectivist outside of online discussions, so I only know their cyber-personas.

          • garysco
            August 31, 2013 at 3:46 am

            Ed, I can appreciate your take on her writing. Yes she can be very long winded, but she was a product of the early-mid 20th century, when the written word and conversations were much more involved then the “twitter”, OMG communications of today.

            Her grasp of high politics and the inner workings of the most powerful in the world, and the direction they will take “us” is chillingly accurate, even 60+ years later. I have a sense that she would be a difficult person to be around, like many intelligent but egotistical humans can be. Her main books (Atlas Shrugged & The Fountainhead) explain her philosophy, but you have to read or listen to her later lectures and papers to get the details. Audibe has professionals read the books to you, but you still have to concentrate a bit or listen twice to “get it”.

            Her detractors like to make her out to be a monster worse than Hitler. Probably with good reason, because she got under their skin with a big flashlight.

          • Ed
            August 31, 2013 at 4:20 am

            Gary, I’m a prolific reader and have been since the late 1950s, when I was in 2nd grade. I’m also a product of the mid 20th century , and I appreciate good writing. I read novels for sport instead of watching TV throughout my time in grade school, so here’s my take on Rand:

            She couldn’t write her way out of a wet paper bag. It isn’t that she was long winded, it’s that she couldn’t create a character or a credible storyline or write dialog or develop a plot. As to whether or not she was an original thinker, meh….who cares? There are so many great original thinkers from her time, that she doesn’t really even stand out.

            If anyone enjoys her novels, that’s OK with me. I just think she sucked as a novelist. I understand that you appreciated her work, but I don’t. To each his own. Peace.

          • August 31, 2013 at 6:42 am

            Dear Gary,

            My take is that Rand was a great essayist but a crappy novelist.

            I read everything she ever published. All her fiction and non-fiction books, and all her newsletters.

            The writing that blew me away was her unapologetic defense of egoism (not to be confused with egotism), individualism, and capitalism.

            By egoism I mean the opposite of altruism. Altruism being the alleged duty to relinquish what is rightfully mine because someone else “needs” it.

            As a student of the British Classical Liberals and the French Physiocrats, I was blown away by the forthrightness of her defense of individual autonomy in face of those who preached collective obligation. I can’t tell you how liberating that was.

            Her novels I respected for the “message” she was trying to send. I agreed wholeheartedly with the message. But I never thought that her novels worked, qua novels. I could always hear the rhetorical gears grinding away. The characters were never really people, but too obvious symbols of this concept or the other.

            It was a shame really, when so many collectivist oriented novelists were so skilled at embedding their ideas in the characters more seamlessly.

            Her cultish aspects were also a distraction from the real issues. They weren’t really integral to what she championed, fortunately.

            Bottom line for me, she was still one of the good guys. She brought millions around to libertarianism, and even despite her objections, market anarchism.

          • DownshiftFast5to1
            August 31, 2013 at 7:23 am

            I’m not an Objectivist. But you guys slamming Rand as a bad writer,… umm, I wonder, where’s your novel?

            …That’s just a thought I had. Nothing against your having that viewpoint.

            “The Next 72 Hours”

          • August 31, 2013 at 7:50 am

            Dear 5to1,

            Actually, I’ve written two feature length screenplays.

            One was being considered for production, but producers rejected it because it opposed gun control.

            One producer actually said to me, “This is a terrific script, but the heroine chooses gun ownership over gun control. Can’t you change it around?”

          • August 31, 2013 at 7:59 am

            Dear 5to1,

            Also, just to clarify. I don’t believe Rand was a crappy writer.

            I thought she was a great essayist, in many ways unparalleled, which is interesting because English wasn’t even her first language! Damned impressive.

            I thought she was a crappy novelist. Not the same thing.

            • August 31, 2013 at 10:20 am

              Morning, Bevin!

              That is an excellent distinction, sir. Quite so.

              Her novels were awkward because they were really philosophical treatises – essays, really.

              Well-said!

          • Ed
            August 31, 2013 at 2:45 pm

            ” umm, I wonder, where’s your novel?”

            Where’s yours? If one had to be a novelist in order to dislike a novel, then one would also need to be a novelist in order to like a novel.

  3. DownshiftFast5to1
    August 30, 2013 at 5:46 am

    I wanted to respond to eric’s comment about wanting to, “smash things”, in response to total bullshit.

    I can’t find the particular instance, or two… or more. So I’ll just say it here:

    eric. You remind me of Billy Jack.

    Billly Jack, wiping his brow in frustration: “… I want you to know. * That I try. * When Jean and the kids at the school tell me that I’m supposed to control my violent temper, and be passive and non-violent like they are. … I try. I really try.

    […] But when I see […] And I think, of the number of years she’s going to have to carry in her memory, the savagery of – this – idiotic moment of yours,… I- Just- Go- Berserk!

    …Then he kicks the hell out of the assholes.

    Yeah, ‘The Left’ have forgotten their roots.
    …It’s as if there *Never was* an anti-war movement.

    And the Right, they seem to be against ALL of the principles they profess to believe in and just go for nothing more than absolute tyranny.

    From my understanding of things: both The Left, and The Right, walked away from what it means to be an American.

    And then there’s Billy Jack in the middle.

    • DownshiftFast5to1
      August 30, 2013 at 7:18 am

      The Woman: “Please! Billy, Please! We’ll go someplace else. Some place where it doesn’t have to be like this.”

      [He gets on his motorcycle]

      Billy Jack: “Oh really!? Well, tell me where is that place? Where is it? In what remote corner of this country? No, in the entire God-damn planet(!) is there such a place where men really care about another, and really love each other? Now you tell me where such a place is and I’ll promise you that I’ll Never hurt another human being as long as I live. Just!-One!-Place! … [Silence]… That’s what I thought.”

    • August 30, 2013 at 9:59 am

      Morning, Downshift –

      Bullshit, I can handle. Hell, I like watching TV preachers – as a for-instance. That’s some first-class bullshit! Life is a series of Bullshit Moments, to a great extent. And that’s ok – so long as no one’s trying to force their bullshit down your throat.

      That’s where I draw the line.

  4. PreacherRye
    August 29, 2013 at 11:44 pm

    I happen to work in a field that is involved directly in dealing with CBP goons and the regulations they enforce on a daily basis. I see things regularly that just make me disgusted with it all. It’s a shame we are actually to a point where I feel a sense of worry that typing something online about it might end up with costumed goons showing up at my office. sigh.

  5. Tor Minotaur
    August 29, 2013 at 11:46 am

    It is usually imagined that a thief, a street gang enforcer, a criminal informant, a prostitute, acknowledge their professions as evil, and are ashamed of it. I have witnessed Just the opposite to be true.

    People whose circumstances and mistakes have placed in a certain position, however unpopular that position may be, form a view of life in general which makes their position seem good and admissible.

    In order to keep up their view of life, these outside the mainstream people instinctively keep to the circle of other people who share their views of life and their own place in it.

    This surprises us, where the persons concerned are thieves, bragging about their dexterity, prostitutes boasting of their depravity, or street gang members bragging of their fear and injuries inflicted.

    This surprises us only because the circle, the atmosphere in which these people live, is limited, and we are outside it.

    But can we not observe the same phenomenon when the well-connected rich boast of their wealth, which they make through corruption;
    when the soldiers in the military pride themselves on their victories, which occur through murder;
    and when those in high places flaunt their power, which is based on intimidation and violence?

    We do not see the perversion in the views of life held by these people, only because the circle formed by them is more extensive, and because we are trapped and subsumed within them and are forced to move inside of them.

  6. Alkylidene
    August 29, 2013 at 3:33 am

    After forcing myself to watch the whole destruction video (not easy), I wanted to see the dollar value of a 2005 Land Rover Defender. After searching a UK used car website, I found a similar one for 15,000 pounds + VAT (20%!). If the VAT Is included, we are looking at a $27,000 loss for just the vehicle.
    Lt Col Smug’s explanation for the destruction rings hollow as the car can be dismantled and used for parts. No, they wanted to make an example of this Beautiful Vehicle. I am sure they spent a couple thousand dollars of our money making this high quality video. Ugh!

    • August 29, 2013 at 10:07 am

      Two additional points:

      First, while the Land Rover may not have met federal “safety” standards, I would bet it’s still more able to take a hit than almost any current government-approved subcompact simply by dint of its weight and size.

      Second, I suspect that more “emissions” result from the manufacture of a new car than the driving of an old, already made car such as this.

      On the first point, in any case, there is no issue of “externalities” or “the commons” involved. Whether a given vehicle is more or less crashworthy than another is the business of the person who buys it – and no business of jackbooted government thugs.

      On the second, it’s a bogey as regards any late model vehicle originally made for the European market (and probably Asian and South American markets) as these vehicles have fuel injection and catalytic converters. They are not “polluters” – they just don’t meet every line-item of U.S. EPA standards.

      It’s all about controlling what people may drive.

      • Doug
        August 29, 2013 at 1:46 pm

        Eric, you miss the point about the non-complying vehicle laws. It is not about control but about money. Your rulers who have allowed (and are allowing) this to occur have been bought and paid for by the people who profit or are protected from these laws. Your kangaroo court system backs them up and you have ball-sacks, like that Customs official in the video, who explain to a dim-witted American public how they are just here to help and protect them.

        • August 29, 2013 at 2:39 pm

          Hi Doug,

          I think it’s about both. Money and power.

          Both provide control over others – the sociopath’s number one priority.

          “Safety” is just a convenient excuse; it’s an effective stratagem because it implies these people care about you.

          But of course, if they did, they’d not threaten you with the sure thing of violence in order to impose their will as opposed to the (slight) possibility you might get hurt by driving – for example – a car without air bags.

          If they – or their friends – can make some money off the deal, so much the better.

        • BrentP
          August 29, 2013 at 4:47 pm

          Doug, if it were just about money we would have a fuel tax to encourage gas sipping vehicles. We’d still be able to buy a giant boat of a car if we were willing to pay the taxes to feed it. If we wanted a european market car the importation would simply be taxed at a very high rate. This is how things work in many nations.

          If I lived in Europe or Australia and wanted to buy a 2014 Mustang I could, it would cost me. A lot. but I could have it. It would be a huge hassle to make it conform to the national requirements and so forth but I could have it if I jumped through all the hoops. However, in the USA if I want a 2014 Ford Falcon, I can’t. The end. Our parents, the government, say no.

          The US ruling class are of the company town utopia creating puritan like tell us all how to live type people. Thus we don’t have punitive taxes on fuel, we have CAFE. CAFE drives cars they don’t think we should drive off the market so we can’t choose them no matter how much we are willing to spend. We don’t have import duties and demands to meet lighting standards and other such things, it’s a blanket ban.

          They want money, but they crave power.

  7. Bill in NC
    August 29, 2013 at 1:29 am

    Now, if I could only get a diesel Hilux smuggled to me here in the U.S.

    • justin
      August 29, 2013 at 1:56 am

      There are plenty of 1KZT Toyota turbo diesel engines for sale.
      find one with a mechanical injector pump or swap the electronic yota pump for a Mitsu 4M40 pump,
      bolt it in your favorite vehicle.

      there are several places that will do the swaps for ya.

      • dom
        August 29, 2013 at 2:01 am

        I have a buddy that did this swap a few years ago into his 4Runners. One of the engines was a mechanical diesel, and the other had a bunch of computer control components. Both turned out really awesome, but the learning curve for him on the computer controled unit was a bitch. He’d purchase half-cuts and have a bunch of extra parts.

        • justin
          August 29, 2013 at 10:18 pm

          Ive swapped a 1KZT into a 4 runner
          its a nice ride, gets eggcellent MPG
          same power as the V-6 using half the fuel

          I also have a 73 Bronco
          I swapped in a EFI 5.0 from a 91 Mustang, disc brakes from a 76 Blazer,
          5 speed trans from a 01 Dakota, and seats from a 92 Miata

          there are ways to import vehicles, just not legally
          speaking of which, why do they care SO MUCH about an illegally imported vehicle, but coddle and pander to illegal immigrants?

          • dom
            August 29, 2013 at 10:31 pm

            What did you do for motor mounts?

          • justin
            August 29, 2013 at 10:46 pm

            Made my own motor mounts.

            I think in the 3rd gen 96 & up the 1KZT bolts in.

            Not worth the trouble though for saving money.
            a 1KZT is $2k minimum, another $1500 or $2000 for various parts to complete the swap. and thats IF you can find the mech injected one. you do NOT want the electronic one,

            Youd have to drive it forever to break even.

            and then you have a engine that you cant get parts for without spending half a day on the phone or internet to locate the parts and a seller willing to ship em to the US.

            plus Ive become a fan of the V-8 swaps in the 4 runners.
            friend of mine swapped a 5.0 mustang motor in a 97 runner and
            I ve ridden in one that had the 1UZ 4.0 V-8 from a Lexus

            Ive transplanted several 88-98 Ford 5.0 engines, and thats pretty easy, all you gotta do is hook up the computer to the ign switch,
            and they are very robust systems, they will run with every single sensor unplugged, as long as the distributor and computer are plugged in, they will crank.

            I had the upper intake manifold and 4 injectors removed from mine, bumped the starter to rotate the crank pulley a little, and the damn thing cranked and idled !
            with no mass air meter, no throttle body, and missing half of the injectors.

            I just sold 2 1KZTs with mech injection pumps and 5 speeds for $2k each. took me forever to sell em.

          • dom
            August 29, 2013 at 10:52 pm

            That is kick ass! I only have 125k on the clock for my 4runner, but would like to have something diesel in the future for it. Mine is a 2002, would that engine bolt right in. Also, do they still make them? A Chevy 350 would be the cat’s ass in a 4Runner though. Sounds like too much of a can o’worms though.

          • justin
            August 29, 2013 at 11:23 pm

            Dunno about the 02, if its possible, someone on yotatech or pirate4x4 has probably already done it.
            But the 3.4 is a great engine, we put 300K on one and it was running good when we sold it. original auto trans too,
            think it had the same fluid as when it left the factory, I never changed it, cause it was always red & smelled fine.

            I know the 3.4s last forever because we bought our 96 runner at the scratch & dent auction, it was totalled.
            The front was bashed in above the bumper, mashed the stuff on the front of the engine, pulleys etc.

            I made alot of calls, (this was before Al Gore;s internet was a big thing) to find a 3.4 that wasnt in running condition

            “we dont sell parts off of running engines” was what I heard from every junkyard. the only way I found one was, when I called one of the junkyards, the person I talked to said that someone had bought a running 3.4 and never returned the old one for a core refund, so they might still have it, they gave me the guys # and I called, and he had loaned his 4wd runner to some ditzy blond who managed to get it in 4-low and drive it on the interstate.

            It had a large hole in the side of the engine where one of the connecting rods made a quick exit.

            My 3.4 Didnt make as much power at 300K as when it only had 100K on it, but as long as you keep oil in it, they run forever.

            The next gen 2003 runner had a V-8 available didnt it?

            I wouldnt want a chevy 350 in a 4Runner
            they are great engines. Ive owned several.

            but I think they are too heavy for a small SUV.

            the Ford 5.0 is a good swap, and the 1UZ Lexus engine is a great swap. lightweight, and DOHC, so it revs to the moon.

            The Cadillac 4.9 makes a great swap into a Fiero, all aluminum, including the block, weighs less and makes twice the HP of the 3.4 Pontiac motor.
            Wonder if anyone has swapped it into a 4runner?

            Ive also seen a VW 1.9 Tdi engine & transaxle swapped into a Fiero,
            guy claimed he regularly got 60 mpg

  8. Bob Robertson
    August 28, 2013 at 11:29 pm

    Don’t blame the border patrol, they’re just following orders.

  9. August 28, 2013 at 5:18 pm

    Preposterously, you also can ride on a motorcycle that provides no protection at all, except the helmet the government forces you to wear. Fortunately, bikers are fanatical about their machines and would stop any ban. And maybe the govt. mafia fears the biker gangs.

  10. Larry
    August 28, 2013 at 5:14 pm

    Corleone, after all, only controlled sections of New York. One could always move to Albany. But the government-mafia’s reach is almost omnipotent…”

    Eric, I think you meant to write, “omnipresent”, not “omnipotent”.

    “But the government-mafia’s reach is almost omnipresent…”

  11. Anon
    August 28, 2013 at 3:24 pm

    I posted a comment on YouTube. I suppose I’m on yet another government list somewhere.

  12. Tor Minotaur
    August 28, 2013 at 2:53 pm

    All you need to know about Russia: Police seize painting of Putin in a negligee from a St. Petersburg gallery.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/10269778/Police-seize-painting-of-Vladimir-Putin-in-a-negligee.html

    Why did the libertarian chicken cross the road?
    http://imgur.com/TUilhhn

    So what government does…
    http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mcf677A3S41rz9fx5o1_500.jpg

  13. August 28, 2013 at 1:03 pm

    So the government and the looney left wants us all to be environmentally-conscious and “reduce, reuse, and recycle”.

    And of course the best way to be environmentally-conscious with *anything* is to use the heck out of it until it’s thoroughly all used up.

    Envirowhackos and the government are hypocrites of the worst sort.

    CLEAN THE ENVIRONMENT: Require government workers to all walk to work.

    • Charles
      August 28, 2013 at 4:05 pm

      Marc hypocrasy is their middle name.

  14. Charles
    August 28, 2013 at 12:53 pm

    Eric just to let you know regarding USA vs UK the crushings go both ways- and using the same reasons as described in your vid:

    • August 28, 2013 at 1:17 pm

      Thanks, Charles.

      These videos make me want to wretch – then, hit something. With my fist.

      Those smarmy little SOBs taking obvious delight in the destruction of someone else’s property – in the name of “safety,” of course.

      One day, I hope, their kind will find no safety anywhere.

      • Charles
        August 28, 2013 at 2:46 pm

        I agree Eric- regardless of which side of the pond they are the same people. I too hope the same for them.

      • liberranter
        August 28, 2013 at 8:31 pm

        One day, I hope, their kind will find no safety anywhere.

        They won’t. One day in the very near future, these creatures are going to run out of people to fuck over, and those that they already HAVE fucked over (i.e., their neighbors and even family members), people with very long memories and thirsty for vengeance, are gonna get their pound of flesh.

        Think: SS guards of a Nazi concentration camp furiously ditching their uniforms and donning striped prisoners garb as the Red Army approaches the camp. It won’t work this time either. Just as the Waffen SS guards were too well-fed to ever be mistaken for abused, starving inmates, so the shaved-headed, roid-bloated bullies will NEVER be mistaken for real human beings and will be torn limb from limb in very short order by those they once victimized with impunity.

        • August 30, 2013 at 3:20 am

          Dear lib,

          “Think: SS guards of a Nazi concentration camp furiously ditching their uniforms and donning striped prisoners garb as the Red Army approaches the camp.”

          I’m visualizing the Brad Pitt character in “Inglorious Basterds” carving swastikas into the SS members’ foreheads.

        • August 30, 2013 at 12:02 pm

          Actually, they could have got away with that disguise trick – because there were indeed some prisoners who were well fed. On the one hand, specialists like musicians were kept out of the main stream and treated better as entertainment for the guards (until they were cycled out), and on the other hand there were always new arrivals who hadn’t yet been abused as much as they were going to. On liberation some musicians were indeed taken for guards until vouched for by other inmates they had smuggled food to, so we know they existed. But even trying to pass for new arrivals could have worked if they were not denounced by inmates, and if they arranged to hide among new arrivals who didn’t know them they might have got away with it for long enough to slip away in the confusion.

      • Garysco
        August 29, 2013 at 3:53 am

        Maybe we should steal their daily driver federal-mobile, dismantle it and sell the parts on EBay.

  15. hopsscotch
    August 28, 2013 at 11:57 am

    The EPA requires that ALL liquids be drained and properly stored and/or disposed of in accordance with environmental regulations.
    It is blatantly obvious that those regulations were ignored. Who will be prosecuted? NOONE.

  16. lee
    August 28, 2013 at 11:45 am

    BrentP makes a good point.

    Let small independents pioneer a new product that catches on with the public and then, like an old lion chasing the hyenas away from a fresh kill that the hyenas made, enter the scene, start making and marketing the product, undercut the small entrepreneurs who then sell the patents and rights or close shop. That’s how McDonald’s did it in the fifties/sixties when they ran the mom and pop burger places out of business.

    Instead of crushing the Defender or limiting the imports of banned vehicles, why not seize them, sell them under a marketing label and pay a small commission to the “importers?” A pure profit motive doesn’t justify mercantile thinking. If the corporations are the government and vice versa, why keep a profitable product off the market when you can monopolize its distribution?

  17. ontoiran
    August 28, 2013 at 7:03 am

    the more i see of these “functionaries” the more i hate anybody who holds a government job

    • August 28, 2013 at 9:06 am

      Ditto.

      Even the “nice” ones. Ultimately, they hold immense power over others. Power that one is largely defenseless against. It’s utterly outrageous – and so, ought to make any sane person mad.

      • August 28, 2013 at 12:10 pm

        Exactly! We have it pretty good here, and at least the sheriff is a true “oathkeeper” type, but the power is there. He’s the first to acknowledge that and keeps a tight rein on his deputies. The local “police” are fairly neutral, and don’t cause anyone much grief, but that could change in a heartbeat. The NEXT sheriff could be a monster…

        The power is there.

        • DownshiftFast5to1
          August 30, 2013 at 4:29 am

          MamaLiberty wrote, “at least the sheriff is a true “oathkeeper” type”

          HaHa!
          As if.
          They all enforce Anti-American asset forfeiture and extend The War on Some Drugs, same as any other. They are all an arm of the FedGov.

          I suppose it’s possible you live in some area where cops are not cops. [Is that even possible?]
          Peace officers in the modern age? I so doubt it.
          I cannot imagine such a condition in the USSA.

          If I’m wrong, … I want to move there.

          • August 30, 2013 at 10:19 am

            In re Oathkeepers:

            They are like Himmler’s “decent” SS men.

            Not personally corrupt, in the sense that they scrupulously adhere to “the law” and never engage in (legally) illicit actions.

            But thugs, nonetheless.

            Worse than the run-of-the-mill, arguably, because they actually do regard themselves as “decent” – and by their warped standards, they are.

            As I see it, no truly decent person could continue to put on the uniform – and would quit.

            It is simply not possible, in my mind, to retain one’s humanity while continuing to “serve” as an enforcer of laws that terrorize, humiliate and – all too often – destroy the lives of innocent people. Innocent of having harmed anyone, that is.

            The “drug” thing alone is unspeakable. And I can speak of it, having been a victim of such enforcement. It turned my wheel, intellectually. My life was almost ruined at age 19. I faced years in prison, potentially. It would have been The End for me. I’d have come out a ruined person, unemployable and probably psychologically wrecked – in my 30s. And why? Because I grew plants.

            The outrage has never left me. To think that some asshole in a funny costume, empowered by the state, could put me in a cage for years… because I grew some plants.

            Every time I see a cop, my anger bubbles up anew. Because I know that every single last one of them has done the same thing to other victims, countless millions of them.

      • August 30, 2013 at 2:53 am

        Dear Eric,

        “Power that one is largely defenseless against. It’s utterly outrageous”

        Yes! That is the whole problem in a nutshell.

        The problem isn’t so much that “The Government” is large and well-armed.

        The problem is that the Sheeple, i.e., your relatives, your neighbors, your “friends,” your “fellow citizens,” be they Muricans, Russians, or Chinese, have mostly taken the blue pill.

        With near unanimity, they fully support “The Government’s” infliction of brute force coercion against you.

        If you resist the outrage and are caged or murdered by the aggressors, they will not condemn “The Government.” They will condemn you!

        That is the problem. Not the fact that “The Government” is large and well-armed.

        That is what must be corrected through deprogramming.

        Now that job can feel like bailing water from a sinking ship with a thimble. But what choice do we have? Give up and do nothing?

    • DownshiftFast5to1
      August 30, 2013 at 4:19 am

      ontoiran, please don’t hate them *all*.
      Some of them are trying to fight the waste fraud and abuse from the inside.

      They’re raging against the machine.

      I think it’s a waste.

      But they’re not all bad people.

    • Tor Minotaur
      August 30, 2013 at 5:38 am

      This maybe an overstatement, but it’s worth considering. The US has been congealing as a Unitedstate since at least 1932 New Deal. The New Deal was accepted because everyone was sick of being sober for 13 years, and at least FDR put a stop to that.

      In the big picture, it may be that any American participating in the economy should be viewed as a war machine functionary. At the root and in every nook and cranny of this society, there is a bleating murderous irrational lashing out at everyone and everything.

      Russia was really more of a caste of slaves throwing off their chains and not giving a shit who paid the price for their newfound “freedoms”

      Under FDR, Mussolini, and Hitler, each nation’s middle class willingly abandoned the normal paths to wealth and cooperative society for a bill of goods sold by the government.

      It’s really ludicrous to hear people talk about the founders or the constitution and various technical philosophical points. The main issue is, no matter what endeavor you want to undertake, there is only the state’s approved process.

      Basically to gain employment, you learn to go out and rob Pauls. Brutalize and intimidate Pauls. Accuse everyone else of being a Paul who deserves to get robbed. Only then, maybe after you pay your dues of evil deeds and violence for a long apprenticeship, will you get a shot of being a productive Peter. Of being a decent person who earns their keep and deserves to think well of themselves.

      Unless you are one in a thousand in talent or physical strength. Unless you come from a family with wealth or power, that is your only option.

      The only exception, for the common rank and file, you have to vastly reduce your nut, and go without, if you expect to be a decent person, who doesn’t have to be a grinning zombie predator to pay his car payment and mortgage.

      • DownshiftFast5to1
        August 30, 2013 at 5:55 am

        Tor wrote, “you have to vastly reduce your nut, and go without, if you expect to be a decent person,”

        Now your getting it.

        …Welcome to my club.
        …Sort of.
        [Not that I’m perfect.] I just ‘get it’.

      • August 30, 2013 at 10:10 am

        Eloquently – and truly – said, Tor.

        One of the things that attracted me to writing (aside from the hours) was – still is – that to a great extent, I can write what under my rules. There is no sanctioning body, no license required. No government-enforced codes that must be followed Or Else. I am not like a doctor who must go to an Approved School, follow The Rules, work within a guild – and so on.

        Also, I am able to work in a way that comports with my economic ethics. I can’t force – and would not try to force – others to buy my articles/books (and web site rantings). They can choose to, if they wish to. I dig that. Having taken the red pill, I’d be culpable were I to do otherwise.

        The task, as I see it, is to encourage as many others as possible to reflect on the violence entailed by the workings of the system so many of them support. If they would recoil from the idea of stealing from someone they know, directly, themselves – they ought to recoil from the idea of stealing from anyone – even if they don’t do the actual stealing themselves.

  18. Garysco
    August 27, 2013 at 11:35 pm

    The control Psychopaths don’t want your life and money, they want you to loose them. That is their evil power glee.

  19. Cloverism = Disease
    August 27, 2013 at 10:05 pm

    The easiest way to enslave a population is to keep telling them they’re free.
    “Land of the Free”……yeah right.

    • Boothe
      August 27, 2013 at 10:15 pm

      Cloverism=Disease – You misunderstood the lyrics. It’s actually “the land of the fee and the home of the slave.”

    • Gil
      August 28, 2013 at 6:39 am

      Freedom for the Libertarian is obeying speed limits imposed by a private road owner.

      • August 28, 2013 at 9:02 am

        Clover,

        Certainly. Because Libertarians believe in adhering to the terms and conditions of any agreement entered into voluntarily by all parties concerned.

      • Tor Minotaur
        August 28, 2013 at 11:58 am

        Freedom is complying with the 10 items or less sign. Pushing a shopping cart at a reasonable speed down the aisle. Taking the top product from a shelf, and leaving the others as they were.

        Cloverism is hiding all the bags of someone else’s store, because paper and plastic is bad for the environment you think. Loudly demanding that cripples, dark skinned people, women, and low IQ people jump the line in front of everyone else at the check out lines. That they get an extra discount or even free goods, while the wealthiest customers pay double or triple.

        Cloverism is robbery on the sidewalk. Being killed on the street. Milling about and daydreaming, obstructing people with places to go.

        Freedom is taking an elevator or escalator without issue. Being made to leave, because you’re not in the store to purchase anything, and instead are up to trouble of some sort. Being made to wait, because you have asked for something done in a special way without any additional payment.

        • Ed
          August 28, 2013 at 12:03 pm

          And, lest we forget, Freedom Isn’t Free.

          • Tor Minotaur
            August 30, 2013 at 2:13 am

            Chris Ledoux – Freedom isn’t free
            You’ve finally arrived at the goals that you set} You thought that was it boy but you can’t quit yet} There’s a lonesome old road and it starts at the top} You got one way to go now and it’s a mighty fast drop] You know freedom ain’t free and glory ain’t cheap] The prize that you gained it’s a crown you can’t keep] When you finally won at vanity’s game] Is the title you hold worth the price you paid You wrote your own song and you lived your own life] But something went wrong cause the feelin’ ain’t right]
            Oh you’ve got it all but the magic’s all gone
            You’re at the top of the world boy but your standing alone) Is the title you hold silver and gold worth the price you paid) You got one way to go…

            Freedom isn’t free – Team America – World Police
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZF5wpntXsk

            Up With People – Freedom Isn’t Free
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYGV8bdrHrk

            Freedom is a word often heard today, but if you want to keep it there’s a price to pay. Each generation got to win it a new, ’cause it’s not something handed down to you.

            Freedom Isn’t Free, Freedom Isn’t Free, You’ve got to pay a price, you’ve got to sacrifice, For your liberty.

            There was a General by the name of George, with a small band of men at Valley Forge, left the comfort of home for cold and ice, They won independence for they paid the price.
            – – – – –

            So it was that a revolution took place within the form. Like the hagfish, the New Deal entered the old form and devoured its meaning from within. The revolutionaries were inside; the defenders were outside.

            A government that had been supported by the people and so controlled by the people became one that supported the people and so controlled them. Much of it is irreversible. That is true because habits of dependence are much easier to form than to break. Once the government, on ground of public policy, has assumed the responsibility to provide people with buying power when they are in want of it, or when they are unable to provide themselves with enough of it, according to a minimum proclaimed by government, it will never be the same again. A government that provides credit to the masses. Controls retirement of the masses.

            A government that had been supported by the people and so controlled by the people became one that supported the people and so controlled them.

          • DownshiftFast5to1
            August 30, 2013 at 4:13 am

            Wait a minute, Ed. Freedom *IS* free!
            It’s the practicing of freedom that’s …conditioned, regulated, outlawed, beat down upon, and etc…

            Freedom is free to those who survive birth.

            It’s the beat downs that make it seem like it’s not free.

            JMHO.

          • Ed
            August 30, 2013 at 11:14 am

            Tor, that silly-assed saying “freedom isn’t free” was posted tongue-in-cheek. It’s the favorite utterance of the W supporters who buy the idea that freedom is the reason wars must be waged perpetually.

          • August 30, 2013 at 11:39 am

            Dear Ed, Tor,

            The expression “Freedom isn’t free” is too ambiguous to be that useful.

            It kinda depends on how one interprets the term “free.”

            When Neocon warfare statists parrot it, they are probably attempting to justify the cost of some military boondoggle, military conscription, or foreign military adventurism, e.g., invading Syria and Iran.

            If a libertarian were to cite it, he might be alluding to Thomas Jefferson’s addage, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

            Taken by itself, it’s too damned ambiguous to be a clear indicator of political orientation.

          • Ed
            August 30, 2013 at 12:06 pm

            “Taken by itself, it’s too damned ambiguous to be a clear indicator of political orientation.”

            Not to me. It’s a buzz-phrase coined for and parroted by the dimbulb asshats who support aggressive war. What it implies is that “freedom” can only be purchased by slaughtering civilians in acts of war disguised as “defending our freedom”. Those acts of unjustified and unprovoked war are given names such as “Operation Iraqi Freedom” and “Operation Enduring Freeedom”.

            Naturally, it’s bullshit. I should probably abandon my lame attempts at humor, such as injecting such little blurbs into the conversation without adding *sarcasm* tags.

          • Jean
            August 30, 2013 at 6:30 pm

            Ed
            August 30, 2013 at 11:14 am

            Tor, that silly-assed saying “freedom isn’t free” was posted tongue-in-cheek. It’s the favorite utterance of the W supporters who buy the idea that freedom is the reason wars must be waged perpetually.

            Posted tongue in cheek, perhaps – but it’s true, and the war MUST be waged eternally…
            Against those who WISH to wage war on others.

            The irony is enough to choke a whale…
            We don’t need to defend ourselves- until someone else wishes to harm us.
            We don’t need weapons, until someone would do us violence.
            We don’t need to wage war FOR freedom – until someone tries to take it away from us.

            Sounds like we should be marching on D.C., as they’ve hit EVERY ENUMERATED REASON in the Declaration of Independence, UP TO AND INCLUDING the DENAIL of the right for people to abolish a government and set up a new one to protect their interests, as in teh Civil War.

            Res ipsa loquitur : it is de facto tyranny, and has been for quite some time.

          • DownshiftFast5to1
            August 30, 2013 at 8:01 pm

            I’d prefer that you did not abandon your attempts at humor, Ed.

            Keep on keeping on.

      • August 30, 2013 at 11:26 am

        Dear Gil,

        Exactly right!

        What? Did you think we were going to deny this? This is exactly what we want.

        We know that free market road systems and transportation systems would be optimized for cost, functionality, speed, convenience, and countless other rational economic factors.

        If competitor A fails to provide it for us, competitor B will in short order, because there will be a commercial opportunity he can exploit. The result will be relentless move to optimum efficiency.

        It is exactly what we want. In your attempt to mock free market solutions, you unwittingly held up the free market ideal.

  20. Mithrandir
    August 27, 2013 at 9:33 pm

    That guy sure looked smug.

    I guess (implied by Officer Smug) there are thousand of people dying in the UK and elsewhere from these 2005 Defenders.

    I feel safe now.

  21. Tor Minotaur
    August 27, 2013 at 3:19 pm

    It’s nice to have everything in one place. Something to let us know if things are getting better than before? Or are they getting worse? Are we fortunate to be half free? Or are we doomed because we’re now half enslaved?

    The optimist says the glass is half full.

    The pessimist says the glass is half empty.

    The realist says the glass contains half the required amount of liquid for it to overflow.

    The cynic wonders who drank the other half.

    The project manager says the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

    The physicist says that the glass is completely full. It is half-filled with water and half-filled with air – hence, completely filled on the whole!

    The nihilist says let’s break the glass.

    The existentialist wonders what is the point of the question.

    The school teacher says it’s not about whether the glass is half empty or half full, it’s whether there is something in the glass at all.

    The experienced drinker say it’s not about whether the glass is half full or half empty, it’s about who is paying for the next round.

    The business to business salesman doesn’t care if the glass is half full or half empty, he’s just thankful for the discussion that will give him ten more minutes to figure out why his powerpoint presentation isn’t working.

    The single mother says sweetheart it’s whatever you want it to be, just please let mummy have few minutes peace and quiet.

    The consultant says let’s examine the question, prepare a strategy for an answer, and decide what my daily rate of compensation should be.

    The inquisitive troublemaker wants to know what’s in the glass anyhow… and is scheming a way to get the rest of it.

    The craftsman sees the dirty glass, washes and dries it, then puts it away in a custom oak and etched glass cabinet that he built himself using only hand tools.

    The worrier frets that the remaining half will evaporate by next morning.

    The fanatic thinks the glass is completely full, even though it isn’t.

    The entrepreneur sees the glass as only using half of its potential.

    The computer specialist says that next year the glass capacity will double, be half the price, but cost you 50% more for me to give you the answer.

    The first engineer says the glass is over-designed for the quantity of water.

    The second engineer says (when the half is tainted) he’s glad he put the other half in a redundant glass.

    The computer programmer says the glass is full-empty.

    The Buddhist says don’t worry, remember the glass is already broken.

    The logician says that where the glass is in process of being filled then it is half full; where it is in the process of being emptied then it is half empty; and where its status in terms of being filled or emptied is unknown then the glass is one in which a boundary between liquid and gas lies exactly midway between the inside bottom and the upper rim, assuming that the glass has parallel sides and rests on a level surface, and where it does not then the liquid/gas boundary lies exactly midway between the upper and lower equal halves of the available total volume of said glass.

    The scientist says a guess based on a visual cue is inaccurate, so mark the glass at the bottom of the meniscus of the content, pour the content into a bigger glass; fill the empty glass with fresh content up to the mark; add the original content back in; if the combined content overflows the lip, the glass was more than half full; if it doesn’t reach the top, the glass was more than half empty; if it neither overflows nor fails to reach the top then it was either half-full or half-empty. Now what was the question again?

    The Dutchman suggests you both pay for the glass and share the contents. Then tells you he will have the bottom half.

    The personal coach knows that the glass goes from full to empty depending on the circumstances, and reminds the drinker that he can always fill the glass when he wishes.

    The grammar-nazi says that while the terms half-full and half-empty are colloquially acceptable the glass can technically be neither since both full and empty are absolute states and therefore are incapable of being halved or modified in any way.

    The auditor first checks whether the empty half is material and then designs the audit procedures to obtain sufficient evidence to conclude that the glass is indeed empty.

    The waiter will hurry to replace the glass with a full one. He documents that the glass was empty when he took it away; and charges you for two full glasses when he brings you the final tab.

    The ineffective organization would discuss the question during the board of directors meeting, convene a committee to research the problem, and assign tasks for a root cause analysis, usually without a complete explanation of the problem to those assigned the tasks. The directors would consider the problem to be above the pay grade of those assigned root cause analysis tasks.

    The dog just wonders: can he eat the glass or will you throw it so he can bring it back… The cat wonders why the glass is only half full (or empty)… maybe it’s a trick… maybe it’s full of poison perhaps…

    The person who is no longer trapped in The Matrix says: “There is no glass…”

    The research scientist says that following initial observation and testing a working hypothesis for further research is: “The glass is both half full and half empty,” and that these findings warrant further investigation with a more representative sample of glasses and contents, which may or may not be liquid.

    The algebraic simultaneous equation theorist says that if the glass is equally half full and half empty, then half full = half empty; therefore ½ x F = ½ x E; therefore (by multiplying both sides of the equation by 2) we show that F = E; i.e. Full equals Empty!

    The efficiency analyst says the glass is operating substantially below optimization level, being consistently exactly 50% under-utilized during the period of assessment, corresponding to an over-resourcing in meeting demand equating to precisely 200% of requisite capacity in volume terms, not accounting for seasonal trends and shrinkage, and that if the situation continues there is in theory opportunity for savings or expansion.

    The ‘perfect’ 1950s housewife would not leave the glass sitting there long enough for anyone to consider the question, but would scoop it up, wash it up, dry it to a gleaming shine and put it back in the glass cabinet in a jiffy. No half-full or half-empty in her world… just a full glass or an untidy one.

    The obsessive compulsive postpones the question until the level is checked, and checked again, and again, and again…

    The phobic says yuck, someone drank out of it and left his germs on the glass.

    The psychiatrist would ask you, “Is the half-empty/half-full glass really that important? I mean… really? Think about it. If fact, let’s not. Let’s set that particular issue aside for a few moments and talk about what’s really bothering you..”

    The sales clerk says even though the glass is half full/empty you are getting more than your money’s worth compared to buying a full glass. The full glass is less expensive because of the economies of producing a common standard version in big quantities, whereas the more expensive half full/empty glass represents much better value because it is more exclusive and better quality, and very hard to come by and thus greatly sought after.

    The customer service agent will agree with you that the glass is half full/empty, and he will do anything in his power to fill the glass up at no extra cost. However, after a full investigation you will be informed that you mistakenly received a half full/empty glass since you only paid for a quarter. You therefore received a half full/empty glass at the price of a quarter-full/three-quarters empty glass. You should consider yourself very lucky, and that any further complaints might result in your having to return the half full/empty glass at your own cost, with no guarantee of any refund.

    The co-dependent hurries to fill your glass, but not so completely that you would spill it and get upset. Because when you get upset…

    The con man says that’s not my glass, mine was bigger.

    The Taoist sees that the glass is both half empty and half full, that neither half could exist without the other, requiring a point of balance in order to maintain equilibrium in the universe, and therefore, are merely two mirror images of the same realistic concept, so in the purity of absolute truth the glass is neither half full or half empty, the glass simply is.

    The boss expects the half-empty glass to be filled in half the time it took to fill half the glass, at half the going rate.

    The trainer says make the glass do push-ups until it sweats itself full!!!

    Schrödinger’s cat says, if you haven’t seen the glass yet, it is both full and empty at the same time.

    The police officer says: “I’ll ask the questions.”

    The (other) pessimist says the glass is half full of shit.

    The marketing professional convinces the buyer that what’s left is more valuable than the first half.

    The banker says: “Let’s put a couple of options on the full half and leverage it until it’s too big to fail, then sell it over and over again… Heck! While we are at it, let’s do the same to the empty half as well!”

    The politician says that under the last government the glass was half-empty, and becoming emptier, but thanks to his own party’s new leadership, the glass is definitely now half-full, and becoming fuller; but if the other party were to return to power, the glass would once again undoubtedly empty rapidly.

    The economist says let market forces decide.

    The call-center operator asks if you’d mind holding while she finds out for you. Your call is important to them…

    The IT support person asks if you’ve tried emptying the glass and then refilling it.

    The insomniac will be up all night wrestling with the question.

    The Keynesian argues that the glass is half-empty, and that government needs to intervene to fill it up.

    The glass half-full person is optimistic the barman is still serving

    The opportunist says, “Thanks, everyone! While you were debating the status of the glass, I went ahead and drank it all. It was very refreshing!”

    • Boothe
      August 27, 2013 at 7:34 pm

      Tor – I’ve never met an insomniac that stays up worrying about the level in a glass. But I once knew an agnostic dyslexic insomniac that stayed up at night pondering if there really is a doG. ;)

      • August 27, 2013 at 11:13 pm

        Dear Boothe,

        I notice you paid due reverence to doG by capitalizing the G.

      • Tor Minotaur
        August 30, 2013 at 1:50 am

        Lol!

        And spotteth twice they the camels before the third hour. And so, the Midianites went forth to Ram Gilead in Kadesh Bilgemath, by Shor Ethra Regalion, to the house of Gash-Bil-Bethuel-Bazda, he who brought the butter dish to Balshazar and the tent peg to the house of Rashomon. And there slew they the goats, yea, and placed they the bits in little pots. Here endeth the lesson.

        O Lord please don’t burn us, don’t grill or toast your flock. Don’t put us on the barbecue, or simmer us in stock. Don’t braise or bake or boil us or stir fry us in a wok. Oh please don’t lightly poach us or baste us with hot fat. Don’t fricassee or roast us or boil us in a vat, and please don’t stick thy servant Lord in a Rotissomat.

        Chaplain: …Ooh, You are so big…
        Congregation: …ooh, You are so big…
        Chaplain: …So absolutely huge.
        Congregation: …So absolutely huge.
        Chaplain: Gosh, we’re all really impressed down here, I can tell You.
        Congregation: Gosh, we’re all really impressed down here, I can tell You.
        Chaplain: Forgive us, O Lord, for this, our dreadful toadying, and…
        Congregation: And barefaced flattery.
        Chaplain: But You are so strong and, well, just so super.
        Congregation: Fantastic.

        – The ironic thing about the UK allowing controlled religious mockery, is it’s state religion is far more fanatical.
        It is one of the leading forces behind all the abortions, genocides, and eugenics. True inhuman monsters they are, pretending it’s all for mother earth, scientific, economic, and not to be helped. Every bit as devoid of reason as anything Catholics or Germanic Protestant advocate.

        ##- enjoy a bellylaugh courtesy of Monty Python, Family Guy, South Park, and then look critically at the alternate statist worldview they’re implicitly shilling for as well as what they’re explicitly mocking.

        • August 30, 2013 at 2:28 am

          Dear Tor,

          “The ironic thing about the UK allowing controlled religious mockery, is it’s state religion is far more fanatical.”

          Yup. The 1997 total ban on civilian handgun ownership is the clearest example.

          How sad. The land that gave us Magna Carta, reduced to this.

          • DownshiftFast5to1
            August 30, 2013 at 3:54 am

            “How sad. The land that gave us Magna Carta, reduced to this.”

            No shit.

            It’s like they never heard of Foghorn Leghorn, and have no clue what a chicken-hawk is.

            It’s odd how generations define themselves by the cartoons they watched while growing up.

            The Strawberry ShortCake generation had the wool pulled over their eyes big time – from the beginning – ./…It went downhill from there.

            Us Wiley E. Coyote generation,… well, some of us get it.

            I wonder what kind of cartoons those Brits have been watching?
            For that matter, I wonder what kind of cartoons the rest of the world has been watching to go along will all this B.S.?

            The current state of things does not seem to fit in with the Power Rangers,… is it a Barney thing,… or a Tela-Tubbies dream?
            Idk. And have no idea.
            …The world has gone mad.

    • August 30, 2013 at 11:44 am

      Dear Tor,

      The grammar-nazi says that while the terms half-full and half-empty are colloquially acceptable the glass can technically be neither since both full and empty are absolute states and therefore are incapable of being halved or modified in any way.

      As a card carrying member of the Grammar Nazi Party, I’m glad you pointed that out! I never noticed that before.

      Now whenever someone brings up the half full half empty anecdote, I will launch into a long winded rant about the importance of semantic precision.

      Believe me when I say I’m only half-joking.

  22. Boothe
    August 27, 2013 at 2:47 pm

    Eric – “Don Corleone, after all, only controlled sections of New York. One could always move to Albany.” I have to take exception with that Eric. One could probably keep their nose clean, their head down and their mouth shut and live their life out in perfect harmony with Don Corleone or any other mob boss (or at least never run afoul of them). But move to Albany? That’s the state capitol. There’s no way in hell you’d ever avoid “paying protection” to the gun-vernment racket on their home turf. They will come looking for you. The mob might not.

  23. Tor Minotaur
    August 27, 2013 at 2:19 pm

    Videos that bring Fury are good.
    FuryAns outwit and defeat NecroMongers

    ApolIonia knows English: Monday Tuesday Thursday Wednesday

    In a few days the Uber-Villains will have to destroy the masters of The Godfather. I submitted a complaint about Apollonia’s wedding night nude scene. She was only 16 when it was filmed. Everyone in this movie will become unpersons. There has always only been Godfather II and Godfather III.

    Obscene indecent or illegal program complaints:
    http://www.fcc.gov/complaints

  24. BrentP
    August 27, 2013 at 2:15 pm

    I think it’s 25 years, not 20. Also it’s a moving age that has nothing to do with being before the ban. The import restrictions are due to the lobbying of foreign corporations such as Mercedes Benz. Of course they were likely joined by domestic companies as well.

    There’s a certain control freakishness among marketeers that they have to control where a product may be available. It goes beyond the rules of the mafias that run the various territories on the planet, they do not want product from market appearing in another. Usually it is a matter of pricing, market tiers and other such things. When people start buying products in other markets and shipping them around the planet it disturbs their vision, their pricing plans (which means high profit markets vs lower profit markets).

    For instance there was recently a court case regarding text books. Someone figured out he could buy college textbooks overseas in his home country far cheaper and sell them for a profit in the USA. Same book as in the USA but it would be soft cover instead of hardcover. The photos would be black and white instead of color. Basically it was good enough. Eventually went to the supreme court. Thankfully that guy followed the Don’s rules on importing books.

    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/thai-student-protected-by-first-sale-supreme-court-rules/

    The stuff about airbags and emission controls and crash standards and the like is really the excuses upon which a mercantile law is sold to the american public. What it comes down to is that automakers want car A to stay in market A and car B to stay in market B. They don’t want the lesser optioned car B that is sold for less than car A to enter market A and undermine sales of car A. This is typical corporate thinking.

    If I were running a corporation and saw people going through hoops to get product B in market A, I would have it sold in market A and wipe out their little business. That’s all it takes. As a manufacturer it’s easy to undercut someone buying at retail and then importing. I wouldn’t worry about lost sales of A because to me, 90% or more of them are not product A customers in the first place. They won’t buy the fully loaded product. I might lose ten sales of A in favor of B but I’ll gain 90 sales of B that wouldn’t have happened at all. So reduced profit on a small percentage of sales is more than offset by the gain in profit from sales. Yes I know there are other costs involved, but when someone can buy at retail, import, and resell without economies of scale, there has to be enough money on the table to cover it.

    The control freak mind simply doesn’t think that way.

    So what’s on board now? RFID, broadband over powerlines, smart meters and other methods of controlling/tracking a product for its entire life. It’s the control freak in people. They can’t stand that the product leaves their control. Of course the corporate partner, government, is all for this sort of thing.

  25. mikehell
    August 27, 2013 at 2:07 pm

    There’s one key difference between the mafia of the state and that of the Corleones et al.: the latter would never tolerate such abject waste of materials while the former would celebrate it. At least the Corleones would find a way to make some money off of “their” confiscated property, perhaps even recirculating the vehicle through the economy. But the state has no interest in capital preservation so off to the junk yard with your overly popular and highly serviceable vehicle!

  26. michael.white
    August 27, 2013 at 12:13 pm

    I love my Defender and can’t stand watching that video – it makes me sick to watch them destroy a beautiful hand-built (since so many parts are bolted together rather than welded) machine. Many people are bringing in 25 year old and older models because they don’t have to comply with the emissions and safety laws. However, the kicker is that you’re not allowed to update anything:

    – Newer, safer disc brakes rather than drum – nope.
    – Newer, cleaner, more efficient engine – nope.
    – Better exhaust for cleaner emissions – nope.
    – High back seats to prevent whiplash – nope.
    – Better headlights for better visibility – nope.

    The list goes on and on. I imagine if the particular customs thug was in a bad mood, he might even bitch about using a newer oil in the engine or using a piece of modern wire. They’d much have you driving one with a rusted through frame and leaking brakes that spews pitch-black diesel exhaust.

    In other words, it’s a blatant example that this has nothing to do with safety or the environment but with control.

    • Doug
      August 27, 2013 at 9:54 pm

      You have been misinformed. I imported into the US a heavily modified ’83 Golf in 2009. Those Customs jerks never looked at the car – only the paperwork. I imported two other “illegal” cars earlier and this 26 year-old car was the only one I told the truth about. And the truth is not something you want to tell any Government Official. It took well over 3 hours to get them to release it to me. The other cars took less than 10 minutes.

      • Boothe
        August 27, 2013 at 10:17 pm

        Doug – When in Rome do as the Romans do. When amongst liars…

        • doug
          August 27, 2013 at 11:23 pm

          You’re right. You can’t fight these guys so you have to go around them. It seems, the guy importing the Land Rover tried to do it the cheapest and easiest way so he could resell it. Believe me, you can get illegal vehicles in the US but you have to be cool about it. And you don’t want to make a business of it. I did it because I liked the cars and intended to keep them.

          • Jean
            August 28, 2013 at 2:45 pm

            You can also execute them until you at least find someone tractable…

      • michael.white
        August 28, 2013 at 1:15 am

        Doug – That used to be true for Defenders until about six months ago. I’ve heard no definitive reason, but given that many people were bringing in mid-80’s Defenders with much newer parts (one of the beauties of the Defender is relative ease with which parts can be interchanged), I’d bet some idiot bragged to the wrong person. Or maybe someone in Customs got tired of surfing porn during their break and went onto ebay to look at Defenders.

        • Ed
          August 28, 2013 at 1:27 am

          “I’d bet some idiot bragged to the wrong person. ”

          Yep, there was probably a snitch in the mix somewhere. Bureaucrats with badges would never get anywhere without snitches.

    • August 27, 2013 at 11:34 pm

      Dear MW,

      “In other words, it’s a blatant example that this has nothing to do with safety or the environment but with control.”

      Exactly. Just like “gun control” is not really about “controlling guns” or “banning guns,” per se.

      If it was, then no one, including the “gun controllers” would be permitted to have guns.

      Nope. It’s about controlling people. It’s “people control” not “gun control.” It’s about controlling people by controlling who will be denied the natural right of self-defense.

      Gun control is about the gun controllers being able to control you because you don’t have a gun.

      • Garysco
        August 29, 2013 at 11:19 pm

        We have our Big Brother mind controllers right here in Fresno. They have clever billboards with their own pictures on them and radio ads everywhere thanking us cows for driving less, carpooling, not using air conditioners, bla,bla, bla,.

        A local radio station (conservative female) personality actually went to their luxury offices and discovered mostly newer bigger SUV’s in the parking lot. Upon questioning not one of those commissars carpool to work.

        It don’t get no better then that.
        http://www.valleyair.org/Home.htm

        • August 30, 2013 at 12:29 am

          Dear Gary,

          Do as I say, not as I do. Typical. Ditto “gun control.”

          Liberal gun grabber website Salon dot com just posted an article entitled

          Clinton’s line was true: The sad facts about assault weapons and voting
          Are there really places in America where it’s easier to buy an AR-15 than vote for president? Here are the details
          By Alex Seitz-Wald

          I left a couple of comments there.

          thechinadesk 6 minutes ago

          Clinton’s line was true.

          Which line was that?

          Was it

          “It depends on what the meaning of the words ‘is’ is.”

          thechinadesk 10 minutes ago

          So-called “gun control” is not about controlling guns. If it was, the gun controllers would be advocating universal disarmament, that no one should own guns, including themselves.

          But they’re not advocating universal disarmament. They’re advocating selective disarmament. Civilian disarmament. Victim disarmament. The disarmament of Mere Mundanes. Your disarmament, while they, the political elites, remain armed to the teeth. They’re advocating gun ownership only by the political class, the ruling nomenklatura, the 1%.

          No. Gun control is Orwellian Newspeak for people control. It is the New Class depriving you of your natural right to self-defense, so that they can control you, and deprive you of the ability to resist their brute force coercion.

          To sum up, gun control is not about the control of guns, it is about the control of other people by depriving them of their guns.

          “After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn’t do it. I sure as hell wouldn’t want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.”
          — William S. Burroughs, icon of the Beat Generation, one of the most politically trenchant, culturally influential, and innovative artists of the 20th century

          • garysco
            August 30, 2013 at 1:27 am

            We (society) have been dumbed down mislead and misinformed so long by our betters (control psychopaths, teachers, politicians) that the majority just can’t conceive of their evil. That results in normalcy bias, with some general bitchiness. So they give us the internet (as it is for now), letters to the editor, false hopes at the polls etc. to complain and get tracked by the likes of the NSA for later use. It stops the immediate human revolution

            They truly fear the man who can think and act for his own best interests, and know 99% will not do it. It is either just too hard or because of fear their chocolate milk will be taken away. Those heretic government worker sluts fit the fear category, along with chemical help from their doctors.
            That was the method used in Soviet Russia, and now… well you finish the sentence.

  27. Ed
    August 27, 2013 at 11:46 am

    Hmmmmmm…makes me wonder how the dimwits snapped to the fact that it was indeed an “unapproved vehicle”. There must have been a snitch involved.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *