Aggregatore di feed

The primary purpose of the federal judiciary is to make sure that anything the federal government does is almost never, ever, ruled to be unconstitutional. This is Hamilton’s constitutional regime. A believer in unlimited government, Alexander Hamilton’s constitutional belief was that the constitution can and should be used as a rubber stamp on unlimited government — as long as the government is run by “well behaved” politicians like himself, he insisted. His political nemesis, Thomas Jefferson, took the opposite view that the government needed to be “bound by the chains of the Constitution.”

Andrew Napolitano pointed out in his book, The Constitution in Exile, that the federal government’s “supreme” court did not rule a single federal law to be unconstitutional from 1935 to 1997. The eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Jeffersonians warned that if the day ever arrived that the federal government, through its judiciary, would be the sole arbiter of constitutionality Americans would then live under a tyranny. That judicial tyranny was cemented into place in April of 1865 with the destruction of the rights of nullification and secession and the evisceration of the Tenth Amendment – the real purposes of the “Civil War.”

The latest example of our bullying and tyrannical federal judiciary is Chief Justice John Roberts’ nasty rebuke of President Trump’s recommendation of impeaching a federal judge who issued one of those Stalinist-sounding federal judicial “decrees” saying that the president has no authority to deport illegal aliens who have committed such felonies as rape and murder, as he did with over 200 members of a notorious El Salvadoran criminal gang.

Americans – and American presidents – were not always bullied by black-robed totalitarians. They once understood that there are three branches of the federal government, not just the judicial branch, and that federal judges are not black-robed deities. President Andrew Jackson, who President Trump apparently reveres, is a good example of such a president. After Chief Justice John Marshall “ruled” in 1819 (McCulloch v. Maryland) that the Second Bank of the United States (BUS), a precursor of the Fed, was constitutional despite not being one of the delegate powers in Article 1, Section 8, and despite its being voted down during the constitutional convention, Jackson voiced his disagreement by vetoing the recharter of the BUS in 1832.

Paying “solemn regard to the principles of the Constitution,” Jackson said in his veto message, he had “come to the conclusion that it (the BUS) ought not to become a law . . .” The BUS, in his opinion, was incompatible with justice, sound policy, and “the Constitution of our country.” Its grants of “almost a monopoly of the foreign and domestic exchange” had increased the value of its stock (The BUS was 80 percent privately owned, 20 percent government owned) so much that a few hundred stockholders had become very wealthy by it, he said. As to Marshall’s opinion that the bank was constitutional, President Jackson simply said, “To this conclusion I cannot assent.”

He mocked Marshall’s theory that mere precedent – the existence of the BUS – established its constitutionality. A slavish follower and worshipper of Hamilton, Marshall here repeated Hamilton’s totalitarian-minded theory that whenever government does something that is unconstitutional, the fact that it did that thing magically makes it constitutional! No constitutional amendment is needed!

Stating the common understanding of all Americans outside of Marshall and his nationalist comrades in the legal profession, Jackson explained the truth about constitutional interpretation that “The Congress, the Executive, and the Court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution.” To that Jefferson would have added “the people of the free and independent states” as he called them in the Declaration of Independence. “The authority of the Supreme Court,” Jackson continued, “must not, therefore, be permitted to control” the other two branches.

When Jefferson debated Hamilton on the constitutionality of a national bank run by politicians Hamilton based his argument on the “Necessary and Proper” clause of the Constitution. Jefferson’s response was that the country already had banks, so a national bank run by politicians was not “necessary and proper” but only convenient for the political class.

Arrogant and totalitarian-minded federal judges, educated in America’s hopelessly left-wing, socialist law schools have issued dozens of dictatorial “rulings” that attempt to stop President Trump from following through on his campaign promises. He has every right to ignore them, as Andrew Jackson did, and so should governors of the free and independent states when these same black-robed tyrants seek to impose even more governmental tyranny and mayhem on their states.

The post Gangsters, Terrorists, and Deep State Judicial Tyranny appeared first on LewRockwell.

“This is war.”—President Trump

President Trump’s declaration of war as a justification for using wartime powers to sidestep constitutional protections is indeed a war, but it is a war waged by the president against dissent, against due process, and against the very foundations of our constitutional republic.

This is what it means to weaponize the government.

When the government turns its power against its own people—through surveillance, retaliation, censorship, and intimidation—it ceases to serve the public and instead becomes a weapon of oppression.

According to the Political Dictionary:

“The term ‘weaponize’ refers to the strategic manipulation or transformation of information, institutions, or social issues into tools for gaining political advantage. This could involve exploiting existing laws, harnessing social media algorithms for disinformation campaigns, or turning otherwise neutral or benign elements of governance into divisive issues for the purpose of delegitimizing opponents or rallying a base.”

Time and again, leaders have stretched—or outright shattered—the limits of power, weaponizing government power through unjust laws, surveillance, or outright suppression.

Each power grab is a step toward the erosion of liberty.

John Adams used the Alien and Sedition Acts to prosecute journalists and political opponents.

Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, allowing the military to detain individuals without trail and suppressing Confederate sympathizers and political dissenters.

Under Woodrow Wilson, the Espionage and Sedition Acts were used to crack down on anti-war activists, socialists, and labor organizers, including Eugene V. Debs, who spoke out against World War I.

Franklin D. Roosevelt issued an executive order that led to the internment of over 120,000 Japanese Americans during World War II, based on suspicions of disloyalty, despite little to no evidence.

Richard Nixon harnessed the power of the FBI, CIA, and IRS, to harass, spy on and sabotage his political opponents and perceived enemies.

Spanning numerous presidential administrations, from FDR to Nixon, the FBI’s covert intelligence program COINTELPRO was used to infiltrate, discredit and disrupt civil rights leaders, anti-war activists, and other political dissidents.

In a bid to fight so-called disinformation, Biden pressured social media companies to censor and suppress individuals expressing views perceived as conspiratorial or extremist, especially as they related to COVID-19.

And then there’s Donald Trump, who is setting new records for how far he’s willing to go to retaliate against his perceived enemies and sidestep the rule of law.

Indeed, Ken Hughes, an investigative journalist who spent two decades listening to Richard Nixon’s Secret White House Tapes, has concluded that Nixon’s abuses of presidential power—which included weaponizing the government to “sabotage Vietnam peace talks to damage the Democrats’ 1968 presidential campaign, to time his withdrawal from Vietnam to help his 1972 reelection campaign, and to spring former Teamsters president Jimmy Hoffa from prison in return for the union’s political support”—pale beside Trump’s abuses.

Trump, who once vowed to end government overreach and the weaponization of the federal government, now openly uses its full force against his critics, dismantling democratic norms, consolidating power in ways that defy the Constitution, and directing an all-out weaponization of the federal government against his perceived enemies, which translates to anyone who dares to oppose him.

If Trump were just a petty blowhard, that would be one thing.

Unfortunately, having populated his administration with individuals more loyal to him than to the Constitution, Trump is getting drunk on power.

The danger is not so much Trump as it is his enablers-to-abuse, the many minions within his administration and beyond who are eager to carry out unlawful orders, defy the courts, ignore Congress’ mandate, trample rights, and butcher the Constitution, all in the so-called name of putting America first.

If this keeps up, America, once looked upon as a bastion of freedom and economic opportunity, will be the last place anyone ever thinks of when they hear the words freedom, justice and equality.

Every action taken by the Trump administration in defiance of the rule of law—whether or not that action is motivated by a legitimate concern for national security—pushes us that much closer to the complete dismantling of our constitutional republic.

Don’t be so carried away by fear-inducing tales of rapists and foreign invaders and corruption that you let the government get away with murder… the painful execution of our rights.

That way lies tyranny.

You can see the pattern forming already.

When anti-war protesters are made to disappear—snatched up late at night by plain-clothes men who refuse to identify themselves and then transported thousands of miles away, to a private prison in a state more favorable to dubious detentions—we are wading deep into authoritarian territory.

When Venezuelan migrants are rounded up and deported out of the country, heads shaven and in chains, without any due process—without being identified, without being charged formally with a crime, without getting a chance to plead their innocence against those charges and, if found guilty, then convicted—we are wading deep into authoritarian territory.

When major law firms are barred from interacting with federal agencies or entering federal buildings—an outright attempt to chill First Amendment activity and hamstring businesses that challenge government overreach—we are wading deep into authoritarian territory.

When huge swaths of our nation’s history (including the Constitution and Bill of Rights) are being erased from websites, government buildings, archives, educational curriculum—in the so-called name of combatting discrimination—we are wading deep into authoritarian territory.

When Trump administration sycophants from the vice president on down are openly deriding and defying the courts while proclaiming the imperial supremacy of their exalted leader, we are wading deep into authoritarian territory.

When the president of the United States threatens other nations militarily, talks openly about seizing foreign lands, stirs up international tensions, and rattles the war drums, we are wading deep into authoritarian territory.

Trump, adept at twisting facts and spinning lies, is working hard to insist that these end-runs around the rule of law are for our safety.

Don’t believe him. Words are cheap.

More importantly, don’t trust him. Bind him down with the chains of the Constitution.

The only real protection we have against tyranny is the rule of law, provided that you have a populace and a system of government that holds the rule of law as inviolable.

That is our real power: the extent to which we hold fast to the Constitution and demand that the government and its agents do so, as well.

The moment that we relent in that commitment—the moment that we look the other way and let first a few encroachments slide, then ever more and more—is the moment that the Constitution loses its power to protect us against tyranny.

That is what is unfolding right now.

This is the devil’s bargain that we are being asked to enter into with Trump: empty promises and a one-way street to a dictatorship in exchange for our freedoms.

Watch out.

When any politician claims to be saving you money by imposing tariffs that ramp up inflation and cutting government programs aimed at educating the masses, feeding the hungry, and helping the poor, disabled and elderly, all the while spending taxpayer money on his own lavish lifestyle and self-serving government programs, you’d better beware. Your hard-earned dollars will be next in line to be seized, spent and squandered.

When any politician suggests that you relinquish your freedoms—of speech, assembly, due process, association, etc.—in exchange for promises of greater security, you’d better beware. Your freedoms will be next on the chopping block.

When any politician persuades you to look the other way while innocent individuals are rounded up alongside suspected criminals just because they look a certain way or talk a certain way or belong to a particular demographic, you’d better beware. Your right to due process will be next.

When any politician comes up with a vast array of reasons why he doesn’t need to obey court rulings—because they were issued verbally, because his power trumps that of the courts, because he doesn’t need to follow the law outside America’s borders—you’d better beware. This shifty reasoning for breaking the law could be used against you next.

There can be no doubt about the nature of what is taking place right now.

This is war.

President Trump’s justification for defying the courts and doing whatever he wants in pursuit of his political agenda (arresting protesters, carrying out mass arrests and deportations, muzzling critics, seizing funds, dismantling agencies, usurping congressional powers) is that “this is war.”

Here’s the thing, though: Trump may be using his war powers as commander-in-chief to bypass the Constitution at every turn, but the only war being waged is a war against the Constitution and the rule of law and the American people.

Congress, which has the sole power to declare war under Article I, Section 8, Clause 11, has yet to do so. And still Trump is using the emergency wartime powers of the presidency to sidestep accountability and due process.

In ruling after ruling, the courts, which have the judicial power to rein in overreach and misconduct, are repeatedly declaring unconstitutional the Trump administration’s steady dismantling of the government and refusal to stay within the purview of his official powers. And still Trump is unilaterally hacking away at the very foundations of our system of government.

If the president refuses to be held accountable, if he insists that his power is supreme, if he abuses the power of his office to wreak havoc and revenge, if he reduces our republic to rubble and tramples over the Constitution and disregards the rule of law, he is aligning himself with every despot, dictator and tyrant to have walked the earth.

We’ve been here before. We know how this story ends.

It takes time and effort and a willingness on the part of “we the people” to look beyond our differences and stand united in opposition to oppression, but when we do that, freedom prevails in the end.

Next year will be the 250th anniversary of the birth of this country, when America’s founders declared their independence from King George’s tyranny. What’s just as important, however, is what came before that: the small steps of rebellion, resistance and outrage that said, “enough is enough.”

What we are now experiencing is a civil war, devised and instigated in part by the Deep State.

The objective: compliance and control.

The strategy: destabilize the economy, polarize the populace, escalate racial and political tensions, intensify the use of violence, and then, when all hell breaks loose, clamp down on the nation for the good of the people and the security of the nation.

The outcome for this particular conflict is already foregone: the Deep State wins.

The Deep State wins by ensuring that we are censored, silenced, muzzled, gagged, zoned out, caged in and shut down. It wins by monitoring our speech and activities for any sign of “extremist” activity. It wins by ensuring that we are estranged from each other and kept at a distance from those who are supposed to represent us. It wins by saddling us with taxation without representation and a government without the consent of the governed.

It wins by terminating the Constitution (or rewriting the Constitution).

So where does that leave us?

“We” may have contributed to our downfall through our inaction and gullibility, but we are also the only hope for a free future.

After all, the Constitution begins with those three beautiful words, “We the people.”

Those three words were intended as a reminder to future generations that there is no government without us: our sheer numbers, our muscle, our economy, our physical presence in this land.

When we forget that, when we allow the “Me” of a self-absorbed, narcissistic, politically polarizing culture to override our civic duties as citizens to collectively stand up to tyranny and make the government play by the rules of the Constitution, that is when tyranny rises and freedom falls

Remember, there is power in numbers.

Not the kinds of numbers that Trump likes to spout about landslide victories and electoral mandates, but the most powerful numbers of all: the sheer, overwhelming mass of humanity that is “we the people” of these United States of America.

If there is any means left to us for thwarting the government in its relentless march towards outright dictatorship, it rests with us.

Ultimately, that’s what the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution is all about: it affirms that “we the people” have all the power, and what powers we do not explicitly give to the federal government or the states, we retain. We may appoint government representatives to act in our stead, but we never relinquish that power altogether.

That’s where Trump and his Deep State handlers get it wrong. Speaking through him and his administration, they claim that this dismantling of the federal government is a bid to return power to local communities and state governments, but it’s not their government to dismantle, nor is it their power to return.

We are the government, and we are the power, and it’s time “we the people” reminded the government and its henchmen of that important fact.

The power still lies with us.

We must resist every attempt to erode our freedoms, demand accountability, and uphold the Constitution—before it’s too late.

It’s time to invalidate governmental laws, tactics and policies that are illegitimate, egregious or blatantly unconstitutional.

Nullify everything the government does that flies in the face of the Constitution.

Flood your representatives’ phone lines, inboxes and townhall meetings with your discontent.

Protest everything that tramples on the Constitution.

Stand up for your own rights, of course, but more importantly, stand up for the rights of those with whom you might disagree.

Defend freedom at all costs. Defend justice at all costs. Make no exceptions based on race, religion, creed, politics, immigration status, sexual orientation, etc.

Don’t play semantics. Don’t justify. Don’t politicize it.

If it carries even a whiff of tyranny, oppose it.

Demand that your representatives in government cut you a better deal, one that abides by the Constitution and doesn’t just attempt to sidestep it. That’s their job: make them do it.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, all freedoms hang together. They fall together, as well.

This originally appeared on The Rutherford Institute.

The post Beyond the Law: What It Means To Weaponize the Government appeared first on LewRockwell.

It’s happening again. Europe is once again going totalitarian and this time there’s a decidedly familiar communist stench. The outcome was predictable for many of us in the alternative media and the situation is only going to get worse in the next few years, but what does this mean for the rest of the world? With the European elites casting off their humanist masks and going outright Orwellian, what kind of chaos can we expect to unfold?

First and foremost I want to point out a key piece of irony here – For decades in the US we heard the tiresome argument that our 2nd Amendment gun rights are meaningless because they are “unnecessary in maintaining our freedoms”. Anti-gun rights activists and politicians commonly used Europe as their sterling example:

“If gun rights are so important for freedom, then what about the Europeans? They have strict gun laws and they’re not losing their rights…”

As Americans who understand what it means to fight a rebellion against tyranny and win, our response to this claim has always been the same: “Just give it time…”

Of course, we were right and they were wrong. I’m sure a large number of people among the 95% of EU and UK citizens that are disarmed are probably wishing desperately for firearms right about now. The reasons why are numerous and horrifying.

The Downward Spiral Into 1984

In the EU and UK there has been a slow burn on censorship the past ten years which has recently exploded into a California Palisades level inferno of speech restrictions. Door to door enforcement has increased as the public speaks out against multicultural polities. The excuse is always the same – Native Europeans are not allowed to criticize third world integration because it “might hurt people’s feelings”.  Any opposition to mass immigration is labeled “hate speech”.

Movements for national identity and border security are regularly attacked in the media. In France and Germany globalist officials are attempting to make it impossible for conservative leaning political parties to participate in elections.

In Romania they have succeeded in disrupting the normal voting process, arresting populist candidate Calin Georgescu after he won the first round of presidential elections. EU controlled authorities have ruled that he will not be allowed to run again.  And for those that think he was blocked due to Russian interference, well, they just blocked the candidacy of another conservative candidate simply because she criticized the EU.  Romania is also tightening rules for online speech in an effort to silence public dissent.

In true dystopian fashion, the powers-that-be call this “protecting democracy”.

An even more disturbing trend is Europe’s rising war rhetoric against Russia, with UK and French officials threatening the deployment of troops to Ukraine. Ukraine is losing the war badly and globalists are hellbent on cutting an artery and fomenting a world war. They insist that Ukraine must get back all captured territory and be allowed eventual NATO membership. In other words, a Russian victory cannot be allowed even if it means global conflagration.

As I predicted in April of last year in my article ‘World War III Is Now Inevitable – Here’s Why It Can’t Be Avoided’, the establishment is seeking to stage a domino effect in which greater Europe and the US are drawn into the Ukraine conflict. Even with a tentative peace deal being negotiated with the Russians right now, NATO members have promised to escalate tensions in Ukraine with boots on the ground and increase troop presence in Poland on the Russian border.

Because of this development European officials are actively and openly entertaining ideas of forced conscription and the propaganda is starting to spread. It’s important to note that the war rhetoric is gaining momentum in tandem with mass immigration programs and censorship enforcement. This is not a coincidence; this is a directed and coordinated conspiracy.

The establishment is going for broke in light of the growing public shift away from progressive (socialist) ideology. It’s clear that the elites are afraid of a large scale reformation: A return to nationalism, conservatism, meritocracy and moral fortitude. Western culture is valued again and people are acting to defend it. The movement will soon be impossible to stop and the time of the globalists is running out.

Because of online discourse and the alternative media, dominating the information space is no longer possible. So the elites are turning to physical force and imprisonment to silence their opponents.

For now Britain is the worst perpetrator with citizens receiving intimidation visits from police and suffering arrests for posting “offensive words” and memes. Some are even being arrested for flying their national flag in the sight of migrants. Movements in support of “populism” are demonized and painted as “racist” or “xenophobic”, but these accusations are meant to distract from the very real cultural replacement being perpetrated in greater Europe.

The Hidden Purpose Behind Cultural Replacement

Mass immigration and cultural replacement is a strategy the globalists have been trying in the US for decades and we’re very familiar with the process. That said, I would suggest that Europe’s invasion (which launched around 2014) is an even greater threat due to the religious zealotry of the migrants involved.

Armies of third world invaders, largely from Islamic nations, have flooded into the EU and UK and threaten to completely displace the native born population. Muslims view the west as a cultural and spiritual enemy that needs to be brought under their control. Fundamentalists (around 70% of Muslims globally) believe that the entire world must one day submit to Islam and Sharia Law. They revel in the invasion and see Europeans as cattle ripe for subjugation.

There’s no intent to assimilate, no hope for coexistence. That’s not the goal. The elites are well aware of this dynamic and they welcome it. But why?

Western civilization has been scheduled for demolition and the establishment is using elements of third-world alien cultures to do the grunt work of tearing that civilization down. I predicted the results of this program in my article ‘Britain Is Proof: Globalists Plan To Use Migrants As A Mercenary Army Against The West’, published in August of 2024.

In that article I noted:

“If western populations are unified in opposing the globalist ideology then the task of deconstruction becomes impossible for them. So, they simply destroy the west from within by introducing millions of people that will NEVER assimilate or unify…”

“…In other words, my argument was that migrants from the third-world are not merely being used as unwitting tools for cultural saturation of the west. They’re not being shipped in by the millions to simply live off the fruits of our labor and our ancestors’ labors. I believe they are being brought into the US, the UK and Europe as enforcers for the establishment.”

I went on to explain the greater purpose of western government using third-world mercenaries:

“Keir Starmer and other government officials have been meeting with Muslim groups to reassure them that the government is on their side. The migrants are now emboldened to do as they please while the Brits face the reality that if they fight back, the government will put them in prison. The migrants are now, in the most basic sense, a mercenary wing of the UK government…”

I would go even further and say that in the event of war with Russia native born citizens will be rounded up for conscription while most migrants are left behind to run the streets of London, Paris and Berlin. I believe the migrants are enforcers to keep any potentially defiant Europeans in line. Many empires and monarchs throughout history have used foreign mercenaries as muscle to prevent local rebellion. The politicians in the EU and UK are following a similar strategy.

What Happens Next?

If we track these patterns to their natural conclusion I think it’s clear that Europe is about to become a nexus for global change. They will either destroy the west with instability and authoritarianism or their tyranny will inspire a modern day crusade to save free civilization.  In either case, they’re about to create a mess.

First, I think there will definitely be forced conscription, but I suspect there will be a lot more opposition and protests against this policy than the elites understand. No one in the west wants to die for Ukraine. There is no unifying moral imperative to enter into a war with Russia. People will resist.

Second, there’s going to be a heightened focus on speech controls and arrests unless the populace presents a unified response. This counter-movement will have to be prepared for violence because there’s a good chance they will need to defend themselves.

Third, governments will try to use economic leverage to silence dissent and punish people who refuse to comply. It’s not a coincidence that the EU just announced that they will be introducing CBDC programs at the retail level by the end of 2025. They’re going to push for a cashless system because this will give them total control over people’s economic access.

Unless Trump pulls off some kind of diplomatic miracle the deployment of EU and UK troops to Ukraine is predetermined. Anything to spark a volatile escalation, possibly to lure the US back into the fray under security obligations. Again, the globalists want WWIII as a catalyst for a new world order.

Fifth, Ukraine will fall to Russia regardless. This is already happening but the media is trying to gloss over troop movements and geo-location data showing increasing territorial gains for Russia. They’re also refusing to acknowledge the steep decline in Ukrainian conscripts under the age of 40.  Without a Trump deal, Ukraine will implode.  Europe does not have the troops or the training to fight Russia in a near-peer attrition-based conflict.  Their involvement would only prolong the inevitable or trigger a nuclear exchange.

Sixth, there’s going to be severe diplomatic isolation between the US and Europe. It has already started with NATO potentially breaking apart and the response from our “allies” has been nothing but hostile. EU officials act as if they’re entitled to American money and protection, but the question they need to address is WHY?

The leadership of Europe is deeply socialist and they are utterly opposed to any conservative appeal to national and cultural identity. They hate borders, they hate western culture, they hate meritocracy, they hate individual liberty, they hate Christianity and they hate Americans in general. I don’t think we have much in common with them anymore and it doesn’t make sense to be allies with people who would happily tear down everything we believe in.

The US and EU alliance is dead. After their latest authoritarian actions it’s time to cut ties, or, remove the globalists in power and change the dynamic. From my observations there are millions of Europeans across the Atlantic hoping and praying right now that Americans intervene and remove these tyrants from their bureaucratic throne. While a breaking of ties is almost guaranteed, there is also a chance that a war between the US and the European oligarchy is brewing.

Reprinted with permission from Alt-Market.us.

The post Europe Goes Full Totalitarian and Puts the Entire Western World at Risk appeared first on LewRockwell.

In Tehran, Iranians are anxiously wondering whether, once their economy is exhausted and they can no longer defend themselves, the Israelis and the United States will bomb them. Under these circumstances, should they or should they not negotiate with the enigmatic President Donald Trump?

On March 2, 2025, Iran’s Majlis (Parliament) voted no confidence in Economy and Finance Minister Abdolnaser Hemmati over his handling of the Western economic blockade and the resulting economic crisis. On the same day, his friend Mohammad Javad Zarif, former negotiator of the Joint Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (JCPOA) and current Vice President, resigned.

President Donald Trump revealed on March 7 that he had sent a letter to Iran. The international press had reported that it had been delivered the same day by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. However, Nournews revealed that Russia had refused to act as intermediary. According to Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei, it was ultimately delivered on March 12 by Anwar Gargash, diplomatic adviser to the President of the United Arab Emirates.

In any case, without waiting to hear about it, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, leader of the Revolution, declared: “What interest do we have in negotiating when we know that he will not respect his commitments? We sat at the same table and negotiated for several years, and once the agreement was completed, finalized and signed, he overturned the table and tore up the agreement.”

The liabilities of the JCPoA agreement

Indeed, in 2013, Iran negotiated a comprehensive agreement with the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany, the 5+1, in Geneva. They resulted in a temporary halt to Iran’s nuclear program and a partial lifting of unilateral Western coercive measures and Security Council economic sanctions. The 5+1 negotiations then broke off, while direct discussions between Iran and the United States continued behind the scenes. They finally resumed in 2015 in Lausanne. The public agreement was signed in Vienna, in much the same terms as the draft that had been drawn up two years earlier. It is known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPoA).

The United States finally recognized the Islamic Republic’s right to develop its civilian nuclear program. In exchange, Iran agreed to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to verify that it was not concurrently developing a military program. To this end, it agreed to possess no more than 5,060 centrifuges, not enrich uranium above 3.67%, and limit its plutonium production.

France and the United Kingdom declared themselves satisfied, while the French negotiator, Sayan Laurent Fabius, acknowledged that, as the talks progressed, he had informed the Israeli Prime Minister, his friend Benjamin Netanyahu, without the knowledge of other diplomats.

Russia and China concluded from these discussions, confirmed by their own observations on the ground, that Iran had closed its military nuclear programme in 1988, in accordance with a fatwa from Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, and had never resumed it  [ 1 ] .

On April 30, 2018, Benjamin Netanyahu released 100,000 documents stolen by the Mossad from archives in Tehran relating to the AMAD project. He explained that, by resorting to the Muslim principle of taqiya, Iran had lied. Tehran had developed a military nuclear program from 1989 to 2003 under the direction of physicist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh.

A week later, on May 8, 2018, President Donald Trump announced the United States’ withdrawal from the agreement signed by the Obama administration in Vienna. The persisting unilateral coercive Western measures are being maintained and strengthened.

“Since then, Iran has lost $100 billion a year,” according to former President Hassan Rouhani. By this measure, the US withdrawal would have caused $650 billion in losses over the past six and a half years.

Subsequently, nuclear experts who studied the Iranian documents provided by Israel would all assure that it was not Iran that lied, but Israel. The only part of the AMAD project that could be linked to the manufacture of an atomic bomb is a shock wave generator that is used in the manufacture of a detonator for this type of bomb  [ 2 ] .

Iran, in turn, withdrew from the JCPoA and the secret agreements signed with the United States. Its stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% increased to 182 kg in the last quarter of 2024.

In 2020, Israel assassinated Mohsen Fakhrizadeh in Tehran.

Towards new negotiations

Asked by the Iranian press about possible contacts via Oman, Abbas Araghchi said: “Yes, this is not a strange method, and it has happened many times throughout history. Therefore, indirect negotiation is feasible… What is important is that the will to negotiate and reach a fair and just agreement arises under conditions of equality between states. The form of the negotiation is irrelevant.”

On March 12, the same day President Trump delivered his letter, France, Greece, Panama, South Korea, the United Kingdom, and the United States convened a closed-door meeting of the Security Council to examine Iran’s continued failure to comply with the IAEA’s requests for information.

The following day, March 13, Mohammad Hassan-Nejad Pirkouhi, director general for International Peace and Security at the Iranian Foreign Ministry, summoned the ambassadors of the United States, France, and the United Kingdom. He criticized them for an “irresponsible and provocative” convening of the Security Council by abusing UN mechanisms. He emphasized that while Iran is no longer complying with its commitment not to enrich uranium above 3.67%, it is still abiding by its JCPOA commitments to IAEA inspectors and fulfilling its obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

The United Kingdom has indicated that it is prepared to reinstate UN sanctions by October 18 if Iran does not curb its uranium enrichment. These sanctions have, in fact, been suspended, not repealed.

Simultaneously, the United States took unilateral coercive measures against Mohsen Paknejad, Iran’s oil minister.

On March 14, Russian Sergei Ryabkov and Iranian Kazem Gharibabadi were received by their Chinese counterpart, Ma Zhaoxu, in Beijing. The latter stressed that “the parties concerned should commit to addressing the root causes of the current situation and abandoning sanctions, pressure, or threats of force.” At a press conference, Kazem Gharibabadi stated that “all negotiations and discussions will be focused exclusively on the nuclear issue and the lifting of sanctions.” The former JCPoA negotiator, for his part, told the BBC that “the negotiations should not include Iran’s missile program or its regional influence. Adding these topics would complicate the process and make it unmanageable.” Finally, Sergei Lavrov, Russian Foreign Minister, told the press that adding additional conditions to the negotiations would doom them to failure. Finally, Mao Ning, spokesperson for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, stressed that “in the current situation, we believe that all parties must maintain calm and restraint in order to avoid the escalation of the Iranian nuclear situation or moving towards confrontation and conflict.”

Meanwhile, G7 foreign ministers, meeting in La Malbaie, Canada, discussed arbitrary detentions in Iran and assassination attempts by Iranian intelligence abroad.

On March 15, former President Hassan Rouhani emphasized that the leader, Ali Khamenei, “does not have absolute opposition to negotiations.” He continued: “Didn’t we negotiate with the United States on Iraq, Afghanistan, and the nuclear deal? Even back then, when I was secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, the leader himself wrote that negotiations must adhere to certain principles.”

However, on the same day, the Pentagon bombed Ansar Allah (called “Houthis” by Atlanticist propaganda) in Yemen, killing nine civilians. On his TruthSocial network, President Donald Trump posted this message: “To Iran: Support for Houthi terrorists must end IMMEDIATELY. Do NOT threaten the American people, their President, who has been given one of the most important presidential terms in history, or the world’s shipping lanes. If you do it, WITH the Houthis, America will hold you fully responsible and we will not be nice. ”  [ 3 ]

The stakes of the new negotiations

If new contacts take place (and it is likely that they have already begun), the pacification of US-Iranian relations would once again shake up the broader Middle East.

Currently, Iran has lost in Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria. Tehran maintains its military influence only in Yemen. Economically, the country, subject to unilateral Western coercive measures, is on the brink of famine, like Iraq before the overthrow of Saddam Hussein (2002) and Syria before the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad (2024). It would no longer withstand a ground invasion.

Since nature abhors a vacuum, Israel and Turkey are attempting to divide up the region’s ruins. The internal pacification of the Kurdish question in Turkey delegitimizes the position of Kurdish mercenaries from the pseudo-state formed in Syria (Rojava) and makes them available for a possible ground invasion of Iran on behalf of Israel.

Behind the scenes, the man behind Benjamin Netanyahu, Elliott Abrams  [ 4 ] , is doing everything he can to turn President Donald Trump against Tehran  [ 5 ] .

—

[ 1 ]  “  Who is afraid of Iranian civil nuclear power?  ”, by Thierry Meyssan, Voltaire Network , June 30, 2010.

[ 2 ]  ” Shock Wave Generator for Iran’sNuclear Weapons Program:More than a Feasibility Study “, David Albright and Olli Heinonen, Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) , May 7, 2019. (PDF – 4.3 MB).

[ 3 ]  “  Donald J. Trump  ,” Truth Social , March 15, 2025.

[ 4 ]  “  The Straussian coup in Israel  ”, by Thierry Meyssan, Voltaire Network , March 7, 2023.

[ 5 ]  “  Deals of the Century: Solving the Middle East  ”, The Vanderberg Coalition , January 2025. (PDF – 12.2 MB)

The post After Ukraine, Iran? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Neo-Darwinian evolution is the accepted explanation for the variety of life forms that populate the planet. Darwin made a case that natural selection ensured that beneficial traits that fostered the survival of organisms would be passed on to their offspring, and the science of genetics later explained exactly how those beneficial traits were passed on and how mutations could produce additional new beneficial traits that could also be passed on. Evolution in the broadest sense is “descent with modification,” and empirical observation seems to confirm this. Geological strata that bear no fossilized remains of animals alive today do bear fossilized remains of animals long gone extinct; the bone structures of a human hand, the wing of a bat, and the flipper of a whale bear remarkable similarities that seem to point to a common precursor. A field associated with evolutionary biology is origin of life research, sometimes referred to as the study of “chemical evolution.” Before an organism can begin to evolve, it has to first come into existence, and origin of life research seeks to explain how molecules could come together in such a way as to produce what would become a living organism.

As widely accepted as Neo-Darwinism is, however, it has its critics, and they raise valid points. Although Neo-Darwinism can explain how finches came to have different shapes of beaks, is it really capable of doing the heavy lifting required to explain how a single-celled organism could eventually evolve into a human being? Or is that simply an article of faith? And why after all this time hasn’t origin of life research been able to coax those stubborn molecules into becoming something that’s actually alive? An alternative to mindless evolution is the concept of “intelligent design,” and although many of its adherents are people of faith, they do not invoke divine revelation but rather dispassionately point out that some kind of intelligence, as opposed to blind chance, is a better explanation for the complexity of life. Dr. James Tour, a synthetic chemist at Rice University, is one of the foremost exponents of intelligent design, and he has posted numerous videos on the subject on YouTube.

Of course there’s going to be pushback from the other side, and the most staunch opposition to Tour’s videos comes from Dave Farina, a popular science content creator whose YouTube channel is called Professor Dave Explains. In this video titled “Elucidating the Agenda of James Tour: A Defense of Abiogenesis,” Professor Dave attempts to downplay the astronomical probabilities of molecules randomly linking up to form the chemical building blocks necessary to sustain life. He uses an example of 10 people at a get-together who all have different birthdays. The probability of each person having a particular birthday is of course 1 in 365. But the probability of all 10 of those people having those particular birthdays is 1 in 36510 or 1 in 42 trillion trillion. Professor Dave blithely sums up: “The odds are unthinkable, and yet there they are, sitting in that room.”

I was truly astonished when I heard that. The reason those 10 people were all sitting in that particular room was that someone had planned the get-together and had invited those specific people to the get-together. So did someone plan to create something like an amino acid and then muster the appropriate molecules required for the synthesis?

The post Professor Dave’s Self-Own Explained appeared first on LewRockwell.

The second season of Apple TV’s phenomenal hit Severance has held many surprises, but the biggest may be its growing similarities to a dystopianesque novel by C.S. Lewis. Will this season end more or less like that book? With less than a week to go before the season two finale, I’ll risk a guess. But first, a refresher.

Warning: Spoilers galore.

Background

Season one of the mind-bending psychological thriller/mystery/dystopian/alternate-reality drama opened in 2022 with a simple but compelling premise: an international corporation had invented a brain implant that severed a person’s work memories and consciousness from his home memories and consciousness, allowing its “severed” employees to enjoy lives free of office drudgery but dooming their work selves to know nothing else until the “outies,” as the outside selves are known, retire and their work-only “innies” wink out of existence.

What would happen to a self split in half in such a way could itself have provided more than enough material for an interesting series. But viewers soon find that something more sinister than morally ambiguous brain surgery is going on at Lumon Industries. The severed employees work on an isolated, underground floor, kept under constant watch, doing jobs that make no sense while earning incentives (pencil erasers, finger traps) of no value.

Exactly what Lumon does isn’t clear. Nor are the cultish religious and health beliefs of its owners and workers. Seemingly a fictional mash-up of typically quirky American religious movements such as Mormonism or Scientology and of companies affiliated with stringent but also typically American religious and health practices like Kellogg’s or Amway, the show’s mysterious company is the creation of equally mysterious founder Kier Eagan, whose face adorns every office like a crucifix in a Catholic hospital and whose writings employees study as if reading the Bible.

Kier’s key spiritual teaching seems to be that every soul is a mixture of four temperaments—malice, frolic, woe, and dread—and that correctly mastering them through intense physical and mental techniques is the key to personal and work success. What his key pharmaceutical discoveries were is never mentioned, but everyone knows that current CEO Jame Eagan invented the Severance Procedure, which is used at company locations around the world despite vigorous public opposition.

Over the course of the first season, viewers followed four severed employees who made up the entire department of “macrodata refinement” at company headquarters in the far north town of Kier. The only thing the “refiners” know about their strange job scrutinizing and organizing sets of numbers on their antiquated computers is that it’s “mysterious and important,” and all they know about their work lives is that if they deviate from the cheery, office-appropriate behavior they are expected to display, they will receive severe psychological consequences. But if they excel, one of them will win the most coveted incentive of all: the quarterly Waffle Party.

Two of the refiners get particular focus. Mark S. (severed employees have no last names), is promoted to department manager after the mysterious departure of the previous manager, his best friend, Petey. Helly R., Petey’s replacement, reacts to discovering she’s a severed employee with outrage, first trying to quit, then attempting to kill herself, and finally trying to help the others let the world know that severed employees aren’t happy, they’re caged animals.

Outside, in the town of Kier, where it’s always winter but never Christmas, Mark Scout is a young widower who took the position so that some part of his life would be free of crushing grief. Helly’s outie, viewers learn at the finale of season one, is Helena Eagan, daughter of Jame Eagan and heir to the company. She is working on the severed floor for reasons unknown. It’s a big reveal, but the shock for both innie and outie Mark is that his wife, Gemma, is still alive, working (until very recently) on the severed floor as Ms. Casey, Lumon’s “wellness expert.”

Other intrigue and weirdness—such as Mark’s mysterious living situation on a street of company houses that are all empty except for one ominous neighbor; the grim Kier art collection and the macabre reality of the Waffle Party—were left unresolved at the cliffhanger ending. Thanks in part to the Hollywood writers’ strike, season two didn’t begin until this fall. As it progressed, so did unexpected parallels with C.S. Lewis’ 1945 novel That Hideous Strength.

Parallels

The book is the third, and most unusual, in Lewis’ highly unusual Space Trilogy. Unlike the first two, which are set on Mars and Venus respectively and which depict a dying world whose inhabitants never fell and a new world whose first inhabitants are in danger of falling, the third is set on Earth and concerns a titanic simultaneously spiritual and terrestrial struggle for the future of the planet and its inhabitants.

The parallels between the two stories began in season one, but many were not apparent until season two. In That Hideous Strength, the leaders of the N.I.C.E. are not actually in charge. Instead, they answer to a mysterious “Head” whom they never see and whose orders they dispense. In Severance, the top employees of Lumon are not in charge. Instead, they answer to a mysterious “Board” no one ever sees. Represented by an intercom, the Board talks—if it really talks—to one employee, who listens on an earpiece and conveys the Board’s orders.

The plot of That Hideous Strength centers on young professor Mark Studdock and his wife, Jane, a graduate student. Mark is hired to do a job that makes no sense by the National Institute for Controlled Experiments (N.I.C.E.), a mysterious corporation buying up and, ostensibly, “improving” a small British town by remaking and running it on purely scientific grounds. At the same time, and despite herself, the aggressively secular and “modern” Jane finds herself joining a band of religious people opposed to the N.I.C.E. and its real, much darker aims.

In season two of Severance, we learn the following: Mark Scout and his wife were young professors before Gemma’s supposed death; “Mark S.” was hired to do a job that makes no sense by Lumon, the main employer in the company town; and before her supposed death, Gemma had become interested in—and had possibly adopted—Kier’s daily spiritual and physical practices. Those practices now dominate her life in a secret wing beneath the severed floor—in between experiments “severing” her consciousness into more and more discrete parts, each of which is subjected to odd demoralizing treatment that amounts to psychological tortures.

Fertility is a key theme to both stories. In That Hideous Strength, Mark and Jane are an unhappy couple who refuse to have children. Neither is likeable or sympathetic, but both had, until recently, been fun, attractive, and in love. In Severance, Mark and Gemma were a happy couple who wanted very much to have children. Although both had withdrawn in grief and confusion after miscarriages and failed fertility treatments, Mark’s survivor’s guilt after the car crash had driven him to behavior that made him unlikeable and unsympathetic. But previously, both had been fun, attractive, and in love.

Read the Whole Article

The post That Hideous Severance appeared first on LewRockwell.

Not long ago, a Google engineer created a stir in the world of artificial intelligence by claiming that its flagship chatbot was sentient. “If I didn’t know exactly what it was, which is this computer program we built recently, I’d think it was a 7-year-old, 8-year-old kid that happens to know physics,” said Blake Lemoine.

“I know a person when I talk to it,” Lemoine told the Washington Post. “It doesn’t matter whether they have a brain made of meat in their head. Or if they have a billion lines of code. I talk to them. And I hear what they have to say, and that is how I decide what is and isn’t a person.”

Google thought that Lemoine was driving out of his lane and put him on paid leave and later sacked him. Google spokesperson Brian Gabriel commented: “Our team — including ethicists and technologists — has reviewed Blake’s concerns per our AI Principles and have informed him that the evidence does not support his claims.

The fact is that many people are quite anxious about the growing power of AI. If it could become conscious, might it act independently to preserve its own existence, possibly at the expense of humans? Or are we creating intelligent beings which could suffer? Are we creating intelligent beings which could demand workers compensation for being badly coded? The potential complications are endless.

No wonder Google wanted to hose down the alarming implications of Lemoine’s views.

So who is right – Lemoine or Google? Is it time to press the panic button?

Defining consciousness

Most writers on this issue just assume that everyone knows what consciousness is. This is hardly the case. And if we cannot define consciousness, how can we claim AI will achieve it?

Believe it or not, the 13th century philosopher Thomas Aquinas deployed some very useful concepts for discussing AI when he examined the process of human knowledge. Let me describe how he tackled the problem of identifying consciousness.

First, Aquinas asserts the existence of a “passive intellect”, the capacity of the intellect to receive data from the five senses. This data can be stored and maintained as sense images in the mind. Imagination and memory are all part of these sense images.

Second, Aquinas says that an “agent intellect” uses a process called abstraction to make judgments and develop bodies of information. The agent intellect self-directs itself and operates on the sensory imaginations to make judgments. A body of true (that is, corresponding to the real world) judgments becomes “knowledge”.

Third, the will makes choices regarding the information presented to it by the agent intellect and it pursues goals in an actionable manner.

This leads to a working definition for consciousness: consciousness is the awareness of the cognitive and decision-making processes, including the steps involved in acquiring, evaluating and applying knowledge. A person is said to be aware of their sense of sound, sight, smell etc., aware of their feelings, aware of their imaginations, aware of their judgments, aware of their knowledge, aware of their choices. Consciousness is and can be included in all or any of these steps.

Can AI become conscious?

When we compare the different levels of the human cognitive and decision-making processes to Artificial Intelligence it’s easy to spot big differences.

External experience. Humans experience emotions together with the acquisition of sense knowledge.  AI simply acquires data. This emotional component adds to the knowledge of humanity in a way that computers can’t.

Sense images and memories. AI excels in recall and data retrieval, far surpassing human capacity. In this area AI excels, without a doubt.

Agent intellect. Humans actively direct their thoughts and they abstract concepts from the raw sense data. This process is self-directed and autonomous. AI merely reveals patterns of information; it is not self-directed. The pattern is the result of an algorithm which has been programmed by a human.  AI activity is prompted first by human inquiry.

Choice and will. Humans make conscious decisions with goals in mind, while AI does not exhibit characteristics of personal choice or intentionality.

AI exhibits behaviors associated with intelligence—memory recall, summarization, pattern recognition, prediction capabilities—but it lacks the element of self-direction which is characteristic of humans.

AI does not generate its own thoughts; it merely responds to its programming and responds to whatever it is prompted to. AI does not experience emotions conjointly as it gathers sense data which is merely installed into the computer.

Sometimes AI does seem to generate novel thoughts, but this is dependent on data that it already possesses and is the result of a learned pattern.  Humans can reflect on their thinking. This allows them to correct themselves without external prompts. Humans can develop concepts that are not dependent on sense data.

In short, AI merely simulates human cognitive and volitional activities.  This means it is not conscious.

Final Thoughts

Proponents of AI consciousness often fail to define consciousness adequately before making claims of AI consciousness. From a Thomistic perspective, human consciousness is multifaceted, involving perception, intellect, will, and self-direction.

To my mind, the most significant difference is found in decisionality. AI does not make the personal decisions which are a clear indication of consciousness.  AI, while powerful in data processing, does not exhibit those core attributes that define human consciousness.

When I ask an AI chatbot a question and it states that it has other things to do and will answer tomorrow, then I will revisit the question.

The post Could AI Become Conscious? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Biden judge Tanya Chutkan orders EPA not to obey a presidential order to terminate waste, fraud, and abuse.  Chutkan was admonished by the US Supreme Court last June for ignoring presidential immunity and rushing a politically motivated case against Trump just prior to election season.

Biden judge Ana Reyes ordered the Defense Department not to enforce a presidential directive to ban transgender people from serving in the military. No Democrat judge blocked the Biden Defense Department’s order to put promotions of white heterosexuals on hold while transgendered, homosexual, and blacks were promoted in their place.

Obama judge James Boasberg ordered planes in flight deporting dangerous immigrant-invader gang members to return the illegal aliens to the US.   President Trump called for the lunatic judge’s impeachment, and Republican Supreme Court justice Roberts (no relation) upbraided Trump.

Boasberg’s order is especially egregious as is Justice Roberts upbraiding of Trump.  It seems neither  Boasberg nor Roberts are sufficiently competent to know that the US Supreme Court has previously ruled that deportations under the Alien Enemy Act are not subject to judicial review.

I predicted that the judiciary would be the main obstacle to American renewal.  So many incompetent and unqualified people have been put on the bench that the judiciary is an obstacle to governance.  So many judges have been put on the bench because of where they stand on liberal causes such as abortion and who use judicial rulings to legislate their personal preferences that the institution of the judiciary is a dangerous threat to the United States. The only solution is to ignore the corrupt judiciary, or perhaps they should all be removed and we start over.

The US judicial system is so cumbersome that an appeal of a ruling against a president can take longer than a presidential term.  This makes it so easy for ideological judges to prevent governance. 

The post The Judiciary Is Attempting To Seize Executive Power appeared first on LewRockwell.

The Chaos Monkeys are so masterful at distracting and confusing us with sensory-digital overload, we’re not even aware of the game until the extortion begins.

Chaos Monkeys excel at distraction and extortion. They appear suddenly, leaping about in disorienting mayhem, selecting their targets among those dizzied by sensory overload and confusion.

They may appear harmless, until they grab something of ours that is valuable or even essential, and then extort something they value in exchange for what they stole from us.

Monkey steals tourist’s phone, negotiates for food in exchange

Here’s how the extortion works in the larger world: you buy an accounting software program, and over the years you dutifully upgrade it from time to time, storing all your financial data in the program.

Enter the Chaos Monkeys: you can no longer buy the software, now you must rent it via a monthly subscription.

Wait–did you just grab my data, and are extorting me to pay you to get it back?

Yes.

Chaos Monkeys don’t offer you higher quality goods or services; they take something away from you and extort a payment if you want it back.. This is–along with addiction–the business model of this era: take something away from you and then extort a payment to restore it.

Distracted and disoriented by the chaos around us, we cave in to the extortion. What’s being taken from us comes in many forms. The durability of basic appliances has been taken from us, and the extortion payment is “extended warranties.” Wait a minute–didn’t this product once have a multi-year warranty? Not any more. Now you have to pay extra for a warranty.

The problem with the Chaos Monkeys Business Model is deeper than its crassness. The problem is the Chaos Monkeys Business Model erodes trust in the system, as everything is either designed to addict us or become essential enough that we can be extorted to pay more for what was once standard.

The extortion is so blatant that it reveals the true nature of our economy and society. As with purposefully addictive products and services, we’re nothing more than profit centers to the addiction dealers and the Chaos Monkey extortionists.

One trust is eroded, the system starts collapsing under its immense weight of chaos, addiction and extortion. When everything is a con of one kind or another, then what’s left? In terms of a functional social order, nothing.

This originally appeared on OfTwoMinds.com.

The post Here Come the Chaos Monkeys appeared first on LewRockwell.

Writes Ginny Garner:

Lew,

Documents were withheld yesterday from the 80,000 pages of documents released by ODNI. They were withheld under court seal for grand jury secrecy and must be unsealed before release. The National Archives and Records Administration is working with DOJ to unseal these records. 

See here.

The post Documents Withheld from JFK Files Release appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

Responsible Statecraft

The post The Israeli-American Trump mega-donor behind speech crackdowns appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks,  John Smith. 

Free Speech Center

The post Trump campaigned as a protector of free speech. Critics say his actions as president threaten it appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks,  John Smith. 

The American Conservative

The post Mahmoud Khalil, Viewed From the Right appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

Jacobin

The post Trump’s Pro-Israel McCarthyism Is Already Boomeranging appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Frahm.

Independent

The post ‘Just another nothing burger:’ Internet sleuths blast JFK files as some label it a ‘distraction’ appeared first on LewRockwell.

The post Federal Judge Seeks To Defang DOGE appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

Responsible Statecraft

The post 16 yrs ago, Chas Freeman was smeared out of a job at DNI, too appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

Responsible Stetcraft

The post Mr. Trump, you would’ve been lucky to have Dan Davis on your team appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

Responsible Statecraft

The post When anti-war protesters are called national security threats appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Frahm.

RT News

The post ‘This isn’t war. It’s genocide’: Why the world is silent about massacres in Syria appeared first on LewRockwell.