 
|
This board is closed to new users and new posts. Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years. Details here.
|
|
The Free Talk Live BBS
Profile of Fred
Show Posts Topics
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
32
General / 6 B.S. Myths You Probably Believe About America's 'Enemies'
« on: October 13, 2011, 08:00:16 PM »
intersting article from Cracked.com:
http://www.cracked.com/article_19461_6-b.s.-myths-you-probably-believe-about-americas-enemies.html
Some of this information was news to me. But, I don't get around much.
http://www.cracked.com/article_19461_6-b.s.-myths-you-probably-believe-about-americas-enemies.html
Some of this information was news to me. But, I don't get around much.
33
General / songs of prohibition
« on: October 12, 2011, 04:05:18 PM »
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLDYHqFygtY&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlNBcNcmKIk[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cy6De74ZXug&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfejBhtAdVo[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4F0LipvqEU&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHwLmh-qdCo&feature=related[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=HWVsbLDZlFU
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlNBcNcmKIk[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cy6De74ZXug&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfejBhtAdVo[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4F0LipvqEU&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHwLmh-qdCo&feature=related[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=HWVsbLDZlFU
35
General / from lewrockwell: armed chinese troops in texas
« on: October 09, 2011, 10:55:42 AM »
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKfuS6gfxPY[/youtube]
36
General / Fred Reed-on the Drug War...
« on: October 08, 2011, 01:47:05 PM »
Helping the DEA
Gratitude Certain
September 25, 2011
.
I see that I may have to take over drug policy for the United States. Maybe not, though. I’ll hold off if I get a call from Michelle Leonhart, who runs the Drug Enforcement Administration, asking me how she ought to do her job, and what she ought to think about Mexico, and what is wrong with Washington’s whole approach to mind candy. (I’m expecting her call any day now.) I will answer as follows:
Now, look here, Ma'am. You need to re-think this drug thing. It’s not going well. It isn’t going to go well. The Bare Skirmish on Drugs (BSkOD) may have seemed a good idea when Reefer Madness came out, or even in the Sixties a half century ago. Now, no. Everyone with the brains of a microwave oven knows that DEA serves only to keep prices up so that the narcos in Mexico can afford classy military weaponry and gorgeous mansions.
It isn’t the fault of DEA. In my days on the police desk I knew a fair few DEA guys, including the magnificent Frank White and…well, others. They were ballsy, smart, savvy, and realistic cowboys, the best company I can imagine. They did their jobs as well as they could which, under the circumstances, was well indeed.
That’s them. Fact is, though, DEA as an organization ain’t done jack-shit about drugs. I’m sorry, but there it is. It’s like a law of logic. If you set out to do something impossible, you won’t do it. That’s DEA.
A little history if I may. In the Sixties, when mind candy went universal, we had pot, acid, shrooms, mescaline, and various amphetamines. Scag was a ghetto drug for strung-out crashers like William Burroughs, coke mostly unknown, and crack nonexistent.
OK, half-century later. To my certain knowledge, today in suburban Washington, as for example at Washington and Lee High where my daughters did time, kids can buy all the aforementioned goodies, plus nitrous, Ecstasy, crystal and, within a five-minute drive, there may still be an open-air crack market in the parking lot of Green Valley pharmacy. Crack isn’t a kid drug, but it is easily available all over Washington.
Further, I know all sorts of people in their sixties now, veterans of Dong Ha or Woodstock, some of them vets of both, and most of them do grass and not infrequently hallucinogens. I’m talking door-gunners, Special Forces guys, at least two Ivy profs, just plain people. So, Michelle, what exactly has the War on Half the Population accomplished?
You certainly aren’t protecting kids in high school, or even middle school, from becoming drooling stoners living in dumpsters. They have easier access to drugs than you do. What protects kids from becoming needle-cases is—I am aware of the preposterousness of this—the common sense of teenagers. They aren’t druggies because they don’t want to be. They aren’t alkies because they don’t want to be. Most don’t smoke because they don’t want to. DEA has nothing to do with it. Kids could easily do all of these things. America is up to the armpits in drugs, tobacco, and booze.
So you see, Michelle, the DEA is like a man sitting on a raft in mid-Pacific, trying to outlaw water.
Now we come, tangentially anyway, to Mexico. It is being torn apart, toward God knows what future, because it lives next to the world’s most gluttonous market for drugs. It seems to Mexicans that Washington is forcing them to die for a BSkoD that Washington won’t fight on its own soil.
Is thisN unreasonable suspicion? Why is it unreasonable?
A couple of things you might do to persuade Mexico that you really want to do your part.
First, why don’t you put a youngish DEA guy, or gal, in each of about ten universities chosen at random: say, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Harvard Medical, Julliard, Haverford, Berkeley, UCLA, and Dartmouth. (I say they’re random). See, young agents could rig their apartments for sound and video. In six months you could arrest hundreds of children of senators, Fortune Five Hundred CEOs, and people high in the Executive branch. You could give them the same sentences that slum blacks get. Think of the headlines: “Senator’s Kid Gets Five Years in the General Population in Leavenworth.” Is that a concept or what?
Mexicans think you don’t do this for reasons of politics. Mexicans just don’t understand the essential probity of America.
Another thing you could do to demonstrate your good faith: You could ask Congress to legislate that people selling drugs to children in high school be tried as adults. Since most of these dealers are themselves in high school, you could put the daughters of lawyers in women’s slam in places like the Cook County Jail. Think how many interesting things they could learn about compulsory lesbian sex.
I mean, you are sincere about wanting to punish dealers, aren’t you?
OK. More and more I see suggestions that the US send troops to Mexico to Right Wrongs and make Mexico into Iowa. The Pentagon is sneaking psychopaths of the CIA and “retired” military men into the country, apparently wanting to showcase its systemic incapacity to win any war against anybody at all. Here is a chance for you to do something useful. DEA agents are not idiots, but colonels are.
You might try to drill into the Pentagonal mind—I would suggest a cold chisel and a sledge hammer—that Mexico differs in a fundamental way from the military’s other comic efforts at martial enterprise: The narcos have a million gringo hostages. Or maybe five hundred thousand. Nobody is sure exactly how many Americans live in Mexico. They—we—are very soft targets. We live in a sort of sprawl across Mexico, concentrated in places well known, grouping in known bars, unarmed and utterly defenseless.
A minor contact I have with the bad guys says that, now, attacking Americans carries a death sentence from people who would carry it out with a blow torch over a period of days. “Oh no. Don’t fuck with the gringos,” says this guy. Like most Mexicans, the narcos figure the US is looking for a pretext to invade. They are happy with the current semi-partnership with Washington and don’t want interference.
But piss these bad boys off—they are very, very bad boys—and they could begin killing gringos by hundreds. Logically it would be an easy way of putting pressure on Washington to back off. Washington could write off aging vets living on disability from Nam, but a lot of expats here live in houses costing a million doomed green dollars.
Tell you what, Michelle. You folks at DEA know what’s out there. You know who the narcos are, and what they are, and what they are capable of doing. Maybe you could explain it to people a lot dumber than you are, such as soldiers, pols, and combative columnists in panties at the Washington Post. What think?
Sincerely,
Fred
Gratitude Certain
September 25, 2011
.
I see that I may have to take over drug policy for the United States. Maybe not, though. I’ll hold off if I get a call from Michelle Leonhart, who runs the Drug Enforcement Administration, asking me how she ought to do her job, and what she ought to think about Mexico, and what is wrong with Washington’s whole approach to mind candy. (I’m expecting her call any day now.) I will answer as follows:
Now, look here, Ma'am. You need to re-think this drug thing. It’s not going well. It isn’t going to go well. The Bare Skirmish on Drugs (BSkOD) may have seemed a good idea when Reefer Madness came out, or even in the Sixties a half century ago. Now, no. Everyone with the brains of a microwave oven knows that DEA serves only to keep prices up so that the narcos in Mexico can afford classy military weaponry and gorgeous mansions.
It isn’t the fault of DEA. In my days on the police desk I knew a fair few DEA guys, including the magnificent Frank White and…well, others. They were ballsy, smart, savvy, and realistic cowboys, the best company I can imagine. They did their jobs as well as they could which, under the circumstances, was well indeed.
That’s them. Fact is, though, DEA as an organization ain’t done jack-shit about drugs. I’m sorry, but there it is. It’s like a law of logic. If you set out to do something impossible, you won’t do it. That’s DEA.
A little history if I may. In the Sixties, when mind candy went universal, we had pot, acid, shrooms, mescaline, and various amphetamines. Scag was a ghetto drug for strung-out crashers like William Burroughs, coke mostly unknown, and crack nonexistent.
OK, half-century later. To my certain knowledge, today in suburban Washington, as for example at Washington and Lee High where my daughters did time, kids can buy all the aforementioned goodies, plus nitrous, Ecstasy, crystal and, within a five-minute drive, there may still be an open-air crack market in the parking lot of Green Valley pharmacy. Crack isn’t a kid drug, but it is easily available all over Washington.
Further, I know all sorts of people in their sixties now, veterans of Dong Ha or Woodstock, some of them vets of both, and most of them do grass and not infrequently hallucinogens. I’m talking door-gunners, Special Forces guys, at least two Ivy profs, just plain people. So, Michelle, what exactly has the War on Half the Population accomplished?
You certainly aren’t protecting kids in high school, or even middle school, from becoming drooling stoners living in dumpsters. They have easier access to drugs than you do. What protects kids from becoming needle-cases is—I am aware of the preposterousness of this—the common sense of teenagers. They aren’t druggies because they don’t want to be. They aren’t alkies because they don’t want to be. Most don’t smoke because they don’t want to. DEA has nothing to do with it. Kids could easily do all of these things. America is up to the armpits in drugs, tobacco, and booze.
So you see, Michelle, the DEA is like a man sitting on a raft in mid-Pacific, trying to outlaw water.
Now we come, tangentially anyway, to Mexico. It is being torn apart, toward God knows what future, because it lives next to the world’s most gluttonous market for drugs. It seems to Mexicans that Washington is forcing them to die for a BSkoD that Washington won’t fight on its own soil.
Is thisN unreasonable suspicion? Why is it unreasonable?
A couple of things you might do to persuade Mexico that you really want to do your part.
First, why don’t you put a youngish DEA guy, or gal, in each of about ten universities chosen at random: say, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Harvard Medical, Julliard, Haverford, Berkeley, UCLA, and Dartmouth. (I say they’re random). See, young agents could rig their apartments for sound and video. In six months you could arrest hundreds of children of senators, Fortune Five Hundred CEOs, and people high in the Executive branch. You could give them the same sentences that slum blacks get. Think of the headlines: “Senator’s Kid Gets Five Years in the General Population in Leavenworth.” Is that a concept or what?
Mexicans think you don’t do this for reasons of politics. Mexicans just don’t understand the essential probity of America.
Another thing you could do to demonstrate your good faith: You could ask Congress to legislate that people selling drugs to children in high school be tried as adults. Since most of these dealers are themselves in high school, you could put the daughters of lawyers in women’s slam in places like the Cook County Jail. Think how many interesting things they could learn about compulsory lesbian sex.
I mean, you are sincere about wanting to punish dealers, aren’t you?
OK. More and more I see suggestions that the US send troops to Mexico to Right Wrongs and make Mexico into Iowa. The Pentagon is sneaking psychopaths of the CIA and “retired” military men into the country, apparently wanting to showcase its systemic incapacity to win any war against anybody at all. Here is a chance for you to do something useful. DEA agents are not idiots, but colonels are.
You might try to drill into the Pentagonal mind—I would suggest a cold chisel and a sledge hammer—that Mexico differs in a fundamental way from the military’s other comic efforts at martial enterprise: The narcos have a million gringo hostages. Or maybe five hundred thousand. Nobody is sure exactly how many Americans live in Mexico. They—we—are very soft targets. We live in a sort of sprawl across Mexico, concentrated in places well known, grouping in known bars, unarmed and utterly defenseless.
A minor contact I have with the bad guys says that, now, attacking Americans carries a death sentence from people who would carry it out with a blow torch over a period of days. “Oh no. Don’t fuck with the gringos,” says this guy. Like most Mexicans, the narcos figure the US is looking for a pretext to invade. They are happy with the current semi-partnership with Washington and don’t want interference.
But piss these bad boys off—they are very, very bad boys—and they could begin killing gringos by hundreds. Logically it would be an easy way of putting pressure on Washington to back off. Washington could write off aging vets living on disability from Nam, but a lot of expats here live in houses costing a million doomed green dollars.
Tell you what, Michelle. You folks at DEA know what’s out there. You know who the narcos are, and what they are, and what they are capable of doing. Maybe you could explain it to people a lot dumber than you are, such as soldiers, pols, and combative columnists in panties at the Washington Post. What think?
Sincerely,
Fred
37
The Show / Ian...I wonder
« on: October 08, 2011, 01:06:31 PM »
Ian, would you have stood in front of the cop car if you knew in advance it would cost you 60 days in jail?
I'm impressed with your determination man...
I'm impressed with your determination man...
38
The Show / Mark and Ian are back....with a vengance!
« on: October 08, 2011, 12:13:12 PM »
Mark, if I ever maligned you before on this board it was misunderstood.
You and Ian together on the show....ROCK!
I noticed you're injecting yourself more in the last couple of shows!
I like it - the two of you together... You've got a lot of upward momentum in my opinion!
Thanks for your work!
You and Ian together on the show....ROCK!
I noticed you're injecting yourself more in the last couple of shows!
I like it - the two of you together... You've got a lot of upward momentum in my opinion!
Thanks for your work!
39
General / Change the Subject!
« on: October 05, 2011, 10:44:27 AM »
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxrljsaGrqc[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-ADAr9-Aqs&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvnpYNYoFvw&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vN1fA1F5gSE&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7u_YMqjOxk&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lS5TIcLJXTw&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V87ge0a94Hc&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgTVkRZ6gVM&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-ADAr9-Aqs&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvnpYNYoFvw&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vN1fA1F5gSE&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7u_YMqjOxk&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lS5TIcLJXTw&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V87ge0a94Hc&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgTVkRZ6gVM&feature=related[/youtube]
40
General / Jake Tapper vs. Jay Carney on the Al-Awlaki Hit
« on: October 02, 2011, 08:18:57 PM »
from LewRockwell:
Pretty fun to watch!
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6bgwZGZiIo[/youtube]
Pretty fun to watch!
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6bgwZGZiIo[/youtube]
41
General / John Shaw ban criteria
« on: September 27, 2011, 05:20:19 PM »
So, am I in danger of being banned? Like Dragline? Can I be candid on this board or not? Is it my language?
If I say punk instead of asshole - is that okay?
Just checking cuz I know you expect honesty from participants...
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9PfrbScLi0[/youtube]
If I say punk instead of asshole - is that okay?
Just checking cuz I know you expect honesty from participants...
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9PfrbScLi0[/youtube]
42
General / new alaric "how to videos"
« on: September 27, 2011, 03:45:01 PM »
Al, I like your video on breaking down pallets. I'm writing to ask you to post some more stuff like this. I'd love to see one of you making a bowie knife. Please!
43
The Show / 9/26/11 show Mark, Luther, and Julia
« on: September 27, 2011, 09:12:52 AM »
Mark, you impress me!
You sound rested and "in the saddle" tonight.
Luther and Julia are awesome too!
Good Show!
You sound rested and "in the saddle" tonight.
Luther and Julia are awesome too!
Good Show!
44
General / Jury Nullification
« on: September 26, 2011, 07:49:43 PM »
Almost all people charged with crimes now are faced with multiple charges (so many laws - no one even knows what's legal anymore) that allows the prosecutor to offer a "deal" Take what we're offering you not to got to trial.
Example: $1000 fine and 6 months probation compared with going to trial and (with all the charges [bullshit laws]) face a possible 7 years in jail with a $50,000.00 fine.
This causes almost no one (I think the statistics are around 1% of people facing charges) to decide to go to trial. They take the "deal". This makes it pretty easy for prosecutors and the state in general to keep rolling through poor folks and taking their money for the "crimes" - which are usually victimless.
...
Jury nullification is the truth about our power as people serving on juries.
The jury (and 100 years ago the judge told the jury this) has the option if they think the law the person is charged with is not fair - (example 5 years in jail for growing pot) they can find the person innocent. This is a right we've always had that allows the public to check "govt power". Just so you know....
Example: $1000 fine and 6 months probation compared with going to trial and (with all the charges [bullshit laws]) face a possible 7 years in jail with a $50,000.00 fine.
This causes almost no one (I think the statistics are around 1% of people facing charges) to decide to go to trial. They take the "deal". This makes it pretty easy for prosecutors and the state in general to keep rolling through poor folks and taking their money for the "crimes" - which are usually victimless.
...
Jury nullification is the truth about our power as people serving on juries.
The jury (and 100 years ago the judge told the jury this) has the option if they think the law the person is charged with is not fair - (example 5 years in jail for growing pot) they can find the person innocent. This is a right we've always had that allows the public to check "govt power". Just so you know....
45
The Show / Mark and Stephanie 9/24/11 show
« on: September 25, 2011, 10:54:46 AM »
Mark, don't take this wrong way, but dude relax and take a break. Maybe let Stephanie run the show while you rest up....
I like most of what I hear you say and I'm impressed with your skill on the topic of liberty on the radio. But, did you ever hear that your greatest weakness is your strength taken to the extreme.
You talk good, but too much is too much.
On this show, you're talking over Stephanie alot. You ask her to read show prep after one sentence, you're interrupting and talking for 2 or 3 minutes.
Give her a chance to say shit too! She seems to be to quite intelligent with a real intuitive knack for communicating.
Other than that, keep up the good work. You just happen to be the sort of person who can't mask his stress level...
I like most of what I hear you say and I'm impressed with your skill on the topic of liberty on the radio. But, did you ever hear that your greatest weakness is your strength taken to the extreme.
You talk good, but too much is too much.
On this show, you're talking over Stephanie alot. You ask her to read show prep after one sentence, you're interrupting and talking for 2 or 3 minutes.
Give her a chance to say shit too! She seems to be to quite intelligent with a real intuitive knack for communicating.
Other than that, keep up the good work. You just happen to be the sort of person who can't mask his stress level...