NavigationBanners
Active forum topicsRecent blog postsUser loginWho's new
Who's onlineThere are currently 0 users and 842 guests online.
|
The Wayback MachineSubmitted by Bill St. Clair on Wed, 2002-06-19 07:00.
From samizdata:
Are you going to come quietly, or do I have do use ear-plugs? -- Spike Milligan in The Goon Show From The Federalist: I understand that this is only anecdotal, but when you get enough anecdotes, it is certainly worth considering. I am the commander for Army recruiting in a large metropolitan area. Only about 45% of those who take our entrance examinations score above a 50. The exams are exponential, in that a one-point difference (a 51, for example) indicates a much greater knowledge. A potential recruit for the Army MUST have a high score because of the technology requirements of today's Army. That said, one of our management tools is projecting how an applicant will fare on the test. Applicants who have been homeschooled ALWAYS pass the test ... [and] ALWAYS score above the 80th percentile. Since homeschoolers are such a small percentage of the population yet their mean is so far above average, it should give us pause for consideration. No Treason Blog is a new weblog maintained by John T. Kennedy. Added to my links page in the "Weblogs" section. The parent site, No Treason!, has some good articles, but hasn't seen any new content, except Mr. Kennedy's piece linked to below, in almost a year. Glad to see some movement from another anarcho-capitalist. Welcome to blogging, John! The Ferret 50 is a .50 BMG single shot that pins onto an AR-15 lower. $1500 for 18" barrel, $1650 for 29" or 36" barrel. From the FAQ: [ar15.com] Do I need to alter my lower to use a Ferret50? Albany (NY) Times Union - Curbing smoking: State lawmakers should not settle for half-hearted restrictions on food establishments - The TU comes out for banning smoking in restaurants. I sent the following letter to the editor: Smoke in Restaurants John T. Kennedy at Strike the Root - The Wrong Hill - Arguing against war is noble, but likely useless. Arguing that you may not be forced to participate in a war you don't believe in is a better hill on which to fight. I'll be looking at the video store for Shenandoah, the film Mr. Kennedy quotes from. [notreasonblog] It doesn't matter if there is a right side in the war, neither side can have any right to require Charlie Anderson to participate in any way. This is the argument libertarians need to make, not that war is evil, but that it can never be moral to force others to participate. It will do no good to win the argument that a war is evil while implicitly accepting that it is legitimately a collective decision; that's the wrong hill. The right hill is the one where we reject the collectivist premise first. John T. Kennedy at No Treason - A Porcupine's Worth Is His Price - in order to establish an anarcho-capitalist society, we don't have to defeat the socialists, just make ourselves too expensive to govern. The lesson the porcupine teaches is that you don't have to be strong enough to defeat a predator to avoid being that predator's lunch. It suffices to be an expensive meal. Predators tend not to dine on porcupines because a serving of porcupine tends not to be worth the mouthful of quill that it costs. War Without End? Not in Our Name is a site dedicated to resisting the U.S. War on the World, Detentions and Round-ups, and Police State Restrictions. The "Not in Our Name" project was launched on June 6 in many U.S. cities. Here is the Pledge of Resistance: [lew]
Kate Connolly and Rory McCarthy at Guardian Unlimited - New film accuses US of war crimes - in Afghanistan. Can't say I'm surprised. [unknown] James Vicini at Rense.com - Supreme Court Rules For IRS On Restaurant Tips - so now the infernals can "estimate" how much restaurant employees made in tips and force them to pay taxes on that amount without bothering about how much they really made. Sheesh. Shoot 'em. [grabbe] Charley Reese - Conservative Or Blockhead? - Hey, Charlie, you're a libertarian, even if you won't admit it. [lew] Some blockheads equate being a conservative with ardent support of any war, no matter how unconstitutional, unnecessary and unjust the war might be. A true conservative supports the Constitution and does not support anybody or anything that violates it. Some people have said there is a resemblance between America today and the Weimar Republic, which eventually produced Adolf Hitler. I think there is some truth to that comparison. There are an awful lot of heel-clickers who swoon with admiration for any politician willing to bomb some foreigners. These same people are more than willing to trade liberty (which they make little use of anyway) for security. That is not conservatism. John R. Lott Jr. at USA Today - Armed citizens can defuse terrorist threat - Apprently written before Rabbi Lloyd chickened out. [kaba] These Brooklyn Jews can point to Israel to counter such criticism. Israeli Police Inspector General Shlomo Aharonisky has repeatedly called on all concealed-handgun-permit holders to carry firearms at all times. In March, Israeli police announced they wanted to increase the number of Israelis carrying handguns by 60,000. Ron Paul's Texas Straight Talk - A Stay of Execution for the Death Tax - the fascists in the senate have let stand the theft of half your parent's money when they die. Fie on them. Fie. Ultimately, the argument against the death tax is a moral one. People should not be punished for working hard, saving, and building wealth. Our society should respect the most basic property right, namely the right to dispose of one's property as one wishes. The American dream is based on making a better life for one's children, despite the empty rhetoric of the class-warfare politicians in Washington. Building wealth is not sinister, it is admirable. Our tax rules should encourage the decidedly American virtue of saving for the future. Patri's World - Laissez-Faire City (10/28/01) - one man's experience with Grabbe's cyberspace community. [notreasonblog] Ted Roberts at The Ludwig von Mises Institute - Markets Care; Governments Don't - and how! [notreasonblog] Brewster Kahle's Internet Archive has finally released their archived web content to the public as the "Wayback Machine" (FAQ). Enter a URL, choose a date, and see the web as it was. Yes! [notreasonblog] The UCSD P-System Museum - UCSD Pascal! Brings back fond memories of the LSI 11-23 system I had in my apartment in 1979. 4 MHz processor, 128 KBytes of RAM, 20 megabyte disk drive. Awesome! [cowlix] add new comment | quote | 1206 reads
|
BlogrollLewRockwell.comQuotesEvery man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission. -- L. Neil Smith Reread that pesky first clause of the Second Amendment. It doesn't say what any of us thought it said. What it says is that infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms is treason. What else do you call an act that endangers "the security of a free state"? And if it's treason, then it's punishable by death. I suggest due process, speedy trials, and public hangings. -- L. Neil Smith Based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, and some of its own empirical work, the panel couldn't identify a single gun control regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide or accidents. -- John Lott, commenting on the National Academy of Sciences report (PDF) on gun control laws Zero Aggression Principle ("Zap") "A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, or to advocate or delegate its initiation. Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim." -- L. Neil Smith Formerly called the "Non-Aggression Principle", or "NAP" Why Did It Have to be... Guns? Make no mistake: all politicians -- even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership -- hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician -- or political philosophy -- can be put. If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you. If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims. What his attitude -- toward your ownership and use of weapons -- conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him? -- L. Neil Smith "Tell me," I was once asked, "What do you think about gun control? Give me the short answer." To which I replied, "If you try to take our firearms we will kill you." -- Mike Vanderboegh The state can only survive as long as a majority is programmed to believe that theft isn't wrong if it's called taxation or asset forfeiture or eminent domain, that assault and kidnapping isn't wrong if it's called arrest, that mass murder isn't wrong if it's called war. -- Bill St. Clair TTLB |
Recent comments
13 hours 37 min ago
13 hours 49 min ago
18 hours 11 min ago
1 day 11 hours ago
4 days 3 hours ago
6 days 19 hours ago
1 week 5 hours ago
1 week 1 day ago
1 week 4 days ago
1 week 5 days ago