Hey, y'all check it out.
The audio book has finally been released.
Just go to fools errand.us.
That's the shortcut.
It'll take you over to the Amazon page.
And very soon, actually, I got a brand new website going up at scotthorton.org.
And so soon, you'll be able to buy that audio book directly from me.
But for now, you can still get it at audible and at amazon.com.
The audio book of fools errand time to end the war in Afghanistan.
And yes, it's read by me.
And I'm sorry, it took so long.
I nitpick the hell out of it.
Trying to get it ready for you guys.
And then plus, it took them forever after I submitted it to finally release it.
But anyway, there you go fools errand.us, amazon.com to search for my name, Scott Horton fools errand.
And the audio book is up there for you.
Also, of course, available in paperback and Kindle if you want the 1150 footnotes.
Sorry, I'm late.
I had to stop by the wax museum again and get the finger that FDR.
We know Al Qaeda Zawahiri is supporting the opposition in Syria.
Are we supporting Al Qaeda in Syria?
It's a proud day for America.
And by God, we've kicked Vietnam syndrome once and for all.
Thank you very, very much.
I say it, I say it again.
You've been had.
You've been took.
You've been hoodwinked.
These witnesses are trying to simply deny things that just about everybody else accepts as fact.
He came, he saw, he died.
We ain't killing their army, but we killing them.
We be on CNN like Say Our Name been saying, say it three times.
The meeting of the largest armies in the history of the world.
Then there's going to be an invasion.
All right, you guys on the line.
We got Eli Clifton from the Nation Institute, and he often writes for Jim Loeb at loeblog.com.
And they got an important one they wrote here.
Pompeo, springtime for Irano slash Islamophobes.
Things, I guess, could be slightly worse, but they're not looking too good.
Welcome back to the show.
How are you doing?
I'm doing well.
Thanks for having me.
So, you know, I'm reminded as I read this thing of something Anthony Gregory said back after Obama got elected about how, especially when it came to just Islam and Muslims in general, that even as George Bush slaughtered him, he sort of tamped down right-wing anti-Muslim sentiment by saying, listen, this is really kind of a very radical group that's sort of acting in the name of Islam, but just because they're getting carried away doesn't mean we should be, that kind of thing.
You know, in George W. Bush language, he said stuff sort of like that.
But then once Obama came in and had a Muslim sounding name and all this sort of innuendo about Kenya and Islam and all this stuff behind him, and really two of his names sounded like two of America's recent enemies, right?
Obama and Hussein, you know, kind of a thing.
And then just politically speaking, they had every incentive to just throw the kitchen sink at the guy, the American right did.
And so, as Anthony put it, that it was like taking the lid off the pot and the right wing just got crazy and stupid about Islam and the rest of this, just brain off and slogans going full blast.
And so now, the real problem is that with the incoming Trump administration, you actually have the kind of real bottom feeding neocons like Frank Gaffney, who always really perpetuated, you know, Geller and all these others, Spencer, not Richard Spencer, but Robert Spencer, and all these others who specialized in pushing all this anti-Islam sentiment that you've done such a good job tracking all this time.
They actually have a line apparently straight into the White House.
That point of view is getting stovepiped right to the top.
Is that right?
Oh, absolutely.
I mean, I think that probably the best example thus far to look at is actually the Muslim ban.
Because when you go back and you look at the announcement or the press release regarding that, that for then candidate Trump on his website, there was only one actual source cited to support the idea that restricting immigration and entry into the United States from people from Muslim countries actually would serve some sort of a benefit.
And that source was Frank Gaffney's Center for Security Policy and the poll they commissioned allegedly showing the violent leanings of Muslims.
And that poll was conducted by Kellyanne Conway.
Now, Kellyanne Conway's polling firm actually acknowledged that it was an unscientific poll that shouldn't be used for any sort of purposes like this.
But I think it's important when we talk about the Muslim ban as this thing that's perceived to come out of the executive branch and that it's the paranoid fantasies of Steve Bannon and Steve Miller.
And we need to remember that it seems as if at least some of the ideas for it, or at least the supporting documentation that they used to justify it, came from Frank Gaffney's Center for Security Policy.
And this is a guy who claimed that the missile defense logo under Barack Obama was morphing into something involving the Star and Crescent and Obama's campaign logo.
So, I mean, this is some out there conspiracy theory type of people who apparently have aligned straight to the top now.
Yeah.
Well, and it's a special kind of conspiracy theorist, right?
Because most conspiracy theorists represent kind of powerless people who are trying their best to figure out what power is doing to them.
But this is more along the lines of, like, Laurie Milroy, where it's conspiracy theories that are made to cater directly to power and give them the excuses to exploit them.
Well, I don't know.
Wolfowitz seems to think that Saddam and Osama really are friends.
So, tell them, Paul.
And then, at the very least, it muddies the waters, you know?
But then, and it's funny, because I always compared Wolfowitz and Gaffney and sort of thought of Gaffney as like a much lower class neocon that maybe, you know, the Center for Security Policy ain't no AEI or whatever.
But that's actually not right.
Like, they really all do pal around.
He really is one of them, just as much as they say, although he never was confirmed to be in the Reagan administration, as he always claims.
That's right.
And I think that certainly, over the course of certainly the George W. Bush administration and the Obama administration, there was this perceived distance between the people who, you know, were the elites who could actually get the year of the president and actually have a real impact on policy, and those that were considered the more fringe actors.
And whether or not there actually was a distinction there, I don't, at this point, I wouldn't want to or wouldn't be able to say.
What I think is pretty clear right now, though, is that it's not just the Obama, or not just the Trump administration that these people like Frank Gaffney have access to.
When you see people like Mike Pompeo, where his entire background is steeped in the Act for America, Bridget Gabriel, Center for Security Policy, Frank Gaffney realm of anti-Muslim activism, you know, let's give credit where credit is due here.
People like Frank Gaffney have a foothold within the Republican Party and have had a foothold inside the Republican Party for a period of time that goes back to a pre-Trump era.
So to try to distance them completely from the party and completely from the policy mechanisms that are at play here, I think is probably a misnomer.
Yeah.
Well, I mean, that's the thing, right?
If you go back to like the Bush Jr. years, it's funny, right?
The people making the more radical claims, they weren't the ones who were actually persecuting, prosecuting the war.
But the neocons inside the administration, like Stephen Hadley or Paul Wolfowitz, were seen to be sort of grownups, AEI and PNAC, compared to sort of Michael Ledeen and Frank Gaffney.
Well, Ledeen was at AEI too, I guess.
Yeah.
But you know what I mean?
Where Gaffney and Ledeen were like, even their friends roll their eyes at them sometimes, but the rest of these guys sort of, they meant business too.
The guys who were more serious were the ones who actually got the wars done and the people killed.
Yeah.
And in all fairness here, and I don't mean this as a compliment, but certainly people who fit into the neoconservative mold, people like Max Boot, people like David Frum, people like Jennifer Rubin at the Washington Post, have expressed their discomfort with this, frankly, because I think that they see that in the long run, their ability to promote and to help sell an American foreign policy that hinges on hawkishness and on militarism and on an aggressive foreign policy is actually going to be hindered in the long run by having these fringe voices who are spouting really unpopular ideas gain such a mainstream foothold to represent both the party as well as, in some ways, sort of the more militant side of the Republican party.
All right, y'all, real quick, here's how to support this show.
First of all, buy my book, Fool's Aaron.
It's at foolsaaron.us, and the audio book is now available as well.
Sign up for the show feeds, iTunes, Stitcher and RSS, this, that, and everything.
It's all at scotthorton.org.
And also you can subscribe at youtube.com slash scotthorton show, the full archive, 4,600 interviews, all available for you on YouTube as well now.
And then check out scotthorton.org slash donate.
For 20 bucks, you'll be able to get the audio book here very soon from there.
Also, $50 if you want a signed copy of the book, Fool's Aaron, the paperback, $100, you get a QR code, silver commodity disc, and anyone who donates $200 or more gets a lifetime subscription to listen and think Libertarian audiobooks.
Take PayPal, one-off and monthly donations, take all different kinds of Bitcoin and digital currencies, especially Zen cash, that's zensystem.io.
But anyway, all those addresses are there at scotthorton.org slash donate.
And of course there's patreon.com.
There was a problem with it, but the problem's fixed now.
Patreon.com slash scotthorton show.
If you want to donate per interview, that's how to do that.
And anybody who donates a dollar or more on Patreon, or signs up for a dollar or more per interview, will get two free audiobooks from listen and think audio.
And that could include my book now too.
So there you go.
Find out all about all that stuff at scotthorton.org slash donate.
Thanks guys.
All right.
Now, so bottom line, you mentioned Bridget Gabriel and, you know, I guess I could have mentioned at the top of the interview here that you have written these great things.
It's a fear Inc, right?
One and two.
That's right.
I wrote fearing one.
I did not write fearing two.
Okay.
But, but yeah, so no.
And that's a real great study of this.
And the bottom line, as you talk about in there is so much of this has to do with the Israel lobby in America, which the neoconservatives are sort of the vanguard of the overall Israel lobby in a way.
And a big part of this really is just, it's the purpose, right?
Of demonizing Islam in general is to conflate the anti-American Al-Qaeda terrorists with Iran, their enemies.
But if the American people just think of them as, you know, them Muslims over there, then maybe that's good enough and they can, you know, divert American efforts.
And they do, they at least constantly muddy the water and look at Syria where they've portrayed the guys who are literally sworn loyal to Ayman al-Zawahiri in the Al-Nusra front.
They're the moderate rebels and it's Hezbollah and Iran and Russia who are, you know, the forces of evil that the forces of light are trying to thwart when, you know, clearly whatever the Russians and the Syrian army are doing is in response to American intervention there and supporting these guys.
But it does work, right?
They are able to really muddy the water.
And a big part of that is just by blaming Mohammed, right?
It's like blaming Karl Marx for everything going on in the USSR and China at the same time, you know?
I mean, I guess the two points I would take to that, first of all, is that when fearing we were very careful actually never to link the foreign policy initiatives of the Bush administration, for instance, or of the neoconservatives with the Islamophobia movement domestically.
Partially because, you know, we wanted to talk about the domestic aspects of it.
And also because I think as you just started to hit upon, you have to kind of speculate to suggest where those link up between the domestic demonization of Muslims and a foreign policy that hinges in many cases on dropping bombs on Muslim countries.
Now, I think with a group like the Center for Security Policy that we've been talking about, that's actually a great example of where those come together.
Because CSP actually pretty actively advocates for both of those things, you know, for extreme hawkishness in the Middle East, at least in as much as an aggressive posture toward Iran constitutes that.
And they're pushing, you know, an agenda at home saying that every single Muslim American organization is in cahoots with the Muslim Brotherhood and should be outlawed.
So, I mean, I think that you certainly can make that case that that linking occurred.
Now, I think the other point you just made there is very interesting about the way that, you know, we're talking about demonizing a very specific type of Islamic extremists in the Middle East.
And I think that that's the missing link here that we often don't talk about is why is it that, you know, very often we want to say, oh, well, this is an extension of, you know, AIPAC or the so-called Israel lobby.
But there's another piece here that doesn't get, that gets even less attention.
And that's the influence of UAE and Saudi Arabia on policymakers and on think tanks in Washington, for that matter, where they've given generous amounts of money.
And I think that that probably also offers some explanatory power in exactly what you're talking about, about why are we fixated on the reach of Hezbollah and the proxy arms of the IRGC and of Iran?
And why aren't we talking about, you know, Wahhabist extremism?
Since that, you know, when you actually want to talk about having a direct national security impact on the United States has probably had a far, far, far greater impact.
And we fought Iraq war two and Iraq war three on behalf of the Arambek Shia forces too.
So it seems like we owe them at least honesty about who has enhanced the Iranians power and influence in the region around here.
It's everybody who hates them the most.
Right, exactly.
Yeah.
All right.
And never remind how, well, we skipped a step where American support for al-Nusra and friends in the early years of the Syrian war ended up leading to the rise of the Islamic State, which blew back in their face so badly that then they had to launch that just mentioned Iraq war three to team up with the Shiites again to drive them out.
Anyway.
That's right.
And then we'll complain about the strength of Shiite militias.
Yeah.
Yeah.
At that point, it was like, well, don't try to, don't torture them too much, Bata Brigade.
Here's your power drill.
You know, these are all Rumsfeld's old friends.
Okay.
So now here's something interesting that you said there, and I don't know if this is deliberate, but it's not like it's that devious.
So it seems to me like it could be deliberate for a further goal.
When you talk about really trying to outlaw Muslim political organizations in the United States, which could be seen as a cynical ploy to try to radicalize American Muslims and to make them more politically angry since they'll have less and less representation and ability to freely associate and lobby in this kind of thing for their own rights and whatever interests they see.
And so, I mean, on one hand, I think for me, it's foreign policy first.
It's just an overall attempt to keep Americans afraid and hateful of Muslims all the time, no matter what, for foreign policy reasons.
But at the same time, though, it seems like that could really, even if it's simply an accident or an unintended consequence, could be a real consequence that American Muslims do become more radicalized if they're simply accused just for wanting to vote or organize at all of being agents of the Muslim Brotherhood that's out to get us all or whatever it is, like you're saying.
And they have made some progress in making those accusations against American Muslim groups, which, and I know, as we talked about, you've really done the work on this, against groups where it's just not true that they're the front for the Muslim Brotherhood in any way, or certainly not any plot against the United States.
You know, I think that there is a close examination that needs to occur here about what are the motivations.
And that's an unintended consequence that may be true.
I don't think it's an intended consequence of the demonization of Muslims in the United States, is the radicalization of them.
And I think you're probably right that a lot of this comes out of, in all likelihood, out of foreign policy.
I think there's another aspect here that we need to look at with this administration, though, and about why would anybody put this much resources into demonizing a population group in the United States that's, I think it's still less than 1% of the population, is spread across the United States so that they don't really control large voting blocks in many congressional districts, if any.
They don't really pose a political threat in any meaningful sense to any sort of status quo of ethnic groups or political organizations in the United States.
And I think that maybe an aspect of what's going on here is that this fits into sort of some of the racist, if not outright nativist, policymaking from people like Stephen Miller in this White House, where they see this is a group that is easy to attack, that people don't really, that already there's distrust of Muslim Americans, thanks to the groundwork of places like Center for Security Policy.
There's ample shoddy research out there and bogus studies and polling you can use to demonize this group.
And if you can succeed in convincing people that this is a group of Americans who simply don't deserve the same protections and rights that the rest of the country deserves, then it makes it easier to move on to further sort of dividing and engaging in identity politics.
So I think that there is, if there is a long game here, that's what I would see at play with the attacks on Muslim Americans.
Well, and, you know, I really should keep track.
I can only juggle so many of these things at a time.
But there have been recent attacks of just, I don't know specifically, but it doesn't look like they're FBI informant entrapment jobs.
It looks like actual attacks by, you know, working class, more or less brainwashed American right wingers who set off bombs at mosques.
There was one just recently, right?
And all kinds of attacks like this.
So, you know, this stuff really matters.
And then, you know, it's funny what you say about how, hey, look, Muslims don't have any political power in America.
It's not like they're really trying.
I mean, I don't know everything about care, but they're basically just screaming, don't hit me the whole time.
It's not like they're trying to voice Sharia law on us and all this.
That's a great slogan, but it's just not happening anywhere.
And yet at the same time, as you say, such a small percent, a few percent of Americans are Muslims, but still, that's millions.
And that's enough that if they really were our enemies, they could start a lot of arson fires and get some terrorism going on around here and fight, but they don't.
All they do is go to work every day and send their kids to government school with everybody else every day.
And so, it's amazing that they try to push this stuff when, if anybody ever goes outside instead of just sitting on Twitter all day, talk about myself there, then, you know, this is nonsense, right?
Like, even if you live out in the sticks, there's a mosque and they get along with everybody.
That's how it is around here, you know?
And, you know, the Minnesota mosque bombing is a great example, because, you know, when you look at the people who were involved in that, I mean, they voiced these political views that kind of covered the spectrum of Trumpism, and it didn't necessarily, like, I was just talking to somebody else today who was saying, where does attacking a mosque fit into this?
You know, they were, like, in favor of the border wall.
They were, like, had these kind of, like, paranoid anti-government views that fit with, you know, maybe, like, a Patriots movement or something.
Like, it didn't, it was more like an InfoWars or something out of the Trump White House type of agenda, like, kind of scattershot.
And where did the mosque come into this?
And that's where I think you have to start asking the questions of where does this ideology, this nativism, this racism, this demonization of minorities, this is where the rubber hits the road.
You know, this is somebody who didn't have, the Minnesota mosque bombing didn't, this is somebody who didn't necessarily have a broad, long history of espousing anti-Muslim views, but attacking a mosque was one thing he could do.
Yeah.
That fit with a broader agenda that was broader than just attacking Muslims, I think.
Yeah.
Well, I mean, the idea is that they'll want to pack up and move away.
Because they don't want them here kind of thing.
And they is a little broader than just Muslims.
Yeah, well, that's certainly true, too.
You know, and a lot of times, of course, and these are the ones that always make the news, as though being Muslim actually is, you're somewhat guilty.
But if you're a Sikh, then it's like, oh, another Sikh was mistaken for a Muslim and attacked.
All right, you guys, here's who supports this show.
First of all, the great Mike Swanson.
He wrote this incredible book called The War State about the rise of the permanent military industrial complex and the new right after World War Two.
It's a really important history.
I think you'll really like it.
It's The War State.
It's on amazon.com and thewarstate.com.
And also, he gives great investment advice if you have any money to invest at wallstreetwindow.com, wallstreetwindow.com for all the financial news and the great advice from Mike Swanson.
And when you follow his advice, I know he recommends that you keep at least some of your savings in metals.
And what you'll want to do then is go to Roberts and Roberts Brokerage Inc.
That's rrbi.co, rrbi.co.
And platinum, palladium, gold and silver, of course, as well.
They take the slightest commission and provide great service.
And if you buy with Bitcoin, there is no service fee at all.
That's rrbi.co for all your precious metals.
And then, of course, Zencash.
It's a new digital currency, but it's also an encrypted messaging app and file transfer app.
And you can learn all about it at zensystem.io, that's zensystem.io for Zencash.
And then libertystickers.com, we've got a brand new website.
In fact, just don't even go to the current website.
Wait like 15 minutes and then go.
He's got a brand new website going up there for libertystickers.com.
It'll be up sometime next week.
And I finally got Illustrator again.
So we're going to be getting some new stickers up there.
Lots of good anti-government propaganda for you there at libertystickers.com.
And listen, if you want a new website, a 2018 model website, you got to keep up with the times for your business or whatever it is you're doing.
What you do is go to expanddesigns.com slash Scott, and you'll save 500 bucks.
Now, you know what?
I'm sorry, because we're completely burying the lead here, and it's all my fault.
But in the few minutes we have, could you please tell me everything you know about Pompeo and his relationship with these kooks?
Because I know the kooks have backed him all this time, and I wish they prioritized foreign policy more, but they're generally pretty good on foreign policy.
But here, they back this guy who is a very right-wing hawk, it seems like, on everything.
I'm glad you pointed that out, because that's something that I think people have overlooked, is that people say, oh, well, he's a kook man, and kook brothers are behind everything bad.
Well, on foreign policy, we should look pretty closely at them, actually, because they do espouse sort of a realist libertarian foreign policy view, which I think you're right, they have not prioritized in their agenda of policy items that they've invested in.
But Pompeo, considering that he's from Kansas and has been supported, kook industries is his number one source of campaign contributions, really hasn't reflected that aspect of their agenda at all.
He's been palling around with people like Frank Gaffney and Bridget Gabriel of Act for America for years now, pretty much since he joined, since he was elected to Congress.
And we can talk about the Islamophobic things he said in conjunction with that, but I actually think there's something that's being overlooked a little bit with Pompeo that I do want to call attention to, which is the fact that these ideas that he has, it's not just about demonizing Muslims.
There's something else going on, and I've gone and I've looked at videos of him speaking at churches in Wichita, and it's very much in the context of a holy war between Christianity and Islam.
And there's at least two examples of this where he kind of spells it out.
In one, at a 2014 church group he was speaking to, he said, this threat to America is from a minority of Muslims who deeply believe that Islam is the way and the light and the only answer.
They abhor Christians and will continue to press against us until we make sure that we pray and stand and fight and make sure that we know that Jesus Christ is our savior is truly the only solution for our world.
Which is kind of interesting, because he's willing to talk in a more moderate way, saying we're talking about a minority of Muslims here.
But then on the other side, this is a Christian holy war.
And then another example in 2015 that I found, again this one speaking to an evangelical church, he talked about attending an Easter sunrise service in Baghdad with U.S. soldiers, some of whom were from Fort Riley and Kansas.
And he said it was the most amazing moment.
These young men and women had been there a long time, we got a chance to pray, the sun came up, and we were in the middle of this ancient Christian place where our fellow followers are being tortured and beheaded and made to scatter from traditional Christian homes.
But we were able to pray that day.
We were able to pray that we knew Jesus Christ was our savior.
So I think there's something really worth noting here, that even when he's willing to talk in more moderate ways about Islamic extremism and about Islamic terrorism and the radicals who are a small minority in that religion, and sometimes he talks more broadly in far more negative, stereotypical ways about Muslims.
But he knows how to dial that back.
But on the other side, he does talk about there being a Christian holy war effectively against Islam.
And that's pretty scary that this guy's about to take over the State Department.
Man, you know, it's funny, because you would think that if they're going to go with that, that the Bible says that now is the time for Christian North America to go and occupy and wage war against Muslims, that it could have been more specific.
I mean, we got Muslim dominated countries from at least half of Nigeria all the way to the Philippines, right?
So you know, it seems like they can just generally wage war forever and wait around.
And at some point, this is going to trigger Megiddo and the battle for Armageddon and all this stuff.
I mean, it sounds basically like ISIS and their whole thing about, we'll see in what town was it in Syria, where they were going to fight the new Romans or whatever?
It's completely crazy.
Yeah, yeah.
Anyway, no, exactly.
And it really does start to reflect that ideology and that rhetoric.
And I think that's, I think that's pretty scary stuff.
Yeah.
And I mean, you know what, because I can understand, I remember, well, I'm sure you do too, in 2002, when people are just scared overall, and people are reaching for their Bibles to explain what's going on, because the Republicans sure as hell aren't explaining.
So, but you know, it was all caught up with, and I'm in Texas, so there's a lot of this on talk radio and stuff.
The Cornerstone Church has a big presence on AM radio in San Antonio, for example, John Hagee's church and that kind of thing.
And so this is sort of the ready-made excuse, answer for people who don't know anything about it is just to say, well, it's the Bible playing out because it's near the millennium.
And it's these different religions collation over there and this and that.
But it sort of seems like, hey, the rapture didn't happen.
It's been all this time.
And that, you know, really, if they had a specific agenda of how to make Jesus come back, exactly.
I mean, last I heard from John Hagee, it was the Chinese were going to invade and occupy the whole Middle East and try to destroy Israel.
And they were the army of Satan coming.
I don't know if they changed that or not, but it just seems like it's kind of a month by month thing.
Yeah.
I mean, the religion is so far out from what's actually playing out on the ground there, other than just all the violence and suffering, which is part of it.
Well, unless you try to make it so.
Yeah, I know.
Well, I mean, again, like, so what's the plan now?
Is we're going to take Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri's side in Iran next and get rid of the Ayatollah for them?
I mean, how many times are we going to do this?
Well, I think they're going to take the side, and Pompeo has made that pretty clear.
And I think, again, to bring it back to this other component that we don't maybe talk about as much as we should, is he is very close with the UAE and the Saudis.
And they, I think, are becoming a more visible foreign policy influence on the United States than they were in the past.
They were influential in the past, but I think we're only starting to realize now how they are influential and the methods through which they leverage that power.
Yeah.
Well, we got to hope he's simply corrupt and cynical and doesn't believe all this end-of-the-world stuff, right?
That would be ideal.
Yeah.
Boy, I hope he can be bribed.
Otherwise, we're in real trouble.
Listen, you do great work, as always.
I appreciate your time.
Thanks, Eli.
Thanks so much for having me.
All right, you guys, that's Eli Clifton.
He's at the Nation Institute, and he writes with our great friend, Jim Loeb, over at the Loeb blog, like your earlobe, loebblog.com.
And this one, we're running it at antiwar.com, too.
You can find it.
Pompeo, springtime for Irano slash Islamophobes.
And you know me, scotthorton.org, foolsaron.us.
The audiobook is out.
Go and buy it.
Also, antiwar.com, libertarianinstitute.org.
And follow me on Twitter, at scotthortonshow.
Thanks, guys.
Hey, y'all.
Next Saturday, I'm giving a speech to the Libertarian Party of New Jersey State Convention.
And this is at the University Inn on the campus of Rutgers University in New Brunswick.
And so I'm not exactly sure what time I go on, but it's in the afternoon of next Saturday, March the 24th in New Brunswick, New Jersey, there at Rutgers University.
So check it all out at njlp.org.
