05/16/13 – Will Grigg – The Scott Horton Show

Hey y'all, Scott Horton here for WallStreetWindow.com.
Mike Swanson is a successful former hedge fund manager whose site is unique on the web.
Subscribers are allowed a window into Mike's very real main account and receive announcements and explanations for all his market moves.
The Federal Reserve has been inflating the money supply to finance the bank bailouts and terror war overseas, so Mike's betting on commodities, mining stocks, European markets and other hedges against a depreciating dollar.
Play along on paper or with real money and then be your own judge of Mike's investment strategies.
Let's see what happens at WallStreetWindow.com.
All right, y'all, welcome back to the show.
I'm Scott Horton.
This is the Scott Horton Show, streaming live from scotthorton.org, Monday through Friday at 11 to 1 Texas time, noon to 2 Eastern.
And most days, except Thursdays, we're on NOAgenda Global Radio at noagendastream.com.
Our first guest today is the great Will Grigg.
His blog is freedominourtime.blogspot.com.
That's how you find it.
It's Pro Libertate is what it's called.
I said that backwards.
His blog is Pro Libertate, which you can find at freedominourtime.blogspot.com.
And I woke up this morning and I thought I'd had this terrible nightmare, but then I realized that all that had happened was I remembered word for word the latest Will Grigg article.
And I thought, my God, this can't be real, but this is real, holy moly.
Welcome back to the show, Will.
How are you doing?
Scott, it's always a pleasure to be with you, and I'm happy that I'm haunting your sleep.
Yeah, I mean, what in the world?
These cops, they're really mean guys, they are.
That's what I think.
It seems to be a profession that selects for that personality type, and that's unfortunate because, like yourself, when I was younger, I had this winsome image of your local police officer as somebody who was preternaturally friendly and also uncommonly heroic and self-sacrificing.
And I do know a few people of that sort who've gone into that profession, and most of them are mortified by what it's become.
Right, yeah.
I know a guy who, well, he's a cab driver and a good friend of mine, decent guy, and he came to know the police real well, being a cab driver, hanging around downtown and whatever, and he decided he wanted to join the Travis County Sheriff's Department, and he got to start off at the jail downtown, basically, is the lowest rung on the ladder thing, whatever.
He started off there, and he ended up lasting 10 months before he quit, and it was because of just the immorality all around.
He couldn't participate, there was no way that he could stop it from happening, and he couldn't participate anymore, and so that was it, 10 months was as far as he could possibly do.
Yeah, people like your friend, and I know more than a few who meet the same description, who are still either burdened or blessed with a functioning conscience, come very quickly to a point of decision when they choose that profession, and that is, do I continue doing what I'm doing and run the risk of becoming like what I see around me?
Do I continue on the assumption that somehow I can be the ray of light that's going to dispel the moral murkiness that surrounds me, or am I going to get out while I still have a soul?
Most of my friends who have gone into that profession have chosen the third option, because they were quickly disabused of the idea that they could use their influence to improve things from within, and they weren't willing to become the type of people they work with, who for whatever reason, and I don't really have the ability to limb the unspoken motivations of people to do this, they seem to take pleasure in reducing human beings into things.
And I don't know where that comes from, and I don't know what we're going to do about it.
As a Christian, I've got some ideas as to the answers to those questions.
How that applies to public policy is something that mine's better stocked and more subtle than mine have blended themselves on for a number of centuries.
Well you know, I hate to just be too simplistic about it, but it really is a racial thing, right?
They just got in the way with doing this to racial minorities in America all along, and so now they're at the point where they can just do it to everybody else too, and now we've got the social media, so local news stories, like the one you're writing about here about Rita Hutchins, becomes a national news story due to the ability of your journalism to bypass NBC to decide for us what's important and get out there to the people.
But really, there's this piece, I was just telling people right before the break, there's this piece at Alternet, why cops and prosecutors get away with throwing innocents in prison.
And the answer is, because they're black, that's why.
And this New York Times piece about how this one cop, a generation ago, put all these people in prison, now has all his murders under review.
The only reason that he got busted all was because one of his victims was a white man, and that guy got a DNA test and was able to get out and then go to work making a scandal about it and getting good lawyers and whatever, and getting it in the New York Times.
But otherwise, if he'd been black like the rest of them, they'd all just still be languishing there with no hope whatsoever.
That's an entirely plausible analysis, and I think you're correct that the way that the incentives have been set up, particularly in New York with the NYPD, which is of course Mayor Bloomberg's private army, as he's put it, for decades it was just assumed that if you were dealing, and it's still the assumption under stop and frisk, that if you're dealing with men of color of a certain age, that they have done something that is wrong, and if you merely inspect them, even cursorially, you're going to find some reason to take them into custody.
And if you can't find a reason, you can invent a reason, you can wrest from them an admission that they've done something that's chargeable.
And this police detective you're talking about promiscuously created false cases, homicide cases, the most serious cases that somebody can investigate using a stable of perjurious witnesses, and on some occasions releasing violent offenders from jail after promising them all kinds of perquisites such as drugs and access to prostitutes, if they would perjure themselves on behalf of his investigations.
And he closed a huge number of cases, and of course he was very flamboyant and self-satisfied.
He was probably somebody who was writing his own memoirs as he was doing these things.
In his mind he was writing what would become a best-selling memoir, perhaps a movie, and there are more than a few NYPD veterans who've done that.
The only worthy one I can think of, quite frankly, of course, is Frank Serpico.
But as you say, Scott, this is not uncommon, and it's not limited by any means to New York.
If you go to any municipal police department of any size and you take a look at the detectives, not the patrol officers, not the knuckle-draggers, the detectives, the people who are supposed to be involved in investigating violent crimes, you're going to find people who are pathological.
This is particularly true, I have found, when you're dealing with people who are investigating domestic abuse and child abuse cases.
And even in a state like Idaho, which is thinly populated, very geographically sizable and thinly populated, municipal police detectives tend to emulate the behavior of your stereotypical corrupt police detectives in places like New York.
In the case of Rita Hutchins up in Sandpoint, Sandpoint's a town of about the same size as Payette, where I live here in the sort of southwestern part of the state.
In the case of Rita Hutchins, she got in trouble with the municipal government because she didn't like the fact that she'd been abused on her own property by a police officer, had no right to be there, had no right to put her hands on Rita.
She filed a complaint with the city government for damages after she'd been injured and required hospitalization following dismissal of the case for resisting and obstructing by a judge who ruled that the police officer had no right to be on Rita's property and no right to put hands on her.
She filed a damage claim and was turned down by the city government, so she filed a notice tort claim that she was going to sue the county in federal court.
She went to the courthouse last August to research public records.
She was harassed by local municipal officials.
She got disgusted and left.
According to one version of the story, she threw down a ballpoint pen that ricocheted off a desktop and struck a deputy clerk in the left arm, and on the basis of this incident, she's been charged with battery.
And this has set in train a whole series of events that led to this horrible April 16th midnight raid on the home of this 58-year-old woman.
She's a quilt artist.
She's lived in this town for 35 years.
Ironically enough, she's originally from the state of New York.
I was just referring to New York, and now she fled to Sandpoint thinking things would be better.
She's a quilt artist, 58 years old, maybe 5'1", 110 pounds, fully clothed and dripping wet.
Three police officers, two deputy sheriffs, and a police detective from the Sandpoint police knocked on her door, then kicked in her door at midnight because a judge had signed a day or night arrest warrant, bench warrant, because she'd failed to appear on a preliminary hearing at a preliminary hearing on the basis of this spurious charge that she had battered a public official because that public official claimed to have been struck in the arm by a ballpoint pen.
And then the deputy county prosecutor, Shane Greenbank, who's driving this case, in a filing seeking for her, Rita Hutchins, to be subjected to a mandatory psychiatric evaluation, tried to depict her as a repeat violent offender by claiming that he had been battered by her.
And what had happened is that in one of the hearings that she did attend, Rita was approached by Mr. Greenbank, who shoved a sheaf of papers at her, and she didn't want them to be hand-delivered.
She wanted a record, a postal record, that she'd received these documents.
So she shoved them right back at him, and he said, that's battery.
You just battered me by shoving this sheaf of papers at me.
And there's been no complaint, there's been no report of battery in that episode.
But he managed to get a credulous judge to sign off on an order mandating a psychiatric evaluation on the basis of supposedly repeat incidents of battery.
And in the filings that they made this last week or so, the county prosecutor's office has made it clear that when this goes to trial, I believe there's going to be a hearing on Monday in Sandpoint.
I hope I'll be able to be there in person to cover this.
But they intend to call as witnesses about a half a dozen police officers and deputy sheriffs in the region, because they want to create a portrait of this woman as a violent and unstable person.
None of these people is a material witness or an eyewitness to any of these incidents of alleged battery, but they're being called for the purpose of trying to create this cumulative portrait of this woman as an unstable person, most likely of the dreaded sovereign citizen persuasion.
And there is, of course, a certain element of the so-called sovereign citizen movement up in North Idaho.
They're blamed for pretty much everything that happens in the region.
But this is happening in a town of 7,000 people, and this is an illustration of something that I cannot emphasize too frequently, which is that there is no such thing as a government too small or too obscure to destroy your life using as its instrument these costumed agents of official coercion.
See, that's the thing of it, too, and the whole idea of cops and robbers is just forget about it.
Who's even ever heard of that?
It's cops versus everybody.
And there's the idea that you would have a sober, rational adult who has some authority and would use their discretion in order to let this one go, whatever it is.
And that's just over.
Forget it.
The only discretion they'll ever use is to clamp down on someone who didn't really do anything at all.
Yes.
In every case.
Yeah.
As is the case spectacularly illustrated by the persecution of Rita Hutchins.
Yeah.
Kicking your door at midnight.
An old lady kicking her door at midnight over a bouncing pen.
Come on, man.
In Sandpoint, Idaho.
Gem State, of course, is supposed to be a constitutional state.
I mentioned before, and we've talked about this, what happened last August in a little town called Letha, which is about 20 miles from where I'm sitting.
This really innocent, harmless couple by the name of Bear and Marcella, they're organic farmers.
They got in the bad graces of neighbors who don't like them.
And on one morning last August, and this the same month, by the way, that Rita Hutchins troubles began up in Sandpoint, Bear and Marcella were getting ready for their daily activities.
And Bear snapped at Marcella.
He was not feeling well.
He'd woken up, he'd awakened that morning with a bad back, and he was feeling a little bit frustrated.
And he said, Marcella, could we not talk about this right now?
But he spoke at her in a voice that was audibly unpleased.
And the neighbor apparently was looking at the keyhole or whatever equivalent would be appropriate in this case.
She called the Gem County Sheriff's Office to report that there was a domestic violence incident underway.
And this got ping ponged back and forth between two Sheriff's Offices, and eventually the Gem County Sheriff's Office showed up in body armor and in full SWAT mode, dragging Marcella terrified out of her home, leaving her bruised and with whiplash.
She's supposedly the victim.
She was fleeing from the police.
She fled back into the home, and she was dragged out of the home by a detective by the name of Rich Paris, who, by the way, has a violent conviction on his record before he became a so-called peace officer.
She was thrown to the ground.
The Sheriff came out and was handcuffed with the muzzle of a rifle at his head and then dropped on his tailbone, leaving him partially crippled.
And then they conducted an illegal search of the home.
They found what they thought was a grow room.
It was a grow room for hydroponic tomatoes.
These are organic gardeners, remember.
But nothing happened.
I posted the video from the raid provided by the Gem County Sheriff's Office, an audio of conversations that took place among the deputies, one of which said, well, we have to assume he's going to be armed and he's anti-law enforcement because he's a constitutionalist.
On the basis of him being profiled as a constitutionalist, they went into paramilitary mode.
About three days before this raid last August, in the same neighborhood, there had been an actual violent incident of a domestic quarrel between a man with a history of violence, and this involved alcohol and a firearm.
And to answer that call in a different home in the same neighborhood, the Gem County Sheriff's Office sent out one deputy and a social worker, and the husband was allowed to leave without being handcuffed.
He was not arrested.
He was just separated from the wife until they had cooled down.
Now, three or four days later, they conducted a raid on Bear Marcella, people with no violent history at all whatsoever.
As a matter of fact, Bear is a retired police officer.
He was a police officer 25 years ago.
He was stabbed actually protecting property, and that left him with serious and lasting injuries.
But they had no history of violence.
They were involved in a very brief verbal spat, the sort of thing that happens in marriages all the time.
There were no firearms involved.
There was no violence.
There was no victim, and yet they were thrown to the ground.
Bear was assaulted.
Their home was illegally searched, and right at the point of this formation, going through their home with guns drawn in a patently illegal search, was Sheriff Chuck Rowland of the Gem County Sheriff's Office.
He's supposed to be protecting the rights of Bear Marcella, and there he is leading the charge to violate every right protected by the Bill of Rights practically here in this illegal raid that was the result of a false and malicious report of domestic violence.
Whatever happened to conducting a welfare check where one deputy sheriff shows up, knocks on the door, and says, is everybody okay here?
Okay, fine.
I see that there's nothing going on.
I was just concerned.
There was a report there might be some trouble here.
Have a nice day.
Let us know if we can help.
That's how a peace officer would have handled that situation, but there are no peace officers in Gem County, Idaho.
I mean, Gem County, Idaho, once again, being part of the Gem State, is supposed to be the sort of a place where the Constitution is respected and individual rights are at a premium, you know, or rather are esteemed at a premium, but unfortunately it's this way here in Idaho, and you can imagine how much worse it must be in other places where people don't even know what the Constitution is or was or is supposed to be.
Right.
Yeah, I mean, the thing is, you know, like in Austin anyway, you go to the west side of town and people think, well, this is the security force, you know, simple as that.
You go to the east side of town and this is the occupying army that they've got to suffer, you know, that has hurt them and their family members.
It's got them paying monthly rent on their freedom through probation fines and all the classes they got to take and all the, you know, the millstones hung around their neck and the people on the west side have no idea how unfair that they're being really in supporting these sheriff regimes, you know, against the people.
And of course, I'm way overgeneralizing because they've victimized a hell of a lot of people on the west side, too.
I'm saying the people on the west side still love it, whereas the people on the east side know better.
You know, they benefit nothing from it.
But it's a little like the division in H.G. Wells, the time machine between the Morlocks, I believe they're called the Yoli, where you have two completely separate societies that are divided in that case by a boundary where some of them lived underground and others of them lived in the cities above the ground.
And there are color lines of the sort you described in a lot of places in Texas and throughout the south, and of course in places like California as well.
What's really interesting about Idaho is that because we really don't have this sharp division here ethnically, because we are perhaps a little bit more ethnically homogenous than other states.
I say that, of course, as somebody who's a large brown guy who sticks out like the proverbial injured digit wherever I go in Idaho.
Because we're a little bit more ethnically homogenous, we don't have that really sharp distinction.
And so the abuse is perhaps here a little bit more visible for that reason.
When you have people, the sort I'm describing, the two cases I described earlier, involve middle-aged people who are white European-Americans who are being treated the way that people in certain black and Hispanic neighborhoods have been treated historically in other places.
But I think that you're entirely correct, Scott, it's metastasized now beyond the artificial constructs, the so-called ghettos.
And it's now becoming more uniform and universal, and thanks to social media, it's becoming more visible.
And that, of course, is an ironic blessing.
I wish people would pay more attention to it.
And reconfigure their perceptions of who these people are and what they actually do.
Yeah.
Well, and you know, I'm not just trying to call names or whatever, but I think a big part of this is they're scared to death of all of the citizens.
Because for some reason, they think we might all hate their guts.
Now, you know, I don't know what it could possibly be that any cops ever did to anybody that would make them think that the average non-criminal person that they're supposedly protecting out there would have nothing but unlimited contempt for them.
But they treat everyone, little old ladies and everyone, as though everybody's got a knife behind their back.
Everybody...
I remember on Cops years ago, there's only two kinds of people in this world, suspects and victims.
You know, they're just... and everybody...
99% are suspects, that's what they are.
Yeah, well, that's a perception that's diligently cultivated in post-academies and in all the training that police receive constantly.
They're marinated in this idea that they're in a 360-degree battlefield and that everybody they confront is a potential threat.
I don't know if that was the case, say, a generation or so ago.
There's a fellow by the name of Richard Roberts, who's a spokesman for the International Union of Police Associations.
And what he says is there's a perception among officers in the field that there's a war on cops going on.
And so naturally, when they're told that they're looked upon with scorn and hatred and potentially murderous hostility, when they're trained to perceive the world in paramilitary terms, when they're given the habiliments of an occupying army rather than a security force that would be appropriate to a free society, these things, of course, cumulatively add up to a mindset that's one that's militaristic rather than oriented toward being peace officers.
And the other thing that I think we should not discount is the fact that, at some level, if these people who are police officers have a functioning conscience, they will know that they should be resented for the things they typically do to people, because you could round up to everything in your description of the police officer's daily routine under the category of things that have nothing to do with protecting life, liberty, or property.
For the most part, they're acting as tax farmers.
They're finding ways to molt us by imposing fines and citations for things that have nothing to do with the protection of life or property.
They're not under any enforceable legal or civil requirement to come to the aid of a citizen who is actually threatened by criminal violence.
And almost without exception, when a police officer encounters a citizen, it's to do something to the citizen rather than to do something for the citizen.
And so if you're accosting a stranger on the street and you're wearing a uniform that's supposed to make them fear you at some level, and you're carrying a firearm, and you're about to impose something upon them that's going to cause all kinds of financial difficulty and disrupt that person's life schedule, why shouldn't the person on the receiving end of your attentions resent you?
I think police officers know this instinctively, and most of them come to overcompensate rather than reevaluating what they're doing, as a number of people who've left the profession have done.
Sheriff Richard Mack, among them, he had a crisis of conscience because he realized that when he was writing tickets for traffic infractions and enforcing idiotic drug laws, he wasn't doing anything to help people.
People like him have left the profession for that reason.
Others have simply grown callouses over their conscience, and as a result, they tend to overcompensate by dehumanizing the people who dare to resent them for the result of their unwelcome attention.
Right.
All right, now, man, we're kind of short on time.
I guess we've got to mention this guy, David Silva, who was apparently passed out on the lawn and so they just beat him to death as a target of opportunity, and in front of everybody, you know, and not too concerned about it, apparently.
I don't know if you want to comment on that, but I'll go ahead and work in sort of my last question for you at this point, too, I guess, which would be, what do we do about this?
I mean, I got to say, I'm not much of a believer in mass democracy.
It doesn't seem to work out too well since most everybody's wrong about everything, you know, but it seems like if if we had a possibility of ever doing anything like you could get a decent guy elected to sheriff to put an end to something like this, you could get a state legislator.
Couldn't you get a state legislator to pass or to at least propose a we're sick and tired of this police militarization act and no more SWAT teams, except in hostage situations or, you know, fleeing wanted murderers or something like that?
You know, some kind of rollback of this or is it just forget it.
We're helpless before the juggernaut of free Pentagon gear and tactics and training for local police.
I don't think that any situation is helpless.
I'm an indomitable optimist in that respect, albeit one who's been somewhat battered by repeated hammer blows inflicted by reality.
With the case of Mr. Silva in I guess it was Bakersfield in Kern County, Kern County is a perfectly awful place in terms of both the local sheriff's office and the prosecutor's office.
This is the side of a terrible child abuse scandal, pseudo child abuse scandal about 20 years ago, 10, 15, 20 years ago.
The typical thing where an ambitious prosecutor finds a couple of eccentric people who following the morphology of the Salem witch trials devised this model of this all encompassing covert child abuse and sex abuse ring, and he put scores of innocent people through the ringer and wrongly wrongfully convicted a number of them.
The county sheriff's office is deeply implicated in that.
So it's pretty much incurably corrupted.
It doesn't surprise me to see that you have a situation where this man who, as you correctly put it, was a target of opportunity, was sleeping on the ground and then rousted by a sheriff's deputy who perceived the man's natural reaction to being awakened by an armed stranger as a form of aggression.
You see, he did not immediately and unconditionally submit, and even the faintest tremor of refusal to submit is considered violent resistance.
You can actually be prosecuted in a lot of jurisdictions for assaulting a police officer because you've withdrawn from unwelcome contact on the part of a police officer.
But the way this escalated is, I think, a beautiful and appalling thumbnail sketch of a mindset at work.
He resisted by withdrawing, so he was set upon by three or four deputies, then a half a dozen.
They called for reinforcements, and at least nine of them beat him to death systematically while he was pleading for his life.
And then they confiscate the cell phones so that there are no independent records of what they just did, so they can go back, and with the aid of their police unions, after of course invoking their garrity rights, which immunize them from prosecution for anything they disclose to Internal Affairs, they can shape the narrative.
This is the sort of thing that an army of occupation does.
This is no different from what the U.S. military did during the occupation of various towns in Iraq or in Afghanistan.
It's no different from what any occupying army does.
They have to assert control.
They have to dominate, assert control.
They have to neutralize any threat to force security.
And so you see constant refrains being sung about the sacred imperative of officer safety and force security.
And that's why, of course, these wonderful mobile devices that can record these incidents and make them available to social media are so useful to us and so terrifying to these people who presume to occupy the neighborhoods where we live.
Alright, now hold it right there, because your website is freedominourtime.blogspot.com and you've got a fun drive going on there right now.
I know you've had a few health problems.
I know people who are regular listeners to this show, they know you, and they value your appearances on this show, and you're riding as highly as I do, and so the word is going out to you guys now to please chip in.
Just go to the bottom of the page or the right side of the page, somewhere you can find it there at Pro Libertate, Will Griggs PayPal button.
You don't have to have PayPal to chip in, and you should.
And please chip in and help support the great William Norman Griggs and his great writing at freedominourtime.blogspot.com.
And thanks very much for your time again on the show, Will.
It's great to talk to you.
Scott, thank you so much.
That means a lot to me.
Hell yeah.
Oh man, I'm late.
Oh man, I'm late.
Sure hope I can make my flight.
Stand there.
Me?
I am standing here.
Come here.
Okay.
Hands up.
Turn around.
Whoa, easy.
Into the scanner.
Ooh, what's this in your pants?
Hey, slow down.
It's just my- Hold it right there.
Your wallet has tripped the metal detector.
What's this?
The Bill of Rights.
That's right.
This is just a harmless stainless steel business card size copy of the Bill of Rights from securityedition.com.
There for exposing the TSA as a bunch of liberty destroying goons who've never protected anyone from anything.
Sir, now give me back my wallet and get out of my way.
Got a plane to catch.
Have a nice day.
Play a leading role in the security theater with the Bill of Rights Security Edition from securityedition.com.
It's the size of a business card, so it fits right in your wallet and it's guaranteed to trip the metal detectors wherever the police state goes.
That's securityedition.com.
And don't forget their great Fourth Amendment socks.
Hey guys, I got his laptop.
Admit it.
Our public debate has been reduced to reading each other's bumper stickers.
Scott Wurtten here for libertystickers.com.
I made up most of them and most of those when I was mad as hell about something.
So if you hate war, empire, central banking, cops, Republicans, Democrats, gun grabbers and status of all stripes, go to libertystickers.com and there's a good chance you'll find just what you need for the back of your truck.
Own a bookstore?
Sell guns at the show?
Get the wholesaler's deal.
Buy any hundred stickers and they drop down in price to a dollar a piece.
You can spread the contempt and make a little money too.
That's libertystickers.com.
Everyone else's stickers suck.
Hey everybody, Scott Wurtten here.
Ever think maybe your group should hire me to give a speech?
Well maybe you should.
I've got a few good ones to choose from including How to End the War on Terror, The Case Against War with Iran, Central Banking and War, Uncle Sam and the Arab Spring, The Ongoing War on Civil Liberties and of course, Why Everything in the World is Woodrow Wilson's Fault.
But I'm happy to talk about just about anything else you've ever heard me cover on the show as well.
So check out youtube.com/Scott Horton Show for some examples and email scott at scotthorton.org for more details.
See you there.
Over at AIPAC, the leaders of the Israel lobby in Washington DC, they're constantly proclaiming unrivaled influence on Capitol Hill and they should be proud.
The NRA and AARP's efforts make them look like puppy dogs in comparison to the campaigns of intimidation regularly run by the neoconservatives and Israel firsters against their political enemies.
But the Israel lobby does not remain unopposed.
At the Council for the National Interest, they put America first, insisting on an end to the empire's unjustified support for Israel's aggression against its neighbors and those whose land it occupies and pushing back against the lobby's determined campaign in favor of US attacks against Israel's enemies.
CNI also does groundbreaking work on the trouble with evangelical Christian Zionism and neocon engineered Islamophobia and drumming up support for this costly and counterproductive policy.
Please help support the efforts of the Council for the National Interest to create a peaceful, pro-American foreign policy.
Just go to councilforthenationalinterest.org and click donate under about us at the top of the page.
And thanks.
Hey y'all, Scott Horton here for the Future of Freedom, the journal of the Future of Freedom Foundation.
Every month, Plum Line individualist editor Sheldon Richmond brings you important news and opinions on policy by heroic FFF President Jacob Hornberger, hard-hitting journalist columnist James Bovard, and others from the best of the libertarian movement.
The Future of Freedom tackles the most important issues facing our country, from the bankrupt and insane welfare and regulatory states, to foreign wars and empire, the dismal state of our economy, and ongoing assaults on civil liberties.
This society needs peace and freedom for prosperity to prevail.
Subscribe to the Future of Freedom in print for just $25 a year, or online for $15 a year at fff.org/subscribe.
And hurry up, because this summer they'll be running my articles about the wars in Libya, Syria, and Somalia in the Future of Freedom too.
That's fff.org/subscribe for the Future of Freedom.
And tell them Scott sent you.