05/29/15 – Ray McGovern – The Scott Horton Show

Hey, Al Scott here.
If you've got a band, a business, a cause, or campaign, and you need stickers to help promote, check out thebumpersticker.com at thebumpersticker.com.
They digitally print with solvent ink, so you get the photo quality results of digital with the strength and durability of old style screen printing.
I'm sure glad I sold thebumpersticker.com to Rick back when he's made a hell of a great company out of it, and there are thousands of satisfied customers who agree with me too.
Let thebumpersticker.com help you get the word out.
That's thebumpersticker.com at thebumpersticker.com.
Our allies in the region were our largest problem in Syria.
The Turks were great friends, the Saudis, the Emiratis, et cetera.
They were so determined to take down Assad, they poured hundreds of millions of dollars and tens, thousands of tons of weapons into anyone who would fight against Assad, except that the people who were being supplied were al-Nusra and al-Qaeda.
Come on, what does the vice president know about it?
He said he was sorry for saying that, so obviously it was a big mistake on his part.
Hey, guess what, everybody?
We got the great Ray McGovern on the phone.
He's great.
He used to be a CIA guy, but now he's a legit human being and does great work for peace all the time and has for years and years and years.
He's the co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, and he's a great peacenik.
He does a lot of speaking, going around with Tell the Word.
You can contact him through there to have him come speak to your church or your group or whatever it is, and he writes a hell of a lot of great stuff.
You can find it all at raymcgovern.com, antiwar.com, and consortiumnews.com.
Welcome back to the show, Ray.
How are you, sir?
Thanks, Scott.
Very happy to have you here.
Now check this out.
We're going to talk some history with you here.
You have two recent pieces, both of which take on various aspects of what really happened in Iraq War II.
Of course, there are a lot of self-justifying mythologies and narratives surrounding that war and how it happened and what went wrong and when and why and everything else.
We saw this all happening like a slow-motion train wreck at the time.
It started out, the slogan was, the surge is working.
The surge is working, and it didn't matter that it wasn't working.
It only mattered that the slogan was just a great slogan, I guess.
I don't know.
It didn't really work on me, but apparently it was really great for a lot of people.
They just loved it, and they would say it over and over again, and then they just changed it to the surge worked, which doesn't quite ring as well audibly, I don't think, as working, but anyway.
People loved the surge worked, too.
That had even more self-congratulation to it and cover-up in it.
Everybody loves believing that myth, as you call it in the title of your article, resurgence of the surge myth.
It's important that we correct this.
I was thinking, Ray, that if they have to claim victory in order to end any of these wars, I guess I don't mind, but then the problem is they go, yeah, that's right.
It was a victory, all right, and then they use that as the excuse to double down the next one, like they did with the Iraq surge myth in Afghanistan.
That's right.
Right now, they're asking for a mulligan at golf terms, but a mulligan comes after you screwed up your tee shot, right?
If they don't admit that they screwed up their tee shot, they'll just drive straight down the fairway.
It'll be in another, even greater mess.
Yeah, well, and so it's kind of complicated, but go ahead and fill us in.
What all was the surge?
What was it supposed to accomplish?
What did it accomplish?
Yeah.
Well, people can be excused for not knowing many of these facts because they couldn't find them in the New York Times, the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, LA Times, or any of the so-called major media.
Plus, it was eight years ago now.
Yeah, well, actually, almost nine.
We're talking the summer of 2006, and things were going very, very poorly, indeed, in Iraq.
And our general on the scene, General Casey, and General Abizade, who had purview over that area, he was based in Tampa, but he spent most of his time in that area.
They came to the conclusion that, my God, you know, there is sectarian hatred like we've never experienced before.
You know, they shouldn't have been surprised at that.
But that's just never going to work.
If the Shia can always figure they can depend on us, and they don't have to give any power sharing to the Sunni, instead, they put them all in jails and torture them.
You know, this is not really doing much for reconciliation.
They'll never get their act together as long as we stay in the country.
And worst of all, my God, the politicians are talking about adding troops.
So what happened?
Well, all through the fall of 2006, they leaked to the press that more troops were not a good idea.
Okay?
And then, when John McCain and his stalwarts from the Senate Armed Services Committee called them to testify, and I have a quote here, it always helps to have facts, right?
Facts and quotes and documents.
So here's John McCain asking General Abizade, again, sense commander, he said, you know, why not?
We would like to have 20,000 more troops in here, says McCain.
And this is what Abizade says, Senator McCain.
I met with every divisional commander, General Casey, the Corps commander, Gerald Emsi, and I asked them, in your professional opinion, if we were to bring in more American troops now, does that add considerably to our ability to achieve success in Iraq?
And they all said no.
And the reason is because we want the Iraqis to do more.
It is easy for the Iraqis to rely on us to do this work.
I believe that more American forces prevent the Iraqis from doing more, from taking more responsibility for their own future.
The date, November 15th, 2006, just at the time when real decisions had to be made as to whether to attenuate our presence there or to have a surge.
Now, at the same time, our ambassador in Iraq, Khaled Zahed, he's at a classified table at the Washington saying pretty much the same thing.
He said, look, a surge is not going to be sustainable.
I'll say another quote here.
He said that he was trying to negotiate a political solution with the Iraqis and, quote, proposals to send in more U.S. forces would not produce a long-term solution and would not make our policy sustainable.
So there's Khaled Zahed, the ambassador.
There's the top military brass.
What do we have next?
Well, now we have the establishment-heavy Iraq Study Group.
This was a group that was formed largely at the initiative of Congress.
Bush and Cheney didn't much care for it, but they had some really good people on it, some really good experts, and it was led by James Baker, no slouch he, and no wimp he or leftist he.
And, of course, the Democrat that they always trot out for such occasions, Lee Hamilton.
Well, they came to the conclusions of their study and, as I say, it was populated by leading lights including a fellow named Robert Gates, who had been head of the CIA and other things.
So they all get together and they decide exactly the same thing.
They say a change in the primary mission of U.S. forces that would enable the U.S. to begin to move its combat forces out is absolutely necessary.
The situation in Iraq is grave and deteriorating.
So they have those three.
You have the generals, you have Khaled Zahed, now you have the Iraq Study Group.
You know, Rumsfeld too, right?
Yeah, you get into it.
Yeah.
You know, the thing that people don't realize is that Rumsfeld himself was committing the mortal sin of going wobbly on a war that was based mostly on his own misguided advice.
It was very much similar to what happened in Vietnam when Robert McNamara, also a previous Secretary, went wobbly on Vietnam and said, you know, I'm out of here, this is not going anywhere.
Well, the thing is too, he was making sense, right?
He was saying the same thing that you're saying, basically, in economic terms, that we've created a moral hazard for these groups.
And he would always say it in the most demeaning way.
We need to take the training wheels off and this kind of thing.
But if they were being honest at all, what they were sort of getting to was the Shia have right now some reason to compromise with the Sunni they've displaced.
But if we send in more troops to be their auxiliaries, to help them ethnically cleanse or sectarianly cleanse the towns and especially the capital city even more, then we're giving them less reason to compromise rather than more.
And so it's actually really pretty simple.
And Donald Rumsfeld is probably right for the first time in his life about something when he said that's an S-candidate.
And now we've got to take this break because we both went on so long.
But hang on one second.
We'll be right back, everybody, with the great Ray McGovern in just a second.
Hey, I'm Scott Horton here for Liberty.me, the social network and community-based publishing platform for the liberty-minded.
Liberty.me combines the best of social media technology all in one place and features classes, discussions, guides, events, publishing, podcasts, and so much more.
And Jeffrey Tucker and I are starting a new monthly show at Liberty.me, Eye on the Empire.
It's just four bucks a month if you use promo code Scott when you sign up.
And hey, once you do, add me as a friend on there at scotthorton.liberty.me.
Be free.
Liberty.me.
Hey, I'm Scott.
Welcome back.
I'm talking with the great Ray McGovern.
We're talking about the surge of 2006 and 7.
The Republicans lost both houses of Congress.
Bush was humiliated.
The war was a disaster.
The Iraq study group said it was time to end the war as the president's father's friends and all that.
Rumsfeld said, hey, let's get the hell out of here, man.
Not that I'm sorry.
And then Bush went with fatneck Fred Kagan and General Jack Keane, and they decided to surge.
Not only are we not leaving, we're doubling down, and it's going to accomplish A, B, C, X, Y, and Z.
Tell them, Ray.
Well, that was the problem for Bush and Cheney when they realized that every sensible person in Washington and in the field was saying it's a fool's errand to send more troops in.
Bush and Cheney went to the American Enterprise Institute, as they usually do, and they said, well, what does it mean for us?
And the answer came back loud and clear from the Kagans, Frederick especially, and from this Jack Keane, who used to be a vice chief of staff in the U.S. Army.
They said, well, it means, Mr. President, you lose a war on your watch.
And he said, well, gosh, you know, how can we avoid that?
And they said, well, we've just got just the thing for you, Mr. President, and we call it a surge.
Actually, it's a good word, surge, you know, kind of, you know, manly, almost, you know, surge.
So, this is what we're going to do.
We put in 30,000 folks.
We separate the Shia from the Sunni in Baghdad.
We ethnically cleanse that city.
Of course, we let Shia do most of the work, and all we need is a general to do this, and we have a guy right here.
His name is David Petraeus.
He's right in the next room.
He's got 12 rows of ribbons and mirrored badges and stuff.
He's a good-looking guy.
He's the guy that can do this militarily.
What we need is a defense secretary, because, clearly, Rumsfeld has outlooked this usefulness.
He's gone wobbly.
So, you got any ideas?
So, Bush calls up his daddy and says, Dad, got any ideas?
So, Elder Bush says, Little Bush loves George.
Just call Bobby Gates.
Little Bush says, yeah, but he was on the Iran study group.
Big Bush, Bobby Gates is a real, how shall I say it, not a chameleon, he's a sort of a windsock.
If you tell him he could be the best secretary of defense, he'll do it, and sure enough, on the 5th of November, just before the election, Bush meets with Gates in Providence, and he explains, you know, we're going to double down here.
We're going to have a surge.
We've got a really beautiful general to do the hard work.
All you have to do is go out to Baghdad and cashier...
Well, not cashier.
You...
Okay.
So, that's what happened.
Gates went out to Baghdad, came back, and Bush, at the end of September, I'm sorry, at the end of December 2006, he says, I'm inclined to add troops to Iraq, but I don't really...
We need to give them a mission.
This is what he said, quote, there's got to be a specific mission that can be accomplished with the addition of more troops, end quote.
December 20th, 2006.
Well, he couldn't just say, look, we want to make sure we don't lose the war on our watch, and we figured if we can separate Shia from Sunni in Baghdad and do other things with 30,000 more troops, well, the cost is likely to be, as it was, 1,000 U.S. troops more killed in that surge, and, you know, countless dozens of thousands of Iraqis.
But, hey, they did.
It worked for their purposes.
They waltzed out, or they actually rode out into the western sunset after the administration was over without having launched the war, leaving Bedlam behind, leaving inevitable Bedlam, and look at Iraq today.
I mean, it's, my God, it's Bedlam, and it's getting worse and worse still.
Fred Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute, and Jack Keane, and Lindsay Nelson, and Senator McCain, guess what they're pushing for?
Another surge!
That's what we need, another surge, because the first one worked so beautifully.
Oh, God!
And you know what?
It's really hard to tell this story to the general audience, because it is a little complicated, and because they've been conditioned to thinking that the surge worked.
The worst thing, Scott, the worst thing of all, was that when Obama was running for president, the sentiment was so thick that anyone who disparaged the surge was just a poor loser, right?
A poor, kind of a spoiled sport.
Right.
You know what he said?
He said, gosh, I have to admit, the surge worked beyond all my expectations.
My God, you know?
So that shows the kind of crowd that he's fallen in with, and how naive he was then, and I just hope he's learned a couple lessons in the last nine years.
Yeah, well, you know, the thing of it was, too, and we talked about this, people can go find you and I discussing this as it was happening in 2006 and 2007 with all this, and as always, it couldn't possibly be right, because it's never, I mean, their narrative, it's never based on any kind of reality at all.
I mean, all we were hearing was it was the Iraqi people versus the terrorists, led by Zarqawi, the terrorist, and we're against them on the side of the civilians, or whatever.
They never were honest at all to say, well, it's us and the winners of the election who are the United Iraqi Alliance, and they are made up of the following factions and their militias, and they're backed by Iran, and on the other side are, you know, the tribal chiefs, and the Sunni imams, and the, you know, Baathist officers, and the foreign fighters, and the, right?
They never were honest about who was who, and who was fighting for what, or any of that.
The whole thing, they didn't just lie us into it, they lied us into staying the whole time by just saying, well, listen, things will get worse if we leave, but they wouldn't say why.
You know, there's never any kind of clarity to that, so they never really, the fact that they never had to explain meant they could never make a policy based on the reality of who's who and what it is they're doing, so they built up a Sunni army that could never be integrated into the Iraqi army.
They said that was the plan, but in fact, they just really created the Islamic State, is all they did.
Yeah, we were paying off the Sunni, you know, to fight al-Qaeda, and not to make problems for the Maliki government.
The understanding was that when we stopped paying off the Sunni, Maliki would pick up the tab.
He didn't.
Instead of that, he sent his Sunni, his Shia death squads into Sunni neighborhoods, cleaning them out, putting them in jail for torture.
You know, most people don't remember that Bradley Manning, now Chelsea Manning, he was in Iraq at precisely this time, during the surge.
July 2007 was when that wiki leaks photographs of the brutalization of Iraq's civilians and of our own troops.
Listen to them in a helicopter.
It's awful, okay?
So Bradley Manning saw that, and he saw on the ground how young students were being wrapped up, put into jail, where there was torture going on, all because they wrote a term paper that criticized the Maliki government.
So these kinds of things come back to bite you, and when people with some sense of honesty and integrity see the awful things that are going on, they try to change them.
Now, Bradley Manning is that, so is Ed Snowden.
Thanks for bringing that up, because that's a not-very-often-told part of that story, that, you know, oh yeah, the kid was gay and was having an identity crisis, or transgender, this, that, whatever, when what happened was he told his superior officer, my God, man, I had this document translated, and it's a newspaper op-ed about basic corruption, and yet my job is to turn this guy over to be tortured, and maybe to death.
And his superior officer told him, that's right, get back to work.
And that was the line that was crossed, and, you know, that gets dropped from the narrative of what happened there, and even I oftentimes talk about Chelsea Manning as heroic, just in terms of the quantity and quality of intelligence leaked, but, you know, I forget myself of what, you know, at the time, in the actual situation, what a heroic thing that was, as a response to what she was being made to participate in.
Yeah, he was the same age as these young college students, you know, and to see them, he knew what went on in those jails.
That was one of these, what I call, immediate personal experiences of unnecessary or, you know, unjustified suffering, and he saw it firsthand, and then he saw the Wicked League stuff, and he said, this is it, I owe it to my people in America to expose what's going on.
Now, even, you know, I have to sort of say, Rumsfeld had it right at the very end, so did the Rocksteady group, Jim Baker, and so did Salih Zaid.
Did they say anything?
So did Casey, the generals, Casey and Zaid.
There's this sort of emergent code, where no matter how important it is for the Americans to know what's really going on, nobody says anything, even the good guys.
Now, I always think of General Zinni, big hotshot Marine general, head of CENTCOM in his day.
He retired, you know, and he's sitting on the 26th of August 2002 at the Veterans for Foreign Wars convention because he's getting a medal, okay, and who's the speaker?
It's Dick Cheney, and Dick Cheney says Iraq is about to get a nuclear weapon, they have all manner of chemical biological warfare, UN inspections aren't working, blah, blah, blah, blah.
And Zinni is sitting there, and later, three years later, he admits to the press, you know, I was still getting the most highly classified information because I was back on contract, and nothing that Cheney said squared with what I knew to be the real intelligence.
Now, that's really nice for him to tell us three years later, right?
Why didn't he have the guts to break with the immersion, to break with the liars and get out there and say, you know, go to Cheney first and see what the hell's going on here.
He didn't.
Neither did George Stennett in his book.
He says, you know, I didn't think it was my place to ask the vice president where he got that intelligence.
So, you know, there's a lot of blame to go around.
But the worst, of course, is that Bush was duly apprised by his ambassador, by his military, by the Iraq study group, not by Gates, because as soon as he was offered to be Secretary of Defense, he thought it was an outstanding idea to do so.
So, you know, you get the worst kind of corruption, the worst kind of sick of fancy.
And that's what killed another thousand U.S. troops.
And that figure is very valid.
And, you know, I should add probably the same thing happened with respect to Afghanistan.
Gates and Petraeus were both the prime movers there, too.
How many unnecessary U.S. troops died?
One thousand again.
So they doubled down twice.
Now, are they going to do it again?
That's what we have to make sure they don't do.
Unless you know this history, it's kind of hard to argue the case.
Well, you know, I've got to bring up here, too, that they fought this entire little mini war against Sadr and his allies, the Shiite militia in East Baghdad and in Najaf in 2007, as well as part of that surge.
And there's a whole book about it called The Good Soldiers.
The hell these guys went through and brought to the people of East Baghdad in the name of fighting Sadr.
But who was Sadr?
He was a member in good standing, one of the leaders of the Republican Party over there, man.
He was part of the United Iraqi Alliance with the Dawa Party and the Supreme Islamic Council.
And America had fought that entire war for him.
And Maliki was only there with his support.of that Shiite party that won the election of 05 and inherited the government.
And so they were trying to marginalize him, and they never did.
He was the least Iranian backed of all of the Shiite leaders.
And what they do, they chased him into Iran, where he got more Iranian backed and picked a fight with his militias and got who knows how many tens of thousands of people killed there in that giant war for nothing, in that giant war against the guy they were fighting for all along and against the guy who right now is the leader of one of the primary militias and his power has not been diminished whatsoever in all this.
Yeah, it's replete with ironies and idiocy.
You know, the figure, the latest figure, accurate figure from a responsible organization of how many Iraqis would kill is a million, okay?
One million.
U.S. troops, well, 4,500.
Now, I'd hate to have that on my conscience.
And yet, this was all very deliberate.
It was all politically inspired, as was the surge in Afghanistan, that one due to Obama's political needs, okay?
I'm being bipartisan here.
But, you know, when you think about what our country has become in condoning and pushing and actually conducting ethnic cleansing, and I'm talking about Baghdad, a city of about 6 million in those days, all right?
It was a predominantly Sunni city.
It became a predominantly Shia city because we did a cordon sanitaire around it and let the Shia militia do their work.
That's why the violence went down.
Shia and Sunni were separated one from the other, and by and large, the Sunni were driven out.
And how many refugees resulted from all this?
Well, from the whole war, it's 4,500,000, 2 million internal refugees in Iraq still, and 2.5 million external refugees eking out an existence in places like Syria and Jordan.
I mean, my goodness, if the American people need further proof of this, all they need to do is read what UCLA has done.
They had a program with a commercial satellite, and they watched, mind you, Scott, they watched the lights go out in the Sunni neighborhoods of Baghdad over a period of the surge.
I mean, my God, you know, just so that Cheney and Bush could waltz into the sunset not having lost the war.
Well, I suppose we've seen worse in this country, but I've not seen worse.
Well, and at the time, it was 3,000 or 4,000 people killed a month during that, like the spring of 2007, especially around then.
Sunni bodies stacked up in the morning on the side of the road like cordwood with drill holes in their skulls.
Imagine dying like that.
A power drill to the brain is how America's allied Baata Brigade and Wolf Brigade got their business done in kicking the Sunnis out of Baghdad, with America really fighting as their auxiliaries, not the other way around.
And, you know, if you think about ISIS today, Scott, well, they were spawned by all this.
They were spawned by what that idiot Brummer did in dissolving the Iraqi army.
They feed on all kinds of legitimate grievances.
And, you know, they're pretty powerful now that the Israelis and the Saudis are supporting them to the hilt.
I've never seen such an unfathomable, uncontrolled, disparate policy as the one we have in that part of the world.
We want to remove Assad, but we don't want to do other things, and we're working with Iran and Baghdad.
It's just total chaos.
And the sooner that we get adults into the White House and the State Department, the better.
Adults?
Man, they're the ones who've been running this thing the whole time.
I say put the kids in there.
They got more sense than this crap.
You know, that's what they said about George Bush and Dick Cheney and Colin Powell.
Like, finally, enough of the panty raids.
We're going to finally have some adult responsibility in charge around here.
That was how they got elected, for crying out loud.
And they said, you know what, we know that George Jr. is a screw-up frat boy, but at least he's got his father's men with him, and we know we can trust their judgment.
Slight correction there.
They didn't get elected, did they?
Oh, yeah, well, no, you got me on a technicality there, but still tens of millions of people turned out to vote for him.
It was close enough, but, yeah, no, you're right.
They did steal it.
But, you know, in a weird kind of sense, when we Americans decided that we could condone the stealing of a presidential election, I was, you know, like everybody else at the time, well, the Supreme Court, you know, sure, they shouldn't have done that, but they did, so let's see.
Well, no, no, we should have just gone out in the streets and said, no, you don't do this.
You count all the votes, and when all the votes were counted, of course we know that Gore would have won that one.
Yeah, no, I was just waiting for the other shoe to drop.
There's nothing hopeful and wait-and-see to me.
I remember even The Onion had a headline that was, this was like in the spring of 2001, maybe June 2001.
Americans kind of snap out of it and realize that George W. Bush is actually the president.
And I was thinking, oh, man, they think that this is just going to be a nothing presidency, but I say we're going to be at war by the end of the year.
And, yeah.
I'm good with this.
You are far off.
Yeah.
I mean, it's so obvious.
He bombed Iraq at the end of his, I was telling people, watch, he'll bomb Iraq within his first month in power, and it said it was within his first week.
And only Obama beat him by bombing Pakistan within three days of being inaugurated.
That even put George Jr. to shame.
Well, you wonder who's running this country, Scott.
You know, Eisenhower warned about the military-industrial complex, but now it's become the military-industrial-congressional-security-services-media corporate complex.
And that's, I dare say, very close to the definition that Mussolini gave, fascism.
And the government corporations and everybody else are waltzing to the tune set by the government.
That's really dangerous.
And what we need to do is stake out some territory now, live up to what Tom Paine and the founders of this country gave us, and face these guys down.
Because in the long run, I do think the American people will rise to the occasion if, and this is a big if, if people like you and others keep spreading some truth around enough to make them shake their heads and say, no, no, this shall not stand.
Yep.
Well, I don't know, man.
I guess, I don't know what the proportions are.
It seems like the movement is growing.
It seems like the Internet is changing things.
We don't have to take it one direction from rather Jennings and Brokaw anymore.
But then again, that might just mean even more celebrity gossip and less things that matter than before.
So I don't really know, Ray, but I tend to think that it's not really going to end until the dollar breaks, where they just spend so much money and print so much money that nobody accepts their money anymore.
At that point, the CIA and the soldiers are going to have to hitchhike home from Central Asia or wherever they're left stranded.
That'll be the first time, Scott.
They'll be glad that they don't have any money.
Yeah.
Well, no, I mean, it's going to be ugly, but that's pretty much the way the Soviet Union fell was just, guess what?
We cannot sustain this.
We would if we could, but we can't.
It's over.
And those days, I don't know how soon they're coming, but they're coming.
And I don't know what else could stop them but that.
But then again, I don't know.
We've got a very interesting election season coming up.
I think we all know how it's going to turn out.
Thanks, Ray, for coming back on my show.
I sure do like talking with you.
You're most welcome, Scott.
Take care now.
That's the great Ray McGovern, everybody.
Right back.
Hey, all Scott here.
If you're like me, you need coffee, lots of it.
And you probably prefer it tastes good, too.
Well, let me tell you about Darren's Coffee, company at Darren'sCoffee.com.
Darren Marion is a natural entrepreneur who decided to leave his corporate job and strike out on his own, making great coffee.
And Darren's Coffee is now delivering right to your door.
Darren gets his beans direct from farmers around the world.
All specialty, premium grade, with no filler.
Hey, the man just wants everyone to have a chance to taste this great coffee.
Darren'sCoffee.com.
Use promo code Scott and get free shipping.
Darren'sCoffee.com.
You hate government?
One of them libertarian types?
Maybe you just can't stand the president, gun grabbers, or warmongers.
Me, too.
That's why I invented LibertyStickers.com.
Well, Rick owns it now, and I didn't make up all of them.
But still, if you're driving around and want to tell everyone else how wrong their politics are, there's only one place to go.
LibertyStickers.com has got your bumper covered.
Left, right, libertarian, empire, police, state, founders, quote, central banking.
Yes, bumper stickers about central banking.
Lots of them.
And, well, everything that matters.
LibertyStickers.com.
Everyone else's stickers suck.
Hey, all.
Scott Horton here for The Future of Freedom, the monthly journal of the Future of Freedom Foundation at fff.org.
Subscribe.
Since 1989, FFF has been pushing an uncompromising moral and economic case for peace, individual liberty, and free markets.
Sign up now for The Future of Freedom, featuring founder and president Jacob Horenberger, as well as Sheldon Richmond, James Bovard, Anthony Gregory, Wendy McElroy, and many more.
It's just $25 a year for the print edition, 15 per year to read it online.
That's fff.org.
Subscribe.
And tell them Scott sent you.
The Future of Freedom