The Humble Libertarian original

[ WIKILEAKS ] Statement from Edward Snowden in Moscow Monday July 1, 21:40 UTC One week ago I left Hong Kong after it became clear that my freedom and safety were under threat for revealing the truth. My continued liberty has been owed to the efforts of friends new and old, family, and others who I have never met and probably never will. I trusted them with my life and they returned that trust with a faith in me for which I will always be thankful. On Thursday, President Obama declared before the world that he would not permit any diplomatic "wheeling and dealing" over my case. Yet now it is being reported that after promising not to do so, the President ordered his Vice President to pressure the leaders of nations from which I have requested protection to deny my asylum petitions. This kind of deception from a world leader is not justice, and neither is the extralegal penalty of exile. These are the old, bad tools of political aggression. Their purpose is to fright...

Alternate headline: Hey Washington, even California 's getting sick of you! Ha ha ha. The Daily Caller reports : 'California lawmakers are pushing a bill that would exempt the state from federal laws authorizing indefinite detention of citizens. The California Public Safety Committee voted unanimously Tuesday in favor of the California Liberty Preservation Act, which was introduced by Republican Assemblyman Tim Donnelly. The bill passed the Democrat-controlled committee 6-0 with the support of a wide-ranging coalition that included the American Civil Liberties Union, Tenth Amendment Center, San Francisco 99% Coalition, San Francisco Board of Supervisors and the Libertarian Party of California. The legislation is designed to free California from having to comply with the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012, which does nothing to prevent the potential seizure and indefinite detention of U.S. citizens. The California bill declares such federal power unc...

The YAL Civil Liberties College Tour starts tonight at 8pm EST at Columbia University in New York City! The four tour stops feature Glenn Greenwald (liberal), Bruce Fein (conservative) and Jacob Hornberger (libertarian). They will discuss habeas corpus, the PATRIOT Act, extraordinary rendition, torture, regime change, and how the war on terrorism has infringed upon the rights of U.S. citizens in the name of making us safe. The tour will be moderated by YAL's own Jack Hunter, and hosted by YAL chapters in conjunction with The Future of Freedom Foundation. If you don't live near any of the stops, you can stream the events online . Wes Messamore , Editor in Chief, T H L Articles | Author's Page

Human Fetus at 10 Weeks - Photo by drsuparna ( CC ) In the following essay I will address the issue of abortion and defend the pro-life position unemotionally, in a tasteful manner, and without reference to religious scripture to support my assertions. Plain reason and the evidence of science make the issue clear enough. My only demand of the reader is that you would also suspend your emotional predispositions and genuinely read and reflect on the validity of the propositions I make. The Argument Outlined My primary argument takes the following syllogistic form: IF: 1. Every human being has the right to live, which should be protected by law, AND: 2. From the moment of conception, the unborn are human beings, THEN: 3. The unborn have the right to live, which should be protected by law. If one accepts the first two premises, then the pro-life position stated in the conclusion is inescapable. Surely, few people will have any qualms about the first premise. Human bein...

No you didn't read that wrong. These kinds of incidents are the reason why more and more people in America are starting to agree that the police are OUT OF CONTROL . Allentown City Surveillance cameras capture Allentown police officer ramming a 14 year-old student against a parked car. After that he backs away and pulls out his taser. Although the minor puts up her hands in surrender, he zaps her in the groin, and she goes down in agony. She had to be hospitalized so the barbs could be removed from her. Date is 9/29/11. Lehigh Valley's Morning Call reports : The mother of a 14-year-old Dieruff High School student has filed a federal lawsuit claiming an Allentown police officer used excessive force when he shot her daughter in the groin with a stun gun during class dismissal in September. Victoria Geist says her daughter, Keshana Wilson, had her arms raised high to indicate she surrendered when officer Jason Ammary pointed a Taser at her on Sept. 29 outside the high sc...

Earlier this year, I published a piece here entitled " Libertarian Dilemma: Anarchy or Minarchy ." In this short essay I posed this problem: Essentially, I am faced with the alternatives of minarchy and anarchy, but I find that each alternative has its own unique and seemingly insoluble problem. To briefly define my terms: libertarians want to maximize human liberty, but disagree as to what form of society will accomplish this best. Anarchy would be a society with no government at all, while minarchy would be a society with a very "minimal government." As I wrote above, I think that both alternatives have a critical problem and I haven't yet come up with a satisfying solution for either. If I were pressed for which I believe is right in the end however, I would have to say minarchy. True freedom requires rule of law, which means a consistent set of laws administered by an impartial civil body politic. My friend Glen Allport, a reader at THL and a...

"With Veterans Day coming up this Friday, we are honoring Oath Keepers as this week’s Rebel of the Week. For taking their oaths to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States so seriously that they have openly promised to disobey any orders that violate their oaths of fidelity to the Constitution, the Oath Keepers organization is full of true rebels!" Read the rest of my article at The Silver Underground . Wes Messamore , Editor in Chief, T H L Articles | Author's Page

This weekend, something truly momentous in U.S. history occurred : the President of the United States signed a death warrant ordering the targeted killing of a United States citizen without trial, a grave violation of the United States Constitution and a chilling precedent of unrestrained executive power. As Judge Andrew Napolitano remarked of the summary execution: the power to order a citizen's death without a trial by jury is not the power of a president, it is the power of a king. Unfortunately, many well-meaning, but confused conservatives have cheered President Obama's action, defended it, and even dismissed thoughtful critics as crazy, out-of-touch, or "weak on national security." More puzzlingly, some of the most ardent critics of President Bush's unprecedented assumption of police powers to spy on American citizens without warrants or accountability, have been silent or even supportive in the face of Obama's usurpation of the power to kill Amer...

In this interview with Neil Cavuto on Fox News, Ron Paul calls the recently ordered killing of Anwar al-Awlaki a "net positive," but expresses concern for the erosion of rule of law and the Constitution. Neil is usually pretty good in his interviews with Dr. Paul, but I have to say that in this interview he interrupted the congressman too many times, asked him some very pointed, loaded questions, and then wouldn't let him actually answer them. Disappointing: Wes Messamore , Editor in Chief, T H L Articles | Author's Page

As many times as journalists, politicians (including the vice president), and even the Department of Homeland Security have called conservatives terrorists in the last two years, it is now more urgent than ever for conservatives to rethink their support for the vast and growing "national security" state and the systematic erosion of America's civil liberties, due process, and rule of law. After 9-11 Americans understandably wanted to be sure their country was safe. Conservatives were willing to maybe give up just a few liberties for security, especially if it was only the terrorists' liberties. So they didn't examine bills like the Patriot Act too closely or ask too many questions. Usually quick to point out and denounce violations of the Constitution penned by our Founding Fathers, conservatives hoping for security allowed the government to run roughshod over various amendments of the Constitution as it built its vast and increasingly unchecked national ...

Whistle-blower Daniel Ellsberg, who warned the American people about the executive malfeasance of Nixon's administration during the war in Vietnam, had the following harrowing statement to say in a recent interview. CNN reports: 'In this interview, Ellsberg says, "Richard Nixon, if he were alive today, would feel vindicated that all the crimes he committed against me–which forced his resignation facing impeachment–are now legal. " (Thanks to the Patriot Act and other laws passed in recent years.) And he says all presidents since Nixon have violated the constitution, most recently President Obama, with the bombing of Libya.' Read more at CNN . Wes Messamore , Editor in Chief, T H L Articles | Author's Page

"He's more machine now than man. His mind is twisted and evil." -Obi-Wan Kenobi, Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi The Birthers have had it wrong all along. We don't need to see Obama's birth certificate-- we need to see his manufacturer's certificate of origin. It would appear that our nation's president is more than just a man... he's a cybernetic organism: part human, part machine . We suspected as much from the very beginning. Instead of just letting the human part give speeches alone-- even at elementary school events-- the president relied on the machine part of itself, the Teleprompter to give those speeches. It couldn't let the imperfect, error-prone human part do the work. The machine half had to take over and flawlessly deliver those carefully crafted li(n)es. After the recent passage of the Patriot Act, we learned just how given over to his machine half President Obama really is. Even with his human side overseas in France,...

By Daryl Luna, Editor: In Defense of the Constitution On February 24, 1803, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down arguably the most important decisi on in its entire history— Marbury v. Madison . It was Chief Justice John Marshall—a Hamiltonian and no fan of limited government—who provided the opinion, which would change the face of the Court and its power forever. The ruling itself i s not what makes this case so significant. Rather, it i s the power that the Court assumed whil e delivering this ruling that begs our attention—the power of judicial review . To most, the concept of judicial review is nothing controversial. Why would it be? Judicial review is merely the practice of the judicial branch overturning legislative and executive act ion it deems unconstitutional. In fact, a number of courts throughout the democratic world have this power expressly noted in their foundational documents. So what is the big deal? First, the Constitution allows for no such judic...

What a development! And not a moment too soon. I have wondered where the Supreme Court has been all these years as the rest of the Federal government continues to violate the provisions of its Constitution. Now free speech has finally been vindicated and I can only hope that more vindications of our Constitutionally-enumerated freedoms and the rule of law are on the horizon. Here's the headline: The Hill: Supreme Court strikes down campaign finance restrictions "The Supreme Court struck down major provisions of campaign finance reform on Thursday, clearing the way for an influx of corporate and union money in politics. The court upheld disclosure requirements for corporations but struck down the distinction between individual expenditures and corporate ones. That should allow corporations to spend freely in support or opposition to candidates. 'No sufficient governmental interest justifies limits on the political speech of nonprofit or for-profit corporations,' Justice...

By: Daryl Luna at: In Defense of the Constitution Editor's Preface: It is a real thrill to publish the following article here at T H L . As events unfold in Washington, I have found my own thoughts turning more and more to nullification as a means to defend our liberties. Here, Daryl Luna, who blogs at In Defense of the Constitution , explains what nullification is and skillfully lays out the historical, Constitutional, and political case for nullification and the 10th Amendment assertion of states' rights against an ever-more-abusive Federal government. I'll let Daryl take it from here: Thomas Jefferson once proclaimed when referring to the checking of federal power, “In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” In our current age it is rare to find anyone who reveres the rule of law, understands adherence to a standard, or seeks preservation of a covenant. Because of a def...