By Liberty Report Staff
The NFL has decided not to force their players to stand for the national anthem. A private organization like the NFL can make its own rules and make its own contracts with its players.
In a free society, that would be the end of the story. Government has no right to shove itself into the middle of private agreements.
But alas, America has strayed very far from a free society. President Trump tweets: “NFL: Too much talk, not enough action. Stand for the National Anthem.”
Forced to stand for a government war song in the name of freedom?
Think about that...even though government never wants you to actually think.
Force and Freedom are polar opposites.
The President should be setting a good example. He should refrain from getting involved in a private matter. Just as government has no right to force a baker to bake a cake for anyone, neither does it have a right to interfere in private decisions about what should be done during the playing of a government war song.
The President should respect private property and private contracts.
The problem is that politicians view private contracts as a nuisance.
Politicians want people to obey them....Period.
We all know people in our private lives who have this complex, right? They get into everyone's business. Everything has to be how they say it should be. They can't leave others alone to make their own decisions.
Outside of government, these types can only do so much damage to society. Most of the time you can just ignore or get yourself away from them somehow.
But politics is the playground for these types. Politics is the NFL for those who have a lust to dominate others. It's the big leagues. It's where these types of people can live out their dreams of grandeur.....and ruin society as a consequence.
When people don’t obey, the politicians look to punish the nonconformists somehow. They'll threaten you with violence, or go after your wallet. They love money, especially if they don't have to work for it.
Will Trump let the NFL and their players make their own decisions, or will he seek to force them to obey?
Perhaps President Trump will stop sending taxpayer money to the NFL so that the league can pump out military propaganda before every game.
Did you know that that’s why the NFL is so gung-ho about military propaganda? That’s our taxes that pay the NFL to put on those shows. We pay for that propaganda.
Remember that when you clock in for that 8 hr. workday. The first half hour is for financing the propaganda during Sunday's game.
The bottom line is that freedom does not come from political dictates or edicts.
Freedom just is.
It's our natural state.
It's when the bullies arrive at the scene that freedom is abridged. Aggressive force should be impermissible.
Instead (at least today) it's routine policy.
Changing rules of engagement, increased bombing runs, and granting field officers more authority to call in drone strikes has resulted in far more civilian casualties in the ongoing US wars in Afghanistan and the Middle East. Will this acceleration lead to quicker victory? Or is it planting the seeds for yet more expansion of the war?
By Liberty Report Staff
Whenever you hear of tax "reform," think of a shell game, or the re-arranging of chairs on a sinking ship. America is in dire need, not for tax "reform," but of genuine tax "cuts." Government revenues, spending and debt have to shrink. Don't hold your breath.
By Rachel Blevins
While the mainstream media focuses on anything but the current state of U.S. intervention in the Middle East, the Trump Administration is breaking records by accumulating a horrific number of civilian deaths.
Former President Obama earned the nickname of “Drone King” when he dramatically escalated the use of drone strikes, while also downplaying the number of innocent civilians who became “collateral damage.” In the two years that his administration devoted to publicly spending millions of taxpayer dollars to fight the Islamic State group, the estimated civilian death toll ranged from 2,300 to 3,400, according to Airwars, an organization tracking deaths in the war against ISIS.
President Trump has been in office for just 9 months, and he has already surpassed Obama’s murderous record with estimated numbers as high as 4,500 civilian deaths.
Trump made headlines in December 2015, when he declared that if elected, he would not only kill members of ISIS—he would also “take out their families.” He is following through on that promise, according to a report from Steven Feldstein, former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State.
Feldstein noted that researchers have documented the rise of “frequent killing of entire families in likely coalition airstrikes” under the Trump Administration. This trend led to “the deaths of at least 57 women and 52 children in Iraq and Syria” in May.
While this may come as no surprise, considering the fact that Trump promised to “bomb the hell out of ISIS” while on the campaign trail, his administration’s offensive against the Islamic State is not the only ongoing war that is killing civilians.
According to a report from United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan documenting civilian causalities during the first half of 2017, “aerial operations” led to a “43 percent increase in civilian casualties compared to the first six months of 2016, including a 67 percent increase in civilian deaths.”
While Trump bragged about giving military commanders “total authorization” to make combat decisions in Afghanistan, Washington Rep. Adam Smith said he believes that this move is contributing to the increase in civilian deaths.
“You really have the military making decisions that were designed to be made by the civilian authorities running the military,” Smith said. “We’ve seen an increase in civilian casualties. … I think they’ve become a little too indiscriminate in what they’re doing.”
The report from Feldstein noted that the Trump Administration has “substantially escalated air strikes and bombings” and the U.S. military “has already used 20 percent more missiles and bombs in combined air operations in 2017 than in all of 2016.”
The alarmingly high civilian death toll has continued to build up over the months. For example, from May 23 to June 23 of this year, at least 472 civilians were killed by U.S. airstrikes. That is significantly more than the 459 civilians who have been killed by terrorist attacks in Europe—in the last 12 years.
While the argument can be made that Trump is doing the same thing Hillary Clinton would have done if she was elected, the question has to asked as to how anyone can justify killing innocent civilians in the first place.
Obama surpassed Bush’s record, and now Trump has surpassed Obama’s record—but the only thing that has actually been “accomplished” is that thousands of innocent civilians have lost their lives, hundreds of thousands of civilians have lost their homes and their communities, and the civilians who do survive in the countries the United States is targeting now, will grow up hating America for destroying their home in the name of “Freedom.”
This article was reprinted from The Free Thought Project with the author's permission.
The horrific truck bomb that killed more than 300 in Somalia was not an isolated incident. It is now thought the attack was revenge for a botched US Special Forces-led raid on a village that left many civilians dead. President Trump is expected to deepen US involvement in Somalia. More blowback on the way?
US-trained troops in the Iraqi army are facing off against US-trained troops in the Kurdish Peshmerga militias over Kurdish separatism and control of northern Iraq. What is at stake? Oil? Self-determination? Something else?
By Chris Rossini
Politicians love to call for "unity." It's always time to "unite" behind what they want. But the search for political unity is equivalent to the search for a unicorn. You're never going to find it.
Politicians seek to use force. Force requires victims. No one wants or likes being the victim. Hence, no unity.
It doesn't have to be this way. We don't have to live in a society of political muggers and their victims, with the exhausting battle that occurs every 4 years to decide who gets to be the mugger.
In fact, America was explicitly formed on the idea of breaking away from this nonsense.
"Live and Let Live" would be the guiding principle. You keep your hands off me and my stuff, and I'll keep my hands off you and your stuff. A real "unity" was formed...and it revolved around refusing to use force against others. Government was not created to be a hitman.
Naturally, the vicious powers outside of America had a problem with this. Governments of hitmen and muggers were the name of the game. Tyranny was mankind's lot for as far back as the history books would go.
If the ideas of America were to succeed, their jig would be up.
This "live and let live" society had to be conquered somehow.
But the way to conquer America would not be on the battlefield. No one would try to come over here to militarily subjugate us. A free people would fight much too hard to keep their liberty.
Instead, America would be conquered by ideas. Slowly, it would become and morph into being just like the vicious powers on the outside.
Domestically, Americans would have to embrace the mugger mentality. This would be accomplished in 1913 with the imposition of the income tax.
America would also become like the vicious outside powers by destroying its currency. A central bank called the Federal Reserve would be created in 1913 along with the income tax.
Busy year, that 1913...
Finally, the knock-out punch would come in foreign policy.
America had a strong tradition of staying out of the affairs of other nations. The philosophy was the same as it was at home: "Live and Let Live." Americans would not step foot on another soil with barrels blazing.
This tradition would be shattered with the fateful decision of jumping into a European war in 1917.
America went on the attack!
FEAR would dominate from that point forward. You name it - Americans were conditioned to be afraid of it.
Attack...Attack...Attack....right up until the present day, where Americans now have to be afraid of North Korea, Iran, Russia, China...and on and on...
Of course, one would guess that outside powers couldn't be happier. Their jig (was not) and is not up. America simply morphed into them and joined the club.
It doesn't have to stay this way.
The ideas of Liberty have not been banished off the face of the Earth. They can be adopted somewhere, even if not in America.
But America would be a great place to re-start the philosophy. That would make a great story someday --- America was knocked down hard, but was able to get back up before the 10 count.
I like it.
"Live and Let Live."
Press Play to hear Ron Paul deliver his Weekly Update:
By Ron Paul
President Trump has been notoriously inconsistent in his foreign policy. He campaigned on and won the presidency with promises to repair relations with Russia, pull out of no-win wars like Afghanistan, and end the failed US policy of nation-building overseas. Once in office he pursued policies exactly the opposite of what he campaigned on. Unfortunately Iran is one of the few areas where the president has been very consistent. And consistently wrong.
In the president’s speech last week he expressed his view that Iran was not “living up to the spirit” of the 2015 nuclear agreement and that he would turn to Congress to apply new sanctions to Iran and to, he hopes, take the US out of the deal entirely.
Nearly every assertion in the president’s speech was embarrassingly incorrect. Iran is not allied with al-Qaeda, as the president stated. The money President Obama sent to Iran was their own money. Much of it was a down-payment made to the US for fighter planes that were never delivered when Iran changed from being friend to foe in 1979. The president also falsely claims that Iran targets the United States with terrorism. He claims that Iran has “fueled sectarian violence in Iraq,” when it was Iranian militias who prevented Baghdad from being overtaken by ISIS in 2014. There are too many other false statements in the president’s speech to mention.
How could he be so wrong on so many basic facts about Iran? Here’s a clue: the media reports that his number one advisor on Iran is his Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley. Ambassador Haley is a “diplomat” who believes war is the best, first option rather than the last, worst option. She has no prior foreign policy experience, but her closest mentor is John Bolton – the neocon who lied us into the Iraq war. How do these people live with themselves when they look around at the death and destruction their policies have caused?
Unfortunately the American people are being neoconned into another war. Just as with the disastrous 2003 US attack on Iraq, the media builds up the fear and does the bidding of the warmongers without checking facts or applying the necessary skepticism to neocon claims.
Like most Americans, I do not endorse Iran’s style of government. I prefer religion and the state to be separate and even though our liberties have been under attack by our government, I prefer our much freer system in the US. But I wonder how many Americans know that Iran has not attacked or “regime-changed” another country in its modern history. Iran’s actions in Syria are at the invitation of the legitimate Syrian government. And why won’t President Trump tell us the truth about Iranian troops in Syria – that they are fighting ISIS and al-Qaeda, both of which are Sunni extremist groups that are Iran’s (and our) mortal enemies?
How many Americans know that Iran is one of the few countries in the region that actually holds elections that are contested by candidates with very different philosophies? Do any Americans wonder why the Saudis are considered one of our greatest allies in the Middle East even though they hold no elections and have one of the world’s worst human rights records?
Let’s be clear here: President Trump did not just announce that he was “de-certifying” Iran’s compliance with the nuclear deal. He announced that Iran was from now on going to be in the bullseye of the US military. Will Americans allow themselves to be lied into another Middle East war?
On Friday, President Trump delivered a blistering speech on Iran that could only have been written by neocons like John Bolton. Trump laid down old charges against Iran as his reasons for refusing to certify Iran's compliance with the nuclear deal. In so doing, he went against most of his closest advisors and cabinet members and against most of the international community. Are neocon hooks now firmly planted into President Trump?