L. Neil Smith's
Number 158, January 28, 2002
Anarchy, Slaves, and Death

Regarding the term "pro-life" as used in the abortion debate.

If one is merely anti-abortion, but supports the death penalty (or at least does not oppose it) then one cannot be "pro-life," merely anti-abortion.

In order to be truly "pro-life," one must also oppose the death penalty under ALL circumstances.

Allowing people who merely oppose abortion to define themselves as "pro-life" is misleading and probably chosen to grab the moral high ground. Let's apply truth in advertising here. If you merely oppose abortion, call it for what it is. Don't prevaricate and imply a moral choice you have not made.

Barbara Cunningham CharlesB@mail.tca.net
Editor, Lone Star Liberty

Hi John,

I noted an article that quickly bounced around the papers (does anyone read them anymore or just look at the pix?) then hit the video newshawks about taking the guns away from the people of Afghanistan. Please tell me I'm not the only one bothered by this! That the US is using UN guidelines to make the newly free people of Afghanistan victims again is too much to bear!

By all accounts the climate of the freed nation is still a little "wild west", and likened by one chair-catching journalist as populated by "shakedown artists". Do our well armed high-tech conquerers need protection from individuals with personal, low tech self protection? Apparently so.

This is a little heartening for those of us that still harbor the belief that an armed population is the best protection from tyranny. But saddened in the fact that the USgov doesn't really trust such a population with its own weapons. I suggest that if this fact is bandied about, those doing the bandying would be considered "unpatriotic". We have to do all we can to protect the troops "over there". Bullshit. What is now happening in Afghan-land is a model for what steps will be undertaken inside the US once "dissident groups" internal to the US are identified.

The calls have already gone out to gather ATF papers as filled out for gun purchases "for review". Information about members of "gun rights" organizations like BRA, GOoA, JPFO, and the like could be used to create suspect lists for the purposes of gun confiscation. To make life a little rough for gun grabbers, I make it a point to "give" a subscription or membership to a liberal aquaintaince or enemy every year. It mucks up things, and strikes a blow for anarchy. It's fun too.

Peace out,

Jack Jerome paratime98@yahoo.com

Dear TLE,

Here is a link to Jonah Goldberg's article which prompted my reply to him: www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg121801.shtml


From: Howland, Curtis
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002
To: 'JonahEmail@aol.com'
Subject: yes, another letter from a "libertarian"...

Mr. Goldberg,

I read one of your articles online, and have enjoyed some of National Review through much of my life, since a family member when I was growing up was a subscriber.

The online article was "The Libertarian Lie". I was actually wondering when you were going to get to something related to the title, and am sad to have reached the end without satisfaction.

Much of your article noted how "libertarians spend their time saying how you just don't get it." And, in fact, I agree with you in that. The "conservative" just doesn't get it, that's why they're not "libertarian".

However, unlike anyone else in history, according to your article, I will tell you what it is you don't get: Non-initiation of force.

I must assume that "initiation of force" was part of the "blah blah blah" part of the libertarian philosophy you itemized. It is, unfortunately, the crux which makes the distinction between "conservative" and "libertarian". It is also what differentiates "liberal" and "libertarian", since the difference between "conservative" and "liberal" is merely the ends which are used to justify the use of force against others.

You obviously disagree with the "libertarian" position that the initiation of force is wrong. I respect your opinion, and would suggest that if you wish to actually debunk "libertarianism", instead of writing endlessly about the individuals with which you disagree, all you have to do is debunk the principle of non-initiation of force.

It's easy to debunk the primary "liberal" principle, since there isn't one. It is my experience that the "conservative" guiding principle(s) is just as vague. Luckily, there is one such vulnerable principle underlying "libertarian" theories, and I do not know of anyone who will deny it.

So please, convince me in an article that initiating force against someone is the right thing to do. Describe your own inspiration in learning when it is right and just and moral to initiate force.

Your article treated the moral argument as if it were a laughable consequence of simplistic thinking. I am willing to believe you're absolutely right and moral in your belief in the initiation of force against others, but you have to convince me. I dare you to make me a conservative.

Curt Howland Howland@Priss.com

[FORWARDED without endorsement or comment. - ed.]

Dear John,

Please take a few minutes of your time to read the following important message. There is a historic trial scheduled to take place in March, and the Isaacson Society Internationale is asking numerous organizations to assist by simply forwarding this letter to other liberty-minded individuals throughout the country. We thank you in advance for any and all support that you can provide!

Respectfully yours,

Beck Horne projectsro@hotmail.com


Dear Freedom-conscious Citizen,

You are kindly requested to read - then forward - this message to those individuals on your e-mail and contact lists:

  • Who dislike government corruption
  • Who dislike government intervention into private, self-reliant organizations
  • Who dislike illegal government seizures that violate one's civil rights
  • Who want the whole truth made known to the public regarding the unconstitutional and illegal actions of certain federal agencies, and who want these agencies to be held accountable for their actions
  • Who respect and honor the Constitution of the United States, and
  • Who reside in the greater Seattle (Washington) area, or know someone who does, or are willing to travel to Seattle.

The Isaacson Society Internationale is a private, faith-based, educational organization of over 10,000 self-reliant, self-supporting members. On May 10, 2000, in the states of Arizona and Washington, military-style raids, complete with automatic weapons and battering rams, were conducted by several federal agencies against the leaders of this private organization. These innocent people were attacked in their homes and had many items seized. Federal agents interrogated these individuals at gunpoint while handcuffed, and used extreme fear and intimidation tactics throughout the entire ordeal. All of these actions were done under the authority of search warrants, not arrest warrants, and these search warrants were issued for documents and information, not for drugs, weapons or terrorists-related items.

Over the past twenty months much IN-justice has occurred. Since the raids of May 2000, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the FBI, the US Postal Service and the US Attorney's office, have claimed that the Isaacson Society's pension fund is a fraudulent investment scheme. None of these agencies have been able to produce any defrauded investors, nor have they shown any other evidence of wrongdoing. Yet the patriarch of the Society, JW Zidar, was arrested in April, 2001, and has since been held at the Seatac Federal Detention Center in Seattle -- without bail -- for over nine months. Several requests for bail have been made and thus far, all of these requests have been denied, which begs the question, "Why?" JW Zidar is not dangerous, he does not have a record, he is not held for a capital crime, nor does he conform to any of the criteria to be considered a flight risk. So, why does Judge Barbara J. Rothstein of the US District Court in Seattle continue to deny him bail?

To learn more about this case, please go to the following link on the Isaacson Society's web site: www.isaacsonsociety.org/html_files/projectsro.html. Then scroll down and click on "Project SRO", where you can read a collection of articles that cite the specifics surrounding the background and continuation of this important case. There you can read the shocking story about how the attorney of one of the defendants was acting as an FBI informant and feeding the FBI information about his client. (Additional information can be found on the "Legal Updates" page.) Unfortunately, the web site is one of the only sources you will find for information on this case because the media has refused to pay any attention to it, except for a few articles that simply repeat what the government has fed the media.

Despite the injustices that have occurred over these many months, we -- the Isaacson Society and its patriarch -- have maintained our presence. Because numerous Constitutional and civil rights have been violated, we are calling the government to task for actions taken improperly, unethically, and sometimes even illegally.

A trial is scheduled to begin at the end of March and may last 10-12 weeks or longer. Why is "United States of America, plaintiff vs. John Wayne Zidar, defendant" such an important trial? Because never in the history of the United States has there been a coordinated attack against a private organization in 9 separate locations by 4 agencies of the U.S. Government all at the same time. And all of this was done without benefit of any complaining parties.

Project SRO (Standing Room Only) represents our joint effort to publicize this history-making trial to as many liberty- and privacy-minded advocates as possible. Because there is only a small number of Isaacson Society members in the Seattle area -- yet the intent is to pack the courtroom EVERY DAY with people who dislike (a stronger word might be "abhor" or "loathe") the federal government's increasing penchant to invade our private lives with little or no respect for the Constitution -- we must ask for your help.

This e-mail will be sent to many mainstream media organizations, to Internet-based media, and to every U.S. Senator and Congressperson inviting them to attend this historic trial. We are appealing to citizens who want to know the truth behind the harassment, lies and injustices committed by agencies of the federal government, to attend. We are asking you to share this message with others -- so that they can make plans to attend and witness this trial.

For those of you reading this message who can possibly attend the trial starting the end of March (through ??? ) -- even for a day -- please contact the Isaacson Society at societyupdates@stny.rr.com. We would like to schedule as many trial attendees as possible for each day that it is under way. We will give you additional details regarding dates, times, directions, etc. during the first part of March, so please let us know on what days you would be available to attend. IF YOU DO ATTEND, PLEASE BRING A PAD AND PENCIL AND KEEP NOTES AS THE PROCEEDINGS CONTINUE. LET THE COURT KNOW THAT YOU ARE THERE WITH AN INTEREST, AND THAT YOU ARE PAYING ATTENTION AND KEEPING TRACK OF THE PROCEEDINGS.

This is more than USA vs. JW Zidar. Much more. The right of non-incorporated associations to freely contract with each other -- without government assistance -- is on trial. Freedom is on trial. We are witnessing the Big Brother that you and I read about years ago. The government's desire to control -- through fear and intimidation -- must be exposed and stopped.

Your appearance in a Seattle courtroom this spring will be a powerful statement for freedom, for civil rights and for why the founding fathers of this country fought a revolution. If it turns out that our country can no longer claim to be the land of the free, and if people are no longer considered innocent until proven otherwise, then we will have already lost. Please forward this e-mail. Your efforts today will have a positive impact on freedom in the next generation's future!

In gratitude for your anticipated participation,

Beck Horne projectsro@hotmail.com
Project SRO Coordinator
Isaacson Society Internationale

Has el Neil finally done it? Harry Browne is calling for Bill of Rights enforcement!


Dennis Kabaczy dkabaczy265428MI@comcast.net

Death by "Gun Control": The Human Cost of Victim Disarmament, by Aaron Zelman and Richard W. Stevens. The new book from JPFO.

Why does JPFO exist? What motivates us year after year? You can find the answers in our brand new book.

People have asked us to present the whole JPFO argument in one place. We have done it. Available now in an easy-reading format and a handy size, the new book is entitled Death by Gun Control: The Human Cost of Victim Disarmament.

The message is simple: Disarmed people are neither free nor safe - they become the criminals' prey and the tyrants' playthings. When the civilians are defenseless and their government goes bad, however, thousands and millions of innocents die.

Order from JPFO NOW!

COMING SOON FROM JPFO: The State vs. The People, by Claire Wolfe and Aaron Zelman

Next to advance to the next article, or
Table of Contents to return to The Libertarian Enterprise, Number 158, January 28, 2002.