Big Head Press

L. Neil Smith's
Number 757, February 9, 2014

Very good kitty

Previous Previous Table of Contents Contents Next Next

Letters to the Editor

Bookmark and Share

Send Letters to
Note: All letters to this address will be considered for
publication unless they say explicitly Not For Publication

[Letters to the editor are welcome on any and all subjects. Sign your letter in the text body with your name and e-mail address as you wish them to appear, otherwise we will use the information in the "From:" header!]

Re: "Neale's Weekly Gun Rant Volume 40 and 41" by Neale Osborn

It has been pointed out to me that I made a simple mistake in my blanket statement "EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN CITIZEN HAS THE RIGHT TO CARRY A CONCEALED WEAPON". I shall now rectify the problem, then expand upon it, as suggested by Mama Liberty.


This is the simple version of my philosophy. HOWEVER, as Mama Liberty said to me earlier today, it properly needs to be expanded and re-worded. Here's HER version, as posted HERE.

This is a Public Service Announcement
Posted on February 3, 2014 by MamaLiberty

By MamaLiberty



Every human being (or sentient being, if you want to get technical) has the absolute, inalienable AUTHORITY of self ownership, which includes the use of any tool whatsoever, for any purpose whatsoever. Every self owning individual ALSO has the absolute and inalienable AUTHORITY to defend themselves, by any means he/she finds necessary, from any other individual who offers credible threat of great harm or death.

No person or group of persons has any legitimate authority to decide anything different for any other individual.

This isn't limited to "Americans," and it isn't limited to "concealed weapons" or even guns.

Just so you know. . . if you even wondered.

I was basically just dealing with the Victim Disarmament Crowd and their take on CCW. And I stand by it. HOWEVER, if you wish to be accurate, this expansion is a far better way of saying it, and making it truly complete. I would boil it down to a single sentence for simplicity's sake.

Every human being/sentient being has the inherent authority to determine what he/she/it needs to use in order to protect themselves and their family, friends, and property from ALL threats—criminal or governmental—and this authority is not limited to firearms alone.

Neale Osborn

Was that worth reading?
Then why not:

payment type

Re: "The Newt and the Toad" by L. Neil Smith

As a novelist concerned with character, I find one thing about these guys fascinating: Assange and Snowden are hetero, Greenwald is gay, Manning is transexual. It probably means nothing, but it is interesting. Even "diversity" appears to be a matter of spontaneous order.

Good essay as always.

One more data point. I've known Wikileaks' Jake Appelbaum for a decade or so; here's a photo of him on my living room rug in California in 2008 demonstrating flaws in disk encryption

(Hey, I still have that couch!)

Jake has worked for/with Wikileaks for quite some time and filled in for Julian to keynote a hackers convention in NYC. Thanks to that affiliation, he's been harassed by FedGov whenever he enters or leaves the country, and has had his email accounts targeted by FedGov.

Jake was described thuslyby Rolling Stone.

Appelbaum identifies himself as "queer," though he refers to at least a dozen female lovers in nearly as many countries

And Adrian Lamo, the ex-hacker who Bradley Manning confided in, and who reported Bradley to FedGov as the source for Wikileaks, was married to a woman who he introduced me to at the same time he introduced me to his ex-boyfriend.

I don't mean to single them out. It's more like a certain amount of sexual orientation fluidity is becoming commonplace today, and hackers like Jake and Adrian and Julian were in the vanguard of this trend quite a while ago. (I remember this going at least as far back as the early 1990s in geek circles.) Or perhaps it's that if you can disregard social and political norms to the extent that you create Wikileaks or hack the NYT, sexual norms are meaningless by comparison.

Declan McCullagh

Was that worth reading?
Then why not:

payment type

Retweeted by OneAmericanVoice
AEI ?@AEI 1h

RT @arthurbrooks: "Simplistic narrative that punishing the rich will miraculously uplift the poor." We need free enterprise, not envy.... OneAmericanVoice ?@OneAmericanVoic 6m
@AEI @arthurbrooks Not simplistic. Wrong economically & morally. The only way to generate wealth is to produce it, applying labor to capital

OneAmericanVoice ?@OneAmericanVoic 2m
@AEI @arthurbrooks Capital is the accumulation of value in excess of the cost of labor and resources of production

OneAmericanVoice ?@OneAmericanVoic 1m
@AEI @arthurbrooks Capital applied to consumption is lost; capital invested generates equal consumption and more productivity geometrically

Terence James Mason

Was that worth reading?
Then why not:

payment type

Running for Congress in the 50 th California District

Hello, this is Mike Benoit. I am running for Congress on the Libertarian Ticket in San Diego California. I need signatures on my petitions to get on the ballot and dollars to pay filing fees. If I am able to get 3,000 signatures I will not have to pay a filing fee. I could use some help gathering these signatures over the next ten days. If you are in San Diego and would like to help that way, please email me back or call me at 619-449-8175.

For those who would like to help offset the filing fee with a cash donation you can do that at

Mike Benoit
8781 Cuyamaca St. Ste D.
Santee, Ca. 92071

or PayPal to

If you would like to know how I intend on winning the seat just email me back.

I am working for our freedom.

Thank you

Mike Benoit

Was that worth reading?
Then why not:

payment type


I just posted this to the FaceBook page of the "Conservative Libertarian Fiction Alliance". There are few messages today that are more important. Please post it, yourself, forward it, and share it as widely as you can. You could be rewarded with many more spiffy books, movies, and other such delights ...



This is the manuscript of a speech I delivered almost seventeeen years ago, on April 19, 1997 at the Annual Convention of the Arizona Libertarian Party, explainuing why the Left nearly always wins any social or political struggle it engages in.

Some things have changed. The Libertarian/Conservative takeover of the alternative media has been a triumph. Some things haven't chenged. The police and government in general are more insanely violent than ever.

However there seems to be little more support, mutual and otherwise, for the arts in Libertarian/Conservative circles than there was nearly a generation ago. This has to change, if we're going to save Western Civilization.

Read the speech, share it around, and I'll discuss it with those who are inclined. This is the kind of thing I signed onto this FaceBook page to do. We have countless writers and musicians, and at least two movie makers going hungry because Libertarian/Conservatives can't get it together as a culture. We could have a little Renaissance, instead, if we put our minds to it.

L. Neil Smith

Was that worth reading?
Then why not:

payment type

This site may receive compensation if a product is purchased
through one of our partner or affiliate referral links. You
already know that, of course, but this is part of the FTC Disclosure
Policy found here. (Warning: this is a 2,359,896-byte 53-page PDF file!)

Rational Review
Rational Review

Rational Review News Digest
Rational Review News Digest

Big Head Press