The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity
Subscribe to the Institute View Us on YouTube Follow Us On Twitter Join Us on Facebook Join Us at Google Plus

Search Results

for:

Jacob G. Hornberger

Will a Crackdown Finally Win the War on Drugs?

undefined

Among the federal government’s biggest failures is the war on drugs. Despite decades of warfare, the federal government is still a long way from declaring victory. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. Today, the federal government is still fiercely waging the drug war, trying as hard as it can to win.

Throughout the decades, drug warriors have lamented that federal officials just haven’t really been serious about winning the drug war. If only they would really “crack down,” the drug war would finally be won.

But what the drug warriors fail to acknowledge is that over the decades of drug warfare, federal officials have cracked down. For example, there have been the mandatory-minimum sentences, where they sent drug users, possessors, and distributors, especially blacks, to jail for inordinately long periods of time. The idea was that if enough people got locked away for much of their lives, people would be dissuaded from violating drug laws. Then the drug war would be over.

There is also asset forfeiture, which enables the DEA and state law-enforcement personnel to steal cash from people, especially blacks, who are traveling down the highway. They don’t even need to charge them with a drug offense. They just take their money from them. The idea is that if someone, especially a black, is carrying a large sum of money, it has to be from drug dealing. So, asset forfeiture was supposed to discourage people from selling drugs. Then, the drug war would be over.
read on...

George Santos Will Be Right at Home

undefined

The mainstream press is so upset over the lies that Congressman-elect George Santos has told that they are besides themselves. In their eyes, Santos sullies the much-vaunted concept of democracy that US officials spread around the world through force of arms, a concept that pretends to result in only the most virtuous, honest people serving in government. 

Actually though, Santos will fit right into Congress and, for that matter, the entire Washington, D.C., establishment. That’s because the entire welfare-warfare state way of life has long been characterized by lies, liars, and frauds. 

Let’s look at a few examples.

James R. Clapper, Jr., served as director of the National Intelligence Agency from 1992 through 1995. He lied to Congress about the federal government’s secret, dark-side surveillance activities against the American people. He figured that his lie would never be exposed, especially by his cohorts within the national-security establishment. But much to his surprise and chagrin, his lie was exposed by Edward Snowden’s revelations. 

Mind you, Clapper didn’t just lie. He was under oath when he lied. That means he committed perjury, which is a federal criminal offense — in fact, a felony. Was he ever indicted and prosecuted? Are you kidding? He is still hailed as a patriot and a hero! The mainstream media even still turns to him for his “expert” commentary on matters relating to “national security.” They love that perjurer!
read on...

We Must Not Forget the US War on Afghanistan

undefined

When the Pentagon used NATO to provoke Russia into invading Ukraine, it had to know that one of the great benefits to such an invasion would be that it would enrich US weapons manufacturers, who, of course, are an important, integral, and loyal part of America’s national-security state form of governmental structure. 

And sure enough, those weapons manufacturers now have a lot to be grateful for. According to an article in the Wall Street Journal: 

"The world’s biggest arms makers are scaling up production of rocket launchers, tanks and ammunition as the industry shifts to meet what executives expect to be sustained demand triggered by the war in Ukraine.

"The Pentagon has committed more than $17 billion in weapons and services to Ukraine, most of it drawn from existing stocks. It has also awarded about $3.4 billion in new contracts to replenish domestic and allies’ stocks."

The Pentagon knew that when it was forced to exit Afghanistan, where it had used a massive amount of weaponry for some twenty years to wreak death and destruction on that impoverished Third World country, its loyal army of arms manufacturers might begin to suffer. The crisis that the Pentagon has ginned up in Ukraine has clearly helped to alleviate that suffering.
read on...

George Orwell, Call Your Venezuelan Office

undefined

It appears that the American people are being prepared for a change of mindsets. After many years of treating Venezuela as an enemy, opponent, adversary, competitor, and rival, it seems that US officials are now changing course and paving the way toward converting Venezuela to a friend, partner, and ally. 

George Orwell, please call your office in Venezuela. Now that the American people will be expected to abandon the deep hostility toward Venezuela that has long been inculcated in them, there is a strong likelihood that the US will also change its attitudes toward Eastasia and Eurasia.

Apparently the driving force behind this new change in policy is oil. The Biden administration is hoping to curry favor with the Maduro regime in the hopes that new supplies of oil can bring down the prices of that commodity. In that way, Biden can get people to see that he’s “fighting inflation,” without having to focus on the Federal Reserve’s longtime police of monetary debauchery.

Of course, this leaves Juan Guaidó out in no man’s land. He’s that Venezuelan guy that US officials have long claimed is the real president of Venezuela, even though he’s never won an election for president. Apparently their reasoning is that White House personnel, along with select members of the Pentagon and the CIA, held an election amongst themselves in which they overwhelmingly elected Guaidó president of Venezuela. But now it seems like they’re dropping him like a hot potato in exchange for oil.
read on...

The Anti-Russia Paranoia

undefined

Given the mid-term elections, the anti-Russia paranoia of US officials has been at a peak. The feds have been scouring the Internet to determine whether the Russians are improperly influencing American voters into supporting candidates who refuse to adopt the Pentagon’s and the CIA’s extreme anti-Russia animus. The idea is that American voters, given that they are mostly public-school graduates, have extremely pliant minds that are overly susceptible to being molded into being pro-communist or pro-Russia dupes. 

For example, last July the Justice Department secured an indictment against a Russian citizen named Aleksandr Viktorovich Ionov who heads up an organization based in Moscow named Anti-Globalization Movement of Russia, which allegedly receives funds from the Russian government. 

The charge? Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen declared, “Ionov allegedly orchestrated a brazen influence campaign, turning US political groups and US citizens into instruments of the Russian government.”

See what I mean? The minds of public-school educated Americans are so pliant and susceptible to propaganda that they have to be protected by their federal daddy from those evil Russkies who are trying to turn them to the dark side.
read on...

The Pentagon Brought on Both Nuclear Crises

undefined

I fully realize that when it comes to Ukraine, one is supposed to focus exclusively on Russia’s invasion and not on what the Pentagon did to gin up the crisis, a crisis that has gotten us perilously close to a world-destroying nuclear war with Russia. Nonetheless, the Pentagon’s role in this crisis needs to be emphasized, over and over again, just as the Pentagon’s role in ginning up the Cuban Missile Crisis also needs to be emphasized, over and over again.
read on...

Are You Attending the RPI Conference This Saturday?

undefined

The Ron Paul Institute is holding its annual conference at the Westin Washington Dulles Airport this Saturday, September 3. It stands to be another outstanding one. I have the honor and pleasure of again speaking at it. I will also be speaking at the conference’s program for young scholars the day before.
read on...

How Did America Survive Without an Espionage Act?

undefined

For some 140 years, the United States did not have an Espionage Act. It didn’t come into existence until 1917, when US officials used it to punish Americans who had the audacity to question the US intervention into World War I, an intervention that ultimately led to the rise of the Hitler regime in the 1930s. 

No one can deny that the United States did not fall into the ocean during those 140 years when it didn’t have an Espionage Act. So, the question naturally arises: How did the country survive without an Espionage Act for almost a century and a half?

Just think: The whole world was free to spy on America without fear of being prosecuted, convicted, and incarcerated by US officials. Think about how scary that must have been for all those Americans who were living during those 140 years. 

After all, everyone knows that the whole world wants to spy on America. And without an Espionage Act, we all know that everyone in the world would spend large portions of their lives and fortunes spying on America.
read on...

America’s Perpetual Foreign-Policy Crises

undefined

Ever since the federal government was converted from a limited-government republic to a national-security state after World War II, America has lived under a system of ongoing, never-ending, perpetual foreign-policy crises. That’s not a coincidence. The national-security establishment — i.e. the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA — need such crises to justify their continued existence and their ever-growing taxpayer-funded largess. 

An interesting aspect of this phenomenon is that oftentimes the crises are ginned up by the national-security establishment itself. Once the crisis materializes, the Pentagon and the CIA play the innocent. “We had nothing to do with ginning up this crisis,” they cry. “We are totally innocent.” 

After the end of the Cold War, the Pentagon and the CIA were desperately in need of a crisis that could replace the Cold War crisis, which they were convinced would last forever. That’s when they began going into the Middle East and killing people. When that massive killing spree, which included killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children, ended up producing terrorist blowback, the national-security establishment had its new crisis — terrorism, which replaced communism as America’s big official enemy. 

The “war on terrorism” replaced the Cold War’s “war on communism.” Americans began fearing the terrorists (and the Muslims) almost as much as they feared the Reds. With the new crisis, the national-security establishment, including its army of “defense” contractors, was assured of continued existence and ever-expanding taxpayer-funded largess.
read on...

US Audacity on Brittney Griner

undefined

Only a person who is willfully blind cannot see that the US position on the Brittney Griner case is driven not by some compassionate concern for her welfare but rather by the extreme anti-Russia animus that has afflicted US officials for more than 75 years.
read on...


Authors

Tags