"We libertarians hold that the genuine patriot is the citizen who takes a public stand against the wrongdoing of his government, in order to get the government back on the right track."

Blaming America for Terrorism
by Jacob G. Hornberger

Yesterday, the would-be plane bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab pled guilty to terrorism in federal district court in Detroit. He’s the guy who was charged with trying to explode a bomb on an international flight coming into Detroit.

Federal court, you ask? Isn’t terrorism an act of war, you say? Isn’t he an enemy combatant? Doesn’t he belong in a POW camp? Why isn’t he jailed at the Pentagon’s military prison at Guantanamo Bay?

All those questions are easy to answer. It’s because terrorism is a crime — a federal criminal offense in the U.S. Code. That’s why a federal grand jury in Detroit indicted him. That’s why a federal prosecutor prosecuted him. That’s why a federal judge accepted his plea and will likely be sentencing him to life in prison without parole.

So, what’s the deal with the Pentagon’s prison camp and “judicial” system at Gitmo? That’s easy to answer too. The Pentagon put that system together after 9/11 as a way to avoid the constitutional system when it felt like doing so. No, they didn’t secure a constitutional amendment nor did they get a law enacted by Congress permitting them to do that. They did it all their own, claiming that they possessed the post-9/11 emergency authority to consider a crime to be either an act of war or a crime, at their option.

Thus, today U.S. officials can treat suspected terrorists either way they want — as illegal enemy combatants, subject to indefinite incarceration, torture, kangaroo tribunals, and even execution, or as federal criminal defendants, where they are accorded the rights and guarantees in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. It’s all up to the president and the Pentagon. Why, under our post-9/11 emergency system, the Pentagon no longer even has to honor federal court jury verdicts or sentences handed down in terrorism cases by federal judges.

In any event, proponents of military statism are undoubtedly saying that Abdulmutallab “blamed America” for what he did, based on the statement that he made to the presiding judge yesterday as part of his guilty plea.

Why would the statists reach that conclusion? Well, consider what Abdulmutallab said: “I attempted to use an explosive device which in the U.S. law is a weapon of mass destruction, which I call a blessed weapon to save the lives of innocent Muslims, for U.S. use of weapons of mass destruction on Muslim populations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen and beyond.”

Now, a libertarian would respond, “Wait a minute, Jacob. Abdulmutallab doesn’t blame America in that statement. His anger and motivation are clearly directed toward U.S. foreign policy, specifically the killing of innocent Muslims in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, and elsewhere.”

Yes, but that exposes the nature of the problem we face when it comes to statists: They can’t draw a distinction between the federal government and America. In their minds, it’s all one great big collectivist entity, with the military and the CIA at the center of it. Thus, in the statist mind, when the U.S. government does something, it’s America doing it.

To get a grasp of the statist mindset, think of a great big bee hive. The hive is the federal government, with the president being the head bee. Near the head bee are the privileged elite bees, whose lives are devoted to serving and fulfilling the wishes and commands of the head bee. Everyone else is a drone, devoting his life to the greater good of the hive.

Thus, when a libertarian takes a stand against something the head bee has done, the statist becomes confused and befuddled and even angry. In his mind, the libertarian is attacking the hive and thereby jeopardizing the best interests of the hive or, even worse, its very existence. That’s a super no-no to a statist. Everyone is expected to rally to the head bee and never challenge his actions or authority, especially in dealings with the rest of the bee hives in the world.

Obviously, libertarians see things totally different from the statists. The way we view it is that there are two separate and distinct entities: the federal government and the private sector (which is the country).

Thus, our concepts of patriotism and the duty of the citizen are dramatically different from that of the statists. We libertarians hold that the genuine patriot is the citizen who takes a public stand against the wrongdoing of his government, in order to get the government back on the right track. We do this not only because we believe it’s the right thing to do but also because we consider it in our own personal interest and in the best interests of our country.

By the way, the Bill of Rights is an explicit acknowledgement of the libertarian mindset and an explicit rejection of the statist mindset. Why is that so? Because it expressly protects the country (i.e., the people in the private sector) from the federal government sector.

Why did our American ancestors do that? Because they believed that the federal government was the biggest threat to the freedom and well-being of the people in America.

How does the Bill of Rights fit with the statist mindset. It doesn't. Their mindsets preclude them from recognizing that the federal government is a serious threat to the country and that the Bill of Rights attempts to protect them from that threat.

Why is Abdulmutallab’s statement important? Because it confirms, once again, what libertarians have been saying since even before 9/11: that foreigners don’t hate our country for its “freedom and values” but rather for the bad things the U.S. Empire has been doing — and continues to do — to people in foreign lands.

And why is that important? Because it leaves the American people with a choice. If Americans choose to continue the federal government’s role as an international military empire, then Americans should understand that one of the costs of such empire (in addition to the money, death, and destruction) is ever-growing anger and rage among foreigners that results in a perpetual threat of terrorism against our country.

And what does a perpetual threat of terrorism mean? It means (1) that some terrorists might ultimately succeed in killing dozens or hundreds of Americans; and (2) that the federal government will continue using this perpetual “war on terrorism” to suspend the fundamental rights and freedoms of the American people, in order to keep them “safe” from the dangers that the government’s own policies have generated.

What’s the other choice? End the U.S. government’s role as an international military empire and world policeman, interloper, and intervener. Immediately withdraw all U.S. troops from around the world, bring them home, and discharge them. Abandon all overseas military bases to the host nations, including Guantanamo. End all foreign aid to everyone.

That would immediately end the anti-American terrorist threats that are rooted in U.S. foreign policy. By restoring a limited-government, constitutional republic to our land, normality would be restored to people’s lives. No more war-on-terrorism excuse for infringing on liberty, privacy, and property rights. No more terrorist crises, no more color-coded alerts, no more groping of children and adults at airports, no more Patriot Act, no more torture, no more assassinations. Just freedom, peace, prosperity, and harmony with the people of the world once again.
Link:
http://www.fff.org/blog/index.asp