--- Begin Message ---
Title: Message
The Political Economy of the War on Drugs
An early
twentieth century writer by the
name of Randolph Bourne remarked that "War is
the
health of the state". The American founders recognized
that government
has a tendency to grow and expand over
time. Nothing does as much to speed up
the growth rate
of as war. Throughout American history the
greatest
expansions of government have occurred during war
times. The
American Civil War of 1861-1865
consolidated the power of the federal regime
over the
previously sovereign states. The entry of the United
States into
the First World War took place at the same
time as the enactment of the
federal income tax, the
implementation of alcohol prohibition, the creation
of
the FBI and other drastic expansions of federal power.
The advent of
the Second World War consolidated the
welfare state of the New Deal, the
cartelization of
industry and labor under Roosevelt's National
Recovery
Administration (modeled after Italian fascism), the
subordination
of the domestic economy under war
production, the interment of
Japanese-Americans in
concentration camps and many other ills. The Cold
War
era brought about the permanent entrenchment of
the
military-industrial complex, the creation of the CIA
in 1947,
permanent peacetime conscription (not ended
until 1971), the creation of the
United Nations and a
foreign policy of world wide military
interventionism.
The war in Vietnam took place along side the advent
of
the Great Society expansion of the welfare state, the
elimination of
the gold standard in monetary policy
and the COINTELPRO program of repression
against
domestic dissidents. The acceleration of the arms race
during the
1980s coincided with the quadrupling of the
national debt. The evidence is
overwhelming that war
is indeed a great boon to the state. War provides
the
state with opportunities to raise taxes, eradicate
civil liberties,
consolidate central power, subsidize
elite economic interests, acquire new
territory,
expand the power of officials, rally the public behind
the
state and many other benefits.
Historically,
states seeking to increase
their power have frequently looked for excuses to
go
to war or hold up the threat of war. The decaying
Roman Empire sought
the support of its citizens by
proclaiming its desire to save them from an
alleged
threat of invasion by the Germanic tribes of the
north. "The
barbarians are at the gates" became their
rallying cry. States can also claim
to be saving
society from some ominous threat by waging a war on
an
alleged "enemy within", that is, some group within the
society that is
villified by officials and attacked as
a grave danger to "ordinary" citizens.
This is what
the Nazis did with the Jews, of course. The Nazi
German
regime denounced Jews as carriers of disease,
criminals, purveyors of
perversions and decadence,
unpatriotic, responsible for the spread of
communism,
engaging in unscrupulous and ruinous banking and
business
practices and many other things. The Nazi
regime demanded and obtained
extraordinary powers in
order to combat the alleged Jewish menace.
The
American regime of today is pursuing an path
identitical to that
followed by Germany during the
1930s. However, the "enemy within" that is
under
attack is not the Jewish people but the users and
sellers of those
particular psychoactive substances
commonly referred to as "drugs".
What is a drug? What is
a "drug user"? What
is a "drug dealer"? How are these
objects/persons
portrayed in the rhetoric of government officials and
in
the media? How consistent is this portrayal with
actual fact? A "drug" is
simply a psychoactive
substance legally prohibited by the state such
as
heroin, cocaine, marijuana, MDMA ("ecstasy") or LSD.
Using this
terminological criteria, other psycho-
active, addictive and potentially
deadly substances
such as alcohol, tobacco and valium are not
considered
"drugs". However, medical research shows that
tobacco
(nicotine) is at least as addictive as heroin and
cocaine. Four
hundred thousand people die from tobacco
use annually in the United States.
The addictive
intoxicant alcohol is the strongest of any
psychoactive
substance and indeed is the only one from
which withdrawal is potentially
fatal. On the other
hand, there has never been a documented case of
death
from marijuana use alone. Also, numerous studies have
shown that
marijuana use does not severely impair
driving while alcohol abuse is
responsible for many,
many traffic fatalities.
Drug users are
typically depicted as
thieves, criminals, negligent parents,
derilects,
degenerates, disruptive neighbors and chronically
unemployed
bums. Former "first lady" Nancy Reagan even
claimed that drug users are
accomplices to murder.
Former Los Angeles Police Chief Daryl Gates
once
remarked that casual marijuana smokers should be
executed for treason
and stated later on that he
wasn't being facetious. However, included in the
ranks
of drug users are many high school and college
students, blue-collar
workers, businesspeople,
housewives, lawyers, physicians,
athletes,
entertainers, judges and, of course, politicians. Are
all of
these people predatory criminals, accomplices
to murder and seditious
traitors to their country?
William F. Buckley has noted that reliable
estimates
indicate that as many as half of the soldiers fighting
in
Vietnam were using drugs such as heroin, opium,
hashish or marijuana at the
time. Were all these folks
who were risking their lives in the name of
their
country criminals and subversives? What is a "drug
dealer"? Simply
put, a drug dealer is a person who
sells a drug to another person who desires
to purchase
it just as a grocer is a "food dealer" or a bartender
is a
"liquor dealer" or a tobacco farmer is a
"nicotine dealer". "Drug dealers"
are often portrayed
as predators preying on the "misery" of
their
customers. But the vast array of breweries,
distilleries, liquor
stores, convenience stores, bars,
nightclubs, dance halls, restaurants,
fraternities and
countless other enterprenuers and establishments are
not
denounced for preying upon the "misery" of
alcoholics and problem drinkers.
Grocers are not
blamed for the woes of anorectics, bulimics and
obese
persons. Interestingly, when "drug dealers" are
prosecuted they are
attacked for preying upon and
allegedly victimizing drug users. However, when
drug
users are prosecuted they are denounced for creating
the market for
drug dealers and perpetrating the
illicit drug trade. Hence, the drug user
becomes the
victim and the criminal simultaneously.
Of course, most
people who use drugs are not
drug addicts in the clinical sense just as most
people
who drink are not alcoholics. Even most addicts are
not derilects
just as most alcoholics are not skid row
bums. In fact, most people are drug
users of some
sort. Rare is the person who completely abstains
from
alcohol, tobacco, caffeine, valium, prozac, ritalin,
marijuana,
heroin, cocaine, hallucinogens and other
psychoactives all at once. The
differentiation between
legal and illegal drugs is cultural and
historical
rather than medical, scientific or ethical. The same
is true of
the differentiation between illegal drug
use and other potentially risky but
legal activities
such as skiing, skydiving, automobile racing,
boxing,
football, rockclimbing, bungee-jumping, overeating,
motorcycling
and cayaking.
Why
are some drugs illegal while others are
not? The earliest American drug laws
begin with
attempts to prohibit opium smoking in the nineteenth
century.
At the time, America was experiencing a wave
of Chinese immigration. Opium
was their drug of
choice. Powerful labor unions such as the
American
Federation of Labor feared competition from Chinese
laborers who
were quite hardworking and generally
willing to work for lower wages. Labor
leaders
villified the Chinese as opium-crazed fiends who
preyed sexually
upon young white girls. Similarly,
blacks and Mexicans used marijuana because
it could be
grown locally and was cheaper than alcohol so
marijuana became
a target as well. The United States
was really the first nation to enact
modern drug
prohibition and began to use its growing international
power
to pressure other nations in the same direction.
The first federal drug laws
began with the passage of
the Harrison Narcotic Act of 1914. Not
coincidentally,
the federal income tax had begun the year before.
Drug
prohibition has continued in the United States since
that time with
varying degrees of intensity. Following
the repeal of alcohol prohibition in
1933, the Bureau
of Prohibition, set up to enforce alcohol
prohibition,
began to target marijuana instead. The Bureau of
Prohibition
is now called the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms (BATF). Drug
enforcement also
intensified in the early 1970s. President Nixon
realized
that substantial political mileage could be
gained from the scapegoating of
drug users even though
his own commission on drug policy recommended
the
decriminalization of marijuana use. It was the era of
the
Vietnam-related culture wars and marijuana users
were portrayed as dirty,
anti-American hippies and
communist sympathizers. However, the current
version
of the drug war, the most intense in American history,
began in
the 1980s. Like Nixon before them, officials
in the Reagan administration
understood that a lot of
political mileage could be gained from whipping
up
hysteria against drug users among more "conservative"
sectors of the
population. As the Cold War began to
wind down in the late 1980s, the
American government
needed a new enemy that it could claim to
be
protecting the people from and "drugs" provided an
easy and obvious
target. Public concern regarding drug
abuse had been rising because of the
advent of the new
and highly addictive drug crack, violence related to
the
new and highly competitive inner-city crack trade
and the death of prominent
college basketball star Len
Bias from an alleged cocaine overdose. The "War
on
Drugs" in its present form began. A new government
agency, the Office
of National Drug Control Policy,
was created and originally headed up by the
neo-
fascist demagogue William J. Bennett. The ONDCP became
an outlet for
anti-drug propaganda generated by the
government. Drastic increases in
government spending
in areas related to drug policy took place.
Draconian
penalties for the tiniest of drug infractions were
implemented.
To fully
understand what the drug war is
about it is necessary to examine some
important and
relevant historical precendents. Traditionally,
when
governments have sought to increase their power by
attacking an
internal population group the usual
targets have been religious and ethnic
minorities.
This was true of the Romans who attacked Christians,
a
predominately lower class religious movement at the
time. This was true
of medieval theocratic states
which attacked, alternately, Catholics,
Protestants,
heretics, witches, Jews, pagans, Muslims, etc. Indeed,
we
might say that just as medieval states maintained
and promoted an official
state religion (usually
Catholicism) and persecuted and prohibited
others
(Protestants, Jews, dissident Catholics) so does the
current
American government maintain official,
socially approved and even government
subsidized and
sold drugs (alcohol, tobacco, ritalin) and prohibits
others
(marijuana, heroin and cocaine) and persecutes
those who use and sell them.
The Nazi regime targeted
Jews, Gypsies, Communists, homosexuals and
other
groups and, historically, many American politicians
have sought to
advance themselves by attacking and
scapegoating blacks, immigrants and other
minorities.
In
contemporary America, it is not socially
acceptable to openly engage in the
villification of
racial and religious minorities as it was in
past
cultures. This would be in conflict with the
prevailing ethos of
religious toleration originating
from the First Amendment to the United
States
Constitution and the minority civil rights revolution
of the 1960s.
Therefore, other cultural groups not
considered to be a part of mainstream or
"respectable"
society, such as "drug users", are targeted instead.
The
historian Richard Lawrence Miller has conducted an
enlightening study of the
parallels between the Nazi
war on Jews and the American war on drug users.
Miller
is more than qualified to comment on these matters. He
is the son
of an investigator for the prosecution
during the Nuremburg trials of Nazi
leaders for war
crimes. Miller is also the author of several books on
both
drug policy and Nazi law and jurisprudence. His
evidence and conclusions are
meticulously researched
and documented. No doubt most Americans would
find
comparisons between the drug war and Nazi persecution
to be the
result of mere fanaticism. Americans ignore
evidence legitimizing such a
comparison at their
peril. Americans do not want to believe that
their
country, supposedly the "land of free" who fought and
defeated
fascism, could have gotten so far off track
as to be pursuing a path
identical to that of the
Nazis. However, the evidence is overwhelming that
this
is indeed the case. The Nazis blamed the Jews for
crime, the spread
of disease, urban blight, the
terrible conditions in slums and many other
ills. The
current American regime blames drug users for all of
these
things. Even the language and terminology
employed by leading drug war
officials and Nazi
leaders is identical. Hans Frank, the Nazi
commissioner
of occupied Poland, remarked that "Jews
are the carriers of diseases and
germs". Likewise, the
original American drug "czar", William
Bennett,
proclaimed, "The casual adult drug user is in some
ways the most
dangerous person because that person is
a carrier...a non-addict's drug use,
in other words,
is highly contagious". Miller notes that "a person
having
the status of Jew was forbidden to do things
permitted to other
persons...they were forbidden to
engage in activities inherent to normal
life, from
driving a car to holding a job". Similarly, William
Bennett
announced: "Drug users who maintain a job and
a steady income should face
stiff fines...These are
the users who should have their names published
in
local papers. They should be subject to drivers'
license suspension,
employer notification, overnight
or weekend detention, eviction from public
housing or
forfeiture of the cars they drive while purchasing
drugs". In
other words, drug users should be rendered
uemployed, homeless and immobile
even when it is clear
that their drug use has harmed no one and that
they
are functional and self-sufficient. Nazi leaders even
went so far as
to claim that Jews represented a type
of supernatural evil. The Nazi
propagandist Julius
Streicher, later hanged for war crimes, remarked,
"The
Jews are not human beings but children of the devil
and the spawns of
crime...This satanic race has no
right to exist". Interestingly, the drug war
criminal
William Bennett told a group of Baptists that "drug
users are the
product of the devil" and later remarked
on television that no trial should
be necessarily
required before the summary execution of accused
drug
sellers because "they deserve to die". Instructively,
even the Nazi
regime found it impossible to suppress
the illegal trade in cocaine and
opiates in Germany.
Miller analyzes the five steps through which
the
Germans systematically accelerated their attacks upon
the Jews and
shows how an identical program has been
implemented in the war on drugs. The
five steps are
identification, ostracism, confiscation, concentration
and
annihlation. The process is well under way.
Consider:
1)
Identification- an undesired class of
persons is held up to be different from
and inferior
to others. Nazis denounced Jews as criminals,
social
parasites, degenerates and other slurs. Drug users are
treated in a
similar manner. What is the truth here?
Just as German Jews were ordinary
German citizens in
every important sense, the distinguished
narcotics
expert Jerome Jaffe remarks:
"The addict who
is able to obtain an
adequate supply of drugs through legitimate
channels
and has
adequate funds usually dresses
properly, maintains his nutrition, and is able
to
discharge his
social and occupational
obligations with reasonable efficiency. He
usually
remains in
good health, suffers
little
inconvenience, and is, in general, difficult to
distinguish from
other person."
2)
Ostracism-the target group is subjected
to institutionalized discrimination
because of their
social status. German Jews were forbidden to drive
cars,
hold certain jobs, serve in the military,
intermarry with ethnic Germans and
many other
activities. Likewise, American drug users can have
their
drivers' licenses revoked, their children taken
away, their employment
terminated and many other
similar sanctions. Under American drug law, drug
users
may be denied student loans and welfare but no similar
sanctions
exist concerning convicted murderers
and
rapists.
3)
Confiscation-the property of the target
group is systematically seized by the
state. The
businesses and homes of German Jews were often seized
and
forfeited to the Gestapo and other Nazi agents.
The homes, businesses,
automobiles, bank accounts and
personal possessions of American drug users
are being
taken from them in a similar manner and frequently
kept by the
police. Even the property of persons never
convicted of any drug "crime" is
frequently seized.
4)
Concentration-the target group is
restricted to certain geographical
locations and
barred from entering others. German Jews were
initially
confined to ghettos and then placed in
concentration camps. American drug
users are placed in
jails and prisons, mental hospitals,
pseudo-military
"boot camps" (a practice also utilized by the Nazis)
and
forced to undergo experimental and unscientific
"substance abuse treatment"
programs in violation of
standards of medical ethics.
At this point
some of the stereotypes hurled
at drug users by drug warriors become
self-fulfilling.
A favorite tactic of the Nazis was to concentrate
Jews
into segregated ghettos and then remove sewage,
electricity and other
sanitation and utility services.
The predictable result would be an increase
in the
spread of tuberculosis and dysentary, lice, rodents,
squalor and
decay. Jews forced to live in these
conditions would then begin to resemble
the stereotype
of the depraved, derilect Jew depicted in Nazi
propaganda.
The Nazis would then use these conditions
as a justification for their racial
views and an
increase in the persecution. Similar tactics are used
against
drug users. Prohibition forces addicts to buy
their drugs on the black
market. Heroin and cocaine
are both worth about two dollars per gram at
standard
market value. But the black market price can often be
fifty times
greater. Consequently, many addicts,
particularly from the poorer classes,
have no options
but theft or prostitution as a means of obtaining
their
drugs. When there was a serious shortage of
tobacco in Europe following the
Second World War, many
tobacco addicts began to steal to finance their
habits
as prices soared and many tobacco-addicted women
resorted to
prostitution in order to obtain money for
cigarettes. The situation that poor
addicts face would
be akin to one where food were declared illegal and
a
sandwhich or a hot dog suddenly cost $200 on the black
market. What
would most people do in such a situation?
Drug policy is designed to all but
guarantee that
addicts become impoverished, homeless, unemployed,
unable
to care for children and other dependents and
intertwined with the criminal
underworld. Likewise,
drug prohibition guarantees that a
disproportionate
number of sociopaths and routine criminals enter the
drug
business and susequently engage in violence as a
means of market discipline
and the elimination of
competitors. This only serves to bolster the
bigoted
stereotypes purveyed by drug war propaganda. The fifth
and final
step in the crusade against German Jews and
American drug users is the
obvious one:
5) Annihlation-the target group is
systematically exterminated. German Jews
were killed
by means of poison gas, firing squads, deliberate
starvation,
incineration, intentional denial of
medical care and prolonged exposure to
harsh
conditions. The mass extermination of American drug
users has not,
at the time this essay is being written
(early 2001), became a full-scale
endeavor. Rather,
the killing of drug users is most often a side effect
of
the general persecution program. Cancer and AIDS
patients who might benefit
from the medicinal use of
marijuana are denied treatment. This seems to
have
been the central factor in the death of the late
author Peter
McWilliams. Some people have suggested
that overdose victims be denied
medical care
altogether (most overdoses are the result of
adulterated
black market drugs). Others, such as New
York radio talk show host Bob Grant,
have suggested
that authorities deliberately place poisoned drug
supplies
on the street for the purpose of
intentionally killing addicts. Officials
ranging from
former drug czar William Bennett to former Los Angeles
Police
Chief Daryl Gates to former Speaker of the
House Newt Gingrinch have called
for the execution of
drug "offenders". Drug users, and even
bystanders
uninvolved with drugs, are sometimes killed as a
result of
terrorist activities by thuggish police SWAT
teams and narcotics and vice
agents. William Bennett
has praised the murder of drug users and sellers
by
private vigilante groups.
The apparatus
necessary for a full-scale
genocide has already been constructed. A target
group
has been subjected to every form of threat,
harassment, persecution,
confiscation and
incarceration. Those who view drug users as
subhumans
deserving mass incarceration are unlikely to be
particularly
troubled by mass extermination. A vast
army of special interest groups has
evolved that has a
powerful incentive to keep the drug war rolling to
its
"final solution". These include:
-police for whom
the drug war is a means of
employment, career advancement, funding for
law
enforcement agencies, power, glory, adventure and
prestige.
-bureaucrats
heading up and employed by a
myriad of agencies involved in the drug war
ranging
from public housing authorities who evict drug using
tenants to
regulatory agencies who shut down the legal
businesses of drug users or
dealers to towing
companies with contracts to impound the cars
of
suspected drug
buyers.
-lawyers, both defense attorneys and
prosecutors, for whom drug cases are a
major source of
business, prestige and career advancement
- the organized
alcohol, tobacco and
pharmaceutical lobby who regard illegal drugs
as
unwanted competition to their own products. Much of
the funding for the
Partnership for a Drug-Free
America, a drug war propaganda group consisting
mostly
of a coalition of advertising agencies, comes from
these
elements.
-politicians building their careers on drug
war demagoguery and inflammatory
rhetoric
-journalists and media outlets for whom the
drug war is a source of
sensationalistic and therefore
ratings-gathering and career-enhancing news.
-construction
companies and service
industries with lucrative government contracts
to
build and supply more and more prisons
-corrections
officials and prison guards'
unions for whom mass imprisonment of drug users
is a
source of job security. The prison guards' union is
the second
largest campaign donor in California state
elections.
-state-subsidized
academics deriving
prestige from developing drug war policy,
gathering
statistics and research, and creating an ideological
smokescreen
for the drug war
-corrupt informants, often criminals
themselves, paid to "snitch" on others
-judges (no
explanation needed)
-"moral
enteprenuers", that is, persons
deriving recognition from pushing the drug
war as a
righteous moral crusade ranging from Jesse Jackson
to
televangelists to radio talk-show hosts
-owners and
employees of "drug treatment"
facilities whose clients are often persons
coerced
into such programs
-corrupt public
officials personally
involved in the drug trade and deriving
enormous
profits from the black market pricing system
-military
officials who see the use of the
military in both foreign and domestic drug
war efforts
as means of obtaining job security, power and
prestige
-organized physicians and pharmacists who
see drug decriminalization as
potential threat to the
monopolistic prescription system of which they are
the
main beneficiaries
-foreign policy
elites who see the drug war
as an excuse for military intervention in
other
countries (such as Columbia) for other political
purposes
-corrupt bankers
who profit from drug money
laundered by their
banks
-parents
groups afraid that an end to the
drug war will result in the increase in the
number of
youngsters who use
drugs
-neigborhood
groups concerned about the
effects of the war on drugs in their community
who
mistakenly blame drugs for the effects of drug
prohibition
-religious
factions for whom drug use is a
strong
taboo
Of
course, many more elements could be
added to this list. At this point, it
needs to be
pointed out that the drug war is, in a broader sense,
a war
against traditional American democracy and civil
and constitutional rights of
every kind. How is this
being done? The drug war is being used to attack
the
First Amendment provisions for freedom of religion,
speech and the
press. American Indians and
Rastafarians for whom peyote and marijuana
have
sacramental meaning are not allowed to practice their
religion. A
case of this type went before the Supreme
Court in 1989. The Court rejected
the claim that
Indian groups had any right to use peyote for
religious
purposes with Justice Antonin Scalia
remarking that freedom of religion was
"a luxury we
can't afford" if it got in the way of the drug war.
This sets
a precedent whereby religious liberty may be
arbitrarily denied when it is in
conflict with state
policy of the moment. Similarly, when the late
Peter
McWilliams was working on a book arguing in favor of
the medical use
of marijuana the federal Drug
Enforcement Administration got word of his
project and
went to his home and confiscated the computer
containing the
files for his manuscript. William F.
Buckley remarked at the time that it was
akin to the
DEA going to the headquarters of the New York Times
and
confiscating their printing presses. The DEA has
also pressured newspapers to
refrain from carrying
columns by Buckley criticizing the DEA.
The Second
Amendment protection of the right
to bear arms is also under attack because
of the drug
war. Violent turf wars conducted by drug dealing
street gangs
and the alleged threat to police by armed
victims of drug war raids have led
to a call for
stricter guns laws, even outright gun confiscation in
some
quarters. All other constitutional rights-freedom
from unreasonable searches
and seizures, due process,
property rights, privacy rights, states'
rights,
exemption from excessive punishment, the provision
against double
jeopardy-are being undermined and
assaulted in the name of the drug war. The
United
States has five percent of the world's population and
twenty-five
percent of the world's prisoners. The drug
war has contributed to a drastic
deterioration in the
realm of race relations. Even though most drug
users
are white, blacks and other minorities are arrested,
prosecuted and
incarcerated for drug "offenses" at a
grossly disproportional rate. Forty
percent of all
black youth in their twenties are either in prison,
on
probation or on parole. One and a half million
children now have one or
both parents in prison. Large
sections of cities have become virtually
uninhabitable
because of violence generated by the drug war.
One last thought
needs to be considered. As
mentioned, the apparatus necessary for a
full-scale
genocide has already been created. The Nazis managed
to
exterminate millions of Jews and other groups. The
only active armed
resistance occurred in the Warsaw
ghetto. Originally containing three hundred
thousand
Jews, the gradual Nazi deportation program eventually
reduced the
population to forty thousand. It was at
this point that an armed resistance
movement, armed
with homemade weapons and led by courageous youth in
their
twenties, began. They succeeded in warding off
the Gestapo for a month before
finally being crushed.
So far the only public official courageous enough
to
advocate genuine resistance to what is being done to
America today has
been former New Hampshire state
representative Tom Alciere. Let's not make
the same
mistake as the Europeans of sixty years ago.
Bibliography:
Drug Warriors and Their Prey: From Police Power to
Police State, by
Richard Lawrence Miller
Nazi Justiz: Law of the Holocaust, by Richard
Lawrence
Miller
The Case for Legalizing Drugs, by Richard
Lawrence
Miller
Ceremonial Chemistry, by Thomas Szasz
Our
Right to Drugs, by Thomas Szasz Liberty and Drugs,
by Thomas Szasz and Milton
Friedman
America's Longest War, by Steven Duke and Albert
Gross
Drug Crazy, by Mike Gray
Smoke and Mirrors, by Dan Baum
Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do, by Peter McWilliams
The
Perpetual Prisoner Machine, by Joel Dyer
Lockdown America, by Christian
Parenti
Deterring Democracy, by Noam Chomsky
Marijuana
Myths-Marijuana Facts, by Lynn Zimmer and
John P. Morgan
The
De-valuing of America, by William Bennett
Libertarianism in One Lesson,
by David Bergland
Why Government Doesn't Work, by Harry Browne
The Failure of America's Foreign Wars, by Jacob
Hornberger and
Richard Ebeling
Liberty Magazine-March 1997, May 1998, November
2000
issues
Free American News Magazine-November 2000
National Review-February 12, 1996
Lost Rights, by James Bovard
Freedom in Chains, by James Bovard
The Right to Heresy, by
Stefan Zweig
The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, by William
L.
Shirer
Libertarian Socialist News (www.overthrow.com)
Antiwar.com
LewRockwell.com
The History of the Jews, by
Paul Johnson
The November Coalition (www.november.com)
Rep. Tom
Alciere (www.tomalciere.com)
| Yahoo! Groups Sponsor |
ADVERTISEMENT
;) |
|
|
Please let us stay on topic and be civil.
To unsubscribe please go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs
-Home Page- www.cia-drugs.org
OM
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
--- End Message ---
