WWIII! For realsies this time!!

I've written before about Jones' interesting habit of predicting the outbreak of WWIII about once a year. This year, the alleged transfer of nuclear warheads from an Air Force base in Texas (Dyess AFB) to one in Florida (DERMO) is the tip-off that WWIII is about to erupt, Jones claimed in early September. Jones and Anthony Gucciardi wrote, "There’s a reason that Russia has begun amassing 160,000 troops and heavy military equipment following an Israeli strike on Russian missiles in Syria. There’s a reason that the troops were called along with naval ships and bombers to attain ‘immediate combat readiness’ along the border. We reported on this months ago while the media was too busy focusing on the Trayvon Martin case to talk about the ignition of World War 3." The entire story is based on the say-so of a single anonymous military source. 
Today, Infowars is crowing over the firing of Major General Michael Carey, the person in charge of intercontinental ballistic missiles at three U.S. bases (note that Dyess is not one of them). Carey was allegedly engaging in illegal gambling in his off-hours, but of course Jones doesn't accept that explanation. Jones is certain that Carey was canned for the paperless transfer of warheads. On his Facebook page, Jones (or someone representing him) posted the following status update yesterday morning: "The General in charge of America's long range nukes has been fired a month after Infowars exposed the top secret transfer of nuclear weapons by Dyess Air Force base." 

Let's assume, for a moment, that Jones' unknown military "insider" is legit and truthful. Let's say that Dyess really was shipping all its ICBMs to Florida for some reason, without the proper authorization and documentation. I have absolutely no reason to trust this information, but let's just say it's solid.
Does this mean WWIII has to start soon?
Of course not. Even if a nuclear strike against Syria takes place soon (and there is absolutely no reason to believe this will be the case), subsequent events are not a foregone conclusion. 
Take a look at Jones' other WWIII predictions. Ask yourself how plausible they were. Keep in mind that he was just as adamant about those predictions as he is about his most recent, Syria-based one. 

Can Alex Jones Spot a Patsy?

These days, it is remarkably difficult to frame someone for a criminal act and get away with it for any appreciable length of time. Sooner or later, an astute journalist or filmmaker or lovelorn correspondent is going to realize that the wrong person is in prison, and they're going to attempt to do something about it. Thanks to the efforts of groups like the Innocence Project, false convictions in the U.S. are being overturned at record pace. In Canada, vigilant media outlets like the fifth estate have turned the falsely convicted into household names, raising awareness of shoddy investigative techniques and bogus expert testimony. In fact, even if a convict is guilty as all hell, a William F. Buckley might step in and persuade the public - and, more importantly, the parole board - that They Got the Wrong Guy. Patsies are certainly not a thing of the past, but it is now harder than ever to sustain a fraudulent case against a suspect.

How ironic, then, that Alex Jones and company have convinced a huge number of us that we live in the Age of the Patsy. Crazy gunmen are actually mind-controlled assassins, racist lunatic bombers are just drugged-up scapegoats, and homicidal hijackers don't even exist.
I've noticed a very interesting thing about Jones and patsies, though. I've mentioned it several times already (notably here), and recent events have reinforced my suspicions in a powerful way.
Here's the deal: If a suspect is thought to be right-wing, like the Boston bomb suspects, Jones will almost immediately denounce the entire case as a false flag operation engineered by one or more government entities (or, in non-U.S. cases like Norway, "globalists" - a handy umbrella term for anyone who does anything Jones doesn't like). But if the suspect appears to have left-leaning tendencies, like ricin-mailing suspect Paul Curtis, Jones and Infowars will float the official story with few questions asked. This was the case with James Lee, who burst into the offices of the Discovery Channel in 2010 and threatened to kill staff members for the corporation's alleged failure to adequately address climate change and environmental pollution. It was also the case with Arizona gunman Jared Loughner, whom Jones denounced as an "abortion-loving atheist" and Infowars declared as fitting into the "classic satanic/vampire cult wannabe mould" (whatever that is). Jones suggested these men could be under the influence of mind control and psychotropic drugs, but didn't refer to them as patsies or try to convince us they were the victims of government blackmail.

On that note, let's take a closer look at how Jones handled the recent ricin mailings and the Boston bombings.

Boston: Barely half an hour after the first reports of bomb blasts, Jones tweets his suspicion that this was a false flag event. Later, Infowars articles tie events in Boston to foiled terrorist plots in which the FBI was involved, and Jones declares the FBI his #1 suspect. Jones predicts that pro-gun advocates like Oath Keepers will be framed for the attack.
Ricin: Responding to reports that letters thought to contain ricin were intercepted en route to President Obama, a Mississippi judge, and Senator Roger Wicker, a Prison Planet article argues that Wicker, as a Republican supporter of Second Amendment rights, was not the victim of right-wing gun nuts (as some media commentators speculated). The article suggests They will attempt to link the ricin letters to Boston.

Boston: In numerous articles, Infowars casts doubt on what the media has to say about the "patsy" suspects. At one point, they even question whether Tamerlan Tsarnaev actually died or not, pointing to grainy unsourced footage of a naked man being detained by police.

Ricin: On the day of Curtis' arrest, Infowars publishes a single article about the ricin mailing, titled "Ricin Arrest: Suspect Appears to Be a Mentally Unstable Democrat". The article does not contradict or question mainstream media reports, and plays up a vaguely anti-gun comment that Curtis once left on HuffPo. There is no longer any suggestion that the ricin mailings could be part of a false flag operation.

Boston: Infowars publishes photos of two "suspects". Though these two men are not doing anything particularly suspicious in the photos, Jones insists they are either military contractors employed by Craft International or Navy SEALs, and that they are much stronger suspects than the Tsarnaev brothers. Jones continues to bang the drum about these two men despite the fact that he is fully aware of the dangers of fingering innocent people.
Ricin: Not a single alternative suspect is presented.

Boston: Jones theorizes the bombings were just an excuse to give the TSA increased powers and enable gun control.

Ricin: After the arrest of Curtis, no alternative theories are presented.

Boston: Jones gradually adds the CIA and other entities to his list of suspects. He continues to refer to the Tsarnaevs as patsies, but admits they might have been involved in some capacity.
Ricin: Still no alternative suspects. Infowars reposts an extremely brief story about Curtis' release without additional comment.

Paul "Kevin" Curtis looked like a pretty good suspect. An Elvis impersonator with a penchant for conspiracy theories, he supposedly used his own initials and a favourite quote in the ricin letters. Even his friends complained about his erratic and obnoxious behaviour. For the past 12 years, he has been zealously trying to expose an alleged organ-harvesting operation, claiming he was wrongfully fired from a custodial job at North Mississippi Medical Center after he found a severed head and other body parts in a morgue refrigerator. The guy is clearly a few croutons short of a salad, and Alex Jones has no love for the mentally ill.
But Curtis was not the guy. He was a patsy. Someone carefully culled information from his many Facebook posts and other online ramblings in order to incriminate him. Because Curtis had previously sent letters about organ harvesting to Sen. Wicker and several other politicians, the lookalike ricin letters quickly made him the prime suspect. There is one suspected culprit in this frame-up job, but to date there have been no other arrests in the case.
How is it that Alex Jones, with his amazing predictive powers and psychic ability, completely missed this? And just why was the Infowars crew so quick to accept mainstream media reports about Curtis, while simultaneously challenging each and every media report about Boston?
I won't answer that. As they say in the conspiracy world, I'm only asking questions.

6 Crazy Notions 'til Christmas: Ron Paul's racism has been debunked

Ron Paul supporters often tell me it simply doesn't matter that for two decades, Ron Paul's newsletters cranked out bizarre and alarmist stories about race wars, blacks taking over white neighbourhoods with their drugs and their random violence, the "gay agenda", and the political liability that blacks have become.*
"He's not really racist," they tell me. "He didn't even know those articles were being written." They say that anyone who still makes an issue of it should be ashamed, because there is no issue and there never really was. Paul apologized and took some of the blame, so now we should just erase it from our minds.

Paul Joseph Watson makes all these arguments, and some others, in today's Infowars piece "Gingrich-Linked Propagandist Recycles Debunked 'Racist' Ron Paul Smear".

To this day, we don't know who wrote the racist articles published in Ron Paul's newsletters, because no one has taken credit/blame for them, and Ron Paul apparently doesn't know who it was (Lew Rockwell is the prime suspect, though).
That in itself is a problem, because a man who wants to run an entire country should have the organizational skills to know what's being published under his name. If I had a newsletter going out to people all over the country, I wouldn't let one stamp touch them until I at had least skimmed the latest issue. I realize Dr. Paul was a busy dude in the '70s, '80s, and '90s, but there's really no excuse for allowing your staff to publish bizarre racist screeds under your name with your consent. Even to this day, Paul claims he doesn't know who was writing what. Doesn't that seem negligent at best, and dishonest at worst? I don't blame Ron Paul for the screwy stuff that gets posted to the Daily Paul forums, because cleaning those up would be like clearing the Aegean stables. I don't fault him for the fact that the American Free Press, a rag established by white supremacists, prints his column; AFP pays him for syndication, and like most columnists who are in syndication, he doesn't pick and choose the publications in which his work appears. But I do blame him for failing to monitor his newsletter more closely. All of this has to make you wonder how many other bucks Paul has passed.

Look at this way: If I welcomed a group of other bloggers to contribute to Leaving Alex Jonestown, and they began posting stuff like "Alex Jones Can Suck My Big Hairy Balls Becuz He Is a Faggot" (that's an actual YouTube comment, BTW), wouldn't you be offended and annoyed with me? I think you'd have every right to be. Clearly, I was shirking my responsibilities and allowing the lunatics to run the asylum.

I'm approaching this from the best-case scenario angle, the one that says Ron Paul simply had some racist associates and let them have too much control over his publications. The worst-case scenario is, well, worse. In that one, Ron Paul did write some or all of the content for some reason (to appeal to a certain demographic, or to convince constituents that he would keep them safe from the invading non-white hordes, or whatever), then lied about it. I would prefer not to think that of Paul. He doesn't seem like a racist. A touch homophobic, certainly, but not the kind of guy who's going to make fun of Kwanzaa or use the phrase "nappy-haired hos" in casual conversation.
Let's face it, though: If we don't know who wrote the stuff, that means we don't know who wrote the stuff. Nothing has been debunked in the newsletter affair.


* There's really no dispute that some of the newsletter content was racist and disparaging of minorities. An unidentified author referred to Martin Luther King Jr. day as "Hate Whitey Day". Another wrote, "Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities." That's fine for a southern newsletter put out by a "League for Racial Purity", but it's not acceptable for a U.S. president.
Check out loads more of the newsletter content at Et tu, Mr. Destructo?.

The Blame Game: Norway Edition

It's not entirely Anders Breivik's fault that he slaughtered dozens of innocent people. We should also blame the New World Order, Muslims, liberals, Jews, people who don't like Jews, and maybe Hitler.


As Alex Jones showed us, the Powers That Be staged a false-flag terror attack in Norway expressly to give themselves an excuse to squash all patriots who oppose big government and "bankster" fraud. This isn't a Norwegian thing; it's a globalist elite thing. So we must remember that domestic terrorism is not the real threat, here.

Pat Buchanan, who has been a guest on The Alex Jones Show several times, may not agree with the first part of that statement, but he's totally on board with the end of it: The media is using the massacre to undermine right-wing populist movements throughout the world. Domestic terrorism isn't the real problem.

Muslims are. Specifically, Muslims immigrating into countries like Norway. In a column at World Net Daily He writes:

"... awful as this atrocity was, native-born and homegrown terrorism is not the macro-threat to the continent.That threat comes from a burgeoning Muslim presence in a Europe that has never known mass immigration, its failure to assimilate, its growing alienation, and its sometime sympathy for Islamic militants and terrorists."

In conclusion:

"As for a climactic conflict between a once-Christian West and an Islamic world that is growing in numbers and advancing inexorably into Europe for the third time in 14 centuries, on this one, Breivik may be right."

Meanwhile, Pamela Geller (a leading opponent of the "Ground Zero Mosque") informs us that while, yes, Breivik's behaviour was monstrous, the Liberal-sponsored youth camp he targeted was an "indoctrination camp run by Norway’s ruling Labor Party for up-and-coming children of the ruling elite".
The same sentiment was expressed by Alex Jones's ideological twin, Glenn Beck, on his radio show. As reported by The Telegraph: "There was a shooting at a political camp, which sounds a little like, you know, the Hitler youth. I mean, who does a camp for kids that's all about politics? Disturbing."
He made a point of adding that a Republican youth camp would also be disturbing. I guess his fact-checker took the year day off, and couldn't tell him about this. It's a little creepy, sure, but "Hitler youth"?

Frequent Jones guest Wayne Madsen has a different take: Because Breivik was reportedly a fan of Pamela Geller's blog, this all but proves he was part of an Israeli Mossad operation to take over... well, pretty much everything.
He writes, "Because our police forces in America, New Zealand, Norway, Britain, Sweden, Denmark, France, Canada, Australia and elsewhere are infiltrated with Mossad sayanim, katsas, and jumper katsas, we must take it upon ourselves to expose these agents, publicize their names, turn the disinfectant of sunshine on their subterranean operations, and generally, make life miserable for them."

Madsen's piece was re-posted to Infowars.

Stomping on the First Ammendment

While Paul Joseph Watson condemns the "thuggery" of the two men who shoved a MoveOn.org supporter to the ground during a Rand Paul rally, and admits they should be prosecuted, he also contends that the woman tried to assault Rand Paul. A video posted at Prison Planet shows Lauren Valle, in red hoodie and blonde wig, breaking ahead of the crowd surrounding his vehicle as it pulls to a stop. She was portraying a corporate executive as part of a satirical MoveOn.org campaign. In the video, Valle holds her Rand Paul sign very close to Paul's open passenger window before he exits the vehicle. This is when an actual Paul supporter grabs her and pulls her away from the vehicle.
Watson even states that Valle's actions were "clearly more aggressive" than the actions of the man who shoved her to the pavement and the man who jammed his foot into her shoulder to help prevent her from getting to her feet.

This is an attempted assault? Holding a sign up to someone's face? While I question Valle's judgement in getting so close to the vehicle, it doesn't look to me like she was threatening Paul, nor was she in any position to harm him. Both of her hands are on the sign.

Watson also wrote an article about an incident that occurred the same night, pointing to it as evidence that the "establishment media" selectively covered the night's events. It seems a woman with an injured foot was also stomped on by a supporter of Rand Paul's rival, Jack Conway. But I think there could be other explanations for why this other incident received little coverage:

- The woman's name is unknown.
- The alleged perpetrator's identity is unknown.
- The circumstances of the alleged stomping are unknown.
- Having your foot stepped on in a crowd could be an accident (though the woman is reportedly pressing charges).
- The encounter was apparently not recorded, as the assault on Valle was.

As further supposed evidence that the media turns a blind eye to leftist violence, Watson mentions that an Obamacare supporter had his finger bitten off by a MoveOn.org activist at a rally last year. This case is more complicated than that, however. First of all, Bill Rice punched the unidentified man in the face and knocked him to the ground. The man got up and the two struggled before Rice's finger was bitten. In other words, we're not talking about an unprovoked assault. Capt. Ross Bonfiglio, a public information officer with the Ventura County Sheriff's Department, said that while Rice was certainly a victim, he was also the "primary aggressor". Also, because the biter remains unidentified (he fled), there is no way of knowing for certain that he was a MoveOn.org supporter.
The mainstream media did not ignore Rice's story, either. He was interviewed by a sympathetic Neil Cavuto on CNN.

Thuggery is thuggery. It should be unconditionally condemned regardless of who perpetrates it, and it should not be exploited for political ends. Alex Jones routinely castigates law enforcement for thuggery, but when it comes to thugs connected with a political candidate who has been a guest on his show, the tune changes. Then the thuggery, while still deplorable, becomes acceptable - even justified.

Countdown to Nothing

Since February 18, the day Joseph Stack plowed a plane into the Austin IRS offices, Jones has been declaring that the government will launch false flag domestic terrorist attacks in mid- to late April, then lay the blame on Tea Partiers and/or tax protesters. The target will probably be the IRS.
He bases this not on any inside scoop, but on the fact that a few documentaries critical of the Tea Party astroturfing effort will be released around that time. He seems to ignore the mainstream media's relatively gentle treatment of Stack and his pathological paranoia. Rather than branding Stack a domestic suicide terrorist, which he most certainly was on some level, the media generally focused on his mental instability and declined to describe him as anything other than an unwell man. He also ignores the fact that the Tea Partiers don't have to be discredited, because the blatant racism and menacing behavior of a few TPers has certainly sufficed to make all TPers look like redneck douchebags.

The Phantom Underage Call Boys

There isn't much to say about the health reform issue that I haven't already mentioned (here, for instance), so I won't even go there. Instead, I'll address an offhand comment that Jones made about Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank. Why? Because it's little factoids like these, casually thrown out, that are embedded in the minds of listeners as "facts". I mean, Jones wouldn't say something on the air if it wasn't true, right?
On Monday's show, Jones stated that Barney Frank can get away with "hiring underage call boys".
I had to look this one up, because I don't exactly keep tabs on the sex lives of congressmen.
As it turns out, between 1985 and 1987 a male prostitute, personal assistant, and lover to Frank sometimes took other clients to Frank's apartment. When caught, he alleged that Frank knew all about it (which Frank denied). This was referred to by some of the more conservative media outlets as a "call boy ring", but it was basically just one male prostitute using a boyfriend's house for sex with other clients.

That's pretty much it. The lover, Stephen Gobie, was not underage when he began his relationship with Frank. He was 28. Furthermore, in 1991 the House ethics committee determined Frank did not know about the prostitution "ring". The panel did conclude that a letter Frank sent to a Virginia prosecutor on Gobie's behalf, in his effort to win probation on felony charges, was "misleading", and that he had used House privileges to get rid of parking tickets Gobie received when driving Frank's car. Frank was reprimanded, but the charges were not serious enough to warrant further action.

Chuck Norris: more questions than answers

I never thought I would even care enough to ask this question, but...

Has Chuck Norris lost his damn mind?

On Jones' show yesterday, he actually said Obama is trying to pull a Chavez move on America, that he's working on "annulling" the 2012 elections so he can install himself as lifetime dictator. Gingrich said something similar a while ago (video here), complaining that Obama has signed too many Executive Orders (33). In his first year of office, G.W. Bush signed 54 Executive Orders. Didn't hear a peep from Gingrich about that.
What evidence is there for this move toward dictatorship? What steps has Obama taken to install himself as dictator? Jones complains that Obama wants to "socialize" or "nationalize" absolutely everything, but thus far nothing has been socialized nor federalized. The banks have not been nationalized. The proposed health care plan leaves health care firmly in the hands of private insurance companies.
It looks like the Federal Reserve is going to be audited. Surely a dictator wouldn't allow that to happen, right?

Norris also gave the opinion that if the U.S. ratifies the Copenhagen agreement, Congress should impeach Obama for even attempting to enforce it. It's just a scam designed by guys like George Soros to "bankrupt our economy here in the United States and then come in with international money and take away the dollar”. Seems like a pretty drastic plan just to replace the dollar, dude. And just exactly how does Soros benefit from "bankrupting the economy"?

“If the people don’t rise up, we’re going to have a revolution in our country."

Lovely. Chuck Norris leading the masses in an uprising that will preserve or restore....what, exactly? I mean, what golden age of American history are we harking back to here? Jones hasn't liked any American president since Jackson, only because Jackson hated bankers. Jones talks a lot about the spirit of 1776, but he also seems to think the founding fathers were just like the baddies of today - Freemasonic New World Order occultists with secret agendas.

What kind of country does Chuck Norris want? What kind of country does Alex Jones want?

Galloway

Quite a few Canadians are spitting mad that one of Alex Jones's former guests, British MP George Galloway, is being barred from Canada for admittedly supporting a terrorist organization. Specifically, he provided vehicles to members of Hamas. He is also an enthusiastic defender/supporter of Hezbollah. He's also been agitating for the overthrow of Mubarak in Egypt. In the past, he has expressed admiration for Saddam Hussein and the Taliban (he actually denies his admiration and praise of Hussein, though it was captured on video). On Jones's show in 2005, he and Jones agreed that Zionists sacrificed other Jews in WWII just to get their homeland (yet another example that Jones does talk about Zionism). *Other than all this*, Galloway's a swell guy.


Yes, I know, Hamas was democratically elected. That means it's a democratically elected terrorist organization, nothing more. Argue with me if you want - I'm just stating a fact. And let's not forget that Mubarak, whether you like him or not, was also democratically elected.


The only thing that's truly interesting about the Galloway controversy is that most of the Canadians rallying in support of Galloway also called for the arrest of George W. as a war criminal last week. They want the law to be unevenly applied; let terrorist supporters in, but keep war criminals out.


And it is legal for Canada's Border Security Agency and immigration officials to bar terrorist supporters from entering the country. They did it to Bill Ayers, who despite his professorship and currently bourgeois lifestyle is, after all, a guy who used to blow up buildings and aspire to otherthrow the democratically elected U.S. government.


Galloway has announced his intention to fight the decision.

The Wallace Connection

It's time to examine some of the people and organizations who have influenced and mentored Alex Jones, starting with two seminal figures of the conspiracy world, G. Edward Griffin and Gary Allen...

The Creature from Jacka** Island

Yesterday's guest, G. Edward Griffin, is best-known as the author of the anti-Federal Reserve book The Creature from Jekyll Island (1994). He is a longtime member of the John Birch Society.

It's not as well-known that Griffin was a speechwriter for George Wallace's '68 presidential campaign. He wrote for Wallace's running-mate, Curtis LeMay, the general infamous for writing in his autobiography just three years earlier that the U.S. would bomb North Vietnam "back into the Stone Age". It's generally believed that LeMay was the inspiration for fluoride-phobic Buck Turgidson (played by George C. Scott) in Dr. Strangelove. But LeMay was a study in contradictions; despite his rabid anti-Communism, he was close friends with Mao.

LeMay wasn't Wallace's first choice; he wanted Kentucky governor and former baseball commissioner Happy Chandler. But Birchers like Griffin kicked up a fuss because Chandler had supported the Brooklyn Dodgers' hiring of Jackie Robinson. Major campaign contributor and Bircher Nelson Bunker Hunt demanded that Wallace make Ezra Taft Benson his running mate, but Wallace ignored him.

Throughout the '60s, Griffin produced documentaries about how much Communism and capitalism suck. You'd think that would leave only socialism, but he hates that too. Like all Birchers, he also hates the UN.

In 1974 he wrote a promotional book about Laetrile as the cure for cancer, A World Without Cancer. Jason Bermas recommended it on yesterday's show. In the book, Griffin accused John D. Rockefeller of suppressing this "cure".

In the '90s Griffin became a champion of Ron Wyatt's and David Fasold's theory that Noah's Ark is at the Durupinar site in Turkey, throwing in some Velikovsky-style catastrophism about the Biblical Flood being caused by a large celestial body approaching Earth. I've never quite understood "arkeology". I won't get into the reality of the Flood right now, but there are practical issues to consider. For instance, why wouldn't Noah and fam cannibalize the ark for its wood? Even the Mayflower ended up as a barn, and the pilgrims weren't exactly reconstructing the whole world from scratch.

Anyway, Fasold's radar readings were never duplicated, and Fasold himself came to believe the site was merely a natural formation and "the oldest running hoax in history". Yet Griffin continued to champion the site.

None Dare Call it Bullsh**

In the very first minute of Alex Jones's very first documentary, America: Destroyed by Design, Jones praised Gary Allen's book 1974 book None Dare Call it Conspiracy and New American magazine.

The late Gary Allen, like G. Edward Griffin, was a longtime member of the John Birch Society. And New American is the society's publication.

Allen was also a speechwriter for George Wallace.

And he served as an advisor to the Wallace supporter mentioned earlier, Nelson Bunker Hunt. Bunker Hunt went on to lose his fortune trying to corner the world market in silver in the '80s. Prior to that, he contributed huge sums to The National Endowment for the Preservation of Liberty, a fund-raising organization that was heavily implicated in the Iran-Contra affair. Somehow, he has managed to recoup most of his fortune in just 20 years.

I strongly suspect he was the primary inspiration for Larry Hagman's character in Nixon. No wonder Gary Allen wrote about "Cowboys" (oil tycoons) vs. "Indians" (Eastern Establishment politicos) in None Dare Call it Conspiracy.

I haven't read NDCIC, but I know about its enduring popularity. A friend was reading it just last month. And largely gushing Amazon reviews give some hints of its appeal in the conspiranoia community, as well as its flaws:

"He believes that the Anti Defamation League was set up just to protect the Rothschilds from criticism."

"He gives an account of how in 1964, David Rockefeller "sacked" Nikita Krushchev. Hardly anything in the USSR was produced without US. patents and machinery. The USSR was sold American arms and components to kill US soldiers in Vietnam."

To be fair, one reviewer makes a rather sensible obversation that will wrap up this post nicely. I support states' rights, but as this person points out, there are certain conditions in which federal intervention becomes necessary - and it's guys like George Wallace and the '60s-era Birchers who create those conditions:

"he decries the limitations that were imposed upon the right of State Governments to decide their own affairs, during the Civil Rights Era...During the Civil Rights Era the powers of the Federal Government were expanded to end segregation. Well, should the Federal Government have stood by and done nothing while atrocities against African Americans were being perpetrated?...The truth is that Southern Governors helped to place limitations upon the rights of States to decide their own affairs, by giving the Federal Government a moral imperative to act. For if Southern Governors, such as George Wallace of Alabama, had done the right thing and ended segregation, the Federal Government would not have had to step in and curtail the powers of the State Governments to decide their own affairs."