Libertarians Without Borders: An Interview with Tom Palmer about the Arab Spring

[nonosh]

Libertarian thinking benefits the world. I'm an Armenian individual with dual citizenship for both United States and Jordan. Indeed, I believe liberty does not have borders.

[MIT2004]

the barack obama ad next to this video is hilarious. and it asks "are you in" there should be a yes or no button, of course i would press the NO button

[UTubekookdetector]

Libya, Haiti (I list Haiti because we've intervened there several times), et al will always be poor and downtrodden until they fundamentally change the way their govt operates. Libya will most likely sink back into an authoritarian society, NATO & US involvement there will do no good.

[bahraouik]

All great movements are popular movements. They are the volcanic eruptions of human passions and emotions, stirred into activity by the ruthless Goddess of Distress or by the torch of the spoken word cast into the midst of the people...By Adolf Hitler.

[bahraouik]

Mr Palmer is One smart america...Bravo!

[8bitRicky]

This guy reminds me of the dry cleaner/actor from Flight of the Conchords.

[goPistons06]

To me Tom Palmer is one of the most eloquent defenders of classical liberalism in the world.

[KingGoomba19]

1:03 The women in the back in pink doesn't have a head?

[irajkhodadoost]

America is still the bastion of hope for millions across the globe who vie to enter this land of opportunity, but it was the hope of many that what happened in 1960's against Vietnam and civil rights movements is long passed. The recent violent actions on the part of NYPD against peaceful protesters who voiced their anger against a system that has been hijacked by the 1% (bankers, Wall Street, Big corporations, CEO's) tells us that we should be vigilant against tyranny even today.

[schmoukiz]

"They're the best friends we can have" - Finally a wise approach instead of the ignorant and absurd way of presenting the Arabs as the boogieman of the West.

[chuck3668831]

(Continued) THE FOLLOWING ARE ALL FACTS! Muhammad was a warlord who waged over 60 military campaigns in his life conquering the pagans and converting them into Islam by force, The Koran says if you leave Islam the penalty is death, blaspheme Islam the penalty is death, dishonor Islam the penalty is death. It has 109 WAR VERSES. Not peace verses. WAR VERSES. If you speak of another faith to a Muslim it is his duty to kill you. Muslims are so moderate which explains the lack of peace and tolerance

[chuck3668831]

This guy is dead wrong. The vast majority of Muslims work towards toleration? Which is why Christianity has been nearly wiped from the Middle East. Christianity has a 7 century head start on Islam yet there is not one Christian majority country. Hmmm why is that I wonder because Islam is tolerant? And the one Jewish state in the region is routinely subject to calls for its annihilation. The few Christians there are live under persecution and terror. And yes Islam is violence.

[hawkermustang]

Sharia Law is coming to all these Islamic states. Islam and freedom don't mix!

[dwoods828]

Newsflash...Islam is NOT a religion...Islam is a system...Sharia is the law...jihad is the way...

[audioblogs12]

A high school student could read Atlas Shrugged.

How do i know? I am a high school student who is currently in the middle of chapter 9 of part 1 of Atlas Shrugged. It's pretty good so far.

[vonGleichenT]

nice men

[TheEuunul]

Oh yeah, we all see how democracy and free market is implemented by the newly instaled goverments. LOL! Islamist partys are wining the elections and gues what kind of economic ideology islam has? Search for terms like zakat and jizia to see libertarian dream :))

[kusari86]

@TheEuunul The HORRORS. A 2.5% tax and you only pay it if your wealth surpasses a certain threshold! Who the hell do they think they are; don't they know that taxes are the price we pay for civilization?

Seriously, where do you Babbitts get your info from, Glen Beck?

''O ye who believe! Eat not up your property among yourselves in vanities: But let there be amongst you traffic and trade by mutual consent: and kill not one another: for verily Allah hath been to you Most Merciful!'' -NISA 4:29

[TheEuunul]

@kusari86

GTFO! Zakat is a tax totaly contrary to libertarian economic ideology. Forcing someone to be charitable is not the libertarian way.

And jizia is even worst becouse, is an discriminatory tax.

[richardcadbury]

Nothing libertarian AT ALL is gonna come out of Arabia anytime soon.

[kusari86]

@richardcadbury The only state in the world today that backs its monetary transaction with gold is Islamic (Malaysia's Kelantan State) and smaller communities in Muslim Indonesia have adopted gold and silver coins for marketplace transactions. Ghaddafi himself wanted to introduce a gold dinar and accept payment for oil in gold only. He has since been taken care of. 

[richardcadbury]

@kusari86 I said *Arabia*. The Malay Archipelago isn't even close...lol

And if you're going to hold up Ghaddafi as even remotely freedom-loving because he wanted gold in exchange for his nationalised oil, then libertarianism is a broader tent than I'd ever imagined.

[migkillertwo]

I knew I heard that tune in a gun video

[aerocabin]

The criminals who call themselves the "government of canada" did a similar thing to me. I ran a successful business importing used cars for 6 years. One day they arbitrarily seized (stole) a shipment of my cars without legal justification. I was forced to hire a lawyer. Six months and $30,000 later the criminals backed down before it went to court.

I sold the business soon after and haven't worked since. I never thought to set myself on fire, but my hatred for statism was cemented for good.

[Asmodeus13X]

And yet we move ever closer to an autocratic government here, go figure...

[EuphoricImpact]

I am highly suspicious if multiple Think Tanks are involved.

[landofthefreemyass]

A man in NH also set himself on fire in front of a government building. It's not isolated to the middle east.

[Vegemighty]

They have the same hair!

[REWHBLCAIN]

Paul wants no border fence to be finished!

[MetalConfuscation]

Libya was "sparked" by NATO bombs, lies and false accusations, it had nothing in common with Egypt or Tunisia

[Mezey5]

@MetalConfuscation If i remember the revolution started before NATO came along, NATO just helped the revolution succeed.

[Panzerfaust04]

@MetalConfuscation When NATO got involved, Gaddafi's forces were at the gates of Benghazi and getting ready to butcher the population there. I can totally understand being against the war in Libya, but it's not correct to say that NATO sparked the conflict. For the first month (late February to late March) it was the Libyan people fighting alone, then the intervention happened at about the last possible moment.

[MetalConfuscation]

@Panzerfaust04 The difference between your post and what was spoon fed to the mindless viewing public by the news on TV is that you left out the lie of thousands butchered or raped by viagra crazed soldiers.

[Panzerfaust04]

@MetalConfuscation ...okay, so explain how I'm wrong. You can call me an idiot and a liar but that's not exactly debunking what I said on any level. As far as I know, I'm correct. If you'd like me to consider your perspective, try giving it to me.

[TheTomGPalmer]

@MetalConfuscation Your statement is a straightforward error. The demonstrations against Gadaffi were underway before Sarkozy launched a campaign for NATO involvement. NATO did not spark the revolt against Gadaffi. The start of the revolt had a great deal in common with Egypt and Tunisia. That fact is independent of whether the NATO intervention was warranted or with any counterfactual speculation about how the revolt would have turned out in its absence. You should admit your error.

[MetalConfuscation]

@TheTomGPalmer The demonstration (or protests) were a far cry from a "revolt" (as you erroneously call it) and what ultimately occurred. In addition to that, it was not those who were demonstrating that carried out the destruction (on the ground) of what Libya had become. So, You are the erroneous one, not me, so I have nothing to admit .

[TheTomGPalmer]

@MetalConfuscation When people protest and are killed and then respond by violence, that constitutes a revolt. It started before NATO intervention. Google "libya revolt timeline." It's not really so hard to do. There's no shame in admitting that you got your facts wrong. Moreover, it doesn't entail admitting to or endorsing any other claim, e.g., supporting the NATO intervention or approving the killing of Gadaffi or endorsing anyone's actions. It's just a matter of getting the facts straight.

[ventura433]

@MetalConfuscation they have all been influence by the west without us they would not have a framework of how democracy looks like. the U.S. has done many wrong things but we are still better of than many other places.

[rdemanow]

"Unaccountable governments that are corrupt and brutal" ... much like ours here in the US.

We really should be setting a better example for the world.

[TheLegalImmigrant05]

@rdemanow "Unaccountable governments that are corrupt and brutal" - like there is any other kind :)

[asleeperj]

@rdemanow Amen. Our involvement in the middle east has gone on for far too long, and when bad things happen, (9-11) our response is even MORE involvement. Talk about illogical.

[chuck3668831]

@rdemanow Yeah the US government is really brutal. Why don't you go to North Korea and lets see if we hear how bad the US government is then?

[rdemanow]

@chuck3668831 Yeah, what agents of the American government could shoot peaceful protesters at will? Oh, wait ...

What if the President could decide that there's "enough evidence" to order the killing of American citizens without a trial? Oh, wait ...

What if police in America could write their own search warrants without being required to get them signed by a judge? Oh, wait ...

What if the American government could lie about the existence of documents requested under FOIA? Oh, wait ...

[chuck3668831]

@rdemanow It wasn't a peaceful protest. One of the protesters sicked a dog on a reporter and there was fighting among them. Secondly you don't get to be an enemy of the constitution then say but I deserve rights and a trial. You don't get to continue murdering people from a hiding place in a foreign land and wait until someone can arrest you for it to stop. So Obama should send our troops into harms way to extract him alive? There is a penalty called treason and the punishment is death. Grow up.

[rdemanow]

@chuck3668831 The fifth amendment to the Constitution expressly guarantees that, regardless of how heinous the crime, the accused shall not be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. That means a trial by jury before a judge, and the presentation of evidence.

The killing of Awlaki - an American citizen - on the President's order, without a trial, makes the Obama administration an enemy of the Constitution.

[chuck3668831]

@rdemanow Not if the person joins with an enemy we are fighting during wartime. If a German American during WW2 went and joined up with the Nazis you are saying his life is off limits? He can continue to kill as many American soldiers as he likes until we can capture him alive and bring him back for a trial? The president's purpose is to protect and defend the constitution and the American people. If an American joins up with the enemy in a foreign land not in Americans jurisdiction who care.

[rdemanow]

@chuck3668831 We should all care, because if we don't, then we are not a nation ruled by laws, but one ruled merely by the whims of men.

Under the Constitution, the government is supposed to represent the people.

So, if we, the people, allow our government to engage in behaviour that would get an ordinary citizen imprisoned, then how is our government is any better (or any different) from Hitler's, Stalin's, Pol Pot's, Castro's, or Kim Jong Il's?

[chuck3668831]

@rdemanow So why aren't the Democrats calling for Obama's impeachment? He ordered the strike. He is commander and chief. And again thanks for not acknowledging my points. Rights can be waived. Like you can waive the right to an attorney if you don't want one. I would say joining the enemy and conducting terror while we are at war waives some rights. Al Awlaki was a sworn enemy of the constitution. No longer a citizen under it.

[rdemanow]

@chuck3668831 Even Robert Hanssen and the Rosenbergs got trials. Regardless of how heinous the treason, the Constitution requires it.

Like I said before, without those restrictions, if the government and it's agents can just do whatever they please without any accountability, there can be no rule of law.

A person's waiving specific Constitutionally protecte rights does not give government agents carte blanche to ignore due process.

[chuck3668831]

@rdemanow The Rosenbergs and Hanssen did not go to an enemy country and aid in the deaths of Americans. They were caught here in America. You fail to acknowledge that fact. If we did get Awlaki then what? He gets released on a technicality because we didn't extradite him properly or brought him from a foreign land without a proper extradition process against his will? So he can go back and plot more terror? And those cases you mentioned were spies. Not active support of enemy combatants.

[kev3d]

@chuck3668831 It doesn't matter where the spies were caught, its the fact that they were charged and given a trial. Charles Manson was given a trial, Mary Suratt was given a trial, even Nazi and Japanese war criminals were given Military trials. Proper trials (Not soviet style show trials) are critical to preserving liberty, for if the government can suspend the right to trial, it can suspend any rights of anyone for any reason it likes.

[chuck3668831]

@kev3d It does matter because you can't hold an American trial in a foreign country. Extradition laws matter.You can't just send troops in to kidnap someone drag him here and hold a trial. And if you are assisting the enemy in a time of war in a land where the enemy is hiding sorry, but you deserve to get killed.You can't go join Al Qaeda and expect the US to say oh we can't bomb that house because one American citizen is inside.You can't fight against US troops and not expect them to put u down

[kev3d]

@chuck3668831 Extradition laws matter? The constitution is the highest law of the land and applies to all citizens, thus you are holding a foreign extradition treaty above the US constitution. It is odd to suggest that "sending in troops" would be illegal yet bombing its A-Okay. By the way, the US is not at war with Yemen. The reality is, if they can tell what car a person is traveling in, they can get local authorities to capture and extradite him. This was not a battlefield snap decision.

[chuck3668831]

@kev3d And where does the US constitution give the US authority to go into a country as you mentioned we aren't at war with and capture an American citizen? Can the government break down your door in the middle of the night and take you away? Your door is on US soil. His is in a foreign country. And no we aren't at war with Yemen. We are at war with Al Qaeda however. And joining it makes you an enemy of the US. American citizen or not.

[rdemanow]

@chuck3668831 "We are at war with Al Qaeda"

Then where is the declaration of war from the Congress that the Constitution demands?

[kev3d]

@chuck3668831 If you read what I wrote, you'd see ..." if they can tell what car a person is traveling in, they can get local authorities to capture and extradite him. " This has been done dozens, if not hundreds of times. Citizens still have rights, even if they are not on US soil. If you want to be inconsistent, just say damn the constitution and be done with it, but don't pretend you care about extradition treaties or what authority the government has or doesn't have in such matters.

[rdemanow]

@chuck3668831 Enemy combatants? Enemy country? What enemy country?

If Yemen is an "enemy country", then where's the Congressional declaration of war demanded by the Constitution? Without it, they are not an "enemy country", and Awlaki is not an "enemy combatant", but a murderer, and according to the Constitution the law must treat him just like any other murderer.

[rdemanow]

@chuck3668831 Obama's being president makes him EVEN MORE responsible for his violations of the Constitution.

You ask why there aren't more people calling for his impeachment? Simple: For generations now, we Americans have been indoctrinated to be obedient to "the authorities", regardless of whether what they're telling us to do is right or wrong.

Example: Under the UCMJ, American soldiers are *required* to disobey illegal orders. How many of them have you seen do that in the last 50 years?

[kev3d]

@rdemanow Hear hear! 

[rdemanow]

@chuck3668831 If one of the protesters sicced a dog on a reporter, then the reporter has the right to sue THAT INDIVIDUAL, and the police have the right to arrest THAT INDIVIDUAL and bring him/her before a judge for arraignment and trial, not tear gas the entire crowd, taze anyone they please, and shoot rubber bullets randomly into the crowd.

[luvcheney1]

@rdemanow As if it is possible to interview individually a mob, and get answers that are credible.

[luvcheney1]

@rdemanow You are right. Lets just say fuck it, and let the terrorist blow everything up. Were done.

[sileb13]

@rdemanow I agree, but at least we're luckier than most here in the US.

[Cleopas82]

Executive "Something or other"?

[SeppLainer]

@Cleopas82

White humour.

[Cleopas82]

@SeppLainer I'm white and I don't get it.  Maybe Welch opted for "something or other" over "Executive shishmishbrlarbleblarble"

[SeppLainer]

meh, you're obviously not white enough to get it....

[iamaliberal]

100th