return to Carol's Libertarian Party page     return to CarolMoore.Net
WHY LIBERTARIANS WANTED TO BOOT
OR DEBATE BOORTZ AT THE 2004 LP CONVENTION
(includes Carol Moore's reply to Boortz' January 1, 2004 desperation attack)

Boot Boortz from LP's 2004 Convention Petition | Debate Boortz at LP's 2004 Convention Petition 
 Do A Boot Boortz or Make Boortz Debate E-Mail to Convention Organizers

See Carol Moore's LIBERTYFORALL.NET article:
IS APPLYING LIBERTARIAN PRINCIPLES TO ISRAEL ANTI-SEMITIC??

EXCERPTS FROM
GEORGE WASHINGTON'S FAREWELL ADDRESS
To the People
of the United States

FRIENDS AND FELLOW-CITIZENS:

.... You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the Independence and Liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts, of common dangers, sufferings, and successes....
    Observe good faith and justice towards all Nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all....
    .... nothing is more essential, than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular Nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The Nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the Government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The Government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times, it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of Nations has been the victim.
     So likewise, a passionate attachment of one Nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite Nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite Nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the Nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained; and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens, (who devote themselves to the favorite nation,) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.
     
As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent Patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practise the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the Public Councils! Such an attachment of a small or weak, towards a great and powerful nation, dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.
     Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens,) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove, that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of Republican Government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defence against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation, and excessive dislike of another, cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots, who may resist the intrigues of the favorite, are liable to become suspected and odious; while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.
....

George Washington

 September 17, 1796



    My New Year's Resolution was to become rich, famous and influential in 2004, and it's already coming true.  On the very first day of the year, Atlanta talk show host Neal Boortz featured me on his web page, someone gave me hundreds of dollars of classic videos I easily can sell online, and I put a petition that will be seen by tens of thousands of Americans and signed by hundreds of libertarians.
      This is the most publicity I've gotten since I was interviewed and appeared on ABC-TV's NIGHTLINE after the Oklahoma City bombing criticizing the government's massacre of 82 men, women and children at Waco . See the complete text of my book THE DAVIDIAN MASSACRE, published by Gun Owners Foundation, plus lots of other relevant information.  (I helped the Davidians get nationally known Second Amendment attorney Steve Halbrook to take their appeal; in 2000 the Supreme Court cut 130 years off six Davidian prisoner's sentences.)
        Neal Boortz position on Waco?  Consider that he boasted in April 2003 on his web page: "We took Iraq in less time than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51-day operation." Give Boortz know aggressiveness, it sounds like Boortz wants to send the FEDS after after gun owners, as well as peaceniks, per the below!  My g-g-g-g-grandfather, who was the head of the militia at Concord on April 19, 1775, would turn over in his grave!
        But I digress... let's start at the beginning....to get to the end ...Why Boortz is so DESPERATE to attack Carol Moore.

Earlier Libertarian Criticism of Boortz
      Libertarians need only read through Neal Boortz' most recent writings on his web page or his Newsmax column to find statements that attack individual liberty or twist the meaning of libertarianism.  Rather than do so I'll just mention a few comments that came into my mailbox over the last couple years, i.e., the ones that I happened to save:
       January 2001 - Boortz outrages libertarian women by asserting that because women don't vote as he wishes they would, "...we also see why women simply don't need to vote."
      Spring 2002 - Boortz' website comments that seem to support the U.S. attacking Iraq are debated by libertarians.  However, as reported in LIBERTY magazine in fall of 2002, Boortz denied to me in person at the July 2002 LP Convention that he supported invading Iraq.  His later coming out to vocally support Bush's war has continued to anger many libertarians.
     May 2003 - Boortz raised libertarian eyebrows when on Newsmax he not only did not criticize a law forbidding citizens the right to boycott another nation (Israel) but seemed quite content that the U.S. government had enforced the law against an American business man.
     April, 2003 - On his web page (archives unavailable, click here) Boortz listed things that took longer than Operation Iraqi Freedom, without making any attempt to state that while he approved of the U.S. conquest of Iraq he deplored Reno's "taking" (and massacring) 82 members of the Davidian religious group. (Of course I'm attacked every time I criticize Israel without deploring suicide bombings in Israel!)
      June 2003 - Brad Edmonds on LewRockwell.Com attacked Boortz willingness to use tax money to aggress on other nations and his supporting the federal government forcing laws on the states, rather than support individual rights within the states.
     Fall 2003 - Atlanta libertarians criticize Boortz for promoting a "management fee" -- what is effect a tax on the airport passengers at the Atlanta airport -- to pay for sewer system work in the city of Atlanta.
     Some libertarians believe that Boortz is just a Rush Limbaugh imitator who tries to be MORE obnoxious than Rush to boost his ratings and that being a "libertarian" is just a gimmick to help him improve his market share.  But it has been his vocal and vicious support for the Iraq War and the Patriot Act which has most outraged libertarians.

Why Do Libertarians Want to Boot Boortz?
       
Neal Boortz spoke at at the 2000 and 2002 Libertarian Party Convention Banquets. At the 2002 Convention I specifically asked Boortz about attacking Iraq.  As I wrote in my Convention Report, published in LIBERTY magazine:
 Boortz was more garrulous. When I asked him about a quotation on his web site that seemed to support invading Iraq, he replied: “I don't think we should invade, I think we should just nuke them!” After laughing heartily, he assured me at length that he really was for a non-interventionist foreign policy and I left 90% convinced.
      However, in
late November, 2003 Antiwar.com columnist Justin Raimondo  attacked Boortz in an article copiously entitled: Boot Boortz! Neal Boortz is a fascist, not a libertarian. So why is he speaking at the Libertarian Party’s national convention? Raimondo cited Boortz support for the Iraq War and Occupation, as well as for the notorious Patriot Act.  He quoted Boortz support for FBI spying on peace activists -- many of  whom are libertarians. "The FBI is investigating the backgrounds and organizational methods of antiwar demonstrators in the US. Hopefully that doesn't come as a surprise to you. It is safe to assume that a large number of these demonstrators are out there in the streets because they want America to fail in its efforts to fight terrorism and its efforts to bring secular representative governments to Iraq and Afghanistan. Translated: Many of these demonstrators are pro-Saddam and anti-US. So, who wouldn't want them investigated by the FBI?"
   Outraged libertarians sprang into action.
  In early December Missouri LP member Tom Knapp, after consulting with Libertarians for Peace members on our yahoogroup, put up a PetitiononLine under the auspices of "Libertarians for a Boortz-Free Convention" http://www.petitiononline.com/noboortz/petition.html As of January 1, 2004 it already had well over 600 signatures, mostly from Libertarian Party members and supporters.  Justin Raimondo published a follow-up column.  Non-libertarian Atlanta columnist John Sugg questioned Boortz libertarian credentials in an article entitled "Neal Boortz is No John Galt." He especially lampooned Boortz stating that Bush never lied to Americans about the reasons for the Iraq War.

      Many libertarian signers of the "Boot Boortz" petition, as well as many other libertarians, also expressed support for 2004 Libertarian Party Convention Planners' featuring a debate between Boortz and an articulate, high profile and hard core Libertarian Party member like Harry Browne, Jacob Hornberger, Sheldon Richman, Mary Gingell, John Clifton, Mary J. Ruwart, etc.
 

Boortz Attacks On Libertarians
     
Boortz obviously has not gone out of his way to exempt libertarians from his exhortations to the FBI to spy on peace activists -- not that such an exemption would excuse him, of course!  And once libertarians began  petitioning for canceling his appearance, or perhaps more threateningly, calling for Boortz to DEBATE a hard core libertarian, he really went ballistic.
      Boortz has used his radio show and web site to attack the petition and libertarians calling for cancellation of his appearance.  He even encouraged his millions of listeners to sign the petition in order to support him, but only a dozen or so did so.  However, Boortz ignored numerous comments from those who have challenged him to debate.

Israel Supporters Attacks on Libertarians -
      Most hard core libertarians don't have a problem with Jews establishing Israel on justly acquired land -- i.e., the 7% of Palestine they had justly bought from original owners plus another maybe 10% of justly homesteaded unoccupied desert since 1948.  But many have a problem with the fact Israel drove off 700,000 Palestinians in 1948 and confiscated their land and then conquered Gaza and the West Bank in 1967 and have settled hundreds of thousans of Israelis on confiscated Palestinian lands there.
    And from time to time some libertarians dare to say so. Such honest and principled outspokenness provokes attacks from Israel supporters.
    In August of 2003 WorldNetDaily.Com published a column by "libertarian" Ilana Mercer attacking several leading libertarians with inflammatory and largely inaccurate accusations that their view on Israel were anti-Semitic.  "Libertarians who loathe Israel"
    Two of the libertarians attacked immediately replied, Sheldon Richman 'Disregard for the truth' and Justin Raimondo's "Note in the Margin" section of another column on antiwar.com.
    Mercer replied to them in yet another insulting screed against on WorldNetDaily.Com "Foaming at the mouth over Israel"
   
WorldNetDaily.Com also published a letter to the editor response to this from Sheldon Richman.  At this point Jacob G. Hornberger weighed in with "Shame on WorldNetDaily"  Fox News Commentator Wendy McElroy also criticized the Mercer column.
        WorldNetDaily commentary editor Tom Ambrose then weighed in with yet another screed against libertarians "Big, bad Israel?"
        Despite these attacks, various libertarians continue to defend libertarian views on the issue all over the Internet and will continue to do so, including in Libertarian Party campaigns
.  This, of course, is what infuriates these virulent Israel supporters.
     
  As we shall see, Boortz also has joined the chorus of neoconservatives smearing as anti-Semites libertarians who dare to apply  libertarian standards to Israel and its supporters.  In doing so Boortz joins the sleazy company of those "dual loyalists" and "Israel Firsters" who put protecting the expansionist ambitions of the Israel's Likkud government above the safety of Americans here at home.
    
Per quotations to the left, George Washington warned about dupes like Boortz who attack those who truly love liberty. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people to surrender their interests.


Boortz Attack on Carol Moore
Carol Moore, in her usual outspoken fashion, managed to annoy Boortz because she kept ccing and blind ccing him on her e-mails to thousands of libertarians on dozens of lists encouraging them to either sign the petition or tell organizers they wanted Boortz to debate.  She has been the most vocal proponent of the Convention Planners asking Boortz to DEBATE a hard core libertarian. She also had the temerity to produce and sell this funny button to libertarians, sending Boortz one gratis, of course.  Just $1.50 at http://www.radicalbuttons.com/bootboortz.html
       Boortz was aided in his attack by Steve Sass, an objectivist national sales tax advocate who has dug his spurs deep into the Libertarian Party of Maryland. (Later note: He later quit the party and joined the Republican Party.) Sass is a Jewish Defense League-wannabe who has been moderated on at least three libertarian lists (including the Maryland libertarian discussion list) for his inability to be civil, rational OR libertarian when it comes to criticism of his favorite nation, Israel. (
Click here to see a tiny sample of the obnoxious comments, fulsome rants and indirect threats of violence Steve Sass directs at libertarians who do not cow tow to his view of Israel's infallibility - including
exhortations that other libertarians commit suicide and not very subtle indications he'd like someone to kill them, not forgetting to mention his own ownership of guns.)
      Sass forwarded my very public June 16, 2003 e-mail on Libertarians for Peace below.  I confess that my reply to Senator Lugar's suggestion the U.S. send troops to "root out terrorists" in Israel was an angry over-reaction to Sass' constant badgering and defacto death threats on the Maryland, Libertarians for Peace, Libertarian and Individual Sovereignty yahoo groups.
All of those attacks and threats were prompted by my (and others) much more calm and rational comments than those in my angry/frustrated rant.  Attacking people for rational comments until they say or write something stupid is the strategy of low lifes like Sass.

The Boortz page content is in red, taken from 
the January 1, 2004 issue.  My reply, including corrections to factual errors, follows.  (NOTE: Given Israel supporters' continued attacks on me for this one stupid email, I posted arelevant blog comment and full commentary on 2/14/2011.)

WHO IS CAROL MOORE?
       Carol Moore is one of the people pushing the "Boot Boortz" movement to get the Libertarian Party to boot me off of the convention speaking agenda in 2004.  But Carol Moore seems to be so much more than that.  Here's a recent posting From Carol More to a Yahoo chat group.  This posting was made last June ... well before the blatantly anti-Semitic Ms. Moore turned her sights on me.

     Sharon would love to have Hamas killing American troops, just like he's delighted to see them killing Jews, since it makes his facist goals of "leibenstraum" and grabbing the rest of Israel that much easier by inflaming the public.
      I'm getting tired of turning on the news first thing in the AM and seeing the TOP story is what is going on in Israel. And it disgusts me to have to watch a congressional sub-committee dominated by pro-Zionists reaming Bush for the TINY little bit he is doing to try to keep the Israelis from driving the Arabs out of what little is left of Palestine, which the goyim obviously dare not ask ANY question of the Bush official that might be interpreted as criticism of Israel. And we've seen how Bush is back to Kissing Sharon's Ass. (See my new collection of ANTI-BUSH and Busharon buttons http://www.carolmoore.net/buttons
      And Mr. Sass wonders why this issue keeps coming up here.. If the Israel's just kept their oppression over there, it would be far less annoying.
       Dealing with the nefarious influence of Israel Firsters on Congress and in the media (which is mostly owned and/or controlled by pro-Zionists, mostly Jews) has got to be a prime goal of the peace movement -- but good luck, with left and right wing pro-Zionists ready to yell anti-semite at the drop of a hat. Even the Buddhist Peace group I went to recently was dominated by pro-Zionist Jews. ARGHGH!!!
      What really is a joke is that Howard Dean is running on a theme of "let's take America back" but he's already met with Sharon and has stated he agrees with Likkud polices. Of course, if he wins the pro-Israel anti-Democrats will be in a real tizzy since they'll want to attack him for foreign policy and go after his wife -- but his wife is Jewish (and doubtless very pro-Israel given her spouse's views) so they'll have to pull their punches.
      Meanwhile Israel keeps building up it's 400 nuke arsenal and can now deliver them any where on earth.
      Anyone else want to concentrate on nonviolent SECESSION from our Special Interest (corporations, labor union, military-industrial, Zionist) controlled government??
 
CM

    Now .. if you want to read Carol's posting from the actual chat room .. here's your link.  I can't express how proud I am to have someone like Carol Moore opposing my appearance before the Libertarian convention.

Carol's Reply and Corrections -
     
First, thanks to Neal for spelling my name right and not deleting the link to my web page! Second thanks to Neal for helping me promote secession on his web page! My secession page is http://www.secession.net Third, thanks for informing Libertarians4Peace that our messages are all online for the world to see and learn from.  If you want to see some disgusting Steve Sass rants on the Libs4Peace group, check out June of 2003 before we had to moderate his insulting postings and he quit the list.
      As for corrections, they are as follows:
      First, the local Buddhist peace group finally got a discussion of the Israel issue going and did so in a wonderfully peaceful, rational and enlightened fashion which the likes of Mr. Boortz and Mr. Sass could learn from.
       Second, Howard Dean may in fact have an independent position on Israel, even if one of his campaign co-chairs is the former head of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (aka AIPAC) and his wife and kids are Jewish. Dean claimed on TV this summer that when he met with Israeli Premier Ariel Sharon this spring, Dean told Sharon he would do what he had to to force Israel come to a fair agreement with the Palestinians.  (Not a libertarian position, but surely not a Likkud-puppet one like Bush's, either!)
       I have come to think Dean, like a lot of us who have had numerous Jewish friends and lovers over a life time, just knows how to talk turkey with Jewish people.  Let's face it, a lot of gentiles outside (and even inside) the major metropoli know hardly any Jews and are uncomfortable expressing their real thoughts and feelings with them.
       Third, I think a lot of people will wonder how I define "mostly" -- in my discussion of control of media and Congress. HINT: mostly does not mean "totally" or "100%" -- it means "highly influential" or "60 or 70%."  I'm always willing to argue the details rationally, as opposed to all those silencers of free speech yelling "anti-Semite" at the least raised eyebrow on Israel's latest confiscation of property or murder of an innocent bystander - or AIPAC's latest ousting of any Congressman or Radio Talk Show Host who doesn't whole heartedly support Israel -- or worse dares to criticize it.
          Finally, let me re-iterate for the umpteenth time -- as a nonviolence advocate I believe Palestinians should forswear violent action, against both civilians and the ever-present Israeli soldiery and armed settlers, except in situations of dire self-defense. (See my site http://whatwouldgandhido.net ) They would be far more successful adopting massive nonviolent civil disobedience.  Even Israel can't get away with shooting down dozens of unarmed civilians day after day in the streets.
         But considering that I haven't even convinced Libertarian Party members in their platform to forswear revolutionary violence against government officials, police and military members, pardon me if I cannot knock myself out arguing it to Hamas!  
         Hmmm.  I wonder if Mr. Boortz has ever read the Libertarian Party's revolutionary planks on individual sovereignty and human rights? Once he does, he'll probably e-mail these "terrorist political positions" to the FBI!

Carol's Relevant Writings

Middle East Issues and Emotions: 1986 and 2003 An article I wrote in 1986 when the American peace movement finally was "breaking the silence" on the issues of United States aid to Israel and Israeli oppression of Palestinians.  In the 16 years since that article was published, American peace and antiwar movements have progressed to the point members can speak openly about, and organize around, these issues without automatic charges of "anti-Semitism."  My new article addresses both the updated political issues and the continuing emotional issues around Middle East organizing -- especially in the libertarian movement.

Voices for Israel-Palestine Confederation on Secession.Net: Palestinians have been trying to "secede" from Israel's UN-mandated occupation for more than 50 years, as well as to regain their confiscated property.  Yet Israelis also have a right to live in the "Promised Land" on their justly acquired (or if necessary, justly compensated) lands, which today might be 15-20 percent, including land that truly was previously unowned.  The voices below describe various confederal options. Perhaps only a transcendent political solution like confederation, arrived at through nonviolent negotiation, can resolve this conflict. 

New Debate Boortz Petition
      Since Carol Moore has been the most vocal proponent of the Convention Planners asking Boortz to DEBATE a hard core libertarian, one must wonder if Boortz' attack was motivated by a DESPERATE FEAR OF DEBATING A HARD CORE LIBERTARIAN.
      I decided it was time to give those libertarians who want a debate a chance to sign a petition.  I don't know if it the DEBATE BOORTZ petition will get as many votes as the BOOT BOORTZ petition, since moderate people are less likely to sign a petition than angry people.   But I thought it was worth a try.  (As of January 4, 2003 it's over 60 signatures.)
       Sign the "Libertarians Requesting Neal Boortz Debate a Libertarian" petition at: http://www.petitiononline.com/debatelp/petition.html  For your convenience, text below:

To:  Libertarian Party 2004 National Convention Planners and Neal Boortz

Given that over 600 individuals, mostly Libertarian Party members and supporters, have as of January 1, 2004 signed a PetitionOnLine requesting that Atlanta, Georgia talk show host Neal Boortz’ appearance at the Libertarian Party 2004 Convention in Atlanta be CANCELED because of Boortz’ consistent misrepresentation of libertarian views... See http://www.petitiononline.com/noboortz/petition.html

Given that many of these individuals, as well as many non-signers, have expressed the desire that alternately Neal Boortz DEBATE a libertarian with hard core libertarian positions on non-intervention, government spying, Second Amendment rights and other issues...

Given that most Libertarian Party members and convention attendees are disgusted that Neal Boortz might be allowed to speak unchallenged as a “libertarian” when Boortz supports invading foreign nations; encourages FBI spying on peace activists, including libertarians; boasts that the military took out Iraq quicker than Janet Reno took out the Second Amendment-loving Branch Davidians; smears libertarian critics of special interests and foreign governments Boortz supports, etc....

Given that IF there is no debate Boortz’ many critics are considering organizing a protest at Boortz’ Atlanta office and/or a protest outside the LP Atlanta Convention and/or a “Boortz Debate” which will include a Boortz stand-in...

We request that Libertarian Party 2004 Convention Planners ask Neal Boortz to debate an articulate, high profile libertarian well-known for his or her hard core support for the libertarian principle of non-initiation of force, including as reflected in the Libertarian Party platform. http://www.lp.org/issues/platform We also request that Mr. Boortz accept such a debate.

This petition will remain available for signing through May 26, 2004, the day prior to the opening of the Libertarian Party's 2004 national convention in Atlanta, Georgia.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned


Carol Moore January 1, 2004  (updated January 4, 2004)