auction, and that his paper money notesrnare fraudulent but that T-bills and thernnew $100 note are not.rnMr. Clark’s is a tragic story. This familyrnwas tricked by the fed’s manipulationrnof interest rates (which was heralded in arnliberal media campaign), sucked into thernfarm welfare racket, and then had itsrnfarm confiscated by the very people whornclaimed to be helping it all along. We’rernsupposed to be surprised that some peoplernwill buy into a cranky monetary theoryrnand adopt exotic political ideologies tornkeep the FBI and other federal agenciesrnfrom destroying their lives?rnWhat is puzzling about this case—rnand puzzling too about the mountingrncases of other groups targeted by thernFBI—is why the federal governmentrnshould be involved at all. We’re talkingrnabout, at worst, $2 million of funny money,rnwhich the Freemen never tried tornpawn off as government-approved paperrncurrency or checks. Most of the peoplernwho got it didn’t accept it; those who didrnknew what they were doing, and werernoften associated with local and state taxrnoffices and other agencies.rnIf media reports are correct, thernFreemen are hardly the only ones engagedrnin issuing these “liens” againstrnagencies and their employees. Besides,rncredit card fraud alone runs into tens ofrnbillions per year, yet the feds are not involvedrnin every case. There are severalrncrackhouses in a neighboring town, oftenrnswarming with visitors, that are not surroundedrnby FBI officials. The Crips andrnthe Bloods, who kill and maim people,rnare not broken up as conspiracies againstrnthe public. For that matter, the fed.rnCongress, and the White House canrndump $40 billion on a bankrupt foreignrngovernment, and you are called a nutcasernfor even looking into it.rnNo, we all know that the FBI’s actionsrnin this case, and in many others, are designedrnto make the point that radical politicalrndissent will not be tolerated. It’srnroughly the same point the governmentrntried to make, much more violently, atrnWaco and Ruby Ridge. Today, we arernsupposed to celebrate the governmentrnfor having the “patience” not to havernstormed the farm and killed people,rnsince the regs no longer allow agencies tornissue shoot-on-sight orders. How sanguinernwe’ve all become to unconstitutionalrnviolations of liberty and rights.rnIn his state of the union address, Clintonrnexplained that we should “never—rnever—shut the federal governmentrndown again.” If we did not have a government,rnhe went on, Americans wouldrnbe “left to fend for themselves,” preciselyrnwhat more and more people are pleadingrnfor the opportunity to do. Ever morerngovernment resources are devoted tornmaking sure they cannot. We might sayrnthat the purpose of the present regime isrnto prevent any group from claiming to bernfreemen, ever again.rnJeffrey A. Tucker is research director forrnthe Ludwig von Mises Institute inrnAuburn, Alabama.rnMEDIArnMcCarthyism inrnManhattanrnbyMarkRachornLast August I wrote an article in thesernpages, “Radio Days,” in which I describedrnWABC talk radio as the only conservativernvoice to be heard in New YorkrnCity and the tri-state area. That voice isrnnow gone; although WBC remains onrnthe air, the station has lost its teeth. OnrnApril 17, the morning papers announcedrnthat “racist” talk-show host Bob Grantrnhad been fired, and that his brilliant colleaguernJay Diamond had “taken a temporaryrnleave of absence.”rnThis may not seem important tornreaders in the greater United States (andrnbeyond), but wherever New York leads,rnother places seem to follow. New Yorkrnand the surrounding states are so givenrnover to absolutist liberalism that the lossrnof the last few vestigial organs of an alternativernpoint of view must be deplored.rnSadly, even the feebly conservative NewrnYork Post could not muster a defense ofrnMr. Grant when the media monolithrnmoved in.rnWhy did Mr. Grant get fired? Hernmade the mistake of being conservative,rnand passionately so. How did Mr. Grantrnget fired? The Disney Corporation recentlyrnacquired WBC. Having refusedrnto part with its subsidiary MiramaxrnFilms’ anti-Catholic movie Priest and thernobscene Kiefs (a film that graphically portraysrnyoung children having sex), Disneyrnsuddenly discovered what it imaginesrnto be ethics and then leaned on WBC,rnafter a campaign of slander by suchrnparagons of virtue as Jesse Jackson, AlrnSharpton, and the “media watchdog”rnFAIR. Fairness and Accuracy In Reportingrnhas long nursed a hatred for WABCrnand its hosts, putting out a carefully editedrntape of Mr. Grant and Mr. Diamond’srnracier quotes.rnIn FAIR’S woddview, any criticism of arnblack person by a white is “racist,” andrnthe tape of Mr. Grant appears to provernthe point. According to the tape, blacksrnare “savages,” “maggots,” and “animals,”rnand the local television news media delightedrnin playing cuts from it. ChannelrnFive news actually denigrated Mr.rnGrant’s listeners for daring to listen to hisrnprogram. The New York papers spoke ofrn”the words of hate that built Grant’srntomb.” What they omitted to mentionrnwas that Mr. Grant’s “words of hate”rnwere reserved for such heroes of the blackrncommunity as the rapists who violatedrnthe Central Park jogger and the riotersrnwho burned down sections of Los Angelesrnin 1992. Neither was Grant sparingrnwith his epithets when it came to whiternsavages, but the New York Times and itsrnacolytes forgot to mention this fact. JackrnNewfield, the aging leftist at the NewrnYork Post, reported that Mr. Grant avoidedrnhaving black guests on his show; perhapsrnNewfield said this because Grant’srnmany black guests were the “wrong kindrnof black,” including Professor WalterrnWilliams and Dr. Thomas Sowell (bothrnof whom Grant often praised as “brilliant”rnand “great Americans”).rnLast month I received the tape FAIRrnhad cobbled together from Grant’s manyrnyears of broadcasting. It was an illsplicedrnand amateurish effort, which anyrncollege radio intern could see through inrnseconds, the words hardly fitting togetherrnand the phrases selected out of context.rnBut that did not stop the monolithrnand its friends in “alternative media”rntrusting the tape’s veracity. I’m surprisedrnsome bright spark did not superimposernMr. Grant’s head on a photograph ofrnCharles Manson.rnThe firing had, of course, been in thernair for a long time, dating from the Republicanrnvictories in New York in 1994.rnMr. Grant’s effective support of Republicanrncandidates rendered him obnoxiousrnto the New York elite. How dare anyonernoppose the saintly orator Mario Cuomo?rnHow dare anyone criticize Mayor Dinkinsrnfor allowing a pogrom to take place inrnJULY 1996/39rnrnrn