[harpseal]

Before you say you'll take milton Freidman's word for something you probably should actually read what he wrote as you have cited Adam Smith and oviously never read him.

[harpseal]

Got the address wrong that was to KDD with you as cc

[KDD]

I don't know how you could possibly come to the conclusion that Smith was a protectionist, unless you're defining 'protectionist' in some way different from me. I would define the term as someone who advocates the use of import restraints for the purpose of giving an advantage to domestic firms over foreign ones. This most certainly is not Adam Smith.

You list what Smith himself describes as "exceptions" to the principle of free trade. This does not in any way make him a protectionist. I shall also allow Smith to speak for himself:

It is the maxim of every prudent master of a family, never to attempt to make at home what it will cost him more to make than to buy. The taylor does not attempt to make his own shoes, but buys them from the shoemaker. The shoemaker does not attempt to make his own clothes, but employs a taylor. The farmer attempts to make neither the one nor the other, but employs different artificers. All of them find it for their interest to employ their whole industry in a way in which they have some advantage over their neighbors, and to purchase with a part of its produce, or what is the same thing, with the price of a part of it, whatever else they have occasion for.

What is prudence in the conduct of every private family, can scare be folly in that of a great kingdom. If a foreign country can supply us with a commodity cheaper than we ourselves can make it, better buy it of them with some part of our own industry, employed in a way in which we have some advantage.

Smith was no protectionist, and if you really believe otherwise, then you have an awful lot to learn about him.