Land of the Free or Jim Crow Incarceration Nation?

The number of Americans in prison has risen eight-fold since 1970, despite the fact that crime rates have decreased.  How can that be?  Well,  today, over 2.3 million American citizens, mostly non-violent, are behind bars. Our nation has the largest prison population in the world - with only 5% of the global population, one-quarter of the entire world’s inmates are in the U.S. It is not the land of the free, if it ever was.  And now that the middle class is eroding, people who were once considered reasonably secure in their gated communities, are being thrown to the wolves, so to speak, ripe for picking.  According to FBI statistics, 35,948 Americans are arrested in the US, on a daily basis, most of them African American, and to be sure, the great majority, poor.

"More than two million people found themselves behind bars at the turn of the twenty-first century, and millions more were relegated to the margins...where discrimination in employment, housing, and access to education were perfectly legal, and where they could be denied the right to vote....Ninety percent of those admitted to prison for drug offenses in many states were black or Latino, yet the mass incarceration of communities of color was explained in race-neutral terms....The New Jim Crow was born" - Michelle Alexander in "The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness" (p. 58).

By criminalizing addiction, and militarizing state and local police forces, the "war on drugs" more than quadrupled our prison population in less than three decades. According to the Cato Institute, in 1997 alone, the Pentagon handed over more than 1.2 million pieces of military equipment to local police departments. The agency also "handled 3.4 million orders of Pentagon equipment from over eleven thousand domestic police agencies in all fifty states." The Cato report also stated, "paramilitary units/SWAT teams were quickly formed in virtually every major city to fight the war on drugs."

So, with the advent of for profit prisons, there is a lobbying arm in state houses across the country and in DC  demanding harsher punishments for "crimes" that hardly constitute any great wickedness; iniquity; and or wrong.

Make no mistake. Not only is this about oppression of an ever-increasing sector of society, this is about creating huge profits for our corporation nation by funneling an ever-increasing number of human beings into slavery.  Private prisons keep only the low cost prisoners - forty cents an hour - because they use them as slave labor and send the harder to control prisoners back to the state prisons where the tax payers pay for it. All prisoners are assigned a CUSIP number, which earns even more profit for the corporation nation.

The private corporate court earns a percentage of the amount of money it collects in fines, and also receives kickbacks by placing citizens in prison or on probation. All prisoners are assigned a CUSIP number based on that prisoner’s STRAWMAN trust. This CUSIP # is then bundled up with other CUSIP numbers and sold as bundled securities on the securities markets. These are bundled persons. Prisoners are commodities for which the fruit of their labor is traded. This is why jails are overflowing, and why so many people get unsupervised probation for so many months. Probationary status is still a form of incarceration, and community service is often assigned. People on probation receive the CUSIP number as well, and are bundled just like the in-house prisoners.

In the book "The New Jim Crow: : Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness" author, Michelle Alexander cites slavery, Jim Crown, and Mass Incarceration as "the three major racialized systems of control adapted in the United States to date." She makes the connection between the prison-industrial complex and the "war on drugs", and the disproportionately high number of African American incarcerated in state and federal prisoners. She argues that this system of mass incarceration "operates as a tightly networked system of laws, policies, customs, and institutions that operate collectively to ensure the subordinate status of a group defined largely by race." The War on Drugs, the book contends, has created "a lower caste of individuals who are permanently barred by law and custom from mainstream society."

In addition to decades of broad U.S. public and political support for getting tough on criminals through longer, harsher prison terms and to the Bush administration's anti-drug and strict-sentencing policies, Alexander points out how the Clinton administration legislated "Three Strikes and Your Out," and the five-year mandatory sentencing for drug offenses due to the use of Crack, which disproportionately targets blacks. Of course, these laws are discriminatory due to the fact that cocaine use in the white community is usually treated as a misdemeanor, which is ridiculous since you need cocaine to produce crack.

There is no doubt that the "War on Drugs", when created, was targeted toward African Americans in an effort to break up families, creating a new racial caste system that renders black males, especially, into non-citizens. They lose the right to vote, and are unable to get a job.  They're ineligible for public assistance such as housing and food stamps, unable to qualify for loans and/or grants for education, and, finally, unable to obtain licenses due to their felony status. Not to mention, the extremely narrow margin of hope when released. This creates a viscous circle that perpetuates itself by increasing homelessness and joblessness, forcing these men and women back into "crime" in order to survive, where the cycle starts all over again.

Moreover, children are left without fathers and mothers without husbands. Alexander writes,

"The U.S. Census Bureau reported in 2002 that there are nearly 3 million more black adult women than men in black communities across the United States, a gender gap of 26 percent. In many areas, the gap is far worse, rising to more than 37 percent in places like New York City. The comparable disparity for whites in the United States is 8 percent. Although a million black men can be found in prisons and jails, public acknowledgment of the role of the criminal justice system in `disappearing' black men is surprisingly rare. Even in the black media-which is generally more willing to raise and tackle issues related to criminal justice-an eerie silence can often be found."

Furthermore, Alexander writes,

"More African American adults are under correctional control today- in prison or jail, on probation or parole- than were enslaved in 1850, a decade before the Civil War began. The mass incarceration of people of color is a big part of the reason that a black child born today is less likely to be raised by both parents than a black child born during slavery. The absence of black fathers from families across America is not simply a function of laziness, immaturity, or too much time watching Sports Center. Thousands of black men have disappeared into prisons and jails, locked away for drug crimes that are largely ignored when committed by whites. The clock has been turned back on racial progress in America." She also states, "African American (youth) were more than six times as likely as whites to be sentenced to prison for identical crimes," because of "unconscious and conscious racial biases infecting decision making."

The bottom line is that, although this was initially designed for the Mass Incarceration of the non-white population, it has now morphed into a war on the entire poor population, growing larger everyday. Total exploitation of the down trodden.

Another excellent book on the subject is "Texas Tough: The Rise of America’s Prison Empire " by Robert Perkinson, which goes into great detail concerning the pernicious rise of America's "for-profit" prison system.

"...is a history of imprisonment, race, and politics from slavery to the present, with an emphasis on Texas, the most locked-down state in the nation. Sweeping in scope and exhaustively researched, it tries to answer some of the most vexing questions of our time: Why has the United States built the largest prison system in the world, unlike anything in the history of democratic governance, and why have racial disparities in criminal justice worsened over the past two generations, despite the landmark victories of the civil rights movement? Drawing on a decade of archival, legal, and legislative research, combined with scores of interviews, this book argues that the history of American criminal justice is a more southern story than most have acknowledged (the prison boom began and has remained most pervasive in the South) and that the politics of race and reaction have played a more prominent role in the expansion of incarceration than elevated crime rates. By drawing parallels between the development of segregation and convict leasing in the aftermath of Reconstruction and the rise of mass imprisonment in the wake of integration, Texas Tough contends that America’s imprisonment crisis has taken shape as the latest chapter in America’s tragic racial history and that a concerted nationwide effort will be required to move the country toward a more equitable and genuinely democratic future."

"America needs fewer laws, not more prisons." -- James Bovard

"Criminal: a person with predatory instincts who has not sufficient capital to form a corporation." -- Howard Scott

Read more...

Big Brother Rules NSA Can Stay Silent on Google Ties

A US Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia, upheld a lower court decision, in EPIC v. NSA ruling that the NSA does not need to confirm nor deny (known as a “Glomar” response, a controversial legal claim that allows federal agencies to conceal the existence of records that might otherwise be subject to public disclosure) its collaborations with Google; how the two work together to spy on American citizens in the name of protecting the public from false flag “cyber-attacks”.

The ruling came in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from the public interest group, EPIC, which stated the public has a right to know about the government spying on citizens.

"Any information pertaining to the relationship between Google and NSA would reveal protected information about NSA's implementation of its information assurance mission," Judge Janice Rogers Brown wrote in the appeals opinion.

Then, there is the NSA's "Perfect Citizen" - how Orwellian - program. According to the Wall Street Journal, the program "would rely on a set of sensors deployed in computer networks for critical infrastructure that would be triggered by unusual activity suggesting an impending cyber attack," although the agency has claimed that there "is no monitoring activity involved, and no sensors are employed in this endeavor" but has refused to release the details of the program.

Suffice to say, they have been tapping into domestic communications since the 1950s, if not before. However, the ever increasing technology combined with the current civil-liberty-eliminating legislation - starting with the Patriot Act - provides the perfect infrastructure for some Hitler/Stalin wannabe to take Nazi like control of your daily existence. 

The bottom line is "Perfect Citizen" and this growing convoluted web of bureaucracies to surveil and control the flow of information on the Internet has nothing to do with protecting critical infrastructure and utilities from being hacked, because all that is required to defend or guard against attack is to disconnect command and control systems for critical infrastructure from the Internet ...a dedicated line that is closed to the net. In other words, this is a ruse to expand the scope of government and domestic spying.

The incremental loss of liberty and privacy marches on as we frogs, distracted by bread and circus, slow-boil in our pots.

Read more...

The Bill That Will Give IRS Power Over Travel

The majority of Americans do not realize how fast power is concentrated in the executive branch of the government, so they ignore, or make excuses for bills and laws passed by Congress, written in deliberately confusing language, that will limit their freedom. That is, if they're even paying attention, and thanks to our corporate controlled media, paying attention takes time...lots of time that most people do not have to witness the convoluted system of barriers to their personal movement...your rights to property, privacy and freedom. The bottom line is recent legislation has effected the average citizen far more than any so-called "terrorist" lurking in the shadows.

Here is a prime example:  S. 1813: MAP-21 “Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act” that passed the Senate by 74 to 22, that will more than likely sail through the House. This is a move to: “reauthorize Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs, and for other purposes.” This bill, proposed by Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer, includes an amendment that will stop any American citizen from leaving the country based upon a decision by the IRS. Another violation of due process.

Specifically, section 40304 - written by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid - states: “Revocation or denial of passport in case of certain unpaid taxes.” This amendment would authorize the State Department to revoke, deny or limit passports for anyone the Internal Revenue Service certifies as having “a seriously delinquent tax debt in an amount in excess of $50,000.”

Well, since the IRS never makes any mistakes, this should contain the elite power brokers, right?   Because, the vast number of Americans do not even earn $50,000, let alone owe $50,000 in taxes.

I wonder if the IRS has ever accused someone of owing $50k who didn't really owe it? Wonder if they would EVER do it in the future? It's a pretty easy thing for such an agency to do.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) had assessed a Trust Fund Recovery Penalty (TFRP) against our client for unpaid payroll taxes Our California tax attorneys filed a request for a collection due process hearing and convinced the IRS Appeals Officer that its determination that the client was liable for the TFRP was erroneous in its entirety saving our client almost 1million dollars.

While she was married our client incurred joint income tax liabilities in excess of $1,000,000. We were able to convince the Internal Revenue Service that our client was an innocent spouse pursuant to Internal Revenue Code § 6015, and the IRS wiped out her entire tax bill.

Our clients were the owners of a closely held family company. After an audit the IRS claimed that the compensation paid to them was unreasonable, and therefore disallowed $750,000 per year in deductions over a multi-year period. The case was referred to our firm by a tax attorney who had spent over two years negotiating with the IRS, without achieving a settlement. Our firm negotiated a settlement with the IRS that saved our clients $2.1 million in tax, penalty and interest.

The IRS claimed our client owed almost $2 million dollars in income taxes due to alleged errors on his tax returns. After filing a petition with the United States Tax Court we settled the case for approximately $20,000.

The IRS claimed our clients owed over $35,000 as the result of an audit. Due to technical errors made by the IRS we were able to convince the IRS to abate the full amount of the taxes and to refund amounts previously paid. [under $50K but it could have been any amount.]

The IRS determined that our client owed a tax debt of approximately $61,000 based upon a trust fund recovery penalty imposing personal liability for corporate payroll taxes. After our intervention the IRS Appeals Division conceded that a mistake had been made and that our client didn't owe any portion of the trust fund recovery penalty.

The IRS determined that our client owed a tax debt of approximately $155,000 based upon a trust fund recovery penalty imposing personal liability for corporate payroll taxes. We convinced the IRS that our client was not a responsible officer and nothing was owed.

Our client received a statutory notice of deficiency from the IRS after an audit claiming that over $230,000 was owed. After filing a petition with the United States Tax Court a settlement was negotiated for less than $4,600.

An offer in compromise submitted by our client's accountant was rejected when the IRS determined that he could afford to pay the total tax due of over $131,000. We convinced the same IRS specialist in offer in compromise to accept less than $30,000. [there are many examples of substantial amounts owed but negotiated to under $50K]

just a few examples located on the website of a Los Angeles tax lawyer randomly spotted from a Google search. there must be many, many more cases nationwide where the IRS has falsely or incorrectly claimed someone owed substantial amount of taxes of over $50K when that person/entity did not in fact owe that much or in some cases, any taxes at all. Ripe for abuse.

Oh, and let's not forget about the Capitol Controls expected in 2013, which would force Americans to keep their money from going offshore.

The Intergovernmental “FATCA Partner Framework” a joint statement issued by the US Treasury along with the governments of the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain.

Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FACTA)

Read more...

Wipe That Anxious Look Off Your Face Granny, or it's the Body Liquefaction Chamber For You!

The airports may be adding a new type of scanner to their Orwellian "security" system, because porno scans and random feel-ups may not be invasive enough.  Now, they want to play Santa Claus, and use their emotion detector to see if you've been naughty or nice. 

A recent article, "New Emotion Detector Can See When We're Lying," reveals a new technology which is a system of video cameras that are connected to "a high-resolution thermal imaging sensor and a suite of algorithms."

Okay, what happened to innocent until proven guilty? Why should law-abiding, innocent people be subjected to the Spanish Inquisition in an airport of all places? Even Torquemada had the good sense to avoid airports.

Links:

Forget Cremation, Body Liquefaction Launches In Florida Funeral Home As Part of Green Movement

The Anderson-McQueen funeral home in St Petersburg is on the vanguard of what promises to be a less toxic day of disposing our remains, by installing a machine that works by dissolving the body in heated alkaline water.

The United Kindom’s BBC news said that the chamber, building by Resomation Ltd of Scotland, is expected to be used for the first time in a few weeks. The company expects to legislative or regulatory permission to use and sell the machines throughout the U.S., Canada and in Europe. Price information was not available

Read more...

Voluminous Codes Eroding the Delicate Balance Between Liberty and Social Order

Liberty is defined as the freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control. In other words, liberty does not imply the absence of rules and consequence of breaking those rules, only the absence of arbritrary and/or despotic rule. At the other end of the spectrum is social order, or the absence of anarchy, which one could say is of equal importance. The United States of America, it is said, is one of the first nations in history to create a form of government that, as much as possible, harmoniously balances liberty and social order.

As we emerge from the first decade of the twenty-first century, the rules preserving rights and liberties have increasingly been sacrificed in the name of "national security", primarily by lawmakers who have created an ambiguous, incoherent web of laws, leaving the average citizen in the dark.

Take the income tax, which can be traced back to 1862, when President Lincoln and Congress created the office of Commissioner of Internal Revenue and enacted an income tax to pay war expenses. It was passed as an emergency and temporary war-time tax, and in 1894, the Supreme Court declared it unconstitional. That is until the 16th amendment exempted income taxes from the constitutional requirements regarding direct taxes, after income taxes on rents, dividends, and interest were ruled to be direct taxes in Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (1895). And in 1913 the very first IRS 1040 form was created, and since that point, the IRS code has morphed into an exceedingly convoluted, complex and oppressive creature.

One might ask, “Why can’t the tax laws be more simple?” Well, not only because  of government’s insatiable desire for revenue, but also because Congress uses the tax laws for reasons other than that for which they were intended. The same is true for our legal system, in general.  Our constitutional rights, if we really ever had them to begin with, have essentially been eviscerated by code. What can we do about it? On an individual basis, not much.

The real world determination of legal or "lawful" arguments lie with the immune judges, and prosecutors. Not only can they enforce the law, they can do so with impunity.

In 1976, the Supreme Court decided, in a case called Imbler v. Pachtman, that prosecutors have absolute immunity from civil rights lawsuits for their work in the courtroom. The court acknowledged that its ruling “does leave the genuinely wronged defendant without civil redress against a prosecutor whose malicious or dishonest action deprives him of liberty,” but said the alternative was worse: leaving prosecutors to fear a lawsuit, or even bankruptcy, every time they lose a trial..

Insofar as income tax, code section 6011 and code section 6012 require citizens to file.  Constitutional? No, but go ahead and try to fight it.

The IRS can bring any action in the courts of the United States. There is an entire section of the Internal Revenue code that creates jurisdiction for the IRS to bring a lawsuit. For example, a section 7403 action, which allows the IRS to file a lawsuit against any delinquent taxpayer in a situation where the IRS wants to seize the property of that taxpayer. Although, the IRS is not allowed to seize the home of a taxpayer through the administrative process, the IRS can seek an order from a judge who allows the IRS to seize the property

It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed? -- James Madison

A Monument of Deficient Wisdom:

The IRS is an agency of the government of the United States; however, it has no respect for the constitution. The courts of the US have enforced the Internal Revenue code to the detriment of the constitution There is nothing morally or constitutionally correct about our current tax law. But, can they as a practical real life matter, enforce it? Yes, they can.

Read more...

Church Prunes Gay Trees in Sin.

Albemarle Road Presbyterian Church, in Charlotte, NC, has been hit with a $4,000 fine for excessive pruning. That's right...$100 per branch, for trimming its own trees...incorrectly!

The Charlotte Observer reports, that city officials slapped Albemarle Road Presbyterian Church with a fine of $100 per branch for “excessively pruning” its crape myrtles.

Now,  it just so happens that is the same church at which the debate to end the "ban on gays and lesbians becoming clergy and lay leaders in the Presbyterian Church took place, which culminated in a vote of 162-154 to change the denomination's constitution by removing a 1997 amendment that said the ordained must either be single and chaste or in a heterosexual marriage".

The Presbytery of Charlotte added its support Tuesday to ending the ban on gays and lesbians becoming clergy and lay leaders in the Presbyterian Church (USA).

Presbyterian church leaders from the seven-county Charlotte region voted 162-154 to change the denomination's constitution by removing a 1997 amendment that said the ordained must either be single and chaste or in a heterosexual marriage.

Going into Tuesday's local vote, that change already had won the backing of a majority of presbyteries in the country. It was scheduled to become effective in July, whatever the Charlotte vote.

Still, Tuesday's debate at Albemarle Road Presbyterian Church drew about 40 speakers - in addition to the two Charlotte pastors chosen to present the two sides.

Could it be, perhaps, that some of the church's more homophobic members,  who just so happened to be in the employment of the city, blamed, what they assumed were "gay" trees, for influencing the end of the ban on gay clergy? Because, you see, the fine will be dropped if the trees are REPLACED...with homophobic trees, no doubt.

"Tom Johnson, senior urban forester for the Charlotte Land Development Division, said, the fine would be dropped if the church replaced each of the improperly pruned trees".

Just a thought.

Read more...

White House and Big Corporations Want to Destroy the Internet as We Know It.

Until very recently, most of us could only passively consume our media. We could listen. We could watch. But we couldn’t touch, enter into, or even respond to the media. The Internet has changed all of that, leveling the playing field in such a way that anyone with a connection can participate. The powers that be are not happy.

The other day, Sen. Al Franken claimed that big corporations are "hoping to destroy" the Internet, by destroying "the very thing that makes it such an important [medium] for independent artists and entrepreneurs: its openness and freedom." He then claimed, "Net neutrality is the First Amendment issue of our time."

However, it appears the Obama administration wants to crackdown on the Internet, and eliminate this new emergent participatory media production that depends on "fair use", by policing the Internet, making copyright infringement a felony.  He wants to tighten many forms of intellectual property law, increase existing criminal penalties, and expand wiretap laws to include copyright and trademark infringement, ultimately giving even more authority to Homeland Security.   He has proposed sweeping revisions to U.S. copyright law, including making "illegal streaming" of audio or video a federal felony and allowing FBI agents to wiretap suspects.

Turning to the specific recommendations, the Administration recommends increasing the statutory maxima for the following offenses:

1. Increase the statutory maximum for economic espionage (18 U.S.C. § 1831) from 15 years in prison to at least 20 years in prison.

2. Increase the statutory maxima for drug offenses under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), particularly for counterfeit drug offenses.

The Administration recommends that Congress: (1)  direct the U.S. Sentencing Commission to increase the U.S. Sentencing Guideline range for intellectual property offenses; (2) require the U.S. Sentencing Commission to consider five specific categories of changes to the Guidelines; and (3) require the U.S. Sentencing Commission to act within 180 days of such legislation being adopted (including issuing a report explaining why it has not adopted any of the specific recommendations). The five categories of specific recommendations for the U.S. Sentencing Commission are:

1. Increase the U.S. Sentencing Guideline range for the theft of trade secrets and economic espionage,
including trade secrets transferred or attempted to be transferred outside of the U.S.

2. Increase the U.S. Sentencing Guideline range for trademark and copyright offenses when infringing products are knowingly sold for use in national defense, national security, critical infrastructure, or by law enforcement.

3. Increase the U.S. Sentencing Guideline range for intellectual property offenses committed by organized criminal enterprises/gangs;

4. Increase the U.S. Sentencing Guideline range for intellectual property offenses that risk death or serious bodily injury and for those offenses involving counterfeit drugs (even when those offenses do not present that risk); and

5. Increase the U.S. Sentencing Guideline range for repeat intellectual property offenders.

The Administration recommends three legislative changes to give enforcement agencies the tools they need to combat infringement:

1. Clarify that, in appropriate circumstances, infringement by streaming, or by means of other similar new technology, is a felony;

2. Authorize DHS, and its component U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), to share pre-seizure information about, and samples of, products and devices with rightholders to help DHS to determine whether the products are infringing or the devices are circumvention devices; and

3. Give law enforcement authority to seek a wiretap for criminal copyright and trademark offenses.

The Administration recommends two legislative changes to allow DHS to share information about enforcement activities with rightholders:

1. Give DHS authority to notify rightholders that infringing goods have been excluded or seized pursuant to a U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) order; and

2. Give DHS authority to share information about, and samples of, circumvention devices with rightholders post-seizure.

The Administration recommends six legislative changes to improve U.S. enforcement efforts involving pharmaceuticals, including counterfeit drugs:

1. Require importers and manufacturers to notify the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other relevant agencies when they discover counterfeit drugs or medical devices, including the known potential health risks associated with those products;

2. Extend the Ryan Haight Act’s definition of “valid prescription” (and its telemedicine exemption) to the FFDCA to drugs that do not contain controlled substances;

3. Adopt a track-and-trace system for pharmaceuticals and related products;

4. Provide for civil and criminal forfeiture under the FFDCA, particularly for counterfeit drug offenses;

5. As noted above, increase the statutory maxima for drug offenses under the FFDCA, particularly for counterfeit drug offenses; and

6. As noted above, recommend that the U.S. Sentencing Commission increase the U.S. Sentencing Guideline range for intellectual property offenses that risk death and serious bodily injury, and for those offenses involving counterfeit drugs (even when those offenses do not present that risk).

What's more is that with all of the important unresolved issues, not to mention, the banksters and  major Wall Street criminals basking in their billions and still in charge, you have to wonder why the Obama administration chooses to focus, in comparison, on what seems like such a trivial matter.  Well, one can only conclude that it's much more than that. It's an underhanded power grab, to control the distribution of information, communication, ultimately providing Big Brother with the power to wiretap anyone for any reason.

It all boils down to who benefits and who pays.   As always, it's the elite who benefit the most - the prison industrial complex, big corporations, Hollywood, the banksters - while we, the taxpayers, continue to pay through the nose. As someone once said, "who gets prosecuted for what has always been and always will be political and decided by those with wealth and power".

Read more...

Linking to Copyright Material May Land You in Prison.

Have you every linked to copyrighted material or passed on a copyrighted video? If you are a regular Internet surfer, of course you have!  Who hasn't?

In fact, Curt Schwaderera, technology editor at Compact PCI Systems, in an analysis of Internet traffic, Year 2009 to Year 2014 window (left) "shows that by the end of this year, Internet video will surpass peer-to-peer file transfer as the highest single percentage of traffic on the Internet."

This brings me to, Brian McCarthy, who found out the hard way that the simple act of linking can land you in prison (because they need another reason to cram people in our more than overcrowded prisons). Anyway, his now  lifeless website, Channelsurfing.net, which did not host any copyrighted material, just linked to it, led to his arrest for “criminal copyright infringement  for the ‘reproduction and distribution’ of copyrighted material.” He could spend up to 5 years in jail. 

Bryan McCarthy did not possesses, did not broadcast, nor did he copy copyright material. If linking is distribution, then anyone with a blog or website is guilty of breaking the law.  Oh, but  he made $90,000 from the advertisements on his site. Okay, but since when is profiting a crime in the good ol' US of A? Why is it that only the big wealthy corporations are allowed to participate in cutthroat competition? Why is it that ICE-HSI (Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Homeland Security Investigations) can make examples out of the "little" people for finding a way earn a few bucks, while the big and powerful can plunder trillions of dollars from "We, the People", and face no repercussions, except an endless stream of reward?

The sad thing is that most Americans will side with Homeland Security in this situation, because they're so conditioned into the belief that our government, our institutions, the law have our best interest at heart, when the only best interest they have at heart is that the wealth and power remain in the hands of the wealthy and powerful...who already own 90% of the world's resources.

Read more...

House Republicans are Not Happy Real ID Act Postponed

Really? And here I thought Republicans did not like the idea of Big Brother Government. But, apparently they do, as they stated in a letter this week to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano that "any further extension of Real ID threatens the security of the United States."

What is Real ID? A national ID card. This standardized digital identity card comes fully equipped with a GPS chip, that would've been required to board airplanes or enter federal buildings thanks to President Bush signing The Real ID Act of 2005, under the guise of an antiterrorist measure . However, due to public outcry, The U.S. Department of Homeland Security postponed the effective date of the Real ID Act until January 15, 2013.

Reliance on new information technology to prevent so-called terror is creating the surveillance society George Orwell predicted. On the surface it may not sound threatening; however, when you consider that computers can cut across electronic data - police/sales/medical/financial records, etc. - discerning patterns and applying profiles that result in brand new information and links in a matter of seconds...and then track you down in another couple of seconds, it's quite scary.

State Legislative Activity in Opposition to Real ID

Read more...

Big Brother's Genetic Roundup for Top-Secret America?

8-year old Big Brother Homeland Security, "already has its own Special Access Programs, its own research arm, its own command center, its own fleet of armored cars and its own 230,000-person workforce, the third-largest after the departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs."

Do we really want them gathering information about us that we don't even know or have access?  As the Washington Post pointed out an "estimated 854,000 people, nearly 1.5 times as many people as live in Washington, D.C., hold top-secret security clearances". Whose to say how many of these unknown people know more about us than we know about ourselves. Whose to say one of these people is not our boss, spouse, next-door neighbor...or even worse, a psychopathic serial killer who targets specific DNA profiles.  Well, you never know.

Here are some of the latest developments in possibly mandatory invasive screening devices:

First, the latest. Under the guise of combating human trafficking, illegal immigration, and finding missing persons,  Homeland Security plans to roll out even more invasive screening at airports this summer. How? They plan on invading your genes with portable DNA scanners that will conduct on-site, real-time genetic testing, in addition too, or in place of, the groping session.   Richard Seldon of NetBio, creator of the scanners said, "DNA information has the potential to become part of the fabric of day-to-day life."  However, this is nothing new. Since 2009, police have already had the authority to conduct warrantless searches by taking blood and saliva during arrests, even from those not convicted of a crime, and the Pentagon maintains a database of over 80,000 DNA profiles.

Let's not forget the safer than safe biometric blueprint grabbing enhanced version of 1000D whole body scanners.

Iscon is introducing an enhanced version of the 1000D whole body scanner equipped with optional biometric technologies and identity verification techniques that will vastly improve security at corrections facilities, law enforcement as well as international airports.

The Iscon 1000D is the only whole body imaging portal that can be integrated with state of the art technologies to detect virtually any object, without radiation or privacy issues and confirm that the person is indeed who they claim to be. This is critical in prisons as inmates try to pose as others to escape as well as airport security to speed processing, identify terrorists and discover contraband.

Iscon1000D uses thermo-conductive infrared technology that completes a 360°scan in 30 seconds, reveals a multitude of objects, but doesn't penetrate clothing, so there's no privacy or radiation issues.

It can detect the thermal imprint of any object that many scanners miss, including:

* thin plastic
* wood
* powder (pills and drugs)
* paper (money)
* liquids
* ceramics (explosives)

Iscon 1000D is already been sold in the U.S., Europe, China, Japan, Iraq, Russia and the Ukraine.

The enhanced system offers stand alone or combined options for integrated security capabilities through identify verification using the following technologies:

Facial Recognition -- Can compare a person's facial attributes to existing databases and cross match with other systems.

Fingerprint Recognition -- Fingerprints are a highly reliable identification method and are a fast and easy way to determine identity. Large law enforcement databases can be accessed to cross match and verify a person's identity quickly and easily.

Iris Recognition -- Scans of a person's iris can be cross-matched to a database for identity verification.

Card/Barcode Reader -- For high traffic areas that need fast scans, the Iscon 1000D is equipped with a card and barcode reader. At manufacturing facilities and other high security operations, that require both scanning and verification, this system is ideal for people who are preapproved and can simply scan their card or barcode and go through safely.

"Facilities are facing significant privacy and health issues using scanners that expose a persons body parts that can be stored and shared digitally," explains Iscon Founder and President Izrail Gorian. Using existing databases available today, or using a proprietary system of employees or inmates, security will ultimately be enhanced for everyone and at the same time ease verification for those who are not suspect."

And as if we need anymore biometric grabbing devices, Sony's Finger Vein Authentication (Mofiria) technology for mobile apparatus  could appear within the year.  Mofiria is a compact camera based system that uses CMOS sensor to capture light scattered diagonally through finger veins.  Data from the pattern is compressed making it possible to store on gadgets for laptops, and mobile devices.  Supposedly, this technology has been in use for two years.

The use of new and highly-intrusive surveillance technology violates the normal expectation of privacy, dignity and respect of every individual, whether they know it or not. Mandatory screening is a direct infringement basic human rights and should not be tolerated.

Links:

Top Secret America

The top-secret world the government created in response to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, has become so large, so unwieldy and so secretive that no one knows how much money it costs, how many people it employs, how many programs exist within it or exactly how many agencies do the same work.

Read more...

As Debt Increases, Freedoms Decrease; Hence Our Indentured Sevitude.

John Adams once stated, "There are two ways to enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt." And Benjamin Franklin said, "Think what you do when you run in debt; you give to another power over your liberty." And that's where we are. Right where Alexis de Toqueville predicted when he said, "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.”

However, having said that, it's not always easy to see the leaves of freedom shriveling and falling to the ground when you are embedded deeply in a forest of debt, especially when that debt serves as the foundation of the economy.  In other words, debt is not a choice, despite all the effort that goes into making each and everyone of us believe that it is.

Right out of the gate, in order to get ahead, most of us must steep ourselves in debt, because without a college education, starting a career is next to impossible. Then, after graduation, it takes anywhere from 10-years to sometimes as much as an entire lifetime to pay this debt off. And, that's just the very beginning of the albatross of debt most people can expect to accumulate over an American lifetime.

The bottom line is that people are slaves to their debt. We're so conditioned into believing debt is as natural as the air we breathe that it's very hard to think of ourselves as indentured servants, but, that's exactly what most of us are.

That's why it's so egregious that President Obama would even consider what White House fiscal commission co-chairs Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson - in favor of brutalizing the middle class while being favorable to the very wealthy - had the nerve to offer as a debt reduction plan:  a proposal that cuts Social Security, in addition to Medicare, Medicaid, and anything else that might possibly offer relief to middle-class America. So, now, every source of retirement income is under siege.   Social Security, personal savings, occupational pensions, including Medicare for retirees,  are potentially up for grabs. Not to mention, Medicaid, that if cut, will leave millions vulnerable to  catastrophic illness costs. In fact, Arizona is already denying organ transplants to people on Medicaid.

Here's the thing. They have no right to touch Social Security. Why?  Well, despite all of the attempts to associate Social Security with the federal budget, it's important to note that Social Security is not part of the federal budget. It is a separate account, a trust, which is funded from our contributions, through payroll taxes. SS has not added one dime to the national debt. The program's payouts have never exceeded revenues, that is, until last year...for the very first time.

Moreover, the  powers that be have plundered SS to fund their destructive agendas for decades. If left alone, the Social Security Trust Fund has a surplus of $2.6 trillion and is expected to remain solvent in its current form until 2037, according to its trustees report.  That's why the tax deal the president struck with Senate Republicans last month that includes a one-year cut in the payroll tax – the source of Social Security's funding – from 6.2% to 4.2% is a little suspicious.  

Only mass outrage can stop the slashing of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other social programs. Meanwhile, as usual, Wall Street is raking in the profits at our expense, even though they continue to torment the innocent, and continue the same practices that initially caused the economic collapse in the first place.

Read more...

Can One Illusion Under "God" Continue to Keep the Common Man in Eternal Subjugation?

Halloween visitors with the President, 31 October 1963

The new and advancing technologies driving the profound changes we see today are bound to eventually change the balance of political power in one way or another. If we the people remain alert and take advantage of the opportunities this new technology offers, we can  level the playing field in ways never seen before.

However,  the global elite are well aware of  this threat to their supreme power. In part, it explains our current situation: a desperate privileged class, bound and determined to remain in control, who must rely increasingly on force, covert or overt, to maintain their place in the social hierarchy. One thing for sure: this distinctively neo-liberal, elitist, and monarchistic group will not go down easy, despite their seemingly progressive rhetoric promoting democratization, liberty, transparency, and the rule of law. They must steadily convince us that those in power act in our best interest, and what better way to do that than a "Potemkin" administration.

President Kennedy speaks at rally in Fort Worth, 22 November 1963.

We were were promised change under President Obama's administration, despite the fact that he has, in fact, made some positive changes,  since he took office, it appears that unlike, former President John F. Kennedy (JFK), President Obama is not prepared to take on those "opposing forces, around the world, by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy" that JFK spoke of, and challenged.  It's not surprising, considering what happens to those who courageously take on those who have everything to lose if the status quo .

So, the Obama administration, for the most part, avoids straying too far from former President Bush's path, which includes: an escalation on the "war on terror" and no big plans to dismantle the failed "war on drugs."  Moreover, rather than the transparent, collaborative, democracy President Obama promised, we the people, remain subservient  to multinational corporate interests and the establishment elite, all the while, carrying on under the increasing surveillance powers put in place under the Patriot Act.

"It’s 18 months and, if not now, when? ... Guantanamo is still not closed. Military commissions are still a mess. The administration still uses state secrets to shield themselves from litigation. There's no prosecution for criminal acts of the Bush administration. Surveillance powers put in place under the Patriot Act have been renewed. If there has been change in the civil liberties context, I frankly don't see it. -- ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero

Are we headed toward a global governance, in which international elites play pass the power, in an effort to render itself unaccountable to its citizens?

Well, as increasing economic interconnection becomes a reality, it exposes us to the covert motives of multinational corporations. This expanding sphere of influence creates the conditions for effective international governance.

". 'substantial decisions are frequently taken by unaccountable officials operating in arcane and secretive international forums, which exert strong pressure on, even if they do not formally bind, national decision-making processes.'

“The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.” -- President John F. Kennedy Speaking to the American Newspaper Association April 27, 1961

"For we are opposed, around the world, by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence; in infiltration instead of invasion; on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice; on guerillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific, and political operations. Its preparations are concealed not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined, its dissenters are silenced, not praised; no expenditure is questioned. - President John F. Kennedy

"This is, in theory, still a free country, but our politically correct, censorious times are such that many of us tremble to give vent to perfectly acceptable views for fear of condemnation. Freedom of speech is thereby imperiled, big questions go undebated, and great lies become accepted, unequivocally as great truths." Simon Heffer in The Daily Mail, 7 June 2000

The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money and more power.

They claim to be superpatriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjugation” -- Vice President Henry Wallace

Links: 

Remarks at the Breakfast of the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce, November 22, 1963 - JFK's last words.

GOSCON - is the Government Open Source Conference, an annual event produced by Oregon State University's Open Source Lab. Now in its sixth year, the conference focuses on the role of open source software and collaboration as an enabler of leading Open Government and Transparency initiatives throughout the US. Speakers come from all levels of government, from City Officials to Federal Agencies.

Read more...

A Professor's Influence Suggests A Promising Outlook for the Future Gay Rights.

Despite the defeat of same-sex marriage in Maine and the possible upcoming battle over same-sex marriage in New Hampshire, where two legislative proposals aim to overturn the new law set to take place January 1 of next year, it's important to realize that the legalization of gay marriage is inevitable.

Exposing the hypocrisy - most recently evident when Carrie Prejean, who is against gay marriage, and at the same time, known for hard-core sex tapes, nude pictures, lying, and cover up, took her microphone off in the middle of an interview on CNN's Larry King Live. Why? She did not want to answer questions from Larry King and a caller inquiring about her views on gay marriage - is crucial to speeding up the process of legalizing same-sex marriage.

Laurence H. Tribe, author of An Invisible Constitution, Professor of constitutional law at Harvard Law School, who said that Obama was "overall the most impressive student he's ever had" (out of 7,000 students including Chief Justice John Roberts ), and who also served as judicial adviser to Obama's campaign, has the experience, depth of knowledge and understanding of what it takes to evolve gay rights to a point of total equality.

In his article, Toward a Less Perfect Union, written in 1996, Tribe pointed out the irony of eviscerating the Constitution's Full Faith and Credit Clause —by giving a state the right to deny the validity of a marriage already sanctioned by a another state - the provision in DOMA that discriminates against gay marriage,

"..The Constitution's principal device for assuring a "more perfect union" is the Full Faith and Credit Clause, which requires that each state must fully credit "the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state." More than half a century ago, the Supreme Court described the clause as "a nationally unifying force" that transformed the individual states from "independent foreign sovereignties, each, free to ignore rights and obligations" created by the others, into integral parts "of a single nation, in which rights . . . established in any [state] are given nationwide application."

And he went on to say,

This would convert the Constitution's most vital unifying clause into a license for balkanization and disunity.

Laurence Tribe, knowingly gave up any chance of winning a place on the "Reagan" Supreme Court when he argued Hardwick’s case in Bowers v. Hardwick, which resulted in a US Supreme Court decision that upheld the constitutionality of a Georgia sodomy law that criminalized oral and anal sex in private between consenting adults which was primarily targeted at homosexuals, even though heterosexuals violated this law nightly. Regarding that case, Tribe said he knew he "couldn't win but wanted to get some good dissents in".

"Tribe, was at the time, probably the only straight lawyer in the country to receive the National Lesbian and Gay Law Association’s Allies for Justice Award, which was bestowed on him in 1996. Tribe was so pleased when notified of the honor, that he asked the person on the phone if he could bring his wife to the award ceremony. There was a few moments of stunned silence on the other end. But, of course, this was all part of that same cultural change. The struggle for gay rights had transcended the gay community — equality under the law had become a fight by all and for all." -- Kathleen Sullivan, his student and later faculty colleague who went on to be named dean of Stanford Law School

After the Bowers decision, Tribe told his students that "time would correct the injustice". Seventeen years later in 2003, his words came true in Lawrence v. Texas, the landmark U S Supreme Court case, that struck down the sodomy law in Texas. Tribe wrote the ACLU brief that the courts accepted when it overruled Bowers.

He said that this is the only case in history that he knows of, where the court said that the earlier decision was wrong on the day it was decided. In other words, the court did not preface their decision with the rhetoric normally spoken before overruling, such as: things have changed, the world has changed, Brown v. Board addresses a world that's different than Plessy v. Ferguson, etc. Instead the court said, "the original decision fundamentally denied the dignity and equality of gay people and was wrong from the start."

One has to ask in light of the recent election results regarding Prop 8, if the right at issue (gay marriage) belongs to the public at large or is it, rather, an individual right that is not subject to majority infringement? Could the following be applied to same-sex marriage? I think so, but what do I know, I'm not an attorney.

The Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause has been interpreted to require non- discrimination in treatment of people.

Specifically, regarding gender, * Reed v. Reed, established that, "arbitrary preference established in favor of males by § 15-312-14 of the Idaho Code cannot stand in the face of the Fourteenth Amendment's command that no State deny the equal protection of the laws to any person within its jurisdiction." That later lead to the equal protection component of the 5th Amendment Due Process Clause stated this way: "confers on petitioner a federal constitutional right to be free from gender discrimination that does not serve important governmental objectives or is not substantially related to the achievement of such objectives."

In addition, the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment was used in deciding Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court decision that stated blacks and whites could not be prevented from marrying as it clearly violated the 14th Amendment's due process clause.

In Laurence Tribe's book, The Invisible Constitution, he refers to the Ninth Amendment as an example that supports the recognition of rights not explicitly mentioned.

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

We can only hope the influence of Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe will shape the fundamental character and underlying assumptions that will inform the Obama administration regarding equal rights, freedom, liberty, and the chance for all citizens to engage in the pursuit of happiness.

Major court decisions effecting same sex marriage:

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)
The U.S. Supreme Court held that a Connecticut law prohibiting the sale and use of contraception could not apply to a married couple because the U.S. Constitution generally guarantees a right to marital privacy.

Loving v. Virginia (1967)
The U.S. Supreme Court invalidated a Virginia law banning interracial marriage, partly on the ground that the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause guarantees a fundamental right to marry.

Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972)
The U.S. Supreme Court invalidated a Massachusetts law prohibiting the distribution of birth control to single people.

Bowers v. Hardwick (1986)
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Georgia anti-sodomy statute on the ground that the constitutional right to privacy does not guarantee the right to have private, consensual sex with a person of the same gender.

Romer v. Evans (1996)
The U.S. Supreme Court invalidated an amendment to the Colorado Constitution that nullified local anti-discrimination protections for gay and lesbian people.

Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
The U.S. Supreme Court invalidated a Texas anti-sodomy statute for violating the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause, thereby overruling Bowers v. Hardwick.

Goodridge v. Department of Public Health (2003)
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that a state law limiting marriage to opposite-sex unions violated the Massachusetts Constitution.

Marriage Cases (2008)
The California Supreme Court held that sexual orientation is a "suspect class" under the California Equal Protection Clause, and state laws limiting marriage to opposite-sex unions therefore violate the state constitution.

Links:
Same Sex Marriage Timeline

"I want judges who have a heart, have an empathy for the teenage mom, the minority, the gay, the disabled. We want them to show empathy. We want them to show compassion." -- President Elect Obama

*An example of how some twist the meaning and intent of the law in the most outrageous ways to fulfill their own discriminatory agenda. This guy wants feedback. Give it to him.

Read more...

Amending the Constitution Under the Radar?

Currently there are 319 executive and independent agencies at the federal level, and every year 70,000 pages of new and proposed regulations are added to the federal register. There are over 4,000 federal statutory crimes, and somewhere between 10,000 and 300,000 regulations with criminal sanctions attached.

Does that sound like a government of limited power with maximum freedom for the individual? Because that was the vision of our Founding Fathers according to Robert A. Levy and William Mellor, authors of The Dirty Dozen: How Twelve Supreme Court Cases Radically Expanded Government and Eroded Freedom which argues that twelve Supreme Court case decisions, since the New Deal have eroded our freedoms and expanded government, thus have altered the course of American history.

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined,” wrote James Madison in Federalist Paper No. 45. And Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist Paper No. 78, "Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them." In other words the judiciary is the weakest branch of government.

If the power is not granted to the federal government by the Constitution it does not have power to act. The Constitution is "animated by a presumption of liberty"[1] and that should be the starting point for any judicial inquiry, however this is not the case anymore.

Instead the Supreme Court, by way of back door, has condoned and enabled the unchecked growth of federal authority outside the amendment process. Unelected justices with lifetime tenure have effectively amended the Constitution without input from or accountability to we the people. The words remain the same but their meaning has profoundly changed, vastly expanding federal powers. This has changed the presumption of liberty to a presumption in favor of government authority on the part of the courts.

Although an excellent book, keep in mind this is the opinion of two men regarding the the Supreme Court's failure to interpret the constitution in a reasonable manner. The "Living Constitution Theory" which espouses that the Constitution should be interpreted in the context of modern challenges and conditions and evolving standards of decency is criticized for "judicial policy-making". "

"Where the Constitution's text is unambiguous, that text controls. But where provisions are unclear, it is entirely proper for courts to consider the broader values underlying the Constitution, like democracy, equality or privacy, in deciding what's constitutional and what's not."

12 Supreme Court cases and associated issues:

Helvering v Davis (1937) declared Social Security was not a contributory insurance program.(Issue:Promoting the general welfare)

Wickard v. Filburn (1942) (Issue: Regulating Interstate Commerce)

Home Building & Loan v. Blaisdell (1933) declared government can unilaterally void parts of private contracts despite Article I Section 10's explicit language to the contrary (Issue: Rescinding Private Contracts)

Whitman v. American Trucking Lawmaking by Administrative Agencies

McConnell v. Federal Election Commission (2003) (Issue: Campaign Finance Reform and Free Speech)

United States v. Miller (1939) (Issue: Gun Owner's Rights)

Korematsu v. U.S. (1944): U.S. declared program of internment for Japanese Americans was constitutional (Issue: Civil Liberties Versus National Security)

Bennis v. Michigan (1996) declared government can use civil forfeiture to take property without compensation that is involved in a crime even if the owner of the property has no involvement in that crime. (Issue: Asset Forfeiture Without Due Process)

Kelo v. City of New London declared governments can seize private property in order to give it to other private hands (Issue: Eminent Domain for Private Use)

Penn Central v . New York (1978) (Issue: Taking Property by Regulation)

U.S. v. Carolene Products (1938) (Issue: Earning an Honest Living)

Grutter v. Bolinger (2003) (Issue:Equal Protection and Racial Preferences)

[1] Restoring the Lost Constitution: The Presumption of Liberty by Randy Barnett

Read more...

It Was Only a Kiss.

"It started out with a kiss How did it end up like this It was only a kiss, it was only a kiss..." so Brandon Flowers, of the Killers, ever so convincingly, belts out in his song, "Mr. Brightside".

But apparently, to some, a kiss is reason enough to get the police involved and rough up the kissers, as this is exactly what happend on June 29 in El Paso, Texas. Five men were kicked out of the restaurant, Chico's after two of them kissed. A private security guard, after calling the men an anti-gay slur in Spanish, called the police, who then, cited a statute on homosexual conduct which was declared unconstitutional six years ago.

In other "kissing" news, a graduate of East Side High School is suing over the school blacking out a photo of him and his boyfriend kissing on his paid personal page in the school yearbook. The school did not black out photos of heterosexual students kissing.

NEWARK (CN) - A graduate of East Side High School demands punitive damages for "severe mental and emotional trauma" because on his paid personal page in the school yearbook, the school blacked out a photo of him kissing his homosexual partner, but it did not black out photos of heterosexual students kissing.

Andre Jackson demands punitive damages for discrimination, pain and suffering, civil rights violations, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Hs is represented in Essex County Court by Anthony Mack

A lawsuit? Over a yearbook picture? Sounds like overkill, right?

Wrong. "Overkill" is the reason this student is suing. The school destroyed this student's picture in a zealous attempt to "spare" the heterosexual student body at the expense of the homosexual student body, reinforcing the deeply ingrained hostility many people in our society have against the GLBT population. This attitude is what prompts the violence we often see against something as innocent as two same-sex individuals, kissing or holding hands.

Recently, the FBI reported that anti-gay hate crimes have been on the rise since 2005. Last month, the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs reported that violent hate crimes against GLBT people increased 24% in 2007 and additional 2% in 2008.

This morning, at the LDS Temple in Salt Lake Utah, a kiss-in was staged to show support for" gay couple, Derek Jones, 25, and Matthew Aune, 28, who say they were detained by Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints security guards after one man had kissed the other on the cheek Thursday. They had argued with the guards and were later cited for trespassing."

Is there any wonder why America is the most violent developed nation in the world?

Questions linger about raid at Fort Worth gay bar.

Another Dallas-area gay bar raid prompts questions

Remembering his 'powerful love'

Jackson Lee demands probe of gay sailor's death

Read more...

Life Without Liberty is Like a body Without Spirit: Human Statue of Liberty

"On a stifling July day in 1918, 18,000 officers and soldiers posed as Lady Liberty on the parade [drill] grounds at Camp Dodge." [This area was west of Baker St. and is currently the area around building S34 and to the west.] "According to a July 3, 1986, story in the Fort Dodge Messenger, many men fainted-they were dressed in woolen uniforms-as the temperature neared 105 degrees Farenheit. The photo, taken from the top of a specially constructed tower by a Chicago photography studio, Mole & Thomas, was intended to help promote the sale of war bonds but was never used."



“Liberty is to the collective body, what health is to every individual body. Without health no pleasure can be tasted by man; without liberty, no happiness can be enjoyed by society.” -- Thomas Jefferson

Read more...

Increasing Surveillance in the Name of Freedom

Firstly, let's figure out what we have the freedom to do in the United States. Do we have the freedom to say anything we want? Do we have the freedom to earn, shop, spend and consume? Do we have the freedom to be indifferent, to love, hate and breed? Do we have the freedom to think, play, work, and worship? Do we have the freedom to to steal, kill, lie, and cheat? Do we have the freedom to live the American dream, pursue happiness, health, wealth and justice?
All of the above? None of the above?

Universally, I would check "none of the above". After all, all citizens are not granted, relatively speaking, all of the aforementioned freedoms. Our "freedoms" are bestowed incrementally, based on wealth, power, status, race, religion, sexuality, gender etc. Assuming a distribution of freedom(s) exist, ranging from "none of the above" (totally disenfranchised American) to "all of the above" (Bush, Cheney), most people reading this blog would probably find themselves closer to the "Bush Cheney" end of the spectrum...however, maybe not for long.

President Bush's “They hate us for our freedoms!” rhetoric makes sense as he himself and those who travel in his circle seem mostly exempt from external control of any kind. However, could it be that all his "freedom" talk is intentional? Perhaps, in an effort to distract us from the blood curdling scream emanating from the "pot" marked liberty...the "pot" he is gradually bringing to a boil, in hopes that the people liberty serves to protect are too stupid to realize.

“Americans are asking, why do they hate us? They hate what we see right here in this chamber -- a democratically elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our freedoms -- our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other. -- President George W. Bush, during an address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American people, United States Capitol, Washington, DC, September 20, 2001.

"See, we love—we love freedom. That's what they didn't understand. They hate things; we love things. They act out of hatred; we don't seek revenge, we seek justice out of love." -- Oklahoma City, Aug. 29, 2002

"This is a nation that loves our freedom, loves our country." -- Washington, D.C, May 17, 2002

It's clear the Bush Administration is redefining liberty in the context of defense and security. Briefly, they are taking away our civil liberties in order to preserve what our founding fathers intended, the right for all men to be free. Their generosity knows no bounds as any potential "gold-mine" could become the target of their anti-liberty tactics to spread freedom.

Currently, the U.S. and the European Union are negotiating a "binding international agreement" regarding the transatlantic sharing of personal information; however, privacy and legal issues may prevent President Bush from signing this legislation into law before the end of his term. Europeans believe there are not enough safeguards against the possibility of the use of their personal data for reasons other than international security, not to mention, the lack of reliable procedures in place when people face the consequences laid out in the agreement in error.

Even more disturbing is Obama's sudden support of the FISA bill, a bill he promised to filibuster if necessary in the democratic primaries. More on him later.

"Nationalizing standards for drivers' licenses and birth certificates, and linking them together via a national database, creates a national ID system pure and simple."
-- Ron Paul

Read more...

Is Fantasy Driving Our Economy Therefore Our Nation?

“Made in the USA” empowered the United States of America in the 20th Century, commonly referred to as the “American century” because of its economic and military supremacy. America relied on the “quality” of its people, made possible by providing the freedom, liberty and focus on “human rights” that is essential to nourish the “fertile ground” necessary for innovation to take place. Unfortunately, this “fertile ground” all but dried up to Americans “lacking” the proper skin color,gender, religious affiliation, and/or status in most cases which is a huge caveat that cannot be overlooked.

However, America’s abundance of “fertile ground” far exceeded every other country at the time and gave even those without the “proper breeding” more opportunity than they would have had anywhere else in the world. In other words, America produced a clear blueprint or paradigm for a level playing field where "everyone" has the chance to succeed.

We used to make everything from steel, cars, television sets, toasters, and appliances to toys, bikes, textiles, and almost every tangible item that existed. Now, we're not sure what drives our economy. All we know, is that some people getting very rich while the majority of us are finding ourselves swimming in debt. Why? Because the financial services sector is in charge now and it's biggest products are debt and credit cards. As Kevin Philips says, in his new book Bad Money, "we now have an economy based on our money being moved around".

As we all know banks and investors charge excessive fees from ATM transactions, insufficient funds, questionable late payment, and anything else they can think of to the outrageous money hedge fund managers make on the fees they charge, - average annual salary in the $50 million range!- fees for services most of us have no understanding of and exist in a world 99.9% of us will never know. Without oversight, banks and the entire financial industry have capitalized on service fees they charge on services and money invisible to us, for the most part.

We are held captive to the financial sector who can arbitrary manipulate the rules and policy to steal from us without having to offer any justification. Considering financial institutions earn billions of dollars off the money we, the people, hand over; how is it fair that we, the people must pay the exorbitant fixed sums these institutions charge based on the capricious whim of a few men at the top?

People see right through the guise of "excellent customer service" the financial services sector promotes in order to engage in what can only be called, "lawful" extortion. However we experience the injustice individually and made to feel like we're the only one who is "stupid" enough to bring this kind of injustice on ourselves, we keep our mouths shut for the most part, so we reluctantly put our trust in these institutions such as the Federal Reserve, never once audited, who manufactures money out of nothing; banks and financial institutions who covertly invest, speculate on, and spend this so-called money (fractional reserve banking) in convoluted practices designed to confuse even the most informed and educated of us, and they do all of this with very little and in some cases, no regulation!

Most Americans have no real understanding of the operation of the international moneylenders ….The accounts of the Federal Reserve System have never been audited. It operates outside the control of Congress and manipulates the credit of the United States. - Barry Goldwater(R-AZ)

Not only are we allowing this industry, one notch above an elaborate magic show, to drive our economy; we have taken on the additional burden of having to import all the goods we no longer produce at an expense we can no longer afford. We are borrowing from countries who are in the process of building enormous wealth by replacing "Made in America" with "Made in China, Korea..."

Since wealth is not destroyed, merely transferred, it's easy to see where the money is going. It's lining the pockets of those who are privileged enough to get backstage passes to this amazing display of smoke and mirrors. The media spares us the details of what's really going on, in part because they themselves do not really understand and in part because they are controlled by the same people who have created this illusion that will eventually crash and burn. Who will pay the price? We, the people who try to earn an honest living but have no choice but to pay not only our share of taxes but in addition, the taxes the multi-millionaires and billionaires should pay but don't.

By his own admission, Warren Buffet, one of the richest men in the world, pays less than half the rate his secretary pays in taxes.

Read more...

When Did America Become A Nation of Frightened Wimps?

Steve over at Steve-Olson.com vividly articulates why Benjiman Franklin and Thomas Jefferson would be very disappointed in what has become of our Nation and how quickly "we the people" sacrifice liberty for security.

Read more...

US in Danger of a Dictatorship.

Presidential candidate Ron Paul has cautioned that the United States is now at a crisis point. He feels "the people", so indifferent to protecting their liberties, are opening the door for a dictatorship. The "elite" may be preparing a take-over even if it means they must make up events to scare "the people".

He has a point.

Read more...