This past week, we learned that the IRS has targeted for additional
scrutiny the tax exemption applications of groups with whose messages it
disagrees. We also learned that the Department of Justice obtained the
personal telephone records of hundreds of reporters and editors employed
by the Associated Press without a search warrant issued by a judge. And
during this past week we learned that the White House, the Department
of State and the CIA all engaged in a conspiracy of disinformation so
that the official version of events of what caused the murders of four
Americans at our facilities in Benghazi, Libya, would not impair Obama’s
re-election campaign in 2012.
The common threads in all of this government secrecy and lying are a
general rejection of government’s moral obligation to tell the truth, a
disturbing yet brazen willingness to evade and avoid the restrictions
the Constitution has deliberately built around government, and a glib
admission that the government can do as it pleases so long as it can
politically get away with it.
The Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause requires that the
government treat all similarly situated entities in a similar manner.
The Constitution’s First Amendment prohibits the government from using
the speech and expressive activities of persons in America as a basis
for the disparate treatment of them.
It should come as no surprise that President Obama told Ohio State
students at graduation ceremonies last week that they should not
question authority and they should reject the calls of those who do. He
argued that “our brave, creative, unique experiment in self-rule” has
been so successful that trusting the government is the same as trusting
ourselves; hence, challenging the government is the same as challenging
ourselves. And he blasted those who incessantly warn of government
tyranny.
Yet, mistrust of government is as old as America itself. America was
born out of mistrust of government. The revolution that was fought in
the 1770s and 1780s was actually won in the minds of colonists in the
mid-1760s when the British imposed the Stamp Act and used writs of
assistance to enforce it. The Stamp Act required all persons in the
colonies to have government-sold stamps on all documents in their
possession, and writs of assistance permitted search warrants written by
British troops in which they authorized themselves to enter private
homes ostensibly to look for the stamps.
U.S. Government to fine companies that do not comply with wiretap orders that violate user's privacy.
Activist Post
Spying without a warrant in America is a crime, a violation of privacy
rights protected by the U.S. Constitution. Yet, the government is asking
technology companies to commit this crime or be fined for
insubordination.
The New York Times is reporting that the Obama administration is "on the
verge of backing a Federal Bureau of Investigation plan for a sweeping
overhaul of surveillance laws that would make it easier to wiretap
people."
Big Brother is watching everything that you do on the Internet and
listening to everything that you say on your phone. Every single day in
America, the U.S. government intercepts and stores nearly 2 billion
emails, phone calls and other forms of electronic communication.
Former NSA employees have come forward and have described exactly what
is taking place, and this surveillance activity has been reported on by
prominent news organizations such as the Washington Post, Fox News and
CNN, but nobody really seems to get too upset about it. Either most
Americans are not aware of what is really going on or they have just
accepted it as part of modern life. But where will this end? Do we
really want to live in a dystopian “Big Brother society” where the
government literally reads every single thing that we write and listens
to every single thing that we say? Is that what the future of America
is going to look like? If so, what do you think our founding fathers
would have said about that?
Mark M. Jaycox, Kurt Opsahl, and Rainey Reitman EFF
Yesterday, the US House prepared for the debate on the privacy-invading
"cybersecurity" bill called CISPA, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and
Protection Act. The rules committee hearing was the last stop before the
bill is voted on by the full House.
In the hearing, Rep. Mike Rogers
(R-MI) was questioned about the core problems in the bill, like the
broad immunity and new corporate spying powers. In response, he characterized users who oppose CISPA as "14 year olds” tweeting in a basement.
Last week, multiple news articles reported 44% of American parents
refusing Gardasil or Cervarix for their children. Between 2008 and 2010,
the percentage of parents concerned about the safety of these two
vaccines nearly quadrupled. As of 2010, only 32% of eligible girls were
vaccinated against HPV. What is wrong with this picture?
Excerpts from national news sources, March 18-22, 2013:
USA Today
The percentage of parents who say they won’t have their teen daughters
vaccinated against the human papillomavirus increases, even though
physicians increasingly recommend the vaccinations. Concerns about
safety and side effects for the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine have
increased among parents: 16% cited these fears as the main reason they
did not have their daughters vaccinated in 2010, up from 5% in 2008…
Medpage Today
Parents increasingly say they are worried about the safety of the human
papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine and don’t intend to vaccinate their teen
daughters… But there is no similar pattern for two other vaccines aimed
at adolescents…
CNN Health
Concerns of mothers and fathers about the safety of the HPV vaccine
grew each year, from 4.5% in 2008 to 16.4% in 2010… The number of
parents who said they would not vaccinate their children for HPV
increased from 38.9% in 2008 to 43.9% in 2010. The main concern was
safety.
CBS News One of the main reasons parents said they didn’t want their children vaccinated against HPV was because of safety concerns.
Bloomberg
The number of girls who received either injection (Gardasil or
Cervarix) rose to about one-third in 2010 from 16 percent in 2008…
FiercePharma
A growing share of U.S. parents say they won’t vaccinate their
daughters… And that leaves Merck’s Gardasil and GSK’s Cervarix with a
shrinking market.
The New York Times …suggesting, the need for interventions beyond clinical recommendations like possibly ‘state and federally designed social marketing campaigns’…
Without brushing aside the need to address safety concerns, the
increasing rates of HPV vaccine refusal suggest that widespread
vaccination will require more than marketing campaigns. Medical professionals need to look for ways to tell a better story to parents and teens about HPV, vaccination and cancer. (emphasis added)
Taxpayer funded social marketing campaigns? Look for ways to ‘tell a
better story’ to parents? Who are these people kidding? What happened
to investigative journalism? What happened to fact-finding? What
happened to fair and balanced journalism?
Has no one considered the possibility that the 43.9% of parents refusing this particular vaccine might have some valid concerns?
Everyone is familiar of the passage in
the Bible. Jesus told Peter to put away his sword, when Jesus was
being arrested, and Peter drew his sword to protect him from arrest.
He swiped off the ear of one of the guards. Jesus shouted, “Put
away your sword, for those who live by the sword, will die by the
sword.” This verse has been often
misused by anti-gun groups to demonstrate that Jesus would be against
gun ownership. Actually nothing could be further from the truth. They
have never read in another passage where Jesus tells his disciples to
arm themselves, after he goes away!
The gun debate is
not what this article is about. I think that too many of us are not
aware of the controversy over drones. While writing this, Senator
Rand Paul is leading a filibuster against Obama's CIA nominee because
of Attorney General Eric Holders contention that drones can be used
to kill Americans – ON AMERICAN SOIL – without due process of
law! As alarming as this position is, what is even more alarming is
the notion that all of these government leaders are not looking into
the future far enough to realize that they may be opening a
bottomless pit of locust upon themselves!
First, a little
background. Of the many theories about President John F Kennedy's
assassination, one that many feel the most probable was that Castro
was behind the plot. Why Castro? Well, it seems that our government,
under the direction of JFK, using both the CIA and the mafia tried to
kill Castro many times! He also was behind the murder of the
president of South Vietnam just months before he himself was killed.
It turned out that the communist countries learned from us that if we
were willing to assassinate their leaders, then they felt free do do
the same to ours. JFK may have been ultimately killed by his own
policies that backfired.
Now to the
present day. America is using drones to kill enemies everywhere, and
by doing so, women and children have been killed, along with some
Americans citizens. Could others decide to use these same weapons
against our own leaders? I think so. And here is my prediction:
Within ten years,
drones are going to be as available as I-Pads. Everyone is going to
be able to buy them. Most are going to be as small as the palm of
your hand. Check this website: http://diydrones.com/
I think you may be surprised. I was.
I can imagine
very soon that drones will be as readily available as AR-15's...
Maybe even more so! These small, insect like drones will be able to
track people without being detected, and yes, KILL people! Here is
my scenario: The president goes out to play a round of golf, and zap
– he's dead! That is the ugly future that I see coming very soon.
Our leaders
should learn that their actions will come back on their own heads...
Just an FYI from The Plain Truth.
Attorney General Eric Holder can imagine a scenario in which it would
be constitutional to carry out a drone strike against and American on
American soil, he wrote in a letter to Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.
“It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance
in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution
and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize
the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United
States,” Holder replied in a letter yesterday to Paul’s question about
whether Obama “has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone
strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial.”
Paul condemned the idea. “The U.S. Attorney General’s refusal to rule
out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on
American soil is more than frightening – it is an affront the
Constitutional due process rights of all Americans,” he said in a
statement.
Would you renounce your U.S. citizenship if it meant you’d be sending
less of your hard-earned dollars to Uncle Sam? Do you want affordable
health care? Do you desire to live a long and healthy life? Do you want
your children to have an affordable college education? Do you want to
retire in relative comfort? Do you desire live your life in relative
freedom and not have to worry government harassment?
If you answered in the affirmative to most of these questions, it might
be time to start packing your bags and looking for greener pastures.
Americans Are Voting With Their Feet
Are you tired of living under relative tyranny where every email is
read, every phone call is listened to and your every movement is tracked
by a number of electronic devices?
The bill, S.B. 5737, proposes "banning the sale of assault weapons." According to the legislation, an "assault weapon"
is any semiautomatic pistol, pump-action rifle or shotgun that can
accept a detachable magazine, with the capacity to accept more than 10
rounds. Any magazine that accepts over 10 rounds itself will also be
banned.
Also included in the definition is any rifle or shotgun with a pistol
grip, a stock of any kind, a muzzle brake or muzzle compensator. The
bill also prohibits the manufacturing, possessing, purchasing, selling
or transferring of an assault weapons "conversion kit."
In order to continue to possess a so-called assault weapon that was
owned before the assumed passing of the legislation, the person must
"safely and securely" store the assault weapon and allow the sheriff of
the county to, no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to
"ensure compliance," despite some apparent civil liberties implications
related to the Fourth Amendment.
If you need to ask the question, then the answer is “yes”. But that is a
glib response and I do not feel glib about America's slide through the
nine rings of political hell.
A police state is generally defined as a totalitarian government that
exerts extreme and pervasive social, political and economic control
over peaceful citizens.
Ayn Rand called it “the ultimate inversion...the stage where the
government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may
act only by permission.”
There are various ways to measure where a nation sits on the police-state axis.
Tribesmen
this week examine the rubble of a building in southeastern Yemen where
American teenager Abdulrahmen al-Awlaki and six suspected al-Qaida
militants were killed in a U.S. drone strike on Oct. 14, 2011.
Al-Awlaki, 16, was the son of Anwar al-Awlaki, who died in a similar
strike two weeks earlier.
By Michael Isikoff National Investigative Correspondent, NBC News
A
confidential Justice Department memo concludes that the U.S. government
can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be
“senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” --
even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an
active plot to attack the U.S.
The 16-page memo,
a copy of which was obtained by NBC News, provides new details about
the legal reasoning behind one of the Obama administration’s most
secretive and controversial polices: its dramatically increased use of
drone strikes against al-Qaida suspects abroad, including those aimed at
American citizens, such as the September 2011 strike in Yemen that
killed alleged al-Qaida operatives Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Both
were U.S. citizens who had never been indicted by the U.S. government
nor charged with any crimes.
According to reports, all personal information stored on major cloud
computing services can be spied on by US agencies without users’
knowledge or even a search warrant.
This is all reportedly being done under the recently reauthorized Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)
and has led British Members of Parliament to call on the British
government to not only end the use of cloud computing but also stop
sharing intelligence services with the U.S, according to the Independent.
As New Zealand’s IOL points out,
under FISA “all documents uploaded on to cloud systems based in the US
or falling under Washington’s jurisdiction can be accessed and analyzed
without a warrant by American security agencies.”
Apparently, US agencies have been able to access private data stored on
the cloud since 2008 while no one had any clue it was going on.
English: Ethanol plant in Turner County, South Dakota, United States (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
This week's warm Washington temperatures had
some thinking about rolling the Lawn-Boy out of the garage for the first
cut of the year. And we all know what that means: Difficult starts due
to E10 gas that gels when it sits.
Now, according to a new study, cars and
truck may face the same fate thanks to President Obama's demand for a
higher ethanol in the new E15 gas.
The fuel industry's American Petroleum Institute
tested the 15 percent ethanol gas approved in 2010 and found it gums up
fuel systems, prompts "check engine" lights to come on, and messes with
fuel gauge readings.
"Failure of these components could result in
breakdowns that leave consumers stranded on busy roads and highways,"
said the industry report. Worse: API said the fuel problems--not found
in E5 or E10 blends--aren't always covered by auto warranties.
The industry prefers pure fuel to an ethanol
mix, but the report isn't likely to slow the administrations green push,
according to a Washington auto lobbyist.
I've explored and written on food politics for years, using articles and
direct links back to my sources to show evidence that the Big
Agra-Big-Food-Big Pharma-Big Government complex is a pernicious
corporatocracy with various satellites in place to conduct its dirty
work of politicking, plundering, deceptive marketing, and purposefully
miseducating the masses. I long ago declared that the food
corporatocracy's nutritional-food satellites such as the two ADAs
(American Dietetic Association and the American Diabetes Association),
the USDA, and the FDA are criminal organizations. The American Dietetic
Association recently changed its name to the Academy of Nutrition and
Dietetics (AND).
Against this backdrop, we must ask: what is
the role of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND)—the nation’s
largest association of nutrition professionals—in preventing or at least
stemming the tide of diet-related health problems? What responsibility
does this influential group of registered dietitians bear to be a
leading advocate for policy changes to make eating healthfully more
accessible? Does forming partnerships with the food industry compromise
such a group’s credibility? And what does the food industry gain from
such partnerships?
Why does it
matter? As this report will show, the food industry’s deep infiltration
of the nation’s top nutrition organization raises serious questions not
only about that profession’s credibility, but also about its policy
positions.
"We are fast approaching the stage of ultimate inversion: the stage
where government is free to do as it pleases, while the citizens may act
only by permission." - Ayn Rand
Why are fully-automatic AR-15s with 30-round magazines and hollow-point
bullets called 'personal defense' weapons when the Department of
Homeland Security purchases them, but semi-auto AR-15s are assault
rifles in the hands of citizens?
The Department of Homeland Security filed a purchase bid
this past June titled "Personal Defense Weapons Solicitation". It is
combined bid for 5.56x45mm NATO ammunition and "select-fire firearm
suitable for personal defense."
I am not sure where I come down on this subject, but this is a true story... The US did do this! What else are they doing??? This is an interesting subject. One of the leading proponets of CHEMTRAILS is Alex Jones...
It goes without saying that the mass media lies - they lied about Iraq
in the lead up to a war that in total, killed over 2 million people.
They lied about Libya, they are lying about Syria. They lie about
vaccines and intentionally try to sell parents the idea of purposefully injecting their children with mercury. Their lies have a single purpose - to serve the special interests that hand them their talking points.
Now the mass media is lying about gun violence. The New York Times wrote a particularly outrageous piece titled "In Gun Debate, a Misguided Focus on Mental Illness," where a "medical doctor" is given space to willfully bend statistics to make the case for banning guns, period.
Unfortunately for this "medical doctor" who claims that the vast
majority of the mentally ill do not commit violent acts, the last
several mass shootings in the US were committed by mentally ill
individuals, all confirmed to be on psychotropic medication. Shooter
Adam Lanza was said by relatives to be on Fanapt (Iloperidone) - an anti-psychotic prescribed for people suffering from schizophrenia.
(CNSNews.com) – The federal government spent enough money on
federal means-tested welfare programs to have sent each impoverished
household a check for nearly $60,000, according to figures from the
Census Bureau and the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
According to a report from the CRS produced for Sen. Jeff Sessions
(R-Ala.), $1 trillion was spent on federal welfare programs during
fiscal year 2011 – with $746 billion in federal funds and $254 in state
matching funds.
The Federal Aviation Administration is working towards putting the
finishing touches on rules and regulations for widespread domestic drone
use, and the agency expects as many as 30,000 UAVs will be in America’s airspace by the decade’s end. As Russia Today notes,
given that the department has already addressed the issue of acquiring
drones to give the DHS a better eye of domestic doings, though, those
law enforcement operations in question could very well transcend away from legitimate uses and quickly cause civil liberty concerns from coast-to-coast.
All drones will be equipped with Electro-Optical/Infra-Red sensors, as
well as the technology to sniff out certain chemicals from thousands of
feet above our heads. Have no fear though, since the "Robotic Aircraft
for Public Safety" program is for your own protection, we are sure Janet
Napolitano would suggest.
A Redlands man has filed a writ of habeas corpus concerning release from
confinement ordered under a conservatorship that may not even exist.
When Charles Castle was grabbed off the street by San Bernardino mental
health court workers Bob Habel and Wayne Henkelman, almost nobody
realized he was missing. Charlie was homeless and while a virtual
fixture on the street scene in Redlands, California, he lacked family
and social support networks. Some folks, such as Ken Stein with the
YMCA, where Charlie went to shower, thought that he was possibly
deceased.
Taken
Not deceased, but certainly disappeared, Charlie was taken to Arrowhead
Regional Center hospital and held in a mental health unit while powerful
parties determined his fate. He reports that he was not present at his
mandated court hearing and only found out several months later that he
had been placed under a mental health conservatorship.
His conservatorship proceedings were steeped in fraud. Charlie was
represented by the same law firm, the law offices of Bryan Hartnell,
which also represented the conservator, Melodie Scott. Initially, the
Public Guardian was appointed as conservator and Scott quickly
petitioned to take over this function.
In the San Antonio school district, the Student Locator Project (SLP)
is being beta-tested at Jay High School and Jones Middle School – two
schools in the Northside district. The SLP includes the use of radio
frequency identification technology (RFID) to “make schools safer, know
where our students are while at school, increase revenues, and provide a
general purpose ‘smart’ ID card.”
In order to check out school library books, register for classes, pay for school lunches, the “smart” ID card is
being employed to trace and track students and their movements on
campuses all across America. By using leverage of educators to coerce
school districts to adopt this method of tracking students, the argument
for the use of the RFID technology is campus safety, efficient
registration, and food and library programs.
In Austin, Texas, collaboration with the Global Positioning System (GPS) and RFID technology is being used to
deter students from skipping classes. In fact, those students having a
negative record with the school they attend are being targeted to be
under surveillance.
After Special Justice Walter Douglas Stokes sentenced former US Marine
Brandon Raub to 30 days detention in the psychiatric ward of the
Veterans Hospital, Circuit Court Judge Allan Sharrett dismissed the
case, citing that the original petition was “devoid of any factual
allegations that it could not be reasonably expected to give rise to a
case or controversy.”
John Whitehead, attorney for the Rutherford Institute and Raub has
stated that since the former Marine’s detention case, he has received
numerous statements from
other veterans who are being discriminated against. The latest trend is
to have our former US service men and women declared mentally ill and
detained against their will.
Just as Raub was forcibly detained in a mental ward, another veteran has been taken without charge or criminal activity. His firearms were confiscated and he was given a court date.
In a study published
in the Archives of Internal Medicine, collaborating with the VA Medical
Center, an estimated one third of veterans returning from Afghanistan
and Iraq were determined to be mentally or psychologically ill.
Touting post-traumatic stress disorder (PSTD), more than half of
returning veterans are considered to be suffering from a war-related
mental disorder.
Recent Comments