Google Search

Monday, December 31, 2012

U.S. Gov't Asks Federal Judge to Dismiss Cases of Americans Killed by Drones


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs'); Joe Wright

As Americans mourn the deaths of 20 children and 6 adults in the Newtown, CT tragedy - and the gun control debate has reached a fever pitch - autonomous killing systems are being funded by American taxpayers, and drone strikes continue to kill an increasing number of civilians abroad.

Barack Obama and the U.S. government policy makers have shown an incredible level of hypocrisy before; on the one hand lamenting such senseless deaths as have occurred in "mass shootings" while conducting their own mass killing, torture, and terror campaigns in foreign lands.

A culture of violence can't have it both ways, though, and the welcoming of drones into American skies by Congress is sure to unleash physical havoc shortly after concerns over surveillance and privacy are dismissed.

As a clear sign of what can be expected, the U.S. government has asked a federal judge to throw out a lawsuit brought by the families of three Americans killed by drone strikes in Yemen. If federal courts rule that these cases are without merit, it will set a dangerous precedent that only the executive branch of government can decide which Americans have a constitutional right to due process, while further enhancing a framework where the government will decide who is fit to be mourned and who should be forgotten.


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- North Carolina: Driving While Nervous is Not a Crime
- Indefinite Detention Without Trial: Completely Unconstitutional, Yet Routine
- Not So Merry Christmas Drug Busts
- Utah: Traffic Stop Valid Even When Cop Causes Violation
- Santa Claus Arrested by DPS Capitol Police for Chalking Sidewalk
- San Diego Cops Beat & Pepper Spray Innocent Man With Down Syndrome
- Arizona Police Officer Caught Hiding Evidence In His Garage, Lying About It -- Keeps Job
- Denver Police Officer Found Guilty Of Using Badge To Sexually Assaulting Woman

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

This Week's Corrupt Cops Stories


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs'); by Phillip Smith

A small-town Florida department run amok loses its chief--at least temporarily--an Alabama cop gets caught delivering weed, four South Texas cops get caught running cocaine, and a Camden, New Jersey, sergeant goes down for a dope squad run amok there. Let's get to it:

In Bal Harbour, Florida, the Bal Harbour police chief was suspended last Wednesday after a US Justice Department report said the department had misspent millions of dollars in drug money it had seized. Chief Thomas Hunker, 61, has been suspended with pay while an outside law enforcement agency investigates. The Bal Harbour police had developed the habit of conducting undercover operations all over the country to target drug dealers and their cash. Records show the agency doled out $624,558 in payments to informants in less than four years, and ran up $23,704 in one month for cross-country trips with first-class flights and luxury car rentals. The feds have frozen millions that Bal Harbour police helped confiscate, and the Justice Department now wants the village to return more than $4 million. The Justice Department also accused Hunker of professional misconduct for, among other things, conducting unauthorized checks of national criminal records databases for individuals who did not have access to those systems; receiving multiple gifts from people who may have benefited from his influence; allowing a drunk individual to drive a marked police vehicle on a beach, getting a "sweet deal" on his wife's car purchase after the department bought several vehicles from the same dealer; allowing inflated overtime on money-laundering investigations; and improperly paying informants.

In Montgomery, Alabama, a Montgomery police officer was arrested last Wednesday after he was caught delivering more than three pounds of high-grade marijuana to a home in Mobile County. Officer Lyvanh Ravasong is charged with marijuana trafficking. Ravasong went down when he arrived at the residence at the wrong time?as Mobile County Sheriff's deputies were executing a search warrant at the address. Ravasong is also believed to be associated with a 16-acre pot farm discovered in October near Chunchala. Officer Ravasong is now former officer Ravasong.

In McAllen, Texas, four South Texas lawmen were arrested late last week on charges they accepted thousands of dollars in bribes to guard shipments of cocaine. Mission Police Officer Jonathan Trevino, 29, and Hidalgo County Sheriff's deputies Fabian Rodriguez, 28, and Gerardo Duran, 30, were arrested last Friday, while Mission Police Officer Alexis Espinosa was arrested a day earlier. All four were members of an anti-drug trafficking task force called the Panama Unit, but are accused of instead providing protection for traffickers. Trevino is the son of Hidalgo County Sheriff Lupe Hidalgo. Federal prosecutors said they received a tip in August that task force members had been stealing drugs and set up a sting. The sting resulted in Duran and another task force member escorting 20 kilograms of cocaine north from McAllen, for which they were paid $4,000. The other task force members earned thousands more dollars for escorting four more cocaine shipments in November. It's unclear what the actual charges are, but all four were being held on $100,000 bonds.

In Camden, New Jersey, a former Camden police sergeant was sentenced last Wednesday to eight months in federal prisons for his role as the supervising officer of a corrupt anti-drug squad that stole cash, conducted illegal searches, planted drugs and falsified reports. Dan Morris, 49, had previously pleaded guilty to conspiracy to deprive others of their civil rights. He admitted that between May 2007 and September 2008, he conducted illegal searches without a warrant or consent, obtained coerced consents to search residences based on threats and undue pressure, stole money during illegal searches and arrests, and allowed officers he supervised to include facts in police reports that were false. Morris is the third Camden officer to plead guilty in the conspiracy, while a fourth was found guilty at trial, and a fifth was acquitted. The FBI probe of the conspiracy has resulted in the reversal of about 200 drug convictions of suspects arrested by the unit between 2007 and 2009, when the cops were arrested. Morris, a city officer since 1986, was the unit?s supervisor during the time of the investigation.


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- North Carolina: Driving While Nervous is Not a Crime
- Indefinite Detention Without Trial: Completely Unconstitutional, Yet Routine
- Not So Merry Christmas Drug Busts
- Utah: Traffic Stop Valid Even When Cop Causes Violation
- Santa Claus Arrested by DPS Capitol Police for Chalking Sidewalk
- San Diego Cops Beat & Pepper Spray Innocent Man With Down Syndrome
- Arizona Police Officer Caught Hiding Evidence In His Garage, Lying About It -- Keeps Job
- Denver Police Officer Found Guilty Of Using Badge To Sexually Assaulting Woman

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Saturday, December 29, 2012

Pundits And Politicans Very Quick To Blame Video Game & Movie Violence For Newtown


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs'); by Mike Masnick

The tragedy last week in Connecticut is still horrifying to think about on many different levels -- but the constant search for blame, and using it to support pet political ideas is troubling. This isn't to say that we don't necessarily need to have a "conversation" on various hot potato political issues, but basing it around an event like this isn't likely to be a productive and informed conversation, but one driven purely by emotions. I understand the desire, and the idea that making use of such a tragedy to create political will to do something, is all too tempting. But I fear what happens when we legislate around emotions, rather than reality. And, no I'm not even going to touch the question of gun control or mental health treatment. Both obviously evoke strong opinions from people on all sides of the issue (and, contrary to popular opinion, there are more than two sides to those issues). Instead, let's talk about the rush to blame video games and TV shows, as seems to happen every single time there's a mass shooting -- and almost always done with no evidence.

We already talked about people rushing to blame a video game, after the incorrectly named "original" suspect in the shootings had, possibly, at some point "liked" the game on Facebook. But, of course, now the politicians are stepping in, and retiring Senator Joe Lieberman is using the tragedy to push forth one of his pet ideas that he's brought up in the past: violent video games and TV must have something to do with it. He's trying to set up a commission to "scrutinize" "the role that violent video games and movies might play in shootings" among other things (yes, including gun control and mental health care).

Lieberman, not surprisingly, was not the only one. A large group of politicians and pundits immediately jumped to the conclusion that video games and movies must have something to do with all of this:

A disturbing number of public figures have lashed out at video games since the atrocity committed at Sandy Hook Elementary on Friday. A bipartisan group of legislators embraced this scapegoating on the Sunday news programs; from Democrats like Sen. Joe Lieberman and Gov. John Hickenlooper to Rep. Jason Chaffetz and former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge.

They were joined by members of the media ? sadly, too many to count.

On MSNBC on Monday, Chris Jansing asked her guests what connection Adam Lanza?s interest in video games had to his murderous shooting spree. She quoted senior White House advisor David Axelrod who tweeted ?shouldn?t we also quit marketing murder as a game?? Liberal contributor Goldie Taylor revealed that she refused to let her child play games until he was 14-years-old.

[....]

On Fox & Friends on Monday, legal analyst Peter Johnson Jr. delivered an offensively sermonizing renunciation of entertainment producers and videogame makers who are ?clinging to guns economically.?

?They are glamorizing guns in this country. They are the scourge in terms of these guns,? Johnson Jr. said of game and filmmakers

Of course, time and time again when these shootings happen, the reports later show... that video games and movies played little to no role. Yes, sometimes the killers played these games, but it's difficult to find teenagers these days who have not played a violent video game or watched a violent movie. It's like saying that we should explore "the role that breakfast plays" in such shootings. How many of the killers ate breakfast that day? In fact, studies seem to suggest that, if anything, violent movies may actually decrease incidents of violence.

Bizarrely, the person with the most thoughtful explanation on some of this might be movie critic Roger Ebert, in a review of Gus Van Sant's movie Elephant from nearly a decade ago. That movie portrayed a similar school shooting, and did so by making it clear that sometimes there are no answers and there is no "other thing" to blame. Sometimes (perhaps many times) these things don't make sense, no matter how many times we want them to make sense. But Ebert also points to another factor that rarely gets discussed:

Let me tell you a story. The day after Columbine, I was interviewed for the Tom Brokaw news program. The reporter had been assigned a theory and was seeking sound bites to support it. "Wouldn't you say," she asked, "that killings like this are influenced by violent movies?" No, I said, I wouldn't say that. "But what about 'Basketball Diaries'?" she asked. "Doesn't that have a scene of a boy walking into a school with a machine gun?" The obscure 1995 Leonardo Di Caprio movie did indeed have a brief fantasy scene of that nature, I said, but the movie failed at the box office (it grossed only $2.5 million), and it's unlikely the Columbine killers saw it.

The reporter looked disappointed, so I offered her my theory. "Events like this," I said, "if they are influenced by anything, are influenced by news programs like your own. When an unbalanced kid walks into a school and starts shooting, it becomes a major media event. Cable news drops ordinary programming and goes around the clock with it. The story is assigned a logo and a theme song; these two kids were packaged as the Trench Coat Mafia. The message is clear to other disturbed kids around the country: If I shoot up my school, I can be famous. The TV will talk about nothing else but me. Experts will try to figure out what I was thinking. The kids and teachers at school will see they shouldn't have messed with me. I'll go out in a blaze of glory."

In short, I said, events like Columbine are influenced far less by violent movies than by CNN, the NBC Nightly News and all the other news media, who glorify the killers in the guise of "explaining" them. I commended the policy at the Sun-Times, where our editor said the paper would no longer feature school killings on Page 1. The reporter thanked me and turned off the camera. Of course the interview was never used. They found plenty of talking heads to condemn violent movies, and everybody was happy.

Meanwhile, Danah Boyd has a related, but somewhat different perspective on the whole thing, noting how the media frenzy around these events also tends to mess with everyone else who are trying to cope with the situation, and makes sure their lives can never go back to any semblance of normalcy. She talks about running into some kids who had gone to Columbine high school, a few months after those attacks:
What I heard was heartbreaking. They had dropped out of school because the insanity from the press proved to be too much to deal with. They talked about not being able to answer the phone ? which would ring all day and night ? because the press always wanted to talk. They talked about being hounded by press wherever they went. All they wanted was to be let alone. So they dropped out of school which they said was fine because it was so close to the end of the year and everything was chaos and no one noticed.
As she notes, it's not the press's fault either. They're also giving the public what they want -- and, she agrees, that some of these topics are important and should be discussed. But the focus on the people in Newtown isn't helping.
But please, please, please? can we leave the poor people of Newtown alone? Can we not shove microphones into the faces of distraught children? Can we stop hovering like buzzards waiting for the fresh meat of gossipy details? Can we let the parents of the deceased choose when and where they want to engage with the public to tell their story? Can we let the community have some dignity in their grief rather than turning them and their lives into a spectacle of mourning?

Yes, the media are the ones engaging in these practices. But the reason that they?re doing so is because we ? the public ? are gawking at the public displays of pain. Our collective fascination with tragedy means that we encourage media practices that rub salt into people?s wounds, all for the most salacious story. And worse, our social media practices mean that the media creators are tracking the kinds of stories that are forwarded. And my hunch is that people are forwarding precisely those salacious stories, even if to critique the practices (such as the interviews of children).

What happened last week was senseless and tragic and painful to think about in all sorts of ways. And, yes, there are reasons to hope that such an event might lead to ideas that would prevent such things in the future, but the way we go about things on such discussions doesn't provide much hope that we're going to do anything valuable or thoughtful in response. Instead, it becomes a rush to do something purely out of an emotional response, and it's unclear how that helps.

(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Commentary
- Ron Paul: Government Security Is Just Another Kind of Violence
- Private Murders versus Government Murders
- Who Goes to Prison Due to Gun Control?
- Gun Control = Gun Violence
- The Spontaneous Order of the Dance Floor
- Scratch A "Liberal," Find A Fascist: The Case Of Barbara Boxer
- American Children and Foreign Children
- I Fear the Government and the Obedient Sheeple, More Than I Fear Guns

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Arizona Police Officer Caught Hiding Evidence In His Garage, Lying About It -- Keeps Job


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs'); Chris | InformationLiberation

A Tempe, Arizona police officer caught hiding evidence in his garage and lying about it will get to keep his job thanks to a ruling by Tempe police chief Tom Ryff.


Via CBS 5:

TEMPE, AZ (CBS5) - An internal investigation revealed a Tempe officer flat out wasn't doing his job. Reports show he knowingly botched 10 cases.

During the investigation, Officer Tony Trow admitted he was taking evidence home and keeping it in his garage. It was also discovered Trow put off writing a murder report for five years.

[...]An internal investigation revealed from September 2004 to March 2012, Trow stored evidence from five cases in his garage to hide his unfinished work. That included case notes, crime scene photos and even original recordings of interviews. The report from that investigation said those items had been tossed together in cardboard boxes.

It was also discovered Trow didn't write nearly a dozen reports, some dating as far back as 2007.

The report showed Trow also didn't bother to turn in the rape kit of a 17-year-old.

Not only should this cop be fired, he should be criminally charged for tampering with evidence.

(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- North Carolina: Driving While Nervous is Not a Crime
- Indefinite Detention Without Trial: Completely Unconstitutional, Yet Routine
- Not So Merry Christmas Drug Busts
- Utah: Traffic Stop Valid Even When Cop Causes Violation
- Santa Claus Arrested by DPS Capitol Police for Chalking Sidewalk
- San Diego Cops Beat & Pepper Spray Innocent Man With Down Syndrome
- Denver Police Officer Found Guilty Of Using Badge To Sexually Assaulting Woman
- Charlotte Cop Kills Dog, Nearly Shoots Pregnant Woman

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Friday, December 28, 2012

Private Murders versus Government Murders


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs'); by Michael Tennant, Future of Freedom Foundation

The December 14 murder of 20 children and 6 women at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, has garnered vast media attention and caused countless people with no connection to the victims to grieve for them. This is not a new phenomenon: nearly all mass murders carried out by civilians generate the same type of coverage and response.

But what of the far more numerous incidents of government murder of innocents? Most of them hardly make the news at all; fewer still produce widespread outpourings of sympathy.

One does not need to look any further than 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. to observe the contrast. Barack Obama was quick to offer an expression of sympathy for the families of the Newtown victims. Yet that very day his administration asked a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit over the drone assassinations of Anwar al-Awlaki, Samir Khan, and Abdulrahman al-Awlaki that Obama ordered in 2011. Both al-Awlakis were American citizens; Abdulrahman, the son of Anwar, was just 16 at the time of his death.

The lawsuit was filed by the father of Anwar al-Awlaki and the mother of Khan -- parents who grieve over the loss of their children (and grandson) no less than the parents of Newtown. To Obama, however, these killings were justified on the basis of that nebulous concept "national security," and the grieving relatives do not even deserve their day in court.

A couple of days later, a "suspected U.S. drone strike killed five suspected militants in Pakistan's tribal region," according to CNN. The Obama administration, which maintains a secret "kill list" from which the president can order assassinations, "counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants," the New York Times reported, so those "five suspected militants" might well have been persons who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, much like the children at Sandy Hook. Obama has yet to express any remorse for these deaths, and hardly any Americans are aware of them, let alone care.

Those five deaths are on top of the 2,500 people estimated to have been killed by the CIA and the U.S. military in the course of more than 300 drone strikes on Obama's watch. Among the innocent people killed by U.S. drones during Obama's presidency are at least 64 children -- more than three times as many as were killed at Sandy Hook -- according to a report from the law schools of Stanford University and New York University. Thus far, the president has not wiped away tears in the course of eloquent speeches on the lives snuffed out by his drones, and they have received very little press coverage. Americans who do know about them will, as often as not, shrug them off as "collateral damage."

And while Obama praised "the first responders who raced to the scene" in Newtown, his administration's policy abroad is to strike the same area multiple times with drone-fired missiles, with the second and later strikes invariably killing first responders attempting to help those injured in the first attack. "The secondary strikes," noted the Stanford-New York report, "have discouraged average civilians from coming to one another's rescue, and even inhibited the provision of emergency medical assistance from humanitarian workers."

Such policies, of course, did not originate with Obama. George W. Bush launched wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that have together taken the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent people. During his presidency U.S. drones attacked a religious school in Pakistan, killing as many as 80 civilians, including 69 children ranging in age from 7 to 17. It being a CIA operation, it was kept under wraps as long as possible, and even now few Americans are aware of this unconscionable action that was performed in their name. Bush certainly did not apologize for it or express solidarity with the grieving relatives of his victims.

The George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton administrations deliberately sabotaged Iraq's sanitation systems and prevented their repair through sanctions. That, too, was not widely reported, and neither president apologized for it. Quite the opposite: Clinton's secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, told a reporter that "the price" -- half a million dead Iraqi children -- was "worth it" to oust Saddam Hussein from power, an objective the bombings and sanctions manifestly failed to achieve.

Under Clinton, too, federal agencies laid siege to the Branch Davidian compound outside Waco, Texas, and in the name of saving children from abuse killed 17 kids and another 59 adults inside the compound.

No government employees were ever brought to account for that incident, though some of the surviving Davidians were tried and convicted for daring to resist the feds' assault on their home.

Going back even further, one could point to Harry Truman's atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki or the Allies' firebombing of German and Japanese cities, which also targeted first responders, under both Truman and his predecessor, Franklin Roosevelt. Even today those actions are justified by many Americans on the basis that "all's fair in love and war"; and besides, they "saved American lives" -- the only ones, apparently, that count.

The U.S. government, of course, is not alone in murdering innocent people. One thinks immediately of the great evils of Adolf Hitler's National Socialists, who killed perhaps 11 million people, or the communist regimes of the Soviet Union, China, and elsewhere, responsible for the deaths of nearly 100 million. All told, governments killed more than 262 million people in the 20th century outside of wars, according to University of Hawaii political science professor R.J. Rummel. Add to that the war dead, also the responsibility of governments, and the figure becomes astronomical. The vast majority of instances of death by government are unknown to all except researchers such as Rummel. Those that are more widely known often have their apologists.

No sane person sticks up for the perpetrator of the Sandy Hook massacre. Likewise, it's about time people stopped sticking up for governments that perpetrate far worse killings -- and started prosecuting the people who order them and carry them out.
_
Michael Tennant is a software developer and freelance writer in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Commentary
- Ron Paul: Government Security Is Just Another Kind of Violence
- Who Goes to Prison Due to Gun Control?
- Gun Control = Gun Violence
- The Spontaneous Order of the Dance Floor
- Scratch A "Liberal," Find A Fascist: The Case Of Barbara Boxer
- American Children and Foreign Children
- I Fear the Government and the Obedient Sheeple, More Than I Fear Guns
- If Obama Is Opposed To Guns, Why Did His Administration Just Purchase 1.6 Billion Rounds Of Ammunition?

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

'A slap on the wrist'


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs'); by Tim Lynch

From the Washington Post:
IF A WITNESS hadn?t shot video of two Prince George?s County police officers savagely beating John McKenna, a University of Maryland student, after a March 2010 men?s basketball game, that would probably have been the end of it. The officers didn?t file a report, as required, on their use of force. When initially questioned about the beating, they lied. And when they filled out the initial paperwork on the incident, police said Mr. McKenna had sustained his injuries, including a concussion, from being kicked by a police horse.
Yes, a real eye-opener. Consider: If there was no video, the cover-up would have succeeded. Even with compelling videotaped evidence of wrongdoing, just a slap on the writs?just enough to say, ?something was done about it.?

(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- North Carolina: Driving While Nervous is Not a Crime
- Indefinite Detention Without Trial: Completely Unconstitutional, Yet Routine
- Not So Merry Christmas Drug Busts
- Utah: Traffic Stop Valid Even When Cop Causes Violation
- Santa Claus Arrested by DPS Capitol Police for Chalking Sidewalk
- San Diego Cops Beat & Pepper Spray Innocent Man With Down Syndrome
- Arizona Police Officer Caught Hiding Evidence In His Garage, Lying About It -- Keeps Job
- Denver Police Officer Found Guilty Of Using Badge To Sexually Assaulting Woman

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Thursday, December 27, 2012

American Children and Foreign Children

by Jacob G. Hornberger

If there is a more emotionally painful experience than a parent's losing a child, I can't imagine what it would be. The emotional wound is raw and goes down to the deepest recesses of a person's heart and soul.

And as we see with the Connecticut massacre of all those little children, it's not just the parents or even just Connecticut residents, who feel the pain and anguish over what has occurred. People all over the country sympathize deeply with the pain being suffered by the parents of those children.

What I find absolutely fascinating, however, is how so many Americans have a totally different reaction when it comes to the deaths of foreign children at the hands of the U.S. national-security state. There is an indifference and a callousness that defies credulity.

Yet, that mindset of indifference and callousness doesn't seem to apply to deaths that occur from natural causes. For example, when there are deaths of foreign children that occur as a result of a tsunami or hurricane, there is a tremendous outpouring of sympathy and help among the American people. There is also tremendous empathy for foreign families who lose children at the hands of a private murderer, as we saw in Norway.

But when the deaths occur as a result of some drone strike, bomb, or sanctions at the hands of the U.S. government, everything seems to shut down within Americans. Sympathy and empathy disappear. People don't want to hear the details. They do their best to shut out any discussion of the episode. The attitude is always, "Regrettable, but now it's time to move on."

Why the difference?

As I argue in my current series, "The Evil of the National Security State," in FFF's monthly journal, Future of Freedom, the answer lies in what the national-security state has done to the American people. In the name of fighting communism and, later, terrorism, it has warped their values and their principles and stultified their consciences.

Ever since the enactment of the National Security Act of 1947, the attitude has been that the national-security state, especially the military and the CIA, must do whatever is necessary to protect "national security." If that means hiring Nazis to help fight the Cold War, so be it. If it means illicit drug experimentation on unknowing Americans, so be it. If it means invading foreign lands without the constitutionally required congressional declaration of war, so be it. If it means assassinating foreign leaders, so be it. If it means military coups in foreign countries, so be it. If it means torture, indefinite incarceration, secret prisons, and kangaroo military tribunals, so be it. If it means assassination of American citizens and foreigners, so be it. If it means bombing wedding parties and funeral processions, so be it. If it means killing children with drones or sanctions, so be it.

Throughout the Cold War and then the "war on terrorism," Americans have walked through the entire process in what seems to be a state of extreme numbness. All that has mattered has been "national security," a term that has no real meaning at all and is not even found in the Constitution. As long as national security has been at stake, Americans have chosen to defer to the authority of national-security state officials. Conscience has been set aside for the sake of national security.

One of the best examples of this phenomenon was with respect to the Iraq sanctions. For 11 long years, the U.S. national-security state maintained one of the cruelest and most brutal systems of sanctions in history against Iraq. Year after year, tens of thousands of Iraqi children were dying from illnesses, malnutrition, and disease.

The situation was made worse by what the national-security state had done to Iraq during the Persian Gulf War, a war that Congress never declared. It had knowingly and intentionally destroyed Iraq's water and sewage treatment plants with the specific aim of spreading illnesses and diseases among the Iraqi people. When the war was over, the sanctions prevented those plants from being repaired.

Throughout those 11 years, there was very little outpouring of outrage, anger, and indignation from the American people. There were some groups and individuals who spoke out against the horror but they were few and far between. Most Americans were indifferent to the massive, ever-increasing, death toll.

Even when two high UN officials, Denis Halliday and Hans von Sponeck, and Jutta Burghardt, head of the World Food Program in Iraq, all stricken by conscience, resigned their positions based on what was being called a "genocide" in Iraq, Americans, by and large, remained distant and detached. If the national-security state said that Saddam Hussein had to go, then that's all that mattered. National security was everything.

There were Americans who chose to help the Iraqi people by sending them or providing them with medicines, money, or other such things. The national-security state ended up going after them with a vengeance. They included groups like Physicians for Social Responsibility and Voices in the Wilderness and individuals like Bert Sacks. National-security state officials threatened them with fines. Just recently, Sacks prevailed in the government's relentless crusade against him in the federal courts to recover a $10,000 fine for helping the Iraqi people in violation of the sanctions.

They were the lucky ones, however. American doctor Rafil Dhafir is currently serving a 22-year jail sentence for helping the Iraqi people in violation of the sanctions. What precisely did he do? Send money to Saddam Hussein? To al-Qaeda in Iraq? Nope. He sent money to an Iraqi charity to help the Iraqi people.

Why a criminal prosecution against Dhafir and merely a civil fine against Sacks? Perhaps the answer lies in the radically different nature of the names and national origin of the two.

Only a few Americans cared what happened to Dhafir, Sacks, or anyone else who responded to the dictates of his conscience by helping the Iraqi people deal with the sanctions.

When U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Madeleine Albright was asked in 1996 by "Sixty Minutes" whether the deaths of half-a-million Iraqi children from the sanctions were "worth it," she responded, "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price -- we think the price is worth it."

Hardly anyone here in the United States batted an eye at her statement. After all, she was the principal spokesman for the U.S. national-security state. And national security was everything. The sanctions continued for another seven years.

The reaction was entirely different in the Middle East. There, the deep emotional pain and anguish was being suffered not only by Iraqi parents who were losing their children, it was being felt by people all over the Middle East, much as people all over the United States are feeling the pain of losing those children in Connecticut.

Imagine -- year after year of watching children die, needlessly. The anger ultimately boiled into rage, which ultimately manifested itself in terrorism against the United States. In fact, when Ramzi Yousef, one of the terrorists who struck the World Trade Center in 1993, appeared for sentencing, he angrily pointed to the deaths of the Iraqi children from the sanctions as one of the reasons for his terrorism. His point about the sanctions would be repeated later by Osama bin Laden.

Yet, when the 9/11 attacks occurred, many Americans quickly accepted the explanation provided by national-security state officials -- that the anger and rage that motivated the terrorists had nothing to do with U.S. foreign policy. It was all about hatred for America's "freedom and values." And when some of us pointed to the sanctions and other acts of U.S. interventionism as providing the motive behind the terrorist strikes, supporters of the national-security state responded with, "Oh, you're nothing but a justifier! You're justifying the attacks!" They were not even willing to entertain the possibility that people in other parts of the world get just as angry when children in their part of the world are killed as Americans do when children in our part of the world are killed. They simply did what they had been doing their entire lives-- defer to the judgment of the national-security state.

After Saddam Hussein's infamous WMDs failed to materialize, all to many Americans quickly accepted the national-security state's alternative rationale for invading and occupying Iraq -- to help the Iraqi people by bringing them "democracy." Of course, hardly anyone asked U.S. officials to reconcile their new-found love for the Iraqi people with their 11 years of brutal sanctions which brought death to hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children.

How many deaths of Iraqi children would actually have been worth regime change in Iraq? 100,000? 50,000? 10,000? 1,000? 100?

The answer is: None. The commandment does not say, "Thou shalt not kill except for regime change or some other political goal." It says, "Thou shalt not kill."

But under the principles of the national-security state, God's laws were subordinated to national security a long time ago. And in the name of national security, all too many Americans have rendered their conscience to the national-security state.
_
Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He was a trial attorney for twelve years in Texas. He also was an adjunct professor at the University of Dallas, where he taught law and economics. In 1987, Mr. Hornberger left the practice of law to become director of programs at the Foundation for Economic Education. He has advanced freedom and free markets on talk-radio stations all across the country as well as on Fox News' Neil Cavuto and Greta van Susteren shows and he appeared as a regular commentator on Judge Andrew Napolitano's show Freedom Watch. View these interviews at LewRockwell.com and from Full Context. Send him email.


View the original article here

Sunday, October 28, 2012

Philip DeFranco Interviewed on Redistribution


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs');

Philip DeFranco, the Host of the Philip DeFranco Show on YouTube, on redistribution of wealth by the government. Is redistribution stealing, like Newt said? Is it legalized theft? Part 1.

(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Economy
- Ron Paul: "Country Should Panic Over Fed's Decision"
- The Fed's Balance At The End Of 2013: $4 Trillion
- Things Are Getting Worse: Median Household Income Has Fallen 4 Years In A Row
- Schiff Vs. Insana; Matter Vs. Anti-Matter
- Peter Schiff On CNBC - Talks Ban Corporate Profits Video
- The Bill Clinton Myth
- Peter Schiff Talks Rising Food Prices On Al Jazeera
- World's richest woman: "Drink less, work more"

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Saturday, October 27, 2012

Seattle Cops Retaliate Against Man That Complained About Seattle Police


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs');

Sorry, I could not read the content fromt this page.

View the original article here

Friday, October 26, 2012

John Kerry Confronted on Building 7 "Controlled Fashion" Comment


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs');

Senator John Kerry gets confronted on his "Controlled fashion" comment regarding the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 and the fact he is a member of Skull & Bones.

(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest General
- Thomas S. Szasz (1920-2012)
- Bill Hicks on COPS
- Keith Olbermann on 9/11 Truth
- Bob Saget on 9/11 Truth
- Will.i.am of The Black Eyed Peas on Obama's Secret Kill List
- 11% Of Likely Voters Favor Legalizing, Regulating Cocaine
- Molyneux To Ron Paul Supporters: I'm Sorry
- Gallup: Americans Rate Public Schools the Worst Place to Educate Children

"We have become a Nazi monster in the eyes of the whole world--a nation of bullies and bastards who would rather kill than live peacefully. We are not just Whores for power and oil, but killer whores with hate and fear in our hearts. We are human scum, and that is how history will judge us...No redeeming social value. Just whores. Get out of our way, or we'll kill you.
Who does vote for these dishonest shitheads? Who among us can be happy and proud of having this innocent blood on our hands? Who are these swine? These flag-sucking half-wits who get fleeced and fooled by stupid rich kids like George Bush? They are the same ones who wanted to have Muhammad Ali locked up for refusing to kill gooks. They speak for all that is cruel and stupid and vicious in the American character. They are the racists and hate mongers among us--they are the Ku Klux Klan. I piss down the throats of these Nazis.
And I am too old to worry about whether they like it or not. Fuck them."
-Hunter S. Thompson, Kingdom of Fear
A cowboy nation ready to eliminate the rest of the world like they did to the native americans. And a texan cowboy wants to be the president.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Thursday, October 25, 2012

Jeremy Scahill Points Out Drone-Bomba-Obama Is A Mass Murdering Criminal, MSNBC Panel Dumbstruck


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs');

Sorry, I could not read the content fromt this page.

View the original article here

Alabama Man Kills Himself in Drug Raid


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs');
by Phillip Smith

A Buhl, Alabama, man apparently shot and killed himself as members of the Tuscaloosa County Sheriff's Office went to serve a possession of a controlled substance warrant last Sunday night. Randall Justin Roberts, 34, becomes the 46th person to die in US domestic drug law enforcement operations so far this year.

Citing police sources, the Alabama.com news portal reported that when deputies went to the front door, Roberts' father, Randall Floyd Roberts refused to let them enter even after they showed him their warrant. The elder Roberts was then arrested for obstruction and subsequently charged with resisting arrest when he struggled with officers.

Once in the house, deputies went to the bedroom where they believed Roberts was, but heard a single gunshot go off as they opened the bedroom door. The deputies retreated, removed his mother from the house, and then set up a perimeter around the house. More deputies responded to the call of shots fired, as did the sheriff's SWAT team, replete with "the department's Bear Cat (Armored Tactical Vehicle), Aviation Unit, K-9 and Paramedic."

The SWAT team gave itself a workout. It tried to contact Roberts using the public address system in the Bear Cat. It threw flash grenades and then tear gas grenades. It used a helicopter to provide cover while it "deployed assets." It used a telescopic TV camera to search rooms in the house. It used the drug dog to indicate that Roberts was in the rear bedroom -- the same one where the single shot came from.

After about two hours, SWAT team members entered the house and found Roberts dead in closet in the bedroom. A .22 revolver was found lying next to him.

It's not clear whether the warrant was a search warrant or an arrest warrant. Roberts had been arrested August 13 on drug distribution charges.


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- Texas Cop Drags 77-Yr-Old Grandmother from Car for Refusing to Show ID
- Texas Police Kill Unarmed Man Before Confiscating Witness Camera and Deleting Images
- Police Learn Propaganda Tactics at Internet Conference
- Drug Sentences Driving Federal Prison Population Growth, Government Report Finds
- Tarnished badges: Opa-locka's troubled police force
- Officer Enforcing Leash Law Shoots Family's Dog, Witness Horrified
- 90-Plus Arrests of D.C. Cops in Under 4 Years
- Infiltrating Occupy: Austin Activists Face Charges for Equipment Provided by Undercover Police

Did he kill himself, or did he "apparently" kill himself? If it was the latter, that was a choice he made. In fact, this whole circumstance was due to choices he made. Ack! I meant FORMER, not latter.
Sorry 'bout that.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Obama Sends More Drones, Marines to Libya, But Did They Ever Leave?


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs');
Apparently, there is nothing so permanent as a temporary US war
by John Glaser


The Obama administration has ordered military reinforcements to Libya following the attack on the US consulate building this week, but the truth is drones had never left Libya?s skies and US Marines have been carrying out missions on the ground since the end of NATO?s war there last year.

The US suspects al-Qaeda affiliates were involved in starting the attack on the US consulate in Libya, which killed the American ambassador and three others, and has not only started an FBI investigation into the incident, but has ordered more drones to surveil Libya, as well as up to 50 additional US Marines and US warships equipped with Tomahawk missiles off the northern coast.

But the Defense Department told Wired?s Danger Room that the drones never left, despite the fact that the NATO air war in Libya came to an end almost a year ago.

?Yes, we have been flying CAPs [combat air patrols] since the war ended,? said Army Lt. Col. Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman. These have apparently been done for surveillance purposes with the consent of the new Libyan government.

Similarly, the 50 additional US Marines being sent to Libya won?t exactly be new. One of the four Americans killed in this week?s consulate attack told ABC News last month he was working with the State Department on an intelligence mission to find some of the hoards of weapons strewn about the country following the collapse of Muammar Gadhafi?s regime.

The late economist Milton Friedman was famous for saying that there is nothing so permanent as a government temporary program. He was referring to domestic policies and bureaucracies, but the same principle applies here. When the US government engages in military action abroad, the tendency is for such military engagements to remain open-ended, in keeping with America?s long history of spreading its military across the entire globe.


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Geopolitics
- Tutu: Bush, Blair should face trial at the Hague
- Permission to Engage: Victims' families and an ex-US soldier unpick the Wikileaks film that showed US forces killing Iraqi civilians in 2007 [Video]
- WoW and Battle.net service pulled from Iran due to US sanctions -- Blizzard
- Julian Assange will be granted asylum, says official
- The Cannibal Warlords of Liberia (Another Smashing Success Of U.S. Interventionism)
- US terror drone strikes kill 18, injure more than dozen in Somalia
- CIA "Manages"? Drug Trade, Mexican Official Says
- Singapore to Relax Death Penalty for Some Drug Traffickers

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Texas Cop Drags 77-Yr-Old Grandmother from Car for Refusing to ID


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs');
Chris | InformationLiberation

"Let's be clear: You are a worthless pleb citizen whose prime directive in life is to unquestioningly obey and pay your criminal overlords as we rob you."

That's what this Texas cop would have said if he could articulate his views beyond grunts and violence.

Via NBC DFW

A local Texas police department is standing by an officer who dragged a 77-year-old grandmother out of her car for speeding after she repeatedly refused to provide her driver's license.

The entire arrest was caught on video by the Keene Police Department.

The woman, Lynn Bedford, of nearby Cleburne, was stopped on Aug. 19 for driving 66 mph in a 50-mph zone.

Bedford told Sgt. Gene Geheb that she had a bladder infection and had to go to the bathroom, but the situation quickly escalated when the officer asked several times for her identification and she refused.

[...]"This incident has been reviewed thoroughly by the Keene Police Department and the City of Keene Administration," Alberti said in a written statement. "All parties have concluded that Sgt. Geheb did not violate any state laws or department policies, and in fact was following department policy in regards to violators not providing identification."

Don't dare say this cop is a bad apple, the majority of police in this country act as this crook does, and their police chiefs defend them. Disband this criminal gang immediately.
_
Chris runs the website InformationLiberation.com, you can read more of his writings here. Follow infolib on twitter here.

(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- Texas Police Kill Unarmed Man Before Confiscating Witness Camera and Deleting Images
- Police Learn Propaganda Tactics at Internet Conference
- Drug Sentences Driving Federal Prison Population Growth, Government Report Finds
- Tarnished badges: Opa-locka's troubled police force
- Officer Enforcing Leash Law Shoots Family's Dog, Witness Horrified
- 90-Plus Arrests of D.C. Cops in Under 4 Years
- Infiltrating Occupy: Austin Activists Face Charges for Equipment Provided by Undercover Police
- LRPD officer Josh Hastings has 6 suspensions in 5 years, currently on paid leave after killing 15-yr-old

While. Opinion about the 77yr old grandmother she should have been more in compliance especially when she knew she was driving over speed limit and then didn't have her proof of address right license which is another violation if she was black Spanish are younger she wouldn't probably have serviced without worst injury or death jesus by anyone who resist oficer of the law order especially when u in the wrong will be treated as suspension so before you breaking laws make sure you have appropriate information and ID jesus. Spoken like a true government 'educated' slave.

Speed limits are nothing more than a revenue extraction and extortion scheme, it's been shown repeatedly higher speed limits, and lower speed limits, have absolutely no effect on the rate of accidents:

"Lowering speed limits below the 50th percentile does not reduce accidents, but does significantly increase driver violations of the speed limit. Conversely, raising the posted speed limits did not increase speeds or accidents."

- U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, Research, Development, and Technology Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, 1992

http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html

Speed limits are about robbing you blind to pay for the bloated salaries of tax-fattened government functionaries and nothing more.

Before you *obey* the laws you might want to have the appropriate information as to why something is a law. The only reason to give a criminal cop like this any sort of obedience is out of the full and complete awareness he is willing to murder you over a traffic ticket.

The word or phrase "investigated thoroughly" now may be interpreted as "His conduct was of the highest order, and demonstrated extreme bravery in an action that required split second judgement, thank God we have officers such as this, knowing that while we go about our daily lives, these brave men and women who serve, are keeping our dangerous world just a bit safer. Now quit your civilian pussy whining and go back to sleep or buy another ipod. We have work to do! There is no rhyme or reason to ever treat a human or citizen like this. We do have rights, cops just try to act like we don't. Too many abuses from police dept all over the states! OBEY
CONSUME
OBEY
CONSUME
OBEY
CONSUME

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Monday, October 22, 2012

No Duty to Secure Wi-Fi from BitTorrent Pirates, Judge Rules


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs');
by Ernesto

A crucial ruling in one of the ongoing BitTorrent lawsuits in the United States has delivered a clear win for open Wi-Fi operators. Among other things, California Judge Phyllis Hamilton ruled that Internet subscribers are not required to secure their wireless networks to prevent outsiders from pirating movies. In other words, people can?t be held liable for the alleged infringements of other people on their network.

BitTorrent lawsuits have been dragging on for more than two years in the US, involving more than a quarter million alleged illicit file-sharers.

The copyright holders who start these cases generally provide nothing more than an IP-address as evidence. They then ask the courts to grant a subpoena which allows them to request the personal details of the alleged offenders from their Internet providers.

The problem with this scheme, however, is that the person who pays the Internet bills may not be the person who pirating the movie or song in question. Several judges have noted that an IP-address is not a person, much to the disappointment of copyright holders.

To counter this argument copyright holders have introduced the ?negligence? theory, arguing that Internet subscribers are liable when other people pirate files through their networks. This would allow copyright holders to sue people even when their targets haven?t committed an offense.

One of these cases was decided last week in favor of the Internet subscriber.

The case was started by adult video company AF Holdings who sued an Internet account holder called Josh Hatfield in a California federal court. AF Holdings claimed that Hatfield had a "duty to secure his Internet connection," and that he "breached that duty by failing to secure his Internet connection."

As a result, AF Holdings argued that Hatfield was liable for the copyright infringements that were committed by an unknown person. Mr. Hatfield disagreed with this claim, and argued that the copyright holder couldn?t prove that people are obliged to secure their wireless networks to prevent piracy.

In her verdict Judge Phyllis Hamilton sided with the defendant.

?AF Holdings has not articulated any basis for imposing on Hatfield a legal duty to prevent the infringement of AF Holdings' copyrighted works, and the court is aware of none,? Hamilton writes.

?Hatfield is not alleged to have any special relationship with AF Holdings that would give rise to a duty to protect AF Holdings' copyrights, and is also not alleged to have engaged in any misfeasance by which he created a risk of peril,? she adds.

In addition to this lack of duty of care, Judge Hamilton ruled that even if negligence could be proven then ?personal injury? state law would be preempted by federal copyright law.

The ruling in the current case is similar to that of Judge Lewis Kaplan in New York earlier this year although perhaps even stronger ? Judge Hamilton specifically rules that Internet subscribers don?t have an obligation towards copyright holders to secure their Wi-Fi.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), who have helped out many alleged BitTorrent pirates over the years, are happy with the outcome.

?This ruling, along with the Tabora ruling in New York, send a strong judicial message that copyright owners can?t use legal tricks to bypass the law?s protections for Internet access points,? EFF?s Mitch Stolz writes.

?There are still many open cases in the federal courts where copyright owners are trying to use this bogus legal theory,? he adds.

The ruling is definitely a setback for the many copyright holders who jumped aboard the lucrative BitTorrent lawsuit bandwagon. Should more judges reach the same conclusion in future cases the end of this type of lawsuit in the U.S. may very well be near.


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Science/Technology
- No Traffic Lights Vs Traffic Lights
- AZ SWAT Team Kills Man in Drug Raid Shoot-Out
- Man Eats Uranium, Drinks and Swims In Reactor Water, Ignites Plutonium In His Bare Hand
- FOI Documents Show TOR Undernet Beyond the Reach of the Federal Investigators
- Keep Out: NASA Asks Future Moon Visitors to Respect Its Stuff
- Leap Motion: A New Way To interact With Your Computer
- Spectacular video: 'Jetman'; soars over Rio de Janeiro skyline
- Jimmy Wales Says Irrelevance, Not Piracy, Will Doom Hollywood

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Sunday, October 21, 2012

Drug Sentences Driving Federal Prison Population Growth, Government Report Finds


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs');
by Phillip Smith

In a report released Wednesday, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that growth in the federal prison population is outstripping the Bureau of Prisons' (BOP) rated capacity to house prisoners and that the bulge in federal prisoners is largely attributable to drug prisoners and longer sentences for them. That growing inmate overcrowding negatively affects inmates, staff, and BOP infrastructure, the GAO said.

The federal prison population increased 9.5% from Fiscal Year 2006 through FY 2011, exceeding a 7% increase in rated capacity. Although BOP increased the number of available beds by 8,300 during that period by opening five new facilities (and closing four minimum security camps), the number of prisons where overcrowding is occurring increased from 36% to 39%, with BOP forecasting overcrowding increasing to encompass 45% of prisons through 2018.

The drug war and harsh federal drug sentencing are the main drivers of the swelling federal prison population. The GAO reported that 48% of federal prisoners were drug offenders last year, and that the average sentence length for federal drug prisoners is now 2 ? times longer than before federal anti-drug legislation passed in the mid-1980s.There are also now more than 100,000 federal drug prisoners, more than the total number of federal prisoners as recently as 20 years ago.

The negative effects of federal prison overcrowding include "increased use of double and triple bunking, waiting lists for education and drug treatment programs, limited meaningful work opportunities, and increased inmate-to-staff ratios," the report found. All of those "contribute to increased inmate misconduct, which negatively affects the safety and security of inmates and staff." The report also noted that "BOP officials and union representatives voiced concerns about a serious incident [read: riot] occurring."

For this report, the GAO also examined prison populations in five states and actions those states have taken to reduce populations. It found that the states "have modified criminal statutes and sentencing, relocated inmates to local facilities, and provided inmates with additional opportunities for early release," the report found.

Noting that the BOP does not have the authority to modify sentences or sentencing, it nevertheless identified possible means for Congress to address federal prison overcrowding. It could reduce inmate populations by reforming sentencing laws or it could increase capacity by building more prisons, or some combination of the two.

Or it could remove drug control from the ambit of criminal justice altogether and treat the use and distribution of currently illegal drugs as a public health problem.


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- Texas Cop Drags 77-Yr-Old Grandmother from Car for Refusing to Show ID
- Texas Police Kill Unarmed Man Before Confiscating Witness Camera and Deleting Images
- Police Learn Propaganda Tactics at Internet Conference
- Tarnished badges: Opa-locka's troubled police force
- Officer Enforcing Leash Law Shoots Family's Dog, Witness Horrified
- 90-Plus Arrests of D.C. Cops in Under 4 Years
- Infiltrating Occupy: Austin Activists Face Charges for Equipment Provided by Undercover Police
- LRPD officer Josh Hastings has 6 suspensions in 5 years, currently on paid leave after killing 15-yr-old

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Saturday, October 20, 2012

Liquid, Liquid Everywhere, But Not a Drop To Drink Free of Our Rulers' Stranglehold


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs');
by Becky Akers

Who?s more obsessed with the fluids we ingest, Mayor Mike "Nanny" Bloomberg or the TSA?

New York City?s Board of Health, whose members Nanny appoints, will vote this week to restrict the quantity of soda consenting adults may sell and other consenting adults may buy to 16 ounces. Though only in certain venues: we are still supposedly free to purchase two-liter jugs of such poison (nope, I don?t drink soda. Hate it, in fact) from supermarkets. But if you wish to slurp from a 20-ounce cup at the movies, you?ll have to head for China, Russia, or some other place freer than Bloom-burg-on-the-Hudson.

Because Nanny hasn?t banned the stuff outright, he insists he?s just your average busybody instead of a megalomaniacal dictator on a power-spree. "All we?re doing here is educating," he lied. "[Compelling you to buy soda in the size I decree] forces you to see the difference."

Nanny?s got plenty of accomplices among the mainstream media?s morons. They obligingly continue to discuss the issue on Nanny?s terms ? the red herring of health ? rather than frame it truly as yet another casualty among our few remaining freedoms. One of them blithered in the New York Slimes, "With 58 percent of adults in New York City overweight or obese and 5,800 deaths a year in the city because of obesity, it is evident that some people just aren?t responsible enough to feed themselves." Yep, I?ll pause while you catch your breath. The arrogance stunned me senseless, too.

But wait, it gets better. Though avoirdupois is an issue so specific to each individual that even the socialists haven?t found a way to redistribute it, this dimwit tries hard nonetheless: "If New Yorkers reduced portion size to 16 ounces from 20 ounces for one sugary drink every two weeks, it would collectively save approximately 2.3 million pounds over one year." From this, Dimwit deduces, "A nanny is just what New York City, and the rest of America, needs." Bloomberg for president, oh, yay.

But while Nanny and lackeys like Dimwit presume we?re foolish children who can?t decide for ourselves how much to drink, the TSA runs to the opposite extreme. It pretends we?re diabolically clever terrorists hoping to blow up our flights with our beverages.

A passenger waiting at his gate in the Port Columbus [Ohio] International Airport recently filmed two of the TSA?s minions doing what they do best: harassing innocent, peaceful passengers. Blue shirts and gloves glowing (too much time near the X-rated X-ray scanners?), the duo ordered victims to present their potables for "testing." Then they waved a magic strip of paper over the liquid and dripped a potion the TSA won?t identify on the paper. (As Bill Fisher, one of the agency?s worthiest critics, put it, "Now the[y] expose people?s drinks to some unknown chemical when OSHA regulations require a Manufacturers Safety Data Sheet for any substance that humans contact"). This song-and-dance supposedly proved that passengers were swilling water, not gasoline.

I suppose it?s a weird sort of compliment: we?re not only terrorists but superhuman ones who chug toxic chemicals. Anyone for a side of ground glass with your liquid explosive?

Meanwhile, our anonymous cinematographer points out that he recorded the TSA?s hocus-pocus "inside the terminal, well beyond the security check and [with drinks] purchased inside" that area. In other words, screeners had already ogled, irradiated and groped these folks while rifling their bags. So even the TSA tacitly admits its security theater is bogus by repeatedly pestering passengers.

If you?re thinking this story is d?j? vu all over again, you?re right. In July, KJCT-TV in Colorado reported that the TSA was snooping into travelers? drinks at the gate. That unleashed a national firestorm, with taxpayers vehemently condemning the gate-rapists? overreach.

The agency?s response ? or non-response ? then was the same as now: "We?ve been doing this for years." Kinda like the shoplifter with bulging pockets telling the store?s detective, "Hey, it?s OK. I been takin? whatever I want for years."

The TSA blames this outrage ? and its ridiculous restrictions of liquids and gels in general ? on Britain?s infamous "Liquid Bomb Plot" from 2006. Supposedly, 25 terrorists planned to smuggle fluids aboard several flights, mix them together in the planes? lavatories, and blow the jets sky-high.

That may be fine for a Hollywood thriller, but it?s pretty much impossible otherwise. You don?t just mix up liquid bombs as easily as you do a martini. Rather, the components require precise laboratory conditions and freezing temperatures, or they fizzle, singing the would-be bomber but not much else.

Terrorists know this even if politicians and bureaucrats don?t. That may be why the British government?s case against the "bombers" fell apart in court: no one seriously hoping to sabotage a flight would waste his time with a liquid bomb in an airliner?s lavatory. Jurors convicted only three defendants ? and on lesser charges, not terrorism.

But the TSA never allows facts to thwart its mission of training slaves to obey, however silly their masters? dictates. Nor am I merely speculating: another passenger who clashed with the TSA over her beverage caught the agency?s admitting this on tape.

Seems that when the goons approached her at her gate and ordered her to surrender her water for testing, she outwitted them by drinking it instead. (I do hope she handed them the empty bottle with a shrug and an insouciant, "Throw it away when you?re done, guys, OK?")

Ah, but having no ingenuity of its own, the TSA doesn?t tolerate it in others. Its brutes promptly denounced her "attitude" and booted her off her flight.

ABC News transcribed the exchange she recorded:

Woman [sic for heroine]: Do you think I?m honestly a threat? Do you think that?

TSA agent: No, no, no but with your attitude . . .

Woman [sic for heroine]: Wait, let me get this straight, this is retaliatory for my attitude? This is not making the airways safer, this is retaliatory.

TSA agent: Pretty much, yes. [Inaudible]

Woman [sic for heroine]: Is that legal?

TSA agent: Yes it is.

As you no doubt expected, the excrement at the agency?s HQ supports this rank abuse, just as it did its thugs? pedophilia and persecution of the elderly: "ABC News contacted the TSA which said, ?In our initial review, we concluded that this individual was screened in accordance with standard procedures.?"

And in our initial review ? and all others since ? we concluded that the TSA flushes freedom down the drain. Time we returned the favor.
_
Becky Akers [send her mail] is a free-lance writer and historian. Her novel, Halestorm, is available in paperback or for Kindle, Nook, iPad, Sony, or for your computer.


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Commentary
- Why Vote?
- Obama Lists His Five Criteria for Death by Drone
- Eight Reasons to End Prohibition of All Drugs Immediately
- Welcome to the American Gulag: Using Involuntary Commitment Laws To Silence Dissenters
- The Liberal Way to Run the World - "Improve" or We'll Kill You
- Of Bidens and Bikers: Does Anybody Remember Derek Hale?
- Abandoning My Pre-9/11 Mentality
- How I Live a Little Freer by Staying on the Move

Oh Master! How generous you are to still allow me to drink! As long as I bow to you in joyous servitude, of course!

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Friday, October 19, 2012

Google Adds Pirate Bay Domains to Censorship List


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs');
by Ernesto

Google has quietly expanded its list of censored search phrases with the addition of The Pirate Bay?s domain names. The blacklist prevents popular keywords from appearing in Google?s Instant and Autocomplete search services, while the pages themselves remain indexed. Although Google understands that there is no silver bullet to stop online copyright infringement, the search giant is convinced that the steps they've taken could help to decrease piracy.

There are certain words Google doesn?t want you to see without explicitly searching for them.

Type in ?peni?? or ?vagin?? and the search giant leaves out the most obvious suggestions. This, despite the fact that these dictionary words are popular searches among the public.

Since January last year Google has been applying the same moral compass to filter "piracy-related? terms from its Autocomplete and Instant services.

Google users who search for terms like "utorrent", "BitTorrent" or "RapidShare" will notice that no suggestions or search results will be shown before they finish typing the full word.

By censoring parts of their search services, Google is sending out a strong signal that they are committed to combating online copyright infringement, and to a certain degree their efforts are effective.

When terms such as BitTorrent, Mediafire and Megaupload were banned we saw that the number of searches dropped drastically. The same happened when ?The Pirate Bay? got censored last year, although many people simply switched to then uncensored domain thepiratebay.org as a shortcut to access their favorite torrent site.

However, since last month thepiratebay.org was also added to the blacklist, as well as thepiratebay.se. When people type in ?thepirate? the two domains are no longer offered as a suggestion. As a direct result, the search volume for these terms dropped instantly.

No Pirate Bay (c.f. Bing!)

The Pirate Bay is used to being censored by now and shrugs off the censorship attempts.

A Pirate Bay spokesperson told TorrentFreak that they are not in the least bit hurt by Google's ?half-baked? attempts to keep people away from their site. They haven't noticed a decrease in referrers from Google, and even if that was the case it wouldn't be a problem as only a tiny percentage of The Pirate Bay's traffic comes from search engines.

Google disagrees, and firmly believes that the measures are effective in decreasing piracy. The company is not trying to prevent Pirate Bay users from accessing the site, but they don?t want to suggest it to people who only type in ?the? into the search bar either.

"While there is no silver bullet for infringement online, this measure is one of several that we have implemented to curb copyright infringement online," a Google?s spokesman told TorrentFreak previously.

Besides censoring piracy related terms, last month Google began downranking ?pirate? websites in its search results. Although we?ve seen some changes in the search results, the effects of this update don?t appear to have had a dramatic impact.

The big question is, where will Google draw the line?


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Big Brother/Orwellian
- House Approves Rep. Lamar Smith's Bill To Keep Spying On Americans
- 16-Year-Old Questioned by FBI Over YouTube Video
- Court To Twitter: No Time For Appeal, Hand Over Info Or You're In Contempt
- New Results From Our Nationwide Cell Phone Tracking Records Requests
- Man Investigated By Police For Buying Ammunition
- The Prisons We Call "Airports"
- FBI begins installation of $1 billion face recognition system across America
- Hackers Get Personal Info On 12-Million Apple Users... From An FBI Laptop

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

The Hope of Freedom in the American Character


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs');
by Wendy McElroy

It is the saddest quotation from classical liberalism. On the eve of World War I, British foreign secretary Sir Edward Grey stated, "The lamps are going out all over Europe. We shall not see them lit again in our time." The lamps or lights were freedom and peace. Grey did not see them again.

Today the lights are going out all over America. Many people are sick at heart about the future of freedom, and understandably so. But there is no need to live in darkness. Freedom is not an external flame or circumstance that is beyond individual control; it is internal and the natural state of man.

Many people realize that government does not create wealth but they still believe it creates freedom. And, so, when freedom becomes scarce, people look almost automatically to government to restore or create it. They agitate for a law, they vote for their candidate, they sign a petition. As with wealth, however, the government can only confiscate freedom, not grant it. Ultimately, all appeals to authority amount to pleading for less to be taken?or for the return of a portion of what was stolen before.

Appeals to government are prevalent in America where the myth of being "the freest nation in the world" is tied to its political system. For example, the Founding Fathers are credited with establishing a free nation as though freedom did not exist before the Constitution. In reality, the Founding Fathers were remarkable not because they created liberty but because they usurped so little of the liberty that already existed. Even the Bill of Rights did not establish freedom; no piece of paper can. The Bill of Rights recognized the prior existence of specific freedoms such as free speech and, then, set up restrictions on how far the government could intrude upon them. The Bill of Rights said "leave the people alone in their freedom." And that is remarkable enough.

Where does liberty come from? In his pivotal book Democracy in America (1835-1840), the classical liberal Alexis de Tocqueville marveled at the expansiveness of American freedom, especially when compared with Europe. He attributed this freedom to one phenomenon; namely, the American character.

Two traits dominated this character: a zeal to join; and, a stubborn individualism.

De Tocqueville called America a "nation of joiners." Whenever three Americans gathered in one place, associations and clubs seemed to spring forth. From construction crews to town hall meetings, from religious societies to fraternal organizations, Americans were driven to combine and improve society. They had a passion for civil society through which average people themselves conducted the business of living together with government rarely in evidence.

At the same moment, an irrepressible spirit of independence and self-interest also drove the American character. Of this trait, de Tocqueville was critical. He wrote, "I see an innumerable multitude of men?.Each of them withdrawn into himself, is almost unaware of the fate of the rest. Mankind, for him, consists in his children and his personal friends. As for the rest of his fellow citizens, they are near enough, but he does not notice them. He touches them but feels nothing. He exists in and for himself, and though he still may have a family, one can at least say that he has not got a fatherland."

De Tocqueville was puzzled by the what he considered a contradiction: Americans were profoundly self-interested and, yet, they were a nation of joiners.

He wrote, "There is perhaps no country on earth where one meets fewer idle people than in America, or where all who work are more passionately devoted to the quest for well-being?.An American will attend to his private interests as though he were alone in the world, yet a moment later he will dedicate himself to the public's business as though he had forgotten them?.The human heart cannot be divided this way. The inhabitants of the United States alternately exhibit a passion for well-being and a passion for liberty so strong and so similar that one can only believe that the two passions are conjoined and confounded somewhere in their souls."

De Tocqueville embraced a false dichotomy. There is no contradiction between economic well-being and liberty. There is no tension between being active in a voluntary society and retaining your individuality. Indeed, the characteristics are two sides of the same coin. The more secure a man is in his personal sovereignty, the more goodwill he feels toward neighbors. He naturally reaches out to them to cooperate for the immense mutual advantages that civil society offers the individual. Indeed, civil society is the result of masses of people pursuing their own self-interest and, then, going home.

This was the American character. Average people administered the business of society while remaining vigorously individualistic. And, so, the American was free.

Today the business of society has been almost completely usurped by government so that no one can so much as buy a tomato without a license and payment of tax being involved. As people lose the ability to administer society so, too, do they lose personal liberty. The one-to-one correlation between the two is strong enough to be considered a cause-and-effect.

Freedom needs nothing so much as Americans returning to character. The nation of joiners needs to join with each other instead of with government in order to resume the administration of civil society. At the same time and at every juncture possible, people need to privatize their own lives by removing government from their actions, attitudes and expectations.

The lights of America will be lit again, one by one, by individuals who reclaim the business of society while privatizing their own lives. There is no need for darkness.
_
Wendy McElroy is Author, lecturer, and freelance writer, and a senior associate of the Laissez Faire Club.


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Commentary
- Why Vote?
- Obama Lists His Five Criteria for Death by Drone
- Liquid, Liquid Everywhere, But Not a Drop To Drink Free of Our Rulers' Stranglehold
- Eight Reasons to End Prohibition of All Drugs Immediately
- Welcome to the American Gulag: Using Involuntary Commitment Laws To Silence Dissenters
- The Liberal Way to Run the World - "Improve" or We'll Kill You
- Of Bidens and Bikers: Does Anybody Remember Derek Hale?
- Abandoning My Pre-9/11 Mentality

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here