Fraternal Order Of Police Lobbies For New Federal Hate Crime Law

Nation's biggest police union boasts that it has spent years lobbying for more federalization of crime and punishment.

The 300,000-member Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) is demanding that the U.S. Congress and President Barack Obama ?act now? to expand the federal hate crimes statute and add police officers as a protected class.

In a recent press release, the police union boasts that it has spent years lobbying for more federalization of crime and punishment. The presser cites a handful of recent incidents, nationally, in which police officers were attacked while on the job.

?Enough is enough! It's time for Congress to do something to protect the men and women who protect us,? said union president Chuck Canterbury.

The federal government?s 1969 hate crime law has been expanded several times and already criminalizes [attempted] bodily injury against anyone based on race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability. Penalties for committing a ?hate crime? extend to up to 10 years in federal prison.

The FOP proposal would add the basis of ?uniform? to the current list.

There are two main principled reasons to oppose all federal hate crime legislation. First, is the basic legal tenet that all people should be treated equally in the eyes of the law. The judicial process should not be dependent upon the demographics of the victim or defendant. This is the reason that ?Lady Justice? wears a blindfold while holding the Scales of Justice. Violence against anyone ? regardless of the identities or beliefs of those involved ? should be prohibited equally and impartially in a fair and just system.

Secondly, the federal government has no legitimate authority to create such laws. The U.S. Constitution ? specifically Article 1, Section 8 ? offers no mention of the federal government having the ability to prohibit crimes of violence between citizens for any reason. Crimes such as assault and murder are properly prohibited at the state-level and are enforced by state or local agencies ? not the FBI. To broaden the scope of federal law enforcers is a mistake and a move toward more centralized authoritarianism.

Readers are advised to oppose the Fraternal Order of Police?s agenda to nationalize crime statutes and create legally protected classes of citizens.

(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/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.0"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- NYPD 'Slowdown' Saves Taxpayers $10M A Week In Parking Ticket Fines
- NJ Man Arrested for Refusing to Hand Over Camera as "Evidence" After Cop Veers Off Road
- Rise of the Nanny Police State: Town Governments Across the US Ban Sledding
- Police in the US Kill Citizens at Over 70 Times the Rate of Other First-World Nations
- Cop Arrested for His Violent Behavior to be Reinstated Despite the Department Not Wanting Him
- Extended Video Shows Aftermath of Tamir Rice Shooting; Cops Gave No Aid, Restrained Sister
- Cop Trying to Kill the Family Dog, Kills Woman Instead, In Front of her Husband and 4-year-old Son
- New York Family Left Homeless After Police Rip Down Walls to Serve DWI Warrant

there is nothing worse is a FOP WHOPP copulator

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 DMCA 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

Federal Court: Cops Cannot Push Drug Dog Into Open Car Door

Federal appeals court allows woman with religious license plate to sue cops who made a drug dog alert on a drug-free car.

Utah state troopers who used a drug dog as a pretense to search a car belonging to an innocent woman are in legal trouble. The US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit on Friday ruled that the victims could sue the troopers for spending two hours rifling through their vehicle without finding anything unlawful, in violation of their constitutional rights.

Utah State Trooper Brian Bairett had been running a speed trap on Interstate 15 when a Jeep driven by Sherida Felders passed through. Bairett said he developed probable cause during the traffic stop because she was nervous, had an air freshener and her license plate holder said "Jesus."

Trooper Bairett accused Felders, a 54-year-old, of transporting cocaine. She denied the accusation and refused his request to search the car. After a drug dog was called in, Trooper Bairett explained the situation to its handler, Iron County Sheriff's Deputy Jeff Malcom.

"This lady -- you know, I walk up to the car and I see air fresheners in the center console and... I start talking to her, you know, just 'So where, you heading to?' 'Oh going to Colorado,' blah, blah, blah," Trooper Bairett said. "To me, I've got probable cause to search the vehicle without her permission or not, so I figured the dog would be the best route to go right now."

Trooper Bairett ordered two teenage passengers out of the Jeep, along with the Chihuahua that was riding in the back. Deputy Malcom explained he intended to leave the door open when the teenagers got out. Dashcam footage recorded what happened.

"Nice of them to leave the door open for you," Deputy Malcom said.

"Yeah it was, wasn't it?" Trooper Bairett responded.

Then the drug dog, named Duke, walked around the car and jumped right through the open door without alerting. Once inside, the dog alerted to the center console. It had two packages of beef jerky. The dog next alerted on the driver's door, which contained nothing. The lower court found the search improper and refused to grant immunity, so Deputy Malcom appealed.

"We agree with the district court that Malcom did not have probable cause to search the car prior to Duke's alert and that the law was then clearly established that, absent probable cause, facilitating a dog's entry into a vehicle during a dog sniff constitutes an unconstitutional search," Judge Timothy M. Tymkovich wrote for the appellate panel. "Taking the facts in the light most favorable to Felders, we conclude that fact questions exist regarding the timing of Duke's alert and Malcom's possible facilitation prior to an alert. As a result, we affirm the district court's decision to deny Malcom summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds."

The court rejected Deputy Malcom's attempt to argue that he was just working on his fellow officer's claim that there was probable cause. The appellate judges said the deputy should have known better.

"The facts Malcom knew -- Felders's nervousness and unwillingness to look at Bairett, possible inconsistencies in travel narratives, a single air freshener, and a religious license plate frame -- could justify no more than reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigative stop," Judge Tymkovich wrote. "A reasonable officer would not conclude that Felders was hauling drugs based on the statements or behavior of either Felders or her two teenage passengers."

A copy of the decision is available in a 50k PDF file at the source link below.

Source: Felders v. Malcom (US Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, 6/20/2014)

(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
- Video Shows Cop Assaulted Fox News Anchor, Lied About Arrest
- A SWAT Team Blew A Hole In My 2-Year-Old Son
- Woman Says DHS Forced Her to Strip Naked at Gunpoint During Terrifying Dawn Raid
- "Public Authority," Drone Murders, and the Death of the Rule of Law
- The Utter Uselessness of Police: Two Recent Examples from Idaho
- This Week's Corrupt Cops Stories
- Cop Shot In Face Ambushing Resident In No-Knock Raid
- Sheriff John Urquhart Keeps the "Gang" Together

So, it IS 'suspicious' to have a air-freshener in your vehicle ?
It seems to me judges are about as stupid as cops ..

Regarding dogs 'superior' smelling-senses as a pretext to provide 'probable cause' :
A female friend of mine once had her property raided by the pigs at night.
The first thing this stupid animal does is to stick it's nose in her crotch, since she was having her period ! This alone saved her from being busted for the 2 weed-joints 'hidden' in the paper-basket !

So, my claim is : These stupid animals can't really smell 'drugs', all they can smell is 'something' . The handler then 'interprets' the dogs reaction
in whatever way fits the agenda and hokus-pokus, there you have your 'probable cause' . And the dog gets lots of positive attention, and a treat .

All dogs belong to Ivan Pavlov !
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Pavlov

(I actually kind of like dogs, but there is no way they are 'clever' )

@8750,

> So, it IS 'suspicious' to have a air-freshener in your vehicle ?

Yes it is; as well as Jesus plate. If you read the book "Arrest-Proof Yourself: An Ex-Cop Reveals How Easy It Is for Anyone to Get Arrested, How Even a Single Arrest Could Ruin Your Life, and What to Do If the Police Get in Your Face", written by former cop and FBI agent Dale Carson, you will find it all there, it's all part of their official training. Highly recommended.

Speaking of dogs, the funny thing is that nobody can say for sure what dog's actions constitute the drug alert that becomes probable cause to search the vehicle. As I understand, the cop can claim that the dog has alerted in any case, and it will be impossible to dispute. I never heard about a single case where the fact whether dog alerted or not, was disputed.

Yeah well .. I'm not a US citizen or resident so I think I will pass on that book,
it will just make me even more infuriated than I already am .
Besides, in my country there is practically no such thing as an 'illegal search', unless the pigs don't find anything illegal at all.
If they don't, they just look at your kitchen-knives and charge you with possession of a knife with a blade longer than 7 cm or they take your Swiss Army-knife and claim it is 'one-hand operated' and/or has 'a locking blade' .
You won't get convicted for that, but that isn't the point : It magically makes the search 'legal' .

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 DMCA 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

Federal Court Rules Stiff Driving Posture Is Suspicious Behavior

A panel of judges unanimously ruled that having hands at "ten-and-two" is suspicious enough to stop drivers inside the USA.

NEW MEXICO ? A federal appeals court has ruled that driving one?s hands at the ?ten-and-two position? is reason enough to pull someone over for further investigation.? No traffic laws have to actually be broken? Additionally, the court ruled that facial acne is reason enough to suspect the driver is a drug smuggler.

The incident took place on April 18, 2012, at roughly 7:45 p.m.? A border patrol agent driving down Highway 80 saw a white Ford F-150 heading the opposite direction.? This took place roughly 40 miles north of the U.S./Mexico border ? well inside the United States.

Although the truck was witnessed breaking no traffic laws,?Border Patrol Agent Joshua Semmerling claimed he noticed several things that drew his suspicions ? while passing the truck at 60 miles per hour.

First was the driver?s upright posture.? The female driver was sitting up straight with her hands properly located on the upper part of the steering wheel.? This was viewed as suspicious activity.

Secondly, the agent claimed that the truck?s tinted windows were suspicious.? It remains unclear how the agent saw driver?s posture through the ?suspicious? tint.

Lastly was the truck?s rear license plate ? which the agent claims to have observed in his rear-view mirror while traveling at a high rate of speed in the opposite direction.? He claimed that he noticed it was from out-of-state, another suspicious characteristic.

The agent decided to make a U-turn and stop the truck.

The driver identified herself as Cindy Lee Westhoven of Tucson, Arizona.? Agent Semmerling then used his keen crime-detecting skills to justify a search of her truck.?? He saw that Mrs. Westhoven had ?acne? on her face and claimed that it was grounds for suspecting her to be a methamphetamine user.

Mrs. Westhoven had already proven she was a U.S. citizen.? She had no warrants and had broken no laws, yet Agent Semmerling claimed that he believed she might be smuggling illegal aliens and/or drugs.?? When she refused to consent to a search, the agent used a drug K9 to sniff her truck.? The dog turned up a small amount of cannabis.? Westhoven was arrested.

Later in court, Westhoven?s defense tried to overturn the arrest due to the shaky ground which the stop was performed upon.? Her attorney argued that the evidence was obtained illegally.?? She was unsuccessful.

?Driving stiffly, having tinted windows, slowing down when seeing law enforcement, and driving in an out-of-the-way area may be innocent conduct by themselves,? Judge Scott M. Matheson, Jr., wrote for the appellate panel. ?But when taken together along with driving a vehicle with out-of-state plates in a mountainous smuggling corridor 40-45 miles away from the border, we conclude Agent Semmerling had reasonable suspicion Ms. Westhoven was involved in smuggling activity.?

The 3-judge panel on the Tenth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals unanimously upheld the search, and rejected Westhoven?s motion to suppress the evidence.

The acceptance of such flimsy suspicions in court is the practical acceptance of zero need for any real indication of a crime occurring before any American can be stopped and searched by federal agents.

Source: US v. Westhoven (US Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, 4/24/2014)

(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 Deputy Who Shot Dog Indicted on Animal Cruelty Charge
- FBI Investigating Bunkerville Protesters!
- Student Punished for Refusing to Pledge Allegiance to the State
- Call the Cops at Your Peril
- NEVER Let Your Kids Talk to the Police
- The American Criminal Justice System is Dead
- Long Island officers caught on video violently striking driver during traffic stop
- Albuquerque Residents Vow to Storm Another City Council Meeting

Judges are not weighing up the probability that a law has been broken , they are RULING the citizen & DICTATING what rights you do or do not have REGARDLESS OF THE CONSTITUTION.
This is modern America today , the most DISFUNCTIONAL democracy on the planet. this is not a democracy. it is a constitutional republic. This is PURE comedy.

Boarder patrol checkstops as far up as the middle of the boarder states.

So the only thing you do is stop citizens while the Hispanic Officers allow Hispanic illegals to sneak right in.

AND if we pushed all these agents down to the boarder, illegals wouldn't be getting in to need those checkpoints.

It's intentional misuse of manpower to pretend we're doing boarder patrol while keeping them as far from the boarder as plausibly believable.

Currently the paranoid drug users and smugglers are now buying pimple cream, keeping the window tint off, learning how to drive like a slacker, and using the main roads. The only suspicious thing was probably that he knows all the local junkies, and they didn't use his friendly neighborhood drug plantation gang to acquire their junk. And with all due respect, are we sure it wasn't something thrown in there, or planted evidence? No we don't. If we quit arresting people for cannabis the police could focus on serious crime.

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 DMCA 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

3-D Printing In The Crosshairs With Federal Ban On Plastic Gun Parts

Americans can go to prison for possessing an arbitrary plastic object, and more bans may be on the way.

A twenty-five year old ban on ?undetectable firearms? is coming up for a renewal, and gun control zealots are looking to renew it and possibly even make it more stringent.? This will have direct implications on the exciting new 3-D printing technology that allows people to manufacture plastic parts at home.

With a 3-D printer, it is possible for private individuals to ?print? complex three-dimensional parts and objects from their computer with the click of a mouse.? All a person needs is an electronic file detailing the specifications of the part to be printed, and a desktop 3-D printer.

The applications of this technology is truly limitless and will be revolutionary once it gets a little more affordable and accessible.? These 3-D printers give people the ability to cheaply and instantly manufacture parts that could be used for home improvement, auto repair, entertainment, business, and more.? In the future there will be no need to spend exorbitant amounts of money ? and weeks of delay ? waiting on obscure mail-order parts.? It will be possible to print them the same day.

The amazing technology has its detractors, though, who don?t like too much freedom in the hands of unpermitted, anonymous individuals.? The fear comes from the many inventive uses for 3-D print technology in the world of firearms.? There is such fear over plastic firearms that prohibitionists had them banned decades before the technology was viable.

But today, it is viable.? In fact, as was proven by Defense Distributed earlier this year, it is now possible to manufacture an entire gun out of 3-D printed parts.? In the Wiki-Weapons project, the world?s first 3-D printed gun was assembled, test-fired, and proven to work.

The electronic files for ?The Liberator? were placed on the internet and downloaded over 100,000 times.? Despite the federal government demanding that the original source be taken down, the files (and others) are still available for download in torrent form.? Whether the police state advocates like it or not, the plans to print a 3-D gun are ubiquitous on the internet.

Months later, there are even more 3-D firearm designs, and even more advancements in the printing technology, which is getting cheaper every day.

Now, for the third time in 25 years, a ban on ?undetectable weapons? is set to expire and Republicans and Democrats in congress have until December 9th to decide how best to prevent any freedoms to be relinquished into the hands of Americans.? The current debate appears to be whether to maintain the already oppressive status quo or to criminalize even more victimless, arbitrary objects and behaviors.

This ban stems back to the 1980s, when hysterical anti-freedom lobbyists convinced congress that plastic guns were the next great menace to the country.? And so, the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988 was passed overwhelmingly by congress and signed by President Ronald Reagan (R) on November 10th, 1988.? The ban came with a 10 year sunset clause.

It became a federal crime to manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer, or receive any firearm that is not? detectable by walk-through metal detection.? A ?plastic gun? that does not contain 3.7 ounces of steel could get a person locked in federal prison for 5 years.

Scheduled to expire on November 10, 1998, the two parties once again united to renew the ban.? Despite maintaining majorities in the House and Senate, Republicans ? led by noted statist House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R) ? made no effort to stop it.? All but four U.S. Representatives voted for it.? It was then signed by prolific gun-grabber President Bill Clinton (D) in October 1998, extending the ban another 5 years.

The process was again repeated in 2003, when Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and White House.? In bipartisan fashion,? the gun ban was disappointingly renewed for an additional 10 years.? President George W. Bush?s (R) signature made it official.

The current law is 18 USC ? 922 (p).

Now, with another expiration imminent, the usual suspects are scrambling to keep federal the gun ban alive.? Democrats, led by Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY), are proposing H. R. 1474 to extend the ban with additional prohibitions, covering not only complete firearms, but also parts, receivers, and magazines made by private individuals.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) is worried that additional gun control measures might cause the expiration to lapse.? ?They're considering altering it, putting more language in it,? he said. ?There's concern that it may be altered in a way that would be problematic.?

Other versions of the bill have entered the House and Senate, maintaining the status quo without extra prohibitions.? Rep. Howard Coble (R-NC) introduced a renewal in the House, and Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL)?introduced a renewal in the Senate.

?It's hard to believe that anyone would oppose a piece of legislation like this, so tied into, so connected with our safety,? snarled Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY), who advocates strengthening the federal gun ban.? Citing living ?in a world of terrorism,? Schumer went on to claim that without this ban people would be free to bring guns into ?airports, stadiums, schools?? Of course, his this was a red herring designed to inflame the public.?? The expiration of the 1988 ban does not alter the legality of possessing a firearm in any location whatsoever.

While it is unsurprising when anti-freedom groups and politicians push for more federal powers and prohibition laws, it is disappointing when even from those who advocate following the U.S. constitution and respecting individual rights are missing in action.

Despite several opportunities to derail it, the National Rifle Association has never provided any notable opposition to the ban, reportedly citing it as being acceptable federal legislation since it didn?t affect very many firearms in production in 1988.? It has yet to give any indication of reversing its position and remains in silent consent to the gun ban, one of many frustrations that gun owners have with the NRA.

With the ease of 3-D printing and the limitless ability to be spread plans across the internet, any further attempt to criminalize 3-D printing will prove embarrassingly ineffective.? The technology is here to stay and even draconian efforts to stop it will fail to keep anyone any safer.? More importantly, the federal government has no business trying to micromanage something like this and criminalizing plastic objects and victimless crimes.

Congress should do the right thing and let the gun ban expire permanently, and promote the unimpeded use of 3-D printing technology by private individuals.? The shameful threats of imprisonment for possessing an arbitrary plastic object is exactly the kind of behavior we would expect from a police state, not a free country.

View the original article here

Federal Judge: NYC Stop And Frisk Violates The 4th Amendment

by Timothy Geigner

For anyone who might not know already, New York City's infamous stop and frisk program is the completely useless policy of the police department to go around randomly molesting anyone they deem to be suspicious, or more correctly described as brown-skinned. It appears that everyone who isn't a member of the NYPD or the current mayor of New York hates this program as much as I do, including AG Eric Holder and the NY City Council. Still, that didn't keep Chuck Schumer from trying to export this interracial softcore porn policy to the federal level by recommending Police Chief Ray Kelly as the head of the Department of Homeland Security. Kelly's resume, however, may take a bit of a hit.

That's because a federal judge recently declared that the stop and frisk program violated tens of thousands of people's constitutional rights, which is the kind of thing that most folks frown on.

In a decision issued on Monday, the judge, Shira A. Scheindlin, ruled that police officers have for years been systematically stopping innocent people in the street without any objective reason to suspect them of wrongdoing. Officers often frisked these people, usually young minority men, for weapons or searched their pockets for contraband, like drugs, before letting them go, according to the 195-page decision.

These stop-and-frisk episodes, which soared in number over the last decade as crime continued to decline, demonstrated a widespread disregard for the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, according to the ruling. It also found violations with the 14th Amendment.

Now, it's worth noting that Scheindlin didn't order that the program be stopped immediately or set a time and date for Mayor Bloomberg's lobotomy, which I found disappointing, but instead has appointed an outside legal counsel to oversee the police department and ensure that any random stopping and frisking of citizens is done constitutionally. That means no stops without reasonable suspicion. The problem, however, has been how police officers thus far have fudged their own reports on why they were stopping people.

While the Supreme Court has long recognized the right of police officers to briefly stop and investigate people who are behaving suspiciously, Judge Scheindlin found that the New York police had overstepped that authority. She found that officers were too quick to deem as suspicious behavior that was perfectly innocent, in effect watering down the legal standard required for a stop.

Obviously no outside legal overseer is going to be able to witness any sizable number of these stops, meaning there is a high likelihood that officers will continue to manufacture suspicion that is unfounded. In addition, it's well known that police officers consider themselves members of a fraternal organization, with all of the implications such a membership carries with it. How accurate a picture this outside counsel will get of these stops moving forward is an open question with a likely problematic answer.

That's why, while we should all be pleased that Judge Scheindlin ruled against stop and frisk, I think it would have been far better to scrap it entirely and make police play by the rules that are already prescribed by our constitution.

Floyd Liability Opinion 8 12 13 (PDF)

(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
- Cop Convicted Of Second-Degree Manslaughter For Shooting 5-Yr-Old Boy In Back Of Head Gets Record Expunged, Now Free Again To Become An Officer
- Boston Cop Shoves Videographer, Then Threatens to Arrest Him for "Battery On A Police Officer"
- Man Refuses To ID At Texas Border Patrol Checkpoint, Checkpoint Officer Says "Get The F*ck Out of Here" & Waves Him Through
- Attorneys For Ibragim Todashev's Father Say There's NO Evidence He Was Armed When FBI Executed Him
- Philly Cop Filmed Punching Small Woman In Face At Puerto Rican Day Parade Gets Job Back With Full Back Pay
- Oregon Deputies Caught on Dash Cam Acknowledging Illegal Traffic Stop
- This Week's Corrupt Cops Stories
- "They Kidnapped Our Child": Why CPS Needs Transparency Now

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

Federal Judge None Too Impressed With Government's Defense Of Its 'No Fly' List

by Tim Cushing

The top secret "No-Fly" list has been problematic since day one. The DHS and FBI apparently believe over 20,000 people are too dangerous to allow to board a plane but not dangerous enough to arrest.

This is the process the government follows to place would-be travelers on the no-fly list.

1. The government places a person on the no-fly list.

That's all there is to it. The list is too "sensitive" to publish and exposing its methodology would apparently result in airliners raining down around us.

If you're a lucky recipient of the "no-fly" designation, here's how you're informed of your new status.

1. Purchase a ticket and attempt to travel. 2. Be rebuffed by TSA personnel.

This process can sometimes be applied with more flexibility.

1. Purchase a roundtrip ticket and fly to a foreign destination. 2. Attempt to return home. 3. Be rebuffed by local customs/security officials.

You won't know you're on The List until the list is triggered, which could happen when you're a few thousand miles from home. And if you think you're boarding the next boat back to the US, think again. The list is also "no-sail," meaning passenger ships are out of the question.

Now, if you're on the list and wish to be removed or, at the very least, informed of why you've been banned from commercial airline travel, there's no reason to panic. The DHS has a resolution process that relies very heavily on "process" and skips the "resolution" completely.

Their only recourse is to file a request with the Department of Homeland Security's "Traveler Redress Inquiry Program," after which DHS responds with a letter that does not explain why they were denied boarding. The letter does not confirm or deny whether their names remain on the No Fly List, and does not indicate whether they can fly. The only way for a person to find out if his or her name was removed from the No Fly List is to buy a plane ticket, go to the airport, see if he or she can get on the flight ? taking the risk of being denied boarding and marked as a suspected terrorist, and losing the cost of the airline ticket.

One wonders what a letter that answers no questions and explains nothing is supposed to "redress."

Dear Sir/Madam No Fly,

Thank you for expressing an interest in our Traveler Redress Inquiry Program. The Department of Homeland Security works in conjunction with all domestic airports, as well as those in 22 other nations worldwide, in order to provide you with a safe traveling experience. We hope that you will continue to make use of our products and services.

Thank you again for your support.

If you have additional comments or questions, please dial (202) 282-8495.

Sincerely, The Department of Homeland Security

This decade-long lack of specifics or actual redress has led to the ACLU suing the federal government on the behalf of thirteen no-fly list members.

Thirteen people on the no-fly list have sued the U.S. government, arguing that their placement deprives them of due process and smears their reputation by branding them as terrorists. Several of the men who filed suit have been surrounded at airport security areas, detained and interrogated.

The suit seeks to either remove the plaintiffs from the no-fly list or tell them why they are on it.

Government attorney Scott Risner addressed these complaints by arguing that air travel is not a "right" but a "convenience."

Risner said placement on the list doesn't stop people from traveling, and stopping people from using one mode of travel doesn't deprive them of their liberty. That's a key question in determining whether the government must ensure due process and one that's at the heart of the constitutionality of being placed on the list.

"We're not suggesting that there's not a convenience in air travel," Risner said. "(But) there's no right to travel without impediments. That's what's happening here.

Risner went so far as to point out that those stranded by sudden inclusion on the no fly list had made it back to the US via alternate forms of travel, thus "proving" a lack of air travel isn't preventing traveling.

Unfortunately for Risner, Judge Anna J. Brown wasn't buying it.

"To call it 'convenience' is marginalizing their argument," Brown said. [She] said alternatives to flying are significantly more expensive. "It's hugely time-consuming, and who knows what impediments there are between the Port of Portland and other countries."

She also pointed out that sea and land travel options aren't suitable replacements for flying, especially when time is of the essence and that the government's argument "fails to take into account the realities of modern life."

The DHS and FBI would obviously like everything to proceed the way it has for years, which means convincing the judge that flying isn't a fundamental right. This removes the question of constitutionality, as least as far as flight restrictions go.

The ACLU has gone further, though, declaring the entire system to be screwed up.

"We're asking the court to finally put a check on the government's use of a blacklist that denies Americans the ability to fly without giving them the explanation or fair hearing that the Constitution requires. It's a question of basic fairness," said ACLU Staff Attorney Nusrat Choudhury, one of the ACLU attorneys who will argue the case Friday in Portland. "It does not make our country safer to ban people from flying without giving them an after-the-fact redress process that allows them to correct the errors that led to their mistaken inclusion on the list."

It also points out that issuance of notice and due process are required for much less far-reaching actions.

The ACLU argues that this system violates the Fifth Amendment's command that the government cannot deprive a person of liberty "without due process of law." Courts have ruled that the Constitution requires some kind of notice and hearing for far less severe actions, such as losing state assistance for utility bills or being suspended from school for 10 days.

Judge Brown hasn't said when she'll issue a ruling, but so far she seems less than impressed with the government's arguments. In the meantime, 20,000 people, including the 13 US citizens represented here (four of which are military veterans), are still stuck in War on Terror limbo -- unofficially "detained" in the US by secretive travel restrictions.

(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
- TSA Puts on the Dog
- Charges Dismissed For Teen Arrested Over NRA T-Shirt
- 5-Year-Old's Suspension Over Toy Cap Gun Reversed
- "There's A LOT Of Wrong Doing Taking Place (By The U.S. Government) That Americans Aren't Aware Of"
- "I Think Glenn Greenwald Should Calm Down" Piers Morgan
- "Snowden Is The Traitor! (NOT ME!) And Anybody That'd Call Him A Hero Is Terribly Misguided!"
- Maddow Does Her Best To Convince You Snowden Is The One Stealing Your Information NOT Obama
- Snowden's Secrets 'Belong To The People Of The US' & He's A Traitor For Giving Them What They Own?

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

Federal Appeals Court Busts Police For Contempt Of Cop Arrest

Eleventh Circuit US Court of Appeals allows false arrest lawsuit to proceed against cops who arrested motorist for being up to no good.

A motorist who was less than cooperative when police performed a traffic stop on her property was vindicated Friday. A federal appeals court made it clear that taking a longer than expected time to produce identification and "being up to no good," was not grounds for arrest.

In an unpublished ruling, the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit allowed Gina Petithomme to sue the Miami-Dade, Florida police department over the treatment she received at the hands of officers on February 6, 2009. Officers Ronald Martin and Jesus Gonzalez had been dispatched to investigate a suspicious White Dodge with two black men inside at the corner of 148th Street and Northwest 10th Place. Before reaching that location, the officers saw a silver Nissan with a piece of white paper allegedly blocking the license plate. The Nissan was parked on private property.

Petithomme, a black woman, was inside the Nissan when officers came on her property to say they were investigating a suspicious vehicle.

"What was the description of the vehicle?" Petithomme asked.

The officers did not say they were looking for a white Dodge, and asked Petithomme to produce identification and for permission to search her vehicle. Petithomme refused the search. On a third request for identification, Petithomme asked if she could go inside her home to retrieve it. It was granted, and as soon as she left the officers began searching through the Nissan. She returned and upon being asked a fourth time, she said the license must be in her car. She finally found it.

"Here's my identification," Petithomme said, holding within Officer Martin's line of vision.

Enraged, Officer Martin arrested Petithomme on the spot, charging her with disorderly conduct and disturbing the peace. The officers said the woman's attitude showed she was "up to no good." The court of appeals disagreed.

"Plaintiff's questions directed towards the officers cannot demonstrate arguable probable cause for disorderly conduct," the court ruled in a per curiam decision. "Under Florida law, screaming obscenities at an officer is not sufficient to violate the statute, and thus, no reasonable officer could have concluded that asking an officer a benign question could constitute a violation of the statute."

Petithomme successfully argued her Fourth Amendment rights had been violated with an illegal search.

"Here, plaintiff and her vehicle did not match the descriptions or the location given by dispatch," the court found. "Thus, the only circumstances suggesting illegal activity was the white paper obstructing plaintiff's tag. The obstructed tag, however, is insufficient to lead a reasonable person to believe that evidence relating to this infraction would be found inside the vehicle."

Because official immunity cannot be granted to an officer who violates a constitutional right, Officers Martin and Gonzalez are now liable for damages in Petithomme's false arrest lawsuit.

A copy of the decision is available in a 70k PDF file at the source link below.

Source: Petithomme v. County of Miami-Dade (US Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit, 3/8/2013)

(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
- VIDEO: Aussie Cops Assault Youth for Filming, Threaten Him With Arrest
- Man Charged With Disorderly Conduct For Telling Cop to 'Go F**k Himself'
- Man Faces Five Years in Prison for Releasing Balloons on Beach as a Romantic Gesture
- This Week's Corrupt Cops Stories
- 'Lady Liberty' Tased by Fort Worth officer
- Phoenix Cop Made Famous On YouTube For Tackling 15-Yr-Old Girl Calls 5-Day Suspension Too Harsh
- Undercover Cops Ensnare a Special Ed Student, Get Him Expelled
- Woman injured in LAPD manhunt says cops won't pay taxes on replacement truck

Awesome! I hope she and her lawyer hang the cops out to dry.

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

Federal Appeals Court Upholds Practice of Mass Student Searches & Random Lockdowns by Police & Drug-Sniffing Dogs in Missouri High School

The Rutherford Institute

SPRINGFIELD, Mo.? In a ruling issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in Burlison v. Springfield Public Schools, the court deemed a Missouri school district?s policy of imposing a ?lockdown? of the school for the purpose of allowing the local sheriff?s department, aided by drug-sniffing dogs, to perform mass inspections of students? belongings to be a ?reasonable procedure to maintain the safety and security of students at the school,? and not a violation of the Fourth Amendment rights of students.

Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute had challenged the school district?s practice of conducting random lockdowns and mass searches of students. Institute attorneys had asked the appeals court to reverse a federal district court?s January 2012 ruling that Springfield Public Schools and the Greene County Sheriff?s Office did not violate the Fourth Amendment rights of students when they executed the April 2010 lockdown at Central High School.

?Random, suspicionless lockdown raids against children teach our children a horrific lesson?one that goes against every fundamental principle this country was founded upon?that we have no rights at all against the police state,? said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. ?Americans should be outraged over the fact that school officials are not only defending such clearly unconstitutional practices but are actually going so far as to insist that these raids are a ?standard drill? that will continue.?

On April 22, 2010, the principal of Central High School announced over the public address system that the school was going into ?lockdown? and that students were prohibited from leaving their classrooms. School officials and agents of the Greene County Sheriff?s Department thereafter ordered students to leave all personal belongings behind and exit the classrooms. Dogs were also brought in to assist in the raid. Upon re-entering the classrooms, students allegedly discovered that their belongings had been rummaged through. Mellony and Doug Burlison, who had two children attending Central High School, complained to school officials that the lockdown and search were a violation of their children?s rights. School officials allegedly responded by insisting that the search was a ?standard drill? and policy of the school district which would continue.

Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute sued the school district in September 2010 on behalf of the Burlisons and their two children, asking the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri to declare that the practice of effecting a lockdown of the school and conducting random, suspicionless seizures and searches violates the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the similar provision of the Missouri Constitution. In its January 2012 decision, the district court declared that the random lockdown and mass searches did not violate students? rights. In its ruling issued March 4, 2013, the Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment, holding that the school?s interest in combatting drug use outweighed the privacy rights of students. Affiliate attorney Jason T. Umbarger of Springfield, Mo., is assisting The Rutherford Institute in its defense of the Burlison family.

Case History

03/08/2013 ? Federal Appeals Court Upholds Practice of Mass Student Searches & Random Lockdowns by Police & Drug-Sniffing Dogs in Missouri High School

06/13/2012 ? Rutherford Institute Challenges Missouri School Over Constitutionality, Continuation of Mass Student Searches & Random Lockdowns

04/24/2012 ? Rutherford Institute Asks Appeals Court to Declare Mass Student Searches & Random Lockdowns in Missouri High Schools To Be Unconstitutional

01/31/2013 ? U.S. District Court Declares Mass Student Searches & Random Lockdowns in Missouri High Schools To Be Legal, Dismisses Fourth Amendment Lawsuit

09/28/2010 ? Rutherford Institute Files Fourth Amendment Lawsuit Against Missouri School Demanding End to Mass Student Searches, Random Lockdowns

Legal Action
The Rutherford Institute's complaint and subsequent reply brief in Burlison v. Springfield Public Schools

(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
- VIDEO: Aussie Cops Assault Youth for Filming, Threaten Him With Arrest
- Man Charged With Disorderly Conduct For Telling Cop to 'Go F**k Himself'
- Man Faces Five Years in Prison for Releasing Balloons on Beach as a Romantic Gesture
- This Week's Corrupt Cops Stories
- 'Lady Liberty' Tased by Fort Worth officer
- Federal Appeals Court Busts Police For Contempt Of Cop Arrest
- Phoenix Cop Made Famous On YouTube For Tackling 15-Yr-Old Girl Calls 5-Day Suspension Too Harsh
- Undercover Cops Ensnare a Special Ed Student, Get Him Expelled

Check your Constitution at the door, kiddies!

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

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

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

FOI Documents Show TOR Undernet Beyond the Reach of the Federal Investigators

Michael Morisy

Recently released documents detail the federal government's inability to pursue cybercriminals shrouded by the tricky anonymity tools used by the Silk Road marketplace and other darknet sites - tools which are funded in part by the federal government itself. In this particular case, a citizen reported stumbling upon a cache of child pornography while browsing the anonymous Tor network's hidden sites, which are viewable with specialized, but readily available, tools and the special .onion domain.

Documents, released through a Freedom of Information Act request by Jason Smathers on MuckRock, show that after being given details of the illicit material, investigators were stymied as to the origin of the pornography's host. In the investigators' own words, "there is not currently a way to trace the origin of the website. As such no other investigative leads exist."

Smathers' request was originally for all Justice Department records mentioning the Silk Road marketplace. The Justice Department forwarded the request on to the FBI for processing. In fact, the FBI had received an almost identical request, also filed by Smathers, and rejected it, claiming at the time that responsive records could not be found.

Read More

Latest Science/Technology
- 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
- New ISP will defend users from government spying
- SpaceX: Entrepreneur's race to space
- Demise of Peak Oil Theory
- Demise of Peak Oil Theory

The U.S. government was instrumental in the creation of TOR. The government can, of course, monitor it. That's why I don't trust TOR. The Government released documents assuring us the secret network it funded cannot spy on us.

Indeed. :-)

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
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill

View the original article here

Federal court enjoins NDAA

An Obama-appointed judge rules its indefinite detention provisions likely violate the 1st and 5th Amendments
BY GLENN GREENWALD

A federal district judge today, the newly-appointed Katherine Forrest of the Southern District of New York, issued an amazing ruling: one which?preliminarily enjoins enforcement of the highly controversial indefinite provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act, enacted by Congress and signed into law by President Obama last December. This afternoon?s ruling came as part of a lawsuit brought by seven dissident plaintiffs ? including Chris Hedges, Dan Ellsberg, Noam Chomsky, and Brigitta Jonsdottir ? alleging that the NDAA violates??both their free speech and?associational rights guaranteed by the First Amendment as well as?due process rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment of the United?States Constitution.?

The ruling was a sweeping victory for the plaintiffs, as it rejected each of the Obama DOJ?s three arguments: (1) because none of the plaintiffs has yet been indefinitely detained, they lack ?standing? to challenge the statute; (2) even if they have standing, the lack of imminent enforcement against them renders injunctive relief unnecessary; and (3)?the NDAA creates no new detention powers beyond what the 2001 AUMF already provides.

As for the DOJ?s first argument ? lack of standing ? the court found that the plaintiffs are already suffering substantial injury from the reasonable fear that they could be indefinitely detained under section 1021 of the NDAA as a result of their constitutionally protected activities.

Read More

Latest Resistance
- Military Detention Law Blocked by New York Judge
- IP-Address Can't Even Identify a State, BitTorrent Judge Rules
- Anarchast Ep. 25 with Josh Luther
- Drone Bombings Truther Caught on Video
- You Have Every Right to Photograph That Cop
- Pokemon Theme Song Creator Creates Parody Re-Mix For Ron Paul
- Rand Paul Launches Campaign to End the TSA
- Montreal Protesters Go Fishing For Cops w/ Donuts On Sticks [Pic]

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
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill

View the original article here

5 New Lies That The Federal Reserve Is Telling The American People

by Michael Snyder

The Federal Reserve says that everything is going to be okay.? The Fed says that unemployment is going to go down, inflation is going to remain low and economic growth is going to steadily increase.? Do you believe them this time?? As you will see later in this article, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has been dead wrong about the economy over and over again.? But the mainstream media and many Americans still seem to have a lot of faith in the Federal Reserve.? It doesn't seem to matter that Bernanke and other Fed officials have been telling the American people lies for years.? As I always say, most people believe what they want to believe, and many people seem to want to have blind faith in the Federal Reserve even when logic and reason would dictate otherwise.? The truth is that things are not going to be getting much better than they are right now.? When the next wave of the financial crisis hits, the U.S. economy is going to fall back into recession, financial markets are going to crash and unemployment is going to absolutely skyrocket.? But you will never hear any of that from the Federal Reserve.

The following are 5 new lies that the Federal Reserve is telling the American people.? After each lie I have posted what The Economic Collapse Blog thinks is actually going to happen....

#1 The Federal Reserve says that the labor market has improved and that unemployment is going to decline significantly over the next few years.

The following is a quote from the FOMC press release that was released on Wednesday....

Labor market conditions have improved in recent months; the unemployment rate has declined but remains elevated.

The Federal Reserve is projecting that the unemployment rate will fall within the range of 7.8 percent and 8.0 percent by the end of 2012.

The Federal Reserve is also projecting that the unemployment rate will fall within the range of 6.7 percent and 7.4 percent by the end of 2014.

The Economic Collapse Blog says that the labor market has not improved.? In March 2010, 58.5 percent of all working age Americans had a job.? Exactly two years later in March 2012, 58.5 percent of all working age Americans had a job.? If the labor market was improving, the percentage of working age Americans with a job should have gone up.

The Economic Collapse Blog also says that while there is a chance the official unemployment rate may go down slightly in the short-term, the truth is that it is going to go up into double digits once the next wave of the financial crisis hits us.

#2 The Federal Reserve says that that U.S. economy is going to experience solid GDP growth over the next couple of years.

In fact, the Federal Reserve is projecting that U.S. GDP will be rising at an annual rate that falls between 3.1 percent and 3.6 percent by the end of 2014.

The Economic Collapse Blog says that a great economic cataclysm is coming....

"When the European banking system crashes (and it will) it is going to reverberate around the globe.? The epicenter of the next great financial crisis is going to be in Europe, and it is getting closer with each passing day."

#3 The Federal Reserve says that we can expect low inflation for an extended period of time.

The Federal Reserve is officially projecting that the annual rate of inflation will not be higher than 2.0 percent by the end of 2012.? Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke reinforced this projection during his press conference on Wednesday....

"But we expect that to pass through the system, and assuming no new shocks in the oil sector, inflation ought to moderate to about 2 percent later this year."

The Economic Collapse Blog says that the Fed is being tremendously dishonest and that if inflation was measured the exact same way that it was measured back in 1980, the annual rate of inflation would be more than 10 percent right now.

The truth is that most middle class families know that we do not have low inflation right now.? This is hammered home millions of times a day when average Americans visit the gas station or the grocery store.

At the beginning of the next recession inflation will likely subside, but that will only be because economic activity will be slowing down dramatically.

#4 The Federal Reserve says that it has built up a 30 year reputation for keeping inflation low.

Ben Bernanke actually had the gall to make the following claim during his press conference on Wednesday....

"We, the Federal Reserve, have spent 30 years building up credibility for low and stable inflation, which has proved extremely valuable in that we've been able to take strong accommodative actions in the last four, five years to support the economy."

Oh really?

The Economic Collapse Blog says that the Federal Reserve has nearly a 100 year reputation for destroying the value of the U.S. dollar.? Even using the Fed's doctored numbers, the value of the U.S. dollar has declined by more than 95 percent since 1913.

To get a really good idea of just how much the dollar has been destroyed by the Fed over the years, just check out this chart.

#5 Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke says that we should trust him because the Federal Reserve stands ready to do whatever is necessary to support the U.S. economy.

"If appropriate... we remain entirely prepared to take additional action"

The Economic Collapse Blog says that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is doing a great disservice by not warning the American people about the tremendous crisis that is coming.? In a recent article I stated that this next crisis will blindside most Americans just like the last one did....

"Sadly, just like back in 2008, most people will never even see this next crisis coming."

So who should you trust - the Federal Reserve or all of the half-crazed bloggers out there that are warning about the "serious doom" that is coming.

Well, come back to this article in a year or two and compare how accurate the predictions were.

In the end, time will tell who is telling lies and who is not.

If we do not learn from history, we are doomed to repeat it.

For example, let's take a quick look at Ben Bernanke's track record over the past several years.

The following are statements that Bernanke actually made to the public....

#1 (July, 2005) "We've never had a decline in house prices on a nationwide basis. So, what I think what is more likely is that house prices will slow, maybe stabilize, might slow consumption spending a bit. I don't think it's gonna drive the economy too far from its full employment path, though."

#2 (October 20, 2005) "House prices have risen by nearly 25 percent over the past two years. Although speculative activity has increased in some areas, at a national level these price increases largely reflect strong economic fundamentals."

#3 (November 15, 2005) "With respect to their safety, derivatives, for the most part, are traded among very sophisticated financial institutions and individuals who have considerable incentive to understand them and to use them properly."

#4 (February 15, 2006) "Housing markets are cooling a bit. Our expectation is that the decline in activity or the slowing in activity will be moderate, that house prices will probably continue to rise."

#5 (February 15, 2007) "Despite the ongoing adjustments in the housing sector, overall economic prospects for households remain good. Household finances appear generally solid, and delinquency rates on most types of consumer loans and residential mortgages remain low."

#6 (March 28, 2007) "At this juncture, however, the impact on the broader economy and financial markets of the problems in the subprime market seems likely to be contained. In particular, mortgages to prime borrowers and fixed-rate mortgages to all classes of borrowers continue to perform well, with low rates of delinquency."

#7 (May 17, 2007) "All that said, given the fundamental factors in place that should support the demand for housing, we believe the effect of the troubles in the subprime sector on the broader housing market will likely be limited, and we do not expect significant spillovers from the subprime market to the rest of the economy or to the financial system.? The vast majority of mortgages, including even subprime mortgages, continue to perform well.? Past gains in house prices have left most homeowners with significant amounts of home equity, and growth in jobs and incomes should help keep the financial obligations of most households manageable."

#8 (January 10, 2008) "The Federal Reserve is not currently forecasting a recession."

#9 (June 10, 2008) "The risk that the economy has entered a substantial downturn appears to have diminished over the past month or so."

But don't worry, Ben Bernanke insists that he knows exactly what is going on this time.

So do you believe him?

A lot of Americans don't.? In fact, an "economic collapse" is the number one catastrophic event that Americans worry about according to one recent survey.

Perhaps that is one reason why so many Americans are preparing for doomsday these days.

The central planners over at the Federal Reserve are not going to solve our economic problems.

The truth is that the Fed is at the very heart of our economic problems.

We have been living in the greatest debt bubble in the history of the world and that debt bubble has been facilitated by the Fed.

Over the past three decades, the total amount of debt in America has increased by about 50 trillion dollars.? By stealing from future generations, we have been able to live like kings and queens, but there is going to be a great price to pay for our foolishness.

Ben Bernanke and the other folks running the Federal Reserve are just going to keep insisting that everything is going to be okay for as long as they possibly can.? They are going to tell you that they know exactly how to fix things and that the economy will be back on track very soon.

Don't be stupid and believe them this time.

View the original article here

Federal plan to mandate handicapped access for all public pools temporarily delayed

The Justice Department on Thursday issued a 60-day stay of execution for hundreds of thousands of public pools which had been required to install ramps and wheelchair lifts by today or else face lawsuits over violating disability laws.

President Obama in 2010 dramatically expanded the rules for access under the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the new regulations mean that every publicly accessible pool ? from municipal facilities to hotels ? must have two "accessible means of entry," at least one of which must be a ramp or wheelchair lift. Spas must also have either a lift or a transfer system to help the disabled enter them, under the new rules.

Under the law, non-compliant facilities can be sued ? and some lawmakers feared a bonanza for lawyers eager to capitalize.

Read More

Latest Economy
- The Mighty Return of Lard
- 'This American Life' Retracts Mike Daisey's Piece On Foxconn For "Significant Fabrications"
- Money Laundering
- Peter Schiff Rips Bernanke at The Atlantic Economy Summit
- Peter Schiff vs Paul Volcker
- Prison Nation Going Broke
- Stress Tests No Sweat
- It's Official - Apple Is Now Bigger Than The Entire US Retail Sector

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
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill

View the original article here

Jeffrey Tucker makes the Case Against the Federal Reserve and the Banking Cartel

Jeffrey Tucker makes the Case Against the Federal Reserve and the Banking Cartel - informationliberationinformationliberation
The news you're not supposed to know...Breaking NewsBrowse by CategoryAnalysisHighlightsMultimediaLatest CommentsArchivesRSS FeedSyndicationAboutContact
Multimedia
An Introduction to Austrian Economics: Understand Economics, Understand EverythingThe Century of the Self: The Untold History of Controlling the Masses Through the Manipulation of Unconscious Desires
The Disappearing Male: From Virility to Sterility
The Obama Deception: The Mask Comes OffOperation Gladio: The Hidden History of U.S. Sponsored False Flag Terrorism in EuropeThe New American Century: The Untold History of The Project for the New American Century(more)Article posted Feb 16 2012, 11:44 PMCategory: EconomySource: YouTubePrint
Jeffrey Tucker makes the Case Against the Federal Reserve and the Banking Cartel


SHARE: Share Tweet Email This


Latest Economy
- Tom Woods Interviews Lew Rockwell
- Another Fed-Backed Solar Company Goes Bankrupt
- Obama: Not Raising Taxes Is a Form of Government Spending
- Fed Should Heed Lessons of 1920 Recession Response, Grant Says
- Keynesians Jump The Gun on Inflation
- Doug Casey Interviewed by Kerry Lutz
- Obama: Lets Debase Our Coinage Even Further to "Save Money"
- Obama Proposes Doubling Dividend Tax on Wealthy









No Comments PostedAdd Comment

Add CommentNameComment

* No HTML


Verification *Please Enter the Verification Code Seen Below 

PLEASE NOTEPlease see our About Page, our Disclaimer, and our Comments Policy.

FAIR USE NOTICEThis 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
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston ChurchillSearch

Advanced SearchLogin Username:

Password:

Remember Me
Forgot Password?
Register
Most Popular TSA Forces Woman To Use Naked Body Scanner Three Times Because of "Cute" Figure - 02/14Kurt Haskell Exposes Government False Flag Operation During Underwear Bomber Sentencing - 02/16Caught On Tape: Cop Sucker Punches Suspect In Back Of Head, Then Charges Him With "Assaulting A Police Officer" - 02/15Caught On Tape: Officer Threatens to Make Up Evidence After Arrest of Innocent Men - 02/14Why Are Government Bureaucrats Turning America Into Nazi Germany? - 02/13According To The FBI, Internet Privacy Is Now Considered To Be Suspicious Activity - 02/06David Stanley, RIP - 02/03911 IS A JOKE: Detroit citizens no longer rely on police as self-defense killings skyrocket - 02/07
HighlightsThe Missing Lesson From Norway: Never Trust a Man in Uniform"They're Only Out To Make Cold Hard American Cash"; Park Police Crack Down on Bicycle Cabs in DC18 Signs That Life In U.S. Public Schools Is Now Essentially Equivalent To Life In U.S. PrisonsEighth Grader Executed for Scaring a CopFeds Drop All Charges Against 27 Head-Shop Owners They Falsely Accused of Being Terrorist Drug DealersStraight-A College Student Faces 125 Years In Jail For Producing Fake IDsTexas Cops Ticket Thousands of Schoolchildren to Raise Revenue, Some as Young as 6-Yrs-OldHouston Police Chief: Videotaping or Criticizing Police May be Sign You're a Cop-Killer(more)
 Top

View the original article here

Federal Appeals Court Upholds Forced Home Entry Over DUI

Federal appeals court rules a police officer who suspects drunk driving can break into a home without first obtaining a warrant.

The US Supreme Court ruled 27 years ago that police could not forcibly enter someone's home over suspected drunk driving. The Fourth District US Court of Appeals in an unpublished decision is looking to change the precedent. A three-judge appellate panel considered the case of Alan J. Cilman who had filed a false arrest lawsuit after Officer M.A. Reeves busted down his door, without a warrant, on October 3, 2004.

Earlier that day, Cilman had left Neighbors Restaurant where he watched a football game and had dinner and drinks. Reeves claimed Cilman drove out of the Neighbors parking lot at a "high rate of speed." Reeves followed, noting that Cilman had run a stop sign, failed to signal and accelerated quickly in turns. Accounts differ over whether Reeves turned on his police lights before Cilman made it to the driveway of his home, which was not far away. Reeves got out of his cruiser as Cilman was walking briskly to the door. Reeves told Cilman to stop, but he did not say the man was under arrest. Cilman told the officer to get off his property as he went inside and locked the door.

Reeves waited for backup, then kicked in Cilman's door and arrested him for being drunk in public and evasion without force -- not driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). Prosecutors later dropped those charges. The US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia agreed that kicking in Cilman's door without a warrant was a violation of the Fourth Amendment, but a jury awarded Cilman $0 in damages as compensation. Officer Reeves appealed the judge's finding that he had violated the Constitution, because under state law he would be forced to resign if found guilty of a second constitutional violation.

Read More

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- UC Davis Campus Police Pepper Spray Student Protesters Sitting Doing Nothing
- Woman Places Sign On Her Car Stating Police Do Not "Protect and Serve," Police Respond By Arresting Her For Crimes She Did Not Commit
- Protect and Serve: NY Cops Violently Drag Woman By Her Hair
- Video Released: Oakland Police Strike Army Ranger With Nightsticks On His Back, Ribs, Shoulders and Hands, Lacerating His Spleen and Causing Internal Bleeding
- "What can you offer to get out of a DUI?" -- Cop solicits women he pulled over
- Dash-Cam Video Shows Sam Houston State Police Beating Student
- Two cops fired over horrific video which shows them beating up suspect - then CELEBRATING
- DEA Sweeps Across Western Washington With Dispensary Raids

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
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill

View the original article here

The Federal Reserve and Bank of America Initiate a Coup to Dump Hundreds of Billions of Dollars of Losses on the American Taxpayer

The Austerity Myth: Federal Spending Up 5% This Year

By JOHN MERLINE, INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

When Republicans took control of the House in January, they pledged to make deep cuts in federal spending, and in April they succeeded in passing a bill advertised as cutting $38 billion from fiscal 2011's budget. Then in August, they pushed for a deal to cut an additional $2.4 trillion over the next decade.

Some analysts have blamed these spending cuts for this year's economic slowdown.

But data released by the Treasury Department on Friday show that, so far, there haven't been any spending cuts at all.

Higher Spending, Deficits

In fact, in the first nine months of this year, federal spending was $120 billion higher than in the same period in 2010, the data show. That's an increase of almost 5%. And deficits during this time were $23.5 billion higher.

These spending hikes haven't stopped many analysts from claiming that the country is in an age of budget austerity, one that's hurting economic growth.

Read More

Latest Economy
- Economic Crisis: How to Cause Them and How to Make Them Worse | Hans-Hermann Hoppe
- "I Am The 1%. Let's Talk."
- 10 Mind Blowing Facts Which Show How Members Of Congress And Federal Employees Are Living The High Life At Our Expense
- Rethinking the Gold Bubble
- Disparities of Wealth
- Protectionism Could Lead To American Poverty
- New York Fed: Student loan debt now over $1 trillion
- A Long, Steep Drop for Americans' Standard of Living

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
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill

View the original article here