Most Americans See Government as "Threat to Rights" For First Time

Trust in established institutions continues to plummet
Paul Joseph Watson

A new poll released by the Pew Research Center has found that a majority of Americans now see the government as a threat to their rights for the first time ever.

A total of 53% of Americans view the government as a threat to their ?personal rights and freedoms,? with 43% not believing it poses a threat and 4 don?t knows.

The?poll also found, ?Only 26% saying they can trust government always or most of the time, while 73% say they can trust the government only some of the time or never. Majorities across all partisan and demographic groups express little or no trust in government.?

Just 20% of whites trust the federal government while a mere 26% of Americans across the board view Congress favorably, in comparison with 50% of the public regarding Congress favorably in 2009.

The poll arrives in the aftermath of a separate?Rasmussen survey?that found just 6 per cent of Americans now rate the mainstream news media as ?very trustworthy?.

Faith in the integrity of established institutions has eroded steadily since the Obama administration took office.

In 2011,?pollster Pat Caddell warned?that Americans were ?pre-revolutionary? after a survey found that just 17 per cent of Americans believed that the U.S. government had the consent of the governed, an all time low.

The founding fathers routinely espoused the view that skepticism of those in power was a healthy and patriotic stance. However, trust in government has plummeted so drastically that it is beginning to pose a threat to the very fabric of society.

That?s why many are concerned that the Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies are gearing up for widespread civil unrest by stockpiling weapons and ammunition.

Instead of rebuilding trust in the system by changing their behavior, becoming more transparent, and respecting the Constitution, federal agencies are increasingly treating the American public as an enemy that needs to be closely watched and defended against physically via a massive arms build up.

_
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for?Infowars.com?and?Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

(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

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

Troubling Public Opinion Trends for Gun Rights and Civil Liberties

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 Anthony Gregory

On how to respond to mass shootings and violent crime, the public opinion trends frighten me, especially when broken down by political identification. Predictably, Democrats are in favor of gun control by wider margins than Republicans. But still, 92% of Republicans favor universal background checks, which I consider as bad a proposal as any being offered. It will mean the death of gun shows as we know them. The relative freedom with which Americans private trade firearms is one of the greatest spheres of liberty in the country, something that sets the United States apart from most places. Ninety-one percent of the population want to abolish the freedom (independents being slightly more reluctant than either Democrats or Republicans to support such a measure). This would be the most significant strike against gun rights, and one of the most important violations of the Bill of Rights in general, in modern times.

One theme I try to focus on in these discussions is how gun control is merely one of many core elements of the police state, and that those who oppose criminal justice and police abuses should be more skeptical of gun laws, and those who favor the right to bear arms should be much more skeptical of militarized policing, prosecutorial shenanigans, the prison system, the drug war, and so many other heavy-handed government measures that contribute to violent crime and boost the rationale for gun control. It never made sense to me that those who favor gun control would decry racism in the courtroom and those who see gun rights as a bulwark against tyranny would deny the pervasiveness of police brutality.

Well, for once, at least these poll results enjoy some internal consistency. 63% of Republicans want to see 15,000 more police on the streets. Not to be outdone, 81% of Democrats back the same proposal.

(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
- I Put My Life On The Line Writing This Article!
- Government Undermines Social Cooperation
- It's Not Evil to Copy
- "Conspiracy Theory": Foundations of a Weaponized Term
- Government Will Lose the War on Piracy
- John Mackey's Political Correctness
- John Taylor Gatto on the Inanity of Gun Control
- "Gun Control for the Children?" Sorry, No Sale.

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

Senate Anti-Leaks Bill Threatens the Rights of the Press and the Public

BY JENNIFER LYNCH AND TREVOR TIMM

The US Senate is currently debating a dangerous bill that, if passed, would have broad consequences for press freedom and the public's right to know. EFF asks senators to stand up for government transparency and the First Amendment and vote it down.

The bill's provisions, buried in the annual Intelligence Authorization Act, are intended to stop leaks of classified information to reporters--a premise worrying in itself--but it is written so sloppily it will also severely impair government transparency and prevent the media from reporting on national security issues.

The problems with this bill are extensive and severe. As the New York Times pointed out in an unusually forceful editorial last Friday, it has been "drafted in secret without public hearings" and bars most government employees from giving press background briefings, even if the information is unclassified--vital for media organizations when reporting on complex issues. Another provision prohibits officials from writing op-eds or appearing on television, again, even if the information is unclassified--a clear prohibition on protected speech.

Classification expert Steven Aftergood documented several specific problems with the bill's broad definitions, most notably that the bill doesn't differentiate between properly and improperly classified information. Even the Freedom of Information Act, which carries a broad exception for classified information. insists it must be "properly classified."

This is especially troubling given that the government's secrecy system has ballooned to absurd proportions, to the point where virtually every government action in the national security or foreign policy realm has been stamped classified, many times improperly. Information is regularly classified to hide embarrassing details, government waste, corruption, and even serious constitutional violations. The former head of the U.S. classification process, J. William Leonard, recently called the system "dysfunctional" because it "clearly lacks the ability to differentiate between trivial information and that which can truly damage our nation's well-being." The bill's definition is virtually an invitation for government officials to further use secrecy to hide their conduct.

And if classification were used to hide such wrongdoing, "there is no exception carved out for whistle-blowers or other news media contacts that advance the public's awareness," as the New York Times reported. At the same time, Congress, its staff, and other high level officials are exempt from many of the bill's provisions.

The Obama administration has already been far too aggressive in prosecuting whistleblowers--its charged more leakers than all other administrations combined--and the latest, wide ranging FBI investigation into new leaks is "casting a distinct chill over press coverage of national security issues as agencies decline routine interview requests and refuse to provide background briefings" as the New York Times reported on its front page last Thursday. The new anti-leaks bill has the potential to permanently alter the way news media can interact with government officials. ??As the New York Times editorial board said in its criticism Friday, this won't just chill the press, but potentially "undermine democracy by denying Americans access to information essential to national debate on critical issues like the extent of government spying powers and the use of torture."

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this bill is the fact that it has been proposed at all. As Steven Aftergood notes, "there is something incongruous, if not outrageous, about the whole effort by Congress to induce stricter secrecy in the executive branch, which already has every institutional incentive to restrict public disclosure of intelligence information." Aftergood reminds us that, in the past, leaks led to investigations into the programs exposed and to "substantive" Congressional oversight. In stark contrast, the response to leaks in the years since September 11, 2001--by both Congress and the Executive--has been to prosecue whisteblowers--and even reporters--and to ensure even more information is kept secret from the American public.

Take, for example, the national debate on the use of classified drone strikes in overseas military operations.? As the New Yorker's Steve Coll wrote, the new book by Newsweek reporter Daniel Klaidman on President Obama's use of classified drone strikes discusses "the first instance in American history of a sitting President speaking of his intent to kill a particular U.S. citizen without that citizen having been charged formally with a crime or convicted at trial." Similarly, when the New York Times reported on U.S. cyberattacks against Iran--another target of recent leak investigations--the Times said the decision to engage in offensive cyberattacks was so consequential and unprecedented, that it is comparable to "the first use of atomic weapons in the 1940s."?

These are just two instances of decisions by the President which -- whether you agree with them or not-- should be debated and scrutinized in both the halls of Congress and the public sphere. Yet because they are hidden behind giant walls of secrecy, there is no oversight or accountability, and the public has no say in decision as to whether the country should be engaging in them at all.

Late Friday, Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee Dianne Feinstein said the committee would "reconsider" some of the proposals after receiving a firestorm of criticism last week. She should go farther and strike them entirely--they have no place in a democracy that values government transparency and prides itself on press freedom and justice under the law.

(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
- Leaked: Stratfor Emails Reveal Secret, Widespread 'TrapWire' Surveillance System
- FBI: Constitution Stands In Way of Government Thwarting "Extremist"? Groups
- FBI Monitored Dotcom Raid Via Live Video Link, Secret Govt Group Involved
- Google Starts Punishing "Pirate" Sites In Search Results
- Court: Feds Can Spy On Americans Without Warrants With No Legal Repurcussions
- Demonoid Busted As A Gift To The United States Government
- FBI's Facial Recognition is Coming to a State Near You
- Did You Know That Professional Writing Is Dying And Only Taxing The Public To Pay Writers Can Save It

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

Student says he was assaulted by his principle for wearing a gay rights T-shirt

MADISONVILLE (WATE) ? A student says he was assaulted by his principal for wearing a T-shirt supporting a Gay Straight Alliance club at his school.

[...]"In the middle of the test, he came into the classroom and evacuated it. He grabbed me by the shirt. When I tried to walk away, he pushed me back at which time I hit a wall," said Chris.

Sigler's sister, Jessica, says even though the principal asked everyone to leave the classroom, she chose to stay in the room with her brother.

"Moser was inches away from his face, taunting him like he wanted him to fight," Jessica said.

Read More

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- Woman Photographs Cop Kicking Handcuffed Man Lying On Ground, Cop Seizes Her Camera, Deletes Evidence, Arrests Her & Files Charges Against Her: Lawsuit
- Obama's Very Real Death Panel
- Secret panel can put Americans on "kill list'
- Ron Paul: US could target journalists for killing
- Feds order California pot dispensaries to shut down - despite being legal under state laws
- Houston police accused of eating suspect's pot brownies turn in less marijuana than they claimed to have seized
- Police ticket 11-year-old boy hit by car
- Goldman Protesters Are Almost Outnumbered by Security Guards in New Jersey

Yeah, EVIL GOVERNMENT strikes again ...
Something like this would never happen in a school run by
The Westboro Baptist Church, The Catholic Church or indeed any other
religious wacko-denomination (By that I mean ALL OF THEM !) I agree. What is "ahh public school" supposed to mean here? "I agree. What is "ahh public school" supposed to mean here? "

It means Chris is a fuckwit.

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

Human Rights Abused, As 62% Arrested Over The British Riots Are Now In Prison

Press TV

Around 62% of those arrested over involvement in Britain’s recent unrest have been imprisoned while only 10% of them allegedly have committed serious offences.

The rest of the arrested people who have not committed any serious offences are to be kept behind bars for an unknown period of time. Human rights organizations have announced that the British government has decided to keep all arrested people in custody until trial.

The British Police have ordered Britain’s courts to refuse to bail the arrested even after they have been charged. The arrested people are to stay behind bars for a longer time as the British government has taken such an “iron fist” approach.

However, as the arrested people’s solicitors have asserted, 62% of the arrested have been imprisoned while they have not been arraigned. What has caused great concern among human rights activists is that only 10% of these people have been charged with serious offences and the rest can be released either on bail or without having to pay bail.

Nonetheless, the British government has refused to free them. Moreover, the British Police have supported the government’s “iron fist” policy describing it as an initiative that would prevent the spread of unrest across Britain in the future.

Meanwhile, the coalition government’s officials have clashed over taking such strict approaches toward the protesters. Former Liberal Democrat leader, Sir Menzies Campbell, rejected the British Prime Minister David Cameron’s remarks that what he called “twisting and misrepresenting of human rights” have led to the unprecedented unrest across Britain.

Campbell warned Cameron against any measures that would question Britain’s commitment to human rights issues. He asserted that tackling Britain’s unrest should not pave the way for Cameron’s interference in the principles of the Human Rights Act, which preserves the European Convention of Human Rights in British law.

These conflicts and concerns come as human rights organizations have stated that keeping those arrested over the recent unrest behind bars for an unknown period of time without arraigning them constitutes an example of human rights violation as they have called on the government to inform the arrested of their charges and rights.

View the original article here

Study: Concept of property rights may come naturally to preschoolers

By Bruce Bower

WASHINGTON ? Young children are possessed by possessions. Preschoolers argue about what belongs to whom with annoying regularity, a habit that might suggest limited appreciation of what it means to own something.

But it?s actually just the opposite, psychologist Ori Friedman of the University of Waterloo in Canada reported on May 28 at the Association for Psychological Science annual meeting. At ages 4 and 5, youngsters value a person?s ownership rights ? say, to a crayon ? far more strongly than adults do, Friedman and psychology graduate student Karen Neary found.

Rather than being learned from parents, a concept of property rights may automatically grow out of 2- to 3-year-olds? ideas about bodily rights, such as assuming that another person can?t touch or control one?s body for no reason, Friedman proposed.

Read More

Latest Science/Technology
- Copyright Laws Now Working to Destroy 3D Printer Industry: Paramount Files Cease and Desist Against 3D Printer 'Pirate'
- File-Hoster Returns With Guns Blazing After Police Raids
- Global warming, false science, and one-world government
- The Wicked Work of Medical Patents
- Gallup: Majority of Human Race Does Not See Global Warming as Serious Threat
- UCLA's first hand transplant patient adapting well to new hand
- It's Official: Environmentalism Is the New Religion
- Alzheimer's Research Disrupted By Ridiculous Patent Dispute

Well! We just need to re-educate those little libertarians and make sure those nasty property rights tendencies don't cause a problem for the common good of this land!!!

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