According to Amnesty International, “the single most reliable predictor of whether someone will be sentenced to death is the race of the victim.”
What more is there to say?
According to Amnesty International, “the single most reliable predictor of whether someone will be sentenced to death is the race of the victim.”
What more is there to say?
The young people are the change. They will be the revolutionaries of the next 10-30 years. I am encourage not because I agree with everything RP says but because so few young people are involved and these few seem enthusiastic. (E)
‘Bout says it all…Not that Miranda rights had much impact on a large percentage of people anyway since most people don’t know enough to keep their mouths shut! Never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever ad infinitum speak to law enforcement except to identify yourself and then only if you are being detained! Know what your rights are and see to it that you make sure they are not infringed. It is not up to them. It is up to you! (E)
This is a few days old but should still be watched as he makes some good points (E)
The following was recorded prior to the judge’s decision in Manning’s case but since most people do not understand the implications of the case and the law involved that influenced Manning in the first place it is an important video. (E)
Stefan Molyneux breaks down the truth about the Bradley Manning trial and situation.
Get more from Stefan Molyneux and Freedomain Radio including books, podcasts and other info at :http://www.freedomainradio.com
For your consideration. (E)
I’d thank my lucky stars to be livin’ here today,
‘Cause the flag still stands for freedom and they can’t take that away,
And I’m proud to be an American where at least I know I’m free.
From our hotel, we see the Rhine water flowing swiftly, from right to left. (Let’s see, the Rhine flows from South to North… to discharge into the North Sea. Or somewhere near there. So, if the water is flowing to the left, we must be on the west bank of the river.)
We just arrived yesterday and spent the day in business meetings. Switzerland is a good place to do business, especially for French people. But, except for a brief walk through the old part of the city, we haven’t had much time to get our bearings.
One thing we notice, however: Like Zurich, Basel is a calm, civilized place. We see no poor people. Nor are there any slums. Nor are there people who look like they shouldn’t be allowed out in public.
In short: This ain’t Baltimore. But then, what is?
Back to the news:
Poor Edward Snowden. The man performed a valuable public service. He should get a medal on this Independence Day. Instead, he will have to face the music.
“As Snowden looks for asylum, doors slam around the world, ” says the International Herald Tribune.
Tuesday, the Russians seemed to close their doors to him. Ecuador seems to be withdrawing its invitation. Venezuela and Bolivia are still possibilities.
But like Julian Assange, he may be forced to hole up in some gloomy embassy. Or worse, he may be handed over to the US for a full program of torture. Yes, they could force him to watch TV! Or a Senate hearing! Or listen to Lee Greenwood whine on the radio!
He will surely want to slit his wrists after a few hours… saving the feds the cost of killing him.
Shoulder to Shoulder With Edward Snowden
Yes, the music Snowden will face, if he is delivered to the Americans, will be grim. He will be charged with treason… which comes with a funeral dirge.
Here at the Diary, we are shoulder to shoulder with Snowden. “He broke the law, ” say the news reports. That’s what we admire about him. Sometimes the law needs be broken.
America circa 2013: History will record that laws grew up like kudzu.
One law told people they had to have health insurance, whether they wanted it or not. Another told them what they could do with their money… another gave them the right to ingest certain things, but not others.
The proliferation of laws made more and more things unlawful. You cannot smoke a cigarette where you please. You cannot have a private conversation. You cannot do this… but you must do that.
This trend gave lawmakers – including mid-level bureaucrats and unnamed officials – more and more power. And took power away from ordinary citizens, who were convinced that it made sense to limit their rights more and more to preserve their freedom.
And every day, during the summer of 2013, the sun shone, the kudzu grew, and wrapped itself around their necks. Did they fail to report a $5 tip? Did they forget to separate their garbage? Or dare to fix a clogged toilet without a permit? Americans were so proud of their freedom, they didn’t notice how fast they were losing it.
They didn’t notice (how could they?) the huge growth in secret organizations around Washington. They could scarcely remember going through an airport without standing in ‘security’ lines with their belts and shoes in their hands. They had to assume (what else could they do?) that public officials really were working to make their lives safer and more prosperous.
But, as more and more things could get you into trouble (more than anyone could possibly keep track of), it became more and more important to keep one’s affairs private.
Likewise, the controllers found it evermore convenient to tap phones and record private email conversations. Who knows when you might say something they could use against you!
Lies Are More Valuable Than Truth
Is the kind of “big data” the feds are gathering useful? Our friend Nassim Taleb tells us that it is probably less accurate… or more prone to misconstruction… than the feds believe:
We’re more fooled by noise than ever before, and it’s because of a nasty phenomenon called “big data.” With big data, researchers have brought cherry-picking to an industrial level.
Modernity provides too many variables, but too little data per variable. So the spurious relationships grow much, much faster than real information. In other words: Big data may mean more information, but it also means morefalse information.
But this is just great for the feds. They know perfectly well that the fight against terror is a pretext. They are zombies. The real goal of zombies is to increase their power and wealth at someone else’s expense. And for that, false information is better than the real thing.
False information can show anything you want it to show – even that a 93-year-old great grandmother is a threat to the nation.
Lies are more valuable, to them, than the truth.
Edward Snowden came out and revealed the extent to which the feds – under the guise of protecting us from terrorism – are keeping track of everyone and everyone’s business.
This was deeply disturbing to thoughtful people… if there still were any who feared the rise of an all-knowing, all-powerful Big Brother state from which no secrets are kept and from which no desires are hidden.
And it was disturbing too to the Big Brothers. They insist on knowing everything about everybody else’s business. But they made it a crime to reveal what they were up to!
In short, nobody likes a snitch… and a snoop especially dislikes a snitch.
Snowden was paid to snoop, not to snitch. He was paid to break the law and lie about it. And now he may have to face the law and pay the price for telling the truth.
© Bill Bonner’s Diary of a Rogue Economist | 819 N Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21201
Original Article: http://www.billbonnersdiary.com/articles/bonner-independence-day.html
Don’t always agree with all Baldwin says. I am NOT a Constitutionalist but still can agree with him on issues of liberty. The crap seems to be hiitin’ the fan for O and company. Unfortunately, the Bush cartel is still on the loose and playing their control games behind the scenes. BTW none of these politicians complaining are without guilt unless you would count those only in office the past couple of years. They MAY NOT have blood on their hands yet. All others need to go to trial for treason-yeah right. (E)
Original article archived here: http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/Articles/tabid/109/ID/1040/The-White-House-Has-No-Credibility.aspx
Published: Thursday, June 20, 2013
Holy Cow, Martha! Will miracles never cease? Chuck Baldwin and the New York Times editorial board actually agree. Are we in the Twilight Zone? Is it Freaky Friday? Is the Times editorial board reading my columns and seeing the light or am I watching CNN and MSNBC too much? I know I don’t watch those two propaganda outlets too much, and I doubt the Times editorial board pays too much attention to what I write, so what is going on?
On June 6, the editorial board of the New York Times posted a column that yours truly could have written. The column was entitled “President Obama’s Dragnet.” The editorial begins:
“Within hours of the disclosure that federal authorities routinely collect data on phone calls Americans make, regardless of whether they have any bearing on a counterterrorism investigation, the Obama administration issued the same platitude it has offered every time President Obama has been caught overreaching in the use of his powers: terrorists are a real menace and you should just trust us to deal with them because we have internal mechanisms (that we are not going to tell you about) to make sure we do not violate your rights.
“Those reassurances have never been persuasive–whether on secret warrants to scoop up a news agency’s phone records or secret orders to kill an American suspected of terrorism–especially coming from a president who once promised transparency and accountability.
“The administration has now lost all credibility on this issue. Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive branch will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it. That is one reason we have long argued that the Patriot Act, enacted in the heat of fear after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks by members of Congress who mostly had not even read it, was reckless in its assignment of unnecessary and overbroad surveillance powers.”
The editorial goes on to say, “Essentially, the administration is saying that without any individual suspicion of wrongdoing, the government is allowed to know whom Americans are calling every time they make a phone call, for how long they talk and from where.
“This sort of tracking can reveal a lot of personal and intimate information about an individual. To causally permit this surveillance–with the American public having no idea that the executive branch is now exercising this power–fundamentally shifts power between the individual and the state, and it repudiates constitutional principles governing search, seizure and privacy.”
The Times editorial concludes by saying, “On Thursday, representative Jim Sensenbrenner, Republican of Wisconsin, who introduced the Patriot Act in 2001, said that the National Security Agency overstepped its bounds by obtaining a secret order to collect phone log records from millions of Americans.
“‘As the author of the Patriot Act, I am extremely troubled by the F.B.I.’s interpretation of this legislation,’ he said in a statement. ‘While I believe the Patriot Act appropriately balanced national security concerns and civil rights, I have always worried about potential abuses.’ He added: ‘Seizing phone records of millions of innocent people is excessive and un-American.’
“Stunning use of the act [Patriot Act] shows, once again, why it needs to be sharply curtailed if not repealed.”
See The New York Times editorial here:
First of all, the Patriot Act introduced by Sensenbrenner and passed into law in 2001 had been introduced before (almost word-for-word) during the Clinton administration. It was soundly defeated by Republican majorities in both the US House and Senate. Then after 9-11, these same Republicans passed the Patriot Act into law. And you read that the principal sponsor of the Act in the House, Jim Sensenbrenner, said he had “always worried about potential abuses.” Then why the heck did he and the rest of the Republicans in the House and Senate pass the darn thing? You know why. Back in 2001, a Republican was in the White House. As we have seen time and time again, party partisanship usually trumps loyalty to the Constitution on Capitol Hill.
Think about it: when Democrat Bill Clinton was President, Democrats on Capitol Hill strongly supported what became known as the Patriot Act; and Republicans opposed it. But when Republican G.W. Bush was President, Republicans supported (and passed) the Patriot Act; and Democrats opposed it. Remember: it was the same bill! What made the difference? The party occupying the White House. Yet, even the chief sponsor of the Patriot Act, Jim Sensenbrenner, said he “always worried about potential abuses.” Well, now we know his worries were justified.
Wouldn’t it be nice if just once members of Congress (from both parties) would choose to err on the side of liberty and constitutional government instead of tyranny and Big-Government?
Secondly, the abuses of power by the White House under the guise of the Patriot Act have been going on ever since the darn thing was passed. Barack Obama is no guiltier of trampling the Bill of Rights than G.W. Bush. It was Bush who pushed through, not only the Patriot Act, but the Military Commissions Act and the NDAA, all of which give the executive branch of the federal government unconstitutional authority to abuse the rights and liberties of the American people.
I even recall when G.W. Bush appeared before the United Nations shortly after ordering the invasion of Iraq and told that body the reason Iraq was invaded was for the “peace and credibility of the United Nations.”
See Bush’s speech to the UN here:
I didn’t know the United Nations had any credibility worth saving. Furthermore, I thought the US armed forces were supposed to fight to preserve the safety and liberty of the United States. You mean to tell me that American forces were sent into Iraq for the benefit of the “peace and credibility of the United Nations”? Egad. I wonder if Bush and Obama are using federal police powers against the American citizenry for the same reason that US troops were used against Iraq: for the “peace and credibility of the United Nations.” I think it is safe to say that anyone who would abuse US troops to fulfill the machinations of the United Nations would have no hesitation to abuse US citizens for the same reason. In other words, everything that G.W. Bush started, Barack Obama is continuing–both in regard to the wars waged in the Middle East and in the abuse of liberties in the United States.
The rubric for all of this abuse is the “War on Terror,” with the Patriot Act serving as the cornerstone piece of legislation authorizing it and the Department of Homeland Security serving as the cornerstone agency enforcing it. The net result is perpetual war abroad and a burgeoning police state at home.
The New York Times is right: the Obama White House has no credibility on this issue. Neither did the Bush White House. Then, again, it might not matter whether the White House has any credibility, as long as the United Nations has credibility. I jest, of course.
The Times is also right when it says the Patriot Act needs to be “sharply curtailed if not repealed.” I vote for the latter.
And why is it left to the New York Times to call for the repeal of the Patriot Act? Where are the so-called conservative Republicans? Where are the cable news networks? Where is the rest of the media? And where are America’s pastors and churches?
The New York Times and Chuck Baldwin preaching the same sermon: who would have ever believed it?
(c) Chuck Baldwin
This is ludicrous! These people are crazy. It is time to stand up. I don’t care for Alex Jones‘ style but if the facts are true, and from my research they are, then what he is saying is well worth listening to. At the very least for the information. (E)
Dismiss this if you like but it is true nonetheless and the solution offered is the best I have seen so far even though I expect it will not be acted on in time (E)
To learn more and find out what you can do go here: http://www.cispaisback.org/
The preceding article spoke of recent revelations about policies of deliberate intimidation against African-Americans and Hispanics by the NYPD that have been coming out in a court case filed against that department. It is disturbing but telling.
I have no doubt that from what I have read over the years that this is policy in most police departments in any city where there are African-Americans and or Hispanic/Latino people in any numbers. I can remember back in the 70’s working in a Des Moines, IA Emergency Room and hearing the kinds of things the cops would say about Blacks in the community. From what I read now about the arrests not much has changed in central Iowa.
White people are afraid of dark-skinned people.
Once you get past our swaggering we are very concerned they will hurt us because of all the Bull Shit we have been taught about them by the culture. They are violent, unpredictable, short-tempered, white haters blah blah blah. So what is the response? Well we must keep them under control and Stop and Frisk is one of the psychological warfare techniques that has been used.
It is warfare because white Americans have a tendency to declare a war on anything we fear or don’t understand. Consciously in some truly evil cases as here, and unconsciously in many of the rest of us. Most of us are unaware of our prejudices, and here I do mean those of us of any skintone. The enemy actually are a few individuals who through manipulation, theft, murder, genocide, and numerous other nefarious activities have brought about a separation of peoples.
By convincing us to fight one another, to distrust one another, to hate one another, they have effectively prevented us from “finding them out”. But the are BEING FOUND OUT! Through the Internet, through prayer, through revolution, through any number of means that the Creator is allowing they will and are being EXPOSED for what they are. Workers of iniquity and dealers in darkness. They are evil to the core and Daddy is going to deal with them SEVERELY.
This exposure is beginning in a case like this where it is evident that the tactics carried out by the NYPD were and are racist and deliberate attempts to rob individuals within the African-American and Hispanic communities of their Constitutional Rights. More importantly, it is evident to this writer and hopefully to others who are watching that this is about attempting to rob people of inalienable rights. Rights that all people everywhere are born with.
The Right to travel free and unhindered without fear of harassment. The Right to freedom from search or seizure without warrant or strong suspicion of having committed a crime. These are rights that everyone has by reason of having been born into the world. They cannot and should not be subject to government control. So long as an individual is causing no one harm and there is no reason to suspect they have been involved in causing someone harm they should be left the hell alone.
That, of course, is the whole point and has been all along. The minions (a servile dependent, follower, or underling) who are these Chiefs of Police, the Commissioner, even The President and other leaders of nations are merely puppets. While it is good they are being exposed we must remember they only serve. The path to those at the top will be paved with their poor souls. They will be mentally crushed as the plans of their masters continue to fail and they realize they chose the wrong side.
Lest one have too much compassion they did make a choice. Yahoveh always always gives people a choice even if the enemy causes them to feel as though they do not. Even death is preferable to serving the evil one. So…there is always a choice. Daddy wins folks.
Though Moorbey and I do not agree on solutions we do both agree that this government is evil and oppressive. It is time the people find something else other than the system we currently have. Here is another example of that idiocy. The prisoners in Guantanamo need to be sent home. They are not terrorists for the most part. those who are should be charged and tried. Except the US govt. is afraid of the publicity should the people get any further information about the horrors of that place.
By Pardiss Kebriaei April 13, 2013 MSNBC” – I’ve just returned from Guantanamo, where my clients and a majority of the other 166 men there have been on hunger strike for over two months. Most of them have been cleared for release or will never be charged. But the Obama administration has refused to send them home.
The way we treat individuals in prison is atrocious as it is. This is inexcusable and supposedly even with a very minor amount of improvement over the past 20 years or so. And even that tiny amount had to be FORCED upon the state by the federal courts! Things need to change folks or one day when you are the one sitting in prison you’ll wish they had.
If you don’t think that is possible you’d better remember that the feds add an extra 1000 or more new laws to the Federal Register each and every year. That doesn’t even include your state and local yocals. So…You and I are all guilty of some crime. They just haven’t chosen to enforce the one we are guilty of yet. They will. (E)
Oh and one more thing-ya better learn to get along with ALL kinds of people no matter how much you disagree with them. Find some common ground. I’ve recently learned I have a lot more in common with former Black Panthers than some christians.
- Judge rejects California’s bid to end U.S. court control of prison mental health care (sacbee.com)
- Daniel McGowan Released After Lawyers Confirm He Was Jailed For HuffPost Blog (earthfirstnews.wordpress.com)
View original post 1,765 more words
This is about as well stated as anything on this subject could have been! (E)
“Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience. Our problem is that numbers of people all over the world have obeyed the dictates of the leaders of their government and have gone to war, and millions have been killed because of this obedience. Our problem is that people are obedient all over the world in the face of poverty and starvation and stupidity, and war, and cruelty. Our problem is that people are obedient while the jails are full of petty thieves, and all the while the grand thieves are running and robbing the country. That’s our problem.”: Howard Zinn, from ‘Failure to Quit‘