…the indiscriminate and immediate disposal of national public lands…

In this Jan. 27, 2016, file photo, rancher Cliven Bundy stands along the road near his ranch in Bunkerville, Nev.

 

The Republican platform committee met this week to draft the document that defines the party’s official principles and policies. Along with provisions on pornography and LGBT “conversion therapy” is an amendment calling for the indiscriminate and immediate disposal of national public lands.

The inclusion of this provision in the Republican Party’s platform reflects the growing influence of and ideological alliance between several anti-park members of the GOP and anti-government extremists, led by Cliven Bundy, who dispute the federal government’s authority over national public lands.

“Congress shall immediately pass universal legislation providing a timely and orderly mechanism requiring the federal government to convey certain federally controlled public lands to the states,” reads the adopted language. “We call upon all national and state leaders and representatives to exert their utmost power and influence to urge the transfer of those lands identified.”

The provision calls for an immediate full-scale disposal of “certain” public lands, without defining which lands it would apply to, leaving national parks, wilderness areas, wildlife refuges, and national forests apparently up for grabs and vulnerable to development, privatization, or transfer to state ownership.

Source: …the indiscriminate and immediate disposal of national public lands… | U.S. Marijuana Party of Kentucky

Advertisements

The U.S. Supreme Court Is Marching in Lockstep with the Police State

 

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/

 

“[I]f the individual is no longer to be sovereign, if the police can pick him up whenever they do not like the cut of his jib, if they can ‘seize’ and ‘search’ him in their discretion, we enter a new regime. The decision to enter it should be made only after a full debate by the people of this country.”-U.S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas

The U.S. Supreme Court was intended to be an institution established to intervene and protect the people against the government and its agents when they overstep their bounds. Yet as I point out in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, Americans can no longer rely on the courts to mete out justice. In the police state being erected around us, the police and other government agents can probe, poke, pinch, taser, search, seize, strip and generally manhandle anyone they see fit in almost any circumstance, all with the general blessing of the courts.

Whether it’s police officers breaking through people’s front doors and shooting them dead in their homes or strip searching innocent motorists on the side of the road, these instances of abuse are continually validated by a judicial system that kowtows to virtually every police demand, no matter how unjust, no matter how in opposition to the Constitution.

These are the hallmarks of the emerging American police state: where police officers, no longer mere servants of the people entrusted with keeping the peace, are part of an elite ruling class dependent on keeping the masses corralled, under control, and treated like suspects and enemies rather than citizens.

A review of the Supreme Court’s rulings over the past 10 years, including some critical ones this term, reveals a startling and steady trend towards pro-police state rulings by an institution concerned more with establishing order and protecting government agents than with upholding the rights enshrined in the Constitution.

Police officers can use lethal force in car chases without fear of lawsuits. In Plumhoff v. Rickard (2014), the Court declared that police officers who used deadly force to terminate a car chase were immune from a lawsuit. The officers were accused of needlessly resorting to deadly force by shooting multiple times at a man and his passenger in a stopped car, killing both individuals.

Police officers can stop cars based only on “anonymous” tips. In a 5-4 ruling inNavarette v. California (2014), the Court declared that police officers can, under the guise of “reasonable suspicion,” stop cars and question drivers based solely on anonymous tips, no matter how dubious, and whether or not they themselves witnessed any troubling behavior. This ruling came on the heels of a ruling by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in U.S. v. Westhoven that driving too carefully, with a rigid posture, taking a scenic route, and having acne are sufficient reasons for a police officer to suspect you of doing something illegal, detain you, search your car, and arrest you–even if you’ve done nothing illegal to warrant the stop in the first place.

Secret Service agents are not accountable for their actions, as long as they’re done in the name of security. In Wood v. Moss (2014), the Court granted “qualified immunity” to Secret Service officials who relocated anti-Bush protesters, despite concerns raised that the protesters’ First Amendment right to freely speak, assemble, and petition their government leaders had been violated. These decisions, part of a recent trend toward granting government officials “qualified immunity”–they are not accountable for their actions–in lawsuits over alleged constitutional violations, merely incentivize government officials to violate constitutional rights without fear of repercussion.

Citizens only have a right to remain silent if they assert it. The Supreme Court ruled inSalinas v. Texas (2013) that persons who are not under arrest must specifically invoke their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination in order to avoid having their refusal to answer police questions used against them in a subsequent criminal trial. What this ruling says, essentially, is that citizens had better know what their rights are and understand when those rights are being violated, because the government is no longer going to be held responsible for informing you of those rights before violating them.

Police have free reign to use drug-sniffing dogs as “search warrants on leashes,” justifying any and all police searches of vehicles stopped on the roadside. In Florida v. Harris (2013), a unanimous Court determined that police officers may use highly unreliable drug-sniffing dogs to conduct warrantless searches of cars during routine traffic stops. In doing so, the justices sided with police by claiming that all that the police need to do to prove probable cause for a search is simply assert that a drug detection dog has received proper training. The ruling turns man’s best friend into an extension of the police state.

Police can forcibly take your DNA, whether or not you’ve been convicted of a crime. InMaryland v. King (2013), a divided Court determined that a person arrested for a crime who is supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty must submit to forcible extraction of their DNA. Once again the Court sided with the guardians of the police state over the defenders of individual liberty in determining that DNA samples may be extracted from people arrested for “serious offenses.” While the Court claims to have made its decision based upon concerns of properly identifying criminal suspects upon arrest, what they actually did is open the door for a nationwide dragnet of suspects targeted via DNA sampling.

Police can stop, search, question and profile citizens and non-citizens alike. The Supreme Court declared in Arizona v. United States (2012) that Arizona police officers have broad authority to stop, search and question individuals–citizen and non-citizen alike. While the law prohibits officers from considering race, color, or national origin, it amounts to little more than a perfunctory nod to discrimination laws on the books, while paving the way for outright racial profiling and destroying the Fourth Amendment.

Police can subject Americans to virtual strip searches, no matter the “offense.” A divided Supreme Court actually prioritized making life easier for overworked jail officials over the basic right of Americans to be free from debasing strip searches. In its 5-4 ruling in Florence v. Burlington (2012), the Court declared that any person who is arrested and processed at a jail house, regardless of the severity of his or her offense (i.e., they can be guilty of nothing more than a minor traffic offense), can be subjected to a virtual strip search by police or jail officials, which involves exposing the genitals and the buttocks. This “license to probe” is now being extended to roadside stops, as police officers throughout the country have begun performing roadside strip searches–some involving anal and vaginal probes–without any evidence of wrongdoing and without a warrant.

Immunity protections for Secret Service agents trump the free speech rights of Americans. The court issued a unanimous decision in Reichle v. Howards (2012), siding with two Secret Service agents who arrested a Colorado man simply for daring to voice critical remarks to Vice President Cheney. However, contrast the Court’s affirmation of the “free speech” rights of corporations and wealthy donors in McCutcheon v. FEC (2014), which does away with established limits on the number of candidates an entity can support with campaign contributions, and Citizens United v. FEC (2010) with its tendency to deny those same rights to average Americans when government interests abound, and you’ll find a noticeable disparity.

Police can break into homes without a warrant, even if it’s the wrong home. In an 8-1 ruling in Kentucky v. King (2011), the Supreme Court placed their trust in the discretion of police officers, rather than in the dictates of the Constitution, when they gave police greater leeway to break into homes or apartments without a warrant. Despite the fact that the police in question ended up pursuing the wrong suspect, invaded the wrong apartment and violated just about every tenet that stands between us and a police state, the Court sanctioned the warrantless raid, leaving Americans with little real protection in the face of all manner of abuses by police.

Police can interrogate minors without their parents present. In a devastating ruling that could very well do away with what little Fourth Amendment protections remain to public school students and their families–the Court threw out a lower court ruling in Camreta v. Greene (2011), which required government authorities to secure a warrant, a court order or parental consent before interrogating students at school. The ramifications are far-reaching, rendering public school students as wards of the state. Once again, the courts sided with law enforcement against the rights of the people.

It’s a crime to not identify yourself when a policeman asks your name. In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada (2004), a majority of the high court agreed that refusing to answer when a policeman asks “What’s your name?” can rightfully be considered a crime under Nevada’s “stop and identify” statute. No longer will Americans, even those not suspected of or charged with any crime, have the right to remain silent when stopped and questioned by a police officer.

The cases the Supreme Court refuses to hear, allowing lower court judgments to stand, are almost as critical as the ones they rule on. Some of these cases, turned away in recent years alone, have delivered devastating blows to the rights enshrined in the Constitution.

Legally owning a firearm is enough to justify a no-knock raid by police. Justices refused to hear Quinn v. Texas (2014) the case of a Texas man who was shot by police through his closed bedroom door and whose home was subject to a no-knock, SWAT-team style forceful entry and raid based solely on the suspicion that there were legally-owned firearms in his household.

The military can arrest and detain American citizens. In refusing to hear Hedges v. Obama (2014), a legal challenge to the indefinite detention provision of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA), the Supreme Court affirmed that the President and the U.S. military can arrest and indefinitely detain individuals, including American citizens. In so doing, the high court also passed up an opportunity to overturn its 1944 Korematsu v. United States ruling allowing for the internment of Japanese-Americans in concentration camps.

Students can be subjected to random lockdowns and mass searches at school. The Court refused to hear Burlison v. Springfield Public Schools (2013), a case involving students at a Missouri public school who were subjected to random lockdowns, mass searches and drug-sniffing dogs by police. In so doing, the Court let stand an appeals court ruling that the searches and lockdowns were reasonable in order to maintain the safety and security of students at the school.

Police officers who don’t know their actions violate the law aren’t guilty of breaking the law. The Supreme Court let stand a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Brooks v. City of Seattle (2012) in which police officers who clearly used excessive force when they repeatedly tasered a pregnant woman during a routine traffic stop were granted immunity from prosecution. The Ninth Circuit actually rationalized its ruling by claiming that the officers couldn’t have known beyond a reasonable doubt that their actions–tasering a pregnant woman who was not a threat in any way until she was unconscious–violated the Fourth Amendment.

When all is said and done, what these assorted court rulings add up to is a disconcerting government mindset that interprets the Constitution one way for the elite–government entities, the police, corporations and the wealthy–and uses a second measure altogether for the underclasses–that is, you and me.

Keep in mind that in former regimes such as Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, the complicity of the courts was the final piece to fall into place before the totalitarian beast stepped out of the shadows and into the light. If history is a guide, then the future that awaits us is truly frightening.

Time, as they say, grows short.

John W. Whitehead is an attorney and author who has written, debated and practiced widely in the area of constitutional law and human rights. Whitehead’s aggressive, pioneering approach to civil liberties has earned him numerous accolades and accomplishments, including the Hungarian Medal of Freedom. His concern for the persecuted and oppressed led him, in 1982, to establish The Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit civil liberties and human rights organization in Charlottesville, Va. Whitehead serves as the Institute’s president and spokesperson.

Global Research Related Articles

CONTINUE READING…

Connecticut Representatives Violating Their Oath Of Office & Committing Treason Knowingly Passing Unconstitutional Laws ~ Sheriffs Refuse To Enforce!

Political Vel Craft

The Unalienable Natural Right Of The People To Keep And Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed.

Representatives Given One Last Chance To Uphold Their Oath Of Office!

Open Letter to the Men and Women of the Connecticut State Police

REPRESENTATIVES RECALLED IN COLORADO:

  1. Detroit Police Chief Tells Citizens To Arm Themselves March 2014
  2. Colorado Anti-Gun Anti-Bill Of Rights Senators RECALLED: Angela Giron And John Morse Join The Unemployment Lines
  3. Colorado Citizens Recalled Second Nazi Anti-Gun Elitist: Anti-Bill Of Rights Senator (sic) Officially Recalled!
  4. Colorado To Recall Third Obama Soviet Democrat: Evie Hudak (D) Colluded In Seditious Gun Control Legislation.

Up to 350,000 American citizens have chosen to ignore the new anti-gun laws in Connecticut, allegedly becoming “felons” under state law. Rather than register or turn in any of their firearms, they’re simply ignoring the law and defending the Constitution of the United States.

Civil disobedience is one of the most powerful ways…

View original post 1,016 more words

Ukraine: Obama’s invasions, 9-11 and mass media control

Ukraine: Obama's invasions, 9-11 and mass media control

The coup d’état in Ukraine and its aftermath as well all of the events leading up to it are proving even to the casual thinking observer that the western corporate controlled media has lost any semblance of even a pretense at being fair, balanced and reasonable. News is about presenting facts and those facts are import for all of us to come to conclusions or formulate an opinion. When the presentation of those facts is being done in a limited, selective and or tainted manner and/or outright fictitious information is being given in such a way as to seem credible and painting itself as truth this stifles debate and makes any dissention or wavering from the narrative seem disreputable and easy to be discounted. Sadly there is almost no alternative in the English speaking world to the state/corporate controlled media or its surrogates.

For those in the West (namely those living in zones controlled by the NSA/US corporate surveillance and control) and living in the media bubble that exists, there is almost now no access for the masses to the truth as almost every form of alternative media has already been compromised and taken over or has been made obscure by the search engines and other methods so that the little truth that is out there is almost impossible for the common consumer to access or even be aware of.

All of this has been done in mostly hidden and secret ways and when any resistance has been met the drum of patriotism is beaten, the bogeyman of terrorism is rolled out and the government censorship and stripping of rights and freedom of information is allowed in the name of security. The methods have been as benign as search engines deleting sites and material from their caches and not indexing certain sites (this occurred widely during the second Bush election and after 9-11) to attempts to pass far reaching legislation such as SOPA/PIPA and other instruments of authoritarian control.

One might say the current paradigm all started with an announcement by a previously unheard of “news service” called Fox News that George Bush had won the presidency after it had already been declared for Al Gore. This was the initial coup in the United States carried out by the neo-conservatives architects behind the PNAC which led to the total coup and usurping of all organs of power in the US that occurred after 9-11. The PNAC collaborators in 9-11 needed 9-11 as a catalyst for their plans which included: the introduction of a complete and total security and surveillance state, funding for the military industrial surveillance complex which was to expand to unheard of levels, complete control of the media and the world wide web, continuing operations to terrorize the populace into submission and allow for the passing of legislation, unification of corporations and government, total political control and the total control of all financial instruments and markets needed to fund their plans.

If one is to believe that 9-11 was not carried out by some Muslim terrorists operating out of a cave in Afghanistan due to the razor sharp precision and the almost perfectly timed choreography with which the most exacting demolitions in the history of man took place, then questions need to be answered. With regard to media control 9-11 showed how the media played a vital role, they first spread the Osama bogeyman lie (even though he himself denied involvement) then they assisted in the cover up that has followed since day one.

Such a crime of historic proportions needed an apparatus of historic proportions to cover it up and the crackdown on the internet and the mass media were those tools. The revelations by Edward Snowden may show the individual working parts and certain pieces of the puzzle but Edward Snowden would not have been allowed access to anything close to the final plan. In order for one to fully comprehend and accept that final plan requires the acceptance that the entire US/NSA security apparatus is designed for two principle purposes, protecting the crimes of the state and those in power controlling it and allowing for the carrying out of wars of aggression with the end goal of complete and total global domination. That is the final “solution” hence anything that is applied to that end is allowed to stand no matter how egregious or illegal, even the murder of 2,999 civilians.

To carry out their objectives, dictated by a small circle of tyrants hiding in the shadows who had seized power, control of the media and the flow of information was vital and the stifling of dissent as well. Hence Obama and his war on journalism, whistle blowers and anyone who seeks the truth. One has only to look at the history of Fox News (and their “Fox Security” operations, akin to the nazi brown shirts) and the spying and intimidation of journalists recently uncovered in the Verizon scandal. This complete control of the media is official US policy backed by Obama, and the current alternative universe reporting on Ukraine is a testament to their effectiveness if not believeability.

The list of victims of those who have suffered at the hands of the regime in the United States is much too long to list here and there are thousands who have fallen and that we will never know about these include members of Anonymous and Hacktivists such as Jeremy Hammond, publishers and truth seekers such as WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, over 600 people who witnessed events on 9-11 and then died in mysterious circumstances, what were reported to be over 9,000 Americans who were rounded up and held under conditions of secret arrest after 9-11, whistle blowers and truth seekers (many of whom I have had the honor to talk to and interview) including Jesselyn Radack (one of the first post 9-11 victims), Bradley Manning, Wayne Madsen, Dr. Kevin Barret, Edward Snowden and the list goes on and on(if I have neglected to list anyone I apologize).

Ukraine: the straw that breaks the back

The US operation to overthrow Ukraine may be the final downfall of the Brezhinsky architects (in my own opinion) and the architects behind establishing US hegemony on the planet. Not only will the US suffer a military humiliation if they decide to attempt to “glue together” their little “project” through open military means but this may finally be the straw that sees the mass murderers in Washington being forced to face an accounting for every crime they have committed since and including 9-11.

Economically they are weak, militarily they are over extended and no matter how much NATO attempts to paint a picture of itself as a “global strike force” their support is waning and they do not have enough force in pace to bring their plan to an fruition. Even if they attempt to obtain control of space and the Arctic they will have to contend with Russia, China and a growing number of countries that have simply had enough of America, their stealing of resources and endless war.

The planners of the Ukraine operation, i.e. Nuland, in all honesty should have been fired. In planning their coup not only did they use all of the instruments and methods that the world is already familiar with and that the “brains” at the CIA think are “top-secret” but they allowed for those plans and intentions to be leaked and not only in the Nuland/Pyatt conversation and the Klitschko e-mails but in hundreds of other ways as well.

Just like the CIA thought Russian intelligence did not know that the Chechen terrorists were controlled by Saudis so they think all of their mercenaries and instruments in Ukraine are secret. Russian intelligence knows far more about 9-11 and all of the plans for global domination that the US has and there may come a time when those responsible will have to account to the world for everything they have done. That is my own personal firm belief.

The Big Ukraine Lies

Back to the media but first let me say I am sorry dear reader for being long winded, this is a matter that is of utmost importance and affects each and every one of us. For we are all human beings, we all desire peace (most of us) and prosperity and we all have a right to live in a world that we can be proud of, free in, and where we can determine our own fates.

The western media coverage regarding Ukraine has been so egregiously falsified that if the general public learns the level at which they have been lied to the consequences will be far reaching and negatively impact the medias future ability to “get their message out” to the world’s public.

The lack of objectivity and outright lies in the western press are so insidiousness as to be nauseating and the fact that the actions of the western architects and their operatives in Ukraine have caused death make the press who is covering up these crimes possible criminal accessories to murder before during and after the fact.

Had the media been doing its job on the day Fox News appeared and annulled the popular vote of Al Gore, hundreds of shattered lives would have been saved today in Ukraine, millions all over the Middle East and 2,999 innocent people on 9-11. But let’s not go there? As Obama loves to say “let’s look forward”! Will that wash this time? Not likely.

Big Lie 1

The EU integration agreement offered nothing positive to Ukraine. It required Ukraine to basically shut down all of its manufacturing and machine building sector. It also required Ukraine to almost cease all trade agreements with Russia and it would have had a hundred more damaging effects on the population including the gutting of the entire agricultural sector and the raising of gas prices. In numbers the EU agreement would have given Ukraine $1 billion dollars over 7 years (the same $1 billion Obama is offering Ukraine now with thousands of political strings attached). The EU agreement and their money would also effectively subvert the sovereignty of Ukraine making Ukraine nothing more than a cheap hooker for the West.

The Customs Union offered Ukraine a minimum of $100 billion over 7 years with no political strings attached and the ability to maintain and expand the industrial, manufacturing and agricultural sectors.

Hence the need to destroy Ukraine. Now the house is burnt and the new owners can have a fire sale especially for Washington. The western media has not covered these aspects at all. Instead following the narrative of freedom, democracy etc ad-nauseum. When you think about it, $6 billion is pretty cheap for an entire country, especially the second largest in Europe, apart from the part of Russia that is in Europe.

Big Lie 2

The “peaceful demonstrators” are in no way part of a popular uprising. They are western backed, militarily trained and pursuing objectives that in no way represent the Ukrainian people. Unless of course the 99% of Ukrainians who are not Bandera Nazis do not count. I believe they would beg to differ.

Their invasion of Kiev and the overthrow of the government was not in any way a democratic or other justifiable process. It was an armed take over and insurrection and the ousting of the government and the president was a coup d’état. Plain and simple.

Big Lie 3

The next lie is repeated over and over again in the western media, like John Kerry repeating over and over again that Syrian President Bashar Al Assad used chemical weapons because the “know” it rings hollow. That lie is that those in power in Kiev are legitimate. Of course this is an old American style operational tactic that they have been using for over 200 years. It is how they committed genocide on the Indians and stole their lands. They burn the house down, send in the sellers who claim to own the property, call them legitimate and then buy the goods for nothing.

Having any business with these illegitimate bodies in Kiev may seem like in a good move to the American planners in their desperation to “glue the thing together” and they will no doubt carry out such moves, but they will not stand the test of time. In reality Ukraine was lost the minute it was revealed that Klitschko was a western puppet, but as Nuland said they had already invested $5 billion in Ukraine so they had to go forward. Hence no matter what, even if the nazis in Kiev start hanging Jews from street posts, the US will continue to call them legitimate.

The western media is also conveniently missing all of the reports about the snipers, the brown shirt SA/SS tactics of the insurrectionists in Ukraine and they way they have terrorized, humiliated and are even slaughtering the populace and the most telling thing, the statement to the United Nations denying the Holocaust in Ukraine and the finding of the Nuremberg Trials. Of course this does not fit with narrative so these facts are just ignored.

Big Lie 4

All activities by the US/NATO/EU and I mean ALL activities, that try to influence Ukraine into giving up its sovereignty are violations of international law and go against the UN Charter, in particular with regard to sovereignty and the rights of peoples to self-determination and to be free from fear of invasion. If one is interested please visit the UN website, the UN Charter is available on-line. If one strictly follows the UN Charter as a framework for international law then even the “operations” of USAID become illegal as they are designed to influence the internal processes of target countries.

The US has no “interests” in Ukraine, other than illegal ones. Russia on the other hand has millions of Russians living there and has military and governmental agreements that allow it to protect its real interests.

However the US loves to claim “interests” or a “threat to its security” every time it invades a country. Where were the real interests in Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq. Its “interests” are the resources and the exploitation of the territories. But just like the US was founded on genocide, the stealing of Indian lands and resources and built by slaves, they continue in the exact same vein. If you doubt go back to footage and news reports before WWII and during the cold war, the US behaved almost in the same manner as it is now. Sanctions, meddling, supporting one side against the other, fumbling around like a bully not sure who to punch, supporting the nazis, then the allies then claiming victory.

Big Lie 5

The western press is screaming about a Russian invasion of Crimea and Ukraine and how the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin is in some way guilty of exactly what the US has been doing for decades. Although thankfully the people around the world are finally beginning to wake up, the US media continues spreading these lies and ignoring what Bush/Obama have done.

The Armed Forces and the Government of the Russian Federation have treaties and agreements with Ukraine allowing for the Black Sea Fleet and the stationing of 25,000 military personnel in Ukraine. Dearest reader, there was no invasion. The troops have been there for over a decade.

The Russian President, as the Commander in Chief of the Russian Armed Forces has been given the right by the Russian Government with the support of the Russian people to call those forces into duty. He also has a request from the legitimate President of Ukraine Victor Yanukovich and the Parliament and the head of Crimea to activate the forces to protect the peace and the lives of the citizens. President Putin also has the legal basis under international law and would be in complete compliance with all international laws and norms to activate these troops, but he has not.

The Ukrainian Armed Forces, without a single shot being fired are now under the control of the only legitimate power in Ukraine, the Crimean authorities. There was no invasion or takeover by Russia. Russia was welcomed with flowers and open arms. Literally.

Some US based law scholars and others are seemingly in shock that Russia is operating legally and within the framework of international law, they continue to blame President Putin for the same illegality that Bush/Obama are guilty of and apparently assume that other countries ignore international law in the same way the US does. All they had to do was listen for the last 20 years: the Russian Federation and its leaders and its people support respect for sovereignty, international law, the rights of peoples to self-determination, the development of societies, foreign relations based on mutual respect and mutual assistance with no strings attached and above all to diplomatic and peaceful processes for conflict resolution.

These are the concepts that Russia lives by and conducts its affairs by. They are not abstractions and rules to be ignored and skirted, manipulated and subverted and applied only to others when the convenience arises as Washington has taken to doing openly.

The international lawlessness of the United States, a country that has sent 300 and more mercenaries in Ukraine to wage an illegal campaign of subversion and terror, can not be allowed to stand to stand much longer. This lawlessness is exemplified by the illegal torture dungeon at Guantanamo Bay Cuba. No country, no leader, and no people anywhere in the world should support such a power, while that key symbol of US lawlessness is still standing, we know they scoff at you and me and the entire world and every single one of us who tries to live a peaceful productive life and follow the rule of law. Law is what makes us civilized and without law, what we will have is the coming of the Fourth Reich, and that Reich is not a German one, but the only thing that the US has that can be called “Made in America”.

I would like to say that I am grateful to the Voice of Russia for allowing the truth to be printed and hope that you dear readers will see through the charade and support the people in Ukraine and the Crimea, who still have the right to self-determination, no matter what the Bandera nazis and their western handlers say.

I am also being accused of lying when I say that Russia has not invaded Ukraine. Please do a simple web search and you will find the agreements signed by Russia and Ukraine which allow for the stationing of approximately 25,000 Russian troops in Ukraine. These are not abstractions, but real concrete legally binding agreements under all international and national laws and conventions. Once you understand that simple fact, you will understand the level that you are being lied to by your media and I would then ask you to direct your rage at them.

I would also ask you, dear reader, to try to find coverage of the statements by the new Ukrainian authorities which amount to Holocaust Denial as they openly stated in front of the UN that the Nuremberg Trials were illegitimate, after that write to the White House and ask Obama how they can possibly support these people. As far as I know Holocaust Denial and denying the legitimacy of the Nuremburg Trials are still crimes in many countries that still follow the rule of law, including in Russia.

Please support the people of Ukraine and Crimea as they battle a new emergence of the nazi plague, something most of the world had thought was relegated to the history books.

Thank you very much for taking the time to read this article and I hope this will lead to a healthy and long overdue debate. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.

CONTINUE READING…

What you need to know about the court decision that just struck down net neutrality

Gigaom

The principle behind the phrase “net neutrality” is that internet service providers of all kinds should treat data flowing over the open internet equally, without giving preferential treatment to data from one provider or platform. On Tuesday, however, the Federal Communications Commission’s rules governing that kind of behavior were struck down by an appeals court in Washington, D.C. — as reported by Gigaom’s Jeff Roberts — in a case launched by Verizon.

This decision — if it remains unchallenged — raises the possibility that large internet service providers could charge certain companies extra for delivering their content to subscribers, and give preference to the content coming from those who are willing pay them a fee, or have cut some other kind of deal. In effect, the democratized nature of the internet would be replaced by a feudal system in which the ability to reach a consumer would be auctioned off…

View original post 1,941 more words

Lincoln, Kennedy & Obama’s "Warnings" (Whistle Blowers Corps & Secret Societies)

 

Lincoln, Kennedy & Obama’s “Warnings” ( Whistle Blowers Corps & Secret Societies )
Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Obama and many more have openly said in public that Private Bankers, Corporations and Secret Societies like the Bilderbergs, Council On Foreign Relations and U.N. were the biggest threat to America. People just don’t what to listen, out of fear for the obvious. So they use defense mechanisms like displaced anger, Racism and they cling to the RED & Blue with a death grip. Meanwhile Campaign Contributions in Tax Havens like Ireland pay for, Outsourcing, Bank Fraud, Corporate Tax Fraud, Wars For Rothschild OPIC Profits and Wall Street Fraud. Meanwhile Corporation profits, Wall Street Profits, Taxes, Printing Money, Food Prices go up and American Citizens have less food on the table.
(People Need To Listen)
Whistle Blower Elected President Teddy Roosevelt “Warnings” Corporations : http://youtu.be/6FbQICYlwVo
Whistle Blower Elected President Kennedy “Warnings” Secret Society Speech : http://youtu.be/utYcFf93Srs
Whistle Blower Elected President Obama “Warnings” Secret Society Speech : http://youtu.be/wjssObygXaQ
Whistle Blower Ireland’s Parliament : http://youtu.be/CnJCvKA-oEU
Whistle Blower FBI : http://youtu.be/do_swOstGaI
Whistle Blower FED & World Bank : http://youtu.be/B1UwZIa9AFc
Whistle Blower CIA : http://youtu.be/fbVYF8gpNdo
Whistle Blower Economic Hit Man Killing US Jobs : http://youtu.be/wuxMcMwA3t8
Whistle Blowers TTP Outsourcing, SOPA Internet Regulation & Banker Deregulation : http://youtu.be/CS-x5SlcPPM
Whistle Blowers “Warnings” Private Banks, Corporations & Secret Societies : http://youtu.be/r4kmWZefTrQ
Whistle Blowers Confront Rothschild : http://youtu.be/6sCioKnpHdY
P.S. An election will only turn what could be a good man into a political puppet and put power into the wrong hands again.


I Will Not Comply !!! : I’m done being passive, you can wallow in your Government Sponsored delusion and petty arguments. I’m not supporting Corruption, Outsourcing, Bank Thievery, Debasing our Currency or Corporate Oil Trade Wars and Washington’s High Treason anymore. Every entitlement, service or oath breaker I have paid taxes for or supported to this day has turned out to be a legal battle or a total rip off. I Will Not Comply any more the IRS and ObamaCare will be getting a “I Will Not Comply” return letter this year. I use cash, barter, trade and go tax free from now on. If this government spies on us I will spy on them back. If this government taxes us I will tax them back. If this government fines, warrants or attacks, American Citizens, American Citizens will attack them back. If this government targets us at our homes American Citizens will Target them at theirs back. We are American Citizens ! We will not be tread on by this treasonous and corrupt government any more. Kevlar and High Tech Toys will not mean shit if they cross my line in the sand.


Uphold the Third Amendment

 

Glenn Harlan Reynolds 2:14 p.m. EDT July 7, 2013

It’s our right as American citizens to have privacy in our own homes.

 

 

Everyone has heard of the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment gets a lot of discussion, and so does the Second. On Independence Day this year, many people rallied in support of the Fourth Amendment in response to the National Security Agency spying scandal.

Several government officials — like embattled IRS official Lois Lerner — lately seem particularly enamored of the Fifth Amendment’s right not to testify. But how many Americans could even tell you what the Third Amendment protects?

Even among those who could, many would consider it a bit of a joke. But they just may be wrong about that. The Third Amendment may be coming into its own. It provides: “No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”

I often tell my constitutional law students that the Third Amendment is the only part of the Bill of Rights that really works — because there are almost no cases of troop-quartering. If only the rest of the Bill of Rights were so effective.

In an article published in the William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal last year, however, Prof. Tom W. Bell points out that such violations, while perhaps rare, are not unknown. In 1942, for example, inhabitants of the Aleutian Islands were forced out of their homes, and in some cases troops were actually quartered there, but it took the federal government decades to admit wrongdoing or pay damages.

Likewise, in a 1982 case in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, prison guards evicted from their quarters and replaced with National Guard troops during a strike sued, and the Court of Appeals found that this action implicated their rights under the Third Amendment, which it characterized as “designed to assure a fundamental right of privacy.”

Now we see another Third Amendment case, from Henderson, Nev., in which the plaintiffs, the Mitchell family, claim that Henderson police seized their home — battering the door open with a battering ram — so as to secure an advantageous position in addressing a domestic violence report involving a neighboring house. The police were quite rude — calling the inhabitants “assholes” and shooting both Anthony Mitchell and his dog with a pepper-ball gun — before setting up a lookout post in the house.

Should the Third Amendment have something to say about this? Well, it speaks only to “troops,” not police — but then, professional police in the modern sense hadn’t been invented at the time of the framing. And given the extreme militarization of police nowadays — with Nomex coveralls, body armor, AR-15 rifles, grenades, armored vehicles, etc., all documented in Radley Balko’s new book, The Rise of the Warrior Cop, — maybe that’s a distinction without a difference anyway. Armed minions of the state seizing your home by force seem close enough to “troops” for me.

Personally, I think we need to return to the sense of one’s home as a castle, a “fundamental right of privacy” that the Third Amendment was intended to protect. Police, except in those rather rare cases where they reasonably think someone inside is being held hostage or the like, should have to knock politely at the door and — unless they have a warrant — should have to depart if the homeowner doesn’t want them to come in. Those who violate this rule should be prosecuted as criminals, and opened up to lawsuits without benefit of official immunity.

Some may protest that this rule will make it harder to go after drug dealers and such, who may flush their drugs away before police can get in. To which I respond, tough. Protecting Americans’ homes from invasions by armed hooligans is more important than protecting prosecutions under the drug war. One would think, in fact, that preventing such invasions is the first duty of police. It’s unfortunate that so many in law enforcement seem to have forgotten that.

Glenn Harlan Reynolds is professor of law at the University of Tennessee. He blogs at InstaPundit.com.

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors.

CONTINUE READING…

The Deeper Meaning of Mass Spying in America

COTO Report

By James Petras
CounterCurrents

The exposure of the Obama regime’s use of the National Security Agency to secretly spy on the communications of hundreds of millions of US and overseas citizens has provoked world-wide denunciations. In the United States , despite widespread mass media coverage and the opposition of civil liberties organizations, there has not been any mass protest. Congressional leaders from both the Republican and Democratic Parties, as well as top judges, approved of the unprecedented domestic spy program. Even worse, when the pervasive spy operations were revealed, top Senate and Congressional leaders repeated their endorsement of each and every intrusion into all electronic and written communication involving American citizens. President Obama and his Attorney General Holder openly and forcefully defended the NSA’s the universal spy operations.

The issues raised by this vast secret police apparatus and its penetration into and control over civil society, infringing on the citizens…

View original post 1,843 more words

Official White House Response to Legalize and Regulate Marijuana in a Manner Similar to Alcohol

 

 

Official White House Response to Legalize and Regulate Marijuana in a Manner Similar to Alcohol. and 7 other petitions

What We Have to Say About Legalizing Marijuana

By Gil Kerlikowske

When the President took office, he directed all of his policymakers to develop policies based on science and research, not ideology or politics. So our concern about marijuana is based on what the science tells us about the drug’s effects.

According to scientists at the National Institutes of Health– the world’s largest source of drug abuse research – marijuana use is associated with addiction, respiratory disease, and cognitive impairment. We know from an array of treatment admission information and Federal data that marijuana use is a significant source for voluntary drug treatment admissions and visits to emergency rooms. Studies also reveal that marijuana potency has almost tripled over the past 20 years, raising serious concerns about what this means for public health – especially among young people who use the drug because research shows their brains continue to develop well into their 20’s. Simply put, it is not a benign drug.

Like many, we are interested in the potential marijuana may have in providing relief to individuals diagnosed with certain serious illnesses. That is why we ardently support ongoing research into determining what components of the marijuana plant can be used as medicine. To date, however, neither the FDA nor the Institute of Medicine have found smoked marijuana to meet the modern standard for safe or effective medicine for any condition.

As a former police chief, I recognize we are not going to arrest our way out of the problem. We also recognize that legalizing marijuana would not provide the answer to any of the health, social, youth education, criminal justice, and community quality of life challenges associated with drug use.

That is why the President’s National Drug Control Strategy is balanced and comprehensive, emphasizing prevention and treatment while at the same time supporting innovative law enforcement efforts that protect public safety and disrupt the supply of drugs entering our communities. Preventing drug use is the most cost-effective way to reduce drug use and its consequences in America. And, as we’ve seen in our work through community coalitions across the country, this approach works in making communities healthier and safer. We’re also focused on expanding access to drug treatment for addicts. Treatment works. In fact, millions of Americans are in successful recovery for drug and alcoholism today. And through our work with innovative drug courts across the Nation, we are improving our criminal justice system to divert non-violent offenders into treatment.

Our commitment to a balanced approach to drug control is real. This last fiscal year alone, the Federal Government spent over $10 billion on drug education and treatment programs compared to just over $9 billion on drug related law enforcement in the U.S.

Thank you for making your voice heard. I encourage you to take a moment to read about the President’s approach to drug control to learn more.

Resources:

Gil Kerlikowske is Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy