Last New Visitor India  Visited 48 minutes ago |  |
Friday, April 20, 2012
12-04-20 Now Blair could be sued for torture in the UK, Dubya and Cheney next?
Now Blair could be sued over Libya torture claims by man who alleges MI6 sent him into the hands of Gaddafi's regime
- Abdel Hakim Belhadj is already suing Jack Straw
- Mail learns lawyers are drawing up case against Blair
PUBLISHED: 00:51 GMT, 19 April 2012 | UPDATED: 04:18 GMT, 19 April 2012
Tony Blair could be next to face a legal claim for damages from the Libyan man who alleges MI6 sent him to be tortured by Gaddafi’s regime, after he announced he was suing Jack Straw.
In a move without precedent against an ex-minister, Abdel Hakim Belhadj served legal papers against the former foreign secretary over claims that he authorised the Secret Intelligence Service to hand him over to Gaddafi’s government.
The Mail has learned that Mr Belhadj’s lawyers are now preparing a case against Mr Blair as well.
Lawsuit: Tony Blair is facing a legal claim from Abdel Hakim Belhadj
In another dramatic development, coalition ministers have apparently undermined Mr Straw’s claims of ignorance about the affair, revealing that papers showing he was implicated in the rendition of Mr Belhadj do exist.
Sapna Malik, a partner at Leigh Day & Co, the firm representing Mr Belhadj, said: ‘It would be surprising to us if something of this magnitude was not done with Mr Blair’s knowledge.
‘Our clients would like us to follow this case up the chain of command. He was at the top of the chain of command. Mr Belhadj certainly wants an apology from Mr Blair. Watch this space.’
Mr Belhadj, 45, was the leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which in 2004 was linked to Al Qaeda – links he fiercely denied.
He was picked up that year following a tip-off by MI6 and flown by the CIA, via the British Indian Ocean territory of Diego Garcia, to Libya where he claims he was tortured for six years.
The incident took place just days before Mr Blair signed his notorious ‘Deal in the Desert’ with Colonel Gaddafi.
Sued: Mr Belhadj has already launched legal action against former foreign secretary Jack Straw
Documents found in Tripoli following the fall of the dictator show that MI6 counter-terrorism chief Sir Mark Allen boasted to Gaddafi’s spy chief Musa Kusa that ‘the intelligence was British’ which led to Mr Belhadj’s capture. He added that the tip-off was ‘the least we could do for you and for Libya’.
Last year Mr Straw appeared to deny any knowledge of the operation. But it emerged at the weekend that after he made those claims, he was approached by MI6 officers who showed him a document he had signed authorising the rendition.Senior figures in the Coalition claim some documents implicating Mr Straw do exist. One source said: ‘There are papers that point the finger at Jack Straw.’
But Downing Street officials yesterday said they have ‘no plans’ to hand over the documents.
Lawyers for Mr Belhadj and Sami Al Saadi, who also claims he was returned to Libya and tortured, yesterday served Mr Straw with notice that they will launch formal legal proceedings against him unless he comes clean, apologises and produces key documents.
Soldier: Abdel Hakim Belhadj speaks to Libyans at a rally in Tripoli in September 2011
Mr Belhadj, now a senior official in the Libyan transitional government, is already suing the Foreign Office and Sir Mark Allen.
They all have four weeks to come clean and publish the papers or the civil case will begin.
Miss Malik said: ‘If the former foreign secretary does not now own up to his role in this extraordinary affair, he will need to face the prospect of trying to defend his position in court.’
She added: ‘The real issue here is not about the amount of compensation, it is to get public acknowledgement and an admission from Jack Straw and others involved in his rendition. We have evidence that implicates very senior people.’
But she admitted they could seek damages that would force Mr Straw to sell his house.
Mr Straw and Mr Blair are also expected to be questioned by Scotland Yard detectives, who have launched a criminal inquiry into the behaviour of ministers and intelligence officials.
Mr Blair has previously claimed he has no recollection of the case.
Yesterday Mr Straw refused to comment, saying: ‘I am sorry that I can’t say more about this case, but with a police investigation pending and this intended civil legal action I am sorry that it is not appropriate for me to say any more about it.
‘They are entitled to bring the action and it will be dealt with in due course.’
12-04-20 The Government's New Spy Law (CISPA)
6 Things You Need to Know About the Government's New Spy Law (CISPA)
April 18, 2012 |
Congress is seriously considering a bill called the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA). Intended to allow information-sharing both between corporations and between corporations and the government, it presents serious dangers to individual privacy. The most important parts of the proposed act permit corporations to share information about their customers with each other and with the government if they assert that this information-sharing is necessary for national security.
While the need for better sharing of information might be necessary in some cases, in its current form CISPA represents a particular danger – a mutually reinforcing combination of public and private threats to privacy. Here are seven things you should know about this pending legislation:
1. CISPA would allow companies to share potentially sensitive customer data with each other in ways that would otherwise be inconsistent with current laws that protect consumer privacy, such as the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA). As the ACLU notes, “[h]ealth records, gun records, tax records, census data, educational records – essentially all information now protected under privacy laws carefully considered and passed by Congress over the past decades --would no longer have that protection as cybersecurity information if these bills are to become law." CISPA would also allow the government to require companies to share customer data without the warrant or subpoena that would be required under current law. The privacy rights of customers may be violated, in other words, without substantial evidence that they pose any kind of security threat.
2. CISPA would also pre-empt state laws that provide more privacy protection than the federal standard. Citizens in some states would face diminished privacy rights both now and in the future.
3. Companies would be broadly immunized from both criminal and civil liability for sharing personal data under CISPA. This is important, because the threat of lawsuits is crucial to ensuring that companies respect the privacy of their customers. Under CIPSA, conversely, corporations would have little incentive to err on the side of protecting privacy and would not face legal sanctions for even wholly unjustified invasions of privacy.
4. Private companies would not be required to remove indentifying information from data they share with the government. Private information could be shared not only with civilian but with military authorities. Given the deference that courts generally show to invocations of national security interests by entities associated with the military, this makes the risks of privacy invasions even more severe. Any information shared under a new legislative framework should go to a civilian rather than a military agency.
5. The only restriction on the sharing of data is that it be related to “cybersecurity.” The bill makes no serious attempt to specifically define what would qualify, and hence this limitation will do very little to limit privacy violations in practice. As the Electronic Freedom Foundation correctly points out, the bill would apply to “far more than what security experts would reasonably consider to be cybersecurity threat indicators—things like port scans, DDoS traffic, and the like.” Without a more careful definition, the potential for abuse is simply too great.
6. Not only does the language of the bill not provide enough protection before the fact, it also does too little to protect individual privacy after information if first shared with the government. As Sharon Bradford Franklin explains, “CISPA lacks any meaningful limitations on the ways in which the federal government may use personal information and the content of private communications that it receives from private companies.”
Until more meaningful protections are added to protect individuals against this public-private privacy threat, Congress should reject CISPA, and if it unwisely chooses to pass the legislation President Obama should veto it. The concerns the White House expressed yesterday are a good sign, but they need to be steadfast and not rush to sign a bad bill.
Thursday, April 19, 2012
12-04-20 The Robber Baron Revival Era
There could not be a better story than the one below, to distill the social disintegration of the United States, with the Bishop of the morally bankrupt Catholic Church, incorporated and exploiting financial bankruptcy to avoid paying reparations, invoking First Amendment rights in denouncing Obama, a spineless, empty suit, operated by corporate powers, by attributing to him a social "agenda", pertaining to female reproductive rights, while pretending not to realize that if Obama, the "Constitutional Law Professor", were to be distinguished, it would have been specifically for his total disregard for Human Rights and the US Constitution, while ADL, a reactionary and corrupt organization, exploits religious past and moneyed legal power to enforce on behalf of the 1%. Beyond that, the parlance reflects the normalization by ever wider parts of the body politic of the totalitarian nature of the American regime, with the ecclesiastic, in the true medieval fashion, the only power able to stand up to it. And all it employed to distract the People of their predicament at the onset of the Robber Baron Revival Era.
JZ
_____
ADL condemns bishop for Obama, Hitler, Stalin comparison
The Anti-Defamation League, a Jewish group that for generations has fought racism and anti-Semitism, has condemned Peoria, Ill., Catholic Bishop Daniel Jenky for remarks it terms “outrageous, offensive and completely over the top.”
The arch-orthodox Bishop Jenky, in a sermon at St. Mary’s Cathedral in Peoria, likened President Obama’s “extreme secularist” policies to those of Germany’s “Iron Chancellor” Otto von Bismarck, Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin.
President Barack Obama on previous Seattle visit.
As related in the Chicago Tribune, Jenky said:
“Remember, that in past history other governments have tried to force Christians to huddle and hide only within the confines of their churches, like the first disciples in the upper room. In the late 19th Century, Bismarck waged his ‘Kulturkampf’, a culture war against the Roman Catholic Church, closing down every Catholic school and hospital, convent and monastery in Imperial Germany.
“Clemenceau, nicknamed the ‘priest eater,’ tried the same thing in France in the first decade of the 20th Century. Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open, but would not tolerate any competition with the state in education, social services and health care.”
“In clear violation of our 1st Amendment rights, Barack Obama with his radical, pro-abortion and extreme secularist agenda now seems intent on following a similar path.”
It wasn’t Jenky’s only comparison. He also took after Catholic politicians who do not follow dictates from the Church hierarchy, saying:
“May God have mercy especially on the souls of those politicians who pretend to be Catholic in church, but in their public lives, rather like Judas Iscariot, betray Jesus Christ by how they vote and how they willingly cooperate with intrinsic evil.”
Lonnie Nasatir, regional director of the Anti-Defamation League in Chicago, asked Jenky to apologize and described the bishop’s homily as “outrageous, offensive and completely over the top.”
“Clearly Bishop Jenky needs a history lesson,” said Nasatir. “There are few, if any, parallels in history to the religious intolerance and anti-Semitism fostered by Stalin, and especially Hitler, who under his regime perpetuated the open persecution and ultimate genocide of Jews, Catholics and many other minorities.”
The Tribune could not reach Jenky for comment. The conservative wing of the Catholic hierarchy has taken to denouncing the press as part of what it claims is an assault on “religious liberty” in America.
Seattle’s Catholic Archbishop J. Peter Sartain was previously bishop of the neighboring Joliet, Ill., diocese.
Posted by Joel Connelly on April 19, 2012 at 2:42 pm
Source:
http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2012/04/19/adl-condemns-bishop-for-obama-hitler-stalin-comparison/
JZ
_____
ADL condemns bishop for Obama, Hitler, Stalin comparison
The Anti-Defamation League, a Jewish group that for generations has fought racism and anti-Semitism, has condemned Peoria, Ill., Catholic Bishop Daniel Jenky for remarks it terms “outrageous, offensive and completely over the top.”
The arch-orthodox Bishop Jenky, in a sermon at St. Mary’s Cathedral in Peoria, likened President Obama’s “extreme secularist” policies to those of Germany’s “Iron Chancellor” Otto von Bismarck, Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin.
President Barack Obama on previous Seattle visit.
As related in the Chicago Tribune, Jenky said:
“Remember, that in past history other governments have tried to force Christians to huddle and hide only within the confines of their churches, like the first disciples in the upper room. In the late 19th Century, Bismarck waged his ‘Kulturkampf’, a culture war against the Roman Catholic Church, closing down every Catholic school and hospital, convent and monastery in Imperial Germany.
“Clemenceau, nicknamed the ‘priest eater,’ tried the same thing in France in the first decade of the 20th Century. Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open, but would not tolerate any competition with the state in education, social services and health care.”
“In clear violation of our 1st Amendment rights, Barack Obama with his radical, pro-abortion and extreme secularist agenda now seems intent on following a similar path.”
It wasn’t Jenky’s only comparison. He also took after Catholic politicians who do not follow dictates from the Church hierarchy, saying:
“May God have mercy especially on the souls of those politicians who pretend to be Catholic in church, but in their public lives, rather like Judas Iscariot, betray Jesus Christ by how they vote and how they willingly cooperate with intrinsic evil.”
Lonnie Nasatir, regional director of the Anti-Defamation League in Chicago, asked Jenky to apologize and described the bishop’s homily as “outrageous, offensive and completely over the top.”
“Clearly Bishop Jenky needs a history lesson,” said Nasatir. “There are few, if any, parallels in history to the religious intolerance and anti-Semitism fostered by Stalin, and especially Hitler, who under his regime perpetuated the open persecution and ultimate genocide of Jews, Catholics and many other minorities.”
The Tribune could not reach Jenky for comment. The conservative wing of the Catholic hierarchy has taken to denouncing the press as part of what it claims is an assault on “religious liberty” in America.
Seattle’s Catholic Archbishop J. Peter Sartain was previously bishop of the neighboring Joliet, Ill., diocese.
Posted by Joel Connelly on April 19, 2012 at 2:42 pm
Source:
http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2012/04/19/adl-condemns-bishop-for-obama-hitler-stalin-comparison/
12-04-19 And the First Amendment...
An Occupier was choked by a Boston Police Officer [badge number #4534] today in the Boston Common while practicing the 1st Amendment of the United States Bill of Rights. The Boston Common is the first park in the world to allow free speech and here is a perfect example of free speech being suppressed. Commissioner Ed Davis you have some explaining to do.
A note from the protester pictured here:
Hi, This is a picture of me. The "pale violet material" I'm holding was a wig I was wearing that a Tea Partier had just knocked off my head. I was asking the tea partier to explain to me why he thought it was okay to knock my wig off ("My hand slipped", he replied sarcastically) when the officer came up and said something along the lines of "okay, take your shit and get out of here" and shoved me a few feet. I turned to him and said "Don't push me". he replied "Don't push you?!" then did this. You can decide yourself if this was deserved or not.
(Photo: Paul Weiskel) For more pictures of this event:http://www.flickr.com/photos/31167233@N08/sets/72157629461002076/with/6935577808
12-04-19 Obama the Socialist...
I doubt that the Mitt could outdo Obama in catering to the banksters...
It's Corruption for Corruption Sake...
_____
Yet Another Obama Big Lie: Mortgage Fraud Investigation Not Even Staffed - naked capitalism
The Administration has managed the impressive task of operating in a more cynical fashion than even its worst critics predicted. Remember the widely ballyhooed mortgage fraud investigation, announced at the State of the Union address? This was the shiny toy that succeeded in getting New York attorney general Eric Schneiderman to abandon his opposition to the mortgage settlement. Schneiderman had been the defacto leader of the dissenters by virtue both of being the first to stand against the effort and by having the Martin Act. Suborning Schneiderman put the objecting state attorneys general in disarray and enabled the Administration to push this toxic deal over the finish line. It was pretty obvious Schneiderman had been had. Obama tellingly did not mention his name in the SOTU. Schneiderman was only a co-chairman of the effort and would still stay on in his day job as state AG...
READ MORE:
http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Yet-Another-Obama-Big-Lie-in-Best_Web_OpEds-120419-940.html
It's Corruption for Corruption Sake...
_____
Yet Another Obama Big Lie: Mortgage Fraud Investigation Not Even Staffed - naked capitalism
The Administration has managed the impressive task of operating in a more cynical fashion than even its worst critics predicted. Remember the widely ballyhooed mortgage fraud investigation, announced at the State of the Union address? This was the shiny toy that succeeded in getting New York attorney general Eric Schneiderman to abandon his opposition to the mortgage settlement. Schneiderman had been the defacto leader of the dissenters by virtue both of being the first to stand against the effort and by having the Martin Act. Suborning Schneiderman put the objecting state attorneys general in disarray and enabled the Administration to push this toxic deal over the finish line. It was pretty obvious Schneiderman had been had. Obama tellingly did not mention his name in the SOTU. Schneiderman was only a co-chairman of the effort and would still stay on in his day job as state AG...
READ MORE:
http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Yet-Another-Obama-Big-Lie-in-Best_Web_OpEds-120419-940.html
12-04-19 Assange on Russia Today Gets the New York Times Mad...
ASSANGE ON RUSSIA TODAY GETS THE NEW YORK TIMES MAD...
From the NYT review:
Mr. Assange says the theme of his half-hour show on RT is "the world tomorrow." But there is something almost atavistic about the outlet he chose. RT, first known as Russia Today, is an English-language news network created by the Russian leader Vladimir V. Putin in 2005 to promote the Kremlin line abroad. (It also broadcasts in Spanish and Arabic.) It's like the Voice of America, only with more money and a zesty anti-American slant. A few correspondents can sound at times like Boris and Natasha of "Rocky & Bullwinkle" fame. Basically, it's an improbable platform for a man who poses as a radical left-wing whistleblower and free-speech frondeur battling the superpowers that be.
___
Let's examine the unstated premises at work here. There is apparently a rule that says it's perfectly OK for a journalist to work for a media outlet owned and controlled by a weapons manufacturer (GE/NBC/MSNBC), or by the U.S. and British governments (BBC/Stars & Stripes/Voice of America), or by Rupert Murdoch and Saudi Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal (Wall St. Journal/Fox News), or by a banking corporation with long-standing ties to right-wing governments (Politico), or by for-profit corporations whose profits depend upon staying in the good graces of the U.S. government (Kaplan/The Washington Post), or by loyalists to one of the two major political parties (National Review/TPM/countless others), but it's an intrinsic violation of journalistic integrity to work for a media outlet owned by the Russian government. Where did that rule come from?
Also, while it's certainly true that the coverage of RT is at times overly deferential to the Russian government, that media outlet never mindlessly disseminated government propaganda to help to start a falsehood-fueled devastating war, the way that Alessandra Stanley's employer (along with most leading American media outlets) did. When it comes to destruction brought about by uncritical media fealty to government propaganda, RT -- as the Russia expert Mark Adomanis documented when American media figures began attacking RT -- is far behind virtually all of the corporate employers of its American media critics.
Then there's the notion that there's something hypocritical about Assange's working for a government-owned media outlet because he "poses as a radical left-wing whistleblower and free-speech frondeur battling the superpowers that be." Actually, Assange has never presented him as anything other than as an advocate for transparency and adversarial journalism -- of shining a light on the conduct of the world's most powerful government and corporate factions -- and if that goal can be fulfilled by using this media platform, how is that remotely hypocritical? Then there's Stanley's mockery of a "few" Russian "correspondents who can sound at times like Boris and Natasha of "Rocky & Bullwinkle' fame": that's called having an accent in a language that isn't your native one, and it's rather petty, at best, to ridicule that as a means of undermining the credibility of RT's journalism.
READ MORE:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Attacks-on-RT-and-Assange-by-Glenn-Greenwald-120418-238.html
From the NYT review:
Mr. Assange says the theme of his half-hour show on RT is "the world tomorrow." But there is something almost atavistic about the outlet he chose. RT, first known as Russia Today, is an English-language news network created by the Russian leader Vladimir V. Putin in 2005 to promote the Kremlin line abroad. (It also broadcasts in Spanish and Arabic.) It's like the Voice of America, only with more money and a zesty anti-American slant. A few correspondents can sound at times like Boris and Natasha of "Rocky & Bullwinkle" fame. Basically, it's an improbable platform for a man who poses as a radical left-wing whistleblower and free-speech frondeur battling the superpowers that be.
___
Let's examine the unstated premises at work here. There is apparently a rule that says it's perfectly OK for a journalist to work for a media outlet owned and controlled by a weapons manufacturer (GE/NBC/MSNBC), or by the U.S. and British governments (BBC/Stars & Stripes/Voice of America), or by Rupert Murdoch and Saudi Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal (Wall St. Journal/Fox News), or by a banking corporation with long-standing ties to right-wing governments (Politico), or by for-profit corporations whose profits depend upon staying in the good graces of the U.S. government (Kaplan/The Washington Post), or by loyalists to one of the two major political parties (National Review/TPM/countless others), but it's an intrinsic violation of journalistic integrity to work for a media outlet owned by the Russian government. Where did that rule come from?
Also, while it's certainly true that the coverage of RT is at times overly deferential to the Russian government, that media outlet never mindlessly disseminated government propaganda to help to start a falsehood-fueled devastating war, the way that Alessandra Stanley's employer (along with most leading American media outlets) did. When it comes to destruction brought about by uncritical media fealty to government propaganda, RT -- as the Russia expert Mark Adomanis documented when American media figures began attacking RT -- is far behind virtually all of the corporate employers of its American media critics.
Then there's the notion that there's something hypocritical about Assange's working for a government-owned media outlet because he "poses as a radical left-wing whistleblower and free-speech frondeur battling the superpowers that be." Actually, Assange has never presented him as anything other than as an advocate for transparency and adversarial journalism -- of shining a light on the conduct of the world's most powerful government and corporate factions -- and if that goal can be fulfilled by using this media platform, how is that remotely hypocritical? Then there's Stanley's mockery of a "few" Russian "correspondents who can sound at times like Boris and Natasha of "Rocky & Bullwinkle' fame": that's called having an accent in a language that isn't your native one, and it's rather petty, at best, to ridicule that as a means of undermining the credibility of RT's journalism.
READ MORE:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Attacks-on-RT-and-Assange-by-Glenn-Greenwald-120418-238.html
12-04-19 Obama - Civil Liberties Nightmare...
How Obama Became a Civil Libertarian's Nightmare
April 18, 2012 |
When Barack Obama took office, he was the civil liberties communities’ great hope. Obama, a former constitutional law professor, pledged to shutter the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and run a transparent and open government. But he has become a civil libertarian’s nightmare: a supposedly liberal president who instead has expanded and fortified many of the Bush administration’s worst policies, lending bipartisan support for a more intrusive and authoritarian federal government.
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
12-04-19 Administration of Courts of the State of Israel disregards the Freedom of Information Act, when it comes to the electronic record systems of the courts
Requests, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, have been filed in the process of preparation of report regarding integrity, or lack thereof, of the electronic record systems of the courts of the State of Israel. Out of nine (9) such requests, so far zero (0) records have been obtained. The responses ranged from "No records exist" (instruction manuals for the systems), through "records of internal deliberations" (appointment record of the Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court), "not a request pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act" (certification authorities and electronic signatures in the Supreme Court), to no response at all (ultimate administrative authority for the servers of the Supreme Court; unpublished changes to the Regulations of the Courts). Implementation of invalid electronic record systems in the courts of the State of Israel over the past decade, involving IBM and EDS, appears as a mirror image of their US counterparts. In the US, where such systems have been implemented a couple of decades earlier, they have been conducive to widespread corruption of the US courts, failing banking regulations, large-scale violations of Human Rights, and civil unrest.![[]](https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=5c7629aba9&view=att&th=136c91ab68e8a814&attid=0.1&disp=emb&zw&atsh=1)
![[]](https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=5c7629aba9&view=att&th=136c91ab68e8a814&attid=0.3&disp=emb&zw&atsh=1)
![[]](https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=5c7629aba9&view=att&th=136c91ab68e8a814&attid=0.4&disp=emb&zw&atsh=1)
View as PDF: http://www.scribd.com/doc/
The 2012 Human Rights Alert's report on the State of Israel is based on:Data mining of the electronic records of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel shows that all electronic decision records were certified by the late Chief Clerk SHMARYAHU COHEN up to 2002. In contrast, all such records are published today unsigned, uncertified, and "subject to editing and phrasing changes". Additionally, data mining uncovered numerous records that were clearly adulterated. For example, certifications by the late Chief Clerk SHMARYAHU COHEN appear on decisions, which were purportedly issued years after his untimely death in March 2002.
Filing papers with the Supreme Court documented the practice of simulated review and the publication of simulated decisions of the Supreme Court.
Freedom of Information responses by the Administration of Courts documented that out of nine (9) requests, filed over the past five months, zero (0) records were provided.
The responses of the Administration of Courts on Freedom of Information requests included:
Judge Moshe Gal, Judge (Ret) Boaz Okon, departing and former Directors of the Administration of the Courts, State of Israel
As is the case in the United States, the electronic record systems are the "flag project" of the Administration of Courts.View as PDF: http://www.scribd.com/doc/
Jerusalem, April 19 - "No court should be permitted to implement its electronic record systems," says Joseph Zernik, PhD, of Human Rights Alert (NGO), " it is a sure prescription for corruption of the courts."
The US courts, which were some of the first to do so, are a good example. Implementation of the electronic systems by the US courts undermined court procedures and laws, which have been established over centuries to safeguard the integrity of the courts, including, but not limited to:
Such conduct undermines the fundamental principles of:
As part of the 2012 Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights in Israel by the Human Rights Council of the United Nations, Human Rights Alert (NGO) is submitting a report, narrowly focused on "Integrity, or lack thereof, of the electronic record systems of the courts of the State of Israel". The latest generation of electronic record systems of the courts of the State of Israel has been implemented over the past decade, with direct involvement of US-based data processing corporations IBM and EDS. The systems were developed and implemented, according to the State Ombudsman Report 60b, out of compliance with the law of the State of Israel, relative to government electronic data systems. The outcome is systems, which are a mirror image of corrupt systems, implemented in the US courts a couple of decades earlier.The US courts, which were some of the first to do so, are a good example. Implementation of the electronic systems by the US courts undermined court procedures and laws, which have been established over centuries to safeguard the integrity of the courts, including, but not limited to:
- Valid signatures, authentication and certification of court records;
- The duties and responsibilities of the clerks of the courts, relative to the integrity of court records;
- Public access to court records, and
- Duly enacted, published regulations of the Courts.
Such conduct undermines the fundamental principles of:
- Separation of the three branches of government - since the regulations, inherent in such systems, are independently established by the courts with no public oversight, and
- Publicity of the law - since the regulations, inherent in such systems, remain unpublished.
The 2012 Human Rights Alert's report on the State of Israel is based on:
- Data-mining of the online electronic records of the courts;
- Filing papers with the Supreme Court of the State of Israel, and documenting the integrity, or lack thereof, in their registration and disposition, and
- Freedom of Information requests, filed on the Administration of the Courts and the Ministry of Justice.
Filing papers with the Supreme Court documented the practice of simulated review and the publication of simulated decisions of the Supreme Court.
The responses of the Administration of Courts on Freedom of Information requests included:
- "No records exist" - relative to instruction manuals for the electronic record systems;
- "Records of internal deliberations" - relative to the appointment record of the current Chief Clerk SARAH LIFSCHITZ;
- "Not a request pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act" - relative to Certification Authorities in the Supreme Court, pursuant to the Electronic Signature Act (2001), and
- No response at all - relative to the ultimate administrative authority for the servers of the Supreme Court and relative to unpublished changes to the Regulations of the Courts, inherent to the electronic record systems.
"The Administration of the Courts disregards the Freedom of Information Act," says Dr Zernik, "most likely, as part of efforts to conceal the lack of integrity of the electronic record systems of the courts."
In the US, where such systems were first implemented a few decades ago, they have been conducive to widespread corruption of the US courts, failing banking regulation, large-scale violations of Human Rights, and civil unrest.________FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUESTS AND RESPONSES BY THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL
A. Instruction Materials for the Electronic Record Systems of the Supreme Court (P-84-2011) - "No records exist"11-11-14 Freedom of Information request on the Administration of Courts, in re: Instruction materials for the electronic record systems of the Supreme Court
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
B. Signed, certified copies of the Ethics Rules for Judges, Guidelines of the Supreme Court (P-92-2011) - Deniedhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
11-12-18 Repeat Freedom of Information requests on the Administration of Courts, in re: Signed Copies of a) Guidelines of the Supreme Court (2010), And b) Ethics Rules for Judges (2007)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
C. Changes in Certification 2001-2 (P-2012-43) – "Not a request pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act"http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-01-19 Freedom of Information request on the Administration of Courts, in re: Changes, around 2001-2 in certification by the Clerk of judicial records of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
D. Apostille certification procedure (P 28-2012) – "Not a request pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act"http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-02-18 Freedom of Information request on the Administration of Courts, in re: Origins and authorization of the 'Public Information Page – Authentication of Public Records (“Apostille”)'
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-02-22 Freedom of Information Request on the Administration of Courts: - Changes to Regulation of the Courts - Office of the Clerk (2004) by the Director of Administration of the Courts
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-04-19 Repeat Freedom of Information requests on the Administration of Courts re: 1) Ultimate administrative authority for the servers of the Supreme Court, 2) Changes to Regulation of the Courts - Office of the Clerk (2004), 3) Appointment Records of Chief Clerks/Certification Procedures of the District Courts
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
G. Appointment Records of Chief Clerks/Certification Procedures of the Supreme Court (P-29-2012) – "Records of internal deliberations"http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-04-19 Repeat Freedom of Information requests on the Administration of Courts re: 1) Ultimate administrative authority for the servers of the Supreme Court, 2) Changes to Regulation of the Courts - Office of the Clerk (2004), 3) Appointment Records of Chief Clerks/Certification Procedures of the District Courts
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-03-02 Freedom of Information request (P-29-2012) on the Administration of Courts, in re: a) Appointment records of the Chief Clerks of the Supreme Court, b) Certification/apostille certification procedures of the Supreme Court
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-03-06 Freedom of Information response (P-29-2012) by the Administration of Courts, in re: a) Appointment records of the Chief Clerks of the Supreme Court, b) Certification/apostille certification procedures of the Supreme Court
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-03-28 Revised Freedom of Information request (P-29-2012) on the Administration of Courts,, in re: a) Appointment records of the Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court, and b) Certification procedures of the electronic records of the Supreme Court
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-03-06 Freedom of Information response (P-29-2012) by the Administration of Courts, in re: a) Appointment records of the Chief Clerks of the Supreme Court, b) Certification/apostille certification procedures of the Supreme Court
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-03-28 Revised Freedom of Information request (P-29-2012) on the Administration of Courts,, in re: a) Appointment records of the Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court, and b) Certification procedures of the electronic records of the Supreme Court
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-03-03 Freedom of Information request on the Administration of Courts, in re: a) Appointment records of the Chief Clerks of the District Courts, b) Certification/Apostille certification procedures of the District Courts
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
I. Implementation of certified electronic signatures in the Supreme Court (P-2012-44) – "Not a request pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act"http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-04-02 Freedom of Information request on the Administration of Courts, in re: Certified electronic signatures and certifying authority of the Supreme Court, if any, pursuant to the Electronic Signature Act (2001)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-04-02 PRESS RELEASE: Ministry of Justice, Administration of Courts, Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court Are Asked to Clarify the Validity of Electronic Signatures of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-04-18 Reply to Administration of Courts on response dated April 4, 2012, denying Freedom of Information Requests (P-2012-28/43/44) re: Supreme court web site, Apostille, electronic signatures
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-04-02 PRESS RELEASE: Ministry of Justice, Administration of Courts, Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court Are Asked to Clarify the Validity of Electronic Signatures of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
12-04-18 Reply to Administration of Courts on response dated April 4, 2012, denying Freedom of Information Requests (P-2012-28/43/44) re: Supreme court web site, Apostille, electronic signatures
http://www.scribd.com/doc/
_______
Joseph Zernik, PhDHuman Rights Alert (NGO)![[]](https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=5c7629aba9&view=att&th=136c91ab68e8a814&attid=0.5&disp=emb&zw&atsh=1)
The 2010 submission of Human Rights Alert to the Human Rights Council (HRC) of the United Nations was reviewed by the HRC professional staff and incorporated in the official HRC Professional Staff Report with a note referring to “corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California.” The 2010 UN UPR report called upon the United States to stop executions, restore habeas corpus and close GITMO, abolish slavery, criminalize torture...
Human Rights Alert online![[]](https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=5c7629aba9&view=att&th=136c91ab68e8a814&attid=0.6&disp=emb&zw&atsh=1)
Flag Counter: 136http://inproperinla.blogspot.
http://inproperinla.wordpress.
http://human-rights-alert.
http://www.liveleak.com/user/
http://www.examiner.com/x-
Take away justice, then, and what are governments but great bandit bands?Saint Augustine, Civitas Dei (City of God,4.4)
_____________________________
Joseph Zernik, PhDHuman Rights Alert (NGO)
The 2010 submission of Human Rights Alert to the Human Rights Council (HRC) of the United Nations was reviewed by the HRC professional staff and incorporated in the official HRC Professional Staff Report with a note referring to “corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California.” The 2010 UN UPR report called upon the United States to stop executions, restore habeas corpus and close GITMO, abolish slavery, criminalize torture...
Human Rights Alert online
http://inproperinla.wordpress.
http://human-rights-alert.
http://www.liveleak.com/user/
http://www.examiner.com/x-
Take away justice, then, and what are governments but great bandit bands?Saint Augustine, Civitas Dei (City of God,4.4)
_____________________________
12-04-18 Facebook Police...
I AM BARRED FROM MAKING ANY FRIEND REQUESTS FOR 14 DAYS...
For making friends with multiple people that I do not know personally...
mark zuckerberg, are you ridiculous, or did you simply bow to pressure by US gov???
I also had to take a tutorial on "Community Guidelines"... :)
12-04-18 Banksters launder foreign drug cartel money as Wells Fargo invests in for-profit prisons
Last year, Wells Fargo paid a fine they could easily afford when they had purchased Wachovia bank, after Wachovia got busted laundering $110 Million dollars of drug money for foreign drug cartels. If you're keeping score at home that means if you get busted smoking a joint you go to jail, but if you get busted laundering millions of dollars in drug cartel money you get a slap on the wrist. Now, here's the catch, if you get caught smoking pot and go to jail, Wells Fargo will make a profit off of that too thanks to America's growing for-profit prison system.
For more details on how the banksters figured out how to flood America with illegal drugs for their own profit and then make money on the back end of the deal when you get sent to jail, make sure to read this article at Salon.com . .
READ MORE:
http://www.salon.com/2012/04/11/wells_fargos_prison_cash_cow/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)