Thursday, March 6, 2014

14-03-06 UKRAINE: US failed policies moving the world closer to disaster!

Predictions of Crimean War II appear by now an understatement.  The situation is quickly becoming Cuban Missile Crisis II.  jz
___


U.S. Military Begin AIR POLICING Missions in Baltic

March 6th, 2014

US to bolster military support to Poland, Baltic
The United States plans to expand military cooperation with Poland and Baltic states to show “support” for its allies after Russia’s intervention in Ukraine, Pentagon chief Chuck Hagel
NATO’s Success in Libya
China ups military spend by 12 percent

14-03-06 US under the Greater Depression - what recovery?

By Jodie Gummow, AlterNet
Infograph shows majority of 5.8 million 'missing' workers have given up the search because there simply aren’t any jobs. READ MORE»
http://act.alternet.org/go/44045?t=18&akid=11573.1117888.X9FJr-

14-03-06 Postcard from the End of America: Joliet


Postcard from the End of America: Joliet 

By Linh Dinh

March 04, 2014 "Information Clearing House - The story of Joliet is familiar enough. With its industries gone, a city turns to the casino as a last ditch salvation, but cannot reverse its decline. The details of this disintegration, though, can be interesting. Take two recent crimes. In one, four people, two men and two women, invited two male friends over for some partying, which in America nearly always involves alcohol and/or drugs and the promise of sex, but the two guests ended up being strangled to death, with their corpses serving as an uneven mattress for some macabre screwing. Yes, you read that right, two of their killers ended up fornicating on top of the cadavers, though, to be fair, the revelers were sensitive enough to place a dirty sheet between the live and dead bodies. Done, they tried to saw up their victims, but without the right tools, the process turned tiresome and messy, so one of the women went out to get a chainsaw or two, and that’s how the story leaked, oozed and splattered. When cops came, they discovered the dead dudes in one room, while in the adjacent one, three ensouled and sentient beings, fastidiously and exactly made in the image of God, no less, were playing video games.

The perpetrators are all white, and the victims black, but they had also been friends before the incident. One of the white women had a child with a black man, and a black victim had a white fiancé. It’s not clear, then, to what degree race was a factor. Another question to ask is why didn’t this bizarre double murder and abuse of corpse case make more of a splash nationally? Granted, we live in a culture where the media can suppress (or inflate) anything, where a Honey Boo Boo’s fart resonates much more loudly than the bomb that killed Michael Hastings, and information flow rests in the hands of a remarkably homogeneous group that also dominates our feeble protest zone, but one would think more people would know about such an iconic crime that illustrates all too perfectly our remarkable degeneracy and blood splattered ennui. Mentally and spiritually voided, let’s kill even our buddies, not to rob them, but just for the hell of it, then why not, let’s fuck for a while on top of Eric and Terrance, then dismember them, and when that doesn’t quite work, let’s play some cool video games for an eternity. Also, when a crime is committed by a group, be it four, ten or an army, it is even more of an indictment of the culture. 
READ MORE:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37851.htm

14-03-06 Hello world!


Recent 
3/6 @ 1:27 : El Paso, Texas, US
3/6 @ 11:31 : Buffalo, New York, US
3/6 @ 11:22 : Bergamo, IT
3/6 @ 9:35 : Jakarta, ID
3/6 @ 2:58 : Orange, California, US
3/6 @ 1:12 : Huntington Beach, California, US
3/6 @ 12:31 : France, FR
3/5 @ 10:52 : Tulare, California, US
3/5 @ 9:48 : Saint-apollinaire, FR
3/5 @ 9:26 : Saskatoon, CA

14-03-06 Snipers Hired By Kiev Protest Leaders - Leaked EU's Ashton Phone Tape

Funny! Obviously, NSA does not monopolize phone surveillance... :) jz
_____
Snipers Hired By Kiev Protest Leaders  - Leaked EU's Ashton Phone Tape
By RT
March 05, 2014 "Information Clearing House - "RT" - The snipers who shot at protesters and police in Kiev were allegedly hired by Maidan leaders, according to a leaked phone conversation between the EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton and Estonian foreign affairs minister, which has emerged online.
Note  - Relevant portion of audio relating to headline begins at 8:15-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZEgJ0oo3OA8
There is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovich, but it was somebody from the new coalition,” Urmas Paet said during the conversation.
“I think we do want to investigate. I mean, I didn’t pick that up, that’s interesting. Gosh,” Ashton answered.
The call took place after Estonia’s Foreign Minister Urmas Paet visited Kiev on February 25, following the peak of clashes between the pro-EU protesters and security forces in the Ukrainian capital.
Paet also recalled his conversation with a doctor who treated those shot by snipers in Kiev. She said that both protesters and police were shot at by the same people.
“And second, what was quite disturbing, this same Olga [Bogomolets] told as well that all the evidence shows that the people who were killed by snipers from both sides, among policemen and then people from the streets, that they were the same snipers killing people from both sides,” the Estonian FM stressed.
Ashton reacted to the information by saying: “Well, yeah…that’s, that’s terrible.”
“So that she then also showed me some photos she said that as a medical doctor she can say that it is the same handwriting, the same type of bullets, and it’s really disturbing that now the new coalition, that they don’t want to investigate what exactly happened,” Paet said.
Olga Bogomolets was the main doctor for the Maidan mobile clinic when protests turned violent in Kiev. She treated the gravely injured and helped organized their transportation to neighboring countries, who had expressed a willingness to treat those with severe wounds. From the outset, Olga blamed the injuries and deaths on snipers. She turned down the position of Vice Prime Minister of Ukraine for Humanitarian Affairs offered by the coup-appointed regime.
The Estonian FM has described the whole sniper issue as “disturbing” and added, “it already discredits from the very beginning” the new Ukrainian power.

His overall impressions of what he saw during his one-day trip to Kiev are “sad,” Paet said during the conversation.

He stressed that the Ukrainian people don’t trust the Maidan leaders, with all the opposition politicians slated to join the new government “having dirty past.”
The file was reportedly uploaded to the web by officers of Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) loyal to ousted President Viktor Yanukovich who hacked Paet’s and Ashton’s phones.
94 people were killed and another 900 injured during the standoff between police and protesters at Maidan Saquare in Kiev last month.

14-03-06 Essence of U.S. Fascism: Crippling Dissent vs. Planned ATROCITIES

Eureka, I've nailed it!--here's a brief, convincing "executive summary" of why America's now a fascist nation. However free daily life now seems, we're systematically crippling the dissent DESPERATELY needed to break the grip of propaganda paving the way for ATROCITIES. This is the central, deeply pernicious feature of fascism today's United States shares with ALL historic fascist regimes.
http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=E07cF2ng%2FwQzYD1ALY3IBxApaDcNU9nd

Tuesday, March 4, 2014

14-03-04 US: Banking fraud - Richmond, CA, and eminent domain

The Stone That Brings Down Goliath? Richmond and Eminent Domain

Tuesday, 04 March 2014 10:09By Ellen BrownWeb of Debt | News Analysis
Mayor Gayle McLaughlin of Richmond, California, in front of a boarded-up house in Richmond, December 20, 2013. Many Richmond residents owe more money on their houses than their houses are worth, but McLaughlin's plan to use of eminent domain to prevent foreclosures has faced significant opposition. (Photo: Jim Wilson / The New York Times)Mayor Gayle McLaughlin of Richmond, California, in front of a boarded-up house in Richmond, December 20, 2013. Many Richmond residents owe more money on their houses than their houses are worth, but McLaughlin's plan to use of eminent domain to prevent foreclosures has faced significant opposition. (Photo: Jim Wilson / The New York Times)READ MORE:http://truth-out.org/news/item/22232-the-stone-that-brings-down-goliath-richmond-and-eminent-domain

14-03-04 US - Misc News of the Abuse: Allged - Cop forces woman to have sex with him

A change from the regular pattern of beat, shoot, check cavities... jz
___
By Matt Reynolds, Courthouse News
Detective Cory Pierce threatened to arrest the woman if she didn't comply to his demands. 

http://act.alternet.org/go/43959?t=18&akid=11564.1117888.VMzZ2g

14-03-04 ISRAEL: Large-scale fraud in State's electronic signatures // הונאת ענק בחתימות האלקטרוניות במדינת ישראל


 
Comsign logo, Lord Keeper of the Seal, Attorney Yoram HaCohen
[עברית להלן - מה שכתבתי בקבוצת דיון משפטית לעניין שחיתות בתי המשפט]
From an Israeli online legal discussion group
The technical aspects of electronic signatures are too complicated to detail here, but is essential for understanding corruption of the Israeli justice system today.
There must be review articles aimed at legal professionals on the subject.
However, contrary to what you wrote "... and they must never be signed using electronic signatures", there is no other way today, since the world is moving towards paperless administration. Therefore, in every civilized nation, an "Electronic Signature Act" was enacted to establish the matter. Moreover, if the law is properly written and implemented, electronic signatures are by far superior to manual signature, for variety of reasons.
However, the Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission to the UN (2013) documented an enormous fraud in the implementation of the Electronic Signature Act in the State of Israel.  This fraud extends beyond the courts. It impacts the Treasury , the Ministry of Defense, and more.
In the past, people here discussed the fact that the State of Israel went through a putsch by rivaling defense related groups (Shin Bet v Chief of Staff Commando Unit), which effectively took over the State.  
The enormous fraud in the State of Israel electronic signature system belongs to veterans of 8200 - IDF Cyberwar Unit...
In this context, one should note the Israeli Biometric Database Act, a related matter, and even more threatening.  To the best of my knowledge, no other nation has enacted a Biometric Database Act. Such system is considered an enormous threat to Human Rights, and an advanced stage in establishing a totalitarian regime.
In Israel, we have some of the world's best experts in computer science and in particularly in encryption (the most relevant field), and such experts expressed again and again their adamant opposition to the Biometric Database Act.  Regardless, the Act passed.  Moreover, the Israeli government has already expressed its intention of privatizing the Biometric Database, an intolerable idea.
And today, I noticed in Haaretz daily that the Mossad and Shin Bet instructed their people not to accept the "smart" ID cards (Biometric Database ID cards). That means that the Biometric Database is intended only for us - the herd...  because under the Biometric Database you are like a cow in the herd, with a chip implanted in its ear...
Back to electronic signatures:
The matter of nationally authorized signatures is central already since the Middle Ages.  Then, the main issue was the King's signature.  Since the King controlled everything, he could sell off the entire kingdom for gold, a woman, or anything else.  Therefore, already in the late Middle Ages, the nobility established the "Lord Keeper of the Seal". What it meant was that the signature of the King alone was not valid any longer. Only when it was combined with the Seal of the Kingdom and the signature of the Lord Keeper of the Seal, a document became valid and effectual.  And the King was prohibited from holding the Seal of the Kingdom.
Such conditions are of course similar to conditions in the courts today, and for similar reasons.
A document, which is signed by a judge alone is not valid and effectual.  Judicial records must be authenticated by the Chief Clerk of the Court (or those lawfully delegated his authority), under the Seal of the Court, and a judge must never hold the Seal of the Court.
During periods of rampant corruption in France, two or three Seals of the Kingdom were established, with two or three keepers of the seals, and all of them had to stamp and sign documents to make them valid and effectual.  Similar conditions are typical in signing a new law - in Israel - the Knesset Chairman, Secretary, and President (?).
Now, imagine conditions, where the Lord Keeper of the Seal decided to sell off the Seal of the Kingdom... 
Moreover, imagine conditions, where a person managed to take over the Seal of the Kingdom, although he is not the lawful Lord Keeper of the Seal, and then sold it off to a friend...
That is what happened in Israel in the years 2001-2004:
Attorney Yoram HaCohen acted as Magistrate and Registrar of Certifying Authorities pursuant to the Electronic Signature Act (2001) in the Ministry of Justice, but without lawful appointment.  He was also in a stated conflict of interest with Comsign Corporation, yet he "privatized" the State of Israel's electronic signatures system to Comsign.
That is only the beginning...
An important side story in this matter is the relationship between the Israeli Bar Association and Comsign. The Bar  effectively acts as an affiliate of Comsign - colluding in the criminal conduct.
Details of the fact and related documents were included in the Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission to the UN Human Rights Council. The submission was incorporated in the UN Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Review (UPR) reprot on Israel (2013) with the note "lack of integrity in the electronic records of the Supreme Court, the district courts and the detainees court in Israel".
The Human Rights Alert submission was most likely the first ever Human Rights report, which was entirely based on examination of computer systems and electronic records, but not on cases of individual persons.
Stated otherwise, today, computer systems of governments are the greatest threat to Human Rights.
Today, following the Snowden affair, such claims are more understandable.  But when I escaped form the US in 2010, and tried to explain to people in Israel and in Europe what happened to me, and why I had to escape from US federal agencies, people could not understand it...
The fraud in the electronic record systems of the State of Israel is more or less a copy of similar fraud in the US, which I documented in the Human Rights Alert submission to the UN in 2010. That submission was incorporated into the first ever UN Human Rights report on the United States (2010) with the note, "corruption of the courts and the legal profession in California".
In the US, in Israel, and elsewhere, when widespread public corruption takes hold, banks (or tycoons) gain control of the nation.  That is what is most clearly evident in the Israeli debtors' courts, in the tycoons "haircuts" on public bonds, and in corrupt bankruptcies of large corporation in Israel today.
In the United States, needless to say, such conditions are expressed in the humongous bailouts of banks, and in the foreclosure fraud crisis.
++++
עניין החתימות האלקטרוניות מסובך מידי להסביר כאן בפרטים טכניים, אבל הוא מהותי לשחיתות מערכת המשפט בישראל היום.
בוודאי יש מאמרי סקירה המיועדים לעורכי דין בנושא בעברית.  הקישור שסיפקתי הוא מאמר למתחילים באנגלית.
בניגוד למה שכתבת, "...ולא יתכן שייחתמו בחתימה אלקטרונית בכלל", אין ברירה היום למעשה, וחייבים להשתמש בחתימות אלקטרוניות, כיוון שהעולם הולך לכיוון של לא להשתמש בנייר.  לכן, בכל מדינה מתוקנת, העבירו "חוק החתימה האלקטרונית", האמור להסדיר את העניין.  
יתרה מזאת, אם החוק כתוב כהלכה, ומיושם כהלכה, חתימות אלקטרוניות עדיפות לעין שיעור על חתימות ידיניות, משלל סיבות.
אולם דוח סייג לזכויות האדם (2013) תיעד הונאת ענק ביישום חוק החתימה האלקטרונית במדינת ישראל.  הונאה זאת היא מעל ומעבר לבתי המשפט, היא נוגעת גם לאוצר, למשרד הביטחון וכו.  
בעבר דובר פה על הפוטש של קבוצות בטחוניות (שב"כ מול סיירת מטכ"ל) שלמעשה השתלטו על המדינה.  הונאת הענק ביישום חוק החתימה האלקטרונית בישראל היא נחלת בוגרי 8200...
לעניין זה יש לציין את חוק המאגר הביומטרי, שהוא עניין קשור, אך חמור עוד יותר.  למיטב ידיעתי,אין מדינה בעולם פרט לישראל, שהעבירה חוק מאגר ביומטרי.  העניין נחשב סכנה אדירה לזכויות האדם, ושלב מתקדם בהשלטת משטר טוטליטרי.  בישראל נמצאים מיטב המומחים למדעי המחשב בתחומי ההצפנה (התחום הרלוונטי), והם הביעו שוב ושוב התנגדות נחרצת לחוק המאגר הביומטרי. למרות זאת, החוק עבר.  יתרה מזאת, ממשלת ישראל כבר החליטה להפריט את המאגר הביומטרי, רעיון בלתי נסבל לחלוטין.
והיום ראיתי בהארץ שהמוסד והשב"כ אסרו על אנשיהם לקבל ת"ז "חכמות". כלומר כל העניין טוב רק לנו, העדר... כי תחת המאגר הביומטרי אתה כמו פרה עם שבב אלקטרוני באוזן בעדר בקר.
לחזור לעניין החתימות:
עניין חתימות מורשות של המדינה הוא עניין מרכזי כבר מימי הביניים.  אז הבעייה המרכזית הייתה החתימה של המלך.  כי הוא למעשה שלט בכל. היה יכול למכור את הממלכה כולה עבור זהב, או אישה, או מה שרצה.  לכן, כבר בסוף ימי הביניים, יצרו האצילים את מוסד "הלורד שומר החותם".  כלומר, חתימת המלך לבדה הייתה חסרת תוקף.  רק אם צורפה אליה חותמת הממלכה וחתימת הלורד שומר החותם, היה המסמך בר תוקף.  ולמלך, כמובן, אסור היה להחזיק את החותם.
מצב זה כמובן דומה למצב בבתי המשפט - ומסיבות דומות. מסמך חתום על ידי שופט לבד אינו בר תוקף. המסמך חייב אוטנטיקציה על ידי המזכיר הראשי של בית המשפט (או מי שהוסמך על ידו כחוק), תחת חותם בית המשפט, ואסור לשופט להחזיק בחותם בית המשפט. 
ובתקופות של שחיתות רבה בצרפת, היו שתיים או שלוש חותמות ושנים או שלושה שומרי חותם, וכולם היו חייבים להחתים ולחתום על מנת להפוך מסמך מלכותי לבר תוקף. מצב דומה תמצא בהעברת חוק - חובה שיהיו עליו מספר חתימות, אינני בקי במצב בארץ, אבל אני מניח יו"ר הכנסת, מזכיר הכנסת, ונשיא המדינה?
עכשיו, תאר לעצמך מצב בו החליט הלורד שומר החותם למכור את החותם.  יתרה מזאת, תאר לך מצב בו אדם הצליח להשתלט על החותם, למרות שאינו הלורד שומר החותם כחוק, ואז מכר את החותם לחברה פרטית של חבריו.
זה מה שקרה בישראל בשנים 2001-2004:
עו"ד יורם הכהן פעל כרשם גורמים מאשרים על פי חוק החתימה האלקטרונית (2001) במשרד המשפטים, אך ללא כתב מינוי כחוק.  הוא היה בניגוד עניינים מוצהר לגבי קומסיין, והפריט את מערך החתימות האלקטרוניות של מדינת ישראל לקומסיין.
וזאת רק ההתחלה...
סיפור צדדי, אך חשוב בעניין זה, הוא הקשר בין לשכת עורכי הדין לקומסיין.  הלשכה פועלת למעשה כנספחת לקומסיין - כלומר, שותפה לדבר עבירה.
פירוט העובדות וקישורים למסמכים המתעדים הונאה זאת נכללו בדו"ח "סייג לזכויות האדם" (NGO).  הדו"ח נכלל בדו"ח הסופי של האו"ם על זכויות האדם בישראל (2013) בצירוף ההערה "חוסר יושרה בכתבים האלקטרוניים של בית המשפט העליון, בתי המשפט המחוזייים ובתי הדין למוחזקי משמורת בישראל".
ככל הנראה, דו"ח "סייג לזכויות האדם" על ישראל (2013) הוא הדו"ח הראשון אי פעם הנוגע לזכויות אדם במדינה, ומבוסס כולו על בדיקת מערכות מחשבים ומסמכים אלקטרוניים (ולא על תיעוד מקרים של בני אדם וכו').
במילים אחרות, היום, מערכות המחשבים של הממשלות הן הסכנה הגדולה ביותר לזכויות האדם.  
עכשיו, לאחר מקרה סנודן, אנשים מבינים זאת טוב יותר, אבל כשברחתי מארה"ב ב-2010, וניסיתי להסביר לאנשים בארץ ובאירופה מה קרה לי, ולמה הייתי צריך לברוח, ולמה אני מבוקש על ידי המשטרה הפדרלית בארה"ב, אנשים לא יכלו להבין ולהאמין לי...  
הסיבה - ההונאה בארץ היא העתק פחות או יותר של הונאה דומה בארה"ב, עשר או עשרים שנה קודם לכן. ואת ההונאה בבתי המשפט שם, תידעתי בדוח לאו"ם בשנת 2010, שנכלל בדוח הראשון אי פעם של האו"ם על זכויות האדם בארה"ב (2010), בצירוף ההערה "שחיתות בתי המשפט ומקצוע עריכת הדין בקליפורניה".
בארה"ב, בישראל, ובמקומות אחרים, כשהשחיתות גוברת, הבנקים (או אילי ההון) משתלטים על העניינים, כי הכסף קונה הכל.  וזה מה שרואים בבירור גמור בהוצל"פ בישראל (אבל גם בתספורות וכניסת הנכסים).
בארה"ב - שחיתות זאת נראית בבירור בחילוץ הענק של הבנקים שם על ידי האוצר מאז 2008, ובהונאות חסרות תקדים בהיקפן בענייני משכנתאות.
קישורים
[1] דוח מקוצר (תרגום עברי) של סייג לזכויות האדם שהתקבל כחלק מדוח האו"ם לגבי זכויות האדם בישראל (2013)
[2] The Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission (2013) for the Universal Periodic Review of israel  by the UN Human Rights Council, as it appears on the UN web site 
 דוח מקוצר (מקור אנגלי) כפי שהוא מופיע באתר האו"ם) של סייג לזכויות האדם שהתקבל כחלק מדוח האו"ם לגבי זכויות האדם בישראל (2013
[3]  13-01-01 The Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission, as incorporated into the UN Human RItghts Council UPR reprort with the note "Lack of integrity in the electronic records of the Supreme Court, the district courts and the detainees courts in Israel" (page 4, paragraph 25) 
 דוח סייג לזכויות האדם נכלל בדוח מועצת זכויות האדם של האו"ם (2013) בלוויית ההערה "חוסר יושרה בכתבים האלקטרוניים של בית המשפט העליון, בתי המשפט המחוזיים, ובתי הדין למוחזקי משמורת בישראל" (עמ' 4, פסקה 25):  
[4] 12-05-10 Human Right Alert,  Appendix I to Submission; 15th UPR - State of Israel - "Integrity, or lack thereof, of the electronic record systems of the courts of the State of Israel"

14-03-04 US gov lying about Ukraine...

Washington is lying about Ukraine just as Washington lied about Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, just as Washington lied about Iranian nukes, just as Washington lied about Syrian president Assad using chemical weapons, just as Washington lied about Afghanistan, Libya, NSA spying, torture. What hasn't Washington lied about?
http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=Z61Np3LnZ4On0gXKvZWMtAhwGm1her9T

14-03-04 ISRAEL: The Judges oppose enactment of "Ethics Rules" for judges - consider it a disgrace...

===14-03-04 ISRAEL: The Judges oppose enactment of "Ethics Rules" for judges - consider it a disgrace...===
"Ethics Rules" are barely enforceable... only corrupt judges oppose "Ethics Rules"...

רק שופטים מושחתים מתנגדים ל"כלל אתיקה" שממילא הם כמעט אינם בני 
אכיפה...יצ
___
=מישאל חשין: "יש גבול לביזוי השופטים ע"י פוליטיקאים"_כלכליסט=
המשנה בדימוס לנשיא ביהמ"ש העליון תקף את הפוליטיקאים שניסו לכפות כללי אתיקה על השופטים: "הם יודעים יפה מאוד להעיר לזולת, אבל לגבי עצמם? דאבל סטנדרט. זה לא מתקבל על הדעת"
http://www.calcalist.co.il/local/articles/1,7340,L-3625694,00.html

Monday, March 3, 2014

14-03-04 An Important Second Listen to the "F--k the EU" Ukraine Recording

An Important Second Listen to the "F--k the EU" Ukraine Recording

By By Robert Wenzel

At the start of February, a very important conversation between Assistant US Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and U.S. Ambassador to the Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt was leaked, the infamous "f----the EU" recording. During the clip, Nuland and Pyatt discuss their desired outcome for the crisis in Ukraine. Now that 3 weeks have passed since the leak and events have developed, it is instructive to listen to the recording once again. (See below.) Keep in mind that this leak was made on February 2, which means the conversation occurred before that date. Viktor Yanukovych did not lose power over the Ukrainian government until more than three weeks later February 24th.

The recording reveals Nuland and Pyatt discussing whether Vitali Klitschko, sometimes referred to as “Klitsch” in the recording, should be named the deputy prime minister and seems to assume that Arseniy Yatseniuk, sometimes referred to in the recording as “Yats,” will become prime minister. Since that conversation,Yatseniuk has, indeed, become prime minister. Anybody that tells you that the US is not running the "revolution" from behind the scenes is blowing smoke.

Posted March 03, 2014

14-03-03 FUKUSHIMA!



===14-03-03 Fukushima: Third Anniversary of the Start of the Catastrophe===
By Karl Grossman
With the third anniversary of the start of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear catastrophe coming next week, the attempted Giant Lie about the disaster continues -- a suppression of information, an effort at dishonesty of historical dimensions.
http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=1Cbyjr8dDxk%2BUCRPGeli%2BsfZdmcR1suh

The IAEA is central to the denial efforts
Of the consequences of the Fukushima disaster, "To date no health effects have been reported in any person as a result of radiation exposure from the accident," declared the IAEA in 2011, a claim it holds to today
.http://www.iaea.org/.../fukushima/missionsummary010611.pdf

=== Nuclear denial: From Hiroshima to Fukushima===
 http://thebulletin.org/.../nuclear-denial-hiroshima...

Nuclear denial: From Hiroshima to Fukushima
thebulletin.org
The Doomsday Clock is an internationally recognized design that conveys how close we are to destroying our civilization with dangerous technologies of our own making. First and foremost among these are nuclear weapons, but the dangers include climate-changing technologies, emerging... Read More

14-03-03 US: The end of Free Speech

OpEdNews Op Eds 

Free Speech, RIP: A Relic of the American Past

By  (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages)

"The First Amendment was intended to secure something more than an exercise in futility."--Justice John Paul Stevens, dissenting in Minnesota Board for Community Colleges v. Knight (1984)

Living in a representative republic means that each person has the right to take a stand for what they think is right, whether that means marching outside the halls of government, wearing clothing with provocative statements, or simply holding up a sign. That's what the First Amendment is supposed to be about. 

Unfortunately, as I show in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American  Police State, through a series of carefully crafted legislative steps and politically expedient court rulings, government officials have managed to disembowel this fundamental freedom, rendering it with little more meaning than the right to file a lawsuit against government officials. In fact, if the court rulings handed down in the last week of February 2014 are anything to go by, the First Amendment has, for all intents and purposes, become an exercise in futility.

On February 26, the U.S. Supreme Court in a 9-0 ruling, held that anti-nuclear activist John Denis Apel could be prosecuted for staging a protest on a public road at an Air Force base, free speech claims notwithstanding, because the public road is technically government property.

From http://www.flickr.com/photos/11316976@N00/6565209053/: no nukes
no nukes
(image by watashiwani)

Insisting that it's not safe to display an American flag in an American public school, on February 27, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that school officials were justified when they ordered three students at a California public high school to cover up their patriotic apparel emblazoned with American flags or be sent home on the Mexican holiday Cinco de Mayo, allegedly out of a concern that it might offend Hispanic students.



On February 28, a federal court dismissed Marine veteran Brandon Raub's case. Despite the fact that Raub was interrogated by Secret Service agents, handcuffed, arrested, subjected to a kangaroo court, and locked up in a mental facility for posting song lyrics and statements on Facebook critical of the government--a clear violation of his free speech rights--the court ruled that Raub's concerns about the government were far-fetched and merited such treatment.

There you have it: three rulings in three days, from three different levels of the American judicial system, and all of them aimed at suppressing free speech. Yet what most people fail to understand is that these cases are not merely about the citizenry's right to freely express themselves. Rather, these cases speak to the citizenry's right to express their concerns abouttheir government to their government, in a time, place and manner best suited to ensuring that those concerns are heard.


The First Amendment gives every American the right to "petition his government for a redress of grievances." This amounts to so much more than filing a lawsuit against the government. It works hand in hand with free speech to ensure, as Adam Newton and Ronald K.L. Collinsreport for the Five Freedoms Project, "that our leaders hear, even if they don't listen to, the electorate. Though public officials may be indifferent, contrary, or silent participants in democratic discourse, at least the First Amendment commands their audience."

The challenge we face today, however, is that government officials have succeeded in insulating themselves from their constituents, making it increasingly difficult for average Americans to make themselves seen or heard by those who most need to hear what "we the people" have to say. Indeed, while lobbyists mill in and out of the White House and the homes and offices of Congressmen, the American people are kept at a distance through free speech zones, electronic town hall meetings, and security barriers. And those who dare to breach the gap--even through silent forms of protest--are arrested for making their voices heard. 

This right to speak freely, assemble, protest and petition one's government officials for a redress of grievances is front and center right now, with the U.S. Supreme Court set to decide five free speech cases this term, the first of which, U.S. v. Apel, was just handed down. The case was based upon claims brought by John Denis Apel, an anti-war activist who holds monthly protests at Vandenburg Air Force Base near Lompoc, California. While the Court did not uphold his conviction for trespassing on military property, they doubled down on the notion that the public is subject to the whims of military commanders in matters relating to use military property, even when it intersects with public property. The Court refused to rule on Apel's First Amendment claims.

The Supreme Court is also set to decide McCullen v. Coakley, which will determine whether or not a Massachusetts law which restricts protests on public sidewalks near the entrances, exits, and driveways of abortion clinics in the state is constitutional. The facts of the case indicate that the law does not abide by a reasonable time, place, and manner restriction, and places an undue burden on protestors. However, it's unclear which way the Court will rule, especially with their refusal to clarify matters in Apel.

Free speech can certainly not be considered "free" when expressive activities across the nation are being increasingly limited, restricted to so-called free speech zones, or altogether blocked, including in front of the Supreme Court's own plaza. If citizens cannot stand out in the open on a public road and voice their disapproval of their government, its representatives and its policies, without fearing prosecution, then the First Amendment with all its robust protections for free speech, assembly and the right to petition one's government for a redress of grievances is little more than window-dressing on a store window--pretty to look at but serving little real purpose.

The case of Harold Hodge is a particularly telling illustration of the way in which the political elite in America have sheltered themselves from all correspondence and criticism.

On a snowy morning in January 2011, Harold Hodge quietly and peacefully stood in the plaza area near the steps leading to the United States Supreme Court Building, wearing a 3' X 2' sign around his neck that proclaimed: "The U.S. Gov. Allows Police To Illegally Murder And Brutalize African Americans And Hispanic People." There weren't many passersby, and he wasn't blocking anyone's way. However, after a few minutes, a police officer informed Hodge that he was violating a federal law that makes it unlawful to display any flag, banner or device designed to bring into public notice a party, organization, or movement while on the grounds of the U.S. Supreme Court and issued him three warnings to leave the plaza. Hodge refused, was handcuffed, placed under arrest, moved to a holding cell, and then was transported to U.S. Capitol Police Headquarters where he was booked and given a citation. 

According to the federal law Hodge is accused of violating, "It is unlawful to parade, stand, or move in processions or assemblages in the Supreme Court Building or grounds, or to display in the Building and grounds a flag, banner, or device designed or adapted to bring into public notice a party, organization, or movement." The penalty for violating this law is a fine of up to $5,000 and/or up to 60 days in jail. 

With the help of The Rutherford Institute, in January 2012, Hodge challenged the constitutionality of the statute barring silent expressive activity in front of the Supreme Court. A year later, in a strongly worded opinion, District Court Judge Beryl L. Howell struck down the federal law, declaring that the "the absolute prohibition on expressive activity [on the Supreme Court plaza] in the statute is unreasonable, substantially overbroad, and irreconcilable with the First Amendment." 

Incredibly, one day later, the marshal for the Supreme Court--with the approval of Chief Justice John Roberts--issued even more strident regulations outlawing expressive activity on the grounds of the high court, including the plaza. Hodge's case, along with a companion case challenging the new regulations on behalf of a broad coalition of protesters, is now making its way through the appeals process. Ironically, it will be the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court who will eventually be asked to decide the constitutionality of their own statute, yet they have already made their views on the subject quite clear. 

This desire to insulate government officials from those exercising their First Amendment rights stems from an elitist mindset which views "we the people" as different, set apart somehow, from the citizens they have been appointed to serve and represent. It is nothing new. In fact, the law under which Harold Hodge was prosecuted was enacted by Congress in 1949. In the decades since, interactions with politicians have become increasingly manufactured and distant. Press conferences, ticketed luncheons, televised speeches and one-sided town hall meetings held over the phone now largely take the place of face-to-face interaction with constituents

Additionally, there has been an increased use of so-called "free speech zones," designated areas for expressive activity used to corral and block protestors at political events from interacting with public officials. Both the Democratic and Republican parties have used these "free speech zones," some located within chain-link cages, at various conventions to mute any and all criticism of their policies. 

Clearly, the government has no interest in hearing what "we the people" have to say. Yet if Americans are not able to peacefully assemble for expressive activity outside of the halls of government or on public roads on which government officials must pass, the First Amendment has lost all meaning. If we cannot stand silently outside of the Supreme Court or the Capitol or the White House, our ability to hold the government accountable for its actions is threatened, and so are the rights and liberties that we cherish as Americans. And if we cannot proclaim our feelings about the government, no matter how controversial, on our clothing, or to passersby, or to the users of the world wide web, then the First Amendment really has become an exercise in futility.

George Orwell, always relevant to our present age, warned against this intolerance for free speech in 1945. As he noted:

The point is that the relative freedom which we enjoy depends of public opinion. The law is no protection. Governments make laws, but whether they are carried out, and how the police behave, depends on the general temper in the country. If large numbers of people are interested in freedom of speech, there will be freedom of speech, even if the law forbids it; if public opinion is sluggish, inconvenient minorities will be persecuted, even if laws exist to protect them... The notion that certain opinions cannot safely be allowed a hearing is growing. It is given currency by intellectuals who confuse the issue by not distinguishing between democratic opposition and open rebellion, and it is reflected in our growing indifference to tyranny and injustice abroad. And even those who declare themselves to be in favour of freedom of opinion generally drop their claim when it is their own adversaries who are being prosecuted.

13-03-03 Hello world!


Recent
3/3 @ 6:39 : West Hollywood, California, US
3/3 @ 6:32 : Compton, California, US
3/3 @ 6:02 : Germany, DE
3/3 @ 5:37 : Simi Valley, California, US
3/3 @ 5:37 : United States, US
3/3 @ 5:09 : Ghaziabad, IN
3/3 @ 2:54 : Miami, Florida, US
3/3 @ 2:01 : Tel Aviv, IL
3/3 @ 12:37 : Dubai, AE
3/3 @ 11:27 : Absecon, New Jersey, US
3/3 @ 6:45 : Buffalo, New York, US