Archive for Police State
No-Warrant Ruling Brings U.S. ‘Closer to Police State’
This ruling is very dangerous to our freedoms and we should follow this one as it proceeds to the Supreme Court.
2. No-Warrant Ruling Brings U.S. ‘Closer to Police State’
A “dangerous” court ruling holds that government agents can sneak onto your property, attach a tracking device to your car, and monitor your every move without a warrant.
The ruling was originally handed down in January by the three-judge U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which covers California and eight other Western states. In August, a larger group of judges decided to let it stand.
“It is a dangerous decision one that, as the dissenting judges warned, could turn America into the sort of totalitarian state imagined by George Orwell,” Adam Cohen, an attorney and former member of the New York Times editorial board, writes in Time magazine.
The case began in 2007, when Drug Enforcement Administration agents suspected Oregon resident Juan Pineda-Moreno of growing marijuana. Agents sneaked onto his property at night and attached a GPS tracking device to the underside of his Jeep, which was parked in his driveway next to his trailer home. Agents used the device to track the suspect to a marijuana growing site. He was arrested and convicted on marijuana manufacturing charges. But Pineda-Moreno challenged the DEA’s actions, claiming they violated his Fourth Amendment rights protecting him from unreasonable search and seizure. “The invasion of his driveway was wrong,” Cohen declared. “The courts have long held that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their homes and in the ‘curtilage,’ a fancy legal term for the area around the home.” But the Ninth Circuit panel ruled that Pineda-Moreno’s driveway was not private. “If a neighborhood child had walked up Pineda-Moreno’s driveway and crawled under his Jeep to retrieve a lost ball or runaway cat, Pineda-Moreno would have no grounds to complain,” the judges stated. “Thus, because Pineda-Moreno did not take steps to exclude passersby from his driveway, he cannot claim a reasonable expectation of privacy in it, regardless of whether a portion of it was located within the curtilage of his home.” The court also ruled that the underside of Pineda-Moreno’s Jeep was not private property. Chief Judge Alex Kozinski dissented from this month’s decision not to reconsider the case, stating: “The panel’s rationale for concluding that Pineda-Moreno had no reasonable expectation of privacy is even more worrisome than its disregard of Supreme Court precedent.” He also wrote: “1984 may have come a bit later than predicted, but it’s here at last.” Cohen warned: “If government agents can track people with secretly planted GPS devices virtually anytime they want, without having to go to a court for a warrant, we are one step closer to a classic police state.” But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has now ruled that tracking a person for an extended period of time with a GPS device is an invasion of privacy that requires a warrant. Observers believe the issue will probably be decided by the Supreme Court.
Police State: Senior Citizen Tasered In His Own Home
Source: Conspiracy Planet
When the police says “Stop resisting,” you better curl up and take the tasering.
In America, now officially a police state, you will be tasered in your own home if you lip off to the police.
Senior citizen Peter McFarland of Marin County, California, discovered this after he fell down the stairs outside his home last year. On June 29, 2009, McFarland tumbled down the stairs and after his wife called paramedics the cops showed up. They entered McFarland’s home and tasered him because they claimed he was suicidal.
“We want to take you to the hospital for an evaluation, you said if you had a gun, you’d shoot yourself in the head,” a deputy can be heard saying on a video of the incident captured on a taser mounted camera. McFarland said the comment was hyperbole made because he was in pain.
Department Of Justice Demonizes Constitutionalists As Extremist Criminals
Source: Public Intelligence
A recent Department of Justice guide for investigators of criminal and extremist groups lists “constitutionalists” and “survivalists” alongside organizations like Al-Qaeda and the Aryan Brotherhood. The 120-page, “Law Enforcement Sensitive” guide to“Investigating Terrorism and Criminal Extremism – Terms and Concepts” describes itself as “a glossary designed primarily as a tool for criminal justice professionals to enhance their understanding of words relating to extremist terminology, phrases, activities, symbols, organizations, and selected names that they may encounter while conducting criminal investigations or prosecutions of members of extremist organizations.”
Constitutionalist, defined by Random House’s 2010 Dictionary as an “adherent or advocate of constitutionalism or of an existing constitution”, is described in the report as a “generic term for members of the ‘patriot’ movement”. Survivalists are described in the document as fearing a “coming collapse of civilization” and are trying to prepare themselves for this collapse. Such individuals are said to have “typically stockpiled food, water, and weapons, especially the latter, and instructed themselves on topics ranging from first aid to childbirth to edible plants”.
The guide defines the term “New World Order” as being “used by conspiracy theorists to refer to a global conspiracy designed to implement worldwide socialism”. The Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Commission, and Council on Foreign Relations are described as organizations “targeted by right-wing extremists for conspiring to dominate the world”. The guide also defines “One World Government” as the “concept that there will ultimately be a single governing body that will control the world”, adding that “some right-wing extremists fear this occurring, believing that white people will be in the minority, with Jewish people ultimately controlling the world”.
While the document’s introduction does state that “the fact that an entry appears in this publication does not imply a connection to illegal activity”, it goes on to say that the guide consists of “terms that may be germane to members of an extremist movement” or are “singularly employed by specific extremist groups”. The obvious result of the inclusion of terms such as “Bilderberg Group” and “Trilateral Commission” in a report titled “Investigating Terrorism and Criminal Extremism” is that law enforcement officials unaware of these groups will tend to associate legitimate discussion as “extremist” speech. This diminishes the credibility of any person attempting to rationally discuss such groups and fosters a perception that any discussion of such groups could be associated with a supposedly “extremist” ideology.
Schools ‘groom kids for surveillance state’?
Source: Pogo Was Right
Schools are increasingly invading student privacy both in school and outside of school. Are schools grooming youth to passively accept a surveillance state where they have no expectation of privacy anywhere? A PogoWasRight.org commentary.
The increasing use of student surveillance and intrusion of school districts into students’ extra-curricular conduct should alarm us all. Whether it is a district surveilling students in their bedrooms via webcam, conducting random drug or locker searches,strip-searching students, lowering the standard for searching students to “reasonable suspicion” from “probable cause,” disciplining students for conduct outside of school hours, searching their cellphones and text messages, or allegedly forcing them to undergo pregnancy testing, student privacy is under increasing threat.
The other day I mentioned a Connecticut school district that wanted to require students to carry an ID card with an RFID chip so that they could track their location. The surveillance capability included locating the student if they were off school premises and in town. Today, I came across another news story from earlier this month that also involves tracking students. KTVU in California reported that the Contra Costa County School District began introducing a tracking system for preschool students that would alert staff when a student leaves school premises. In order to accomplish that, students will reportedly be required to wear a jersey that contains the RFID tag that uses Wi-Fi to send signals to sensors located throughout the school.
I realize that some might argue that these are just little pre-schoolers and of course, we want to protect their safety, etc., but keep in mind that one of the major justifications for the program is to save staff time in terms of having to manually record attendance, etc. In exchange for that time and cost-saving, what price do we pay psychologically as a society? It strikes me that schools are grooming our youth to simply accept being tracked and monitored wherever they go and that anything they do, anywhere, can be used against them in school or elsewhere.
Is this really how we want to raise our children? To be sheep who accept being tracked and who have little sense of privacy or entitlement to privacy?
A study released last year by Fordham Law’s Center on Law and Information Privacy found that the education sector was not doing enough to protect the privacy of student information. It did not, however, look at the question of whether schools were actually invading student privacy and systematically eroding student privacy rights and autonomy. It’s time for a national dialogue about student privacy, while there are still some remnants of it left.
The Return Of Civil Disobedience
Source: Personal Liberty Digest
It’s good to see civil disobedience making a comeback.
As NBC’s Washington, D.C., affiliate reported recently, a group of students who were members of the conservative Young America’s Foundation High School Conference were touring the Capitol in June. While visiting the Lincoln Memorial, the group spontaneously began singing the National Anthem when a U.S. Park Police officer tried to shut them down.
Rather than be intimidated by the fascist brown shirt on duty, a girl in the group is heard to say on the video, “This is America, we sing the national anthem. Who says on the Lincoln Memorial we can’t sing the national anthem, that’s what I want to know?”
Mirroring Bush-era police state, Obama supports DNA sampling of public when arrested
Source: Natural News – David Gutierrez
In an interview with John Walsh of “America’s Most Wanted,” President Obama voiced his support for the mandatory collection of DNA samples from U.S. residents who have not been convicted of any crime.
“It’s the right thing to do [to] tighten the grip,” he said.
Obama told Walsh that he supports the position of the federal government and the 18 states that have passed laws requiring the collection of DNA samples from all people arrested for anything from a felony to a misdemeanor. These DNA samples then become part of law enforcement databases that can then be used in future investigations.
In California, police are also allowed to use DNA databases to conduct “familial searches” for people who are close relatives of the person who presumably left behind genetic material at a crime scene. Police can then question the unknown person’s relatives in the hopes of gaining more information about them.
“Regarding fingerprinting, the U.S. Supreme Court has said for more than 30 years that it is not a search,” said ACLU attorney Michael Risher. “But DNA, the method of taking it, is an invasion of our body. The more significant the invasion, the more justification thegovernment needs.
“Our position is before you take somebody’s genetic information, you need either a warrant or that person needs to be convicted of a felony with all the procedural protections anybody gets when you are charged and tried with a felony.”
Obama’s support of compulsory DNA sampling is only the most recent decision to bring him under fire from civil liberties advocates, who accuse him of continuing Bush-era policies. Other such decisions include the refusal to close Guantanamo Bay, reveal information about domestic spying programs (or halt those programs), or repeal the Patriot Act.
Sources for this story include: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/20… ;http://littlealexinwonderland.wordp… ; http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u….
VIDEO: Congressman tacitly admits that United States is run by federal dictatorship, Constitution is worthless
Source: YouTube.com
New Massachusetts law extends censorship to IM, e-mail, Web
Source: Ars Technica
It has long been illegal in Massachusetts to provide minors with “matter harmful to minors” under the state’s “Crimes against chastity, morality, decency, and good order” law. The law targets obscenity, but only its physical forms, which makes it easier to enforce. When little Johnny steps inside the adult video store, clerks can check his ID before selling him that DVD of industrial sexuality. And anyone trying show hardcore porn to a 13-year old knows exactly what they’re doing, and who they’re doing it to.
In April, this “harmful to minors” law received a brief update—not more than a couple of paragraphs—but they had profound implications for free expression. The new law extended “harmful to minors” to the Internet. In addition to smutty books, films, pamphlets, pictures, plays, dances, and statues (!), Massachusetts decided that the “matter” which might harm minors should now include:
electronic mail, instant messages, text messages, and any other communication created by means of use of the Internet or wireless network, whether by computer, telephone, or any other device or by any transfer of signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, data, or intelligence of any nature transmitted in whole or in part by a wire, radio, electromagnetic, photo-electronic or photo-optical system.
The law went into effect yesterday, and today it was challenged in court by the ACLU, the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, and several booksellers. By going digital, the expanded law suddenly moves away from the shop counter and onto the ‘Net, where it “threatens Internet communications nationwide and even worldwide.” READ FULL STORY
Next WikiLeaks Release May Involve ECHELON-like Project
WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange. (Colbert Report)
WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange. (Colbert Report)
SOURCE: ABC NEWS
HAYDEN’S NOTE:
Wondering what the ECHELON project is all about? Go here to find out more!
(Essentially, ECHELON is a code word for an automated global interception and relay system operated by the intelligence agencies the world over.)
WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange has given his strongest indication yet about the next big leak from his whistleblower organisation.
There has been rampant speculation about WikiLeaks’ next revelation following its recent release of a top secret military video showing an attack in Baghdad which killed more than a dozen people, including two employees of the Reuters news agency.
Bradley Manning, a US military intelligence officer based in Iraq, has been arrested on suspicion of leaking the video but it is also claimed that Manning bragged online that he had handed WikiLeaks 260,000 secret US State Department cables.
In an interview with the ABC’s Foreign Correspondent, Mr Assange said cryptically of WikiLeaks’ current project:
“I can give an analogy. If there had been mass spying that had affected many, many people and organisations and the details of that mass spying were released then that is something that would reveal that the interests of many people had been abused.”
He agreed it would be of the “calibre” of publishing information about the way the top secret Echelon system – the US-UK electronic spying network which eavesdrops on worldwide communications traffic – had been used. READ FULL STORY
Backlash grows against full-body scanners in airports
Dave Couts, a program analyst for the Transportation Security Administration, demonstrates how to stand in the new body-scanning machine at Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix. Some fliers are uncomfortable being scanned by the machines.
Source: Gary Stoller, USA TODAY
Opposition to new full-body imaging machines to screen passengers and the government’s deployment of them at most major airports is growing.
Many frequent fliers complain they’re time-consuming or invade their privacy. The world’s airlines say they shouldn’t be used for primary security screening. And questions are being raised about possible effects on passengers’ health.
“The system takes three to five times as long as walking through a metal detector,” says Phil Bush of Atlanta, one of many fliers on USA TODAY’s Road Warriors panel who oppose the machines. “This looks to be yet another disaster waiting to happen.”
BODY SCANNERS: Concerns about privacy and health set off debate
The machines — dubbed by some fliers as virtual strip searches — were installed at many airports in March after a Christmas Day airline bombing attempt. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has spent more than $80 million for about 500 machines, including 133 now at airports. It plans to install about 1,000 by the end of next year.
The machines are running into complaints and questions here and overseas:
•The International Air Transport Association, which represents 250 of the world’s airlines, including major U.S. carriers, says the TSA lacks “a strategy and a vision” of how the machines fit into a comprehensive checkpoint security plan. “The TSA is putting the cart before the horse,” association spokesman Steve Lott says.
•Security officials in Dubai said this month they wouldn’t use the machines because they violate “personal privacy,” and information about their “side effects” on health isn’t known.
•Last month, the European Commission said in a report that “a rigorous scientific assessment” of potential health risks is needed before machines are deployed there. It also said screening methods besides the new machines should be used on pregnant women, babies, children and people with disabilities
