GBTV - Where the Truth Lives

Election Season 2014

And it has brought us to this trainwreck called ObamaCare and we have bankrupted our kids and grandkids!

We are now headed into the 2014 Election Season and common sense and conservatism are on the rise. Please stand-up and be counted!

Reading Collusion: How the Media Stole the 2012 Election is a great place to start!

The Founding Father's Real Reason for the Second Amendment

And remember the words of Thomas Jefferson "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." See Video of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp’s Congressional Testimony: What the Second Amendment is REALLY For, below (u-tube HERE).

The Leaders Are Here... Palin, Cruz, Lee, Paul, Chaffetz....

T'S A WONDERFUL LIFE

Can You Really Still Believe That None of These People Would Have Done a Better Job???

Bloggers' Rights at EFF

SIGN THE PETITION TODAY...

Showing posts with label police state. Show all posts
Showing posts with label police state. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

This Week’s Watcher’s Council Nominations – Black And White Edition

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/assets/Obama%20hoodie.jpg

Welcome to the Watcher’s Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the ‘sphere, and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council.Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday.

Council News:

This week, Ask Marion and The Pirate’s Cove earned honorable mention status with some great articles.

So, let’s see what we have this week….

Council Submissions
Honorable Mentions
Non-Council Submissions

Enjoy! And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that!

Bill Whittle: The best take you will hear on George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin

Bill Whittle: The best take you will hear on George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin

Video:  AFTERBURNER w/ BILL WHITTLE: The Lynching

Evil Racist White Hispanic Rescues Family From Overturned Truck

Saturday, March 3, 2012

“Embarrassed and Humiliated” TSA Apologizes For…

The Transportation Security Administration has apologized after a mother in Hawaii was left “embarrassed and humiliated” after an agent ordered her to pump breast milk in an airport bathroom to prove her electric pump was real.

Amy Strand was traveling with her 9-month-old daughter on her way home from Kauai Wednesday when she was told she would not be allowed to board until she could show the agent full bottles of breast milk, Hawaii ABC affiliate KITV-TV reported.

Just minutes before going through security Wednesday, she said she had done “what no nursing mother wants to do” and dumped the breast milk from the bottles, thinking they would be a screening hassle. But when she was going through the line, the agent stopped her and asked to look at her equipment, which included the pump, a cooler pack and the empty bottles. Because recently-changed TSA guidelines permit women to fly with breast milk but treat electric pumps as medical equipment, Strand had to prove the pump was medically necessary to be able to fly with it.

Read more at The Blaze. By Madeleine Morgenstern – h/t to Anglo at Sovereignty in Colorado

Wednesday, February 29, 2012

HR 347 Just Passed Without Notice - US "Trespass Bill" will make protest illegal

‘Trespass Bill’ will make protest illegal

Just when you thought the government couldn’t ruin the First Amendment any further: The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it.

Under H.R. 347, a federal law will formally be applied to such instances, but will also allow the government to bring charges to protesters, demonstrators and activists at political events and other outings across America.

This is absolute tyranny.  No doubt about it.  Makes it easy to do roundups and protects their butts (now they're all Kings) by stomping all over us.  Even in little ways... think of Town Hall meetings... being carted away for asking a question the Congress Member doesn't like.  You Betcha!

The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347 late Monday, 02.27.12, a bill which is being dubbed the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011.  Hmmmm…

Washington: US park police detains a Christian religious activist during a pro-life demonstration in front of the White House in Washington on February 16, 2012. (AFP Photo/Jewel Samad)

Just when you thought the government couldn’t ruin the First Amendment any further: The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it.

The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347 late Monday, a bill which is being dubbed the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. In the bill, Congress officially makes it illegal to trespass on the grounds of the White House, which, on the surface, seems not just harmless and necessary, but somewhat shocking that such a rule isn’t already on the books. The wording in the bill, however, extends to allow the government to go after much more than tourists that transverse the wrought iron White House fence.

Under the act, the government is also given the power to bring charges against Americans engaged in political protest anywhere in the country.

Under current law, White House trespassers are prosecuted under a local ordinance, a Washington, DC legislation that can bring misdemeanor charges for anyone trying to get close to the president without authorization. Under H.R. 347, a federal law will formally be applied to such instances, but will also allow the government to bring charges to protesters, demonstrators and activists at political events and other outings across America.

The new legislation allows prosecutors to charge anyone who enters a building without permission or with the intent to disrupt a government function with a federal offense if Secret Service is on the scene, but the law stretches to include not just the president’s palatial Pennsylvania Avenue home. Under the law, any building or grounds where the president is visiting — even temporarily — is covered, as is any building or grounds “restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance."

It’s not just the president who would be spared from protesters, either.

Covered under the bill is any person protected by the Secret Service. Although such protection isn’t extended to just everybody, making it a federal offense to even accidently disrupt an event attended by a person with such status essentially crushes whatever currently remains of the right to assemble and peacefully protest.

Hours after the act passed, presidential candidate Rick Santorum was granted Secret Service protection. For the American protester, this indeed means that glitter-bombing the former Pennsylvania senator is officially a very big no-no, but it doesn’t stop with just him. Santorum’s coverage under the Secret Service began on Tuesday, but fellow GOP hopeful Mitt Romney has already been receiving such security. A campaign aide who asked not to be identified confirmed last week to CBS News that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has sought Secret Service protection as well. Even former contender Herman Cain received the armed protection treatment when he was still in the running for the Republican Party nod.

In the text of the act, the law is allowed to be used against anyone who knowingly enters or remains in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so, but those grounds are considered any area where someone — rather it’s President Obama, Senator Santorum or Governor Romney — will be temporarily visiting, whether or not the public is even made aware. Entering such a facility is thus outlawed, as is disrupting the orderly conduct of “official functions,” engaging in disorderly conduct “within such proximity to” the event or acting violent to anyone, anywhere near the premises. Under that verbiage, that means a peaceful protest outside a candidate’s concession speech would be a federal offense, but those occurrences covered as special event of national significance don’t just stop there, either. And neither does the list of covered persons that receive protection.

Outside of the current presidential race, the Secret Service is responsible for guarding an array of politicians, even those from outside America. George W Bush is granted protection until ten years after his administration ended, or 2019, and every living president before him is eligible for life-time, federally funded coverage. Visiting heads of state are extended an offer too, and the events sanctioned as those of national significance — a decision that is left up to the US Department of Homeland Security — extends to more than the obvious. While presidential inaugurations and meeting of foreign dignitaries are awarded the title, nearly three dozen events in all have been considered a National Special Security Event (NSSE) since the term was created under President Clinton. Among past events on the DHS-sanctioned NSSE list are Super Bowl XXXVI, the funerals of Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford, most State of the Union addresses and the 2008 Democratic and Republican National Conventions.

With Secret Service protection awarded to visiting dignitaries, this also means, for instance, that the federal government could consider a demonstration against any foreign president on American soil as a violation of federal law, as long as it could be considered disruptive to whatever function is occurring.

When thousands of protesters are expected to descend on Chicago this spring for the 2012 G8 and NATO summits, they will also be approaching the grounds of a National Special Security Event. That means disruptive activity, to whichever court has to consider it, will be a federal offense under the act.

And don’t forget if you intend on fighting such charges, you might not be able to rely on evidence of your own. In the state of Illinois, videotaping the police, under current law, brings criminals charges. Don’t fret. It’s not like the country will really try to enforce it — right?

On the bright side, does this mean that the law could apply to law enforcement officers reprimanded for using excessive force on protesters at political events? Probably. Of course, some fear that the act is being created just to keep those demonstrations from ever occuring, and given the vague language on par with the loose definition of a “terrorist” under the NDAA, if passed this act is expected to do a lot more harm to the First Amendment than good.

United States Representative Justin Amash (MI-03) was one of only three lawmakers to vote against the act when it appeared in the House late Monday. Explaining his take on the act through his official Facebook account on Tuesday, Rep. Amash writes, “The bill expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it's illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it's illegal.”

“Some government officials may need extraordinary protection to ensure their safety. But criminalizing legitimate First Amendment activity — even if that activity is annoying to those government officials — violates our rights,” adds the representative.

Now that the act has overwhelmingly made it through the House, the next set of hands to sift through its pages could very well be President Barack Obama; the US Senate had already passed the bill back on February 6. Less than two months ago, the president approved the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, essentially suspending habeas corpus from American citizens. Could the next order out of the Executive Branch be revoking some of the Bill of Rights? Only if you consider the part about being able to assemble a staple of the First Amendment, really. Don’t worry, though. Obama was, after all, a constitutional law professor. When he signed the NDAA on December 31, he accompanied his signature with a signing statement that let Americans know that, just because he authorized the indefinite detention of Americans didn’t mean he thought it was right.

Should President Obama suspend the right to assemble, Americans might expect another apology to accompany it in which the commander-in-chief condemns the very act he authorizes. If you disagree with such a decision, however, don’t take it to the White House. Sixteen-hundred Pennsylvania Avenue and the vicinity is, of course, covered under this act.

Related:

HR 347  -  Thomas.loc.gov  -  This is pre-emptive law – all dissent..freedom of speech

HR 347 just passed - is this real?

National Responder Support Camp (NRSC)

Solicitation Number: HSFE70-12-R-0033

The House passed bill H.R. 347. A bill that makes it illegal to protest ...

(HR 347)  -  http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20120227/BILLS-112hr347-SUS.pdf

H.R. 347: Goodbye, First Amendment: 'Trespass Bill' will make ...

Alerts

Obama Fights to Retain Warrantless Wiretapping: Despite being propelled to victory by progressive supporters critical of the Bush administration’s record on civil liberties, President Barack Obama has directed the Justice Department to defend many of the policies of George W. Bush, including warrantless wiretapping. Last week, the Justice Department filed papers asking the Supreme Court to overturn an appeals court ruling that allowed the continuation of an ACLU lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a 2008 law giving the government unprecedented authority to monitor Americans’ international emails and phone calls. AllGov -  more

Homeland Security Lied to Congress About Spying on US Citizens: All this is happening under the Obama administration, yet those who complained about Bush listening to known terrorist associates are no longer screaming bloody murder because it’s their guy who is running the show. Yes, the Department of Homeland Security has been caught in a lie. They are monitoring US citizens, including journalists, who oppose Obama’s agenda (or use certain words) with the assistance of Facebook, Twitter and other forms of social media. DHS, under the Obama regime, believes US citizens are the enemy. more

It’s Time to Accept Reality That It’s Too Late: It is too late to save your neighbor. It is too late to save your friend. It is too late to save a family member who will not listen or believes in the power of a global solution. It is too late to plan for a world of freedom and individualism. Atlas is shrugging, yet nobody cares. The power of the people is now the rule of law. Sadly the “people” who are in control are neither those of the Founders or of God. Prepare accordingly. more

The Culture and Mindset of FEMA and Emergency Responders: An Inside Look: I recently had the privilege to interview a highly credible inside source who has worked in the emergency response field for many years. He has been to dozens of trainings over the years. As an insider, he has been to many FEMA training centers, and has access to highly classified information. What my anonymous source shared with me about the culture and mindset of the emergency responder community was very alarming. I will give you a couple of quotes to get started: more

Steve Quayle Program Note: Steve and Greg Evensen guest on Omega Man Radio in a 3-hr program Thurs. March 1; 6p.m. PST / 7p.m. MTN / 8p.m. CST / 9p.m. EST. Topic: Catastrophic Upheaval In All Realms Is Now In Motion-The Coming Slaughter. Listen Live / Chat. Call In: 1-917-889-2745.

Related:

US “Trespass Bill” will make protest illegal  Listen to this article. Powered by Odiogo.com

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Silent Running – The Targeting of Americans

clip_image001

Hear that? That’s the shredding of the Constitution and your rights as America sinks into a full-fledged police state. Not only are the government goons now shutting down more and more sites at an alarming rate (without due process), they are now putting their literal sites on Americans who fall under their personal definition of ‘terrorist.’ And the last time I read the Southern Poverty Law Center tripe, that included Tea Partiers, patriots, Christians, Libertarians, gun enthusiasts and pretty much anyone who does not tow the government line. Welcome to Obama’s Third Reich – American style…

While Americans were giving thanks for what little we have left, our politicians were cooking up a doozy of a surprise for us just in time for the holidays. And who can you thank for this poisonous present? Well, none other than Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) – a Progressive on the Left and a Progressive on the Right. Now that’s bipartisanship to die for, literally.

>From the ACLU via The Daily Sheeple:

The Senate is gearing up for a vote on Monday or Tuesday that goes to the very heart of who we are as Americans. The Senate will be voting on a bill that will direct American military resources not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war zone, but at American citizens and other civilians far from any battlefield — even people in the United States itself.

…

The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. Even Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised his concerns about the NDAA detention provisions during last night’s Republican debate. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself.

The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing.

I know it sounds incredible. New powers to use the military worldwide, even within the United States? Hasn’t anyone told the Senate that Osama bin Laden is dead, that the president is pulling all of the combat troops out of Iraq and trying to figure out how to get combat troops out of Afghanistan too? And American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?

If that doesn’t make your blood run stone cold, I don’t know what will. I looked at the bill and it looks to me as if it is referring more to the Department of Justice and Homeland Security than the military, but hey, either way, it’s a crap sandwich for Constitutional Conservatives like me and all other patriotic Americans. I can’t stand the ACLU, but this time they are right and people better pay attention. If I’m wrong about the military angle on this, then our boys and girls will be forced to turn on Americans or be ‘disciplined.’ That could be a life and death decision for them. Pray for our troops – I know in my heart they will not turn on their family and friends. They would be forced into a blatant violation of the Posse Comitatus Act and that would be the final straw to break in the birth pains of a civil war.

I don’t know about you, but I’m sick and tired of elitists telling us we are overreacting, while legislation is being crafted and debated in secret, while we lose more and more of our freedoms with each passing day. All of us should be royally pissed off. You don’t actually think these asshat politicians have our best interests and security in mind do you? Damned right they don’t. They want to control us, enslave us, shut us up and close us down. I know that I won’t go down without a fight, what say you?

If they pass this monstrosity, they can come to your home in the dead of night and take you with no due process and you will simply disappear. They will never give the reason – the fact they consider you an enemy of the State will be all it takes. That’s not America. That’s a fascist totalitarian State and I’ve got news for America – it will happen if the Progressives stay in power. Many, many will disappear and many more will die.

The vote on this either happened today or will take place tomorrow. Remember who voted and how. I know Udall out of Utah was presenting an amendment that would neutralize a lot of this, but I don’t hold a lot of optimism that he will prevail.

From InfoWars:

“I would also point out that these provisions raise serious questions as to who we are as a society and what our Constitution seeks to protect,” Colorado Senator Mark Udall said in a speech last week. One section of these provisions, section 1031, would be interpreted as allowing the military to capture and indefinitely detain American citizens on U.S. soil. Section 1031 essentially repeals the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 by authorizing the U.S. military to perform law enforcement functions on American soil. That alone should alarm my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, but there are other problems with these provisions that must be resolved.”

Convinced yet? Silent running indeed. I suggest you buy food, silver and keep a gun by your door.

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton - the NoisyRoom

Related:

Have a look at this Website Take Down Order on Scrid.com  http://www.scribd.com/doc/73747279/USAHM-Take-Down  - h/t to Alternative News

Senate Legislation: Senate To Vote on Legislation to Detain Americans Without Charge or Trial

Saturday, October 22, 2011

Woman Roughed Up, Arrested for Reciting the Constitution During TSA Inspection

This is a story you will want to read!  IF every American did what she did while in the airport screening area we’d be a step closer to winning our freedom back!

Oct. 17, 2011

Albuquerque International Sunport Security Checkpoint:

I pass a camera crew filming the ticket counter. I stop and consider telling them what I am about to do, but decide against it. They probably won't care. Instead, I wheel my baggage to the security area.

I can feel my heart beat in my chest. I've never done anything like this. I've always said “Yes sir,” even when I didn't agree. Even this simple act fills me with conflicting emotions.

New Mexico is far warmer than my native Pacific Northwest. I'm sweating by the time I reach the first inspection of my ID. I'm sure I already look like a terrorist. The TSA agent, perched on his stool, takes no notice. I look enough like my driver's license and I have a valid airline ticket. He black lights my ID and lets me pass with hardly a glance.

I've come here to moonlight from my real job. My daughter had an operation, and I had to come up with thousands in deductible. She's in college and, so far, I've managed to keep her from becoming a debt slave, like her mother. I took eight extra weekends of work in the Land of Enchantment to cover the cost. I'm lucky, I guess, I can do that. Others, with fewer job opportunities, have no choice but to go bankrupt.

My heart kicks it up another notch when I get to the conveyor belt. Shouldn't have had that coffee this morning but thank God I didn't eat anything, or I'd be hugging the trash can right now.

Come on, I tell myself, what are they going to do? Confiscate your toothpaste? Say something mean to you? So what. Relax. You can do this. You should do this. You have to do this.

I take off my shoes and strip my backpack of computer and the baggie of incidentals. I stand in line while my armpits grow embarrassingly moist and I feel my heart race. I think, Get a hold of yourself. You're being a drama queen.

When it is my turn, I decline to go through the monitor that scans under your clothes, as I always do. The TSA agent starts his spiel about how safe it is. I've done my research. His statements are questionable, but that is not why I am doing this. I start my own spiel.

"The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution reads: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, an particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

-----

I'm speaking loud and clear so those around me can hear. Before I get to "unreasonable search" a man in an ill-fitting suit and a tie marches up to me. He tells me I was disrupting his operation. I have no idea what his position is. He stands in front of the metal detector--the first place they usually screen me. He tells me I am holding up the line. I drop my voice and tell him to go ahead and screen me. I'll take the pat down. But that's not what he wants. He wants me to shut up. I continue reading the Fourth Amendment.

He asks me to go with him to some undisclosed location to “talk”. He indicates with his hand somewhere back toward ticketing, away from being screened. I decline. He tries to gently guide me with a hand on my elbow, like we're on a date, pushing me back up the line. I stand firm. I want to go forward, let them pat me down while I read the Fourth Amendment to my fellow citizens.

He asks me what airline I'm on. I have seen no badge or ID. I ask him if he has a warrant for the information. He looks at me dumbfounded. He sees the United boarding pass in my hand. He tells me he won't allow me to fly. I have no idea if he has that sort of authority.

I say as loudly and clearly as I can, "I am being told I can not fly for reading you the Fourth Amendment."

He says, "If you keep this up I'll call the police."

I say as loud as I can, "You are going to arrest me for reading the Constitution?"

"You are disrupting the screening process, and yes we will arrest you."

Again, I say I will be screened but not by the machine. They make no effort to walk me through the metal detector or find a female officer to frisk me. He tries again to walk me out of the area. I stand my ground and read the First Amendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise there of, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for redress of grievances."

The police do come, two of them. A young man and a grizzled officer with a road map of wrinkles lining his face. The young man stands in front of me and now I am terrified. They aren't just going to take my toothpaste. Why didn't I ask the camera crew to come--take the chance of getting the brush off? They might not do this, if there was a camera. Do I have the will to continue? I hear his voice asking for my name over the thudding of my heart in my ears.  Do I have to give it to him? I'm not sure.

I look behind him to the startled mass of silent passengers. "If you have a cell phone camera, this would make good You Tube footage." It is an act of desperation, and I don't see anyone reach for their phone.

They jack hammer questions at me, name, where am I from, phone number, etc. I lose track, I can't tell which questions I am obligated to answer and which I'm not. I concentrate on the officer in front of me. I think I know what the police can and can't do. He asks me my name, again, and I ask "Do you have a warrant or am I under arrest?"

He sees the license and plane ticket still in my hand and tries to take them. I pull them back. "Do you have a warrant to remove those?" He lets them go.

Guy with a Tie tells the cops I won't be flying. The police try to push me out of the area. I stand my ground.

"You are giving up your Constitutional rights for something that only has a 1 in 25 million chance of happening. Fifty times less than death by lightening or being struck by an asteroid." I call to the herd of passengers. They stare at me dazed.

The cops push me with more aggression and tell me that if I don't quit, I will be arrested.

I yell, “Thomas Jefferson said, 'those who would give up their liberty for their security deserve neither.'”

They physically push me out of the security area. I try to dig in my heels and resist, but my stocking feet slide over the tile floor.

I shout, "When you allow the Bill of Rights to be violated, you deprive your children of the  government your parents gave you. That is neither reasonable or responsible."

They stop pushing me at the end of the security check point and I regain my footing.

The old goat of a cop shoves me. "Get the hell out of here!" he yells, "Go on, stop causin' trouble."

I am in my stocking feet, with no cell phone, wallet or back pack. I stare at his snaring face and I can't. I just can't walk away. In for a penny, in for a pound. I sit down.

Instantly, my right hand is yanked behind my back and the cuffs are snapped on so tight they cut my skin. I grit my teeth, bite my tongue and let them have the left hand as well. He yanks the ID and boarding pass out of my hand. He pulls me up before he tells me to stand, but I scramble to my feet so I won't be resisting arrest. I walk where I am directed. At the first people I pass, I shout, "I am being arrested for reading the Constitution of the United States."

Old Goat lifts my hands up so high it hurts.

I continue to yell. People walking to the gate stare wide-eyed, but no one stops. In my hometown of Arcata, someone would have whipped out a cell phone and filmed it for You Tube, or at least “Shame!”ed the police for this act of cruelty.

A shout comes from behind me, "You are not being arrested."

I switch to, "I am being battered for reading the Constitution of the United States."

Old Goat pushes my hands up to the level of my shoulder blades, forcing me to walk bent over. I grunt with the pain but I won't give in to him.

"I am being battered for reading the Constitution of the United States, and when I tell you that he hurts me more."

Now my hands are over my head and it's hard to breathe. My eyes water, but I will not cry. My voice is high pitched with the strain of it. I have to pause to pant between my word, but I'm all-in.

"I...pant...am being battered...pant...for reading the Constitution...pant...and when I tell you that...pant...he hurts me more."

I am actually glad when we reach the holding cell. They throw me inside and slam the door with all the drama of any cop show.

The cell is clean and small, secured with a security door you would put on the front of your house. I sit on the bench at the far wall. My wrists, especially the right, are killing me. My mouth is parched and I am gasping.

Suddenly, I am filled with self-doubt. The bad machine doesn't know it is a bad machine. I say a prayer. Have I done the wrong thing? I've never stood up like this before--am I a bad person?

Calm descends. No. My words were the truth. If I can't turn to a fellow citizen and say, “Hey the TSA isn't obeying the Constitution. They're acting like this is a totalitarian state. What do you think?,” then it's because I live in a totalitarian state. I have acted on the side of democracy, so I can look the next generation in the face and say, “At least I tried.”

Young cop sits at a desk outside my security door. I hear Old Goat in the adjoining room tell someone, "We arrested her for disorderly conduct."

I yell, "That is the first time I've heard a charge." I do not add that there have been no Miranda rights or "You're under arrest." statement. In fact, they kept insisting while I was being marched through ticketing I was not under arrest--just cuffed and brutalized.

They ignore me. Old Goat asks for a statement from Guy with a Tie.

I ask, "Can I go back and get a statement from the people who witnessed it?"

Of course, there is no response.

I turn to young cop. "How does it feel to be one of the brown shirts."

"What?"

"You can look it up later," I say.

He says, "Did you listen to what people were saying?"

"I listened to what you told me. I responded to your questions."

"No--to the people in the airport? They were shouting for you to shut up."

True, one of them in the back of the line was irritated by the delay. The rest looked on wide-eyed and confused. I don't remember anyone shouting encouragement, but it was hard concentrating on the crowd with so many men in my face.

I try a different tactic. "Didn't you take an oath to defend the Constitution?"

"Look, we're just trying to keep you safe."

"The thing you are keeping me safe from, only has a 1 in 25 million chance of occurring. I'm more likely to win the lottery today."

"Maybe you should have bought a ticket."

I sigh and switch tactics again. “I know you have a job to do. I bet when you got into this it was to be of service. But how do you feel about what you just did?”

"I followed the rules and did this by the book. You disobeyed an officer when you wouldn't give me your license."

"I wasn't under arrest. You had no right to take anything from me. What if you book doesn't follow the Constitution, the highest law in the land?"

"It's not that big a deal. It's for everyone's safety. We don't want to take the risk. You don't have to fly you know. You give up your rights when you fly." (Yes, he really said that.)

"You know, as well as I do, I do have to fly. I have a job, too. I got to feed by family, too. That's just an excuse for ignoring the Constitution. What if they say you need to give up your rights  in order drive a car, or board a bus. Where is your line in the sand that can't be crossed. You know where mine is."

He chews on his lip, turning this over in his mind.

“I know about orders. I have to follow rules, too,” I continue. “Would it surprise you to know I was in the Air Force once?”

He looks me in the face, really seeing me for the first time. “Yes, actually, it would.”

“Twenty years. I'm a retired Lieutenant Colonel.”

"How are those cuffs? Are they too tight?"

"They're a bit snug,” I smile at him, “I wouldn't mind them a little looser."

He unlocks the door, and I turn my back so he can loosen the cuffs but he takes them off. He asks over my shoulder, "Are you thirsty? Would you like some water?"

I turn rubbing my protesting right wrist. There is a half inch dent in my skin outlining the cuff. "I'd love some water."

He brings a cold bottle and shuts the door. I'm grateful when the chill of the water hits my hot throat. I down half the bottle before I even realize it.

Guy in a Tie comes to the cage door. He asks if the address on my license is correct. I confirm that it is. He asks my phone number.  I ask if he is an officer of the law and does he have a warrant. He asks if I am refusing to talk to him. I ask if I am legally obligated to give him information. He asks again if I am refusing to talk to him. I tell him I am refusing to answer questions, and he leaves.

Young cop comes to the door. "What's your name?"

I sigh and ask about a warrant.

"We have your license. That's not why I am asking. I just wanted to know your name."

I give him my first name--the one on the license since they already have it. "What's you name?" I ask.

"Jared (not his real name)."

"Pleased to meet you Jared. Wish it was under better circumstances."

He nods and smiles.

A new man comes to the door. Marty (also not a real name) has a better fitting suit than Guy with a Tie. Polite is apparently in his job description.

"If I could get you home tonight, would you like that?" They must have hired him from a pool of telephone solicitors.

"Depends on the situation."

"But you would like that?"

"My husband would like it."

"Well, I'm married. Making the spouse happy usually makes my life better."

I can't deny this, and I nod. He disappears and returns. He offers to get me on a later flight if I take a misdemeanor charge of Disorderly Conduct. I feel like I am giving in, but what can I do? I actually do have to go to work tomorrow.

He says there is the little matter of getting through airport security. I say that I never declined a physical search, it was never offered. My intent was to read the Constitution, while it was happening. He speaks to someone in the next room. I ask who he is talking to and Guy with a Tie emerges.

"You refused to talk to me."

"No, I refused to give you personal information you were not entitled to."

"You refused to be searched."

"I never refused. You never offered. You only offered to remove me from the area."

"You don't have a right to disrupt the screening."

"You disrupted the screening. I just read the Constitution."

Marty intervenes. Clearly, his job is to get this resolved today. He breaks us up and I ask him, "So next week, when I have to fly again, what's going to happen when I read the Constitution?"

I actually feel pity for the way he looks at me. I have just made his day a living hell and I really do feel sorry for him and for calling Jared a Brown Shirt.

"Let's just get through today,” he says.

I agree to be searched and tell them I will read the Constitution in a normal voice while they do it. This is not good enough for Guy with a Tie. He says if I read the statement, I can't pay attention to what the frisking officer tells me. You know, how she is going to put her hands here and there and use the back of her hand to check my "sensitive areas". They tell me I need to listen to this, I kid you not, for my own safety. I say I will only read while she is not speaking. That won't do either, because I won't be concentrating on her instructions. Seriously, this was their rational explanation to me for continuing to violate my First and Fourth Amendment rights. I have to get home so I finally acquiesce.

Marty asks if I could be released and Jared lets me out. They give me back my shoes. Old Goat explains that I could await arraignment next Monday, or take the misdemeanor. I say I have already agreed to the misdemeanor.

“OK,” he says, “then you need to wait 'til Monday.” He leaves again.

"Wait a minute.” I call after him, “I don't think I understood the options. Could you come back and explain them to me?" There is only silence. My heart is beating again.

"I said I was taking the misdemeanor. Did I not understand what that was?" Monday is  a week away. My job and my husband will kill me.

Jared comes to the rescue. He gets Old Goat to write up the misdemeanor charge and explains I have to appear before the judge here in New Mexico. That is going to be damned inconvenient, as I live in Northern California, but I agree.

Jared and Marty walk me back to security with Guy in a Tie. Jared asks, "What did you do in the Force?"

"Same thing I do now. I'm a doctor."

He snorts and looks at me. I know I'm not what he expected. Now, he can't help but think about all I've said. Is he drawing his own line in the sand? Maybe. It took me a while, too. I got here in stages, not all at once.

They walk me to the ticket booth. Three planes and I won't get home until midnight, but at least I am going home. Marty gives me his card and asks that I call him the next time I flying through Albuquerque. I agree. I have nothing to hide, I maintain that I have not done anything not guaranteed to me by the Constitution.

They search me and I am sore and exhausted. I am silent. They check my bags for explosives and my backpack alarms. The same pack ,with the same contents, I have had checked here multiple times with no problems, alarms today. I share this fun fact with Jared. He smiles and nods. They unpack it and examine everything but decide the 3 mm bamboo knitting needles aren't that dangerous.

Guy with a Tie wants to know if I was born in Arcata. I ask why I should give this information. He asks for my phone number. Again I ask if I am legally obligated to give it.  He says that a TSA representative will want to follow up about the incident. I'd love to talk to customer service about today. I give my number.

He dances from foot to foot and hunches his shoulder. He won't look me in the eye for more than a microsecond.

I say, "I can tell by your body language you know more than you are telling me."

He gives me the deer in the headlights look and says "That's not my department."

"What's not your department?"

"Investigations. When they call you."

"You mean an agent is going to call me?"

"Well, yes."

"Agent of whom, TSA or FBI."

"TSA."

"What will they be investigating me for?"

The headlights are closing in on the deer. "I don't know. That's not my department."

I nod, too tired to worry that part of the intimidation leveled at people who aren't good little sheep is to be investigated by a federal agency for terrorism.

I turn to my gate. I have 5 hours.

I call my husband.  “Why would you do such a thing in some damn red-neck state, where I can't get to you?” He has for years tried to cure me of my delusion that there is some democracy left in the United States. I can hear the worry in his voice and I am sorry for putting it there. I try to reassure him that I am alright.

I find the first available electric socket and I write.

Tears finally come. People pass me by, staring, but I just put my head down and write. I open my veins and I write it all, the fear, the self doubt, the shock, the pain, the indignation.

When I am done, it is time to board. I pack my computer and stand in line, trying to come to grips with all that just happened.

I wonder what my husband will say when I get home. I wonder how I'm going to get down here for a court appearance. I wonder if they will let me fly again. I wonder what will happen if I read the Constitution next week when I have to come back. I wonder, briefly, what Ben Franklin or Thomas Jefferson would say, if they knew it was a sign of terrorism to recite the Bill of Rights.

Source: AlterNet

Related:

Video: Check out the video 'POLICE STATE - TSA, Homeland Security & Tampa Police Set Up Nazi Checkpoints At Bus Stations' Now you can expect pat downs on buses ... what's next ... stopping us on the highways? Yep… In fact, that is already happening in Tennessee!!


Benjamin Franklin: “He who trades liberty for (perceived) security deserves and rarely gets either!!”

Wake-up America we are being set-up and played!!

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Game On… NFL wants pat-downs from ankles up at all stadiums

First the airport, and most experts say that is a waste of time, and now Football games. Tomorrow it will be school, the market and every public building. 

Time to scream STOP!!

The NFL wants all fans patted down from the ankles up this season to improve fan safety.

Under the new "enhanced" pat-down procedures, the NFL wants all 32 clubs to search fans from the ankles to the knees as well as the waist up. Previously, security guards only patted down fans from the waist up while looking for booze, weapons or other banned items.

The stricter physical screening policy impacts the 16.6 million fans expected to attend live regular season NFL games this season. The more thorough searches will spell longer lines for ticket-holding fans seeking entry to games. It's sure to raise the ire of some fans who consider it an invasion of privacy.

The NFL recommended the new guidelines before the kickoff of the 2011 season which coincided with the 10th anniversary of 9/11. The league hopes fans will be "patient," says spokesman Brian McCarthy, and arrive earlier to games to avoid long, punishing lines.

"The enhanced security procedures recommended by our office before the start of the season will further increase the safety of fans but will require some additional time," McCarthy told USA TODAY in a statement Thursday. "We encourage fans to come early, enjoy their tailgating tradition, and be patient as they enter the stadium."

The NFL suffered damage to its family-friendly image when a South Carolina man was arrested for using an illegal stun gun on other fans at a New York Jets-Dallas Cowboys game Sunday night.

VOTE: Agree or disagree with NFL's head-to-toe patdowns?

THE HUDDLE: Brady tells Pats fans to start drinking early

The NFL predicts its live gate will be equal this year to last season's overall regular season attendance of 16,569,514.

The Buffalo Bills have announced the changes for fans attending this Sunday's home game against the Oakland Raiders at Ralph Wilson Stadium. The Bills' announcement reads in part:

The Buffalo Bills will be implementing an enhanced pat-down procedure starting with this Sunday's game and the organization wants to communicate this new process to all fans attending the game. The new procedure is a recommendation from the NFL in accordance with the league's Best Practices policies. Specifically, the enhanced portion of the pat-down is for the area from the knees to the ankles. Bills officials have long recommended that fans arrive early to the gates and continue to do so, especially with the enhanced pat-down now part of the security measures taken at Ralph Wilson Stadium.

UPDATE: The Indianapolis Colts also issued a statement Thursday announcing stricter security screenings for fans entering Lucas Oil Stadium:

At the direction of the NFL, fans attending this Sunday's Colts vs. Browns game, and future NFL games, will be subject to an enhanced personal security screening prior to entering Lucas Oil Stadium. The screening will include physical pat-down (above the waist as well as below the knees) and inspection of all items. The enhanced personal security screening is in addition to the process guests have typically experienced at NFL games since 2001. In order to accommodate this security enhancement, guests are asked to arrive earlier than normal to avoid longer security lines at the checkpoints. Guests may refuse inspections; however, management reserves the right to refuse entry.

The idea of being physically searched by strangers while attending NFL games has been controversial for years. Several fans have filed lawsuits across the U.S., challenging the league's physical screenings in court. But the NFL's policies were upheld in court.

Source:  USAToday

“Those who trade liberty (freedom) for security generally get nor deserve either!!”  … Benjamin Franklin

Related: 

To Whom It May Concern

From Mike Adams at Natural News:

These police-state pat-downs, you see, are going to be expanded to the point where you have to show your papers on demand at every government building, sporting event and even shopping malls and movie theaters. America's descent into a total communist-style police state has begun.

Alex Jones, by the way, has announced a boycott of the NFL and their sponsors; urges all NFL ticket holders to demand refunds, not attend games and boycott purchases of NFL and sponsor’s products.  Here's Natural News: article

Video: Alex Jones Calls for NFL Boycott!!: TSA Report – Article

This will be the NFL Fan’s big chance to show their patriotism as well as stand up for their own rights.  If they, the macho representation of manhood that they present themselves as, rollover for this America has a much bigger problem than we ever imagined. So the Onus is on you… will you allow yourself, your wives, girlfriends and kids to be patted down and humiliated, like the TSA does to us at the airport, or will you stand for liberty, freedom and freedom over football?

Football Ring Lost 40-Years Ago in Hawaii Will Be Returned to Owner

Monday, August 29, 2011

Bisbee rancher beaten by SWAT after called in by a coyote… and Sir Robt Peel’s 9 Principles…

Bisbee rancher beaten by SWAT after called in by a coyote

Sounds like we need to make a stand at this old boys ranch, what do you think?  This may be the place for a final line in the sand stand.

A MUST READ, AND MUST SHARE

Remember to Flush OBAMA in 2012clip_image001


Bisbee rancher beaten by SWAT after called in by a coyote

According to this source  his name is Dave Boggess, cousin to Roger Barnett

Message in the Oath Keeeprs facebook grouptoday 8/23/11:

Cassie McSasserson
I just got a message from a friend in Arizona "we have a 'situation' here outside Bisbee. A rancher who's house is within yards of a major immigrant pass has been beaten and nearly killed by the Bisbee Police. i am not sure they even have jurisdiction where he is. They confiscated all his weapons. I have asked him to write a statement, but after that, not sure where to go what to do. If you have any suggestions... It is my thinking that he has been targeted for the proximity of his land. He is elderly. During the beating one officer grabbed and tugged on his pacemaker. he was hospitalized overnight. They refuse to give him a receipt for the 7 weapons they took. They threw him to the ground when he was asked to come out of the house and he did so - in a t shirt and shorts, barefoot"

Cassie McSasserson OK this is the story "I will tell all I know. I am not yet sure how far he wants to go with this. He has been badly frightened. I would not want to go ahead without his permission.
What he told me last night (I was there fixing his computer) is that (obviously if you could see his property) he owns a major thourofare from Mexico to Naco and Bisbee. He said it is the best path because he owns a ravine that goes to the border. he has never hurt anyone, is elderly and ill.

Well, last week, a Coyote (human not animal) was bringing a bunch across and were giving his 30-yr-old daughter a very hard toime, driving by slow, looking in windows and all. So, he went out with his AK47 and popped a few into the air to get them to go away. The Coyote called the police and they sent a SWAT team. He said between 6 and 10 cop cars pulled in and speakered to him to come out of the house unarmed. He came out in a t-shirt, shorts and no shoes. They grabbed him, threw him on the ground, mashed his head into the gravel and started pounding on his pacemaker. Sorry I do not recall what he told me they were saying to him. They skinned his knees (he has photos) and cut up his head near where he has previously had a stroke - that scared him they were pounding on the part of his head where he had had a stroke, and were pounding on his pacemaker and grinding him into the dirt. They then went into his house - he says without permission or even ASKING and confiscated 6-7 weapons. They took him to Police dept. were he started to look really bad and so they took him to the hospital, where he was kept overnight. The next day, from the hospital he called and asked about a ride back (small town we have no public transport or taxi - he would have had to walk 10 miles home) they said no and that they didn't have to give him a receipt for his weapons. That is where I came in the picture - a few days later.

When I was at his place last night, I saw 5 illegals within 200 yards of his house. But also when I was there and he was telling me the story, he broke down and cried 3 times during the telling. Also as I was there, he would drop little bits of info so it is hard for me to put it all together. I told him I would help him if he wanted, that he has to write out a statement of every detail and I would get it to people. He at that point was ready to commit suicide, I thought. He is a recovering alcoholic and has started drinking over this so it was really hard for me to get the story. They have fucked this man up.
I asked him how many illegals has he turned in over the years, and he told me about 200 and that BP Border Patrol, always thank him. Then... as I was leaving, he tells me that if he calls BP from his house phone, they don't answer anymore. If you could see where his property lays, you would think as I do, they just want his property and will kill him to get it.

He kept telling me that the SWAT team acted as if it was a Drill or a training thing. He said it was surreal, and he feels as if he has been raped. he has not yet decided how far he wants to go, or if he should try to sell, or what but the property has been in his family for generations - his family is one of two or three in the area that originally settled here. I promised to talk to him tomorrow as I still have more computer works to do and so i will see where he is, then. But as I was leaving and I told him i would help him if he wants to fight, he sort of perked up and said yes, I want to fight. But tonight, at my neighbors for dinner he had a mini-stroke or something and we rushed him home. I think really, he is scared to death and thought he was alone until i showed up and said I would help, if he wants it. I think he needs to write out the statement and get it to me as he promised, and we go from there..."

It is starting to get ugly my fellow patriots!!
h/t to Yvonne

Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito
Bullets and Beans

http://bonfiresblog.wordpress.com

http://www.oathkeepers.org
http://www.st-ares.org/

Lest it should not be forgotten, you do not have to have taken an oath to be responsible for right from wrong, it is incumbent on every citizen to act:

The police are the public and the public are the police;

The police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen. Sir Robert Peel

clip_image002

The nine principles by Sir Robert Peel

  1. The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
  2. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions.
  3. Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observance of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.
  4. The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.
  5. Police seek and preserve public favor not by catering to public opinion but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
  6. Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient.
  7. Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence
  8. Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
  9. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.

These principles listed above may have been Sir Robert Peel’s principles. However, the Metropolitan Police’s founding principles and, de facto the founding principles of all other modern (post 1829) UK police forces, was summarized by Sir Richard Mayne (the first commissioner) in 1829 in the following terms:

The nine principles by Sir Richard Mayne

  1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
  2. To recognize always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behavior and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
  3. To recognize always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
  4. To recognize always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
  5. To seek and preserve public favor, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humor; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
  6. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.
  7. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
  8. To recognize always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.
  9. To recognize always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.

In a broad sense these principles were continued to be taught until the time of Sir Robert Mark when he introduced his little “blue book” in the 1970’s:

The principles of Sir Robert Mark

“The primary object of an efficient police is the prevention of crime: the next that of detection and punishment of offenders if crime is committed. To these ends all the efforts of police must be directed. The protection of life and property, the preservation of public tranquility, and the absence of crime, will alone prove whether those efforts have been successful and whether the objects for which the police were appointed have been attained.”

Mark does go on though to make the point that the above is done with the consent of the public and is not done by way of imposing on the public.

Since Sir Robert Mark every commissioner has had his own set of “principles”, for instance Sir Peter Imbert had “The Plus Program” and so on.

Notwithstanding the generality of my last comment, poster versions of Sir Richard Mayne’s principles could still be seen within the Met Police Training school as late as the early 1990’s (for historical purposes).

Friday, July 29, 2011

Important Alert… Especially for Parents and Grandparents! - Frightening!

 

Video:  Smartphone pictures pose privacy risks

You may be perfectly safe after changing the settings… but who really knows?

How to protect your mobile phone and computer from illegal police searches

http://www.naturalnews.com/032985_illegal_searches_mobile_phones.html

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, long defenders of electronic rights, has  written a legal guide

(NaturalNews) The U.S. Constitution is clear about the issue of privacy. In fact, the Fourth Amendment states, in part, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..."

With that in mind, it's safe to say it's more than just a little disturbing to know that, in certain circumstances, police can search your cell phone and computer(s), even if you don't want them to and even if they don't yet have a warrant to do so.

The good news is, someone out there has recognized the problem and has taken steps to help you protect that vast amount of data you have stored on your smart phone or laptop.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, long defenders of electronic rights, has written a legal guide designed to help you better understand your rights and, more importantly, when police can - and cannot - legally confiscate and search your personal electronic devices.

"In the heat of the moment, it can be hard to remember what your rights are and how to exercise them," says EFF Senior Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann. "Sometimes police can search your computer whether you like it or not, but sometimes they can't. We wrote this guide to help you tell the difference and to empower you to assert your rights when the police come knocking."

Adds EFF Staff Attorney Hanni Fakhoury, "With smart phones, tablet computers, and laptops, we carry around with us an unprecedented amount of sensitive personal information.

"That smart phone in your pocket right now could contain email from your doctor or your kid's teacher, not to mention detailed contact information for all of your friends and family members," Fakhoury continued. "Your laptop probably holds even more data -- your Internet browsing history, family photo albums, and maybe even things like an electronic copy of your taxes or your employment agreement. This is sensitive data that's worth protecting from prying eyes."

According to a summary of full EFF legal guide:

· Always say "no" when police ask if they can search your server, personal computer or cell phone because if you give them permission to search, they don't need a warrant - even to enter your home;
· If police tell you they have a search warrant, ask to see it because you have a right to;
· Make sure police are only searching the areas outlined in the warrant;
· Be silent - you don't have to help the police or answer their questions, and that means you don't have to give them your encryption keys or passwords;
· If you do decide to talk, don't lie because lying to the police is a crime;
· Finally, if you can consult with a lawyer before police conduct a search or even just talk to you, that's ideal.
This guide is extremely helpful in this digital age when being secure in our "papers" and effects now includes our data-filled electronic devices. Know your rights; that is your best protection.

Consistently watch the other hand my friends… we are living in scary times.  Technology may make things easier for you… but it also makes it easier for Big Brother and the other bad guys (pedophiles, robbers, etc) to keep an eye on you and your loved ones… and they are!

By Ask Marion

Related:

Cops to Use Facial Recognition iPhone

Cyber Command and Internet Dangers

Microsoft Files Patent for Software that Allows the Government to Spy on All Personal Digital Communications

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Cops to Use Facial Recognition iPhone

CRIMEARE U.S. COPS PREPARING WIDESPREAD USE OF FACIAL RECOGNITION IPHONE?

moris

Starting as early as September, cops across the country  may be using a new iphone-based device to identify people based on a picture of their face, iris scan, or a fingerprint reader, raising concerns about how the data will be gathered, stored, and used.

The device in question is called the MORIS,  which stands for Mobile Offender Recognition and Information System. Made by BI2 Technologies of Plymouth, Mass, it runs on the iphone platform. The company states that it has contracts with 40 government agencies to deliver 1,000 devices this fall.

Unlike other currently used biometric technologies, the MORIS does not require a separate digital camera or upload time, and automatically scans known databases for criminal warrants and other relevant history. The Wall Street Journal gives specifics on how this new device works:

“To scan a person’s iris, police officers can hold the special iris-scanning camera on device, called MORIS, about 5 to 6 inches away from an individual’s irises. After snapping a high resolution photo, the MORIS system analyzes 235 unique features in each iris and uses an algorithm to match that person with their identity if they are in the database.”

“For the facial recognition, an officer takes a photo of a person at a distance of about 2 feet to 5 feet. Based on technologies from Animetrics Inc., the system analyzes about 130 distinguishing points on the face, such as the distance between a person’s eye and nose. It then scans the database for likely matches.”

As for the usage of the devices, the law does not appear settled on whether police need consent to take a person’s photo.  Generally speaking, the law does not prohibit taking photos of people in a public place. But taking and storing photos for law enforcement purposes- particularly if the subject is in custody- could trigger a different standard of rules. The law becomes even more vague on issues such as whether an iris scan constitutes a search.

Below is a video presentation for the Brockton Police Department showing facial recognition and iris scanning technologies that have been demoed and will soon be in use by various law enforcement units in Massachusetts. The presenters show the devices, discuss the database, and describe the features designed to help law enforcement officers.

Video:  Mass. Police Get Facial Recognition App For iPhones

US Troops overseas have used a variety of biometric tools for years to vet allies and identify insurgents and terrorists. But the MORIS is poised to become the first widespread, mobile usage of such technology here in the US by local and federal law enforcement.

Law enforcement analysts believe the device could prevent the wrong inmates from obtaining prison release, to identify accident victims and keep track of the homeless. While there are many privacy and civil liberties concerns associated with law enforcement’s widespread use of facial recognition devices, the landscape of biometrics is already rapidly changing with programs such as Facebook Facial Recognition:

Video:  Facebook Expands Facial Recognition for Photo Tagging, Triggering Privacy Concerns

Source:  the Blaze

Important info for anyone- just like "Minority Report" - please read the threads below as well.

After frantic calls and a hearing with Registry officials, Gass learned the problem: An antiterrorism computerized facial recognition system that scans a database of millions of state driver’s license images had picked his as a possible fraud.

It turned out Gass was flagged because he looks like another driver, not because his image was being used to create a fake identity. His driving privileges were returned but, he alleges in a lawsuit, only after 10 days of bureaucratic wrangling to prove he is who he says he is.

· Caught in a dragnet [facial recognition software glitch - MA]

Sunday, July 17, 2011 11:09:57 AM · by Daffynition · 8 replies

Boston Globe ^ | July 17, 2011 | Meghan E. Irons

John H. Gass hadn’t had a traffic ticket in years, so the Natick resident was surprised this spring when he received a letter from the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles informing him to cease driving because his license had been revoked. Tweet 4 people Tweeted this ShareThis “I was shocked,’’ Gass said in a recent interview. “As far as I was concerned, I had done nothing wrong.’’ After frantic calls and a hearing with Registry officials, Gass learned the problem: An antiterrorism computerized facial recognition system that scans a database of millions of state driver’s license images had picked his...

Police to Scan Faces and Eyes, Prompting Privacy Concerns
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread728366/pg1

*** FACE RECOGNITION DEVICE - ALL POLICE FORCES WILL HAVE IT BEFORE YEAR END ***
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1563576/pg1

Hospitals, doctors take 'palm prints' to ID patients

Palms have taken on a new meaning at some doctors' offices and hospitals. More unique than fingerprints, palm readings are helping keep patients straight and safe.

Full Speed Ahead For Facial Recognition Technology

Face.com has been used to tag over 25 billion faces in over 7 billion photos since launching in late 2007. Facebook users had been using the Face.com facial recognition app to tag friends in photos for two years before Facebook stepped on the Israel-based company’s toes by making facial recognition a default feature for photo tagging this year.

How to protect your mobile phone and computer from illegal police searches

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, long defenders of electronic rights, has  written a legal guide - http://www.naturalnews.com/032985_illegal_searches_mobile_phones.html

(NaturalNews) The U.S. Constitution is clear about the issue of privacy. In fact, the Fourth Amendment states, in part, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..."
With that in mind, it's safe to say it's more than just a little disturbing to know that, in certain circumstances, police can search your cell phone and computer(s), even if you don't want them to and even if they don't yet have a warrant to do so.

The good news is, someone out there has recognized the problem and has taken steps to help you protect that vast amount of data you have stored on your smart phone or laptop.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, long defenders of electronic rights, has written a legal guide designed to help you better understand your rights and, more importantly, when police can - and cannot - legally confiscate and search your personal electronic devices.
"In the heat of the moment, it can be hard to remember what your rights are and how to exercise them," says EFF Senior Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann. "Sometimes police can search your computer whether you like it or not, but sometimes they can't. We wrote this guide to help you tell the difference and to empower you to assert your rights when the police come knocking."

Adds EFF Staff Attorney Hanni Fakhoury, "With smart phones, tablet computers, and laptops, we carry around with us an unprecedented amount of sensitive personal information.

"That smart phone in your pocket right now could contain email from your doctor or your kid's teacher, not to mention detailed contact information for all of your friends and family members," Fakhoury continued. "Your laptop probably holds even more data -- your Internet browsing history, family photo albums, and maybe even things like an electronic copy of your taxes or your employment agreement. This is sensitive data that's worth protecting from prying eyes."

According to a summary of full EFF legal guide:

· Always say "no" when police ask if they can search your server, personal computer or cell phone because if you give them permission to search, they don't need a warrant - even to enter your home;
· If police tell you they have a search warrant, ask to see it because you have a right to;
· Make sure police are only searching the areas outlined in the warrant;
· Be silent - you don't have to help the police or answer their questions, and that means you don't have to give them your encryption keys or passwords;
· If you do decide to talk, don't lie because lying to the police is a crime;
· Finally, if you can consult with a lawyer before police conduct a search or even just talk to you, that's ideal.

This guide is extremely helpful in this digital age when being secure in our "papers" and effects now includes our data-filled electronic devices. Know your rights; that is your best protection.

HIDDEN CAMERA : Actual Cable Box with Hidden Camera

You really need to read the comments on this video.  Evidently if your computer has a video camera, web cam, the gov't can go in and activate it. Also I saw this advertised on TV today
http://thefutureoftv.org/

Mirrored


Video:  Hidden Camera in Cable Box

What do you think?

Uploaded by ledaOhio937 on Jul 20, 2011

FULL ARTICLES BELOW!!

SUB my Channels Since YT nukes me!!!

Cable companies installing HIDDEN CAMERAS in your boxes!!

Did You Go Digital Last Night? Does Your Latest Must-Have Tech Gadget Have Hidden Surveillance for Our Police State Nanny System?
http://ur1.ca/44yio  from newteevee: If you have some tinfoil handy, now might be a good time to fashion a hat. At the Digital Living Room conference today, Gerard Kunkel, Comcast's senior VP of user experience, told me the cable company is experimenting with different camera technologies built into devices so it can know who's in your living room.

Kunkel also spoke on camera with me about fixing bad Comcast user experiences, the ongoing BitTorrent battle and VOD. But he mostly towed the corporate line on these issues (the monitoring your living room came up after my camera was put away).

sheeple

There Is No First Amendment Without the Second Amendment!

“ He who gives up their freedom for security, generally gets or deserves either!!”  …Benjamin Franklin